Last Thursday voters in Scotland voted on the issue of whether to secede from the United Kingdom. And as you know, the difficulties in Catalonia in Spain are reaching a fever pitch of secessionism.  But there's another country where's there's growing rumblings about secession(and of course, it's RT that's reporting it):

Inspired by Scotland: Quarter of Americans want their states to secede from US

Now, you can count me in...or at least, as far as the sentiment is concerned.. those who know me well know that being a good midwesterner from an upper plains state, I'd not miss it at all if California, and the northeast from Boston to Richmond, went their own way. Not only wouldn't I miss them, I'd show them the door, contribute money to their travel fund, and encourage them to take Illinois - or at least Chicago - and the state of Washington along for the ride. There's even a bit of historical basis for my unabashed proud parochialism: it is the elites of the northeastern USA that have largely screwed up American education(not to mention a lot of other things). And California?  Need I really rehearse the galloping nitwittery of social engineering that that state has exported, after a few other elites targeted it for some social engineering of its own? In short, I'm a proud member of the "fly-over people", and as far as I'm concerned, those from the northeast or the west coast can keep right on flying over us. Don't stop here.

But all joking aside and on a serious note, the RT article strikes a sobering chord:

"Texas Nationalist Movement president Daniel Miller told RT that Texans are unhappy with how Washington politicos ignore the issues most important to their state.

“One of the big issues in here Texas right now… is obviously the border and immigration,” Miller said.“Over the last eight years, issues related to the border and immigration have consistently polled as the number one concern for Texans, yet the federal government continues to do absolutely nothing substantial about addressing the border crisis or the immigration issues.”(emphasis in the original)

Texans are not alone. Most people in the USA, I suspect, if pressed, would indicate some major dissatisfaction with the federal "government" somewhere, over some issue. It is the sentiment that the federal government is out of control, and thoroughly representative of private and corporate interests, and no longer the good of the country, that is the real problem. And this is suggested in the following article"

Scots Independents Lose Vote but Win the Fight

I want to draw you attention to one set of statements in this article:

"The Scottish independents may have lost the vote in this week’s historic referendum on secession, but they have won a decisive fight – with the winning argument that the United Kingdom is a broken-down entity in drastic need of democratic overhaul.

"And it is not just within Britain that the essence of this argument is resonating. The Scots’ push for independence, or at the very least for acquiring more democratic powers, is serving to fuel separatist sentiments across Europe, in Spain’s Catalonia region, Belgium, Italy and elsewhere.

"Indeed, it could be said, the issues raised by the Scots of democratic accountability, more equitable economic policies, and more independence in international relations as opposed to subservience for example to NATO group think, all such issues resonate not just with “separatists” but to many ordinary citizens right across the EU.

"The Spanish government in Madrid even threatened to veto an application to the European Union from an independent Scotland. That’s a measure of how concerned Madrid was taking the Scottish “contagion” spreading to its own borders."(Emphases added)

In other words, the real rub is that the perception is growing across Europe and America that their governments are simply no longer genuinely representative, that they are, to some extent, co-opted or even captive to something else. And underneath the buzzwords "democratic" and "democracy", the real perception is the loss of liberty and equal treatment before just laws. Indeed, in the USA, the problem is a Congress that by and large doesn't even read the mountain of paper usually attached to legislation any more. "We-need-to-pass-it-to-find-out-what's-in-it" Nancy Pelosi comes to mind (she's from California, folks).

But I hope you caught, in that first statement, the "hook": "...the United Kingdom is a broken-down entity in drastic need of democratic overhaul." In other words, secessionist sentiment, or even general cynicism, can easily be co-opted themselves, to become the "crises of opportunity" to "overhaul" the Spanish, the British - or the American - constitutions by the very same unaccountable elites that have designed and orchestrated the current mess.

And that's the real rub. If there is a dysfunctionality in the USA, it is because the constitutional instrument has been hedged about by a triple layer of security: by a history of dubious Supreme Court decisions, executive orders, and a Congress that often doesn't even read the legislation it passes. It is, functionally if not de jure, a dead letter, and that's the problem. What is needed - in least in America - is a population that is aware of its real history and meaning, and how the oligarchical subversion of that document began at a very early date. No vision of the future can be formed without an accurate remembrance of the past.

There's another thing the article mentions, and this is the growing opposition in Europe to NATO... i.e., an opposition to the subversion of the national interest to some far off organization with its own internationalist and imperialist agendas. Scots and Spaniards are not alone in this. Americans share it too, and the real underlying current uniting them all can be summed up in one word: liberty, and all that this implies.

If there's a lesson to be learned from the Scots' vote then, it's this: if London doesn't get its act together, there will only be more votes, and eventually, one of them will succeed.

See you on the flip side...


Posted in

Joseph P. Farrell

Joseph P. Farrell has a doctorate in patristics from the University of Oxford, and pursues research in physics, alternative history and science, and "strange stuff". His book The Giza DeathStar, for which the Giza Community is named, was published in the spring of 2002, and was his first venture into "alternative history and science".


  1. jedi on September 24, 2014 at 12:47 pm

    between the spanish and english at the georgia guidestones is a new block added

    room 237 if added up separately, and the amount of times the word time is mentioned in kubricks films.

    Looks like a sign that it is time….time for what.

    • Robert Barricklow on September 24, 2014 at 12:55 pm

      To be, or not to be.
      But why choose?
      Why not do both?
      1 + 1 = 2
      Which, actually equal 3 states of being.
      The trinity?

      • jedi on September 24, 2014 at 1:17 pm

        and then there is the 4th option,
        That scenario which is, well, no matter how fantastic is what were left with.

        Hey Robert check out this link…just for the pyramid at giza overlay with the glands of the brain hooked into our sensory fields. The perception control center of the mind and the voice chakra.

        a lot of rubbish in there, but hey, i guess anything is possible from those 3 “views” of the world….roy g biv

        • Robert Barricklow on September 24, 2014 at 3:28 pm

          Having viewed “Room 237” I became somewhat bedazzled by all the mis/dis direction/information.
          Yes 4.
          But the these 1234 perceptions are “taught”; whereas the truth is “set” within the individual/frequency; continually “changing”, a wavelength permeating quantum energies that collapse around in an observation thought process that is/has non-locality/spin.
          It is & is not; at once.
          It can be live-action specific; in symbolism, that not known but – at once, & at once, and at once, – moving towards zero in time/space/collapse.

          In other words, unexplainable.

          Oh, I came across a great Hitchcock quote in a hardboiled thriller I’m reading:

          “Someone once told me that every minute, a murder occurs. So I don’t want to waste your time. I know you want to go back to work”.

          • jedi on September 28, 2014 at 9:08 am

            Robert it is explainable.
            sin cos tan…one more completes you.
            the time space continuum…and guess what, the pyramid engineers knew it.

            Have a look at Jack throwing a red rubber ball at the wall over the fireplace scene.
            The murder book scenes were appropriately left on “the cutting room” floor.
            Kubricks Cube …
            and in 2001, the moon scene…have a look at the twin tower cleanup at night time..and look for the obelisk…did Kubrick predict the future? or was it …planned? and then have a look at globeki tepe and look for the buried obelisks.

          • Robert Barricklow on September 28, 2014 at 9:20 am

            The un is explainable in NO Un certain terms.
            It’s two meanings at/once/being three.

          • jedi on September 28, 2014 at 11:08 am

            The 3 burnt astronauts are in the picture as “bell” hops, and some other victims/ suspects as “well” .

            reverse the dates…April 7 1912, Easter Sunday.

            as for the ideas on convergence….it wouldnt be a “masters” piece without that.
            heres 2 to go, hmm…davinchi did it…now Kubrick…


            “The view” has always been nicer from a mountain top though.

          • jedi on September 28, 2014 at 11:22 am

            lol on the Hitchcock..waste your time…ti me. Murder…lol ..get back too work.
            all work and no play make Jack “adult” boy.
            good one…red rum red rum

  2. Robert Barricklow on September 24, 2014 at 11:00 am

    Now Ellen Brown weighs in on how

    “Scots can still gain economic sovereignty”.

  3. Robert Barricklow on September 23, 2014 at 8:26 am

    The Max Keiser Report 657/Scotland Vote???

  4. Robert Barricklow on September 22, 2014 at 10:24 am

    • sjy1969 on September 22, 2014 at 1:23 pm

      This one has already been debunked by the Yes campaign, no less. See my response to LSM at the very bottom of the thread

      • Robert Barricklow on September 22, 2014 at 2:10 pm

        I don’t see irrefutable proof either way.
        Used to like exit polls, but even those can be compromised. The best laid plans and all that…
        In my minds eye, the die was cast long ago against the publics interest in favor of the private, extremely well financed private ones.
        So am I bias?
        Yes, I am. The public has my interest at heart. As they are the underdogs, & always have been. At least in in memories accessible. But I do admire ANY debunking, even when the private side does it on-the-square. Truth is the aim, and anything that helps truth to gain on the lies ahead, is truly welcome.
        Thanks for the post sjy 1969.

        • jedi on September 23, 2014 at 9:48 am

          The underdogs might be the problem, or being misled…..just a thought. I always route for them too when conflicts become neccesesary though. 2 wolves and a sheep voting what’s for lunch.

      • Robert Barricklow on September 22, 2014 at 3:09 pm

        It is the essence of democracy that we NOT trust and NOT have faith in our leaders. Democracy is a system built on DISTRUST. When it works we get REAL debate, investigation, exposure & accountability.
        TRUST Only A Vigilant, Informed, Distrustful citizenry: WE THE PEOPLE!

  5. Paul D. on September 22, 2014 at 3:16 am

    DR.J, you really hit the ball out of the park with this one! May all of us be blessed with clear sight and pure hearts to see this thru to it’s rightful conclusion.

  6. henry on September 21, 2014 at 7:00 pm

    With regard to recent Scottish referendum on Independence, I recall two interesting comments i read on youtube

    -“The elites don’t divide a nation that is already a conquered territory, they only divide it when its yet to be conquered”

    This argument is certainly true to the NATO bombings of former Yugoslavia and subsequent dissolution of that country into number of smaller states. It is certainly true to ongoing conflict in Syria and Iraq..

    -“At first glance, i thought this is about financial prosperity and romantic nationalism, but after watching these videos (on the Scottish Yes campaign) i see this is about disenchanted low and middle classes vs the city of London.”

    Before the referendum, several banks indicated that they would relocate their headquarters out of Scotland if it became independent.
    Not to mention, the EU and some of its member states (Spain particularly) have expressed concern and put pressure on the Scots, then there is the worries coming from Washington D.C.
    To use SNP leader Alex Salmond’s own words, “alot scaremongering” (directed at the Scottish referendum). it seems the Scottish independence movement doesnt sit too well with the Anglo-American elites.

    • sjy1969 on September 22, 2014 at 8:59 am

      Correct re disenchantment with City of London but also Westminster.

      Wee Eck wasn’t above a bit of scaremongering of his own, it should be noted, particularly with regard to the NHS.

  7. moxie on September 21, 2014 at 12:17 pm

    And if nations fail to break free from the globalist plan?
    Will there be regionalism? where people will not be able to vote?
    This is from americanfreedomwatchradio:
    ” The Johannesburg Implementation plan lays out the orders explaining how to use NGO’s regional councils and unelected bureaucrats to promote their sustainability plans by training local officials. As one planner A. D. states: ” stop all these community meetings and put the plan in place, because fascism works.”
    Somebody from a 3rd world country told me recently, that there have been plans last year to centralize water supply in their rural community. And this year, without the knowledge of most in that area, the plan was implemented without conferring with the representatives about the consequences of that project. so last summer, their own “water well” dried up (a siphoning effect by the central pumps). And they haven’t even connected to the central supply. They had to buy commercial water. And in other places, water became undrinkable. Those who imposed the said project were to receive monetary “incentives”..

    “They sell their policies to communities as a way to prosper using sustainable programs that are overly expensive, have no scientific basis and ARE DESIGNED TO FAIL. These policies are at the root of the economic failure and massive debt. With the manmade sorry economy we have had for several years our communities are easy prey once commissioners smell the “free money”. Most municipalities have no idea of what they are getting into. Sadly, these organizations use that to their benefit.”

    • Robert Barricklow on September 21, 2014 at 4:05 pm

      Yes, they want to own it ALL! (privatize)
      Crisis by design(you see public; your way just doesn’t work)

      • moxie on September 21, 2014 at 4:42 pm

        Privatization is an outer shell. Their plan for an “overhaul” means something else.
        All the data collection, for assessment and classification.. for the implementation of psy programming. Remember IBM and its role in the marking of those in the camps..

  8. sjy1969 on September 21, 2014 at 12:14 pm

    One last thing re NATO. the Scottish Government certainly had no objections to being in NATO, only being a base for nuclear weapons. Indeed, we were committed to spending a higher percentage of GDP on defence than Germany.

  9. sjy1969 on September 21, 2014 at 11:03 am

    A few points Doctor Farrell:

    It’s worth pointing out for many overseas readers that the Independence campaign was not an anti English but an anti Westminster campaign as you are correct to point out.. This despite some of the more rabid commentary from the unionist press (stand up Daily Torygraph). In a recent poll, the two most important reasons given by yes voters were dissatisfaction with Westminster politics and that decisions about Scotland should be taken in Scotland. Interestingly only 20% of yes voters rated the statement “that on balance Scotland’s future looks brighter as an independent country” as most important.

    It may take months or years but this vote even for no (for now) will change the UK for good. A week ago when yes campaign looked like it could win, the leaders of the 3 Westminster parties were bounced into agreeing a back-of-a-fag-packet plan by former PM Gordon Brown to devolve more powers to the Scottish Parliament. This was an option that many (including, it is rumoured, Scottish First Minister Alex Salmond) wanted on the ballot paper all along and it is likely it turned many voters back to no. If Westminster don’t deliver, there will be the inevitable cries of betrayal and we’ll be back in the same situation within a decade.

    • sjy1969 on September 21, 2014 at 11:24 am

      Trouble is, if it is delivered the Westminster parties must address the “West Lothian Question” which asks how it can be fair that Scottish MPs can vote over e.g health legislation that affects England in Westminster but English MPs can’t vote over health legislation that affects Scotland and is decided upon in the Scottish Parliament. This has already descended into a party political argument.. The Tories don’t want Scottish MPs voting on English issues as it would make a Tory majority in England more likely and Labour are against it for the reason that it may make them far less likely to gain power in England, even if they can win a UK general election. Personally, if that forces Labour to go back to being a left of centre party that puts UK interests before mega corporations, that won’t be a bad thing. It’s a moot point anyway for if the powers are not devolved the Scottish Labour Party is as good as dead anyway.

      Aside from all that, the English regions particularly in the North have woken up to the fact that they can’t let the continued London domination go on unchallenged.

      So in my view it’s either Scottish independence in future or a more federal UK keeping only a centralised defence and foreign policy and such like.

      Interesting times as they say.

      • RAJM on September 22, 2014 at 10:51 am

        It was difficult to get any detail from the ‘Yes’ campaign on how an Independent Scotland would function as an economy. I understand that much would have to be developed and needed time to put together.
        Would Scotland have its own currency or join the EU?
        Would Scotland have its own army and navy?
        How much would the economy be relying on north sea gas and oil reserves?
        Finally, it was sickening to see the UK press and Whitehall panic and rally amid, perhaps, the first truly democratic threat in decades. I believe, regardless of the outcome, that the cat has indeed been put among the pigeons.

        • sjy1969 on September 22, 2014 at 1:52 pm

          The economics of Independence were rather uncertain but that didn’t deter many people. A lot of my friends accepted that things would get tough before they improved but were willing to go through that for the sake of getting away from Westminster.

          The plan was to negotiate a currency union with the remaining UK to use the Pound but that was ruled out by the Westminster parties (we’ll never know now if they actually would have vetoed it). This was a ctiticism of the plan; how can you be independent and not control your own currency? The alternative suggested was to use the pound unofficially like Panama uses the Dollar which would have required raising 10s of billions in Sterling reserves. There was no appetite to join the Euro – the events of the last 6 years made sure of that.

          We’d have had our own Army, Navy and would have applied to be a non nuclear member of NATO. Planned defence spending was 1.7% of GDP (Germany’s is 1.3%)

          Re oil and gas, the plan was to set up an oil fund like Norway but I reckon they would have just frittered away oil revenues like the UK has done.

          There was indeed a panic with a week to go when one of only a couple of opinion polls over the whole 2-year campaign showed a Yes lead. I wouldn’t call it sickening -what else would they do in a case like that? Nevertheless, promises have been made and if they’re not kept, we’ll be doing it all over again within a decade and if so, I reckon we’d vote for independence the next time. Westminster has been put on notice.

          • RAJM on September 22, 2014 at 3:50 pm

            Thanks. Is it fair to equate Scottish independence with the commentary here that separation means the initial moves toward liberation from corporate elites?
            History has shown us that the elites have consistently machinated ruled divided and conquered. Can we bring trusted with liberty? Can we be trusted with freedom? Eric Frohm might answer no..

  10. Quinnotaur on September 21, 2014 at 10:55 am

    By the way doc, I am currently trapped in the north east (pennsyltuckey to be exact) and share your sentiments about said north east. I am not alone. There are many here who adhere to the values of “flyover” country. We just have no real voice at the moment.

  11. Quinnotaur on September 21, 2014 at 10:52 am

    Could it be the elite want more division so as to create more chaos? As far as I know, the banksters have wanted the United States broken up and Balkanized since at least the civil war….

  12. Robert Barricklow on September 21, 2014 at 10:41 am

    There is the Nation State that can represent the peoples’ will in the form of a Republic. With today’s technology, perhaps more of a democracy than republic. This reflects strong political capital, if you will. In others words the Nation State being a ship that carries the peoples’ will through the global seas of commercial and cultural exchanges.
    Enter the East India Company’s Armed Flotilla(Transnational Corporations) that wants to enforce It’s maritime law(TPP), currency(world’s reserve dollar), culture(Hollywood) & might(full-spectrum dominance). No Nation States; except, in-name-only.
    Not only are the Transnational too big: to fail, & to jail; but also, they are too big to tell apart or pry apart, or pry into.
    Everything is rigged(yes, even elections Scotty).The superpower corporate elite will never be made to pay for their crimes; as Fitts says/Crime that pays, is crime that stays.
    As far as separation goes? There is THE problem that makes separation rather mute:
    With the expansion of private police & military companies, the power elite are investing in the violent means with which to maintain & further their power. With money(spun out of thin air) comes power, influence & propaganda. Black Rock & numerous other banks & Wall Street institutions financially backing groups like Parent Revolution and Student first, whose agendas are to privatize and subsequently corporatize the public school system. The Transnationalist Class is laying the foundation for privatization of the whole globe. If public democratic institutions-including schools, post offices, universities, the military, and even churches-become privately owned entities, the corporate interests will truly dominate. Then, we become neo-feudal societies, where the reign of kings is replaced by private corporate ownership and the people serve as peasants.

    • Lost on September 21, 2014 at 11:14 am

      ” If public democratic institutions-including schools, post offices, universities, the military, and even churches-become privately owned entities, the corporate interests will truly dominate.”

      All a big argument for much more government control, with many processes for shining light into policies and procedures, than exist today.

      There’s a reason, Reagan, Thatcher, Chase, UBS, and Citi, Exxon and Lockheed and Microsoft, and Apple and Google are intensely disliked.

      Anyhow, it’s unlikely that anyone of these parties would ever develop something as profound as this internet we’re using.

      And there are plenty of Russian, Chinese and Japanese abuses too.

  13. Aridzonan_13 on September 21, 2014 at 10:01 am

    The Pro Centralization / Mr. Global Team had a bit of a scare with the Scottish election. How or if it was stolen is another question. But, it points out that corruption is killing the host. Where if existing laws were enforced. The problem could be fixed. But, selective enforcement of law is how we got into this mess in the first place. The Royals and a host of celebraties came out on the NO side. The System went into full “No Change” / “Slow Burn” mode. It would be interesting to investigate how much money was spent on the “No” side and where it came from.

    However, Grounds Keeper Willie of Simpsons fame had +4M views on YouTube. So, ya gotta say, there appears to be a lot of folks that support “Aye or Die” sentiment. Please note a couple of references, one on “oil” and “how not to run a country”.. Willie was definitely on his game.

  14. bdw000 on September 21, 2014 at 9:43 am

    “What is needed – in least in America – is a population that is aware of its real history and meaning, and how the oligarchical subversion of that document began at a very early date.”

    I won’t argue with that, but I will say that, if it is accurate, my opinion is that all is lost.

    • LSM on September 21, 2014 at 12:58 pm

      nothing is lost; the age of information (internet) still exists; it’s just a matter of waking people up, coaxing them to pull their heads out of the sand and face reality

  15. marcos toledo on September 21, 2014 at 9:36 am

    The dirty little secret is that the Western European and Arab States are tribal societies at heart. Unlike Persia-Iran they have not really consolidated themselves into nation-states it’s been either city-state or Empire nothing in between. Europe is still in it’s warring states phase and I suspect the Arab States are not even at that stage. As for Scotland it’s the Norman invaders inability to treat it’s people as equals and they treated were screwed like Ireland. Plus the UK oligarchs inability to face reality after WW II it’s days of Empire were over.

    • marcos toledo on September 21, 2014 at 9:52 am

      Also the Trans-National Corporations are going to love this no more having to bribe nation-states any new mini-state complains about it’s treatment by these corporations. Ukraine is a postal child for the future though even a nation-state can be dealt with witness the fate of the late Soviet Union for example and the USA is next on the chopping block. As for the indigenous people it will be back to the future 16th to 19-20 century slaughter festivals against them more open than what they are suffering now. If your a non-native minority you head will be on the chopping block too.

  16. justawhoaman on September 21, 2014 at 9:03 am

    The PTB can not afford to let the people secede from their global slave states; hence, there will not be a “clean” election until the people decide that there is one. The fact that the American population did not object openly to the fraudulent elections (pick one, or all) and now the Scots are not screaming bloody murder over their obvious stolen opportunity is only related to the fear of the people, based upon escalating police-trained-to-military-standards and local police arms buildup. Most of us fly-overs want a revolution, but a bloodless one; we salute those who stand up for the Constitution but even those of us “hunter-types” would prefer our ammunition be aimed at feral pigs or wildlife for our table. This fact keeps the smoldering anger from flaring to confrontational levels and sends the working American (the producers) back to work on Monday after expending their frustration energies yelling at their “team” on Sunday.

    As an adopted Texan, I see the pot beginning to ripple from the heat beneath the surface. It will soon grow to an obvious boil and many are ready with gloves on. I hope it doesn’t start here, but given the sentiment of “remember the Alamo”…………

    • Lost on September 21, 2014 at 9:23 am

      Um, there were plenty of objections, including inauguration day protests, when G. W. Bush stole the 2000 US presidential election.

      • LSM on September 21, 2014 at 12:52 pm

        G. W. Bush’s 2000 election was stolen by the global/bankster elite as most all elections probably have since the Act of 1871, including the Kennedy election; problem was he turned his back on his handlers/funders and tried to actually do something for the common man- that’s what cost him his life

        • Lost on September 21, 2014 at 6:00 pm


          There’s a difference between a stolen election where the results don’t match the votes cast, and what you’ve described.

          If you mean for example that Obama is a representative of other powers, sure, but Obama won his election without changing votes, or tossing legitimate votes. No matter what Rush Limbaugh claims.

          Right there are questions about the 1960 US presidential election, but it is also a myth that Nixon didn’t fight the outcome.

          • justawhoaman on September 22, 2014 at 8:31 am

            Right. When there were more votes for Obama than there were registered voters in that precinct (multiple states, multiple precincts)… uh, nothing to see here, folks. Move along. Nothing to see here. Nothing to see here. Oh, and if you dare challenge that fact, I am sure a little visit from the IRS might change your mind about challenging those votes. All legal. Nothing to see here. Nothing to…

    • LSM on September 21, 2014 at 12:54 pm

      “The PTB can not afford to let the people secede from their global slave states”- no s**t- any wonder why the election was rigged?

  17. Lost on September 21, 2014 at 8:46 am


    “Liberty” in the USA oft means, in the minds of those who claim its loss, the capacity to take any action they please.

    And at least in the USA, a lot of people yelling about lack of liberty come from places like Texas.

    Sorry Texans (and Koch brothers) your liberty does NOT give you the freedom to pollute my skies, invade my bedroom, or frack my rivers.

    Freedom of action is not something guaranteed in the US Constitution, nor are taxes for the general welfare forbidden, I suggest many from Texas–and elsewhere–read and apprehend that document before screaming about liberty.

    And specific to Texas, well there were a lot more immigrants coming across the border with Mexico in 1997 than today, why would that be? (Funny how Texans wining about immigrants forget the white Texans are the children of immigrants, and forget about the big coastal cities in the US with many immigrants, not always brown and actually native to the Americas though.)

    Re: Scotland, because of this push in Scotland, there’s a state legislature and Scotland sets some of its own social welfare polices.

    And unlike the UK, secession takes a bit more than the Parliament in London tweaking a law followed by a vote. Secession in the US takes throwing out the Constitution.

    Regarding Pelosi, and the Affordable Care Act: Sorry it was well understood what was in the bill before the vote, since it had been debated for months, unlike say the Patriot Act. I have no idea if Ms Pelosi said what’s claimed, but given the misrepresentations of her vote against giving GWBush a free hand to take action against Iraq, I’d be real careful claiming she said any such thing without a specific citation.

    • bdw000 on September 21, 2014 at 9:40 am

      “Secession in the US takes throwing out the Constitution.”

      Nothing in the Constitution forbids secession.

      Show me where in the Constitution it says that when a state votes, on a certain date, to “join the Union,” that it is strictly forbidden, FOR ALL TIME, for that state to then vote to LEAVE the Union.

      Of course, the Civil War proved that the FEDERAL GOVERNMENT (NOT the Constitution) will act like the Mafia and literally kill anyone who tries to leave.

      • Lost on September 21, 2014 at 10:03 am


        Perhaps I should have said the process of ratification precludes then leaving the union.

        And in fact, states can leave the US, but that means that the entire constitution would have to be repealed, which takes more than one state just voting to leave. So that’s the point about throwing out the constitution.

        In other words, once part of the constitutional union separating from the union takes an act at the constitutional level, not a simple secession vote like Scotland’s vote to stay in the UK.

        It is also ruled upon law, pre civil war.

        Now you’d have a point that there is a way for the constitution to be amended to allow a state to leave the union, but again that’s a different process than a popular vote or a simple vote in a single state legislature.

  18. LSM on September 21, 2014 at 7:59 am

    voter fraud was perpetrated in Scotland (could we have guessed beforehand this might become a possibility?); just for starters:!


    • Lost on September 21, 2014 at 8:52 am


      Skip the rumors of fraud and think of it this way, if the vote for Scottish independence had been held 30 years ago, the pro independence vote would have attracted less than 10 percent of the vote (and Thatcher was hated there).

      But today it attracts 45 percent of the vote.

      Perhaps instead of independence the Scots could push for a written constitution for the UK, one where making fun of the monarch is allowed–or perhaps there is no monarch.

      • sjy1969 on September 21, 2014 at 10:30 am

        Correct. The largest support for independence has been in Dundee and the Central Belt particularly around Glasgow, which were devasted in the early 80s under Thatcher. It’s also the generation of males who were growing up and of working age at that time who are the biggest backers of independence.

        The Conservatives have gone from having from 36 Scottish MPs out of 72 in 1955 to having 1 out of 59 now and that has mainly happened since the Thatcher government. One of the main reasons that friends of mine told me they were voting yes is so that they would never again have to suffer a Conservative Westminster government that they didn’t vote for, Scottish Parliament notwithstanding.

        And that’s before we even get on to the subject of the poll tax…

        • Lost on September 21, 2014 at 11:05 am


          “poll tax” that’s a euphemism. Tax on existence more like.

          • sjy1969 on September 21, 2014 at 11:35 am

            Believe me, it’s not a euphemism here. It still provokes extremely hostile reactions 25 years later.

    • sjy1969 on September 21, 2014 at 9:48 am

      That’ll be Dundee where they voted 57-43 for independence, the largest margin of any region in the country. Clearly the PTBs didn’t fix that count very well. That’s the second time you’ve posted nonsense like this. This is Scotland, home of the Enlightenment, we’re talking about. Not Sudan. Or Florida.

      If you don’t believe me, check out the official Twitter account of the Dundee independence campaign:

      These people would have been at the count watching. Don’t you think they would have cried foul by now if there was a problem? Just because the MSM can’t be trusted, do you think videos posted by some random on social media are automatically the Truth?

Help the Community Grow

Please understand a donation is a gift and does not confer membership or license to audiobooks. To become a paid member, visit member registration.

Upcoming Events