BBC Alex Salmond talks about his plans for Scotland's future
The cause of Scottish national independence is to be sold out by Alex Salmond on St Andrew's day when he publicizes his white paper much-hyped as an "independence referendum" white paper and plan.
It is a lie. It is a fraud. It does not offer Scottish national independence.
The referendum plan that Salmond and the Queen's civil servants have come up with is for an independent Queen's state with the Scots to be denied our national independence.
So long as we Scots are denied the right to elect our own head of state, a president, of a Scottish republic, we will not be independent but enslaved by the Queen's state.
What Salmond proposes is not a half-way house to Scottish national independence either. A Queen's Scottish state would not be progress. We already have a Queen's Scottish state and Salmond is the Queen's first minister already.
Salmond's referendum plan is a plan for the status quo which is the Saltire used as an alternative Queen's butcher's apron for the Queen's ministers and officers in Scotland.
Salmond's plan is not a plan for us Scots - it is a plan against us Scots, to keep us down and under the brutal heel of the Queen's ministers and officers.
The danger is that there will also be republicans who foolishly welcome Salmond's referendum plan as, so we are told, "a move forward, a half-way house to a Scottish republic". Lies, lies and more lies.
To see Scottish republicans dance to Salmond's royalist tune is even more of a betrayal.
Scottish republicans expect to be betrayed by royalists. But when republicans betray the cause of an independent Scottish republic by agreeing with royalists' plans it is an unexpected betrayal.
I will not betray the cause of an independent Scottish republic and I call every co-called "Scottish republican" who supports Salmond's referendum plan announced on Monday "TRAITOR!" because that is what they will be.
See these topics and polls in the Users and Guests forum of the For Freedom Forums.
Sticky: [ Poll ] What do you think about Salmond's plan for a referendum?
Sticky: [ Poll ] If Alex Salmond shat on a plate and called it 'mince' ...
PS. For OpenDemocracy
It is not "OurKingdom" you idiots, it is Queen Elizabeth's and her family's to inherit! The only thing that is ever ours is the axe that removes the monarch's head. Power is with the UK state and there is precious little liberty. When we the people elect our own head of a state, a president, of a republic, then the power and liberty will be with the people but the kingdom won't be ours then it will be dead. If it is your kingdom it must be because you are a royalist lackey and traitor against democracy.
Peter Dow's Scottish National Standard Bearer website
Update - 28th February 2010
Salmond betrays Scottish independence for Queen's united kingdoms and the Union of the Crowns
Peter Dow says Salmond betrays Scottish independence for Queen's united kingdoms (VIDEO)
On the 25th February 2010, Queen Elizabeth's First Minister Alex Salmond presented a paper entitled "Scotland’s Future: Draft Referendum (Scotland) Bill Consultation" and I quote -
Scotland's Future: Draft Referendum (Scotland) Bill Consultation
1.19 Her Majesty The Queen would remain as Head of State. The current parliamentary and political Union of Great Britain and Northern Ireland would become a monarchical and social Union – united kingdoms rather than a United Kingdom – maintaining a relationship forged in 1603 by the Union of the Crowns.
So there is Salmond's approach printed in black and white in his own paper - he intends to deny the Scots the sovereign right of an independent nation to elect our own head of state, he intends the head of state and the Scottish sovereign to be Queen Elizabeth and the reality is Salmond opposes the sovereignty of the Scottish people, preferring the sovereignty of the Queen.
But then Salmond tells his big lie when presenting that publication which surrenders sovereignty to the Queen when he lied to us all -
"but the important principle that underlies the approach of the SNP government and indeed the approach in this paper is of course the principle of our belief in the sovereignty of the Scottish people"
Salmond SAYS the approach of his paper supports the sovereignty of the Scottish people but the truth is the exact opposite - Salmond's paper's approach actually surrenders sovereignty to the Queen and to the "United Kingdoms" and the Union of the Crowns.
This man Salmond is a bare faced LIAR who has betrayed the Scots to his Queen and goodness knows why ANY Scot believes a word out of his mouth.
Salmond's treachery does not end there. Even the ballot paper he proposes is rigged to stop Scots voting simply for Scottish national independence without risking the appearance of agreeing to retain the Queen.
Never have the Scots been confronted with such a devious traitor as Alex Salmond.
The sovereignty of the Scottish people will be asserted when we Scots are allowed to elect our own head of state, a president of a Scottish republic and when our good president defends the sovereign rights and freedoms of the Scots to speak out, to protest and to govern ourselves democratically in a free country, with ALL Scots as part of the government and with no monarch as head of state. Only then will we have the sovereignty of the Scottish people truly respected.
There is no route to Scottish independence which includes following this traitor Salmond or supporting his referendum plan. Salmond's plan is a dead end which keeps the Scots in slavery under the brutal rule of the Queen's United Kingdoms.
The true route to Scottish national independence is to oust the Queen by banning her and the Windsor royal family from Scotland and to enforce that ban by any means necessary.
Peter Dow's Scottish National Standard Bearer website - scot.tk
The For Freedom Forums, Forums for robust political debate - figh.tk
Thanks for telling us we are lackeys and traitors. Not the way to start a debate or persuade anyone, such denunciation. So I guess you are just interested in having a vent. The paradox is that there are states with elected heads of state, ie Presidents, which are just as fixed and top down as the UK's. There is no panacea for this. The symbolic head of state matters a great deal, but is not politically decisive. Indeed one of the ways the British system works is to displace attention onto the head of state, personalising it, while the real power proceeds. What Baghot called decorative is clearly more than that, but it is also in part a heat shield. That's why the constitition matters much more, and of course when we have a democratic one there has to be a referendum on what kind of state people want. If the British (or if it is after a breakup of the UK, the English) vote to retain the Windsors for sentimental and historic reasons, they may be wrong but they won't be "slaves". The monarch will have to swear an oath to the protect the constitution in any coronation, putting a formal end to devine right - which is why the Royal Family resist any such development.
Clearly, also, there are countries with monarchs, such as Spain which are constitutional democracies that belong to the people far more than out own.
As for the name "Our Kingdom". Well, this combines the aspirational with the assertive. The fact is that we live in a Kingdom. All too often democrats and radicals want to talk to themselves rather than engage with reality as it is. Is it "Our" Kindom, no it is not! This is obvious to any democrat and we all need to assume other people are intelligent and have minds. So, the implication is: Let's make it ours!
Anthony Barnett - Let me be positive and constructive then - I suggest a change of name to the "OurKingdom" section. By the way "Power and liberty in Britain" is an excellent subtitle - no need to change that. (Are you liking my more constructive tone already? lol)
What about "OurBritain" or "OurRevolution" or "OurRebellion" or "OurInsurrection" or "OurLiberation" or ... [the rest of this post had to be deleted, apologies, Editor]
[the rest of this post had to be deleted, apologies, Editor]
[elected republicans who won't swear allegiance to the Queen have to be banned from speaking in parliament, apologies, the Queen]
[John Charles de Menezes had to be shot dead in the London Underground, apologies, the Queen]
Yes I think we get the idea what YOUR kingdom is all about.
Monarchy and Kingdom is not a direct equivilent, the two descriptions are not the same, and are not drawn from the same set of ideas or even cultures and languages.
To accept this handed down from 'on high' description, that monarchy and kingdom are the same is to accept the elites terms of reference, culture, language and ideals.
What Scotland chooses to do about membership of this Union and whether they want to retain the Queen or not is their choice for Scotland. But it is not their choice for England, that is Englands choice. So should the Union end and Scotland choose to be a republic (in the terms set by your elites), and England remain a Kingdom, then you will have to respect Englands choice as much as England must respect yours.
But wild threats and talk of executions, murders and other such things to a neighbouring states head, is not the way to go about peaceful coexistance.
To be fair to the SNP, nowhere in their literature have they stated support for Scottish independence, without it being under the crown. So, it’s slightly disingenuous of Peter Dow to claim the SNP are selling Scottish republicanism down the river. The SNP have never been full-bloodied republicans. Well, not in my lifetime.
What strikes me these days about the call for full Scottish independence is how silly it sounds – especially when you consider the once mighty financial institutions of the Royal Bank of Scotland, Halifax Bank of Scotland, and the Dunfermline Building Society, are now owned by the British state. The same state Scottish republicans want to be free from.
Scotland, once acknowledged throughout the world as prudent and sober managers of other peoples capital – have spent the last 18 months running down south with their begging bowls in hand, looking more like Icelandic elites.
Given perilous state of financial institutions in Scotland, my question to Peter Dow is, how, or more precisely, who exactly is going to finance Scottish independence – without the British state and it’s crown?
"Scotland, once acknowledged throughout the world as prudent and sober managers of other peoples capital – have spent the last 18 months running down south with their begging bowls in hand, looking more like Icelandic elites."
Blaming Scots for the inevitable collapse of Thatcherism is pretty silly. It is Westminster parties in collusion with their bosses across the Atlantic who made the finance "industry" the main pillar of the UK economy. It is compensation we are demanding, not alms.
And who would be paying it pray tell?
As all of us and our childrens' children will be paying for it in one way or another, i suggest the price we should exact for the democratic and financial deficits from the discredited British political system is recognition of popular sovereignty, pending a codified constitution or constitutions derived from the self-determination of the forms of governance best suited to our needs, and the provision of a suite of ways and means to exercise that responsibility, such as Citizens' Petitions, Initiatives & Bills, Preferenda & Referenda and Conventions, so that any electorate can raise any matter of concern with any elected or as yet non-elected body and have it acted upon.
By so ruling us in, we should be able to play our full part in fostering sustainable growth whilst cutting waste through spending in the most cost efficient way on the essentials we value that add value to our lives and shape the kind of society we would prefer with governance as its servant.
The suggestion is free. The doing would be no mean feat.
The question of how a newly independent Scotland would finance itself appears symbolically, more like the elephant in the room. Dr Andrew Goudie, Scotland’s chief economic adviser suggested in his State of the Economy presentation last year that the prospects for the Scottish economy remain increasingly bleak. http://www.scotland.gov.uk/Resource/Doc/918/0085408.pdf
The latest round of economic indicators has vindicated Dr Goudie’s dire prediction, of anemic economic growth and ‘significant’ increase in unemployment – indeed, Scotland now appears to be currently experiencing the fastest job loss rate throughout Western Europe. http://business.scotsman.com/recession/Scots-job-loss-rate-fastest.6082491.jp
Again, I ask, how will Scotland finance its independence? Without first having an independent banking sector (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/7796329.stm), and without significant industrial strength, or a powerful public sector to drive it all? http://thescotsman.scotsman.com/scotland/Looming-new-39public-sector-recession39.6102362.jp
Post new comment