Viva Catalonia

dave3974: Catalan officials claimed 90% of 2.2million voters had called for independence in an 'illegal' referendum blighted by violent scenes which left at least 888 people injured.

World leaders condemned the brutal scenes after officials revealed that hundreds of protesters have been injured so far.

Officers were seen kicking and stamping on protesters as they stormed buildings and seized ballot boxes.

Footage captured in the village of Sarria de Ter in the province of Girona showed authorities using an axe to smash down the doors of a polling station where Catalan president Carles Puigdemont was due to cast his vote.

He said the region had won the right to become an independent state with the referendum results due in a few days.

And in Barcelona, the region's capital, officers fired rubber bullets at thousands of protesters demonstrating against their votes being denied.

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4937860/Riot-police-clash-voters-Catalonia.html#ixzz4wjXm8hzB
Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook

The giant midget: It only takes 51% majority to win in a so called democratic society
I am assuming that 90% isn't good enough 😳😳😳😳

On the pitch Manchester United scored 5 goals and Barcelona scored a big fat zero
Does that mean Barcelona wins the match..???

chronology: The Vote was an ilegal Vote, so 'no' voters never turned out. The Spanish Police have been praised for their Professional and skilled work.

The Spanish and Catalan people do not need people medling in their affairs. Ulster and Catalonia have proud people and proud histories, but neither Region can claim Statehood. Ulster belongs in Britain or Ireland, Catalonia belongs in Spain.

ghostgeek: The Scots got a vote on independance, so why should the Catalans be denied one?

ghostgeek: After all, one can claim that America belongs to Britain and Americans should damn well pay their taxes to the Crown.

chronology: ghost you are being silly now. England had no moral ownership of any of North America, it was stolen from Holland and France and Spain. They stole it from each other and round and round we go.

ghostgeek: So your taxes should be going to Holland, France and Spain. Is that what you're saying? So what about the Pilgrim Fathers?

ghostgeek: And ... err ... the natives, who presumably everybody stole off?

ghostgeek: Doesn't look like anybody should be bandying about the word "moral".

chronology: Ghost you are being silly now. We must give credit to the United States Government as the Lawmakers who set the standard for other countires to follow in attempting to redress wrongs done to 'First Nation' people.

As for the other things you say, well honestly. I suppose England still ownes California? or more to the point Her Majesty The Queen does?

Look ghost, that is how nations behaved back then. The U.S. Government eventually tried to end all this 'kill and grab' custom, and again, well done America.

Wild__: The crown can have the US debt.

chronology: wild. If am not mistaken Her Majesty actually does still own all the Rights to all minerals and resources in the U.S. and North America. All gold, oil, coal, Uranium, everything underground is owned by The Queen.

But the Queen would be unlikely to ever take the Corporations to Court for pinching Her wealth.

ghostgeek: The U.S. Government eventually tried to end all this 'kill and grab' custom? Not until it had nabbed all the land it didn't. The U.S. is no different to any other empire building nation. After all, Britain abolished slavery before America.

ghostgeek: I mean, let's admit it. America is the product of aggressive imperialism.

ghostgeek: Imperialism is an action that involves a country extending its power by the acquisition of territories.

chronology: ghost Old Chap you are being cynical. No country or people has done more for Human Rights or Civil Rights than the American people.

The devellopment of America underwent a number of major steps. None were 'Imperialism. First we had the Louisiana Purchase, something many Americans were uncertain about accepting, the other was the entry of California into the Union. Texas joined the Union for safety from Mexico. Personally it is difficult to see any of that as 'Imperialism' .

At the end of the Civil War, the Union was the undisputed 'Alpha Dog' of the Americas. Did America embark on a journey of conquest? no, America just got on with rebuilding the Union.

ghostgeek: Explain the War of 1812.

ghostgeek: And then explain the Indian Wars.

ghostgeek: The Mexican-American War (1846-1848) marked the first U.S. armed conflict chiefly fought on foreign soil. It pitted a politically divided and militarily unprepared Mexico against the expansionist-minded administration of U.S. President James K. Polk, who believed the United States had a “manifest destiny” to spread across the continent to the Pacific Ocean. A border skirmish along the Rio Grande started off the fighting and was followed by a series of U.S. victories. When the dust cleared, Mexico had lost about one-third of its territory, including nearly all of present-day California, Utah, Nevada, Arizona and New Mexico.

[ http://www.history.com/topics/mexican-american-war ]

ghostgeek: Seems you've also got some explaining to do concerning the war with Mexico.

ghostgeek: Also, I'd like to read your thoughts on the Philippine-American War.

chronology: Ghost you are just arranging a confrontational set of tabloid history snippets intended to set the U.S. in a aggressive stance.

The War of 1812 with Great Britain to no ones surprise broke out during failed negotiations to establish a new Central Bank in the U.S. no surprises there as to the reason for the War.

There were no Indian 'wars' as such. Western Civilisation was in a period of rapid expansion in Australia, North America, South Africa, New Zealand, few people gave any consideration to First Nation people anywhere. This is sad ghost, but not uniquely 'American' .

Mexico and the U.S. both disputed Territory yes, but the people of those Territories had their sights set on Washington as their Capital, it was not the other way around as you seem to insist.

ghost, history is a violent and disturbing story for all mankind. But no one anywhere would suggest that the South West has not benifited greatly from being a member of the United States. Had they chosen Mexico their history would be very different indeed.

ghostgeek: No Indian Wars as such? Considering the native population was nearly decimated one wonders what would have been the outcome if there had been a few wars.

chronology: Philippine American Wars? America was sucked into that conflict after it's war with Spain. Politics like Nature hates a vaccume and U.S. Troops moved into the Philippines to prevent the expansion of 'the usual suspects' at the time.

Look ghost you are just trying to 'tabloid history' into an anti American sentiment. Had the U.S. been successful in it's modernisation efforts in the Philippines it would have been a real benefit to the local people.

ghostgeek: It was the local people doing the fighting. Seems some of them wanted to be free of Spain, just like the Catalans. And they didn't want the U.S. taking up the slack.

chronology: ghost, really. An Irish person was telling me the worst thing that happened to Ireland was when Britain left the country in 1926. When Britain left the leaders of Ireland handed the country over to the Catholic Church. Well I don't know, I think if Irish people decided to leave the U.K. that is their choice, but fair enough, if an even more intrusive force takes the place of Britain then that may not be a good thing.

When America left the Philippines maybe the people were not as 'free' as you suggest. Maybe darkness decended on the islands as the lights of American ships sailed back to San Francisco. Maybe some folks can't see a true friend when they see one.