Wednesday, April 3, 2013 6:41:54 PM
Thursday, September 18, 2014. Mark that date down. It is a date which will be featured prominently in many a history book. The only question is, what will it be remembered for?
The separatists of the SNP are split on this issue. Salmond and his henchmen hope it will be a Flodden result where Scots are once again the victims of the evil English Empire. With a 'No' victory Alex can once again safely retire behind the barricades of improbability and blame the Union for his unfulfilled promises.
The rank and file of their core support, on the other hand, look up from their fantasy world of kilts and broadswords and pray for another Bannockburn moment. For them it is the opportunity to shape their hatred of the auld enemy into a concrete form. They hope for nothing more than a chance, however fleeting, to gloat.
Sadly, though, for most Scots the day has no meaning. They feel as disconnected from Holyrood as they do Westminster. They have been offered little more than a choice between two unions. Independence is not on the ballot in any meaningful way. They are being asked to choose between hatred and necessity. Having been subjected to so many lies by the SNP they can be forgiven for seeing this not as history in the making, but history in the fabrication. So, the vast majority look at the issue rather blandly and tell the politicians they will vote for whomever offers them more money. There are no principles involved, no loyalties, and no allegiance.
Lost in the whole charade are those Scots who truly wanted independence. They have seen their dreams and their trust betrayed by the SNP who gave in to political expediency and became British Separatists rather than Scottish Nationalists. Their love for Scotland has been trampled into the muck and mire of political intrigue and duplicity.
So, Thursday, September 18, 2014 will never be known as another Bannockburn or Flodden. It may well be remembered as Scotland's National Day of Shame. It will be a day to reflect on the way in which the people of Scotland are constantly betrayed by the infighting and greed of their own leaders.
Thursday, March 28, 2013 2:39:20 PM
The phrase ‘in terms of the debate’ may end up being Alex Salmond’s most enduring legacy. It was used by the Scottish First Minister during a televised interview in which he was asked a direct question which required a simple ‘yes’ or ‘no’ response. He was asked if he had, “sought advice from your own law officers” regarding the Scottish Government’s claim that Scotland would remain a member of the European Union upon gaining independence. His answer was a quick, “yes, in terms of the debate.”
Some will naively take this to mean the Scottish Government had sought legal advice on the issue. However, it is not quite so cut and dried. Parliament asked to see the advice and was denied. The First Minister even launched legal action to thwart a Freedom of Information request to see the legal opinion. It turns out there was no legal briefing to see. When accused of lying Salmond declared that his use of the phrase in ‘terms of the debate’ acted as a qualifier which changed the meaning of ‘yes’ into ‘no’.
Today the phrase is widely used to indicate a deceptive answer or an outright lie. Middle aged women are now able to state their age as, “29, in terms of the debate.” You can make the most outrageous statement as long as you add the qualifier. If someone says something unbelievable, the standard response now is to ask the person if they are being truthful in terms of the debate. It is so much better than directly accusing them of deception.
Salmond and his Scottish National Party have built upon this success and turned deception into an art form. In the information age it is no longer necessary to actually lie as long as you add a qualifier. It is enough to simply misdirect and let the ball start rolling. The average SNP member is not the best or brightest Scotland has to offer, but is usually very active on the internet and social networking platforms. The SNP strategy is to make ambiguous or misleading statements and let their supporters misinterpret them and spread the word. If a lie is told often enough then people will start to believe.
Salmond’s reference to a new oil boom is a case in point. It is strikingly similar to his infamous ‘in terms of the debate’ remark. Here the so-called boom is not related to an increase in either production or price. The statement is modified by his use of the term ‘investment’. The expenditure to develop new oil and gas comprises his new prosperity. He leaves it to his minions to declare the greater benefits. When the boom fails to materialise Salmond can claim his statement was clearly ‘in terms of the investment’.
Another example is the use of ‘by wholesale value’ when describing reserves as being less than half depleted. He does not disagree that most of the oil has already been extracted and is a dwindling resource. He leaves it to his supporters to misinterpret and claim that Scotland still has more than half her reserves left. Once again, his minions can make fools of themselves while Salmond clings to his plausible deniability.
The assertion that Scotland owns 94% of all UK oil and gas is based upon the ‘median sea boundary’. This means that his estimates are predicated on the UK altering the accepted borders in Scotland’s favour and giving away a substantial portion of reserves. That is highly unlikely to happen and would fly in the face of the treaties already in place to divide NSO amongst participating countries.
Salmond has also claimed an independent Scotland would own nearly 60% of the EU’s oil and gas reserves. This is such a bold statement it really deserves a place next to ‘in terms of the debate’. He has managed to deliver two misconceptions in one. By leaving Norway’s huge share out he leaves the impression Scotland has Europe over a barrel…so to speak. He also implies that Scotland will be a member of the EU. It is a brilliant bit of deception.
Many Scots have cast a wishful eye at Norway’s sovereign oil fund. Salmond has told his acolytes that Scotland will have the same sort of investment. They might want to pay particular attention to the qualifier ‘in good economic times’.
Tuesday, June 19, 2012 1:47:44 PM
Near the end of May we heard Ken Clarke declare that only extreme nationalists were interested in holding a 'silly' European referendum. More recently David Cameron has entered the discussion saying the people do not want one, there is no public support. It's almost like they are kicking sand in the collective face of those who want to withdraw from the EU.
Many of people have expressed outrage at their comments. Some have asked how such intelligent people can make such stupid observations. People have commented on polls which show enormous support for a referendum, some indicating as much as 80pc support. Yet the government continues to make statements denying the need.Why?
There is only one party which has tied its wagon to the Europe question,UKIP. Normally that would be fine,someone running for parliament asking a question most politicians are afraid to ask.In this case,however, most of the support UKIP attracts comes at the expense of the Conservatives.Cameron knows that this will hand Labour a majority in the next election. So, why not just hold a referendum during the next general election?
If the Conservatives call for a referendum on Europe they will be seen as supporting it. The danger is that should Labour win, it would entrench Britain in Europe so deeply that escape might never again be an option. The Battle for Britain is on.
At first the Conservatives stance seems contradictory. They belittle those who want a referendum and then deny that there is even support for one. Yet,for some reason, they feel it is important enough for senior members of the government to publicly attack. If there is no support, why provoke the beast? Perhaps the government is asking for help.Perhaps they are trying to provoke a response that cannot be ignored. They want to be able to say,"we didn't want this,but,the people have spoken." Such a move would mitigate the damage UKIP will do to the Conservative's election chances while not allowing Labour to claim the people want Europe.
So far we have not seen much of a reaction.Yes, many of you have posted comments expressing support for a referendum,but,who reads those comments? There is a e-petition on the subject which has gathered a paltry 66,800 signatures. Failing widespread public demonstrations how else can the government be supported in trying to hold a referendum.
The e-petition is here for anyone interested