Tuesday 30 July 2013

Sincerest form of flattery or a cynical counterfeit?

Just when you thought the Scottish separation debate couldn't sink any lower or get any more depressing along comes an example of the kind of cynical dishonesty which disgusts and disillusions people in equal measure.


The SNP know that they cannot succeed without the kind of support enjoyed by the Scottish Constitutional Convention: a broad-based campaign which had support across Scottish society - from churches, community groups, trades unions and business groups - all undeprinned by the democratic authority of (most) of our political parties.


There is one serious impediment to the SNP's plans to emulate the convention. Where devolution had the overwhelming support of the vast majority of Scots, separation remains very much a minority interest. What to do?


Those clever wee monkeys over at SNP HQ have come up with the answer. If the real Labour movement won't give its support for separation then just fake one that does.


There was the SNP claim that a 4,000-strong CWU branch backed separation. That fell apart almost immediately when it was revealed that rather than the thousands claimed, the vote for separation wasn't in the thousands, or even the hundreds for that matter, but in the dozens.


Their sham Labour Party for Independence is going the same way. Its launch looked like a badly-organised stunt, senior SNP figures have been caught impersonating Labour supporters and its website is a mix of mysogyny, bile, paranoia and swivel-eyed grievance-fuelled bampottery. In fact the only link to the Labour Party seems to be the logo they've stolen.


The cynicism and dishonesty in presenting a fake grouping as bona fide, complete with support from senior SNP figures, is a new low in an already shabby campaign for separation. LabourForIndy is a cheap knock-off; it's a con; and the SNP are clearly behind it.

The mystery here is why the media are so reluctant to report the deception...

Wednesday 17 July 2013

ALEX SALMOND IS A BIG FAT IDIOT and other observations...

On BBC Radio Scotland’s Good Morning Scotland programme Alex Salmond claimed:
“There are pretty fundamental reasons why it is not going to be the case that they would refuse a formal currency union"
Hmmm..there's a pretty fundamental reason for believing that they would; like they've already said as much. In a UK Treasury report published this year this statement was made: "In the event of Scottish independence, the economic rationale for the continuing UK to enter a formal sterling union with another state is not clear" and George Osborne - you know, the guy who will dictate the policy of the UK in the unlikely event of a yes vote - has said a formal currency union is unlikely...
Undeterred the bold Alex blunders on: "sterling is as much our currency as it is George Osborne’s"
Wtf? The Bank of England is wholly owned by the UK Government and has its targets set by the UK Treasury. If we leave the UK we leave its currency and lose the protection of its central bank.
Mr Salmond finished with this doozy: “We will get the formal currency union..because they can’t claim sole title over the assets to the United Kingdom, unless of course they want us to accept no share of the liabilities of the United Kingdom”
Oh right, so we're back to threatening to walk away from our responsibilities are we? And presumably we'll retain our triple AAA status even though we would be a state who refuses to pay its debts. This is AAA buffoonery even by Salmond's own exceptionally high standards.
This year has been a harrowing one for supporters of separation. It has been made infinitely worse by the the first minister who has blundered from one disaster to another and from one crackpot announcement to the next ludicrous assertion.
We go into the summer holidays comforted with the knowledge that the UK is safe as long as Alex Salmond plays a leading role in the campaign to break it up....