Shut up or get out
When I entered front line politics in 2012 as an SNP councillor, I was clear that my guiding ambition was to play a full part in the restoration of independence to Scotland. Over the past 10 years that commitment has only strengthened as the need for independence has grown ever more urgent. From oil and gas, to wind, tidal, wave and hydro Scotland’s vast energy resources keeps the UK powered and Her Majesty’s Treasury pumped full of cash.
Make no mistake, Scotland IS the broad shoulders of the UK.
Our reward for that vast contribution of energy, food, drink and water? To be fleeced of those resources, charged for transmitting our energy, denied access to associated revenue and berated, and ridiculed in the “mother of all parliaments”.
But it’s the social injustice that results from this distortion of governance that is finally beginning to dawn on many as the cost-of-living crisis deepens and more Scots find they are paying through the nose for energy when Scotland produces far more than we could possibly need.
When I rose to my feet on Wednesday 13th July, I had no doubt about the words I was going to say. I had no doubt about who I would be speaking to, and I had no doubt about who I was speaking for.
As Kenny made to leave the chamber after his rebuke from the speaker, I began to deliver my assessment of the current impasse on Scotland’s constitutional future.
The moment was chosen for maximum political exposure. The most dishonest and disreputable Prime Minister in UK history was about to begin his swan song and we were determined that Scotland would be heard and our mandate for independence would not be ignored.
For my point of order, I addressed Boris Johnson directly: “Mr. Speaker, that charlatan has no mandate, no right, and no authority to dismiss the voice of the people of Scotland”, I started, going on to add “Someone who no longer commands the support of his own party, has no right to hold our nation hostage. Not him or his unelected successors. Scotland’s Claim of Right must be respected!”
For those who dismiss what we did, make no mistake our action that day amplified the cause of independence far beyond the Common’s chamber. Our intervention in parliament was no mere stunt, it has been reported across Europe and beyond to Mexico, China and many places in between.
As a consequence, the following Wednesday the ALBA party leadership held a very successful press conference with the Foreign Press Association, such is the interest in democracy denial for Scotland. Gaining interest and recognition of this is a vital component of building international support for Scottish independence
The cost-of-living calamity being endured in Scotland is a direct and unnecessary consequence of Westminster rule. It’s not Scotland that should fear independence -be in no doubt it is HM Treasury who fear the double whammy of losing Scotland’s revenue and having to pay an independent Scotland a fair rate for our energy surplus, our water, and our exceptional food and drink.
Scotland’s people need not suffer this iniquity, but we need to corral the justified anger into peaceful and persistent public demonstrations and build an unstoppable drive towards independence.
On Wednesday the 13th of July Scotland was given a clear ultimatum from the Speaker; “Shut up or get out”. Scotland won’t shut up, so now’s the time to get out.
Saffron Robe.
Republicofscotland.
Breeks.
Robert Hughes.
Scott.
The idea of picking at random those whom make up the Scottish Assembly is a fair judgement to make.
This ensures there being less chance of infiltration on a long term basis,
May I make a suggestion that to prevent corruption settling in to the new Scottish Assembly that we perhaps have the office term made , shorter than present political parties.
And the Scots as a nation are able to have a connection, a voice vote via digital form or text in a suggestive manner. Or a big no,
This may at first seem a crazy suggestion, but on reflection it prevents disconnect between the Sovereign people of Scotland and politicians set on their own agenda’s of ideology such as Trans issues, green climate change ideology. Energy,
The Snp were too quick to implement this disconnect between people and politicians, that is how we such a crazy set of legislation and laws in Scotland.
It also puts freedom of speech at the forefront for Scotland.
Oh, look: The ‘Scots history is garbage’ gibe, yet again.
“Which can only be achieved with the consent of the majority of Scots. Win over hearts and minds with logic and facts that fit the modern world – stop harping back to medieval documents and falling for the garbage coming from the SSRG.” Pike 1.47pm
PS: We actually attained a majority of Scots for Yes in 2014, but alas, used a wide-open local franchise allowing any old Tom, Dick and – just here for the free NHS and property – Harry to vote on Scotland’s constitutional future, incomers sufficient to suffocate the rest of us. And 37% of Nos wanted greater powers for Scotland. ‘So suck it up.’
Now, when’s the next Trafalgar Day I must remember to commemorate?
@Gareth (2.22) –
Good to see you popping in.
Prepare to be viciously fingered as a ‘frothing nativist’.
😉
robertkknight says:
30 July, 2022 at 12:46 pm
Perhaps Article 19 was one of those cans which got kicked down the road?
When you take a step back, there’s just something totally incongruous about Union which purports to join two Nations into one forevermore, but which makes specific provisions for elements of the former Nations to survive intact and retain their independence in perpetuity.
Makes you wonder whether the Scottish Advisors to Queen Anne were horse trading to get more “constitutionally ambiguous” matters specified as Articles in the Treaty.
I’m not trying to get the Parcel o’ Rogues off the hook, but I think there was more to the story.
I cannot remember the name, but one of the Scottish parliamentarians most vociferously opposed to the Union suddenly changed to support the Union, but was absent from Parliament on the day of the vote, claiming he had toothache. Why the sudden change of heart?
The obvious suggestion is he was bribed or coerced in some way, but maybe, just maybe, the horse trading which went on was seen as fairly successful, with the Treaty laced with a host of irremediable constitutional paradoxes and contradictions, that it became important to get “that” particularly leaky Treaty of Union adopted, instead of a more oppressive agreement.
Much the same way people opposed to Brexit had to vote in support of a Brexit deal, because that was better than a no-deal Brexit.
It’s idle conjecture at the end of the day, and won’t change anything, but just once, I’d like to Scotland’s contemporary side of the story, not the UK’s tinted version, where our politicians are portrayed as useless, untrustworthy and hapless as our colonial entrepreneurs and their Darien scheme. Yeah Scotchland, you’re useless aren’t you? Sound familiar to anybody?
Oh yeah, and all those years repulsing repeated colonial invasions? That’s gonna be called the “Scottish Wars of Independence” not the decades of stalwart Scottish Defence to boot out plundering invaders.
The Union’s indoctrination started early.
“Good to see you popping in. Prepare to be viciously fingered as a ‘frothing nativist’.” ? Ian 2.22.
The old egregous insult at Scots history. Sheesh!
Hard to believe Scotland is the only nation in the world that does not have an indigenous ethnic group, and of course, Scots are not an ethnic minority in the UK either. How odd.
Just back from selling my books at the SSRG conference, good venue, good atmosphere, good folks keen to learn, and I sold every last one!
It was the Duke of Hamilton with the toothache….
James che says:
30 July, 2022 at 2:13 pm
The idea of picking at random those whom make up the Scottish Assembly is a fair judgement to make.
This ensures there being less chance of infiltration on a long term basis…
I’ve commented “somewhere” that perhaps the Convention of the Estates should be completely temporary, acting like a troubleshooter brought in to deal with a Constitutional state of emergency.
It creates itself, prompted to action to dispute some unconstitutional outrage or miscarriage of justice, or, to declare a Treaty of Union breached and at an end.
When the Convention is assembled to specifically address a given task, not a permanent body or institution, who it’s members happen to be becomes much less relevant.
I’m actually having a bad day here, bad few days actually, long story, but it’s totally wrecked my access to SSRG Conference, but tune in at 3:30 for Sara Salyers Breakout presentation… How the Convention of the Estates can be re-constituted. That should be really interesting…
I think it’s Zoom friendly, but £5 for a 3 day online ticket.
link to scottishsovereigntyresearchgroup.org
I note that not one of The Bonnie Purple Heather Brigade has even attempted to my question posed at 10.01 this morning.
Far better to drone on endlessly about anything rather than finding ways of persuading the MAJORITY of the electorate to switch from No to YES.
@Gareth & Breeks –
Thanks very much for the updates re SSRG, all sounds very positive.
Looking forward to seeing Salyers presentation.
😉
Robert knight,
Breeks.
Republicofscotland.
Saffron Robe.
It is a engaging topic depending where you are standing this treaty of the union thingy ma bob.
And quite laughable in a sad sort of way
To hear so many here say, the treaty of the union is Not important any more while commenting on a site for Scottish independence to gain our independence from….the treaty of the union.
Here may I propose a different take on the treaty of the union as not being relevant to Scots and Scotland.
There was NO Treaty of the Union between the Scottish parliament of the Three Estates and the English parliament.
Because before the Treaty of Union was signed or took place ( the Scots as a nation rose up together ) together, and Chased the Barons and Nobles to flee, out of their Scottish Parliament, and out of office.
ie it was void, deleted, was no more, the Scots as a nation had chosen through self determination not to have the nobles and barons sitting as their represenatives.
Having chased out of office the nobles and barons in Scotland, The nobles and Scottish barons went on to make a more personal treaty for themselves, a arrangement for themselves with England in exchange for private money into their purses.
By now, after having been chased out of office and holding no legal jurisdiction to represent the Scots in Scotland or the Scottish parliament,
They could not enter a treaty for the Scots, and out of fear of retribution from the Scots inserted the “claim of right” for Scots as a nation into their own personal treaty with the english parliament.
The english parliament in their hurry to get this done did not question the Claim of Right, NOR did they question the validity of a parliament that had been chased out of office in Scotland,
The treaty of that union is still extant today with all the Scottish Barons and Nobles that signed their names to it,
But not as office holders representing the Parliament of Scotland.
This makes the treaty a double edged sword for the the Great British parliament,
1) because it promised in the personal treaty with Scottish nobles and barons under the inserted “Claim of Right” that the Scots were Sovereign,
2) They had not signed a Treaty with all the Scots.
3) They had not signed a Treaty with the official sitting parliament of Scotland.
4) They wondered wether to ask the sovereign Scots that were not in the treaty if they would like a vote on joining, but decided this would not work, due to the problebility of Scots voting the wrong way.
So only the Barons and Nobles as private subjects out of office entered into a treaty of union with the English parliament.
@ “Dan” 9.32 am
I think not…
We are in agreement that little thinking seems to be involved on your part.
It’s hardly rocket science. Gauging what the majority thinks can only be done either directly by asking every individual, asking them to express their preference via a vote, or using properly weighted polling.
Of course I might be wrong that views such as franchise restriction, calling for up to 20% of Scots to be denied a vote, fluffing for Vlad and his great bunch of lads who are only giving the folk of Country 404 what they deserve, covidiocy, tin foil hattery about WEF / the Great Satan / the Great Reset / Davos, and droning on about 300 year old treaties nobody with a life gives a shit about are actually all mainstream views, supported by the overwhelming majority.
Meanwhile, back in the real world……
What happened to your observance of the new ‘personal attacks’ strictures?
Get a grip FFS.
It doesn’t apply to creepy as fuck stalkers like “Scott” who has form for stepping well over the mark, as even some of the moonhowlers have acknowledged in the past in his interaction with me.
I won’t be taking any moral lessons from someone who recently opined that there will be trouble ahead, either thanks very much!
@ breeks and James Che , i’m with James on that one, I believe a continuous assembly would be more advantageous in SHOWING politicians that they are ONLY EMPLOYEES and I would agree it should be formed of normal citizens run along the same lines as jury duty but exemptions can be accepted as in jury duty , I would also say that the name convention of the estates also harkens back to feudalism which has unsavoury connotations, I much prefer People’s Assembly because that’s where the power should ultimately rest
Breeks.
I am in agreement with your suggestion. The the assembly of Sovereign Scots could be bought in to deal with constitutional emergencies, for there are many that are being run over with a steam roller now, and some that need emergency correcting from the past.
When I muse relentlessly over all aspects of the Pseudo treaty of the union, ask questions that may seem immature in my knowledge, of those here in the know or with more knowledge than I,
It is not just myself that is learning the history and legalities, there are many others here also whom will be learning for the first time,
So I do not mind appearing so ignorant, being mocked for my persistent’s or being corrected in detail,
So if those being asked do not mind providing answers we all learn as a independence for Scotland group.
The more I learn the more I am amazed at how this treaty of union has existed for so long with so many loop holes,
Perhaps one of those reasons is as mentioned above, information has been kept in the dark for to long from Scots and Scotland.
@Chas
I note that not one of The Bonnie Purple Heather Brigade has even attempted to my question posed at 10.01 this morning.
Nor will they do so. They all seem remarkably long on assertion and short on actual proof or evidence. It does seem passing strange that this bunch of rank amateurs have chanced upon a cunning plan for indy that has totally escaped the notice of all the experts in constitutional history and law both in Scotland and everywhere else.
Even more astonishing, that having been shown up by the detailed research of such part timers, nary a one of these experts has put their head above the parapet and endorsed these novel plans which will waft us to the sunny uplands without the need of anything as tiresome as a referendum, a plebsicitary election or even a demonstrable majority of Scots supporting it.
“Cunning plans for indy” (TM) is essentially a faith based position: everything necessary will just happen if we believe hard enough and clap for long enough, like believing Tinkerbell is real.
Andy Ellis says: 30 July, 2022 at 8:58 am
You aren’t are smart as you think you are and the ones you are trying to influence aren’t as stupid as you think they are.
I can’t be the only one thinking that it’s not a great sign that the Brigadoon Popular Front and the People’s Front for the Liberation of Brigadoon can’t even agree on what the new vehicle for independence bypassing referendums or elections will even be called.
Conventions of the Estates, People’s Assembly, National Assembly? How about People’s Soviet? Caledonian Jamahariya? Scottish Juche Assembly?
Or…you know….we could just try winning a majority at the next general election rather than argue what couturier designed the Emperor’s new clothes.
Twathater.
I also prefer Peoples Assembly, rather than the word convention,
Conventions as word and deed are of no importance, if judged by how Westminster breaks treats them. As with most conventions around the globe.
Perhaps I would go further in my suggestion, in thinking it should always relate to the people of Scotland as a rightful and correct procedure rather than a separate political entity.
Thus my feeling here is that it should be titled.
The Sovereign Scots peoples Assembly.
Pacman
You aren’t are smart as you think you are and the ones you are trying to influence aren’t as stupid as you think they are.
I have a pretty good idea how smart I am thanks. I don’t think the ones I’m trying to influence are stupid at all. It’s plain for all to see that some of the pieces of work in here are definitely as stupid as their output suggests though.
It’s obvious to all but the claque of like minded nativists, conspiracy theorists and Brigadoon Popular Front types that they represent about as significant a section of the movement as RISE or the SSP, only without the discipline or programme.
PacMan.
4: 12 pm.
I like it.:-)
The Sovereign Scots peoples Assembly.
Interestingly SSPA is also the acronym for:
– The South Sudan People’s Army
– Solid State Power Amp
– the US State Secrets Protection Act (S. 2533)
It all sounds a bit….well……People’s Republic of Jockistan doesn’t it?
“Which can only be achieved with the consent of the majority of Scots. Win over hearts and minds with logic and facts that fit the modern world – stop harping back to medieval documents and falling for the garbage coming from the SSRG.”
Chris Pike @1.47pm.
SSRG and Salvo are doing sterling work on the Claim of Right by trying to inform the Scottish public about it, it has lain hidden for far too long and now that it has been rediscovered the Scottish public have right to know that it its they and not Westminster nor the monarchy that are sovereign in Scotland.
The Claim of Right will also be needed when a referendum or plebiscitary election is to be held, for Scotland to hold an indyref or plebiscitary election we will need to defy English law, and use OUR Claim of Right to do so.
Westminster should and will not play any part in a Scottish indyref, it will be for Scots to decide what the substance of the plebiscite will entail, again the Claim of Right allows us to do so, that’s why knowledge of the Claim of Right must be spread far and wide across Scotland, Scots must read and learn about it, its part of their birthright.
Scotland will be far better off without Westminster interfering in devolved matters and making policy in reserved matters. Scotland will make its own tailored trade deals and not be excluded from talks on deals made in England that are then thrust upon Scots. EFTA membership affords us the best of both worlds trading with the EU and the UK.
There’s nothing Scotland can’t do as independent nation except maybe hold a seat on the Permanent Members UNSC, and I’m confident we wouldn’t really want that anyway.
Of course England or should I say Westminster doesn’t want a small asset rich independent neighbour next door that it cannot control, and for good reason, currently some of our assets such as oil/gas/electricity the last one surplus heads South of the border at a a price Scots do not control.
Many accounting tricks are used to hide Scotland’s wealth from its people, and the likes of Hinckely Point nuclear power station will cost Scots dearly but we won’t benefit from it, HS2 another White Elephant will also cost Scots dearly even though its a failure, these are just two of the projects that Scots pay for (not to mention nuclear subs and missiles) but in reality it doesn’t want or need.
Scotland doesn’t need the union to be a successful independent nation, that’s why the entire Britnat media, the House Jocks and the Westminster parliament opposes it. THEY NEED Scotland.
Whoops andy is back to personal verbal abuse to as many Scots here with as many insults as he can fit to a few posts after Rev Stu warned him.
Tut tut andy.
PacMan says:
30 July, 2022 at 4:12 pm
@Andy Ellis
You aren’t are smart as you think you are
He’s still smarter than you though.
Andy Ellis says:
30 July, 2022 at 4:25 pm
It’s obvious to all but the claque of like minded nativists, conspiracy theorists and Brigadoon Popular Front types that they represent about as significant a section of the movement as RISE or the SSP, only without the discipline or programme.
How dare you, Mr Ellis!
Don’t you remember that RISE was the future of Scottish politics, and Cat Boyd was the greatest thing in Scottish politics since Winnie Ewing? The
sad aging lecherous hackscutting edge journalists of Scottish churnalism and a pretendy online “newspaper” said so, all because of her largechestinterest inSinn FeinerScottish nationalismumJeremy Corbynshameless self-promotion, whoops “worthy causes”.Gareth , well done on the sales – I’m enjoying volume 2 too much so I hope volume 3 is well on the way!
“Gareth , well done on the sales – I’m enjoying volume 2 too much so I hope volume 3 is well on the way! Dorothy 4.56
Happy to learn you’re happy, Dorothy. Yes, final book in trilogy planned for Xmas!
Andy Ellis
You are correct.
The braindead are too busy debating (I use that word very loosely) amongst themselves to contemplate anything that is practical and realistic in the REAL world. Far better for them to discuss events of hundreds of years ago and imaginary solutions to today’s problems.
Maybe Santa Claus will bring them what they want but, in all honesty, I am not even sure they know what that is. Of course that will not stop them posting about it constantly.
Gareth says:
30 July, 2022 at 5:04 pm
“Gareth , well done on the sales – I’m enjoying volume 2 too much so I hope volume 3 is well on the way! Dorothy 4.56 ”
” Happy to learn you’re happy, Dorothy. Yes, final book in trilogy planned for Xmas! ”
Good onya Gareth . Great your work is finding an appreciative audience .
I wonder when J.Arthur Ellis’s magnum opus …” HOW MY BEST MATE STU CAMPBELL AND I DEFEATED THE BLOODY SOILERS ( AND WON INDEPENDENCE FOR S.EDINBURGH ) ” will finally hit the charity shops ?
I believe it’s being proofread by * Chas * , so it may be a while yet
Andy Ellis says: 30 July, 2022 at 4:25 pm
Keep it up, keep you out of trouble.
Mark Boyle says: 30 July, 2022 at 4:48 pm
Er, It’s 2022?
If you don’t think it 2022 then maybe you should get in touch with your doctor, mental health issues, onsetting dementia, other mental problems…
Methinks there are a few people who are either going mental, going potty or think they living in 2014?
Who do you think you are kidding Mr Hitler?
If you think we’re on the run
We are the boys who will stop your little game
We are the boys who will make you think again
‘Cos who do you think you are kidding Mr Hitler?
If you think old England’s done
Well after an afternoon of English horse racing on a supposedly Scottish tv channel STV (a wee clue its not Scottish, it sold out years ago to ITV) we now have you guessed it an English football match.
Add in that on recent days STV has aired umpteen old James Bond movies, also a far as I’m aware folk in borders don’t even get this English content from a psuedo-Scottish tv channel, they get their tv straight from England.
Of course many Scots have been conditioned to think this is normal, its not, English nativism has all but crowded out Scottish culture on tv, and in many other areas as well.
Another reason why we cannot afford not to be independent.
twathater says:
30 July, 2022 at 3:52 pm
@ breeks and James Che , i’m with James on that one, I believe a continuous assembly would be more advantageous in SHOWING politicians that they are ONLY EMPLOYEES…
I agree with both sides ha! ha! ha! Mr Diplomacy sitting on the fence…
Yes, there is a need for something permanent and Constitutionally based, but I also think in our immediate situation needing a Convention of the Estates within the next 12 months, I think it might be more expedient to create a temporary body to address a state of Constitutional emergency.
I think it would be easier to set up, easier to define, easier to man, and easier to codify and describe it’s purpose. When it goes to the International Community, they will know it’s purpose and we can all get right to the point.
It might be that the permanent body evolves from the temporary one, or maybe they remain different things. I can see pros and cons both ways, but I think a temporary body would scare fewer horses in the beginning.
Its pretty interesting to note that Ellis and his crew (we know who they are) have and are desperate to deride, the Claim of Right, and any thought of a Conventions of the Estates, People’s Assembly, or National Assembly.
“Good onya Gareth. Great your work is finding an appreciative audience.” Robert Hughes 5.04pm
Eat yer heart out, JK!
The thirst for knowledge from folk is reassuring, the momentum for self-governance unabated. Then again, no nation ever rose up to demand its abolition.
Andy Ellis says: at 3:28 pm
“We are in agreement that little thinking seems to be involved on your part.
It’s hardly rocket science. Gauging what the majority thinks can only be done either directly by asking every individual, asking them to express their preference via a vote, or using properly weighted polling.”
I note you’re self IDing as a 10 year old today with such a witty come back…
And yet you then go on to admit that gauging what the majority think can only be done by asking them, which I am pretty sure you haven’t done, so why not just shut the fuck up about you constantly knowing or speaking for what the majority think.
Here’s something, Indy supporters aren’t a fixed group, they could be described as the overlap of an ever in flux Venn diagram. Everyone holds their own unique and differing views that sometimes mean they are an Indy supporter and some times they will drop out of that group.
The question of EU membership was an example of a change of position influencer that made some folk leave and some folk join the Indy supporter collective.
The whole genderwoowoo shite with moonhowling roasters that put pronouns in their bios is another divisive piece of pish too. (Personally I blame the parents…) 😉
Who knows what the stats for Indy would be if Scots weren’t getting force fed all this genderwang nonsense by the Scottish
GovernmentAdministrators of Devolved Powers.Indy support is therefore not a constant group so pandering not to lose anyone is one of the reasons Indy support hasn’t grown much over years and hovers around 47%. Maybe a change of tack and policy outlook is required to actually build over 50% Indy support. Managing to build or buy a couple of reasonably priced and functional ferries might have helped too… but I digress.
It’s noted you don’t really ever have a go at calling out the likes of “Brexit”eer John Main when he rolls out his “show me the money coz it’s all about the wealth” shite, when it was always known that leaving the EU was going to have negative consequences for Scotland’s wealth.
He asks us to show how an Indy Scotland would benefit folks, yet he supported “Brexit” which had a load of lies and pish as to the benefits it would bring, let alone clarify what type of “Brexit” the UK would actually get, eg retain single market access.
I was in the real world today, riding with an extremely diverse group of hunners of folk of all ages, and from all different walks of life, and from all over Scotland, and yet we all managed to accept and tolerate our differences to support our common aim.
And it was an in your face reminder of what Scotland has as we cruised up through vast expanses of land.
For anyone that thinks Scotland is too wee, I’ll be happy to give them a backie on my motorbike and drop them off somewhere, and maybe as they spend hours walking across our bonnie and fertile and unpopulated countryside back to their hoose it might finally dawn on them that they’re holding an incorrect appraisal of our nation.
Lots of snidy wee comments from the braindead but not one of them will even try and answer questions asked. I wonder why that is?
“Would one of the individuals, who continually harp on about 300 year old treaties, colonialism, etc etc please enlighten those of us, who are not so wise, what they envisage the end result would be if matters panned out as the 6 of them want. In replying please also advise who decides the course of action to be taken and how.”
Independence, and the people of Scotland, via a vote.
Like I said when you allow another country to make policy for you its often detrimental, why do Scots keep allowing a foreign government to interfere in Scotland, we must dissolve this union.
“The UK government is offering open access to Scottish markets for intensive, low-welfare farmers, echoing ‘The Great Betrayal’” of the 1920s, which decimated Scottish agriculture. They signed the deals on Scotland’s behalf without consent or consulting…”
link to twitter.com
Another FULL HOUSE at SSRG today, really good speakers and break out workshops.
Looking forward to tomorrow.
You know, I signed up for the weekend out of a sense of duty (I mean – 3 days!!!!)… and I’ve come back each day totally enthused and enlivened.
Looking forward to tomorrow.
Hope it went well AUOB and for the Yes Bikers up the Glen.
Here, Here Alex.
“DON’T ALLOW INDEPENDENCE DEBATE TO TAKE PLACE IN A CONSTITUTIONAL VACUUM – PROCLAIM SCOTLAND’S CLAIM OF RIGHT FAR AND WIDE” SAYS SALMOND”
link to salvo.scot
Chas says:
30 July, 2022 at 6:30 pm
Lots of snidy wee comments from the braindead but not one of them will even try and answer questions asked. I wonder why that is?
Just a long shot, but maybe they scrolled past and haven’t read them.
Worth a peek.
link to constitutionforscotland.scot
And a read.
link to 12ft.io
PacMan says:
30 July, 2022 at 5:24 pm
Er, It’s 2022?
If you don’t think it 2022 then maybe you should get in touch with your doctor, mental health issues, onsetting dementia, other mental problems
Which part of “was” (ie. “Don’t you remember that RISE was the future of Scottish politics”, “Cat Boyd was the greatest thing in Scottish politics since Winnie Ewing?) – ie. the past tense – did you not quite understand in your rush to slobber up another stunning post?
@Mark Boyle –
How did we get on to Cat Boyd in the first place, and who, in their right mind, ever compared her to Winnie Ewing?
Cat Boyd was hopeless as a speaker and was not popular with ‘ordinary’ activists. The way she and her RISE comrades infiltrated the SSP was despicable and marked her card permanently.
The main reason she drew attention, esp in the run-up to indyref1 is that a lot of folk (NB ‘folk’, not just guys) fancied her.
But no-one ever fancied Cat Boyd as much as Cat Boyd.
Ian Brotherhood says:
30 July, 2022 at 8:49 pm
@Mark Boyle –
How did we get on to Cat Boyd in the first place, and who, in their right mind, ever compared her to Winnie Ewing?
Andy Ellis had mentioned RISE at 4.25pm and I made a tongue in cheek “outraged” reply at 4.48pm.
Cat Boyd was hopeless as a speaker and was not popular with ‘ordinary’ activists. The way she and her RISE comrades infiltrated the SSP was despicable and marked her card permanently.
They were far from being the only ones to infiltrate the SSP, but they couldn’t be told
She was part of the Scottish Left Review – one of those self-congratulatory journals of Guardianista socialists which has included Aamar Anwar amongst its writers, conveniently forgotting all about his Young Conservative past when droning its “once Tory scum, always Tory scum” mantra, and which would have long ago folded if it wasn’t for outside funding and, most importantly, library subscriptions.
The main reason she drew attention, esp in the run-up to indyref1 is that a lot of folk (NB ‘folk’, not just guys) fancied her.
But no-one ever fancied Cat Boyd as much as Cat Boyd.
Indeed.
Different strokes for different folks of course, but even by the standards of the west of Scotland she was a particularly vacuous “Gallus Alice”, an atypical “in your face” West of Scotland bore who thought being overbearing and obnoxious was being “full of character”.
“Weegielanders” often wonder why those from other parts of Scotland find a little of them goes a long way, and the worst of it is as they comprise the vast majority of the population their tendency is to believe that it is everyone else – especially those from Edinburgh – whom are at fault. There’s always been an “us” and “them” about the “Teuchters” of the Highlands, but they are less happy to acknowledge in this area of the world the clash of differences between those in the west with the rest of Scotland – and what sort of country we want … dare one suggest one a lot less 21st century than the rest of Scotland would wish?
There’s times I wonder how much the Cat Boyds – and those who cheerleadered them – cost us getting over the line as much as the lies of the press and “Vow”s … and how much the enemies of Scotland knew this would be so …
I see that interest in Salvo and the Claim of Right has been redefined as ultranationalist extremism, along with referring to yourself as Scottish and so much else.
It’s almost as if the Scottish people are in prison but aren’t allowed to refer to the constitutional chains that restrain them, the institutional walls that contain them, or the miscarriage of justice that put them there.
Sure, parole is possible but if you request it then you’re instantly ineligible. Who drafted this Section 30 process, Joseph Heller?
Why would Salvo annoy anyone that wasn’t a unionist? No harm can come from the Scottish people knowing they have the sovereign right to self determination, which they absolute do in international law (regardless of the Claim of Right).
We are all going to die in this stinking prison if something isn’t done and soon.
@Mark Boyle (10.57) –
You clearly know your onions when it comes to that stuff, and fair do’s, it’s important that first-hand witnesses not only retain their memories of what happened, but are prepared to stick their heads up and share them.
I remain proud of my involvement with the SSP but there’s no ‘nostalgia’ about it all. We punched well above our weight a decade ago – despite the whole Sheridan affair – and that made us a target. Obviously, the State had to keep tabs on us so we had a sudden influx of ‘enthusiastic’ new members in the summer of 2014. And RISE was just a twinkle in Shafi’s eye at that time but had already received nods and winks from senior SSP folk. (They know who they are.) If you know of other infiltrating groups/entryists I’m not the only one who would very much like to know about them. Someone will, one day, write a comprehensive history of that period but few will ever read it.
Ultimately, the SSP was just too ‘good’ for its own good – we were neutralised pretty effectively, aye, but it wouldn’t have been possible without collusion between senior office-holders and the ‘woke’ luvvies in arts/media who had abandoned Labour but still wanted to appear ‘politically active’. I’ll never name names but I know who (in my wee neck of the woods at any rate) helped to destroy what was, for many Scots, a serious left-wing alternative to the shameful Labour party. We represented hope, if only for a short time, and ‘they’ (i.e. the usual suspects) just couldn’t thole that.
Hatuey @ 30 July 2022 10.57pm
It’s almost as if the Scottish people are in prison but aren’t allowed to refer to the constitutional chains that restrain them
————
The only people preventing Scottish independence are the 55% of Scots who voted NO – win them over and you will become independent. As Stuart Campbell has previously demonstrated, support for independence has flatlined at 47%. The majority of “sovereign” Scots do not (yet) support independence.
Christopher Pike says:
30 July, 2022 at 11:33 pm
The only people preventing Scottish independence are the 55% of Scots who voted NO
Not all No voters were Scots. Some say the only people preventing Scottish independence are the % of non Scots who voted NO.
But I don’t need to win anyone over, fishy Pike; poverty and hardship will do the heavy lifting, as it always has.
When the people succumb we will be right here waiting for them with the ideas they want to hear — you’ve been robbed, you’re exceptional, take back control, it doesn’t have to be like this, you should be rich, it’s your country, etc., etc., etc.
The country will fall into our hands like a piece of ripe fruit and nobody will be able to do a thing to stop it. If about 50% are pro-Indy now, how many more will be pro-Indy when the economy collapses in about 4 months, as it most certainly will? All the signs suggest this recession is going to be monumentally bad, particularly for post Brexit UK.
In historical materialism we trust.
@Dan 6.17 pm
which I am pretty sure you haven’t done, so why not just shut the fuck up about you constantly knowing or speaking for what the majority think.
Because it triggers folk like you so much to be reminded that they represent a tiny minority. I don’t have to go out and personally ask every single “sovereign Scot” their opinion. If it’s beyond your faculties to figure out that proposing SSP/RISE type policies will inevitably lead to SSP/RISE levels of support. Nobody is stopping parts of the movement advocating against EU and NATO membership, or promoting franchise restriction, covidiocy, and sundry conspiracy theories so beloved of the BTL claque in here, but if you’re going to cast doubt on the glaringly obvious fact that such policies are – at best – fringe pursuits, you’re going to have to do a lot better than telling me to STFU.
By the way, does being a “sovereign Scot” exclude anyone not born in Scotland, or who hasn’t lived here for 20 years..? You know, the ones the nativists want to exclude from discussion about the future of their country?
Will the Jamahariya of Jockistan acolytes be checking birth certificates and proof of long term residence of those who appoint themselves to the Convention of the Estates, or National Assembly or whatever it is they’re calling it this week?
It’s noted you don’t really ever have a go at calling out the likes of “Brexit”eer John Main when he rolls out his “show me the money coz it’s all about the wealth” shite, when it was always known that leaving the EU was going to have negative consequences for Scotland’s wealth.
So you’ve looked at every interaction have you? That seems about as likely as me having asked every “Sovereign Scot” their views….. you see how that logic works, right? In fact, I seem to recall I have publicly disagreed with John Main WRT to his views on the EU.
It is however undeniable that one of the biggest factors in persuading people to switch from No to Yes is economics, and how much money they’ll have in their pockets. Few people disagreed with that concept during the #indyref1 campaign as I recall, indeed I remember it being widely publicised at the time that polling suggested if you could guarantee folk would be better off by a few hundred quid a year, the Yes would have won.
As you say, the movement is diverse. Figures suggest that around 30% of SNP supporters are staunchly anti-EU, and that a significant of Scottish Labour voters support independence. Constructing a majority presupposes building a majority from a diverse group. Folk pandering to nativists and conspiracy theorists should bear that in mind before they start throwing stones in their glass houses.
@Hatuey
poverty and hardship will do the heavy lifting, as it always has.
Yeah, yeah…we don’t have to do the hard work, independence will just fall in to our laps. That’s bound to work. Worldwide revolution is inevitable.
So tell us, in 4 months time when the Great Reset doesn’t happen, will you still be spouting this pish, or will there be some other excuse that inevitability has been deferred for “X” months/years/decades?
@ Mark Boyle
I haven’t been following the site for a wee while and had popped in for a rant which IMHO was valid. You then got involved in the follow up to the rant which something that had nothing to do with it.
What I had said in response to you is valid. As someone who was taken in by Nicola Sturgeon for a long time, I don’t want make the same mistakes as I had did but I don’t want to be a prisoner of the past.
I made mistakes, I have learned from them and have moved on.
I know some people’s motives is to keep digging up the past to muddle the waters of the independence debate but maybe others should do the same?
@Ian Brotherhood (11.27)
Two people I knew who were involved with the Scottish Socialist Party, both left with their fingers burned. One was Chloe McCormack, who was touted by the SSP – especially Tommy Sheridan – as some sort of young radical in their youth wing, and who “led” some sort of “school strike” in George Square long before Greta Thunberg got the idea of giving kids an excuse to dog it on a Friday. The moment they discovered she attended the now defunct Laurel Park private school in Glasgow (via the assisted places scheme, which she took up under her own bat as she was a bit fed up understandably with getting her head flushed down the bogs of a certain school in Cardonald …), she was dropped like a red hot brick.
The other was the late Honor McCurley. God, even referring to her as “the late” feels weird, although it has been well over a decade now since she died of a brain tumour. Honor was always eccentric in the two decades I knew her as a friend of a friend (amongst her many antics in the middle of a crowded coffee bar reaching over the table to rip open my shirt – buttons flying – because “I wanted to know if you have a hairy chest”. She could also be unreliable – not turning up for meet ups later explained as headaches. That tumour could have been sitting in her for years and years, slowly making her that bit more erratic, letting her get ‘used’ to being that wee bit worse, until by the time she did act it was too late. Today of course you’ll be lucky to find anyone that’s not had an MRI scan – the NHS’s favourite toy. Back then it was only if strongly suspected of cancer.
But I digress.
Honor’s mum was Anna McCurley, the MP briefly for Renfrewshire West and Inverclyde. Honor always objected as a child being dragged along to help mummy’s Tory Party functions – as MP’s kids so often are. It dogged her formative years, especially as she could see in what mummy’s party’s policies were clearly doing (and not doing) for Glasgow and beyond (to be fair to her mum, she was banging her head off a brick wall dealing with “kill the poor” types taking over the Tories in places like Bishopton, and feudal Labourites in Linwood happy for their friends and neighbours suffer if it boosted their advancement).
True, she and her mum – as mothers and daughters often do – didn’t always see eye to eye. For example, Honor was sent to Laurel Bank (later Laurel Park) rather than Craigholme – even though it was literally right across the road from where she lived. The excuse given was “the uniform looks nicer” as the reason for going to the only school in town none of the neighbourhood kids (posh as it was) were going. The real reason was undoubtedly Craigholme’s reputation for being a little too bohemian (as opposed to the three west end schools of the GGSC – Malory Towers on acid, as Laura Kuenssberg would doubtless testify …) and which in the end was to be its undoing, but that’s another topic.
I knew where she was coming from, objecting to being separated from friends at an early age because of adults’ nonsense – except in my case it was the idiotic sectarian division which in those days was set in cast iron, and never more so than amongst “the salt of the earth”. Kick with the wrong foot – you went to a different school to all your neighbourhood friends.
Fast forward to adulthood, Honor was in geriatric nursing, which meant many hours being bitten with NHS false teeth by those who didn’t want to have a bath no matter how badly they smelled. She joined the Scottish Socialist Party because, well, you don’t become a nurse in the UK without quickly turning socialist as a result, and because like many with eyes to see, she saw Tommy Sheridan as just about Socialism’s last realistic stand. Even Tories like Phil Gaillie (who was to die two months before Honor) thought so.
But she was always held in suspicion because of her background, even though she could have been one of its trump cards – an articulate, humorous speaker from a comfortable background who was socialist not because of “the politics of envy” but from a simple sense of anger at the criminality of a society where there was so much want in a land of plenty, where people slept in the alleyways beside Glasgow’s yuppie bars selling overpriced drinks to arseholes who spent more on hair products in a week than some had to live on for a month. She could have been the Scottish Tories’ – and Labour’s – worst nightmare, someone with no financial self interest act to grind but one purely motivated by a sense of right versus wrong.
She was also regarded as a “threat” by the likes of Rosie Kane and her mates to her own advancement up the greasy pole, who thought belching dated platitudes it wouldn’t have been worth buying a copy of “Socialist Worker” for resonated with anyone sane in the post-Thatcher/still-Blair world.
The day Honor chucked it, she sent me an email saying “in the circus of politics, Rosie Kane will never been anyone more than the clown.” The disaster of 2007 proved her only too right. Socialism in Scotland has been in the doldrums ever since the halcyon days of Tommy.
If it does come back … if HE comes back … he’d better pick his friends more carefully next time.
@ Andy Ellis
That’s a whole lot of waffle there, padded out with your usual supplementary serving of extra diversionary waffle thrown in.
All that text generated by you off the back of me simply pointing out that you can’t know accurately, therefore cannot speak for “the majority” of current Indy supporting folk in all areas of their views.
The other point is that the current majority of the Indy supporting movement are still just a minority of the overall electorate, but that minority still managed to double down on dumbfuckery after the 2016 Holyrood election, by then chucking the best part of 1.1 million of their 2nd votes away voting SNP in the 2021 election.
And they also continue to vote for a very different SNP Party from what it previously was. This site has highlighted this situation for years and that the SNP are effectively captured and ain’t really that motivated to work with any degree of credibility towards returning Scotland to self-governing status.
So there are a significant amount of very gullible or politically naive folk in the current pro-indy group which hasn’t managed to build support from 47% in many years.
Ergo, it ain’t going anywhere as it is, so things need a shake up, and if that shake up means losing some to gain more and build so Indy support becomes a majority of the overall electorate then that is what needs to be done.
Clearly the current mob in charge isn’t going to progress things as the contents of the most recent Wings article show.
@Dan 10.25 am
As per usual, we’d all get on a lot better if you actually interact with what people say, rather than what you *wished* they had said to prop up what passes for your point. I’ve never claimed to know “accurately” what opinions were on given topics. It is however self evident that the the majority supports EU membership, NATO membership, rejects covidiocy and broadly supports helping Country 404 rather than Vlad and those Republic of Scotland and others regard as a nice bunch of lads who are only giving the inhabitants of the country they invaded what they deserved.
You are free to disagree of course, and to insist the majority think differently. We’re free to point at you and laugh for your delusion. Like so many in here, you mistake the noisy and enthusiastic clapping of the conspiracy theory addled “usual suspects” in here for support elsewhere. If you’re so sure my views don’t align with the majority, prove me wrong. We’ll wait…..
Encouraging more support for “the movement” is only going to come from “soft No” voters. Believing they are going to be impressed by the anti-EU, anti-NATO, pro-Vlad and his nice bunch of lads, conspiracy theorising moonhowlers is as fatuous an argument as believing that RISE and the SSP would deliver independence. The roughly 50% or so of voters who aren’t currently supporting indy comprise of a hard core of around 30% dyed in the wool Britnats, unionist and loyalists who will never support it on principle and 20% who might be persuaded.
It’s always possible of course that we *might* lose some of the roughly 50% pro-indy votes if some decide the type of indy on offer isn’t to their liking, whether in general or on specific issues like the EU, NATO or TRA extremism in the SNP setting a baleful precedent. I doubt ideological purists like that are going to cost us many votes though, don’t you? Certainly it’s likely to be a lot less than the numbers we still need to “convert”.
The current mob’s obsession with the Provisional TRA probably won’t help convert too many soft No voters, but it probably comes down to how big a part that issue plays in people’s decision making. Even folk who are viscerally opposed to the implications of TRA and its deeply misogynistic agenda may overlook it if they prioritise other areas, or if they simply aren’t aware of it or consider it (relatively) unimportant.
Loads more waffle there Andy… But maybe “we’d” all get on a lot better if you did exactly what you state I should do.
And as for this: ““It’s always possible of course that we *might* lose some of the roughly 50% pro-indy votes if some decide the type of indy on offer isn’t to their liking, whether in general or on specific issues like the EU, NATO or TRA extremism in the SNP setting a baleful precedent. I doubt ideological purists like that are going to cost us many votes though, don’t you?”
I see you’re using the royal “we” and “us” again, but were you not one of those ideological purists that stated you’d campaign against Indy if the type of Indy wasn’t to your liking? 😉
That was the point I was making re. the Venn diagram of current stagnated Indy support. It is inevitable that some folk will take the huff, but is that such a bad thing if they and their not so well supported but hugely amplified views left as they had become a blocking mechanism to increasing support. And the Indy support group numbers would actually increase as more small c conservative Scots felt Indy was becoming palatable.
Now that could be in relation to stuff like the gendershiz, or civic nationalism…
I’ve had a lot on recently and can’t recall if Stu did any recent polling on the views held by Scots re. Who they think should be eligible to vote in Scottish constitutional matters. There’s been plenty polling on gender stuff but it’d be interesting data for the franchise debate to see what Scots think.
The foreign policy of an Independent Scotland – NATO, EU, EEA, etc – can only be decided BY an indy Scotland.
The only relevant negotiations to be had with rUK the day after indy is the removal of UK civil servants, troops, etc from Scotland. Everything else is for an independent Scotland to decide.
ROS @ 7.51PM RE Alex Salmond and proclaim Scotland’s COR FAR AND WIDE , OH NO that will be the death of the ALBA party
A spokesperson who claims to represent a majority of independence supporters and who is also a self confessed FOUNDING member of the ALBA party has stated unequivocally that the MAJORITY of members who are also indy supporters are incensed and outraged that Alex Salmond is wasting the parties time and energy pursuing this ancient and frankly inconsequential SOVEREIGNTY document
The spokesperson is also outraged that the document refers to the SCOTTISH people and makes no provision or mention of NEW SCOTS or students or holiday home owners or temporary residents , he insists that the SOVEREIGN CLAIM OF RIGHT documentation must specifically name these groups or he will ACTIVELY work against independence
Asserting that he speaks on behalf of the majority of independence supporters whilst denigrating people who request evidence to support his claim he and his small claque of progressive civic nationalists ridicule Alex Salmond’s demand for the CLAIM OF RIGHT to be front and centre in Scotland’s drive for independence because it is divisive natavistic sectarian racism which alienates most of the population of Scotland and it should be consigned to the ancient history books because it has no bearing in Scotland’s future
The spokesperson when questioned stated that he had no designs or thoughts on taking public office but he was extremely concerned that Scotland’s new Scots may feel that the indigenous people were being given priority over people who came here for economic and family reasons which is the opposite of civic progressive nationalism
If NATO-boy was a real supporter of independence, he would welcome and be happy to entertain my theories about the economy and the possibilities a major downturn might create. These are historical forces, the likes of which have driven progress since time immemorial — there’s nothing radical or novel involved.
Looking at the officially allowed routes and the highly suspicious tendencies of the SNP under Sturgeon, it is likely (I would say almost certain) that the route I have described above represents the only realistic hope for us.
That’s quite a depressing thing to contemplate but it’s almost impossible to imagine that Alba will achieve anything electorally in the next decade. The referendum next year is a waste of time, regardless of what the Supreme Court says, and the plebiscitary election idea has, as far as I can make out, already been ditched.
Who should b able to vote in a 2nd inyref?
Seems there should be two models – same franchise as the first indyref
Or similar to the franchise for voting in NI in a referendum on unity. The latter is laid out in the Good Friday Agreement as follows:
‘The British and Irish Governments declare that it is their join understanding that the term “the people of Northern Ireland” in paragraph (vi) of Article One of this Agreement means, for the purpose of giving effect to this provision [a referendum on unity], all persons born in Northern Ireland and having, at the time of their birth, at least one parent who is a British citizen, an Irish citizen or is otherwise entitled to reside in Northern Ireland without any restriction on their period of residence’
I’m sure Andy Ellis will make his usual sneering remarks about ‘nativists’ in relation to the second option, but it is how the question of the franchise is addressed for a referendum on Irish unity – which is a broadly similar constitutional referendum to an Indyref and is also within the UK – unlike some of the more exotic models proposed.