FREEDOM!!!! [3]

Thanks Eldo- he did an interview with the BBC too I watched. I am rather with the reporter however when Galloway says "What we need is a Labour government, a real Labour government on both sides of the border" and the reporter responds as the voice of the sceptical public with, "Well good luck with that."

Such a scenario is almost impossible to envision in the current political climate that has existed for the last 30 plus years, as Middle England would never vote for a real left wing, socialist party. And if they dont vote for it, it doesn't happen.

His alternative to independence is based on a scenario that is considerably less likely to ever occur.

Yeah, I know a little bit about George Galloway, and while I find a lot of his ideas refreshing to hear from a mainstream politician (or close enough to get into the House of Commons), I'm not sure how close to reality some of his ideas are. I seriously doubt that there is broad-based support for a socialist Scotland, which seems to be what he wants. I get the impression that the SNP is at least a step in that direct compared to the Tories or New Labour, though he raises some worthwhile points about the make-up of the pro-independence coalition.

I would argue that the SNP's success in running the Scottish Parliament to date has come down to them not caring what side of the political divide a good idea comes from.
Salmond is an economist so he is in favour of creating a good atmosphere for business, he is not a tax big business, redistribute wealth socialist, he is more conservative on that side- let business thrive with low rates and taxation and they will provide the employment which will actually drive your economy.
But on the other side they support and have maintain a nationalised welfare state and pursue strong green policies and renewable energy, traditionally left wing favourites.

Their critics accuse them of pandering to whatever the people want, their supports say that's what a government is actually supposed to do, carry out the wishes of the electorate.

But however you cut it the mix has been successful so far, both in the country and politically.

The SNP won a landslide for several reasons, but one of them was that they had done well, noticeably well. And that's rare, usually governments either maintain the status quo or you notice all the mistakes, its rare to actually notice that a government is improving things you can see and directly experience.

Its worth remembering Salmond has been planning this for a long time, the first step was to get elected, which he did as a minority government, then he proved they could work with others and still get things done that people actually cared about, and they ran the economy well. Then they got a majority government and demonstrated that even though they didn't need others votes to pass legislation they would still reach out, and consulted all other parties on draft bills and tried to get their votes with compromise and concession.
Salmond had a task before he could risk calling for independence, he had to convince the people that such a state was even possible, that a Scottish government could be effective, and make a difference, he had to give a glimpse into what he wanted the people to see could be possible.
It might be a utopia, but the SNP tactic is to fight the negativity of the NO side with hope, with a vision. Not thinking people will expect utopia, but that they might think even if its impossible, is not such a bad thing to be striving for anyway.

It remains to be seen if he has succeed. But he has stuck to the plan.

Weirdly that sounds about as plausible as a lot of stuff they come up with.   

One of the tricky things about this referendum is sometimes there are no answers until we try it.

Today Scottish Financial Enterprises (SFE), a board made up of representatives form a range of Scottish finance institutes put out a briefing on independence to their members, it said in it-

'there were "some major risks and uncertainties" around independence, including the nature and cost of any new regulatory framework and the "likely" separation, over time, of the Scottish and UK financial services markets.
The paper said international competitiveness was likely to be affected as Scottish-based firms would have to deal with extra costs and complexities that would not apply to competitors. "Many of the most important questions about the consequences of a 'Yes' vote cannot be answered before it occurs. Uncertainty is extensive and likely to continue for some time after such a vote. - BBC

But at the same time another group put an open letter in the Financial Times, this letter was signed by-

' business figures including former SFE executive director James Scott, fund manager Angus Tulloch, and Prof David Simpson, a former advisor to Standard Life, insisted that staying in the Union presented uncertainty around taxes, regulation and whether the UK would remain a part of the EU.
It stated: "Any truly objective analysis of what the referendum means for business requires a more thoughtful consideration of the UK's current trajectory."

And on the SFE report-

Martin Gilbert, chief executive of global investment group Aberdeen Asset Management, said of the SFE briefing: "Our position is neutral. It's unfortunate that the document really just outlines all the negatives rather than being balanced ... it's unfortunate that it hasn't come from the board of SFE."


This is why so many voters are still undecided. Where does the truth lie? And when you have 36 newspapers in the country, all supporting the Union, and a national broadcaster whose reputation for impartiality is going through a shredder truth gets ever more elusive.

The Scottish Police Force have made 3 short films to improve their image, as they think policing in general has been tarnished by recent scandals, even though all those scandals happened in the English police forces which are separate.

Oh, dear. Those youtube comments. Bunch of know-it-alls.

Been a lively week in the independence debate.
It started with a poll showing a majority of Scots believe Osbourne is bluffing over there being no currency union in the event of a Yes.
That was followed almost immediately by a story in the Guardian, sighting an unnamed senior cabinet source who said -

"Of course there would be a currency union," the minister told the Guardian.
A currency union will eventually be agreed between an independent Scotland and the remainder of the UK to ensure fiscal and economic stability on both sides of the border, according to a government minister at the heart of the pro-union campaign.'


And so another scare tactic hit the dust- this one badly as it implies that the main UK parties have conspired to deliberately lie to the Scottish people about this important matter.

And after being told by Westminster an independent Scotland could not manage its oil and that independence would lead to a fall in production and therefore revenue brought on by uncertainty the oil industry has come out today saying they estimate 39,000 new jobs will be created in the industry over the next few years- so killing  stone dead yet another scare tactic.

And all the time the polls are  slowly narrowing with YES creeping every closer to the magic 50% and NO creeping ever lower.
In response to all this the Better Together campaign has been holding 'crisis' meetings- and have decided they need to change tact and not be so negative and speak up in a positive case for the future of Scotland within the UK- problem is none of the parties in Better Together can agree on a future and all have their own completely different versions of what a NO vote could mean- and all depend on the relevant party getting a majority at Westminster first.
And if they think the people of Scotland wont see a change in tactic as just that- a soulless attempt to manipulate rather than a heartfelt vision of the future, they are in for a shock I think.

Scotland is hosting the Commonwealth Games this summer- but what do you do if your a small country to add a little more pizazz to your opening ceremony but you dont want to spend a fortune?- easy you move the scheduling of the demolition of some iconic buildings to the opening ceremony and spectacularly blow the buggers up as part of the opening ceremony   



As a foot note to this I once had very drunken sex in one of those, but I was so drunk I cant remember now which block it was in (or for that matter who with!    ) Ah, good days, blurry days, but good days.

thats no way to treat an erection   even if it is too big and smells of dog pee

Scottish Week kicked off in New York today with a marathon starting in Central Park.

But I am curious- does it actually get much coverage over there?

I've never heard of Scottish Week, though I don't live in NYC either.

Well thats not a good sign- its in its 11th year!

Here a pic of the start of the run-

I don't see any kilts there.

There were apparently some folks running in kilts (and painted faces   ) and there were bagpipes too.

You mean to say that painted faces aren't authentically Scottish? Next you'll be telling me that you guys didn't actually moon the English en masse before the Battle of Stirling Bridge.

The Picts painted their faces- but no one even knows what happened to them for certain. They were either wiped out, or much more likely merged into the emerging kingdom of Dalriada (from my bit of the country) to eventually form the country of Alba, which is more or less modern Scotland (and all that was long before Wallaces time by more than a thousand years)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Picts

And almost nothing in Braveheart has any historical basis beyond Wallace fighting a battle at Striling Bridge and later being killed. Still, its good for tourism.

I'm just yanking your chain about Braveheart. I thought it was a thoroughly mediocre film. And they didn't even have a bridge in the final battle.

The history of pre-Stuart Scotland is definitely interesting to me, though. I've done a fair bit of reading on British history, but the farther back you go, the more narrow the focus is solely on England. I've been trying to branch out though.

Ive put these up before but if you didnt get a chance to watch this series last time its not a bad place to start for a general overview-



Thats the series where the presenter is pretty much the ethnic type I would cast to play Aragorn- someone with a mix of northern (Scottish) and southern (Italian) blood blended over several generations.

If you want to go further back in time try this-



And for the maths heads here this is a lecture by Professor Tony Mann (Professor Tony Mann has taught mathematics and computing at the University of Greenwich for over twenty years. He was President of the British Society for the History of Mathematics from 2008 to 2011 and is editor of the Newsletter of the London Mathematical Society.) on mathematics in Neolithic Scotland (particularly interesting when taken with the previous video).



And a short video looking at Skara Brae (dates to about 3200BC if memory serves) and is basically the Flinstones House, only real-

I love watching that guys progs, he makes them so...watchable. hes got a way of lulling you in & your hooked. The times Ive wondered what he would look like with a short 'manly' haircut ?? It suits him, to have long hair, & I think its a sort of trade mark ? I find him charming without being patronizing !, intelligent without being big-headed, I like his soft,easy going voice, its relaxing. you relax you take the programe in more, you learn something whilst feeling entertained.

Thanks Petty, I'll definitely give those a watch.

He's a sensible lad, our Eldo  

I know, and intelligent, witty, likeable and still young too, its enough to make a person very crabbit indeed!   

yep !   oh, a misspent youth ! why did I do it ?