mardi, septembre 30, 2014

Tim Armstrong: Air Cuan Dubh Drilseach



Bellacaledonia: Air Cuan Dubh Drilseach

_______________________

California school bans all Christian books


A school in California has caused controversy by banning all Christian material from its library. Staff at the library were told to remove all books with a Christian message, authored by Christians or published by a Christian company. One of the books to be removed was Corrie ten Boom’s ‘The Hiding Place’, the story of a Christian family who helped Jews escape the Holocaust.

Violation

A parent of students enrolled at Springs Charter Schools contacted the Pacific Justice Institute (PJI), a religious advocacy group, after talking to library personnel. She was shocked at the number of books being removed from shelves to be given away. As a result the PJI contacted the school to alert them that in banning the books, they were violating the First Amendment.

Sectarian

The schools Superintendent Kathleen Hermsmeyer, responded to the PJI in a letter writing: “We do not purchase sectarian educational materials and do not allow sectarian materials on our state-authorized lending shelves”.

Corrie ten Boom’s ‘The Hiding Place’, a true story of courage and compassion by Christians in Nazi Germany, is one of many titles deemed “sectarian”.

'Purging'

President of the PJI, Brad Dacus commented: “It is alarming that a school library would attempt to purge books from religious authors. Indeed, some of the greatest literature of Western Civilization comes from people of faith. Are they going to ban the sermons or speeches of the Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr.?”Libraries cannot engage in an open purging of books simply because they are of a Christian perspective”, Dacus continued.

Dacus called the school to immediately reverse their “ill-conceived and illegal book-banning policy” or face further legal action.

’Cultural vandalism’

Earlier this year, the UK wide hotel chain Travelodge removed the Bible from all of its rooms, in a move criticised by the Church of England. Bibles provided free by the Gideons were taken away to avoid discriminating against any other religion. Writing on the Telegraph website, commentator Tim Stanley described Travelodge’s decision as “an act of cultural vandalism upon a tradition that goes back 126 years”.
Reblogged from The Christian Institute
_______________________

Robert Louis Stevenson i nGaeilge

Oileán an Órchiste 
CRUA / HARDBACK
Oileán an Órchiste
Robert Louis Stevenson
Leabhar Breac 2014
ISBN 978-1-909907-40-9
176 lch.

Tá an t-úrscéal Treasure Island le Robert Louis Stevenson ar cheann de na húrscéalta eachtraíochta is mó cáil riamh. Scéal scleondrach atmaisféarach é seo faoi fhoghlaithe mara ar an bhfarraige mhór, faoi mhapa órchiste, agus faoi Jim Hawkins, buachaill sna déaga a chuireann chun farraige agus é meallta ag draíocht an bhithiúnaigh Long John Silver.

San aistriúchán breá seo le Darach Ó Scolaí, tá an t-úrscéal seo a scríobhadh in 1883 curtha in oiriúint do léitheoirí an lae inniu, agus maisithe le pictiúir ó eagrán 1911 den leabhar le N.C. Wyeth.

_________________

Cás aduain 
an Dr Jekyll agus Mhr Hyde 
Robert Louis Stevenson a scríobh
Mathew Staunton a mhaisigh
Conall Ceárnach a d'aistrigh go Gaeilge
Evertype 2014
ISBN 978-1-78201-075-3
Lth/Pgs 163

"Bhí ina lámh aige bata trom, agus e ag imirt leis; ach níor fhreagair se focal, agus ba dhóigh le duine air go raibh sé ag éisteacht le mífhoighne ba dheacair a chosc. Agus ansin ar iompú na boise bhris ar an bhfoighne aige le rabharta feirge, bhuail sé a leathchos in aghaidh an talaimh, bheartaigh sé an bata, agus d'iompair sé e féin ar nós duine buile. Chuaigh an seanduine uasal coiscéim ar gcúl, agus cosúlacht air go raibh ionadh air agus e goillte beagan. Leis sin chuaigh Mr Hyde thar na bearta ar fad, agus leag sé ar talamh le buille bata e. Agus nóiméad ina dhiaidh sin, le fíochmhaire ápa, bhí sé ag satailt ar an gcorpán faoina chosa, e ag radadh stoirme buillí anuas air a bhris na cnámha le torann agus a thug ar an gcorp damhsa ar an mbóthar." 

Scéal scáfar uafar a chuirfidh alltacht agus anbhá ar lucht a léite. Dearmad na léirithe éadroma de atá feicthe agat i scannain agus cruinnigh do mhisneach le dul i bhfiontar sceimhle síceolaíoch Jekyll agus Hyde. 

Is i Londain Shasanna ata an t-úrscéal suite mar dhea, ach tá gach uile leathanach de ar maos in atmaisféar dúrúnda Dhún Éideann - an áit ar rugadh Robert Louis Stevenson. An fabhalscéal Freudach, fáthscéal moráltachta no allagóire aerach e? Is fútsa a chinneadh.

________________

An Spáinn ag iarraidh reifreann na Catalóine a chosc de réir dlí

An Spáinn ag iarraidh reifreann na Catalóine a chosc de réir dlí

Tá Priomh Aire na Spáinne, Mariano Rajoy, i ndiaidh iarraidh ar Chúirt Bhunreachtúil na tíre a rialú ar reifreann na Catalóine. Dar leis go bhfuil an reifreann faoi neamhspleáchas, atá le bheith ann ar 9 Samhain, míbhunreachtúil agus mar sin mídhleathach. Tá an rialtas in Maidrid ag iarraidh an reifreann a chosc sula mbeadh sé ann.


Thacaigh parlimint na Catalóine le reifreann an tseachtain seo caite agus mhaígh Príomh Aire na Catalóine, Artur Más, gur faill é do phobal na Catalóine comhrá a bheith acu faoi neamhspleáchas. 

Beidh dá cheist ar an pháipéar vótála ag fiafraí tuairim dhaoine maidir le stát a bheith ann dárbh ainm an Chatalóin agus ag fiafraí ar cheart go mba stát neamhspleách é .

Deir an Spáinn go mba cheart go mbeadh vóta ag achan Spáinneach maidir le ceist bhunreachtúil den tsórt seo agus mar sin go mbeadh aon vóta ar bhonn reigiúnda mídhleathach.

‘Níl ligfear d’éinne ná d’aon rud aontas na Spáinne a chur ó mhaith’ arsa an Príomh Aire Rajoy, a chuir go dian i gcoinne neamhspleáchas d’Albain agus atá maíte ar sheasamh go docht i gcoinne aon iarracht chun neamhspleáchas a cheadú in aon reigiúin sa Spáinn.

In 2010 dar le suirbhéanna áirithe go raibh tuairim is an chúigiú cuid de phobal na Catalóine ar son neamhspleáchais. Tá sin méadaithe go leathchuid den phobal de réir suirbhéanna a rinneadh le tamall beag anuas.

Scríofa ag Nuacht24 ar 29.09.2014
______________________

vendredi, septembre 26, 2014

Technology breakthrough boosts North Sea oil future

Technology breakthrough boosts North Sea oil future
Michael Gray (25/09/2014)

Reblogged from Business for Scotland

A team at Heriott Watt University are celebrating another break-through in North Sea extraction technology. Professor Mehran Sohrabi, at the centre for enhanced oil recovery, has announced progress in gas injection technology and ‘low salinity water injection’. When combined, these new forms of extraction can add decades onto the lives of existing and future North Sea oil and gas fields.

The Professor said, “This is a massive leap forward, especially in an offshore setting. The process is relatively inexpensive, meaning the costs for enhanced oil recovery could fall dramatically while yields could rise.

“It’s also cleaner as you’re removing the need for potentially toxic chemicals.”

This is the latest in a series of positive developments for the North Sea industry.

Business for Scotland previously reported on other technological developments in early July. This was before increased attention to the expansion of the Clair Ridge field West of Shetland. The new operations are set to last decades. Oil and Gas people, Sir Professor Donald Mackay and business group N56 all stated that the industry was in vibrant health for future decades.

The additional income from offshore oil will run into the tens of billions, with some estimating that it will rise to hundreds of billions of pounds. The devolution of offshore revenue will be a crucial part of any proposal on further powers for Scotland.

________________________

Scotland will force Westminster to deliver ‘Devo-Max’ promise

Debating Chamber of Scottish Parliament, Holyrood, Edinburgh
Scotland will force Westminster to deliver ‘Devo-Max’ promise
Michael Gray (24/09/2014)

The dividing lines have shifted, but not by much. The result of the referendum represents a blow to those who have campaigned tirelessly for decades. Yet the resilience and determination of those campaigning for a better Scotland has been impressive. Now the challenge is to get the best deal for Scotland. There will now be an even wider coalition who support this.

In a panicked response to the growth in support for independence, Cameron, Clegg and Miliband promised ‘Devolution Max’ by next February. The phrase ‘devolution max’ – which is from the Steel Report and ‘Your Scotland, Your Voice’ report – includes the devolution of all tax and social security powers. Opinion polling after the vote found that 25% of No voters did so for more powers.

Anything less than this will be viewed by the people of Scotland as a failure of Westminster to deliver on the economic powers Scotland’s economy needs. Membership of Yes supporting parties has more than doubled and membership of Business for Scotland also continues to grow.
Read full article 

_________________

Yes – Business for Scotland will continue

Yes – 
Business for Scotland 
will continue
Gordon MacIntyre-Kemp | 23/09/2014

Reblogged from Business for Scotland

Alex Salmond at Vision for ScotlandBusiness for Scotland has been around in one form or another since our successful devolution campaign targeting business people in 1997.  In the run up to the 2014 independence referendum we morphed from a small pressure group into a fast growing and influential business network and think tank. Many people are now asking if we will continue and this time the answer is a very definite Yes.

Business for Scotland campaigned for a Yes vote as we believe that would be the best route to creating a more prosperous, sustainable and economically sound country. We still believe that independence would be the best route but it is not the only way we can make progress.  Just as with other many other organisations who campaigned for a Yes vote, we will continue campaigning for a better Scotland.

A Missed Opportunity

Our members are disappointed that the opportunity to improve Scotland through the powers that would have come with independence has been lost. We also see great uncertainty in the powers that were offered by the Westminster party leaders.  We note that this referendum was won with a promise, a vow, that was described as ‘devo-max’. We have serious doubts that Westminster can actually deliver that vow in a way that will match the expectations of the people of Scotland.  We accept the mandate given by the referendum result to bring substantial more powers to Scotland and will work to help shape and define the powers required to make progress. Having won the referendum with that promise we need to make sure the Westminster parties give us access to the full menu of economic powers and don’t just expect Scotland to exist on the crumbs from Westminster’s table.

The legacy of this campaign is a thoroughly politically engaged and active population the likes of which Scotland has not seen for generations.  We hope to help develop that activism and engagement within the Scottish business community to help create economic and business policies that will drive Scotland forward and to campaign for the powers we need to let Scotland economy thrive.

As a member owned co-operative we are already engaging with our membership to create a shared vision as to what activities we should undertake.  We have a board meeting in early October and will set a date for our AGM then.

Having been a major part of the successful campaign for devolution in 1997 we know how to campaign for more powers and will switch our efforts to that priority, for now.  However we note that if Westminster fails to deliver on promises made in their “vow”, then the Scottish people may very quickly decide to support full independence. If that happens Business for Scotland will once again seek to engage and educate the people of Scotland on the economic and business benefits of independence.

The Business for Scotland journey over the past two years.

It has been an incredible campaign, unprecedented in modern politics, and Business for Scotland members played a significant part in the campaign:

  • We signed up more than 3000 members and engaged with more than a million Scottish voters via our website
  • Held and attended hundreds of events in towns and cities across Scotland
  • Raised £30k through a crowd funding project from supporters to help fund our video campaign which helped generate over 180,000 channel views
  • Launched our compelling Vision for Scotland document at our superb sell out conference in Edinburgh
  • Distributed more than a quarter of a million leaflets
  • Participated in hundreds of media appearances and press interviews
  • Toured Scotland with our Roadshow and Battle Bus
  • Raised the maximum funds allowed to campaign whilst also raising almost £50k for the CLIC Sargent children’s charity at our annual dinner
  • To top it all our local groups and volunteers took the streets to spread the positive message from Business for Scotland

I would like to thank all of our members, city leaders, directors and active campaigners, those who attended our events and engaged with our campaign.

Conclusion

Business for Scotland still has a key role to play in creating a strong, ambitious business vision for Scotland and ensuring that the business community receives the support and encouragement it needs to flourish.

We must take this opportunity to be the business organisation that stands up for what Scotland needs.



mardi, septembre 23, 2014

Max Keiser on how Scots lost tons of cash by voting 'NO' to independence


Publiée le 2014-09-22
Max Keiser says Scotland could have become of the world's most prosperous countries, but it was threatened into throwing the historic opportunity away.
____________________

England After Scotland

England After Scotland
By by Mark Perryman (September 23, 2014)

In a recent Counterfire article on the Scottish referendum campaign Alex Snowdon used a rarely mentioned phrase, the ‘English Left’. Apart from a few mavericks, amongst whom I number myself, who have been arguing for a progressive Englishness for the past few years, this is a prefix that up to now the Left seemed distinctly uncomfortable with.

While language is important, politics cannot be reduced simply to the words that we use. But, in the aftermath of Scotland’s historic referendum, recognising a break of the Union as a vital stage in transforming Britain’s ancien regime of establishment, monarchy and privilege must in part define Left politics north and south of the border (Wales and the North of Ireland too).

A 45% vote for independence is quite extraordinary. All three parliamentary parties, with UKiP following close behind, the entire media establishment (with the solitary exception of Scotland’s Sunday Herald newspaper), the full weight of the business and finance sectors, were ranged against Scottish independence. We now have a Scotland in which 45% of the population no longer want to be part of Britain.

Read full article HERE

_______________________

First Minister Alex Salmond: Statement to Scottish Parliament, Sept 23 2014


Statement by 
First Minister Alex Salmond
Scottish Parliament, Edinburgh
Tuesday, September 23, 2014


Last week’s referendum was an extraordinary, empowering, exhilarating experience. Huge credit is due to both sides.

It’s worth comparing it with previous referendums. The vote of 1979 was a botched job, where the side which gained the most votes was unable to have its wishes put into effect. In 1997, turnout was 60%.

Last week, turnout was 85% - the highest for any vote of this scale ever held on these islands.

With the exception of a few miscreants, both sides of the debate conducted themselves in an extraordinarily democratic, civilised and engaged manner.

And so to every single campaigner and voter, whatever your view and whatever your vote, I want to say thank you. This has been the greatest democratic experience in Scotland’s history. It has brought us great credit both nationally and internationally.

That overwhelmingly positive side to the referendum is now generally recognised. It is a shame that a few metropolitan journalists concentrated on negative elements.

But the true story to emerge from the referendum is that Scotland has the most politically engaged population in Western Europe. For both sides, that is a significant and positive fact to be reckoned with. We need to retain and encourage the people’s engagement, vitality and spirit. Nothing is more important for the future than that.

I will add a couple of caveats to that point towards the end of my speech. But I want to focus on the positive. And so I will concentrate on two points in particular, which arise from the referendum.

The first is this. There is not a shred of evidence for arguing that 16 and 17 year olds should not be allowed to vote. Their engagement in this debate was second to none. They proved themselves to be the serious, passionate, committed citizens we always believed they would be.

Everyone in this chamber should be proud of our decision to widen the franchise. There is an overwhelming and unanswerable case, for giving 16 and 17 year olds the vote, in all future elections in Scotland and across the UK. All parties in this parliament should urge Westminster to make this happen in time for next year’s general election.

The second point, or the second question, is one which has already been asked by many people. Where do we go from here?

From the moment the result of the referendum became clear, Section 30 of the Edinburgh Agreement came into effect. That means that both the UK Government and the Scottish Government are committed to accepting the outcome of the referendum, and working together in the best interests of Scotland and the rest of the UK.

I believe strongly in section 30. I put it into the Edinburgh Agreement. The Scottish government will stick to it.

That means the Scottish Government will contribute fully to a process to empower the Scottish Parliament and the Scottish people. We will bring forward constructive proposals for doing this.

I relayed this intention to the Prime Minister within minutes of the result being confirmed. That is how the Scottish Government intends to proceed.

I welcome the appointment of Lord Smith. He is a trusted person who has given great service to Scotland, and whose oversight of the Commonwealth Games Organising Committee was outstanding.

But I should say that David Cameron surprised me - and I suspect others in this chamber - with his statement on Friday morning, less than an hour after the outcome was confirmed. He said that change in Scotland should be in tandem and - in case we didn’t understand what that meant – at the same pace, as change in England and the rest of the UK.

That condition, as all of us know, would throw the entire process into delay and confusion. It would directly contradict the clear commitments made in the campaign.

The briefing from yesterday afternoon was decisively different from the Friday morning statement. That suggests that the UK Government recognises the importance of meeting its commitments. It’s crucial that they do so.

This parliament now has a responsibility to hold Westminster’s feet to the fire to ensure that the pledges are met. That’s not just a job for the Scottish Government – it’s one for all parties. In fact, there is a special obligation on the unionist parties. They promised further devolution; it is essential that they deliver.

But all parties should understand, that the true guardians of progress are not the political parties at Westminster, or the parties here at Holyrood, or Lord Smith – they are the energised electorate of this nation, the community of Scotland, who will not brook or tolerate any equivocation or delay.

I was struck by the statement yesterday by Graeme Smith of the STUC. I suspect he captured the feelings of many people in Scotland.

“The vast civic movement for meaningful and progressive change that has built up in the last two years is impatient for change and will not accept minimalist proposals developed in a pre-referendum context handed down on a take them or leave them basis…

“They are not going to be passive participants in the process or tolerate political obfuscation or compromise. The sooner the politicians recognise this and get down to working with civil society and the communities and people of Scotland to deliver a comprehensive new devolution settlement the better.'

The referendum debate engaged people in every community of the country. Its final outcome cannot be a last-minute deal between a small group of Westminster politicians.

Lord Smith has recognised the need to capture the energy of the referendum debate. All of us should support his commitment to consultation.

After all, one thing we now know is that proper consultation and debate energises people, rather than distracts them.

It’s worth remembering that since the Edinburgh Agreement was signed in 2012, the number of people unemployed in Scotland has reduced by 40,000; the economy has come out of recession ahead of the rest of the UK; Scotland has outperformed every part of the UK outside London and the south-east for foreign investment; visitor spending in Scotland has increased; exports have grown; the Scottish Government has introduced 30 new bills into this parliament; and we have delivered the most successful Commonwealth Games in history.

I mention that because in the last Parliamentary debate before the referendum, Johann Lamont expressed concern about “the way in which Scotland has been on pause on the big decisions facing our country.”

Scotland wasn’t on pause for the referendum; it was on fast-forward. Asking ourselves what sort of country we want to be isn’t something that is separate from good government; it’s part of good government.

Political confidence and economic confidence gang thegither. All of us have a responsibility to maintain that political confidence and self-belief - to involve our empowered and engaged electorate in delivering meaningful changes to devolution.

Any improvement of the devolution settlement will require a legislative consent motion here at Holyrood. So there is a clear role for this parliament in considering what new powers should be delivered.

There will doubtless be a range of views and proposals. The Scottish Government’s view is that an enhanced devolution settlement should meet three key tests. 

They should enable us to make Scotland a more prosperous country – in particular, genuine job-creating powers are important. They should allow us to build a fairer society. We need to address the deep-lying causes of inequality within Scottish society. And they should enable Scotland to have a stronger and clearer voice on the international stage. 

The Labour Party, less than two weeks before the referendum, promised “home rule for Scotland inside the United Kingdom”. We need to ensure that the powers delivered to this parliament match - not just the rhetoric of the Westminster parties, but also the ambitions of the people of Scotland.

It is also vital that new economic powers do not disadvantage Scotland. The vow made by unionist party leaders was absolutely clear that “because of the continuation of the Barnett allocation for resources, and the powers of the Scottish Parliament to raise revenue, we can state categorically that the final say on how much is spent on the NHS will be a matter for the Scottish Parliament.” But the Westminster parliamentary motion on further devolution, released over the weekend, failed to repeat that promise. The Barnett formula is essential – as the unionists’ vow acknowledged – until or unless Scotland has control of all of our resources. We need absolute clarity that the UK parties will stay true to their promises about Barnett.

We also need to ensure that the Scottish Parliament is entrenched in legislation – that it can never be abolished by Westminster. This was clearly promised before the referendum, but is again missing from the Westminster Parliamentary Motion. And while making that important change, the UK Government should finally give a statutory basis to the Sewel Convention of Legislative Consent Motions.

Overall, there is a great opportunity for this parliament. We can work together to help the UK government to deliver its promise of significant extra powers for this chamber; and we can do so in a way which deserves, sustains and encourages the interest and engagement of the people of Scotland.

I did say that there were two caveats that I wanted to add to the hugely positive nature of the referendum process. Both involve the criminal law, and so they are worth including in this statement.

There is still the outstanding matter of the briefing by the Treasury on the evening of 10 September, 45 minutes before an RBS Board meeting finished. We need to establish the full circumstances and justifications for the briefing, and how it can be anything other than contrary to Section 52 of the Criminal Justice Act 1993.

Secondly, the scenes we saw in Glasgow around George Square on Friday night cannot be tolerated. We expect and know that Police Scotland will take the necessary action against those who indulged in mindless thuggery against a peaceful demonstration.

Overall, however, although those caveats are important, they are relatively minor, when set against the significance of what Scotland has experienced.

When Donald Dewar spoke at the opening of this Parliament in 1999, he reflected at one point on the discourse of the Scottish Enlightenment, as an echo from the past which helped to shape modern Scotland.

What we have seen in the last two years is a new discourse of democratic enlightenment. Scotland now has the most politically engaged population in Western Europe, and one of the most engaged of any country anywhere in the world.

This land has been a hub of peaceful, passionate discussion in the workplace; at home; in cafes and pubs; and on the streets. Across Scotland, people have been energised and enthused by politics in a way which has simply never happened before.

We have seen a generational change –in attitudes towards independence and greater self-government, and also in how politics should be carried out. We have a totally new body politic, a new spirit abroad in the land – one which is speaking loud and clear. All of us must realise that things cannot ever be the same again.

Wherever we are travelling together, we are a better nation today than we were at the start of this process. We are more informed, more enabled, more empowered.

As a result, our great national debate will help to make us a fairer, more prosperous and more democratic country. All of Scotland has emerged as the winner.
Source
__________________

Lesley Riddoch: Aftermath - the effects of the Referendum - this week's Podcast

Access podcast 
_______________________

NO2NP: Say No to the Named Person scheme


Publiée le 2014-06-06
The Scottish Government's planned Named Person scheme will undermine parents' authority over their own children and allow state officials unprecedented powers to interfere with family life. That's why so many are saying NO2NP.

For more information please visit http://no2np.org/
___________________________

lundi, septembre 22, 2014

Which campaign did Gordon Brown really save?

Which campaign did Gordon Brown really save?
 By G.A.Ponsonby (21 Sept 2014)

So Gordon has done it again.  The man who saved the world after the banking crisis has now donned his cape in order to save the Union.

Well, that’s the narrative the media and Labour would have us believe.

The truth is that Brown no more saved the Union than David Cameron or Ed Miliband intend to honour Brown’s panic pledge of Home Rule for Scotland.

What saved the Union of course was the might of the broadcasting machine called the BBC.  And no, I don’t blame Nick Robinson’s cack handed news report when he let his own vanity get in the way of reporting the truth.

The BBC essentially stepped in when the Better Together campaign had all but disintegrated.  When the fateful poll showing Yes had pulled ahead was published by the Sunday Times, all pretence of balance was ditched.

From that moment the BBC’s task was to allow the No campaign to set the narrative.  At one point with days to go until referendum day, BBC Scotland chose a No campaign claim as their top story for five consecutive days.

Some of the stories were shocking.  The role of the broadcaster in colluding with the Treasury in the RBS ‘brass plate’ scare story was disgraceful.  Even worse was Eleanor Bradford’s shocking propagandising of a routine NHS report to suggest the Scottish Government were secretly planning cuts.

The BBC could have handled the job itself, but Brown’s nerve deserted him and he careered into the referendum like a bull in a china shop.  Downing Street and his own party leadership had no idea what he was doing.  He was winging it.

The BBC in Scotland, unwilling to challenge the man they view as Scotland’s de-facto First Minister of course gave him his platform.  Brown’s emergency speech was broadcast live - Churchill style - to a waiting nation.  The war against the uppity Scots had to be won.

The move was designed to give the impression of even more powers on offer in the event of a No vote and to persuade just enough undecided voters that the mythical beast of Devo Max was now on the agenda and would be delivered rapidly.

It was rushed and ill thought through and has now left Labour and the Conservatives with a constitutional headache.

Brown of course rushed in before the leaders of the Westminster parties had even formulated their plan to stem rising support for Yes.  He effectively bounced them into signing a vow they knew couldn’t be honoured.

His timetable was always unworkable and both Cameron and Miliband have already effectively ditched the Brown promise of Home Rule.

So where are we?

Read full article HERE
_______________________

Alex Salmond speech captured 21 Sept 2014


Posted on YouTube by Nicole Cumming (21 September 2014)
_______________________

dimanche, septembre 21, 2014

Scottish referendum: will the English now learn to speak “national”?

Scottish referendum: will the English now learn to speak “national”?
What does the narrow victory for preserving the Union tell us about the shifting forms of national identity in modern Britain?

by David Goodhart (19 September 2014)

It has been widely noted that aside from its many tactical and leadership errors the “No” campaign struggled to find much meaning in the idea of Britishness. Although Britain continues to exist (just!) as a state and a set of institutions—the armed forces, the BBC and so on—fewer and fewer people regard it as a national home, it has become functional rather than emotional. For many years now the Scots and Welsh have placed their Scottish and Welsh identities before their British one, and the English have in recent years followed suit.

...What about the English? Because Englishness for much of the 19th and 20th century was submerged into Britishness the English remain semi-literate in the language of modern national identity. 
Read full article HERE

______________________

samedi, septembre 20, 2014

Jack Straw: Make Union "Indissoluble" by Law


Of course if Scottish secession becomes illegal, no promises to Scotland need be kept. Holyrood itself could be suspended with impunity.
______________________

The Drum: New Media for a New Scotland


Publiée le 2014-09-18
New Media for a New Scotland 
BY BELLACALEDONIA on SEPTEMBER 20, 2014

Bella Caledonia will be announcing plans for an extended service, and our new ideas for improved content next week. We will be reaching out to readers for your support.

We are going nowhere. We are the 45. This is just the beginning.

In the meantime, enjoy this film from The Drum which explores some of the problems in our existing media landscape.

The Drum investigates the political tilt of Scotland’s mainstream media during the lead-up to the Independence Referendum on September 18 2014. 
________________________
See also -
Enough is Enough
_________________________


Publiée le 2014-09-13
BBC Referendum Bias - Glasgow Rally & Orange Order

On the day of one of the biggest political rallies Scotland has ever seen:

BBC national news reports 'thousands from across UK in pro-union rally' when it was actually an organised Orange Order march. The following news package contained no footage whatsoever of the 'rally', conveniently omitting the fact that it was lead by the Orange Order. 

Both national and regional news programmes failed to report the massive Yes rally on Buchanan Street despite having cameras following the two No campaigners on the same street.

In terms of balance the piece focuses heavily on several No campaign events/issues whilst a single event attended by Alex Salmond offers the sole coverage for the 'other side'.
__________________

Referendum: Victory & Defeat

Victory is easy to endure.
Surviving defeat takes heroes!
___________________________

jeudi, septembre 18, 2014

With a Yes vote we can protect our valued NHS


Publiée le 2014-08-23
Dr Philippa Whitford is voting Yes to protect Scotland's NHS as a valued universal public service. She says a Yes vote will save Scotland's NHS from cascading effects from the privatisation of the English NHS. She says, "in Westminster they believe that the market rules, and the market rules everything - everything is for sale, nothing is sacred."
__________________

Yes means...

mercredi, septembre 17, 2014

Dimbleby interviews Salmond on Scottish independence referendum


Publiée le 2014-09-17
"Scotland Decides: The Dimbleby Interviews" (BBC1 HD, 16 Sept 2014)
___________________

Scottish Referendum 2014 - The Wee Blue Book narrated


The Wee Blue Book is a very useful booklet full of facts and figures about Scottish independence, it's advantages to the people of Scotland, it's costs and how a Scottish Government (any Scottish Government, not just an SNP one) could pay for said costs. Also, all these figures are fully referenced, with links (available in the digital copies) to UK government figures, academic experts, and Unionists politicians and officials' statements, with few, if any, links to pro-independence sources, so you can have a look at the sources yourself and see what unbiased, and even strongly pro-union biased sources, have to say. 

_____________________________

lundi, septembre 15, 2014

UK's most senior Civil Servant urged businesses to come out against independence, says FT editor

UK's most senior Civil Servant urged businesses to come out against independence, says FT editor
By Martin Kelly (15 Sept 2014)

The UK's most senior Civil Servant has been pressurising businesses in an attempt at getting them to speak out against Scottish independence, the editor of the Financial Times has said.

Speaking on the Today Programme this morning, Financial Times editor Lionel Barber said business leaders hadn't wanted to get involved in politics, but as polling day draws closer and the polls tighten: "Mr Cameron and the Cabinet Secretary Sir Jeremy Heywood has been on the phone saying, 'will you please speak up?'"

Asked if he knew that was the case, Mr Barber replied: "We know they have, we know they have."

Read full article HERE
_________________________

John Beattie Show: Stuart Cosgrove & Eamon O'Neill on BBC Bias


John Beattie (pictured) hosts BBC Radio Scotland programme
____________________
See also:
Stuart Cosgrove
Balance failure in BBC Scottish independence referendum coverage ‘wrong and not acceptable’ says Channel 4’s Stuart Cosgrove
Channel 4’s director of creative diversity, Stuart Cosgrove, has slammed the lack of journalistic scrutiny of Scottish independence referendum ‘scare headlines’ and called for a re-think at the BBC on the nature of balance and due impartiality.

Read full artice HERE

_________________