* .* .*
With less than two months of the year left to go, the 2025 Scot Goes Pop fundraiser is still short of its target figure. If you'd like to help keep the lights on during the several months it will take me to find out whether an alternative funding model is viable (realistically it could be a wait of around four months or more), card donations are welcome HERE. Or, if you prefer, direct donations can be made via PayPal. My PayPal email address is: jkellysta@yahoo.co.uk
Many thanks to everyone who has donated so far.
Entirely off topic, but worth a laugh.
ReplyDeleteThe Football Association of Ireland has voted overwhelmingly to urge UEFA to ban the Zionist entity from European competition. This isn’t some I’ll founded virtue signalling, the FAI cite two contraventions of provisions within the UEFA rule book.
* A requirement to establish & implement anti racism policies.
* The scheduling of games on territory controlled by the Palestinian Authority without the permission of said body.
Now the punchline. Odious piece of human filth, US Senator, Lindsey Graham has threatened Ireland with dire consequences over the actions of one of its sporting associations.
Graham has the most acute of tin-ears when it comes to this issue. When a substantial portion of the American right & far right are sprinting away from the Apartheid state in an ever growing avalanche, Graham doubles down in his absolute loyalty.
I shudder to think what kompromat Mossad have on the Senator for Tel Aviv West.
I think the more obvious bit is that UEFA shouldn't include countries in Asia.
DeleteWell done Ireland. Israel is only in EUFA because Africa and Asia do not want anything to do with them. It is a disgrace that Scotland’s women footballers are scheduled to play Israel in the World Cup. Some of these women footballers could have served in the IDF while they were carrying out a genocide.
DeleteWell done Ireland. Israel is only in EUFA because Africa and Asia do not want anything to do with them. It is a disgrace that Scotland’s women footballers are scheduled to play Israel in the World Cup. Some of these women footballers could have served in the IDF while they were carrying out a genocide.
DeleteObviously the SNP figure needs to be nearly 20% higher to advance Independence under Swinney’s plan.
ReplyDeleteI think you're overstating the difficulty there. It maybe needs to be 10 points higher, but not 20.
DeleteFor Holyrood it needs to be at least 44% and preferably near to 50%. Meaanwhile a comment btl on the National:
Delete"It was us Scots who signed away our own country and argued to take over England’s throne and came up with the idea of Great Britain. Who are we fighting? Ourselves I think."
He's not entirely right historically - but he's not wrong either.
The most certain route to Independence, and the easiest, is to first achieve self-determination.
ReplyDeleteWhat will distress and really offend many Indy activists, is that that is WITHIN the UK state. It would guarantee the INTERNAL route to self-determination that the UKSC and the Quebec court talked about in their rulings.
And the best actors to achieve this - are the SNP and the other pro-Indy parties.
Unfortunately this view point is acceptable to probably only about 5% of Independence activists, though it would be acceptable to 75% or more of the electorate, meaning that if the SNP and other parties campaigned on a platform of self-determination, they could easily achieve an overall majority, and probably over 50% maybe even 60% of the votes.
It seems they should also make representation to JPTI to backup their campaigns, along with BfS and all YES groups.
Sadly it won't happen, and if this comment achieves any replies, that is why. Thalamus (angry splutter) wins over cortex (think before reacting).
So that is absolutely true. Swinney needs to lean into reality and reach out to the public and co-share their hopes and aspirations for independence. But he has to accommodate 93-70-96 and the diverse views of minority groupings. If not everyone supports the idea of independence we have to cherish that view and come to accommodation with it. This is the roadmap to success, but not in a vainglorious way.
DeleteYesindyref2 talking his trying to seem reasonable self serving twaddle again
DeleteThere is only one independence party in Scotland in any position to further the cause of independence, it's that simple, all the rest are not even also ran's in Westminster's eyes, and that includes the Greens
The precedent is and always will be a one party majority in support of independence then and only then will it happen
It's not John Swinney's or Nicola Sturgeon's fault that this is the only precedent Westminster will recognize, this precedent was set long before those two leaders were in the job and Yesindyref2 and IFS and all the others who claim a majority of lots of parties will be enough know it
If Scotland want's independence for real then they must vote SNP with each vote they have for the SNP to try and get it
Then if Westminster puts up another road block and says no then that's the time to change the approach and not arguing about it before there's a chance to win and beat Westminster at its own game
Actually when I re-read what I posted, it should be " the best actors to achieve this - are the SNP and the other pro-Indy parties - AND any other party that includes self-determination in their manifesto.
DeleteThere's a big difference between 1). Going for a mandate for a referendum, 2), Going for a mandate for full self-determination and 3). Going for a mandate for Independence.
Self-determination seems to often be confused with Independence. Yet in 2014 Scotland exercised our self-determination, and sadly a small majority said "NO", as in, not at this time, not yet, or not under those conditions, or not if Scotland gets a lot more powers.
But it was an exercise of self-determination, whatever the outcome.
Anon at 11.56pm is just another anonymous poster misrepresenting what I have posted for over 5 years on SGP. These people also claim I post too much but they seem to be unable to understand and retain what I have posted.
DeleteI have always said a majority yes vote in a de facto referendum is the way forward. I have said this many many many times on SGP but here we have an anon poster saying “ and IFS and all the others who claim a majority of lots of parties will be enough”. Only this anon knows if he is deliberately lying or just cannae read well.
Yes, but that exercise in self-determination has since been superseded by multiple decisions by the Scottish public to hold a second independence referendum - decisions that were not enacted because the UK is a prison in which the Scottish people's right to self-determination is not respected or upheld.
DeleteJames the UK is a prison as you say because they control our rights. All colonies are prisons and are not democracies.
DeleteAnon at 11.56. You and others have made up a rule on One Party Voting that is nonsense. Swinney has caused the Indy movement huge damage. You are complicit.
DeleteI do have to laugh at people like 11.56pm who says:
Delete“ The precedent is and always will be a one party majority in support of independence then and only then will it happen”
It didnae happen in 2015, 2017 and 2019. So was the SNP a unionist party over that period?
On further analysis of the post at 11.56pm I tend to think there is a high possibility it is Dr Jim again posting his pish full of excuses for Sturgeon and Swinney. Although it was missing the usual comment that Salmond was to blame for everything.
The Liberation/Salvo making representation to JPTI has proven to be a folly to be expected - and perhaps a lesson to shouty activists who refuse to accept that the country itself has to commit itself to wanting independence - and that independence can only be achieved through acknowledgement that Westminster cannot be excluded from any truly viable route to gaining it. All the bloviating that it can be achieved by just acting as if we're independent and assuming that the country will back a movement claim that 50-55% is representative of the country gagging for independence and that the movement therefore legally represents the will of the country - is just reality denial.
ReplyDelete"Ye kin tak a horse tae watter ..but ye cannae mak it drink!"
DeleteValid comment @ 4:14 pm.
So what *should* we be doing, then? Trying our best not to die out, while waiting for the Gravy Train brigade to stuff themselves full enough forever?
DeleteThis impasse—Scotland supports independence on the whole but the party of independence does not—has to give somehow. But how?
Any informed poster knew this. I and others have been saying this for some time. I called it then and I’ll call it now, it’s student politics.
DeleteAnon at 4.14pm says: “ The Liberation/ Salvo making representation to JPTI” they are making a representation to the UN and JPTI had been hired to assist them in that course of action. So if you do not understand the basics it does little for you and anon at 4.08pms credibility in commenting on the matter.
DeleteIt may well prove to be a folly in due course but you have jumped the gun. My position is that a majority yes vote in a de facto referendum is required before the UN will take the matter further forward. You can make a superb case that Scotland is a colony but if you cannae prove that a majority disnae like being in the colony then the UN will do nothing.
Sadly 4.14pm and 4.08pm seem happy to give Westminster a veto over our rights to independence if we vote for it. Perhaps they need to review whether they think that makes them independence supporters.
Common sense from JPTi, in its rebuke to the ridiculous behaviour of Liberation Scotland and Salvo Scotland -
ReplyDelete"In its advocacy, JPTi has often cited Switzerland’s federal structure as an exemplary model for achieving robust autonomy within a stable and democratic framework. However, the ultimate decision between autonomy and independence must belong exclusively to the people of Scotland, not to self-appointed civil society actors such as Liberation Scotland or SalvoScot Ltd. The absurdity of the present situation lies in their denial of political reality: that no Member State of the United Nations will support the decolonisation of Scotland unless credible evidence is presented that these groups genuinely represent the will of the Scottish people."
no Member State of the United Nations will support the decolonisation of Scotland unless credible evidence is presented that these groups genuinely represent the will of the Scottish people
DeleteThis is why a de facto referendum is needed. There's no other way of making it unambiguous that Scotland supports independence. A single-party majority for the SNP on 40% of the vote certainly doesn't do that. Arguably even 50%+1 in the popular vote for independence parties doesn't - who's to say that people weren't voting for those parties' policy on bus fares, for example?
The only way of putting it beyond doubt is a referendum or single-issue election in which the Yes side gets a popular majority. Until then we're just wasting time
Your post is spot on Keaton other than your last sentence where you refer to a “ popular majority” - whatever that is. Over 50% is democratic and sufficient. The UK left the EU on under 52%. It continually surprises me why it takes people so long to realise that we need to demonstrate a majority in favour of independence. It disnae need to be 75% or anything like that.
Delete2.07pm is me IFS.
Delete538 its not me IFS
DeleteWhy? What will you do if I react? You make a statement then warn people not to answer. Are you Trump or Mussolini or Amin?
ReplyDeleteHi James. Off topic, but I wanted to ask about your views on Ref UK’s electoral prospects in Scotland.
ReplyDeleteOn one hand: encouraging polling + high profile UK leader + £ for campaigning. OTOH: near invisibility on the ground in Scotland + do they even have a Scottish leader? + who are their 2026 HR candidates, do they even know? + few local Councillors.
I guess they are just going to rely on posted letters through the door? But party (any party) “election literature” is very rarely read by anyone except committed party supporters and a few opponents (in order to hate the party more), that is voters whose mind is already made up one way or the other.
What the established parties here all have are local Councillors, Scottish party leaders (even if “branch office”…), incumbent MSPs etc all of which provides a platform for local get out the vote + even persuasion.
Do you see this lack of local visibility/ party infrastructure & Scots leadership all significantly hurting Ref UK when it comes to the HR 2026 vote?
Thanks.
Yes and the fact they are racists
DeleteReform has one MSP and 19 councillors in Scotland atm.
DeleteWe're in uncharted territory, so I suppose a lot of the answer to your question is "we don't know yet". However, it's worth pointing out that at the Caerphilly by-election, a number of commentators made the point that for the first time the lack of an identifiable Welsh leader for Reform was harming the party with voters - apparently that was coming up on the doorstep and in focus groups. So logically the same issue might harm Reform in Scotland as the Holyrood campaign gets into full swing.
DeleteRef U K have the added benefit of being actively promoted on a daily basis by BBC. And there’s will be a lot of black money indirectly promoting them. They will gain seats in 2026. :(
DeleteReally interesting article in Guardian about Hope Not Hate in depth poll analysis of 11,000 RefUK supporters - 'Who Supports Reform and Why?'. Instructive on the voter groupings. Doesn't include Scotland - but insightful on who and why with the highest percentage group the most interesting and from which I think in Scotland we should pay attention to these groupings as on the ground observations look very similar make-up.
DeleteSensible comment. Not all Reform voters will be bad, like not. That goes without saying,
DeleteBut the reasons that are driving people to vote Reform is something that should be looked at from Scotland perspective. People are discontent, disillusioned with mainstream parties and the faux democracy systems both here and in Westminster.
The opportunity for change is all around us. Hope and vision for a better Scotland will sell. Of that there is no doubt.
Why are some IFS posts in blue and others in black? Is there two IFSs?
ReplyDeleteHeaven forbid! One’s bad enough.
DeleteWhy do you post as an anon? Anonymous at 8.12pm
Delete@ 8-12pm
Deleteahem .......ARE there two IFS's?
You're welcome.
Accepted, but is there two IFSs?
DeleteThere is only one IFS. Although trolls have tried to post comments and pass them off as if they are from me.
DeleteAn aside - great news on Reuters that ScotGov has been given the same credit rating as UK. Originally initiated move by Humza - a result which seems to defy the notion that he was 'useless' after all! This sounds great news for Scotland and great confidence confirmation from the credit agency in ScotGov's economic management and trustworthiness. Big plus for ScotGov/SNP.
ReplyDeleteGood grief. A small article low down on the main page, this is how the National covers this major story:
Delete"Premium Bonds
Scottish Government handed same credit rating as UK ahead of bonds plan"
Premium Bonds! No, it isn't Ernie.
Another week, another heartbreak for KC.
ReplyDeleteSelf determination is a right of all peoples. We are going backwards if we go for a referendum to “ get the right of self determination.” Do the English ever ask for a referendum to establish any of their rights - NO.
ReplyDeleteAll this stuff about kow towing to Westminster from various posters above is just more of the Scottish cringe. If you say please to Westminster they will say piss off.
You get a democratic vote for independence via a de facto referendum and then you tell Westminster to piss off. The Britnats are scared of a de facto referendum as are the devolutionists in the SNP.
The post at 1.58pm is me IFS.
DeleteThe British establishment is genuinely terrified of referendums after the near miss of 2014 and the carnage of 2016. Westminster will never, ever grant one again.
DeleteDe facto is the only way. Nobody gives it to you. You have to take it.
More crap from IFS about SNP devolutionists, it wasn't Swinney or Sturgeon who invented the phrase devo max and who wanted that on the ballot paper, that was your man Salmond IFS that came up with that and he lost
Delete@ IFS 1.58PM Why would the English ask for a referendum? they already own everything, did you not know that
DeleteDr Jim at 10.27pm. Why do you not post on SGP as Dr Jim but prefer to hide in among the anonymous posters? Is it because you are worried that if you put Dr Jim on your posts James will not publish them due to all the personal abuse you used to post about James on WGD? Or are you just ashamed about some of the stuff you post as you know they are Trumpian style lies?
DeleteJimbo says : “ that was your man Salmond IFS” - you get so much wrong Jimbo. You are the SNP member not me so Salmond was YOUR man. There was no devomax option on the ballot paper so you are prattling on about an irrelevance.
On the other hand Sturgeon and Swinney, both your men again, have garnered votes and monies on the back of a referendum ( save the date ) promise and then a de facto referendum promise and delivered nothing but a dodgy motor home and a police investigation.
Sturgeon and Swinney have had multiple election wins and mandates for a referendum and done nothing over the previous 11 years. Over that period they could have called a de facto referendum at Holyrood. These are the non actions of devolutionists.
If you knew anything about SNP history IFS you'd know that nobody in the SNP wanted Alex Salmond, Winnie Ewing called him slippery, and they were all proved correct
DeleteSalmond was as much a liability as a plus, then went on to be a minus and he was the architect of devo max not independence as he claimed
It was Tory David Cameron that offered Scotland a referendum on independence and Salmond who didn't want it
And by the way I'm not Dr Jim either
The Dr Jim tribute act at 8.47pm. Why you think I am the least bit interested in reading your potted history of Salmond is beyond me.
DeleteFind Out Now, Westminster voting intention, field work 12th Nov.
ReplyDeleteUK headlines; no change within margin of noise from last week, RefUK 16% lead, Greens 2nd on 17%, Labour in fourth on 15%.
Scottish sub-sample (120)
Con 6%, Lab 16%, LibDem 8%, RefUK 20%, Green 15%, SNP 28%
Promising result for Greens on a Westminster franchise, but a tiny population sample.
DE FACTO NOW
ReplyDelete