Sunday, May 3, 2020

A short reply to Dani Garavelli: perhaps the independence movement should be reclaimed from those who think independence is less important than purity tests?

Is Dani Garavelli a Yes supporter? I asked that question on Twitter because I genuinely don't know the answer.  If she isn't, the billing of her column today as being about "reclaiming the Yes movement from the conspiracy theorists" would seem a bit odd.  In much the same way that it's a bit odd for David Leask to be forever posing as the defender of the "real SNP" against an interloper "alt Nat" faction that is supposedly led - with glorious irony - by the man who was the leader of the SNP for almost one-quarter of its entire existence to date.  In general, the people who get to decide whether there's any need to "reclaim" a movement are those who actually adhere to its original values and objectives.  If others attempt to do it, it's reasonable to wonder whether there's an agenda at play, one that might well not be in the best interests of the movement.

First and foremost, the Yes movement is about the belief that Scotland would be better off as an independent country.  Whatever anyone might think about Craig Murray and his views and any controversial claims he has made, no-one can realistically doubt that his belief in independence is genuine and total.  There is no need for people who may not even believe in independence to "reclaim" the movement from those who do.

It would certainly be absurd to try to reclaim it from Alex Salmond, who literally led the Yes campaign in the 2014 referendum.  And yet that is what some people are attempting.  Ms Garavelli talks about the vitriol directed at her and other critics of Mr Salmond after the trial, and yet there was a fair bit of vitriol flying in the other direction as well.  In particular, there was a none-too-subtle orchestrated attempt (involving a small number of senior SNP parliamentarians who used conveniently indirect language) to reframe Mr Salmond's acquittal as being the outcome of an 'illegitimate defence' that was somehow generically harmful to women and that should preclude his involvement in the SNP in the future.

Ms Garavelli returns to that theme today, suggesting that the threshold for Mr Salmond's political "rehabilitation" (is there a need to "rehabilitate" someone who was acquitted?) ought to be higher than the avoidance of a criminal conviction, and she points to a couple of incidents that he did admit to in court as disqualifying behaviour.  Different people will have different views on this, but I must say I'm not convinced.  Ms Garavelli herself describes one of the incidents as "consensual", but nevertheless tries to use it to demonise Mr Salmond on the basis of the large age gap.  But as I understand it, we're talking about women who were well into their twenties at the time.  This is not a Derek Mackay or Mark McDonald scenario.  If we're going to exclude from the SNP anyone who at any point in their lives behaved less than impeccably during consensual encounters with individuals who were well over the age of consent, there aren't going to be many people left in the party.

And yet that prospect won't deter Mr Salmond's most fanatical critics, because they do want the SNP and the Yes movement to be much more narrowly based.  They want it to exclude heterosexual men whose private lives fall short of a radical feminist ideal.  They want it to exclude anyone who isn't on one particular side of a debate over trans rights that is by no means settled as far as the general public is concerned.  And most bizarrely and troublingly of all, they want it to exclude anyone who doesn't adhere to certain hardline orthodoxies on the subject of Russia.  If the independence movement needs to be reclaimed from anyone at all, it's from people who seem to regard purity on the above topics as more important than independence itself.

I remain firmly of the view that setting up a new independence party would be a mistake.  Even if it's led by someone high profile enough to have a chance of winning list seats, the prospect of two pro-indy parties who regard each other with disdain due to a 'cultural' divide does not strike me as a recipe for furthering the cause of independence in the longer term.  But the SNP leadership have as much of a responsibility as anyone for avoiding that outcome - they need to ensure that the party is not a cold house for opponents of self-ID, for supporters of Palestinian rights, for those who happen to think RT or Sputnik aren't worse than the BBC or Sky, and above all for people who actually believe passionately in independence.  If such people feel they no longer have a place within the SNP, they'll find somewhere else to go, and that'll be a lose/lose for all concerned.

Ms Garavelli accuses Mr Salmond of planning to "set fire to the house he built just to watch his enemies burn".  But arguably he's simply doing the same thing as his accusers would say they did - putting justice ahead of political considerations.  It's easy to sneer at suggestions of Mr Salmond being "set up" by citing the full range of conspiratorial actors that Craig Murray has accused, but you don't have to believe the "Deep State" was involved to think there may be an issue here.  From what I can gather, the central allegation is that a number of people within the SNP coordinated with each other, due to a misplaced fear that Nicola Sturgeon's leadership of the party might be seriously threatened if Mr Salmond's credibility wasn't totally destroyed.  If there's any evidence to support that allegation, it should be investigated with an open mind rather than dismissed as a crank conspiracy theory - just as the allegations against Mr Salmond were thoroughly investigated and tested.

92 comments:

  1. where did she write it?

    ReplyDelete
  2. Does anyone know, did DG or any unionist commentator ever refute the series of allegations in Criag Murray's article, or does she and her defenders simply call him names as a fringe voice, conspiracy theorist?

    Has anyone done an analysis of the reporting on the couple of days Murray reported on the trial relative to mainstream reporting immediately before and after, in terms of airing (or suppression) of the defence view?

    Does anyone know if the disproprotionate reporting of the prosecuation case relative to the defence case ( a sin of omission, as it were) could ever constitute unfair reporting or influencingn the outcome of a case?



    ReplyDelete
  3. I'd suggest that Nicola Sturgeon should immediately establish a new party to be known as the NSP (Nicola Sturgeon Party) in order to clear the path for Alex Salmond to rejoin the SNP.

    The NSP could then put its case on each of the various contentious issues outlined above directly to the people of Scotland without derailing the campaign for independence in the process.

    ReplyDelete
  4. This comment has been removed by the author.

    ReplyDelete
  5. Journalists are falling over themselves to stir up emotions and animosity within the Independence movement in order to do it damage. They are using supporters of Alex Salmond and Nicola Sturgeon to create "sides" so as they can pit them against one another. Why would anyone that supports Independence need to be on one side or the other? They don't is the answer. The charges against Alex Salmond were ridiculous and quite rightly a jury threw them out. It is no great secret that senior figures in the SNP and the civil service side of the Scottish government were the main players in the charges against him.

    Does that mean Nicola Sturgeon played some part? Does it hell, at least not until we see some evidence. Meantime there are many who wish you to believe that she did play a part, my question would be why?

    It beats me why people actually listen to what these journalists have to say when it is clearly targeted at causing splits and bad mouthing Alex Salmond to get temperatures rising.

    We should ignore these sirens for they absoulutely do not write such dross because they believe Scotland should be an Indendent country. The opposite is of course true so why would I pay attention to their shit stirring?

    I ignore all that crap, it has nothing to do with Scotland becoming an Independent country and that's why they write it. They want to divide and split the Independence movement into opposing factions, to destroy it from within so that Scotland will fail to become Independent. That is their goal.

    Ignore the trolls that work for the MSM.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Nicely put.

      Delete
    2. The people who are giving the unionists the ammo are the traitors in the SNP and the Britnats in the Civil service.

      Why has Nicola Sturgeon not sacked any of her "close advisers" or Mc Cann?

      Delete
    3. How odd.

      Nicola Sturgeon changed the law to allow MI5 approved civil servant lesley evans to launch a targeted harassment campaign against Alex Salmond.

      When a judge shot that down in flames at a cost of £500,000 of MY MONEY, Nicola Sturgeon expressed her full support of the MI5 approved civil servant lesley evans, AND her sorrow at the plight of the poor victims of the former FM.

      MI5 approved civil servant lesley evans then twats out "we have lost the battle but we will win the war!"

      Before you know it two of Nicola Sturgeon's best friends make false rape allegations against Alex Salmond and are given immunity from prosecution in return.

      Tell us again how Nicola Sturgeon isn't involved.


      Delete
  6. good post James

    Ronnie

    ReplyDelete
  7. Put the blame where it belongs, the Scottish Office when the then Scottish Secretary was greatly increased the number of staff he had in Edinburgh who infiltrated the S.N.P.


    ReplyDelete
  8. The Yougov poll that shows the SNP on 54% for Holyrood gives, according to Ballot Box Scotland apparently, 68 seats to the SNP including 5 from the list. That, without the list MSPs is 63, 2 less than am overall majority.

    Anyone who thinks a second independence party to split that vote and perhaps deprive the SNP of those 5 list seats is a good idea, is a dangerous fool.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. It's only a bad idea if you think the SNP will actually do anything with its standing in the polls to win independence. All these ex Labour types seem to have a built in tendency to wait and wait and wait and wait and wait for better times to come along.

      If say 60 % in the polls for independence - I can just hear certain people saying wait - let's wait till 65% just to make sure. What they mean is wait till I have retired and filled my pockets.

      Delete
  9. Just a general question, but if age gap between consensual adult partners is issue, why didn't people complain in the past about the 17 year gap between Alex Salmond and his wife?

    Is it ok for men to date women old enough to be their mother, but not for women to date men old enough to their father?

    This sounds misogynistic to me.

    ReplyDelete
  10. What about the 24 year age gap between Johnson and his fiancee? Are the media making a big deal about that? Hmmm.

    ReplyDelete
  11. James, I wish all independence supporters had the mindset described in this article. I like Paul Kavanagh for that reason: when everyone else seems to have lost their mind, he *is* the voice of reason.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Craig P have you ever asked WGD directly if he thinks the SNP and Scotgov need a clear out at the top. Perhaps he knows more than he says.

      Delete
    2. Your're as bad as the journalist trolls that are shit stirring as that is exactly what that question is attempting to do.

      Just why would WGD "know more than he says" and if he does but chooses to keep it to himself then that's his business isn't it?

      You lot are pathetic, you really are but you're getting nowhere. Nicola Sturgeon is the most popular politician in the UK, the SNP support increasing and will increase even more as Westminster incompetence comes under more scrutinty.

      Your crap tactics reek of desperation and they stink.

      Delete
    3. Take a chill pill thepnr.

      So because someone is extremely capable and very popular does that mean they should be absolved from any responsibility for the way their officials and advisers have conducted themselves in putting together a criminal conspiracy and committing perjury. I think not. Can she sack her husband?

      Delete
    4. You like to ask questions I see.

      Tell me this. Do you do that in order to further the cause of winning Independence or is it because you usually go around gossiping like an old fish wife?

      There is yet to be an inquiry and a book to be written I believe, maybe best we wait and see what that reveals eh?

      Delete
    5. Take two chill pills. In case you didn't notice you asked a question in your previous post. Not aware it is a crime to ask questions.

      In Nicola Sturgeons speech in January what was her strategy for gaining independence?

      Delete
    6. Thepnr - " maybe we best wait" - that's the problem with ex labour supporters wait wait wait wait combined with excuses. No need to wait - it is crystal clear that a gang of Britnats have infiltrated the SNP. One of them was happy to describe herself as a soft independence supporter in court. Get a grip thepnr and open your mind to the evidence.

      Delete
  12. Wings Forward UnitMay 3, 2020 at 7:27 PM

    As Rev Stu's campaign begins to bear fruit in the press his Twitter account is hobbled:

    Sealand Gazette
    @SealandGazette

    Twitter's latest zany prank is to lock my @RevStu
    account for "suspicious behaviour", but not let me reset the password to get back in.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. The only thing his campaign ever achieved was to get people to pay for his new teeth

      He's a clown

      Delete
  13. I don't believe this is about Alex Salmond personally, I believe it's more to do with the people who are using his predicament to achieve what they want
    They oppose Nicola Sturgeon and want her gone but so far they can't produce Alex as opposed to her as he's remaining silent and not taking sides in what seems to be and argument between supporters of each but not directly involving either of the two

    In any case it's neither here nor there, Alex Salmond has had his front line turn and lost and any attempt to return to front line again will be met with the full force of the British press no smoke without fire headlines and sarcastic cartoons of a beaten man, which would do the SNP more harm than good

    Alex Salmond's not an idiot he must know what would await him shoud he even consider such a move, so it's a no from me

    As for the conspirators I wouldn't touch any of them with somebody else's barge pole, ex Brits and bloggers from England bleating their David Icke theories that all just sound like Liberal Democrat rantings of discontent

    It's Nicola Sturgeons turn and her ratings are through the roof why do these people want to damage that by accusations of Unionist spy and rubbish nonsense like that, the FM has been a supporter of Independence for 35 years whan it definitely wasn't popular to be so, folk should be looking a lot more closely at the motives of her accusers, not her

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Bang on.

      For what it's worth, the noise on twitter is just that. Noise on twitter. The tide continues to turn and the FM goes from strength to strength. Those that would prefer to talk amongst themselves about independence will not help us gain a majority. The FM will. As someone else said on here recently, she is playing a world class game of chess and is the only credible leader in the country.

      Delete
    2. Hit the nail on the head. Who more than anyone wishes to see Nicola Sturgeon removed as leader of the SNP and Scottish government?

      Who is it that are embarressed every single day by her leadership during this crisis?

      Who is it that have most to gain by getting rid of her and causing a rupture in the SNP and a split between Independence supporters?

      A. It is very clearly not those that support Independence.

      The answer then lies elsewhere but you really shouldn't have to look too far in order to find it. It's all around you.

      Delete
    3. Those who would seek to stop independence told me Salmond was a rapist. Now they are telling me Sturgeon's SNP is a hardcore unionist party and I shouldn't vote for it.

      As with Salmond, I think I'll just keep tabs on developments and make my mind up about what, if anything, is going on with Sturgeon when I have the facts in hand.

      Delete
  14. Garavelli like all these so called journalists in the MSM is a lying propagandist.

    ReplyDelete
  15. Ive just read that article, and yours, and I agree with almost everything you wrote. One thing though, I don't like your use of "Radical Feminist". It comes from exactly the same place as "TERF". Its a lazy phrase, designed to put women back in their box, and I don't think you intended it that way.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. It's not designed to "put women back in their box". Radical feminism is a real thing, not a term of abuse -

      https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Radical_feminism

      In this instance I inserted the word "radical" because I see no particular reason why other types of feminism would have a problem with age-gap relationships or encounters.

      Delete
    2. Reading the description, I would definitely be classed as a radical feminist.

      My mother wouldn't have it any other way.

      Delete
    3. Not all women agree with the demonisation of Trans people and my mother would also not have it any other way. Nor would my daughter or granddaughter.

      Delete
    4. Sure, I would never agree with the demonisation of trans people, and neither do 'radical feminists' from my observations of the debate.

      Delete
    5. Then you've been observing differen 'radical feminists' than I have and as a lifelong feminist I am horrified. I see 'feminists' calling for Trans to be stripped of the right to change their legal gender, being stripped of the right to use facilities such as toilets appropriate to their assigned gender. I see 'feminists' forming fake 'LGB' organisations that exclude Trans and the fight for trans rights. I see 'feminists' claiming that trans rights somehow diminish women's rights. I see an escalation of the violence against Trans people, especially trans women, caused by this anti-Trans campaign. And it turns my stomach.

      Delete
    6. Fake LGB? With Simon Fanshawe, co -founder of Stonewall UK there?
      I know a lot of women; of the ones I have discussed this with, most are "liberal", but disagree with the idea that a) you can change biological sex b) women have penises c) women should not be entitled to single *sex* spaces.
      They express concern about the creeping of the transgender umbrella to move from transsexuals to cross dressers.

      Delete
  16. Awful lot of (new) siren calls for me not to vote SNP. I suspect it isn't a coincidence that this is happening while brexit ruins the union and Yes moves steadily into (long term demographic driven) majority.

    Incidentally, as research scientist, I'm absolutely in the 'you can't get women with penises' camp. I might be mr uber liberal, but I live in the world of fact, and believe in science based law.

    That said, even if this issue was central to me, I would certainly never vote for a party which told me the big, fat lie that I can vote 'tactically' on the Holyrood PR list vote. What utter shite. I can vote tactically on the FPTP constituency, but it's impossible on a PR list.

    Nobody who tries to take me for a fool in this way will ever get my vote, particularly if they appear to want elected just so they can be elected, rather than presenting me with a full manifesto.

    A party that presented me with a manifesto I liked, while telling me to vote for it based on that, while being honest about electoral realities, would get a fair hearing.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. So what do you plan to do with Transgender people who at the moment DO have certain rights. I can only assume that you plan to undo those rights since you claim the do not even exist. Do you also plant to send them to re-education camps?

      Delete
    2. Excuse me? I absolutely believe sex dysphoria exists. Of course it does, and with it transmen/transwomen. There are many types of body dysphoria, and these can be very serious conditions.

      And I'm not denying anyone any rights. I've no idea what you are on about.

      For the record, I never use 'gender'. I think it's a very sexist term based on stereotypes, and I have no time for gender conformance. My parents taught me to respect people however they want to dress and whoever they wish to sleep with. For me, there is no such thing as male or female 'presenting'. Dresses and make up are for men as much as they are for women. Wear what the hell you like.

      So if I say male/female, this relates to biological sex, as taught at school/uni. Like I was performing an autopsy. No emotion the flesh, bones, genes etc. Avoids confusion, which I think is a huge part of the problem in this debate; the conflation of sex with 'gender'.

      Delete
    3. Being transgender involves a LOT more than a guy putting on some lipstick which you do not seem to understand. 'Respect people' is weak sauce and protects no one's rights. I think it's nice that you 'respect people' but transgender people deserve more than one person's 'respect'. They deserve protection of their rights and a stop to the violence and harassment that the current anti-Trans campaign is encouraging.

      Delete
    4. No, I understand the concept of sex dysphoria and noted how serious a condition it could be. This was my opening sentence. I had a family member with a body dysphoria disorder who made themselves very ill over it when young, so I can fully understand how badly such conditions can impact mental health.

      I'm not harassing anyone nor being violent. I am however currently, it would appear, being harassed / berated for being someone who treats and respects all people equality. Forgive me for being 'nice'.

      I remain unsure as to what rights are under threat here.

      I don't care what someone's sex is, how they wish to 'present', how they wish to 'identify', or who they want to sleep with. If you turn up at my home calling yourself shaun or shelia, I won't treat you any differently. A trans person would notice zero difference in how I treated them pre or post 'transition' because, of course, they're the same person.

      However, as a hetrosexual male, I know perfectly well what constitutes a women vs a man in the 'empirical' definition, which is what my original statement pertained to. A penis is a 100% male appendage, and that applies even in the case of transwomen body dysphoria, for it is of course is the cause of the dysphoria.

      However, going forward, for clarity, I will use woman vs womxn, man vs mxn which I understand is increasingly accepted distinguishing definitions.

      Delete
  17. It's the SNP Amish wing, you must adhere to their radical beliefs or be excommunicated from the party and Yes movement.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. There are 125,000 members of the SNP and I'm sure they don't agree on everything and in fact the majority probably think just like you! Wouldn't that be a surprise.

      The SNP are NOT the Yes or Independence movement but they are our best vehicle to us gaining Indepndence.

      Or do you have a better idea?

      Delete
  18. Just exactly what is it that Nicola Sturgeon haters and opponents of all things SNP think they are contributing to the struggle to help Scotland become an Independent country?

    Why do they believe that slagging off the leader of the Scottish government will increase support for Independence rather than hinder it?

    Why do they hate so much and sound just like an extreme British Nationalist in a rant?

    Why can't they be more positive and actually encourage support rather than continually slag off those that have devoted their entire life to winning Independence as both Alex Salmond AND Nicola Sturgeon have done?

    When Scotland does become Independent under Nicola Sturgeons leadership there will be an awful lot of egg dripping from an awful lot of chins.

    Unless of course they never wanted Independence in the first place and were just stoking the flames to spread division and had so many idiots falling for it that they jumped on the bandwagon to do the job of Westminster for them in order to help keep Scotland chained.

    ReplyDelete
  19. If Nicola Sturgeon was really a rubbish leader there wouldn't be so much fuss, it's only because everybody expects so much of her because she is a good leader and probably the best ever that there's so much noise about her

    She won't just hold a referendum, she'll win one, but she'll win it when the right time comes, and that's for her to determine not a bunch of internet trolls and bloggers and pretendy supporters

    The world only knows Scotland wants Independence because of Nicola Sturgeon, Alex Salmond was great but he was a small Scottish fish in a big English pond and he lost, Nicola Sturgeon is a world class leader and the world knows who she is

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. State of you that doesn't respond to comments made on your posts hen.

      Delete
  20. James Kelly wrote: "I remain firmly of the view that setting up a new independence party would be a mistake. Even if it's led by someone high profile enough to have a chance of winning list seats, the prospect of two pro-indy parties who regard each other with disdain due to a 'cultural' divide does not strike me as a recipe for furthering the cause of independence in the longer term."

    What we do know is it was the apparatus of the Sturgeon regime that instituted and conspired in this vendetta against Salmond. It was high-ranking apparatchiks of the regime that bore false witness against him in court with the intent of ruining him and both shutting him up and shuttering him up, for the rest of his life.

    Their intent was murderous in the sense of taking away his remaining time upon this earth to live beyond a 8’x12’ prison cell. Murderous, in their attempts to erase him from SNP and Scottish political history. Murderous, in their continuing jihad to grind his character and reputation to powder.

    This is NOT a dispute between two factions of independentistas within one party, James. This is a struggle between those who believe in an independent Scotland and a crypto-Unionist and woke entryist cabal who control the executive and the apparatus of the Party.

    It matters naught if the SNP is soaring in the polls. The empirical evidence of the past five years clearly demonstrates it is in *deed*, a compliant Union-centric party that is never, ever, going to seriously challenge WM power.

    The SNP is now alas, an irrelevance in terms of this nation’s continuing struggle for liberty. At its head is a corrupt career pol whose only concern is the accumulation and maintenance of her power to be used in the service of her self interest. She has promoted to high office other self serving crypto-Unionist pols and has thoroughly seeded the apparatus with pathogenic woke-identity entryists.

    It seems increasingly unlikely the Party can reform itself anytime soon, leaving Scotland and the electorate with no credible party of independence to vote for come next year’s election. Unless a major delousing of the party hierarchy and the eradication of woke pathogens from the apparatus can be achieved in short order, there is no alternative to the formation of an authentic party of independence to challenge the wee pretendy nationalists of the SNP at the next election.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. "It was high-ranking apparatchiks of the regime that bore false witness against him in court with the intent of ruining him and both shutting him up and shuttering him up, for the rest of his life.

      Their intent was murderous in the sense of taking away his remaining time upon this earth to live beyond a 8’x12’ prison cell...

      This is a struggle between those who believe in an independent Scotland and a crypto-Unionist and woke entryist cabal who control the executive and the apparatus of the Party...

      The SNP is now alas, an irrelevance in terms of this nation’s continuing struggle for liberty..."

      It's a bit flowery but Hahahahahaha I pissed myself reading that. What an arse alas LOL!

      Delete
    2. "high-ranking apparatchiks"

      "bore false witness"

      "Their intent was murderous"

      "crypto-Unionist and woke entryist cabal"

      "The SNP is now alas, an irrelevance"
      ------------------------------------------------------------------
      You could write for Mills & Boon I love every word of it, absolute class HAHAHA

      Delete
  21. Forgive my ignorance but what is a "crypto-Unionist" by the way? Would be very happy to know if you cared to explain it.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Think we have reached the Jimmy point.

      https://youtu.be/Xb82v7wh1Fw

      Can't decide if it is rampant fundamentalism where self immolation is preferable to any notion of compromise or delay or simply a desperate attempt to create this mythical civil war within the SNP. Either way it seems to be bypassing my SNP branch. Our membership numbers are up and the mood is optimistic.


      Delete
    2. Cheers HandandShrimp long time since I watched some Reggie Perrin. They don't make them like that anymore LOL

      I only joined the SNP just over a year ago in support of Alex Salmond funnily enough! There are few dissenting voices here either in the path we're taking towards Independence.

      The internet and the blogs like we are commenting on right now are not representative of the population at large (thankfully) but just us activists and our opponents stirring the porridge.

      I do know this though, Independence can no longer be ignored and Westminster must be worried. Expect more disinformation and attempts to split the Yes movement.

      They have no chance though, we are but a tiny group and the public at large see none of this. All I see is that we are winning.

      Delete
    3. So you are a thick as shit newcomer to the Nat sis. You and Eck could live together in a flat in Moscow in spite of the smell.

      Delete
    4. Another pathetic scream of impotent rage from Covidia.
      No wonder it can't get anyone to pay it for its trolling.

      Delete
    5. 'Forgive my ignorance but what is a "crypto-Unionist" by the way? Would be very happy to know if you cared to explain it.'

      Certainly, dear boy...

      crypto adjective:
      Definition of crypto
      1: not openly avowed or declared —often used in combination...

      Now run along, there's a good functional illiterate.

      Delete
    6. But seriously, what kind of scrotum says "bore false witness"?

      Delete
  22. Some "high-ranking apparatchiks" working for Westminster "bore false witness" in an attack on Alex Salmond. "Their intent was murderous" but they failed and he survived.
    Now the hunt is on for the "crypto-Unionist and woke entryist cabal" who are believed to have orchestrated the plot to murder Salmond. If they can't find them then Nicola Sturgeon has to be guilty. She must have done it as she is their leader.

    Sadly this has meant the death knell for the Independence movement and "The SNP is now alas, an irrelevance" so we all have to give up and go back to voting Labour, Tory or the Lib Dems and forget all about Independence.

    That is, only if you still believe in Santa Claus and the tooth Fairy.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. If Kim Yung Eck was subjected to a Georgi Markov type injection from a Russian agent he would not be missed.

      Delete
    2. Great Warped Compulsivist, You seem to be in urgent need of professional psychiatric advice. Really.

      Delete
    3. I cannot get help the experts are locked down. Send the polis.

      Delete
    4. There is no "hunt is on" - anyone who has been paying attention knows who they are.

      Everyone knows that there has been no investigation into who leaked the details to the Daily Record.
      Everyone knows that there has been no sackings/suspensions of guilty parties even though the SNP are normally super fast in dealing with such matters.

      Apologists for such behaviour have not learned any lessons from being apologists for the Labour Party for year after year.

      Delete
  23. People who want to talk about GRA should set up a forum to do that instead of using independence ones. It just means thousands of folk all over Scotland have to do a lot of scrolling.

    ReplyDelete
  24. I've been a member of the SNP party for a good number of years now. Here's an ordinary member's take on the above. The ordinary member doesn't give a fig about all of these nonsensical agendas of the right-on, hipster, gender activists: what we want is independence, first and foremost.

    Unfortunately, what the SNP's success has allowed for, is agenda-driven factions, mainly those who dumped Labour as redundant to their beliefs, to organise themselves within the party echelons like Japanese knotweed; they've done so, because at the top of the party are a growing cabal of MPs, MSPs and advisers, queuing around the leaders' table, spouting their nonsensical views; drowning out the central ethos of the party: independence.

    Now, all of this, highlighted by a MSM who gleefully report on everything SNPBAD, is a massive turn-off to your average voter. Personally, as an ordinary member, I don't care about anyone's sexual orientation or how folk self-id. If independence isn't the driving force, what are we here for?

    ReplyDelete
  25. Is Garavelli a genunine independence supporter? Clearly, not

    There are a small number of SNP MPs, and a cabal of entryists, who also clearly do not prioritise independence

    Personally, I will wait and see what the 2021 Manifesto contains. If it contains a firm commitment to a referendum, if there is an SNP majority, good. If not I'm done

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. The 2021 manifesto should be for independence not just a referendum. The SNP have already had multiple mandates to hold a referendum. How many do they need! Pathetic!

      The SNP is supposed to be the party of Scottish independence not the party that collects mandates for a referendum.

      Delete
    2. The SNP are the government for Scotland not the Scottish nationalist government for just half of Scotland
      Do you want them to behave like the Tory nationalist government of England or do you want everybody represented, y'know like democracy

      Delete
    3. The SNP don't exist to be at the beck and call of just those who support them on Independence
      One job is to convince the half of Scotland who don't want Independence that it's a good idea
      The other half of the job is to govern democratically to demonstrate how fair an Independent Scotland should be

      If the SNP behaved like the Tories and rode roughsod over the will of half the people of the country they'd end up just as unpopular as the Tories then nobody would want Independence would they, because why would you swap one bunch of the wrong kind of English nationalists for another who might turn out the same

      The SNP and Nicola Sturgeon are doing the job right and demonstrating to the half of Scotland who don't want Independence that it will be good and fair and not excluding the folk who don't vote for them

      Do you want a decent country afterwards or do you just want to win at the cost of a divided Scotland just like Northern Ireland

      Delete
    4. Anonymous - your comments are irrelevant to the point I made. It's a democratic vote so it is not acting unfairly. Clearly you have no understanding of democracy.

      There is nothing good or fair about the conduct of the people around Nicola Sturgeon when it comes to the criminal conspiracy they put together re Salmond. Best climb Down off your high horse.

      Delete
    5. "No understanding of democracy"

      But you can't declare independence with less than half the vote when the proposal was explicitly rejected 4.5 years ago. Be serious.

      Delete
    6. Arlene Foster - be serious - you cannot even read.

      Delete
    7. You can spot the Rev Stu Craig Murray brigade a mile away,
      oh btw send me more money to my bank in the Strand in England and i'll tell you more stuff to wind you up to help stop Independence, but you'll never know that because you're stupid and we got paid some of Boris's internet money

      Delete
    8. A fool and their money are easily parted.

      £900,000 for not much work is a good gig in anybody's book.

      Delete
  26. Hey there J R Tomlin interesting stuff but I don't get it. You say "They (trans) deserve protection of their rights and a stop to the violence and harassment that the current anti-Trans campaign is encouraging." What campaign? Nobody's taking their rights away - give me a link if they are. As far as I can see, the whole issue is around diminishing the rights of women. Trans rights are the same as for any individual and those rights (that we all share) extend UP TO A CERTAIN POINT. Its always been like that. I can't use a ladies toilet and that's okay. Easy solution is to make them all unisex rather than have all this agro. Take a chill pill my friend and join the travellers, we have our rights driven over all the time.

    ReplyDelete
  27. The crucial error was to allow the 'code of conduct' rules to be applied retrospectively. Not only is that the sort of legislation introduced by totalitarian regimes to apply to the regimes' opponents or any people they want to eliminate, but it was quite plainly introduced to apply to Salmond, unconcerned with any damage done to the SNP and the cause of independence. And it is those people who wanted that retrospective application who do not consider independence a priority, or may not want it at all.

    ReplyDelete
  28. Craig Murray has a good takedown of Garavelli,

    Tortoise was sponsored to produce the Dani Garavelli attempted assassination of Alex Salmond by Tulchan Communications, the same firm that employed Ruth Davidson on £50,000 a year for 24 days of corporate lobbying – until banned by the Scottish Parliament.

    Tulchan Communications is an openly Tory body. Its Chief Executive is Lord Feldman, former Chairman of the Tory Party. Its directors include Lisa Kerr, former SPAD to George Osborne. It is a part of the UK’s suave system of corruption, whereby political hacks with the inside track get paid huge bungs by firms to influence ministers in their favour on tax, contracts, regulations etc.

    https://www.craigmurray.org.uk/archives/2020/04/who-paid-dani-garavelli/

    Independence supporter ?. Not likely, hack for hire more like.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. You think Craig Murray is an Independence supporter? really? really? what planet are you people on

      Delete
    2. This refers to Garavelli.

      Delete
  29. In Nicola Sturgeons speech in January what was her strategy for gaining Scottish independence - you know the primary objective of the SNP.

    ReplyDelete
  30. Daniel Gravel is a No voting labour yoon hag.
    Also a member of the Integrity Initiative alongside our beloved leasky and fake dr jones.

    ReplyDelete
  31. The Britnats are still progressing their Brexit. The virus is not stopping them.

    The Britnats are still celebrating VE Day - rearranging a bank holiday. The virus is not stopping them.

    The SNP progressing independence - no. The virus is today's excuse. Pathetic.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. The UK fought the Nazis so it is not unusual to celebrate defeating the Nazi scum. Of course you are a sad Nazi. We would be a few billion quid better off if we had left he EU sooner. That money is in the pockets of the EU Mafia.

      Delete
    2. Turds can work a keyboard - amazing.

      Delete
    3. How ironic that the song We'll Meet Again will become the Nat si Turds new EU anthem when we leave. History is not on your side Unk.

      Delete
    4. Naw it is a tablet. I do not need anti Nat si wipes as there is none of the scum around to contaminate.

      Delete
    5. In that case, Covidia will be perfectly placed to install its Tory overlords' much-heralded app.
      And when the time comes, they'll know where to find Covidia in order to march its idle carcass off into the fields to work like a good Britnazi patriot.

      Delete
  32. Oh god! Look at my navel. It's more perfect than yours. Me. Me. Me.

    ReplyDelete
  33. By percentage head of population in Scotland more folk have died in Ayrshire and Inverclyde, think about that for a minute

    ReplyDelete
  34. They're Orange Lodge areas aren't they

    ReplyDelete