Sunday, November 1, 2020

The case for backing Craig Murray as SNP President

The honorary role of SNP President has in some ways just as impressive a pedigree as the position of party leader.  The legendary Robert Bontine Cunninghame Graham (aka Don Roberto) was President but never leader, and the same was true of Roland Muirhead, Donald Stewart and Winnie Ewing.  Both positions were held by Robert McIntyre and William Wolfe.  In a more rational world, the presidency would have been the natural role for Alex Salmond to take on if he had been welcomed back into the SNP fold after his acquittal - imagine the barnstorming speeches he could have given to finish conference every year, sending the membership off with a spring in their step.  In the absence of such rationality, though, Mike Russell is probably the next-best candidate for the job, and there's no real doubt at all that he will get it.

First of all, though, he faces a challenge from Craig Murray, who is using the contest to make the case for much greater urgency in the quest for independence.  I must say I'm very disappointed in the scathing reaction from certain quarters to Craig's decision to throw his hat into the ring.  Presumably the most faithful leadership loyalists believe, as I do, that people should stick with the SNP and not flirt with no-hoper splinter parties.  That being the case, it inescapably follows that the SNP must remain a broad church and that dissenting voices must be heard.  Craig is doing absolutely the right thing - staying in the party, fighting his corner, making his case, and giving the members (or rather the delegates) a meaningful choice between two competing visions and strategies.  He will, presumably, define success not as victory but the securing of a substantial minority vote to demonstrate to the leadership the depth of feeling about the need for a route-map to independence that does not accept the validity of a Westminster veto.

To me, that looks like a highly desirable outcome - the current popular leadership still firmly in charge, but pushed by members towards considering a more realistic and effective strategy.  So I've nominated Craig for the role of President, and I'd urge you to do the same if you're a member of the SNP and agree with me about the need for a Plan B.  You can nominate him by logging in to your SNP member account, then clicking on "elections" and then "nominations".  Don't be deterred by the customary attempts to deligitimise Craig as a "crank conspiracy theorist", because this isn't actually about Craig Murray anyway.  Mike Russell will be the President - this is about seizing an opportunity to make our voices heard at a conference which isn't even being permitted a direct vote on Plan B.  

Oh, and as for the synthetic outrage at Craig's rather imaginative wheeze of running an advert in support of his campaign in The National, I'd have to ask - have these people never seen a paid advert before?!

59 comments:

  1. I didn't know there was such a thing as SNP President until I saw that Craig Murray was running for the position. My SNP membership has lapsed and it's likely to stay that way but I'd renew it with Craig Murray as President. It would be good, I think, to have someone like him of high profile in the role promoting the right of self determination as the actual legal reality that it is rather than the media and party leadership narrative that it is merely a vague moral notion.

    ReplyDelete
  2. "Craig is doing absolutely the right thing - staying in the party, fighting his corner, making his case, and giving the members (or rather the delegates) a meaningful choice between two competing visions and strategies."

    I couldn't agree more ... and I've nominated Mr Murray.

    ReplyDelete
  3. That's another nomination from me too as sometimes leaderships need a kick up the proverbial. Those who disagree with Murray will of course probably look at this as some sort of conspiracy, and noisily complain.

    ReplyDelete
  4. The rank and file of the party certainly need to reassert themselves against mounting bureaucratic centralisation. Supporting Craig is a plausible part of this.

    Even if you are not too keen on him, do you really want an independent Scotland in which the leadership of the largest political party is run by an elite which disregards it's own grassroots and feels the need to organisationally protect itself from them ?

    It's a sure fire formula for the new Scotland to underachieve and simply be a less obnoxious variant of the UK it has struggled to be free of.

    Please, at least give Craig some thought as part of a wider redemoctratisation of the SNP.

    ReplyDelete
  5. Given the choice of Craig Murray and Mike Russell, I'd take neither of them. I guess having a choice between an old far-right-wing libertarian and a bitter old paranoid delusional is a reflection of the modern party.

    ReplyDelete
  6. I quite like Craig Murray and believe his heart is in the right place. A decent man. When I read his blogs I do find myself nodding to about half of it, but then unfortunately taking a perplexed face at the other half where his logic falls down or he contradicts himself.

    I see this in my own area of science; people become convinced something is true because there appears to be good evidence for it, and they get all excited and determined to show it to the world. However, that causes them to overlook the contradictory evidence that is right in front of their eyes. It's not really intentional, nor an attempt to mislead, just a normal human weakness. It's certainly not 'conspiracy theory' as folks tend to believe these based on little to no credible evidence at all.

    I don't think he'd make a bad president, and maybe I will nominate him for some of the reasoning from James above. Salmond really would have been an obvious choice here, but that option seems a bit scuppered right now. I'll ponder this a little then make my decision.

    I think for me if my vote has a chance of changing things, I need the candidate to be calm/clever/logical, and very difficult to counter in a debate, not just be a decent person with good intentions.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. SS - " I think for me if my vote has a chance of changing things, ..." so SS what are these things that need changing? As a Fanboy who lies for Sturgeon you usually say everything is just perfect.

      Delete
    2. SS - " when I read his blogs..." you must have missed all the Salmond trial reporting then. And all the same Reporting saying the same as Campbell the man you Record your hate for on a regular basis. So SS just what did Wings do to you that Murray didn't because they both report the same facts on Sturgeon? Did he say you were a Britnat or just a pretentious arse?

      "I quite like Craig Murray " - 😂😂😂😂😂😂 you then go on to trash his Reporting with your phoney science explanation.

      Delete
    3. My weird unionist anti-indy party stalker arrives, and offers no support for Craig Murray, unsurprisingly.

      Delete
    4. SS - I am not an SNP member so cannot vote for Murray - your memory failing you - I have posted this before.

      So what did Wings say to you to get you all upset?

      SS you are the one who stalks me and verbally abuses me so you are a big softy are you - like to dish out the insults but like a cry baby cannae handle it back. Is that what Campbell said to you?

      So what are these things that need changing in the SNP - that's what YOU said SS - cat got your tongue.

      Delete
    5. This comment has been removed by the author.

      Delete
    6. You are responding to my post, not the other way around.

      And you are openly admitting you will not be supporting Murray, but instead constantly attack his party.

      As for changes in the SNP... I think people in the party who have 'convicted' sturgeon and others of criminal conspiracy by mob justice need dealt with.

      Until such time as sturgeon is found guilty of something by the relevant authorities, she is innocent, just like salmond pre and post trial.

      Anyone who says she is a criminal conspirator is no better than those who claimed salmond is was a rapist.

      If people have evidence, they provide it to the authorities, not conduct trial by blog.

      Delete
    7. SSS - you really really cannot read well can you. I said it doesn't matter to me who wins the presidency because what matters to me is independence and the current leadership will not care who votes for whom in the presidency. How many times do I have to repeat what I have already posted. You really really are a time waster. Is that what Campbell said to you? What's the big secret? Did he say you were a phoney or a pretentious arse. Surely you cannot still be so upset all these years later by that. So what's the big secret?

      "Trial by blog" - what about trial by using the Britnat media. That is what the Scotgov/SNP have been doing to Salmond. Colluding with the Britnat media - some independence supporters. Oh that's right one of them said she was a soft yes. What about trial by using the Scotgov funded Rape Crisis Scotland organisation. So don't give me any of your Holy Willie shit again. What about the leaking of all the salacious details of the false complaints to the Daily Record. Still no Scotgov investigation into who leaked all these details. Has Sturgeon ordered an investigation into the leak - no! Draw your own conclusion - I don't need to.

      Delete
    8. If you think trial by blog is acceptable in the face of trial by media, it's you that has taken the moral low ground, not me.

      Did your mum never tell you that two wrongs don't make a right? Or that 'an eye for an eye and the whole world goes blind'.

      I will continue to work on the basis of 'innocent until proven guilty', applied to all, and you can call that 'holy willie' shit of you like. Doesn't bother me at all.

      As for WoS. I just refer to that English blog when you seem to have copied and pasted from it without providing the link to your source, as usual.

      I think he's called me 'cunt, wanker, idiot etc quite a few times. But then sticks and stones etc. It's only cowardly bullies that through around / get worked up by personal insults. The rest of us just see it as child like tantrums.

      Delete
    9. So speaks Scottish Skier A.

      Well you keep saying my posts don't bother you and I am just helping Scottish independence - yes I am helping Scottish independence - so why on earth do you keep stalking me. Just pissof and have a conversation with any one or two of your multiple personalities.

      For someone who doesn't mind insults you do seem obsessed with WOS - well one of your personalities is - not sure which one it is.

      Delete
  7. James , a very interesting and sensible article that I agree with for the most part.

    So why do you think Salmond has not been welcomed back into the SNP?

    There are only splinter parties, as you call them, because the SNP is not a broad church. Its current leadership have no intention of delivering independence. A DRAFT referendum bill is just another phoney promise. Like you I was at George square a year ago to listen to Sturgeon and all the other speakers. I still held out hope then that Sturgeon would deliver independence and that she was a decent person. Sturgeon's useless speech in Jan 2020 and all the evidence re Salmonds trial and the Scot parliament inquiry have put paid to that hope. Sturgeon's mask slipped on the Sophy Ridge show where she once again smeared Salmond.

    Even if Murray got 40% of the vote I have no confidence that the current leadership will change in any way whatsoever. After all they have presided over a malicious and evil fit up of Salmond. Lied to a civil and criminal court, lied to the Scottish parliament and lied to the Scottish parliament inquiry. Not the sort of people to be influenced by a failed vote for the presidency.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Has Salmond asked to come back?

      What splinter parties? 18 parties contested 2016, and as far as I know, about the same will contest 2020. Splinter would suggest a proportion of the SNP has broken away. I'm not aware of any defectors and polling shows at best 1% for any small other pro-indy party, ergo zero seats.

      As for lying, you are not able to make such judgments as you are not part of associated investigations. You just pronounce from your union jack armchair, speak for Salmond without his permission, and besmirch the dead.

      If people have lied on court, they will be put on trial for perjury and be forced to resign. If Sturgeon has mislead parliament, she'll be forced to resign.

      Sturgeon etc are innocent until found guilty, just as Salmond was. It's you that's breaking the law by calling innocent people criminals. You are trying to interfere with due process and set up innocent people.

      Delete
    2. SSS - my post was addressed to the site owner but as my resident Britnat stalker you of course have to get in there with your crap.

      Delete
    3. SSS (Scottish Skier Stalker) - I can make judgements because the evidence is all out there. Only idiots and Britnats like you will deny the truth.

      PS idiot - there is no legal trial taking place so I cannot prejudice any trial or break any law. You do post the greatest amount of pish. Now you claim to be a scientist - so I am giving you credit as having some intelligence so you must post this crap because you are a Tory Britnat. Or are you really an idiot who is not a scientist. That has to be a possibility I suppose since you do lie like Trump.

      Delete
    4. SSS - " besmirch the dead" - everyone of your posts contain a bucket load of so much crap.

      Delete
    5. SSS - "What splinter parties" too scared to ask that of the site host - It was James Kelly who stated that in his article. You did actually read the article?

      Delete
    6. SSS - " has Salmond asked to come back" - I have no idea - I don't speak for Salmond. It was of course our site host James Kelly who raised this point in his article. You did read the article or are you only on here to stalk me. Missing GWC are you - you pair were like a couple of clowns - one a phoney independence supporter and the other a clear Britnat. The laurel and hardy of this site.

      Surely SNP members would be informed if Salmond wanted to rejoin or if there was a secret ban on him - so SS why are you asking me that you are the member not me. Just a weirdo stalker who is missing his pal GWC.

      Delete
    7. "besmirch the dead"

      You used the death of someone to attack Craig Murray's party, the SNP.

      http://scotgoespop.blogspot.com/2020/10/a-bit-more-on-that-incredible-jl.html?showComment=1604153171357#c8903614595887699905

      Did Connery give you permission to use him for your attack?

      No, I didn't think so. Christ, the man has only just passed away. What if family members are reading this blog? You are sick.

      Delete
    8. SSS ( Scottish Skier Stalker) - " did Connery give you permission to use him for your attack" what utter pish you post. You cannot argue the facts/evidence so you just post pish that is becoming increasingly deranged. It is called deflection.

      You have five approaches: lie, mislead, misrepresent, deflect and insult. None of which are to your credit. You also seem to think that trying to send Salmond to jail for possibly the rest of his life is just another party internal squabble. That says everything about your lack of decency. Away and look for some sort of moral compass.

      You claim not to be a Tory but you certainly have all the same attributes of a Tory.

      PS - idiot - Murray has attacked the SNP leadership many more times than me and in more serious ways. So once again you post pish.

      Delete
    9. This comment has been removed by the author.

      Delete
    10. For Sturgeon to 'send Salmond to jail', she would need to have either:
      1. Falsely claim, in court trial, that he committed a crime (e.g. attempted rape against her person) punishable by jail term and/or:
      2. Lied in court as a witness to corroborate the false claim of someone else accusing him of such a crime

      These are the only routes by which should could be in whole or part responsible for him going to jail even though he was innocent.

      Which of these has she done and when was the conviction for it?

      Or are you defaming an innocent (until proved guilty) person convicted of no crime? Which is the very thing you accuse others of doing you hypocrite.

      Delete
    11. SSS - you seem to delete a lot of your own posts - is this a sign of some sort of multiple personality disorder - one thinks he is an indpendence supporter, one thinks he is a Tory and the other thinks he works in a university. Or is the simple answer that you are just a pretentious arse.

      PS - your post above is more pish .

      Delete
    12. It's Peter Murrell doing it if I step out of line and reveal some truth.

      That or I make a confusing typo(s) and wish to correct.

      Delete
    13. SS really has multiple personalities.

      You referred to the attempt to send Salmond to jail as as an internal squabble.

      I doubt if this happened to you at your place of employment you would not describe it thus. Or maybe not - I guess it depends on who you are at the time.

      I am pretty sure you will soon deny you said this. Just like you tried to deny you said you wanted to wait 5 years before indyref2 - that would mean Scotland being ruled by the Tories for another 5 years. Only a Tory would want that. You recently backtracked on that to say you wanted a referendum shortly after the May 2021. Election. Of course shortly can mean anything. Sounds like your multiple personalities cannot agree with each other.

      Delete
  8. Scotland/Wales/ N.Ireland ask for an extension of furlough for months. Johnson says pissof.

    England needs a lockdown due to Johnsons incompetence and furlough is extended by a month for England but with no clarity over what it means for Scitland/Wales/N.Ireland.

    It is amazing the amount of humiliation Britnats not in England will take from Englands UK government. They are like beaten dogs - pathetic creatures.

    ReplyDelete
  9. You’re usually very sensible James, but I can’t endorse this policy of “vote for him because he’ll lose anyway”. I did that one time and it didn’t end up so well, because of an unexpected result! From now on I’m only going to vote for people or propositions that I actually want to win, and I commend the lesson I learned to others so they don’t need to make the same mistake.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. “vote for him because he’ll lose anyway”

      No, that's not really what I'm saying. Mike Russell will win anyway, that's just a fact (to the extent that something that hasn't happened yet can be a fact), but I'd support Craig even if I thought he had a chance of winning.

      Delete
  10. I try always to be fair. In the Salmond trail, I did not and would never have all the evidence before me, so I passed no judgement on the man. I awaited the findings of the trial. I openly stated this position numerous times and attacked those who were pre-judging.

    I extend the same fairness to everyone else, including Sturgeon.

    I cannot support mob trial by blog.

    If people have evidence of wrongdoing / criminality, they take it to the relevant authorities. Sturgeon, Murrell etc are all innocent until proven guilty of something by either the party, Holyrood standards commission, or the police/courts.

    People can, rightly, press the authorities into investigating potential wrongdoing. Contrary to what some say, this is perfectly acceptable and often the duty of e.g. an employer with a duty of care. It is falsely accusing or giving other false testimony that is a crime, not pushing for wrongdoing to be investigated. Quite the opposite; people should not turn a blind eye to criminality, but press the authorities to investigate. IfS - if you believe Sturgeon to be a criminal, then go to the police with your material rather than defame an innocent (by law) person in public.

    What is morally wrong is convicting people in blogs and comments. That is the behavior of those calling Salmond a rapist before his trial and/or continuing to infer so now.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. SSS - more pish from you. In your comments upstream you say you support Murray but he has condemned Sturgeon in way stronger terms than me.

      You are an idiot and a Holy Willie who actually has no moral compass at all.

      Delete
    2. Yes you prize idiot, that's the reason I don't think I can justify supporting his nomination, and I'm not afraid to say it. It would be hypocritical of me.

      He unfortunately does 'convict people without trial' on his blog.

      It's a pity, because I support many of the causes he backs and did for example follow his reporting of the Salmond trial closely.

      We can't condemn people for trying to ruin the reputations of innocent (until proven guilty) people while attempting to do that ourselves. We can't treat people differently because they are on our side.

      Delete
    3. I spend some time today reading his blog to refresh my thoughts here.

      Delete
    4. "In your comments upstream you say you support Murray"

      No, what I said was:

      I quite like Craig Murray and believe his heart is in the right place. A decent man.

      I just think he's wrong to convict sturgeon without trial for the very, very serious criminal charges of conspiracy to commit perjury and/or perjury in relation to charges against salmond which carried a jail sentence.

      It is only through such actions that Sturgeon could have 'conspired to put an innocent man in jail'.

      But maybe he knows stuff I don't. If so, he should take it to the police / CPS. The same police/CPS that gave Salmond a fair trial in which he was found innocent of all charges.

      Delete
    5. SS says about Craig Murray -"I don't think he would make a bad president, and maybe I will nominate him". You said that today at 11.19am.

      Just how old are you SS - perhaps I have done you an injustice. Perhaps you do not mislead, lie, misrepresent etc - perhaps your memory is going.

      You have obviously forgotten - the jury gave Salmond a fair trial. The CPFS and the judge ruled out evidence by Salmonds defence team. The police fair - give me a break.

      As in the Mafia, and with Trump as well, if everyone around you is guilty and they are all close associates/ friends/ people who work for you. Well you either have very poor judgement;

      or you know fine well what they have been up to;

      or have given out the instructions for them to follow.

      Delete
    6. "In your comments upstream you say you support Murray"

      Please identify where I said I support Murray.

      You have identified where I said I might, but not where you claim I said I would.

      Thanks.

      Delete
    7. You are now claiming the judge was openly biased and acting against Salmond? That all CPS staff and police officers are biased against him too, including the majority that support indy? That these all committed perjury and/or broke the law to put him in jail, all to further Sturgeon's career?

      This is starting to get rather outlandish.

      Delete
    8. Has Salmond claimed police Scotland, the CPS and the judge were all out to get him or that something you came up with?

      Delete
    9. SS - naw your misrepresentation is outlandish.

      See when you are posting it would help if you clarified which of your personalities is actually posting eg

      Scottish Skier A = Holy Willie

      Scottish Skier B = attempting to send an innocent man to jail is just an internal squabble.

      Scottish Skier C = the scientist at university.

      Scottish Skier D = the guy who cannot remember what he has just posted.

      Scottish Skier E = I don't think Murray would make a bad president.

      Scottish Skier F = I don't think I can support his nomination.

      Delete
    10. And why were the jurors not anti-Salmond? This would have been piss easy to arrange if everyone is in on the conspiracy.

      Could they have not at least managed 50% anti-Salmond?

      Delete
    11. Is this Scottish Skier A or ? Still not got the hang of this multiple personality thing have you.

      Well they did manage to dismiss two of the jurors late on in the trial - I'm guessing you are personality D since you forgot that.

      Delete
  11. Well, covid daily cases have fallen to levels seen back in early october now, which is great news.

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-53511877

    Unfortunately, we still have areas under heavy restrictions so the UK borrowing/taxes funded furlough extension either continues as a reserved, UK-wide welfare benefit, or devolved nations get the powers to reintroduce it at the treasury's expense as and when it suits them.

    I think we can expect furlough to be extended and the move to JSS delayed. It would be too complex to do anything else and London will not devolve such a power.

    ReplyDelete
  12. James,
    Thanks for supporting Craig and your voice of sanity. A big vote for Craig will definitely fire a warning shot across HMS Murrells

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Dhuglass - I think a couple of torpedoes is what is required.

      Delete
  13. Final electoral count:305
    Trump:203

    ReplyDelete
  14. There seems to be some confusion over the furlough extension.

    It is, according to the news, UK wide, just as you'd expect for a reserved matter (welfare / tax / unemployment).

    However, it was instituted because England needed it.

    In response, the devolved governments are asking, rightly, what happens if they need the same say in January...February, but England doesn't? What then? If an English national lockdown triggers UK furlough, then surely a Welsh national lockdown should trigger the same?

    It's full UK-furlough each time or the devolved governments have the power to introduce a devolved furlough funded by the UK government treasury, with England having the same power.

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-54768330

    ...The Scottish government wants to carefully monitor the spread of the virus and adjust the protection level for each local authority as required, rather than rushing to new national action.

    However, Ms Sturgeon has repeatedly made clear that if that doesn't work, she is prepared to consider another lockdown.

    What she wants is maximum flexibility to decide if and when that's needed.

    That means securing a guarantee from the Treasury that the furlough extension made available UK-wide during the [new] lockdown for England would also be there if Scotland locked down at a later date.

    She's backed in that call by Scottish Conservative leader Douglas Ross...

    ReplyDelete
  15. SS - I posted on this subject at 1.48 pm. Good to see you and James Kelly following my lead even if it is nearly 6 hours later In your case SS.

    A guarantee from Westminster is worthless. The EU are finding that out right now. Of course if we were independent we wouldn't need to get out the begging bowl and ask for some of our own money back and this is what YOU actually said you wanted another 5 years of Tory rule - now backtracked to shortly after May 2021.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. YOU actually said you wanted another 5 years of Tory rule

      Why don't you get the link to the comment where I said that and share it with everyone?

      People think you are a unionist concern troll liar. Prove them wrong! Just right click on the comment timestamp, copy, and paste into a new post.

      Delete
    2. Scottish Skier D - you haven't got the hang of this yet - have you.

      Your memory is clearly a problem in this personality. Who are these "people" you refer to - just how many multiple personalities do you have.

      I have no need to prove your multiple personalities wrong - particularly if it is D as D will just forget again.

      Delete
  16. Alex Salmond calls for Nicola Sturgeon to be investigated for misleading parliament. A headline by The National,

    Scottish Skier B will be along soon to say The National is Unionist.

    William Purves will be along soon to call The National quislings.

    Barbe49 will be along soon to say I don't understand any of this - my IQ is only 49.

    Ramstam will be along to say I 'm no sure but I want independence now.

    ReplyDelete
  17. A question for all you SNP members. Now I know you are not told what Murrell the Chief Exec of the SNP gets paid but does he receive an annual performance appraisal and is it carried out by his wife.

    Now that would be an interesting chat over breakfast.

    "Dearest that time again for your annual appraisal.
    Ok Nic but can I finish my croissant first.
    Ok Peter but it is your third croissant already. So Peter do you think your performance was brilliant or excellent this year.
    Just brilliant Nic no doubt about it. Sue is always saying I am brilliant.
    Who is this Sue?
    Sue you know - Sue is the one I got to get "people" to sort out Salmond
    Oh right - ok I'll just mark you down as a brilliant performer.
    What sort of pay rise do you want this year Peter?
    Oh the usual 10% will do fine. I don't want to be greedy and use up all the indyref donations. Better keep some in case that pratt Alyn Smith makes a pratt of himself again next year. When he was away in Europe it was a case of out of sight, out of mind, but now he is in in Westminster I think we better get Colin to try and set up an Alyn crowdfunder.
    Good idea Peter darling you deserve your 10% pay rise.


    ReplyDelete
  18. You two idiots are giving this site a bad name again. Why don't you both grow up?

    ReplyDelete