Once again, talkRadio covers the issues that are being totally ignored by the mainstream media, which is keen to push the panic Covid-19 lie, as well as the ridiculous “green” agenda, designed to keep us all strictly under Government control and to make us all poorer. If you disagree, feel free to say so…
Also, is the new Reform UK Party likely to win the “anti-lockdown” battle – or should Richard Tice stick with the Brexit Battle?
Nicola Sturgeon [left] has announced a draft bill will be drawn up setting out the timing, terms and question for a new Scottish independence referendum.
The first minister said that Brexit strengthened the case for Scotland to become an independent country.
Unveiling the Programme for government, Sturgeon said that a similar announcement in an independent Scotland would outline plans for an extension to the furlough scheme, more money in borrowing, a more progressive immigration system and a universal basic income.
She told MSPs that a new draft Bill will be drawn up setting out the timing and terms for a new independence referendum, as well as the question to be asked to voters if it is given the green light by Westminster.
The first minister added: “Then, at next year’s election, we will make the case for Scotland to become an independent country and seek a clear endorsement of Scotland’s right to choose our own future.”
Scottish Conservative leader Douglas Ross tweeted: “The first minister just doesn’t get it. We need to take Scotland forward and recover from this crisis together, not go back to the divisions of the past.”
Earlier this month a poll suggested support for Scottish independence has reached a record high of 55%.
The research by Panelbase found the results of the 2014 independence referendum – when 55% of Scots voted to stay in the United Kingdom – were reversed.
Pro-independence organisation Business for Scotland commissioned the poll, with chief executive Gordon MacIntyre-Kemp hailing the results as a “huge landmark” showing the “writing is very definitely on the wall for the union”.
Panelbase questioned a total of 1,011 people across Scotland between August 12 and 18 for the research.
Overall, 51% of those questioned said they support independence, 42% said they would vote to stay in the UK and 7% of voters were undecided.
When undecided voters were excluded, 55% favoured Scotland leaving the UK, with 45% preferring to stay in the union. Source…
Given the flat outright immoral legislation introduced by the SNP-led Scottish Government over the years since the Parliament became a devolved administration, could any Catholic – or anyone remotely considering themselves to be Christian – possibly consider voting for independence at this time? I can’t see it – can you?
Born in Budapest, Soros survived Nazi Germany–occupied Hungary and moved to the United Kingdom in 1947. He attended the London School of Economics, graduating with a bachelor’s, then obtaining a master’s, and eventually a Doctor of Philosophy. Soros began his business career by taking various jobs at merchant banks in the United Kingdom and then the United States, before starting his first hedge fund, Double Eagle, in 1969. Profits from his first fund furnished the seed money to start Soros Fund Management, his second hedge fund, in 1970. Double Eagle was renamed to Quantum Fund and was the principal firm Soros advised. At its founding, Quantum Fund had $12 million in assets under management, and as of 2011 it had $25 billion, the majority of Soros’s overall net worth.
Soros is known as “The Man Who Broke the Bank of England” because of his short sale of US$10 billion worth of pounds sterling, which made him a profit of $1 billion during the 1992 Black Wednesday UK currency crisis. Based on his early studies of philosophy, Soros formulated an application of Karl Popper‘s General Theory of Reflexivity to capital markets, which he claims renders a clear picture of asset bubbles and fundamental/market value of securities, as well as value discrepancies used for shorting and swapping stocks.
Soros is a well-known supporter of progressive and liberal political causes, to which he dispenses donations through his foundation, the Open Society Foundations. Between 1979 and 2011, he donated more than $11 billion to various philanthropic causes; by 2017, his donations “on civil initiatives to reduce poverty and increase transparency, and on scholarships and universities around the world” totaled $12 b…
On Soros’s 90th birthday (12 August, 2020), American commentator Bill Reilly opines that he, Soros, has done more damage to the USA than any other person or group…
Nigel Farage questions Soros’s links to the European Union…
This thread is posted following conversations with people here in Scotland who have never heard of George Soros. These are people who consider themselves to be reasonably well informed but had no idea of the extent of this one man’s influence. The subject arose during a brief discussion about the riots in America. The possibility that these riots and “protests” were paid for by this one elderly gentleman was breaking news to these politically aware Scots – never mind his funding of abortion etc. So, how many others know nothing about this man? How many others have no idea that he is using his money to re-shape society – or in the plan set out at the January 2019 World Economic Forum, to “reset the world“?
Should this wealthy man be allowed to use his money to thwart the USA election in November, because that’s what he seems to have in mind. Trump was falsely accused of colluding with Russia to win the 2016 election. Should Soros be allowed to collude with the Democrats and/or whoever else, to prevent Trump winning a second term? In the popular parlance of cancel culture, we need to debate whether or not George Soros should be cancelled… I vote “aye”!
Mairead McGuinness is the first Vice President of the European Parliament, in post since 2017. In several news interviews following Nigel Farage’s final speech at the European Parliament she highlighted Nigel’s use of the word “hate”, shock-horrified at the use of that word. However, contrary to her disingenuous insinuations, Nigel did not say that he hated any person, or group or nation, merely the structures, the system. It’s reasonable to assume that Ms McGuinness would hate to live under the totalitarian regime in North Korea and she would be outraged, surely, if anyone misinterpreted that sentiment to suggest that she hates the people of North Korea.
In an email exchange earlier today, the reader who expressed enthusiasm about marking Brexit Day with this thread, threw cold water on Mairead McGuinness’s remarks about the use of the word “hate” by Nigel Farage in the above clip – he writes:
“I don’t care what that humourless Irish woman thinks. I hate the EU as well. It seems that ‘hate’ has become a crime, but there’s nothing wrong with hate under certain circumstances. It’s quite right to hate evil. The EU is of its nature thoroughly evil, as are all totalitarian systems (although whether every willing participant realises that is another matter) so there’s nothing wrong with calling it evil. I feel like I’ve just got out of prison! And a Happy Brexit Day to you!”
Anyway, share your thoughts on the UK’s future outside the EU. With no need to implement EU directives, is there a chance we can begin to restore Christian culture, not least in the area of personal morality, and the teaching of marriage and family life in schools?
Finally, as an acknowledgment of the one million-plus Scots who voted to leave the EU – but who have been generally ignored in virtually all the discussions about Brexit since 2016 – let’s launch this discussion by flying our national flag, as we pray for Scotland and the rest of the UK, at this important juncture in our history.
St Andrew, pray for us!
St George, pray for us!
St David, pray for us!
St Patrick, pray for us!
Our Lady, Queen of Peace… pray for us!
All of the UK political parties are pro-abortion – with the exception of The Brexit Party, which has no stated policy on abortion – so we ought to pray very especially to Our Lady of Guadalupe, Patroness of the Unborn, that, somehow, the result of tomorrow’s election will lead to a change of heart, and ultimately a repeal of the 1967 Abortion Act. It would be wonderful if – at the very least – none of the pro-abortion activists fighting for the complete decriminalisation of abortion, are re-elected. Decriminalisation means that babies can be killed up to and including birth – even after birth. Even the minimal protection offered by current abortion legislation will be swept away by total decriminalisation.
If you are wavering about how to vote, and not sure that “a single issue” should prevent you from voting for a pro-abortion party, check out the facts – including the graphic information about what actually happens during an abortion – here and reflect that future generations will look back in total horror at the fact that we allowed the murder of unborn babies as a matter of legal entitlement. Reflect, too, that, at our Judgement on death, we will, surely, look back in horror if we facilitated, in any way, the murder of innocent, unborn children. So, let’s ask Our Lady of Guadalupe to guide us as we decide how best to use our vote on 12 December.
Our Lady of Guadalupe, pray for us!
As we prepare to go to the polls in the General Election on 12 December, it is worth reflecting on Church teaching and the principles which should guide us in deciding how to use our vote without violating God’s law.
Click here to read a guide prepared for American Catholics, which seems to be fairly comprehensive. I’ve not studied everything on that [EWTN] site, but I have checked out some key topics and I think we will all find it useful, and a source for fruitful discussion.
Below, a video clip from the trial of St Thomas More, saint and martyr, patron of lawyers and politicians, who has been an inspiration to many, including many who are not Catholics, because of his strong, conscientious insistence that God’s law must always be above any law created by man.
If the voting guide given in the introduction above still leave you with unanswered questions or doubts, feel free to ask for clarification on this thread.
Here, at Catholic Truth, we are apolitical and we discuss politics only in the context of our Catholic duty to be decent members of society, contributing, where possible, to the common good. Please, therefore engage in discussion in a spirit of respect, bearing in mind that the Church exhorts us to adhere to certain principles but does not dictate that we should support (or not) any particular political party. Our overall aim must be to take care not to offend God in the way we vote; not to support the transgression of His Moral Law. To this end we pray…
St Thomas More, intercede for us, and for all the politicians participating in the forthcoming election; guide and inspire us in the weeks ahead… Our Lady, Help of Christians, pray for us.
The woman behind this court case, Gina Miller, was all smiles today, absolutely delighted, speaking victoriously outside the Supreme Court in London, after winning her anti-Brexit, and anti-democracy case. Here’s one editor’s opinion of her and her shenanigans to stop Brexit – this editor doesn’t trust herself to find words that would keep her beyond the scope of the Thought Police.
Is anyone out there actually surprised at the decision of the Supreme Court? There is, is there not, a total absence of morality in the world of politics today – remember, the MPs in court today supporting Gina Miller’s efforts to stop Brexit (and many others in Parliament) don’t give a toss about the 17.4 million of us who voted to leave the EU. That’s surely more than merely anti-democratic – but immoral as well. Agreed?
Daily, we hear the mantra that we need a second BREXIT referendum because we know so much more now that we did in 2016 when we voted to leave the EU.
Well, if that is true about BREXIT, it is true, also, about abortion because there is no question that we know MUCH more about life in the womb today than we knew when the Abortion Act was passed in 1967.
If Rachel Riley’s comments in the above interview about the behaviour of her baby in the womb don’t convince you, check out the several 3D videos available on YouTube where you can see for yourself the activity of unborn babies. Very busy little people, no question about it!
For the record, I saw Rachel Riley interviewed on this subject on Sky News where the female interviewer was clearly – it seemed to me – taken aback by her remarks, and none too pleased, realising, no doubt, the implications for the “pro-choice” lobby of what Rachel Riley was saying. However, try as I have done, I can’t find it on YouTube. Thus, the above clip from the BBC news will have to suffice for now.
So, what, now? Should there be a national debate – and a referendum – on the concept of the woman’s right to choose, now that we have SO much more information about life in the womb than we did back in 1967, when there were actually campaigners claiming that the foetus (Latin word for “offspring”) isn’t human at all. Of course, gradually that position was dropped in favour of the “pro-choice” – the woman’s right to choose to kill her baby if that is what she decided – argument , with that right set to be extended until the moment of birth or immediately after birth (infanticide) which is already legal in the USA. The pro-abortion MPs in Parliament are pushing for that here, using the euphemism “decriminalisation” of abortion. They are among the anti-BREXIT MPs demanding a second referendum “because we know so much more now than when we voted to leave the EU in 2016.” I’ve written to a number of them putting the same argument for a national abortion debate and, needless to say, not one of them has replied.
Over to you – are we justified in calling for a referendum on abortion, now that we can actually see for ourselves that there is a truly human life in the womb, more active than certain folk outside the womb… (think lazy teenagers!)
In Parliament last night, Prime Minister Johnson was in very good form, firmly insisting that the UK will leave the EU on 31 October, despite all the disgraceful shenanigans of the “remainer” MPs to stop Brexit. Rushed through legislation to try to tie the Prime Minister’s hands did not appear to faze him at all, as he proceeded with assurances that the UK will leave on the 31 October, as promised to the electorate. Shocking scenes, staged by MPs, furious that all their demonic efforts had apparently failed, took place in the House of Commons as the procedure began for suspending Parliament for five weeks, prior to a Queen’s Speech and a new session of Parliament.
Are these scenes evidence of diabolical activity – or simply another instance of frustrated “remainers” refusing – like spoilt children – to take “yes” [we want out of the EU] for an answer? Would someone please explain to me what is so attractive about remaining in the EU which, more or less everyone agrees (leavers and remainers), is a corrupt outfit? Why the desperation on the part of the “remoaners” not to leave? I don’t get it…