Scotland, Independence…..fine, go ahead and yawn, but at least try and stay awake, for a wee bit :)

What is your choice:

  1. the continuance of the “Union” where the UK will be in/is 1.3+ Trillion pounds worth of debt…..with that debt growing astronomically day after day, despite George Osborne’s austerity cuts (read as rich ex-towel folder exacting his revenge on the low waged, just for being poor).

Or…

  1. an independent Scotland that will get a AAA rating from Standard and Poor’s. A rating that _doesn’t even include the output from our oil industry._

Let’s have a look at the credit worthy state of the UK, and quote the BBC about the UNITED Kingdom just recently:

"The UK has lost its top AAA credit rating for the first time since 1978":

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-21554311

Let’s have a look at what Standard and Poor’s (S&P) said about an Independent Scotland (without the oil) the other day:

http://newsnetscotland.com/index.php/referendum/8806-credit-agency-confirms-indy-scotland-set-for-triple-a-credit-rating

"Even excluding North Sea output and calculating per capita GDP only by looking at onshore income, Scotland would qualify for our highest economic assessment. Higher GDP per capita, in our view, gives a country a broader potential tax and funding base to draw from, which supports creditworthiness." - S&P

If you don’t believe NNS, then maybe The Telegraph could persuade you.:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/economics/10665032/Scotland-could-go-it-alone-Standard-and-Poors.html

Bizzarrely and despite such good news the Telegraph opened this article with:

"The Scottish economy would face "significant, but not unsurpassable" challenges, if it were to separate from the rest of the UK, according to analysis by Standard and Poor’s."

I’m past trying to decipher London media, but I’m of the opnion (which I can have because I’m not a journo) the first paragraph is a bending-of-the-truth opener to scare the shite out of skim readers, to make them stop reading any further. Then they grudgingly report the facts.

If you can persevere further with the article, it does go on to say:

"The ratings agency says there is "no fundamental reason" that Scotland could not float its own currency"

"The ratings agency cited "high-quality human capital, flexible product and labour markets and transparent institutions" as other reasons for confidence in the Scottish economy."

I’m buggered if I can resolve the opening para of doom and gloom when reporting on S&P’s assessment of a bright future for Scotland’s credit rating later on. Did Denise Roland come to work that day on a breakfast of doom and gloom and out of date cereal?

Astonishingly”, I couldn’t find anything about S&P’s AAA report on the BBC news site that wasn’t an opinion piece. Remember, journalists are supposed to REPORT facts, not have opinions. There seems to be far too much “opinion” on the BBC news website, and not much in the way of impartial reporting of hard facts.

Moving on, here’s another interesting note by S&P after the “row” concerning Standard Life, who according to the MSM, are making preparations to exit Scotland in the event of adverse conditions after a Yes vote. This is what S&P said:

"S&P [Standards and Poor’s] also said a shrinking of Scotland’s ‘unusually large’ financial services sector could boost the country’s sovereign credit rating by reducing the size of the economy’s external balance sheet and reducing its liabilities."

In effect, in the unlikely event of Standard Life exiting Scotland (i.e. moving a brass door plaque and not much else), we’d still be in a good financial position - i.e. rebalancing our economy away from a reliance on the financial sector.

As an aside, Derek Bateman’s reaction to Standard Life’s behaviour is quite insightful:

https://derekbateman1.wordpress.com/2014/02/27/standard-procedure/

"But the real prize here is that it confirms more surely than ever that No [campaign] is corporate, moneyed and selfish. Its largest support is outside Scotland, it’s money comes from the millionaires, even it’s boss Alistair Darling fills his pockets with corporate dosh on top of his full-time MP’s salary."

Back to S&P…..I would quote the BBC on S&P, but as I wrote earlier, I’m buggered if I can find a proper news report other than an “opinion piece” by Douglas Fraser here, so I won’t quote it, so fuck you BBC:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-26380402

DON’T FORGET, this is an OPINION piece from myopic London media, a media centre that can barely see past the M25. OPINION does not equal proper, analytical, independent and bias-free journalism which has been so lacking by the BBC and MSM (Main Stream Media) in this debate.

But, that’s fairly typical of the BBC at this juncture, they are after all the UK “state broadcaster”, and as in war-time days, they are there to broadcast government propaganda in the event of the United Kingdom coming under attack. And here’s the thing, the United Kingdom IS under attack, but not by Luftwaffe Heinkels or Messerschmitts or even an occupational force. The attack is coming from a democratic movement by the Scottish People who want to have a serious rethink about our partnership in the Union.

The Scots are still part of the UK today, why is the BBC in wartime propaganda mode against us?

These days, the Westminster government can’t send in an army from England like they did in the early 1900’s to crush a populist strike movement by Scottish workers. The last time they did this they put the Scottish army barracks under lock and key, probably just in case Scottish troops joined that sadly crushed embryo of a revolution - go read up on the Red Clydesiders and The 1919 Battle of George Square.

Instead, the BBC is now acting as the UK government’s primary weapon of choice - a slick propaganda weapon - there to defend the continuance of the Union at all costs.

The BBC has so far been largely biased towards the Union in its reporting about Scottish independence, I think any normal thinking person must see that. This state of affairs with aunti beeb has already been identified by Dr John Robertson of the University of West Scotland:

http://www.opendemocracy.net/ourkingdom/john-robertson-oliver-huitson/interview-bbc-bias-bullying-and-scottish-referendum

Go and watch Kirsty Wark interview anyone from the Yes campaign on Newsnight on her big studio telly, then compare her interview style when she engages someone from the No campaign. The difference in guest courtesy and grilling is quite remarkable.

Anyhoo….make your own minds up about Scottish Independence, but make sure you have the facts first. Here’s a bunch of sites you should visit and peruse before believing what you see on the BBC or the national press about Scottish Independence:

http://newsnetscotland.com/
http://wingsoverscotland.com/
http://www.businessforscotland.co.uk/
http://bellacaledonia.org.uk/
http://derekbateman1.wordpress.com/
http://weegingerdug.wordpress.com/

This is just a handful of my own daily reading, but there are loads more which are linked to in the various blog rolls of these sites.

dimlylitmealsforone

Beer reviewing, done properly.

dimlylitmealsforone:

There are few pleasures in life comparable to drinking alone in your stinking flat, but I find there’s often a sense of guilt upon realising you’ve passed out in front of Holby City and soaked through to the cushion of your Argos armchair.

I thought I might alleviate some of this shame by giving…

See what they did there?

The Scots are having it rammed down our throats that the cost of borrowing will be more expensive for an independent Scotland. Today the LibLabCon’s present us with this new “power”:

http://www.heraldscotland.com/politics/referendum-news/treasury-reveals-historic-borrowing-deal-for-scotland.23473658

It’s a distraction, these are neutered borrowing powers.

  • A £2.2 billion cap on money rasing, seriously what use is that for any serious capital expenditure project such as fixing the A9, M8 and A96 properly? It’s spare change, 2.2 billion quid does not go a long way these days.

  • More importantly, borrowing rates that are higher than the rest of the UK - did you see what they did there?

You just know that when any Scottish Unionist politician is crawing about how wonderful a new policy or power, dispensed by Westminster, is for Scotland, and passing it off as “historic”, said policy is in reality going to be an ineffectual pile of shite not worth the paper it’s written on, and designed to firmly maintain the status quo.

I didn’t even bother reading the BBC Scotlandshire or The Scotman’s take on this because I just know they’ll have re-printed the Westminster press release with some minor editing, no questions asked.

Scottish Independence

In many ways I wish I’d paid more attention in english class to grammar and what the hell an adverb is. I wish my school had encouraged debating and communication skills. But I guess that’s my lot for having been pushed into a state sponsored Catholic school at the age of 12. The catholic church wants you to believe, not debate.

I’ve got a whole heap of things I want to say about Scottish independence and how the state sponsored media (BBC) are covering the Independence referendum. I hope to trickle out my own thoughts based on evidence rather than clever usage of the english language.

Stay tuned.