CONVERSATION IS TRICKY WITH CLOSED LABOUR MINDS

"Conversation should be more than a whisper"

Of course the SNP is playing for time. It has no hope of getting a referendum bill through Parliament and there must be a sporting chance that eventually the opposition parties will fall out among themselves. Yet surely the electorate deserves something more concrete than a website.

http://news.scotsman.com/opinion/Conversation-should-be-more-than.3775918.jp

The SNP Government have published a White paper on independence, not just put up a website, though no doubt the Scotsman hacks haven't bothered to read it!

Unfortunately to have a conversation it takes both sides to be willing to debate and logically consider all the options. The SNP did this, their paper made a serious attempt to look at the other options short of independence that the Scottish people might be interested in.

The unionists however have spat out the dummy, decided that normal power for scotland is out of the question and have retreated to London only to be told by Gordon Brown (and his mouthpiece David Cairns) that no significant powers will be coming to Scotland whether the public want them or not!

It's all just "the McChattering classes" the Scottish public still love Labour and the union, which is why they gave the SNP their first ever victory and Labour's poll figures are in freefall!

Wendy is showing that she is as much of a puppet as Jack McConnell and Labour are actively proving that they have learnt nothing from the election result and are maintaing the contemptuous attitude towards scottish aspirations that they maintained when in power.

As long as they ignore the logical option of independence those who have some ambition for Scotland will have a conversation without them, we might not get much arguments but let's face it we've heard all their scaremongering rubbish against independence many times before. It didn't wash with the scotiish public in the last election and I very much doubt it will work in any future independence referendum either.

That's why the unionists don't want to give us a referendum, they know their arguments aren't working and they could easily lose it.

Unfirtunately for them, the argument has moved on. The question must now be, why no? Who not have the normal powers every other country has, the seat at the UN the individual voice in the EU and control of our own natural resources?

Why allow ourselves to be used as a military base when we don't want nuclear weapons, why not decide our own future free of control by people who clearly despise their own country and think we are all second rate cretins who can't tie our own shoe laces without England?

There's no good reason to not go for it ourselves.

I believe we can and we will and eventually the SNP positive message will convince all Scots of the virtues of normal powers. Labour's day is done, a bit like the tired British union and the tatty flag which goes along with it.

SCOTLAND: OUR CONFIDENCE IS GROWING

We are in a difficult situation in Scotland, even though we weren't technically a colony and although we played a large part in the workings of the Empire, in fact Britain has also treated us like a colony or at least an occupied country in many respects.

Certainly our original languages have been deliberately disparaged and there was even a concerted attempt to wipe out our national identity altogether and rename us as 'North Britain'. This project obviously failed (probably due to the actions of Scottish patriots like Walter Scott and Robert Burns) but there is an underlying current of imperial racist attitudes towards anything Scottish.

This isn't often entirely obvious but it manifests itself in both the 'we can't do it by ourselves' poltics of unionism and the 'I don't like my own accent' cringe. This has been identified in other countries and the answer to it is to build our confidence by taking back what's ours.

I think our national confidence has grown with the new Government and we are very close to making the logical decision to support normal powers.

"Sovereignty will come only when the final step is not seen as a vital break with the past, but rather as a natural one."

- Scotsman article

I think that the above time has almost come and if the Scots do eventually get the opportunity of a vote on independence, I think they would actually go for it. We've now heard the scaremongering of Labour on numerous occasions and it's no longer working.

The last election proved that. Labour's contribution to Scottish constitutional politics is to contemptously claim it's just waffle from "the McChattering classes". Jack McConnell was never treated as anything other than a joke by his bosses in London and it's pretty obvious they don't listen to Wendy very much either.

Since Labour are so awful and the Tories and Lib Dems in this regard are not much better, Hobson's choice is the SNP. While the SNP rule in the parliament Scotland's confidence will only increase.

LET SCOTLAND DECIDE - INDEPENDENCE PETITION LAUNCHES

The petition is launched at the Scottish parliament, Margo MacDonald Independent MSP signs watched by SNP First Minister Alex Salmond and other SNP MSP's and Elaine C Smith of the Independence Convention (who are co-ordinating the petition).

Deacon Blue at the SIC's Burns night party which celebrated the event. Andy Gray, Dougie MacLean, Jimmy Reid and others were also involved.

You can download the petition form at:
http://www.scottishindependenceconvention.com/

GAME ON!

Independence First are holding a working conference to help co-ordinate the petition on the ground. Details are as follows: Working Conference, Saturday 1st March 2008, STUC premises, 333 Woodlands Road, Glasgow, 1pm – 4pm (registration 12.15pm onwards)

Guest speakers from SIC include Convenor Elaine C Smith, who will be opening the conference, and Isobel Lindsay. All groups are entitled to send a maximum of 2 delegates, cost £5 per organisation. For individuals attending the fee is £2. Tea, coffee and biscuits will be available on the day.

For further information and to register for the event please email Independence First National Secretary Carol Roscoe secretary@independence1st.com, or telephone 01764 684446.

Salmond outlines his vision of Scotland as world peacekeeper

An independent Scotland could become a global peacemaker, First Minister Alex Salmond suggested yesterday. He believes Scotland could play a significant role in international conflict resolution, building on the sense of goodwill towards the nation from around the globe.

"Real leadership is not just about winning conflict, it is about having a strategy to defuse it," he said in the inaugural talk on Scotland in the World Forum series being organised by Aberdeen University.

"Resolution of conflict is harder, more subtle. More difficult. But it is an area where Scotland can excel. One only needs to look to the efforts of our Nordic friends in a range of such conflict situations to see the extent of what can be achieved," he went on.

He said global citizenship was about commitment to safety and security around the world.
"For me, therefore, Scottish independence is not just an opportunity to move Scotland forward but a chance for Scotland to give something back - to meet our global responsibilities."
In a separate launch yesterday, the government said it wanted to encourage more overseas firms to use Scotland's legal brains. Business and legal experts meeting in Edinburgh have been asked by Justice Secretary Kenny MacAskill to find ways of making Scotland "the jurisdiction of choice" for solving disputes and going to court.

http://www.theherald.co.uk/politics/news/display.var.2018196.0.0.php

Well said Alex Salmond. We need to get our seat at the UN and independent representation at the EU. We need independence not any form of devolution where Britain still runs our foreign affairs.

Scotland has potential and we now (for the first time) have a First Minister who has positive energy and believes in our country. That's a lot better than trying to pretend we have an Empire by sooking up to the new imperialist element in the USA.

Scotland could lead by example to Wales, Cornwall, the Basque country and Catalonia by getting our independence first, we then have the potential to be a positive rational voice in the world community but we won't get there if we are led by people who still hark back to the Empire like Prince Andrew or Gordon Brown.

We can do a lot better.

IS UK TREASURY TRYING TO MURDER THE SCOTTISH BANK NOTE?

HOLYROOD and Westminster clashed yesterday over the future of Scottish banknotes, with a claim from Alex Salmond that the Treasury is trying a “smash-and-grab” cash raid and a dismissal from Labour that the First Minister was “scaremongering”.

Mr Salmond’s attack voiced fears Scottish banks may be forced to stop issuing their own notes if proposed Treasury rules are put into effect. UK Government Chancellor Alistair Darling last week launched a consultation on measures aimed at improving financial stability and protecting depositors in the wake of the Northern Rock crisis.

This included the level of deposits banks are required to lodge with the Bank of England. The SNP leader claimed the changes could sharply raise costs for Scottish banks, as well as those in Northern Ireland, that issue their own notes and the possible cost could reach £100m a year – making the distinctive banknotes uneconomic.

In Scotland, three banks are allowed to issue their own notes: Clydesdale Bank, Royal Bank of Scotland and Bank of Scotland, which has been issuing notes since 1695. No other country allows commercial banks to issue branded notes. Under current laws, the banks have to lodge funds with the Bank of England to cover the value of their notes, but only for three days of the week. On the other four it can be invested elsewhere, gaining millions in interest.

However, the new proposals would require funds to be lodged with the Bank of England for the entire week. Mr Salmond yesterday claimed the changes were “the greatest threat” to Scottish notes since 1845, the year the Banknotes Scotland Act was introduced to regulate the procedure.

The First Minister said: “This is a real dagger at the heart of Scottish banknotes, which are a proud tradition in Scotland and hugely popular with the Scottish public. It would remove any advantage from issuing notes. I am certain one or more of the banks would stop the note issue.”
Mr Salmond also launched an attack on the Treasury and Mr Darling: “Under the cover of a consultation on financial stability, the Treasur y is launching a smash-and-grab at the Scottish note issue. What makes this particularly underhand and shabby is to cloak it in a document about financial stability.”

A spokesman for Clydesdale Bank said it was “very concerned” about the potential impact of the proposals and was seeking a meeting with the Treasury. He said: “If this were to go ahead it would force us to consider whether issuing banknotes would be viable, a position we do not want to be forced into.”

Britain's splitting headache

NINE days ago, Scottish drawing rooms echoed with the glorious, phlegm-sodden sounds of Robert Burns poems, recited loudly and at length. Burns Night takes place every year on January 25, the presumed birthday of the adored Scottish poet. A haggis supper is optional, but recitation of Burns' most famous poem, the feisty Address to a Haggis, is not.

In it, he hails the "great chieftain of the pudding race", which is sneered at by the anglicised upper class but keeps the Scot strong: "The trembling earth resounds his tread."
Burns died in 1796, but his patriotic poem has more resonance than ever. Despite last year celebrating 300 years of its union with England, Scotland, along with parts of Wales and Northern Ireland, is restless.

The Scottish National Party, whose goal is Scottish independence, has won government for the first time ever, and there is talk of a referendum on the subject. Wales, which occupies a place in the English heart similar to that of Tasmania in Australia, also has its own independence movement. And despite a recent power-sharing agreement, the voices of nationalism in Northern Ireland are stronger than ever. Which leaves a very lonely England looking vulnerable as the last vestiges of its old empire are threatened.

Read whole article here:

http://www.theage.com.au/news/world/britains-splitting-headache/2008/02/02/1201801099008.html

Muslim anger at report MP was bugged

LONDON (Reuters) - Muslim groups reacted with anger on Sunday to claims that an MP had his private conversations with a constituent secretly bugged by Scotland Yard anti-terrorist officers.
They said the allegations could damage relations between the Muslim community and the police.
It is public policy that law agencies cannot eavesdrop on politicians since a bugging scandal involving Harold Wilson's government.

But the Justice Secretary was forced to order an immediate inquiry after allegations in the Sunday Times claimed that electronic listening devices were used to tap two conversations between Sadiq Khan, MP for Tooting, and Babar Ahmad, being held on remand while awaiting deportation to the United States.

Ahmad is accused of running Web sites supporting terrorism and raising funds for Muslim militants in Chechnya and Afghanistan, and with urging Muslims to fight a 'holy war'.
The Muslim Council of Britain called for urgent meetings with the Home Secretary, Jacqui Smith, and Straw, to ask for clarification on the "disturbing news".

"Today's revelations are simply appalling and raise a whole range of vital issues to do with confidentiality and how to hold to account the improper behaviour of senior police officers," Dr. Muhammad Abdul Bari, secretary-general of the Muslim Council of Britain, said in a statement.
"This kind of behaviour cannot but do immense damage to the level of trust between Muslim communities and the police."

Hizb ut-Tahrir, an organisation Britain threatened to ban after the 2005 attacks on London, said the allegation was indicative of the country's ever increasing draconian security measures.
"Is it any surprise that many Muslims believe Britain is becoming a police state for our community?" it said in a statement.

Downing Street 'Lost Letter' on bugging

The Conservatives are accusing Number Ten of losing a letter warning Gordon Brown an MP may have been bugged. Labour whip Sadiq Khan was apparently recorded by police while visiting a terror suspect in prison.

Downing Street staff say they never received the letter from David Davis but the Shadow Home Secretary insists it was delivered. A spokeswoman said: "We have received a number of letters from David Davis since the beginning of December, on matters such as the Humber Bridge, the Security Industry Authority and licensing laws.

"But having conducted a detailed check, we have no record of receiving a letter about the bugging of MPs. Consequently the Prime Minister knows nothing about this letter."

Human rights group condemns UK/US hypocrisy

The fact that promises of humane treatment from state torturers are inherently
untrustworthy and have not worked in a number of cases does not seem to bother
London

The US, UK and other western nations are ignoring flawed or rigged elections in some countries for the sake of political convenience, Human Rights Watch charged today in its annual round-up of rights abuses around the world.

While publicly espousing the cause of democracy, Washington, London and others were happy to deal closely with "despots masquerading as democrats" such as Pakistan's president, Pervez Musharraf, Russia's Vladimir Putin and the Egyptian leader, Hosni Mubarak, the US-based group said.

Separately, HRW singled out the UK government as a concern for its policy of deporting terrorism suspects to countries with repressive regimes if assurances are given the detainees will not be tortured or otherwise mistreated.

This "handy device" had now been borrowed by the US to justify renditions, while Russia and other nations were also happily trying it out, the group said.

The report detailed human rights abuses in more than 75 countries and territories, covering perennial rights pariahs such as North Korea, Burma and China as well as the US and EU.
It additionally criticised Israel for blockading Gaza in response to rocket attacks, describing this as "collective punishment of Gaza's civilian population in violation of international humanitarian law".

But HRW's primary target this year was what it views as the hypocrisy of western nations condemning democratic violations only when expedient.

"Rarely has democracy been so acclaimed yet so breached, so promoted yet so disrespected, so important yet so disappointing," HRW's executive director, Kenneth Roth, said in an introduction to the 569-page document.

This "pseudo democracy" had seen leaders in countries such as Egypt, Nigeria and Ethiopia recognised abroad for their popular mandates despite elections plagued by fraud, intimidation or other flaws.

"It seems Washington and European governments will accept even the most dubious election so long as the 'victor' is a strategic or commercial ally," Roth said, calling the promotion of democracy "a softer and fuzzier alternative to defending human rights."

President Bush had even praised Musharraf, who seized power in a 1999 coup, for placing Pakistan "on the road to democracy", Roth noted.

"If, unlike human rights law, 'the road to democracy' permits locking up political opponents, dismissing independent judges, and silencing the independent press, it is easy to see why tyrants the world over are tempted to believe that they, too, might be eligible," he said.

In Africa, Roth said, the current violence in Kenya prompted by the seemingly rigged election on December 27, which returned President Mwai Kibaki to power, could be traced back to overseas reluctance to challenge a similarly flawed poll in Nigeria 10 months earlier.

"Nigeria's leader came to power in a violent and fraudulent vote, yet he has been accepted on the international stage. It's no wonder Kenya's president felt able to rig his re-election," he said.
In a separate section of the report, HRW castigated the UK for its pioneering policy of allowing terrorism suspects to be transferred to the care of brutal regimes on receipt of what the group termed "empty promises of humane treatment".

"The fact that promises of humane treatment from state torturers are inherently untrustworthy and have not worked in a number of cases does not seem to bother London," it said. "The goal is to deport terrorism suspects, no matter what - and if brokering unreliable, unenforceable agreements with states that torture is what it takes, then so be it."

The UK had sought such assurances from "a veritable A-list of abusive regimes", among them Algeria, Egypt and Libya, HRW said, with other countries now following its lead.
Russia, the report noted, happily accepted such diplomatic assurances from Uzbekistan, "a notorious practitioner of torture".

Bye Bye Peter MacMahon!

So it's bye bye to Peter MacMahon, moved over to the Scotsman's business desk from the politics. That the Scotsman imagined this guy was a suitable political editor when he was previously working directly for the Labour party says a lot about the paper.

They were never interested in genuine political journalism, instead they preferred to get an Ex Spin Doctor to spin lies and half truths about the SNP. Now it appears even they are sick of him, maybe they think their new Lib Dem supporting hack is more subtle, who knows?

Good riddence to MacMahon anyway, you won't be missed.

Festival is (not) key terror target

This from the hootsman:

http://thescotsman.scotsman.com/scotland/Festival-is-key-terror-target.3723328.jp#2425482

Headline: Festival is key terror target

Actuality: "I don't have specific intelligence that Edinburgh is going to be the next target."

This is typical of the dishonest reporting of this newspaper. If there needed to be a headline at all it would have been much more accurate (but less deliberately alarming) to say:
"Policeman warns of possible threat to Festival"

There is a very thin line between warning of possible dangers and actively encouraging it.

Unfortunately since the Glasgow attempt it is obvious that we are a target but it is also equally obvious that we shouldn't be since foreign policy is not controlled in Scotland. Until we are an independent country that can make our own voice heard internationally we will continue to pay the price for intemperate actions and language by senior politicians in the UK and US.

This claim which has no obvious basis in reality is designed to stoke up fear and encourage people to agree to further removal of human rights and democratic safeguards. It's a bit like the UK Government who have in writing admitted that ID cards have nothing whatsover to do with combatting terrorism yet despite this regularly suggest that they might do so.

This British Government is a disaster, it doesn't represent the views of most Scots and without independence we will always be in danger both from terrorists and from right of centre politicians who are desperate to grab more police powers.

Scotland has to fight for a fair deal on new oil negotiations

by former SNP leader Gordon Wilson (writing in the Sunday Herald)

ON THE face of it, this was very good news. After losing the benefits of the oil in the North Sea, Scotland could have a second chance in the eastern Atlantic. Until recently, this has been legally impossible; only the Continental Shelf could be developed. Now the UN has opened up new frontiers in deeper waters - provided the adjoining nations agree.

If Scotland were independent, we would be negotiating the division of 162,935 square miles of sea bed forming the Rockall/Hatton Basin, deemed to be oil-rich. But Scotland is not a negotiating party along with Ireland, Iceland and Denmark (acting for the Faroe Islands) who all have claims. Our seat is occupied by the British government in London. So what's the problem? Surely it will look after Scotland's interests?

But will it? The evidence is that the British government has a habit of ignoring the interests of the Scottish people if they clash with imperial priorities. In the early 1970s, the Heath government sacrificed the needs of the Scottish fishing industry to get into the Common Market. The Common Fisheries Policy surrendered Scottish waters to European competitors. Ever since, Britain has treated fishing as an unimportant British issue.

Evidence from government records, recently issued after 30 years, shows that Westminster governments conspired to deceive the Scottish people as to the value of Scotland's oil, in order to retain the oil revenues for the British Treasury.

Be careful Scotland! We can't trust the Foreign Office to look after our interests. The four negotiating countries are not bound by law on the setting of boundaries, and can mutually agree deals - deals which may not benefit Scotland. As with fishing, Scotland can be ignored. And didn't Downing Street recently do a deal on prisoner transfers to Libya without consulting the Scottish government? Yet we're asked to trust them.

We'd be mad to do so. I have written to Alex Salmond about these negotiations, advising that the Scottish government become involved. We must know what's been agreed in our name and hire lawyers and oil experts so we can ensure any deal is fair. If he is blocked by London, it should be made clear that independent Scotland will not accept a damaging treaty.

Mr Salmond should alert the Danish, Irish and Icelandic governments. I am sure the Faroese, represented by Denmark, will be consulted and this will be a powerful argument for the Scottish government to use.

Gordon Wilson is former director of the It's Scotland's Oil campaign

http://www.sundayherald.com/oped/opinion/display.var.1945357.0.0.php

Plot to damage support for Scottish independence

I believe that the so called Scottish National Liberation Army (SNLA) is a mythical organisation invented to damage the cause of Scottish independence. Any Scots supporter of independence would be aware that any terrorist action would and could only damage our cause which is reliant on convincing the majority of Scots to vote for normal powers for Scotland.

It seems more than likely that this bizarre plan did not emanate from any person who lives north of the border. Someone unknown has recruited a nutter from England to attempt to damage our cause. Any Englishman who wants to kill his fellow Englishmen is quite clearly mad and he has obviously been manipulated by someone else.

I suspect the hidden hand of the British secret service in this plot and in all the other activies by the one man letter bomber Matt Busby which have been reported at convenient times over the years (ie any time support for independence is on the rise). Mr Busby seems to be allowed to act as an extremely convenient bogey man despite the fact he could have been arrested quite easily by Britain years ago.

Man accused of poison plot for Scottish independence
Press Association
Monday January 7, 2008

An Englishman sent poisoned drinks to public figures as part of a plot to try to force the British government out of Scotland, a court was told today. Wayne Cook, 45 also threatened to kill English people "with no hesitation or compunction" by poisoning water supplies, Manchester crown court heard. Cook, of Tyldesley, Greater Manchester, is charged with two counts of using noxious substances or things to cause harm and intimidate, under anti-terrorism legislation.

Americans will welcome Scottish independence

It was a pleasure to see Floyd McKay address the historic events unfolding in Scotland ["Scot free," guest commentary, Jan. 6].

Last spring, Scots elected the first government in 300 years that wants Scotland to rejoin the international community as an equal and independent partner.

Perhaps more importantly, First Minister Alex Salmond is the country's first leader who trusts the people to decide Scotland's future in a referendum.

McKay correctly wrote that "there is little question that Scotland is capable of handling its own affairs." There is no need to use negative words like "separation" or "breakup," however, when far more apt words would be "independence" and "international engagement."

The democratic deficit always struck me, as an American who worked at the Scottish Parliament and government, as curious. Scotland is an immensely wealthy nation — rich in education (with first-class universities), natural resources (including much of Europe's oil), and industry (with enviable financial and biotech sectors). Why shouldn't Scots consider independence, just as their neighbors, Ireland, Iceland and Norway, have done?

If Scots choose independence at the ballot box, Americans should welcome an old friend to the community of nations. After all, independence has worked well for us.

— Jennifer Erickson, Washington, D.C.

From the Seattle Times
http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/opinion/2004120603_sunlets13.html

Peter MacMahon - The backstabber who worked for Labour

Here's a few interesting archive articles about Peter MacMahon who despite working for the McLeish Labour administration, the Scotsman still thinks we should listen to his opinions as a journalist. Just how thick do they think we are?!

In fact MacMahon still tries to put his most positive spin on everything Labour does and attacks the SNP at every turn. Is he inspired by guilt? Taking the Scotsman's 5K to rat on his old boss who despite his faults still actually appeared to have some small ambition for his own country something which was obviously lacking in his successor Jack McConnell. It was amusing to read of McConnell being abused in London by his political masters but it also showed the contempt they have always had for the office of First Minister (Brown has only ever phoned Alex Salmond ONCE it was revealed this week). no doubt McLeish's job was hardly helped when wee Wendy used to go above his head to Gordon Brown, nor no doubt was he helped by being advised by Peter MacMahon!

Ian MacWhirter lays out the facts:

The backstabber; It was the ultimate kiss and tell. Peter MacMahon's

http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_qn4156/is_20020127/ai_n9626593

and the Sunday Herald's opinion on it:

http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_qn4156/is_20020127/ai_n9626608

Who knows, who cares if MacMahon's slavish pro Labour pieces are due to guilt over his past actions, what's very clear is that Peter MacMahon is in no way a non biased journalist (if he ever was one in the past) and as long as the Scotsman employs him they show that they have as little interest in the truth as he has.

Happy New Year!

The idea that Scotland is well served by the union is an absurd one. The fact is that (as Wendy Wood once memorably pointed out) England is far larger than Scotland and has far more Westminister MP's and if the analogy was a football match then England would have over 100 players to our eleven!

Our unionist 'friends' appear to believe that's just dandy that it's some kind of honour and privilege to have a poor rate of growth in the economy and to give up taxes on oil revenues, that it's great to be a nuclear target and have nuclear weapons that Scotland does not want or require to prop up a relationship with the US which benefits only one side. Brown's Britain might psychologically require a nuclear virility symbol to maintain delusions of grandeur but Scotland does not need or want such rubbish, what we do need is the international representation that membership of the UK denies to us.

There is a clear choice nowadays between those who want normal powers for our country and those who want to see a situation continue where we have a pocket money parliament which lacks crucial political powers. Between those who want no Scottish representation at the UN or the EU and those who want proper representation.

Between those who want to hold a conversation about self government and those who just want to provide the bare minimum of powers that won't upset their party leaders in London.We know where Labour stand and it's not in Scotland's corner. If they are getting cuffed in the polls then it is well deserved.

When the Tories ignored Scottish opinion they achieved long term pariah status. labour deserve the same and their former junior partner the risible undemocratic liberal party deserve to go down as well.

Happy New Year all!

Last year was the year when for the first time the largest group of Scots voters voted for a party that believes in Scotland. I'm very proud of that achievement particularly when the press coverage was so ridiculously biased against the SNP.

Express Group to back Scottish Independence!

Recent Daily Express headline highlighting a readers poll which showed massive support for Scottish independence. According to the Guardian the whole Express group of papers are about to declare their support for normal powers for Scotland.

This is welcome move by the 'Scottish' Daily Express. Though London owned and controlled the fact that the owners see a commercial benefit in making this political move suggests the independence cause is being treated more seriously by the British media.

Like the Sun we can no doubt expect a later return to unionism, however it's still better to have one paper on our side than none. My late grandmother read the Express as do many older people so hopefully this move will encourage some older voters to be less resistant to the general idea of independence. (It would be great if the Sunday Post could adjust it's line as well).

Recent polls suggest that Labour's harsh scaremongering tactics (backed up by a compliant media) have, as they were designed to do, put a short lived scare into older people (and women) over independence. Luckily the sight of a Scottish Government doing a more effective job than the British Government and standing up for our interests (Salmond delivered a great talk tonight about supporting Gaelic broadcasting) will convince a majority throughout Scotland to support independence in a future referendum.

---------

Extract of article from the Guardian (full version here: http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2007/dec/19/dailyexpress.pressandpublishing?gusrc=rss&feed=media )

Once one of the most widely-read papers in Scotland, the paper's sales have been suffering. It has been sold as the Scottish Daily Express for decades, long before other London titles launched dedicated Scottish editions, and commanded substantial loyalty among its readers.

The Audit Bureau of Circulations put Daily Express sales in November in Scotland at 80,454, against 127,759 for the Daily Mail. Desmond's other titles - the Daily Star, which sells 91,668 copies a day in Scotland, and the Sunday Express, selling 44,472 - are also expected to join the pro-independence push. Last weekend, the Sunday Express carried an opinion piece by Alex Salmond, setting out the case for independence.

This new editorial stance is a minor coup for First Minister Salmond. Although the Sun briefly flirted with nationalism in the early 1990s, Scottish daily papers have traditionally been neutral or firmly pro-union. At the last Scottish parliamentary election in May, the Scotsman declared itself tentatively pro-SNP but opposed independence, while only Sunday papers boldly embraced the nationalist party.

Daily Telegraph pleads 'call yourself British' - Game Over 4 unionists

I find it tremendously amusing that the Daily Telegraph are so desperate to prop up the failing concept of Britishness that they are now running a campaign for English people to call themselves British!

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/opinion/main.jhtml?xml=/opinion/2007/12/10/dl1001.xml

This is because even according to their own polling most English people prefer to call themselves English rather than British.

When the only part of the UK that got any benefit from the British union can't even be bothered terming themselves by their past imperialist identity it shows that the union is well past it's sell by date and suits no-one. The Telegraph's campaign won't work any more than Brown's plans for a British national day or a new 'national' anthem.

The Scots and English have outgrown the British identity, we don't need it and we don't want it.

It's almost as funny as 'call me Dave' lecturing the Scots on Britishness (to a hand picked gathering of Tory party activists of course, he wouldn't want to hear from any real people in Scotland, the Tories ignored our views for their entire term in power!) :

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2007/12/10/nbrits410.xml

"an English politician in a Scottish city saying clearly today and for all time that Britain comes first"

What a shock! We really thought the Tories might have an interest in standing up for Scotland? Aye right! The puppets are still firmly attached to their strings.

Mr Cameron waxes lyrical about the enlightenment and yet during that period if any enlightened soul criticised the British union they were put in irons and sent to Botany Bay!

The enlightenment wasn't a political enlightenment, it was a time of severe political oppression and also the time when the Brits tried to remove Scottish identity altogether.

Luckily for us enough of our historic contemparies were as fond of the idea of 'North Britain' as most of us are today and the concept was (eventually) given the bum's rush.

It's a pity Tory leader David Cameron cannot realise that in Scotland people are most proud of being Scottish, and in England most people consider themselves to be English. We CAN have an equal relationship - when both our countries are independent and we are NOT locked into a union with a country ten times our size.

Get hame to yer bed 'new boy David' and leave Scottish politics to those that have a genuine interest in it!

Melanie Reid's bile against Scotland doesn't become her

10/12/2007

Letter to the Editor
The Times

Sir,

If I was Melanie Reid's doctor I would be seriously concerned. Her article about St Andrew's day 'wake me up I'm trapped in a wee nightmare' suggests she is in imminent danger of choking on her own bile.

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/comment/columnists/melanie_reid/article2988408.ece

What annoys me about unionists is that while they seem to hate Scottish nationalism they at the same time ignore all the flaws in British nationalism. Thus people like Billy Connolly can shower scorn on the SNP while being proud of his status as 'a Commander in the British Empire'. Isn't that a ridiculous imperialist ostentation? Isn't the SNP's civic form of nationalism more admirable than Gordon Brown's attempts to invent a British national day?

Melanie Reid thinks the height of Scottish culture is masquerading in a Russ Abbot style 'see you Jimmy' wig, that says nothing about Scotland but it says a lot about her contempt for her own country. Does Reid wince like a scalded cat when she sees a Saltire? Does her heart beat with horror when the Scotland football team play?

I believe that Reid is a victim of the British cringe. An inability to see the worth of her own nation because someone sold her on the idea of Britishness as a kid.

That big map with the pink bits showing Britain's imperial extent has left her jealous that anyone else might have some justifiable pride in Scotland on our national day.

Sad for her, not so sad for the rest of us.

Yours faithfully,

Joe Middleton

Just what the doctor ordered

Great article - quite frankly I'm surprised the SoS printed it as it's well above their usual standard. JOE

by DANI GARAVELLI (from Scotland on Sunday)

IMAGINE you are suffering from asthma. Your GP has recommended you take salbutamol and beclomethasone, but you can't really afford two prescription charges this week, so you toss up and opt for salbutamol. As a result, you have a severe attack and end up at A&E in the early hours of the morning - a visit that costs the NHS much more than the £6.85 you just saved.

Or perhaps you are suffering from depression that has been kept at bay by a mixture of drugs, but it's Christmas and you've presents to buy so you decide to skip your medication for a couple of weeks and find yourself unable to cope. How much does your inability to pay for your prescription cost the country in terms of arranging foster care for your children and loss of productivity? Then there is the anomaly of cancer patients who receive drugs free in hospital, but have to pay once they go home to their families.

Wherever you stand ideologically on prescription charges - and since the NHS is supposed to be free at the point of use it is easy to argue they should never have been introduced in the first place - the way the system is currently administered is a mess. Not only are they an inefficient form of taxation (they are costly to process and 90% of them are free), but the system of exemptions is arbitrary and unfair: the cut-off point for those eligible for free prescriptions on the grounds of low income is so sharp that those who are just above it often end up worse off than those who are just below it, and the list of those exempted on the grounds of chronic conditions has not been updated since the Sixties, before conditions such as HIV existed and before asthma was so widespread.

Those not exempted can benefit from a Prescription Prepayment Certificate (PPC), a three-month, six-month or 12-month pre-payment or "season" ticket which will save them money. But this adds to the bureaucracy and is not widely publicised. A recent survey by the National Association of Citizens' Advice Bureaux (Nacab) found 27% of those who could have benefited from PPCs did not even know of their existence.

Last week, the Scottish Executive tried to address these inequities by pledging to reduce the charges steadily every year until 2011 when they will be scrapped altogether. Instead of being lauded, they found themselves facing criticism, both from those who believe those who can afford to pay should continue to do so, and those who believe the party should have kept to the letter of its manifesto promise -which was to scrap prescription charges for those chronic conditions immediately.
But it seems to me the party has walked a tightrope between ideology and fiscal prudence with considerable agility. Research shows a direct link between prescription charges and the failure to manage drug regimes properly.

A survey carried out in 2001 showed around 50% of those who had received a prescription in the past year (and about two-thirds with long-term health problems) found it difficult to meet the charges, while Nacab estimates about 100,000 of its clients fail to make full use of their prescriptions. For the government of a country with a low life expectancy that supports improving access to health services to allow this situation to continue would have been unthinkable.

Yet almost two years ago, the Labour executive did precisely that, voting against the Scottish Socialist Party Bill with a fraction of the backlash the SNP is now facing. One option the new executive could have considered was to extend the number of exemptions, but instigating a sweeping review of which chronic conditions should be included would have been time-consuming and expensive, and many people felt it would be unfair to keep charging a smaller and smaller proportion of the population.

As for the SNP's decision not to axe prescription charges for those with chronic conditions sooner, it is unfortunate, but it would be particularly wasteful to launch a review expected to take until 2009 to complete when prescription charges will cease to exist in four years' time.

The party has already pledged to reduce the cost of prescriptions - to £5 next year and by a further £1 a year to 2011, and could easily help ease the burden on those who need regular medication by advertising the "season ticket" option more widely.
Those who oppose the scrapping of charges say they are necessary as a barrier to demand; that if they were abolished patients would seek prescriptions for drugs such as paracetemol that they would previously have bought over the counter. Some doctors have recommended the imposition of a token charge of say £1: small enough not to jeopardise people's access to medication, but enough to remind them that drugs are not free and should not be sought frivolously.

Early studies of the situation in Wales - where prescription charges were scrapped in April - however, suggested no perceptible change in GPs' prescribing habits and only a slight rise in the number of patients asking for prescriptions for over-the-counter medicines. There, patients are reaping the benefits of not having to worry about whether or not they can afford to take the drugs they need and administration has been reduced.

You really have to be the kind of person for whom the glass is always half empty to berate the SNP for "reneging" on a tiny part of its manifesto pledge, when what it has actually done is to commit to a socialist policy that Scottish Labour bodyswerved for a decade.

The fear of Scottish independence that unites historic enemies

A couple of superb letters from the Herald:

Scotland's parliament, after years in the doldrums, has sprung to life following the May elections. Not only has the minority SNP government been extremely active, but now the three big opposition parties are uniting in a "historic" cause to improve and develop the powers of the Scottish people. Historic enemies such as Labour and the Tories have put aside their differences to work in common cause for the Scottish people. How wonderful, so what has driven them together? I can only just remember the last time it happened, when Nazi aircraft were bombing us. So what force is driving them together now?

Well, it is obvious to me that the enemy which now confronts them, and which drives them into each other's arms, is the pressure from the Scottish people demanding more power for the Scottish Parliament, and their fear that this will result in Scottish independence. Which Labour has been trying to ignore until now.

Their urgent odd-fitting coalition is designed to stop this at all costs. As usual, they all know what they don't want but they are far from certain about what they do. They reject any common ground with the SNP government. They reject the ideas of Canon Kenyon Wright, who wants this debate to be inclusive.

Their belated recognition that Scotland must have a greater say in how its people and resources are used, is welcome. However, their attempt to divert us from getting the power we need to stop our young people from being killed in an illegal war in Iraq, or to stop nuclear weapons being based in our country, is futile.

They have entered into the debate, which they are most welcome to do, but they do not have, and cannot have, the right to control or direct it.

Andy Anderson, 22 Earlish, Nr Portree, Isle-of-Skye.

It is interesting to see the timely parallels between Kosovo's battle for independence, and the ongoing debate on our own nation's constitutional future.

For months the future of the Serbian breakaway province of Kosovo has been uncertain, and after 120 days of negotiations between Serbian and Kosovo Albanian leaders, sponsored by a troika comprising US, Russia and the EU, no conclusion has been reached.

Following this failure, Kosovo's Albanian leaders are expected to declare independence, creating Europe's newest nation, a declaration that is expected to be recognised by the UK Government.
Contrast this with the Constitutional Commission devised by the opposition parties in the Scottish Parliament and supported by their London masters, which is to review the devolution settlement and the powers of the Scottish Parliament, but will stop short of independence.

It is rather ironic that while, on the one hand, we see London Labour approve Kosovan independence, it denies the Scottish people a say on their own constitutional future through a referendum, failing even to include the option of independence in their own commission.

Alex Orr, Flat 8, 35 Bryson Road, Edinburgh.

Welsh Leader seeks SNP link

LABOUR'S Welsh First Minister Rhodri Morgan wants to work with Alex Salmond to find a common approach to working with Westminster. The two men held talks yesterday at Mr Salmond's official residence, Bute House in Charlotte Square.

Later, Mr Morgan delivered a lecture at Edinburgh University in which he argued that both Scotland and Wales were moving on to "Devolution Mark Two". Mr Morgan said: "Alex Salmond and I come from very different political traditions, but that doesn't mean we can't find things to work together on."

---------------

Good news! Wales and Scotland have had a very similar experience of British rule and Mr Morgan is currently in an alliance with Plaid Cymru in the Welsh assembly.

How much are the papers worth to unionists?

According to the ever more laughable Scotsman the SNP bought the last election because Brian Souter gave them a donation:





I must have fell asleep during the election campaign, because what I remember is the newspapers giving regular huge ridiculous headlines to the idea that Armageddon would happen if anyone dared vote SNP!

How much was that worth to the Labour party and their fellow unionists? How much is the extraordinary blatant bias of the Daily Record (which is now handed out for free on the streets of Edinburgh) and the Scotsman worth?

Much of the Scottish press can't get over the fact they all told people to vote against the SNP and yet the party still won the elections. In fact the SNP are now riding higher than ever in the opinion polls despite the continued efforts of the Britman which even managed to concoct a negative headline out of the fact revealed yesterday than the SNP is committed to removing prescription charges over the course of the parliament- a change which the Scotsman campaigned for!!!

Increasingly no one believes one word of the Scotsman or the Daily Record with their ridiculous bias, if a new paper was set up now which offered an alternative to these papers (ie some fair reporting of the news) it would potentially clear up.

SCOTSMAN CHOPS WENDY ALEXANDER/PETER MACMAHON LETTER

Well the Scotsman printed my letter:



No comparison to be made


Peter MacMahon attempts to compare the illegal donation to Wendy Alexander's leadership campaign with Professor David Bell's research that some council tax payers might lose pennies on their benefits if the SNP's council tax freeze goes ahead (Opinion, 4 December).


If there are no increases in council tax then common sense indicates that all tax payers will be better off than if there had been an increase.


If your council tax is currently paid by benefits agencies then you will see no difference in your income whatsoever.


If the government pays out slightly less council tax relief then this is a saving of pennies for the government not a serious hit on the incomes of low earners and it is quite frankly an insult to suggest otherwise.


JOE MIDDLETON
Wardieburn Place South
Edinburgh




http://thescotsman.scotsman.com/letters.cfm?id=1901652007



Sadly they chopped all the decent bits, full version is below:



Come on, come off it!


Sir,


I know Peter MacMahon is an ex-Labour party spin doctor but his latest attempt to spin Labour out of difficulty beggars belief 'SNP in no position to claim moral high ground' Scotsman 04/12.
MacMahon attempts to compare the illegal donation to Wendy Alexander's leadership campaign with the Scotsman's research that some council tax payers might lose pennies on their benefits if the SNP's council tax freeze goes ahead.


If there are no increases in Council Tax then common sense indicates that all tax payers will be better off than if there had been an increase. If your council tax is currently paid by benefits agencies then you will see no difference in your income whatsoever.


If the Government pays out slightly less Council Tax relief then this is a saving of pennies for the Government not a serious hit on the incomes of low earners and it is quite frankly an insult to suggest otherwise.


Mr MacMahon's new found concern about the pennies of the under classes is as unconvincing as Ms Alexander's explanations that she didn't know her donor was off shore despite writing to him at his home address!


Yours faithfully,


Joe Middleton

WENDY SCUPPERS HER OWN DEFENCE

This was reported in the Scotsman today:

"But Ms Alexander has a series of e-mails, between herself and Charlie Gordon, the Labour MSP who solicited the donation on her behalf, in which she asks Mr Gordon about the legality of the donation."

This suggests that Ms Alexander KNEW or at least SUSPECTED that the donation was dodgy before she wrote to the donor's Jersey address thanking him for the money. Up to now she has claimed that she didn't know she had done wrong, but now we know in fact she did but was willing to accept dubious assurances from Charlie Gordan MSP (who has been set up as a sacrificial lamb, watch for a by-election defeat from the SNP shortly).

Open mouth insert foot - this email trail will haunt Alexander in the future.

'KEEP CRUSHING THOSE SCOTS' SAYS BROWN

British Prime Minister Gordon Brown has rejected calls to amend the British national anthem 'God Save the Queen' which refers to 'rebellious Scots to crush' a reference to the Jacobite uprising.

The national anthem is not inclusive and should perhaps be changed, Lord Goldsmith, the former attorney general now leading a citizenship review for Gordon Brown, has suggested.
He said that there were problems with some of the later verses of the anthem, which refer to "rebellious Scots" being crushed.

Lord Goldsmith said: "Part of it is not actually that inclusive, but that's if you go on to the later verses. "Some people have suggested we might think about whether there are different words that might be put in place which would be more inclusive."

But last night, Number 10 made clear that Lord Goldsmith's plan was not backed by Gordon Brown, himself a Scot representing a Scottish constituency. A Downing Street spokesman said: "This does not reflect the Government's views. We are proud of our national anthem and the traditions it represents."

Lord Goldsmith's suggestion also brought an immediate rebuke from a Tory MP who warned that such a change could lead to the "unravelling all sorts of things". Andrew Rosindell, MP for Romford in Essex, told the Daily Telegraph: "I don't think we need to change the national anthem. It's an historic anthem."

Mr Rosindell, who two years ago complained that the national anthem was no longer played at the end of main programming each night on BBC1, also dismissed calls for the Welsh Dragon to be added to the Union flag.

-----------------

Who cares about the Scots and Welsh, that's the 'inner meaning 'of this story. The British flag with it's St George's Cross dominating the front and with the saltire to the rear shows the relative powers within the union. Wales flag is too different so they don't even bother including it.

Dump the anthem, dump the union and dump Gordon Brown a Scot who doesn't even have the bottle to object to his fellow Scots being crushed in the British national song! You can imagine his instinctive response: Mr Brown felt it might be too embarassing (for him) to change the national anthem. "As a Scot I find it a privelege to be crushed by Britain."

Scots Wha Hae should be our national anthem after independence but up till then the people's choice 'Flower of Scotland' must prevail. 'We can still rise now and be a nation again' is a sentiment which has genuine relevance.

Britain and England can have whatever anthems they like because they have no relevance to us anyway, just don't expect us to sing 'em.

Who benefits from move to 'De-Tox' Scots Tories?

The Conservatives. It doesn't help the SNP one iota but it does suggest that the SNP are daft enough to believe David Cameron's cynical rebranding exercise.

I hope the SNP activists prove to be wiser than SNP MSP's and vote to maintain the complete bar on working with the Conservatives. The ban shows the party's rightful disdain for the Conservatives who have a long history of being both anti-Scottish and of completely ignoring Scottish views.

The Tories are the party of Thatcher. Cameron's 'Mr nice' persona doesn't fit with the grassroots of his party. The SNP should do nothing to help the Tories get back involved in the Scottish mainstream, they are irrelevant to Scotland like ALL their fellow unionists.

The SNP is a democratic party so despite the fact that this is being raised there is no guarantee that it will be passed. I think the SNP activists will be likely to decide that continuing to keep the Tories at arms length is a good idea and will vote accordingly.

Des Browne - I give very little time to Scotland job

Des Browne the Defence Secretary has admitted that he hardly gives any time to his Scottish Secretary job and claims he spends most of his time on defence matters (he is joint Defence and Scottish Secretary).

Browne has admitted he carries out his duties as Secretary of State for Scotland in his spare time as he attempts to fight claims he is a "part-time" Defence Secretary. His dual mandate at the Ministry of Defence and the Scotland Office has sparked anger from former military chiefs and opposition MPs, who say he needs to devote his entire time to defence matters.

But Mr Browne yesterday insisted the armed forces should not feel insulted by his juggling act, as he spent the same amount of time on defence as he did before he was landed with the Scotland Office portfolio in June.

His admission came after the Tory leader, David Cameron, called on Gordon Brown, the Prime Minister, to appoint a full-time defence secretary on the back of a row sparked by five former military chiefs. Although Mr Browne was in Glasgow yesterday attending a conference on regenerating the city, he made clear that defence took up most of his diary.

"I would put my record on commitment and delivery up against anyone's," he said. "The amount of time that [the job of Scottish Secretary] takes comes out of what was my private life, my family's life and my constituents' time."

Mr Browne added: "I devote as much time to being Secretary of State for Defence as I did in the time that I was not Secretary of State for Scotland. "I have been with more regularity into the operational theatres than any secretary of defence ever has been, and when I go out and talk to troops they don't raise these abstract issues about what other title you may have. They look to see what I do. And if you have some criticism about a part of the job I should have been doing and I'm not doing, I will answer it."

The Conservatives were quick to blame the dual mandate on the Prime Minister. Mr Browne was already Defence Secretary when the Prime Minister added the Scotland portfolio to his workload nearly six months ago.

In a letter to Mr Brown, Mr Cameron said: "At a time when our forces are engaged in two highly dangerous missions in Iraq and Afghanistan, the need for the Defence Secretary to be able to concentrate full-time on his role is surely a matter of plain commonsense.

"People do not understand why you have chosen to combine the job of Defence Secretary with Scottish secretary at such a crucial time."

Liam Fox, the shadow defence secretary, said Mr Browne was "having to spend time fighting the SNP and the Taleban", calling this "an insult to the men and women of our armed forces".

----

What utter contempt for Scotland. We don't need Des Browne, we don't need a Scottish Secretary or a Scottish Office, what we do need is independence, soon.

Determination's Coull is still desperately attacking IF

Had the misfortune to go on Our Scotland website and came across this thread:

http://ourscotland.myfreeforum.org/sutra51431.php#51431

...where my former colleague in Independence First (now part of 'Determination') Dave Coull is trying (and failing) to tarnish another IF member (Kevin Williamson)'s reputation.

Contrary to Mr Coull's interpretation of events, it was his own nit picking and dubious approach to debate which led to IF closing down our member's forum. If he wants to blame anyone for it he can blame me and not Kev who wasn't at the meeting who decided it (and indeed objected to the decision afterwards).

Members at the meeting which decided to close the forum felt it would be better (and politer) if any grievances were addressed at meetings face to face rather than through an online forum which tended lend itself to pedants who wouldn't let any point go and would waste everyone's time.

This has proven to be the case. Of course this was not the real reason Dave Coull and others left to form Determination, the real reason was that their pal Neal Caple was bumped as Convenor in a democratic vote and replaced with our current convener, Eric Canning.

They've bumped their gums about Canning's membership of the Communist Party of scotland (which supports independence) yet have overlooked Canning's massive experience as a former Vice Chair of the Scottish Constitutional Convention. Sadly they could not accept democracy when it didn't go their way and even had the cheek to mis-use our database to send out their propaganda.

Independence First has organised two rallies for an independence referendum, we have also organised an online petition for a referendum and have received answers from the British Government (unsatisfying answers but answers nonetheless).

The departure of Coull and his friends has left us with less activists, however at least we don't have to put up with the childish behaviour of Mr Coull and can ignore most of his outbursts.

Independence First is now working with the Independence Convention to create a new and stronger petition demanding an independence referendum. We believe that after 300 years the Scottish people need to have a direct say on the self determination of their country.

The fight goes on and anyone who wants to join Independence First should come to the Wash bar in Edinburgh tonight at 6.30pm.

3rd Time Unlucky for Alexander as she appoints spin doctor who admires SNP!

(from Sunday Herald)

SCOTTISH LABOUR'S new spin-doctor made a series of damning criticisms of his colleagues weeks before he accepted the job as the party's head of communications. Gavin Yates used his blog to describe Wendy Alexander as "abrasive", labelled shadow health minister Andy Kerr as "simply uninspiring", and blasted Jack McConnell for being a "lame duck leader" when in office.

He also said the fledgling SNP government had a "long and impressive" list of achievements, while describing first minister Alex Salmond as "a great example of a politician on top of his game".

The online blasts are the latest PR disaster for Alexander who, as Labour's newly appointed Holyrood leader, has watched two spin-doctors quit in as many months.

The first press aide, Brian Lironi, quit his post in September, days after she had been formally installed as leader.

Then her media chief, Matthew Marr, resigned in disgrace eight days ago after shouting the c-word at Salmond during an awards ceremony.

Alexander is set for further embarrassment after it emerged that Yates - the Labour group's new head of communications - attacked his future bosses weeks before accepting the new job.

His comments featured on his WordPress-hosted blog, GYmedia. A message on the blog page now states: "The authors have deleted this blog. The content is no longer available." But the Sunday Herald has uncovered a number of Yates's postings, many of which portray the Labour leadership in a negative light.

On Alexander's speech to the UK Labour conference in September, one of his internet postings states: "New Labour leader Wendy Alexander was rather less positive, using her conference speech to apologise' for losing the last election in Scotland. Rather odd: and certainly doesn't bode well for her renewal agenda.

"The news yesterday that her spinner-in-chief Lironi had resigned after a month, to be replaced by a man who ripped up his party card a few years ago, does not augur a speedy return to government either."

The same entry, which was made days after Alexander became leader, saw him aim a jibe in her direction: "As Gordon Brown considers taking the biggest political risk of his life, the Scottish government can go along unhindered by a competent opposition."

Brits 'R' now Bhoys as Reid becomes Celtic Chairman

Celtic Football Club have recently appointed John Reid MP as their club chairman. Reid is a London orientated British unionist who has shown a constant and visceral hatred of his own country's aspirations towards independence.

A former Communist, Reid embraced the New Labour project for the sake of his own career. He worked besides Tony Blair and Gordon Brown as they neutered Labour into a washed out shadow of the Conservative party and they all went along with the US in the ill thought out and ultimately illegal invasion of Iraq.

As Home Secretary he demanded that immigrants should speak English and used internment camps where asylum seeking families were kept in captivity by the British Government.

This is the man who every year got up and waffled a lot of hypocritical drivel about socialism at Labour's party conferences (while his colleagues tried to privatise the NHS and introduced student loans!). Reid has been praised for his political 'X-factor' but in fact he is a brazen demagogue who could and would say anything to retain political power. Whenever Tony Blair needed someone to defend the indefensible John Reid would be wheeled out on Newsnight. (One time the old hypocrite used the fact he was Scottish to whinge that Jeremy Paxman was being racist towards him. Paxman had called him Tony Blair's attack dog, which is exactly what he was, someone who could argue black was white with fake conviction on the orders of his boss.)

Reid has no interest in Scotland whatsoever and has consistently claimed that we are too wee, too daft and too poor to be independent. Who next? Could an Ulster Unionist be chairman of Celtic? An Orangeman? If not, why not? After all they pretty much share the same opinions as Doctor Reid about Scotland and Ireland when it comes to their rights to independence.

It is a sad fact that some people in Britain have a hatred for the Irish, a hatred which is promoted by the Orange Lodge and by other organisations like the Masons which are effectively anti-Catholic societies.

The continued prescence of the ubiquitous Irish joke, clearly designed to portray the Irish as thickos undeserving of independence (a bit like the tight Jocks) shows a society which has racist opinions at it's core.

The loud mouthed bigoted types who originally demonstrated against Irish immigration nowadays turn their hatred on Poles and other new migrants but it is all part of an imperialist mindset which talk of 'them' and 'us', us being assumed to be the Brits, the false imperial identity designed to justify an Empire which doesn't fit Scotland or Ireland well and never has.

The most obvious representatives of this imperialist misplaced hatred is the Orange Order, which is not only against Irish independence (and Catholic Schools and anything else to do with promoting Roman Catholism) it is also actively campaigning against Scottish independence. Last year the order had one of their biggest ever demonstrations in Scotland, specifically against Scottish independence. 10,000 Orangemen marched through Edinburgh to oppose our rights to rule ourselves!

For Celtic to appoint John Reid an arch enemy of both Scotland and Ireland as their club chairman beggers belief, the fans might as well burn all their Tricolours and join their old rivals Rangers in waving the Butcher's Apron because that is what this pompous jingoistic cretin has built his 'career' on waving.

Answer received from German Consulate re Potterings remarks

I put in a complaint to the German Consulate in Scotland about the comments of the EU President (and German Euro MP) Hans Pöttering who said he felt that Scotland should not consider independence and would be better of remaining in the UK, an extraordinary comment from a supposedly neutral official who is supposed to represent the whole EU. I was interested to find out exactly what the German Government thought of Mr Pottering's ill judged comments.

This was the consulate's reply:

Dear Mr Middleton,

Thank you for your e-mail of 18 November 2007 regarding a recent interview by the President of the European Parliament, Mr Hans Pöttering, MEP on regional policies in Europe. As you are undoubtedly aware, Mr Pöttering acted in his capacity as Member of the European Parliament, which is an independent institution of the European Union.

As a Consul of the Federal Republic of Germany, I am not authorized to comment on any of Mr. Pöttering´s statements. All I could say on the matter is that – at the end of the day - it is up to the Scottish people to decide whether the actual devolution settlement should be altered or not.

May suggest, that you put further questions directly to the European Parliament, which might be done via the following link
https://www.secure.europarl.europa.eu/parliament/public/citizensMail/secured/cmRequest.do?cmLanguage=en

You may also write to the European Parliament Office in Scotland ( The Tun, 4 Jackson's Entry, Holyrood Road, Edinburgh EH8 8PJ or email: ependiburgh@europarl.europa.eu ).

Yours sincerely,

Ingo Radcke

Consul General of the Federal Republic of Germany 16 Eglinton Crescent Edinburgh EH12 5DG tel.: 0131-337 2323 fax: 0131-346 1578 www.edinburgh.diplo.de

Life without Scotland? Lies about Scotland more like.

Visitors to the Guardian website may be attracted by the link described as "Guardian writers examine what the UK would be like if scotland were to go it alone."

http://politics.guardian.co.uk/scotland/story/0,,2211295,00.html

Sadly on arriving they will be subjected to a rather childish, pathetic piss take which examines no issues and instead simply waffles pure drivel. That the Guardian (usually a decent paper it has to be said) should run this contemptous garbage and pass it off as genuine analysis shows that Scotland is neither treated seriously or fairly by any of the English press.

Edinburgh Independence First Meeting - 26th November

Well our dreams of football glory may have been smashed but the fight for political independence goes on!

Independence First's next big event will be the National Petition for an Independence Referendum 'Let Scotland decide' which is being organised by the Scottish Independence Convention with the assistance of IndependenceFirst.

To this end we are organising a working conference to help make sure the petition is effective at grassroots level. All members of IndependenceFirst will receive notification by mail about this with more details shortly.

Our next local Edinburgh branch meeting is on:

Monday 26th November Starting at 6.30pm, Wash Bar, 11-13 North Bank St,Edinburgh, EH1 2LP.

** ALL WELCOME **

http://www.independence1st.org

ID Cards fight steps up a gear

The NO2ID campaign is calling in it's 11,360 £10 pledges to take the anti ID card campaign to the next level, a campaign of civil disobedience against this totally unnecessary measure.

If anyone out there would like to donate to the campaign the link is here:

http://www.no2id.net/pledge/

Scotland goes down - but the fight goes on!

We were robbed. A last minute goal from a free kick which should never have been given. Sometimes it seems to be almost inevitable, Scotland puts in a brave performance yet every time we eventually go down to a heartbreaking defeat.

Yet let's face it we did well to even get into this position. we played well and had Italy on the ropes for much of the game, We can therefore be proud of our performance and hope to do better in 2010 in South Africa.

Our strong run of results in the qualifying stages of the European championships SHOULD mean we get a better draw this time and hopefully we WILL qualify for the next world cup.

Our footballers did us proud.

Well done all.

Typical bias by the Britman against SNP over Police numbers

http://thescotsman.scotsman.com/index.cfm?id=1794842007

This headline would tend to suggest that the SNP are CUTTING spending on the police and removing police men from the beat. In actual fact the SNP are INCREASING spending and are planning to recruit 500 extra officers at a cost of £54M.

It is perhaps predictable that the press would try and stab the SNP in the back over this as polls show that 'Law 'N' Order' is one of the most emotive issues around. However the fact is the SNP are spending more than Labour on the police and if they can't yet deliver the 1,000 extra police they wanted to that is because Labour in London have cut back on the parliament's funds in real terms.

Colin McKerracher, Grampian Chief Constable and president of Acpos, has said the association welcomes the announcement of the 150 extra officers.

WILLIAMSON TO LAUNCH BELLA CALEDONIA

Kev Williamson has sent out the following info re the launch of the new magazine he is publishing 'Bella Caledonia':

An event coming up this Saturday, 27th of October in Edinburgh

Time: 7.30 Location: Out of the Blue Drill Hall (former TA drill hall)

30-38 Dalmeny Street (just off Leith Walk) Edinburgh Map here: http://tinyurl.com/2xf3vu

This an event to celebrate and discuss the launch of Bella Caledonia, a brand new paper for the emergent Scotland. The newspaper is pro-independence, republican, internationalist, and anti-authoritarian. The first edition has a flagship article by Andy Wightman ("Who Owns Scotland") on ownership and control of The Balmoral Estates. It will prove The Queen does not own Balmoral Estates - and explain who does - and why we have been misled on official documents and websites about this.

These facts have never been published before and are central to the argument about land reform and taking control of all Scottish lands back into the hands of Scots.

Alasdair Gray has re-designed Bella Caledonia (a character illustrated in his novel Poor Things) and provided the artwork to create the masthead for the newspaper. Radical historian James D Young is interviewed.

There will also be a libertarian left analysis of the Veneuelan revolution 1999-2006 included in the magazine.

Rejecting the centralism and authoritarianism of the old Marxist left, promoting movements rather than parties, Bella Caledonia intends to join the dots from the political processes in Scotland, to the stateless nations of Europe, to the revolutionary Bolivarian processes at work in Latin/South America, and throughout the anti-globalisation movement.

The newspaper - which is not associated or linked to any political party or organisation - will be handed out free to all Scots who want one. First edition available on the night. 5000 print run. The discussion panel will include editors Mike Small (who helped set up IndyMedia Scotland) and Kevin Williamson (founded Rebel Inc), as well as one of Scotland's foremost radical historians, James D. Young.

(Note: Lesley Riddoch - who has contributed a piece to the newspaper about women in the Outer Hebrides and the renaming back of the Western Isles to its original Celtic name of the Hebrides - but has had to pull out of the discussion.)

---

Mike Small has written a number of excellent articles for the Guardian recently and Indy Media Scotland (which is also edited by Gus Abraham of the 1820 blog) is the most effective local Scottish news website around. - JM

Archie Stirling's Uncle wasn't as clean as he pretends

Scots' generosity of spirit stretched by MacKenzie's laughable criticisms

Following Kelvin MacKenzie's outburst on Question Time (your report, 13 October), the research assistant to Christine Grahame MSP has, presumably with approval, made complaints to the Tayside and Metropolitan police forces under Section 155 of the Criminal Justice and Public Order Act 1994.

This neatly sums up the complete uselessness of some of our MSPs and their assistants. Where's their confidence in the Scottish people? Are we so feeble that we have to go running to nanny every time anyone says anything unpleasant? Are we Scots - the greatest inventors in the world - so over-sensitive that we can't choose to either ignore or laugh at something so obviously puerile and untrue?

What MacKenzie - a talented ex-tabloid editor, journalist and broadcaster - apparently said, was that the Scots were not entrepreneurial and that they relied on the clever English for handouts. That, of course, is to paraphrase because MacKenzie was bent on milking the situation for just such a reaction as he has got. Now the office of one of our less thoughtful MSPs has decided, instead of ignoring and laughing at something so clearly untrue, to take action. The truth is that the Scots are one of the most entrepreneurial and talented races on Earth - or at least used to be - but may have occasionally been accused of being a bit dour in the humour department by those who were not subtle enough to understand "dry".

This reaction to Kelvin MacKenzie is truly sad. With crime rates rising, police time at a premium and most police stations unmanned where is our sense of proportion? Apart from anything else, the comments made MacKenzie look stupid and bigoted - we should leave it at that.

ARCHIE STIRLING
Craigarnhall
Bridge of Allan, Stirlingshire

--------------

Archie Stirling's party despite being given blanket coverage by a compliant media received an extremely low vote. This was deserved becaused it termed itself 'Scottish voice' while ignoring almost everyone in Scotland's views!

His letter tries to suggest that the SNP should be blamed for a 'nanny state' attitude because of the actions of one of their researchers, who isn't even a member of the party! "This neatly sums up the complete uselessness of some of our MSPs and their assistants."

Does it really? I don't think so, it shows that in fact our MSP's are employing people with brains who know the law of the land.

Individual political activists can take action without necessarily being asked to do so by any political party. This doesn't neatly tie in with Mr Stirling's top down 'Big Daddy knows best' type of politics however.

Stirling's 'big idea' seemed to be at the last election that he was intrinsically 'better' than all the other candidates for MSP. Presumably due to his money, his snobbery and his 'status' as the nephew of the founder of the SAS.

In fact his uncle was also involved in a coup to bring down the democratically elected Wilson Labour Government! To use this 'pedigree' was ridiculous and his right of centre unionist politics fell on deservedly deaf ears in Scotland.

More Tories? Why? The ones we have just now are bad enough.

GOOD RIDDENCE TO POMPOUS IRRELEVANT BRIT MING

Steve Bell summed up Ming's political future with this cartoon.

In a media obsessed age any personal faults are magnified. Ming might have been clever but he came across as pompous and his love for the Britain that he represented at the Olympics was out of place in modern Scotland.

His leadership has led the Scottish Lib Dems into the political wilderness with their undemocratic disdain for a referendum on Scottish independence, while at the same time demanding one on the EU. (the Tories are hypocrites in this area as well).

Dynamic politicians have charisma and earn respect no matter what their age is. Age might have been the excuse to get rid of him but the reality was that Campbell wasn't an effective leader of his party. Also, his own attempts to draw attention away from his age - claiming recently that he had 'married a young turk himself' were cringeworthy.

Since Labour have moved to the right and the Tories have moved to the left (marginally) both are attempting to occupy the voter friendly, politically muddled ''centre ground'.

In this situation the Lib Dems become irrelevant because they can't seriously compete with the 'big two'. In Scotland the SNP are a much more logical alternative to Labour and the Tories.

This leads to the question, what is the point of the Lib Dems? The answer is not a lot and they would be as well to throw their lot in entirely with the Labour party who they kept afloat in Scotland for many years. Those genuine home rulers who would balk at Labour's unionism (there doesn't seem to be a lot of them left given the non-reaction to the blocking of an indy referendum) could then move over to the much more relevant SNP.

SNP ARE RIGHT TO BACK SCOTS FARMERS

The SNP did the right thing. Scottish farmers were promised compensation and then cynically denied it. If Labour had still been in power then this would have been swept under the carpet.
Instead the SNP tried to talk to the UK Government about it but when they refused to listen they made the only possible choice and backed our farmers interests and demanded that the Goverment pay the planed compensation.

The Scotsman has become used to a supine boot licking Labour Executive which meekly follows orders whether they are in Scotlands national interest or not. We now have a Scottish Government which is prepared to fight our corner, that is a fact to be welcomed by all who have ambition for our country.

BROWN BOTTLES ELECTION AND SHOWS HIS TRUE COLOURS

Mediawatch have it absolutely right.

'Wha' will fill a cowart's grave?'

'Wha sae base as be a slave?'

'Let him turn and flee!'

Sums up Gordon Brown. The man who writes voluminous books about courage and heroism saw a couple of positive opinion polls for 'call me Dave' Cameron's Tories and ran like a big fat scared rabbit!

Brown feels 'we need some time to get to know him' yet we already know him! We know his fake bluster about Britishness and his new dodgy accent are designed to cover up his Scottishness. We know his new found love for the England team and his love for Gazza's goals are either a fabrication or an act of treason against his home country, we know he was up to his neck in the 'New Labour' project and is just as responsible ultimately for the Iraq debacle as Tony Blair.

Brown bottled it when he had the chance to defeat Blair for the leadership, he sat in the sidelines moaned and griped to journos but kept schtum while Blair sold the Labour party's soul. Now he has a chance against just as light weight a contender, against a simpering boy from the home counties and he can't even face up to him.

This individual is not fit to be British Prime Minister, he's hardly fit to be a Scottish MP, he has sold out everything and he is now sitting on borrowed time, a lame duck PM, fearful to go to the electorate because he knows he'll get humped. Good riddance Brown, you've muffed your chance and you won't get another.

LET SCOTLAND DECIDE

Isn't it ironic that the first genuinely Scottish Prime Minister we have had in some time sounds more like a 'Little Englander' than any of his predecessors? Gordon Brown has adopted the language of the far right, threatening deportations and shouting for "British jobs for British Workers". He has even embraced Margaret Thatcher's legacy and is now being given warm praise by people like Norman Tebbit.

The question is what priority does Scotland have in Brown's vision of Britain? The obvious answer is not much. Ever since James VI and I moved his court to England in 1603 we have been ruled by people who may be nominally completely Scottish but whose first thought has been to their new adopted home in England's green and pleasant land.

Who speaks for Scotland in London at the moment? Certainly not Des Browne our 'Scottish Secretary' who doesn't even listen to Wendy Alexander. It seems to be nobody at all, apart from the small current SNP Group in Parliament. If a General Election is called the Scottish people may well decide that to increase that group would be a very smart option.

As for David Cameron's Conservatives their call to 'Let the People Decide' on Europe is fair enough but it is also somewhat hypocritical when they and their fellow unionist parties are blocking a referendum on independence in Scotland. Why not let Scotland decide?

I believe that increasingly the UK parliament will be seen for what it is, an unnecessary obstacle in the path of Scotland's people which is preventing us from moving towards the type of free and social democratic state most Scots would prefer.

BOOM! MacWhirter shoots down Brown and Labour

Excellent piece from Ian MacWhirter in the Sunday Herald:

Getting the blues from Brown’s conference spin

IT'S THE eyes that are the give-away. In the sci-fi comedy Men In Black, you could tell the aliens who had stolen the bodies of Earthlings because their eyes always behaved in inhuman ways. Well, the Brownite young Turks have similar oracular ataxia: think of the thousand-yard stare of Ed Balls; the manic gleam in the eyes David Miliband; or Douglas Alexander's cross-eyed glaze, which makes the development secretary look as if he is too exhausted to see straight.

Everyone has praised Gordon Brown's conference for its unity, cleverness and presentation. How he has shafted the Tories by stealing their clothes. But there was something alien about this Labour conference, a strange look in its eyes. They behaved a little like The Stepford Wives, or some religious sect. Come to think of it, the last time I saw someone looking like David Miliband they were trying to sell me a copy of The Watchtower...

There were 81 references to "B-word" [British] in Brown's speech. He was using techniques of repetition drawn from American advertising, but it sounded neurotic, insincere, protesting too much. Then there was the ham-fisted celebration of John Smeaton, have-a-go hero of Glasgow airport. It was all so clunkingly, transparently manipulative. As Brown got up to speak, the colour of the conference stage backdrop changed from red to Tory blue to make sure TV viewers got the message.

Read full article here:

http://www.sundayherald.com/oped/opinion/display.var.1724139.0.0.php

GORDON BROWN'S LATEST FAN - NORMAN TEBBIT!

Labour's traditional supporters will surely love this, not! Not only has Brown grasped Mrs Thatcher to his buxom, now he is embraced by the grotesque Norman Tebbit, with friends like these and slogans like "Real jobs for Real Britains" Brown has proven that he is not only out of touch but like David Blunkett he'll use the race card when required. If Tebbit is supporting him, and former top Tories are welcomed at their conference, Labour must realise in their heart of hearts that they have lost their way.

Norman Tebbit - Right wing loon who invented the 'Cricket Test' which suggested that people shouldn't be allowed to stay in Britain unless they supported England at cricket.

A right wing former Tory minister praised Gordon Brown and attacked David Cameron today as the party geared up for its conference next week. Lord Tebbit, the former Conservative party chairman, said that voters believed that Mr Cameron was out of touch and had "no experience of the world". By contrast, he praised Gordon Brown's "courtesy and political nous" in inviting Lady Thatcher to No 10 at a time when the Tory leadership was attempting to distance itself from her.

In an interview with the Times, Lord Tebbit said that Mr Brown was a "very clever man and I have considerable regard for him", adding that the prime minister was not "tacky" in the manner of his predecessor, Tony Blair.

Lord Tebbit, who served in Lady Thatcher's cabinet, said that the former prime minister knew exactly what she was doing when she was photographed in Downing Street with Mr Brown earlier this month.

"I'm quite sure that Margaret Thatcher knew exactly what she was doing," he said.
"She's, first, too well-mannered to rebuff the prime minister and, second, of course, the present Conservative leadership has been at great pains to distance himself from her - and she is, after all, a woman."

He said that the present Tory party "lack somebody of the standing of Margaret". He said that the prime minister's invitation to Lady Thatcher was "Gordon Brown at his very best, a wonderful mixture of his courtesy and his political nous".

He added: "After all, Cameron described himself as the 'heir to Blair'. It's only natural that Brown should make himself the 'heir to Thatcher'. It's the perfect response, isn't it?"

LABOUR'S LOVE FOR BRITAIN WILL BE THEIR UNDOING

Alexander says sorry for letting SNP gain power at Holyrood - Wendy Alexander has apologised to the people of Scotland for allowing the SNP to be victorious over Labour in the May elections (reports the Britman).

http://thescotsman.scotsman.com/index.cfm?id=1531252007

How can Wendy Alexander apologise "to the people of Scotland" for "allowing Labour to be defeated"? The fact is that the people CHOSE the SNP because they had a positive uplifting message and faith in their own folk something Labour will never understand in a million years.

While Wendy actually apologies to her Labour chums (when in fact they should be grateful the Scots have given them the benefit of the doubt for years) and pleads for help to defeat the SNP, her boss tells us exactly why Labour will never deserve another vote from a Scot again:

Quote from the Scotsman's front page article: "And that nation, as ever, is Britain, an identity the Prime Minister again made clear he believes must come before and above those of the constituent parts of the United Kingdom."

http://thescotsman.scotsman.com/index.cfm?id=1531142007

Aye well there's the rub, if Brown doesn't care about Scotland and puts Britain first as he so clearly does, why should we care about him? The more Brown trumpets his love for Britain the more Scots will flush his party down the toilet of history. His hingers on like the Alexanders will enjoy the u-bend right beside him.