Scottish Independence – the Referendum – Germany Say’s Foul



Remember This Statement It Is Relevant to Scotland’s Future As An ndependent Nation

73% of voters aged 65y+ voted against secession whilst 71% of 16-17 year-old’s supported independence.





Strategic Planning and Successful Delivery Of An Attack on the Scottish Independence Referendum “Yes” Campaign

The 2014 Scottish referendum showed that a Westminster government, aided greatly by a compliant Civil Service was well capable of conducting a ruthless campaign of misinformation and fear with the purpose of convincing Scottish society that it was expedient to preserve the existing order.

Scots living outwith Scotland were barred from taking part in the referendum, a right that was extended only to those who lived in Scotland, including Irish, English, Welsh and EC, other immigrants. The decision to debar Scots living in other countries significantly weakened the independence movement since a recorded 10-15% swing voter grouping was subjected to an intensive misinformation campaign by the Westminster government before going to polls and their votes decided the outcome of the plebiscite.

Just before the referendum and well within the “purdah” period the Westminster government, (supported by opposition party leaders) illegally tabled a “binding Vow” offering devolution of extensive new powers on tax, spending and welfare if the Scots rejected independence, though fully-fledged autonomy was not offered. The “new” option added a second question to the referendum ballot paper well after the closure date for the return of postal votes effectively disenfranchising many scots voters.

Cameron committed his government to have the new plans in place and agreed by November 2014, with draft legislation ready by January 2015. “We will ensure that those commitments are honored in full, “he said on September 19, the day after the vote. But qualifying his statement he added the rider that other people in other parts of the United Kingdom would also need to have more rights to govern their own affairs, particularly in England. He said “I’ve long believed that a crucial part of this debate that’s missing is England. … The question of English votes for English laws, the so called West Lothian question, requires a definitive answer.”


Other External Influences Ensuring Success For “Better Together”

Before going to the polls Scottish voters were further softened up by the Westminster government controlled media and press who, quoting eminent USA and EC sources repeatedly warned that a newly independent Scotland would bring with it an onslaught of economic, cultural, and geopolitical troubles. Economists added to the assault predicting a deterioration of Scotland’s economic performance with living standards being greatly reduced. There were also dire warnings of rising unemployment and bankruptcies. It was also suggested that there might be no access to credit/debit cards.
Senior military officers were deployed to attack the independence campaign claiming it’s success would weaken the defensive capability of the British Isles. Their primary concern was centred on the commitment by the SNP to reject any suggestion that the United Kingdom would be permitted to keep its nuclear fleet on the Clyde. Expelling the Trident Program from Scottish waters had long been a mainstay of the Scottish Nationalist cause and this was not negotiable
The officers berated Scots, warning that removing the nuclear submarines and Trident from Faslane would come at a substantial price for Scotland and the United Kingdom, both literally and figuratively. The naval base employed in excess of 6,000 highly-skilled, well-paid workers and was the largest single site employer in Scotland.

They omitted to mention that the vast bulk of the workers were resident in England and contributed little to the Scottish economy since there was a weekly exodus of the workers from Faslane to England at 1600 hours each Friday.

They further warned that removal would attract a £25 billion cost and there was no definative plan in place setting out where the submarines and Trident would be located (and who would meet the cost) should Scotland vote yes.





Germany Did Not Jump For Joy At the Outcome of the Referendum

There is a growing discontent within the EC about the role played by the UK in heavily criticised clandestine activities acting against the interests of it’s citizens. Namely “rendition and internet/telephone” eavesdropping programmes put in place by the USA with the active participation of the UK. The foregoing coupled with Westminster’s aloof stance within the EC, always denying the agreed treaty process of integration engenders doubt about the UK’s future intentions in regards to EC membership. Conversely Scotland is known to be very much in favour of retaining full EC membership.

Public opinion in Germany predominantly supported the concept of Scotland’s independence but the German Chancellor, Angela Merkel and Foreign Minister, Frank-Walter Steinmeier officially welcomed the referendum result (confirming the North Atlantic solidarity process). However informed gossip within the German government provides support to the view that they were not entirely enamoured about the outcome since the partition of the UK would have boosted Germany’s influence and slowed the rapprochement between Paris and London which is viewed in Berlin as kind of rebirth of Entente Cordiale.



7 replies on “Scottish Independence – the Referendum – Germany Say’s Foul”

“Scots living outwith Scotland were barred from taking part in the referendum, a right that was extended only to those who lived in Scotland, including Irish, English, Welsh and EC, other immigrants.”

As someone who is English, but has decided to make my home in Scotland (with my Scottish wife and our children) I regard it as absolutely correct that I did have a vote in the referendum, and that Scots who have chosen to live outwith Scotland did not get a vote. It was a referendum for the resident population as a whole – an exercise in self-determination.

Just how you would determine who living in an other country was a Scot and how you could register them to vote etc.? Any franchise based on ethnic origin would reasonably have been regarded as racist.

I was initially included to support retention of the union with my country of birth and residence for 55 years, However having lived in scotland for 7 years by the referendum, I was persuaded, mostly by the Better Together and UK Gov (mis)-information, to vote Yes, but also by the fact that the Yes movement was not about ethnicity, but rather about the government of Scotland by the residents of Scotland. The existence of “English for Yes” group indicates I was not alone.

If Scotland is to gain independence at some future date we should have no truck with any gerry-manderring of the franchise, whether that be by limiting it within Scotland based on ethnicity / country of origin, or by inclusion of those “Scots” who have chosen, for whatever reason, to live outwith Scotland.


You simply can not manipulate who is included in the electorate so as to get the vote you would like. How would you feel ifyou were debarred so as to guarantee a result that you profoundly disagree with. Imagine debarring anyone not owning their own house or earning at least £100k to guarantee a Tory victory in a general election. Could that be regarded as democratic?.
Further you did not explain how you would determine who outside Scotland should be entitled to vote, how you would communicate that entitlement to them and how you would actually administer the process of them voting. I am assuming that your proposal would apply to whom ever you decide are “Scots living outwith Scotland” no matter where in the world they live and not just to those resident in other parts of the UK.
The only valid franchise for any future referendum is the same as the previous one, namely those entitled to vote in Scottish Goverment elections.


As an over 65 year old who voted yes, I question the statistic as to age shape of the Yes and No Voters. If this is based on polling, how big and how random was the sample? If it based on checking the ballot papers against the census returns, who did this, by whose authority, and who was keeping the process under scrutiny? Divide and conquer applies either way. Democracy, as we experience it, is in massive deficit to transparency and equality for all citizens.


I am well over 65y and I also voted yes but I believe the stats to accurately reflect the pensioner voting pattern. I did write an article on the impact of the pensions fear campaign orchestrated by the Treasury. They sold pensioners a three legged pup distributing false information.


“However informed gossip within the German government provides support to the view that they were not entirely enamoured about the outcome since the partition of the UK would have boosted Germany’s influence and slowed the rapprochement between Paris and London ”

There were a good few countries that would love to see Britians demise, Spain would like it (though as an old Empire themselves, they may find the Basques, Catalans and Balearics, quick to follow.)

No doubt Dublin would love to see Britain humbled, and a great many in Scotland who came over when the potato crop failed, they call themselves Scots, they don’t like Britain, they say they love Ireland , but they don’t want to live there, (Ireland is a beacon of progressive politics in these isles , free health, education and a generous welfare system) No food banks either.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.