Scottish Independence Referendum Fraud

Smoking-gun evidence of vote-rigging in the Scottish Independence Referendum. -LW

In Dundee, a strong YES area, the count was suspended twice due to fire alarms. The turnout in the strong YES area of Dundee was 78.8%, which is lower than the 85% turnout in Scotland as a whole In Dundee, ‘Yes’ ballot papers were spotted on a ‘No’ table.

THE “integrity” of the electoral register in Scotland has been called into question ahead of this month’s historic referendum vote after it emerged yesterday that children as young as three have been registered to vote and received polling cards. Once this is achieved, a corrupt if not criminal, manual count will sway the election in favor of the Bank of England, of course with the help of their secret servants called the Mi5. That’s when the voter fraud and rigging begins, and in the end, all questions about the legitimacy of the vote cannot be settled once the evidence is destroyed. The process is already in place. The ballots are thrown away. Easy-peazy. recount re-count

Margot MacDonald, former deputy leader of the Scottish National Party, wrote to the boss of MI5, Andrew Parker (above) asking for an assurance that MI5 spies would not interfere in the referendum on independence for Scotland. In Dundee, a fire alarm led to the evacuation of the building where the vote was being counted

As recently as Sunday, Britain’s Queen Elizabeth expressed hope that Scottish voters think very carefully about the future before voting in Thursday’s independence referendum, adding, “Well, I hope people will think very carefully about the future.”

A day after the Queen’s remarks, British Prime Minister David Cameron warned the Scots against declaring independence from the UK. As a final push for the No campaign, Cameron said, “There’s no going back from this. No re-run. If Scotland votes ‘yes’, the UK will split and we will go our separate ways forever,” he said in an emotional manner.

This is while the British state broadcaster BBC has been accused of biased coverage against the independence of Scotland. Salmond has slammed the network for using a “dirty tricks campaign” to disrupt the outcome of this week’s referendum on Scottish independence. scotland scottish independence “scotland independence” “vote no” “vote yes” vote uk british “united kingdom” “great britain” ballot 2014 2015 future union england london evidence camera footage media news entertainment count counting “made in uk” “made in scotland” whiskey “scotch whiskey” campaign government election elite games trendy trending viral europe “european union” gbp pound gold oil edinburgh glasgow “elite nwo agenda” exposed truth contract contractor alex jones infowars rant gerald celente max keiser david icke anonymous spain italy quebec texas states u.s. usa illuminati bilderberg royal bloodlines citizenship daboo7 glenn beck coast to coast am lindsey williams louis farrakhan

A survey conducted by Britain-based ICM research foundation and released on Sunday, showed that the pro-independence campaign enjoyed 54-percent support compared to the 46 percent for anti-independence campaign.

The Westminster has repeatedly warned against Scotland’s independence, saying it will jeopardize the UK’s stability and damage its international standing. Scottish authorities, on the other hand, argue that independence from the UK would free Scotland from London’s austerity policies and unnecessary military spending. The independence referendum could result in Scotland’s breakaway from the United Kingdom after more than 300 years of political union.

In Glasgow, “Police are investigating ten cases of electoral fraud.”

Voters turned up at polling stations to find that people had already voted using their names. Police officers have remove the ballot papers concerned. The papers were from 10 different boxes across Glasgow, and not concentrated in one area. In Dundee, a strong YES area, the count was suspended twice due to fire alarms.

UN Live United Nations Web TV – Live Now – Security Council: Iraq

If you’ve been watching the saga of the ISIS/ISIL or the Dinar RV, this is a major event, happening now . . .

UN Live United Nations Web TV – Live Now – Security Council: Iraq.

The REAL Reason Britain is Freaking Out About Scottish Independence Washington’s Blog

. . . comment on the GLP forum about Scotland . . .

Re: The Polls have opened in Scotland – what’s it going to be?

Question: What happens when the oil runs out?

Answer: Don’t know, ask England, their’s runs out tonight.


Oil

David Cameron and the British media have been freaking out about the potential Scottish independence.

They’ve blathered on about “history”, “common defense” and other red herrings.

But it’s really all about oil …

Specifically, if Scotland becomes independent, it gets to keep 90% of the revenues from its huge oil reserves.

The New York Times reports:

Scottish nationalists have long argued that being governed from London has deprived their country of its fair share of the wealth from Britain’s oil and natural gas fields, which mostly lie in North Sea waters off their shores.

“It’s Scotland’s oil” was the rallying cry in the 1970s that helped raise the profile of the Scottish Nationalist Party, which now leads the country and is pushing for a vote to secede in the referendum on Thursday. Alex Salmond, the politician leading the separatist movement, has pointed to North Sea energy as the treasure that would help finance an independent Scotland — ensuring that the country could continue the generous public spending, including free university tuition, that he is promising voters.

Al Jazeera notes:

Massive oil reserves in the North Sea are at the heart of the Scottish independence debate. Many are questioning whether the reserves are just for Scotland or if the rest of the United Kingodm should continue to benefit from their profits.

NBC writes:

The ‘Yes’ campaign … says Scots should have total control of their own affairs and that revenue from Scotland’s offshore oil fields would sustain the country’s economy

In addition, as Max Keiser explained:

(1) The UK can now borrow cheaply using the giant Scottish oil reserves as collateral

(2) If Scotland leaves, the collateral (oil reserves) is no longer available

(3) So the cost of borrowing money for Britain skyrockets

Scotland’s North Sea oil reserves are slowing running out, and so oil won’t be such a valuable resource forever.

But for now, it is still invaluable (especially as collateral for British borrowing) … and the key to Britain’s panic over potential Scottish independence.

Source.

LibTech NYC: Robert David Steele – The Open Source Everything Manifesto

In a nutshell, Robert David Steele’s solution is to have all 7 billion of us with 24/7 access to all information in all languages via the Internet.

Robert David Steele – The Open Source Everything Manifesto – at LibTech NYC on May 21 2014.

tinyurl.com/ose-2014

Libtech NYC 2014 — a half-day conference to “envision, learn, share and build robust, decentralized networks through participatory systems”, presented by the Internet Society’s New York Chapter (ISOC-NY) and RECLAIM.CC, as part of Internet Week NY.

Related Links

Obama Begs for More War: Did Putin Just Bring Peace to Ukraine?

Here is a completely different spin on the situation in the Ukraine, and it looks good. -LW


by MIKE WHITNEY

“In the implementing of their policies, our western partners– the United States first and foremost – prefer to be guided not by international law, but by force. They believe in their own ‘exceptionalism’, that they are allowed to decide on the fate of the world, and that they are always right.”

– Russian President Vladimir Putin

“What did we do to deserve this? What did we do to deserve being bombed from planes, shot at from tanks, and have phosphorous bombs dropped on us? ….That we wanted to live the way we want, and speak our own language, and make friends with whom we want?”

– Alexander V. Zakharchenko, Chairman of The Council of Ministers of The Donetsk National Republic, The Vineyard of the Saker

There is no way to overstate the significance of what has transpired in Ukraine in the last three weeks. What began as a murderous onslaught on the mainly Russian-speaking population of east Ukraine, has turned into a major triumph against a belligerent and expansionistic empire that has been repulsed by a scrappy, battle-hardened militia engaged in a conventional, land-based war. The conflict in east Ukraine is Obama’s war; launched by Obama’s junta government, executed by Obama’s proxy army, and directed by Obama’s advisors in Kiev. The driving force behind the war is Washington’s ambitious pivot to Asia, a strategy that pits Russia against Europe to prevent further economic integration and to establish NATO forward-operating bases on Russia’s western border. Despite the overheated rhetoric, the talk of a (NATO) “Rapid Reaction Force”, and additional economic sanctions; the US plan to draw Ukraine into the western sphere of influence and weaken Russia in the process, is in tatters. And the reason it is in tatters is because a highly-motivated and adaptable militia has trounced Obama’s troopers at every turn pushing the Ukrainian army to the brink of collapse. Check out this frontline update from The Saker:

“The (Ukrainian Army) is not retreating on one, two or even three directions, it is retreating everywhere (except north of Lugansk). Entire battalions are leaving the front under orders of their battalion commanders and without the approval of the Junta leaders. At least one such battalion commander is already being judged for desertion. The entire Ukie leadership seems to be in a panic mode, especially Iatseniuk and Kolomoiski, while the Nazis are mad as hell at the Poroshenko administration. There are constant rumors of an anti-Poroshenko coup by outraged Nazi nationalists…..

The bottom line is this: Poroshenko promised a victory in a matter of weeks and his forces suffered one of the most total defeats in the history of warfare. ….the most likely thing is that this ridiculous “Banderastan” experiment has seriously begun sinking now and that many rats are leaving the ship.

The War in Ukraine“, Vineyard of the Saker

The fact that the demoralized Ukrainian army has been defeated by the superior fighting force is of little importance in the big scheme of things, however, the fact that Washington’s global resource war– which began on 9-11 and has reduced numerous sovereign countries into anarchic, failed states– has been stopped in its tracks, is significant. The so called War on Terror–which was recently rebranded under the ISIS moniker–has wreaked holy havoc and death on Iraq, Afghanistan, Libya, and now Syria. By routing the Ukrainian army the Novorussian Armed Forces (NAF) has put the kibosh on Obama’s Great Game strategy in Eurasia and torpedoed Washington’s plan to rule the world by force of arms. It could be that the battles of Lugansk and Donetsk are eventually regarded as the turning point, where the lumbering and over-extended empire finally met its match and began its precipitous decline. In any event, there’s no doubt that Friday’s ceasefire agreement is a serious blow to US hegemony.

THE PROBLEM IS NATO

“The defining factor in relations with NATO remains the unacceptability for Russia of plans to move the military infrastructure of the alliance towards our borders, including via enlargement of the bloc,” said Mikhail Popov, deputy head of Putin’s Security Council.

The issue has always been NATO expansion, not the ridiculous claim that Putin wants to rebuild the Russian Empire. The only one interested in in stitching together a global Caliphate is Barack Hussein Obama and his nutcase neocon advisors. Putin is not interested in an empire. Putin just wants to make money like everyone else. He wants to sell gas to Europe, raise living standards and rebuild the country. What’s wrong with that?

Putin’s not a troublemaker. He’s not sticking a freaking first-strike nuclear missile system in Havana just 60 miles from Miami. But that’s what Obama wants to do. Obama want to establish NATO bases on Russia’s doorstep and deploy his fake-named “missile defense system” a couple hundred miles from Moscow. Putin can’t allow that. No one in their right mind would allow that. It’s a direct threat to national security. Here’s how Putin summed it up in a recent press conference:

“Russia is an independent and active participant of international relations. Just like any nation it has national interests that must be taken into consideration and respected…..We stand against having a military organization meddling in our backyard, next to our homeland or in the territories that are historically ours. I just cannot imagine visiting NATO sailors in Sevastopol,” he stressed. “Most of them are fine lads, but I’d rather they visit us in Sevastopol than the other way around.” (Vladimir Putin)

Washington’s harebrained gambit was doomed from the get go. Who made the decision to topple Yanuchovych, install a US-puppet in Kiev, fill-out the security services with neo Nazis, and wage a bloody ethnic cleansing purge on the Russian-speaking people in the east? Who was it? Isn’t there any accountability among the Obama team or is it all a matter of “failing upwards” like the Bush crowd? Here’s Putin again:

“Our western partners created the ‘Kosovo precedent’ with their own hands. In a situation absolutely the same as the one in Crimea they recognized Kosovo’s secession from Serbia legitimate while arguing that no permission from a country’s central authority for a unilateral declaration of independence is necessary….And the UN International Court of Justice agreed with those arguments. That’s what they said; that’s what they trumpeted all over the world and coerced everyone to accept – and now they are complaining about Crimea. Why is that?”

Doesn’t Putin have a point? Isn’t this what we’ve seen over and over again, that there’s one standard for the US and another for everyone else?

Of course it is. But Putin’s not going to stand for it. In fact, just this week, Russia’s Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov expanded on Putin’s comments in an interview that never appeared in the western media. Here’s what he said:

“The current stage of international relations is marked by a transition to a fundamentally new world order – a polycentric model based on due regard for the appearance of new economic and financial centres. And political weight comes with economic and financial influence. Transition to a polycentric world order reflects an objective trend according to which the world order should be based on the world’s cultural and civilisational diversity. This is objective reality, which no one can deny. …

After a long period of dominance in global economy and politics, these countries are trying to keep their positions by artificial means. They know that their economic positions are not as strong as they were after WWII, when America accounted for over half of global GDP, but they are trying to use all available military and political instruments, social media, regime-change technology and other instruments to keep back the objective process of the development of a democratic world order based on the equality of all sides.

Not everyone has realized yet that it is impossible to move contrary to an objective historical process. We strongly hope that this will happen, because otherwise more illegal unilateral sanctions will be approved against Russia, to which we will respond accordingly, as we have already tried to do. But this, I repeat, is not our choice; we don’t want confrontation.” (Press Conference: Russia’s Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov)

“A new world order based on a polycentric model”? What a great idea. You mean, a world in which other sovereign nations get a say-so in the way the world is run? You mean, a world in which the economic, political, and military decision-making does not emerge from one center of power that is dominated by privately-owned banks, transnational corporations and voracious western elites? You mean, a world in which international law can be applied evenly so that one country cannot unilaterally create off-shore gulags, or incite color coded revolutions, or carry out extra-legal abductions and killings, or order drone attacks on wedding parties or conduct any of the other heinous violations of human rights which imperial Washington engages in without batting an eye?

The NAF’s victory in east Ukraine brings us all one step closer to actualizing the multi-polar world of which Lavrov and Putin speak so glowingly. In fact, just hours ago Ukrainian President Petro Poroshenko capitulated and signed a ceasefire agreement with the leaders of the anti-fascist militia, Igor Plotnitsky and Aleksandr Zakharchenko. (Remember: “We never negotiate with terrorists”?) Ukraine’s National Security Council (SNBO) has reported that its troops have halted all military actions. The government’s public statement reads as follows:

“According to the decision of the President of Ukraine and the order of the chief of the General staff of the military units of Ukraine, troops in the area of anti-terrorist operations ceased fire at 15.00 GMT.”

Peace at last?

It sure looks like it.

So while Obama is busy trying to ramp up the violence by rallying NATO to expand the wars around the world, international peacekeepers will begin the thorny task of implementing a seven-point peace plan put forward by none-other-than Vladimir Putin.

The difference between the peacemakers and the warmongers has rarely been as stark as it is today.

MIKE WHITNEY lives in Washington state. He is a contributor to Hopeless: Barack Obama and the Politics of Illusion (AK Press). Hopeless is also available in a Kindle edition. He can be reached at fergiewhitney@msn.com.

Source.

FOX, CNN And MSNBC All Mystified By Obama’s ISIS Flip-Flop

What does it mean when the lamestream media picks up on the discrepancies in Obama’s statements to the press? Do you think Obama did this, deliberately? -LW

obamaBobbleHead(Video link)

The cable news universe converged into a single point at 4 p.m. EST on Wednesday, with hosts on Fox News, CNN and MSNBC all simultaneously expressing confusion over President Barack Obama’s most recent flip-flop on a strategy to defeat the brutal Islamic terror group ISIS.

On Wednesday morning Obama spoke in Estonia about the need to “degrade and destroy” ISIS — right before he went on to explain his goal of “shrinking” ISIS to a “manageable problem.” By Wednesday afternoon, that disconnect was noticed by all three of the major cable networks.

“Alright, I want you to listen to something, because I’m confused,” Fox News host Neil Cauvto said, playing both clips for his audience. “Destroy or debate? A manageable problem? Maybe that is the problem . . . The president might’ve been wise to stick to his opening remarks and focus on annihilating them.”

Meanwhile, on CNN, Jake Tapper expressed similar concerns. “President Obama vowed to destroy ISIS,” he began. “But then, a few minutes later, he said the goal was to make ISIS a ‘manageable problem.’ So, which is it? . . . President Obama’s seemingly-contradictory remarks might make it difficult to know exactly what he thinks — especially after ISIS beheaded a second American.”

Even MSNBC got in on the action, with guest host Luke Russert playing both clips side-by-side. “At first, the president offered an uncompromising goal,” he said. “[But] later, the president appeared to mitigate that declaration to destroy ISIS . . . With the president already facing criticism from some lawmakers over his ISIS strategy, that remark drew further anger.”

Source.