SHERIDAN TRIAL SHOWS HIDDEN HAND OF SECURITY SERVICES

Tommy Sheridan - Scot

Anyone who works for the cause of Scottish independence is a source of concern for the British Government. It is sad but true that since as far back as the 19th century (and probably long before) paid informants have infiltrated political pro-democracy groups in Scotland and fed back to their London masters.

Hector MacMillan's book about Thomas Muir provides copious evidence of police infiltration prior to the abortive 1820 rising. In retrospect we can see that the campaigners were looking for normal political rights such as paid MP's, the right to vote and freedom of expression but the state at the time did not agree.

The British state still has a large budget for such unsavoury characters and they are almost undetectable so long as they pretend to do their job. Recent events in Ireland bear this fact out.

The Tommy Sheridan trial, in fact an excuse for the London controlled media to gorge themselves on his supposed hypocrisy (one misnamed paper has over thirty seperate stories on their website relating to the case) shows all the hall marks of being orchestrated by MI5.

Damaging allegations are spun as fact by the mass circulation free paper the Metro which is wholly owned by the Daily Mail one of the most right wing of all right wing papers. (The Metro is pure concentrated garbage and it's letters column puts Viz's joke 'letterbocks' letters to shame for their banality and absurdity.

A series of frankly ridiculous allegations have been rolled out through all the British media in a concerted and obvious campaign of character assassination. Every day the Daily Record has a new sordid headline, every day another unreliablke witness says "the News of the World paid me money to say this but oh yes, it's still true yer honour!"

If we look at the SSP then we can see that most of its original members came from the old London based Militant tendency. Later they became Scottish Militant Labour and later they metamorphosised into the SSP, though most of the personnel conveniently remained the same.

Shortly after formation the SSP took into its ranks the Socialist Workers Party, another London based outfit that supports self determination for every country except Scotland.

Militant was a traditional Brit-left party, the SWP are a Brit left party. All are subject to extensive infiltration by the security services as indeed are most political parties (though they don't like to admit it as it makes them look paranoid).

The SSP however was different - it supported independence for Scotland (under Sheridan's leadership anyway) and cut substantially into the SNP vote at the last election.

Despite the SSP's willingness to risk jail for any cause, when it comes to the man who was their former leader, the man who was largely responsible for increasing their vote and the man who has led the majority of their campaigns a hereto unknown sudden respect for law and order appears!

Suddenly we have a mysteriously long list of party members willing to testify for the News of the World, the scummiest of all scummy tabloids in its effort to defame Tommy Sheridan even further because he decided to take them to court for an erroneous article.

It is claimed that Sheridan spontaneously admitted to a series of allegations while at the same time saying he was going to take the NOTW to court! Just to keep things tidy this confession was kept aside by his own party to be produced specially for the paper!

That the SSP would keep such a minute at all is bizarre when it was well aware of their former leader's proposed court action and must have known that such a minute would compromise his case.

Any sensible professional political party would have kept schtum over the whole affair, said we support our leader and wished him well in court. After all given their financial problems they could no doubt have used the extra cash Sheridan's trial might have provided.

The only possible conclusion is that the SSP has either been voluntarily compromised from within by people who are willing to sing for their supper if it preserves their career at the expense of their former comrade, which is bad enough OR this is part of a campaign by the security services to smear our most left wing politician because of his continued support for independence.

It is highly instructive that Mr Sheridan's replacement is so dumb that he is willing to attack the Scottish flag. Clearly he has no interest in Scottish independence, which suits the British state just fine. He even flew back from his holiday just to put his ex-friend in the sh*t, "I would have supported Tommy's even if I thought he was telling lies" he says, and "oh yes, I voted against the option of supporting Tommy." (Eh?!)

Either the SSP is infested by complete idiots or has a few Government spies in key positions who chose to knive their leader when they saw an opportunity and leave the party in a 'safer' pair of hands. That this safe pair of hands probably doesn't even realise this is no indication that it hasn't happened!

It is rumoured that Sheridan is being prepared to join the mis-named 'Respect'. Respect for the existing state apparatus that is! In reality Galloway's only consistent quality is his rejection of normal powers for his own country, no doubt that explains his miraculous political survival skills, he's no threat to the British state.

Sheridan is and is therefore an extremely important element in Scottish politics.

I hope he kicks the News of the World's collective a*se.

Defiant Blair says: I'm staying put and police inquiry will clear me of any corruption

Key quote "It is absurd to say that if someone supports a political party financially... that they should be debarred from being party supporters for those places reserved specifically for party supporters."

- TONY BLAIR

[A pity that's not what the law says Tony! JOE]

A DEFIANT Tony Blair yesterday predicted that he will be cleared by a police investigation into Labour's finances and signalled he wants to stay on as Prime Minister for at least another year.
Mr Blair's robust defence of the £14 million the Labour Party raised in secret loans last year follows the arrest last week of his chief fundraiser, Lord Levy. Downing Street nominated four of the lenders for seats in the House of Lords.

Scotland Yard detectives have signalled they plan to interview the Prime Minister and some Labour MPs believe the funding scandal could force him from office within months. Roy Hattersley, the former Labour deputy leader, yesterday said Mr Blair should quit by October over the affair.

[Good riddance! This is a man who has achieved nothing in Government and has sold his soul to the political right. His partner in crime Gordon Broon is just as bad. Time to escape this gang of incompetent sleazy unprincipled thieves by voting for independence. JOE]

EDINBURGH INDEPENDENCE FIRST LAUNCH DRAWS INTERNATIONAL SUPPORT

The launch of a new branch in Edinburgh by Independence First, the referendum campaign, has been strongly welcomed by pro-independence movements across Europe. The independence referendum campaign received messages of support from parties in Catalonia, Sardinia and Corsica and the largest trade union in the Basque Country. Around two dozen political activists in the Wash bar heard that Scotland can make a massive impact internationally by breaking up the British state and becoming “a beacon for peace” in the wider world.











Former MSP Lloyd Quinan told the meeting that “Scotland has the potential to become independent next year. This is absolutely necessary to give the Scots the democratic space to decide their own destiny because without that space it doesn’t matter what we believe in because it won’t happen. We can potentially be a democratic inspiration to other independence movements but only if we work together for independence and support this campaign for a democratic referendum.”










Bill Scott of the Scottish Socialist Party remembered the disappointment of being cheated out of devolution in 1979 “It was a terrible time, but over the next twenty years we gained a parliament and we have it in our power to move that parliament to independence.” He added “Scots have died in numerous imperial wars at a far higher rate than our percentage of the population of the UK, it’s time for this to end.”

Eric Canning of the Communist Party of Scotland was the vice Convener of the Constitutional (devolution) Convention “It was the only campaign that I was involved in which was wound up because it was a success. I’m proud of that, but the fight isn’t over. Scotland needs independence, with that independence we can become a beacon for peace and tolerance in the world and we can break up the anglo-American imperialist alliance which potentially threatens the world with nuclear destruction.”









Bill Wilson of the Scottish National Party said “Scotland’s democratic voice has never been properly heard. 300 years ago the supposed representatives of the people fled out of the back door of our parliament after signing away our rights. We’ve never been given a choice about being part of Britain and we’re not getting any benefits from it. We are no better or worse than any other country and we have the same rights of self determination. It’s time to use those rights and free our nation.”

Author and publisher Kevin Williamson who chaired and spoke at the meeting commented “We are now seeing the potential of Independence First - to unite the Scottish Independence movement. Independence First is simply about support for Independence and nothing else. There was a real unity of purpose today however that the British state must end and Scotland must be allowed a distinct international voice.”

Joe Middleton Press Officer of Independence First commented: “This was a great meeting. Independence First wants this new branch to be at the heart of our campaigning. We have plans for a massive democracy march through Edinburgh on the 30th September and for a pledge independence campaign to affect the next Scottish elections.”

Tensions continue in UK

If English resentment is bad under Blair it will be worse with Brown as Prime Minister.

http://www.sundayherald.com/56428

So while Scotland’s First Minister Jack McConnell says he’s supporting any team not wearing three lions on their shirts, England’s MPs, past and present, are returning to the undercurrent of the Resentment in all its forms. Lord Barnett, Jim Callaghan’s Treasury minister, says the simplistic “Barnett Formula” wasn’t a long-term formula and that the over-subsidy of the Scots should stop to the tune of billions each year. London’s mayor, Ken Livingstone, says he too is fed up with the rich capital exporting its wealth north of the border.

But who is going to challenge this belief? Even though Brown is said to be privately sympathetic to the notion that it is London, not Scotland, which is over-subsidised, he will not risk a debate where he could be forced to take sides.

Having asked the first West Lothian Question, Tam Dalyell recently told the Sunday Herald, that even if Brown made it to Number 10, he would be the last Scot to do so. That would mean a decisive victory for this generation of English MPs, and an effective “cleansing” (however emotive that word is) of the Scots from power at Westminster.

The Scots had it coming to them

It always amuses me when people write about "the Scots" as if we were all the same, particularly when it is in negative terms like this.

Well Johnny Boy you know where you can stick your 'pearl' of Britishness.

If you're from Fife, you're a Scot yersel! So your self loathing which has obviously made you prefer to identify your interests with England is a psychological problem which no doubt might improve with treatment.

JOE

http://www.ft.com/cms/s/5cfc8922-0de3-11db-a385-0000779e2340.html

The Scots had it coming to them
By John Lloyd

The Scots have put a large mark on the world - a judgment made readily bythemselves, but also by others. It is evident, in part, by its absence: Scots Diaspora in the Anglosphere do not normally identify themselves with ahyphen, as Scots-Americans.

The inference is that they were there from thebeginning, creating cultures, polities and institutions. Abroad and in the past, a glory. At home and at present, less glorious.

Malaise has been the common trope through which Scotland is today understood- even after, in the late 1990s, sustained pressure had produced a devolved parliament. That establishment, the continuing favouring of Scotland in UK public spending per head, [yawn! The lessons of Goebbels again, keep lying until they believe it - JOE], the ability of Scots MPs to vote on English matters but not the reverse ['The English' have never worried about this before, no doubt that's because they've got 90% of the population of the UK - JOE]and a gradual realisation south of the borderthat the Scots could still be aggressively Anglophobic [aw diddums we wouldn't supinely support your fitba team, NEWSFLASH! no other countries like it either! JOE] have given a newly perky opposition Conservative party something to exploit.

[In other words the Brits have decided that Cameron is next up after the fake socialist Tony Blair to continue to promote Toryism in the UK - JOE]

It proposes to bar Scots MPs from voting on English issues, a line that points up the inequity of the relationship, for the English. [Unfortunately many English bills do affect Scotland].

That line has much to do with the presumed next prime minister - Gordon Brown, the chancellor of the exchequer, son of a Scots Presbyterian minister. If the Conservatives can succeed in depriving him of part of his British mandate, they will have struck a blow before he takes office. He has sought to protect himself with a battery of speeches on the greatness and goodness of the Union: his problem is that Scots politics has been, for atleast two decades, dominated by an ideology which sees in England/Britishness a source of Scotland's miseries.

[with good reason - JOE]

Where he sought to reinvent Britishness, the most ardent spirits among his countrymen seek to ensure there is no such reinvention. Few prominent Scots are prepared to stand up for the Union and forBritishness - leaving Mr Brown so isolated on the issue as to be easily made a figure of opportunism or ridicule.

[Which is all he deserves, he's a traitor! In footballing terms at least - JOE]

Few prominent Scots now see in theUnion, or in Britishness, a suitable cause for renovation: the nationalism-lite argument is now received, and largely unexamined, wisdom.

Thus when the English react with irritation, or when the Conservatives seek to capitalise on that, it is not (as it is often portrayed) mere St George'scross flag-waving. Britishness had, in the past, been formed around Protestantism, [it still institutionally discriminates against Catholics- JOE] common threats and empire: but what remained, as these loyalties receded, was a structure that had to cope with national diversityin one state - a good preparation for a world in which such national and ethnic diversity proliferates.

Britishness, it turned out, was a precious discovery both for defusing old hatreds (except the Irish hatred) and forgiving new arrivals the possibility of a loyalty that was non-ethnic.

[What utter trash - Britishness equals an imperial nationalism which is dependent on superiority to other nations and cultures. Civic led Scottish nationalism is far superior both intellectually and emotionaly for our post imperial role. All we want in Scotland is normal powers, England/Britain still thinks it's a 'world power' and acts accordingly JOE]

The Scots, in short, have something in themselves to blame. That is, that they too easily undervalued, or even threw away, a pearl - Britishness -worth more than tribal bonding.

[We won't miss it. Or the imperial attitudes from certain papers over recent weeks. Keep yer beads and baubles, the only King I respect is Elvis! JOE ]

The writer comes from Fife [but rarely thinks about it, no doubt- JOE]

BLAIR CALL FOR BRITISH FOOTBALL TEAM

PM Tony Blair wants unified Britain soccer team for 2012 Olympics

LONDON (AP) - Tony Blair wants a unified Britain playing soccer at the 2012 London Olympics.
The Prime Minister said it's time for the home countries to play under one flag for the first time since the 1956 Olympics in Melbourne, Australia. I think it would be a good idea," Blair told the Times of London on Wednesday. "When you are hosting the Olympics and you have lots of countries who send their teams, it would be a shame if we didn't have one of our own."
London 2012 Chairman Sebastian Coe agreed with the prime minister.

"I want a Britain team, we will have a Britain team," Coe said. "But I also want to maintain the independence of the domestic federations to compete in European cups and World Cups."

The International Olympic Committee doesn't recognize separate teams from Britain's home countries - England, Wales, Northern Ireland and Scotland. Each country's soccer association qualifies for and plays separately at the World Cup and European Championship.

After the four countries met last November to discuss a unified team, only England and Northern Ireland agreed in principle to the idea. Scotland and Wales fear joining a combined team would dilute their authority in world governing body FIFA.

Alex Salmond, leader of the Scottish National Party, demanded a statement from Mr. Blair over his remarks. "Is it the Prime Minister's wish for this just for the Olympics or does he wish like previous Labour ministers to abolish the Scottish soccer team altogether?" Salmond asked.

"Why should he be attempting to bully the Scottish soccer association and the Welsh authorities into doing something that they believe would jeopardize their position in international football?"

The Football Association of Wales secretary general David Collins said last December there was no possibility of a change of mind. All of the people in Wales and the media, press and television, are in agreement in that decision," Collins said. "No way would the spectators based in Wales like to see Wales stop playing as a national team."

The Millennium Stadium in Cardiff and Glasgow's Hampden Park are both listed as venues for Olympic soccer competition in 2012. Both could be taken off the list.

Britain, an Olympic soccer gold medallist in 1900, 1908 and 1912, would have a men's team for the first time since the 1956 Olympics and a women's team for the first time.

[No chance- this will come back to haunt Blair. JOE]

FSN IS SUPPORTING IF SEPTEMBER DEMOCRACY MARCH

Alan Masterton (FSN National secretary) has recently confirmed that the Federation of Student
Nationalists will be supporting and attending Independence First's pro-democracy march on 30th September.

The Independence Convention has also confirmed their support.

More information is available here:

http://www.independence1st.com/march.html

INDEPENDENCE DAY ON MOUND

INDEPENDENCE First, the grassroots campaign for a referendum on
Scottish independence, will officially launch its Edinburgh branch on
Sunday.

Publisher and author Kevin Williamson will chair the meeting at The
Wash bar on The Mound at 3pm.

Speakers will include Bill Wilson of the Scottish National Party, Alan
McCombes of the Scottish Socialist Party, Eric Canning of the
Communist Party of Scotland and former MSP Lloyd Quinan.

Spokesman Joe Middleton said: "This meeting is for everyone who
supports Scottish independence."

Jack the puppet's fate tied to rulers

[Excellent! - JOE]

JIM SILLARS

IF you flee wi' the craws, you get shot wi' the craws. That age-old Scottish saying is now haunting Labour MSPs at Holyrood. Although they claim to be from the Scottish Labour Party, they are in reality British Labour MSPs, and as public anger and contempt grows for British Labour, down they are going to go, and they know it.

Their problem is that no matter how many kilts Jack McConnell models, or how many Saltires he waves, or how many times he says he doesn't support England in the World Cup, people in Scotland know that Labour MSPs are puppets jerked around on British Labour strings pulled in London.

Not once have those Labour MSPs refused to toe the line laid down by Tony Blair. The vote in the Scottish Parliament about going to war with Iraq was the supreme example. We saw, against the war, the greatest demonstration ever with masses of Scots saying "Not in my name."

Yet these Blairites at Holyrood, jumping to Downing Street's instructions, voted for what they knew was wrong.

There was a chilling message for all politicos like them from the mouth of the Independent in Blaenau Gwent, Nye Bevan's old seat. "You have taken us for granted for too long," was his winner's message to Labour, the party he was once a member of.

Exactly the same message heard from the voters of Dunfermline earlier this year when Labour was trounced in what it regarded, arrogantly, as a safe seat where the votes were weighed not counted.

Precisely the same message heard from the Monklands hospital campaigners last week when they learned that having the Home Secretary John Reid as their MP, and three Labour MSPs in the constituencies it served, was worth nothing.

Labour in Scotland has become the Establishment. As the Tory vote has withered, the Lib Dems seeming to be no more than a Borders and North-East regional nuisance, and with people so easily frightened of independence and the SNP, Labour has dined extravagantly at the public
trough, and taken its pre-eminent position for granted.

In Labour eyes it has become the duty for people to vote Labour, not for Labour to serve the people. The party that was nurtured in the womb of principle, born to fight for the underprivileged, whose pioneers made enormous sacrifices for a noble socialist cause, has become a featherbed of cronyism.

But the fatal mistake of Labour has been to assume that they can take the people for granted all of the time.

Times have changed. As the old industrial Scotland died away, to be replaced by the new economic structures of the service and technology industries, and as former council tenants became owner occupiers (and therefore not subject to the whims of local councillors over where they stayed), the old tribal Labour loyalty began to wane.

Today, few young or middle-aged people automatically vote as their mums and dads did.

Political parties are now on trial by an electorate grown tired of spin, falsehood and promises never delivered.

It is no longer the case that Labour could put a red jacket on a monkey and get it easily elected.

The Scots now see Labour clearer than they ever did before, and they don't like what they see. Especially as MSPs' ties with Blair cannot be hidden, and are going to prove fatal in next year's elections.

‘Scots give £853 a head to England’

DOUGLAS FRASER, Scottish Political Editor
July 04 2006

A NEW front opened up yesterday in the political war over Scotland's financial relations with the rest of the UK, with the SNP publishing figures that claim the UK depends on Scotland.

Alex Salmond, the Scottish National Party leader, set out figures that suggest the surplus being sent from Scotland to the Treasury this year will amount to £853 per person in Scotland. That assumes Scotland can be credited with most of the booming revenue from North Sea oil, and that Scotland can avoid its share of this year's UK budget deficit, estimated at £38bn. The claimed surplus would fall by more than three-quarters if Scotland carried its population share of Gordon Brown's borrowing requirement.

The SNP claims contrast with those made by opponents of Scottish independence that the imbalance in spending between Scotland and the rest of the UK means a "subsidy" of £1500 per head is spent by the Treasury on Scotland. They reflect the party's concern that the current debate about Scotland, being fuelled by Tory opposition to Gordon Brown as Labour's next leader, is seeing the idea that Scotland is subsidised by England becoming more firmly established. Mr Salmond attacked Jack McConnell for supporting that argument, saying the First Minister should be doing more to argue Scotland's position, instead of courting controversy with his support for England's opponents in the World Cup.

The new analysis by Stewart Hosie, the party's economic spokesman at Westminster, takes British government estimates of the share of expenditure and revenue, and adjusts them for spending on defence and the civil service in London, which the SNP sees as a net benefit to England. There are also adjustments for spending that is not counted in parallel for England and Scotland.

For instance, the SNP says the government's figures count Scottish courts and prison costs as Scottish expenditure, but English courts and prison costs do not count as such in England.The latest figures address the current or static position for the national accounts, adding to a complex picture in which Nationalists and their critics also argue over the historic position of money flows between Scotland and the Treasury, and the potential Scotland has in transition to independence and afterwards to sustain current spending levels.

The battle has become more important 10 months from the Holyrood election, with opinion poll evidence that the SNP is gaining at Labour's expense.A more sceptical view of independence was yesterday published by economists at the Fraser of Allander Institute, an economic think tank at Strathclyde University, which found that full taxation powers at Holyrood would lead to an unstable economy, services being cut and tax increases.

Mr Salmond yesterday dismissed the work, authored by the institute's director, Professor Brian Ashcroft, as politically biased.The SNP is stepping up its campaigning, even though the Holyrood parliament has just begun its summer recess, with Mr Salmond setting out environment policy in a speech later this week and then seeking to pre-empt Whitehall's energy review.

http://www.theherald.co.uk/politics/65278-print.shtml

METRO HIGHLIGHTS ENGLISH HYPOCRISY

Today's Metro was very interesting. On Page 2 we discovered that Gordon Brown was 'too Scottish' to be Prime Minister, however on page 42 Andy Murray is the 'best of British'.

Both are Scots but only one is now acceptable to the English.

Yet earlier that same week Andy wasn't acceptable to the English either. A column in the (English version of the) Sun explained:

"I'm beginning to weary at the outbursts of Andrew Murray, the young Scottish tennis player whose conceit is not regrettably matched by his talent.

His latest idea to prove his Scottishness (presumably mean and morose) is by announcing he will wear a Paraguayan shirt when England play against them in the World Cup. I quite understand Scots not liking the English, even dim ones like Mr Murray.

It must be painful to receive handouts to the tune of £30bn this year - money generated by the clever English.It must be painful for more and more Scots to leave behind the land of call centres and golf courses and head to London to find work - once again supplied by the clever English.

The latest figures from the 2001 Census showed there were 800,000 Scots living in England, and since the South East has continued to explode while Scotland - as The Economist points out this week - continues to decline, those numbers will have risen sharply from that.

It must be painful to recognise that these days all Scotland can export is national politicians (Blair, Brown, Reid) whose major skill set is telling lies.

So next time, Mr Murray, you are down south (possibly Wimbledon, although your first-round exit from the French Open won't have helped your ambition) perhaps you can try and work out how many Scots are in the stadium and, more importantly, who paid for their seats. And another thing, why do we carry the Scottish football results?"

Subsequent to this column Murray was targetted by English bigots because he dared to say he wasn't supporting England, the sickos were even slagging Andy for being a former pupil of Dunblane. Now he's proven to be more successful than Tim Henman however suddenly the Erits apparently love him.

What's the difference? Why are the English desperate to adopt Andy Murray while they are desperate to lose poor old Gordon? It's not as if Gordon is attached to Scotland, far from it, his favourite Goal is Gazza's against Scotland and it's not as if he's ever put Scotland before his career.

The answer is that England believes they deserve success. They have an imperialist mindset based upon their past position in the world. That's why they think England is the best football team. Why they can't understand why other countries like Scotland don't feel the same way about them (at least they don't if they are honest about it).

The Empire's over. We might still get people getting medals saying Member or Commander of the British Empire, bowing to the Queen and being tapped on the shoulder, but there is no empire any more.

Where does Scotland fit? We're all right if we pretend we're English and wave the union Jack and support England but if we attempt to push our own identity or have our own accent suddenly we're all ungrateful malingarers who are bleeding England's tax's dry.

What was our past status in the empire, were we partners? Er, no. We were supposed to be renamed North Britain, we were a colony who was threatened with Military force after our King decided that he preferred England's pleasant lands to Scotland's rocky mountains.

Brown also prefers England but he's still too Scottish. He's not like Tony who despite being born and educated in Scotland says he's English and acts the part. No Brown's still got an accent and might one day remember his principles (it's not likely but no-one in England wants to take the chance.)

Gordon wants his slice of the bigger cake which is why he's sold us out. But now the English don't want him, they still want Murray though, because he might get the success they crave and they can forget the uncomfortable fact that he's not English, he's Scottish.

We do have a Scottish Parliament but we also still have a UK Government which controls Defense , broadcasting and foreign affairs. If even a sell out artist like Gordon Brown isn't acceptable to the English then why should Scots believe we will ever be properly treated by their 90% of the UK parliament?

We don't need London rule to have sporting success. Remember the Commonwealth games? London rule is only good for those who prefer England to Scotland.

There will be another world cup campaign soon and I can predict the result, Scotland will battle bravely but we won't make it. Why? Because the World Cup is fixed. It's called seeding, big nations like England get an easy ride in, even though they never get very far (not in the last forty years or so) . We get lumped with France, Italy and Ukraine while England are always put in a group of easy teams.

Scottish independence may not help our football team but it will give us the political voice to make our own way in the world. Hopefully that will rub off on our football and rugby players, who knows?

What it would also do is let England know that their empire and their world power is gone. It would help them to adjust to their reality as a nation on the periphary of Europe who don't naturally deserve to have everything and everybody served up to them on a silver platter.

Maybe then England won't think it can still threaten other countries with nuclear oblivion if they don't behave, even though it's really the Yanks who control the button. Maybe Blair will realise he's not a US President.

We don't need Trident and we don't need Britain, it's days are gone.

Keep flying the Saltire Andy, because we won't turn on you if you lose a game of tennis.

Blow for Labour as poll puts SNP ahead

[Excellent! JOE]

PETER MACMAHON (Scotsman)

LABOUR'S ambition of retaining power at Holyrood suffered a severe setback last night after the Scottish National Party took the lead in an opinion poll for the first time since the 2003 elections.

A survey of voting intentions by the Ipsos MORI organisation revealed a massive swing to the SNP in both the constituency and list sections of the Holyrood voting system. In just three months, Labour has slipped from a 14-point lead over the SNP to being two points behind them. Just 28 per cent of voters said they would back Labour in a Holyrood election compared with 30 per cent who opted for the SNP.

In the second, list vote, Labour's support is now 26 per cent, down from 33 per cent, while the SNP commands the support of 28 per cent of voters, up from 23 per cent, giving them a two-point lead.

The poll, which surveys voters across Scotland every three months, found a similar pattern for Westminster voting intentions. Labour dropped from 44 per cent in the January to March period to 36 per cent in the April to June survey.

Alex Salmond, the SNP leader, claimed yesterday that the figures showed that Scotland was at a "political tipping point". Speaking after he had unveiled his party's list candidates for the elections, he added: "The SNP remains in a neck-and-neck contest with Labour for political leadership of Scotland next year.

"We'll win this contest, firstly by working harder than our political opponents and secondly by presenting our positive vision of a new Scotland. Scotland is a country with great potential, but we are being failed by the washed out Labour/Liberal Democrat government in Edinburgh."

If the poll figures were repeated at the election in May, Labour and the SNP would have about 40 seats each.

Labour last night tried to play down the findings, although they will send shockwaves through the party, which fears that it could suffer as a result of the growing unpopularity of Tony Blair's government at Westminster.

A Labour spokesman said: "The voters face a real choice at the next election between a nationalist party committed to the damaging policy of independence or a Labour Party who will invest in schools and hospitals and take tough action on crime and anti-social behaviour. Independence would be a hammer blow to the Scottish economy and destroy Labour's strong economic progress and investment in public services."

Labour also tried to minimise the damage the poll might do to the party by trying to discredit the survey. It claimed the small sample size of under 500 electors who were certain to vote raised questions about the "robustness" of the findings. However, Labour strategists will see the poll as confirming the trends in voter opinion that have shown up in their own private polling.

The result will come as a disappointment to both the Liberal Democrats, who have hopes of exploiting Labour's unpopularity, and the Scottish Conservatives.

Although it showed the Lib Dems at 19 per cent in the constituency vote, compared with 17 per cent three months ago, and up one percentage point to 19 per cent in the list vote, the party would have hoped for a bigger boost from its by-election victory in Dunfermline and West Fife in February. The Tories were up one percentage point to 15 per cent in the constituency vote and remained at 16 per cent for the list vote.

The Scottish Socialist Party share of support was down from 3 to 1 per cent in the list vote projections, whereas the Greens, who only stand in the second voting list, rose from 4 to 6 per cent.

Mark Ballard, a Green MSP, welcomed the survey, saying: "As environmental issues have risen up the political agenda, voters are clearly turning to the party that offers the clearest solutions to the environmental crisis.

"Greens are also being increasingly recognised for our work in the Scottish Parliament on social justice and sustainable economic development, demonstrating that we are serious about our role in the new politics of Scotland. "This new opinion poll shows Greens have staying power and look forward to another success in 2007."

http://news.scotsman.com/index.cfm?id=959122006

SICK COLUMN FROM THE SUN

This recently appeared in 'the Sun' newspaper (English version of course). Shocking stuff.

I have some good news and bad news about the English-hating Scots

Opinion

KELVIN MACKENZIE

I HAVE some good news and bad news about the English-hating Scots. The good news is that they are dying sooner than the rest of us. The Office of National Statistics reveals that Glaswegians especially are going early.

The Government office says that thanks to a lifelong diet of misery,cynicism, fried Mars bars and tins of syrupy beer, Glaswegians areturning in their sporrans at 70 years old, compared to the UK average of 76.

Now the bad news. Five years ago Allan Robinson, 44, moved from Leeds to the ugly suburb of Coatbridge in Lanarkshire. (Last year, Coatbridge had more 999 calls than the rest of Scotland. Nice people.)

He put a single St George's Cross in his window to support England. The effect; thugs smashed three windows. He went down to the shops in his England kit with his girlfriend and the locals hurled abuse at them.

He was so frightened, he didn't leave his home all weekend and is now thinking of moving. Only thinking? The faster we accept that Scotland and England are two nations divided by a common language, the better.

My solution is simple. Build Hadrian's Wall another hundred foot higher and start air lifting in Red Cross parcels of...Mars bars.

SCOTS MUST AVOID PETITIONING WESTMINSTER AT ALL COSTS

Jamie Marr (The Earl of Marr) has recently launched a referendum bill from the House of Lords at Westminster. Unfortunately petitioning Westminster in any shape or form is doomed to failure and is a complete waste of time. We had a 2m petition for home rule in the 50's which was completely ignored.

We must learn the lessons of history and concentrate all practical efforts on the Scottish Parliament. That is where Scottish sovereignty now lies.

Marr is basically still a Brit in terms of his attitudes (when he was challenged at the Convention he responded about Westminster 'It's still our Parliament'). His new found support for independence combined with his reliance on the Queen as a peer in the House of Lords mean his ambitions are limited to taking Scottish sovereignty back to the union of crowns.

Yet the Union of Crowns was what began the British union and where Scotland's problems began. Independence campaigners are working together within the independence convention and independence first and we generally rightly believethat arguments about the EU and republicanism are largely irrelevant until we actually acheive independence.

However Marr feels forced to petition Westmister because of his loyalty to the UK queen. That may be the most logical route for him but his personal loyalty to the monarch is not shared by most Scottish independence supporters.

Sovereignty in Scotland lies with the people of Scotland and therefore logically with our new parliament. Only this parliament can legitimately decide to move forwards towards independence.

Westmister is the political enemy of Scotland and if we attempt to influence policy there we will never succeed. Scotland's representatives are hopelessly outnumbered and most of them have no interest in their own country anyway.

Our new parliament may not be perfect but at least it is a genuine reflection of our votes. All our future efforts must be primarily targetted towards this if we are to have a decent chance of success.

MCCONNELL FOOTBALL BLUSTER IS IRRELEVANT

Scotland's First Minister Jack McConnell has came in for a lot of criticism in the English media for his 'refusal to back England' and his choice of Trinidad & Tobago (England's group opponents) as his supposed favourite team.

His old pal (former FM) Henry 'a muddle not a fiddle' McLeish has also attacked him recently.


The real problem is not Jack McConnell's choice of team to support in the world cup, that's up to him and no-one is particularly interested, particularly when he simply steals the words of Alex Salmond.

The problem is politicians who put England's national interests before the political needs of their own nation.

The most absurd example is of course Gordon Brown who claims that his favourite goal was Gazza's against Scotland (!) but should we really be that surprised?

Gordon has never given any thought to Scotland for years, like Tony he has chosen the larger more powerful nation over the one of his birth. In the 1970's most Labour politicians were well aware that Scotland could become one of the most prosperous contries in Europe with independence but they sold us out so they could keep a chance of gaining power in England.

What have they done with that power? Nothing at all, they have merely aped Thatcherism and continued the Tory legacy. A pointless exercise. The problem I have with McConnell is that he can't see the potential this country has an independent nation.

He prefers English rule (as does Henry who is off the same ilk) and his irrelevant comments about football are designed to cover up that obvious fact. He supports England where it matters over their continued political rule over Scotland, and his attempts to appear more Scottish by making a point of supporting their opponents is highly transparent.

Most Scots probably prefer England to lose because of their jingoistic commentators and their assumption that everyone in the UK does support them anyway. McConnell knows this and this is the reason behind his mini 'rebellion'. He is entitled to support whoever he likes but he has obviously made a point of this thinking it would help him to appear more 'Scottish' before the next elections.

However, the day Jack puts Scotland's political interests first will be the day he deserves his title as First Minister, until then he remains an ineffective stooge of the UK Government.

Ex Tory Monteith: only SNP can offer change

Monteith: only SNP can offer change
ROBBIE DINWOODIE
June 09 2006

The Tory MSP forced out of his party last year for plotting to undermine the leadership of David McLetchie has now savaged the performance of Annabel Goldie, and said that only the SNP offers prospects of a change.

Brian Monteith, who now sits as an Independent Conservative for the Lothians, is scathing about Miss Goldie's performance and claims that Tories up and down the land have reacted with "amazement and anger" to what he terms the "vote blue, get red" decision to offer a stability pact with Labour after next May.

Such a deal would be short of a formal coalition but, in exchange for support on an issue-by-issue basis, Tories would agree not to back a no-confidence vote during a term of parliament.

In a signed newspaper column, Mr Monteith said: "[Miss Goldie] and her lieutenants have let it be known that if Labour suffers a humiliating reverse at next year's Scottish parliament elections, the Tories will ride to their rescue."

He added: "If a voter wants change, the only party that now offers it is the SNP."

Top-up fees aren't the answer - Mark Ballard (Greens)

Thanks to the abolition of grants and the introduction of loans, students now leave university saddled with thousands of pounds of debts. Student finance, or to be more accurate student debt, is now the most critical issue in higher education.

http://news.scotsman.com/opinion.cfm?id=846792006

KEN LIVINGSTONE'S REMARKS REFLECT THE INJUSTICE OF LONDON RULE

London 'subsidising Scots lifestyle', says Livingstone
http://news.scotsman.com/scotland.cfm?id=837422006#new

KEN Livingstone, the London mayor, has come under fire for suggesting that Londoners' money keeps Scots in a lifestyle "to which they are accustomed". The outspoken Labour mayor made the remark at a reception on Monday night as he tried to explain why the city needed a new £10 billion rail link.

He told politicians: "We need Crossrail to keep London's economy ticking over so that we can continue to pay for the Scottish to live the lifestyle to which they are accustomed."

His political opponents said the comments were insulting.

The mayor's remarks also infuriated Alex Salmond, the Scottish National Party leader, who yesterday introduced a bill calling for the repatriation of North Sea oil reserves to Scotland.
Mr Salmond said: "When you include all Scotland's resources, we subsidise the rest of the UK by £3,000 a year for the average Scottish family."

This "£200 billion raid" on Scottish resources over 30 years was "the greatest act of international larceny since the Spanish stole the Inca gold", he said.

Mr Salmond also taunted Gordon Brown's support for England in the World Cup, accusing the Chancellor of "morphing into an Englishman". He accused Mr Brown of spending "long hours" at the Treasury trying to memorise the names of the England squad.

Mr Salmond's bill stands little chance of becoming law due to a lack of parliamentary time.

A spokesman for Mr Livingstone told The Scotsman the mayor had made a light-hearted joke. "But behind it lies a serious point. If London is to be able to continue to transfer resources to the rest of the country, which it accepts it should do, it has to be able to invest."

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

As Salmond points out, Ken's figures are wrong, however they are typical of a mindset amongst English politicians who have lied for so long about the finances of Scotland that they now believe it!

Figures are notoriously fickle beasts depending on who is quoting them however there can be no doubt that Scotland has substantially subsidised England through Oil. A road in Scotland which costs £1M and benefits 5,000 people. The same road is built in England for the same price but this benefits £50,000 people. Does that mean the Scots are 10 times better off?
No, it's just a road. Scotland has a small population spread over a large area and has enormous natural resources.

Ken Livingstone and probably most Londeners have no real interest in working out who owes who but there's a lot more money goes into London through Government investment than ever reaches Scotland and in a much much smaller area.

The answer to the problem of this misunderstanding of course is Scottish independence and let England spend whatever they like on London. As long as Scotland is ruled by England and by politicians based in London our interests will never be properly addressed.

The Scottish Independence Guide http://www.scottishindependence.com

The above website gives more information about independence ie normal national powers for Scotland. Who really believes Scotland is incapable if running our own affairs? Apart from power hungry politicians with an eye on England like Brown or those with limited ambitions for Scotland like Jack McConnell, most would agree it makes logical sense and according to recent polls would vote that way if they had the chance in a referendum.

Not so strange bedfellows (unionists)

http://www.theherald.co.uk/features/63410-print.shtml
Strangest bedfellows

Your Letters June 06 2006

Further to your Strangest bedfellows editorial (June 5): since April this year, Dumfries and Galloway Council has been ruled by a minority Labour administration supported by Conservative councillors. As with the Labour/Conservative "stability pact", proposed by Annabel Goldie for a future Scottish Parliament, this falls short of an actual coalition. Rather, Dumfries and Galloway's Conservative councillors "informally" agreed to vote with Labour councillors against the former Independent/SNP/LibDem administration's council tax rise and budget proposals. Quite how long this "popular front" will last is difficult to gauge. The new Labour group (with Conservative support) is pushing through a series of dramatic budget cuts which may yet provoke a local backlash.If these "strange bedfellows" can continue to co-operate through into 2007, Dumfries and Galloway will give political pundits and voters a chance to see if this particular version of the future really does work.

Alistair Livingston, 4a Abercromby Road, Castle Douglas.

It has been claimed that the Scottish electoral system is highly complex, perhaps even confusing to voters. It is, therefore, pleasant to see politicians attempting to simplify the system. I refer, of course, to the decision by the Tory party to seek an alliance with New Labour, and New Labour's welcoming of the deal. This will make the next election so much simpler; independence with the SNP or the British Union under the Liberal/Labour/Tory alliance. It also rather cuts down on political slogans. I do not think we will be hearing, "Vote Labour to keep out the Tories" ever again.

Dr Bill Wilson, SNP Renfrewshire West, 14 William Street, Paisley.

Vote Labour get Tories, vote Tories get Labour, is there a difference?:

Joint Tory/Labour campaign site:
http://cameronmcconnell2007.50megs.com/

Support any team you like - as long as it's England

IndyGal wrote (on the freescot forum www.freescot.com/forum/) :

Just watched the news on GMTV read out by a Scottish newsreader. The two presenters on the couch Ben Sheppard and Penny Smith had just been asking Scottish viewers to text in and say if they were supporting England in the World Cup. At the end of the News, they asked the newsreader if she was supporting England and she said no. Penny said something like "you're not supporting the home nation?", the newsreader said "yes but it's not MY home nation" and then almost jumped out of her seat at the sharp intakes of breath she was apparently hearing in her ear from the show's producers. So now, Scots are not even allowed to state the fact, the truth, that England is NOT their nation without eliciting a negative response. THEN Penny Smith decided to "tease" the newsreader by suggesting "perhaps it's because they're jealous because England sends Scotland £50 million pounds a year" - can't remember the exact quote or figures but you get the jist and I've complained. I think we TV watchers are going to be kept busy during the World Cup.

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

It would be useful if there was some kind of media monitoring unit which kept an eye on all the channels for examples of media bias against Scotland. The incident you described might seem small but they do have a cumulative effect so well done 'Indygal' for complaining about it.

The real problem is of course that there is no independent Scottish media and as long as Britain and England are considered to be interchangable and the assumption (since 83% or whatever of the viewers are English) therefore is that everyone watching is English, loves England and wants them to win the world cup.

At least during these tournaments the reality of the situation becomes more exposed. Both the Lib Dems and Labour supported broadcasting powers for devolution therefore all independence supporting MSP's in the parliament should be piling pressure on the executive to declare that they want them now or explain why not.

Also a few letters in the paper might help, since all the letters on this topic tend to be "I hate England" without any analysis of the political situation.

I'm sure we all wince when yet another politically correct independence supporting MSP declares his new found love for the 'old enemy', while I understand their reasons (well I did the first time when Andrew Wilson did it) , to promote the fact that the SNP is multicultural and doesn't have an irrational hatred of England, it is now looking ever more desperate.

'Wee Jack' of course has tried to play the Scottish card by making a meaningless announcement that he's supporting Trinidad and Tobago (after Alex Salmond named them as his preferred team ) . Naturally he was condemned by the London news media who expected him to love England as much as every other Brit politician who denies Scotland's potential. This was of course a safe move for Jack (even though his spin doctor pal in the Scotsman condemned it) because it has no political implications.

The fact is that we are different countries and there should be no assumed obligation on Scots to support England at football, cricket or anything else -unless you're a true Brit of course like auld Ming or Gordon Broon who sold their souls to England years ago. They might as well change their official nationality to 'English' like Tony has. JOE