- Tweet
- Share 0
- LinkedIn 0
The Blog That Reaches the Parts… 161
Allowed HTML - you can use:
<a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <s> <strike> <strong>
Allowed HTML - you can use:
“A country that issues its debts in its own currency can’t go bankrupt.
Wrong.
No bank would lend to any entity incapable of going bankrupt.
Issuing currency itself (“paper”) is similar to taking out debt.
Mick
The corollary of recriminations and discontent by yes voters after a no vote, is the actions and and behaviour of no voters after a yes vote.
I think it is highly unlikely that No campaigners would concede the result readily.
A comparison of the two sets of circumstances suggests to me that No voters would be in a position to undermine or do damage to the nascent independent Scotland than Yes voters to a united G. Britain.
The core issue is really democracy and governance.
It seems to me that yes voters are mainly concerned with establishing better forms of democratic representation and political accountability in the context of the erosion of political accountability and quality of democracy.
The main concerns of the No campaigners have been matters of convenience, exaggerated to suggest that a cataclysm after the Yes vote.They have ignored many issues that have dominated politics over the last decade. These are Iraq and Tony Blair’s Nulabour failures, the failures of Afghanistan and the descent of the UK towards plutocracy and away from social democracy, Brown’s ludicrous ‘world saving’ economic performance as Chancellor,where to all intents, he adopted Thatcherite policies and the use of housing bubbles and credit to generate an unsustainable financial capitalism which directly led to a scabrous Tory government that has enacted some of the most anti-democratic and repressive legislation possible.
Essentially , I think a yes vote is yes vote for the breakdown of a corrupt(ed) mainstream political system in the UK. A separation will, I believe, lead to a greater degree of democratic accountability in the entire UK and a diminishing of the centrality of certain key institutions that are part and parcel of the unsatisfactory UK political process.
Are you really happy with peerages for cash? FPTP ? A three party system that offers differently spun versions of the same policies and directions?
MJ: Do you have the poll that Westminster paid over 50 thousands pounds for and then refused to release the information ? That would indeed be welcome.
O/T, and sincere apologies, but this one’s fun:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/northamerica/usa/11029036/Britain-discussed-US-request-to-build-Guantanamo-style-prison-on-Diego-Garcia-after-September-11-attacks-officials-say.html
Michael Blyth, the British head of security on Diego Garcia at the time of 9/11, told The Telegraph that he was asked in 2001 to investigate whether it was possible to house hundreds of prisoners from Afghanistan on the island.
“There was a discussion of whether or not Diego Garcia would be good as a transitory point for up to 500 prisoners of war coming out of Afghanistan,” said Mr Blyth, a former Royal Marine now working in the risk consultancy industry in the US.
The plan was “quickly nixed”, however, after Adam Peters, the senior British officer on the base, learned that proposals for a detention centre would need 300 guards, dogs and security cameras and were therefore impractical….
…Separately, a security source with first-hand knowledge of US-UK intelligence relations in the period after 9/11 has also told The Telegraph that lawyers from the British and American governments did discuss the legality of using Diego Garcia in extraordinary rendition operations, but the British side again maintained that it was legally impossible.
Legally impossible for us, but go ahead, do what you like on our territory.
There were renewed demands for clarity over Diego Garcia last month after a foreign office minister said in a statement that Diego Garcia flight logs from 2002 were incomplete “due to water damage”, feeding long-standing suspicions of a possible cover-up of UK involvement.
The following week, however, the government back-tracked, saying the damaged records had since “dried out” and all were now fully available for scrutiny.
It also emerged, after a Whitehall official was inadvertently photographed carrying sensitive documents, that the complete flight logs are now in the possession of Scotland Yard detectives investigating the UK involvement in the rendition of Mr Belhadj.
The existence of the flight logs appeared to contradict UK government assurances given in 2008 that a “thorough review” had found no such information.
It is unknown if a full cross-referencing of the contents against known CIA rendition aircraft has yielded new information, but pressure is now growing on ministers to release the files to avoid any further allegations of cover-up.
(see link above)
The BBC don’t seem to have broken this yet, so thanks to the Turkish Gazeteport
for linking this more widely. And getting Blair into the headline:
http://www.gazeteport.com.tr/haber/178300/blaire-yeni-guantanamo-kurma-talebi
“Demand to Blair: new Guantanamo building”, (slightly less approximately than Google Translate)
That is dynamite Ba’al, that means only those ‘few pages’ got waterlogged anybody might have an interest in….. first there is waterboarding, followed by waterlogging….
Mick
“I haven’t witnessed any No Campaigners preparing their excuses in the event of losing the referendum”. Hubris is a wonderful thing.
Indeed, Nevermind. You’d think waterlogged paper would have the decency to stay waterlogged and flush itself down the toilet, wouldn’t you?
Returning to the topic, *many a true word in jest* – zone:
http://www.dailysquib.co.uk/world/9026-scotland-freedom-priceless.html
That’s a pretty good line to take, IMO.
I agree with Tony Opmoc at 10:59 re go for a new currency.
If I were pro independence and running the campaign (I am undecided and not running any campaign) I would equate a no vote with coach potatoes, i.e. if you are too busy to make any effort stay in bed note no. If you have got some guts here is your chance vote yes.
No one wants to bring up the old Brit Empire but if you do look at it you see an awful lot of Scots who got up and did things (not all good but they had some will power.
Can’t help but feel that the emphasis on keeping the pound is because the yes campaign is worried that to discuss a new currency / plan B just invites an easy line of attack and endless questioning and prefer to try and keep chummy with those who want an easy life and a seamless transition. If there is a yes vote it won’t be easy, it won’t be seamless and the yes campaign might as well be upfront about it and encourage those who are up to it to say yes and those who are too passive to stay on the sofa and send in a postal vote no.
The No campaigners have been trumpeting that Scotland has no plan B.
Watch this (Scotland Votes What’s at Stake for the UK )
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XYGUlg3WhX4
rUK has NO plans at all.No flag.No Name !No idea what to do in the case that Scotland says YES. They have their heads up their ar**es or in the sand.
Habba: When all you can do is insult then I guess I struck a nerve and won.
It’s not what I think , but it certainly is odd that in a normal election 70 K of the votes would be postal and in the referendum it has mushroomed to 700 K & ~ 18% of the electorate.
I know you have no dog , but any suggestions what rUK could be called after a Yes vote ?
Craig,
You need to consult a dictionary surrounding the definition of hubris. Then compare it with the definition of an observation. Once you have done both of those things you might be able to understand my comments.
Habba,….I know you have no dog ….
Ah, but he has.
“rUK has NO plans at all.No flag.No Name !No idea what to do in the case that Scotland says YES. They have their heads up their ar**es or in the sand.”
The UK has a name, they have a flag, they have armed services, they have a currency and a central bank, they have revenue, customs, immigration, postal and diplomatic services, they have a stock exchange and an oil burse.
If Scotland votes for independence they will be voting to leave the British institutions, they will still remain without them.
DoNNyDARKO
“Habba: When all you can do is insult then I guess I struck a nerve and won.
It’s not what I think , but it certainly is odd that in a normal election 70 K of the votes would be postal and in the referendum it has mushroomed to 700 K & ~ 18% of the electorate.”
___________________
“Insult”?
You might like to consider whether your original comment* was insulting to the majority of Scots who, according to all polls at present, intend to vote No.
(* “Sounds like Westminster is preparing for a Karzai type ballot.”)
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
When you’ve thought about that – and perhaps seen fit to offer an apology – think about this: I have no idea where your figures come from, but it might be that enough Scots unable to vote in person for one reason or another feel strongly enough about the issue to make sure that their voice is heard. Which they might not do in other elections.
******************
Apologies for the above, which is probably displeasingly polite and reasonable for a commmenter of your type. 🙂
Fred
13 Aug, 2014 – 8:41 pm
“I think currency is an important issue and those being asked to decide have a right to know.”
——————————————-
Don’t the people of Scotland also have a right to know what the Conservative, LibDem and Labour party stance would be on the currency if Scotland voted for independence?
Why is it only the SNP that have to answer the currency question?
Do the Better Together parties not have a plan in case of a Yes vote?
Großer witz
13 Aug, 2014 – 9:23 pm
“Na canny. Na canny see what’s wrong with yous Engerlesh bastard paedos…”
——————————
Put a haggis in it Gobler.
“Why is it only the SNP that have to answer the currency question?”
Because it is the SNP who are in power in Scotland and it is they who will be doing the deciding.
Habbabkuk (La vita è bella) !
13 Aug, 2014 – 9:40 pm
“If the polls which indicate that Yes voting intentions have declined to around 35% and the Noes are at over 60 % are anywhere near correct, I’m beginning to see what’s behind most of the outpourings on this and similar threads.”
“The words “frustration” and “bad losers” come to mind.”
——————————————
Habbabkuk if you use statistics please reference your source.
9th May 2013:
NO: 65%
YES: 26%
Don’tKnow: 17%
7th August 2014:
NO: 45%
YES: 37%
Don’tKnow: 13%
http://whatscotlandthinks.org/questions/should-scotland-be-an-independent-country-1#line
I think it will be a close call Habbabkuk. So close that the major parties have resorted to all sorts of dirty tricks and negative propaganda because there is the possibility of a yes win.
But if it’s a No result you can gloat all you like it won’t change the reality of the propaganda machine and how propaganda does work on many people.
So many of the more shouty Yessers are headbangers without a clue how to win over moderates on the other side. They are far more vociferous than the Noers. Far more Yes signs have been stuck up in Scotland than No signs. Head…bang! Their arguments don’t stand up to rational challenge, and rather than admit this they get all nasty and give their xenophobia an airing when in difficulty.
Quite a lot of Yessers are so intoxicated that they think the polls are all an English (“Westminster”) plot and that in fact Yes is ahead and pulling further ahead. They are a typical bunch of politicians, but a bunch many of whom have believed their own bullshit to the max, which is quite sad.
There are going to be quite a lot of drunken Yessite tossers around when the results come in. English residents who are known to be No supporters should maybe stay inside. I hope no houses get burnt. (That fucking film Braveheart has a lot to answer for. The IRA probably loved it. But I digress.) Any English resident who experiences xenophobic abuse in the run-up to the vote should consider contacting the police.
No will win. Personally I don’t want Yes supporters to grovel (really), but I do want them to accept the result gracefully, shut the fuck up about independence, and start to contribute alongside the majority to making Scotland a better place – which BTW isn’t reducible to devo max and more public money in the hands of the freemasonic crooks who run Scotland.
Mick
13 Aug, 2014 – 11:26 pm
“The sooner this bloody referendum is over the better. Sad to see that some of those supporting the Yes Campaign are already lining up reasons as to why they failed…”
I take it you’re a NO supporter Mick.
But don’t you think that, in the event of a NO win, that the negative fear campaign by the Better Together team including the BBC and the other mainstream media would have played a part in the failure of the YES vote?
Scare stories like the Scottish military would desert to England in the event of independence. (Daily Mail)
Mr Scorgie
Whatever!
Vox populi, vox dei.
I recommend you read and digest No’s comments at 16h00.
Mr Scorgie
“But don’t you think that, in the event of a NO win, that the negative fear campaign by the Better Together team including the BBC and the other mainstream media would have played a part in the failure of the YES vote?”
__________________
As with several of the other Yessers on here, your comment is an indirect insult to the Scottish voters (whether intended or not)
Mr Scorgie
“But if it’s a No result you can gloat all you like it won’t change the reality of the propaganda machine and how propaganda does work on many people.”
__________________
Actually, Doug, I shan’t be gloating.
But I would suggest that, in the event of a No vote (especially if this is followed by further devolved powers for the Scottish Assembly), the opportunity is taken to solve, once and for all, the “West Lothian” question.
I believe that MPs sitting for Scottish constituencies should not be able to vote on legislation affecting England and Wales in areas for which competence has been – or will be – devolved to Scotland. Education policy is but one example.
What say you, Doug?
Parky
14 Aug, 2014 – 12:20 am
“If there is a NO outcome, will the referendum become an annual or bi-annual event until the correct answer is found?”
No Parky but it will if its a Yes outcome!
A pretty ugly mixed-up post @4:00pm. That projection thing again. Even in the Borders where I’ve been visiting which was though to be a tough call, there are Yes signs in windows, Yes stickers on cars everywhere, elaborate large wooden Yes cutout signs brighten up the most unlikely places, from well-kept gardens in troubled housing schemes, to small neat villages, even larger properties you’d have thought were Tory territory have large Yes signs in their gardens, from Carter Bar all the way along the A68 and back roads in between, up the A7 all the way into Edinburgh, the Yes message is everywhere, people are daring to show their intentions, and delightedly finding unimagined high approval and support, it is very encouraging. The pubs including those with many patrons from over border are abuzz too with eager anticipation of a Yes referendum result. I’ve spoken to people locally from over the border, from as far afield as Middlesborough who’re thinking moving up here after independence, where their votes, for the first time in their lives might count for something, this is no protest vote against yet another deeply unpopular government in Westminster, this is a rejection of UK politics entirely. Naysayers, there seem more of them online trolling the usual tired predictable themes, than exist in the real world.
Doug,
Why does it matter if I am a No supporter?
In my post I did not refer to the arguments or tactics used by either side but only that Yes Supporters are already starting to concoct excuses for why they might lose. On this blog there is a reference to rigging postal ballots. At the weekend I listened to a friend of mine who is normally fairly rational, and certainly not disposed to half-baked conspiracy theories, suggest that there is a warehouse full of pre-prepared fraudulent ballots which will be sent to the count centres in order to secure a vote for the status quo. What nonsense.
As for your second point I could only accept it if I believed that the media have been grossly biased towards the Better Together Campaign over that of the Yes Campaign. I don’t believe that is true.
We could go back and forth, probably at quite considerable length, over which campaign has fought the more considered and factually accurate campaign but I doubt we would agree. So I am not going to bother.
As I said last night, regardless of who wins I want both sides of the debate to come together, either as citizens of the UK or of an independent Scotland. It will also be beyond joy to go to the pub or out for dinner without having to listen to the same tedious reasons as to why the future of civilisation depends on a Yes or No vote.
Five more weeks and we will be free…;)
Mr Scorgie
“Don’t the people of Scotland also have a right to know what the Conservative, LibDem and Labour party stance would be on the currency if Scotland voted for independence?
Why is it only the SNP that have to answer the currency question?
Do the Better Together parties not have a plan in case of a Yes vote?”
___________________
Not for the first time, Doug, you’re missing the point.
It is for those who seek to change the status quo to justify their position and the need for change. That includes stating what they will do if the rUK govt declines a currency union. It is, inter alia, a matter of respect for the Scottish electorate.
The No campaign, on the other hand, does not need to prognosticate on what Westminster would do in the event of a Yes vote. It would only need to do so if the entire UK population was entitled to vote in this referendum, which is not the case.
Ferguson, Missouri is now Baghdad.
Coming to a village near you.
This was a reasonably interesting documentary and more impartial than I thought, it’s there for a few more days….
http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/b04dr69k/scotland-votes-whats-at-stake-for-the-uk
@doug scorgie 14 Aug, 2014 – 4:56 pm
I thought if it was a Yes then it’s a done deal and the changeover machinery whirls into motion. If a No then does Alex Salmond have another go in a few years when the time is right etc. This was as someone pointed out earlier the case for ROI and Denmark as I seem to remember who were dragged to the polls until they agreed. So much for Democracy but it is the EU afterall.
Re the televised last week, Darling was keen to find out if there was a plan B in place in the event of no currency union and Salmond just as keen not to contemplate the very idea. I’m sure there is a plan B and C etc but we are then into the world of ‘hypertheticals’ and politicians don’t seem to like discussing them at all.