Via Peter A Bell. Jim Murphy exhibiting his customary casual dishonesty. Bill Munro is not being condemned for his opposition to Scotland being a normal nation. He is being condemned for ill-informed scaremongering of a kind that even Project Fear itself would be hard-pressed to match. The claim about Scotland being obliged, under any circumstances, to accept a 5/63rd share of the UK national debt is just one of the brazen lies told by Munro to employees of Barrhead Travel. Contrary to Munros claims, there is no joint and several liability for all £1,185bn of [UK debt]. This was confirmed by the British Treasury more than a month before Munro sent his threatening email. Are we to believe that he was unaware of this? In which case, he can hardly claim to be speaking as an informed individual. And if he was aware of the British Treasurys statement? What does that make him other than a liar? But no more of a liar than Jim Murphy. His claim that we dont know what currency independent Scotland would be using is, as he must surely know, simply untrue. Even if the threat by the Tory/Labour alliance to abolish the currency union hadnt been revealed for the bluff that most of us knew it to be, it was still absolutely certain that Scotland would continue to use the pond. There is no doubt about this. Murphy is lying. His next blatant lie is about there being a guarantee of more powers if the people of Scotland throw away the opportunity offered by the referendum. There is no such guarantee. There arent even any credible, viable proposals on the table. And no way to vote on them even if there were. Murphy is lying. But not all his lies are so explicit. He merely seeks to imply that Scotland would be expelled and excluded from the EU after independence, despite the fact that he knows full well there is no way in which this can happen. Unless London tries to veto Scotlands continuing membership of the EU. Is that what he is threatening? Or is he just lying again? After al, we know Jim Murphy is a liar. Then there is the threat of trade sanctions against Scotland after we restore our rightful constitutional status. Murphy implies that we would be denied access to the markets in a way which he ought to be aware would be illegal. Can such an knowingly empty threat be called a lie? Im not sure what else we might call it. Especially when we already know that Jim Murphy is a liar. m.scotsman/news/politics/top-stories/barrhead-travel-boss-defends-referendum-staff-memo-1-3359505
Posted on: Mon, 31 Mar 2014 17:44:26 +0000
Trending Topics
Recently Viewed Topics
© 2015