stooges of the Kremlin

Wings Over Scotland


The half-full electorate

Posted on June 28, 2018 by

As alert readers will know, we’ve heard little from the Unionist parties in Scotland over the last couple of years but “SCOTLAND SAID NO!”, “SCOTLAND DOESN’T WANT ANOTHER REFERENDUM!” and “WHAT PART OF NO DON’T YOU UNDERSTAND?”

That clutch of blunt, angry slogans was (and remains) pretty much the entire Scottish Conservatives manifesto, for example, and it rests on the claim – based on some extremely misleading selective reading of opinion polls – that the nation is implacably opposed to a second vote. The reality, as we know, is somewhat more balanced. But it’s never been quite THIS balanced before.

In our new Panelbase poll we stuck to our principle of asking questions related to realistic propositions (rather than, say, the always-bizarre “If there was a referendum tomorrow…”), and based our options on Parliamentary mandates. And what we found was that the Scottish electorate is split so precisely down the middle on a second indyref that rounding off the numbers gives you a total of 101% of voters.

To be exact, 50.64% of Scots want another vote on independence held either in this Parliament or the next one (which polls suggest will be on a knife-edge of a Yes majority), while 49.36% don’t. Within those two groups are near-identical splits at the extremes, with 34% wanting the soonest option and the same number demanding that there NEVER be another indyref.

83% of 2014 Yes voters picked the top two options, and 76% of No voters the bottom two. And slightly curiously it was the people with most time to wait who were the most impatient – 66% of 18-34s chose the top two options (three quarters of them wanting the vote pre-Brexit), compared to just 48% of 35-54s and 41% of the over-55s. But the party numbers were the most interesting.

While Tory voters believe that democracy ended forever in 2014 so far as the constitution is concerned, Labour voters are a lot less sure – despite their party’s strenuous opposition, almost half of them (47%) want another referendum before the end of the next Parliament, and nearly a quarter of Lib Dems agree.

The most revealing thing about the results is that what one might call the “once in a generation” option – the third one – wasn’t even nearly the preferred choice of ANY group. The fiction that Unionist parties will stop objecting once 20 or so years have passed is weasel-worded can-kicking. There are no moderates in this debate. The true split is between “soon” and “never”.

And given that that’s the case, and that the issue isn’t going to go away until it’s settled (and a second vote WILL settle it one way or the other, because voters won’t tolerate a third one and if Yes can’t win it under the current circumstances it’s a hopeless case anyway), plainly the most sensible thing – for everyone – is to go with “soon”.

(The idea that voters don’t want a second referendum is further undermined by the fact that fully 95% of respondents say they WOULD vote in another one if it came along.)

There are all kinds of arguments for just getting it over with, but the main one is that otherwise, Scottish politics is going to be locked in a closed loop until we’re all dead.

Print Friendly

    1 Trackbacks/Pingbacks

    1. 28 06 18 12:56

      The half-full electorate | speymouth

    254 to “The half-full electorate”

    1. Merkin Scot says:

      Can’t think of any countries which have elected to rejoin the Union after having achieved Independence.

    2. Dave McEwan Hill says:

      With you entirely, Stu

      These polls, showing SNP steadily climbing, are not the whole picture.

      Observations

      They do not measure enthusiasm and determination to vote. There is no doubt that an SNP support energised by an independence campaign or an independence message is much more motivated than any other vote so I would immediately add a significant percentage for SNP to any poll if we are in an independence campaign.

      Recent polls certainly indicate Labour losing most of its seats in Scotland again. But there is more to it than that. At the “snap” General Election in parts of Scotland where the Labour vote routinely votes for the party likeliest to beat the Tories the now defunct Corbyn effect actually significantly increased the Labour vote (from very low bases certainly). It put a significant extra vote in Argyll and Bute onto the most feckless Parliamentary candidate I have ever seen and we nearly lost the seat (to a Tory).
      Have look at the Alex Salmond result. The Lib Dem vote indeed moved largely to Tory but in the final analysis I would argue the couple of thousand increase in the small Labour vote (much of which will have voted SNP on many occasions to keep the Tory out) may well have been more damaging and could have cost Alex the seat .

      My feeling however now is that in a FPTP election the SNP would presently gain 10 to 15 seats back again and in a good and appropriate campaign get very close to passing the 50% of the electorate.
      (Which must be a worrying consideration darn souff contemplating a General Election).

      The comparative silence from Woof Davidson is perhaps significant. It may of course just be that the total incoherence of the Westminster establishment over the brexit shambles has relegated Scotland and instruction thereof to comparative insignificance and Woofy is not getting directions. What an opportunity we now have to strike hard and fast!

      Another encouraging element is that we know that a significant proportion of the traditional Labour vote will vote YES and that is not factored into Parliamentary style polls and of the 22% or 23% of the electorate who still support Labour a significant portion of that will never vote Tory so any talk of a unionist Tory/Labour alliance achieving a majority is fanciful.

      Did anybody watch STV last night? I switched to cartoons when I saw Haggerty was on.

      I’m away to brush up on my Belgian (is there such a language?)

    3. Oscar Taime says:

      While “Later than 2026” may just be the preferred position for those who would still vote “No” it is hard not to notice that 67% for a vote at some point is quite a bit higher than 34%. In any case we can be fairly sure that 67% would be reported elsewhere with glee if it was against ever having a referendum. That said even 34% for the “no surrender” option is still way to high in the current circumstances

    4. Bob says:

      The problem with another referendum is that we simply can’t trust that it won’t be fiddled. If something is probable, they (the establishment) will always twist it to improbable.

      I don’t know the answer to that, but it has been suggested that a referendum won’t be necessary as it will be settled in court. Along the lines of England can’t impose it’s madness on another nation.

      Can anyone expand on this or is it just a dream?

    5. Oscar Taime says:

      too

    6. Hoss Mackintosh says:

      Interesting results!

      I wonder what the polls will be in a years time when the full horror of Brexit and the complete ineptitude of the WM parties is finally revealed.

      Just keep pushing – the Union is on a very shoogly peg.

    7. HandandShrimp says:

      The Lib Dems are just Tory Lite aren’t they?

    8. Scottish Steve says:

      If Scots reject independence for a second time, especially in the current circumstances, then we don’t deserve it.

    9. bobajock says:

      Look – if we do a 2nd referendum and it fails to get a ‘Yes’, then I will run as a Tory candidate and go full monty Tory, killing services (and subsequently people), and removing options for everyone.

      Roll on a No, cos I is gonna fk dem up democratically.

    10. Iain says:

      I don’t agree that a lost second referendum would settle the issue for ever.

      Were it lost, it wouldn’t be lost by much, and it can’t be supposed that nearly 50% of the population of Scotland desperate to be rid of Westminster rule would just give up and tolerate whatever England dumps on them.

      It’s pretty clear to me that England is heading down the pan. Its whole wealth, status and influence has been based on the exploitation of many other countries’ resources, and these are no longer available. There’s very little left, and what there is is diminishing. We keep up the drive until we win.

    11. Cuilean says:

      I think a lot of voters in 2014 nearly voted ‘YES’voters but on the day plumped for NO’ as (a) they fell for the last week purdah period and subsequently proven empty prmise of devo-max (b) they naively thought they could have another referendum as and when we pleased, little thinking that it was only because the UK sneered at the first Indyref as a fool’s errand which would be soundly humiliated when 80% of Scots voted NO and (c) och, the UK is in the EU so why upset a fairly steady economic vessel and face all that uncertainty all on our own.

      But (a) (b) & (c) don’t exist anymore.

      We need to do it.

      I am hoping the SNP have been keeping their powder dry til May shows her hand (her white paper) and we can put some meat on the bones of the final Brexit deal.

      I suspect May has been cunningly letting the clock ticked down on the Brexit final deal, without showing her hand, to the last minute precisely because she does not want to give the SNP too much time to call Indyref2.

      I had to laugh out loud today when UK Govt, through its mouthpiece the BBC in Scotland said that if SNP call Indyref2, the SNP will be putting its party interests before the country.

      The SNP’s only country it deems to wish to govern is SCotland, which voted remain & was elected to both Westminster & Holyrood on the manifestos that being dragged out against the will of the Scottish people would trigger Indyref2.

      The waverers in 2014 who voted NO last time will know they are not going to get a third bite at the cherry. It’ll be now or never. That is going to give us a huge YES win, in my humble opinion.

    12. defo says:

      Scots, wha hae wi’ Wallace bled,
      Scots, wham Bruce has aften led;
      Welcome to your gory bed,
      Or to victory!

      Now’s the day, and now’s the hour;
      See the front o’ battle lour;
      See approach proud Edward’s power—
      Chains and slavery!

      Wha will be a ("Tractor" - Ed) knave?
      Wha can fill a coward’s grave!
      Wha sae base as be a slave?
      Let him turn and flee!

      Wha for Scotland’s king and law
      Freedom’s sword will strongly draw,
      Freeman stand, or freeman fa’,
      Let him follow me!

      By oppression’s woes and pains!
      By your sons in servile chains!
      We will drain our dearest veins,
      But they shall be free!

      Lay the proud usurpers low!
      Tyrants fall in every foe!
      Liberty’s in every blow!—
      Let us do or die!

    13. Merkin Scot says:

      “………and it can’t be supposed that nearly 50% of the population of Scotland desperate to be rid of Westminster rule would just give up and tolerate whatever England dumps on them.”
      .
      That is exactly what can be supposed. Unfortunately.

    14. Jeff says:

      Dave McEwan Hill;

      French is the spoken language in the pretend parts of Belgium such as Brussels, but Flemish or ‘Vlaams’ is de taal van België. Very similar to Dutch so, here’s your phrases to be shouting;

      kom op België! (Come on Belgium!) (Pronounced ‘Belcheea’ ‘ch’ as in the Scottish ‘loCH’.

      haal het recht op jij! (Get it right up ee!)(‘reCHt’ as in ‘loCH’ again, ‘jij’ is pronounced ‘yey’…..

    15. Doug Bryce says:

      > when the full horror of Brexit and the complete ineptitude of the WM parties is finally revealed.

      Exactly : we need to play a long game and wait for ‘brexit effect’. Those who are paying attention realise it is coming.

      Striking too early risks some people thinking everything is just fine and transitional deals will merge into permanent trade deals maintaining status quo.

      Only once the Tories have clearly addressed FoM vs Single Market, beyond point of no return, should we strike.

    16. donnywho says:

      In reference to the general belief that the media has had no influence and or effect and why they are fighting against a new Referendum.

      I honestly believe that that is not so, they have had a huge effect and not in a benign way.

      Like the Vietnam war the Media and the Presidency followed the line that the “boys” were winning and it would only take one big push. And this in a time where the Media were considerably freer than now. They held the line and the War went on!

      So back to today and Scotland, we have a much more complaint and on message Media in this country than 60’s America. So remember that it took decades for the peace movement to “divide” the country but divide it they did. They achieved this by being visible and never stopping. This caused the State to mobilize every trick they had CIA FBI etc (tin hats conspiracy at the time, documented truth now)!

      But they were forced to overplay their hand and trust in the Media, State, Army and Presidency were eroded.

      We are, i think there or there abouts, the marches terrify them and the media is being forced to give one more Big Push, to win. Even though they know they are losing and their pronouncements sound more insane and manic by the day.

      So as i see it they are keeping the lid on the Movement but barely succeeding. They know that they will lose hence the fight to stop any vote on the subject and the struggle to de-legitimize the very idea.

      We must continue to “frighten” the sheep, we must continue to grow and if our betters tell us we are not winning… Remember America, John Wayne and the Media were Winning in Vietnam till they had helicopters evacuating the Embassy.

      I so want to watch Fluffy being helicoptered out of the UK Government in Scotland Office!

    17. Holebender says:


      HandandShrimp says:
      28 June, 2018 at 11:28 am

      The Lib Dems are just Tory Lite aren’t they?

      I have to disagree; I’d say they’re full fat Tory based on these responses. And they have the nerve to demand a second EU referendum!

    18. Eric says:

      Firstly please don’t give credence to the alleged ‘Scot Tories’ there’s no such thing they’re British Conservative & Unionist Party. They don’t deserve the moniker of Scot. Secondly great read but who does Panelbase actually ask for opinions of this nature. Do they just use the same names time afyer time or is it done randomly. I’ve never ever been asked if I was for or against indy or another referendum. Can we put our names down to be on Panelbase? I honestly believe the number for pro referendum/indy to be higher. Or is that just my heightened opinion of where Scotland really has to go.

    19. Ian McCubbin says:

      This is encouraging but I along with about 20-30 of local Yes activists half of whom are SNP members now want independence by other means.

      We?do not trust the polling in a referendum tone free from tampering and or blatant corruption by unionist groups at canvassing counting and recording of votes.
      So it would be interesting to see you conduct a poll on whether a referendum or UDI or other means self determination would be acceptable to which groups like those shown here.

    20. Dr Jim says:

      Eh *voters won’t tolerate a third one* is that not the same as saying we won’t tolerate a second one, democracy is democracy, if a party is elected on a manifesto of introducing a referendum on something then that’s what should happen without question
      What would happen if the Tories won an election on a manifesto of rejoining the Union after we’d left, not likely or probable but if they did it would still be democracy (a horrible thought but still)

      Democracy didn’t stop in 2014 and it shouldn’t stop ever

    21. Welsh Sion says:

      defo @ 11:43am

      Back at ya …

      15. (of 20.)

      Scots Wha Hae – Reprise

      Scots, wha hae wi’ Salmond bled,
      Scots, wham Sturgeon aften led,
      Welcome tae yer gory bed
      Or tae destiny.

      Now’s the day, an’ now’s the hour:
      Seize oor chance a’ last fir power.
      See the fearties start tae cower.
      Scotland will be free!

      Wha will be a low appeaser?
      Wha will bow tae Lunnon’s Th’resa?
      Wha sae base as be a greaser?
      Let him turn an’ flee.

      Wha fir Scotland’s Pride an’ Aw’
      Freedom’s sword will strongly draw?
      Bondsman stand or Freeman fa’:
      Let him follow me.

      By th’ oppressive woes and pains,
      Of oor sons in servile chains,
      We will drain oor dearest veins
      But we shall be free!

      Lay Westminster oh so low.
      Tractors fall – like every foe.
      Liberty’s oors wi’ every blow!
      Let us vote fir SNP!
      ______

      [With acknowledgements]

      Songs for the New Politics
      2013-2018

    22. Bob Thomas says:

      Curious that 17 (5% of SNP) members never want another Independence Referendum!

      Are they ‘secret unionist’ infiltrators? LOL!

    23. Ken500 says:

      Polls are used to make money and manipulate the vote. Often fraudulently. Just a joke. Take it with pinch of salt. Electoral rules and Lawa broken fraudulently time and time again. With impunity.

    24. Muscleguy says:

      @Dr Jim
      It comes from the Quebec situation. They had two indyrefs, the last being lost on a knife edge after the rest of Canada launched a genuine Love Bomb in the latter stages. Also in reaction to that narrow squeak the Federal Govt devolved more powers to Quebec satisfying a significant proportion of those inclined to vote Oui!.

      Since then the Parti Quebecois has descended down the language exclusion route. They used their extra devolution to insist on fluent French to have ANY public sector job for eg. This hardening alienated moderates and has reduced support for Independence. Basically people got a preview of how things would be under the PQ post Independence and recoiled.

      Fortunately we don’t have that issue in Scotland, despite some Unionists trying to stir it up wrt Gaelic. It IS a problem for PC in Wales and their language stance hurts them despite being bilingual enhancing intelligence and mental flexibility.

    25. mike cassidy says:

      Brexit gets crazier and crazier

      as arch-brexiteer Ashcroft recommends a small independent country inside the EU as an ideal host for the “EU outposts” of UK companies after Brexit.

      (doesn’t archive)

      https://www.conservativehome.com/platform/2018/06/lord-ashcroft-special-report-malta-makes-a-strong-case-to-host-the-eu-outposts-of-british-companies-after-brexit.html

      Brexit as written by Lewis Carroll.

      Some great comments as well – seriously!

    26. Ken500 says:

      Quebec is totally different. Federal system. Total fiscal? autonomy. Power of veto. Dual language. Different resources, culture, religion, climate, population industry, different foreign, social and economic policies. Differences must be considered before comparisons.

    27. Rev. Stuart Campbell says:

      “Can anyone expand on this or is it just a dream?”

      It’s total bollocks.

    28. Rev. Stuart Campbell says:

      “Curious that 17 (5% of SNP) members never want another Independence Referendum!

      Are they ‘secret unionist’ infiltrators? LOL!”

      Not all SNP voters – these polls sample voters, not party members – want indepdendence. They just think they’re the best party to run a devolved Scotland.

    29. Ken500 says:

      Some in Quebec did not want to lose their Canadian passport. Crucial deciding ke issue.

    30. Derick fae Yell says:

      Dave McEwan Hill

      “My feeling however now is that in a FPTP election the SNP would presently gain 10 to 15 seats back again and in a good and appropriate campaign get very close to passing the 50% of the electorate.”

      Agreed. The manifesto for any snap election should include an unqualified commitment to hold a referendum, no ifs buts, this happens or that happens ‘Will hold’.

      There’s no need for a S30 for a referendum in the name of Scottish MPs. Arguably there’s no need for it anyway, but if we go along with the pretence that Westminster is sovereign, then a majority of Scottish Westminster MPs is so, irrespective of what’s reserved or devolved to Holyrood

    31. manandboy says:

      With hedge funds able to commission private polls producing reliable raw data, anyone with access to this data knows what they have to do to manipulate the result if desired.
      All that’s needed is enough money and control of the media. The British Establishment have both without limit.

      We cannot win the battle for Independence on any ground held by far superior UK government forces.

      However, at present the Independence cause has two unique advantages, neither of which will come into play until Brexit actually kicks off.
      The first is all the very bad consequences of Brexit once they become real to No voters in Scotland.

      The second is the very highly charged division in England between Leave voters and Remain voters. Brexit may well be so destructive that Remainers will not put up with it – and at that point the dam containing 16 + million people’s accumulated anger and frustration may very well burst. If that happens, then all bets are off.

      One thing is for sure. Unless some shift takes place in the balance of Yes and No, and/or in the BritNat media stranglehold, Independence is going nowhere soon.

    32. Welsh Sion says:

      Muscleguy @ 12:14 pm

      It [language issue] IS a problem for PC in Wales and their language stance hurts them despite being bilingual enhancing intelligence and mental flexibility.

      ______

      Not so much a problem as you think – and I speak as a Member of both PC and SNP and a campaigning and professional Welsh speaking linguist with Cymraeg/Welsh my mother tongue.

      Rather, it’s our old friends in the MSM who tend to make the language a political football, when it suits them, and then distorts that (what’s new?) more often than not into attacks on the language and its supporters and pandering to monolingual troublemakers.

      The language has a great amount of support from all political parties (well, perhaps not UKIP, but even they at election time sometimes prepare their propaganda in the ‘language of heaven’) and none in Cymru/Wales, and the recent opinion poll confirms that Welsh people want more to be done to support it. Leanne Wood herself is a Welsh learner.

      It is the historic perception, aided and abetted by those who should know better, who associate the Welsh language as being solely that which interests PC. What really needs to be done is to galvanise, professionalise the leadership (taking in rules learnt from her sister party in Scotland) and empowering the grassroots whose voice for independence must be heard and acted upon.

      We are pleased to co-operate and share ideas with Scotland and also maintain our identity as Welshies – whoever we are and wherever we are from. Don’t forget either, that essentially the language has also historically, politically and socially been essentially our sole badge of identity over the centuries – no institutions, no national church, no legal system, no nothing barring the language after our so-called “Acts of Union” (1535 and 1542) existed thereafter. We were officially and legally (until 1967) identified for Westminster legislative purposes as “England.”

    33. Ken500 says:

      Alex. Salmond lost by 2,000 votes? – 6,000 less came out to vote. It was raining heavily all day. LibDems voted Tory. (Davidson uttering – fraudulent funds?) Broken electoral rules. Apathy? Complacency. Shock, horror. Now useless incompetent ignorant Tories. No one happy.

      Even staunch unionists. Raging. See some of the comments! Writing to Alex to give support. Writing to Davidson with condemnations. Some people never learn.

    34. defo says:

      Welsh Sion

      Very good. RB’s original is just as relevant today, as it was back then.

      As for a second indyref defeat, (it won’t happen but…) i’ve advised all 4 of my offspring to emigrate.
      I’d rather see them less, but with them having a fighting chance of success, rather than they stayed and stifled here.

    35. Thepnr says:

      The good news I suppose is that fully 66% want another referendum at some point in the future. The not so good news is that are split almost 50/50 between before the end of this parliament or at some later date.

      Just 34% wanting one before 2021 and for which there is currently a mandate is far too low given the imminent Brexit.

      What has happened to the 62% that supported remain? It looks like they fail to see the link between Scotland staying in the EU as an Independent country or exiting under Westminster rule.

      I’m disappointed in this as it looks like a great many remain voters have accepted leaving the EU is the price to be paid to remain a part of the UK. No doubt the bulk of them will be Tory remain voters who have just shrugged their shoulders at the prospect of Brexit.

      It looks obvious that the great majority of Scots are failing to pay attention, could be a lot of pain has to be suffered before people can appreciate the reality of Brexit and Tory governments in Westminster for the foreseeable future. I despise how easy it appears to be to manipulate the opinions of those not politically engaged.

      We need to up our game in fighting against the propaganda and becoming more visible as the Yes movement is one step in the right direction. We can’t afford to be shy about our support for Independence, get the stickers back on the cars and keep wearing the badges.

      Encourage discussion with No supporters and help open their eyes. It’s the strongest tool in the box and it looks like the best chance we have of increasing support.

    36. Iain says:

      Re my assertion that “it can’t be supposed that nearly 50% of the population of Scotland desperate to be rid of Westminster rule would just give up and tolerate whatever England dumps on them” and your response that indeed “it is exactly what can be supposed. Unfortunately”.

      I know what you mean: the sheer lack, amongst so many, of smeddum and guts and of knowledge of the country and of sense of a national community is distressing. You have to reckon that there will always be some. But we only have to get over the 50% once – whenever – and there’ll be no return. And in the meantime there’s enough of us to make Scotland a constant pain within the UK.

    37. Ken500 says:

      G. Martin. Not surprising.

    38. Albert Herring says:

      The majority of the voters who won’t tolerate a third one will be dead soon, so Scottish politics is only going to be locked in a closed loop until THEY’RE all dead.

    39. Andy-B says:

      I wonder if those who never want another independence vote are happy with the way the British government are attempting to roll back Scottish devolution?

      Do they not realise such tactics will also impact on their families lives as well in a negative way.

      Is remaining part of a very uneven union more important to them, than the future of their children, if so where does that mentality arise from, to be a no at all costs.

    40. Ian Brotherhood says:

      ‘Soon or never’

      A sobering wee phrase there.

    41. donnywho says:

      Thepnr, i sympathize with your view but take a more glass half full view.

      In spite of a Media onslaught they have lost the battle of … should there be another referendum.

      Now they are left with when, and they will put it back as far as possible… now not being the time and all.

      But they have to use progressively worse tactics to keep us rebellious Scots in place. It is in the long run self defeating and as a result we will win.

      The timing is a hard one, if we were to launch now… can we win, are we justified, will Britain retreat from Brexit? We do not know, so some will opt for the latest date possible.

      Some even believe there might be another election (Westminster)which should be fought on another manifesto for referendum.

      The point is none of us know the future and where politics will take us in a week never mind a month. So do not be too hard on those whose timescales differ… they still want the same thing and they are the Vast majority! Half full!

    42. Grant says:

      There’s got to be a level of cognitive dissonance amongst the 34% that needs to be exposed.

      What if we asked?

      ‘Do you believe in peoples’ right to self-determination?’

      ‘When, at all, should there be a second independence referendum?’

      Answerers of ‘yes’ and ‘never’ would prefer that Scotland should be uniquely less democratic.

    43. defo says:

      Andy-B
      “Is remaining part of a very uneven union more important to them, than the future of their children, if so where does that mentality arise from, to be a no at all costs.”

      Centuries of indoctrination, with the emphasis on controlling education (or lack of).

      I’ve a OO bluenose ‘mate’ who is a pretty good guy generally, but give him some facts, and his eyes glaze over. He’s right because… just because.

    44. Breeks says:


      Bob Thomas says:
      28 June, 2018 at 12:06 pm
      Curious that 17 (5% of SNP) members never want another Independence Referendum!

      Are they ‘secret unionist’ infiltrators? LOL!

      No, they could be like me. Utterly disillusioned with democracy that is hopelessly compromised by Unionist propaganda, and an Independence campaign which seeks to determine the definitive issue of Constitutional Sovereignty by an ephemeral ballot, which itself has disputed constitutional status and legitimacy.

      Before you have a referendum, be smart and know that it has Constitutional integrity and that Scottish Sovereignty is sacrosanct. Take that fundamental precaution of making sure the vote is sovereign, because then you don’t need the vote to prove you are sovereign.

      Without recognised sovereignty, a referendum is just an opinion poll. What’s the point of having one? Get the issue into a Constitutional Test case, prove we are already sovereign in law, and demand International recognition.

      So put me in that 5%. I’ll take a referendum if there’s one going, but the release of our sovereignty requires straightforward legal arbitration, not popularity in a Constitutionally ambiguous referendum.

    45. Proud Cybernat says:

      The First Minister is on record as stating that a second indy referendum will take place within the life of this Scottish Parliament. If the Maybot denies S30 (not actually required), then the 2021 Scottish Election becomes a defacto IndyRef.

      Just after the 2014 ref I did an analysis of the result on a big spreadsheet, plugged in all sorts of voting demographics, age demographics, births, deaths etc.

      Based simply on the above I had YES gaining parity with NO by 2022. But none of this took into account the ongoing disaster that is Brexit, nor that our EU citizens here in Scotland (about 180,000), many of whom probably voted NO last time will this time probably not be allowed to vote at all (so NO has lost 100k+ votes) or will vote YES.

      I think patience is the key here. An EU holding pattern / transition period after March 2019 might be to our advantage.

    46. Sinky says:

      In case you missed Rev Stu’s tweet

      Gillian Martin wasn’t even talking about trans people, but about students PRETENDING to be trans for a joke. FFS.

      https://web.archive.org/web/20100805174353/http://misssymartin.blogspot.com/2007/06/this-is-my-main-offender.html

    47. gus1940 says:

      Re Gillian Martin it is time for an onslaught on the BLOG History and any other on-line posts of the Guys In The Black Hats and that includes the print media BBC & STV.

    48. Giving Goose says:

      O/T (apologies) & Re Gillian Martin.

      Gillian’s comments are absolutely spot on in her blog of Oh-so-many-years-ago!

      To be frank; I wish there were more people like her out there, who were prepared to be honest with their (in Gillian’s case – completely harmless) personal views.

      Gillian is also very funny.

      The faux rage from the Unionist’s tells you more about them than Gillian.

      A bunch of artificial, London centric, off the shelf, careerist idiots.

    49. Ken500 says:

      Gillian Martin. Not surprising. No research and vetting. Kettle black. Another own goal. For the unionists. More to come. Some people never learn Useless ignorant incompetents.

    50. Socrates MacSporran says:

      That great expression from Burns certainly seems to apply to the stooshie over Gillian Martin.

      The Unco Guid are sill among us, and seemingly determined to stand up from British values.

      To use another from the Bard – sic a parcel o’ rogues in a nation.

    51. Ken500 says:

      Get sacked for a blog. Educationalist. Informative? Equal education system. Some minority respect. Kettle black. Reformation respectability. Ignorant incompetence. Some people never learn.

    52. Tam the Bam. says:

      Ken500 @ 1-48pm

      For once in your life…..pull up your trousers and give your mouth a turn.

    53. Ken500 says:

      ‘The Greens will continue to stand for equality etc, blah, blah, blah, says the 6 white, wealthy, middle class men sitting there. No self awareness.

    54. CameronB Brodie says:

      There will be no peace until Scotland has justice. The Tory’s ‘plan’ for Brexit Britain, demands that Scotland sacrifices what pitifully limited political agency it possesses. It offers no hope for Scotland, in return, yet it will dictate the direction and boundaries of Scotland’s future potential. A direction of travel that Scotland specifically rejected.

      From a critical realist, post-colonial feminist perspective, Westminster is practicing authoritarian totalitarianism and is treating Scotland with racist contempt.

      Psychology & Social Action

      Psychology and social action together form the backbone of Critical Psychology. Critical Psychology refers to a variety of approaches that challenge mainstream psychology’s assumptions and practices that help sustain unjust political, economic, and other societal structures.

      http://www.centerforintegrativepsychology.org/about-cip/psychology-social-action

      A critical theory of democratic agency: An interview with Eva Erman
      https://www.ntnu.no/ojs/index.php/etikk_i_praksis/article/download/1929/1953/

      Social Representations and the Politics of Participation
      https://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007/978-1-137-29118-9_2

    55. Ken500 says:

      Some bams should have gone to specsavers.

    56. shug says:

      We have to turn the soft no voters and not by shouting Tory scum at them.

      For my money 50 years ago we have a large manufacturing capability now we have nothing and for 30 of these years we were the 13 top oil producer in the world

      Does this seem like Westminster has provided good government

      The other on I have used is

      Norway has a sovereign wealth fund of 1 trillion dollars while Westminster has left us with almost 2 trillion dollars debt – where did the money go – it was not spent here

      I still hear too much

      Sturgeon is wasting money of – stuff!!
      God save us from a Scottish government
      Usual BBC arguments

      How do we break the stalemate

    57. manandboy says:

      http://chrisgreybrexitblog.blogspot.com/2018/06/what-business-is-saying-about-brexit.html?m=0

      Prof. Chris Grey’s latest Brexit thoughts. Although one of the very best out there, he continues to refer to Britain as a country. So you see, brainwashing touches us all.

    58. Peter A Bell says:

      Apparently, 34% of Scots want, not only to forfeit their own right of self-determination, but to deprive ALL the people of Scotland of their right to determine the kind of government which best suits their needs.

      That’s a third of the population backing the anti-democratic dogma peddled by Ruth Davidson. That’s scary.

    59. stewartb says:

      Sinky @ 1:36 pm

      Thanks for the link to what Gillian Martin actually wrote.

      https://web.archive.org/web/20100805174353/http://misssymartin.blogspot.com/2007/06/this-is-my-main-offender.html

      Its been enlightening to read all of it and not to form my opinion – and immediately judge – based on the selective quotes, absence of context and expressions of outrage in the Holyrood chamber today. The problem in PR terms is that out of context, some of the quotes appear toxic. And how many fair and reasonable folk hearing or reading about what Gillian Martin wrote will take the time, give her the consideration, to read the blog in full? Very few I suspect: rather, take her to the stocks and the FM along with her!

      IMHO, in context, taken as whole, the whole things reads as a ‘too clever by half’ attempt at satire, at humour, which is having a go at political correctness and virtue signalling in certain publicly funded initiatives.

      This in 2018 would be a topic minefield – especially given the examples and word images used in the blog – and a minefield into which savvy people in public life would not now choose to tread. But it was not written in 2018 and it was not written by someone then fulfilling the role of an elected politician. It was written in 2007: she became an MSP in 2015.

      Ill-advised, perhaps with hindsight, especially IF one knew of the future career path (the alternative: play safe, keep quiet, stay bland?); overly graphic in its use of language, yes; funny, not very (at least to me). But what was the target of the blog? And of CRITICAL importance, was the target the differently abled or minorities, or was it the overly politically correct and virtue signalling managers around her?

      I guess we will all read into the blog what we choose: for me, fundamentally, I see someone calling out political correctness and virtue signalling, 11 years ago, in a not especially humorous way.

      How well crafted was your prose, your satire, 11 years ago? Are there no topics you pontificated about in 2007, no earlier attempts at wit, that out of context could be used against you now? Have you changed any of your views on particular topics since 2007 and re-considered how best to/how best not to express your views on sensitive subjects? Or were you always perfectly judged and future-proofed in all you did, all you said and all you wrote in 2007?

    60. Craig P says:

      Bob says:
      28 June, 2018 at 11:20 am

      I don’t know the answer to that, but it has been suggested that a referendum won’t be necessary as it will be settled in court. Along the lines of England can’t impose it’s madness on another nation.

      Can anyone expand on this or is it just a dream?

      Bob, that’s a political question (answered in 2014 with a No vote) and a courtroom won’t touch it with a bargepole. The only routes are a referendum or a general election on a mandate of secession.

    61. Derek says:

      Just wondering; which group is the missing person from the first table missing from? Adds to 1017.

      (it’s a bit quiet today…)

    62. Col says:

      If the second indy ref is lost the snp just need to state that every election there on in will fought on gaining indy. A majority of mp’s and we’re off!

    63. Robert Peffers says:

      @Craig P says: 28 June, 2018 at 2:52 pm:

      ” … that’s a political question (answered in 2014 with a No vote) and a courtroom won’t touch it with a bargepole. The only routes are a referendum or a general election on a mandate of secession.”

      And your legal evidence, or even your own personal logic, to back up your stated conclusion is what exactly?

    64. Robert J. Sutherland says:

      Thepnr @ 12:48,

      You could argue that the apparent stasis is due to the SNP leadership playing the Brexit game thus far by continually arguing that the UK as a whole should remain within the SM/CU, and thereby not rallying the doubters behind a stronger alternative proposition, ie. full indy.

      The caution was a necessary position in the first instance because (as we know) people were suffering from a mixture of referendum fatigue and a lack of reliable facts (the Leave campaign having produced at vast expense a thick 1950’s pea-soup fog of lies and distortions). You can’t make a move until after some kind of tipping point has been reached among enough of the public-at-large thinking it out for themselves.

      But now with a dawning understanding of what a guddle Brexit really means, and in the light of recent events, the SNP (and all of us with it) might be better off now taking a more confrontational pro-indy stance.

      People need reminding that there is an alternative to just metaphorically shrugging their shoulders, lying back and “thinking of England”. A tacit acceptance of a fait accompli is what I have always feared the most.

      Besides, under growing public pressure from business interests, the UKGov might still muddle into some kind of Brexit-lite SM deal that would totally vindicate the SNP but likewise leave them undifferentiated, outflanked and ignored.

      I have always maintained that it’s going to take more than just the unfolding of events that will make a difference. A referendum campaign would do precisely that. Concentrate minds and make explicit the available alternatives.

      In the meantime, we really still need to make a clearer case for our own “taking back control”, instead of just hanging around waiting passively for the UKGov to sort themselves out and decide what they are going to do to us (without our consent).

    65. Maolbeatha says:

      I agree with a lot of what has been posted above.

      Many people don’t want change. They don’t see things as being that bad.
      The way that Westminster and the Torys in particular act should sway anyone to get away from Westminster control.

      Davidson, Rennie and the Labour will do whatever their head office tells them to. Head office will ALWAYS act in the UKs interests, and tell its employees to follow suit.

      If we get independence I would expect them all to suddenly switch to supporting an Independent Scotland.
      Career before all.

      But how do we know these things?

      Its not from the BBC, or the Newspapers or in fact any of the media with the greatest reach.

      We know because we are interested and actively go looking for the information.
      Those that don’t care, wont go looking and so receive the msm message.

      An our sources are not as widely distributed or looked at as the competition.

      Nicola has said for a long time that she will wait until the effects of Brexit are known, she spoke of the Autumn of this year.
      That would tie in with the white paper.

      Will that shake those that don’t really care?

      Being too radical or having any controversial attachments risks scaring off voters. This also annoys those wanting radical change or those wanting to see more politicians speak their minds. But there are more moderates than there are radicals.

      Timing is a tricky one.

      Before the mandate runs out and after Brexit details / effects are made known. Known to be detrimental and known to all.

      But how will the full effects of Brexit get to people that don’t go looking for it?

      I would like to see the referendum handled by anyone other than the electoral commission. Any department or organisation affiliated to, regulated by or part of the Westminster government has a vested interest in the result and so its impartiality is at least questionable.

    66. Derick fae Yell says:

      Thepnr

      “What has happened to the 62% that supported remain? It looks like they fail to see the link between Scotland staying in the EU as an Independent country or exiting under Westminster rule”

      Nothing. There never was a link between two different votes. If there was then Independence support would have been 60% for the past two years.

      As I keep saying, and no doubt everyone is totally sick of hearing it (cue torrent of abuse!)

      EFTA! Or rather EFTA EEA, because that gives 90% of the practical benefits of EU membership AND something that the Yes Leavers can vote positively for.

      Polling (forget who – Curtice I think) has 62% of the Scottish people happy with Freedom of Movement in return for Freedom of Trade. That’s basically EEA membership, and our potential Yes vote. There for the taking, with a tiny tweak to Independence in Europe.

    67. frogesque says:

      Gillian Martin writes a blog 11 years ago, since deleted, yet is denied junior office.

      David Cameron performed necrophilia with with a pig and became Prime Minister.

      Wtf?!

    68. Proud Cybernat says:

      But how will the full effects of Brexit get to people that don’t go looking for it?

      When they or a family member loses their job.
      When they see the prices in shops sky-rocketing.
      When they see the shop shelves empty.
      When their annual holiday is no longer affordable.
      When they see the Yankee Fracking Co. pumping all sorts of shit under their homes and methane coming out the taps.
      When they’re eating chlorinated chicken and testosterone beef.

      And–which is more–then they’ll be a YES, my son!

    69. Craig P says:

      Robert Peffers says:
      28 June, 2018 at 3:07 pm

      And your legal evidence, or even your own personal logic, to back up your stated conclusion is what exactly?

      Why not state the case for the dissolution of the union today in a courtroom, and let Bob make up his own mind how realistic a route that is?

    70. Jomry says:

      Re Gillian Martin and Sinky and Stewart’s above.

      Like you, I have gone to the “offending” blog direct and would urge others to do likewise since context is all. The article is contentious and provocative as it is intended to be. It was written at a time when inter college collaboration was a thing of the past and colleges were increasingly competitive in their attempts to woo students with a vastly inflated role for college PR departments. Inclusivity was central to their marketing.

      What Gillian is highlighting is the sometimes crass use of disabled and minority groups in marketing images and events to promote such inclusivity. Similarly the meaningless and unreliable “student satisfaction” and other questionnaires turned into statistics to bolster performance – still a very real issue.

      The comments below the article at the time are also very telling. Some disagree with her point of view. Others support it with examples of their own. All engage with the issues she raises. I can find no-one who is offended by anything she wrote.

      I know little about Gillian Martin but from this article alone it is evident that she has sound knowledge of college issues and a realistic outlook that can only be of benefit to a Minister with responsibility for this sector. This, however, will matter little to those who spend their lives scraping deep into barrels to unearth some sludge which might give them some petty political victory

    71. Robert J. Sutherland says:

      Derick fae Yell @ 15:23,

      Well, there’s a self-referential circular argument if ever there was one. By making no clear link between independence and the Brexit lifeboat, and focussing all the attention on just some other version of Brexit-lite, is it any wonder that some folk are still sitting on the fence?

      If people are going to have some kind of Brexit forced on them come what may, why on earth should they worry about indy on top?

      Waiting patiently to see the whites of our opponents’ eyes is one thing, running away from taking on your opponents on ground of your own choosing is quite another.

      I thought the SNP leadership had finally woken up these last two weeks to the notion that going on the front foot might actually be a winning strategy, but there’s evidently no convincing some.

    72. galamcennalath says:

      The BritNats are clutching at straws. They quite honestly don’t have much going for their current and proposed Brexitised setup.

      Pointing out the obvious …. there has been a relentless anti Indy/SNP/SG/Scotland campaign since 2015 when they realised IndyRef1 and its aftermath settled nothing. In contrast, there has been low key pro Indy activity. Result? A slow movement to Indy support and perhaps just as important, an acceptance that it is likely to happen.

      Just wait till IndyRef2 is announced and YES2 fires up with a vengeance. What have the BritNats got left? Try to sell post Brexit UK?

      I was reminded the other day of Prospect Theory. It’s a theory explaining how and why people will sometimes take a gamble, and yet other times are risk aversed. (Lots of info about it online).

      Put simply, if people have something guaranteed in their hands, they will not gamble on losing it. Basically, better with the ‘bird in the hand’.

      Conversely when it comes to loses and negatives, people are much more inclined to gamble in an attempt to reduce the loss, even at the risk of increasing it.

      In IndyRef1 a lot of people thought they had a status quo guaranteed and therefore wouldn’t risk that.

      In EURef, Leave played a blinder by attacking the EU rather than dwell on their own plans (If they even had any). Just enough people thought the EU wasn’t worth keeping and were willing to gamble on an unknown outcome. I have no doubt one of these fancy consultancies designed their campaign around that psychology.

      IndyRef2. There is and will be no status quo. We don’t even need to attack the Union, the Tories are doing that for us! As Stu says, if we can’t win now, we never will.

    73. Robert Peffers says:

      @Bob says: 28 June, 2018 at 11:20 am:

      ” …
      I don’t know the answer to that, but it has been suggested that a referendum won’t be necessary as it will be settled in court. Along the lines of England can’t impose it’s madness on another nation.”

      First of all, Bob, you are on the right lines but have misconceptions. You say, ” … Along the lines of England can’t impost it’s madness on another nation”.

      So your first mistake is that it is, “England”, making the imposition. What/who is making that imposition is the Westminster Parliament that claims, (under English Law), that, “The Treaty of Union, ‘Extinguished’, the Kingdom of Scotland and renamed the Kingdom of England as the United Kingdom”.

      The Treaty of Union did no such thing and the Treaty of Union itself is the positive legal proof that it did no such thing but first allow me to explain something few Scots realise. It is, “The Treaty of Union that formed the original, “United Kingdom of Great Britain”, and note there is no mention of Ireland or Wales in that original title and Great Britain is just the biggest, (Greatest in size), island of the British Isles. It was not the Acts of Union for they were both the final acts of the two partner kingdoms who then went into recess. They were just the individual acceptance of the agreement to unite the two still independent parliaments and a United Kingdom parliament did not then exist – and couldn’t exist until the individual parliaments agreed to unite.

      However, there is/was a preface/introduction to the Treaty of Union that uses the phrase, “and her dominions”, but the dominions of the Kingdom of England the Treaty was concerned with were Wales and Ireland which were respectively taken under the Kingdom of England’s dominion in 1284, (Statute of Rhuddlan), and 1542, (Crown of Ireland Act), so the Kingdom of England, in 1706/7 was signing as a single Kingdom that contained the three countries of England, Wales & Ireland.

      The misconception is about the two respective Acts of Union which were the last Acts passed by the two partner kingdoms that signed the Treaty of Union and then the Kingdom of England parliament that passed the English Act of Union officially put itself legally into permeant recession. The Parliament of the Kingd om of Scotland, though, did not officially sit and go into recession and was thus only legally, “Prorogued”.

      Now watch this video clip of Winnie Ewing, “Reconvening”, the old Scottish Parliament when she opened the current Scottish Parliament:-

      http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aiottF-df3Y

      So legally Holyrood is a reconvened Scottish Parliament. i.e. Legally taken out of recession.

      The Westminster Parliament is legally a two KINGDOM partnership and the two partner Kingdom’s are equally sovereign signatories to the Treaty of Union but there has never been a Kingdom of England parliament, (elected as such), since the last day of April 1707. Westminster is NOT the legally elected parliament of The Kingdom of England. It legally is what it always legally began as – “The Parliament of The United Kingdom Of Great Britain”.

      As to the false claims that the 1800/1 agreement was, “A Treaty of Union”, with the Kingdom of Northern Ireland – that is complete hogwash.

      First of all it isn’t an agreement between the Kingdom of Ireland and anyone else. It isn’t even an agreement between the former Kingdom of Ireland for that was annexed by the Kingdom of England it 1542 and it wasn’t an agreement with Northern Ireland as Northern Ireland became part of the Kingdom of England in 1542.

      It was the United Kingdom accepting their former Dominion of the Irish Free Stale that had just declared itself to be, the newly formed Republic of Ireland.

      When the Irish Free State was declared by the Westminster Parliament they gave Northern Ireland the option of either going with the south or remaining part of the United Kingdom and the North decided to stay with the United Kingdom.

      In effect all the so called, “Anglo-Irish Treaty”, did was add, “& Northern Ireland”, to the title, “The United Kingdom of Great Britain”. It did not add another kingdom to the bipartite United Kingdom of Great Britain because all Ireland joined the United Kingdom as part of the Kingdom of England it 1707.

      So here is what is the likely way things will go in due course. Westminster will end up out of Europe by default and without any agreement but beforehand Nicola Sturgeon will call a referendum and Westminster will attempt to say it is illegal and ban it. However, there is no law, either English or Scottish that can prevent anyone holding a referendum.

      So Wes5tminster will attempt to say it is illegal but to do so they will require a court judgement to say it is and just which court will Westminster refer their claim to?

      The Westminster created Supreme Court and that court can be claimed to be illegal because the Treaty of Union specifically states that English Law & Scottish Law are sacrosanct in perpetuity and the Treaty of Union is very clear on that point.

      So where does it go from there?

      The answer is the European Court of Human Rights, (Also known as the World Court), and remember that the Westminster Government has just fallen out with the European Union Parliament. Don’t imagine Europe isn’t watching carefully for only last week Europe’s Chief negotiator said publicly that in the event of a United Kingdom break-up with the Westminster, (UK) Parliament leaving that Scotland’s membership in the European Union wold be swift and easy as not only had the Scots voted to remain but Scotland had met all the EU rules of entry since ever there was an EU.

      Sorry it is so convoluted but you cannot squeeze hundreds of years of complicated history down to a few words.

    74. Breeks says:

      Derick fae Yell says:
      28 June, 2018 at 3:23 pm

      EFTA! Or rather EFTA EEA, because that gives 90% of the practical benefits of EU membership…

      No it doesn’t. It’s just a Trade Agreement.

    75. Thepnr says:

      Learned something totally new today and that is that to appoint a government minister in Scotland you must first have the agreement of the Scottish Parliament.

      Just shows then how important an overall majority is for the governing party. I also wonder if parliament has ever before refused and appointment of a minister selected by the governing party?

      Questions questions, but it looks like a recipe for chaos as it appears as if parliament could choose to elect no ministers from the largest party and basically force an election.

      I can’t see that having been the intention as what if is most likely on overall majority arises for any party and parliament still refuses to approve of ministers would it be election after election?

      Seems ridiculous to me to be honest and for all the other parties to refuse to approve Gillian Martin as a minister because of something written on a blog in 2007 is even more ridiculous. The lot of them really need to grow up, no wonder half of Scots want rid of the Union. Pathetic.

    76. ScottishPsyche says:

      From today’s news, it is clear that no one can ever change their mind about anything. Opinions expressed are immutable, set in stone and the further back you go the more criticism you deserve – if you are in the SNP, that is. Also, you can never apologise or explain enough.

      My opinions on Trans (and other) issues have changed many times based on the prevailing professional thinking, the politics of the day and my own experience of dealing with individuals who present to services in a multitude of ways. Would I write a blog about it? No, absolutely not.

      Gillian Martin was, it seems, writing from a personal perspective based on the hoops institutions have to go through to get money based on the prevailing thinking at the time, and she illustrated that with exaggerated hackneyed images designed to show how ridiculous and easily manipulated the system was. Her views on race were different though, she made fairly sweeping statements based on her own limited experiences, something I believe she deeply regrets. Based on the testimonies of those who work with her and know her now, and who have defended her, she is a caring inclusive, hard-working person who has actively promoted the TIE campaign through actions and words.

      She will have ample time to set out her current views and I hope she is allowed to do so. Words matter so much but we should be allowed to detach ourselves from ideas and sentiments as we learn more and the world changes. How else are we going persuade people to vote for Independence?!

      Majury was given the opportunity to recant and I understand he was reinstated based on an apology but that the other councillor refused and was not reinstated. Do we believe Majury? I suppose we have to or else we risk being somewhat hypocritical.

    77. jfngw says:

      BBC journalists are euphoric, they have a SNP head, you can see the barely concealed pleasure in their tweets. But we all know they are protecting Tory and Labour party who contain real bigots, almost unreported by the BBC.

    78. Robert Louis says:

      Having read the full blog post by Gillian Martin, it is abundantly clear that she was criticising those who seek to exploit minority groups, rather than mocking or criticising those groups. THAT IS VERY CLEAR. Those who do not understand that, need to go back to school to learn interpretation of the English language.

      AS a gay person, I would wholeheartedly endorse the appointment of Gillian Martin to Government. She has done NOTHING wrong.

      Too many people jumping to conclusions from comments taken wholly out of context from ten years ago.

    79. Confused says:

      I read GMartins blogpost looking for some guilty pleasures – but … er, it’s not exactly “/pol/ worthy” is it? Mild satire, 7/10 for effort but don’t count on the book deal.

      A few years ago there were some pretty good -anonymous- blogs by people working in schools, social work, the police, casualty medicine – but they seem to have disappeared. Maybe the talented bloggers got their deals, left their professions then found they had fuck-all to write about. The depressing thing is how, across the board, anyone who dares to tell the truth about what things are really like, risks losing their job. (In a way, Irvine Welsh’s entire fantastical oeuvre is just “confessions of a housing officer”.)

      Freedom of speech, my arse! – Please select your approved-opinion from the drop down menu and follow the signs to the nearest available echo chamber.

      Then there’s this virtue signalling craze (- we used to call it fake piety) – is virtue signalling the “new wanking”? Back in 2010 you were cracking one off to some lesbo 3-way on the pornhub but in 2018 you’ve just posted a gif-meme about trumps-a-nazi … post … like … retweet … AHH … AAAAH ….AAARGH!!! – monitor splattered … but once is never enough – you’ve become an “orgasm addict”. The mother lode is to be first on some worthy cause no one else knows about – this promotes a kind of “misery tourism”.

      “theres a black chick in the maths dept – quick – get her on the frontcover of the prospectus!”

      – who has not come across this kind of tokenism, itself a real form of hidden racism from people avidly professed to be anti-racists who would witch-hunt anyone they found of “every day racism” or “micro aggression”?

      I, for one, welcome our new TRANNY OVERLORDS.

    80. stewartb says:

      “EFTA! Or rather EFTA EEA, because that gives 90% of the practical benefits of EU membership…” “No it doesn’t. It’s just a Trade Agreement.”

      Let’s try to be more accurate in use of the terms. As shown below, whatever one’s view of the merits of the EU, EFTA and EEA, for the sub-set of EFTA members that are within the EEA, EFTA is very far from JUST a Trade Agreement!

      The European Free Trade Association (EFTA) is the intergovernmental organisation of Iceland, Liechtenstein, Norway and Switzerland. It was set up in 1960 for the promotion of free trade AND economic integration between its members. (My emphasis.)

      The main tasks of EFTA are now threefold:

      1) Maintaining and developing the EFTA Convention, which regulates economic relations BETWEEN the four EFTA States;

      (2) Managing the Agreement on the European Economic Area (EEA Agreement), which brings together the Member States of the European Union AND THREE of the EFTA States – Iceland, Liechtenstein and Norway – in a SINGLE MARKET (aka the “Internal Market”)

      3) Developing EFTA’s own worldwide (i.e. outside the EU) network of free trade agreements (currently 27 Free Trade Agreements covering 38 countries and territories outside the EU).

      Moreover, the EEA Agreement guarantees equal rights and obligations WITHIN the Single Market for individuals and economic operators in the EEA. It provides for the inclusion of EU legislation COVERING THE FOUR FREEDOMS — the free movement of goods, services, persons and capital — throughout the 31 EEA States i.e. the EU members plus Iceland, Liechtenstein and Norway .

      In addition, the EEA Agreement covers cooperation in other areas such as research and development, education, social policy, the environment, consumer protection, tourism and culture, collectively known as “flanking and horizontal” policies. The EEA Agreement guarantees equal rights and obligations within the Single Market for citizens and economic operators in the EEA.

      The EEA Agreement also states that when a country becomes a member of the European Union, it shall also apply to become party to the EEA Agreement (Article 128), thus leading to an enlargement of the EEA.

      And for completeness, what is the EEA NOT? The EEA Agreement entered into by the sub-set of EFTA countries does not cover the following EU policies:

      – Common Agriculture and Fisheries Policies (although the Agreement contains provisions on various aspects of trade in agricultural and fish products);
      – Customs Union;
      – Common Trade Policy;
      – Common Foreign and Security Policy;
      – Justice and Home Affairs (even though the EFTA countries are part of the Schengen area); or
      – Monetary Union (EMU).

    81. Roland Smith says:

      I would ask a different question. Something along the lines,
      In order to have the option of staying in the SM and CU do you support having a referendum before the end of the UK transition period with the EU, after the UK has broken all ties with the EU or never.

    82. Tam the Bam. says:

      Well now Jackson (Carlaw)…whats this I’m hearing about you making ‘racist’ jokes at the expense of people from China and Zimbabwe…hmmmm?

      JC:Bbbbut…..that was way back in April 2005 for goodness sake!

      ahhhhh Bisto!

    83. Brian Powell says:

      I think one of the problems for many Scots is they think if they ignore it, whatever it happens to be, then they are in charge of it.

    84. Tam the Bam. says:

      Brian Powell @ 5-36pm

      In charge of what in particular?

    85. Brian Powell says:

      Abd now they have found that blog got her out of post so easily they will be going through every record they can find of every post.

      The opposition don’t want a higher standard of morals etc, though there wasn’t even an issue, they just want to have the SG running out of people for posts. They are not going to act on their own politicians.

      The action from the SG could be to act quickly the quicker to get past this but there is the danger.

    86. mike cassidy says:

      OT

      See those people you laugh at when they put “Jedi Warrior” on their census form.

      http://archive.is/Yk6h6

      “The bottom line is that storing nuclear secrets in the cloud creates a lucrative and alluring target for adversaries.”

    87. Thepnr says:

      The right of people to have an opinion and then change it later on is freedom of opinion. Our opinion is shaped as usual by the media and those around us and will change often.

      Everyone of us has I’d wager, changed our mind on some important matter or another, we mature in other words. How many as an example were in favour of the first Gulf war? I was because I was led to believe it would make things better for those living there.

      I was fooled and now shown to have been an idiot so I have changed my mind and am against the West interfering at anytime in the ME.

      How about bringing back stoning for the crime of adultery? It was very popular at one time, people even took part!

      Even now though in recent history UK laws are full of statutes that recognised the changes in opinion of the electorate and the fact that opinions do change. Hanging, abortion, gay marriage etc. ect. All are signs of people becoming more accepting of others choices.

      To think though that in 2018 in a place such as Holyrood the fact you expressed an opinion more than 10 years ago that might now appear out of step with the mainstream means you are not fit to be a minister is totally ridiculous.

      Racism is unacceptable though it wasn’t always so, but even now it still doesn’t seem to be unacceptable in the Tory party as so many of their elected members get away with it.

      There are a lot of skeletons hiding in cupboards within that particular party. The idiots that voted against Gillian Martin need there heads examined for there is nothing like having your own skeletons exposed that will leave some of them looking very silly.

      Holyrood should change the rules for they make NO SENSE WHATSOEVER.

    88. British Conservative and Unionist leader for Lizzy`s northern bit, Ruth Davidson, accused the whole Scots race of being vandals and thieves,

      “Usually they put the Scots in a place where nothing can be broken. Or stolen for that matter!”

      said

      British Conservative and Unionist leader for the northern bit Ruth Davidson,

      the act of being racist against your own ethnic group is called Internalized racism,

      quite common amongst the yoon and BBC and has been a stumbling block for black liberation in America,

      so not trivial,

      sack her now.

    89. r.esquierdo says:

      Bring it on I have been ready since October 2014. It took me a while to stop greetin and draw masel the gither

    90. H Scott says:

      The killer stat is 67% saying when the next referendum should be held rather than not held at all. That’s the latent maximum Yes vote as things stand.

    91. Gfaetheblock says:

      Thepnr

      No one voted against Gillian Martin. Sturgeon rescinded the job offer due to her racist and transphobic blog.

    92. Croompenstein says:

      Sturgeon rescinded the job offer

      Eh, First Minister to you.. 😀

    93. Ken says:

      I’m in England reading a left Labour blog. It tells me that Labour is going to join the TORIES in Aberdeen to run the council. Tell me that it’s not true. Please.

    94. Brian Doonthetoon says:

      Hi Gfaetheblock at 6:26 pm.

      You observed,

      “Thepnr

      No one voted against Gillian Martin. Sturgeon rescinded the job offer due to her racist and transphobic blog.”

      You have, obviously, not read the blog from 10 years ago that was cited. There was nothing in it that was “racist and transphobic”.

      It was a piece of satire, exposing the thinking of college managements, in a market competing for ‘bums on seats’.

    95. jfngw says:

      Tracked down the Jackson Carlaw quote of Gillian Martins blog, his quote is not quite what is written. It is a list of how the waiters categorise their clients – ‘According to the waiters (all black ghetto New Orleans lads to a man) the tippers ranked thus:’

      The blog is here:

      https://web.archive.org/web/20120107161709/http://misssymartin.blogspot.com/2007/03/devil-in-green-dress.html

      BBC used this quote to disparage First Minister – they have either not read it or are complicit with Labour/Tories of hiding the truth.

    96. jfngw says:

      Just to add, do Labour and the Tories think we will not search out the facts and the quotes accurately?

      Once again they are found to be wanting, misusing quotes by selective editing, and effectively not being truthful. Who would have thought it!

    97. ronnie anderson says:

      Gillian Martins name as a junior minister not going forward for royal assent lol Welcome Mr Trump & your racist views

    98. Gfaetheblock says:

      Brian,

      I have read the blog (via Catriona Stewart on twitter). I get what she was trying to do, but the language used were hers, the articulation of the ideas were hers and there was no quotes or other signal the suggest this was not hery words. I don’t know if she believes all that she wrote, but what she wrote was (by her own admission) not acceptable, hence why she deleted it. This is no some silly wee student writing, but a middle aged professional.

    99. crazycat says:

      @ Ken at 6.49

      It tells me that Labour is going to join the TORIES in Aberdeen to run the council. Tell me that it’s not true. Please.

      They did that more than a year ago, after the May 2017 council elections. They (9 councillors) were suspended from the party almost immediately, but continued to form the council administration. (Elsewhere, SLab and the Tories have less formal arrangements, which they have got away with; in Aberdeen it’s a formal coalition, I believe.)

      It’s come up again now, because SLab have finally got round to making a non-decision about whether to un-suspend or expel them – by passing the buck to the UK party.

      This not only confirms their “branch office” status, but also the divide between the “leadership” (Richard Leonard etc) and the old guard (Anne Begg, Hugh Pennington, Catherine Stihler and others). RL and co maybe (it’s hard to tell) want to expel them; AB and co see nothing wrong with the coalition (it keeps the SNP out + gets round the awkward fact that the voters rejected large numbers of SLab candidates, including the previous council leader).

    100. Holly Teine says:

      @Ken in England – the Labour Party regularly team up with the Tories in Scotland. The ex leader of Scottish Labour recommended Labour supporters vote Tory in at least one election in seats that Labour weren’t in with a chance, in order to keep out another political party, the SNP. They run councils together, and are in cahoots. In fact, there’s a really good graphic going around for the “Conservative and Labour Unionist Party” as they stand together on so many issues.

      Re: the poll. I was thinking that perhaps only Indy supporters would want another referendum at all, never mind soon, so the just over 50% who do want one could be deemed supporters of Indy. I realised pretty swiftly that there’s probably a good number of Unionists who want a referendum that returns a NO again in order to double down on the crushing of Scotland. Hey ho for that idea!

    101. Croompenstein says:

      @jfngw

      FFS is that the blog the yoons are all frothing about, I just don’t see what all the fuss is about.

      We will witness true homophobic, sectarian behaviour from the yoons on Saturday as they vie for a kiss at Arlene’s arse in Cowdenbeath. The true face of the union will be there for all to see as brother and sister yoon twist there faces in hatred and chant their sectarian bile in the Kingdom of Fife.. 🙁

    102. jfngw says:

      @Croompenstein

      There are two blogs they are quoting, the one I linked to and the one linked to on the Rev twitter feed.

    103. HandandShrimp says:

      The Guardian has Severin wittering on about Gillian Martin’s blog

      in a detailed account of the restaurant tipping culture in New Orleans, her blog spoke of “American Blacks – don’t tip at all or tip next to nothing – to be avoided. The waiters (also black, remember) would do anything to avoid serving a table of blacks …”

      She went on: “American Jews – tip ok but only if you’ve absolutely busted your hump and everything was faultless in the extreme. Often complain about the quality of the food, and then the small portions (Copyright: Woody Allen)”

      And: “American Christian Whites – tip well (a combination of feeling guilty about slavery and wanting rub their comparative wealth in your face).” [sic]

      Now it seems to me Gillian Martin is recounting infirmation conveyed to her by a black waiter/waitress about the tipping habits of US customers.

      Is that racist? If so then the who can do any social studies or marketing analysis into any social group because clearly we are expected to pretend there are no differences.

      Actually if that is the breadth and depth of it then I really can’t see what the fuss is about. Are black waitresses not allowed to make jokes about white customers feeling guilty about the slavery thing? Who says they can’t? White male middle class journalists?

    104. Famous15 says:

      Have read Gillian Martin’s blogs and they are innocent . That they were written ten years ago is only a reminder of the change in the chattering classes.

      The irony is that she was satirising political correctness in one and describing working class exploitation in the other. The ten years only serves to remind us of a world moved on.

      Please reinstate and face down the hypocrites who are the real wicked ones.

    105. Meg merrilees says:

      All this fuss about Gillian Martin but we’ve got Tory councillors that think it’s ok to post
      photos of ‘black people’ on an aeroplane with a ‘white’ air steward and the caption ..’ no I’m not your lunch”.

      Supposedly they’ve been on a course and all is now ok.
      Send Gillian on a course about not reposting satire, and get Ruth Davidson to stand in front of the cameras saying that she has apologised to all those offended about the post and all will be ok.

      Ah, just a minute, it’s an ess-en-pee faux pas – well it’s obvious, she’ll have to be imprisoned in a cage, suspended on the walls of Berwick Castle for the next 10 years… nothing less will do.

    106. jfngw says:

      @HandandShrimp

      It is quite obviously a recounting of the waiters attitude (she was not a waiter), the intro to the list makes it clear:

      ‘According to the waiters (all black ghetto New Orleans lads to a man) the tippers ranked thus:’

      It looks like the usual SNP witch-hunt from the MSM, doing the unionist bidding as per usual.

      Stopped reading the guardian, Carroll not a ‘journalist’ worth five minutes of my time. In fact his writing stopped me buying any of their output after 40 years of supporting it (the Observer actually as I was never really a dailly paper purchaser).

    107. Terence callachan says:

      The elephant in the room is the huge number of English people living in Scotland and it is an absolutely huge number you won’t find another country in the world that has 18% of its population consisting of people from one single other country.
      To allow English a say in Scottish independence is suicidal for independence.
      English people like any other people in the world love their country no matter where they are living and they will be loyal to their country ,you may get a small number of English people in Scotland who have decided to vote for Scottish independence but that is for unusual reasons such as they have a Scottish husband or wife or some other close family connection nearly all English people living in Scotland voted against Scottish independence in 2014 they made up a third of the NO vote and they will vote NO again if given the chance ,in fact they will always vote NO.
      There is no chance of Scotland becoming independent if you allow people who come from the country you want to be independent from to vote on the matter particularly because England has over 50 million people compared to Scotlands 5 million and they can and do install English people in jobs here in Scotland whenever they want to ,just look at the English MP,s in the Scottish parliament who don’t even live in Scotland it’s a disgrace,a tragedy .
      It sickens me that trusted people like weegingerdug keep saying that everyone living in Scotland must have a vote on Scottish independence including English people when he knows full well that there are many many people living in Scotland who do not get to vote in a Scottish independence referendum or any elections because of their status of residence and their nationality .
      To vote in an election in Scotland you have to meet certain conditions and Scotland should apply those conditions in its independence referendum thus excluding people who are English
      It is scandalous that English people get to vote on whether or not England should continue to control Scotland

    108. HandandShrimp says:

      I am a bit concerned that the incessant navel gazing will result in very good candidates not being selected because they said something controversial years ago and we will be left with all the posts filled in every walk of life with right-on incompetents who have never had an original thought in their lives…

      or worse, the general public, who are far less interested in this intellectual wanking than the media and the various self appointed guardians of the politically correct, will elect someone like Trump who sets out to topple as many windmills as he or she can see as a complete over-reaction to this tedious intellectual self abuse.

      I am not even going to go there on the transgender thing because there is clearly a serious bun fight going on between feminists and transgender advocates and I for one am not getting in the middle that as I am on a lose lose from all sides.

    109. Ottomanboi says:

      It would be interesting to have a demographic break down of the 34% never.
      I am meeting people of my age who have switched from yes to no. The future after Brexit will be bleak for many young people and they are cautiously sticking with the status quo. Project Fear mark2 in action.
      This mountain is just getting steeper. The engineered political stasis since the EU referendum has not helped. Normal polite opposition cuts no mustard.

    110. Sinky says:

      jfngw says @ 7.14 pm:

      This is the “rascist” blog the BBC says is offensive?

      Gilliam Marin is quoting what Black New Orleans waiters says about tipping.

      The world has gone mad. Oh wait here is Jackson Carlaw’s racist remarks from 2005

      Go to @R_Davidson1980 to see the Scotsman report
      4h4 hours ago

    111. HandandShrimp says:

      Terence

      It is 8% not 18% and many English people will vote for independence because this is their home now and they don’t want to leave the EU nor do they want a Tory Government. I don’t have a problem with that.

    112. jfngw says:

      @Sinky

      Read the Scotsman! never…NEVer…NEVER.

      I’ll leave it to others to highlight anything interesting they might print, I don’t expect I will be inconvenienced too often.

    113. Clapper57 says:

      Wow England are actually bottling it….Wahahaha….would be nice to see Belgium get an own goal…wahahaha.

      Ma Ma Ma Ma…me no want to play with the big boys….me want easy play time.

      Bang goes the national pride with this performance….fear is a terrible thing.. get through the sneaky way…where’s Panama hat trick man….sookin his dummy…..

    114. Clapper57 says:

      ps. if England get a goal it will be an error….on their part.

      Someone didn’t stick to the master plan….the bottle it campaign.

    115. Clapper57 says:

      If England get a goal …it means someone fcuked up.

      Masterplan not adhered to….i.e. the bottle it campaign.

    116. Legerwood says:

      Terence callachan @ 8.22pm
      “”The elephant in the room is the huge number of English people living in Scotland and it is an absolutely huge number you won’t find another country in the world that has 18% of its population consisting of people from one single other country.””

      As someone else has pointed out it is 8%.

      As to not finding ‘another country in the world…’ about 70 percent of Jordan’s population is of Palestinian origin, almost two million of them in refugee camps, but generally they are well integrated into Jordanian society as indeed are many, many of the English people who live in Scotland

    117. Clapper57 says:

      Ooops sorry for duplicate English masterplan posts…though to be fair slight variation between two….Hee Hee.

    118. Rock says:

      I can say with 100% confidence that Nicola will not dare hold an illegal independence referendum before Brexit has been completed.

      Before there is a flood of posters claiming that Scotland can hold an independence referendum whenever it wants to, the fact is that it has never yet done so without Westminster’s approval.

      You can only prove me wrong if and when it does.

    119. Holly Teine says:

      Tired of people like Terence callachan. Some of the strongest advocates for Indy were born in England, myself included, and I’d feel more than somewhat let down if this daft idea of his happened. Not that it will, there are a great many more in the movement with a bit of sense.

    120. Dave McEwan Hill says:

      Terence callachan at 8.22

      No,it is not. We have plenty of them supporting YES and it is growing steadily. The older retired English among us voted NO in a little more than the percentage of the older retired Scots. We have lots of English people in our YES Cowal circle.
      We lost the referendum because not enough Scots voted YES. End of.

    121. Thepnr says:

      @Holly Teine

      The likes of Terrance callachan and Rock that post on Wings have but a single message and post that self same message over and over and over again.

      It’s drivel and can safely be ignored.

    122. Dave McEwan Hill says:

      Rock – cock, frock, sock, talk, walk,mock, dock, hock, hawk,jock,lock,knock.
      So much opportunity for a pithy limerick or two. Anybody up for it?

    123. stewartb says:

      Sinky @ 8:31 pm and jfngw:

      You write: ‘This is the “rascist” blog the BBC says is offensive? Gilliam Marin is quoting what Black New Orleans waiters says about tipping'”

      Thanks for the alert. It literally took me three minutes of searching online to confirm this is a well trodden subject. See this for example: “Is it true that waiters dislike serving black/African-American patrons because of bad tipping?”

      Source: https://www.quora.com/Is-it-true-that-waiters-dislike-serving-black-African-American-patrons-because-of-bad-tipping

      This contains a lengthy thread from as recently as 2016 on a topic that I had absolutely no awareness of (why should I?) – it contains some 75 btl contributions debating this (acknowledged) ‘sensitive subject’.

      I make no judgement on the veracity or importance of the contention but simply point out its wider currency.

    124. louis.b.argyll says:

      Donnywho,
      ‘I so want to watch Fluffy being helicoptered out of the UK Government in Scotland Office!’

      Sigh-gone?

      Haven’t even got my coat off.

    125. Clapper57 says:

      @ Thepnr says @ 9.26pm

      “It’s drivel and can safely be ignored”.
      —————————————————–

      Yeh shut up Rock & Terrance, I, that is Clapper57, want to talk about the football tonight OK…..hee hee hee….

      I’ll get me football strip as opposed to me coat !

      Have a good evening Thepnr

    126. Hamish100 says:

      rock –you aint important enough

    127. Scotspatriot says:

      My Family has a very good friend in his 80’s. He lives in the West Highlands. He was born in Yorkshire. I have never met a man more determined to see Scottish Independence than him.
      He simply can’t understand why a native Scot would vote against his own Country’s Self Determination.
      Neither can I !

    128. Gfaetheblock says:

      Stewart’s & Sinky

      That is the blog that where she propagates racial stereotypes.

      This is the blog where she uses offensive language to describe various minorities in higher education

      https://twitter.com/dsandersontimes/status/1012295549805002753?s=21

      Two blogs, the later is the bigger issue I think, neither are great.

    129. mike cassidy says:

      Gfaetheblock

      Clearly you are the sort of knuckledragger who thinks the Pub Landlord is real.

      http://archive.is/RhG5e

    130. Croompenstein says:

      @Gfaetheblock

      One more time with feeling…

      FFS is that the blog the yoons are all frothing about, I just don’t see what all the fuss is about.

      We will witness true homophobic, sectarian behaviour from the yoons on Saturday as they vie for a kiss at Arlene’s arse in Cowdenbeath. The true face of the union will be there for all to see as brother and sister yoon twist there faces in hatred and chant their sectarian bile in the Kingdom of Fife.. ?

    131. Dr Jim says:

      I know a Rangers guy who wouldn’t vote for Independence because that would mean (in his mind) Rangers would never get to play in the English premier league

      There’s stupid and there’s Wow!

      But if there’s him there must be more (talk about scary)

    132. mike cassidy says:

      And just when you thought it was all over and it would be safe to walk the streets of Cowdenbeath

      There will be a second march at 6pm.

      WTF

      http://archive.is/cz8a5

    133. Ian Brotherhood says:

      Anent references to Vietnam, ‘sigh-gone’ (ha-ha!) etc, has anyone else seen a recently released documentary called ‘The Vietnam War’? I’ve been watching it via Netflix and it is soo-fekkin-perb.

      Maybe it’s just me, being a nerd who grew up in that era, but it’s so detailed, wonderful still photography as well as footage, ‘secret’ tapes of Kennedy, LBJ etc. It’s in 10 parts and they’re all approx 90 mins so it’s clearly a major project. I don’t know if it’s ever been on terrestrial telly as I don’t watch it but I heartily recommend it to anyone who isn’t quite sure what that whole ‘Vietnam thing’ was all about.

    134. Thepnr says:

      @mike cassidy

      “He marched them up to the top of the hill and he marched them down again”

    135. Gfaetheblock says:

      Mike Cassidy – isn’t he? As the FM has ended Martin’s ministerial career today, is she a ‘knuckle dragger as well?

      Croompenstien – as I said above, I can see what she was trying to do, but done in poor taste and poor judgement. You might not agree with the result, but can you really not see what that problem is here?

      The biggest concern is how tone deaf the SNP machine have been here. Who advised the FM on this, this is such an obvious own goal and was public knowledge?

    136. stewartb says:

      Gfaetheblock @ 9:47 pm & Sinky

      Re this example of a blog by Gillian Martin:

      https://twitter.com/dsandersontimes/status/1012295549805002753?s=21

      In my view, as is still evident on careful reading for a third time, this is an attempt at satire; it refers time and again to what third parties in management are doing and which the author wishes to expose, to satirise; and for effect, the author uses graphic language to describe the ‘targets’ of the political correct.

      I intend no more comment on this topic. I do not know Ms Martin: I simply wished to promote objectivity and fair play based on the evidence in question, viz. what Ms Martin actually wrote 11 years ago. (This is a person’s reputation and career after all.) But candidly I can’t help rising when I smell the stench of the ‘holier than thou’.

      Best regards Sinky!

    137. Gfaetheblock says:

      Ian b

      It was on bbc4 at xmas, it is excellent. There are other ken burns docs on Netflix, on prohibition and the civil war, equally extensive and excellent.

    138. frogesque says:

      @gfaetheblock: 10.28

      Anything by Ken Burns is well worth watching. Have seen most of his documentaries on PBS.

      Puts the likes of Attenburgh to shame.

    139. mike cassidy says:

      Ian Brotherhood

      I presume this is the Ken Burns series which BBC4 screened
      last year with each 90 minutes edited down to about an hour.

      The Guardian review said this.

      Above all, the Burns brand carries with it a sense of trustworthiness; of a project undertaken with humility, but without an agenda beyond the truth. Maybe it’s this notion, rather than the idea that the Vietnam war is at the root of the US’s divisive apolitical culture, that makes the series seem so important right now.

      http://archive.is/lUyk8

      For, to put it mildly, an alternative assessment.

      http://archive.is/jPgrp

      Me.

      I kept thinking about Frankie Boyle’s comment on American foreign policy.

      “Because not only will America go into your country and kill all your people,” he begins. “But what’s worse I think is they’ll come back twenty years later and make a movie about how killing your people made their soldiers feel sad.”

    140. Dr Jim says:

      This might be breaking news the BBC has just sneaked in

      BAE Systems have won a 20 billion order for the type 26 ships to be built in Adelaide Australia

      Oh but they did say they would be *designed* on the Clyde

    141. boris says:

      Breaking news:

      A new UK Government hub building is to be built, completion before 2020, in the New Waverley site in the centre of Edinburgh.

      It will accomodate up to 3000 UK Civil Servants.

      Around 100 staff presently located in the Scottish Office at Melville Crescent will be relocated and increased in numbers reflecting increased post brexit responsibilities added to the recently expanded remit of the Secretary of State for Scotland who will be charged with delivering the political agenda for the UK government of Scotland.

      Around 2900 Civil Servants will also be relocated from:

      HM Treasury.
      HM Revenue and Customs.
      The Information Commissioner’s Office.
      The Office of the Advocate General.

      The move is designed to kill off once and for all times any chance of Scotland gaining independence.

      https://stv.tv/news/politics/1420907-scotland-office-base-to-be-moved-from-edinburgh/

    142. frogesque says:

      @ Dr Jim 10.46

      Caught some of that report on Shortbread, Newsdrive this afternoon.

      Clyde design, Aussie built. BAE pockets lined.

    143. ben madigan says:

      @ Croompenstein and others who mentioned

      ” true homophobic, sectarian behaviour on Saturday in Cowdenbeath. The true face of the union will be there for all to see as brother and sister yoon twist there faces in hatred and chant their sectarian bile in the Kingdom of Fife”

      I don’t know what to say to the folk of Cowdenbeath, especially as there is apparently going to be another “Walk” at 6.00 pm.
      So that’s the whole day gone and the early evening.

      maybe people could just shut up shops, pubs and cafes for the day and head out somewhere nearby?
      Together with the townsfolk?

      In other words ostracise the orange order and its marches next Saturday. Spend your free time and spending money elsewhere on the day – and spend it back in Cowdenbeath over the following weeks, inviting other people to join you as the “Town that does not support the orange order”

      Would be a temporary loss of takings on the day for the business people but might provide long-term benefits overall for the town.

    144. Sarah says:

      @Ghillie and Deryk fae Yell re Maritime Wingers: I have responded on the previous post to your comments.

    145. Welsh Sion says:

      Guess we haven’t heard from you Clapper57 coz you’re doing a victory jig and celebrating with your Belgian friends … and who could play you!

      But these arrogant Brutish Broadcasting Corporation types never learn do they? A summary of the match by one of their so-called journos turned into the usual clap trap of, “it’s ok that the lads lost tonight, they’ll have an easier game to play against Colombia and then onto the quarter finals where they’ll probably meet Sweden who, as eny fule kno, are no great force at football.”

      Obviously, they have selected memories of having the same ideas in 2016 once the three lions had disposed of Iceland in the Euros. Didn’t that go well? 😀

      And in case Scotland missed it, the Wales Office (aka the UK Government’s Office in wales) is also sporting (sorry!) a cross of St George for the duration of Ingerlund’s stay in Russia. Seems like Cairns and Mundell have some joint cunning plan to rub up the natives the wrong way, eh? Likewise, apparently No. 10 Downing Street.

      And how do the babus account for all this nationalistic (which as we know, is not nationalistic) fervour on behalf of the England team? Yep, their a home nation in this family of nations of the Disunited Kingdump which is so precious and we’re obliged to tug our forelocks and celebrate and support this team. Aye, right – but did any of you see any sign of a red dragon flag flying over No. 10 Downing Street during the 2016 Euros? Me neither.

      Theresa has even pledged [sic] to fly the cross of St George if England get through to the Women’s World Cup next year. The fact that Wales are handier placed to do so than the Englishwomen seems to have passed them by – according to a Downing Street spokesperson: “the pledge would apply to all nations who qualify”.

    146. Welsh Sion says:

      Apologies. Last part of para. 1 should read,

      “- and who would blame you!”

    147. Southern Rock says:

      Watching Question Time and again Scotland Wales and N Ireland completely ignored.

      Brexit is about England.

      How we feel is completely irrelevant.

      We can only hope that this feeling of injustice that we feel, will spread to all right thinking Scots.

      This “England at all costs” mentality does my head right in.

      I am past the angry stage.

    148. yesindyref2 says:

      So it’s already 66% who want a Referendum. That’ll shut SiU up.

    149. louis.b.argyll says:

      Do you want to go to the supermarket?

      No.

      Do you want to eat tonight?

      Yes.

      Will you go to the supermarket against your will?

      No.

      Do you want to go to the supermarket?

      Yes.

    150. Ian Brotherhood says:

      @Gfae, MC, Frog –

      I’m only on Ep. 4 but already got two major ‘hits’ from it: first, the ‘burning monk’ (‘Thich Quang Duc’, spelling from Wiki) was burning as I was born. Blimey!

      Second, seeing John Negroponte (in Ep 3) making some quip or anecdote: John Negroponte was one of the dudes sitting directly behind Colin Powell as he wagged a phial of talcum powder at representatives of this planet’s nations in the UN, trying to get approval for genocide. If memory serves, our very own Jack Straw appeared at the same sitting. That’d be the same Jack Straw involved in denying the activity which made it into some ‘news’ here-and-there earlier today…news which confirms what Craig Murray was telling us all along…

      ‘No point delving into history – it’s over and done and that’s that.’

      Zatright, eh?

      😉

    151. Thepnr says:

      See in ten years time I might decide to stand as a candidate for Holyrood as a member of Any-other Party.

      Then no doubt some wee toerag will come along and expose all the reasons that I couldn’t possibly stand because I once posted an opinion of this or that on Wings Over Scotland in 2014 during the referendum campaign.

      What a load of shite, unlike Gillian Martin there is no way I would have apologised for anything I thought or wrote with regards politics or political views. The only thing I would apologise for is abuse I might have given any individual in a heated moment during a disagreement with them here on Wings. So taht would have been done and dusted.

      We’re in a really weird place now, the likes of Katie Hopkins gets massive coverage with her extreme racism and that’s OK but if you write in the words of a black waitress in New Orleans then they become your words and it’s not OK.

      Hypocrites!

      Orwell wrote a novel of the future set in 1984 and to believe that the reality of his imagination is bearing fruit is both unbelievable and just a wee bit scary.

    152. Clapper57 says:

      @
      Welsh Sion says:
      28 June, 2018 at 11:33 pm
      “Guess we haven’t heard from you Clapper57 coz you’re doing a victory jig and celebrating with your Belgian friends … and who could play you”!……

      ————————————————————–

      Welsh Sion…glad you corrected it to ““- and who would blame you”!

      Thought for a minute you were taking my “I’ll get me football strip as opposed to me coat” literally and you thought I was some dandy handy footballer…..no not so much celebrating with Belgians more commiserating that they actually played enough to score a goal…as opposed to taking easy way and playing like a junior team of one legged cowardly custards….they do say though be careful what you wish for ……..Well Hello Columbia meet your new super duper fan.

    153. louis.b.argyll says:

      Boris,
      Re planned UK Gov expansion into Scotland.

      Excellent news!
      We’ll have them surrounded.

    154. cynicalHighlander says:

      Terence callachan

      Fuck Off

      Get your racism and and stick it up your arse.

    155. louis.b.argyll says:

      The UK Tory hegemony is grooming Scotland, setting us up for the crime of the century.

      They will steal billions from our land and environment, use our energy to subsidise their industries and keep our infrastructure fifteen years behind England’s by denying us the purse strings.

    156. Thepnr says:

      @cynicalHighlander

      I’m with you on that, many fail to realise that the MSM would love nothing better than to expose Wings as a hotbed of Anti-Englishness.

      I reckon there onto plums and are scrapping the bottom of the barrel with that tactic.

    157. louis.b.argyll says:

      Thepnr, your last paragraph there, a reason to go early, before any convoluted nonsense and ‘things are going to be great in the UK, if you just wait another five or ten years, honest..’

    158. louis.b.argyll says:

      Thepnr, the previous..Oh never mind.

    159. Thepnr says:

      @louis.b.argyll

      Think I know what you meant, get in there with the head down 🙂

    160. cynicalHighlander says:

      Thepnr

      Ta they need challenged every time they post sooner rather than later. Nobody in the world had a choice of where their mother was going to drop them so racist comments have no place anywhere or anytime.

    161. TJenny says:

      O/T – weird or what. Last night I signed Doug Daniels’ ‘Expel The Aberdeen Labour Nine’ petition, which he set up (a bit tongue in cheek, I think) to oppose SLabour’s ‘Support The Slabour Nine in Aberdeen’ petition. Anyhoo, I’ve received an email from Change. org saying:

      ‘ my name, we’re missing your name (from the SLab Support petition)Since you visited, this petition now has 534 supporters.

      Now I’ve been checking both pages to see the numbers go up – DD’s expel one is about double Slab’s :-), but how and why are Change.org contacting me to sign two opposing petitions?

      Is it just another data/email mining outfit?

    162. Thepnr says:

      @cynicalHighlander

      Your post at 12:14 was great. No mealy mouthing there it stated your opinion loud and clear and I heard it.

      That’s what we all should do, no more being wall flowers or making excuses we really do have to be louder. How else to make people listen?

      Your use of the sweary words was the perfect example of them being effective and we’ve had discussions on here about that before. Used at the right time they are powerful.

      Stirred me for sure as the passion was obvious and you nailed you target, thanks CH.

    163. Still Positive says:

      The pnr @ 1.26

      Totally agree.

      We need to go for indyref before we are destroyed as a country.

    164. Meg merrilees says:

      Frogesque, Dr Jim

      that’ll be the BAE that has Teresa May’s husband’s company as a major investor then…

    165. Meg merrilees says:

      I’m not a football aficionado and even I can see that England deliberately lost the game tonight to be in the opposite side from Brazil in the next bit of the tournament. Cowards!

      I loved the euphemistic phrase -” Joe Bloggs ( insert their captains name – I can’t remember it, the one who’s been scoring the goals) is resting for this game”…

      Heard an interesting report on the radio today about 3-sided football where 3 teams of 6 a side play on an hexagonal pitch and the aim is not to score goals – it was their World Cup and for the next one, it’s coming to England in 2020.
      Anyhow, this man had been playing recently in a foreign country where there were teams of all nationalities. There was even a man called Connor O’ Keefe, a Brit ( ?), playing for Spain but the team that won, the Romads consisted of two men from Rome, two men from Madrid and two men from England. So to sum up he said,
      ..”England has already won one World Cup this year, let’s hope it will be two shortly.”

      Good old BBC double standards on show again.

    166. cirsium says:

      @Ian Brotherhood, 10.18pm

      this is an interesting article by John Pilger on the Ken Burns documentary series on Vietnam

      https://consortiumnews.com/2017/09/21/the-killing-of-history/

    167. Ghillie says:

      Iain at 11.39 am

      I totally agree.

      If our second referendum on Independence is not successful I absolutely do not believe that will be the end of it. Who gives up after only two battles?

      I for one will never give up on Scotland.

      I have picked up the baton from my parents and indeed my ancestors, and my sons are long since in this frae and will continue long after I am dead. And this is echoed by every one of their friends – from many walks in life and many are new Scots.

      Scotland’s NEED for Independence is NOT going to go away. That need will only grow stronger and stronger.

      All our Yes voters are not going to go away either. Folk recognising the NEED for Independence will continue to grow.

      Our Independence-minded politicians are astute and will choose the optimum time to hold the second referendum on Independence.

      And I do hope and pray that brings us to Independence as soon as possible.

    168. Ghillie says:

      Cameron b @ 2.27 pm

      Yes.

    169. gus1940 says:

      O/T

      Must read article on Newsnet re the Great Forex Rigging Scandal on the day of The Brexit Referendum.

    170. gus1940 says:

      Re the political and media crucifixion Of Gillian Martin over her ‘tipping ‘ comments.

      Surely all she was doing re that was reporting the comments/views of US waiting staff.

      Note the word ‘reporting’ as that is what our heroes in the MSM do.

      She was reporting the views of individuals not her own views.

      It can be argued that while the original blog and the tipping one showed perhaps a lack of judgement they did not show any signs of the writer herself holding evil views.

    171. Sarah says:

      @Ghillie 5 a.m. I completely agree – never give up. Carry on holding referendums as long as necessary [and use them for other issues too, as the Swiss, the Irish and probably many other countries do]. It’s called democracy, isn’t it?

      What we have [every 4 or 5 years one party swaps with the other and in between we are ignored, and paid for the privilege!] is stuck in one form and never has been a sensible way to go on.

    172. Les Wilson says:

      On EBCs this morning, Gary Robertson asked the question “should we reinstate national Service?” This follows French restarting it in some form.

      Here, I wonder if this follows the lack of Scots joining the British army. I remember an army officer saying ( reported on BBC” that the lack of Scots signing up despite a recruitment drive was “very unusual, had in fact never happened before.”

      Westminster loves Scots in their army. With Independence on the horizon it makes me doubt their intentions.

    173. Les Wilson says:

      Ref previous,
      they are now making it subject of the phone call-in this morning.
      Would start at age 16.
      Remember that means our grand kids could be called up to fight.
      A very Westminster project.
      Also seems set up by EBCs as they have already have had a woman to indicates it would do good. Not in my name.

    174. Les Wilson says:

      Ref previous post,
      They are now making it subject of the phone call-in this morning.
      Would start at age 16.
      Remember that means our grand kids could be called up to fight.
      A very Westminster project.
      Also seems set up by EBCs as they have already have had a woman to indicates it would do good. Not in my name.

    175. starlaw says:

      Conscription failed last time round. Some conscripts posted to Malaya went on patrol without guns as officers were more afraid of them than they were of the enemy.

    176. Ghillie says:

      Sarah, did you ever find out who the distinguised gent with flowing locks who sailed under the Scottish Ensign and altered course to salute you waving your Saltire is?

    177. Shinty says:

      As others have said – AYE TILL I DIE.

    178. Chick McGregor says:

      At some point the line of distinction between ‘Softly, softly catchee monkee’ and ‘Spinelessness’ becomes blurred.

    179. Ken500 says:

      Trump has stopped joint military operations with South Korea. He professes to want a detente with Russia. Intended meetings with Putin. Trump realises the US is spending too much on redundant weaponry. Half of Federal taxes raises. In deep debt. 4 times more than China, (1.2Billion pop) much more than than Russia. (Pop150million). They are less militaristic than US has been. They peace in the world.

      Gorbachev/Putin et al have released more people to self determination and freedom than any other world leaders. 150Million people. The Russian pop has halved from the days of the USSR. (300 Million people). Even if it was because there was little alternative. The economy was becoming difficult to maintain.

      Many changes from 1990’s till now. Poland, Ukraine, Lithuania, Latvia etc. became self governing. The Berlin Wall came down 1989. Many changes in Europe. Putin is a great Statesman who wants peace. He has improved the Russian economy, reduced poverty and brought prosperity to Russia. That is why the Russian rate him higher than other world leader. 80%.+ Putin wants peace in the Middle East nearer to the Russian border.

      There had to be Arms limitation agreements in the 1980’s. The Arms Race was bankrupting the US and Russia, Both countries. Funds spent on redundant weaponry could have been used to improve the world economy. Not destroy it. Can Trump and Putin come to a deal or arrangement? Making for a more peaceful world, Agreements can often come for weird and unexpected sources. The have in the past. Reagan/Gorbachev.

      Thatcher even got in on the act for cheap publicity, but caused the Falklands war. Glasnost and Perestroika. Changed direction in the world. Putin supported Scottish Indepenence. Supports self determination. Did not approve of the Cameron manipulation. Russia can improve further economically. There is still much bureaucracy holding it back. Still regarded with suspicion. Russia saved the West in 11WW. 26Million Russians died.

      The US compensated Vietnam for what it had done. Gave many £Billions of dollars. To try and being restitution. Reconstruction, Vietnam/Asia are growth areas in the world. Beautiful countries. There have had conflict between them. China has been invaded violently by Britain and the Japanese, Burma a military state. Trying to reform and improve, Still troubled. Asia has expanding markets, Growth.

      The UK/US/France has never reconstituted Iraq or other for all the damage they have done. They have damaged and betrayed the Middle East for over 100 years. The Balfour Agreenpment. The plight of the Palestinians detained illegally in camps with no hope. Disgraceful. Never ending war etc. Maiming and killing millions of people.

      Britain and France (US) carved up the Middle East. They have been bombing it to bits for years taking its resources and denying the people the vote or democracy. The Tories have put naive Tory William on the front publicity stunt. The auld granny would not have gone. The Royals are supposed to be totally non political and unbiased heads of State. They are always interfering. Their extravagant income increased again while people are being sanctioned and starved to death. Charles £20Million pays £2Million in taxes. Getting more off the State. Total spend £400Million. An extravagance. Ridiculous.

      It is worrying there are now calls for increases in mititsry spending when the world cannot afford it. More redundant weaponry. No funds for the economy or essential service. The EU will resist not likely to countenance it. They try to keep a balance and live within their means successfully. Some beautiful, fairer, equal more prosperous counties.

      The EU was formed after the 11WW to stop,wars and starvation in Eurooe. In that they have been relatively successful. The Tories are trying to cause a recession. In order to make them and their cronies exceptionally wealthy at the expense of others, May and Johnston et al are corrupt. Johnston is a complete greedy criminal. The lies about Russia RT are just incomprehensible. Fabrication for affect.

      The Westminster unionists are illegally sanctioning, starving and killing people. There are calls to raise arms spending. They do not have the funding Trident £100Billion is a total, complete, waste. The Race to the bottom. Patrolling the seas illegally. Trolling the world. Westminster unionists treat the migrants and refugees badly illegally detsining them for years. Illegally deporting citizens, Chucking good people out of Scotland. Incompresensibly. Just a disgrace,

    180. Breeks says:


      Sarah says:
      29 June, 2018 at 7:46 am
      @Ghillie 5 a.m. I completely agree – never give up. Carry on holding referendums as long as necessary…

      It tells you all you need to know about Unionism that they will fight vociferously to suppress democracy and prevent a referendum from happening, but run a mile rather than seize hold of their apparent majority, simply maintain that apparent majority, and actually win that referendum.

      Ask yourself whether that is the strategy of the democrat defending free speech, free will, and freedom of choice, or the overseer crushing dissent and imposing his will as absolute.

      Unionism is defying gravity. It is apparently winning in the opinion polls with an argument it cannot sustain nor even articulate. That truth is so stark in its silhouette that even a neutral opinion begins to harbour suspicions about the objectivity of the opinion poll. How can it be? This isn’t logical. Since our media is so corrupt, why should we suppose our pollsters are any different? They are the same “Establishment” aren’t they? (Let me stress, I’m not saying the polls are corrupt, but I am predisposed to believe “something” just isn’t quite right here).

      Just like Unionists ducking out the argument, there’s another a good issue to ponder… Given pro Independence arguments get such little air time and invariably suffer such hostile exposure, precisely what is it that puts the same idea in all our heads that the opinion polls must be wrong? What is it that’s making us all think Independence should be ahead?

      Do you see it? The Unionists can see the same writing on the wall as we do. We Yessers are behind, but we think we should be ahead. They are ahead, but think they rightfully ought to be losing. They don’t want a referendum because its their own suspicions they don’t want to see tested. We want a referendum because we do.

      The Nemesis of Unionism is truth, because truth is the Nemesis of all propaganda. Independence is not a question of if, but when, and the when might not be very far away. Just ask any Unionist.

    181. Ken500 says:

      The Tories have cut the Military personnel from 100,000 to 80,000. Wanted to build up a Reserve force. There has been a lack of recruits. (TA style) Average spend on Defence. £40Billion . Redundant weaponry that never gets delivered. More ordered. They now want to raise it £20Billion. They do not have the funds. EU membership kept joint military spending down. Shared Defence costs one if the advantages. Leaving could cost another £20Billion? a year on Defence, £Billions more in any case. Westminster unionists making money out of other people’s misery and killing people. Typical. Illegal wars, financial fraud and tax evasion. £Trns in debt, Ruining the economy.

    182. Ghillie says:

      Gillian Martin MSP,

      Thank you for your honesty, candour and heartfelt regret.

      I do believe your aged comments have, for political advantage, been taken untruthfully out of context. And I know, I for one, have matured in the last 10 years. Surely everyone has. Though I do get that what you said historically was satire. Where does that leave us?

      Surely that is a million miles away from the bigotry and racialism and lying that has been called out and IGNORED by the Liberal Democrats, Labour and the Tories in Scotland not to mention the press.

      However, quite rightly, for now, the SNP are taking the hardest line possible as always for the integrity of the party, hard as that is on some of our loved and valued members.

      I can not imagine that was an easy decision to take by the party but I do get the impression that you understand and can cope with the political fallout for now.

      Hell will freeze over before Scotland sees the other parties ever taking such responsibility for their paid staff or members.

      However pet, your day will come =)

    183. Highland Wifie says:

      Regards the suggestion that national service is reintroduced, it wouldn’t surprise me if it was a ‘spiffing wheeze’ to ensure our young people are available for any little venture WM chooses to start. After all it won’t be their little darlings in the front line you can be sure.

      Scots youngsters have traditionally gone into the forces in response to lack of other opportunities to get three square meals a day and a secure job. Now that Scotland is presenting them with an alternative, a choice not to have to do that, the numbers are falling. Most of the young people (men particularly) I met in school who wanted to go into the army had chaotic home lives and limited opportunities. The discipline and regimentation of being in a military environment appealed to them. It gave them a purpose. There will always be people who enjoy that life but it shouldn’t be forced on them due to poverty and lack of other options.

      Re. Gillian Martin. Just another victim of the double standards practised by our unionist politicians, ably supported by the corrupt media. If you really are a nasty racist with vile views you get a free pass but if you have SNP after your name and you wrote something ten years ago that takes a punt at political correctness and hypocrisy then ‘must resign’. Pathetic.

    184. Graeme says:

      This thing about flying the St George Cross in Edinburgh during the world cup is just there to wind us up it’s petty and it’s childish and to coin a new word Mundellesq,

      The vast majority of Scots don’t support the England football team in fact most Scots will support any team playing England that’s just how it is and they know that and I don’t particularly care if they like it but nonetheless I think even they aren’t stupid enough to believe that flying the England flag is gonna change that one little bit so why do it, They’re trolling us simple as that.

      In an independent Scotland we should fly the flag of any nation playing England be it football, rugby, or whatever on all our government & public buildings as a reminder of how petty and nasty the unionists were and how lucky we are to be shot of them

    185. Luigi says:

      Graeme says:

      29 June, 2018 at 9:02 am

      This thing about flying the St George Cross in Edinburgh during the world cup is just there to wind us up it’s petty and it’s childish and to coin a new word Mundellesq,

      And you know what would really wind Mundell and his BritNat cronies more than anything?

      Seeeing lots of England flags flying on the indy marches. “English scots for independence!” A few Rangers tops here and there would rub salt into their wounds. All Under One Banner. 🙂

    186. orri says:

      Thing is, the Scotland Office were last hear to mutter that they aren’t flying the English Flag in Scotland due to all the scaffolding making it impossible.

      https://inews.co.uk/news/scotland/scotland-office-england-flag-world-cup-matchdays/

      However, the English flag will not be flown above the Scotland Office’s base in Edinburgh, as building works on the exterior mean the flag poles cannot be safely accessed.

    187. Luigi says:

      RE: Gillian Martin:

      Sorry folks, but SNP politicians have to maintain a much higher set of standards than any other politicians, particularly the BritNats). Fairness doesn’t come into it. That’s just the way of it.

    188. Luigi says:

      Breeks says:

      29 June, 2018 at 8:39 am

      Unionism is defying gravity

      What goes up, must come down. 🙂

    189. orri says:

      Think the drop in Scottish recruits was started by Cameron “rebalancing” the make up of forces by binning/combining regiments. Not that bad an idea given they felt they had to lock up the local regiments when dealing with protests in Glasgow.

      If that’s had an effect on actual recruiting then all the chat about people being unwilling to serve Scotland rather than the Britain seems dubious.

      However don’t let them fool you. The last time “National Service” was touted it was more like “National Servitude”. Think of it like YOP schemes gone viral where young people are forced into what would be lower paid jobs seen to benefit the nation except that the tax payer picks up the tab.

    190. Ottomanboi says:

      Anti-Scottish tendencies and how to recognise them.
      References to the ‘S’ country should be cut to a bare minimum. Avoid uttering the name SNP. Assume ‘the country’ or ‘the nation’ is always UK or England. Denigrate or disparage life, weather, culture, history, customs or anything else available to thumb down existence on England’s northern rim. However, sing the praises of the not particularly Scottish, HQ in London, Edinburgh Festival.
      Take it for granted Scots people would prefer to live elsewhere. Talk up Gove, Davidson, Brown as the perfect models of what a Scotch person should be. Compare the country to Yorkshire. Mention London has a bigger population. Visibly wince should the word independence, in Scottish not Brexit context, be spoken. Attribute sinister fascistic, racist leanings to its advocates. Query what has Scotland ever done ‘for us’. Quickly change the subject to the Tudors or Hitler or the British Tiddly Winks team or that weird Gazza character in the Archers, England as England ought to be.

    191. Reluctant Nationalist says:

      @ Ottomanboi

      http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8lMexzk3TA8

    192. galamcennalath says:

      Ottomanboi says:

      Anti-Scottish tendencies

      Well summarised!

      Something like that could make a clever leaflet, because clearly not everyone has had their eyes and minds open to that accurate vision of reality.

    193. Ottomanboi says:

      Almost forgot, if you’re Scottish or Welsh it is required that ‘justification’ for being what you are is necessary. The system assumes a natural cultural order laid down by the predatory Franco-Norman conquerors when Englaland became Angleterre. England, the only country that celebrates being conquered and ruled by a succession of foreign monarchs; a land with the permanent for sale, à vendre, zu verkaufen sign.

    194. galamcennalath says:

      News on the Brexit front …. May calls for talks to accelerate and intensify!

      Doh! Who is it who is holding up talks by not signing up to what has already been agreed about an Ireland backstop? Who won’t come out with alternatives to that backstop? Who still won’t clarify the status of EU citizens? Who has stuck to strict red lines which mean the only future relationship will be a narrow trade only deal?

      I somehow don’t think the EU27 need to be told to shift their arse!

      Two possibilities…

      1) The Tories actually want to achieve a very hard Brexit via a no divorce deal exit.

      2) They still fantasise about a cherry picking, keep the good, dump what they don’t like, divorce and future deal all rolled up in one. When May calls on the talks to accelerate, she means for the EU27 to give her that magical Brexit outcome.

      Both the cliff jumpers and the cherry pickers want to keep bits of the EU. As someone said – when they were in they wanted opt-outs, but when they are out they want opt-ins!

    195. Ghillie says:

      Another bonny day =)

      Enjoy it folks 🙂

    196. jfngw says:

      @Luigi
      You are setting an unbelievably high barrier, how many of us have not said something daft or made an inappropriate joke in their past.

      Strange world, we have a Tory foreign secretary that has often used racist term (pick..y) but it is just brushed aside. But a SNP MSP repeats in a blog how black waiters in New Orleans restaurant categorise their customers and it is a sacking offence.

      The other blog was a critique on how education institutions use minorities to generate funding, with some sarcasm to highlight how far they may go.

      Of course the media are not interested in the facts, the head of a SNP MSP is more important to them. They are the unionist lapdogs, unwilling to hold any of their politicians to account.

      When Davidson referred to Scots as vandals and thieves in London, not an eyebrow was raised by the MSM. And remember this was her opinion not just her reporting someone else’s remarks (and not even 11 years ago).

    197. Sarah says:

      @Ghillie 8.22

      No, not tracked him down yet – I couldn’t see the name on the boat which might have helped. I hoped he was a Winger and might see my post but given this weather he is probably cruising the whole way round our lovely coast – lucky man!

      What a shame about Gillian Martin. Falsehood winning above truth yet again. I’m inclined to think that FM should have resisted – but then I couldn’t bear the stress of being FM for five minutes!!

    198. jfngw says:

      @galamcennalath

      There is the third option that they want to try and break up the EU, something certain Tory commentators have let slip in the past. Why else all this BBC negative stories regarding the imminent problems the EU face and their continual excitement every time there is an election within a country and their talking up of any right wing candidates.

      They have frothed over Holland, France, Germany, (maybe more that I’ve forgotten). There hope is now Italy, but I fear they may once again be disappointed as Italian politics to me always seems to be in upheaval (this view is of course coloured by UK MSM reporting).

    199. Ghillie says:

      Sarah @ 10.24 am

      If the gent of long locks flying the Scottish Ensign is sailing round about our coast then he will surely hear of his popularity =)

      Gillian Martin, it is a new day =)

      As it is for us all =)

    200. Meg merrilees says:

      O/T

      Just read an article the gist of which I wanted to pass on to everyone.

      In Birmingham they were handing out water and suncream to homeless people. It is very difficult for homeless people to get water – there used to be drinking fountains but they’ve gone now and if they ask in a cafe they are hustled out.

      Plus they are often awake all night and sleep by day so they are waking up with terrible sunburn.

      Please keep an eye out for homeless people, and their dogs!, and offer them water and possibly even an unused umbrella as a sunshade.

      I know I’m preaching to the converted – apologies

    201. Ottomanboi says:

      And finally, as a child i was taken to Barra. On a glorious, mediterranean type day my family were having breakfast in our hotel. At a neighbouring table a party were studying the bi-lingual menu. An English voice, at full volume, ridiculed at some length the Gaelic text. Those with him, some were Scots, laughed but looked embarrassed. My parents, recognising this type of colonial, cultural put down and the sheepish reaction to it, were enraged and apologised in their fractured English to the waitress who was on the receiving end of this ignorance.
      A moment of revelation and political enlightenment Indeed.

    202. Fireproofjim says:

      Starlaw 0807
      “Conscripts patrolling in Malaya without guns because the officers were afraid of them”
      Utter nonsense.
      I’m of that generation when National Service was the norm. Many of my contemporaries were in Malaya at the time and like all National Servicemen accepted that it was just something everybody had to do and the sooner it was over the better.
      Nobody ever patrolled without “guns” (rifles actually).
      If you want to be believed you must post your sources. Not just some rubbish you heard from a man down the pub.

    203. Dave McEwan Hill says:

      Sarah at 10.24

      I think the FM did exactly the right thing and I’m sure Gillian understands that. That immediate action kills the story and that the political imperative. Nicola has made it clear that she holds Gillian in high regard and tomorrow is another day

    204. Les Wilson says:

      Thinking about Spain and the threats we sometimes get that they would vote against Scotland joining the EU.

      Let’s think about Gibraltar, which Spain really wants back. Not forgetting it is part of the Spanish land mass, which was taken by the UK. It has always been essentially Spanish,but now a UK port for military projection.

      What if an Independent Scotland suggested to Spain that if instead of a veto against us, we could use our support to help return Gib to them?.

    205. Dave McEwan Hill says:

      What language do the Colombians speak?
      What is “getitrightupya” in it?

    206. Craig P says:

      Yes, send Gillian Martin on a course. On how to write satire. That blog was pish.

      PS Terence Callachan –
      1. Lithuania has a higher percentage than 18% from another country – 26% of the population is Russian.
      2. Scotland has 9% English population, not 18% – stop inventing and spreading fake stats.
      3. Scotland had similar numbers born in Ireland back in the 19th century and we got a century & more of sectarianism. We’ll have none of that shite today thank you.

    207. Dave McEwan Hill says:

      Wasn’t the exultation in England over the defeat of Germany (who actually should have won about six nil)pretty disgusting?
      Nearly as disgusting as the scrufffy Jocks dancing when England gets beaten.

    208. galamcennalath says:

      jfngw says:

      There is the third option that they want to try and break up the EU

      True, the far right loonies would certainly like nothing better. Some prick even suggested Ireland might best solve issues there by following the UK out of the EU. He was probably being serious!

      The Tories seem obsessed with trade, commerce, finance which is not what the EU is primarily about. Foremost it is about peace in Europe. It’s also about comprehensive rights and setting high standards, which the Yanks hate and the nutters want to remove from the UK. The EU has now set the de facto world standard for food and agriculture.

      But honestly, I think the Tories dreaming about damaging the EU is punching above their pay grade. Doesn’t stop them dreaming about it, though. The UK will become a marginalised, impoverished, even more socially unequal entity with Brexit. No one else in the EU really wants that.

      And as we often end our comments … Scotland needs to move on and away from their madness.

    209. manandboy says:

      https://mobile.twitter.com/matthewchampion

      “there is no independent media in North Korea whatsoever”

      The Tories were right. They are lagging behind in Scotland.

      Control the Media, control the election.

    210. starlaw says:

      fireproof jim 10-24
      Got my information through reading histories of the time. Saw documentaries on TV. Heard men from my village talking about the nonsense that went on and had a friend who ended up driving a padre about because he firstly refused to do his conscription as he felt he owed this country nothing and decided he would just lie in jail. The padre talked him into becoming his driver and the army agreed. You don’t get to read such stories in the press. But we know what the Press are.

    211. Ian Brotherhood says:

      @cirsium (2.37) –

      Thanks for the link to the Pilger piece.

      It’s always great to read Pilger when his hackles are up. I’m wondering if he’ll appear later in the series. His criticism is, of course, valid (coming from him, it couldn’t possibly be ignored) but it shouldn’t put people off viewing the mass of original media shown in the series and making their own minds up.

    212. Jomry says:

      Re Gillian Martin.
      Having read and further considered both of the ‘offensive’ blogs in question, It is my opinion that there is nothing there of sufficient substance to merit the withdrawal of the offer of a ministerial role. Selective quotations devoid of context and intent can always be used to denigrate – as they have been here.

      The reason for the withdrawal of her name will have little to do with an assessment of her ability to do the job. The clinical calculation that will have been made is “can we (snp) afford to have a minister in post who will continually attract the barrel-scraping jibes of MSM and opposition politicians?” But she will continue to attract these anyway, however unjustified.

      While the desire to protect the party is understandable, the human cost is throwing someone under a bus – shades of Michelle Thomson – and this leaves me very uncomfortable. It gives further encouragement to those in opposition to pursue this tactic because they have evidence of its success. My own reaction would have been to face this up and support and defend Gillian Martin – but that is why I would probably never have made it in politics.

      I am sure that Gillian Martin will recover from this. She has issued a twitter statement saying that she apologised two years ago and removed her blog because of the offence some of her words had caused – and she repeats this apology. So she obviously does regret the choice of some of her word images in a provocative blog written 11 years ago. As others have said, who amongst us can say that they regret nothing they have said or written in the past.

      If the snp feel that the contents of these two blogs reveal things substantive enough to bar her from ministerial post, then at least that is a judgement made in principle. I would strongly disagree with such a judgement but it is not my call to make. If the decision has been made simply to avoid continuing flak, then I think the snp is poorer for it.

    213. Breeks says:


      galamcennalath says:
      29 June, 2018 at 10:10 am
      News on the Brexit front …. May calls for talks to accelerate and intensify!…

      May, and the whole BritNat Establishment desperately needs a Scapegot. Somehow, all the calamities of Brexit will be Europe’s fault, the ruptures and division in the UK will all be the fault of the Remainers, and Scotland’s departure will be the beastly SNP’s fault. Westminster will carry on in its blind arrogance and double standards, blaming everybody else but themselves, and getting away with it because the BBC and UK Press play the same tune.

      I hope an Independent Scotland will have great links and friendship with the real “mother county England”, but without a root and branch review of the toxic Westminster government, I increasingly see it less and less likely. Right now, I just want out. I don’t want to listen anymore, I want out. I don’t want to negotiate with someone I don’t trust, I want out. The louder and prouder they scream about “Great Britain”, the more alien and foreign that “culture” becomes. My “Britishness” is not a thing I feel proud of, but a burden I grow increasingly tired of carrying. That’s not a judgement on Britishness itself by the way, but recognition that Britishness is theirs, not mine, and they are very welcome to it.

      I know, Britishness is a geographic reference, and I know too that an Indy Scotland will still be British, but you know what? The title “British” simply means nothing to me. Even supposing I had to forfeit our rightful claim on the title, and I had to sign a paper promising never to call myself British ever again, I honestly couldn’t care less. Let’s just get this over with and move on. You want the CD’s? Take them, just go. You want the dog? No, he is ours. He stays, you go, and you go now.

      A new era of Scottish vitality is about to be unleashed, and I can hardly wait. Quarrelling over how British I may or may not be is ZZZZZzzzzzz….

    214. Petra says:

      I see that Arlene Foster is fronting the Orange Order walk in Cowdenbeath Scotland! Why on earth is she coming over here when the Battle they commemorate was played out in Ireland and there are numerous “walks” she could join there.

      I reckon we all know what’s going on and should attempt to do something about it by complaining to the SG, local Council and Police Scotland about what they stand for, inconvenience to traffic / shoppers, cost of policing etc.

    215. Thepnr says:

      @Jomry

      I agree with everything you have written, you have to stand up to bullies even if it means getting a black eye for your efforts.

    216. Petra says:

      @ Breeks at 11:5m ….. “You want the dog? No he is ours…”

      Another great post Breeks but I’d say I’m at the stage of telling them to take the dog too. That’s how bad it is.

      By the way I was listening to Indycar Ross’s videos and came across one where he proposed the SG should push a Sovereignty Bill through. I’ll try and find it.

    217. orri says:

      https://archive.is/Bne4T

      Not sure if it’s meant to trash Gillian Martin or not?

      Context is everything it seems. Even when in one paragraph they make it clear she’s quoting others about who tips what and the next they blur that. Obviously they think their readers have the attention of a goldfish.

      The point she was making was about institutions taking funding for minorities for financial gain. To an extent that they exploit them for publicity shots. The reference to hairy knuckled transvestites used the word Laydee and probably refers to these two notorious homophobes
      http://www.bbc.co.uk/comedy/littlebritain/characters/emily.shtml

    218. Derick fae Yell says:

      Breeks says: 28 June, 2018 at 4:42 pm

      EFTA EEA, because that gives 90% of the practical benefits of EU membership…

      “No it doesn’t. It’s just a Trade Agreement.”

      It is much more than just a Trade Agreement. It is the EEA Agreement that guarantees the Four Freedoms, not the specific route to EEA membership. See The EEA Agreement, Article 128.

      The EEA IS the Single Market, with the exception of the Customs Union. Consider the position of Norway, in the EEA, with Turkey – which is in the Customs Union, but not in the single market.

      “The EEA Agreement guarantees equal rights and obligations within the Internal Market for individuals and economic operators in the EEA. It provides for the inclusion of EU legislation covering the four freedoms — the free movement of goods, services, persons and capital — throughout the 31 EEA States. In addition, the Agreement covers cooperation in other important areas such as research and development, education, social policy, the environment, consumer protection, tourism and culture, collectively known as “flanking and horizontal” policies. The Agreement guarantees equal rights and obligations within the Internal Market for citizens and economic operators in the EEA.”

      http://www.efta.int/eea/eea-agreement

      It doesn’t matter how desirable EU membership is, if we don’t get a Yes vote.

      No Yes vote = No EU membership, no single market membership. Nothing. Nada. Zip. Just stuck in Brexitland, being asset stripped.

      We need to win. And to win we need a position, a back story, that is both deliverable and which can attract a majority for Yes. Nothing else matters. I don’t care if MEPs get to go to the European Parliament to feel important. We cannot, absolutely cannot, be out of the single market for years.

      Remember the “Buckaroo Principle”. Yes, no distractions.

    219. HandandShrimp says:

      The more I read of Gillian Martin’s blog the more I like her. I do not think she is exhibiting racist or any other hate she is merely observing and commenting on society’s often humorous attempts to grapple with complex issues.

      I still can’t see why it is wrong to pass on the experience of the waiters on ranking for tipping. Would it have been OK if one of the waiters had written that? If so, why not second hand? If a journalist had been in that restaurant and spoken to one of the waiters would he have self censored and not included the ranking in any piece discussing working in New Orleans?

    220. Terence callachan says:

      So in response to my point about the huge number and percentage of English people living in Scotland and my point that you won’t find another country in the world with such a huge percentage of people from another single country living in their country ,
      there have been two people who have said I am wrong
      One of them said Jordan has 18% of its population made up of Syrian people because Syrian people flooded into Jordan during the war
      My response to that is that those Syrians live in refugee camps and do not get to vote on Jordanian matters and they will in all likelihood return to Syria once it has stabilised.
      The other person said 20% of lithuanias population is made up of Russian people but that is incorrect it’s actually about 6%
      Here is a link to prove it

      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russians_in_Lithuania

      18% of Scotlands population is English people not 8%
      I should clarify that as we are talking about voting rights the 18% does not include children under 16
      Perhaps if you include children under 16 the figure is 8% I don’t know but for people of voting age in a Scottish independence referendum it is 18% of people in Scotland are English
      I reiterate that nearly all will once again vote against Scottish independence
      People here and elsewhere wonder why the support for Scottish independence stalls at 50% no matter what England and Westminster do to Scotland and its people well this is your answer English people like people across the world will support their own country and to most of them that is England although as we have regularly seen some think UK or Britain is their country because they see England and UK and England and Britain as one and the same thing.
      I have nothing against English people supporting their country of course they should do that ,I merely make the point that they will do that no matter where they are living ,even if they live in Scotland they will support England and what is best for England
      Some people mention englishscots for yes ,they are very few in number ,why no Welsh Scots for yes or Irish Scots for yes or Japanese Scots for yes ? Because Welsh Irish Japanese people do not look upon Scotland as being a part of their country,the English people do.
      By the way ,swear ,insult, call me what you will,I do not have a racist bone in my body but I’m strong and have had a well travelled well trained and educated life so it’s water off a ducks back to me,I would prefer it if you chose better words ,if you are able,and it would be more productive if you could forward a counter argument other than swear and insult in a threatening manner
      One last point
      Just remember it was England that decided that citizens living in UK that come from other EU countries could not vote in the Brexit referendum
      Scotland can choose who votes in a Scottish independence referendum
      We can legally say that because it is England that we want to break free from
      We are not allowing English people to vote in the Scottish independence referendum
      That does not affect their rights to vote in all elections in Scotland it only
      says that whether England continues to control Scotland or whether Scotland becomes an independent country is not a decision for English people to make

      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russians_in_Lithuania

    221. Shinty says:

      https://twitter.com/RayVersionTwo/status/1012489965777899521

      Murdo getting his arse skelped on twitter by James Dornan.

    222. Thepnr says:

      @Terence callachan

      You need telling again! The ONLY source of relevant figures for the number of English born people living in Scotland is the last census results from 2011.

      Population of Scotland 5,295,403

      Born in England 459,486

      Get you calculator out that is 8.7% so FUCK OFF with your lies.

      http://www.scotlandscensus.gov.uk/ods-analyser/jsf/tableView/tableView.xhtml

    223. Breeks says:


      stewartb says:
      28 June, 2018 at 5:25 pm
      “EFTA! Or rather EFTA EEA, because that gives 90% of the practical benefits of EU membership…” “No it doesn’t. It’s just a Trade Agreement.”

      Let’s try to be more accurate in use of the terms. As shown below, whatever one’s view of the merits of the EU, EFTA and EEA, for the sub-set of EFTA members that are within the EEA, EFTA is very far from JUST a Trade Agreement!….

      Switzerland is an member of EFTA with a guillotine clause whereby should Switzerland breach any one the various bilateral treaties it agreed with the EU, it would be deemed to have breached them all, and all the Treaties would be automatically terminated. Switzerland also has to abide by EU legislation, even changes to EU legislation which haven’t even happened yet, or it’s guillotine clause automatically terminates it’s Treaties, and the Swiss have say whatsoever in the EU’s legislative process.

      EFTA is a Trade Agreement. If you agree to the constraints, you can access the EU’s Free Market, but thats it. Your home may be at risk if you don’t keep up the payments.

      EU Membership comes with a seat on the Board, a respected say on all matters, a National Veto on matters you disapprove of. You are party to the decision making process of who gets a deal and who doesnt. As a member, you benefit from all Trade Deals negotiated between the EU Collective and 130+ other countries. As a member, the EU will use its strength to protect your interests from aggressive trade policies from the US, China, or deregulated UK.

      EFTA members are also Sovereign Nations who possess International Personality and can enter into binding sovereign agreements. For Scotland to secure its own EFTA Treaty, it too would require to secure a degree of Sovereign recognition, recognition which would empower Scotland to negotiate its own full EU membership without any transitional EFTA arrangement required.

      When Brexiteers whine about the costs and burden of EU membership, the lack of power you have to influence Europe, the unelected bureaucracy and red tape that’s involved, and the need to “take back control” it is not an accurate summation of EU membership at all, but it is a pretty fair summation of a “take it or leave it, like it or lump it” EFTA Agreement with Europe. An EFTA agreement is what Brexiteers have nightmares about.

      I repeat. It is just a Trade Agreement with Europe in full sovereign and legislative control. It’s not even a poor man’s EU membership.

    224. Thepnr says:

      @Breeks

      “It’s not even a poor man’s EU membership.”

      Though you’ll have to admit that it does appear to suit Iceland, Norway, Switzerland and Liechtenstein.

    225. Robert Peffers says:

      @Craig P says: 28 June, 2018 at 4:01 pm:

      ” … Why not state the case for the dissolution of the union today in a courtroom. …

      Come on – think this thing through. My wise old granny had a saying, (most wise auld grannies do have wise sayings).

      This one went along the lines of, “Dinna test the depth o the burn watter wi baith feet”.

      Applied to the legal sovereignty of the people of Scotland that saying is warning about taking rash action in haste. In this case there are several issues that need careful consideration before taking action.

      There are three legal systems in play with this issue:-

      Independent Scots Law.

      Independent English Law, (and there is no such thing as a United Kingdom Legal system as Westminster uses the English Rule of Law).

      The third Rule of Law is Worldwide international law.

      That introduces several variables and the first is that courts do not instigate cases they judge cases brought to them and there will be at least two sides to be judged – even criminal cases need at least two different litigants.

      In Scotland the Police investigate and the Procurators Fiscal decide if they will prosecute and the other party is thus a defendant.

      In civil cases one party appeals to the court about another party’s actions.

      So, first up, what is the complaint that requires a court’s decision?

      Who is the complainant and who/what is complained about and to which jurisdiction is the appeal to be made?

      There is always a case for Westminster to make to defend itself against a Scottish complainant that by custom and practice the people of Scotland have accepted that Her Majesty, (as the sovereign Queen of England), is legally sovereign over Scotland and Scots as well.

      However, as the Queen of England is also the Queen of Scots and under Scots law she is NOT sovereign in Scotland and Westminster has wrongly assumed that the 1688 decision of the English courts that the Monarchy of England must legally delegate their sovereignty to the Parliament of England applies. The problem is that Westminster ceased to be the Parliament of England on 1 May 1707 and it became the Parliament of the United Kingdom not the continuing Parliament of England.

      So which rule of law do we want to decide that issue? At the outset this will not involve the Westminster instigated Supreme court until it has been decided by either English or Scots courts and, if disputed, then appealed to the Supreme court by a litigant who thinks the court ruling of either Scotland or England is wrong. Thus it would go on for years in increasingly higher courts and at increasingly greater costs.

      So figure it this way – we first require a decision that we can claim to be wrong under independent Scots law. This is so because we cannot bring a case for Scotland’s peoples being legally sovereign except in the Scottish High Court. Then Westminster will simply appeal the decision at the UK supreme court and we would likely lose our appeal as the Supreme Court, which should not have been invented in the first place, will rule in favour of their paymasters at Westminster.

      So what is needed is for Theresa May/Westminster to decide on an action that is against what the Scottish Government already has a mandate to carry out.

      That makes the Scottish Government, (on behalf of the legally sovereign people of Scotland), the appellant and they have the choice of which court to bring the complaint to.

      Furthermore, if, after the Scottish High Court rules against Theresa May/Westminster/The Queen of England, the SG has the right to take the matter to the World Court. a.k.a. -The International Court of Justice (abbreviated ICJ:

      This is commonly referred to as the World Court, it is the principal judicial organ of the United Nations (UN). It settles legal disputes between member states and gives advisory opinions to authorized UN organs and specialized agencies.

      So there’s the two alternatives.

      The SG brings a case to the Scottish High Court and Westminster refers it to the UK Supreme Court who will likely rule for their Westminster mentors or we wait until May/UK Government makes a decision we can appeal to the ICJ at the Hague.

      Which one do you imagine offers the best chance of ruling in Scotland’s favour?

    226. Brian Doonthetoon says:

      Hi Sarah & Ghillie.

      Could this be your wee boatie?

      https://photos.marinetraffic.com/ais/showphoto.aspx?photoid=2762951

      I ended up with that one by clicking on the blue symbol to the left of Rhue on this map.

      https://www.marinetraffic.com/en/ais/home/centerx:-5.1/centery:57.8/zoom:10

      Then clicking on “Ship photos”.

    227. K1 says:

      You miss the entire point that others are making.

      How is it that we separate these English folk that reside in Scotland to give us the edge in Scotland gaining her independence?

      For that is the why of what you are suggesting? You seriously believe that if the English folk are not allowed to partake in the referendum then we will gain our independence, correct?

      So let’s be practical about this? How do we attain this?

      Will it depend on how long ago someone who was ‘born’ in England has resided here? We can only use this criteria, can’t we? It has to be where they were born, correct?

      If that is the criteria, we are immediately into a huge bureaucratic headache. And if I may say so ‘a purge’.

      So how far back do we go to reach the ‘cut off’ year?

      If you seriously cannot ‘see’ how this would play out, then there is something else at play in your outpourings on these threads on this subject?

      For those born in England, say with Scottish parents…who then travelled to live in Scotland and were raised here their entire lives, they would be refused a vote?

      For those born in England, say with English parents…who then travelled to live in Scotland and were raised here their entire lives, they would be refused a vote and so would their parents?

      For those born in England, say with one English parent and another Scottish…who then travelled to live in Scotland and were raised here their entire lives, would be refused a vote and so would their English parent?

      It would be so peculiarly blood and soil that there is simply no way we could as a movement fend off those accusations? It would play into the ‘anti English’ rhetoric and it would make us a pariah nation?

      To gain our independence we manipulated it to get the result we wanted?

      ‘Just remember it was England that decided that citizens living in UK that come from other EU countries could not vote in the Brexit referendum’

      And that in a nutshell is exactly why we will not follow Westminster’s xenophobic and racist approach to our referendum, we didn’t do it last time and the SNP fought for the EU citizen’s to be included in the EU ref. before the vote.

      Immediately after the EU result one of the first things our FM did was to publicly reassure our EU citizens that they were safe in Scotland, whilst the purge, including the Windrush debacle, and using the EU citizens rights as negotiating chips have become a huge issue in light of that decision to disenfranchise EU citizens.

      Hate/racists crime has surged in England since that vote.

      You surely did not mean to suggest we should follow England’s lead…and yet that is exactly what you did suggest?

    228. Derick fae Yell says:

      Thepnr says: 29 June, 2018 at 1:22 pm

      “Though you’ll have to admit that it does appear to suit Iceland, Norway, Switzerland and Liechtenstein.”

      It does. Which is why support in Norway for moving to EU membership is now 22% (down from 48% in 1994).
      http://norwaytoday.info/news/opinion-poll-shows-continued-majority-support-eea-membership/

      And why no opinion poll in Iceland for the last eight years has shown majority support for EU membership
      https://icelandmonitor.mbl.is/news/politics_and_society/2017/10/18/fresh_poll_confirms_iceland_s_long_standing_opposit/

      Opinion in Switzerland is so low they’ve stopped asking as far as I can see.

      Where they are WORKs for them.

      Setting aside the fantasy that the EU will set aside it’s accession rules just for Scotland, to let us ‘stay’ by some as yet un-invented magical process, because we are so very special, there’s only one practical way into the single market in an acceptable timescale.

      Should Scotland be an independent country Y/N?

      conflate it with other pet issues, including EU membership, and we will lose again

    229. Sarah says:

      @Briandttoon:

      That is very clever, Brian, and great fun to see what ships and such are around – I can’t see Ullapool from here so when there are tall ships and cruise ships in the harbour I have no idea but now I will be able to look at the marine traffic site!

      However, the Shearwater is not “my” boat, sadly – mine was a small single-masted yacht, dark blue hull, blue-edged white sail.

    230. Brian Doonthetoon says:

      Using two sets of figures…

      According to Thepnr, the population of Scotland is 5,295,403 and the number of those born in England is 459,486, a figure of 8.677%.

      Trying to work out what Mr Callachan’s figures mean is a tad brainfreezing.

      He says voting-age English-born amount to 18%. 18% of what? The 5.3 million population, or 18% of the ‘voting-age’ electorate, which for the 2014 referendum, was 4,283,392?

      Maybe if Mr Callachan provides a link to his source of the 18% figure, all will be made clear? The reason I ask is that 18% of the electorate amounts to 771,010.

      18% of the population = 953,172.

      How can there be more English-born voters than English-born residents?

      Nah… too much for a Friday afternoon. Brain stall. Call brain support!

    231. Bob says:

      @Robert Peffers says: 28 June, 2018 at 4:41 pm and 29 June, 2018 at 1:36 pm

      Thanks, Robert, for taking the time to write these comprehensive and complex explanations. Clearly the ICJ offers the best chance of ruling in Scotland’s favour.

      And so how to bring this about?

      The Scottish Government already has a mandate for Indy2. Is it therefore being suggested that should Theresa May deny Indy2, that would be the catalyst for the start of a legal process that will give Scotland it’s independence back via the courts?

    232. Thepnr says:

      @Brian Doonthetoon

      I’m guessing you can’t see the table that I linked too as it is the numbers I posted are not “according to my figures” simply the actual figures from the census.

      You might like to do some exploring yourself for you can find the answers you want including for example how many English born living in Scotland are under 16 so means they couldn’t have voted and means of course less than 8.667% had a vote.

      Check it out and see how many English born lived in Dundee at the time of the census as you can do all that LOL.

      http://www.scotlandscensus.gov.uk/ods-web/standard-outputs.html

      Just choose your preferences to find the information you want.

    233. Breeks says:


      Thepnr says:
      29 June, 2018 at 1:22 pm
      @Breeks

      “It’s not even a poor man’s EU membership.”

      Though you’ll have to admit that it does appear to suit Iceland, Norway, Switzerland and Liechtenstein.

      The Norwegian Government has held two referendums to join the EU, but the people decided against it. The Swiss too held a referendum to join but again the people voted No. Iceland and Liechtenstein I don’t know about, but if the Norwegian and Swiss Governments had got their wish, their respective countries would be EU member states.

      Rather than suiting them, EFTA is the best deal available to a population which refuses to join, but that does not mean in any way that EFTA is the wiser choice of the two options.

      With specific regard to Scotland however, I believe our Whisky is a global product, our food stuffs are globally significant from Arbroath Smokies to Aberdeen Angus beef, our Tweeds and hosiery industries are globally significant. A world leading product breeds world leading envy. The US wants to make Scotch Whisky, or was it Peru? The English want Scottish Tweed in English clothes they can sell as English/British made. Our food products are GM free but Trade Deals with the US will demand deregulation to accommodate American practices and less informative labelling.

      I cannot speak for Norway, Switzerland or Iceland, but what makes Scotland a different case is the nature of Scotland’s finest products NEED protection from cheap imitations and abuse of the Scottish Brand. You can’t really manufacture “fake” crude oil, but its easy to churn out cheap Whisky and sell it as “Scotch”. How do you know your Arbroath Smokies come from Arbroath, or even that they are haddock? Westminster won’t look after us. Westminster will sell us out in a heartbeat, and the US will buy us up in a heartbeat. Scotland NEEDS the clout, integrity, and negotiating prowess of the EU to play the heavy whenever foreign manufacturers cast a greedy eye over Scotland’s reputation, trademark products and branding.

      Scotland’s EU membership means we trade on the high street through the best “designer” shops. Scotland as an EFTA State would see us trading from a market stall, trying to compete with faked, knock off goods that have fallen off the back of a lorry or been imported from the Far East sweat shops.

      Scotland’s producers have done the hard work, and earned the reputation they currently have. Europe will protect that product’s distinctive qualities and reputation. Westminster, especially after Brexit, will sell it to the highest bidder at the first practicable opportunity.

      Scotland’s brand and the EU’s brand are the perfect compliment to each other. EFTA is small time thinking.

    234. Petra says:

      There’s no way that 8.7% of the Scottish population relates to people formerly born in England. That figure is 7 years out of date. In the last few months I’ve been travelling all over Scotland which includes all islands of the Outer Hebrides and have found that in some areas the figure is close to or over 50%.

      I see that some individuals also mention elderly Scots born people, whom they reckon (eh?) caused us to lose last time round, passing away. Sadly they will be passing away, however to be replaced by elderly English born people. Over 50,000 people are now moving from south to north every year. Up to date figures will be available to anyone who can be bothered checking it out.

      I’m not getting into the “debate”, but imo in relation to the next referendum a residency limit of 5 years should apply to everyone regardless of where they come from, exit polls should be carried out and the Northern Ireland policy / procedure for postal votes should definitely be put in place.

    235. Thepnr says:

      @Breeks

      I’m not trying to be picky but protected food names can also come under the EU umbrella if an EFTA member seeks them.

      EU and Iceland strike deal to protect Geographical Indications and enhance trade for agricultural and food products

      https://ec.europa.eu/agriculture/newsroom/224_en

      Like yourself I would prefer full EU membership to continue but like everything else if support for Independence is more likely through EFTA then that would be my priority.

      Thing is I doubt we will ever be any the wiser as to which would gain most support, but I would never exclude one option over another.

    236. Thepnr says:

      @Petra

      “Up to date figures will be available to anyone who can be bothered checking it out.”

      If you have it to hand I would very much appreciate a link to those up to date figures that anybody who could be bothered could find. Thanks very muchly.

    237. Thepnr says:

      @Petra

      In 2014 they would have been 3 years out of date, I’m looking forward to your link of more authoritative recent figures from other than a census.

      By the way I also agree with your minimum residency requirements though would have thought 2 years enough and said so in my response to the Scottish Government consultation on such.

    238. Derick fae Yell says:

      Geographical Indicators, which provide ‘copyright’ protection for regional or specialist products, were incorporated into the EEA Agreement earlier this year

      Incidentally, Lichtenstein chose to opt out. Because as an EFTA member they have the freedom to choose to do so.

      http://www.efta.int/eea-lex/32018R0175

      We don’t know how much support there is for EFTA EEA membership AND Independence.

      We do however, know how much support there is for EU EEA membership AND Independence. Currently 47-48% (unless Stuart is going to surprise us with a new poll result!)

    239. Petra says:

      Hi Thepnr I’m supposed to be working on a report right now, lol, however I’m suffering from an obsessive condition called CannystayawafaeWings.

      I’ll see what I can find Thepnr and get back to you. I’d prefer 5 years (or more) residency as it would prevent most students from voting.

    240. Foonurt says:

      Terence callachan – aye, soart oot yurr nummurrs.

      Fuckin’ awe ower, thurr shoap.

    241. Thepnr says:

      @Foonurt

      Just thought I’d mention that I love your style, you are the most unique poster on Wings and one guaranteed to bring a smile 🙂

    242. Breeks says:

      Thepnr says:
      29 June, 2018 at 4:00 pm
      @Breeks

      I’m not trying to be picky but protected food names can also come under the EU umbrella if an EFTA member seeks them.

      EU and Iceland strike deal to protect Geographical Indications and enhance trade for agricultural and food products…

      Be as picky as you like. It’s cool, but to quote a line from your link…

      “With the agreement on GIs, the full list of 1150 EU’s protected agricultural products and foodstuffs will enjoy in Iceland the same level of protection as in the EU market…”

      The deal is Iceland accepts the condition that it respects the EU’s list of 1150 protected products. I’d say that kinda vindicates what I was saying. The EU presents the deal, retains control, and Iceland has to take it or leave it. The EU has negotiated similar deals with over 140 non-EU countries which now respect the EU’s list of GI definitions or they don’t get their EU trade deal.

      EFTA does provide things that Iceland wants, but it has to conform to the EU’s agenda to get it. The EU is protecting its members, but protecting its members states from non-EU members.

      Currently, the EU protects our standards and protocols from cut price, sub standard countries. That privilege will end with Brexit.

      Through Brexit, the UK will no longer be protected by the EU, but instead, will become a country which the EU will seek to protect its members from. The very instant the UK deregulates itself and diverges away from EU standards, you can forget any trade deal, the EU will not touch the UK with a barge pole.

    243. yesindyref2 says:

      @Terence callachan
      You SiU types really don’t do facts.

      From the 2011 Census, of a population of 5,295,403, 459,486 were bion in England. That is, as Thepnr says, 8.6770733%

      So as Thepnr says, Fuck Off with your unionist lies.

    244. Breeks says:

      And just add, forget any gentlemen’s agreement to respect existing GI’s, (that’s Geographical Indicated produce), the EU will want to control and limit the UK’s urge to deregulate its economy and undercut the EU, so I would fully expect losing your existing GI protection is a virtual certainty given its potency as a bargaining chip and disincentive for the UK to deregulate.

      This is the kind of thing the UK should have been negotiating with the EU for months.

    245. yesindyref2 says:

      @Petra
      There are some areas in Scotland that have been half English since 2001, which is when I started travelling all over tourist Scotland including the islands for my business. It hasn’t changed. Back in 2001-2, there were pubs where all you’d hear was English accents, and the shops were like a village green in England. Sadly the roast beef and Yorkshire pudding didn’t travel with them, well, not a lot.

    246. Dave McEwan Hill says:

      yesindyref2 and petra
      Is an assumption here being made that all the English people coming to Scotland are NO voters. Very far from the case and getting further from it. We have a significant number of English people in our SNP branch and English people helping in the Forward Shop in Dunoon

      And do you know what? They are easier to convert to YES than many of our own.As soon as you make sure to them that they are welcome they start walking towards us.That is why we will be reassuring the many that live in this area that we are very happy to have them as friends. That removes their defensive nervousness and many of them really do want to march with us to a better future and a better country than the one we have left.

    247. Rock says:

      I agree with Terence callachan.

      Rock (22nd February – “The makings of a deal”):

      “Only the most stupid people on earth would give English settlers, including holiday home owners, a vote on Scotland’s independence from England.

      Before there is a flood of pretendy pro-independence English settlers rushing to post, if you really want Scottish independence, there would be a better chance of achieving it if all English settlers were denied the vote.

      It is a proven fact that the vast majority of the English voted No.

      And it is not rocket science to forecast that the vast majority will always vote No.

      I find that completely natural, but I find it completely wrong and stupid for them to be given a vote.

      Brexit would not have won if EU nationals settled in the UK had been given the vote. In my view, it was right to deny them the vote.”

    248. Rock says:

      Robert Peffers, (18th February 2017 – “Here comes a surprise”):

      “The fact is that a little common sense will show that the immigrants mainly come to find work. Elderly English cadgers excepted, these who sell up expensive city homes for cheaper, or better, Scottish accommodation, free bus passes and the benefits of such as free prescriptions, care at home and cheaper Council Tax. These are often the ones most prone to call scots subsidy junkies.”

      Who is more anti-English, Robert Peffers or Terence callachan?

    249. Petra says:

      @ Dave McEwan Hill says at 9:47 pm

      ”yesindyref2 and petra

      Is an assumption here being made that all the English people coming to Scotland are NO voters. Very far from the case and getting further from it. We have a significant number of English people in our SNP branch and English people helping in the Forward Shop in Dunoon

      And do you know what? They are easier to convert to YES than many of our own. As soon as you make sure to them that they are welcome they start walking towards us. That is why we will be reassuring the many that live in this area that we are very happy to have them as friends. That removes their defensive nervousness and many of them really do want to march with us to a better future and a better country than the one we have left.”

      Dave last time round 74% of ”English Scots” voted No. That means that 26% voted Yes and it does look as though many English people are now fleeing England for all of the obvious reasons. On my recent travels I met many (prior) English people who have moved here and plan to vote Yes next time round. Time will tell if that ”74%’ vote diminishes. Meanwhile all we can do is try to get the facts …”truth” … out there to all Scots regardless of where they came from previously. And of course the shambolic Westminster parties are doing the heavy lifting for us right now.

    250. Croompenstein says:

      @Rock@10:06

      The answer is Terence callachan… 🙂

    251. yesindyref2 says:

      @Petra / @Dave McEwan Hill
      Well, I know quite a few English around the islands and highlands, and though it’s bad to generalise, they tend not to be risk averse, more likely to invest in their business and take chances. Active in the community, maybe part-time firefighters ,mountain rescue. Quite a few really don’t like Westminster, and some moved up here to get away from the rat race. Others just love Scotland. Some I know to be YES, but with others I find it hard to think they’d be against taking the chance of Indy.

      Maybe this so-called 74% against Indy live in cities where I don’t go. But I doubt very much it’s 74% NO in the sticks! Wouldn’t surprise me if it was the other way around.

    252. sinky says:

      Gordon Brewer fails to challenge Labour on its Brexit position. No discussion on Tory dark money.

      In Sunday Times Michael Glackin column a complete joke even worse than usual.



    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. Ignore these rules and I WILL KILL YOU WITH HAMMERS.




    ↑ Top