Scottish Referendum

Afghanistan – Policy In The Field Of War Decided By Labour Politicians – British Army Suffered Horrendous Casualties Four Times Greater Than The Americans – Why?

Dr-John-ReidBetter Togethermurphy nucarticle-2270948-1541BC71000005DC-446_308x425


John Reid, “now Baron”, (Labour Party bulldog) recently resurfaced and, declaring himself, “a man to be trusted” attacked any persons who indicated they would vote, “Yes” to independence. I am of the view he should hang his head in shame and take himself away from politics forever. A has-been who blatantly failed the nations forces.





April 29 2006 Afghanistan:
UK deployed over 3,000 military personnel, tasked to create a safe base and to provide leadership of a Nato-led peacekeeping force. In direct support a large US-led force was deployed throughout the country aggressively eliminating militants.

John Reid, Secretary of State for Defence, addressing the world’s press in Kabul, spoke of how Britain would remain in the Nato offensive, emphasising the importance of preventing the Taliban returning to power. He further stated, “We’re in Helmand and the South to assist and protect the Afghan people reconstructing their economy and democracy” and, “we would be perfectly happy to leave in three years time without firing one shot.”

Enjoying a deal of advance knowledge, through secret briefing, (of the mission to which the soldiers had been tasked) he belatedly first advised the leader of the soldiers that the area to which they had been deployed was heavily infested with nests of vipers and whilst they should exercise care, nests should be removed and vipers eliminated if the mission required it.

The leader of the soldiers expressed surprise and disappointment, warning Reid that the soldiers were neither equipped nor trained to deal with problems such as indicated. Reid off-handedly blustered that they would have to muddle through and learn quickly. He left the troops to their fate and returned to Westminster, well removed from the area.

He returned to Westminster, to yet another government scandal, (1,200+) illegal immigrants, previously imprisoned for very serious crimes against UK citizens had not been deported on release and could not be traced. The Home Secretary had been sacked for incompetence. Reid replaced him.






Casualties, in Afghanistan, very quickly mounted up, as the UK soldiers were heavily attacked by the vipers. It was noted that a USA unit located alongside the UK force was suffering markedly fewer similarly killed or wounded. This was attributed to the issue, (before deployment) of appropriate weapons, suitable equipment, protective clothing, special viper kill training and back-up support.



bomb_1803897cWAR BASRAsoldiers-1024_226828k


Requests that similar measures be introduced, by Westminster were rebuffed, on the basis that finance for the mission had been previously fixed. Casualties continued increasing. The UK media, appalled at the attrition level publicly voiced their concerns. This resulted in pressure being applied by the UK public who insisted UK forces should be properly trained and equipped. Westminster reluctantly agreed to rectify matters and borrowed £ billions on the open market.



mckay_42046918_afghan_kabul_map203x152Major General Mackay

Britain Sent Troops Into Helmand Province With, “Eyes Shut and Fingers Crossed”

Major General Mackay, Greatly respected, Force Commander in Helmand, (in an interview in the Times), not long after he left the Army said;

“Labour’s “complacent” approach to the Afghan mission had proved “very costly”.  The genesis of their approach is born of complacency, the thought that, ‘we can deal with it as and when it happens”.  It resulted, I believe, in the upper echelons of the Labour government going into Helmand with their eyes shut and their fingers crossed.

“For those who fought and died or suffered injuries in that period, this proved a very costly means of conducting counter-insurgency. The issue is whether or not our politicians, diplomats, intelligence services, civil servants and senior military have done enough, adapted enough, been innovative enough or courageous enough to make tough, and more often than not, unpalatable choices.”

“My answer to that question is that they have not or have failed to do so too often. Muddling through seemed to be the default setting, along with the protection of individual and collective interests”.




Follow up – The disastrous legacy John Reid left the Army and the nation

446 British soldiers met their deaths – a higher figure than in Iraq, or the Falklands – most commonly from improvised explosive devices buried along the dusty roads of Helmand province. They have been killed at four times the rate of US troops, a statistical disparity which nobody at Westminster seems anxious to have explained.

The maximum acceptable level of Major Combat casualties is 6 deaths per 1000.  USA forces suffered 3 deaths per 1000 in the same period.

UK forces suffered 13 deaths per 1000. (twice the normal rate).

3560 soldiers were wounded. A snapshot of non-lethal casualties showed that in one year alone, (between April 2012 and March 2013)  29 British soldiers had limbs amputated. Twelve of these were classified as “significant multiple amputees”. The average age of those who died was 22. Thirty-one were teenagers, 200 in their 20s.

Of the Afghan veterans who had made it home more or less in one piece, the most common cause of death in 2012 was suicide.

One reason for the very high British casualty rate – in the absence of written evidence – could be the ignorance and stupidity of British politicians and their carelessness about the lives of the young people they were sending into battle, the resultant failure to provide basic equipment and the deployment of personnel in ways which made no military (or any other sort of) sense.




Scottish Referendum

Post Office Sell-Off Scandal

The recent privatisation by the, “Department for Business, Innovation and Skills” of 70% of the Royal Mail proved to be a complete and utter disaster. The UK taxpayer lost £1 Billion on the deal, primarily a result of the share price being set, (by Vince Cable) at the lowest possible permitted level, acting on the advice of Goldman Sachs and UBS.

Privatisation rules contained a clause allowing, (Vince Cable) to increase the initial selling price per share should demand exceed the allocation, maximising the return. Bids for shares exceeded total availability by twenty-four fold but he declined to do so.

Joe Public was also short changed, being allocated only, 8% of the share total. The vast bulk of the allocation, 62% was given over to 21, “Priority Investors” in the believe that they would be in for the long-term. The wide based spread of share ownership would therefore provide stability. This did not happen, shares are now owned by only 6 large consortia.

The first day of the sale ensured a minimum 30% profit on each share. Priority customers, (included Goldman Sachs and UBS) made a killing.

The National Audit Office, (NAO), in a report to Parliament, severely criticised the actions of Mr Cable, querying the involvement of, Goldman Sachs and UBS, providing stock market advice, including recommended selling price per share together with a large allocation of shares.

Resign Mr Cable!!! Not a chance. I see no wrong, said he!!  Yet another example of the disease that is Westminster. Scotland is best out of it. Vote, “Yes” in the next referendum.

Scottish Referendum

Deceit and Treachery – Obama’s Unforgivable Betrayal of the Scots in 2014


U.S. Embassy London on Twitter: "Name: @MatthewBarzun Specialist ...




US Interference in the 2014 Independence referendum

In a public address Barack Obama said:

“The interest of the US in the Scottish independence referendum issue is to ensure the United Kingdom remains a strong, robust, united and effective partner”.

The day before the referendum he tweeted:

“The UK is an extraordinary partner for America and a force for good in an unstable world. I hope it remains strong, robust, and united.”


Obama Tweets Message Against Scottish Independence Ahead Of Vote ...



Letter to the President

Duncan Forbes, a voter from Aberdeen was incensed by Obama’s ill-advised and inappropriate intervention and wrote to him.

From: Duncan Forbes

To: Political Barack Obama

Hello Mr. President.

I write this correspondence both in anger and disbelief. You allowed yourself to be duped by what has transpired to be a Westminster orchestrated BBC criminal partisan piece of bad journalism.

It may even have made you an accessory to a crime.

If I or any other Scotsman had dared to interfere in any U.S. plebiscite, you would be justifiably angered and offended.

If I had suggested that I should be allowed to purchase another country lock stock and barrel for a court accepted £20,000 sterling, to be distributed amongst standing politicians or representatives so as to secure the parliamentary vote in my favour, your country, the community of nations and the U.N. would be up in arms, probably threatening military reprisals and sanctions, etc.

Well, Mr. President, that’s exactly what Lord Gillingham of Westminster did.

He paid the Duke of Queensberry that odious sum of money which against the current rate of exchange becomes £240,000. Which when divided equates to less than tuppence a Scot.

Lord Archibald Campbell’s share was £1,100 and Scottish lord Lord Banffshire’s contribution was a derisory £11 and 2 shillings.

A financial transaction all of which was illegal under Scot’s law and morally wrong under any court in the world.

Our national bard “Robert Burns” nailed it in verse several times “sic parcel o rogues in a nation” and “chains and slavery”.

It beggars belief that yourself, as a black man who has fought like your forefathers to be all you can be, striving for equal rights, race laws, equal opportunities, the million man march, a seat on the bus, and finally the presidency are backing the continued illegal Westminster governance of Scotland.

With the shortest life expectancy in the British isles, the smallest average wage, highest cancer rates, the hardest working race, and the greatest contributor per head to their coffers.

The English cleared millions of Scots off their land and shipped them to the colonies (sounds familiar) and only stopped when the army needed Scottish soldiers to fight their wars in the US!!

Surely you, a black man and President of the US cannot justify your actions supporting England’s regime suppressing and controlling another race for personal gain? Your electorate will have its say on the matter.

So I ask, is this what you want to be in bed with?

Will your wife and kids respect you more or less for this?

How many “Mac’s” on your countries boards?

How much corporate sponsorship will you possibly lose?

As a black man in power, how could you live with yourself?

You have fallen a great distance in my eyes, remember the audit trail and facts as you look in the mirror.

As you kiss your wife and kids good night, will they have the same pride in their eyes when they find out?

Well, will they?

Think about it!

in disgust.

Duncan Forbes


I am just one of the “one hundred” who signed our “declaration of independence” and I defy anyone or anything to tell me to live under Westminster rule.


White House Gently Opposes Scottish Independence|News|teleSUR