The Prime Minister of the UK, David Cameron asked President Putin and other world leaders to speak out against Scottish independence
In 2014 Russia retained the role of the presidency of the influential G8 group of industrial nations placing President Putin in a position of increased influence over world affairs.
Tass, Kremlin’s mouthpiece reported that David Cameron had written and warned Putin and many other nations that Scottish independence would “send shockwaves across the whole of Europe”.
The news was released a few days after reports of the creation of an anti-separatist alliance between Cameron and the Spanish government.
The Westminster government’s anti-independence civil service team also bragged that they had employed underhand tactics and orchestrated the “Project Fear Campaign” globally.
Asked to comment Alex Salmond said,
“It is shameful that Cameron refuses to debate in front of the people of Scotland, but is perfectly willing to lobby against Scotland’s interests around the world adding credibility to reports that he lobbied the Spanish prime minister to speak out against Scottish independence and this after their foreign minister had already made perfectly clear that Scotland’s referendum was a matter for the people of Scotland.
This kind of behaviour shows exactly why Scotland should represent our own interests as an independent nation. Scotland will be a responsible global citizen and a good friend to our neighbours in the rest of the UK.” (The Herald)
2016: Defence Minister, Philip Hammond ‘tried to court-martial senior general
General Sir Richard Shirreff, who served as Nato’s deputy supreme allied commander for Europe until 2014, said before standing down from the post that the Government was taking “one hell of a risk” in cutting the regular army.
In his book ‘2017: The War with Russia’, Sir Richard claims he was summoned by the head of the Army who told him the Foreign Secretary wanted disciplinary action against him.
Formal action would have involved a court-martial and, fortunately for (Mr Hammond’s) political reputation — “it also seems he had not appreciated that I reported to Nato and not to him, wiser counsel prevailed. But the damage to our armed forces… had already been done. It’s the duty of senior soldiers engaged with politicians not to think like politicians, not to make life easier for politicians, but to be prepared to lay out the military consequences of political decisions, and I sense that is something that has got blurred in recent years.”
Sir Richard, who was the army’s third most senior officer, said the level of cutbacks to the British military means the armed forces might not be able to deploy an effective force for war. There has been a hollowing out, a cutting away at muscle and damn nearly every bone in UK defences.
I would question whether the UK could deploy a division for war — I think that’s highly unlikely. The notion of deploying a division for war as the UK did in Iraq in 2003 and Iraq in 1991 is frankly almost inconceivable.” (Politics Home)
2016: Scandalous splurge – Ministry of Defence doubles spending on on ‘experts’ and cuts fighting forces to the bone
Whitehall defence chiefs employ over 2,395 pen-pushers (many on salaries over £60K) in its Finance Department, at an annual cost in excess of £75million. It also employs 282 lawyers at a cost to the taxpayer of £26 million.
But last year it still spent another £17.8 million on legal consultants. And £57million on other experts in areas such as “change management.”
In recent years, the Army has axed 18,000 personnel, the RAF 6,000 and the Navy 3,000.
The MoD announced it was closing 10 sites across the UK reducing the size of its built estate by 30 per cent.
The chief of the UK National Defence Association said: “For the MOD to be lavishing so much public money on “consultancy” is scandalous and an insult to all the soldiers, sailors and airmen who have lost their jobs in the last few years in wave after wave of penny-pinching Defence cuts.” (the Sun)
2016: Gen Sir Richard Barrons, Senior General of the British Armed Forces accuses the government of leaving the UK vulnerable to a military attack
General Sir Richard Barrons served as Commander Joint Forces Command, one of the six ‘Chiefs of Staff” leading the UK Armed Forces until April 2016.
He was responsible for 23000 people worldwide and a budget of £4.3Bn, delivering intelligence, Special Forces, operational command and control, information systems and communications, logistics, medical support, and advanced education and training across the Armed Forces.
His military career includes leadership from Captain to General on military operations in Bosnia, Kosovo, Northern Ireland, Iraq and Afghanistan – often as part of US-led coalitions.
He continued: “Counter-terrorism is the limit of up-to-date plans and preparations to secure our airspace, waters and territory. Neither the UK homeland nor a deployed force could be protected from a concerted Russian air effort. The army has grown used to operating from safe bases in the middle of its operating area, against opponents who do not manoeuvre at scale.”
He further warned that crucial manpower in all three armed services is “dangerously squeezed and there is a sense that modern conflict is ordained to be only as small and as short term as the UK wishes and is able to afford which is absurd. The failure to come to terms with this will not matter at all if we are lucky in the way the world happens to turn out, but it could matter a very great deal if even a few of the risks now at large conspire against the UK.”
The memo was sent to the Defence Secretary, following the government’s decision to increase defence spending by nearly £5bn ($6.5bn) by 2020-21, reaching Nato’s target to spend 2% of GDP on defence until 2020.
But the vast bulk of the projected increase in defence spending includes the purchase of “big ticket” items, New type 26 destroyers, 2 aircraft carriers (without aircraft or crews), 48 x F35 Joint Strike Fighter aircraft (not available from the USA for some years yet). Replacement of the Trident nuclear missile systems and accompanying nuclear submarines. Conventional forces are reduced to their lowest level ever, including reservists and recruitment is stagnant.
The US-built F35 joint strike aircraft is the most expensive combat aircraft ever. But payloads are restricted and with a complement of 48, the RAF will only be able to place 6 in the air in any combat situation. In any event, the aircraft will not be available much before 2023.
Plans are to deploy the new carriers equipped with complements of US aircraft and flyers but the logistics of joint deployment of forces has yet to be discussed and may never get off the ground in which case the carriers will be mothballed for a few years.
Britain has 6 x type 45 destroyers. 4 are tasked to protect the new carriers. The remaining 2 destroyers are needed for the defence of the UK mainland & islands. And the foregoing provides no time for maintenance.
The Type 45 destroyers are unable to operate in warm climates for any length of time due to design faults and this restricts their deployment to the North Atlantic. So the navy will need to confine deployment of the new carriers to the same area. Hardly inspiring.
The army has not deployed forces for training in tank warfare since 2003 and skills have been lost or waned. Plans are to upgrade the remaining ageing Challenger tanks but not until other higher priority items are completed.
Russia’s new “Armata” tanks outspeed and outgun the Challenger and are equipped with an active protection system that further reduces the efficacy of existing UK anti-tank weapons by over 50%.
The UK operates a fleet of 6 x AWACS planes, (providing long-range radar coverage and command hubs for deployed forces). They are hopelessly outdated and require ever-increasing downtime for maintenance. It is known that only 1 aircraft is guaranteed to be airworthy at any time.
1 Nov 2016: Army’s new £3.5bn mini-tanks are ‘DEATH traps’ that are only useful against ‘incompetent enemies’ who cannot hit them with heavy artillery
Hundreds of Ajax mini-tanks are due to be supplied to the Army next year with the full order of 600 delivered to the Ministry of Defence by 2024.
But sources have claimed the delivery could be delayed due to complications with a revolutionary weapons system fitted onboard each tank, although the MoD has insisted the project will be completed on time and will provide the ‘best’ tanks.
Critics claim the ‘lightly armoured’ tanks cannot stand up to heavy artillery and say the weaponry on board is not sufficient – with the gun having already ‘stopped working’ during foreign trials. Raising concerns about the new tanks, one former defence official told The Times: ‘It is fine if you are operating against incompetent enemies, but if you are up against a peer enemy this thing is useless, it’s a death trap.’
The Ajax armoured vehicles will travel at speeds of up to 40mph and have been touted as the first-ever fully digital armoured fighting vehicle in UK military history.
The 589 tanks are said to become the ‘eyes and ears’ of the British Army on the battlefields of the future. The new vehicle will allegedly give the army enhanced intelligence, surveillance, protection, target acquisition and reconnaissance capabilities, and it will be able to defend itself with a highly effective 40-millimetre cannon, which was developed jointly with France.
However, critics claim the cannon has already encountered problems during routine testing in overseas trials and say it is simply not up to the job of defending rival power from countries such as Russia. Referring to an alleged complication with the cannon’s turret – a section attached to the weapon to feed ammunition to the barrel – a source claimed: ‘As soon as the turret was subject to vibration and bumps the [feeding] mechanism failed. ‘My understanding is that there are quite a few reasons why the programme has been delayed’.
In addition, there are reported concerns that the barrel life of the weapon system is too short to function adequately – although the MoD says the new technology ‘can’t be compared to previous technology’. The turret and feeding mechanism on the cannon is being supplied and tested by defence firm Lockheed Martin, while the cannon and ammunition are being developed by BAE Systems and Nexter.
The Ajax tanks are being supplied to the MoD by US defence company General Dynamics, as part of a £3.5bn deal. A spokesman for Lockheed Martin admitted ‘issues did arise in recent trials’ on the weaponry but said ‘early indications point to a component failure and not a design flaw’.
The Times reported. BAE systems said the cannon had passed ‘stringent qualification trials’ and said there were no issues with its performance or when it will be delivered. ‘Deliveries to date to the UK Ministry of Defence are ahead of schedule,’ a spokesman said.
The MoD said the project is ‘running to time and cost expectations’ and insisted the tanks were ‘the best in class. delivering internationally best-in-class standards of scalable protection, reliability, mobility, lethality, and all-weather surveillance. Prototype vehicles are currently being put through the process of a rigorous trial, with successful live firings taking place in April and more to come. ‘As planned, the Army will take delivery of the first production vehicles in Spring 17.
July 2017: The Army is set to scrap the £5.5billion ‘light tank’ before it has entered service.
In tests, the Ajax armoured vehicle could not be fired on the move or go faster than 20mph. It also caused crews to suffer acute hearing loss, nausea and spinal injuries. The Ministry of Defence has already spent £4billion on Ajax but only 26 of the 589 ordered in 2014 have been delivered.
Malcolm Muggeridge the last honest political commentator
“In the eyes of posterity it will inevitably seem that, in safeguarding our freedom, we destroyed it. The vast clandestine apparatus we built up to prove our enemies’ resources and intentions only served in the end to confuse our own purposes; that practice of deceiving others for the good of the state-led infallibly to our deceiving ourselves; and that vast army of clandestine personnel built up to execute these purposes were soon caught up in the web of their own sick fantasies, with disastrous consequences for them and us.”
12 Aug 2015: The British Army is to train the Ukraine Defence Forces
The United Kingdom Secretary of State for Stoking up conflict said, during a visit to Kyiv that the British Army will be investing more UK taxpayers’ money into training the Ukrainian army by, increasing the number of soldiers in the programme from just over 1,000 to around 2,000 Yet another Battalion of the Highlanders Regiment is being deployed
But Article 10 of the Minsk II Accord states; “There will be a pull-out of all foreign armed formations, military equipment, and also mercenaries from the territory of Ukraine under OSCE supervision. Disarmament of all illegal groups.“
Judge for yourselves: Is this in compliance with Minsk II? Or is it a flagrant violation of it?
During his visit, he told the Ukrainian Prime Minister that the visit “reaffirmed the UK’s support”. and went on to say: “Seven thousand people have already died in Ukraine, right on the doorstep of Europe … This is not a frozen conflict, it’s still red hot. We are not going to turn our back on Ukraine.”
Of course, he conveniently forgot to mention that the majority of the 7,000 or so dead people were civilians in the South East of Ukraine (they are Ukrainians too), who died at the hands of the Ukrainian Armed Forces, or the so-called volunteer battalions such as the one led by arch Nazi Stepan Bandera.
Three questions the UK needs to answer
1. Is the UK Government going to sanction itself for violating the Minsk II Accords?
2. In reaffirming the UK Government’s support for “Ukraine”, do we include those “Ukrainians” who have been shelled relentlessly by the “Ukrainian” Government?
3. Are we going to be training any of those nice chaps with the SS runes?
Who forged papers falsely linking Saddam Hussein to yellow-cake uranium produced in “Nigeria” (in fact it is from Niger and the document was forged by guess who?)
Who provided “concrete intelligence” to the UK’s bed-master about Saddam Hussein’s Weapons of Mass Destruction (in fact a thesis copied and pasted from the Net and sexed up by Blair and his spin doctors)?
Who was it that invaded Iraq based on shamefaced lies?
Who supported terrorists inLibya that they had listed as proscribed?
Who lied about Syria, claiming that the elected government was using chemical weapons against their own soldiers?
Who supported terrorist groups in Syria who cut the heads off small boys?
Who Staged an illegal coup in Ukraine, backing a motley bunch of fascists, terrorists and murderers.
Who perpetrated massacres of Russian speaking Ukrainians and threatened to clear the Ukraine of Jews?
Who copied and posted photographs from the Net from two decades before and relating to another country claiming President Assad was murdering civilians (when the photography pertained to a NATO massacre in Iraq two decades before)?
Who conducts 24-hour-a-day cyber-terrorist attacks against western publications?
The international community is fast losing patience with the UK and its partner in crime across the Atlantic. It is a fact that the world does not need the UK or USA. They need the World.
Putin’s Russia pulls the strings and the Tory Party Dances to their tune
In the past ten years, approximately 10,000 super-wealthy Chinese and Russian business investors and entrepreneurs have been issued with “golden visas” by the Tory government providing them with a right of residence in the UK.
So many of Putin’s oligarchs and their wider families have gained the advantage of the scheme that the UK capital is now known as “Londongrad”.
Assertions that Tory’s welcome inward investment regardless of source is well-founded.
The “tier one” investor visa, requires only that the applicant operate a UK bank account with a balance of not less than £2m. This permits investors full residence in the UK for up to five years.
But eligibility for extensions and permanent residence is guaranteed after making further investments.
Scottish Torys have the affrontery to demand a Public Inquiry into Russian interference in Scottish politics
The Westminster “Intelligence & Security Committee” (ISC) only this week released its politically delayed Russia report warning that the UK is at risk of Russian exploitation because of the Tory Party’s acceptance of large amounts of political donations, establishing inappropriate relationships with Russian oligarchs. The report read:
“In brief, Russian influence in the UK is “the new normal”, and there are a lot of Russians with very close links to Putin who are well integrated into the UK business and social scene, and accepted because of their wealth. This level of integration London, in particular, means any measures now being taken by the Government are not preventative but rather constitute damage limitation.”
And information released to the public today revealed that 14 of the present Tory government ministers,(including six Cabinet members) have accepted tens of thousands of pounds in donations from Russian oligarchs.
A public inquiry should be conducted without delay so that UK citizens can be assured all measures necessary will be introduced urgently bringing an end to external interference in the nation’s politics. Including banning the practice of politicians taking money from foreigners.
But a 2018 Tory government inquiry giving a warning about Russian influence has been blatantly ignored
The report, published by Theresa May’s Tory government, “Foreign Affairs Committee”, accused government ministers of risking national security by “turning a blind eye” to Russian, “dirty money” flowing through the City of London.
Concerns were also raised about “golden visas” being issued in ever-increasing numbers despite the alleged involvement of Russia in the Salisbury Novichok nerve agent attack.
In its conclusion, the report demanded that the Government get tough on foreign nationals by tightening the rules of the scheme making it more secure.
But interestingly, the one voice of dissent from his own committee was from the then Foreign Secretary, Boris Johnson who suggested that “there was no real role for Government in the process”.
The insidious dogma of hyper-extremist activists is holding Scottish politics to ransom
Scotland is a colony of England and its politicians are permitted to operate only under the strict control of the Westminster government. Faced with this reality the acceptable face of politics within Scotland has become narrow-minded and focused on encouraging the development of pressure groups with narrow agenda’s who are able to successfully transfer their aims and ambitions across the border to England.
LGBTQ hyper-extremist and fundamentalist activists increasingly exert political influence on society in England and Scotland well in excess of levels warranted by their numbers and mainstream politicians need to be alerted to this since many of the views and demands for change they wish to impose are toxic to the vast bulk of the electorate.
Addressing the issues in Scotland requires an understanding of the modus-operandi of the activists which is to become cuckoos in the nest of the SNP and over time crowd out anyone who failed to accede to their demands.
As of February 2022, the group have grown in numbers and influence and through a process of gerrymandering, internal election processes now dictate and decide SNP policies.
The SNP no longer exists in the form many of its members signed up to yet it strangely continues to promote itself to the Scottish electorate as the party of independence.
The two main LGBTQ activist centres are located in Stirling and Aberdeen and are focussed on the leadership of two SNP MP’s: Alyn Smith and Kirsty Blackman who together with their supporters have done little to progress the cause of Scottish independence and should have the courage of their convictions and leave the SNP too form a new political party and stand for office in a by-election in a new LGBTQ Party.
The Aberdeen faction first raised its head in January 2018 when a small number of LGBTQ activists located in the Grampian Region formed an umbrella organisation the “Aberdeen Independence Movement” (AIM). Its membership comprised:
Co-Chairs: Fatima Joji: from Westhill, Aberdeenshire, topped the SNP’s North-East regional list for the Scottish Parliament elections. Kenny Anderson: Longtime SNP supporter. Managing Director and Majority Shareholder, Anderson Buchan Properties Ltd.
Other members Neil Baillie: SNP Councillor Vicky Harper: SNP Councillor Andy Stuart: SNP Convenor Aberdeenshire West
Finance Team: Virginia Dawod: Manager, Robert Gordon University.
Theo Forbes: Graphics Media And Communications Officer. 2016 2018: Member of the National Executive Committee and National Events and Fundraising Officer, “Young Scots for Independence”. 2017 2021: Employed by the SNP as an intern from September 2020. Attended Aberdeen University studying Politics & International Relations.
Joshua Aaron Mennie: from Aberdeen 2018: 2020: Media Consultant. Intern for Kirsty Blackwood MP. 2019 – 2020: Member National Executive Committee (NEC) and Convener for the official LGBTQ+ wing of the SNP. 2022 – Pres: Communications & Officer Manager to Karen Adam MSP at Holyrood.
Tourette’s Syndrome* sufferer, Mennie is a person to note since his rise to prominence within the Party has been remarkable. In his 3 years of membership, he has been elected as a disabled member of the NEC. Heads the “Out For Indy” group and is the leader of the party within a party, the LGBTQ+ group of the SNP.
The Equality Act 2010 (‘the Act’) and Disability Discrimination Act 1995 (‘DDA’) defines a disabled person as:
“A person has a disability if they have a physical or mental impairment, and the impairment has a substantial and long-term adverse effect on the person’s ability to carry out normal day-to-day activities.” Tourette’s syndrome is not listed in the Social Security Administration’s Blue Book (the guide used to help SSA representatives determine whether a person qualifies for disability based on their condition)
And the Mennie family are well represented in the party. His sister Jessica was elected in 2019, SNP councillor for Donside in Aberdeen (£18k annual salary). She was also the office manager (2015-2019) to Mark McDonald MSP, who was forced to resign from the Party by its leadership who outlandishly accepted an allegation of sexual harassment against him based on a joke about an autocorrect error in a single text message. It is claimed that she also works for party HQ in a new job which was allegedly not advertised and for which nobody else was interviewed.
NEC Meeting hijacked by LGBTQ activists
The LGBTQ group proposed that the SNP’s eight regional lists for the Scottish parliamentary election should include in top place, either a *BAME or a disabled candidate. Four regions would be allocated a BAME person and the other four a disabled person. The proposal carried the rider that disabled status should be by self-identification with no confirmatory checking being carried out.
The proposal was debated at some length since many members believed it would be illegal to adopt the proposal under equalities law. The matter was deferred and referred to the Party’s legal counsel, Jonathan Mitchell QC who warned that the policy was legally dubious and open to challenge in the courts and any case brought by a person disadvantaged by the rule would probably succeed, and cost the SNP tens of thousands of pounds in legal expenses.
But the LGBTQ group insisted the proposal should be decided by the NEC and its LGBTQ Chair, Kirsten Oswald allowed the matter to be put to a vote. The vote was tied and it was expected that in compliance with accepted practice the Chair would cast her vote for retention of the status quo. She didn’t and passed the motion placing the Party at great risk of legal and costly claims of discrimination.
Three members announced conflicts of interest before the vote.
Fiona Robertson who declared that she intended to seek the top spot on the North-East list as a disabled candidate who was in attendance as a substitute for an NEC member who was unable to attend. Did not recuse herself from the vote.
Graham Campbell, a councillor from Glasgow who declared his intention to stand on either the Glasgow or Lothian lists, both of which were to have their top spots reserved for BAME* candidates under the proposal. Campbell, whose partner is SNP MP Anne McLauchlin, did not recuse himself from the vote.
Greg McCarra from the Association of Nationalist Councillors (who is neither disabled nor BAME) also declared he was seeking nomination. He did recuse himself from the vote.
Black Asian and Minority Ethnic (BAME) candidates. The 2011 census identified, 2.66% of the Scottish population as Asian and 0.5% Black and the SNP policy is unfairly discrimatory against Asians. Not a lot of wisdom in directly transferring and implementing American electoral policies in Scotland
Those subsequently included on the protected list for the North East of Scotland included: Fatima Joji, Christian Allard, Fergus Mutch, William Duff, Julie Bell, Nadia El-Nakla, John Cooke, Lynne Short, Gillian Al-Samarai and Joshua Mennie.
Gillian al-Samari
Comments on the North East Scotland list candidates:
Joshua Mennie. See before. Claimed to be disabled suffering from Tourette’s Syndrome
Gillian al-Samari: Councillor for Dyce, Bucksburn and Danestone (salary £18K) also worked for Mark McDonald MSP between 2013-2019. McDonald was forced to resign from the Party by its leadership who outlandishly accepted an allegation of sexual harassment against him based on a joke about an autocorrect error in a single text message. Councillor Samari ceased working for McDonald on 23 March 2019 and transferred her employment to Kirsty Blackman MP on 1 May 2019, taking up a position as a caseworker. Her swift transfer was criticised by opposition party’s who accused her of double-dipping” the taxpayer’s purse.
Fatima Joji: Caseworker for Richard Thomson MP. interests: politics and development advocacy. Holds a postgraduate diploma in ‘International Development (Poverty, Inequality & Development). Chair of AIM. Key political statements:
26 May 2021: Unsuccessful in the Scottish election in the North East regional list she tried to address the issue within the party but felt she now needed to speak out after being “harassed for months” with no support from the Party.
On her experience as a candidate for selection in Aberdeenshire West, she said that as a Black candidate it had been mixed. While the local membership was “largely positive” her name had been included in a tweet claiming that Justice Secretary Humza Yousaf had overturned the decision to fail several BAME candidates at vetting, allowing them to stand.
But Joji insisted she had passed vetting without issue. “But I think it did have an impact,” she said of the tweet.
She urged the SNP to address the under-representation of BAME candidates, particularly in areas with large communities of colour through the list system Saying. “I think there is a real opportunity there to turn rhetoric into reality.”
10 Sep 2021: I am SNP because of its progressive and inclusive policies that are built upon the foundations of equality fairness, dignity and respect.
Mennie attacks Kate Forbes
The SNP’s Finance Secretary, Derek Mackay, fell from grace after revelations in the press that he had made sexual advances toward a 16-year-old boy, inundating him with inappropriate Facebook messages and inviting him to meet up.
Mackay resigned on the day he was supposed to present the SNP Government’s budget and the Government’s Public Finance Minister, Kate Forbes, completed the task. Her presentation was excellent and she became the front runner to replace MacKay as Cabinet Secretary for the Economy. But in Mennie’s mind, her proposed appointment, as opposed to Mackay’s resignation, became the controversy.
The zealous monomaniac and ferocious tweeter ignored an actual scandal. Mackay, a 42-year-old minister, was tipped to be the next leader of Scotland being forced to resign for grooming a child, to confront an imaginary one. A church-going minister, tipped to be the next Finance Secretary, who believes, as indeed other non-church going ministers also believe, that the legal definition of male and female ought not to be changed without informed public discussion and agreement. He tweeted: “The last thing our party needs is Kate Forbes climbing the ladder when she has such questionable views on equality.”
As evidence of these “questionable” views, he also tweeted: “I’m always concerned when politicians conflate their personal religious beliefs into their work-life to the detriment of others,” confirming a complete lack of self-awareness. His tweet, (since deleted) was his response to a letter published in the press (https://www.thenational.scot/news/19859777.kate-forbes-calls-tolerance-gra-debate) highlighting concerns over the Scottish government’s proposed changes to the Gender Recognition Act (a law that would replace the legal definition of sex with gender self-declaration).
Scottish 2014 Independence Referendum: Guidance for the UK and Scottish Governments and Civil Servants
Departments need to take particular care in approaching activity during this period and civil servants must ensure that they conduct themselves in accordance with the requirements of the Civil Service Code. In particular, civil servants are under an obligation: not to undertake any activity which could call into question their political impartiality; and, to ensure that public resources are not used for party political purposes.
In addition, the Scottish Independence Referendum Act 2013 (‘the Act’) sets out the legal framework for the referendum, including restrictions on Scottish Government publicity. The Act provides a 28-day restricted period from 22 August 2014 to 18 September 2014. During this period, the Scottish Government and Scottish public authorities will operate under statutory restrictions on the publication of information. Under the Edinburgh Agreement, the UK Government committed to act according to these same restrictions.
25 Aug 2014: Scottish Independence Referendum – The underhand conduct of the CBI and the UK Government
There was panic in the ranks of the UK government-led “Better Together” campaign following the second TV and final debate on Scottish independence when Alex Salmond emerged victoriously.
The Westminster Civil Service “defence of the Union” team, led by the most corrupt cabinet secretary in British political history, Sir Jeremy Heywood decided that something of significance needed to be thrown into the mix and this was manifest with the publication of a letter canvassed and organised by Amanda Harvie, leader of the Tory Party in Scotland, Media Response Unit.
Harvie, on being questioned about the spontaneity of the response to her canvassing activities admitted that many Business Leaders had refused to sign the letter or had failed to respond.
The letter devalued by the narrowness of its contributors and its political bias was signed by 133 business leaders from banking, mining, engineering, food, whisky and technology was published on the front page of every major newspaper and given repeated exposure over 3 days on a number of Scottish television programmes, stated that vital issues including currency, regulation, tax, pensions and support for exports around the world had not been resolved and a ‘Yes’ vote would be “bad for business”.
But supporters of an independent Scotland had their champions in Sir George Mathewson the former chairman of The Royal Bank of Scotland, who said: “Scotland’s vital financial services sector would flourish if Scotland voted “yes”. There is nothing to suggest that being part of a smaller country hinders a financial services industry. Switzerland, for example, has in Geneva and Zurich not one, but two of the world’s top 10 financial centres. Singapore, with 5 million people, is ranked 4th. Investment is an increasingly global business, where success depends much more on people than on borders.”
The economist and former head of Scottish Enterprise, Sir Donald MacKay, argued that an independent Scotland would be in better fiscal shape than the UK saying: “An independent Scotland should use that financial advantage to invest in re-engineering our economy towards industrial, manufacturing and tradeable services development.”
Jim McColl, one of Scotland’s richest men and head of the engineering investment business, Clyde Blowers Capital, was enthusiastic about Scottish independence and said he would consider returning home to Scotland from Monaco in the event of the “Yes” vote prevailed.
Willie Walsh, the chief executive of IAG, owner of British Airways, also said that independence would be good for Scotland.
Business for Scotland hit back with the statement: “Business for Scotland has 2,500 members who run businesses in Scotland, employ people across the country in a range of industries, and all believe that Scottish independence is in the best interests of Scotland and Scottish business. It’s a position reached after looking at the facts and figures and realising that, from a simple balance sheet point of view as well as other considerations, our best interests lie in becoming an independent country.”
27 Aug 2014: Scottish Independence Referendum – The CBI Dinner in Glasgow
Early in 2014, the CBI registered as a formal “Better Together” campaign group in the referendum but withdrew its registration after it prompted more than a dozen members to resign or suspend their membership. In an attempt to limit damage and save its membership base the CBI formally adopted a policy of strict neutrality in all matters pertaining to the referendum. It came as a bit of a bombshell therefore when the London based organisation betrayed its membership and convened a quasi impromptu dinner/business meeting in Glasgow on Thursday 27 August 2014.
The Electoral Commission had previously been formally advised of the CBI position of neutrality and asked the organisers for additional information, including the cost of the dinner then ruled that proposals did not constitute campaigning stating that it had received assurances that the cost would be within the spending limit of £10,000.
Subsequent inquiry revealed that the CBI had originally planned to host a much larger event but this had been greatly reduced to meet campaigning rules.
A revelation that confirmed, in the minds of many Scots, an act of collusion between the Electoral Commission and the UK government promoting the “No” campaign.
The lobbying event which was was promoted as a pro-Union ‘Better Together’ get together confirmed the falsity of the BBC’s much-hyped neutrality on the referendum following revelations that the corporation had been secretly paying the CBI tens of thousands of pounds membership fees each year.
Prime Minister Cameron who had cancelled all plans and meetings and rushed up to Glasgow to attend the dinner was humiliated when the CBI president Sir Mike Rake used the occasion to warn that the real danger to Scotland’s and Britain’s businesses came not from a “Yes” vote but from the Prime Minister’s promise to hold an in-out referendum on EU membership.
Not long after his address arch unionist supporting BBC reporter Nick Robinson interviewed Cameron and failed to challenge his wildly inaccurate assertions about a number of matters including a claim without foundation that the billions of pounds of deficit incurred the Bank of Scotland at the time of the World financial crash would need to be accounted for by an independent Scottish Government.
He also asked a previously rehearsed loaded question: “will you guarantee more powers to Scotland in the event of a “No” vote and, if so, when? In a clear breach of “Purdah,” Cameron replied: “Yes and soon is the very short answer to that.” View here: (https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-scotland-politics-28952197)
Alex Salmond later commented: “The dinner was a humiliating experience for Cameron since it exposed the powerful Eurosceptic seam within the Tory Party which is dragging Scotland ever nearer to the exit door of Europe. For Cameron to be lectured by one of the UK’s most senior business figures about the dangers of his in-out referendum shows just how worried companies are about the prospect of the UK being taken out of Europe. For Scotland, the choice is clear. A “Yes” vote which will protect our place in the EU as an independent member, or a “No” vote which results in us being dragged out of Europe against our will, shutting us off from a single market of more than 500 million people with potentially devastating consequences for jobs and investment. He wants his Unionist Government to continue to run Scotland from London with an occasional ministerial public eye visit just to keep an eye on things. Alistair Darling seems to have been shoved aside he’s not even allowed on to the phone-ins, he was replaced by (Labour MP) Douglas Alexander just a few hours ago and he has since been replaced by David Cameron. When is David Cameron going to have the guts to do what Alistair Darling did. Have a debate with me on Scotlands future.
A few months before the start of the 2014 Scottish referendum campaign the BBC decided to clear out a number of Scottish based presenters replacing them with reliable Unionists.
Broadcaster Sarah Smith, the daughter of the late Labour leader, John Smith who fitted the profile perfectly, was recruited at great expense from Channel 4 to anchor BBC2’s Referendum programme.
Sarah was ecstatic since she and her husband enjoy a close family relationship with her mother Baroness Smith with whom she lives, in Edinburgh and her Scottish based sister who is married to Lord John Robertson’s son.
She was married, on the island of Iona, by the Rev Douglas Alexander, father of Labour Party stalwarts Douglas and Wendy.
A picture of Labour Party links so strong it should have ensured she would be the last person on earth to be contracted by the BBC to present unbiased commentary in a referendum which could possibly bring an end to the party of her beloved father and all of her close-knit family and friends.
Lord Robertson
The BBC – A Labour Party Fiefdom and the 2014 referendum
Including Smith, the impartial BBC blatantly foisted a number of other high profile Unionists supporting television and radio presenters onto the Scottish public.
Two of the most prominent are Kirsty Wark, a close personal friend of the Labour Party ex-first minister McConnell and James Naughtie, right-wing unionist and chief executive of the British American Project.
Unfairly, the 2014 “Better Together” campaign was led by a group of Anglos all with a Unionist persuasion, who had long ago deserted Scotland for greener pastures.
People whose concept of Scotland and Scots mirrored the village of Brigadoon.
Not for them the re-birth of Scotland, as a democratic state taking its place in the world once more.
The Internet Social media hits back
A post on the “exposing anti-independence bias on the BBC” Facebook page asserted:
“The appointment of Sarah Smith to “assist” the coming referendum debate alongside Jim Naughtie is another instance of London based “talent” being shipped in to make the case for the Union.”
Saville Inquiry – Sarah Gets Wise long after the event
The BBC was ordered to launch an inquiry into its cultural practices in previous decades and recently.
Business Correspondent Sarah Smith reflected on her own experience with the Corporation in the 1990s:
“I joined the BBC in Glasgow as a 20-year-old trainee in 1989. I never saw any underage sex or rapes. But in those days sexist jokes and inappropriate touching were considered normal. That same year the BBC Scotland TV newsroom Christmas party had the theme of “Grape and Vine”. Someone thought it was funny and went around Broadcasting House and deleted the “G” on every poster, changing the theme to “Rape and Vine”. A fellow, female, trainee lodged a formal complaint with management, saying she did not wish to work in a newsroom displaying the posters and asked for them to be removed. She was immediately shunned by just about all of the male journalists in the newsroom. In the follow-up, she was systematically ridiculed for being unable to take a joke and treated unfairly when assignments were being handed out. The posters stayed in place leaving our only avenue of protesting a boycott of the party.
September 23 2007: It was the most poignant of walks down the aisle for Sarah the eldest daughter of late Labour leader John Smith yesterday as she was married yards from her father’s grave.
Family and friends who travelled to Iona for the wedding included:
Lord Chancellor Derry Irvine. (Mentor of Tony Blair and Peter Mandelson and architect of New Labour)
Lord Gordon, former chairman of Scottish Radio Holdings.
Lord Robertson, former Secretary-General of NATO.
Lord Robertson’s son, Malcolm, married Sarah’s younger sister, Jane, three years before, at Port Charlotte, on Islay.
Jane, 35, was Sarah’s matron of honour while her other sister, Catherine, was a bridesmaid.
Other guests included Sarah’s Channel 4 colleague Krishnan Guru-Murthy, and main presenter Jon Snow.
The traditional service was led by family friend Rev Douglas Alexander, the father of International Development Secretary Douglas Alexander and new Scottish Labour leader Wendy Alexander.
Marriage Simon Conway & Sarah Smith
back at BBC Scotland, Things were not going well
In the months before the 2014 referendum, BBC journalists and staff were at loggerheads with senior management over the role, identity and broadcasting profile of the BBC Scotland News and Current Affairs team.
Management and Staff consultation procedures had broken down on a number of occasions following accusations that management ruled by diktat and pronouncement which rendered fruitful discussion impossible.
Many organisational and programme presentation changes had been dropped on staff without discussion or warning.
An example is the surprise announcement that BBC Scotland “News-night “Scotland’ would be shut down soon. No discussion. No date of Closure. No staff briefing about their future. The staff were made to sit on death row for months without knowing their fate.
Other worrying behaviour patterns developed. Scottish based journalists and staff employed for many years by the organisation were increasingly sidelined. Their views and opinions were given very little purchase.
Staff became increasing aware that management had turned its face away from Scots who had made a great success of devolution. Preferring to promote retention of the union. The BBC had gone back 10 years.
The placement in the team, in leadership roles, of Unionist supporting presenters Sarah Smith and James Naughtie on very expensive contracts was paid for by the withdrawal of employment from some staff. This caused much consternation and unhappiness. Management and Staff union discussions failed to resolve matters and the unhappiness was manifest for some time.
Smith and Naughtie have qualities but they also have deep-seated Labour Party and Unionist roots and backgrounds and have not been engaged in the Scottish debate, having spent long periods living elsewhere but Scotland. Their express dismissal of anything positive about the SNP was prevalent in their persona and this has never been challenged by management despite staff unease.
The company is a global leader in the design, supply and ongoing service of engineering equipment for the mining, oil and gas, power and industrial sectors and is listed on the London Stock Exchange. With annual sales in excess of 2 billion, it employs around 15,000 people and operates in more than 42 countries.
It maintains manufacturing facilities in North and South America, the UK, mainland Europe, Australia, South Africa, India and China.
Annual profits vary between 300-600 million.
Lord Smith of Kelvin was chairman of the Group between 2002 and 2013.
Additional information
The companies main operational thrust in the UK over the next few years (2016-2020) is to be directed at the development and expansion of Nuclear Power and Fracking
The Group has consistently and actively solicited support to its campaigns against any form of Scottish devolution or independence and although founded and registered in Scotland less than 5% of the Groups total workforce is Scottish based.
The Group is an active member of the networking organisation, “Common Purpose” which provides unique and highly productive opportunities through its extensive connections.
In 2013, a team of leaders undertook specialist leadership development programmes and attended a global leadership conference run by “Common Purpose” which had assembled exceptional senior people from across the Commonwealth to tackle challenges that businesses, governments and society face today with the aim of building global relationships for use in the future. The Weir Groups tentacles of influence spread far and wide.
Iraqi Oil for Food Programme
Trade sanctions against Iraq were introduced after Saddam Hussein invaded Kuwait in 1990 but the measures contributed to an increase in the suffering and starvation among the Iraqi population and the UN set up the Oil for Food Programme (OFFP).
From 1996 onwards, Saddam Hussein was allowed to sell oil, but all the receipts were placed in a UN account in Paris. Iraq was then able to use the funds to buy goods approved by the UN for the benefit of its population.
Using its French subsidiary Wemco to administer the deals (because of Iraq’s “Buy British Last” policy), the Weir Group tendered for and won several contracts which involved supplying spare parts for water and oil pumps to Iraq’s North Oil Company and South Oil Company.
How the Weir Group worked the scam
Knowing the money could not be paid into an Iraqi bank, it was agreed an Iraqi agent would pay it from his own pocket. When it received the money from the OFFP, the company paid a 10 per cent kickback plus a further 4 per cent for the agent’s services to a fake Geneva-based company, Corsin Finance Ltd. The payments did not arouse suspicion as paying an agent to act on overseas deals was in itself entirely legitimate.
Two meetings were held on 13 and 14 September 2001 at the behest of a group director who was not involved in the OFFP contracts but had become aware of what was going on. At the second meeting, the director gave the go-ahead for the kickbacks despite being told they were illegal. The first payment was made that same day. In total, Weir Group plc secured 16 contracts worth 35 million paying kickbacks of 3 million.
2010: Weir Group prosecuted for providing kickbacks to the Iraqi regime
The “Oil For Food Programme” OFFP was put in place by the United Nations UN to ensure sanctions would not punish Iraqi citizens for the excesses of their government.
The Weir Group agreed on supply contracts heavily overcharging the programme, between 2001 and 2003 diverting around £3.1 million away from humanitarian aid to the coffers of Saddam Hussein.
The company was fined £3 million. The judge said he was taking into account the company’s guilty plea and its willingness to pay back the £9.4 million profits it made from the deals and the £3.1 million it had diverted from the OFFP together with a £1.4 million sum it had paid to its Iraqi agent for acting as a conduit for the illegal payments.
Weir Group PLC put profits before ethics; when told it had to pay a 10 per cent kickback or it wouldn’t win contracts, any scruples about UN sanctions disappeared.
Not one, of the more than 50 employees of the Weir Group involved was identified or pursued through the courts. Despite the fact that a number of individuals from other UK companies charged with similar offences of corruption and violation of sanctions, were charged, tried and punished. Moreover, though most of those at the helm at the time had moved on, many secured prestigious posts elsewhere.
In a statement explaining its decision to keep individuals out of the frame, the Crown Office said: “In the course of this investigation it became clear that the decision to pay kickbacks to the Iraqi government and to pay fees to the Iraqi agent, was taken at Weir Group level. It was, therefore, deemed that the most appropriate course of action was to prosecute The Weir Group plc rather than any individual who may have been involved in these events.”
A critic of the Crown Office said “the fines levied against The Weir Group was a pittance when set against its overall turnover. And they will simply be incorporated into the annual profit and loss account reducing the corporation tax bill. The fines should have been made the personal responsibility of the directors which would have added bite to the punishment.”
Lord Smith of Kelvin, Weir Group’s chairman, said the judgement “finally drew a line” under the prosecution investigation. “What happened back in 2001 was wrong and we accept full responsibility”.
27 August 2014: Weir Group chief executive canvasses support of business leaders to his cause.
Announcing their opposition to a yes vote, 133 business leaders said: “Our economic ties inside the United Kingdom are very close and support almost 1 million Scottish jobs and the rest of the UK is Scotland’s biggest market by far. Our conclusion is that the business case for independence has not been made.”
Their intervention was coordinated by Keith Cochrane, chief executive of the Scottish engineering company the Weir Group and coincided with a campaigning visit to Scotland by David Cameron.
In a follow up on BBC Radio Scotland, Cochrane said he expected Scotland to face higher interest rates and higher costs for business if there was a yes vote. “Scottish business is deeply frustrated at the lack of answers to some basic questions which are pretty fundamental to business as we look forward. The economy is clearly one of the most significant concerns of voters and we felt it was important that Scottish business contributed to the debate. These are real businesses accounting for real jobs.”
RIVALS: Weir Group chief Keith Cochrane (left) “Better Together” and Clyde Blowers Jim McColl (right) “Yes”
12 September 2014: Weir Group to move Glasgow HQ if Scotland votes ‘yes’
Chief Executive Keith Cochrane has said that the group could not guarantee that it would keep its Glasgow headquarters if Scotland became independent after the referendum, although the group’s three service centres would remain in the country.
27 November 2014: Lord Smith of Kelvin the former chairman of the Weir group which championed the anti-independence to chair the DevoMax commission
The Smith Commission issued its report on the shape and form of the devolved powers promised to Scotland by the political parties at Westminster in the days before and after the Scottish Independence referendum.
Scottish peatlands sustain the bulk of Scotlands wildlife and provide storage and filtration systems ensuring a plentiful supply of clean water.
In addition, they store around 2 billion tonnes of carbon and are capable of holding many billions of tonnes more but not without a major investment of finance which is well beyond the means of a devolved Scottish government.
So, once again the future health and well being of Scots is in the hands of Westminster politicians.
Scotlands climate change prevention targets are also subsumed into the UK target and this places an extra burden on Scotland since the bulk of the peatlands in England are extensively damaged, many areas beyond repair due to massive drainage, peat extraction and burning over many centuries.
Scottish peatlands have suffered damage but not to the same extent. But it is calculated that around 25 million tonnes of co2 are released back into the atmosphere each year by Scotlands damaged peatlands a situation that needs to be rectified without undue delay.
The drawback is a lack of government funding. Around £1 billion is needed now and expectations are that £30 million might be made available.
Trees also absorb large amounts of carbon and store it in their wood but as in the case of the peatlands, huge areas of Scottish native woodland has been destroyed over hundreds of years and must be replaced.
Attracting new money is imperative to success so that the afforestation of Scotlands woodlands can be assured and rewilding measures will need to include investment opportunities for forestry management affording the production of conifer trees for the provision of wood to be used on sustainable projects.
Brexit
Departing from the European Market returned the UK to World Free Trade ideals and all its benefits and pitfalls.
A financial pot returned was £4.50 Billion previously handed over to the EC each year to provide financial support of the EC farming policy which only encouraged the inefficient use of farming land and the production of unwanted produce.
The bulk of the pot will be withheld by the Westminster government and farming grants will be much reduced due to the commitments to trade agreements put in place post Brexit with countries worldwide for the supply of produce.
The foregoing pressures will force many small farmers off the land and large estate holders will also feel the pinch as their grants dry up.
Scottish Land Commission
Farmers identified items of concern that they believe are relevant to the maintenance and development of the tenant farming sector in Scotland, namely: support and carbon trading.
Bolstered by the recent announcement of a new government-appointed advisory board to oversee proposals for future agriculture support, farming leaders’ attention is focused on future support for the industry.
Farmer groups have also advised the Scottish Government on how to cut emissions and the new advisory board is committed to the creation of a package of pilot measures as part of the Government’s approach.
The aim is to meet the Government’s climate change obligation to transition to net-zero carbon emissions by 2045. This means the adoption of measures to reduce greenhouse gasses:
Optimise slurry and manure usage and storage.
Increase innovation in areas such as feedstuffs and use of fertilisers, causing less disturbance to soils.
Support carbon sequestration and storage through planting trees, restoring peatland, or growing biomass.
The Clearances
Scotland is on the cusp of a boom in the purchase of many millions of acres of Scotlands highland and lowland estates, peatlands and forests with businesses looking to invest billions to meet their climate change commitments.
The land grab is being led by hedge funds and large conglomerates that are seeking to offset their carbon emissions with their purchases.
Authorising a transfer of title will be subject to the approval of the Scottish Land Commission who will insist on rewilding measures including extensive tree planting and peatland restoration supported by financial grants adding value to the land boosting profits.
Comment:
Westminster politicians took our oil and gas and our wind and wave power and the final indignity. Our land.
Zionist businessmen, politicians and those associated with them have absolute control over the lives of every individual in the UK
In the early eighties one such altruistic businessman, James Goldsmith, announced to the world that he was an environmentalist who would be committing his considerable financial resources to support “green issues.”
Many rallied to his cause and promised international cooperation, a much-welcomed consequence of the Zionist movements’ commitment to the “new world order.” which promised great benefits to the planet.
He was also instrumental in convincing Thatcher and the Tories to commit substantial financial resources to the support of “green” issues.
One Goldsmith venture that found favour with the Tories was “debt-for-nature” swaps. Thatcher backed a radical proposal to preserve endangered rain forests which meant offering Third World countries deals involving their crippling international debts.
The terms of the schemes required the United Kingdom to buy up Third World debt and agree to forego interest payments on the condition that tropical rain forests were left untouched.
What wonderful saviours of the world Goldsmith and the Tories appeared to be. But ever the opportunist Goldsmith had been plotting. What he advocated was a tried and much utilized British imperialist raw materials grab.
And Brazil was the first target for a “hostile” takeover. It transpired that Goldsmith’s brother Edward, he of the “Green Party” was a very good friend of Brazil’s Environment Secretary and unsurprisingly Brazil, accepted foreign limitations on its sovereignty in the form of “debt-for-nature swaps.”
At a meeting of all Brazil’s bank creditors, the Finance Minister stated that the mineral-rich country was prepared to accept converting part of the $60 billion it owed into environmental conditionalities.
Other countries including, Bolivia, Costa Rica, and the Philippines also entered into similar debt deals in which environmentalist groups such as Prince Philip’s “World Wide Fund for Nature” bought the defaulted debt of those nations from bankers at very steep discounts.
The environmentalists put up 10-15% of the nominal value of the debt, and the government paid the full nominal value in local currency to their local front group to buy up lands, ostensibly for protecting them.
Only the oligarchy associated with the green group had access to the protected enclaves. This meant that Goldsmith and his ilk retained control over forests and underground minerals and other resources worth many thousands’ times more than was paid it.
But Goldsmith really did love lumber. In 1985, he purchased “Crown Zellerbach” an American forest products company with vast timber reserves. In doing so he became the sixth-largest owner supplier of timber, with huge reserves primarily in Washington, Oregon, Louisiana, and Mississippi. His control of third world forestry added a premium to his US forestry.
Afternote: The “Worldwide Fund for Nature” is a “Zionist Bilderberg” financial money pot providing a source of tax-free income for the rich and famous.
caltonjock 
