PullMyFinger

#AnnexeGate takes a sinister twist. http://thetinboonie.com/scotland-set-to-remain-in-the-uk-after-independence-from-the-uk

That backfired!

If you want to vote you need to be resident in Scotland.

I've got a first issue of "The little pot boiler". Will you sign it for me?

We might be away in the Europa League that day! Better set our sights on a Champions League place to leave the Thursday free, then. Vote by post WILL I be able to "vote by post" ? What do I have to do to make a postal vote, please ? First you have to be on the electoral roll for local elections, which ward/constituency are you in? Perth? That's a PH postcode! Sorry Jock, if you're not resident you don't get to vote. That's only fair though.

Wonga.com

Shall I make a negative case against the union then?

I wish that was true, but politics is about winning, not about the truth, and the no camp is pulling out everything it has to 'win ugly'. Calling in favours from anybody from rich American politicians to dear old clueless Ken Clarke, as long as they have no interest in Scotland at all, but can come up with an 'authoritative' quote. The McCrone report shows that we have been cynically lied to before in the interests of preserving the UK, so why should it be any different now? As licence payers we should expect the BBC to be impartial, but a quick search will show you that it is not. Some of us don't pay for a license because we don't watch live broadcasts. Good article here http://www.craigmurray.org.uk/archives/2013/04/bbc-the-new-hammer-of-the-scots/

Declaration of Independence is not really like a petition to be delivered to Downing Street. It is a prop to be used by campaigners and you'll see people out and about in the High Streets and going door to door with clipboards. The real purpose is to get people talking about Independence and therefore thinking about it. Whoever puts forward the more positive case forward will win. Early days yet but support is rising with local groups cropping up all over the country.

On currency. You won't find this in the mainstream media. http://nationalcollective.com/2013/04/24/the-currency-question/

http://bellacaledonia.org.uk/2013/04/30/farago/

The UK Minister for Defence has requested that the additional saving requested from the treasury come from Welfare and Healthcare budgets. The knock on effect in Scotland if this happens is a loss of Barnet consequentials to the tune of £60 million. http://wingsoverscotland.com/the-hidden-cost-of-the-union/ Only an idiot, eh Laurence? UK-OK

3. Latest GERS figures show us contributing 9.9% of revenue whilst receiving 9.3% of expenditure but let's not kid ourselves, we still spend more than we are contributing. Currently the UK has borrowed £245 billion more than expected since "austerity" measures were introduced. As with everything else, things change and sometimes they don't get updated where they are published in a timely manner. Just like the Better Together leaflets advising we could lose the UKs AAA credit rating leading to our mortgage rates increasing and it costing us £ billions. Two of the three agencies have now downgraded us and the leaflet still goes out and our interest rates haven't changed yet. When the interest rate does go up and it will, the UK will collapse further and faster than Greece. We are currently (as the UK nation) in debt to the tune of 500% GDP when you add in personal debts this rises to circa 800% and rising. Rates have been contolled by the Bank of England by quantative easing (borrowing more to pay off loans). The £ in your pocket in 2008 is now worth 80p. This was never going to end well. There comes a time when rates must rise and we'll be the ones to pay. Westminster are set on shafting all those on benefits and low incomes all the while they feather their own nests by selling off the NHS, ambulance service, police service and post office amongst other things to companies they and their cronies have interests in. Rant over

Why? Please make a positive case for voting no preferably without reference to wee dogs and sausage rolls. I will then make my case for voting yes limitted to covering the 3 areas of democracy, the economy and socially.

I could easily say the same about your post but that doesn't make me right, does it? Why not go through the article and highlight the inaccuracies with linked evidence to back yourself up or are you just a troll? It doesn't make you right because you can't do it. Thank you for agreeing. Why can't you do it though? I don't have the time or inclination to argue with George Galloway by proxy on the internet. Seeing as you are on the verge of tears about it though, here are a few highlights of inaccuracies in the post: - Thatcher said "there is no such thing as society" in an interview with Women's Own, not in her speech to the Church of Scotland. - It's a pretty loose definition of 'blasphemy' to talk about her intrepretation of the Good Samaritan tale, although no galloway rant is complete these days without some bizarre religious dog-whistling. - His talk of her "destroying" industry is a willfull distortion - the industries that Galloway is wistfully talking about were hugely subsidised by the state, a situation where productive industries were drained of theri profits (98% taxation on investment income, 83% on salary income for top earners) to pour into money pits. If these industries had been able to compete they'd have survived - they could not. - His glossing over of union power is ridiculous. Speak to anyone involved in the press during the 1970s and 80s and you'll find out what the truth was about the print unions - they held the entire industry to ransom and what happened at Wapping was due to technology, thankfully, making them obselete. - Regarding Northern Ireland, political/special category status was withdrawn before Thatcher came to power (by Roy Mason, IIRC). In the event, what did Galloway expect her to do? Give in? TheIRA at that time were dedicated to murdering their way to power in Ireland. - State collusion between Loyalist terrorists and the security forces happened throughout the conflict, a cursory reading of history tells you that. The UVF in Mid-Ulster operated hand in glove with British intelligence throughout the 1970s, the UDR and B Specials had a consistent core of Loyalist sympathisers in it's ranks, in the 70s some estimates put it at 15-20% of total manpower had contact with loyalist paramilitaries. Also, recent court cases have shown that several atrocities in the early 90s, after Thatcher left power, occurred either with the involvement or knowledge of British intelligence (Loughinisland). it's a fallacy to say that it became endemic during Thatchers rule and it's also a mistake to attribute it to her. If GG actually thinks that these things were signed off around the Cabinet table then he's delusional. - The "Cold War fanaticism" that GG talks about is hilarious - Thatcher helped bring about the end of the Cold War and the collapse of Soviet domination of Eastern and Central Europe. Have a read of the obituries and tributes to her from Europe to see what people think of her there. - Again, a hilarious misreading of history to say that "she pushed... George Bush Sen into the first Iraq War". Saddam was removed from Kuwait by the largest military coalition in history, comprising Arab states, Europe, the Americas. The idea that she somehow forced Bush to act against his will is a fantasy from Galloway. - GG repeats a lie about the Afghan mujahadeen - there isn't a simple continum between the people who the West aided (a process started by Jimmy Carter) and those who became the Taliban. There is zero evidence that any WEstern aid ever reached Al Queda. In fact, the evidence is the opposite, Bin Laden didn't want their aid. It's interesting to note that GG supported the invasion and occupation of Afghanistan by the Soviet Union. - It's interesting that GG says "I was one of the last men standing in parliament opposing this immoral policy of “my enemy’s enemy is my friend” when he is the single biggest example of this policy in British politics. He says he opposed Saddam and may well have done (although the evidence of his involvement in any opposition to him is pretty scant). However, as soon as Saddam became an enemy of the WEst GG prostrated himself in from of Saddam, acting a propaganda agent for the Ba'athists, eulogising Saddam. He is doing the same thing now with Assad in Syria. The Belgrano and Mandela questions are covered above. That wasn't so difficult, was it? Here's a couple of links to support you (I didn't actually disagree with you, did I?) http://www.margaretthatcher.org/document/107246 Transcript of speach to General Assembly of C of S http://www.margaretthatcher.org/speeches/displaydocument.asp?docid=104210 Transcript of interview for LWT One thing though, he may not have condemned Saddam publicly to the extent that many others in the West did but let's get some contect on Saddam. When he was invading Iran and gassing his own countrymen in the North, it was the Western leaders who supported him, armed him, financed him and trained him. Foreign policy has a habit of haunting habitual offenders. I'm afraid you have been taken in by some crab propaganda. The Vulcan assault was a minor irritation to the Argentinians and was quickly dealt with. It had little actual bearing on the conduct or outcome of the war. The RAF is well aware that this conflict was won by the combined efforts of the Navy and Army and now that 25 years have passed they are using this one very expensive and ultimately inconsequential action as a sad attempt to make themselves look relevant. They were (and should remain) embarrassed that the most memorable conflict since WWII involving ONLY UK forces against a belligerent enemy attacking British soil was beyond their effective capability. Silly me, I though the fact that the Argie's Mirage fighters couldn't use the runway to land saved a lot of British service personnel's lives (Naval and Marines). The Mirage squadrans were withdrawn following the bombing of the runway, short runways are okay for take off but not for landing. This is why I said "paved the way", the Argentines were shocked that the Air Force could reach them from the UK.

High unemployment = good? Good post though.

snatch

I could easily say the same about your post but that doesn't make me right, does it? Why not go through the article and highlight the inaccuracies with linked evidence to back yourself up or are you just a troll? It doesn't make you right because you can't do it. Thank you for agreeing. Why can't you do it though?

I doubt Neil Lennon sees it like that, at least I hope not. Either way third is ours to lose and second is still there to be won. Believe!

I could easily say the same about your post but that doesn't make me right, does it? Why not go through the article and highlight the inaccuracies with linked evidence to back yourself up or are you just a troll?

Puts them into the dangerzone for relegation playoffs.

Tories, New Labour, LibDem, what's the difference now? Politically? Seriously?

It was the poll tax that impacted her popularity in Scotland. She may have had a positive effect on the economy in the long run but ultimately her policies have killed off support for the Conservative and Unionist Party. In an independent Scotland I believe there would be a resurgence of support for a right of centre party, many of those who support SNP would indeed be of that ilk. There's a button to the left of the font dropdown menu, if you highlight your text then click that you can create a spolier.

I see Alan Savage has made a donation to BitterTogether of £100,000. http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-scotland-politics-22058475 Would have been better spent on ICT imo but it's his money to waste. I wonder how he feels about sharing story with Ian Taylor? http://nationalcollective.com/2013/04/07/dirty-money-the-tory-millionaire-bankrolling-better-together/ At least Alan stays in Scotland and I assume he pays tax unlike Taylor with his EBT.

official ICT site @ http://ictfc.com Wow! Kudos to ICTFC.com!