Why I signed petition to rerun Scotland’s independence referendum

RERUN REFERENDUM WHY I SIGNED

How does the 45 Movement go from strength to strength? Firstly, nurture the cross-party unity and radical democratic content of the movement. We need this to pry apart the artificial unity of our Better Together opponents.

Project Fear has not packed up. Neither shall we. But the Lib Dems, Tories, Labour and UKIP will fight each other to a stand-still at the general election next May, splitting their vote, with internal divisions further rendering each and every one of these parties to a significant extent impotent in the face of a justifiably hostile electorate. YES Scotland doesn’t have to do that.

Scotland’s 45 Movement can, at least to some extent, continue to park our differences – on the Monarchy, currency, NATO, corporation tax and a lot more. This unity will come under strain. We all know that, and are prepared for it. But we need to address our differences, contain them as best we can. We need to at least try to negotiate a workable electoral non-aggression pact, one that takes account of the relative strengths of the component parts of the movement.

Nicola Sturgeon’s credentials is not in doubt. Not after how she conducted herself during the referendum, with a very attractive double act with the Greens Patrick Harvie. At Westminster, the SNP group needs to unite with Caroline Lucas MP, and with other MPs and would-be MPs to promoting investment in welfare, not warfare, uniting on a set of constitutional changes that reinforces democracy or everyone: proportional representation, no unelected second chamber, ending the Royal Prerogative, Prime Ministerial patronage, reciprocity when it comes to devolution, which will inevitably be resisted by Labour MPs, even though this is unlikely to help them as they’ve committed political suicide in Scotland.

Everything the 45 Movement can do to inflict propaganda – or any other – defeats on the anti-democratic Unionist parties should be seized on with both hands. As part of this process, petitions can play a part.

While I remain to be convinced of all of the arguments behind this particular petition, so long as it’s the only game in town, I will sign it. Anything that keeps the issue of Scottish independence in the fore of the political agenda is worth considering.

Even if Nicola Sturgeon and the rest of the Scottish government don’t think the case has been made for a recount, such a petition strengthens the hands of the 45 Movement. It does this by exposing the idiocy of those Tory propagandists who pretend the strength of feeling for keeping the momentum for independence going comes down to Nicola Sturgeon’s personal stubbornness. Nothing could be further from the truth.

The 45 Movement refuses to surrender because we know in our heart of hearts, if not in every case with complete understanding of what went on here, that Scotland’s referendum was anti-democratic in so many ways. Whether they included the physical stuffing of ballot boxes, or the theft of legitimate ballots, is neither here nor there. One day soon, the majority of Scotland’s voters will demand independence. With decent strategy and tactics, that day will not be very far off.

If you want to sign this petition, you’ll find it by clicking this link: https://www.change.org/p/nicola-sturgeon-we-the-undersigned-demand-a-revote-of-the-scottish-referendum-counted-by-impartial-international-parties

Posted in politics, Scottish Independence | Tagged , | Leave a comment

Channel Four News: tabloid ‘journalism’, trial by television, Tories and ghouls

Jon Snow, Jane Deith and Matt Frei of Channel Four News

Jon Snow, Jane Deith and Matt Frei of Channel Four News

I was deeply upset by the news yesterday when I learned of the death of Brenda Leyland. Don’t mind in the least sharing the fact I shed tears. Many times during the day.

Brenda may have had questions to answer; the jury’s still out on that one. But she died an innocent woman. And we all know by now that she was a vulnerable woman, one whose mental state was ignored by police officers who ludicrously outsourced questioning to Rupert Murdoch’s SKY News, probably the same officers who have been bought and sold by News International for decades. And all these criminals went on to hound Brenda Leyland to an early grave.

Adding insult to injury (more accurately, not injury, but not murder neither: manslaughter?), not only does SKY News insist they did nothing wrong; BBC and Channel Four News editors are defending Martin Brunt’s behavior, and implicitly that of SKY News editors.

The almost appropriately-named Jane Deith of Channel Four News introduced her hatchet job of this poor woman by implying that she only got what she deserved. Friends, family, her entire community, and those of us who never met her and know next to nothing about her, but know she did not deserve this… We are grieving. And Channel Four News editor allows Jane Deith to pollute the airwaves with this nasty defense of Rupert Murdoch’s trial-by-television?

Channel Four News editor thinks he can get away with this rubbish because he can’t be sued by Brenda Leyland. And her family can’t sue Jane Deith for her insults. However, when people have had time to grieve, anger will fuel their passion. Those responsible will pay a price. Martin Brunt must know this.

Martin Brunt has always struck me as intelligent and a decent, humane individual, much more so than than most of his colleagues in the broadcasting industry. I don’t think he will be able to pretend he bears no responsibility for Brenda Leyland’s death. I am sure he will already feel guilty without my having to explain to him why he should do this. I think he will want to get this off his conscience. I think he will want to help society ensure there are no more incidents like this ever again.

Unfortunately for Martin Brunt, if he speaks out and accepts his personal responsibility, he will necessarily take others down with him – including the editor of SKY News for letting this garbage be aired. And anyone at the station who broke the law with police officers – a problem endemic inside every organization touched by Rupert Murdoch – they will face criminal charges, sooner or later.

Martin Brunt cannot move on with the rest of his life until he takes decisions that will lead to a massive headache for Rupert Murdoch, for his editor, and for all shareholders of SKY News. But if he is a decent man, someone who wants to be able to look himself in the mirror, someone able to have a good nights sleep ever again, then he will speak out. The sooner the better, for everyone’s sake.

Posted in politics | Tagged , , , , | 1 Comment

Who killed Sweepy?

Does Martin Brunt accept he got this badly wrong?

Does Martin Brunt accept he got this badly wrong?

Who killed Brenda Leyland? If you get your news from SKY or the BBC, then no one is responsible. “No suspicious circumstances,” according to the cops, the same police officers no doubt with a long history of taking bribes from staff at News International. It was just one of those things. The bloody left hand of the BBC washes the bloody right hand of SKY News. Rupert Murdoch will turn a blind eye to Jimmy Savile etc if the ex-Murdoch editor James Harding looks the other way as SKY News gets caught hounding a vulnerable woman into taking her own life. This is truly sick.

If Brenda had committed a crime, as SKY News Martin Brunt insists was the case, then it was up to a jury of her peers to determine what it was, and how serious it was. It was not the business of Martin Brunt or SKY News editors to publicly humiliate her.

Brenda had an absolute right to legal representation if there was a prime facie case against her. Why was none offered? Why was a judge not allowed to weigh up mitigating factors in determining the sentence, if a jury did in fact decide that she had broken the law? Why could a judge and jury not have decided that her motives mattered, or any potential risk to her health, such as has become so tragically apparent to all of us?

Martin Brunt knows that regardless of whether the target of her ‘trolling’ (the McCanns) were innocent people, then at least Brenda’s motives were not altogether bad: her heart was in the right place even if she got this wrong.

Brenda thought she was fighting for justice for a dead child. Was she on to something? I have absolutely no idea. I don’t like jumping to conclusions. I have not seen any evidence, and have no interest in searching for it. Juries need to do that; not self-appointed armchair detectives.

I never participated in the so-called trolling of the McCanns. And I am not justifying those, including Brenda, who have done that. However, let’s assume for the sake of argument that the ‘trolls’ are totally wide of the mark. Why do they think it is okay for them to ‘troll’ the McCanns? They do it precisely because BBC, SKY and Channel4 News – day-in, day-out – invite their viewers to join them in finding certain individuals guilty in advance of any fair trial. They may do this by innuendo, by playing a game of cat and mouse with the legal profession. But they know precisely what they are doing. This is a game right-wing Tories never tire of. That is because it distracts the victims of a rotten system, run by the likes of Rupert Murdoch and David Cameron, and drags the masses off into total dead ends.

In other words, all these so-called trolls are simply DIY versions of the crime correspondents of all the major news networks in the United Kingdom. You want to know who is guilty of mobilizing the so-called trolling of the McCanns? Rupert Murdoch needs to take a good hard look in the mirror for his answer. Murdoch and his tabloid journalists are the ones to blame for all this internet vigilantism. And they now have the blood of Brenda Leyland on their hands too.

Posted in politics, Uncategorized | Tagged , , | 5 Comments

Rupert Murdoch’s tabloid values drove Brenda Leyland to an early grave.

rupert-murdoch_news-corp

This billionaire uses SKY News to attack vulnerable women. Thanks to corrupt cops who queue up to take bribes from him, this man gets away with phone hacking, with corruption on an industrial scale, with destroying evidence – including shredding emails, and using sledgehammers on hard disks -, paying off witnesses, dragging at least one criminal into 10 Downing Street, and now humiliating women whose sole motivation was a desire (possibly badly directed) to winning justice for a dead child, forcing his victim to take her own life.

This man is Rupert Murdoch. And he should be charged with psychological torture without regard to the vulnerability of his victim, and the potential for suicide. This man is a self-appointed judge, jury and executioner, and he has blood on his hands. He ought to spend the rest of his life in jail.

Posted in politics | Leave a comment

Why I may contest Douglas Alexander’s seat in next May’s general election

This is not a joke. I am considering standing as an MP

This is not a joke. I am considering standing as an MP

Not for the first time, I tweeted yesterday that I’m considering standing as an independent in next May’s general election. I was surprised to discover that this tweet was being retweeted. For the sake of clarity, I explained that I’m not joking. Since it is being retweeted, I want to say a lot about why I am serious.

Firstly, as I made clear on Twitter yesterday, I don’t want to be an MP. Is it a great ploy to make a job application and say you don’t want to get it? Typically this is not a great idea. However, there is an idea that anyone who wants to be an MP should be automatically disqualified. Don’t expect to win on my using this Catch 22 as my key policy. However, I may corner the surrealist and anarchist vote by explaining why I am not a typical parliamentary candidate.

Secondly, while I don’t think I’d be a great MP, the qualities that I know I lack are not in great abundance by most of those who are MPs. I may not be a genius, but compared to the typical Labour MP, I’m Einstein: everything’s relative, apart from the speed of light. MPs are also, by and large, liars. I will focus on that. I can supply ample proof of how I am not afraid to speak my mind, which is in precious short supply amongst most politicians. While most MPs have contempt for the voters, I will express solidarity with my constitutents by sharing their living standards: like Dave Nellist, I too would take only the average wage of a skilled worker. What happens to the leftover is not something I have given any thought to. Not yet.

I don’t think I have a hope in hell of actually being elected. That is one of the reasons I am considering standing. I don’t mind losing my deposit, but I will fight to save it. And I want to earn all the votes that I do get. I want to explain why I am standing. And I will be standing specifically to expose the sitting MP: Douglas Alexander, and his role in making my life hell. I have referred to this before, and I won’t rest until what he has done becomes public knowledge.

Let me be clear about something else: I want there to be a single slate of pro-Scottish independence candidates at next May’s general election. This is one of many reasons I really do not want to stand. I want the SNP to negotiate an electoral non-aggression pact that stops Ed Miliband’s traitors saving their bacon. They deserve to pay the price for mangling democracy in Scotland in the referendum.. They need the SNP to stand against the Greens and other pro-independence candidates. Gonnae no dae that? I have argued since our defeat on 18th of last month that we need to pick ourselves up, and start all over again. Rewriting the joke about Tories and pandas into one about Tories, Lib Dems and Labour is something I would love. So how on earth could I dare threaten this electoral pact myself? That is a question I will now address.

I want to negotiate my way out of standing in the general election. I will abandon this in return for the SNP leadership examining my allegations against Douglas Alexander and others. The ball is in their court.

 

Posted in politics, Scottish Independence, Uncategorized | Tagged | Leave a comment

Rupert Murdoch thinks he is above the law? Time for him to wake up.

Brenda Leyland, driven to death by Rupert Murdoch's SKY News

Brenda Leyland, driven to death by Rupert Murdoch’s SKY News

Please sign my petition to expose the tabloid ‘journalism’ of Rupert Murdoch, driving people to an early death. Fight for a public inquiry into the role of this billionaire foreigner mangling Britain’s democracy and justice system: https://www.change.org/p/david-cameron-launch-a-public-inquiry-into-trial-by-television-reference-must-be-made-to-brenda-leyland-denied-legal-representation-by-sky-news-threatened-with-jail-and-now-dead

Posted in politics, Uncategorized | Tagged , , , | Leave a comment

Douglas Alexander and me. His sister. My sister. And the British State. Part 1

DOUGLAS ALEXANDER BIG BANNER

Douglas Alexander is my MP. He has just ran a nasty campaign in Scotland, and his boss is very proud of what he’s done. One of the many things Dougie did was bore the audience of debates to tears with his endless name-dropping of members of his family, which did not go down well with Comrade Alexander. Dougie attacked the audience for groaning at his incessant reference to his sister, his mother, his dad, his wife, his dogs, cats, goldfish or whatever the hell they were. I got bored and stopped listening.

Anyway, since Douglas Alexander did refer to his sister, I thought I would use this to help me in structuring my tale about what an utterly appalling Member of Parliament he is, and why he should be driven from office at the earliest opportunity. I am now going to tie us together in a way that makes reference to both of our sisters. I am doing this with a great deal of apprehension, and I need to make this point right at the start.

Of the four of us, only two can be described as famous, although my sister has not heard of any of the famous peeps: Wendy Alexander is as anonymous to my sis as is Dougie himself. This gives an indication of how my sister is an innocent bystander in this. I don’t want her to become collateral damage in a war of David Cameron and Douglas Alexander’s rich and powerful chums dragging my name through the mud.

My sister has nothing to do with politics. She is a private citizen and, as such, should not be hounded by the press. That, unfortunately, is what I am worried about. David Cameron and Douglas Alexander are bound to try to get to me by hounding relatives who have got nothing to do with this. Let me state for the record that as far as I know, my sister may vote Tory. I neither know, nor care. One of the first things I said to her when we met for the first time in decades recently is that I was not going to ask her how she intended to vote in Scotland’s referendum. To this she replied she wouldn’t tell me anyway. I am not going to dwell on that, not going to draw any inference. All I will say is that my sister should be off-limits as far as the media is concerned.

While I won’t be mentioning my sister’s name, I will be referring to her a great deal, and it will be in reference to Douglas Alexander, his sister and the British State, and to illegality that links him to David Cameron and, it would seem, judging by her speech to yesterday’s Conservative Party conference, to Home Secretary Theresa May.

[End of Part I]

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment