Sunday 27 September 2015


Grateful thanks to Panda Paws for pointing out this video. I can do no better than offer the information contained on the Youtube original.

ALTERED STATE: Reflections on Scotland's First Independence Referendum. Part 1 How to Steal a Country in 10 Days reflects on the conduct of the BBC and HM Treasury during Scotland's Independence Referendum during the final days of the campaign; organisations both bound to strict codes of impartiality. 

Was the last minute reintroduction of the 'Devo Max' offer a clear breach of the Edinburgh Agreement and a cynical attempt to split the pro-independence vote? Did HM Treasury deliberately collude with the BBC during the illegal RBS leak of market sensitive information to damage the economic case of the Yes campaign? Watch and make up your own mind. 

This episode includes interviews with Derek Bateman, Professor John Robertson, Paul Kavanagh (Wee Ginger Dug) and Christopher Silver.

Derek Bateman

Wee Ginger Dug's New Book is now available for order:
Send your order request to and Paul will email you with details on how to make payment. You can pay by Paypal, bank transfer, cheque or cash. Signed copies of both volumes are available for a special price of £20 plus £4 P&P within the UK.

Professor John Robertson's latest research Scotland’s Propaganda War: The Media and the 2014 Independence Referendum is now free to view:

Christopher Silver's new book 'The Case for a Scottish Media' is due for release.


  1. I followed the link earlier and was very impressed by the film.

    I have just seen the exit polls from Catalonia, and am glad they have more cojones than we did. I note from articles in other once trusted publications, that the Catalans have been subject to the same crap we were. No pensions, economic disasters and being kicked out of the Euro and the EU, etc.

    Hopefully the Catalans will achieve their freedom, and all the nonsense can be fully reported on the MOT for the bullshit it was ( not hold my breath there ). When they are still using the Euro, they still get their pensions, banks decide to stay there and make money, and the world doesn't end.

    Then our fearties can see how daft they were, and get it bloody right next time.

    Saor Alba

    1. Bravo Catalunya.

      I agree with all you say. I'm pleased for them. proud of them, and I hope they get what they want despite the Spanish government, the EU, etc etc. Spain seriously can't afford to let them go. They are easily the richest part of the Iberian Peninsula.

      Bona sort Catalunya!

      The programme was superb. I didn't realise that UKOK had actually broken the law by changing the game after people had voted, and within the purdah period.

      It seems they can do whatever they want.

      I think there are more instalments to come and I seem to remember reading that James Kelly is in them.

      If anyone sees them, please let me know.

    2. Congratulations to all of Catalonia :) It is important to note however that unlike Scotland Catalonia has control over it's own media and broadcasters. This meant that unlike here the Spanish claims over currency, EU membership, pensions etc could be exposed as clear lies thereby helping boost the yes vote, if we had control over the media and broadcasting the way Catalonia does YES would have won easily. The level of pro-Union propaganda and bias in the press prior to Scotland's referendum would have put Goebbels to shame.

    3. I agree. In this devo super max we were supposed to be getting, where we had more power over things than any other devolved parliament in the world (except most of them), broadcasting is very firmly kept in the hands of the Tory toffs in London.

      I suspect they worry about what a Scottish broadcast media would make of all the weird practices of government ministers, with whomsoever... or whatsoever!!

      A pig in a poke?

  2. I think Gordon Brown is actually not a very nice person. He gained the leadership of the Labour Party without a vote to ratify himself.

    He avoided his chance to win, because of his natural born cowardice of the electortate, and lost later when that idiocy became apparent.

    He sold his granny over the independence debate and has paid out cheapskate excuses for his consequently failed ability to deliver anything like devo max.

    The man has failed in every role he has occupied in public life.

    He is a disgrace to Fife, sons of the manse, and Labour Party politicians in particular.

    My, I am glad I got that off my chest.

    1. I agree, Douglas. I'm reading about him now. All the things that got him elected were ditched when he got power, and he had power in a big way under Blair, more than any Chancellor had had before (and that's saying something). He was responsible for a great deal that went wrong under New labour in domestic policy, while his parter in crime was responsible for the foreign policy and war mongering.

      As you say, he talked big but failed to deliver, and has admitted that he failed to deliver, but despite his elder statesman position, and the fact he saved the world, it seems that Cameron has beaten him.

      Cameron, who is there becasue he's related to the queen!

      Says it all.

    2. Dougy

      Gordon not all bad,,after all he saved the Union obviously Cameron
      the English Prime minister betrayed him 24hrs later but you expect
      that anyway,


      Still our Jeremy will put it all to rights and in doing so invalidate
      all the snp excuses for Independence .
      Cameron related to the queen.....where do you get that piggery pokery
      from ??? porky pie that one

    3. He's a 5th cousin, or something. So is Obso, although I think he’s a 4th cousin. They seem to be related through William 4th, the one before Victoria, who had a pile of bastard children because his wife Adelaide was unable to have kids. This probably means they are descended from bastards… which explains much.

      What I can’t get over is Brown being gullible enough to be taken in by Etonboy, or Piggyboy as we must now learn to call him. I mean, he’s hardly MENSA material is he, and Brown, for all his faults, is reasonably intelligent.

      Jeremy may well promise to make things right, but he really will have to try to learn something about Scotland first. I don't blame him being rusty on Scots law. He's a London MP, and until a few weeks ago that's all he was, and all he was ever going to be. I might add he's a bloody good one, by all accounts.

      However John Major, not Nicola Sturgeon privatized the trains. Labour had 13 years in which to renationalise them (the easiest and cheapest renationalisation, easily done). They didn't.

      Edinburgh has the right to deal with the franchising of Scotland only railways, but within the framework of UK law, which doesn't allow for nationalisation, unless in emergency, by Westminster (East Coast, when the idiot National Express begged to be released from their loss making contract; a contract which should NEVER have been agreed in the first place because it was so ridiculously cheap that even the doorman on the Ministry of Transport would have known it was a joke.)
      The Scottish government also did exactly what Labour did with Calmac.

      According to Craig Murray, who has contacts, the briefing came not from Kezia Dugdale, but from Neil Findlay.

      I thought better of Neil, who must know the truth of that matter. I also wonder why when needing information on Scotland, Jeremy doesn’t go to Dugdale. Something about carping on the sidelines, maybe?

      Today Mr McDonald told a pile of lies about what the SNP had voted for in London. It was a total invention, but I expect a lot of people believed it.

      I'm disappointed on two fronts. Firstly, I expected better of the left wingers, and secondly why are they fighting the SNP who will vote with them on most stuff, and letting the Tories off.

  3. Our fearties, aye, we certainly have some of those. We also have plenty of mushrooms, kept in the dark and fed manure. They appear to prefer that status.

    The Catalans I believe have there own media and tv channel, it will be interesting to learn how much influence that had on the result.

    I so wish them good luck.

    1. Hello Golfnut:

      Well, they've won a majority in parliament. That's the first hurdle.

      I wish them luck too.

      I'd love them to call out the Spanish government on their threats, just to prove how empty they are.

  4. I support Scots Indy but don't see how 48% of the popular vote for indy-supporting Catalan parties amounts to a mandate for Indy.
    They themselves said the election itself was a de facto plebiscite.

    1. True Al.

      It's a close thing, but they wouldn't have won a referendum on that score, you're right.

  5. tris

    Must admit after all the tutelage from the republic and its denizens
    i always put the anti-Corbyn media attacks through my snp/nat
    right wing media analyzer .
    The results are very illuminating and give an accurate deconstruction
    of their ontological underpinnings .......

    1. It's always good to see you illuminated Niko!

  6. Apologies if im wrong but as i understand it UKOK didnt really break the Edinburgh agreement, the vow and its aftermath were designed to look like devo max without promising it. It was the BBC in particular that kept referring to it as devo max and UKOK were just happy to let them run with it without uttering devo max themselves.
    Gordon Brown stated "as near federalism as is possible within the uk" key point being Westminster gets to decide what is "as possible in the uk".

    1. Most of what they said was couched in really vague terms Anon.

      But they did change the goalposts in the purdah period, when public polling said that YES had 51% adn private polling said 54%. They did break, possibly not the law, but rules and regulations, when they involved the head of state (now admitted), when the civil service was employed to scare people off, and admitted doing so...(Treasury).

      TheBBC were a disgrace, but we expected that since the disgulsting performance of Wark in 2007 when she was so angry that her friends Jock McConnell was not any longer FM, that she was appallingly rude to the FM, so rude she was forced, even by the BBC, who hate him, to apologise.

      The press, owned mainly by English, Russian, Australian/American, French proprietors were openlyu biased as they had every right to be.

      Gordon Brown either lied, or was duped by Cameron into backing the new proposals, which had been ruled out at Edinburgh. It was status quo or independence then.

      Dr Brown, duped by a posh boy with the best qualifications money can buy.

      Tut tut.

      But the silliest people were those who fell for it.

      Brown doesn't have to live under the Tories. We do.

  7. So pleased you made a post of this - it deserves to be seen by as many as possible. I heard about it on twitter and fortunately it's spread throughout twitter. Now that Wings has tweeted about it, that should bring in more well deserved views.

    Speaking of Scotland, I'd like to mention "Grand tours of Scottish Islands" available on bbc iplayer, My word we live in a beautiful country. Though last week's told the story briefly of Guinard - poisoned with anthrax. And did you know that Compton Mackenzie bought an island and was a founder member of the SNP - he was born in England so obviously hated himself!!

    1. I thought it was worth being seen as widely as possible, and Munguin said that the way to ensure this was to put it up as a post on his blog. (Yes, I know, but you try to tell him that!)

      Anyway, if Stuart has put it up then ... job done. Half the world will see it.

      I'm glad you reminded me about the islands. I'd like to have a look at that.

      That's tonight's entertainment sorted.

  8. Replies
    1. I worry about any government having influence in a state broadcaster. And the BBC has a track record of bias against Scotland in general.

      But the alternative that was waiting in the wings had we got a yes result was scarier - Murdoch. The impression was that an independent Scotland would set up a new national broadcaster, and no prizes for guessing who would have been advising Alex.

      My personal view is that the BBC should be completely free of government influence, bar essential legislation. Let the company be run by programme makers, not political arselickers.

    2. Except its not "Government" which is the problem. The BBC is at arms length from "Government". It is however, a part of that ethereal beast "the Establishment". We seek to remove the influence of that establishment from our country, but whilst ordinary people buy into whatever crud the Ministry Of Truth spouts, they have a major tool in their arsenal.

      The presenters who filter our news and interview our spokesmen are overwhelmingly allied to Unionism, and Labour in our neck of the woods.

      Be under no illusion that Labour is any less part of the establishment that the Blue Tories. Oh, I saw a hereditary Kinnock on a You Tube interview the other week. But I have not seen Lord Longford's Niece, nor Viscount Stansgate's son since I binned the box last September.

      I think the best thing would be to privatise the damned thing. At least when I read a Daily Fail article I know the xenophobic stable it comes from. And If I watch RT I know its not going to criticise Putin. But the big lie at the MOT is how impartial it is. We are brought up to believe in it uncritically. I was too. Until the scales were lifted last year. It is primarily the propaganda arm of a supergovernmental organisation.

      Everything you see, everything you read ( this too ), has to be viewed critically. If you care what is going on you are not going to have the truth handed to you by British establishment advertorials dressed up as news. You have to do your own homework. Nothing is ever what it seems. If you mistrust Mr Murdoch or Mr Desmond, how can it be you trust an organisation just because you have been "taught" to?

      If the BBC was under Holyrood control would that make you less likely to believe it? Its under establishment control just now, is that any more trustworthy?

      Saor Alba

    3. I just can't see the reason for a state broadcaster.

      I certainly can;t see the reason for one that has as many channels and spin offs as this one, but which, at the end of the day, owes its existence to the Westminster government, and depends upon the goodwill of the English Culture Secretary (and not the Scottish, Welsh or NOI culture secretaries) for its income.

      If my £500,000 a year salary + expenses + car depended on being biased towards the Eton-Oxford lads in the Cabinet, I might be tempted to throw impartiality out the window.

      Scrap it. It churns out largely commercially based programmes. It should be able to manage on advertising.

    4. I'm in favour of a state funded broadcaster, but one that is fully independence of political interference, except to legislate that the broadcaster provides a wide range of programming for all (bar the, *ahem* educational stuff!). Management structure should be at a sensible level, with the budget primarily aimed at delivering quality programming.

      And when it comes to this, I do not trust Holyrood any more than I trust Westminster.


    5. As long as the state decides the level of payment due to a state broadcaster, surely that state will "control" the broadcaster.

      No one in the BBC wants to get on the wrong side of the English culture secretary.

      I agree, that if it were in Edinburgh, no one would want to get on the wrong side of the Scottish culture secretary. It's nothing to do with the country; it's to do with the power that setting the budget for greedy businessmen at the top of the broadcaster, gives the government.

      I don't have a massive problem with a state broadcaster, as long as it is very small. 1 tv channel and a maximum of two radio channels and a website. It should also be possible to opt out of receiving them.

      With hundreds of other channels to watch, it is ridiculous to HAVE to pay for the output of the BBC, which many people simply never glance at.

      Most of the rubbish they churn out is commercial pap and could easily be provided on a "popular" basis.

      I'd like to see a much wider responsibility to the public. They seem to be accountable to what the establishments thinks is the public, Sit this Lady that and Lord the other thing!

      Let's have plain Mrs and Mrs Joe McBloggs on the BBC board of governors.