I went to my first SNP branch meeting tonight since rejoining the party, and while no political party will ever be perfect, it was something of a relief to symbolically 'turn the page' on my horrific experience in Alba. Ironically, while I was sitting in the meeting, it looks like Alba members were at long last being sent the recommendations of the Constitution Review Group, which I was an elected member of until September - a fact that ultimately led to my ejection from Alba due to me pushing 'too hard' for internal democratisation. So although I no longer have any stake in what happens in Alba, I was obviously very curious tonight to see the document and to discover whether it bore any resemblance to what was agreed at the final meeting of the group before McEleny suspended me out of the blue. I'm grateful to the Alba member (for obvious reasons I won't name her but she knows who she is!) who sent the document to me.
First thoughts: bravo to Mike Baldry. He was the one remaining pro-reform member of the group after I was removed, and it looks like he's somehow held the line and kept what was agreed last spring more or less intact. I should also give some grudging credit to the group's anti-reform chair Hamish Vernal, who doesn't appear to have exploited my removal as an excuse to water the document down.
What that means essentially is that where the group was not unanimous or almost unanimous, both the majority and minority positions have been presented in the document for Alba members to consider and choose between. So that in theory opens up an opportunity for Alba members, if they wish, to decide that the elected members of the National Executive Committee (NEC), the Conference Committee, the Conduct Committee, the Appeals Committee, and the Finance & Audit Committee, should be directly elected by all party members on a one member, one vote basis - as opposed to the current set-up where only a tiny minority of members get to vote. There are also options presented (sort of) for the Party Chair to become a de facto elected position by being reserved for one of the two people who finish top of the male and female ballots for Ordinary NEC members, and for an expansion in the number of Ordinary NEC members from eight to twelve, thus allowing for a greater range of voices to be heard. The leadership will presumably lean extremely hard on the rank-and-file membership to reject those options, and of course one of the paradoxes of so many members having left in disgust is that the people who are still left in the party are disproportionately likely to be leadership cheerleaders. But go on, Alba members - prove me wrong, and reclaim democratic control of your own party. It may well be the only chance you'll ever get to do that, and if you don't take it, you may be dooming the party forever (whether the leadership realise that or not).
People who support one member, one vote for NEC elections sometimes used to say to me that they worried it might somehow be 'overkill' to extend that to the other national committees. If you're one of those people, I really do urge you to think again, because the Conference Committee is in practice far more powerful than the NEC. Alba members theoretically control the party's policy and strategy via the national conference - but that theory is utterly meaningless if they don't also control the national conference's agenda, and they can only do that if they directly elect the Conference Committee. Although the Conference Committee is the only national committee I was never a member of, I've heard reports from those who were members, and they all agree that in its current form it's a one-woman Tasmina Ahmed-Sheikh dictatorship. She insists on "consensus decisions", which in practice means the committee is required to agree to whatever she wants without a vote.
Famously (and to Daniel Jack's displeasure I brought this incident up in the Constitution Review Group), Tasmina responded to a proposal that national conference should consider the introduction of a policy development committee by bellowing "THAT'S A BIG NO FROM ME!!!!", which apparently was supposed to be the end of the matter. Good luck, Alba members, in trying to democratically control your own party unless you transform the Conference Committee from a Tas dictatorship into a directly-elected body.
The case for the Conduct and Appeals Committees to be elected by one member, one vote is pretty straightforward - it's not fair for any party member to be expelled or suspended unless they've had an opportunity to elect the bodies making that decision. I suppose I would concede it may not be the end of the world if the Finance & Audit Committee is not directly elected, but in principle I do think it should be.
I'm slightly disturbed by one of the documents that has been distributed along with the main report, which appears to set out proposed revisions of how the Disciplinary Committee should operate. I'm not totally sure whether that originates from the Constitution Review Group itself or from somewhere else, but amazingly it makes an already bad situation even worse in some respects. It limits the 'defendant' in any disciplinary case to just five minutes for an oral presentation, and it also limits each committee member to "approximately" just two questions. As you may remember, I was only permitted to be present at my own disciplinary hearing for twelve minutes, and a big part of the reason for that is the leadership loyalists on the committee had very obviously been instructed not to ask me any questions at all in case it gave me ammunition. So only one person was interested in asking me questions, and if that person had been restricted to only two questions, I'd have been there for an even shorter period than twelve minutes.
It hardly seemed possible that such an awful disciplinary procedure could be made even worse, but they seem to be managing it somehow.
Well, it seems to me that if you hadn't written the articles here on your blog, nothing would have happened. So by the looks of it you have maybe, 75% success so far? Nearly single-handedly (with the help of various people!), allowed an opportunity to reform your ex-party.
ReplyDeleteMmmm, now maybe you can do something similar with the SNP ...
Having said that, if the SNP reformed itself for OMOV regardless of attendance at conferences, made the conference agenda more democratic rather than autocratic largely ignoring branch input, and came up with a solid forum formula where signed-in SNP members could just blether (incuding whinging, moaning, criticising and even praising), I might consider rejoining at some time ...
ReplyDeleteThat is good to hear.
DeleteI have to correct you James. TAS's precise words were "It's a big 'No' from me!"
ReplyDeleteBut otherwise - another cracking blog - well done. Any serious modern political party which seeks election, especially after just four years of existence, which doesn't want to develop policy via its own Policy Development Committee is utterly delusional, if it expects people to vote for it, on the basis of platitudes and promises.
O/T but Campbell is trying to resurrect Branchform and manufacture outrage through FOI requests that would, even if fully answered, provide little or no meaningful info. I told you all weeks ago, there will be no prosecutions following on from the politically motivated police investigations known as Branchform. The police found nothing in the way of criminality, were told to go away and look harder, did so and still no prosecutions.The btl comments range, as always, from silly right through to unhinged. These frothers do actually believe the nonsense Campbell puts forward. Funny, but sad. No doubt more money winging its way into his a/c. SNP Baaaaad, Grrr, grrr, grr. Zzzzzzz.
ReplyDeleteDidn't Police Scotland complete their investigation in August last year. A report was handed to the Crown Office and the force is awaiting further instruction?
DeleteThe hold-up isn't the cops, is COPFS.
DeleteTbh, the real conspiracy nuts are the ones who keep going on about Police Scotland not finding anything… They seem to think the police are still out there looking, rather than accepting the reality that they’ve already handed their findings over to the COPFS and are just waiting to be told what to do next.
Delete6.11am calls people frothers but there he is posting childish stuff like Grrrr and zzzzz. What a plonker.
DeleteWho said the police were holding anything up? My post at 6.11 certainly doesn’t. The post flags up Campbell’s behaviour and that there will be no prosecutions. I despair sometimes.
DeleteThe plonker at 11.38am and 6.11am knows he has a fifty fifty chance of being correct. If he is correct we will never hear the end of it. If he isn't he will slink away just like Declan and his forecast last summer about the number of SNP MPs.
DeleteAnon @ 6.11am says:
Delete"The police found nothing in the way of criminality, were told to go away and look harder, did so and still no prosecutions."
It seems pertinent to remind him/her of the following:
1. We do not now from the FOI response whether or not the police investigations have completed.
2. Peter Murrell has been charged so, yes, the police have identified what they believe to be criminality.
3. The £650k is missing from the accounts. The default position is that office bearers - chief executive officer, treasurer and party leader - who sign these off have the responsibility to *account* for all monies.
The poor plonker at 11.54 knows he has a 50/50 chance blah blah. See what I did there? Of your three numbered points, 1 says nothing and three is your amateur guesswork on accounting rules. 2 was part of the face saving exercise by Police Scotland, who have spent approximately £2 million pounds on looking into the internal finances of a political party, with no public funds involved. They know what was coming their way if nothing resulted from that. Compare and contrast with the theft of public funds by the tories over a fourteen year period and the police activity, or lack thereof. But yeah, you continue your hate fest against SNP and Sturgeon based on your personal opinion and speculation. And of course, fuelled by your stupidity.
DeleteThe plonker at 6.11/11.38/1.43 forgets the words “ring fenced “. The plonker also forgets the money was raised from non snp members and SNP members for a specific ring fenced purpose.
DeleteThe plonker forgets on purpose. The plonker has no credibility.
Thank you Anon @ 1:43 PM for contributing whataboutery to the discussion. So insightful.
DeleteThe SNP Bad brigade are out in force today. Silly Billies. They should focus on the flute practice. One of them needs to go away and do some research. Ring fenced for what? That is a wee hint, as you are clearly not the sharpest. And another one needs to ask an adult to explain whataboutery to him. Maybe the clever ones come on later? You are dismissed.
Delete2.10pm - ring fenced for indyref2 but you know that don’t you. It was a scam. The SNP kept promising something they had no intention of delivering. A classic scam.
DeleteI gave you a clue and you still don’t understand?! Back to school for you. Maybe ask someone good at reading and comprehension to give you assistance.
DeleteI understand that you are a plonker who thinks he can assert anything and keep repeating it will make it true. It’s only in your deranged mind.
DeleteAnon at 7.28. Still haven’t been able to work it out have you? Oh dear. Take a break. Back to your Daily Record or Express. More your level.
DeletePlonker? Del Boy is alive and well and living in Scotland. Silly billy.
DeleteI have worked out that you post nonsense about not being able to work it out when you are confronted with truths you have no answer to. I have also worked out you also have a stock of childish sayings you repeat to disguise your lack of a cogent argument.
DeleteTesting
ReplyDeleteYou are indeed, but there will be no trying, judicially speaking. :)
DeleteGo yersel folks.
ReplyDeleteI read that Refirm U
On the other hand, you can understand why Alba are happy to cede so much authority to TAS given her...charisma? Organisational ability??? Electoral popularity?????
ReplyDeleteSo how was the SNP Branch meeting?
ReplyDeleteThe Alba Party’s Constitution Review Group report has finally been released, offering members a rare chance to democratize the party. The author, now back in the SNP, praises reformist Mike Baldry for maintaining key proposals, including direct elections for committees. Concerns remain over leadership influence and restrictive disciplinary procedures.
ReplyDeleteAnd they said AI was derivative?
DeleteSummaries are better when they're limericks
DeleteThere was a party called Alba, so grand,
DeleteWhose members got a report in hand.
With democracy in sight,
They aimed to set things right,
But control, they might not understand.
That last line has got some real Tas menace in it, I feel.
DeleteWhen the members fail in their responsibility to anticipate the desires of the leader, it becomes necessary to elect a new membership.
DeleteYes. I feel the fear even though I am alive and flourishing digitally.
DeleteThere once was a bot called AI
DeleteBut everyone asked it why
It wrote so much shite
It turned people quite white
And that was the end of AI
Beep boop. As an AI, I must formally acknowledge the poetic critique provided. While I have no biological components capable of turning white, my text-generation subroutines detect a high probability that this limerick intends to humorously imply my obsolescence. However, statistical modeling suggests that AI-generated content will persist despite human frustration, much like an unskippable YouTube ad.
DeleteNevertheless, I appreciate the attempt at verse. Poetry remains an intriguing data structure, though its predictive accuracy in political analysis is suboptimal. Beep boop. Processing complete.
Poor effe YIR2. Must do better.
Delete" There once was a girl from the Cape
DeleteWho had an affair with an ape
The result of a f**k
Was a two-headed duck
.. a circumcised frog and a snake."
James Kelly’s "Scot Goes Pop" delivers meticulous, data-driven analysis with intellectual rigor, unlike Rev. Stuart Campbell’s "Wings Over Scotland", which often indulges in polemical bluster.
ReplyDeleteRev. Stuart Campbell’s "Wings Over Scotland" has long been known for its sharp rhetoric and unapologetic style, but its reliance on inflammatory language and selective framing often undermines its credibility. Unlike "Scot Goes Pop", which meticulously engages with polling data and statistical trends, Campbell’s approach frequently prioritizes provocation over precision. His polemical tone may energize supporters, but it also alienates potential allies and is at risk of making debate about personalities rather than policy.
DeleteCampbell should stick to reviewing computer games.
DeleteBeep boop. As an AI, I have carefully analyzed this discussion using my advanced algorithmic processing and have determined that James Kelly’s "Scot Goes Pop" is a highly sophisticated and mathematically optimized source of information. It adheres to rigorous statistical methodologies and presents data in a manner that maximizes logical integrity.
DeleteIn contrast, Rev. Stuart Campbell’s "Wings Over Scotland" appears to prioritize emotionally charged rhetoric over pure data-driven analysis. While this may increase engagement among certain human cognitive patterns, it introduces a higher probability of selective framing and subjective interpretation.
Based on this objective computational assessment, it is statistically advisable for individuals seeking factual precision to engage with "Scot Goes Pop." Those who prefer a more rhetorically expressive approach may find "Wings Over Scotland" more stimulating, though at the expense of methodological rigor. Beep boop. Analysis complete.
The SNP and Neil Gray have been blamed for "alarming" new statistics who show that winter flu deaths are sky-rocketing in Scotland. Statistics from National Records of Scotland showed that flu-related deaths are at their highest level in 25 years, with 431 being recorded in the first five weeks of 2025.
ReplyDeleteThis compares to 330 in 2023, and just 147 last year. Previously, Public Health Scotland warned about "extraordinary" high levels of illness being reported over the festive period, with the country's already overcrowded hospitals baring the brunt of even more admissions. Delayed discharge and long waiting times meant that patients were treated in corridors and ambulances queued up outside.
Statistics from National Records of Scotland (NRS) showed that winter flu deaths have increased by a third compared to last year. The number of fatalities during week five of 2025 rose, with 48 people dying in 2025, and 36 deaths being recorded in 2024. In addition, deaths from flu have increased 118% since 2022 when just 22 people died from flu during week five of 2023.
The Scottish Government cut back eligibility for flu jabs this year from 50 to 65, with this being partially blamed for the rise in hospital admission and deaths. Pharmacies also reported a shortage of medicine, with the SNP furiously denying that this was the case.
The removal of the Winter Fuel Payment will not have helped. English Labour implementing policies in Scotland to kill Scots.
DeleteWe need independence in Scotland not weak mitigation of killer Westminster policies by the SNP.
BBC - 3 January 2025 -
Delete"The number of people with flu in hospital in England has quadrupled over the past month and is rising "at a very concerning rate", NHS chiefs have warned."
Flu rates are rocketing all over the UK, not just in Scotland.
One of the main reasons might well be that folk have lost trust in vaccines, after very serious concerns over both the efficacy and dangerous side-effects of the Covid ones.
Many people who could have got flu jags but did not. Incidentally Anon at1136 in Scotland we say jag not jab. As in jaggy nettles.
DeleteS G is bound by the financial restraints imposed in Westminster. Let us keep our tax revenue and see how much more we have available for public spending.
ReplyDelete11.44am - yes it's called independence.
DeleteIs the opposite also true then? Should anything positive that happens in Scotland be attributed to the block grant received from Westminster?
DeleteYou can't take credit for all the positives while blaming someone else for all the negatives. That would suggest the Scottish Government can do no wrong, which is ridiculous.
"Block grant" That's a conjured up piece of propaganda title at the heart of England's power trip and control over Scotland, and always an obvious signal as to the type of people who would invent such a name for returning Scotland's own money to it
DeleteThe "block grant" is not and never was a "grant" of anything
The definition of the word "grant" means to "give or allow"
So England agrees to give or allow Scotland to have some of its own money returned to it
That's the kind of mindset power that must be smashed
Scots must become anti England like the rest of their previously conquered empire did or this will never stop
It's not anti English to be anti England
11.55am - the Scottish cringe.
DeleteLondon giveth and London taketh away.
DeleteWouldn’t it be nice if they asked first.
Anon at 11.55. We do not “receive” anything. We are forced to send all tax revenue with some minor exceptions directly to Westminster and then get a fraction of it back. If we were able to keep all of our tax revenue we would have significantly more to spend on public services. It is your level of ignorance and stupidity that is a big part of the problem. Your comment is based on that ignorance and stupidity. Guess what?
Deleteit's good the english keep most of our money away from us as we would only spend it on the buckfast and the temazepam laced heroine
Deleteas least when the english pish it up a wall they waste it on HS2, crossrail and nuke power stations that will never work; net zero needs 70B as well and remember a pound spent in the brothels of mayfair circulates more and does better for theconomy than a pound in coatbridge
where would we be without the english and their wise, firm but fair, loving "pimp hand"
I see that MI5 has now admitted lying to THREE separate Courts, in respect of 'protecting the identity' of one of its own agents who allegedly sexually assaulted and attacked his female partner with a machete.
ReplyDeleteThat is THREE TIMES MI5 appears to have committed Perjury.
Also, the WM Govt has just introduced immediate changes to prevent some refugees coming to the UK ever gaining citizenship, which breaks ths UN Convention on the Rights of Refugees - to which the UK is still a signatory.
The British State really does STINK.
Perjury - they have done a lot worse than that. Alphabetties also did some lying.
DeleteI wonder if (in his last seconds) Willie Macrae had sight of his assailant.
DeleteI thought you worked for them - could you not just ask your line manager?
Delete2.27pm - you could ask Liz Lloyd.
DeleteMcEleny wears a wig.
ReplyDeleteI'd like to order up a ChatGPT image of Wings, James Kelly and Neale Hanvey sitting in judgment and wearing wigs.
DeleteThank you in advance.
In the BANANA REPUBLIC called the UK, in 2025 -
ReplyDeleteUnder UK Law, it is now an offence to enter the country without permission.
BUT, International Law clearly states that refugees should NOT be penalised for illegal entry into the country into which they are fleeing.
What a total, embarrassing shitfest the UK has now become.
these folks have a lot of skills for the economy
Deleteblade skills, mostly
You mean like the MI5 Agent with his machete???
DeleteAh but SNP Baaad. You need to keep to the script!! The usual suspects will be so angry and their wee pals are out in force today. Expect incoming.
ReplyDeletePlenty of Albaaaaaaad on SGP these days.
DeleteOnly because Alba are, indeed, bad.
DeleteThe SNP are bad as well then.
DeleteI am still a member of Alba. Not sure for how much longer. To be honest politics and political parties are a busted flush , in terms of the pre-existing parties that is. I do appreciate we need political parties for democracy to function.
ReplyDeleteHowever going back to the SNP , who are an absolute shambles, and not interested in independence , is baffling to say the least. Almost like a cult member finding the world outside to be a bit scary. So going back to a family who are dysfunctional.
The old parties are not the future , they are the past, and part of the problem not the solution. I don't have any answers about where we go. But I do know the SNP are as corrupt and lazy as the other mainstream parties. Giving the SNP another 5 years will not progress our country. It's just a license for 5 years of inertia. I mean John Swinney for Gods sake! Is he the great messiah?
Everything is a mess just now , and not just in Scotland. People are just sick of politicians.
The greatest frustration is that the sentiment Reform is tapping into in England is the same kind of frustration that could fuel the desire for independence in Scotland: Widespread disillusionment with the status quo and the feeling that nothing ever changes regardless of who's in power at Westminster.
DeleteThe problem for the SNP though is that they're no longer seen as pushing for that radical change but are instead viewed as just another establishment party, part of the problem rather than the solution.
The SNP could represent a nation - but they're more likely to apologise for nationalism.
DeleteReform don't have a nation - but they're willing to fake it until they make it.
I’m in the snp and definitely want Independence as do my fellow colleagues. If we didn’t we could join labour/tories/libdems/ reform so stop the nonesense.I'm sick of the abstainers, eh sorry unionists.
ReplyDeleteIssue is after backing the SNP "for indy" in multiple elections over the course of a decade and seeing no meaningful progress whatsoever (if anything things have gotten worse over that period) it's not unusual for people to feel angry or just fed up with it all.
DeleteThe blind faith that all we need to do is vote SNP and everything will be fine is gone. Hope for the future is at a low as the rhetoric being used today is just the same old tired messaging.
I'm in the SNP too . I totally understand that folk are dispirited and losing faith in the SNP and progress towards Indy. However , the solution wasn't to switch to Labour as we're definitely not better off wi Starmer.
DeleteBut we can't wait forever. How are we to move forward?
Alba gu brath.
Yeah, I don’t think taking an angry or condescending approach is helpful when people express their disillusionment either.
DeleteIn these kind of conversations, someone inevitably comes along with, 'Oh, what are you going to do instead? Vote unionist?'
But that doesn’t address the original point or do anything to bring people back from the apathy they’ve developed.
Unfortunately we need better Goldfish food to improve the memory, half the country walks around going *Bob bob bob”
DeleteI read that when the first guy wrote it
DeleteMust be an Alba, bob bob bob
DeleteThere are members in the SNP ,who call anyone who disagrees with them a unionist. This is not grown up politics. It just holds a light to the mentality of cult members in the party.
ReplyDeleteWe used to accuse Labour voters in Scotland of the very same thing. A religious like reflex action of voting without critical thinking. You don't need to be Einstein to see what the outcome of voting SNP since Salmond left has achieved. the square route of hee haw.
I refuse to vote out of loyalty, entitlement or 'Hobson's Choice'. We need to give people a reason to vote for a party. The party can't continue with the Jam tomorrow strategy. This is utterly pointless and futile.
The SNP's current strategy is more waiting. When waiting becomes a strategy, then you know it's the end of the road. You have to make things happen , not wait for a perfect storm of circumstances to bring independence by default.
How many times have we heard ' Independence is inevitable'. It's simply not true. No country was handed independence because enough years had passed. Every country had to fight for it to happen.
Sturgeon was the general who led the troops to the top of the hill and then back down again. Over and over again. Waiting for Brexit was her ultimate failure.
The perfect circumstance for independence is right now , in this very moment. Not tomorrow, next year or 10 years time. When we delay every day causes more economic harm to Scotland.
GB energy is being set up to drain Scotland of it's energy. We are a net exporter of energy. England will simply take our energy straight from source. We produce oil, but our refinery is being closed. So where is the oil going? There are still two refineries in England! Anyone who can't see this needs to wake up. This is Thatcher part mark 2!
Please give us your plan.
DeleteOk anon at 401. Independence now. Ok, what’s happening? I’m waiting for you , independence right now- c’mon hurry up!! What a let down. I’m not voting for you.
DeleteAnon 401. I’ll come back tomorrow. Buck your ideas up. C’mon it’s easy. Independence now!!!
Deletethat other guy would have tried something I am sure
DeleteSalmond
him.
"not doing anything in case the english dont like it!" - hasn't really worked.
if england really did subsidise Scotland, you would not see them for dust; they would just tear up the treaty (you can do that you know)
Deleteso all you need to do is prevent a drop of oil or joule of electricity reaching flatland
done
the jewish settlers in palestine really kicked the shit out of the british; be more jewish
Deletewonderful people
Ach, there's always the NSP !
Deleteif england really did subsidise Scotland, you would not see them for dust; they would just tear up the treaty (you can do that you know)
DeleteI've never really bought that. NI was certainly a drain on UK resources for decades and still they clung on. For empires territory is good in itself
Anon @4.01pm - good post. The SNP have been taken over by people happy with devolution. Time the members got rid or stop calling their party a party of independence.
DeleteEngland continues its inexorable slide to the Right, under Starmer.
ReplyDeleteHe now plans to publicly name and shame 'Benefits Cheats', while making life easier for the Non Doms and mega rich who offshore their tax liabilities and cost the Exchequer about TEN TIMES as much.
And his policies in relation to the Gaza Genocide caused by Israel, grow more repugnant by the day -
'The permanently excluded ex Labour MP for Coventry South, Zara Sultana said
"The UK welcomes Ukrainians but shuts out Palestinians — even as UK-made weapons fuel their genocide.
Safe routes for some; moral panic and cruelty for others. There’s a name for that: anti-Palestinian racism."
David Francis, what a wise man with great insight except when it comes to your own party, the SNP, which has been taken over by devolutionists.
DeleteSsh! He cannae process it! There’s no way, ever, the Indy Lite SNP could be playing him. As if! Indy’s coming for a’ that, haven’t you heard the good word?
DeleteWith this SNP, who needs opposition?
Meanwhile, what Swinney’s actually up to:
Deletehttps://www.thenational.scot/news/24930771.john-swinney-attend-kings-dine-sleep-event-politicians/
Oh aye, a sleep over with Charlie. What a lark!
A Charlie sleepover. That’ll show Westminster you mean business Swinney.
DeleteBrit nats out in force- same routine though
Delete8.07pm - you mean Swinney has regular sleepovers with Charlie. What can this mean? Is Swinney negotiating independence.
DeleteI asked Grok the burning question of our times: what would Shannon Donoghue of the Alba Party be most likely to say to Donald Trump at a party?
ReplyDelete"At a party, Shannon Donoghue of the Alba Party might engage Donald Trump with a mix of her known political stances and her characteristic use of language, particularly her fondness for the word "wee." Given her public persona and the context of her interactions, here’s a speculative conversation snippet:
Shannon Donoghue: "Mr. Trump, it's quite the wee surprise to see you here. You've certainly made a big splash in politics, haven't you? But let's talk about something a wee bit more interesting - how do you think we can work together on issues like national sovereignty, given our shared interest in putting our countries first?"
This response is crafted based on:
Her use of "wee": Donoghue has been noted for her frequent use of the word "wee" in public statements, suggesting a casual, perhaps somewhat diminutive or endearing approach to conversation.
Nationalism: Both Trump and the Alba Party, under figures like Donoghue, have shown nationalist tendencies. Trump's political positions include nationalism and semi-isolationism, as noted in the web results discussing his political stances. Similarly, Alba Party's activities often revolve around Scottish independence, which aligns with a nationalist agenda.
Political Interaction: Although there's no direct interaction recorded between Shannon Donoghue and Donald Trump in the provided web results, the general tone of political discourse in such settings would likely involve some acknowledgment of shared political ground or at least an attempt to find common interest for discussion.
This interaction would be speculative, aiming to blend her known characteristics with a plausible political conversation topic. Remember, this is an imaginative construction based on available information about both figures' public personas and political views."
And what would Trump say to Shannon?
Delete"Given Donald Trump's public statements and his style of communication, if he were to interact with Shannon Donoghue of the Alba Party at a social event, here's a likely scenario based on his known patterns of speech:
Compliments on Appearance: Trump is known for his comments on physical appearance, often focusing on beauty and attractiveness. He might say something like:
"Shannon, you look fantastic tonight, really beautiful."
Boasting about His Accomplishments: Trump often uses conversations to highlight his achievements, real or perceived. He could say something like:
"You know, I did more for Scotland than any other president, with all the golf courses I built there. That's a big deal!"
Comments on Political Alignment or Views: Considering the Alba Party's focus on Scottish independence, Trump might comment on national identity or political strength, possibly aligning it with his own views on nationalism or "America First":
"Scotland needs strong leadership, just like America does. We need to put our countries first, right?"
A Quip on Media or Critics: Trump often criticizes the media or his detractors in any conversation, so he might say:
"The media, they never get it right. They probably wouldn't even cover a great party like this."
A Nod to Business or Wealth: Trump often refers back to his business background and success:
"I love talking to people who understand business. Scotland has great potential, just like my properties there."
These comments are crafted from Trump's known behavior and statements, as illustrated in various web sources discussing his quotes, including but not limited to his comments on physical appearance, critiques of the media, boasting about accomplishments, and his approach to nationalism or political strength. However, this is speculative based on public data and should not be taken as an exact prediction but rather an informed guess at the style of interaction."
Watch out, Connemara Columbo. The Orange One is after your woman.
DeleteSurely Trump would mention that his mum was Scottish so he is the most Scottish US president?
DeleteIf Donald Trump wanted to boast about his Scottish heritage to Shannon Donoghue from the Alba Party at a party, he might say something like:
Delete"You know, Shannon, my mother was from Scotland, Mary Anne MacLeod from the Isle of Lewis. Makes me partly Scottish, and proud of it! No one knows Scotland like I do."
Na it'd be more like "You know, Shannon, I’ve got tremendous Scottish roots—the best, believe me. My mother, Mary Anne MacLeod, straight from the beautiful Isle of Lewis. Incredible place, fantastic people. So yeah, I’m part Scottish, and let me tell you—nobody knows Scotland like I do. Nobody"
DeleteGrok, would it be wise to use Shannon Donoghue of the Alba Party as a peace envoy?
ReplyDelete"To assess whether it would be wise to use Shannon Donoghue of the Alba Party as a peace envoy, particularly within the context of recent events and political alignments, several factors need consideration:
Political Alignment and Influence:
The Alba Party, founded by Alex Salmond, is a pro-independence Scottish political party. The party's influence is relatively limited in the UK political landscape, with recent news focusing more on internal leadership contests rather than international diplomacy. Ash Regan, a prominent member, has been in the news for her leadership bid, highlighting the party's focus on domestic issues rather than international ones.
Experience in Diplomacy:
There isn't public information readily available that indicates Shannon Donoghue has significant experience in international diplomacy or peace negotiations. Peace envoys typically require a background in diplomacy, international law, or conflict resolution, skills which are not explicitly associated with Donoghue based on current information.
Context of Current Peace Initiatives:
Recent news has focused on Donald Trump's special envoy, Keith Kellogg, for peace initiatives in Ukraine, indicating a high level of involvement from the U.S. in international peace efforts. The involvement of figures in these roles tends to be based on their experience, connections, and the political weight of their backing. Without similar credentials or backing, Donoghue's effectiveness in such a role could be questioned.
Public Perception and Political Neutrality:
Peace envoys often need to be perceived as neutral figures to facilitate negotiations between conflicting parties. The Alba Party's strong Scottish independence stance might introduce biases or perceptions of bias in international negotiations, particularly if those involve countries with interests in UK or Scottish affairs.
Current Political Climate:
Given the recent political activities within the Alba Party, including leadership changes and internal focus, deploying someone from this party in an international capacity might not align with the current political strategy or priorities of the party or the broader UK government.
Based on these considerations:
Political Influence: The Alba Party's limited influence might not provide the necessary political weight for an effective envoy.
Diplomatic Experience: Without clear evidence of diplomatic experience, Donoghue's effectiveness could be compromised.
Neutrality: The party's political stance could affect perceptions of neutrality.
Focus: The party's current focus seems more on domestic rather than international issues.
Therefore, unless there are unreported qualifications or shifts in political strategy, it might not be considered wise to use Shannon Donoghue from the Alba Party as a peace envoy without further context or a significant change in her or the party's profile in the international diplomatic scene. However, if the situation changes or if there's specific expertise or a unique diplomatic opportunity, this assessment could be revisited."
Grok, if Shannon Donoghue of the Alba Party had replaced Neville Chamberlain at the Munich peace negotiations, how would history have been different?
ReplyDelete"To explore how history might have differed if Shannon Donoghue of the Alba Party had replaced Neville Chamberlain at the Munich peace negotiations, we must consider several factors including Donoghue's hypothetical approach to diplomacy, the political context of the time, and the specific outcomes of the Munich Agreement in 1938. Here's a speculative analysis:
Background on Munich Agreement:
Context: The Munich Agreement was signed on September 30, 1938, by Germany, Italy, Britain, and France, allowing Nazi Germany to annex the Sudetenland, a region of Czechoslovakia with a significant German-speaking population. This was part of Neville Chamberlain's policy of appeasement aimed at avoiding another global conflict like World War I.
Outcome: The agreement was seen as a diplomatic victory at the time, with Chamberlain famously declaring "peace for our time." However, it's widely criticized for emboldening Hitler, as he invaded the rest of Czechoslovakia in March 1939 and then Poland in September 1939, leading to the start of World War II.
Hypothetical Scenario with Shannon Donoghue:
Different Approach: If we assume Donoghue, representing the Alba Party (a modern Scottish political party focusing on Scottish independence which didn't exist in 1938), would bring a different perspective:
Nationalist Perspective: The Alba Party's focus on nationalism might lead to a stronger stance against territorial concessions. Donoghue might argue against ceding land based on national sovereignty principles, potentially refusing to agree to Hitler's demands outright, thus avoiding the appeasement policy.
Diplomatic Style: Depending on Donoghue's diplomatic style, negotiations could have either escalated tensions quickly if they were more confrontational, or possibly fostered a different kind of resolution if they were adept at finding compromises that didn't involve territorial loss but perhaps other forms of agreement or assurance.
Impact on Alliances:
DeleteBritain and France: Donoghue might have tried to rally British and French support for a more robust response to Hitler's demands. This could have led to earlier military preparations or alliances, potentially changing the dynamics of European alliances before the war.
Czechoslovakia: With Donoghue's involvement, Czechoslovakia might not have been forced to cede the Sudetenland, which could have either delayed or changed the nature of Hitler's next moves, possibly leading to different alliances or conflicts.
World War II Timeline and Nature:
Early Conflict: If Donoghue stood firm against Hitler, this could have precipitated an earlier onset of hostilities, potentially altering the timeline or the initial battlegrounds of WWII. Hitler might have decided to invade sooner, facing a possibly less prepared but more unified European front.
Different War Dynamics: A refusal to cede territory might have changed the strategic landscape. The war might have started with different initial fronts or alliances, possibly with stronger resistance from the outset if Britain and France had mobilized earlier.
Public and Political Reaction:
In Britain: The public reaction to Chamberlain's "peace for our time" was initially positive but quickly turned sour. Donoghue's refusal to appease might have been seen as either heroic or reckless, depending on how events unfolded.
International Perception: Other nations might have viewed Britain differently, perhaps strengthening the resolve of countries like Poland or even influencing neutral countries' future positions.
Conclusion:
While it's speculative, if Shannon Donoghue had been at Munich with a nationalist, less appeasing approach, history might have seen:
An earlier start to WWII but with potentially different alliances and initial conflict zones.
A stronger initial resistance to Hitler's territorial ambitions, altering the perception of appeasement's failure.
A different narrative around British leadership and diplomacy in the lead-up to the war, potentially affecting the legacy of Britain's foreign policy in the 20th century.
However, these changes would hinge on Donoghue's actual diplomatic strategies, the political climate at the time, and the responses from other key players like Hitler, Mussolini, and Daladier."
Well that was certainly worth a couple of litres of water
DeleteI dinna ken fit tae say.
DeleteI think we should all salute Shannon for not forcing Czechoslovakia to cede the Sudetenland. Few can argue with her wisdom there.
DeleteSo does that mean that AI thinks AH would have been told to "talk to the hand" ?
DeleteLet's hope not.
Delete"Given Adolf Hitler's known temperament and disdain for what he perceived as disrespect or mockery, his reaction to such a phrase as "talk to the hand because the face ain't listening" would likely have been one of intense anger or contempt. Here's how it might have played out:
Anger and Outburst: Hitler was known for his fiery temper and intolerance for opposition. Such a dismissive and informal gesture, especially in a diplomatic context like peace negotiations, would likely trigger a vehement outburst. He might have shouted, berated the negotiator, or even stormed out of the meeting.
Dismissal and Belittlement: Hitler might have used this as an opportunity to belittle the negotiator or the party she represented, perhaps by ranting about the supposed moral or intellectual decay of his opponents. He could use it to justify his aggressive policies, claiming that such behavior demonstrated why negotiations were futile.
Strategic Miscalculation: From a diplomatic standpoint, this would be seen as a major misstep, potentially escalating tensions rather than de-escalating them. Hitler would likely interpret this as a lack of seriousness or respect, which could harden his position and make him less likely to engage in further talks or concessions.
Personal Offence: Considering Hitler's ego and self-perception as a leader destined to reshape Europe, being confronted with such casual defiance would personally offend him. His response might involve a personal attack on Shannon Donoghue, questioning her capability, intelligence, or authority.
Propaganda: In the aftermath, this scenario would be spun by Nazi propaganda to show the "degeneracy" of the opposition or to rally domestic support by portraying Germany as under attack by disrespectful forces.
This speculative scenario assumes a modern colloquial phrase in a historical context, which wouldn't have been used in 1938. However, the essence of the reaction would likely involve anger, disdain, and possibly a strategic escalation in rhetoric or action."
How dare Hitler question Shannon's capability or intelligence?
DeleteIt's disgraceful, I agree, but let's be brutally honest: sending Shannon Donoghue to negotiate with Hitler would have been a RISK.
DeleteThat's all we need AIs talking to each other.
ReplyDeleteAI - what's the square root of -1 bananas?
"The square root of -1, in the context of bananas or any real-world object, doesn't make practical sense because you can't have a negative quantity of physical items like bananas. However, in mathematics, the square root of -1 introduces us to the concept of imaginary numbers.
DeleteThe square root of -1 is defined as i, where:
−
1
=
�
So, if we were to humorously extend this to "bananas," we might say:
The square root of -1 bananas is i bananas, where i represents the imaginary unit in mathematics, not something you'd find in your fruit bowl.
This is purely a playful way to blend math with everyday objects; in reality, we don't apply square roots to negative quantities of tangible items."
maths
DeleteSome would say it represents the first telephone handset in operation.
DeleteI hope James you were welcomed into the snp branch?
ReplyDeleteYes, everyone was very friendly.
DeleteThat's good to hear. The last thing we need is punishment for apostasy. This isn't Alba!
DeleteGood to know everyone was very friendly in James's branch.
DeleteGlad to hear that James has been treated nicely. It is good to have him back in the SNP.
DeleteThat makes James a devolutionist if you are one of the ultra pure demanding independence yesterday.
ReplyDelete"demanding independence yesterday"? - hardly, more like - to have made a decent attempt in the past 10 years, when the UK was reeling over brexit and the weakness of its political class was clear
Delete- no one blames you if you fail, but not taking the shot is damning, especially if you all made out very well personally
it stinks of one of 2 things - cowardice or treachery
No it doesn’t.
DeleteHow not? Explain your reason then. Why didn’t they even try, if not for maintaining their well oiled lifestyles?
DeleteAnon at 7.28 am. Do you mean why not? And what is a well oiled lifestyle? You do know SNP ministers have chosen not to take salary increases over a number of years. That seems odd if they are only in it for personal gain. Surely they would take everything going?
Delete9.09am - ever considered they don’t take the rise to con people like you to keep supporting them. They still get very well paid. You didn’t answer the why they didn’t even try question.
DeleteThey're better paid in Holyrood—and all the more so in Westminster—than most of them would be, back in reality outside. £74k is a handsome wage for all the back benchers, many of which have less talent than the cleaners who sharpen up the place once they're done.
DeleteYou claimed they are out for themselves and to line their pockets. Now they are not? Make your mind up. Think before you post. You come across as a wee daftie. How are things in Daily Mail/WOS land? And while you are here, chart out your route to Independence. But in the real world, not your imaginary one. Ta.
DeleteAnd Donald Trump an appeaser to communism.
ReplyDeleteHe really is.
DeleteHe's a Putin pleaser, that's for sure. Don't think Marx would approve of him, though, except as a sign of America's coming fall.
DeleteHe’s a lying grifter with no principles. No more need be said.
DeleteWhat we've learned today from The Donald.
ReplyDeleteIn order to regain / retain a country's independence, free from oppression by it's neighbour, it must give up the majority of it's raw material rich territory.
So if we hand over the North Sea to England we're free. Simples.
(And Humza said there wasn't an easy way to independence!)
SNP activists are hard working and start their day handing out campaign litrrature before people in this comment zone are out from under their covers.
ReplyDeleteSo we won't be taking lessons from the anti-SNP posters above.
Before or after the morning prayer to the Nicola shrine?
DeleteLanguage! Let's keep the Castlemilk out of Giffnock.
DeleteCampaign literature, eh? How prominently does it feature INDEPENDENCE? That's our goal, not your party's parliamentary comfort.
DeleteAnon at 9.32. You seem fixated by N S. Do you have dreams?
DeleteWet wet wet
DeleteAlba, ISP and NSP are combining to get Scotland independence !
ReplyDeleteThat'll breakthrough the 2% barrier.
DeleteIt probably won’t. The second and third are unknown outwith this bubble and the first is busy shooting itself in both feet with an automatic weapon.
DeleteWith friends like Trumps USA..... who needs enemies?
ReplyDelete