The unionists were worried that the 700th anniversary of the Battle of Bannockburn might remind Scots of their national history. So they brilliantly have co-opted the MOD to counter any possible effect on popular perception, by holding British Armed Forces Day in the same location on the same date as the celebrations of Bannockburn (28-9 June 2014).
Armed Forces Day is held every year at Edinburgh. It has never been held on the site outside Stirling before. Suddenly to move it there, on the same day as a long-planned event already attracting tens of thousands of people, can hardly be a coincidence. I just watched a live broadcast of a session of a committee of the Scottish Parliament where officials of Stirling Council refused to answer questions as to who took the decision to hold the same events on the same day. They did so on the grounds there will be an independent audit of this ludicrous decision. Evidence given to the committee said that the late addition of the MOD event had caused ticket numbers for the Bannockburn event to be cut by over half.
STIRLING COUNCIL IS RUN BY A NEW LABOUR AND CONSERVATIVE COALITION of unionists aimed to keep the largest party – the SNP – out of power. A more interesting question is the decision making process in the MOD that led to this gross abuse of the army for political propaganda purposes.
This demeaning of the commemoration of Bannockburn is yet another Bitter Together initiative that will backfire spectacularly. Nobody in Scotland was going to base their vote on a battle that happened seven hundred years ago. But the banding together of Labour and Tories to attempt to downplay the sacrifice and cause, to offer a gross and deliberate insult to the memory of those who fought and died for their country, is going to upset an awful lot of people.
Shameless AND clueless opportunist numbskulls.
A truly idiotic and insensitive fix.
Every time i think Bitter Together can’t stoop any lower or shoot themsleves in the foot even more they surpass themselves.
“Celebration of Bannockburn” – slip of the pen demonstrates the real face of nationalism I’m afraid. Some of us never celebrate people killing each other.
ESLO
Your choice. I shall be celebrating.
I honestly believe that if they could Bitter Together would organise mass hangings for treason to coincide with the Bannockburn celebrations.
However that said, let’s do one thing right. Let’s celebrate the history of Scotlands soldiers and fighting men properly. Link it with Bannockburn as Scots soldiers fought there too and won a glorious battle.
Let’s not stoop to their level and be bitter towards anyone now.
Tutuanatiaratoo
I agree – but that does not mean I can’t dislike Edward II.
And his dad.
“Some of us never celebrate people killing each other.”
Quite right. But Robert the Bruce was a freedom-fighter. In 1375 John Barbour wrote:
“A! Fredome is a noble thing!”
This was embodied in the ‘Declaration of Arbroath’ “For we fight not for glory, nor riches, nor honour, but for freedom alone, which no man gives up except with his life.”
An even greater freedom could ensue if Scotland refuses to provide a base for the Trident replacement. All of the UK’s nuclear facility is at Faslane/Coulport. Last week I got to meet Chris Bambery whose “A People’s History of Scotland” will be shortly available. The quotes aboveare from that book. It is improving my knowledge of Scottish history.
http://www.waterstones.com/waterstonesweb/products/chris+bambery/a+people27s+history+of+scotland/10115406/
Culloden.
Really like connecting the site for the celebration of Bannockburn to Sterling with what the same people are trying to do in North Korea – i. e., reporting all its alleged excesses in the hope that its citizenry will overthrow it the next time the Pentagon hits it with another disaster.
Such a parcel of Walter Scottery in the nation. Bannockburn was a pissing contest between two bunches of Normans, ffs. If it had been a peoples’ revolution, that would be different. But it was all about deciding the ownership of the serfs – or those that survived being in the infantry. As usual, come to think of it.
Some of us never celebrate people killing each other.
Isn’t that what the British armed forces day is about?
Comrade Kim Jong Zevul –
“If it had been a peoples’ revolution, that would be different. But it was all about deciding the ownership of the serfs – or those that survived being in the infantry. As usual, come to think of it.”
That’s how things were then and your average serf wouldn’t have known or expected anything better. Anyway, more recent history shows that “peoples’ revolutions” are also just a transfer of the serfs to very much more brutal ownership.
__________________________
Kathy
“Some of us never celebrate people killing each other. Isn’t that what the British armed forces day is about?”
No.
The odious Brown renamed Veterans’ Day as Armed Forces Day. Who else. He also founded the Elizabeth Cross. All part of the propaganda for offensive war.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elizabeth_Cross
It says here that it is centred on Stirling this year. So Brown and the Scottish NuLabour crowd will feature. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Armed_Forces_Day_(United_Kingdom)
Andy Murray was made a Freeman of the city of Stirling today. He blubbed through his acceptance speech. Poor lad.
Its like everything else that Westminster does, and will have the same effect. It will increase the YES vote
That’s how things were then
I thought that would go without saying. But naturally, it didn’t.
more recent history shows that “peoples’ revolutions” are also just a transfer of the serfs to very much more brutal ownership.
Which would have been a cause for concern in the specific context of Bannockburn, and very good reason to memorialise it. My point – to labour it for your benefit – was that Bannockburn wasn’t actually for the benefit of the Scots or English but for that of their Norman feudal overlords. It wasn’t a glorious victory for the Scots, at the end of the day, but a profitable investment by some Normans. In mitigation, unlike today’s politicians and investment bankers, the beneficiaries were actually present, and at some hazard of their lives.
What wasn’t how things were then, btw, was murdering your rival in front of a monastery altar, which is what Bruce had previously done to John Comyn – a much more determinedly pro-Scottish figure than the Bruce. Very little about this in the standard myth.
Something similar happened at the anti-Trident (and heavily YES-leaning) rally in George Square on 5 April. All the publicity that went out beforehand said that the rally would set off at 11 a.m. On the Thursday before the rally, Glasgow City Council said we had to set off at 10.30, so anyone arriving at George Square would’ve found themselves in an empty George Square with the exception of a few stalls. Dunno if it would’ve been much bigger, but the rally, while energetic and positive, was disappointing in numbers.
Anon,
All military parades are,in effect,dick-waving contests of varying stripe.
To suggest there isn’t a jingoistic element or celebratory echoes of past murderous events is nonsense.
I suspect you know this but you do seem to be in a particularly trollish mood today,moreso than usual-were this possible.
“It is improving my knowledge of Scottish history.”
Let’s improve it a little more. Robert de Brus was part of the Norman aristocracy, rich land owners who kept the people of Scotland and Northern Ireland in slavery. The only thing they fought for was power and wealth for themselves.
Fred
Absolute Rubbish. Declaration of Arbroath, 1320
“As long as but a hundred of us remain alive, never will we on any conditions be brought under English rule. It is in truth not for glory, nor riches, nor honours, that we are fighting, but for freedom – for that alone, which no honest man gives up but with life itself”.
Fred, I’m trying to improve my understanding by consulting historians with an in-depth knowledge not from those who regurgitate Wikipedia entries. Yes, it was, and still is, wealthy people who perpetuate a livelihood from stealing the world’s resources, who lead others into battle from behind. Blair is one of the more recent examples, but please, if you want to improve my knowledge you have to amass some of your own first.
“As long as but a hundred of us remain alive, never will we on any conditions be brought under English rule. It is in truth not for glory, nor riches, nor honours, that we are fighting, but for freedom – for that alone, which no honest man gives up but with life itself”.
By Alastair de Campbell? 6 years after Bannockburn, and signed by the then equivalent of the Scottish Landowners’ Association. Still, as Anon says, that was how things were done then. Economic power sprang from land and taxable tenants. The Scots didn’t win anything, and a lot of them were killed in the process.
UK SUBSERVIENCE TO THE U.S. EMPIRE
The elephant in the room in the debate on independence for Scotland is the UK’s absolute subservience to the US Empire. Which the UK Muppet Stream Media treats as an absolute taboo.
A taboo entertainingly broken on Media Lens Message Board –
“Just hastened the demise of their Western empire, which is now on its very last legs. In these Interesting, inevitably changing Times, the little nations of The Isles might well hope to thrive better, in some sort of more egalitarian confederacy than hitherto – including England, naturally, once it’s shaken off the dead hand of the English-raj class of parasitical crooks. England’s urgent business to do, in the next fifteen-to-twenty years, with luck. But when Scotland gets free, it will be, we may reasonably hope, the death knell of not just the contemptible uk-state, but of the monstrous USuk entity too, as the whole USukisnato-axis follows the Warsaw Pact down the tubes.”
http://members5.boardhost.com/medialens/msg/1398182048.html
ER, Indeed!
A reply to ‘Macmillan’s sell-out a vital lesson for Scotland,’ by The Editors – April 22, 2014, 11:05 am – Media Lens Message Board –
http://members5.boardhost.com/medialens/msg/1398161143.html
Does an independent Scotland also give the US Empire ‘a kick in the bollock’s’ in additition the UK establishment? By greatly weakening the European – and world – influence of the US Empire’s number one satrap?
> > “Craig, I think you should campaign for a different type of independence. Not Scotland breaking away from the rest of the UK, but the common folk of England, Scotland, Northern Ireland and Wales finding a way to divorce themselves from the deep state/Establishment maggots who run the place, and who are really responsible for the crimes that we lament on this blog.” – King of Welsh Noir
>“I agree with the aim – I just think the break-up of the UK is the kind of kick in the bollocks of the Establishment that will assist the process.” – Craig Murray
– http://www.craigmurray.org.uk/archives/2014/04/positive-headlines/#comment-453600
Yes, we can! ; )
There were some similar (ER, forthright) opinions in a post on the Adam Werrity Affair on the idea that the UK and US might still be ‘Allies’ by any normal understanding of the term. Tom Welch’s post was a succinct summary of a rambling diatribe. ; )
– ‘Mathew Gould and Adam Werrity’ – Craig Murray blog – October 14, 2011 –
– http://www.craigmurray.org.uk/archives/2011/10/matthew-gould-and-adam-werritty/#comment-323913
In 1603 James VI of Scotland became James I of England and hence the whole of the UK. The move for Scottish independence is a modern phenomenon and part of the movement for democracy worldwide. Thus arguments about events before the 19th century are inapplicable.
Abe, please study some history before you post, eh?
This article is nationalist propaganda decrying nationalist propaganda. Hilarious. Well the writer did hone his trade working for the British empire he now berates.
Some of us will be a tad more Scottish than others if you get me.
“Not Scotland breaking away from the rest of the UK, but the common folk of England, Scotland, Northern Ireland and Wales finding a way to divorce themselves from the deep state/Establishment maggots who run the place, and who are really responsible for the crimes that we lament on this blog.”
In the 70’s Gates’ shop at CIA viewed ethnic and cultural divergence as the USSR’s achille’s heel. This was fairly prescient, as cracks in the Warsaw Pact resulted not from satellites rebelling against Soviets but from divergent approaches to repressing domestic populations. The repressive analog for the NATO bloc today is austerity, since economic rights are the primary threat to the regimes. Germans are the hard-liners again. Merkel is the Honecker of immiseration.
Long story short, nationalist fissures help exterminate the maggots too.
Mike Mac: I looked up “Bannockburn” in wikipedia. Bannockburn was a nationalist struggle against an occupier, but James VI was not an occupier. William I of Hanover successfully conquered James II, and he was then the king of the UK. James II’s descendant Bonnie Prince Charlie attempted the same thing with the help of Scottish supporter’s but his attempt failed, and so he was the king of the UK. That’s why I would him as making an unsuccessful attempt at secession. Hence I regard the SNP as a modern phenomenon. Which historical fact do you feel I’ve missed?
(Corrected typos)
Mike Mac: I looked up “Bannockburn” in wikipedia. Bannockburn was a nationalist struggle against an occupier, but James VI was not an occupier. William I of Hanover successfully conquered James II, and he was then the king of the UK. James II’s descendant Bonnie Prince Charlie attempted the same thing with the help of Scottish supporters but his attempt failed, and so he was never the king of the UK. That’s why I would him as making an unsuccessful attempt at secession. Hence I regard the SNP as a modern phenomenon. Which historical fact do you feel I’ve missed?
Whatever your views on ancient battles, its still part of Scotland’s history. To use the British army as a political football is a disgrace. This will simply reaffirm the view held by many Scots that Labour are more interested in power in Westminster than representing the views and aspirations of the people of Scotland.
I live in East Dunbartonshire and we also are under the yoke of a Labour/Tory unholy alliance and a pigs ear they are making of the place!
“Let’s improve it a little more. Robert de Brus was part of the Norman aristocracy, rich land owners who kept the people of Scotland and Northern Ireland in slavery. The only thing they fought for was power and wealth for themselves.”
Well, let me correct your total lack of understanding. The fact that Bruce had a great, great, great grandfather who was Norman did not make him one. He was born in Scotland and descended from as many Scots as from Normans. The Chronical of Lanercost of the day (English in case you don’t know it) put it pretty bluntly about the Bruce: “He was a Scot so he joined the Scots.”
Was he noble and not commoner, Yes. He was a direct descendant of of SCOTTISH royalty, not Norman. The calumnies against the Bruce are nothing but British propaganda, the usual attempts to destroy a nation’s sense of nationhood that is common to the British style of rule.