Wings Over Scotland

Did Mr Smart have the Labour Party in mind as her possible vehicle to Bute House? I know he sees Unionist parties as pretty much interchangeable.

The thought of Ruthie wee tank commander in charge of Scotland fills me with horror.

It is a measure of the unionist that they are the only ones not embarrassed when they talk.

Does anyone have any thoughts or views on what is happening with the church of Scotland and church of England and their recent cooperation agreement??

For years we took that shyster and fraud, Murphy seriously. let’s not waste any brain cells on all the other jokers. That is all they are. Feckin’ comedians. Here today, gone by lunchtime.. moved onto other gigs…

However, I do like the response of, ‘How’s that going?’ hmmmmm….

Ruth riding up to Bute house in her ministerial tank. No thanks.

Surprised no one put Ruth’s own quote from the Telegraph into a picture; ” “Running a … country is not for faint hearted. I don’t think I’m up to it, I don’t want it …”

link to archive.is

Here’s a response from way back. Before Ruth Davidson was even thought of.. well, maybe she’s just been thought of. /Users/neilanderson/Desktop/Ruth Davidson Response.jpg

After reading Smart’s blog, I kind of had the same look on my face as the wee lassie above.

Seriously …WTF???

That made absolutely no sense at all. A piece that basically said ‘anyone, but the SNP!’ Even being ruled by UKIP would probably be preferable in the world of Smart. It was just a rambling moan about random things that apparently the SNP might do …or might not!

And yet it really doesn’t matter in Mr Smart’s world, for make no bones about it, no matter what choices John Swinney or Nicola were to make, the boy Smart would still moan. Bring back tolls on the Forth Road Bridge? – Moan! Don’t bring back tolls on the Forth Road Bridge? – Moan! Debate about bringing back tolls on the Forth Road Bridge? – Moan! Don’t debate about bringing back tolls on the Forth Road Bridge? – Moan!

I’m surprised that he didn’t blame the SNP for the constant rain we’ve had for the last two months. Ooops! Moan!

Well …I suppose that it’s no surprise that so far, no one has bothered to comment on his article …which will probably end in a moan!

Em……no I’ll get it…… eh….em…..no sorry.

Christina Hendricks gets my vile separatist vote.

“Strangely I even feel some sympathy for the “#SNPbad” school of criticism.

I know what we are against but I have absolutely no idea what we are for.

We are against the Council Tax freeze but will we lift it? No idea.

We are opposed to the SNP failing to use the Calman powers but would we have used them? No idea.

We believe Forth Bridge maintenance was underfunded but would we re-introduce tolls? No idea.

We think the NHS needs more resources but do we support Prescription Charges? No idea.

We oppose cutting college places and maintenance grants to fund free university education but would we introduce fees, or even bring back the Graduate Endowment? No idea.”

Are knives out for Kez? Yes.

They could keep ignoring Scottish independence, with all the UKOK London reigns over you Scotland region zealotry, what their online freak show displays but

Vote No Idea party this May:D

So the liebour unionists tell the voters to vote for anyone but the SNP. That’s good of them. They have been taking the piss for a very long time, and the people of Scotland know that now and there is no turning back.

The spin doctors must be about to start working overtime all the way to May, the establishment will be desperate and have all kinds of tactics up their dirty, nasty sleeves.

Periscopes to the ready.

To Macart
Is there no wan for boak?

They’ve had it, finished, gone, defunct and that blog from Ian Smart is the proof.

The Labour party in Scotland is disintegrating before our very eyes. Well, want to know something I’m happy to say good riddance when it has people representing it like those of Mr not so Smart.

Don’t let the door hit you on the arse on the way out!

@Grouse Beater

She wasn`t filling up her mobile gun was she,cause that would have needed diesel not petrol.

Always see Davidson as the Alexander Boris de Pfeffel Johnson of Scotland,

on the surface they come across as bumbling idiots but underneath they are the same Right Wing fanatics as all Tories.

Alexicon

Kezia has never heard of Ian Smart…that is a fact…or something else.

It’d be kind of handy to photoshop Ruth’s face onto this one:

link to screenprism.com

I’ll just leave these here shall I? 😀

link to youtube.com

link to youtube.com

Perhaps a name change would be in order – drop the Ian and add – Notso ?

If you were paranoid you might wonder if there’s going to be more than a few constituencies where Labour simply don’t stand. A desperate ploy whereby it’s hoped that Labour supporters will vote Conservative at the local level in exchange for the reverse at the regional.

It may be unlikely but two parties working in collusion that way might be able to game the voting system in order to secure a combined majority.

I just spilled my whisky, yah dirty!

Quote Notso Smart…….“One of the things that you eventually learn about democratic politics…….. Is that the only thing that really matters is elections” …… Aye people’s well being isn’t even a consideration for this senior representative of the British Labour Party in Scotland.

He then goes on to point out that the Blue Tories have been “mainly running the country for the past 250 years” ……. So knowing this, NOTSO fought tooth and nail to keep Scotland in the Union, to be governed by the Blue Tories.

What an utter buffoon. The head clown, indeed, in his own Smart’s Circus of Unionist Horrors. Does his job well – makes people laugh.

Could it be that Smartie lives in that never-never land of Edinburgh South where all political allegiances are possible and are given reality in the portly shape of Murray , the MP for Hogworts.

Is this fella Smart a pall of the chap who’s reported in the press as advocating/insisting that the new forth road bridge be — ” mothballed”!, I kid you not, cannot remember his name, who the hell would want to anyway, are these types of people specially bread to amuse?.

Regarding my last posting,
I believe that numpty who’s advocating that the new forth bridge be —-mothballed , is standing in the forthcoming Hollyrood elections, some Edinburgh district.

Smart by name,
Mind Fart by nature!

First Munchkin Ruthie Krankie- Tank Commander! lol (Never Ever!)

What ever happened to Dippity Dug and Dim Jim’s investigation into Smart calling SNP members Nazi Scum?

Although all 3 exchanged regularly on social media, the gruesome twosome lied about knowing him and the slander that Smart had posted to them.

Why would we be shocked if the Red and Blue Tory Parties agreed
to let one of their group stand against SNP?

They have the same policies, they put Westminster First at all times, and their Scottish representatives are firstly in it for themselves, and the possibility of a nice seat in the Lords awaits those who can cheat and rape Scotland above and beyond the norm.

Not such a surprising attitude, given the grandparent’s of both Red and Blue Tory parties, sought to reform British society in such a way as to diverted revolutionary tensions, whilst also maintaining the tradition social equilibrium (i.e. the status quo). Toffs at the top, as is only proper. It’s all down to eugenics, see. 😉

Unlike on the continent, where Marxism was much more influential and where anarchism and communism posed a seemingly greater challenge, most British socialism sought accommodation with capitalism and was reformist in character. The Fabian, Sidney Webb (1859–1947), represented an administrative type of socialism, based upon efficiency and organization.

link to encyclopedia.com

British Labour – neo-colonial in outlook and crypto-facist in approach, IMHO. Anyone know if Mr. Smart is a Fabian? 🙂

I wonder if Mr. Smart accepts the proposition that a traditionalist society needs to evolve, if it is to survive in a post-modern world?

Also note in the comments the nasty little implication that Labour should attempt to try and create and exploit sectarian differences between immigrants and native Scots. Lovely people these unionists.

Tears of a clown.

link to labourhame.com

So you rage SNP bad! over and over and over and over and over, then complain about it.

Red tory unionists are a crazy breed:-( or 🙂

All depends on your UKOKism really

Albaman
Said commentator has a degree in engineering, which he is rightly proud of. 😉

@albaman and @cameron Brodie

But what about contract law?

see Peter Bell’s insight on link to scoop.it Why we should mothball the Forth replacement crossing

Albaman says:
2 January, 2016 at 3:53 pm
Regarding my last posting,
I believe that numpty who’s advocating that the new forth bridge be —-mothballed , is standing in the forthcoming Hollyrood elections, some Edinburgh district.

I feel dirty – but check out Labour Hame

Bruce Whitehead – whoever he is:

labourhame.com/why-we-should-mothball-the-forth-replacement-crossing/

Why we should mothball the Forth replacement crossing

This is a ridiculous thing.

Why has red and blue tory UK.gov pumped hundreds of billions into England’s road/rail/air/sea transport infrstucture for decades?

Because it’s all got massive economic multipliers. Sure they say, well we make the money, then hand it out to you sweaties up there but they were all UKOK crapping themselves last May GE because they knew that SNP anywhere near UK.gov could contining giant UK.gov spends like HS2 or Heathrow 3 in south of England might instead be pulled north up teamGB, into and around their Scogland region. And that’s just never going to happen in the economic UKOK world of the red and blue tory yoon, either side of the border.

I assume the organisers know what they are doing yesindyref. 😉

I have just asked John, who I think is one of the organisers, a “village idiot” styled long winded question about this for you yesindyref. 🙂

Here is one of the latest posts from John for anyone who is interested:

I am getting all the scenic spots filmed by a drone, our plan is to stop at Helmsdale for half an hour and the Kyle of Tongue for an hour, the guy who owns the Kyle of Tongue hotel is putting coffee and sanwiches on for us.

Another update gives an idea of what sort of vehicle is going:

62 cars
1 horse box
5 Campervans
7 Motorbikes
180 people,
There are also 46 passenger spaces available for those who don’t drive or don’t have a car.

Before anyone asks … I have absolutely NO idea about what the horsebox thingy is all about! 😀

Ian Smart does so much to advance the case for Scottish Nationhood, poor bitter twisted hate filled fool.

Here’s the ‘Smarter’ brother, with Sheena Wellington, at the launch of the ‘Spirit Of Independence’ in August, 2014.

link to youtube.com

@Brian Doonthetoon

Thanks for that link. A nice rendition of Caledonia indeed.

If the tories and labour in Scotland join together to form one party to try and defeat SNP would they be called labatories, still full of shine

I’m also seriously considering it.

They’ve already consulted with Police. As I understand it, camping is the accommodation :-). I’ve already checked that I can borrow my daughter’s camping gear.

Should be fun.

@LA
Sounds good, I might be up and around about then. After Inverness, might be a good idea to fuel up in Wick, that’s where I do it at the fuel station on the right at the lights before you go down to the roundabout and then bridge and town centre. It’s cheap for some reason.

I’m a little bit pissed, but reading my brother’s and sisters in the wings movement inspires me to be think that we will be independent and free from this terrible union sooner than you think. There is no turning back to the bad old days of a one party Labour state, we will not go back in our boxes. The UK is finished, they sealed their fate, the only way is down to an normal European middle ranking state. Scotland is fed up providing the money and cannon fodder for their futile foreign war’s, which we have a knack of losing. So just think it’s down to us. We can win our freedom through our own hard work.

If we put the new bridge back in it’s box unused and unplayed with we’ll be able to sell it for a profit in the future on one of those Bargainy Hunty Shows I’m sure I’ve got a Star Wars thingy as well

That’s a really clever idea from Labour there
Cannae fault them fur brains eh

if Ian Smart says the sky is blue most of Scotland would open a window and check 🙂
However as part of the “system” when he says Kezia is not a credible alternative what we can deduce is he is lining up someone who he considers can be.
Ruthie will never be in power but it is credible she will lead the biggest opposition party.
Unthinkable a few short years ago.

Re. the Acts of Union, the monarchy, state churches and all that jazz, here’s what the “The Oxford Companion to British History” (2002), has to say on the matter.

The English government was driven to seek a union when in 1705, to try to extract economic concessions, the Scottish Parliament passed an act allowing Scotland to choose a successor to the Scottish crown on Anne’s death, putting the prospect of the Hanoverian succession in jeopardy. The articles of union negotiated by the commissioners formed the basis of the Acts passed by both the English and Scottish Parliaments.

The unitary state of Great Britain was established on 12 May 1707 with Anne as queen, and the succession guaranteed in the house of Hanover. The Scottish Parliament was abolished, and Scottish representation in the British parliament consisted of 45 MPs and 16 representative peers (the numbers based on the respective sizes of the two economies). Free trade between North Britain (Scotland) and South Britain (England) was established, and England’s colonies were open to the Scots on an equal footing. The Scots retained their own legal system (though the House of Lords soon established its position as the highest court of appeal from the Scottish courts), as well as their own Privy Council (this, however, was abolished in 1708). The established churches were to remain the same: Anglican in England and presbyterian in Scotland….

link to encyclopedia.com

Ian not-so Smart, championing the cause of Ruthie Tank commander – Reminds me of how Johann Lamont and other red tories cheered when David Coburn became Scotland’s first UKIP MEP.

Don,t condemn poor Kez, she did appear on Uni challenge and got the correct answer regarding a question about Oor Willie of Sunday Post fame ,what more do want from a Scottish Labour leader – common sense!!!
Remember Labour MSPs not reknowend for knowing how the voters live.

oops did it again – no more Jura malt good night all – maybe

Response to the idea from a couple of guys who met her when she was over doing an anti-indy deal with the Spanish right.

link to youtube.com

labour really are in melt down, any delusions they had about their place in Scotland have evaporated. they are staring at another hammering in may, followed perhaps by an eu ref where they will again share both in and out platforms with the tories, which I still think will be an in vote, followed by another hammering in council elections.

at some point, what remains of labour in Scotland, with no power, or money and few representatives and supporters, will need to decided whether they are labour or unionists. a Scottish unionist party is now inevitable. joining with the tories is unlikely to lose them any more support in Scotland.

the tweets and greetin’ on social media is just this realisation setting in.

re- mags curran….I bet she knows who alan grogan is now,

Ruth Davidson is the most disgraceful and dishonest politician in Scotland, in my view.

Ian Smart is preparing the ground for the formation of United Labour and Tory Party of Scotland.

Robert Peffers says:
2 January, 2016 at 7:39 pm

@shug says: 2 January, 2016 at 12:17 pm:

all well and good but what is the deal between the Church of Scotland and England about and what are they planning

Is the church of Scotland planning to sell out in some way come a second referendum. I know it will be discussed at the general assembly but will anyone there speak up for Scotland or are all members now unionists of the worst variety that know their place

@Marcia

Thanks for the front page preview of tomorrows Sunday Herald.

It’s starting to feel like the referendum all over again.

Ian Smart, John McTernan, bah. Get right intae thum.

Shug there was an interview on BBC Scotland. The Columba Declaration is supposed to be about working with what the two have in common. As the ‘ established Churches of each nation ‘( their words not mine) they feel they can do something or other to support their work.

Now considering one Church has 26 Bishops, a vicar appear in every other episode of Midsummer Murders or is that Morse and a portfolio and contacts direct to both Govt and HRH while the other is losing parishners,sharing a minister between several churches , I’m not sure how that will work out.

Plus there are so many faiths now that might not attend those ‘ established’ churches, call me cynical but I think clutching at straws about covers it , on both sides.

Yours an ex parishner

O/T – on the State Broadcaster Radio 4 channel at 13:10 today (Saturday 2nd Jan) there was programme called “Correspondents Look Ahead” with four of their “B” list correspondents giving their views on what will happen in 2016. The chat was led by Owen Bennett Jones and one of the other correspondents was Jon Sopel. Mr Sopel offered his views on a Brexit referendum in 2016, and stated:

“If it is a very, very close vote, and I spent years covering UK politics, that the Conservative Party will continue to tear itself apart over this issue. If Cameron could win by sorta 65% say we stay in, 35% say, eh, we should go out that’s a very comfortable victory and that should take the issue off the table. Maybe the anti-Europeans will reluctantly have to accept that they have been defeated and this issue has gone for another generation. If it is much tighter than that, I kinda foresee that the issue will just carry on debilitating kindof the Conservative Party and affecting British politics and it’s relations with the EU.”

So there we have it. According to the BBC, if, in a referendum, the margin for victory is anything less than 30%, then the proponents on the losing side do not have to accept that the issue has been defeated for a generation.

I do wonder what Brillo will make of this latest BBC directive?

@shug says: 2 January, 2016 at 10:38 pm:

” … all well and good but what is the deal between the Church of Scotland and England about and what are they planning”

Sorry Shug, I may be misleading you. I have, for many years, held the view that, “The Establishment”, have been around in South Britain since at least Roman Times.

The Establishment is composed of the Royals, Aristocracy, Unionist Political parties, High ranking military of the navy, army, air force and security services. It includes the Church Lords, the law lords and the media owners and is funded by the financial sector of, “The City”. The Education high heads are in there too.

The political party in-fighting is a sham. When the Establishment is under threat we can plainly see them all close ranks against the people. See how easily the Unionist parties can form coalitions one with the other.

The perception of the Blue/Red/Yellow Tories is not in fact an illusion. Their collective blind hatred of the independence movement in general and the SNP in particular only serves to expose them all as just different branches of the Ancient British Establishment.

Thus the several Christian Churches in the UK are no exception – different names – same objective.

OT: Have a laugh at this BUM story , That the SNP ruined Hogmanay:-
link to capx.co

Bob Peffers and others.
Henry VIII regarded Scotland as being rightly his, as attested by the ‘rough wooing’.

The Reformation in England was seen as primarily one of political expediency. Unlike everywhere else there was no attempt at any kind of democratisation of the church. The only real change in the structure in England was who the head of the church was, the hierarchical structure of archbishops, bishops, mass, confessions etc. remained intact.

The Catholic church could not accommodate Henry’s predilection for divorce and remarrying but other than that, they were quite at one with the general structure.

In Scotland, Reformation was, as elsewhere in Europe, seen primarily as a chance to democratise what had become a top down, pseudo-imperialist organisation (despite the term ‘Catholic’ implying permitted diversity (as long as it remained at a cloistered level)).

That is a very salient difference between the two reformation movements.

However, although democratisation of the church seems to have been the major driver here in Scotland that did not stop English medieval spin-meisters from spotting a political advantage and reformation in Scotland was seen by Henry’s advisors as a way to help ‘capture Scotland’.

Hence, we see historical reference to George Wishart (or perhaps his brother) being an agent in the pay of Henry VIII.

Similar suspicions exist re Knox during the Elizabethan era although Knox and Elizabeth themselves were notoriously at loggerheads.

My point is, there has always been spin when it is a matter of acquiring new territory.

And Scots are not exempt. For example as part of Malcolm III’s attempts to annex Northumbria, in addition to numerous invasion attempts, he not only promoted the spread of Northern English throughout his realm but married an ‘English’ princess (who may have been more fluent in Hungarian than in English since she was born and raised there). Political expediency knows no bounds.

I see Mr McKenna has opted for some wishful thinking over on the Graun in place of reasoned commentary. Basically he’s having a dig at Mr Harris and his observations on the impending irrelevance of Labour in Scottish politics. Now Kevin, being an old Labour supporter of long standing, is never going to take such an observation lying down no matter how accurate.

In fact he does lay out a number of pertinent and to my mind accurate reasons as to why our electorate have turned their backs on Labour. Where he wanders off the beaten track is in his hopes of reviving Labour in Scotland and his hopes for the direction of travel for Ms Dugdale. He believes that Ms Dugdale should take a leaf from Mr Corbyn’s book no less. Take Labour in Scotland down a road it hasn’t travelled for many a decade, as in being a party of the people.

Yeah, I know. Firstly Labour in Scotland isn’t a separate entity from Labour anywhere else in the UK. Secondly Mr Corbyn for all the support of England’s membership is NOT a leader in control of his own party and thirdly Labour in Scotland is toxic for a very good reason. They betrayed their own folk on every level for decades whilst reaping the rewards of career. Why on earth would anyone wish to revive this? Why would they trust those who abandoned them, stole from them, manipulated them and abused their trust?

Labour in Scotland will NOT become a Scottish Labour party until a. They become a truly independent Scottish Labour party b. They clean out the long time tribal careerists tied to the idea of parliament before people c. They’ve spent a considerable period of time on the naughty step

Lastly his parting advice to Kezia. Attack the SNP where they are weak – NHS, Education and Policing…in the face of results and performance which indicates our institutions are performing above and beyond past records and expectations, STILL this bullshit insinuation that somehow they aren’t fit simply because Labour is not in charge or basically, yes (sigh), SNP bad.

A lazy end to an otherwise good piece. I suppose he can’t help himself, but damn he can be infuriating at times. No, no institution should consider itself the finished article and all of them should and must continue to constantly evaluate and evolve, strive for improvement. There is always room for improvement, but just what do you have to do to get a pat on the fucking back for jobs well done in difficult circumstances around here?

In Mr McKenna’s eyes, be run by a Labour administration I suppose.

The Church of Scotland was guaranteed separate status, forever under the Act of Union. Anything that compromises that will lead to it’s own demise. The Churches are losing members faster than a sieve loses water. An attempt to stop the flow and stop losing money? CoE Bishops sit in the unelected HoL . Unfair or propping up the Union. It could be to protect their status. ‘Status Quo’. How they can protect a UK Gov that breaks the ‘Law’ at every turn? Still no report of the latest Thatcher revelations, although individual Churchmen did speak out against them, and showed some concern.

The state of Britain is secular. There are more non religious than religious in Britain. Why Cameron et al keep on banging the drum for Christianity is political, petty and ridiculous. Especially while bombing the Middle East to bits, causing the worst migration in Europe since 11WW. Supporting absolute, despot Monarchies, with no support for civil or voting rights. Sanctioning the vulnerable and starving them. Not very concerning behaviour or ‘Christian’. Breaking every ‘commandmant’ in the book. Pulling off more lying promises at the Referendum, aided by the lying Press.

Some Churches do speak out against Westminster’s criminal, illegal behaviour some just acquiesce, seeking a future reward. The greedy banks who pay no taxes fund the Unionist Parties. The criminal politicians are in their pockets. Breaking the Law at every turn. Then spouting ‘Christian’ values. Total hypocrites. Farron ‘the Christian’ voted for more bombing in Syria. Even though a majority in Britain are totally against more illegal wars, costing £Trillions of wasted money. £170Billion for Trident, while the vulnerable starve. Trade and give aid. Do not invade. Vote with a conscience.

OT I’m not a Green supporter but for TV and radio coverage in May we must have fair dos.

link to scottishgreens.org.uk

It would be totally unreasonable if the almost defunct LibDems were given more coverage than the Greens.

Also, Green and Tory support aren’t all that different. So why should the Tories get a higher profile than the Greens?

The days of politics being about the Tories, Labour, LibDems plus (perhaps, maybe, if we can be bothered) SNP, are LONG gone.

I think the Greens can appeal to disaffected Lab and LibDem supporters who have tribal animosity towards the SNP. I want the Greens to soak up Unionist votes. To do so they need to reach those voters, and as we all know, those are probably the people who get their world view from the TV, radio and CorpPress.

Constantly attacking public services is a waste of time. The public appreciate the public services and the job that they do, with qualification. There could be improvements and that is what the SNP Gov is continuing and will continue to do. To keep on attacking public services run until four years ago by Unionists is counter productive. The ‘Unionist’ legacy. The electorate are not stupid. Give then more credibility. They know about pass failures and who is responsible. The lies that have been told. There comes a tipping point. The ‘Status Quo’ rejected. Fast approaching. Unionist/Green politicians total incompetence. Policies reneged upon.

@galamcennalath

Aye! Aunties slip is showing. Here is the Herald version.

link to archive.is

Just heard that the Tunnocks tea cake is rebranding for daun Sarf!

The lion is gone (maybe’s up North as well)… Yes looks like it’s a British tea cake now.

link to archive.is

Never bought a Tunnocks anything for about 3 years
Wish me luck off to the Glasgow sales… 🙁

NHS, Policing and Education. The SNP are having to sort out the Unionist failings. Sort out the Unionist mess as usual. More money has gone into all of them. Along with lower ‘loss leading’ ‘ drink consumption (lower legal allowance), and minimum pricing. The Unionists voted against all of them. No additional specialist training for additional needs pupils. Police 40% of ‘charges’ which had to be processed and never came to court. Annoying folk and more costly. The Police need more ‘Law’ training. There was no integration between hospital and social care.

All that is changing. Increased NHS funding. Funded social care, prescriptions for the elderly. New Police administration. Increased student funding. Students get loans. Leaves training in additional needs for pupils in education to be comprehensively covered. Lower class sizes to be maintained.

Councils to spend the money allocated to public services not diverted to wasteful, grotesque projects. Against the majority wishes and the public interest.

The only thing that will revive red tory Kez in their Scotland region, is JC promising to “give” us devo-max, like what they UKOK said they would. if we voted No.

Has JC got the chops to save SLab in their Scotland region? No.

And of course, steaming pile of tory lies and hypocrisy that is The Graun, don’t like that. So Mackenna chunters away at the living horror that is Scottish NHS, cops etc.

Other news

link to cleanforthequeen.co.uk

Oh when will death come.

The Queen certainly cleans up £400Million++ a year. How much dirty money keeps the wheels greased. Blair has just been stopped from staying at British Embassies for free, around the world. Protected by taxpayers money. The £100Million Royal PM jet.

A £10/20 fine for litter dropping could clean up the state.

heedtracker says:

“The only thing that will revive red tory Kez in their Scotland region, is JC promising to “give” us devo-max, like what they UKOK said they would. if we voted No.”

That most certainly would have worked for Labour and Milliband 3-4 years ago.

It’s too late now. Labour missed the best opportunity to save their Union, and give themselves a future in Scotland. However, I say that with hindsight!

Firstly, it could be 5-10-15 years before Labour might be in a position it “give” anything from WM.

Being the party who pushed for as little devolution as possible with Smith, voters would assume they were lying (again) if they suddenly became the party pushing max, rather than min.

Regarding Kevin McKenna. Mr McKenna now has weekly columns in the Observer, National and Herald newspapers. He may still, as far as I know, have a connection with the Daily Mail.

This means, he has to, in any week, come up with three or four columns, reflecting roughly the political stance of these four different newspapers.

Not an easy task, made harder by the fact, McKenna is old-fashioned, “plastic Paddy”-Celtic-supporting-Glasgow Labour. I doubt if he has had four ideas in his life.

I know he has two: “Rangers bad” and “SNP Bad” and that is hardly a recipe for holding on to all four column commissions for long.

Certainly, in the case of the Herald – he will never come close to filling the mighty hole which Ian Bell’s death has left.

Lenny, I eat all those mentioned now plus Marks and Spencers T cakes ,though I don’t know who makes them for Markies – I hope it is Lees and not Tunnocks.

( I do miss the creamy goo of Tunnocks now you mention your desire for logs!)

McKenna is in it for the dosh, further analysis if futile.

Ian Bell, unfortunately, is irreplaceable. Renowned for his integrity and consistency and admired even by those who disagreed with his point of view. Kevin McKenna is as the dunce to Ian’s dux. Mr McKenna, like so many, see making money and pleasing everyone as a success! He will not be successful, in the way Ian was, until he understands this and finds a sense of purpose and some resolution!

From Boab McShakespurn’s “Hop it”
(Something rotten in the state of Westminster, a right state)

To Tea-Cake, or not to Tea-Cake- that is the question:
Whether ’tis nobler in the mind to stuff in
The alternatives that don’t cost an outrageous fortune
Or to take arms against the likes of Tescos,
And by opposing end them.
To diet- to eat- No more; and by an SNP Vote to say we end
The heartache, and the thousand unnatural cuts
That Scots are heir to. ‘Tis a consummation
Devoutly to be wish’d.

To diet- to eat?
To sleep- perchance to dream of Independence:
ay, there’s the rub!
For in that sleep of dearth what dreams may come
When we have shuffled off this Westminster Boil,
Must give us pause. There’s the respect
That makes calamity of so long life.
For who would bear the Walnut Whips and Cream Horns of time,
Th’ oppressor’s wrong, the proud man’s contumely,
The pangs of self determination, the law’s delay,
The insolence of office, and the spurns
That patient merit of the unworthy takes.

Wouldn’t be at all surprised if all those nasty nats didn’t go into supermarkets and squeeze all the boxes of Tunnocks Tea Cakes

@shug says: 2 January, 2016 at 10:38 pm:

” … all well and good but what is the deal between the Church of Scotland and England about and what are they planning …

What I’m saying, Shug, (in my own cack handed way), is that almost all the churches, in both Scotland & England, are now, and always have been, parts of, “The Establishment.

“The establishment”, being the elite that has been running things since we have had recorded history.

Think about it – The Romans ruled south Britain by Romanising the existing Briton leadership and letting them do Roman’s bidding. Note that we Britons did not become genetically Mediterranean so the Romans never generally interbred with us.

After the Romans left they were replaced, by invitation, with the Anglo Saxon, (Germanic), tribes. Yet genetically there are less than 5% of Britons of actual Anglo Saxon descent among us. Thus another ruling elite.

BTW: The Normans that gave us the Feudal system we still have today, (The Royals, Aristocrats, and with law lords, church lords and hereditary peers still sitting in the HOL).

Then with an education system that sees the leaders of all Unionist political parties drawn from classmates at a handful of English public schools and onto the Oxbridge Universities. Not to mention they are at the lead in the armed forces, churches, law systems, civil service and even such as the Masons and Orange Order.

The facts stare us in the face, “The Establishment”, has been an ever present factor in dictating British History since ever there was British history.

To the man and woman on our streets this has never really been apparent but all evidence points to its existence.

The Media is led by them and they award, “Honours”, to their loyal servants too.

I was questioned as regards my take on the Treaty of Union but consider this – The people of Scotland were rioting in the streets. The Scottish Parliamentarians did not meet and dissolve the old Scottish Parliament.

The people were hunting them down and would have lynched them. It is claimed that one parliamentarian’s signature was obtained on the Treaty paper in what is now a females toilet, in cellar, in a café across the road from the old parliament on the Royal Mile., (how’s that for split infinitives)?

The old Scots Parliament was never dissolved but was legally prorogued and announced as over by Town Criers around the streets of Edinburgh. Furthermore, the Jacobites were still fighting for Scottish independence at Culloden, early 40 years after the Treaty was signed.

Does that sound like the treaty was signed by a popular agreement of the people?

More like being signed by a faction of what Robert Burns describes as, “A Paircel o Rogues”, composed of the Landowners, Lairds, Law Lords and Churchmen that comprised the, “Three Estates”.

The members of the Parliament of Scotland were collectively referred to as the Three Estates (In Scots, “Thre Estaitis”. These were known as the community of the realm, and until 1690 were :-

First estate: Prelates (bishops and abbots).

Second estate: Lairds (dukes, earls, parliamentary peers (after 1437) and lay tenants-in-chief).

Third estate: Burgh commissioners (representatives chosen by the royal burghs).

The First Estate was overthrown during the Glorious Revolution and the accession of William III.

The Second Estate was then split into two to retain the division into three.

Parliament of Scotland was unicameral, all members sat in the same chamber, as opposed to the separate English House of Lords and House of Commons.

The Scottish Parliament also had University constituencies from Scotland’s five Ancient universities.

This system was adopted by the Parliament of England when James VI ascended to the English throne. This continued in the Parliament of Great Britain after 1707 and the Parliament of the United Kingdom until 1950.

Robert Peffers, with regard to the unpopularity of the Union, this is well remembered but I was once told by an Englishman that it was unpopular in England. This I have never had confirmed. Do you know if this in fact was true?

@Legerwood says: 2 January, 2016 at 11:03 pm:

“But George the First was a Stewart on his mother’s side. He was the great-grandson of James VI and I.”

So what? Scotland was legally an independent Kingdom between 1603 and 1706/7.

Thus the Westminster Parliament had no legal authority to depose a Scottish Monarch. Furthermore, under Scots law, (even today), the people and not either Westminster or the Monarch of England are sovereign.

” … George’s mother, Sophia Duches of Hanover was granddaughter of James VI and I and as a Protestant and a Stewart was heiress presumptive to Queen Anne but died shortly before Anne leaving her son as heir …

Again, so what? The point is that the Glorious Revolution was the, (still independent English parliament), attempting interfere and exert English sovereignty over the legally sovereign people of Scotland.

” … There were Stewart’s who had a better claim but they were Catholics and thus ruled out. I believe the Bill of Rights and Claim of Rights passed in the 1680s by the respective Parliaments of England and Scotland ruled out a Catholic succession.”

Again so what? Note that the law of Scotland, as it remains today, states the people, and not either the Royals nor the Parliament of the Kingdom of England, were sovereign. Much like today in fact.

” … Something that the English historians like to gloss over.”

Something that much of Scotland’s historians also tend to, not just gloss over, but lie through their teeth about.

” … George was not chosen just because he was a Protestant, the Stewart connection was also important but rarely if ever mentioned.”

Perhaps for the very good reason that it was only of importance to the Establishment but not to the People.

It is not generally recognised that parts of North England were joining the Jacobite cause as they marched south.

As I point out elsewhere the Establishment were well entrenched in the Scottish Parliament between the so called Union of the Crowns and in 1706/7.

I posted this already :-

The members of the Parliament of Scotland were collectively referred to as the Three Estates (In Scots, “Thre Estaitis”. These were known as the community of the realm, and until 1690 were :-

First estate: Prelates (bishops and abbots).

Second estate: Lairds (dukes, earls, parliamentary peers (after 1437) and lay tenants-in-chief).

Third estate: Burgh commissioners (representatives chosen by the royal burghs).

*****
The First Estate was overthrown during the Glorious Revolution and the accession of William III.

The Second Estate was then split into two to retain the division into three.

Parliament of Scotland was unicameral, all members sat in the same chamber, as opposed to the separate English House of Lords and House of Commons.

The Scottish Parliament also had University constituencies from Scotland’s five Ancient universities.

This system was adopted by the Parliament of England when James VI ascended to the English throne. This continued in the Parliament of Great Britain after 1707 and the Parliament of the United Kingdom until 1950.

Note that at the time of the treaty the sovereign people of Scotland were rioting in the streets and stoning the parliamentarians. That the parliament never sat and dissolved itself. It was instead proclaimed ended around the streets of Edinburgh by criers.

In fact the old parliament was legally prorogued – not dissolved. Legally the Scots parliament required a mandate of the sovereign people but did not have one.

Remember the armies of England were still illegally killing both Scottish troops and civilians at Culloden almost 40 years later in 1745. To this day the sovereign people of Scotland have never been asked to renounce their legal sovereignty. Need I ask the obvious question of, “Why Not”?

Note: ***** The Glorious Revolution took place in an independent Kingdom of England. Why then is it applied to the independent Kingdom of Scotland?

Shug: I saw this item mentioned in the BBC news last week.
I,like you I guess, sensed something sinister. The Church of Scotland has been and is politically a Trojan Unionist horse in Scottish society.

Knox was a disloyal to Scotland, colluding with the English to undermine Mary Queen of Scots and the existing Catholic church. Those of us taught crap Scottish history at ‘State’ schools were sold the lies about Mary as weak and ‘loose’; we also had the bullshit about Bonnie Prince Charlie as effete and a drunk.

All these things may well be true, but the real narrative was and is a sectarian motive designed to reinforce the constitutional position of ‘catholicism’ in relation to the monarchy in the UK as an anathema.

I have no belief or allegiance to monarchy or religion of any colour. But I know that the COS has had a malign influence on Scottish society. Some of its members and of its ministers are decent and god fearing no doubt, but the institutional mien of the Church is and seems to be one of loyalty to the English crown ( The only Scottish crown is in fact that: a crown only) and the British State.

The pro establishment stance during the Highland clearances, the anti-Irish propaganda it spewed out in the 1900s. The shocking invitation to the arch criminal Thatcher and her disgusting ‘Sermon on the Mount’. Their institutional silence during the referendum and their weak and pathetic non resistance to the treatment of the poor and defenceless in our country.

The COS is as Peffers says part of the Institutional oppression of Scotland. It masquerades as ‘Scottish’ yet it is riddled with Unionist lackeys, masons and orange order acolytes. This latest move is completely compatible with its recent history and identity.

The questions should be: Who authorised this movement and why? Is Unionism now officially part of the COS creed? Have church members been canvassed on this radical move?

@ Effigy 12:18pm – Absolutely stoatin. I love it. Fair made me smile and I will be keeping it in archive.

@Molly says: 2 January, 2016 at 11:07 pm:

” … As the ‘ established Churches of each nation ‘(their words not mine) they feel they can do something or other to support their work.

Ah! Yes! Molly, your comment that it is their words not yours indicates you are aware of the importance of that little misleading statement.

“The definition of, An Established Church is :-

Noun. A church that is officially recognized as a national institution by a government; in England it is the Church of England”.

Under the Treaty of Union there can be no such thing as an Established Church in Scotland. The Monarch cannot be head of a Scottish Church. Which is one good reason there is an Episcopalian, rather than COfE in Scotland.

The Kingdom of England, “Establishment”, has a legal sovereign head, Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth II. The Kingdom of England is, “A Constitutional Monarchy”, formed in 1688, that comprises only the countries of England, Wales, (from 1284), and Ireland, (from 1542 and N. Ireland , from 1800/1).

Scotland was still a legally independent Kingdom between 1603 and 1706/7 and The Treaty of Union. The Treaty of Union specifically rules out any legal Establishment of any church in Scotland because the Monarch, (legal head of the Establishment), is prohibited from heading a Scottish Church.

Yet here we have the Church of Scotland claiming to be the Established Church in Scotland. However, myself and many other Scots have always known that the hierarchy of the Scottish Churches have remained always not only royalists but parts of the Establishment and there are no more loyalists in Scotland than the Loyal Orange Order.

Yet historically there is absolutely no written, or legal, evidence whatsoever that either Westminster or the Royals holds sovereignty over Scotland. It has, though, always been presumed by the Establishment that it does.

Including, (ironically), the Present Secretary of State for Scotland who said, in the public domain, “The Treaty of Union extinguished the Kingdom of Scotland and renamed the Kingdom of England as The United Kingdom”.

Cite : – link to youtube.com

However, the fact remains there are recorded precedents under Scottish law that set in stone the legal fact that in Scotland the people are legally sovereign. In other words Mundell and his Establishment cohorts are bare faced liars who will continue to face that hurdle in any moves to prevent a proven majority of the legally sovereign people of Scotland taking their legal independence.

That’s a legal fact – independence can be legally claimed by a majority of the people of Scotland.

Let us give Nicola that clear legal mandate.

I don’t have a problem with the Westminster confession stuff.it was a document of its time. They could not have a king that was subservient to Rome. It is also not a lot different from the declaration immigrants currently have to swear when they enter the USA renouncing all foreign potentiate etc
My issue is the church of Scotland being lined up to do a tunnocks

@Effijy

Just read your ode thingy to a tea cake… excellent 🙂

Just back from the sales in Glasgow…don’t ask!.. and she put the cherry on the top when she plonked an ’empire biscuit’ down with my coffee in John Lewis cafe. 🙁

I’m sure she’s doing it deliberately although she claims not.

Off to do all my x-words now as the next thread, although interesting, won’t concern me as I don’t twitter.

@shug says: 3 January, 2016 at 5:52 pm:

” … My issue is the church of Scotland being lined up to do a tunnocks”

Well Shug, I was brought up i my early years by my Grandparents as Dad & Mum were conscripted for WWII to fight and work on munitions respectively. My Grandparents were a mixed Protestant/RC couple as were my parents.

I went to whatever denomination school was nearest home. I am thus non-sectarian and really have never been too impressed by the Biblical fairy tales. I have no axe to grind.

I have always also rather doubted the history taught in our schools and I treat both, very much interconnected subject with much scepticism and believe nothing of either subject without proof positive. That and what I see, hear, read and detect around me.

I also spent quite a lot of Sundays at speaker’s corer at the Foot of the Mound in Edinburgh. There used to be a person who was a regular soapbox speaker there called John Cormack.

This guy was Protestant Action and some of the stuff he spouted would have him instantly arrested now. Thing is he was a Leith Councillor, sat on the bench in court as a Baillie and his biased sentencing of Catholics was disgraceful. I was genuinely shocked at some of the things this guy spouted in public.

He was also a leading light in the Morningside sectarian riots of 1935

Here’s Speaker’s Corner:-
link to facebook.com

and a bit about Cormack:-

link to scotsman.com

So it always seemed to me the Church of Scotland have been much more establishment and sectarian than they ever let on to be in public. I also have studied the history of Scottish education and sectarianism while researching other things.

So sorry to say the CofE seem to have encouraged sectarianism and supported the Establishment throughout their entire history. As indeed have several other pillars of Scottish life including the law, education and the individual police forces.

Had not come across Cormack before

I noticed that he had served in Ireland during the revolution there. I wonder if he saw friends killed etc that caused him to be so anti catholic. (not making excuses for him)

I always wonder where the perception of Scotland being anti catholic comes from. I can’t think of any other country where;
an immigrant group comes into the country

is allowed to have segregated education funded by the state

is allowed to discriminate against teachers of a different faith

Where their faith teachers are allowed full participation in the state education system

A prize is on offer for anyone that can name a country that supports any immigrant community in such a way.

It strikes me that Orange unionists from northern Ireland and green nationalists from southern Ireland both want to shout down Scotland

I think it is time for people to want to be Scottish in the same way Tunnocks wants to be British