Friday, March 12, 2021

The choice in May is simple: either keep the flame of independence burning, or extinguish it completely until 2026

The other day, I challenged Wings readers to ask Stuart what his plan was for using this election to bring independence closer, rather than push it further way.  If voting for the SNP is supposedly harmful, then who should we vote for instead, and how will that help?  I don't know if he read that post or if it was just coincidence, but a few hours later he posted this - 

"We wish we had a constructive course of action to suggest to you, folks. But we don’t, because democracy has failed you. There is no way you can vote that will fix the ruins the SNP have made of Scotland. We cannot see a way forward. It is becoming nearly impossible to evade the conclusion that all is lost. Nicola Sturgeon has destroyed it."

And, in fairness, that's a very clear and direct answer to the question I wanted posed.  He's given up on independence, has no plan for making it happen, and thinks no such plan is even possible.  The problem is, of course, that it's a dreadful and self-evidently wrong answer that his readers - most of whom still passionately long for independence - must reject.  It doesn't even make sense on the basis of Stuart's own world view.  If, as he believes, Nicola Sturgeon is the biggest roadblock to independence and that the current SNP leadership have no intention of taking the steps necessary to bring a referendum about, it surely must have occurred to him that if the SNP win this election there would be five more years of government in which a leadership change could occur - and that would be pretty likely to happen, because Ms Sturgeon has already served as First Minister for six and a half years, and ten years often proves to be the shelf-life for even the most successful leader.  If, say, Joanna Cherry or someone with similar views were to take over, they could actually do something with that power if the pro-indy parties have a majority in the Scottish Parliament - but they would be utterly powerless if there's no majority.  And the question of whether there's a majority or not will be determined in the election this May.  It's not rocket science - so why does Stuart not seem to care what the result of that election is? Actually, strike that, why does he seem to be actively campaigning to make a pro-independence majority less likely to happen?

I'd just note that Stuart has been insisting to his readers for months that Nicola Sturgeon's departure is inevitable, and is just a question of when not if.  If he truly believes that, and if it hasn't been a gigantic bluff, then even the strongest Sturgeon-sceptic should have no reservation in campaigning for a pro-indy majority in May, because the First Minister won't be around for much longer anyway.  Indeed, it would probably be better if a leadership change waits until after the election, because at that point there's more likely to be an adventurous choice of successor.  Immediately before an election, all the SNP would care about is picking a safe pair of hands to get us through the next few weeks.  (John Swinney is the name that springs to mind.)

There's also the possibility that Stuart is wrong and that a majority SNP government would deliver independence even under Nicola Sturgeon's leadership.  It's impossible to quantify the likelihood of that in percentage terms, but isn't it worth giving ourselves the chance of finding out?  All of these points boil down to the same basic choice - we either keep the flame of hope alive by electing a pro-indy majority in May, or we extinguish all hope until at least 2026.  Isn't keeping hope alive the logical thing to do, and if you don't think that, aren't you part of the problem?

Incidentally, I don't for a moment believe the conspiracy theorists, such as controversial journalist David Leask, who say that Stuart is a 'plant', put there to destroy the independence movement from within.  I think he just has an 'all or nothing' psychological disposition, which leads him to catastrophise and become destructive when things aren't going in the way he hoped.  But it's up to others to pull him out of that pit, not to jump in with him and drag this whole country in too.

186 comments:

  1. We've no choice but to vote SNP. The trouble is the SNP knows this.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Hello Alan. Because they know they can obfuscate and delay for as long as they want and people will still vote for them since the alternative of voting for unionists is inconceivable.

      I agree with Stuart Campbell to a certain extent: I honestly believe Nicola Sturgeon has priorities other than Scotland's independence on her mind and in her heart. She is not willing to break any Westminster laws or procedures in pursuit of independence, and the britnats know that too.

      For me independence is more important than anything else, covid included. I can't say the same for Nicola Sturgeon.

      Our/my only hope is that there are others in the SNP hierarchy who think the same as me and will soon do something about it.

      Delete
    2. Of course. Anyone who questions the unimpeachable SNP must be a unionist.

      Delete
    3. No, not a unionist, but certainly someone with an agenda. The cause of independence has never been more popular but we see constant sniping at those who have led us to this point. It is same smearing and scapegoating that destroyed the Labour party in Scotland and yet the same old types just repeat the same old games.

      Delete
  2. Another insightful article. Lets suppose that NS has no intention of ever going for Indy and like many of the other apparatchiks simply wants a comfortable, well-paid life and prosperous retirement. If that were true, it must surely occur to her that such a policy could only fool some of the people some of the time and not all of the people all of the time. A point would be reached, and I suggest it will be reached before the 2026 election, that many will have twigged that we are just being strung along and support for the SNP will collapse.

    Personally, I don't agree with that analysis. I tend to think it's more to do with the different approach of (some) women to politics and management more generally. Among other things, women tend to be more cautious and consensual.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. She has already said she will call for an independence vote THIS YEAR, there are to many unionists on this page who say they are supporting independence but would not vote SNP 1 and 2.

      Delete
    2. I believe her and it's SNP 1&2 for me as well. Independence is so much more important than personal dislikes of individuals or individual policies. People and policies come and go. Unpopular laws can be changed. But if we don't vote SNP we'll be under Tory rule for .... a generation or more.

      Delete
    3. @ William Purves

      There are too many people like yourself who accuse people they disagree with of being unionists. It is actually counterproductive to call genuine Indy supporters 'unionist' for disagreeing with Sturgeon and the current SNP.

      If there were some acceptance that the SNP is falling short at this point but it is the best we have, I would have more hope that we could pull the thing around after the Holyrood election and would feel more encouraged to vote SNP 1&2.

      But when people like yourself are uncritical of the situation and happy to condemn those who are not happy as unionists, I begin to think that there is no prospect of pulling the thing around after the election and it might be better just to lose to a unionist coalition and give ourselves 5 years to get our heads together.

      At this point, you need to be pulling the Indy movement together with a position which includes Sturgeon/SNP fans and haters. Calling 'unionist' on Indy supporters is about the most damaging thing you can do at this moment. More damaging than criticising Sturgeon and the SNP.

      Delete
    4. William
      Nicola Sturgeon called for a vote in 2017, rejected. Called again in 2020, rejected. Can call again in 2021, will be rejected and she will do nothing but say keep giving us mandates so we can keep asking. Total waste of time, new strategy and new leadership needed urgently.

      Delete
    5. William Purves will you post on here on 1/Jan 2022 saying sorry I was wrong there wasn't a referendum in 2021. Nope you will just ignore it and claim there will be a refendum in 2022. This has been going on since 2017.

      The referendum is ALWAYS NEXT YEAR in Sturgeons SNP. She is playing you all for mugs.

      Delete
  3. I don’t think Wings has said that Sturgeon’s departure is inevitable. He has argued that it is very likely, and desirable. But recent weeks there has been a growing suspicion that Sturgeon may survive despite the lies, breaking the code, and unjustly vilifying her former mentor. She may survive well into the next parliament and take down the hopes for independence with her. A new leader may emerge toward 2026, but after so long in power, the chances of the SNP in 2026 are presumably somewhat reduced, and the cause of independence may be overtaken by events.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. "I don’t think Wings has said that Sturgeon’s departure is inevitable."

      Oh he absolutely has. He's said that explicitly.

      Delete
    2. Salmond put himself, Nicola and the SNP in that position by his behaviour

      Delete
    3. What behaviour was that? Being framed by a coven of rabid feminazis?

      Delete
    4. Mike, that statement is either delusional or dishonest. Which is it?

      The current mess was the creation of the SG, nobody else. The head of the SG is Sturgeon, nobody else. The policy and procedure appears to have been a product of the Civil Service, for whatever reason, but at whose direction is unclear.

      Salmond was tried in court and found not guilty. He must therefore be afforded the respect that befits that of what he is: an innocent man.

      Unless you can substantiate "behaviour" of which he is guilty beyond a reasonable doubt, and report this to the police, then you have no right to impune a fellow citizen's good character.

      Delete
    5. Mike Lothian - you are delusional. Sturgeon orchestrated the whole thing right from the beginning.

      Delete
    6. Unless you can substantiate "behaviour" of which he is guilty beyond a reasonable doubt, and report this to the police, then you have no right to impune a fellow citizen's good character.

      Lol, the sanctimony. Why are some people so desperate to white knight for this guy? It's as bad as the other lot who fangirl over "Nicola". At least Labour voters don't have any illusions about Starmer, Sarwar and Leonard being rubbish.

      Delete
    7. It was an enquiry for Alex where he got of lightly It was an inquisition for Nicola like it was for the witches in the 16th Century, if they drowned they weren't.

      Delete
    8. There's a lot of misogyny going on. AS admitted he behaved badly. Timeline: AS behaves inappropriately (as he admitted); women complain; SG (or civil servants) make an bourach of the procedure & the rest is history. If AS had behaved appropriately in his dealings with female co-workers we wouldn't be where we are now.

      If you say it all the fault of NS & SG you are saying that the behaviour of AS which he admitted was less than acceptable, is OK, then you are saying it's OK for powerful men to behave badly with women colleagues or women in general. That's misogyny in my book and as a male "feminist" ie a supporter of women's rights, that makes me sick. And I've read people saying it's normal for men to behave badly in the workplace with women. No it's not.

      Delete
    9. The only thing I recall Salmond admitting to was a consensual clothed cuddle with younger woman while both had drunk too much and who accepted his apology at the time. Harvey Weinstein this ain’t! To use this as justification for the way he has been treated by so called “friends” is what is morally lacking in this whole situation.

      Delete
    10. James can you cite Wings as saying Sturgeon would definitely go, because I distinctly remember him saying it was very likely and putting a percentage of many 90% on it a few months ago. I don’t think Wings has ever floated a scenario of Sturgeon surviving the enquiries, winning the election, and being forced out shortly after. The assumption has been that Sturgeon would likely be forced to resign after the enquiries and before the election.

      Delete
    11. Smearer Dornaidh. Your post re Salmond is utter nonsense. You read to many Britnat papers and watch too many Britnat channels. Unfortunately what is too common is for some people to post nonsense like yours about Salmond.

      William Purves do you even bother to check what you are saying is accurate before you post.

      Keaton - some of us believe it is wrong for politicians who have power to try to lock up citizens using false testimony of their friends and people who work for them.

      Delete
  4. Your correct James. Very well put✓

    As for Stuart? I've been keeping an eye on his posts, and he is very soft on unionists and unionist parties right now, even the other day he was almost sympathetic towards JK Rowling ! whereas over a year or more ago he would have been gunning for these people...

    His U-turn in behaviour and attitude is stark. And that's me putting it mildly !

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. When was the last time he wrote something in support of indy? Or criticised anything the unionists have been doing?

      Delete
    2. Stuart, you doesn't like the criticism, do you?

      Delete
    3. All started after he was nicked and his PC etc. were examined by, at least the police, if not MI5 - just saying!

      I wonder if I an get my money back for the promised next WBB!

      Delete
    4. Try asking to see the Wings accounts and you get banned.

      Yet he attacks the SNP for not being transparent when you can download theirs in detail online.

      Delete

  5. "I think he just has an 'all or nothing' psychological disposition, which leads him to catastrophise and become destructive when things aren't going in the way he hoped"

    My biggest problem by a long way James,catastrophising. Been compared to Stuart a few times recently by my closest friends.

    ReplyDelete
  6. Voting SNP in the constituency gives a small measure of hope. Replacing Sturgeon with someone like Robertson or Swinney both heavily implicated in the wrong doing and devolutionists will go nowhere. The only hope is that the SNP membership wake up. I'm prepared to give them a chance to get a leadership of the SNP that actually wants independence and does not think an acceptable political strategy to stay in power is to make up sexual allegations to send someone to jail.

    If Sturgeon or any of her gang are still in charge at the next election and there has been no referendum then surely even the dead will waken up to what they truly are. This is the last chance saloon - if they don't deliver a referendum then I won't be voting for the SNP at the next election.

    ReplyDelete
  7. It is even more nuanced than you explain.

    I’ve spent hours encouraging fellows members to stay & recover the SNP as a vehicle for Independence rather than peripheral identity issues. I’ve seen family members alienated, angry & leaving. My hopes were raised by the grassroots voting at Conference Elections despite heavy handed stage management but dashed again when the same faces re-appeared wielding power through other routes.

    The grassroots SNP that I know want Independence and have no time for other baggage. Unfortunately those at the controls have these additional issues prioritised. We tried to influence them but they are barricaded in with a small but utterly ruthless guard (see unconstitutional actions of key committees). Conference has been cancelled.

    The SNP has not always been full on for Independence, in the distant past there was a strong Home Rule element, that seems to be where we are with the current leadership. So gradual & committed to following British rules that I honestly cannot see them making a move for Independence.

    I want to vote for a party that has a viable route to Independence in my lifetime.

    Avoiding a Unionist ScotGov is still a valuable aim, it allows us to fight another day but think that we’ll be faced with the exact same dilemmas in 2026 unless the SNP Leadership recovers their senses.

    ReplyDelete
  8. Don't overlook what he said two paragraphs above that: "Because if they somehow miraculously achieved independence tomorrow, we’d be afraid to live in the Scotland they’re creating."

    To which I'd ask, what about the Britain that's being created now? Patel's carving up of our rights is constantly dissected by @davidallengreen and paints a very grim picture. Very relevant to the Indy debate.

    The point of Scottish Independence is that the people of Scotland determines who and what our government is. The power to dump our FM and choose a new one is ours alone. But we are helpless against the UK Home Office. We can't stop it doing things and whoever we make FM can't stop them.

    Nevertheless, we have to face the possibility that Stuart Campbell isn't going to be campaigning for Yes this time around.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Absolutely, he may be merely midway through a political journey every bit as surprising as George Galloway's or Claire Fox's. Who knows, he could be in the House of Lords within a few years.

      Delete
    2. He loves brexit England.

      If you followed his twitter you can see he loves Bath; one of the most quintessentially English of cities. If you want to live and breath England, it's where you'd move to. All those photos of his strolls through the quaint Georgian streets and canal paths then a glass of fine English cider in a warm beer garden.

      He openly admits he prefers the company of 'brave English' people to the 'gutless Scots' in his favoured read, the right-wing establishment English Times.

      He does the hiding in plain sight thing. It's just he knows how to tell his current target audience what they want to hear making them ignore the obvious.

      I was kinda taken in by it in the early days. Then post 2014 I worked out that the previous talk about him returning to Scotland was a lot of shit and he was just looking to make some money. He loved England and had no intention of living in Scotland. He wasn't forced down there like many scots have been looking for work, but he was English for 30 years because he likes being English. The daily mail style trans stuff just confirmed he fits in down south well; a natural tory.

      Delete
    3. Nothing wrong with liking England and supporting Scottish independence.

      The key question is what kind of society do we want in Scotland. I want one where we pay workers such as nurses more and end corruption and cronyism to the tune of billions of £s. It seems this can only happen with independence. If Wings doesn’t think that argument is good enough then his support for independence is shallow.

      Delete
    4. Sure. Nothing wrong with folks liking England more than Scotland. It's just pretending things are the other way around so you can get cash out of folks that's shitty.

      Delete
  9. Checked his twitter stream last night (the ComeToGhana account). Whew - absolute wall-to-wall rage and paranoia. He really has got people acting like terrified cattle about the trans issue. Given his attitude to feminism in general in the past it is just incredible how he has managed to dupe people into seeing him as a brave defender of women.
    Many were just waiting for the transition away from independence support, and it's pretty much happening now. The pivot will secure a solid revenue stream going forward, I'm sure.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Is Come to Ghana actually him, or is that just a suspicion? I intreracted with that account a week or two back without realising.

      Delete
    2. Campbell is using the same techniques that the Nazi's used in their first few years in office by demonizing a certain section of the population to whip up fake anxieties. The right wing press used the same techniques to whip up anti-European sentiment.

      Delete
    3. Yes, it is him and no doubt a couple of names on this site.

      Delete
    4. Is Come to Ghana actually him, or is that just a suspicion?

      He links to the account from his blog, and the other day it posted "F*ck independence". So it seems pretty conclusive.

      Delete
    5. Campbell is using the same techniques that the Nazi's used in their first few years in office by demonizing a certain section of the population to whip up fake anxieties

      Yes, definitely. Just like the normal population, a certain % of trans people will be weirdo dickheads, racist whatever. Campbell picks these out for his articles and does the whole dog whistle 'this is what trans people are like, can you really trust them?' thing. It's revolting and what had me click he was no real indy supporter, but just using them to feather his nice bath nest. He is a rabble rouser for whatever idiots will send him money. He's worked out there's cash in attacking the SNP, so he's running with that now.

      And I actually get it tight from the idiots on the other side as think the whole sexist 'gender identity' thing is a crock of shit. I mean christ, apparently I'm trans non-binary for thinking this according to stonewall. Sex dysphoria is however a real medical condition though, and distressing for many, so making lives easier is desirable.

      Delete
    6. Equating Stuart Campbell to nazism is a level of deranged idiocy that is disappointing on any independence site.

      Just because the guy disagrees with you doesn't merit such careless and malicious commentary.

      Delete
  10. An ideal situation IMO would be a minority SNP government with feet held firmly to the fire by a strong pro-indy opposition. (No, not you Mr. Harvie, sit down please)

    However, at the moment the ISP is just a pointless sideshow, most ordinary people have not even heard of them and they will not get any seats.

    So a Sturgeon majority it will have to be. And it will have to be the Grassroots that hold her feet to the fire.

    I suggest ASAP as Covid restrictions allow a permanently manned Independence Camp is set up outside Holyrood, while AUOB organise the biggest pro-indy marches ever, regularly marching us past Bute House, Holyrood and anywhere Sturgeon may think she can hide.

    ReplyDelete
  11. Vote Tory for indy!

    Choose your colour: blue Tory; red Tory or yellow Tory, it matters not. Let's teach each thatessempee a lesson, Sturgeon too.

    Eck, the Messiah, will soon appear astride his unicorn to proclaim a universal declaration of, er, isolation! Stuff process, stuff credibility, stuff international recognition and dinner worry too much about a majority.

    Weer Sco'ish an' we kin jist suit wursels when we feel like it, okay ya bass!



    Or maybe we can just get real & accept the fact that there's a lot procedural shite to plough through and sometimes progress will be glacial.

    I understand that there are genuine misgivings about the SNP's recent performance and I certainly share the frustrations about slow progress, but some people need to understand that there are severe limitations to what we can do at times.

    We need to focus on the goal, but also understand that sometimes we just can't have it all our own way. We can't even begin to consider alternatives until we've exhausted the now established procedure; you don't have to like it, but you do have to lump it. An independent Scotland has to be part of the global community any that won't happen if UDI is declared prematurely; this is a fact, not an opinion. The big players on the international stage don't particularly like independence movements as a rule, they threaten the status quo and it makes them jittery; especially if there are independence movements within their own borders.

    So please, when you see someone slagging off the SNP without offering a viable alternative, ask yourself who benefits? If the answer isn't the indy movement and after due consideration it appears that the Union benefits, then maybe it's actually a Unionist troll that's behind it, directly or indirectly.

    So if we do end up with the Unionists forming a 2 or 3 way coalition because you've been dishing out the tough love, or abstaining, or using your list vote as a protest, I hope you're big enough to own the result.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. ^ Correct.

      Arguments based on "the sovereignty of the Scottish people" and the UN declaration on human rights may be comforting, but aren't worth a hill of beans without international approval. Though, like so many beans, they do provide a lot of hot air.

      Hypotheticals don't count. We have to actually act out the section 30 route, actually be blocked, then reach an actual constitutional crisis for alternatives to become legitimate. And while a deadly pandemic keeps us off the streets, it's going to be slower progress than we'd like.

      Delete
    2. Drew Anderson -

      1. The cringe writ large.
      2. Scotland cannot do a UDI.
      3. If there is no SNP majority it will be down to the SNP leadership and people like you.
      4. As morons are not protected in Humzas Hate crime law I can freely say you are a moron Drew. So just to be clear in this post I am not slagging off the SNP but morons like you and your fellow morons on WGD.
      5. Now you probably will be offended by this post but please be clear it is intentional not accidental. You are happy to post on WGD slagging off others with Kavanagh protecting you but no protection here.

      Delete
    3. Thanks John.

      As for you IfS, you can just fuck off and shag yer hand as far as I'm concerned. By all means slag off my posts if it gives you some sort of thrill, but I'll be taking Mr Kelly's advice from a while back: "if you don't like a post, just ignore it". I'll just scroll past yours from here on out, you really don't post anything worth reading & haven't done for quite some time.

      1. Reality not cringe;
      2. No argument there;
      3. Aye right, people like me actually voting for them as opposed to you encouraging people to waste their list vote;
      4. Run out of points to make, so lob in an insult why don't you;
      5. Why would I be offended by someone who's sole purpose in life seems to be throwing insults around on somebody else's site? Actually engaging in a conversation & exchanging ideas would appear to be beyond you, I'd say feeling pity is nearer the mark; you could do with some professional help IMHO.

      So a little friendly advice: if you want to win hearts and minds, cut out the personal stuff. If you want to continue behaving like an arsehole, you're doing just dandy.

      Note to James: I've been reading your blogs for years, long enough to know that you are tolerant to a fault. I'm certainly aware that little provokes you, but you do get prickly when people tell you what to do; so I'll avoid doing that. But seriously, look at IfS's parting shot: "...no protection here." If that isn't setting the agenda, what is? Is this your site or his? Jus'askin'.

      Delete
    4. Drew Anderson - you give the game away with your final comments. You like posting on WGD slagging off others but you ain't that happy when you get it back.

      You Drew are a hypocrite and a coward. You say you will skip on past my posts then beg James Kelly to stop me posting. Skip on by all the time fine by me. You seem to forget that people read WGD and see all the attacks that you and others post. So your holier than thou stuff is hypocritical.

      It is James Kelly's site not yours Drew and I note you have previous on this by complaining about non Sturgeon loyalists being allowed to post on his site unlike on your favoured site WGD. I repeat you are a hypocrite.

      Delete
    5. This is Drew Henderson on WGD " ....Eck fanboys and perhaps general misogynists have to be factored in." So clearly Drew does not follow his own advice on how to win hearts and minds

      This is the hypocrite Drew Henderson who complains about my posting. Drew is quite happy to sling the mud. Unlike Drew I do not try and get bloggers to ban anyone from their site not even the pathological liar Smearer Skier.

      Delete
  12. *dinnae*, not dinner. Autocorrupt in action.

    ReplyDelete
  13. I suppose what I'm missing in the "Vote SNP this (last) time because they are the only realistic hope for independence" arguments is any sense that the same case could reused next time. At what point does one throw up ones hands & say enough already? For some of us it is clearly "now". Others appear to require another 5 years of centralising power, disenfranchising the branch members, passing laws that were not in any manifesto and not wanted by large % of the population, inventing new accountancy methods that dissimulate several hundred of thousands of pounds raised for an Indy campaign inside an account with less than 100 pounds and demonstrably fail to move any closer to independence beyond the utterly forlorn "Please Tory Overlord can I have another S30".

    Once you see it in this light it is a little easier to feel that rejecting them now may be better in the long run.

    Of course I understand, and have made, the argument that Westminster could take anything less than an overwhelming SNP victory as an excuse to close Holyrood. To this I'd simply note that the current SNP government has not managed to stop them building Queen Elizabeth House or legislating to fund tory run councils without input from Holyrood. So I guess I feel that the answer to your initial questions "who should we vote for instead, and how will that help" is you vote for another Indy party on the list vote & hope enough others will do so for us to obtain a pro-Indy majority where the balance of power is held by a party or parties that will hold the SNPs feet to the fire whether on Indy and their misogyny. Sure it's a leap faith but so was voting the SNP back in the day & having already leafleted for, canvased for, stood outside the polling station from 07:00 to 21:00 and voted for one SNP nonentity in a yellow & black rosette I'd rather believe in & vote for what we can be than for the sad remnants of a party I put my faith in for over 40 years.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. "is you vote for another Indy party on the list vote & hope enough others will do so for us to obtain a pro-Indy majority where the balance of power is held by a party or parties that will hold the SNPs feet to the fire whether on Indy and their misogyny"

      That's an answer to the first part of the question. It's not a credible answer to the second part, ie. "how will that help?" because in their current state, ISP and AFI are plainly not going to get close winning any seats at all, let alone holding the balance of power.

      But I'll grant you that voting for a fringe pro-indy party is less destructive than what Stuart seems to be doing - campaigning for the SNP to lose without specifying any alternative. (Although I gather he would vote for Johann Lamont if given a chance, because of the GRA issue, which gives an indication of where independence ranks on his list of priorities.)

      Delete
    2. Joan McAlpine is on my list.

      Wings sings her praises then tries to get folk not to vote for her.

      Delete
    3. Agree the ISP & ADI are not great choices as things stand but many disillusioned SNP voters spent years being helping them rise from nowhere, while being told some variant of SNP is a wasted vote, only Labour can ever get into power / beat the tories / etc etc.

      Now that the SNP has been overrun by entryist carpetbaggers I guess we're just more likely than most to vote for a new cleaner Indy party ideally with a rock solid constitution to avoid the antidemocratic over centralisation that has destroyed the credibility of the SNP.

      Delete
  14. I get irritated when people blame Stu for everything that's wrong with the indy movement. The SNP still has formal party democracy, but everyone knows it's not working properly. The list ranking carry on is just the latest example, but we've all seen years of gerrymandered conference resolutions, and then conference decisions being all but ignored by the leadership. We all know the party is dangerously centralised. It started under Salmond and has got a lot worse under Sturgeon. We all know Murrell shouldn't have that job.

    But what can anyone do? What would actually change if we put our faith in the SNP in May and by 2026 we're still no closer to independence. Do we give up on them then? Who do we vote for instead? Even starting now, you couldn't build a party able to do any more than ISP or AFI can now by 2026.

    In the meantime, the SNP will take a majority vote as endorsement of everything they want to do, despite the fact that folk are being morally bullied into voting SNP on the grounds that if you don't vote SNP, you're an "Uncle Tam," a Yoon or some sort of woman-hating bigot.

    Sturgeon WILL have to resign if either inquiry is remotely honest in its deliberations. My suspicion is that she does, right as the Parliament is dissolved, saying that she made a couple of small technical mistakes but it was worth it to stop a wicked man getting away with his sins. She will then ask the people of Scotland for their verdict on her. And then everyone who supports independence will have no choice but to endorse her as leader, because the election will not just be "the independence election" but also, coincidentally, the "Nicola election."

    I'll probably vote SNP, but if there is even a moment of hesitation in an aggressive push for independence, we have to be ready for an all-out campaign to establish an alternative party and to put all available pressure on the Scottish Government.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. In the meantime, the SNP will take a majority vote as endorsement of everything they want to do, despite the fact that folk are being morally bullied into voting SNP

      Nobody's bullied me into anything. Have you not got any backbone?

      And you are not being bullied either. Unless folk are turning up at your door to hound you about what to vote? Putting a gun to your head?

      Obviously if you voluntarily go on the internet and engage with politically active folks, they might try get you to vote a particularly way. All sorts on here try to get me to vote unionists, ISP, Green, SNP...However, since I volunteered for that, it's not bullying. And I've backbone; I'll vote how I want.

      The outcome of the investigations will determine whether Sturgeon chooses to try and stand again. Like it or not, she must step down in a few weeks. Her term as FM is ending by law. The parliament will seek candidates for a new FM (and cabinet) for the next term in the 28 days post election.

      Obviously, no matter what, if Sturgeon stands for election as an MSP and prospective FM, then wins her seat while the party wins the election, following which she wins the vote to elect a new FM, then she is Scotland's FM.

      The people will have spoken.

      The code says ministers should step down if they break the code. The way back is to get a new mandate, e.g. by the consent of the people and parliament. Nothing prevents it because it is the morally and democratically correct thing to do. Let the people be your judge.

      Delete
  15. ".....democracy has failed you. There is no way you can vote that will fix the ruins the SNP have made of Scotland. We cannot see a way forward. It is becoming nearly impossible to evade the conclusion that all is lost. Nicola Sturgeon has destroyed it."

    I find that statement indistiguishable from the utterance of Yoons, overt and covert, over the last ten years.
    Are you sure Campbell is not a Unionist plant? His ever-so-sudden change of attitude happened right after his interview with Salmond on RT. Did he spot a chance to ingratiate himself with the beleagered and vulnerable ex-FM by offering the support of (at the time) the Scotland's premier independence blogg. If he is a plant, the timing reflects the panic in the heart of the establishment.
    Of course, he could just be a pratt who likes the sound of his own keyboard.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. He could of course if he is a plant he could be using use the former FM's predicament as something of a trojan horse to attack the SNP Government. I think his change of direction was after his failed court case against Kezia Dugdale. He was hoping for some support in his defamation case from the SNP but none was forthcoming. He was even more bitter after that.

      Delete
    2. Unknown - see in that tiny brain of yours has it ever considered he is attacking the SNP Government because they have done something wrong. Of course you could just keep posting the same old conspiracy theory that has been aired millions of times by pea brains like yourself.

      Delete
  16. Latest local election results.

    https://twitter.com/BallotBoxScot/status/1370361991060205573

    and

    https://twitter.com/BallotBoxScot/status/1370369515595440131

    SNP vote up in each contest.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Livingston South By-Election 11/03/2021, First Preferences:

      SNP ~ 2465 (43.9%, +3.0)
      Labour ~ 1382 (24.6%, -10.9)
      Conservative ~ 989 (17.6%, -1.8)
      Ind ~ 332 (5.9%, +5.9)
      Green ~ 234 (4.2%, +1.7)
      Lib Dem ~ 185 (3.3%, +1.5)
      UKIP ~ 29 (0.5%, +0.5)

      SNP elected stage 7.

      Leaderdale and Melrose (Borders) By-Election, 1st Prefs:

      Con ~ 1380 (39.9%, +8.0)
      SNP ~ 1042 (30.2%, +12.4)
      LD ~ 538 (15.6%, +6.2)
      D (Ind) ~ 159 (4.6%, +4.6)
      Grn ~ 152 (4.4%, +4.4)
      Lab ~ 115 (3.3%, +3.3)
      W (Ind) ~ 69 (2%, +2)

      Con elected stage 7.

      Delete
    2. I voted in leaderdale. That's a really decent increase for the SNP.

      Melrose is super Tory. Full of wealthy English retirees.

      Great news for Livingston.

      Delete
    3. A 12.4% increase I believe.A 'Tweeter' described Melrose as the Henley-on-Thames of the Scottish Borders.....fancy a cucumber sandwich Skier?

      Delete
    4. Every party is up on 2017 in Leaderdale and Melrose, so I take it there was a significant independent last time. Anyone know anything about their Yes/No alignment? If they were Unionist (or even neutral), that's a brilliant result for the SNP.

      Delete
    5. 3rd by-election result.

      Aird and Loch Ness (Highland) By-Election, 1st Prefs:

      Independent ~ 997 (28.3%, +28.3)
      SNP ~ 994 (28.2%, +5.9)
      Conservative ~ 824 (23.4%, +3.7)
      Lib Dem ~ 300 (8.5%, -1.7)
      Green ~ 272 (7.7%, +0.1)
      Labour ~ 133 (3.8%, +3.8)

      Independent elected stage 5.

      https://twitter.com/BallotBoxScot/status/1370399590478921739

      Delete
  17. The trouble with your vision of things, James, is that you apparently believe that wishing things to be true will make them so. But I'm pretty sure that your views are slightly more nuanced than that because I read what you write with an open though questioning mind. Just as I do what is written on Wings. Anyone with half a brain reading that post by Stuart would be able to tell he was having a particularly bad day & might well have been feeling a sense of despair which came through on his writing. You were also discrediting the critical thinking capabilities of many Wings readers who are not actually hanging on every word that Stu utters & do not view him as any kind of political Messiah. You have many regular commenters & many more regular readers who appreciate the insights you offer but don't agree with your conclusions some of the time. Wings is exactly the same. Can I suggest that you & Stuart try to ignore each other as much as possible please? He is absolutely a dick at times & he is not always right in his views or analysis but he has proven himself to be ahead of the curve over many years - just as you have - so how about not making this about personalities, eh?

    ReplyDelete
  18. God, imagine if there was even any point attempting to convey what a load of dishonest shite you've just written.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Andy and Tam that is out of order talking about James post like that. It's his site he is entitled to express his opinion.

      Delete
    2. We were'nt referring to James post and well you know it GWC.

      Delete
    3. Tam the Bampot - it's not my fault you and Andy cannot handle a simple post and make it clear who you are referring to. You really think name calling will help make people support your party Mr Bampot. Really. If you do you truly are a Bam.

      Delete
  19. The hate crime bill debate was democracy at work. Consensus politics with 72% of MSPs from 4/5 parties voting for it. Left, right and centre shaped it with amendments. Anyone that tells you it is and 'SNP policy' is just lying to you end of. The SNP are a minority; no new law is theirs.

    And the other day having the FM, lord advocate etc quizzed for hours live on TV by the opposition; pure transparent democracy. You will never see the like of that in the UK. It's nordic nation PR democracy; these once again topping the democracy list in 2020.

    No wonder trust in Sturgeon soared after it.

    Sturgeon's cabinet is being judged by a committee majority comprised of unionist / opposition MSPs while she herself is being investigated by an impartial international observer (Irish) regarding the ministerial code.

    In May Scots will vote under a PR system which will deliver them a government which will nearly perfectly match how they voted. They will have multiple choices (rather just just 2-3), with little parties just needing 5% in a region to get elected. If folks don't like the SNP, they can freely make that known. No need for tactical voting; it is PR.

    Transparent, accountable democracy.

    Scotland lacks democracy only through its membership of the UK.

    Hence the headlines saying the UK government will overturn the result if the SNP / Yes parties win.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Smearer Skier (liar since 2014) - An Inquiry that the people being investigated get to control what evidence is made available to the Inquiry. Only in Smearers world is that just perfect transparent democracy. The sad thing is the Smearer probably thinks it is.

      Delete
    2. What documents are the committee missing?

      Delete
    3. Smearer Skier (liar since 2014) - pissof - get yourself a research assistant you Pratt. Get one of these imaginary PHD students to find out for you.

      Delete
  20. It is valid for James to ask questions and explain his point of view. A lot of which I agree with.

    My question for the Sturgeon loyalists:

    How many years will it take, if any, with no referendum taking place before you realise the current leadership will not deliver a referendum never mind actual independence.

    1. One year after the May election.
    2. Two years after the May election.
    3. Three years after the May election.
    4. Four years after the May election.
    5. Five years after the May election.
    6. Vote Sturgeon again in 2026 for a referendum.
    7. Sturgeon is a Saint and will deliver independence when she is ready.

    What is your timescale, if any, for waking up. Just wondering how long I might have to wait.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Sturgeon can't make Scotland independent. Only Scots can.

      Delete
    2. Smearer Skier First up to select an option - oops he didn't pick an option. Proof once again he really really cannot read well. Just as well he is not a uni employee.

      Delete
    3. I thought you were voting SNP IfS. If so, should you not answer your own question?

      Delete
    4. Smearer Skier (liar since 2014) - you really really canot read well can you. The question is addressed to Sturgeon loyalists and that aint me. You are truly a Pratt Smearer. Unluckily for you Pratts, arseholes and Sturgeon loyalists ain't a protected category.

      Delete
    5. 'Arse' is an English word.

      The fact you never use the Scots 'erse' gives you away.

      Delete
    6. Smearer Skier (liar since 2014) - that post is a give away that you are a complete and utter arse.

      Delete
    7. Not a word from the Sturgeon loyalists except for Smearer Skier and he didn't even address the question.

      So it appears that the Sturgeon loyalists will remain loyal forever and forever and forever. Unlike a fairy story it will not have a happy ending. The cognitive dissonance will be masive.

      Delete
    8. Not a sturgeon loyalist but to answer your question I would say after 2 years and if after the whole section 30/ court process has played out and there has not been a ref or one in the immediate future ie 6months I would expect a pro indy parliament to dissolve and force a plebiscite election

      Delete
    9. Matthew - fair comment and a mature sensible one. The point of my post is to highlight how Sturgeon loyalists just cannot get their heads to even think that Sturgeon will not deliver a referendum never mind actual independence. How many years will that be after Sturgeon first introduced the referendum carrot to Theresa May?

      Delete
    10. I completely agree that we made big mistakes back in 16/17 the biggest failure in strategy was not factoring in the possibility of a snap action and if there wasn't one I think the strategy would have played out well but the SNP were put on the backfoot its as simple as that and they are to blame. To be fair tho the people that aren't happy or don't think the SNP are interested in indy were very happy with the strategy before the election was called and it went tits up. I broadly think that Sturgeons broad strategy on indy has been to court no voters, build consensus, try compromise ie on brexit, section 30. The impression I get or hope for is that it is all part of a bigger strategy and it is merely box ticking exercise and as a result when it comes to campaigning in the actual indyref she has built some brownie points with the electorate. I'm no insider or even member

      Delete
  21. Our country doesn’t have a SINGLE political party remotely fit for government. Voters in May face a choice between the evil, the stupid, and the evil and stupid. And they can’t even be angry about it, because even the politest anger is now a hate crime.

    'Our country' says the man who has freely made England his home for 30 years.

    If you can't read from the above that Wings is on board with London to try and overturn the coming election, you are blind.

    'No party capable of government' = the election result must be overturned due to corruption / complete breakdown in democracy. Devolution must be rolled back, with London taking control again.

    Even the Scottish judiciary and police and under attack. Scotland's judges / faculty of advocates are now the 'corrupt clown office'.

    This is needed because it is Scots judges that will hear any challenge to an indyref. So they must be attacked as corrupt and incapable of making fair judgement. The lord advocate is target No. 1 as he will fight the Scottish people's case in court. He must be declared corrupt and incompetent as a result.

    It is all leading to an attempt to overturn the election and overthrow Holyrood. Stuart Campbell is fully signed up.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Smearer Skier (liar since 2014) - do you deliberately post pish? Judges are not part of the " corrupt clown office ".

      Smearer Skier and his own personal conspiracy theory. Lies, smears and pish that is what Smearer adds to this blog btl.

      Delete
    2. It's not been me or the SNP attacking the scots legal system and it's independence.

      http://www.advocates.org.uk/news-and-responses/news/2021/feb/importance-of-maintaining-confidence-in-judicial-system-and-rule-of-law

      THE Faculty has released the following statement, in the name of a Faculty spokesperson, in relation to public debate surrounding the work of the Scottish Parliament’s Committee on the Scottish Government Handling of Harassment Complaints:

      “The Faculty of Advocates is becoming increasingly concerned at the debate, both in the media and in parliament, in relation to the parliamentary committee into the investigation of harassment allegations. The debate appears increasingly to be focussed on the courts and Crown Office.

      “The Faculty wishes to remind all concerned of the importance of maintaining confidence in the judicial system and in the rule of law. Maintaining that confidence requires, amongst other things, recognition of the importance of the independent role of the Lord Advocate, the independent role of the courts and, perhaps most importantly, the vital place of the verdicts of impartial juries in criminal proceedings.

      “No one in public life is beyond reproach, and healthy public debate surrounding the justice system is to be encouraged. However, when the public discourse fails to respect the basic tenets of the independence of the system, it is in danger of leading to irreparable harm. Such harm is something which might be to the detriment of Scotland as a whole in the long term.”

      Delete
    3. Smearer skier (liar since 2014) - "...and, perhaps most importantly, the vital place of the verdicts of impartial juries in criminal proceedings. ".

      These words refer to Sturgeon and Smearers like you Smearer. So you are attacking the justice system. So once again you are lying Smearer.

      Delete
  22. You have to be a 'conspiracy theorist' to think that MI5 spies on the SNP and has probably plants in the independence movement? On the contrary, spying is a proven fact and plants quite likely. Is Stu Campbell one of them? I doubt it, but I *do* suspect that he has been subverted and now actively opposes independence without admitting it.

    ReplyDelete
  23. Unionism is absolutely shitting bricks right now.

    They are starting to consider very, very desperate measures. This has the Welsh and N. Irish even starting to think it might be time to go, because if England is overturning Scottish elections, Wales and N. Ireland are next.

    All of this will break the union. Might get a bit rough though. Hold tight.

    ReplyDelete
  24. More from Yougov:

    Sturgeon's performance as FM:
    68% Well
    27% Badly
    =+41% NET Well

    Johnson's performance as PM:
    23% Well
    71% Badly
    =-48% NET Badly


    https://www.thenational.scot/news/19156922.scotlands-covid-vaccine-rollout-seen-success-overwhelming-majority/

    Scotland's Covid vaccine rollout seen as success by overwhelming majority

    Campbell is totally out of touch with Scottish people. It's almost like he's an English Tory.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Have not seen the tables yet. I am assuming this is a new poll which post-dates the 4-8 March Yougov, which had, for the same question:

      Sturgeon's performance as FM:
      61% Well
      34% Badly
      =+27% NET Well


      Which would imply support for the FM is rising, in line with trust in her rising following her attendance at the committee.

      Delete
    2. Smearer Skier (liar since 2014) - the public trusted Tony Blair when he said Sadam Hussein had Weapons of Mass Destruction that could hit us within 46 mins or so. Look where that public trust took us. Millions dead, multiple wars and decades of terrorism.

      Blair and Sturgeon both good politicians, both good actors and both good liars. No wonder Sturgeon loved her selfie with Alistair Campbell.

      Delete
    3. Blair's sat ratings fell through his term.

      It pretty much finished Labour in Scotland.

      Delete
  25. Grant Karte SNP member is the person charged with threatening J. Cherry. Smearer Skier said I was wrong to say it was an SNP member. He said it was a Unionist. Smearer is paranoid he sees unionists everywhere. Probably checks under his bed for unionists every night.

    Smearer Skier WRONG again.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Anyone can go online and become and SNP member, including unionists.

      If he was attacking cherry, it suggests he was unionist. Surely you'd agree on this?

      Delete
    2. Smearer Skier (liar since 2014) - the narcissist cannae handle being wrong. Are there right wing unionists in the SNP most certainly but not the plumber Grant Karte.

      Delete
    3. Scottish skier has a much harder time hunting out unionists than you do. You merely have to look in a mirror.

      Delete
    4. Doonhamer - you certainly aren't big on originality.

      Delete
    5. Stuart Campbell and Michael Gove could join the SNP if they wanted from their bases in the south of England.

      Takes a few minutes online.

      Delete
    6. To be honest, the abuse directed at Cherry made me wonder if the guy concerned isn't one of those posting anti-SNP stuff on here. The language is very similar.

      Delete
    7. This sums up Smearer Skier ( liar since 2014) - if anyone says there might be unionists in the SNP Smearer is outraged. But if Smearer himself says it is easy for unionists to join the SNP and an SNP member is a Unionist then that is ok. Smearer is always right because he is a narcissist.

      Delete
  26. James, Your exposition of the state of play pretty much concurs with how I see things at present.
    Nicola is pretty much unassailable as the next/continuing FM.
    Recent posts on Wings would suggest his hold on wingers is less secure.
    Many are incredulous that a pro-indy blog like Wings is leading its followers to consider voting Tory/Unionist to overturn SNP rule.
    The excuse is "We need to get rid of Sturgeon" and it has to happen before the election!
    If he gets his way the Rev Stu Campbell will have achieved what the Tories have struggled to do - saving the Union for another 5 year.
    Who's side are you on boy, who's side are you on.
    BTW, well done the new SNP Councillor in Livingston South.
    Ye've fair cheered us all up!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Ramstam, you vastly overestimate Campbell's influence.

      Delete
    2. Yes, the Englishman has little to no influence.

      Delete
    3. Smearer a Skier (liar since 2014) - I remember you saying you went to work in England just like Campbell.

      How are you two different - oh that's right you lied about that didn't you unlike Campbell.

      Delete
    4. No, I was almost forced to after graduation in the late 1990's; one of the benefits of the union to young scots. A science graduate of Scotland's ancient unis but with Scotland at 9% unemployment in an oil boom, there were no jobs; the oil cash was funding a boom in Bath etc.

      But I didn't have to in the end; got a job related to oil and gas.

      But going to England as an economic migrant 'on yer bike' because you can't get work in your own country is totally different to choosing to be English as Stuart Campbell does. I mean it's not as if he couldn't write his blog from Bathgate. But he loves living in quintessential brexit-voting England with brexit-voting English people. He openly admits this; saying the English are brave and Scots gutless, even though Scots (born/identifying) voted Yes in 2014, and continue to support indy. His twitter was a veritable brochure for the most English of English life. Not even British, but pure English.

      Yet he talks of Scotland as 'his country'. What shite. He hates Scotland and openly admits this.

      Pretty obvious from his blog.

      Delete
    5. He loves Scotland, he just doesn't want to live here.

      Delete
    6. He loves England, preferring it to Scotland, hence chooses to live there.

      Delete
    7. Freedom fighters don't, as a rule, freely choose to live in another country, particularly the one their country folks are fighting for freedom from.

      Imagine the Bruce had moved to Bath and said he preferred the brave English to the gutless scots.

      Delete
    8. I'll remember that next time the SNP trots out Alan Cummings and Brian Cox, the same way they used to trot out Sean Connery. Dirty foreign traitors all, is that right?

      Delete
    9. I wasn't aware these two were 'freedom fighters' that made a living out of political campaigning on Scottish politics? I thought they were just folks with a view like anyone?

      I also wasn't aware they called Scots e.g. 'gutless... woke... c**ts' while the English are 'brave', and currently reside in England?

      I've checked and it seems they don't write extensive political blogs attacking the Scottish government and its running of Scotland. My guess this is because they don’t live in Scotland. I mean how could you know if the Scottish NHS is good or shit unless you actually use it?

      Often people have to relocate for work, or even for love. What industry do they work in? Is it big in the USA? Did they maybe move there for work?

      Many Scots have had to leave Scotland to find work / follow their careers. This obviously isn't needed in the case of blogging.

      People are welcome to have a view on Scottish indy, but if you want to actively campaign when it comes to elections, form a campaign group in indyrefs, maybe try living here (rather than setting up a PO box on rose street for the purpose because you live in England).

      Stuart Campbell can do what he likes, but let’s not kid ourselves; he loves England. He prefers it to Scotland, and openly admits that. He is also against Scottish indy, as per the quote in James’s article above.

      At least he's finally being honest now. His site is anti-independence.

      Delete
    10. Smearer Skier (liar since 2014) - you lied about having to leave Scotland to find work. What else have you lied about? You are a pathological liar and no one should believe a word you post.

      Delete
  27. All the by-elections across Scotland.
    SNP on the rise, even in majority Tory or Labour so-called stronghold areas.
    Heids up - we're winning the popular vote and unionists have shown their hand early doors.
    Expect project fear mark3 in the lead up to the May elections, and remember that RP = Relentless Positivity always wins in the end. Why?
    Because the people always want to believe that better days are ahead.

    ReplyDelete
  28. James re your tweet I suppose the SNP could take Smearer Skiers advice and just say he is a Unionist.

    ReplyDelete
  29. For the record, my present intention is to grit my teeth, hold my nose and vote SNP on both ballots. I will do so with a heavy heart and I anticipate a troubled conscience as my only reward.

    Having said that, I have great sympathy with Stu Campbell's perspective. Everything he says is entirely justifiable. Voting SNP in May is the easy choice only for those who are fortunate enough not to be afflicted with any kind of political awareness. For those who see what is happening and understand the implications this will be the most painful electoral choice they have ever been obliged to make.

    And let us be very clear obout this. It is the party leadership which has made it difficult for people like myself to vote SNP in the coming election. It is the behaviour of the leadership which is driving good people away from the party. It IS NOT anything I read on Wings Over Scotland which is making me gag at the thought of voting SNP in May. Because all Stu Campbell writes about is stuff that I already know to be true having had the information from numerous trusted sources and from my own personal knowledge.

    The party leadership has, for reasons that nobody can fathom, opted to test not only members' commitment to the party but the commitment to independence of every one of us who can still think for themselves.

    That I will be voting SNP in May is the measure of my own dedication to Scotland's cause. By the same token, the fact that lifelong independence campaigners are not voting for the SNP indicates nothing other than the depth of the disgust that the leadership has engendered. While it might seem that Stu Campbell's dedication to that cause is less than my own I am painfully aware that it may rather be that his moral sense is greater than mine.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. and of course, to be afflicted with any kind of political awareness, one must agree with you or the almighty Rev. Your arrogance is breath taking as is your condescension towards those not as afflicted as you.

      Delete
    2. Why not reply to the comments by Mr Bell in a productive way father than making sarcastic and flippant comment which adds nothing to the debate?

      Delete
    3. Hey Peter, If you can find a better party than the SNP vote for them. But their isn't one, forby recent troubles.
      I was thinking AFI till the Lothian candidate - ex solidarity, ex SSP, ex Labour, ex SNP (he's had more parties than Pippa Dee!) did a newspaper interview attacking the SNP and not mentioning independence once.
      For that reason I'll likely be SNP1&2.
      HOWEVER if the new SNP Govt. stalls on independence after May I'll be looking for radical change at the top of the SNP.

      Delete
    4. Ramstam - timescale for stalling before you want radical change?

      Delete
    5. Let's be very clear about this. You're going to pull your teeth why?

      Delete
  30. Without the power of a people's mandate the SNP will be unamendable for 5 years if we don't vote for them in May.
    Are we forgetting that many of the SNP candidates up for election in May are not in the same image as the prevailing lot.
    They were selected by the ordinary SNP membership and won't IMO be "me too" to any slippage in commitment to Indyref2.
    And no I don't believe Stu Campbell's commitment moral or otherwise should be held as above anybody else's.
    His understanding of Scotland's political mood is largely online.
    Trust your own instincts first , and obviously - vote SNP.

    ReplyDelete
  31. I am not going to be drawn into the debate over the Salmond-Sturgeon dispute but I will make an observation that so many Sturgeon detractors fail to note. When Alex was accused, everyone demanded that he have his day in court and in the end, he was acquitted. However, the Sturgeon detractors do not give Nicola the same. The investigation is not yet concluded but the usual suspects are out in force pushing their own personal agenda. If these are not unionist plants, then they have hidden agendas, personal or political, that would benefit from a weaker SNP or Nicola gone, or both. Either way they are allies of the Yoons. End of..

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Doonhammer - sorry to burst your bubble but unlike Salmond Sturgeon is not in a court of law so you do not observe very well. I don't need the end of this investigation to see when people are lying and deliberately hiding evidence of wrongdoing. End of...

      Delete
    2. Yes, because Sturgeon is innocent.

      Delete
    3. Smearer Skier (liar since 2014) - aye people lie and try to hide things because they are innocent.

      Delete
    4. Just because you say something doesn't make it true.

      We'll get a verdict on sturgeon soon from the unionist/opposition dominated committee and independent international observer James Hamilton shortly. Just in time for the election, helping Scots make an informed decision.

      I trust you will respect the result and not do a Johnson/Trump on us.

      Delete
    5. Smearer Skier (liar since 2014) - lying again Smearer it is not a Unionist dominated Committee. The Convenor is SNP. The people being investigated getting to control the evidence is not a fair Inquiry.

      Smearer you lie like Trump. I wonder if you even live in Scotland you lie so much. You used to say you were employed by a uni - LIE. You used to say you had to leave Scotland to find work - LIE.

      Delete
  32. Sorry I forgot that you are God's gift to the movement and able to see all, know all, and spew all at a moment's notice. All hail...

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Hey Doonhammer you forgot to write Sturgeon at the end of your post. You are not very good at this posting stuff are you.

      PS Doonhammer - see this observation of yours that you think is something only you thought of - sorry to burst your bubble again but plenty have said this before you and they were talking mince just like you. I mean even the idiot Smearer Skier has posted that observation on countless occasions.

      Delete
    2. All he does is repeat all the same bile over and over again about this enquiry. Nothing positive, always moaning about something Sturgeon does. The polls showing that the majority side with the FM rather than AS re the enquiry must grate on you. Quite a few of us take no side in the matter and will wait to see what the official report says.

      Delete
    3. Unknown is that you moaning again about me. All you do is moan moan moan. Instead of moaning why not apply your limited number of brain cells and pick a moniker. I suggest moanalot then you will be instantly recognisable. I doubt you have the intelligence to read the official report since you cannot even pick a moniker.

      Delete
  33. There is only one sensible course of action for those who wish to get out from under Tory rule, and that's to vote SNP/SNP in May.

    If the polls DO hold up, and the SNP win 70 seats, then the onus will be on the SNP leadership. If they DO piss about as certain doomsayers are predicting, then we will have to take drastic action against the present SNP leadership, ranging from votes of no confidence at conferences, right up to setting up a rival party. If that has to happen, then I doubt that I'll live to see an independent Scotland.

    On the other hand, if Campbell, Craig Murray, Peter Bell, Gordon Ross et al are wrong, and Sturgeon DOES hold a referendum (with or without a section 30 order), will they admit they were wrong? Will these folk wield their considerable journalistic skills to HELP the SNP get and win a referendum? Will Campbell desist from his anti-SNP vendetta, and do what he USED to do?...... eviscerate Stephen Daisley and his ilk?

    If I am wrong about keeping faith with the SNP leadership, and they let us down after May, I will be very, very sad, but I WILL join in with efforts to defenestrate them.

    If the SNP DOES make major moves towards getting a referendum by the end of this year, is there ANY chance of those I mentioned uttering an "oops! I got THAT wrong!"??

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. No. They'll just claim they pressured the gov into it. Which cud be true or false. We'll never know. But hopefully they do put their greevances aside and help the fight

      Delete
    2. Alex - major moves is not having a referendum. You never answered my question Alex that I posed upstream. How many years after May are you prepared to wait?

      I can answer your question no problem - if Sturgeon does hold a referendum she will be a liability as she is hopelessly compromised and will not want to win it.

      Delete
    3. The alternative is Tory rule in perpetuity.

      Delete
    4. IFS. We'll have to agree to disagree on the issue of a referendum being a "major move". I have absolutely no idea what YOUR agenda is, but mine has been consistent since I joined the SNP right after the referendum.

      I was gobsmacked by that result, and figured out that to avoid a repeat of that defeat, we yes voters had to persuade no voters that an independent Scotland was a good thing.

      That's all. Everything else is window dressing. SNP internal struggles, Court cases. Sleekit worm tongues trying their best to cause dissension among yes voters.

      The only importance the parade of ne'er do well Tories from Westminster and their nodding heads in Holyrood have, is the bungling way they are alienating undecided Scots. What they do in parliament or say they are going to do in parliament is entirely unimportant ...... except for the fact that every time Doris, or Gove, or Rees Mogg get up on their hind hooves and utter some inane Tory nonsense, they drive a few more former no voters into the yes camp.

      It will be great if the SNP get 70 seats in Holyrood in May, but the importance of that is DWARFED by the importance of more than 50% voting SNP or Green. IF THAT happens, then it won't matter a toss who is leading the independence movement. They'll either have to shit or get off the pot.

      When (whoever) declares Scotland to be an independent country, success or failure won't hinge in whether Sturgeon is leader of the SNP, or whether Pete Wishart, Ian Blackford etc are "tory plants" (or any of the other "Q-anon" type conspiracies....... it will depend on whether a MAJORITY OF SCOTS want independence. THEN the international community will recognise us as independent.

      If we DON'T have a majority, if we HAVEN'T spoken to our neighbours (rather than nitpicking about who are the REAL independent supporters), then we won't DESERVE to be independent.

      Folk like you, who spread irrelevant shite about whether or not Sturgeon is a MI5 "plant", are doing naff-all for independence. So far, I have converted five and a half friends and relatives to the cause of yes. Not exactly silver-tongued for six and a half years labour, but nevertheless, it constitutes a far greater success than any of your doubt-inducing nonsense that you post on here..

      Scotland WILL be independent ....... because WE persuaded our neighbours. Now whether I can take the credit for my five and a half converts, or whether I have to cede that honour to the idiot antics of the Tories is moot. One thing I AM failrly sure about, is that the likes of you, with your sleekit, doubt-inducing rhetoric have done zilch for the cause of independence.

      Now, that's my opinion. You're obviously not going to like or agree with my opinion, but if YOU have converted less than five and a half no voters to yes, then you are inferior to me in the ONLY area that matters........

      Delete
    5. Alex - you seem to have the same problem as Smearer Skier - you said in your original post "making moves towards a referendum" that is not the same as actually having a referendum. So please stop reinventing what you posted. Obviously, actually having a referendum is a major move but that is not what you posted.

      My agenda is Scottish independence. I don't believe that is the agenda of the current SNP leadership. It is 4 years since the carrot of a referendum was first dangled by Sturgeon - 4 years.

      I have supported independence all my adult life. Unlike some ex Britnat party voters. If you were interested in facts you would see that I have never mentioned Sturgeon being an Mi5 plant. Hey what's new - people like you don't really care about the truth, facts and evidence. So Alex you are fairly wrong. If there is no means to get a vote on independence then it doesn't matter if there is a majority for independence.

      Delete
    6. IFS, you've got it exactly 180 degrees wrong. There are several ways of getting independence, including a referendum, and a plebiscite election, but there is absolutely no point in bleatering a load of shit about methodology, if you don't have a majority for independence. In fact, it would be morally wrong to try and obtain independence if that's not what the majority of Scots want.

      If your agenda really was Scottish independence, then you would be concentrating on getting those close to you round to your way of thinking. Instead, you gabble a load of shit speculation about the characters of the SNP leadership.

      It doesn't matter who is leading the SNP. If there is a greater-than-50% majority for independence parties in May, then the leadership will be given the chance to lead us into a referendum. If they fail to do that, then we'll ALL have to re-think.

      You asked how long I'd be prepared to give the SNP to organise a referendum, and the answer is, I don't know. Not years, but probably months. I suspect that, on the other hand, NOTHING will change your mind. You'll start calling for Sturgeon's head on May 7th, regardless of the circumstances, and no matter what she says or does. As I said, I have NO IDEA what your agenda is.....

      Delete
    7. Alex, you do have the same problem as Smearer Skier you cannot read well. I told you what my agenda is. I have already convinced nearly all of my family and friends that Scotland should be free so you should just shut your cake hole you know nothing about me. I'll bet you on the other hand are an old Labour voter. Well when you were voting for the Britnats I was supporting independence.

      If you follow your logic the 2014 referendum was morally wrong. You are talking piss. If you follow your logic the SNP were wrong to put a mandate for a referendum in their manifesto for 2016 and 2017 elections.

      It's well past the time that you "ALL have to rethink". It is not speculation about the leadership. You dont like it - neither do I but it is the truth. Do you think it is right that people could be voting for someone in the May election who perjured themselves in Salmonds criminal trial?

      Delete
    8. IFS, you may THINK you've outlined your agenda, but it is still a mystery to many. This argument is about the inexplicable change in Campbell's focus, and your desperate defence of that change.

      In August 2014, he published 94 blogs, of which, 94 were focused on unionist lies and unionist journalists.

      Last month, (when I checked), he had written 100 blogs, only 4 of which were anti-unionist, and 96 of which were anti-SNP. Now, according to YOU, this is because the SNP have changed, but MY question to you (which you haven't TRIED to answer), is ......"Have the unionists changed?".

      Are the unionists REALLY so little danger to independence, that Campbell can afford to spend so little of his efforts against them? It's his blog, and he can write whatever he wants. He can even ban anyone who doesn't slavishly agree with his every word. What I can't understand, are the sheep who have become so obsessed with protecting him, (folk like you), that they don't seem to have noticed how little of his talents are now expended against unionists. According to Campbell, as we approach this election, (and whatever happens afterwards), the greatest enemy that the yes movement faces is not Doris, or Gove, or DRoss, or the BBC, or the Daily Ranger, or the the Daily Vile, or the Hootsman...... no ...... the greatest danger we face (96% of the danger) is the SNP. According to the Bathman, we need to forget about the unionists, and attack the REAL enemy of independence - the SNP.

      I realise that your ovine brain is incapable of processing this, but I'm putting it out there anyway, because "hope springs eternal in the human breast".....

      Delete
    9. Alex Birnie - you are like Smearer Skier - you cannot read well and you just make up stuff. Now you are resorting to straight out insults.

      Now PAY ATTENTION Alex where do I desperately defend Campbell in the posts above. You are all over the place making up stuff. You and Smearer and others are obsessed with Campbell - that is not healthy. I do not mention Campbell once in the above posts but you bring it back to him.

      Cognitive dissonance is what is happening to you.

      Delete
    10. ITFS, your troll tactics might irk some folk, but I'm too old to be diverted by those kinds of tactics.

      You are finding it really difficult to answer a relatively simple question .....

      "Are the unionist media no longer worth Campbell's attention?".

      Have they been defeated? If they have, then your desperate defence of the Bathman is justified, and we can all relax, because independence is going to be easy-peasy, now that the BBC, the Hootsman etc are going to play fair.

      If, on the other hand, we've still got a fight on our hands with these people, then what in the name of the wee man does the "English resident" think he's doing? He has all but stopped attacking the unionist media, and instead, expends 96% of his criticism against the SNP.

      Now, you may agree with Campbell - (that the SNP constitute a bigger threat to independence than the unionist meeja does) - in which case, you and I will have to agree to disagree......

      By the way, I've decided that Independence for Scotland is a VERY misleading name to give yourself, so ..... as you have done with other contributors, i'n christening you "I Troll For Scotland", hence the ITFS.....

      Delete
    11. Hey Alex as you have decided to go down the stupid route - I'll just refer to you as Alex the old arse - no wait Hait Crime - best just make it Alex the Arse.

      You and Smearer are obsessed with Campbell. I don't speak for Campbell try getting that in to your thick skull.

      I'll tell you what you didn't deny that you used to be a Britnat Labour in Scotland man.

      So how many years did you spend attacking the SNP and Scottish independence.

      Well you weren't that smart then and you ain't that smart now. Maybe I'll change it from Alex the Arse to Alex the thick ex Britnat.

      Delete
    12. TFS ......... obsessed with Wings? Not really...... extremely puzzled as to how such an effective anti-unionist weapon has abandoned any pretence of fighting the pro-union media, and seems to be hell bent on destroying the only viable political vehicle for getting us independence.

      Yes, there are many things that a lot of folk don't like about the SNP leadership, but, anyone who says they are for Independence, but swivels from being a ferocious critic of unionist journalists ..... 100% of the time, to spending only 4% of their time and effort on fighting the same people, is just full of shit.

      It doesn't pique your curiosity as to what caused this sudden change of emphasis? You've given a BS answer about how the SNP have changed, but it still leaves the question ...... have the unionists changed? If they are still pumping out the same anti-SNP propaganda in the same quantity (and the definitely ARE), then what has happened to Campbell to make find common cause with them?

      I could place an article by Stephen Daisley (or any of the rest) alongside an article from Campbell, and if I expunged the profanity from Campbell's article, then folk who aren't acquainted with his style would be hard pressed to pick out the article by Daisley, from the one by Campbell.

      It would be impossible to decide which was written by the unionist journalist, and which was written by the "seeker after independence".

      But it's not just a case of the quality, it's the quantity. I wouldn't be at all surprised if Campbell's output of anti-SNP vituperation matches the totality of the anti independence media's output. The BBC and unionist newspapers are quoting Wings articles, for Christ's sake!!

      Who would have believed back in 2014, that the Rev would be a more potent weapon against the SNP than the totality of the unionist meeja?

      You may think that's all right. Your ovine tendency might allow you to be sanguine about that. I can't. My only hope is that as his circle of devotees diminishes, he will become ever more irrelevant. I'm probably worrying too much, because if I were to ask 100 undecided voters who he was, the percentage who recognised his name would probably be in the same ballpark as his anti-unionist output nowadays - about 4%.

      Delete
    13. Alex the idiot just posts a long comment all about Campbell and denies he is obsessed with Campbell. 😂😂😂😂😂😂. I guess that does make you an idiot right enough.

      How you can say in the current article that Salmond is your hero but support the people who tried to put him in jail is another idiotic joke on your part. Who would want a hero worshipper like you that turns their back on him. Shameful.

      You seem to spend so much time analysing Campbell's articles but miss the key point - it is the current SNP leadership he is railing against not the SNP. That again makes you an idiot for missing that.

      Delete
  34. What Peter Bell said.

    Good job I'm doing a proxy vote this year, otherwise I might accidentally spoil my ballot paper by boaking on it.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I can't see a reason to boak on Joan McAlpine and Christine Grahame, much as English bloggers tell me to.

      Delete
  35. Apart from shoe-gazing obsessives, I don't think that Scottish independence is high up on people's priorities.

    Some antiwoke reactionary hate blog designed to part Daily male pensioners from their savings on fear of getting raped by a manwoman in a toilet cubicle when your 75 is completely mad to most.

    ReplyDelete
  36. Meanwhile, we have a Holyrood administration that is so banal that their most controversial policy involves stirring something or other. They probably have the spoon bit sticking in the air.

    A government budget that basically involves no change at all. etc.

    ReplyDelete
  37. A 'judge me on education' policy that was so flawed they didn't even bother to bring it to parliament.

    The SNP is really getting on for a cult. Apparently the next one up is Keith Brown, who is currently in charge of the great SNP independence campaign. I would check him for a pulse.

    ReplyDelete
  38. Realistically, the only thing the SNP have done to promote Scottish independence in the last 7 years is punt a far-right-wing government austerity doctrine, and paid a corporate lobbyist for the pleasure. The SNP pays corporate lobbyists to advise them..........

    I think the SNP conference members were so enthralled, they voted to change the words 'as soon as possible' to 'as soon as feasible', or something. FFS

    ReplyDelete
  39. The volume and nature of posts on recent threads support the impact of the committee starting to filter through and it being this:

    From what you have seen or heard about the Alex Salmond inquiry and how it relates to Nicola Sturgeon, do you think each of the following has or has not generally told the truth?

    Nicola Sturgeon
    44(+14)% Has generally told the truth
    36(nc)% Has not generally told the truth
    10(-13)% Don't know

    Changes on 25th January


    If Sturgeon is largely cleared, the SNP vote is going to massively surge, starting from a base of >50%.

    I think she probably will be. After all, if the quintessential Englishman is claiming she's guilty, I can be pretty confident she's not. That rule of thumb has yet to fail me.

    ReplyDelete
  40. Yet to hear any decent reason why I should vote against Christine Grahame and Joan McAlpine.

    Only the Englishman and followers telling me to kick McAlpine of parliament by not voting SNP on the list.

    ReplyDelete
  41. Anyway - here's Scottish democracy (by the way, Nicola Sturgeon is an ex-lawyer):

    Scottish public health minister Nicola Sturgeon tells everyone about public health.

    Scottish transport minister Nicola Sturgeon tells everyone about shipbuilding.

    Scottish transport minister Nicola Sturgeon tells everyone about Ayr International Airport.

    Scottish energy minister Nicola Sturgeon tells everyone about solar panels.

    Scottish education minister Nicola Sturgeon tells everyone about exams.

    Scottish health minister Nicola Sturgeon tells everyone about drugs.

    There is a lot more, and it is getting boring.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. You really need to get over your Sturgeon obsession.

      Delete
    2. Oh for the guid auld days before devolution, eh wee sleeked courin timrous beastie ?

      Delete
    3. Very unhealthy obsession. What with IFS and others you could set up a self-help group to get some needed therapy. You will make yourself ill or get sectioned.

      Delete
    4. Same posting pattern as IFS - just like the awful WOS bloke who has an unhealthy obsession re IFS.

      David Morton.

      Delete
  42. In some of your letters i have never heard as much bumph written all my life.

    ReplyDelete
  43. Oh well, I suppose that the blogger's party will get votes for being managerially sound, even if its all a toothpaste ad. You might as well vote for the civil service. After all, the Scottish 3-day-a-week-when-we-are-not-on-holiday parliament passes the majority of it's legislation on to the Scottish Office, because the Scottish Parliament can't be bothered.

    Look it up.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Scottish Office? Doesn't exist - it's the Scotland Office. So much for your knowledge about politics in Scotland.

      Delete
  44. It's funny how some people totally obsess with sturgeon. Almost cult-like the way they do nothing but go on about her. It's like she is independence / the SNP to them. The dear leader of Scotland in their eyes.

    Focusing all their efforts on their hatred of her is where they are going wrong though in the same way they went wrong with Salmond back ahead of 2014.

    But hey, why interrupt your enemy while they are making a mistake.

    I think she's decent enough as an FM. I preferred Salmond's style, although I think hers gains more widespread appeal. He was somewhat marmite. I'm voting for my local SNP candidates though, not Sturgeon, just like everyone in Scotland is apart from her constituents.

    ReplyDelete
  45. Committee is dominated by unionists / opposition MSPs who are all standing against the SNP in May.

    https://www.thenational.scot/news/19158586.msps-to-dismiss-claims-peter-murrell-messages-prove-salmond-conspiracy/

    MSPs 'to dismiss claims that Peter Murrell messages prove Salmond conspiracy'

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. "According to reports the MSPs think the Scottish Parliament should publish all of the messages, as they are concerned the leaking of certain elements may have mischaracterised their content.

      Murrell and others involved in the discussion have been approached for their permission to go ahead with this."


      'mischaracterised their content'. I wonder who would do that. A state broadcaster maybe? English bloggers?

      Delete
  46. The truth about the survation poll from Survation's Carl Shoben.

    https://twitter.com/CarlSurvation/status/1370689717545672706

    Carl Shoben
    @CarlSurvation
    Majority say Sturgeon shouldn't resign over ministerial code dispute. Those who think she should are largely sum of people who don't support her anyway.


    https://twitter.com/CarlSurvation/status/1370687802610946055
    Carl Shoben
    @CarlSurvation
    2h
    This is complacent to say the least. The last few weeks have seen a small change, connected to Salmond/Sturgeon dispute but nothing structural. Our poll yesterday shows this with SNP voters also rallying to Sturgeon.


    Shite from S. English right wingers:

    https://wingsoverscotland.com/the-own-goal/

    ReplyDelete
  47. Joanna Cherry isn't going to take over, she is too mired in the old stuff, but a new face that people really respect such as Kate Forbes would be an option, should that ever come up.
    She has a government portfolio and doing it extremely well. Another plus, she is not into grandstanding, but hits home hard when she deals with the issues.

    ReplyDelete
  48. British empire apparently going to try and reduce support for independence by refusing Scots the right to vote, plastering union jacks on stuff Scots didn't want but had to pay for through their taxes, and setting up a new imperial governor's office in Glasgow.

    ReplyDelete
  49. Based on the recent survation and Panelbase polls...

    Groups that think Sturgeon should resign:
    - Men over 55
    - Conservative & labour voters
    - English people
    - Wings

    ReplyDelete
  50. By contrast:

    https://www.survation.com/third-of-bame-scots-have-experienced-discrimination-in-scotland-in-the-past-two-years/

    BAME Scots:
    55% Yes
    45% No

    92% Remain in the EU
    8% Leave the EU

    Makes me proud of Scotland.

    ReplyDelete
  51. I doubt we are all proud of the SNP over-riding local planning law so that Donald Trump could turn a nature reserve into a putting green.

    ReplyDelete
  52. Possibly because anywhere north of Edinburgh only exists in magical realism.

    ReplyDelete
  53. @Moose - I think you'll find that the magical realism of the UKs biggest export comes from the North of Scotland.
    Much appreciated by HM Great British United Kingdom treasury in London England.
    Nae bridges or Tunnels from Boris Johnson, just Scotland's taxes and revenues by-passing Holyrood on the way south.
    And you never noticed.

    ReplyDelete