Showing posts with label YesSNP. SNP lies. Show all posts

Monday, 13 September 2021

Wings over Scotlands fake propaganda attempting to misinform on Scottish Law

If you didn't previously understand Wings over Scotland was anything other than a fake propaganda blog feeding misinformation to its readers then this should help you finally to see the light. https://archive.is/Tatlc

Wings can be seen here desperately trying to falsely sell the idea that Craig Murray was unjustly Jailed on some sort of invented crime of "Jigsaw Identification" which however is a charge wholly invented by Wings himself as the actual crime Craig Murray was Jailed for was in fact "Contempt of Court." alone. The fact this assertion made by Wings is untrue we should assume until actually proven otherwise that lots of his other assertions on the Prison Services treatment of Craig Murray in the same blog are also potentially untrue as well because anyone would be a complete utter fool believing anything written on a propaganda blog without finding other external factual sources to back them up.

A full summary of the whole Court Case proceedings against Craig Murray can be seen on the Scottish Courts Document link provided and can be clearly seen to be for "Contempt of Court" not for Wings own invented crime of "Jigsaw Identification". While reading the whole text is an eye opening experience on the whole case a shorter summary if chosen could be read within pages 36-42 of it.

https://www.scotcourts.gov.uk/docs/default-source/cos-general-docs/pdf-docs-for-opinions/2021hcj002.pdf?fbclid=IwAR2BECuq6OluW_Fd_2zDDexAu6Xh_6MTwtdhKiiKo7altQJmMRsdiuZpQb4

The Guardian Newspaper also laid out the Contempt of Court charges in an article. "Lady Dorrian, Scotland’s second most senior judge, said Murray’s offences were so serious and deliberate he deserved imprisonment, despite a plea from his lawyer that the 62-year-old was too infirm to go to jail, and had a young family. She said his repeated breaches, which included refusing to take down the blogposts despite legal warnings from the Crown Office, were a “contempt of considerable gravity”. His actions “strike at the heart of the fair administration of justice”, she added."Sitting with Lords Turnbull and Menzies, Dorrian, the lord justice clerk, said Murray’s actions had not only risked identifying four complainers but could also frighten rape complainers, the Scottish legal term for complainants, from stepping forward in future, particularly in high-profile cases involving powerful defendants.

Several of Murray’s followers said they had identified complainers as a result of his blogposts, yet he continued to keep them online.

Murray “understood the risk inherent in the action he was taking, deliberately decided to run that risk knowing that jigsaw identification of the complainers might result, and did so repeatedly. It appears from the posts and articles that he was in fact relishing the task he set himself.”

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2021/may/11/former-ambassador-craig-murray-jailed-for-alex-salmond-case-blogposts

So while Wings continues to try to flog the already dead Horse that Craig Murray is a completely innocent man unjustly jailed we can see from the Legal court Summary and other published articles that Craig Murray in truth set out to aid the identification of accusers in a court trial despite a court order being already in place to protect those accusers identities.

Craig Murray was aware a protection order was in place yet at no point did he appear to care of the implications of exposing accusers names or for their safety.

Craig Murray chose his course of action knowing the risks and doesn't appear to have given a thought either for the implications of his deliberate actions for his own later protestations of poor Health or for the wellbeing of his own Wife and young Children while jailed, but only after his conviction did these considerations come into any sort of play which would suggest Craig Murray might not give much of a damn about anyone but himself in truth in many peoples eyes and later on was merely trying act the part the wounded party instead.

If Wings invented propaganda trying to portray Craig Murray as an innocent man is beyond the pale then how did so many of his faithful but equally clueless fan club still fall for his propaganda Wee Blue Book on Scottish Independence which rather than being "full of useful facts " which were actually based on already out of date Scottish Government 2011-2012 GERS financial figures when later Scottish Government 2012-2013 GERS data (which also included a £1.2Bn downgrade to the earlier numbers) were already available to him to use at the time of publication instead ? Its estimated that approx £300K was raised from crowdfunding to print and distribute the Wee Blue Book which when based on already out of date financial numbers in the first place was a complete waste of so many peoples hard earned cash but as an act of probable fake propaganda on the wider Nationalist movement itself was something of a masterstroke (depending on your point of view) and if it was only fit for the dustbin in 2013 then it isn't worth even a passing look for "facts" at todays date when another 8 years of newer Scot Gov figures now exist. If anyone is in doubt of the value of the Wee Blue Book all you have to do is to look and see what year of GERS it uses and the much later date the WBB was published.

More information on and errors from the Wee Blue Book debunked here https://chokkablog.blogspot.com/2015/10/wings-and-his-wee-blue-book-of-errors.html

and here https://chokkablog.blogspot.com/2015/10/wings-wee-blue-book-of-errors-part-ii.html

Scottish Government link showing the £1.2 Billion downward amended 2011-2012 GERS numbers published along with the 2012-2013 GERS numbers in March 2014. https://www.gov.scot/publications/government-expenditure-revenue-scotland-2012-13/pages/11/

Date of Publication of Wee Blue Book shown here as 11 August 2014 https://wingsoverscotland.com/weebluebook/

Friday, 20 November 2015

Is an SNP led "Indy 2" referendum finally dead for at least a generation ?

Could this new information hammer the SNP's chances

for good ?

Very recently Alex Bell (ex SNP policy advisor to Alex Salmond) published a report on "Rattle" that "The SNP’s model of independence is broken beyond repair. The party should either build a new one or stop offering it as an alternative to Tory cuts" (Read the whole important article here )

However some of the important text that makes an Indy2 difficult is below .......

=======================================================================

"2014 was an economic sweetspot for two reasons. It was a good year for oil, and it came after thirty good years. Thus the Scottish economy looked healthy and was able to boast that it had chipped in more to the UK treasury than it had got back over recent times.

That is not the same as being able to say the Scottish economy could afford British levels of spending, which was a significant plank of the Yes promise. That debatable point could be obscured by lots of noise, and the SNP is accomplished at shouting.
But Nicola Sturgeon knows the SNP is good at misdirection. The party’s success has been built on hard work and spin. Behind the scenes she isn’t gullible. It may work in public to rubbish claims by the Institute of Fiscal Studies that there is a gap between what Scots pay into government and what they get out in services, but only fools believe their own propaganda. The fact is a gap exists – Scotland does not earn enough to pay for its current level of spending."
========================================================================

The current spending gap between what Scotland spends and what it actually earns in Tax Revenues is approximately £9 Billion pounds, this means that to be "Independent" or to take on "FFR" (Full Fiscal Responsibility) it would have to be able to fund that gap (at least), either by raising Taxes , cutting Spending (including deep Welfare cuts) or combinations of both plus potentially taking on levels of debt (which needs to be serviced ...which has added additional costs) in the money markets. (for more on debt issues and costs read the "Rattle " article direct )

This "Onshore" Spending gap has in the past been offset by good "Offshore" North Sea Oil Revenues on profits which in good years balances the shortfall ,sometimes even excelling it but in bad years of poor revenues the shorfall in Scottish Spending needs is met by the RUK taxpayer as part of the "pooling and sharing" of resources arrangements with the RUK government.

It goes without saying then that with the halving of Oil prices and the hugely rising costs of operating in the North Sea the final revenues on taxable profts are now very small in fact the last reported Oil tax revenues wasn't a profit at all it was actually a cost to the UK taxpayer of around £300 million.

This means that currently the natural Scottish "onshore" spending gap is now fully exposed at around £9 billion pounds required to fill that gap. Therefore if the SNP wanted to hold another Indy2 referendum it would have to convince Scots to accept a lower standard of living than in RUK after Independence due to having to cut spending or have higher rates on personal Income tax in Scotland (or both) this could also cause a movement of Jobs and workers which wouldn't be good for the Scottish economy either. I doubt if the Scots electorate would ever successfully vote to have a lower standard of living as their RUK counterparts..after all do Turkeys vote for Christmas ?

It has to be assumed then that the SNP would choose to wait until better economic conditions arrived and only then it could attempt to try convince Scots once again of a rosy and successful future, however this might be hard to achieve considering the electorate have seen how they were deceived last time.

So the ten million dollar question is ..how short or long a period could it be until Oil prices rose to allow the SNP to have a second attempt at Independence ?

It's not just as simple as waiting to get back to where the Oil price was last year because the cost of operating in the North Sea have also risen hugely with steel and engineering infrastructure being so old it is now needing replaced at modern day costs, this means profits and therefore taxes on profits are going to be so much smaller than they used to be in the last ten years. It's been said in fact that for Oil revenues to get back to the levels of 10 years ago Oil prices per barrel would have to get back nearer to $200 per barrel compared with the price last year of $113 per barrel.

Recent data that has been made available from BP though now suggests that Global Oil reserves are actually going to double by 2050 and will far outstrip demand , therefore it could be expected that Oil prices per barrel could now remain low or even go lower than now for a very very long time to come, this in turn (if its fact) is going to make it very difficult for the SNP to make another case for Independence for potentially a very long time as well... on the back of Oil revenues at least.

The SNP could of course try also to convince the electorate to vote on accepting a lower standard of living than in the rest of the UK...but could Turkey's really be convinced to vote for Christmas..I personally don't think it would ever be successful and a second failed Referndum would sink the SNP as a political party for a very long time.

The BP article is below :.

========================================================================

"The world is no longer at risk of running out of oil or gas, with existing technology capable of unlocking so much that global reserves would almost double by 2050 despite booming consumption, BP has said.

When taking into account all accessible forms of energy, including nuclear, wind and solar, there are enough resources to meet 20 times what the world will need over that period, David Eyton, BP Group head of technology said.

"Energy resources are plentiful. Concerns over running out of oil and gas have disappeared," Mr Eyton said at the launch of BP's inaugural Oil and gas companies have invested heavily in squeezing the maximum from existing reservoirs by using chemicals, super computers and robotics. The halving of Oil prices since last June has further dampened their appetite to explore for new resources, with more than $200bn-worth of projects scrapped in recent months.

By applying these technologies, the global proved fossil fuel resources could increase from 2.9 trillion barrels of oil equivalent (boe) to 4.8 trillion boe by 2050, nearly double the projected 2.5 trillion boe required to meet global demand until 2050, BP said.
With new exploration and technology, the resources could leap to a staggering 7.5 trillion boe, Mr Eyton said.
"We are probably nearing the point where potential from additional recovery from discovered reservoir exceeds the potential for exploration."
The world is, however, expected to reduce its reliance on fossil fuels in favour of cleaner sources of energy as governments introduce policies limiting carbon emissions in order to combat global warming.
"A price on carbon would advantage certain resources," Mr Eyton said.
Governments are expected to agree on a framework to limit global warming by limiting carbon emissions at the United Nation's climate summit in Paris starting this month. European oil companies have urged policy makers to introduce a global price on carbon that will favour the use of less dirty natural gas at the expense of coal.
"Ultimately, national and international policies will determine how much of and which resources will be produced."
"We envisage increasing competition between energy resources," he said. "This will likely result in increased competition in the energy market and disruption for the incumbent."
In North America, a price of $40 per tonne of carbon would make gas turbine power plants more cost-effective than coal, BP said.
However, an $80 per tonne price on carbon would make onshore wind technology competitive with gas-fired power and would also make carbon capture and sequestration with gas-fired power economic.
And while oil is expected to be the main source fuelling the transport sector by at least 2035, electric vehicles could approach cost-parity with the internal combustion engine, due to advances in battery technology, BP said.
BP, the largest operator of solar and wind power among its peers, will see its investment portfolio evolve over time in line with government policies, Mr Eyton said.
However, an $80 per tonne price on carbon would make onshore wind technology competitive with gas-fired power and would also make carbon capture and sequestration with gas-fired power economic. "
The original online report can be found via this link by clicking here
========================================================================
The oil price is unlikely to recover next year, according to the boss of the French energy giant, Total.Total's Patrick Pouyanne "doesn't anticipate a recovery in 2016". In fact, he thinks supply will grow faster than demand next year.
He is not alone. Last Friday, Goldman Sachs put out a note suggesting prices could fall a lot further.
"While [we are] forecasting oil prices over the next few months to be near $40 a barrel, or roughly where they are trading today, there could be another 50% to fall," the investment bank said.
Read the whole Total Oil article by clicking here
========================================================================

For explanations on the Scottish economy , the "onshore" and "offshore" revenues and also on how "pooling and sharing" works to the Scottish advantage see Kevin Hagues presentations by clicking here

Kevins main Blog and menu can be found here
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Update 12 Jan 2016 :Oil down to $31.26 per barrel.

Latest on the Oil price and how its affecting different countries ability to budget, this doesn't specifically mention Scotland but Sir Ian Wood said the North Sea Oil industry just doesn't work at $45-$50 previously , how bad this will actually be probably won't be apparent until after the publication of the next GERS report before MAY, hopefully they won't get away with trying to delay them ,,,but i wouldn't be suprised if they try this because te numbers will lose them votes

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-35289766

"SNP Energy Spokesman admits "No more huge Oil incomes for Scotland ever" Click on here.

Why Electric Cars will cause the NEXT Oil Crisis fall
http://www.bloomberg.com/features/2016-ev-oil-crisis/

#activesnp #BothVotesSNP #sp16 #Holyrood #Indycamp #Indyref2 #SNPout #SNP
#SNPcult #Scotland
# Rangers #Celtic #SNPLies
#Photooftheday #Dundee #Yescity #Glasgow#Dundee #Aurora #Cats #Dogs #Mull #Skye
#Yessnp #Yes #celebsforindy #Tech #SNPcult #Cults #ScottishResistance #DavidIcke

#Hamilton #Larkhall #Stonehouse #Nairn #Culloden #Inverness #Fracking

#BBCScotland #Cybernats #Goebbels #GERS #Gers #Gers

Tuesday, 20 October 2015

SNP Energy Spokesman admits No huge Income from Oil for Scotland ...Ever.

The chickens are finally coming home to roost for Alex Salmond and the SNP's grossly over optimistic "False Prospectus" white paper called "Scotland's Future" . A nation might have expected it's senior Politicians to have produced an honest document for a nation to base its decision about its future direction on with perhaps a little bit of "gloss" attached but what it was actually produced was no more than a fantasy using over optimistic Oil "spot" prices, over optimistic Oil revenue growth figures and over optimistic industrial growth predictions while there really was no good economic evidence for doing so.

They were produced for one reckless reason and one reckless reason only ...to try and impose the SNP's  singular idealogical reason for existing... Independence. It can now clearly be seen too, if what was for all purposes merely a reckelss gamble, meant risking ruining Scotlands economy for decades and the entire whole economic wellbeing of it's people for their life terms then that for the SNP seniors clearly can be now seen to have be of little primary concern. First and foremost the SNP aim was to win Independence and therefore economic competence and responsibility was the first sacrifice thrown to the wind. Any economic fallout from failure of course wasn't going to hurt highly paid MP's, MSP's and other highly paid members of the SNP political new Scottish establishment near as much as ordinary hard working people, hard working people who with a failed SNP economic plan would have to work harder for longer and pay higher levels of income tax to help bail out the Scottish economy while supporting the SNP failed plans engineers and so called "visionaries" wages and comfortable pension plans.

If the vote had been a YES and Scotland's economy and its people's livelihoods were headed like Lemmings over the cliff of financial ruin what might have Alex Salmond then said ? Well for this we may be able to look to past History because Alex Salmond did actually play more than a bit part in the ruin of the massive and powerful Royal Bank of Scotland by actively encouraging Fred Goodwins reckless behaviour during the takeover of ABN bank just prior to the financial crisis that happened in 2008 (an event strangely that SNP supporters like to blame on Labour) his words were " With Hindsight he would have done things differently" does the man have no shame ? See more here   Would he perhaps have used the same phrase and simply walked away into the shadows with a shrug of his shoulders when Scotlands economy had went into meltdown after the massive fall in Oil revenues had left Scotland with a huge spending deficit to fill... its currently about £8-9 billion which if we had voted for Independence would have meant an additional 16% income tax on top of what we already pay or a 14% cut in Welfare support and other spending (including hopefully Gaelic roadsigns but with SNP priorities one never knows) or combinations of both including taking on crushing debts in the money markets for our Children and Grandchildren to have to pay for in future Generations (Think of Greece's experiences recently) This would have been the reality of a YES vote.

Thankfully because the nation voted NO..we really did "dodge a bullet" and our now precarious financial state will effectively be baled out by the larger UK government using the "pooling and sharing " arrangement that we benefit by from being part of the overall Union of the United Kingdom, this essentially means that the Westminster Government will continue to fund our over extended Scottish budget spending deficit thus saving us from hugely painful income tax rises and spending cuts that would have made anything the Tories had inflicted up till now feel like Christmas every day.
If you want to learn about the Scottish economy and how "pooling and sharing" works... watch Kevin Hagues excellent video's here http://chokkablog.blogspot.co.uk/2015/07/chokkablog-videos.html

Newspaper Article extract on this subject is below

"The SNP’s energy spokesman Callum McCaig has admitted that the Scottish Government will never see the “huge income” from oil revenues that were predicted as the cornerstone of an independent Scotland’s economy.

Aberdeen South MP, Callum McCaig, insisted the industry was still “fundamental” to the country’s fortunes, but that it was now in a “different stage”.

His comments – which will cast major doubts on the economic case for independence – came as the Chief Executive of Oil and Gas UK admitted estimates that 65,000 jobs would be lost in the sector now seemed “conservative”.

Last night, Conservative MSP Alex Johnstone said Scottish people would be “breathing a sigh of relief” that they did not vote Yes “based on the false promise of a second oil boom”."

Mr McCaig told a fringe meeting at the SNP’s conference in Aberdeen yesterday: “We are probably at a different stage in terms of taxation.

Despite admitting that tax revenues would never be what they were predicted to be, Mr McCaig said he was confident the industry would bounce back from its current downturn.

He said: “We are in a different stage in the industry now.

“The exact make-up of that is to be resolved over the coming months as the exact oil price is worked through.

In June, the Scottish Government dramatically downgraded its estimates of oil revenues, with the lowest estimate being slashed by 80% compared to pre-referendum predictions.

North East MSP Mr Johnstone said: “Everyone remembers Alex Salmond saying there was ‘little doubt’ Scotland was on the cusp of another oil boom, but the truth is, it was one of the SNP’s biggest cons during the referendum campaign.

“For months they’ve avoided publishing their own projections, because they knew they were vastly wrong and now we have one of their own MPs admit that fact.

“A huge amount has happened in the oil industry over the last year, not least the massive drop in oil price. Scotland will be breathing a sigh of relief that we didn’t vote Yes based on the false promise of a second oil boom.”

Deirdre Michie chief executive of Oil and Gas UK said: “In our report, we estimate a reduction of jobs in the sector of around 15%. Since the publication of the report we have seen more job losses and we now know that figure is likely to be a conservative one.

“It is always important to remember that these people (losing their jobs) are real people with mortgages and families to support.”

See the full article by clicking here

=====================================================================

Alex Salmond was also caught out lying another time during the Independence Referendum notably on the issue of having obtained "legal advice " on Scotland being able to re-join the EU...see text from article below:-

"On almost every critical point raised during the debate about Scotland’s future, Salmond was deliberately misleading. I’m not just thinking of his claim that he’d received legal advice reassuring him that an independent Scotland wouldn’t need to reapply for membership of the European Union. When the Information Commissioner ordered the Scottish government to respond to an FOI request to disclose the advice it had received, Salmond’s ministers spent £19,452.92 of public money appealing the decision, only to admit later that the ‘advice’ was a figment of Salmond’s imagination. So the First Minister misled the Scottish people on this point and spent taxpayers’ money to try to conceal the fact.Then there were the SNP’s fictitious claims about the economic impact of independence — and I’m indebted here to the blogger Kevin Hague, who has devoted years to unpicking the SNP’s rhetoric. For instance, there was the assertion that Scotland sends more money to Westminster than it gets back, thanks to North Sea oil.
If you factor in its share of oil revenue, Scotland has been a net contributor to Britain’s coffers in three of the last 15 years. For the other 12, oil hasn’t been sufficient to offset the fact that the Scottish government spends £1,450 more and raises £250 less per person than the rest of the UK. This makes Salmond’s claim, repeated ad infinitum, that ‘oil is just a bonus’ and Scotland could get along perfectly well without it, even more absurd. If you add the £1,450 and £250 together, you get a per capita gap of £1,700, which means that, without North Sea oil, its deficit would be £9.1 billion higher than it is as part of the UK. It turns out that oil revenue is critical to offsetting the deficit gap, which is presumably why Salmond wildly over-estimated it in the SNP’s white paper on Scotland’s future. In it, he claimed that revenue from North Sea oil in 2016/17 — the first year of Scotland’s independence — would be between £6.8 billion and £7.9 billion. In fact, it’s likely to be around £600 million.
If you deduct the £600 million from the £9.1 billion, that means Scotland would be facing an annual deficit gap of £8.5 billion in its first year of independence and there’s no reason to think that would change over the next ten to 15 years. In order for Scotland to be better off out of the UK, oil revenue would have to increase by several thousand per cent, or the Scottish economy would have to grow by a faster amount than the rest of the UK — around 15 per cent faster. For Scotland to wash its own face would mean massive public spending cuts. Far from imposing austerity on Scotland, the British government is saving Nicola Sturgeon from having to find Greek levels of savings. Who would have thunk it?
The SNP is, by some margin, the most dishonest party in Britain."
For whole article click here
======================================================================

During the recent SNP conference Andrew Neil of the Daily Politics TV programme interviewed Stewart Hosie and asked him what the SNP would have done to fill the now existent £8-9 billion deficit gap if they had won a returned YES vote at the Independence Referendum....watch here how Stewart Hosie tries first to bodyswerve from providing any answer on this issue and when cornered produces a lie by trying to blame Westminster (yet again) for having higher Oil price prdeictions than the SNP did, this is a lie that can easily be seen by checking the SNP manifesto yourself. Watch him squirm and lie here

The well respected economist David Smith from the Economist also produced an article on "Scotland dodged a bullet" the whole article can be read by clicking here

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------