The world's most-read Scottish politics website

Wings Over Scotland


Attack Of The Giant Squirrels

Posted on January 22, 2021 by

All we can say is that the other nine points better be amazing.

Because this, readers, is ZZZ-grade donkey fodder.

SPOILER – Here’s how it’ll pan out:

SCOTTISH GOVERNMENT: “We’re going to have another indyref!”

EVERY COUNCIL IN SCOTLAND: “No you’re not. In our view that’s illegal, and so we’re simply not going to participate. Good luck finding polling stations and people to operate them and do all the admin and get the Electoral Commission to co-operate and all the rest of it.”

SCOTTISH GOVERNMENT: “Um.”

EVERY COUNCIL: What on Earth does “hold a legal indyref” mean anyway? Just like that, aye? If you have the power to do that why the hell haven’t you done it before now? Why didn’t you do it after the Brexit vote, say?

SCOTTISH GOVERNMENT: “Um, we were busy?”

EVERY COUNCIL: “And even if there was some way that you could make us go along with this ridiculous fantasy, which there isn’t – what are you going to do, force Returning Officers out at gunpoint? Where would you even get guns? – Unionist voters would boycott it and you’d have zero democratic legitimacy. Exactly as happened in Catalonia. Are they independent now?”

SCOTTISH GOVERNMENT: “Um. But maybe that court case that we’ve been frantically obstructing and insulting for months will have found in our favour?”

EVERY COUNCIL: “Then aren’t people going to ask why you didn’t do that four years ago and save Scotland from Brexit before it happened, rather than putting the country through years of untold chaos under a malicious Tory government and then trying to get back into Europe from outside?”

SCOTTISH GOVERNMENT: “Um.”

EVERY COUNCIL: “And in any case, haven’t your own MSPs been running around telling everyone that even if Martin Keatings did win that case the UK government would just rewrite the Scotland Act to overturn it?”

SCOTTISH GOVERNMENT: “Um.”

EVERY COUNCIL: And what if the court has actually ruled definitively that you DON’T have the power to hold a referendum?

SCOTTISH GOVERNMENT: “Um.”

EVERY COUNCIL: “It’s just embarrassing. The UK government won’t need to lift a finger because the whole plan’s a total non-starter. And when is this madness supposed to happen anyway?”

SCOTTISH GOVERNMENT: “Um, 2023 sometime, maybe?”

EVERY COUNCIL: “Wait, didn’t you say it had to be 2021? Didn’t you ‘set a date’ barely two months ago? You can hardly say you didn’t know about the pandemic in November, can you?”

SCOTTISH GOVERNMENT: “Um.”

EVERY COUNCIL: “So what you’re actually telling us is that you’re now kicking the whole can down the road for another two and a quarter years, because you actually think your idiot supporters will swallow that, and that’ll give you loads of breathing time to come up with some more hopeless excuses when the UK tells you to sod off yet again, at which point you can get back to fuming about how outrageous and undemocratic it all is and telling people that you have a brilliant plan as long as they vote for you again in the 2024 UK election?”

SCOTTISH GOVERNMENT: [inaudible mumble]

Four and a half years and THAT’S what they’re trying to punt at you, readers? Dear God above. The sheer, naked, crass, insulting contempt of it.

But hey! Never mind that pesky inquiry! Just look at the pretty squirrel!

Print Friendly

    140 to “Attack Of The Giant Squirrels”

    1. BuggerlePanda says:

      I despair, I really do.

    2. Aulbea1 says:

      Plebiscite in May or down the tube we go.

    3. Sarah says:

      But but surely they will listen to the National Assembly if we say something different e.g. hey, what about a nice quick plebiscite election in May?

    4. solarflare says:

      To be fair, that is one weird-ass squirrel.

    5. Bob Mack says:

      SQUIRRELADON. Larger than a sold pup. Preys on nuts.

      Often found in communal habjtats in Edinburgh.

    6. Kate says:

      Well bowl me over with surprise, NOT! I think nine with even just one working brain cell know that all she wants is another term, then she buggers off leaving the party back in the 70’s, where it would have No chance of ever recovering, as the U.K. GOV office will be in charge by then.. And Scotland will just become NORTH BRITAIN for real…I have gone from total adoration of that party, so practically hating everyone in. The bad are doing bad things & getting away with it, while the so called GOOD stand by doing sweet F All..

    7. blackhack says:

      I’m losing the will to live…..I’ll be cancelling my SNP membership on Monday…..Never ever thought it would get to this…
      I’ll be voting ISP when the election comes around…I’m 68 this year and if we don’t go soon I’ll never see independence for Scotland..

    8. Frazerio says:

      Isnt there other news they could splash on the front page at the mo? No? Nothing about Sturgeon? Or the SNP? Or that Alicsammin? No? Really? What about the TWO inquiries into the First Minister? Or one of those inquiries taking the government to court to force it to hand over relevant documents? Nothing about that is worthy of a front page???

      Oh, ok then, lurvely squirrel!!!

    9. Famous15 says:

      Lese majeste?

      I want to start a campaign to end Lese Majeste in Thailand.

      I will bet anyone I will win that campaign before the dafties here win Scottish independence.

      Anybody! Anybody? Say £100.

    10. Tippy says:

      To be fair, it’s a really cool squirrel.

    11. Muscleguy says:

      Exactly and it is of course in the National the manage Yes expectations to keep the peasants quiet paper. I expect the Ginger Dug will be in it telling us how wonderful all this is. It makes me want to puke.

      Except I’m drinking beer and eating popcorn to celebrate the TPNW coming into force. Been watching the celebration video. We had a toast at the end, hence the beer.

      The TPNW means if Scotgov makes ANY deal to let FUK keep operating their weapons from Faslane and Coulport after independence we will be subject to international sanctions for being in violation fo the TPNW.

      The ISP and I expect the Greens will be forcefully reminding the SNP of this if we ever get another sort of indyref.

      All the boycott stuff gets avoided if we just do a plebiscite election. Are the unionist parties going to risk not being in the parliament which organises an Indy Scotland? No way.

      But of course the SNP are against the very idea. Now instead of puking I want to scream in rage and frustration.

    12. Robert Louis says:

      I don’t blame The National. I blame the cretinous individuals in the Scottish government leadership, who think this a great ruse, to distract from government lies.

      What? You mean that if we elect the SNP in May, then this time they really, really, truly promise to ‘look into and fully expect a discussion on a potential referendum on independence, hopefully to be announced within the first or second half of the next parliament’. Aye, right.

      Fool me once shame on you, fool me twice, shame on me. Nobody sane believes a word of what the SNP say now. Too much procrastination, too many lies.

    13. Tartanpigsy says:

      That’s a guid squirrel

    14. Polly says:

      Yep, thin gruel but there’s little in their cupboard to serve us now and they’re battle that huge fire in the basement. As Gideon says those arms of the British state, police and civil service will be roped in to ensure we can’t hold one just like Catalonia.

    15. Alison Brown says:

      I despair!! How have we got to this?

    16. Polly says:

      *battling

    17. Muscleguy says:

      @Robert Louis
      Instead of doing a fawning splash of this the National could take a leaf out of the Rev Stu’s book and do some fucking journalistic analysis of it. How about paying the Rev to write a forensice critique of it. That might give them some credibility.

      All these front page splashes just insult my intelligence. Fuck ’em.

    18. Livionian says:

      Fucking morons.

    19. Hugh Jarse says:

      Punk squirrel!

      This’ll probably keep the Ginger dug in cakes for at least a year, and the devotees will be creaming.

      They could try to withhold LA funding, but what a disaster that could, probably would be.
      Not enough lawyers in Scotland for that eventuality.

    20. Rev. Stuart Campbell says:

      “The TPNW means if Scotgov makes ANY deal to let FUK keep operating their weapons from Faslane and Coulport after independence we will be subject to international sanctions for being in violation fo the TPNW.”

      Oh great, there goes all our negotiation leverage and billions of pounds a year so that a bunch of fucking hippies can feel morally superior.

    21. JSC says:

      That’s a trans squirrel, and they’ve lost their nuts

    22. Eileen Carson says:

      I suspect this ‘rush to indy’ was a smokescreen to hide the committee’s legal request to COPFS for withheld evidence.

    23. Sarah says:

      @ blackhack: did you register to attend the National Assembly? If we kick up enough of a row and email our MSPs it might have an effect. Worth a try, anyway.

      There are plenty in the party who are still trying to change it from within. That is a quicker route than not voting for them on the rare occasions there is an election.

    24. Duncan Clark says:

      Could we replace the majority of MSPs with squirrels?

      1. Would anyone notice?
      2. Think how much fun squirrels would have in the beams of the chamber ceiling.
      3. Squirrels are brighter than Tom Arthur.

    25. Sarah says:

      @ Rev: Joanna Cherry has tweeted that she is “delighted to see these ideas being taken forward”.

      So perhaps it isn’t all squirrel feed?

    26. Mc Duff says:

      Frazerio
      Spot on. I don’t buy the National anymore as it is merely a mouthpiece for Sturgeon who has made it more than clear that she is not interested in independence hence this rag is not either. It produces fluffy indy stories to keep the Sturgeonites in there cosy coma.

    27. Mist001 says:

      Just a distraction from the Salmond business. The National’s in somebodys pocket.

    28. James Horace says:

      It’s quite funny to think that over half the Yes movement actually believe this tosh.

      They think it is real, because Nicola said so and the toarys are bad.

      The Black Saltire and Bill Cruickshank will be so happy with this news. Its this sort of nonsense that the true morons of the movement get off on.

      I despair.

    29. Daisy Walker says:

      It is a punk squirrel isn’t it. I think it’s fab.

      I’m not so surprised or worried about the headline.

      What really needs to happen now is the new NEC, and pro plebiscite and anti corruption MP’ and MSP’s step up to the plate this weekend.

      They must not be under any illusion that they can be gradualist too, just a bit more proactive than Nicola.

      That’s the danger I would suggest, that the same ruse gets played on us all over again. Meet the new messiah, same as the old one.

      If they do not facilitate a democratic means by which Scotland can vote to defend herself at this awful moment in time, then there is no point in them.

    30. robertknight says:

      .
      Don’t look over there – look over here !

      Ooooooohhhhhh…………..

      Shy-neeeeeee baubles ! ! ! !
      .

      Fanzine for the Dear Leader’s faithful followers.

    31. SilverDarling says:

      The National is just taking the p*ss now. This must be the hundredth permutation of the ‘they’ll believe anything’ front page.

      Tom Arthur must have phoned them for help from his office at Queen Elizabeth House.

    32. JOML says:

      Need a new Independence Party to capture the votes from the side shows.

    33. kapelmeister says:

      So Tom Arthur thinks Westminster can legitimately do what it likes about Scotland and has total power over us, yet he’s also adamant that we’re not a colony. Consistent, joined up thinking clearly not his thing.

      Apparently Tom has a music degree. Does that make him a Liszt MSP?

    34. Daisy Walker says:

      Also comes in the same week when polling show majority support for a Plebiscite Indy election, majority believe Brexit has been project England First, and majority of Scots want Scot Gov to prioritise getting us back into the EU.

      But you know, all together now…

      somewhere over the rainbow, way up high, there’s an Indy ref awaiting, cause Nicola never lies.

    35. kapelmeister says:

      Never in the history of Scottish journalism have the words Major Exclusive sounded so hollow.

    36. Chris says:

      A giant Malabar squirrel, brightens everyone’s day??

      Can we elect them to replace the present MSPs ?

    37. Morgatron says:

      I wouldn’t wipe my arse with the National , its rag.

    38. mr thms says:

      The Bill for the Referendums (Scotland) Act 2020 of the Scottish Parliament was passed by the Parliament on 19th December 2019 and received Royal Assent on 29th January 2020

      https://www.legislation.gov.uk

    39. Liz g says:

      Muscle Guy and the Rev..
      The way they’d get round Scottish resistance to the neuks and the international interest in what’s going on with them , is to make Faslane and Coleport “British ” territory …. and I mean actual British Land, then there is no deal, that land is theirs… nae rent…a one off token payment and the War Mongers get their way…

      Simply renting the Base is the one thing we’ll be forbidden to do by the nuclear authorities.
      And ye can see their point as it has the ( remote potential, with a wide reading of the rules ) to actually double UK capacity.
      The British want that Territory to be indisputably theirs , and we shouldn’t deal with them over it.
      Not least because its nuclear weapons involved here, and that means it’s not just a landlord/ tennent agreement …. But rather it’s all the international American driven rules coming into play too.

      Said it before Rev… forget the bloody money, make it impossible to keep them here and get them gone.

      My preference is through our Constitution….. but I’m no wed tae it… by any means necessary will do !

    40. tricia young says:

      ISP all the way. If you support indy then you have no choice but to vote this. I will go down fighting for independence but i feel now i am walking through mud when we all walked on air.

    41. Rev. Stuart Campbell says:

      “The way they’d get round Scottish resistance to the neuks and the international interest in what’s going on with them , is to make Faslane and Coleport “British ” territory …. and I mean actual British Land, then there is no deal, that land is theirs… nae rent…a one off token payment and the War Mongers get their way…”

      Who is “they”?

    42. AYRSHIRE ROB says:

      Must admit that’s a cool squirrel. Thought wan o they daft woke lot had attacked a poor wee squirrel wae a spray can, but real eh.
      Malabor giant squirrel fae India – wan cool dude.

    43. AYRSHIRE ROB says:

      Malabar even

    44. Davie Oga says:

      If for some bizarre reason The FM is contesting Glasgow South again, is it possible for an actual live squirrel to run against her? I’m assuming that there is no electoral law stipulating that the candidate must be a human being or the majority of parliamentarians would never have reached the nomination stage.

      Mike Russell

      You could have been someone more than a perpetual devolutionist fecklessly lending
      credibility the inept liars and bedlamites in Bute House. There was a time when a Brexit Minister/ Constitution Minister would consider it a matter of honour to resign were they to fail so abysmally at their brief. Not you Mike. Kept in there til May to max out that pension didn’t you. It’s a shame the Scottish taxpayer
      will still be providing your undeserved largesse long after anyone remembers who you were. 22 years at the trough. I wish you many more sir.

      You could have been someone

    45. Dan says:

      Are those Council responses premised on the basis that they are “unionist” controlled?

      If Scottish unionists are so enamored with the way things are done in The Kingdom of England that they want The Kingdom of Scotland to remain in the union, then they should have no issue with the Scottish Parliament changing the Local Authority voting system to FPTP to emulate the English system.

    46. Neil in Glasgow says:

      The squirrel looks like the dog they had on This Morning the other day (I’m stuck working at home, OK? Spin to Win anyone?). The first thing i said was that’s abuse. Which in this case is extremely ironic.

      At what point can you seek political asylum somewhere? I had a great holiday in dubai a few years ago. At this point sheikh mohammed seems a… What’s the Arab version of a saint?

    47. Bob Mack says:

      Sadly I have gotten to the stage where I don’t actually care if Nicola is guilty or not any more.

      I watch as Tory Ministers cobble together a new Constitution for the whole of the UK and Labour discuss a new power bonus.

      All desjgned to neutralise Independence. Trinkets for the natives.

      Meanwhile the SNP talk about referendums almost two and a half years away. Its numbing stupidity. We have to do something very soon. How can I vote for an Independence party who want to stall that very thing whilst their opponents are moving all their resources to prevent it.

      Nero fiddling whilst Rome burns.

    48. Daisy Walker says:

      Had a look at Indy For Scotland Twitter feed. Superb, quality, quality videos.

      What the snp should have been producing since 2014.

      Am going to join them tomorrow.

      If they can keep producing stuff of that quality we will win, and my god, it fairly shows up just how tired and lacklustre the snp has become, with all their rebuttals units, highly paid media ‘experts’, and ‘t’Ask forces.

      If anyone needs a pick me up, give it a look.

    49. Astonished says:

      Jings – If anything says they’re afraid it’s this.

      I’ve added Mike Russell to the list, and the National (although I’ve always had my suspicions). Only 11 steps : whoop -de – doo.

      I’ve got one : and I’ve e-mailed Keith Brown about it.

      Once Nicola has gone ( and it is now certain) I want a new candidate selection process. This might prove helpful in hurrying up MSPs in speaking out. P.S. This process better get rid of Humza “dead woke ” useless.

    50. 100%Yes says:

      The National and a lot of bloggers are making a lot of money saying a lot about Independence but not actually bothered if it happens, because if independence did happen there incomes would disappear. We had Martin Keating case today in court with the Scottish Government’s QC James Wolffe arguing that Keatings did not have the “standing” to bring such an action, so basically why hasn’t the SNP and or the Scottish Government taken this action. Additionally, why is the SNP now saying they’ll hold a legal referendum in 2022, when yesterday there stance was it was the “Gold standard” and Westminster couldn’t maintain refusing it.Whatever happens the one thing is for certain No referendum will be acknowledge as legal and YES we will have to go to the international court and YES it will be so important that Nicola Sturgeon is no longer leader because let’s be honest, all this Fucking mess she is to blame. Any challenge to the courts should have been a joint effort between the people and its government, why it wasn’t been is beyond me.

    51. Annie 621 says:

      Mark Twain..Been quoting this for years,never truer.

    52. Desimond says:

      How do you spell Comfy in Gaelic?

      Imagine if anyone at Scottish Labour had the vision to see the big open goal there in front of them.
      One day someone will come along and scoop up those Indy votes that will ooze away from Squirrel Nutterkins Party

    53. holymacmoses says:

      I think this article may be a read between the li(n)es effort whereby what appears on the surface seems positive and progressive but underpinning it are four sets of hydraulic brakes which are automatically applied as soon as 5mph is reached.

    54. Beaker says:

      That is the funniest article I’ve read in ages, especially question 2.

      Personally I think this Indyref 2 plan smacks of desperation and deflection – “pwetty pwease let me stay and I pwomise we’ll get it.”

      The squirrel pic is cool.

    55. Fraser Reid says:

      just got one word for all this………squirrel!

    56. Fraser Reid says:

      O/T that squirrel is now part of my desktop!

    57. PeterV says:

      AYRSHIRE NOB

      The Pub Bore!!!

      Uncle Albert,,,”During the war…”

    58. Josef Ó Luain says:

      One Party! one Paper! What the fuck else do you need in a totalitarian state?

    59. Liz g says:

      Rev @ 11.24
      They is … the Nuclear Poliferation decider people ( I know .. but I’m no actually an anti neuk Hippie)
      I mean the group/ body that decide or enforce the international arrangements that oversees who can and can’t have neuks and how many/ or how much total
      “wattage 🙂 ” any given Country can have.
      Apparently there are limits.
      Which as I understand it , is the problem with returning the U.K. ones to the US even temporarily!

    60. Daisy Walker says:

      @PeterV, your previous racist comment about the English is being quoted in full by George Galloway, under the heading of ‘Scottish Nationalists’. On Twitter.

      Don’t think handing our enemies a stick to beat us with is a good idea.

    61. Neil in Glasgow says:

      Labour are missing an open goal by not even kidding on they are willing to debate independence (like the snp currently are – kidding on that is). They are staunch. They root out any prospective electoral candidates with perverse leanings early on.

      An independence embracing, left centrive party in scotland would fly. But it’s union before people with them, as the sole purpose is to prop up London. Like that’s ever going to happen again.

      I’m in Glasgow provan. Ivan mckee is our current msp and to say he’s not very vocal (on anything) is pretty accurate. It would seem he’s more splinters in his arse than pinnochio. I voted for him the last time but unless something radical happens, either in terms of him questioning or calling out the leadership’s shenanigans, I’ll be spoiling my ballot for the constituency vote and it’ll be ISP on the list. My mother would have a go at me for spoiling the paper though, so I might need to put myself up for the constituency vote 🙂

    62. PeterV says:

      Dizzy Walker.

      Me,,,say anything bad about our southern neighbours???

      Shoorly Shum Mishtake!!!

      Do you have proof of this miscarriage of justice Dizzy???

    63. Iain More says:

      Love the Squirrel.

      As for Mark Twain – well rumours of a referendum have been greatly exaggerated!!!! The SNPs MI5 plants will use the new deadlier strain of the English Tory Plague to kill off the referendum.

    64. James Horace says:

      PeterV is right up there with The Black Saltire and Sean Clerkin.

    65. Steve Davison says:

      Would not be shocked if each Russells 11 points in his plan are planned to take a year each to implement but as I dont read the rag I will never find out .As for Blackturd announce indy ref date I cant see why this site gives him covrage he and the rest of the expats are irrelevant to scottish politics and are best served by filling in there expense claims and keeping away from the parliment to avoid further embarrassment

    66. PeterV says:

      Hello there George,

      I hear you are an avid follower of Wings.

      Could be worse George, you could have landed on the Wee Gingerbread Man’s website.

    67. Rev. Stuart Campbell says:

      “They is … the Nuclear Poliferation decider people”

      As the UK isn’t a signatory it’d be none of their business.

    68. PeterV says:

      You are absolutely correct Rev.

    69. Wee Crabbit Bas says:

      Looking forward to the National running the headline, “REVEALED: HOW THE PEOPLE WERE FOOLED AND THE FFM WAS FRAMED.” Or “WON’T GET FOOLED AGAIN. PLEBS SAY AYE!”

      Keeping the dream alive.

    70. Steve Davison says:

      Who says the bbc doesnt cover the top scottish stories 32k into space for a haggis is the best that comes out of bbc scotland onto news24 ,well its a slow news week for scotland

    71. Garrion says:

      Well, on the upside, and considering the absolutely obvious timing, they’re clearly on the back foot, and that they’re contriving and coming up with this flat footed garbage means that they are not in control of the narrative. They’re feeling the pressure. Let’s keep it up.

    72. PeterV says:

      Bad day at the office???

      Don’t worry, just call the National and tell them to run with a front page headline about Scotland holding an Independence referendum in the very very near future.

    73. vlad (not that one) says:

      Bugger. If I was a youngster I would emigrate. Done that, been there. But, as it happens, I’ll stay & fight.

    74. Jontoscots20 says:

      Oh give The Nash a Pulitzer for that “major exclusive”. Scotland’s complacent and pliant press is one culture i ‘ll happily cancel.

    75. Famous15 says:

      Biden’s gender discrimination order offers hope to transgender athletes!

      And yet he retains the science of climate change?

    76. PhilM says:

      They want to make us think they’re reaching higher when it has the opposite effect of only making them sink lower.
      I’m actually feeling quite nostalgic for two days ago.

    77. Steve Davison says:

      PeterV
      Tom harris in the telegraph has a piece claiming the Salmond wont bring down TBoBH as someone else on here commented the MSM will play both sides of the story and discredit all aspects of Scottish politics and Indie .All of this was cause by your above mentioned bitch

    78. Davie Oga says:

      WhoRattledYourCage says:
      22 January, 2021 at 11:23 pm
      https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1995/39/section/44/enacted

      Curious if this legislation from 1995 is applicable. Where it uses the word “Parliament” , is it solely applicable to Westminster or would “The Scottish Parliament” inherit it on opening in 1999?

    79. David says:

      PeterV is a member of the “Three Commas” gang. He seems to have been assigned a task to write nasty, vicious, or anti-English comments here.
      Why? So that they can be quoted by anti-indy forces to ‘prove’ how bad the pro-indy people are.
      Don’t give PeterV the oxygen of publicity – just scroll on past his comments.

    80. Liz g says:

      Rev @ 12.23
      Who’s Business it is?
      Is exactly what I think would be up for grabs on our independence.

      A .. no UK at all but rather something to be decided, an rUK left, or an rUK being a continuer state, or just England , whichever it turns out to be ! It seems to be assumed that they would “own” the weapons.

      These weapons are … truth be told American and America is a signatory , and will likely play a part in their fate.

      Nevertheless , we… as in Scotland and England , are not going to be able to just have a landlord/ tenant agreement over these weapons , other Countries can , likely will , and I’d say should take an interest in their fate.
      In that case , Westminster by dint of being the tried and tested Government ( you of all people don’t need schooled on our current potential administration) will , I think , be seen as the ” go to people ” and therefore… Scotland could be pushed into a *sort * of partition of that land.
      Well that’s a whole host of trouble in and of itself Rev… that’s the Westcoast of Scotland as you well know, but normal people don’t see the inbedded and inbread idocy there.
      We don’t need that shit, either
      Not for all the weapons rental on the planet, would we have enough to mitigate for a “generation ” or more , the open sore a west coast little Britain could cost us

      Not withstanding the original debate between us …
      If Scotland’s Constitution says no nuclear weapons…. then Westminster cannot be permitted to do on Scottish soil that which Holyrood is forbidden from doing .
      And so we are again back to partitioning Scotland and allowing an English/ British enclave of British soil to exist on the West Coast ( the bloody West Coast Rev !! ) in order to facilitate these weapons being compatible with our brand new Constitution…
      A problem we don’t need to have …. Why make a rod for our own back ?

    81. vlad (not that one) says:

      As an SNP plain ordinary member speaking to the NEC, I ask you SNP people upstairs in my party to please come clean now.

      I have had more than enough of the obfuscation. It is in your power to clear the Augean stables. Go for it, before spooks really go for it.

      For a while I imagined we lived in a free country.

      D

      Elsewhere I am also detecting a global attack on spreedom of speech, and am curious what is driving it.

    82. vlad (not that one) says:

      Apologies for lapsi keyboardasae. (spreedom)
      The post was about freedom of speech.

    83. David Wardrope says:

      This may be metaphorical or not, but that squirrel is honking. That is all.

    84. Frank Ness says:

      David 1.08am

      Surprise sur-fuckin-prise, anti english comments found on a pro Scottish Independence website.

      Dry yer fuckin eyes.

      Ta fuckin clown.

    85. Ivor H. Trewth says:

      Surely we must have a poll out in the next 24 hours to divert attention from SQUIRRELAGEDDON?
      I wish they wouldn’t treat us like morons.
      If the right carrot is dangled, I’ll bite.
      But this isn’t a carrot, it’s just …nonsense?
      What happened to winning hearts and minds?
      This is a shoe-horn, not a victory.

    86. Liz g says:

      Vlad ( not that one ) @ 1.29
      Spreedom ….!!!
      Oh I don’t know so much Vlad… I kind of liked it 🙂

    87. Saffron Robe says:

      The National has gone from a national newspaper to a comic book. Not so much an organ of communication as an organ of onanism!

      The SNP are following the “sequential way” of flushing themselves and Scotland down the pan. They are now telling so many lies that they are having to lie about their lies. The liar lied and said she never lied…

      And yes that is a pretty squirrel. I suppose it’s better to look at than the car crash that passes for the Scottish Government and their 11-point plan without a single genuine point to it except to shaft us over and over again.

    88. L says:

      It’s fine fir an Alex Salmond led ISP List party. A full on media campaign would hold SNP properly to account.

    89. L says:

      It’s time for an Alex Salmond led ISP led List party.

    90. Patrick Roden says:

      The National?

      The same one that’s owned by the ultra unionist Herald Newspaper?

      Being used to fool independence supporters, you say?

      Well, I Never!

    91. David says:

      Frank Ness @ 1:47am. How old are you, Master Pottymouth – ten? eleven?

      No more trolling please, you know fine well this website is pro-indy, not anti-English. Off you trot.

    92. Osakisushi says:

      Mr Russel is my local MSP and over the years, I’ve interacted with him quite amicably.

      But he’s a career politician, a time server, a comfy slippers fan.

    93. ebreah says:

      That is the Malabar Giant Squirrel (Ratufa indica). Makes senses the SNP want to use it. One of the biggest and flashiest around. Am very sure it will distract a lot of people, as per some comments above???. But in all seriousness, the pressure is building up. This is, in a small measure, a caving in. Ramp up the ante some more.

    94. ebreah says:

      Sorry the question marks are supposed to be smileys.

    95. Heaver says:

      Scottish parliament orders prosecutors to release Salmond leak evidence

    96. StuartM says:

      Like many another Scot I have family members who are English-born and raised. To express disdain for English individuals such as politicians like Boris for their actions is one thing, to express hostility towards people for being English is every bit as wrong as those in England (and the English papers) disparaging all Scots.

    97. twathater says:

      LATEST email from Martin highlighting the duplicity and stupidity of the NATIONAL’S SNP proclamation
      ————————————

      Update on Peoples Action on Section 30

      Dear Backers,

      By now (interesting timing) you will have seen the story in the National about the SNP’s 11 point plan, with the subheading “SNP will hold legal indyref and dare Westminster to challenge it in court.”

      The first thing I will say to that is that you cannot hold a “legal” indyref if you have not first ascertained if it is legal. We know this because the word legal is followed by the words “dare Westminster to challenge it in court”. If you are expecting a legal challenge then it means that automatically that the SNP do not know one way or the other if it would be legal.

      The irony is that we made this exact argument over the past two days and the counsel for the lord advocate stated that there was nothing on the table to indicate that the Scottish Ministers would not be seeking to hold a referendum without knowing if it was or wasn’t competent. That has clearly now been found to be false, because you cannot, on one hand, purport to hold a legal referendum and also then advance the fact that it will be challenged by the UK Government. Because if you are expecting a challenge, then there is an open question about the lawfulness of that act. That’s just basic common sense.

      It’s like saying that a washing machine will not need to be repaired for at least 25 years and then trying to sell a 5-year guarantee. The very fact that you are trying to sell an extended guarantee for the appliance shows that the appliance could break down in the next 5 years.

      Also, the word legal is the incorrect term to use here. Legal and Illegal are terms used to describe something which is specifically allowed or prohibited in law – in black and white as it were. The proper terms to use in this case are Lawful or Unlawful because the written law is uncertain on the subject. We know it is uncertain because it is literally the point of the Peoples Action on Section 30. If the question over the legality of something comes down to mibye aye, mibye naw, then you are talking about lawful and unlawful, not legal and illegal. And the First Minister knows the distinction because she studied law.

      I have to raise doubts about this article for a number of reasons. The first being that it looks as if the SNP leadership have excluded their own members from the decision-making process entirely – So much for the national assembly, they promised to give all of their members an opportunity to help chart the course. It seems clear that the leadership have unilaterally decided on that course, excluding the membership.

      However, it is the plan that the SNP leadership have decided upon which gives me the greatest concern. It is the one thing we’ve been warning about since the case started a year ago.

      The SNP are saying that they intend to put a draft bill forward in March. They will then campaign on a promise to put that bill to the chamber of Holyrood if they are elected.

      This, in of itself, makes absolutely zero sense politically and zero sense legislatively. The SNP could have easily passed the bill through Holyrood before the election with a clause in that act which specified the conditions under which it could be activated i.e. a majority vote of Holyrood. They would have then been able to campaign on a clear mandate of activating that bill after the 2021 elections. But the most important thing about putting the bill through fully and making it an act is that it would have protected the right of the Scottish People because it having been fully legislated for, it would have had protection from possible interference at Westminster with respect to reserved laws which could be passed.

      But no, the SNP have decided only to put forward a draft bill to Holyrood, just before they break off for the election campaign. This will leave the bill on public display, and within minutes of it being made public, the UK Governments legal teams will set to work finding ways to undermine the bill through laws passed at Westminster.

      Now let’s say for argument that the UK Government doesn’t undermine the bill the minute it is published and wait until the SNP put the bill to the floor after the 2021 elections to challenge the bill for competency before the court. This would immediately prevent the bill from gaining royal assent until the court decision on whether the bill was lawful or not. The problem is that while the court battle is going on, there is nothing to stop the Tories at Westminster passing legislation, or modifying existing legislation to take provisions of the indyref bill out of the competence of Holyrood.

      How do we know this? Well! This is exactly what the tories did to the SNP with the continuity bill. While the Scottish Government was fighting the UK Government in court, Westminster modified an act of parliament to make certain provisions of the continuity bill out of the hands of Holyrood, the court was then forced to rule against the continuity bill because of the law changes at Westminster gaining royal assent.

      Make no mistake, the SNP are playing an extremely dangerous game here. They have exposed us to at least three avenues of legislative attack from the Tories at Westminster and this could very well end up costing us independence.

      So what now for the Peoples Action on Section 30?

      In simple terms, we continue to the end. And the reason we continue to the end is that hopefully, it will offset the monumental stupidity being displayed by the Scottish Government. If we can prove beyond a doubt that the Scottish Parliament has the power to legislate for a second referendum without the consent of Westminster, then when the SNP put their bill forward, Westminster will have nothing to challenge. That’s because establishing that it is competent for the Scottish Parliament to legislate for indyref2 means that by default it establishes their bill would also be competent.

      In other words, this case has never mattered more.

      So much for a stress-free weekend!

      The hearings

      As you know, the hearings are complete and Lady Carmichael expects to render an opinion within days, not weeks. It is almost certain there will be an appeal, either by the UK Gov, or by us. One way or another though – we’re going to see this case to its conclusion.

      As always, I hope you are safe and well and I will update you as more information comes our way.

      All the best

      Martin

    98. MaggieC says:

      The latest from Martin Keatings ,

      Update on Peoples Action on Section 30

      Dear Backers,
      By now (interesting timing) you will have seen the story in the National about the SNP’s 11 point plan, with the subheading “SNP will hold legal indyref and dare Westminster to challenge it in court.”

      The first thing I will say to that is that you cannot hold a “legal” indyref if you have not first ascertained if it is legal. We know this because the word legal is followed by the words “dare Westminster to challenge it in court”. If you are expecting a legal challenge then it means that automatically that the SNP do not know one way or the other if it would be legal.

      The irony is that we made this exact argument over the past two days and the counsel for the lord advocate stated that there was nothing on the table to indicate that the Scottish Ministers would not be seeking to hold a referendum without knowing if it was or wasn’t competent. That has clearly now been found to be false, because you cannot, on one hand, purport to hold a legal referendum and also then advance the fact that it will be challenged by the UK Government. Because if you are expecting a challenge, then there is an open question about the lawfulness of that act. That’s just basic common sense.

      It’s like saying that a washing machine will not need to be repaired for at least 25 years and then trying to sell a 5-year guarantee. The very fact that you are trying to sell an extended guarantee for the appliance shows that the appliance could break down in the next 5 years.
      Also, the word legal is the incorrect term to use here. Legal and Illegal are terms used to describe something which is specifically allowed or prohibited in law – in black and white as it were. The proper terms to use in this case are Lawful or Unlawful because the written law is uncertain on the subject. We know it is uncertain because it is literally the point of the Peoples Action on Section 30. If the question over the legality of something comes down to mibye aye, mibye naw, then you are talking about lawful and unlawful, not legal and illegal. And the First Minister knows the distinction because she studied law.

      I have to raise doubts about this article for a number of reasons. The first being that it looks as if the SNP leadership have excluded their own members from the decision-making process entirely – So much for the national assembly, they promised to give all of their members an opportunity to help chart the course. It seems clear that the leadership have unilaterally decided on that course, excluding the membership.

      However, it is the plan that the SNP leadership have decided upon which gives me the greatest concern. It is the one thing we’ve been warning about since the case started a year ago.
      The SNP are saying that they intend to put a draft bill forward in March. They will then campaign on a promise to put that bill to the chamber of Holyrood if they are elected.

      This, in of itself, makes absolutely zero sense politically and zero sense legislatively. The SNP could have easily passed the bill through Holyrood before the election with a clause in that act which specified the conditions under which it could be activated i.e. a majority vote of Holyrood. They would have then been able to campaign on a clear mandate of activating that bill after the 2021 elections. But the most important thing about putting the bill through fully and making it an act is that it would have protected the right of the Scottish People because it having been fully legislated for, it would have had protection from possible interference at Westminster with respect to reserved laws which could be passed.

      But no, the SNP have decided only to put forward a draft bill to Holyrood, just before they break off for the election campaign. This will leave the bill on public display, and within minutes of it being made public, the UK Governments legal teams will set to work finding ways to undermine the bill through laws passed at Westminster.

      Now let’s say for argument that the UK Government doesn’t undermine the bill the minute it is published and wait until the SNP put the bill to the floor after the 2021 elections to challenge the bill for competency before the court. This would immediately prevent the bill from gaining royal assent until the court decision on whether the bill was lawful or not. The problem is that while the court battle is going on, there is nothing to stop the Tories at Westminster passing legislation, or modifying existing legislation to take provisions of the indyref bill out of the competence of Holyrood.

      How do we know this? Well! This is exactly what the tories did to the SNP with the continuity bill. While the Scottish Government was fighting the UK Government in court, Westminster modified an act of parliament to make certain provisions of the continuity bill out of the hands of Holyrood, the court was then forced to rule against the continuity bill because of the law changes at Westminster gaining royal assent.
      Make no mistake, the SNP are playing an extremely dangerous game here. They have exposed us to at least three avenues of legislative attack from the Tories at Westminster and this could very well end up costing us independence.

      So what now for the Peoples Action on Section 30?
      In simple terms, we continue to the end. And the reason we continue to the end is that hopefully, it will offset the monumental stupidity being displayed by the Scottish Government. If we can prove beyond a doubt that the Scottish Parliament has the power to legislate for a second referendum without the consent of Westminster, then when the SNP put their bill forward, Westminster will have nothing to challenge. That’s because establishing that it is competent for the Scottish Parliament to legislate for indyref2 means that by default it establishes their bill would also be competent.
      In other words, this case has never mattered more.
      So much for a stress-free weekend!

      The hearings
      As you know, the hearings are complete and Lady Carmichael expects to render an opinion within days, not weeks. It is almost certain there will be an appeal, either by the UK Gov, or by us. One way or another though – we’re going to see this case to its conclusion.

      As always, I hope you are safe and well and I will update you as more information comes our way.

      All the best

      Martin

    99. mr thms says:

      The Presiding Officer ruled the replacement for the 2018 Bill to be within the competence of the Scottish Parliament. It was passed in December. There have been no reports that UK law officers have referred it to the Supreme Court. Mind you it does aim to make sure that Scottish law can continue to align with EU law for ten years, with two five year extensions. I wonder why up to twenty years has been set aside. I know! Belgium…

      https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/State_reform_in_Belgium

    100. MaggieC says:

      Rev Stuart Campbell ,
      Me @ 5.16 am ,

      Sorry I posted the update from Martin Keatings without refreshing this page and I’ve just seen that Twathater had also posted it , so just delete my post please . LOL .

    101. Al-Stuart says:

      .
      Muscle guy and others that use acronyms I BEG you PLEASE at least use the phrase first and by all means then acronym to your heart’s content.

      Muscle guy I will probably go “doh”like Homer Simpson if/when you clarify what “TNPW” means?

      But at this moment, when I read your words, all I see is someone passionate about something – who cares about something but I might as well just KYWH.

      Best, Al.

    102. David Caledonia says:

      Alex Blenfield is amazing and he is english through and through, he is allways having a go at the Dilly Dolly all the way and her mendacious ways.
      Wish more scots where like him, at least he tells all the arses to go and flush their heeds down the bog.
      The Dilly Dolly is so delusional that she actually believes the likes of me take any notice of her whiffling piffling and pure refined dross that would not be out of place in bindens fantasy world, and the book of the worlds biggest shit spreaders.
      All in all the world is going mad these days, maybe I will waken up and discover nothing happened, and that I dreamt it all, after all it happened to bobby ewing in dallas, if only my life was like dallas, texas tea would go down a treat just now.

      And btw George Galloway if your reading this, your still a useless tit

    103. Blow my pipe says:

      someone writing about acronyms, well I will join in with something that bugs me, long posts on here, if I want to read a long winded story I will go to the library cause I certainly can’t be bothered reading them here

    104. Frank Ness says:

      David 2.26am

      Don’t be a wanker mate.

      Don’t tell me what I am for or against.

      You do your thing and I’ll do mine.

      Don’t tell me how to fuckin think, ya dick.

      If i am against the english, then I must have my reasons, if you are for the english then you must have your reasons.

      But don’t try to railroad everybody into your way if thinking.

      Hope that’s clear enough for you???

      ,,, ,,, ,,, ,,,. ,,,

    105. Frank Ness says:

      I see we had a visitation from a wee Ginger Dugger during the night.

      You know who you urr.

      Was she here to get tore into Sturgeon,,,no fuckin chance.

      She visits here, half pished, to talk about anything other than Sturgeon Bad.

      Why does she bother???

      Well I don’t really know.

      What I do know is that she is no Winger and is fooling nobody.

      But let’s hope we don’t see her again for a very long time.

    106. Frank Ness says:

      David

      Alwhite matey.

      Signed,

      The three commas,,,

    107. Roddy Macdonald says:

      Well, if you can see anything new here in the 11 point plan which isn’t a plan you’re a better man than I Gunga Din. It’s too pathetic even to be laughable.

      https://archive.is/vu9pt

    108. StuartM says:

      I think TPNW refers to the Treaty for the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons that was signed yesterday by a number of countries, none of whom actually have any nuclear weapons. It is yet another piece of virtue signalling which will achieve nothing. None of the countries that actually do own nuclear weapons are about to give them up, although they are all very anxious to prevent anyone else having any. That’s their version of “nuclear non-proliferation” – nukes for me but not for thee. The genie of the nuclear bomb has escaped the bottle and no amount of treaties will stuff it back in again.

      On the TV news last night there were the usual shots of Hiroshima and blether about how evil nuclear bombs are. Also as usual, they neglected to mention that more people were killed in a single firebombing raid on Tokyo using conventional incendiary bombs than in the A-bombing of either Hiroshima or Nagasaki. They further didn’t mention that the RAF dropped jellied petrol (ie napalm) on German cities because it had the useful property of the blazing petroleum running down into the lowest spots, such as air-raid shelters. Nor that 23 million Soviet citizens died in WW2 of hunger, disease and battle casualties without nuclear weapons being involved. Conventional war is bad enough, nuclear weapons are just an extension.

      Arguably the Hiroshima and Nagasaki bombings SAVED lives, both Allied and Japanese, by ending the war without an Allied invasion of Japan. The Japanese military planned to resist the invasion to the last man, woman and child, arming civilians with bamboo spears against Allied tanks and guns. In the battle for Okinawa civilians had been urged to commit suicide rather than surrender and many did so. Had the war continued for another year more civilians and POWs in Japan and occupied territory would have died of hunger and disease. Moreover the Jap military planned to murder every Allied POW in their hands in the event of invasion. That on top of large casualties among the Allied invasion forces. So the use of A-bombs was not clearly unjustified.

      Indeed it may be that nuclear weapons have saved us from WW3. During the early 60s the US contemplated a first strike against the USSR at a time when the US had overwhelming superiority in bombs and missiles. The US military estimated that Soviet retaliatory strikes would kill “only” 20-30 US citizens. That was unacceptable to Kennedy and prompted him to choose negotiation over war. Similarly there have been no more wars between India and Pakistan since both acquired nuclear bombs, despite India’s overwhelming military superiority and the coming to power of India’s fascist and fanatically anti-Muslim BJP Party. So maybe the nukes have saved us from any major wars, if not quite a few small ones.

    109. Eileen Carson says:

      The key sentence “The issue of whether there should be such a referendum is different from the issue of whether Scotland should be independent.”

      Much Ado About Nothing I fear.

    110. Contrary says:

      Agree with Martin Keatings says on the matter, as posted above ,,, by various people 🙂 (lucky I checked before posting myself).

      The SNP are conning the electorate left, right and centre. ‘Convincing soft noes’ doesn’t give them free rein to ride roughshod over the entire political and legal systems, and mislead the entirety of the electorate into believing in fairies. Living in a fantasy land isn’t going to result in us getting anything except more neoliberal (free markets run the country really) Westminster rule, more austerity, more financial crashes, ,,, etc etc. And Nicola Sturgeon’s head seems to be fully embedded in fantasy.

    111. Effijy says:

      I am totally repelled by SNP’s actions and lack of it
      in recent times but they have kicked the can beyond
      recognition.

      I cancelled. My membership months ago but was going to vote
      for them through gritted teeth, but now I can’t.

      I will never vote for any London corruption party and I let them in
      thru an open door by not voting or spoiling the ballot paper.

      We need to form an Independence Party or grow ISP to a point where
      they have a candidate in every constituency.

      We need to focus on what we can build that takes us toward independence.

      Rev, you and your contacts are needed more than ever now.
      What do we do from here?

    112. Andy Ellis says:

      It is entirely unsurprising that the gradualists are all frothing at the mouth about this worthless distraction. It’s a desperate hail Mary pass to deflect from Sturgeon’s imminent political defenestration, and to act as a smokescreen for hard of thinking gradualists when – inevitably – #indyref2 gets punted into the longest of long grass.

      An “unagreed” referendum is the very definition of pointlessness. Turnout will be low, many unionists will boycott it and the international community won’t recognise it. We end up in the Catalan cul-de-sac.

      I’m beyond tired of the SNPs lack of political balls. Even those who ought to know better like Joanna Cherry appear to be giving this pointless drivel some credence.

      We already KNOW what will happen:

      1) The SNP win a majority @ #HR2021
      2) They ask permission to exercise our self determination
      3) Westminster says “now is not the time, get back to us in 2055”
      4) Holyrood announces they’re going to hold a referendum anyway, but not until the pandemic is sorted.
      [WAIT “X” YEARS]
      5) The SNP announces it’s safe to hold a referendum.
      6) Scottish local authorities refuse to participate, unionist parties urge a boycott
      7) The vote is held, but turnout is lower than expected
      8) The pro-independence campaign wins
      9) The UK government and international community refuse to recognise the validity of the referendum.

      Scenario 2:
      1) Declare #HR2021 elections plebiscitary
      2) Win the elections
      3) Declare independence

      The moral of this tale? Keep it simple stupid!

    113. Stuart MacKay says:

      I know wee Annie that you’re hungry, have holes in you’re shoes and the mold in your bedroom is not helping that cough but now that we closed Faslane that sense of moral superiority will keep you warm at night.

      Yes, ignore the phase removal that would get rid of the weapons but still bring in the billions that would close the food banks for ever.

      Yes, forget about Chernobyl and the fact that if the Americans even fought a nuclear war in Europe, Scotland is a radioactive wasteland whether there are weapons on our soil or not. Don’t forget Prestwick is getting nuked whether we are in the fight or not. It’s simply too valuable if hell breaks loose.

      What’s next? Give all the oil away because it’s right thing to do. Running a country is hard. Play all your cards and fix the problems first. Leave the morals for later.

    114. Stuart MacKay says:

      Daisy Walker

      Got a link for Indy for Scotland? Four 4 with that name. None had videos.

    115. Stuart MacKay says:

      Mike Russell must have watched Spinal Tap once too often – “See our indyref plan is much better than the others. It goes to eleven.”

    116. holymacmoses says:

      Blow my pipe says:
      23 January, 2021 at 5:42 am
      someone writing about acronyms, well I will join in with something that bugs me, long posts on here, if I want to read a long winded story I will go to the library cause I certainly can’t be bothered reading them here

      scroll

    117. holymacmoses says:

      Stuart MacKay says:
      23 January, 2021 at 10:19 am
      Mike Russell must have watched Spinal Tap once too often – “See our indyref plan is much better than the others. It goes to eleven.

      next: ‘Smell the Baker’s Dozen’ with a modern twist on the revised cover graphics:-)

    118. Willie says:

      Pap for the punters to sucker them along.

    119. holymacmoses says:

      The SNP are reactive rather than proactive

    120. Lorna Campbell says:

      Arrrrrrrrrgggggggghhhhhhh! Another steaming pile of horse manure. It’s the fkcg referendum – any referendum, that’s the problem. Drop the S30, drop any kind of useless referendum we neither need nor will win, and go for the jugular. Make the election a partially-plebiscitary one (with lots of other policies that the Unionists cannot afford to let through by boycotting the election), with immediate effect if we win a majority of seats and votes, taken as a whole for pro independence parties because they also reflect the Scottish will on independence, even if they have different subsidiary policies. We then act as if we are actually independent – you know, like other independent countries that don’t cringe and grovel to their neighbour – and invite Westminster to start mutual negotiations on the end of the Union and on the division of assets, resources, etc.

      If they renege, we take our case (built on Westminster’s breaching of the Treaty in its own favour and to our detriment, on numerous occasions, and on international law sanctioned by the UN Charter and customary precedent in international law between states in the division and allocation of territory, maritime and terrestrial, resources and assets, with a request for our case to be expedited in light of Brexit) to the Floor of the General Assembly of the UN. That is the Manifesto we need.

      There is no other way now. It is, and has been, since 2014, the insistence on that bloody second referendum that has stalled us. It plays into the hands of both Westminster and the Unionists up here and also into the hands of a foot-dragging coterie within the SNPG, captured by pseudo ‘woke’ ideology and drunk on power. Take that step-by-step plan and shove it where the sun don’t shine. It is useless.

    121. Daniel says:

      So there is no chance Sturgeon wants a legal battle in court of legality? We are almost certain to win and almost certainly will get even more folk to switch to Yes.

      Would explain why she has been against the current court case involving section 30.i am not a big Sturgeon fan but I’m hoping she wants it to get a little messy so it’s even more clear how they treat Scotland to the general public. And if they don’t challenge us then great, we have a referendum. I think she’ll ask for S30, stating that it is the last once and then move on.

      Maybe wishful thinking but it could work it well if that’s the case.

    122. Derick fae Yell says:

      Stuart Mackay 10:13am

      https://twitter.com/IndyScotParty

    123. Cath says:

      Scenario 2:
      1) Declare #HR2021 elections plebiscitary
      2) Win the elections
      3) Declare independence

      One question: what happens in that scenario of the pro indy parties don’t win an outright majority? Or worse, enough people are scared off by that prospect (this is Scotland we’re talking about remember) that they lose – not too hard to do under the Holyrood system and we end up with a unionist coalition?

      Part of me thinks, actually, that might be OK because SLAB and the LDs would have to work with the most right wing, proBrexit, English nationalist Tory party ever, to neuter Holyrood and roll back devolution and, who knows, they may even find that impossible to do (but I certainly wouldn’t hold my breath). The other part feels that would be absolutely our last chance blown and an end to even devolution.

    124. Cath says:

      My own feeling is a plebiscitary election would *only* be worth the risk if we already had two established pro-indy parties: the SNP and either another more aggressive one, with established and well known campaigners who could be almost guaranteed to pick up list seats. Or if Labour had switched to being pro-indy so there was a guarantee of a pro-indy Holyrood that way. As things stand, the risk of a plebiscite right now seems pretty massive to me. As, of course, is the risk of not holding one as things stand. It’s a right mess. The 2019 WM election should have been a plebiscite based on “We will declare independence if/when we are dragged out the EU.”

    125. Derick fae Yell says:

      “what happens in that scenario of the pro indy parties don’t win an outright majority?”

      We do it again for Westminster 2024. And every election until we win. SF 1918

    126. Mac says:

      What kind of newspaper puts a political statement under their banner like The National. i.e.

      “The Newspaper that supports an Independent Scotland”

      On which other Newspaper do you see something like that?

      The Times does not declare its love of the tories, The Guardian does not declare its (pretend) support for the left and so on.

      Newspapers usually like to pretend they just reporting the news and it is only through their obvious editorial slant do you see which way they leaning.

      There is something very artificial about the National. Like one of those fake Apple stores in China. It looks quite convincing to the untrained eye but it is not what it is pretending to be when you look more closely.

      It is a marketing gimmick, created by the same people who own The National’s sister paper, The Herald, to ‘capture’ a certain demographic that it could no longer convince to buy the Herald, but which would not compete directly with The Herald.

      The National is not sincere IMHO and the statement below the name is a lie.

    127. Cod says:

      EVERY COUNCIL IN SCOTLAND: “No you’re not. In our view that’s illegal, and so we’re simply not going to participate. Good luck finding polling stations and people to operate them and do all the admin and get the Electoral Commission to co-operate and all the rest of it.”

      I’ve literally said this almost word for word dozens of times over the years. You need the Councils to agree in order to hold an effective referendum or indeed of any national vote of any kind.

      The answers have varied between “the Scottish Government can take over all the required functions” (good luck with that!) to “once Council officials start getting arrested for impeding the will of the Scottish Government they’ll fall into line” (hahahahahaa is what I have to say to that), to “SNP controlled Councils will carry out the work” (as of today the SNP control no councils with a majority, 6 as a minority, and 8 in coalition, so there are precisely zero councils where that approach would work), to “you’re a Unionist troll” (apparently facts have a political bias, who knew?)

      There is no answer to this question which works out well. Without the support of the Councils what you get is a partial referendum, in which a large percentage of the population, both for and against independence, do not get to make their opinion known. That is an affront to democracy. Even if there is majority support for independence having a referendum on it where only a fraction of the population gets to vote on the matter makes the result an unsupportable mockery.

      Also, is point 10-3, that the UK Government would need to dispute the legal basis for a referendum without an S30 being granted via court action, not exactly what is happening in the Keatings case right now, a case which the Scottish Government tried it’s hardest to scupper?

    128. David Hooks says:

      Don’t disagree on the assertion that it’s a squirrel, nor on the point that if this is the plan then it should have been done years ago (I’ve been calling for it for years as exactly this), but I do disagree that holding a referendum would be illegal or that the Scottish Government has no right to do so. Nor do I agree that unionists will boycott it (and if you get more than 50% of the electorate voting Yes then it literally doesn’t matter if they don’t vote because it would have been the same result if everyone else had voted No). As to the point about councils not engaging, it’s fairly ridiculous but even if they did there would be no shortage of people willing to do the leg work and you’d have international observers to ensure it was all done correctly.
      The key things are whether the referendum would be legally binding on the UK government and why it wasn’t done years ago (and why did the First Minister repeatedly assert that holding a vote without a s30 would be illegal and do the UK government’s job for it). As to the first point, the Claim Of Right (whose origins lie before the union was even formed, is enshrined in the acts of union and was also passed without opposition at Westminster) states that the people of Scotland have the right to choose the FORM of government that best suits their needs. So the UK government might seek to challenge it, but they’d lose and they know it hence the past few years of shenanigans. Why it wasn’t done years ago and save us from all the chaos of Brexit (not to mention actually benefit from Brexit with EU institutions and companies moving here -which is too late now) well unfortunately that’s too easy and uncomfortable to answer. The SNP didn’t think they’d win until people actually felt the pain. They were basically willing to sacrifice those jobs and businesses to save them doing the hard work of actually having a campaign.

    129. Stuart MacKay says:

      Derick fae Yell

      Thanks for the link. You’re right on the result in May. If we lose then we know exactly where we stand. We’ll know for sure that all the gradualism in the world is not going to persuade the soft-nos’.

      Cath, so there’s more work to do to make the decision for all a no-brainer. Do we want independence or not?

    130. Daisy Walker says:

      Hello Stuart MacKay,

      I typed in Independence For Scotland Party twitter…. and it came up straight away.

      I tried the link that Dereck fae Yell put up and computer went on a go slow. So, it might be one ofthose anomalies that keep coming up whenever a yesser tries to look up Indy stuff.

      Craig Murray and jc’s Twitter accounts are other ones that end up screwing my computer, not that I’m blaming 5em in any way. It’s always an issue when there is something particularly news worthy.

    131. Rev. Stuart Campbell says:

      “Don’t disagree on the assertion that it’s a squirrel, nor on the point that if this is the plan then it should have been done years ago (I’ve been calling for it for years as exactly this), but I do disagree that holding a referendum would be illegal or that the Scottish Government has no right to do so. Nor do I agree that unionists will boycott it (and if you get more than 50% of the electorate voting Yes then it literally doesn’t matter if they don’t vote because it would have been the same result if everyone else had voted No). As to the point about councils not engaging, it’s fairly ridiculous but even if they did there would be no shortage of people willing to do the leg work and you’d have international observers to ensure it was all done correctly.”

      I didn’t say the referendum was illegal. I said that’s what the COUNCILS would say. And there’s nothing the Scottish Government could do to force them to comply.

      And sure, if you got more than 50% of the electorate voting Yes, any boycott would be irrelevant. But that’s an incredibly big ask in an “unofficial” referendum – even if it had full council co-operation to make it easy for people to vote, which it wouldn’t have. The Catalans did incredibly well to get 39% of the total electorate voting Yes, and we’d have to do 25% better than that.

      And as for the “leg work”? Who exactly are these volunteers going to be? SNP activists? Oh aye, that looks legitimate. Random punters? Chosen by who? Supervised by who? Working where? Logistically it’s just a total fantasy. Sit down and think about it for five minutes.

    132. Daisy Walker says:

      Re what happens if we hold a plebiscite election in May and lose.

      We will have planted the idea of it, firmly within the electorates consciousness, for what looks like being one of the most damaging 5 Years in Scotland history within the union. Come the GE, it will be a very real possibility, but most importantly a valid method by which to vote for it.

      With regards unionists boycotting. That presents a very difficult problem for unionists. A large chunk of the no voters, were tories, and/or elderly. Both of which groups will turn out to vote, come hell or high water, and they rather like their ‘silent majority’ power that they wield at the ballot box. For the elderly, particularly, they were brought up with the lesson that the 2nd world war, in particular, was to enable them to vote.

      Anyone telling them not to vote, doesn’t understand them.

    133. Stuart MacKay says:

      Mac

      11,000 subscribers can’t pay for very much. That’s why it has the quality of a high-school newspaper or those endless rows of women’s magazines which are only there to sell shampoo.

      The paper is owned by NewsQuest which themselves have a rather long and convoluted ownership trail, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Newsquest#New_parent_company which ends up at Japan’s Softbank last time I checked.

      So The National’s “nationalism” is just a market niche. It will be interesting to see what happens when the Cult of St. Nicola finally comes off the rails.

    134. Stuart MacKay says:

      Daisy Walker,

      We will have planted the idea of it, firmly within the electorates consciousness

      Once the plebiscite door is opened, it can’t be closed again.

      The UK just fatally weakened itself with Brexit and the pandemic, if and when it goes away, dealt the whole enterprise another body blow. Even if everything went swimmingly there’s at least a couple of years of disruption to get through until the economy finds it’s feet again (so you can ignore all the lies about and indyref from the SNP without wholesale change in the top half of the party). A plebiscite election is a vote for change. The rcent poll shows the electorate already know this. All it needs is for the independence parties to put it first on their agenda.

    135. iain mhor says:

      Still wondering how a referendum will be made binding and not advisory, never read a single explanation of that. It’s only “an expensive poll”

      Sure, it’s difficult for a UK government to ignore and not move to implement the result of a referendum – merely difficult though – not impossible, nor unlawful, nor illegal, quite the opposite.

      I suppose that will be another bridge to be crossed by the SNP after the ‘event’ and not to be considered in advance. Perhaps a taskforce will be assigned.

      Which part of the Edinburgh agreement contained the unambiguous clause, setting out how the result of the 2014 referendum would be binding on the UK government?

      “The two governments are committed to continue to work together constructively in the light of the outcome, whatever it is, in the best interests of the people of Scotland and of the rest of the United Kingdom”

      Yeah… in the best interests.

      That’s yer lot, because the unequivocable, prime tenet of the UK ‘constitution’, is ‘The sovereignty of the Crown in Parliament” – Parliamentary Sovereignty.

      In matters lertaining to referendums un the UK; I refer to the House oF Lords Select Committee on the Constitution – 12th Report of Session 2009–10 Referendums in the United Kingdom (Report with Evidence)

      https://bit.ly/2Mir8ME

      p45(192)

      “…because the UK does not have a written constitution “as a matter of constitutional law a referendum cannot be binding in this country” …and the Government’s evidence supported this. Michael Wills MP told us “I think the crucial thing here is that the referendum does not bind Parliament. In the end Parliament will make its own decision on that”

      p20(58)

      “…the sovereignty of Parliament “is certainly threatened by the use of referendums. Referendums put the people before parliament. The sovereignty of parliament becomes the sovereignty of the people … Introducing direct democracy into the political system … challenges the indirect, representative democracy that has been the essence of UK democracy. If the people vote one way, their representatives another, who should prevail, who is sovereign?”

      p46(197)
      “We recognise that because of the sovereignty of Parliament, referendums cannot be legally binding in the UK, and are therefore advisory. However, it would be difficult for Parliament to ignore a decisive expression of public opinion”

      Indeed, as I suggested – difficult, not impossible.

      That’s before we get anywhere near the arguments of what occurs after the ‘event’ – but that is a whole other story. For those who wish to put the cart before the horse, they can rage and agree, in equal measure, with Crawford and Boyle (yes, yes I know)

      “Annex A Opinion: Referendum on the Independence of Scotland etc”

      https://bit.ly/3ocRVHe

      *If those discussing Nuclear Weapons today have got this far, (not @Blow My Pipe, obviously) the above “Opinion” of messrs Crawford & Boyle does touch on Faslane as an enclave post independence (p87-para 96)

    136. T.C. Nu says:

      StuartM@8:00am

      ‘.. That was unacceptable to Kennedy and prompted him to choose negotiation over war.’

      What?, the self-same Kennedy who fought an election on the lie of ‘a missile gap’, and who persisted in ‘poking the bear’ by allowing the continued presence of US nukes in Turkey and Italy, and then who almost immanentized the eschaton during the subsequent Cuban missile crisis that the placement of these US nukes provoked?

      Think about the US presidents we’ve had since, we had Reagan FFS!, and yet Kennedy is the only one who almost pressed the bloody button.

      ‘..Similarly there have been no more wars between India and Pakistan since both acquired nuclear bombs, despite India’s overwhelming military superiority and the coming to power of India’s fascist and fanatically anti-Muslim BJP Party.’

      As I’ve said in another place, you have one country where the predominant religion believes in reincarnation, another where the predominant religion teaches that if you die in jihad, you go straight to paradise..it’s just a matter of when regarding that war, not if (Why do you think India wants hypersonic missiles?).

      Look at their ancient history/sagas and the descriptions of the bloody and devastating internecine battles they fought on the Indian subcontinent (taking the hyperbole with a pinch of salt, and forgetting the ancient astronut BS about ancient nukes you’ll invariably come across online).
      I’ve worked with Indians and Pakistanis, I’ve worked with people of Indian and Pakistani descent, they do not like each other, particularly, the Sikh-Pakistani ‘antipathy’ is, umm, rather quite strong.
      There was a story doing the rounds, many years ago, about Israel approaching India regarding a plan to take out the (at that point) nascent Pakistani nuclear program, it would have involved Israeli jets overflying Indian territory to reach the Pakistani facilities. The offer was politely refused with words along the lines of ‘no thanks, we’ll deal with them when the time comes’.

      Of all the nations with Nukes, India and Pakistan worry me the most as I do think they will eventually use them against each other thanks to the innate antipathy there backed by religion.
      Israel concerns me slightly, they might just decide one day to go ‘fuck it’ and engineer a surprise present for the Iranians in the form of an ‘unexpected criticality accident’ at one of their nuclear facilities using one of the Nukes they don’t have, honest…
      Then there’s the French, not a concern, more an observation; they did say a few years ago now that they had removed the UK (as well as German) targets (L’Angleterre, ah, la perfide Angleterre..) from their missiles active target lists, maybe Brexit has changed their mind on that decision apropos the UK ones?

      In my opinion, the reason we have an ongoing WW3 comprising of serial/parallel conventional warfare ‘skirmishes’ between seemingly opposing factions rather than an all-out ‘let loose the Nukes’ one?
      Ask yourself this question, would ‘capitalism’ in any of its multifarious global disguises profit from, or even survive, a nuclear war?

      As recent events have shown, there are more effective toys they can use to kill target populations without damaging assets (even the old “Capitalist” neutron bombs caused damage and produced fall-out) though, of course as the main players in this game have all signed bits of paper saying they won’t play ‘the game’ using these particular toys, honest….

      Aye, right, and ‘Brutus is an honourable man’

    137. Anagach says:

      Has any council declared they will refuse to implement
      a vote if the Scottish parliament passes a bill for one ?

    138. Andy Ellis says:

      @Cath 12.04pm

      “One question: what happens in that scenario of the pro indy parties don’t win an outright majority? Or worse, enough people are scared off by that prospect (this is Scotland we’re talking about remember) that they lose – not too hard to do under the Holyrood system and we end up with a unionist coalition?”

      – – – – – – – –

      *Shrugs*: then we deserve everything we get for our political and moral cowardice.

      Plebiscitary elections are NOT as likely to be subject to a yoon boycott as a “wildcat” referendum. Not enough britnats are going to risk handing untrammelled power to pro-indy parties for a 5 year Holyrood term by trying to queer the pitch of a plebiscitary General Election.

      The issue is that the Yes movement broadly and the SNP in particular, has not put the S30 legality issue beyond legal doubt (shamefully leaving it to Martin Keatings and his contributors to do so ), has failed to make the case that plebiscitary elections are in fact just as valid, and indeed more common, as a route to independence both historically and constitutionally, and has locked itself in to accepting an effective britnat veto on self determination without Westminster permission.

      The only thing that matters in the end is international recognition. What they will look for is a clear majority of voters saying “Yes” in response to a clear question. They will not dismiss a result because less than 50% of ALL voters accept, unless turnout in the election is freakishly low i.e. less than 50%.

      Again, such a low turnout is VERY unlikely for a General Election.

      We’re more likely to end up with a unionist majority because pro-indy people get pissed off with the gradualism and lack of fight in the party. With luck the ISP or another pro-indy party will emerge to challenge the SNP both on the list and in constituencies: there is really very little to lose, as it’s increasingly obvious the SNP are a devolutionary rather than independence force.

    139. Orlando Quarmby says:

      Squirrel aficionados will adore today’s Sunday National front page. The SNP under Sturgeon really has done fuck all to prepare for Indy over almost five years, but the shite the National’s unquestioningly putting out on their behalf shows they have loads of contempt for the intelligence of those of us who gave them those mandates. Interesting how the National, which used to snipe at the party has gone full-on Sturgeonite since it became apparent there was little danger of her attempting to break the union – and they’ve gotten even more supportive of her as the evidence against her role in the conspiracy against Salmond has become ever more apparent.

    140. StuartM says:

      @T.C. Nu

      You’ve got to look at the dates. Kennedy was campaigning for President in 1960 and was inaugurated in January 1961. When he got into office he was presented with intelligence that the Soviets were far behind in both numbers and effectiveness of bombs and missiles and the actual “missile gap” favoured the USA. Naturally, he wouldn’t want to publicise that and admit he’d campaigned on a false premise.

      The option of a first strike was presented to him on July 20 1961, positing a strike in 1963 when the military calculated their superiority would be greatest. Kennedy rejected that and, concerned that rogue elements in the military might launch it anyway (See Dr Strangelove), took steps to centralise control over nuclear weapons in the President’s hands.

      The Cuban Missile Crisis was in October 1962, a whole year later. Kennedy rejected the military’s advice to bomb and invade Cuba and opted for a blockade and negotiation precisely because he feared the confrontation might escalate into nuclear war.

      https://prospect.org/world/u.s.-military-plan-nuclear-first-strike-1963/

      “the last year of his life saw repeated initiatives to settle conflicts and reduce tensions: the normalization of Berlin, the withdrawal of missiles from Turkey, the no-invasion pledge on Cuba and the effort, only partially effective, to end to the covert campaign (OP/MONGOOSE) against Castro, the test-ban treaty”.

      Regarding your assertion that Kennedy was more dangerous than Reagan, that’s not so. The closest the world came to nuclear Armageddon was in November 1983.
      https://www.atomicheritage.org/history/nuclear-close-calls-able-archer-83

      Reagan’s reckless rhetoric and provocative actions convinced the Soviets that he was going to attack them, and then NATO ran an exercise simulating a nuclear war so realistic that the Soviets thought it was actually happening for real. Luckily a USAF Intelligence Officer kept his head and didn’t order a higher NATO alert in response to the Soviet alert.

      Regarding the Indians and Pakistanis I don’t see that ideas of reincarnation etc carry much weight. The average Pakistani or Indian isn’t eager to die anytime soon and that goes double for the top politicians and generals who have power and wealth. If Narendra Modi was reincarnated he’d probably come back as a cockroach.



    Comment - please read this page for comment rules. HTML tags like <i> and <b> are permitted. Use paragraph breaks in long comments. DO NOT SIGN YOUR COMMENTS, either with a name or a slogan. If your comment does not appear immediately, DO NOT REPOST IT. Ignore these rules and I WILL KILL YOU WITH HAMMERS.




    ↑ Top