The world's most-read Scottish politics website

Wings Over Scotland


The mannie who cannae

Posted on January 05, 2021 by

Poor old Blair McDougall. He doesn’t think Scotland can do anything.

What a dismally rotten, hopeless wee province he thinks Scotland is. It must be such a miserable experience to be him, constantly ashamed of your own nationality. (Except, of course, Blair’s nationality is British, not Scottish.)

Because here are just a few of the countries that have managed to conduct elections and/or referendums during the coronavirus pandemic:

But apparently Scotland is much less competent and resilient than Moldova, Papua New Guinea, Surinam, the Falkland Islands, Burkina Faso, Jamaica, Northern Cyprus, South Korea, Bolivia, Lithuania, Syria, Poland, Niue (wherever the hell that is), and the United States of America – at least according to its own media.

Nicola Sturgeon, meanwhile, is firmly against any thoughts of postponing the election over the coronavirus, although she IS more than happy to postpone independence for the same reason. Apparently only some kinds of votes cause logistical problems.

From this site’s particular point of view, a delay of perhaps two or three months to the election would actually be quite welcome, because it would greatly lessen the chances of the Scottish Government stalling and obstructing its way out of two inquiries into its conduct over the Alex Salmond affair delivering their verdicts before polling day.

(Not least because if the main inquiry doesn’t report before the election, Linda Fabiani, the inquiry’s convener, will have retired as an MSP and presumably no longer be able to act as chair. Goodness knows what happens then. Even if there was some way she could continue as an external convener, it’d be too late to matter anyway.)

Nevertheless, we can see no justification for the election not going ahead. We continue to have faith in the integrity of the Scottish Parliament and trust that both the verdicts and the election will be with us by the spring.

Print Friendly

    1 Trackbacks/Pingbacks

    1. 10 01 21 21:40

      The logic of fear – politics-99.com

    232 to “The mannie who cannae”

    1. Helen Yates says:

      because it would greatly lessen the chances of the Scottish Government stalling and obstructing its way out of two inquiries into its conduct over the Alex Salmond affair delivering their verdicts before polling day.

      Apparently this is exactly what is happening.

    2. Dave Llewellyn says:

      The reporting date for the Parliamentary Inquiry into the Salmond Stitchup has been put back to June from March on the Scotgov website. Strangely the chair of the inquiry is retiring in May and there’s a good possibility Alex Cole Hamilton and Murdo may well be removed at the ballot. Unless the election is postponed it looks like the sham of the inquiry is about to go under the same wheels as stopping Brexitvand any chance of getting independence through this “leadership”.

    3. Ian Brotherhood says:

      Wouldn’t Margaret Mitchell automatically take Linda Fabiani’s place as Convener?

      I really don’t know, just asking…

    4. Bob Mack says:

      Be realistic. Why would Nicola say no to a referendum but yes to an election which would disrupt the Inquiry_____Oh. Sorry

      Light bulb moment!!

    5. Rev. Stuart Campbell says:

      “The reporting date for the Parliamentary Inquiry into the Salmond Stitchup has been put back to June from March on the Scotgov website.”

      Got a link? I looked on the committee’s website but there was nothing, and I see nothing on the main ScotGov site.

    6. Doesn’t calling an election mean the government isn’t meant to announced any major decisions during that time? Purdah and all that.

      Also, all MSPs cease to be. So how can the Scottish Parliament hold the government to account during that time?

      Delaying election to September seems a more sensible option – otherwise, Nicola was a liar when she said the pandemic was the only thing she was concentrating on.

    7. Stuart Insh says:

      Was Peter Murrell meant to be in front of the enquiry again today?

    8. WARNING: a rogue d is on the loose

      Look how it mucked up the tense of announce in my post

      Why the Rev allows rogue ds to roam his site, well I don’t know…

    9. stonefree says:

      Just a small question.
      Is the Scottish Parliament( I hate using that word) not fixed term (In time period of sitting)as per statute,and it can be called at any time, but only brought forward , but not put back?

    10. Effijy says:

      Yes it makes sense that only England can cope with 2 things
      Civid and Brexit.

      Obviously half witted Scotland can only do Covid better than England
      but not anything else on top.

      Our brains might melt down if we had to make a X on paper.

      Hey! Wait a minute, the Tories promised 2 million vaccinations per week now
      and that number growing week by week.

      With 24 million classed as vulnerable in day 10 weeks.
      Why that would be at the end of March with 1 million already administered.

      Great they could do another 10 million in April so most of the country would
      Be vaccinated before Mays Election.

      A great opportunity for Westminster to rig the postal votes again.
      Is that then 3 things they have been working on then.

      Show offs!

    11. Polly says:

      ‘Nicola Sturgeon, meanwhile, is firmly against any thoughts of postponing the election over the coronavirus, although she IS more than happy to postpone independence for the same reason. Apparently not all kinds of votes are equal.’

      Yes that’s what shows their hypocrisy. One definitely should go ahead and the other under no circumstances. And the only reason at all I’ve heard postulated is ‘the electorate will think SNP are pushing independence at a time when they shouldn’t and will punish them accordingly’ which is a pretty feeble reason. If, after Brexit and the threat of a badly handled covid pandemic don’t galvanise folk to realise Scotland should make its own decisions then nothing will and no future time will matter.

      They obviously want the election before they lose even more support this time so they’re in for another so many years to plan to their hearts content, but not a referendum or plebiscite election which would set them on a course impossible to get away from where tough action and choices must follow.

    12. Dave Llewellyn says:

      My previous post about the report date being changed is no longer valid. I have gone on the check for the link and now neither date is on the site. Either the original March one or thee new June one. Sorry I should have screenshoted it. Maybe you could delete my previous post Stu
      It won’t let me do it on my phone.

    13. Clwyd Griffiths says:

      Call me crazy but I wonder if the fact that sLab is trailing badly in the polls has anything to do with Blair McDougall’s sudden conversion to postponing the election stance?

    14. kapelmeister says:

      McDoughball doesn’t even consider postponing till say, Autumn this year. Postpone for at least 12 months he says. What a doughball!

      There’s no reason why the election can’t proceed in May. Going to a polling station with facemask is no different to going to a foodshop during lockdown. Well, one difference being you are in and out the polling station a lot quicker. And people in the at risk categories can get postal or proxy votes. That’s what other countries have been doing, as Stu’s extensive list shows.

      Having said that, a postponement would give the anti-Sturgeon faction in the SNP more time to depose Her Maj and get a new leader in well before the election campaign.

    15. kapelmeister says:

      Sturgeon – Park independence but fire up ma election bus!

    16. MaggieC says:

      Rev Stuart Campbell @ 1.57 pm ,

      “ Got a link? I looked on the committee’s website but there was nothing, and I see nothing on the main ScotGov site. “

      I’ve also had a look as well and I cannot see any information about that but I see that Stuart McMillan has now taken Angela Constance’s place on the Committee as she’s now the Minister for drugs policy as Ministers cannot sit on Committees .

      https://www.parliament.scot/parliamentarybusiness/CurrentCommittees/111055.aspx

    17. Josef Ó Luain says:

      Nobody will hear McDougall or Llewellin from underneath the mountainous heap of contradictory evidence, so effortlessly produced by Wings.

    18. Giesabrek says:

      Delay it until August. Might be safer, and more time for all the Salmond stuff to be out in the open.

    19. MaggieC says:

      Stuart Insh @ 2.07 pm

      “ Was Peter Murrell meant to be in front of the enquiry again today? “
      .
      Parliament is in recess until 12th January .

    20. Don’t get his thinking. The way Labour’s support is plummeting they’ll be lucky to save a deposit if they’ve to wait another year.

    21. Livionian says:

      Aye get on with it. We are a hardy bunch us. Although I feel apathy might keep more people away this time round than the pandemic. Nobody I know that is voting SNP is doing so out of any enthusiasm, only because they can’t think of any better options. People are hardly buzzing about it.

      As for me, I almost don’t see a point in voting. I’m never voting for the SNP again because of thousands of reasons. I want independence so would never vote for a unionist party. The greens are to woke and I’m not a Marxist nutter so that rules out the far left parties. I genuinely don’t know if there is a point in me voting this time, although I’m happy to vote for a no hoper indy list party just so I don’t let the side down

    22. Rev. Stuart Campbell says:

      “Was Peter Murrell meant to be in front of the enquiry again today?”

      No, nobody was. My information is that the non-SNP members of the committee are very keen to bring him back in, but the SNP ones are fighting it tooth and nail.

    23. Rev. Stuart Campbell says:

      “Don’t get his thinking. The way Labour’s support is plummeting they’ll be lucky to save a deposit if they’ve to wait another year.”

      If you’re going to get thrashed anyway, may as well wait a year, keep your current diddies in a wage and hope for a miracle.

    24. winifred mccartney says:

      McDougall must be hoping the magic roundabout will magic up some votes for labour – no chance – labour now spinning out of orbit and into nothingness and good riddance.

    25. Ottomanboi says:

      « Mass vaccination » what are the Scots, a flock of sheep?
      Can see elections being « postponed » until all have been well and truly shafted, sorry injected.
      Mrs Murrell as she sees herself.
      https://de.toonpool.com/user/37658/files/coronavirus_3569015.jpg

    26. Mjack says:

      The longer any enquiry goes on the more it becomes a fudge and nothing comes of it.

    27. Aled Gwyn Job says:

      Off tangent I Know- but does anyone on this site know whether Margaret Thatcher ever said that all Scotland needed to do to gain its independence was to achieve a majority of the seats in a Scottish Election?

      Or were her comments a much circulated and quoted urban myth?

    28. Tim says:

      It’s also worth noting that Switzerland held nationwide referendums in Febuary, September and November. All of which appear to have gone smoothly.

    29. Breeks says:

      If you postpone Elections or referendums because of COVID, what do you do if COVID is here to stay?

    30. PhilM says:

      Last time I was at the baker’s they had some very tasty currant diddies…highly recommended. I think they might originate in Fife but ahm no sure.

    31. Saffron Robe says:

      Ottomanboi, I agree with you. “Injected” is only one letter away from “infected”.

      The silver bullet which will protect us as much as a ghost dance shirt against real bullets.

    32. Astonished says:

      Who is the more incompetent pennington or mcdougal ?

      Discuss and show your working.

    33. Beaker says:

      It might have been easier to make a list of countries that DIDN’T hold an election due to COVID.

      @Breeks says:
      5 January, 2021 at 3:09 pm
      “If you postpone Elections or referendums because of COVID, what do you do if COVID is here to stay?”

      Don’t give them ideas 🙂

    34. ahundredthidiot says:

      We need to be very wary here……they are laying the seeds.

      If they start to make noises about ‘allowing’ a plebiscite election and then announce it will all be a big arse ‘postal’ vote due to COVID…….we can pretty much expect to get ‘Trumped’.

      good ole postal votes…….screwing democracy in the proverbial for decades.

    35. Republicofscotland says:

      That wretched creature Blair wants the elections postponed because his Tory branch office in Scotland looks set to take a hiding, as do the other anti-Scottish British nationalist branch offices of Labour and the Lib/Dems in Scotland.

      AS for Sturgeon, she’ll use any excuse in the book to prolong not having to hold an indyref.

      I can’t make my mind up whether the British Nationalist MSP’s are feining over the precarious position that Sturgeon’s in or not.

      I suppose a slight delay a month or two, would allow other new indy parties seeking list votes to be fully prepared. Hopefully by then Sturgeon and Murrell are history.

    36. AYRSHIRE ROB says:

      Just an idea.

      If we put the vaccine in the beer.Open all the pubs and restaurants, we’ll be sorted by Sun night!

      That good enough for you anti vaxxers?

      Just trying to help.

    37. Craig Fisher says:

      ‘Aled Gwyn Job says:
      5 January, 2021 at 3:03 pm
      Off tangent I Know- but does anyone on this site know whether Margaret Thatcher ever said that all Scotland needed to do to gain its independence was to achieve a majority of the seats in a Scottish Election?’

      I think you are mixing up your urban myths – there were no Scottish Elections when Thatcher was in power, and the quote often used about Scotland sending a majority of nationalist MPs to Westminster, never seems to be corroborated.

    38. newburghgowfer says:

      If Heineken made fannies I’m sure Blair Pilsbury McDonut would be the outcome. He is the Fannies fanny !!

    39. Hatuey says:

      Well, I hope it is postponed on the basis that the SNP would have more time to get rid of Sturgeon and bring in someone new.

      For what it’s worth, I’d be willing to bet that Salmond never gives evidence at the inquiry. They’ll impose some conditions on his appearance that he won’t be able to accept and say he refused…

    40. Dan says:

      Claim of Right for Scotland is a principle that the people of Scotland have the sovereign right to determine the form of government best suited to their needs.

      I propose that we, the sovereign people of Scotland, require a referendum to establish if we consent, or not, to our current form of government stalling an election at this critical juncture, and thus denying us our ability to express our democratic will in choosing the makeup of our government in its current form.
      Should we be denied this choice by our current government, then we could choose to remove our consent and move to create another form of government better suited to our needs.

    41. Beaker says:

      @newburghgowfer says:
      5 January, 2021 at 4:02 pm
      “If Heineken made fannies I’m sure Blair Pilsbury McDonut would be the outcome. He is the Fannies fanny !!”

      Don’t you mean Carlsberg?

    42. Bob Mack says:

      Durect quote from Mrs Thatcher s book The Downing St years.

      ” As a nation they have the right to self determination. Thus far they have not exercised that right and have chosen to stay in the Union “.

    43. How can Nicola avoid being called a liar if she holds an election in May when she said her entire focus was on the pandemic?

    44. Gregor says:

      Don’t forget:

      Global pandemic virus source (Wuhan) has more freedom than you, and is enjoying a huge street party:

      https://twitter.com/CBSNews/status/1344709967086047232

    45. As for indyref2, if we’re all vaccinated this year then there is nothing stopping it being held Thu 15 Sep 2022.

      I believe NS should put that date in the next manifesto.

      If Boris can Brexit *during* a pandemic, we can hold an indyref2 a year *after* the pandemic ended.

    46. Ian says:

      Note that both the regional elections held in Spain on 12th July had been postponed from 5th April.

      Spain was in full lockdown on 5th April though and restrictions had been eased by 12th July.

    47. Tannadice Boy says:

      The odds on the SNP winning the next Holyrood Election are 1 to 33. In other words, a foregone conclusion. Even if the Murrells were to go between now and then I doubt it would substantially change the outcome. In her role as First Minister, Nicola is a prime mover in delaying that election. If she doesn’t want to delay, as stated, then the election will go ahead in May. So that leaves the Inquiry with time pressure, not a good thing. Also new party entrants of which they are a few waiting registration with the Electoral Commission will be pressured. One surprising example being Black Lives Matter (Scotland) wonder what there view is on Independence?. And there are others but not one Alex Salmond is associated with, so his comeback can be discounted. Not a good outlook if you are not a fanboy of the Murrells. It’s all on the Inquiry making incisive progress. Otherwise we face 5 more years of the gravy train, gender woo woo and being part of the UK. (No chance of the election being a Plebiscite as Nicola says computer says no)

    48. Johnny Martin says:

      Gregory Beekman:

      Nicola is hardly *holding* the referendum as it’s something that’s supposed to happen automatically as a function of the state.

      I recognise that this will not prevent some people from saying what you suggest though.

      As for independence, yes, good luck. They seem to be trying all they can to signify that they want people to get scunnered and give up, as per this nonsense….

      https://twitter.com/David_Jamieson7/status/1346489624831602688

    49. ahundredthidiot says:

      I know someone who recently took out a mortgage and is actively hoping to be put on furlough by their SME employer.

      Literally almost as thick as Ayrshire Rob – although I am guessing that lockdown loony probably works for the public sector.

      The cretin clearly doesn’t work in the service sector – which is being decimated. Arse.

    50. Stuart MacKay says:

      Bye, bye to asking nicely for independence: https://archive.is/20cXi

      England will receive an additional 10 MPs under a planned review of parliamentary constituency boundaries beginning this month.

      The shake-up – based on latest voter registration figures – will see Scotland lose two seats and Wales lose eight.

    51. Willie says:

      Increasingly you have to see this coronavirus thing as a political cover.

      No one doubts that there is an outbreak of a flu related infection that preys on the elderly and the sick. No body doubts that intensive care beds are being used up. But tell me, why is it that none of the Louise Jordan – Nightingale hospitals are in use if things are so bad.

      And don’t you think things get unexpectedly conveniently bad just as Brexit occurs and the economy absolutely tanks as the reality of a rotten deal and Britain’s poor economic position starts to become clear.

      So again why all the bad figures now but empty emergency hospitals built specifically for the pandemic.

      And if COVID is so bad why did Johnson and his government make Brexit their sole focus. And how come we now have four gunboats deployed into the Channel in a show of strength. Or what about the carrier fleet now heading off to the Far East in a show of naval strength. Not exactly the focus of a country in the middle of a supposed health crisis.

      Yep, something doesn’t gel. But one thing though there are some well connected people making fortunes out of the COVID emergency.

      Economic and political re-set??

    52. Clyde says:

      I posted yesterday that Sturgeon got her mates at Porten Down to come up with a stronger virus than the one we had previously and let it gradually spread up from the MANKY LANDS to the south our border, so it arrives in Scotland in time for the May election.

      It was a bit tongue n cheek.

      But it seems it might not be that far off the mark.

    53. Republicofscotland says:

      Stuart @4.36pm.

      Stuart thanks for the link, I see the Tory strong hold of the South-East will be the big winner in all of this with the most additional MP’s.

    54. Hatuey says:

      Dan, I get no pleasure from telling you this, but if our hope of achieving independence hinges on the Claim of Right, we don’t have any hope of achieving independence.

      95% of the electorate think that sort of stuff is nuts.

    55. Dan says:

      @ Stuart Mackay

      Hmm, so political representation is to be based on latest voter registration figures for an area, rather than actual population numbers residing there.
      We know that many folk living in poverty, and other precarious positions due to government policies such as austerity are more likely to move around or be disenfranchised and thus drop off the electoral roll.

    56. Robert Louis says:

      Aled Gwyn Job at 303pm,

      I have over the years, seen many sources for such a view quoted, including speeches made in the HoC by Tories. I do not have links, but it is correct that not just Thatcher, but the Tories generally in Westminster firmly were of the view that a majority of pro indy MP’s would suffice to end the treaty of union between Scotland and England.

      All my life this has been widely known, including within the SNP. It was at the time of Thatcher (I was around then) absolutely seen as a clear route for Scottish independence. With No Scottish parliament, the membership of the HoC was seen as the only possible indeicator of public mood within Scotland.

      Labour also held that view. It wasn’t some kind of urban myth, or something that was only said by Thatcher.

      Of course Westminster and the Tories changed their tune when it actually happened. Many including myself, fully expected the beginning of begotiations to end the union treaty membership of Scotland, once we had an SNP majority. It was in fact a certain Nicola Sturgeon who decided that it no longer applied.

      In short, it was the concensus political perspective across the UK, that all Scotland had to do was elect a majority of SNP (or pro-indy) MP’s to Westminster to end Scotland’s membership of the UK union with England. They never thought it would ever happen, due to Labour dominance in Scotland.

      Other folks may have sources and links – I have read articles where hansard is cited (i.e official text from HoC).

    57. Hatuey says:

      Ian Brotherhood says:
      5 January, 2021 at 1:45 pm
      “Wouldn’t Margaret Mitchell automatically take Linda Fabiani’s place as Convener?”

      I’d like that.

    58. robertknight says:

      Ronald Fraser @ 4:47

      “But it seems it might not be that far off the mark.”

      You’re so far off the mark you’re off the board, and the Rev binned you off this site nearly a week ago. Take the hint!

    59. Dan says:

      @ Hatuey

      Aye, isn’t it nuts that so many folk are unaware of this. Which is why it’s crazy you don’t spend more time enlightening folk to that situation, instead of shunning folk that are trying to raise awareness of the power they as individuals hold.

    60. Robert Louis says:

      Hatuey at 501pm,

      Sorry but they don’t. YOU ‘think’ the claim of right is nuts. It was endorsed by Westminster only two years ago, and has been a consistent aspect of political debate since before I was a boy (a long time ago).

    61. Muscleguy says:

      Niue is an island in the tropical Pacific. It is a dependency of NZ inherited from the UK. Most adult Niueans are working in NZ leaving the young and the old in Niue.

      Couple of years ago NZ ran with the UN Decolonisation program a plebiscite asking Niue to become independent. NZ was offering sweeteners for them to do so. Imagine.

      Niue voted to remain dependent.

    62. George Rutherford says:

      Clyde 4.47pm

      You describe England as being the “MANKY LANDS”.

      Very funny LoL.

      They have now given the world the most contagious form of Covid ever.

      Can I add that the MANKY LANDS are inhabited by the MANKY MOB.

      The English are hated throughout the civilised World and as soon as it is agreed that indyRef2 will go ahead, I will be the happiest guy in the world, because this time we ain’t losing no Referendum.

    63. Socrates MacSporran says:

      I note some BTL posters raising the subject of Thatcher’s widely-known assertion that a kajority of pro-independence MPs elected to Westminster would be grounds for Scotland ending the Union.

      We hear, all the time, the Tories mouthing off the lie about the SNP saying 2014 was a once in a generation referendum – whereas, as we all know, that was Wee Eck’s personal opinion, which he clarified as being “a parliamentary generation – 5 to 7 years.”

      The SNP MPs and MSPs whould be ordered, every time they raise the matter of independence, to make sure they quote Thatcher’s written opinion on what should happen with a majority of pro-independence Scottish MPs in Westminster.

      I beleive that would quickly shut up the Tories on “once in a generation.”

      Throw-in the Vow, “lead not leave” and the way Labour is less-willing than the Tories to concede certain powers to Holyrood, and the Unionists would be up shit creek sans paddle.

    64. John Main says:

      Clyde

      Lots of info online about the latest South African Covid-19 mutation. I suggest you educate yourself.

      It is even more infectious than your current favourite – the deliberately engineered manky variant. I am looking forwards to hearing your explanation for why the South Africans want to thwart Scottish Independence. Take your time and make it a good one.

      For the more serious contributors and readers out there, there is some suggestion that this latest mutation may reduce the effectiveness of the vaccines already developed.

    65. newburghgowfer says:

      Sorry @Beaker, wrong Beer but he is still the Fannies fanny

    66. J Galt says:

      Straws in the Wind?

      Sturgeon’s “no reason” to postpone seems a bit mealy-mouthed to me.

      “No reason” – until it’s handed to her perhaps?

    67. Republicofscotland says:

      I don’t recall seeing this from last year.

      https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2020-10-19/u-k-s-tories-start-war-gaming-to-stop-scottish-independence

      However I think the EU indicated a few weeks ago that the rest of the UK would have no decision on whether Scotland could return to the EU.

    68. Kate says:

      Aled Gwyn Job says:
      5 January, 2021 at 3:03 pm
      Off tangent I Know- but does anyone on this site know whether Margaret Thatcher ever said that all Scotland needed to do to gain its independence was to achieve a majority of the seats in a Scottish Election?

      Or were her comments a much circulated and quoted urban myth?

      What she actually said is this…”IF(The Tory Party)sometimes seems ENGLISH to some Scots that is because the UNION is inevitably dominated by England by reason of it’s greater population. The Scots, being a proud nation with an historic past, will inevitably resent some expressions of this fact from time to time. As a nation, they have an undoubted right to National self determination; thus far they have exercises that right by joining and remaining in the Union. Should they determine on INDEPENDENCE no English party or politician would stand in there way, however much we might regret their departure. What the Scots (Not Indeed The English) cannot do, however, is to insist upon their own terms for remaining in the Union. Regardless of the views of the others..

      I took a screen shot of this some time ago when I first saw it printed, I have copied word for word from that screen shot, as I can’t see a way to upload a photo here..

    69. Mia says:

      @Aled Gwyn Job

      The 2 quotes below are from the intervention by Martyn Day, SNP MP for Linlithgow and East Falkrik at the House of Commons, Recorded on Hansard:
      Referendum on Scottish Independence, volume 631: debated on Monday, 13 November 2017

      “Is a referendum the correct method to decide on Scottish independence? If we believe in democracy, there are logically only two routes by which we can make such a decision: the parliamentary route or by public plebiscite. The debate has moved on considerably in my lifetime from the days when we took the view that having a simple majority of SNP MPs at Westminster was the route to negotiate for independence. Even Thatcher accepted that route, and her successor Major made the point that no nation could be “held irrevocably in a union against its will”.”

      “If we believe in a parliamentary democracy using the system that Westminster uses—I have a lot of complaints about that and want a proportional system of representation at all elections—then we have to accept that a simple majority is a win under this democratic approach”

      Please copy and paste the address below to your browser if you want to read the whole exchange. When you go back in time, it is quite interesting to see the overwhelmingly pathetic excuses used by the 3 unionist parties’ representatives at the time to stop indyref. It is the same boring excuses they use today.

      Even at that point in time, with just 35 seats in Westminster, it was clear they did not have any valid excuse to stop the referendum, so if the referendum did not take place or the union did not end at the time using the second democratic route, it is simply because Sturgeon’s SNP did not want to:

      https://hansard.parliament.uk/commons/2017-11-13/debates/42449346-E2BE-4429-921B-3F72D50E27B9/ReferendumOnScottishIndependence

      On a personal note, I think only Scotland’s MPs took part in this debate. There was an England MP as chair, but the actual speakers were only Scotland’s MPs. Doesn’t this tell us that the England MPs have absolutely no business telling us if or when we can have our referendum and any attempt by them to claim a right to do so is nothing but deception?

      At least on 13 November 2017 our MPs still had a pulse and were still willing to and actively debating in Westminster about a second independence referendum, upholding our democratic mandate and telling us that there are only 2 democratic routes for independence, a referendum or a parliamentary majority that the SNP had then and continues to have to this day.

      Were there any other debates on Scottish independence in Westminster ever since? If not, why not?

      Where would this debate have gone if Mr Salmond was one of the SNP MPs? We will never know.

      Meanwhile, what was being cooked closer to home and within the guts of the Scottish government? A relentless and disgusting smearing campaign against Mr Salmond, the only person in Scotland that got us anywhere near a referendum on independence and possibly the only one with the balls to use the other democratic route if necessary.

      3 days before that debate on Scotland’s indyref, on 10th November 2017, Nicola Sturgeon was slapping Mr Salmond (metaphorically speaking) in the press because of his choice of broadcaster for his new programme. Incidentally, Mundell also mentioned sarcastically Mr Salmond’s RT programme during the debate.

      By 16 November 2017, just 3 days after that debate on Scotland’s independence by our MPs, the bogus complaints procedure aiming to catch in the net “a former minister” was being sent to the UK Cabinet Office by email for “revision”.

      By 20th and 21st November, before the procedure was even given the green light, Somers was already meeting with one of the complainants

      It is like two parallel worlds diverging from each other isn’t it? Like two wheels spinning in different directions and counteracting each other.

      Where the MPs paying just lip service in that debate or they had not a clue what was going on in the guts of the Scottish government at the time?

      Did the rogue actions of the Scottish government stall all debate on independence? If so, why? Why did the SNP MPs and rest of MSPs allowed the actions of a rogue MSP and her civil servant nodding donkeys to change completely Scotland’s democratic direction of travel and the aim of Scotland’s legitimate representatives in Westminster?

      What was the real reason that moved Sturgeon and Evans to make the new complaints procedure extensive to former ministers when there was not even one for former civil servants?

    70. Alf Baird says:

      Socrates MacSporran @ 5.20

      It wisnae just Thatcher. According to former Tory Party Chairman Norman Tebbitt: “John (Major) has made it clear that a majority of SNP MP’s after an election would serve as a mandate to begin negotiations for separation. There are no plans to hold a referendum.” (Robertson 1997).

      And Former Home Secretary Leon Brittan likewise maintained that Scotland could be independent if the nationalists won a majority of seats. However his caveat was that this should be at two successive general elections, and he also suggested that this was a view “almost universally shared among Tory back benchers” (Woodifield 1988).

      More recently, in 2010, Tories in Scotland argued that: “If people in Scotland were bursting to be free would they not be taking the opportunity to vote SNP? Should the SNP not be campaigning to win a majority of Scotland’s 59 seats” (Swanson 2010).

      So the reality is the Tories and Labour always taunted Scottish nationalists that they would need to win a majority of seats for independence. It was only after the SNP actually started to win a majority of seats in Scotland, at Holyrood and Westminster, that the Tories shifted the goalposts to the need for a referendum and then a S.30 referendum.

      The fact is, Scotland has returned three successive majorities of SNP MP’s and is de facto independent already. The only people holding Scotland within the UK union are therefore SNP MP’s!

    71. twathater says:

      @ Kate 5.35pm yes Kate I remember seeing that exact quote within the last few days on twatter

    72. Hatuey says:

      Robert, if, as you say, the Claim of Right has been “a consistent aspect of political debate” since before you were a boy, that’s an argument for ditching it in political debate.

      And I’m not shunning anyone, Dan. The claim of right has a part to play in establishing Scotland’s right to self determination, but only within a framework that satisfies constitutional law as it exists today, not on its own.

    73. Clyde says:

      Excellent article Rev Stu, Scotland’s only true investigative journalist.

      Does House Jock McDougall still play the Tuba???

      Or did somebody ram it up his Arse???

      The Labour Party is an irrelevance in Scotland.

      A bit like the LibDens and Greens.

      The Tory Party is the only Party of opposition in Scotland.

      And only because of the diehard bluenoses in Scotland and because of places like Moray, where the southern MANKY MOB have moved in to.

    74. twathater says:

      Stu I would like to thank you for the heaps of posts over the past few weeks and months , the information and exposures contained within these posts has not diminished the quality by an iota , and has only served to show other not so savvy bloggers how REAL investigative journalism should be done , the constant repeat by other bloggers that bozo bad , wm bad ,tories bad only highlights their need to up their game

    75. Dan says:

      @ Hatuey

      You have been fairly consistent btl in your attempts to steer folk away from, or have been dismissive of folk, that try to promote or highlight Scot’s sovereignty or cultural matters in discussions.
      If you have spent any serious amount of time campaigning with the wider public to promote Scotland returning to a status of self-governance you would know that you need a range of topics and angles to converse with the diverse range of punters that reside in Scotland.
      Why are you trying to reduce, or diminish in importance, the number of potential aspects activists could utilise?

    76. Johnny Martin says:
      5 January, 2021 at 4:32 pm
      Gregory Beekman:

      Nicola is hardly *holding* the referendum as it’s something that’s supposed to happen automatically as a function of the state.

      I know you meant election there.

      Fair point, though – the state holds the election, not the FM.

      But the point is, she wants it to go ahead. If she suggested a delay to Sept, I’m sure there’d be support. The fact she isn’t suggesting a delay then makes one think: how on Earth is she going to run an election campaign and manage the pandemic? Yes, I’m sure she can multi-task but I’d rather she woke up thinking about the pandemic rather than waking up thinking about how best to counter an opposition attack.

    77. Stuart MacKay says:

      Dan @5:03pm

      It’s straight out of the American playbook. It ensures the poor and ethnic minorities that are the most disadvantaged. It is also why you hear so much on the news about voter registration drives whenever there is a presidential election in the USA.

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


      The term gerrymandering is named after American politician Elbridge Gerry (pronounced with a hard “g”; “Gherry”, Vice President of the United States at the time of his death, who, as Governor of Massachusetts in 1812, signed a bill that created a partisan district in the Boston area that was compared to the shape of a mythological salamander. The term has negative connotations and gerrymandering is almost always considered a corruption of the democratic process. The resulting district is known as a gerrymander (/?d??ri?mænd?r, ???ri-/). The word is also a verb for the process.

      Despicable and entirely predictable.

    78. Clyde says:

      What has engerland done for you???

      Well,,,it gave us Austerity, foodbanks, Eye watering Debt, Nuclear Missiles, illegal wars, Margaret Thatcher, Boris Johnson, a parasite royal family, London, the most corrupt City in the world, a bias lying Media, anti democratic government, the worst racism in the world and the most contagious strain of coronavirus anywhere in the world.

      No wonder the majority of Scots want away from the mob

      Add if I missed anything.

    79. Rick H Johnston says:

      Expect the idea that we cannot have a May election while in a pandemic to gain traction among Unionist politicians.
      The US elected a new president in November,and other countries have had general elections.
      Already the red and blue Tories are uniting against Scottish democracy.
      This is sheer desperation and make no mistake the MSM will join in to support it.
      Better together never really disbanded.
      Tony Blair is blaming Scottish voters for not electing a strong enough opposition to the SNP. Who the hell goes to the polls to elect an opposition?
      Are we a bloody colony or what.

    80. Laing french says:

      Maybe Blair Mcdougall should consider moving to bright happy exuberant Englund?

    81. kapelmeister says:

      Here’s hoping all Scotland’s 59 Commons seats are abolished before the next Westminster GE.

    82. AYRSHIRE ROB says:

      Aw, ‘the idiot’ doesn’t like the idea of putting the vaccine in beer. What a shame. His idea like some others is just to open up, let it rip our NHS to shreds,make people Ill ,devastate families and destroy the economy even worse than it is now.Oh and don’t mention the continued mass casualties.

      For the last time fruitcake, this is not the flu. Its kills by the 100’s of thousands, not a few hundred.

      You’re literally as dumb as ‘i won by a lot’ ‘I won bigly’ ‘many people in my head are saying’ ‘no way I lost the election’s’ Trump.

    83. Dorothy Devine says:

      Kapelmeister , by the next GE there will be 57 Scottish seats.

    84. Mia says:

      “by the next GE there will be 57 Scottish seats”

      So you think there will be another GE?

      That is disappointing.

      If after sending 3 successive overall majorities of nationalists to WEstminster the SnP MPs still force us to remain in this union and watch in distress how our assets are stolen from our children or privatised and exploited for other’s benefit, the humiliation of a decrease in our representation in the so called UK parliament because they do not have the balls to end the union, then they better start preparing their resumes because by that time it will be more than obvious that Sturgeon and her disciples’ gradualist disastrous approach has been an embarrassing, unforgivable and spectacular failure of cosmic proportions.

      If by the next GE we are still in this union and out of the EU union, it will be the political burial of the SNP, sturgeon at the helm or not.

      The SNP MPs have until the next GE, whenever that is, to find the backbone they lost in 2017 and negotiate the end of the union. It is about time they eject the rogue that has locked herself in the driving seat, to kick out the husband that is standing on the breaks, to disable the reverse gear of our car and get going.

      There has been petrol in the tank since May 2015 and several spare tyres in the form of indyref mandates have been put in the boot ever since.

      Tick tock.

    85. Lochside says:

      Why are people on here still questioning the basis of Independence based on the majority of Scottish seats as the trigger point?

      For the part of the 20th century that witnessed the inception of universal sufferage and the creation of the SNP, the only stage for Scottish Sovereignty to be asserted was Westminster. Historically that’s where our Sovereignty was delivered and supposedly represented and protected by our MPs from 1707 onwards.

      The reality was that those MPs for the period up until 2015 only represented their bosses in the hegemony of English national parties..red, blue and yellow unionists. The sole objective of the SNP was to be elected to Westminster and when in a majority, to petition the dissolution of the U.K. That objective and that right was recognised and respected by the English body politic until the SNP gave the ba’ away.

      Unfortunately, somewhere along the line, the SNP dropped this condition for asserting Sovereignty and AS came up with the toxic Indyref idea, a failure that defined us as colonial possessions of England. BTW the Claim of Right has been ‘debated’ in Parliament twice in the last few years and basically ignored. Debates have been hollow shams engineered by the SNP to virtue signal to its loyalists. The votes absent for or against precisely because it had no constitutional muscle, unlike the Act/Treaties of Union, and has been sidelined by the IndyRef obsfucation.

      Unfortunately, the SNP internally started to undermine their own raison d’etre: falling for the total distraction of Holyrood as the ‘return’ of the Scottish Parliament was a fiction and a dangerous invitation to the English to undermine further the point of our MPs duty in Westminster.

      Let’s be clear: As Burns said ( not Gove)’facts are chiels that winna ding’..Westminster is sovereign over all the devolved assemblies and it is the crucible where our severance of the accursed Union must be acted out. Section 30s and plebiscite blah blahs are doomed to utter failure and humiliation. Our MPs have the Sovereign right and duty to strike the blow that severs the chains of English supremacy over us now!

    86. Dorothy Devine says:

      Mia , I am hoping not but fearing so.

    87. DaveL says:

      @Muscleguy 5.15pm

      I was pleased to see your post re Niue because I’ve been trying to remember the name of that island for ages.

      The reason is that as far as I remember New Zealand offers the people there independence on a regular basis, every four to six years or so. And as you note they say ‘no thanks’, it has nothing of value to NZ and is an ongoing expense on the public purse.

      If they had oil or any other valueable commodity we can be sure things would be very different.

    88. Saffron Robe says:

      Willie at 4:40 pm. I’m with you and agree with your line of argument.

      To me, Covid-19(84) is the best description for the pandemic; not because there isn’t any truth to it, but because the truth has been obscured by lies and dishonesty.

      If we are still under lockdown/severe restrictions come March, does that not mean we will be right back to where we started from? We are caught in a loop like a madman repeating the same thing over and over again and expecting a different result.

      Nicola Sturgeon’s record:

      Six wasted years on delivering independence.
      Almost a year wasted on trying to deal with Covid-19, not to mention the lives lost.

      Six wasted years for the people of Scotland.

      I think the root problem with the SNP is as follows: Nicola Sturgeon is much more intent on exercising her own (autocratic) will than in exercising the democratic will of the Scottish people who put her there. Democracy relies on trust and quite plainly she can’t be trusted.

    89. Clyde says:

      Ah blame the MANKY MOB, pure and simple.

      The MANKY MOB reside in the MANKY LANDS to the south of the Scottish border and they do actually exist.

      One of their biggest exports is a rather disgusting human being called MANKY JAIKIT.

      He’s a regular attendee at all Yes Rallies.

      His message to the people of Scotland is to remain a Colony and subservient to MANKY LAND for ever more.

    90. Mia says:

      “Unfortunately, somewhere along the line, the SNP dropped this condition for asserting Sovereignty and AS came up with the toxic Indyref idea”

      More on that here

      “The reinvention of the SNP”, by David Torrance, 21 May 2015, The guardian”

      here is a quote from that article

      “But the first major step towards rejuvenating the SNP came in 2000, when Salmond persuaded his party to adopt a new path towards independence. Before then, nationalists had argued that a majority of Scottish seats in either the House of Commons or a devolved Scottish parliament would constitute a mandate for independence negotiations. There was no need, they argued, for a referendum. But Salmond and others on the “gradualist” wing of the party realised this scared certain voters; what was needed was something to separate the SNP from its longstanding aim.

      Salmond’s first big step towards rejuvenating the SNP came in 2000, when he persuaded his party to adopt a new path
      Following a close vote, “independence must be achieved by a referendum” became the new SNP orthodoxy. This shift in policy was not welcomed by more fundamentalist nationalists. To them, the word “referendum” generally meant a unionist trap, the sort used to thwart Scotland’s constitutional ambitions rather than advance them”

      It seems that the “need” of a referendum for independence has been manufactured by the gradualist wing of the SNP. It should have become obvious in 2014 that unless that referendum can be completely detached from interference by the British state and its institutions, it is a loss cause and is indeed “a unionist trap, the sort used to thwart Scotland’s constitutional ambitions rather than advance them”.

      That Sturgeon has not chosen to learn from mistakes by reverting that policy and rather risks the british state robbing us of our yes result, yet again, is quite telling.

    91. john rose says:

      I’m curious to know about the by-elections to the house of Lords at the end of December… is that really how they are reported in official lists? Is the truth too bewildering for foreigners?

    92. Hatuey says:

      Dan, culture is an entirely different subject and I don’t know what it is if people like you can’t define it. So, here’s your chance; explain to me what it is in cultural terms that both unifies and distinguishes everybody (or at least a large majority of the people) in Scotland.

      Is it food? A love of a certain type of music? Religion or faith? Maybe we have certain habits or behavioural traits. Maybe you think we are saintly. God’s chosen people? Over to you.

      I’m not trying to diminish anything. No matter what comes out of any debate about Scottish history, culture, and sovereignty (here, in the courts, or anywhere else), we are incarcerated in the British Union with very few options for escape.

      Any route we find to independence will depend on overcoming political and constitutional barriers that exist in the here and now, not in the distant past or the minds of half-cut romantics, and that’s where we need to focus.

      If you reduce the argument to some tartan-clad pseudo-socialist pipe dream, you lose the argument.

    93. stuart mctavish says:

      Gregory Beekman @6.00pm
      Simple way would be to invoke Margaret Thatcher’s doctrine, kindly provided above by Kate, to declare England independent and run for Holyrood on a manifesto to take rUK (Scotland NI and Wales, Bahamas etc.) back into the EU following a GE in the Autumn..

      The kicker would be if Salmond’s appearance has indeed been delayed until June since that would allow him to front a list party in May and replace half the people on the committee with his own 🙂

    94. Saffron Robe says:

      “This shift in policy was not welcomed by more fundamentalist nationalists. To them, the word ‘referendum’ generally meant a Unionist trap, the sort used to thwart Scotland’s constitutional ambitions rather than advance them.”

      That’s very interesting Mia. I have always considered the referendum route to be a Unionist trap for the reasons you explain: “It should have become obvious in 2014 that unless that referendum can be completely detached from interference by the British state and its institutions, it is a lost cause and is indeed a Unionist trap.”

      And if we extrapolate the argument further, then asking for a Section 30 order is simply allowing the Unionists to set the trap for us!

    95. Stuart MacKay says:

      Hatuey

      Culture is nothing simple you can point your finger at. Instead it is the way people think, behave and interact with each other. Wearing tartan, eating paella or drinking Suntory are just attributes. It’s the culture that binds it all together.

      Scots, Geordies, Poles and Norwegians all have shared culture. It’s not so much where you stand but what you see from where you’re standing.

      I hope that was suitably vague and hand-wavy.

    96. Dan says:

      @ Hatuey

      Ach, get awa’ wi yer deflecting to avoid answering my question as to why you would try to reduce the stock and value of potential campaigning aspects Indy activists can utilise to help enlighten the broad spectrum of views held by our fellow Scots.
      We are all unique individuals and we don’t exist in isolation, so we have to have the ability to listen and be receptive to where other people are at in the scheme of things. Because of this, being able to communicate and relate to folk on an array of subject matters is very useful when in campaigning mode and more likely to reap some rewards.
      When you knock on hundreds of stranger’s door when canvassing, or some random comes up to you when you’re on a street stall, you have no idea who they are or what views they hold, so being equipped to deal with a vast range of potential conversational subjects is required, and believe it or not the stuff you call “nuts” do actually have value sometimes.
      You said 95% don’t care for this sort of stuff, so bloody what, we don’t need to convince 95%, we work on the ones who we can bring over to our side using whatever ways we can.

      Re. Culture The word definitely exists because it is in the bloody dictionary and a quick google will throw up the following couple of meanings for it.

      the arts and other manifestations of human intellectual achievement regarded collectively.

      the ideas, customs, and social behaviour of a particular people or society.

      If you are unable or simply unwilling to consider that Scotland has its own unique traits that fit in to those definitions then I can’t help you, and I have no interest in getting drawn into a tit for tat shitfest over it.

    97. Derek says:

      @Gregory Beekman says:
      5 January, 2021 at 2:08 pm
      WARNING: a rogue d is on the loose

      d d d d d d d d d d D

      There it goes! …and there’s more of them!

    98. Kangaroo says:

      Willie @4:40

      Absolutely spot on. This has been the case all along. The Deep State was using the manufactured pandemic to inject us with a fake vaccine called Covid 19. This actually stands for
      COVert
      IDentification
      for
      Artificial
      Intelligence
      1 referring to A
      9 referring to I
      This vaccine included a nanobot chip which could be read by scanners and upload/download your biometric and other info to their computers. It was the ultimate means of control.

      This plan has been thwarted by the US Military and 4,10,20 otherwise known as DJT Donald John Trump.
      The lockdown a are to ensure everyone stays home and safe whilst they arrest the bad guys.

      NB the use of numbers to replace letters is called Gematria and is Masonic, ask one if you don’t believe me, or use Google.

      You will see on 6th Jan evidence being laid before the US Congress which will blow your mind and most of the other BTL commenters.

      A good start would be to check out pedoempire.org and DJTs lawyer Lin Woods’ tweets @LlinWood.
      He states that rape and murder of children was used by the CIA FBI MOSSAD MI6 and Epstein to advance their agendas.

      The vast majority of the bad guys have been arrested and executed. The navy in the Channel is to catch the runners.

      “Clowns to the left of me
      Joker’s to the right
      I’m stuck in the middle with the Pinball Wizards”?

    99. Bob Mack says:

      Oh boy! Skippy’s dropped a screw.

    100. FFS bring that Cameron guy back and hunt Skippy!

    101. Andy Ellis says:

      @Dave Beveridge

      Don’t even think it! Spameron has now turned his baleful glance and cut and paste antics to Grouse Beater’s blog: Gareth would do well to follow Stu’s example PDQ.

      It is to be hoped Stu takes the hint from the general and very noticeable improvement BTL after Spameron’s exclusion and follows suit with obvious fruit loops like Skippy, Clyde & their ilk?

    102. Derek says:

      The ‘roo has pitched up in Munguin-land, too.

    103. Saffron Robe says:

      Kangaroo, how do you know that the 19 in Gematria stands for “artificial intelligence” and not “artificially induced” or “artfully indoctrinated” for example?

    104. AYRSHIRE ROB says:

      Can you give us a clue what 4,10,20 is like?

      Is it a secret code or wit?

    105. Lynne says:

      Precedents are being set. Greater Manchester council elections looking likely to be deferred to summer/autumn on the grounds of ‘Covid safety concerns’.

      https://twitter.com/kevfitz21/status/1346556436747321345

    106. Gregor says:

      The despicable actions and behavior of rotten Scot Gov/SNP hierarchy is seriously challenging my perception of ‘Scotland’s culture’ (a culture of rotten institutions; duplicitous, conspiring and colluding state officials; reckless & dangerous wacko policies/Rules/Laws, etc ?), however, Scotland to me, is the place I best feel, recognise and trust as my home, dependable friend, and most viable future…

    107. Alf Baird says:

      Dan

      Been through the ‘culture-gap’ with Hatuey before, who seems not to appreciate the nature or the importance of culture and its critical relationship to national liberation. As you imply, it is to a large degree our national culture that is driving Scots to seek independence, in which (Scots) language also plays a large part, most peoples in self-determination conflict being culturally and linguistically divided.

      Fanon remains very informative on the relationship between, and impact of colonialism on national culture:

      “Culture is first the expression of a nation, the expression of its preferences, of its taboos and its patterns. A national culture is the sum total of all these appraisals. In the colonial situation, culture, which is doubly deprived of the support of the nation and of the state, falls away and dies. The condition for its (i.e. national culture) existence is therefore national liberation and the renaissance of the state. The nation is not only the condition of culture, its fruitfulness, its continuing renewal, and its deepening. It is also a necessity. It is the fight for national existence which sets culture moving and opens to it the doors of creation. Later on it is the nation which will ensure the condition and framework necessary to culture. The nation gathers together the various indispensable elements necessary for the creation of a culture, those elements which alone can give it credibility, validity, life and creative power. In the same way it is its national character that will make such a culture open to other cultures.. A non-existent culture can hardly be expected to have bearing on reality, or to influence reality. The first necessity is the re-establishment of the nation in order to give life to national culture in the strictly biological sense of the phrase.”

    108. Saffron Robe says:

      Or even “absurdly insane”?

    109. Liz says:

      willie @4.42pm

      The reason the nightingale hospitals aren’t being used in England is because there are no staff to staff them. There never were. It was all a PR job by the UK gov. Any hospital that sent patients tthere were expected to send staff with them. Scotland has not reached the point of exceeding hospital beds yet.

    110. Tam Fae somewhere says:

      Perth cooncil elections recently held after a couple of deaths of serving councillors show that not only can you hold elections during covid19 but that you can also hold these elections in Scotland.

      Precedent already set for elections in Scotland during covid19 🙂

    111. Iain More says:

      Breeks says:
      5 January, 2021 at 3:09 pm

      “If you postpone Elections or referendums because of COVID, what do you do if COVID is here to stay?”

      That is the tyrants option. There is no excuse for delaying either in a supposed democracy. Heck hey are even making it so that those with Covid 19 can vote in US State of Georgia today.

    112. Hatuey says:

      Dan: “If you are unable or simply unwilling to consider that Scotland has its own unique traits“

      I asked you to tell me what they were. You can’t give one example. You’re the one chapping on doors with this pitch, not me.

      For me it’s enough to say the thing that distinguishes us is the fact that we are Scottish, which is a matter of definition; I don’t know why that isn’t enough for you and others.

      My advice is to avoid this sort of subject entirely if you’re out canvassing. It’s a can of worms and it’s not like we are short of important and meaningful things to talk about.

    113. Mc Duff says:

      I fear Sturgeon wants to hold the election she knows she will win and then park independence in a dark cellar.
      I loathe this woman.

    114. Effijy says:

      I’m worried about the May election being mainly by
      Postal votes which we already know will be corrupted
      by every intelligence and military group at Westminster’s
      disposal.

      Ruth can again open the ballot boxes before the count just to ensure
      she put all the X’s in the right box.

    115. Hatuey says:

      “It is to be hoped Stu takes the hint from the general and very noticeable improvement BTL after Spameron’s exclusion and follows suit with obvious fruit loops like Skippy, Clyde & their ilk?”

      Here we go again.

    116. Mia says:

      “And if we extrapolate the argument further, then asking for a Section 30 order is simply allowing the Unionists to set the trap for us!”

      I agree. I must admit that I have always seen the “requirement” for a S30 that Sturgeon is so adamant to abide by as a totally unnecessary and self-defeating manoeuvre that negates our principle of popular sovereignty, our claim of right and the premise this is a union. It is at all practical effects the same as demoting Scotland to the status of England’s colony and handing to England’s government for free a right to veto that they never had in the first place.

      If my memory does not fail, I read a while back a BBC article where it said that Mr Salmond’s did not request an S30. He simply announced the referendum and then England politicians almost fell over themselves to hand over to him the S30 “to avoid legal complications” because they were not sure at the time if consent from Westminster was required or not. Mr Salmond simply accepted it.

      I also read a while back the paper that pretended to “justify” at the time the requirement for a S30 and I was most unconvinced.It seemed to be more a collection of unionist lawyers’ opinions than a balance document exploring both possibilities.

      Looking retrospectively, maybe they knew there was not a chance in hell they would allow Mr Salmond win that referendum so in reality perhaps they were setting the trap for the next one, because surely another one would come as they knew their “interventions” would only serve to stall independence and therefore the question would not be settled.

      I wonder if they thought creating such “requirement” for an S30 would make the SNP under the right leader innocuous now that that the gradualist faction of the SNP had shot themselves in both feet by setting the precedent for a referendum as the only “standard” road to independence.

      Sturgeon has gone a step forward in denying Scotland its right to self determination by deciding on her own accord that both restrictions (the S30 + pre indy referendum) are not only “the” gold standard but the only “legal” route when it is just one option.

      Mr Salmond had a very good reason to change the policy at the time to a referendum and is that prior to that, they never managed to reach anywhere near 20 MPs. Clearly that policy worked as they got a majority in Holyrood in 2011 and then 56 MPs in 2015. But 2015 is the time you would think a shrewd political operator/strategist would revert the policy back to a majority of MPs/MSPs as it was crystal clear at the time that the combination of a referendum that could be tampered with by the English establishment and a S30 acting as a gatekeeper would be the last resource unionist hand break to Scotland’s self-determination after it came so darn close in 2014. It seems Nicola Sturgeon has been doing the dirty work of holding that hand brake on behalf of the British state.

    117. wee monkey says:

      George Rutherford says:
      5 January, 2021 at 5:18 pm
      Clyde 4.47pm

      You describe England as being the “MANKY LANDS”.

      Very funny LoL.

      They have now given the world the most contagious form of Covid ever.”

      Actually it is the South African mutation that holds that honour…

    118. Hatuey says:

      Alf: “ it is to a large degree our national culture that is driving Scots to seek independence”

      I could just as easily argue that national culture is holding Scotland back. If I did, someone might legitimately expect me to explain what I meant and provide examples. And that’s all I’m asking you to do.

    119. Clyde says:

      60 000 new cases of the MANKY LANDS Virus in one day.

      That is out of control and the worst strain of Covid anywhere in the world.

      The MANKY bastards to the south of our border should be put under house arrest for the foreseeable future.

      Armed gaurds should be put on the Scottish border so not a single MANKY bastard gets into Scotland.

    120. Bob Mack says:

      How do you explain “Scottish” culture?

      Well having travelled all around the world and visited many countries, I have always been asked about Scotland.

      People ask me about Burns The Highlands.Skye, The Glaxgow Boys, Loch Lomand, Nessie ,Highland games,Kilts.

      I enjoy trave!,but I love coming home, because it is exactly that. A comfirting familiarity with all things that I take for granted and foreigners want to eagerly want know about.

      In Japan I was asked about Prince Charlie and Culloden. I was asked if all McDonald’s were the same family.

      Culture is something we take for granted. Our daily lives.

      I stood marvelling at the Colliseum whilst ordinary Roman citizens never paid it one bit of attention.

      Scotland has great and unique culture. We sometimes just don’t see it.

    121. James Che. says:

      Hatuey, The claim of right, is in uk legislation, being part of the treaty of the union, it is unchanged and unamended.
      The claim of right is in the Scotland act,
      The claim of right went through Westminster in the last few years with no refusal from Westminster,
      The claim of right for the people of Scotland to chose whom governs us is very legal,
      What I am over the moon about is how many readers and commenters here are realising that the Scottish people are indeed sovereign above governments and monarchy.
      And just to add to my joy, let the Scottish people here know that the claim of right is not limited in any way.
      Let me clarify that remark,
      a) The claim of right does not have a set time limit imposed upon it.
      b) The claim of right does not state, it can only be used once, and thereafter becomes obsolete, nope, Apparently we can use it over and over if we needed to.
      c) The claim of right does not state the method that has to be used to use it. ( ie ) does not state anywhere that we have to have a section 30, or a referendum when the uk parliament allows.
      d) it is part of the constitution of the union of the Scotland and England, /uk
      Add this to the right to self determination, the broken treaty of the union, human rights, and it is a massive boost to those of us that wish to end the treaty of the union.
      Here are a few more quotes to add to the Tory position on sovereignty that make us smile.
      ?David Davis. mp,former Brexit minister, 10th March 2019.
      Quote: There is no other treaty in the world that I’m aware of where a sovereign nation undertakes to join up and can only leave when the other side says so.

      Geffory Cox, mp, attorney General, 12th March 2019.
      ?Quote: every sovereign state has the right to withdraw from a treaty if the treaty is not anymore compatible to its interests.

      ?Kate Hoey. mp, to attorney general. 12th March 2019.
      Why would a nation sign up to a deal with a union which says we are not able to leave when we want to.

      So Scots having the claim of right, making them sovereign and having a right to chose whom governs them, and when the Scottish people Do not choose Westminster or a political party that is not following independence for Scotland or anyone full of wokery that is damaging to the Scottish people, Thus ending the of treaty of the union by legal default.

    122. Polly says:

      Alf Baird says: at 5:40 pm

      Oh good post and details and quotes are worth keeping. Thank you.

      @ Lochside

      ‘…the Claim of Right has been ‘debated’ in Parliament twice in the last few years and basically ignored. Debates have been hollow shams engineered by the SNP to virtue signal to its loyalists. The votes absent for or against precisely because it had no constitutional muscle’

      Entirely true and unfortunate.

      @ Stuart MacKay

      ‘Scots, Geordies, Poles and Norwegians all have shared culture. It’s not so much where you stand but what you see from where you’re standing.

      I hope that was suitably vague and hand-wavy.’

      I found that rather deep myself, of course I might be notoriously shallow 🙂

    123. Beaker says:

      Someone give Kangaroo his medication. Or perhaps take him off it.

      Either that or he’s been watching Demolition Man.

    124. Derek says:
      5 January, 2021 at 9:22 pm

      d d d d d d d d d d D

      There it goes! …and there’s more of them!

      Damn it! It’s cloned d d d itself!

    125. Alf Baird says:

      Culture is who we are and what differentiates us from all other peoples.

      Colonialism gives us a ‘clandestine culture’ where if we even mention ‘our culture’ we are reprimanded, by the colonizer and also by the colonised elite.

      Worth remembering that “cultural imperialism is the practice of promoting the (supposedly ‘superior’) culture and/or language of one nation in another.”

      Which helps explain why some Scots have a confused national identity and hence opt to reject their own (supposedly ‘inferior’) national identity and culture/language.

    126. Famous15 says:

      Clyde is desperate to create an anti English theme and so tarnish the Yessers good name.

      He is as obvious as the clueless anti vaxers trying similar tainting of the site.

      Independence is normal and it is good that normal people on this site think so too.

    127. Elmac says:

      On the subject of vaccination, it is claimed there have been over 92,000 carried out in Scotland so far. I have a neighbour who is 88, in poor health, and is fighting emphysema and 2 types of cancer. He has had no contact whatsoever from the NHS. I would like a breakdown of the various groups vaccinated to date and whether that includes politcians, royalty or anyone else under 80 who is not involved in the NHS, emergency or care systems.

      Would be interested to have fellow Wingers thoughts on this as I am concerned that the right people are being vaccinated.

    128. Elmac says:

      I have no axe to grind on soccer but methinks NS is doing everything she can to deflect public attention at a dangerous time for her and is stirring the pot on Celtic’s training trip to Dubai. The facts are no laws were infringed, the players are less likely to be infected there than back home, and they are not mixing any more than they would be in their training sessions in Glasgow.

      Come on Sturgeon, spare us the deflection, and concentrate on cutting out the lies, corruption and obfuscation in your own party. You could make a start by complying with the Salmond enquiry and putting the aspirations of our country above your own.

    129. Polly says:

      @ Elmac

      I’m getting tired, pls see answer previous thread. :). Good night

    130. Clyde says:

      Famous15

      Another Sturgeonista who refuses to critisize Sturgeon in any way.

      I personally think she has moved up here from the MANKY LANDS and prefers Sturgeon’s approach to indyRef2, which is that it will never happen

      Go on Famous15, say just one bad word about Sturgeon, just one.

      Independence is normal,,,you obviously are not.

    131. Hatuey says:

      I’m sorry Bob Mack, but being happy to return home isn’t unique to Scotland and, therefore, isn’t an example of Scottish culture.

      Anyway, I give up. Have your culture. It’ll inevitably descend into cancel-culture and mindless xenophobia, but knock yourselves out – everybody else seems to be doing it, why not Scotland?

      Loch Lomond and Nessie it is…

    132. George Rutherford says:

      Famous15

      What has been your contribution to today’s debate, to go after another poster?

      Why?

      What did anyone learn from your post?

      Go away and come back when you have some meaningful contribution to make.

    133. Hatuey says:

      Without looking on Google or anything, can anyone tell me when Canada or Australia achieved independence?

      No cheating. (and yes, I know they still have the queen as head of state)

    134. Davie Oga says:

      Canada – depends.

      Canada has been autonomous and self governing since confederation in 1867.

      Technically, total independence bar queenie never occurred until the repatriation of the Canadian constitution in 1982.

    135. Hatuey says:

      Thanks, Davie. Would or could you argue that Canada lacks independence today?

    136. Saffron Robe says:

      Mia, I don’t disagree with anything you say at 11:17 pm. However, I think the premise is much simpler. Simply by asking you are giving tacit legitimacy to the authority being asked.

      Westminster has no right or legitimacy to deny us self-determination. Nicola Sturgeon by asking gives them that right.

      But it comes down to the same thing in the end which you summarise succinctly:

      “It seems Nicola Sturgeon has been doing the dirty work of holding that hand brake on behalf of the British state.”

    137. Elmac says:

      Polly @1.16

      Posted in previous thread in error and repeated on this one. Found your response and it sounds like you have the same concerns as I do.

      Anybody else with anecdotal evidence of failure to vaccinate those at major risk or dodgy preferences given? If the system is not working or is being corrupted then the sooner this is aired the better.

    138. Davie Oga says:

      I think the pace of Canadian constitutional change would scare a lot of people in Scotland, particularly politicians. We should be grateful Scotgov have adopted a long term strategy. In 125 years The SNP will have a minimum of 50 mandates, plus with advances in cryogenics, and the religious like devotion so many have to the dear leader, The SNP can keep their “best asset” as leader until plan A comes to fruition.

      It’s a well known fact that no country with 50 democratic mandates has ever been refused a diamond standard, gold plated, sec 30 order from Westminster. It’s also a well known fact that none of the dozens of
      countries that gained independence from The UK were so cravenly servile to request even 1 section 30 order, but we are where we are.

    139. Hugh Jarse says:

      Astonished says: at 3:20 pm

      “Who is the more incompetent pennington or mcdougal ?

      Discuss and show your working”

      If competence is denoted on effective shilling for the imperial masters, Blair is nowhere, a mere footnote.

      Sir Hugh ‘green ink’ Pennington is a shoo in for his wonderful impersonation’s of a wide variety of ‘experts’ in the straight to DVD ‘Expers Schmexperts

    140. Davie Oga says:

      Hatuey says:
      6 January, 2021 at 1:37 am
      Thanks, Davie. Would or could you argue that Canada lacks independence today?

      Of course not. Canada has total political independence and every year that goes by the relationship with the UK grows weaker.
      Pretty much relegated to ceremony now.

      I always get a good chuckle at the Brexit delusion of reengaging with the likes of Canada and Australia. Especially the idea of a Wasp version of freedom of movement.
      Never in a million years.

    141. Hugh Jarse says:

      Missing t’s now!

      Faces conjure the strangest connections. Stories.

      I’m seeing the same haunted, dead eyed look of the aging boys choir masters and sadistic scout leaders, as they’re lead to , cuffed, out the back of the High court.

    142. Hugh Jarse says:

      If you are Lesely Evans + co, look away now.

      Read the two opening descriptions, and understand how governing in Scotland really works.

      https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Civil_Service_(United_Kingdom)

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

      I was looking into who pulls the levers in Marine Scotland, now we’re playing silly buggers over Rockall, for the Imperial masters.

    143. George Rutherford says:

      Who are the lynch mob who chased CamB out of town?

      The guy Andy Ellis, so now you have this particular poster Cam B eliminated, are you going to enlighten us now with your worldly knowledge?

      On you go Mr Ellis, fill your boots with all this free space YOU have created.

      I personally think you are a coward Mr Ellis, you run with the pack.

    144. Hugh Jarse says:

      Sorry, i should have put these two first. Again, you don’t have to read past the overview to work it out.

      Kapos for Westmidden!

      https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marine_Scotland#:~:text=Marine%20Scotland%20is%20a%20civil,safeguard%20its%20valuable%20marine%20ecosystems.

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

    145. Hatuey says:

      Cheers for your thoughts, Davie.

      The thing you said about the pace of constitutional change in Canada is interesting. I suppose another way of describing it might be to say they got independence in stages.

      Irish or say Indian independence was done differently. It was more abrupt.

      Explains everything really, when you think about it, possibly even the Salmond scandal.

    146. Al-Stuart says:

      .
      Hi Stu.,

      The intemperate ad hominem attack by George Rutherford upon Andy Ellis just made me realise why…

      Each Wings BTL thread is now 100% more interesting and flows with ideas and exchanges focussing on the important matters to come. Such as the future of the SNP; getting the ScotGov focus returned to IndyRef2. Plus the hopeful return of Alex Salmond to frontline Scottish politics.

      Now, since uber-troll has gone back to Norway, we have far more positive threads and mostly respectful, with courteous discourse amongst the Wings Over Scotland BTL Brigade.

      Stuart I realise now, how much you laboured about excommunicating Cameron Brodie.

      Some of us have a limited time left in this life and I for one am passionate about seeing
      Scottish Independence before I follow Sean Connery out of the door.

      As a result, Cameron Brodie really upset me because I took precious hours to read the articles in his links. Better I had spent that time with my grandkids growing up.

      It eventually became apparent that most of Cameron’s links were OFF-toic irrelevance. Stu., I just traced back to when you posted CBB’s P45 eviction notice, and was struck by the significant number of BTL comments that followed that supported you. So many WOS contributors who had tried to reason with Brodie got abused by him. Many BTL contrbers thanked you on sending Cameron B Brodie on his way.

      Andy Ellis is right. There is a sad want about the wee guy. His seeking attention, or recognition for the legal degree he didn’t get. Latterly I felt sorry for him.

      What I do know is the 25% of each thread Cameron was spamming got worse. When he started copying and pasted large screeds of obscure feckless text in ADDITION to the irrelevat off-topic life-wasting links to nowhere, the distractive off-topic guff got worse.

      An analogy that comes to mind is walking barefoot on a sunny beach. The sand underfoot can be a warm pleasure. Same with reading different and genuinely informative BTL debates.

      Then introduce a pack of incontinent dogs crapping all over that beach. Scrolling pasts a beach littered with CBB turds sounds like a Billy Connolly anecdote. But these craps of wisdom splattered all over BTL make the place a distracting minefield.

      George Rutherford aka Cam2 or CamApologist is nostalgic for: The legal thesis of wart-hogs, their marriage contract and contextual mating habits”.

      George Rutherford, perhaps you can summarise the top 3 ON TOPIC links out of 3,876 posts CamB spammed (in 140 characters or less) which advanced the cause of Scottish Independence?

      I believe Stuart gave you/your friend many chances to stop spamming. The overtures pleading with Brodie to remain ON TOPIC were thrown back into the face of the site owner and all those who tried to reason with CBB.

      Stuart, thank you for letting go of someone who pretended to help but was, I believe, a very disruptive troll.

      Surely gaining Scottish Independence and staying on THAT topic is far more important than the OFF-topic narcissism of Cameron Brodie? For that matter, better we concentrate on Nicola Sturgeon and her focus on saving England from itself over Brexit and silencing freedom of speech with the useful idiot, Humza Patsy and his Orwellian nuking of free speech?

    147. Liz g says:

      George Rutherford @ 3.06
      There’s only ONE moderator on this site George… have ye no been here long?
      Andy Ellis or anyone else has nae power here , and it’s unfair to say that he has.
      There’s also no advertising and therefore no conflict of interest on Wings.
      He takes no ones coin but that freely given by us.
      As I remember it, editorial freedom was a condition of the Rev agreeing to continue with Wings back in September 2014.
      There’s always a warning too George , unless,of course a poster is being absolutely outrageous, and to ignore that is a choice.
      So , I’d say, “ask not what others can do with the Indy space the Rev provides , but , rather ask what you yourself can do with it ” ….is probably the best way forwards , my friend 🙂

    148. Breeks says:

      Polly says:
      6 January, 2021 at 12:09 am

      ‘…the Claim of Right has been ‘debated’ in Parliament twice in the last few years and basically ignored….

      Westminster cannot alter Scotland’s Claim of Right, just as Westminster cannot alter Scotland’s Sovereign Constitution, and furthermore, Westminster cannot alter one word in the Treaty of Union without the explicit agreement of both signatories. There is no debate, because there is nothing debatable about it.

      Westminster doesn’t waste it’s time on debates it would lose, but instead wields power by creating ambiguous and commonly unwritten conventions and workarounds, and studiously avoiding these conventions being tested against awkward Constitutional realities. It is no accident that so many of these ‘conventions’ aren’t written down.

      Scotland’s greatest weakness throughout history has been the success of English Colonialism at eroding Scotland’s self confidence and muddying the water over Scotland’s sovereignty. In particular, they try to anglicise the concept of Scotland’s popular Sovereignty to make it compatible with the English divine sovereignty of their Monarch. The two sovereignties are thoroughly incompatible, and cannot be combined as one, or even described as one.

      UK Sovereignty only exists via a Convention of Parliamentary Sovereignty, which presumes that Scotland’s Sovereignty will agree to go along with the will of the Westminster Parliament. Essentially, the Convention works by saying the will of Westminster will make the decision, and we’ll get around the obstacle of Scotland’s sovereignty by never ever asking it to be approved, but Scotland’s mutual consent is ‘presumed’.

      That is why the UK traditionally loaths government by referendum, because it creates a massive problem for the UK’s Convention of Parliamentary Sovereignty if the Sovereign Nation of Scotland has actually says no to thing… as Scotland said no to Brexit. It runs totally contrary to the spirit of Sovereignty by convention, and mutual consent, when clearly, there is no consensus.

      People think I’m a rocket for saying so, but I’m telling you again regardless, Scotland should properly be impeaching the Scottish ‘Government’ for it’s lamentable Constitutional illiteracy, and abject failure to derail Scotland’s Brexit using the Scottish Constitution and popular sovereignty of the people. They have singularly failed to deploy the control mechanisms which can and have constrained the colonial aspirations of Westminster for three centuries.

      Under Sturgeons SNP, the tendrils of Westminster’s Colonial aspirations have been given free access to Scotland’s private defences, and an odious and dangerous precedent set whereby the sovereign will of the Scottish people can be vetoed by Westminster.

      It is not the success of Westminster that Scotland was Brexited, but the abject FAILURE of a shitty Scottish Government which wasn’t on top of its brief constitutionally, and allowed itself to be bushwhacked and Scotland drummed out of Europe.

      Personally, I am INCREDULOUS that any Scottish Government could be so reckless and incompetent with Scotland’s Constitutional strength, and the reason for that reckless incompetence stinks more strongly of corruption and treachery than even the Alex Salmond stitch up, and the infiltration of the Wokerratti.

      What makes this treachery worse is that unlike the Salmond Stitch up or Invasion of the Wokist Bodysnatchers, the colonial subjugation of Scotland’s Constitutional Sovereignty has got under the wire without one single constitutional challenge or protest.

      I’m telling you people of Scotland, the current “Scottish Government” should be impeached and hung out to dry for their complicity with Scotland’s unconstitutional subjugation.

      Scotland needs it’s own Legislature / Parliament established from scratch which recognises NO Constitutional rights over Scotland except those of Scotland’s own sovereign Constitution. Sturgeon, her hokey wee cabal, and indeed the whole SNP should be too embarrassed to show their faces in Scotland because their cowardice and failure to defend Scotland is right up there beside the Scottish Lords / Parcel O’ Rogues who sold out Scotland in 1707. At least the 1707 Rogues had the excuse of being bribed. The 2020 Rogues were just inept and gullible.

      Can’t we just ‘fix’ Holyrood and ‘undo’ this unconstitutional impropriety? – Placebo. What needs ‘fixed’ is the false perception amongst the Scot’s people that their sovereignty has been removed when it hasn’t, and what needs restored is the certain belief that it’s the people of Scotland who have the last word / casting vote in what Scotland says and does, and you can take your scrawny Section 30 Agreement, indeed you can take your whole scabby Scotland Act, and shove it up your arse. The people of Scotland are sovereign.

      Fix the psyche of our damaged and abused Nation, and reacquaint ourselves with our masterful sovereign Constitution, and the trappings of this perfidious and insatiably greedy Union will fall apart. Scotland’s disgrace will be that we took 300 years to do it.

      SNP? 70 years of progress destroyed by one tenure of Nicola Sturgeon.

      If you’re trying to defend Scotland’s Constitution, you MUST address the 1707 Treaty of Union as an International Agreement, and fight for your rights as a Nation. If you merely contest it under domestic UK Laws, you are fighting as a Region, not a Nation, and you have allowed yourself to be a tame and timid house-jock.

      Westminster rules us because Scotland is drenched in a malignant fog, like an anaesthetising miasma, that paralyses our defences like an animal that’s been drugged to keep it docile, and leaves us confused, bewildered and robbed of our self confidence. I’m sorry folks, but a timid wee Holyrood quoting Westminster’s rule book like a gospel is a component of that suppression.

      We don’t need to wait for a Holyrood Inquiry to be rid of this farcical and inept “Scottish Government”, but please, please, please, when we mobilise ourselves as a nation, can we be much more rigorous when choosing who we put in charge?

    149. North chiel says:

      Another “ hard hitting & to the point “ post from Breeks @ 0616 a.m. illustrating the continued abject failure of our independence leaders to CONFRONT Westminster over the continued breaches of treaty of union and the sovereign decision of our people to remain in the EU . The path to Independence is quite straightforward. Send a WRITTEN ( final) request to The PM for a section 30 agreement with the MESSAGE that if this is not forthcoming then our FM will resign her government and the SNP will proceed with a Holyrood election on a SINLE ISSUE of INDEPENDENCE for SCOTLAND.
      END THIS FARCE NOW !!

    150. Clyde says:

      Liz g

      You’re a wee Ginger Dugger

      How dare you step foot inside Wings, the site that is fighting against Sturgeon and her weirdo administration.

      Get back to the Dug where you belong.

      You are a stranger in these parts hen.

      Now trot off and don’t come back.

      No Sturgeonistas allowed.

    151. Clyde says:

      Al Stuart

      So you are another one of the Cam B lynch mob as somebody up thread called out.

      Your 2000 word rants are Ok, but you strongly object to someone else posting what they want to post.

      You and the other member of your Lynch mib,,, Andy Ellis, is also allowed to rant freely, but also objects to Cam B having a post.

      So you two want to decide what we all read?

      I think you call that a dictatorship.

    152. Dandee says:

      Clyde aka Ronald Fraser.
      I think it’s you who should trot off,,,all you do is slag England and anything English..what language do you speak?.

    153. Clyde says:

      Dandee

      Are you one of the MANKY MOB from MANKY LAND by any chance???

      And who is the Ronnie Fraser you speak of???

      Are you a member of the Wings thought police.

      That department is growing by the day.

    154. Clyde says:

      Piers Morgan telling us the useless Oxford vaccine is going to save the world.

      What a wanker.

      The english Oxford vaccine is useless.

      The World Health Organization said yesterday the the Pfizer and Oxford vaccines should be g

    155. Clyde says:

      The WHO told us yesterday that the second hand should be given no later than 21 days

      Boris and Sturgeon are giving the second hand after 3 months.

      Rendering the whole process useless

    156. Clyde says:

      Second Jab,,,,nit second hand

    157. Clyde says:

      Typos

    158. Dandee says:

      LOL…Your busy this morning..

    159. Al-Stuart says:

      .
      Clyde,

      BTL is about debating, not ad hominem attacks by you RONALD FRASER.

      You have been BANNED once already by the OWNER of this site.

      You rant about Andy Ellis heading a lynch mob, when he is just trying to extinguish bin fires such as the fire lighting arse-on-pissed that you are.

      Then you troll your own disgusting one-stoat lynch mob against Liz to chase her off this site as if you were some legitimate arbiter.

      Clyde/Ronald, you are a sleekit bigot who sneaked back on here. I suspect Rev Stu., is too busy researching proper articles working to get us Scottish Independence rather than spend time on wasters like you.

      RONALD FRASER, after you got BANNED by Stuart Campbell, you dishonestly snuck back on here under the FAKE name of “CLYDE”. You have been found out. I hope Stu., recognizes your cheating ways and presses his BAN button to eject you again.

      Don’t let the door hit your erse on the road out.

      Away an bile yer head ya waste of space.

      Sorry Liz, sorry Stu., but roasters like Ronald Clyde Fraser are all that I loathe about the dregs in society that make Twitter such a cess-pit and website blog BTLs such a nightmare. He is the guy with the matches that start bin fires BTL.

      Clyde, Is this post short enough for you? Feckless waste of space.

    160. Dandee says:

      The oxford vaccine is just as good as the Pfizer.

    161. robert Hughes says:

      Breeks – just brilliant again . After the conversation between Dan , Alf and Hatuey upthread I would be interested in the latter’s response to this post . If I understand correctly Mr H’s view is that arguments for Indy based on sovereignty are a non-starter , something that would confuse the issue or simply generate shrugs of indifference or bafflement . H if I have mischaracterised your views , I will stand corrected

    162. Andy Ellis says:

      @ Al-Stuart

      Well said. Here’s hoping the “powers that be” are listening. I noticed Spameron was trying to infect Grouse Beater’s blog too: these roasters just can’t help themselves. It’s like whack a mole of unthinking zoomers.

      Nary an original thought or coherent argument between them.

    163. Clyde says:

      PFIZER ASSESSMENT

      The criticism comes after Pfizer said that it only assessed its vaccine on a two-dose regimen where people were given the jab three weeks apart, and there was “no data to demonstrate that protection after the first dose is sustained after 21 days”.

      In a statement, Pfizer says: “Pfizer and BioNTech’s Phase 3 study for the Covid-19 vaccine was designed to evaluate the vaccine’s safety and efficacy following a 2-dose schedule, separated by 21 days.

      “The safety and efficacy of the vaccine has not been evaluated on different dosing schedules as the majority of trial participants received the second dose within the window specified in the study design.

      “Data from the Phase 3 study demonstrated that, although partial protection from the vaccine appears to begin as early as 12 days after the first dose, two doses of the vaccine are required to provide the maximum protection against the disease, a vaccine efficacy of 95 per cent.

      “There are no data to demonstrate that protection after the first dose is sustained after 21 days.”

      PFIZER ASSESSMENT
      The criticism comes after Pfizer said that it only assessed its vaccine on a two-dose regimen where people were given the jab three weeks apart, and there was “no data to demonstrate that protection after the first dose is sustained after 21 days”.

      In a statement, Pfizer says: “Pfizer and BioNTech’s Phase 3 study for the Covid-19 vaccine was designed to evaluate the vaccine’s safety and efficacy following a 2-dose schedule, separated by 21 days.

      “The safety and efficacy of the vaccine has not been evaluated on different dosing schedules as the majority of trial participants received the second dose within the window specified in the study design.

      “Data from the Phase 3 study demonstrated that, although partial protection from the vaccine appears to begin as early as 12 days after the first dose, two doses of the vaccine are required to provide the maximum protection against the disease, a vaccine efficacy of 95 per cent.

      “There are no data to demonstrate that protection after the first dose is sustained after 21 days.”

      So these jabs are only tested for 21 days.

      But Boris //Sturgeon and the rest of them are telling us that a 3 month gap between jabs is ok,,, going against all the manufactures guidelines.

      And as for the vaccine made in Oxford MANKY LAND, well that is just getting no where near me,

      Rat’s Pish MANKY LAND vaccine is useless and dangerous.

    164. John Main says:

      @Alf Baird

      Enjoying reading your thoughts on culture.

      What’s your take on the fact that the third most spoken language in Scotland has gone from being Gaelic to Polish in next to no time? In fact, according to the 2011 census, twice as many Scots naturally speak Polish at home as naturally speak Gaelic.

      https://scotlandscensus.gov.uk/ethnicity-identity-language-and-religion

      I am always amused on my (currently forbidden) stravaigs into The Highlands to see the bi-lingual road signs in English and Gaelic. If I were a Polish speaker and taxpayer I would not find it so funny.

      How does this cultural shift, sanctioned and encouraged by the Holyrood establishment, fit into your colonial worldview? Have you been unlucky enough to lose your job lately? Are you aware that some, if not all, interview places for employment by agencies of the Scottish state are reserved for what is euphemistically described as “new Scots”?

      IMO your belief that the assault on Scottish culture comes only from south of the border is mistaken.

    165. AYRSHIRE ROB says:

      Al stuart

      The eegit has had a lot more usernames than Clyde or Ronald. There’s been numerous names over past year!

      He’s obviously using a VPN and lots of email addy’s.

    166. Stuart MacKay says:

      John Main

      Culture is first the expression of a nation, the expression of its preferences, of its taboos and its patterns. A national culture is the sum total of all these appraisals.

      I don’t see language, religion or skin colour mentioned there. Why do you?

    167. Andy Ellis says:

      @ John Main

      I always wonder if those etiolated Scots who rail against the huge expense of Gaelic road signs and call for Polish to be recognised as an official language would be so fast to call for the same treatment for Urdu or Punjabi in areas where that was the largest second language.

      I think we know the answer in the case of most of them, don’t we readers? 🙂

    168. George Rutherford says:

      So, free speech is alive and kicking on Wings Over Scotland,

      As long as Dandee, Al Stuart and Andy Ellis approves of what you wrote.

      That sounds fair enough, does it not?

      Well, maybe not.

      Do you get an extra wee Wings Thought Police badge when you sign up for that guys?

    169. t42 says:

      Trolls probing for cracks.
      Try bending over and looking in the mirror.

    170. Andy Ellis says:

      @ Hatuey, Davie et al

      Interesting discussion up-thread about Canada, Australia & their paths to independence. I recall discussions about that in the run up to #indyref1 WRT Westminster’s role and the pretentions of English parliamentary supremacy vis-à-vis Scots popular sovereignty in the context of whether a S30 Order was required in 2012.

      It was pointed out at the time that technically Westminster could abrogate the independence it “gave” to Dominions like Canada, Australia & NZ. Of course nobody in the international community would take a blind bit of notice, and the citizens of those nations would doubtless all stand around pointing and laughing. It appears to be a conceit deeply rooted amongst many Scots unionists and British nationalists that Scotland needs permission, despite the UK government’s own statements on Kosovar independence not being contingent on Serbian permission.

      Of course it is hard to free some slaves from chains they revere.

    171. Dandee says:

      t42..8.30..not a troll and my arse isn’t that big

    172. Andy Ellis says:

      @ George Rutherford

      As Stu has frequently pointed out, this is his blog not a democracy. He gives wide latitude – too wide in the view of many of us, but that’s just “our view” – to some individuals, but he has limits which he has recently used to good effect. As others have also pointed out the positive effect of that BTL is obvious for anyone without blinkers to see.

      Of course there would be nothing to stop Spameron constructing his own blog to promote his links, or Clyde to platform his bigotry and anti English bike. Of course, neither will do so as it’s much easier to parasitise someone else’s more successful blog, and use that as a platform. I don’t really agree that most of these oxygen thieves are unionist plants or GCHQ moles: simple explanations are usually more accurate. The vast majority are just sad inadequate individuals who probably still live with their Mammies and are bashing their output away in their underwear while eating cereal from the box.

      It’s just a shame some of the hard of thinking in here think it’s appropriate or worth defending these roaster because *reasons* or *waaa… free speech*.

    173. Rev. Stuart Campbell says:

      “Now trot off and don’t come back.

      No Sturgeonistas allowed.”

      I decide that, not you. Banned.

    174. George Rutherford says:

      “Now trot off and don’t come back.

      No Sturgeonistas allowed.”

      Banned for that Stu?????????

      Fuckin hell man.

      I liked the style of Clyde’s posts.

      What the fuck is happening here Stu?

    175. Breeks says:

      I would add to my earlier quote that the new ISP is something I heartily approve of, and they are to be commended for some of the content they are starting to produce, but It comes with a warning.

      On the one hand, the ISP is making the right noises constitutionally, which is terrific, but the ISP itself is declaring itself as a Party targeting List Seats in our Devolved Assembly, which, for the reasons I stated earlier, should be impeached and replaced with a new Parliament / interim Convention which properly respects Scotland’s popular sovereignty.

      There is an inherent contradiction in that. The ISP needs to be careful mixing the elements of fire and ice if you follow me. If you’re proponents of the Scottish Constitution, then you should have the same qualms about the constitutional integrity of Holyrood that I do. Do you follow me?

      My other point relates to the Claim of Right being discussed and even voted upon at Westminster. This is almost meaningless, because the Claim of Right has no jurisdiction in England. The Claim of Right is the right drawn from the 1320 Declaration of Arbroath for the people of Scotland to depose a Scottish King who has failed to defend Scotland from English Colonialism. It is not a thing we can use to clobber the English.

      It is not Westminster which needs to run in fear of Scotland’s Claim of Right, it is Holyrood, (and yes, ok, Queen Elizabeth).

      Yet if he should give up what he has begun, and agree to make us or our kingdom subject to the King of England or the English, we should exert ourselves at once to drive him out as our enemy and a subverter of his own rights and ours, and make some other man who was well able to defend us our King; for, as long as but a hundred of us remain alive, never will we on any conditions be brought under English rule.

      Anybody familiar with the SNP’s handling of Brexit and reading that extract from the Declaration of Arbroath might be feeling the hairs stand up on the back of their necks… Because that’s “The Right” which the Claim of Right refers to, and it doesn’t put the constitutional crosshairs on Westminster does it?….

      You’ll notice I said the Westminster debate was “almost” meaningless, and that is because Westminster’s endorsement of Scotland’s Claim of Right could be interpreted as a form of inadvertent International Recognition, – recognition of sorts that Scotland’s Claim of Right is extant, ergo the Constitution which enabled the Claim of Right, that being Scotland’s Sovereign Constitution is extant too.

      The Claim of Right has no power over Westminster. It is a Scottish device to remove weak, ineffective and / or treacherous Leadership of Scotland. If Scotland resolved to rid itself of a weak and ineffective Scottish Government which surrendered Scotland’s interests to subjugation by England, I believe the Claim of Right would give us the right, (if maybe not the 21st Century mechanism), to impeach Holyrood and drive it out as a subverter of it’s own rights and ours.

      But should Scotland find itself at the International Court of Justice at the UN making the case for sovereign recognition, the significance of that Westminster vote and “international recognition of sorts” would surely help us prove our case and undermine the UK’s position. Unfortunately, if we never contest the issue and make case for Scotland’s sovereign recognition, then we will never know.

    176. George Rutherford says:

      Did Liz g stick Clyde in???????

    177. robert Hughes says:

      How long before arch Shape-Shifter ” Clyde ” returns in another guise , and how long before his comments reveal his true identity – a day ? For what it’s worth ….. pretty sure our man has his tongue firmly planted in cheek a lot of the time , though the ad hominem attacks on other posters here are at best a distraction , at worse an abuse of WoS tolerance and fellow Indy supporters , as if we don’t have sufficient division in the ranks .

    178. George Rutherford says:

      Cam B no more
      Clyde no more

      I’m sure the Proclaimers could make a song out of this if these “Banned” signs keep going up.

    179. George Rutherford says:

      Robert Hughes

      You sound like an old fuckin snob.

      Just my personal opinion of course.

    180. ScotsRenewables says:

      Bye-bye Clyde, don’t let the door hit your arse on the way out.

      This is turning into more than a bin fire, more like long term landfill smoulder.

    181. robert Hughes says:

      Ah well George 1) I couldn’t give a f… about your opinion 2) keep stoking unnecessary divisions if you lack the imagination for anything more productive

    182. Jomry says:

      @Breeks 9.09.
      Re Your comments on ISP. I heartily endorse these. I have been increasingly impressed with the content and style of the short video messages they have been putting out – clear and punchy – similar in style to Phantom Power output. They say the kind of things I have no difficulty agreeing with.

      They are light years ahead of the output of the SNP which is almost universally dire. I would urge people who think the same to spread them further when they come across them

    183. Jockanese Wind Talker says:

      100% on the money, another succinct post @
      Breeks says at 6:16 am

      You are carrying Robert Peffers torch aloft and allowing its truth to continue to burn brightly.

    184. Dandee says:

      Clyde hasnt left he has many aliases

    185. iain mhor says:

      I read of the Claim of Right recently (and have written of it myself) I think what confuses people, is he United Kingdom (etc) and the fact it is the laws, ordinances, government and parliament of the UK (etc) which we all currently live under – not the laws of Scotland.

      Scotland has no laws or constitution, any laws or constitution pertaining to Scotland are those of the UK(etc)
      The laws, where they exist and the constitution of Scotland, where it exists, is defined by the extant statute constitution of the United Kingdom – all Treaties and Articles are now part of the corpus of UK legislation. and governed by it. Scotland is subject to the satute laws and ordinances of the UK.

      I think the clauses of the Acts of Union were quite clear and have the same old EULA type clause embedded within them , the same as can be found in the Scotland Act(s) and in daily life and basically say “These are the laws of Union forever, or until such times as the UK sees fit to change them”

      As for inalienable rights, staute rights, Articles and Treaties and Clauses and Claims – may I refer anyone interested to the “Statute Law Revision (Scotland) Acts”

      The Act(s) of Union as incorporated into UK statute, have been altered several times since their inception. Because they can be, the Acts always contained the “EULA” clause and such UK Acts as ‘Statute Law Revisuin (Scitland) Acts have altered them.

      If Scotland’s ‘Claim of Right’ can be shown to be enshrined in UK statute law, it remains subject to amendment or repeal by the UK.

      I’m not saying that it is a pointless, or unconstructive discussion, nor that the “Claim of Right, Articles of Union etc etc are invalid routes to pursue- just pointing out that they are not inviolable, inalienable rights and untouchable – under UK law everything can be and is subject to change “as it sees fit”

      Suggesting “Scotland has no laws or constitution” is going to enrage a lot of people, yet it doesn’t change the fact that Scotland is not an independent country.
      Even the fact that it can be argued that it is in an equal Union, it does not alter the fact that Scotland is governed under UK law.

      I Scotland’s own ‘laws and constitutional principles’ have been enfolded within UK law – it is still UK law – the entire Union with England and creation of the UK, stipulated that the UK law had primacy and the new UK could amend everything from that point forward ‘as it saw fit’

      The Claim of right is indeed extraordinarily interesting, but not because it is somehow a statute “law”

      No country can ever achieve independence ‘100% legally and constitutionally’, for the simple fact that the pending independent nation (by definition) cannot abide by and is rejecting, whatever ‘legal and constitutional’ processes are in place.

      As mentioned elsewhere, independence is a political act, not a ‘lawful’ act. The right to make the law is the political act – a claim of right if you like.

    186. James says:

      “Hatuey says:
      5 January, 2021 at 10:53 pm
      Dan: “If you are unable or simply unwilling to consider that Scotland has its own unique traits”
      I asked you to tell me what they were. You can’t give one example. You’re the one chapping on doors with this pitch, not me.”

      Erm….how about…we don’t vote Tory? That any good?

    187. Stuart MacKay says:

      I don’t think one size fits all is going to work. We’ve already seem how a party can get derailed. Expecting the ISP to be a better SNP is asking for trouble. It’s much better to spread the work / battle across several fronts. If one front gets taken down we’re still operational on all the others.

      I realise that takes a lot of work and some pieces, e.g. constituion and law and hence government, fit together naturally so there is a tendency to lump things together. Reinforcing Keating in the courts, AUOB on the ground, the ISP in Holyrood, etc. would stand a better chance of success.

    188. Polly says:

      @ Breeks at 6.16am

      You’re preaching to the choir Breeks and I, like many others, agree with a lot of what you say. In the post you quote from, where I was agreeing with another poster that the only reason any recent vote was allowed to be held in the commons about our Claim of Right was because they considered it to be, and the SNP also, lamentably, considered it to be only a token dressing to be held up – and they acted accordingly in all being there to vote on it while no opposition was in attendance. It was pure theatre as the original poster said, designed for the troops back home. There’s nothing wrong with theatre or rousing troops – like the singing of the EU anthem or wearing of white roses, so long as there’s also meat and potatoes brought with the ice swan to the banquet.

      But the using of the Claim politically requires the majority of Scotland to be invested and at present that is not the case, nor have the independence leaders worked towards it, despite ideas of a new constitutional convention being brought forward, but those ideas never coming to fruition. Unfortunately these things will take a while to percolate down, even once the coffee pot is switched on. I would argue that since the SNP now consider Westminster the arbiter then Sturgeon, as leader of the SNP, should be down there, since Holyrood is still the parish council and not where the big boys play. I disagree with you though that the Claim is the only route that might take us where we want to go. As they say, there are more ways to skin a cat…

    189. Breeks says:

      iain mhor says:
      6 January, 2021 at 9:52 am

      ….The Claim of right is indeed extraordinarily interesting, but not because it is somehow a statute “law”

      No country can ever achieve independence ‘100% legally and constitutionally’….

      I can agree with some of what you say Iain, but to put the counter argument rather bluntly, we don’t need to be in the 100% bracket of anything. We need only demonstrate a stronger and more legitimate claim over Scotland’s Sovereignty than Westminster can demonstrate.

      And it’s not just a simple two horse race, because Scotland would have to overthrow more than 300 years of established convention. But add in the unconstitutional and undemocratic subjugation of Scotland through Brexit, and I firmly believe Scotland could succeed in asserting it’s sovereign ascendancy and having it recognised internationally.

      But the Scottish Constitution has an undisputed source in the Declaration of Arbroath, a document which still exists, Papal recognition, the “International Recognition” of it’s day, and the ratifaction of the 1328 Treaty of Edinburgh / Northampton.

      Scotland has if you like, impeccable credentials making it a Nation, or rather affirming it already was one, which surely moves the substance of meaningful constitutional debate to the Treaty of Union, mired in controversy and documented corruption from it’s inception, and how and whether it removed Scotland’s status as a Nation, and how and whether it removed popular Constitutional Sovereignty from the people.

      Which brings us back to the Claim of Right, and a remnant or vestige of Scotland’s 1320 Declaration of Arbroath that is still extant in 2020, and thus contradicting the fallacy that Scotland’s Constitution was extinguished.

    190. Breeks says:

      Breeks says:
      6 January, 2021 at 10:29 am

      But add in the unconstitutional and undemocratic subjugation of Scotland through Brexit…

      … That being a material breach of the Treaty of Union.

    191. Polly says:

      @ Stuart MacKay

      ‘I realise that takes a lot of work and some pieces, e.g. constituion and law and hence government, fit together naturally so there is a tendency to lump things together. Reinforcing Keating in the courts, AUOB on the ground, the ISP in Holyrood, etc. would stand a better chance of success.’

      Yes. You make a great point here Stuart for too long all eggs have been one main basket, whether of leader focus (Salmond as well as Sturgeon) or one party, making them too easy to focus on or take out. There’s also the fact cells operating individually with a unified aim cover much more ground and appeal to wider demographic. Some of that is already happening thankfully, let’s see it bear fruit.

    192. Alf Baird says:

      John Main @ 8.06

      “IMO your belief that the assault on Scottish culture comes only from south of the border is mistaken.”

      On the contrary, I tend to agree with you that the oppression suffered by a people may also become ‘internalised’, as with established theory such as ‘Internalized Racism. and ‘Appropriated Racial Oppression’, which results in “..the personal conscious or subconscious acceptance of the dominant society’s racist views, stereotypes and biases of one’s ethnic group. It gives rise to patterns of thinking, feeling and behaving that results in discriminating, minimizing, criticizing, finding fault, invalidating and hating oneself while simultaneously valuing the dominant culture” (Rangel 2014).

      Related to cultural imperialism, the ‘dominant culture’ as far as Scots are concerned is of course Anglophone, and which brings with it a Cultural Hegemony and its artificial social constructs, including its ‘values’ and “..a ruling class who manipulate the culture of that society” in such a way “that benefit only the ruling class (Buttigieg 1992).

      We should not forget here, also for Hatuey’s benefit, who said rather revealingly that “I could just as easily argue that national culture is holding Scotland back”, the impact of the ‘Scottish Cultural Cringe’; the latter an (intended?) outcome of cultural domination, and a psychological condition which, according to Beveridge & Turnbull (1989), relates to many Scots believing their own people as being too inferior even to run their own affairs. In some respects the Cringe may be one aspect still holding back Scotland’s SNP MP’s from pulling the plug on the UK union, given the fact the Tories always taunted the SNP to first get a majority before they could negotiate ‘separation’. Well, now they have had 3 successive majorities yet still they feel sufficiently inferior relative to the dominant culture to do anything meaningful about it.

      These theoretical aspects and more are covered in my book ‘Doun-Hauden: The Socio-Political Determinants of Scottish Independence’.

      ‘Doun-hauden’ in Scots means ‘oppressed’ which in post-colonial research is the primary reason for any people seeking independence.

    193. Hatuey says:

      The conversation we are having about the Claim of Right started with me suggesting that ordinary people in the real world today regard stuff like that as nuts. I stand by that. I’ll go further, I think it is nuts myself. I wonder how many people commenting on it have actually read it. Here’s a very typical extract;

      “King James the Seventh being a profest papist Did assume the Regall power and acted as king without ever takeing the oath required by law and hath by the advyce of Evill and wicked Counsellors …”

      It’s a product of its time, we might say.

      Nuts as it is to talk of “profest papists” in today’s context, I’ve never dismissed the potential legal and constitutional relevance of the document. That relevance has yet to be established.

      Even the most generous assessment of that document’s legal standing today would change very little. The political and constitutional work needs to be done either way.

      In short, regardless of the claim of right, the independence movement needs 1) a leadership that is fully committed to the goal of independence, 2) sustained public and electoral support, and 3) a constitutional route or plan that lead us towards independence.

      We don’t have any of those things yet and none of them are likely to be easy. What’s more, we absolute need each one of them — nothing works unless all of those conditions are addressed and satisfied.

      Pinning hopes on things like the claim of right carries risks and serves as a distraction. If some court or judgement by the House of Lords deems the claim of right to be irrelevant, are we going to give up?

      Scotland is a country. Nobody disputes it. That matters. In international law, it’s likely to matter more than the claim of right. Again, though, deliverance depends on conditions 1 to 3 above. The logical and rational thing to do is work on those 3 conditions.

    194. Hatuey says:

      Alf, you were invited to ask me what I meant when I said “I could just as easily argue that national culture is holding Scotland back”. Now you’ve gone and superimposed your own views on me. I won’t pretend I’m offended but your interpretation is incorrect.

    195. Polly says:

      @Hatuey

      I agree with a lot of what you say here and tend to share your more realistic assessment of how realpolitik works in practice so long as you don’t jettison the ideals behind the Claim of Right even if you do wink at the stupid old language. And so long as any legal or arcane law/act/treaty/provision/citation or anything else from history which might be used usefully is not also jettisoned from our artillery. You actually seem to me to agree with Dan, that keeping options open and argument mobile and tailored is a good route.

      I disagree with your number 2). sustained public and electoral support surely is proven by winning every election since 2014 – that’s six years after all. We want independence and we show it, so one down two to go?

    196. Alf Baird says:

      Hatuey

      Yes, it seems rather obvious that Scotland’s ‘clandestine’ culture is held back (haud doon even) by a dominant Anglophone elite culture, which is of course the purpose of cultural imperialism and colonialism, i.e. to wipe out another culture.

      As Fanon tells us: “..the conscious and organized undertaking by a colonized people to re-establish the sovereignty of that nation is the most complete and obvious cultural manifestation that exists”.

    197. Hatuey says:

      Okay, Polly. And it’s fine to disagree on things. I disagree with Alf a lot but it hasn’t impacted on my appreciation of him.

      On point 2, yes, it’s probably the easiest conditional to achieve and to a large extent we are there already. It’s always been my working assumption that support for independence is understated or muffled by the media and polls.

      The thing about political polling (and PR generally) that a lot of people don’t understand is that it’s inextricably connected to propaganda. I won’t bore with the historical details but when you look at the history of polling it is kinda obvious that they invented it in order to measure the effectiveness of their propaganda. Propaganda wasn’t a controversial thing back then, the way it is now.

      In short, if it wasn’t for the media and propaganda, we can assume support for independence would be a lot higher. That’s good but we can’t assume support will be sustained or grow when/if we start really fighting for independence. It’s complicated. So much depends on perceptions and the MSM.

    198. Polly says:

      @ Hatuey

      Indeed, I agree about polling propaganda and have from early days been cynical enough to suspect propaganda from almost everyone. I wouldn’t like everyone always agreeing either, after all I like a good disputation myself now and then. So long as all independence supporters are in agreement of the end goal and of using any means to achieve it is surely the only important thing.

    199. Saffron Robe says:

      Breeks, I salute you for your comment at 6:16 am. There can be few finer examples of why the pen is mightier than the sword.

      A few of my own thoughts:

      1. If we view the current Scottish parliament not as “devolved” but as an extension or arm of the British parliament then things become much clearer. A puppet government as it were.
      2. “In particular, they try to anglicise the concept of Scotland’s popular sovereignty to make it compatible with the English divine sovereignty of their Monarch.” As a deeply religious person, I would interpret this to mean that in England it is the monarch who is (considered) divine, but in Scotland it is the people who are divine. In this sense we are very similar to the Jewish people. G-d is not present in a single person (the monarch), but in the people as a whole. This may seem far-fetched, but if divinity does not rest with the monarch, then it must rest with the people; just as sovereignty in Scotland does not lie with the monarch but with the people. We have one advantage over the historic sufferings of the Jewish people – our nation has never been destroyed in the same way that the Temple was destroyed i.e. not one stone left standing. However as Alf Baird might say, albeit not in such an overtly religious way, it is the belief in our own divinity which has been lost, or more correctly, the source of divinity in ourselves.
      3. For those who are not religiously inclined, “it is the belief in our own divinity which has been lost”, can be replaced with, “it is the belief in ourselves and our own abilities which has been lost”.

    200. Saffron Robe says:

      Addendum to the above:

      “It is the belief in our own divinity which has been lost, or more correctly, the source of divinity in ourselves.”

      should read:

      “It is the belief in our own divinity which has been lost, or more correctly, the source of divinity within ourselves.”

    201. Alf Baird says:

      Saffron Robe

      There is a great deal in what you say.

      1. is absolutely correct, the FM/cabinet is merely the figureheads of a puppet ‘government’ which in reality is little more than a spending department of the UK Gov. As I have noted before, in reference to Fanon, this gives the colonized people two layers of colonial governance and hence two layers of colonial oppression.

      2. on the question of sovereignty, we might turn to Albert Memmi who would no doubt confirm that we are under the control of a “group of colonizers whose values are sovereign” and also by the colonized elite (their ‘little helpers’) who “imitate his dress, his accent, and his manners” and closely follow his policy priorities. Both groupings “partakes of an elevated world from which he automatically reaps the privileges”. Hence these groups align to the dominant sovereign values of the colonizer, which in this instance as you suggest is the British Crown etc. which implies the SNP elite is in effect undermining the sovereignty of the Scottish people; this is not really a surprise given Fanon’s perspective that the dominant National Party elite will seek its own “accommodation with colonialism”.

      3. The lack of belief in ourselves reflects as noted above to some extent the cultural cringe which is an inevitable outcome of cultural imperialism and colonisation and the ongoing efforts to wipe out a supposedly inferior (Scottish) culture and sense of national identity, which we may say is now the primary objective of the ‘union’. In my research on this subject the role of Appropriated Racial Oppression also appears to have a part to play as we see with some ‘elite’ Scots on the colonizer side vigorously attacking and hence oppressing from the advantage of their elevated privileged positions the supposedly more ‘radical’ Scots seeking independence. This is something which Fanon also predicts as one of the more vile aspects of colonialism – which is arguably what we have been witnessing for the last several years (coinciding with SNP electoral domination) and in the ongoing Holyrood enquiry and upcoming political ‘trials’.

    202. Hatuey says:

      Alf, you know and I know that there are alternative theories that explain a lot of those assumptions and points you make.

      With regards to every word you say in point 3 above, for example, Marxism, drawing on the role of class in society rather than culture, gives a much more compelling explanation.

      I’m not a Marxist but there is a gaping problem in your analysis that Marxism exposes – all of those traits you describe in regards to dominant values etc., are found in societies that aren’t colonies – that’s a problem for you. Indeed, you’ll find a lot of that stuff in ancient civilisations too, Egypt, Rome, etc.

      I don’t know how you can have formal structures and standards in society for things like language, engineering, art, cooking, building, etc., without creating a value system. You attribute that value system to colonialism but it seems to exist everywhere.

      That’s not to say your analysis is rubbish. I vaguely remember reading about how they had trouble enticing indigenous people in South America into working in modern factories in the early 20th century. The indigenous people attributed no value to the money, consumer goods, and trinkets being offered and so the government had to convince them that going around half naked with spears was backward and uncivilised. I believe that was in Guatemala.

    203. Robert Hughes says:

      Hatuey ( BTW being slightly nerdish I googled your moniker , is this it’s origin ? ” Hatuey (/???twe?/), also Hatüey (/???tu?e?/; died February 2, 1512), was a Taíno Cacique (chief) originally from what is now called the island of Hispaniola, who lived in the early sixteenth century and fled to Cuba during the Spanish conquest. ” ) is it not also the case the Native Americans had no concept of land ownership , so many of the treaties they signed ( literally not worth the paper they were written on ) were meaningless to them , alas , no so for the ” settlers ” . Excellent conversation guys

    204. Saffron Robe says:

      Alf, very eloquently put. “Appropriated Racial Oppression” is perhaps the saddest expression of our subjugation as a people – the delight that some Scots take in putting down and belittling their own race by identifying with the jingoism and triumphalism of the oppressor. Politicians such as Michael Gove, and Scottish football supporters who sing “Rule Britannia” and “God Save the Queen” for instance, spring to mind.

      Robert Hughes says:

      “Is it not also the case the Native Americans had no concept of land ownership, so many of the treaties they signed (literally not worth the paper they were written on) were meaningless to them, alas, not so for the ”settlers”?

      Robert, you raise a very interesting point. I remember watching a documentary which described the very same – how an Indian tribe who lived on one of the islands around New York were cheated out of their island for the price of a pearl necklace.

      Oppression, colonialism and neo-liberalism go hand-in-hand and, historically, Westminster is the epicentre of that scourge. That is why we have such a huge battle on our hands.

    205. John Main says:

      @Alf Baird

      Thank you for your reasoned reply. I thought the Scots Cringe had effectively died out. I can certainly think of a claim to that effect in a recently published work (but can’t remember the details – sorry).

      When it was widespread, it was, I think, regarded as a hangover from the Jacobite defeats. I always wondered about that. The German and Japanese defeats would seem to have been just as catastrophic for them, yet the survivors have bounced back in little more than two generations. Then again, the Confederate defeat in the USA has left many problems. Come to think of it, there is much unfinished business from the Norman Conquest.

      I have some sympathy with your idea that many Scots, up to and including the SNP government itself, regard the Scots as too inferior to run their own affairs. Why else would a movement claiming to desire freedom and self-determination state that as soon as that is achieved, the next step will be to hand control and most decision making over to Brussels?

    206. North chiel says:

      “ John Mann @ 0829 p.m. “ Perhaps Sir you should pose the same question to the 27 other INDEPENDENT countries which make up the EU ? Are they all wrong & England right ?

    207. Hatuey says:

      Robert: “ is it not also the case the Native Americans had no concept of land ownership , so many of the treaties they signed ( literally not worth the paper they were written on ) were meaningless to them”

      Well, you’re almost right. Let’s put that in perspective. Between say 1776 and 1876, the US signed around 400 treaties with Native American tribes. If it’s difficult to say how many of those treaties were broken, it’s because most of the tribes were simply exterminated from the earth, literally disappeared.

      Apparently so many native Americans were killed after Europeans arrived in 1492, that it caused global cooling, and the US played a big part in that so maybe the environmental movement should cut America some slack. https://www.businessinsider.com/climate-changed-after-europeans-killed-indigenous-americans-2019-2?r=US&IR=T

      So, yes, in the sense that they didn’t understand the treaties and signed them in the hope of finding a way to survive, and were later wiped out, you could say they weren’t very “treaty worthy”.

      You got my name right but don’t forget Hatuey beer…

    208. Saffron Robe says:

      Talking of how we are taught to feel culturally inferior I can give two simple examples using language:

      Let us take the English words “water” and “Possil”.

      In Glaswegian dialect these are pronounced “waater” and “P-oh-ssil” with a long ‘a’ and a long ‘o’ respectively.

      However, how many of us who have been “educated” cringe when we hear them pronounced this way?

      The truth of the matter is that in the Glaswegian pronunciation the vowel sounds are actually purer, in the same sense that German has retained the purity of its vowel sounds. The English pronunciation – “wauter” and “Paussil” – is actually less pure and therefore culturally inferior to the Scottish pronunciation! Whoever would have thought!

    209. Alf Baird says:

      Saffron Robe @ 11.04

      You are right to stress the fundamental difference between a peoples natural language and another state imposed artificial language (i.e. linguistic imperialism), which explains Scotland’s ‘Cultural Division of Labour’ (Hechter 1998) and ongoing structural inequalities between Scotland’s mostly privileged Anglophone elite, and Scots speakers. As you imply this is also a major factor in the cultural cringe and in Appropriated Racial Oppression, as well as a range of diverse mental health side effects including a schizoid psyche (Purves 1997).

      Language (and culture) is critical in relation to independence given that: “it is an individual’s linguistic perceptions that directly determine their national identity” (Medeiros 2017). And this also explains why most peoples’ in self-determination conflict are linguistically divided. Thus, many if not most ‘No’ voters are Anglophone and holding to a British identity, whilst most ‘Yes’ voters are Scots speakers holding to a Scottish identity. This also helps explain why the British state refuses to teach the Scots language to Scots bairns in schools, despite the protest of Council of Europe on minority language provision, and instead merrily pumps them full of ‘superior’ English grammar, leaving Scots langage anely for the playgrund an in the hoose.

      Aye, tae maist Scots fowk oor Scots language is oor naitural mither tung, nae Englis garred doon oor thrapples.

      (Tho I’m pretty sure Hatuey will shortly come running with his alternative take.)

    210. Saffron Robe says:

      Aye, ah couldn’y agree mair wi’ ye Alf if ah tried!

    211. Hatuey says:

      “ Thus, many if not most ‘No’ voters are Anglophone and holding to a British identity, whilst most ‘Yes’ voters are Scots speakers holding to a Scottish identity. ”

      Alf, we have discussed this before. You’re being dishonest here, more than just wrong.

      The biggest determinant here, and I’ve scrutinised the data, is class. What you’re saying is actually bananas and I’m sure intelligent people reading this will see that.

      We are very much generalising here, let’s be clear on that.

      The data shows that people in Scotland are most like to vote for independence or against it on the basis of how well off they are (how much they have to lose or gain). And that’s ultra normal in politics.

      There’s no explicable or plausible case for suggesting they are driven by attitudes towards slang. There’s correlation, for sure, well off people tend to be better educated and have more regard for formal rules of grammar etc., where poorer people tend more towards slang, and again, that’s ultra normal in all countries, whether they’re colonies or not, but nobody in the social sciences, political science, or statistics, has ever suggested that people decide how to vote on the basis of how they talk. It’s actually ridiculous.

      Let’s clarify what you seem to be arguing; when faced with the independence referendum in 2014, are you suggesting people thought “oh, well I speak slang (Scots) and on that basis I will vote for independence…” Do you really believe that? It’s crackers.

    212. Breeks says:

      John Main says:
      6 January, 2021 at 8:29 pm

      “…. Why else would a movement claiming to desire freedom and self-determination state that as soon as that is achieved, the next step will be to hand control and most decision making over to Brussels?”

      Question for you John, suppose your Nation was going to war, would you prefer to do it with or without allies? Yes, some of those allies will be bigger and stronger than you are, and their sheer mass will dictate from time to time their influence will be greater than yours, but they are allies because they see things the same way you do, share multiple common objectives, and they value and respect your participation because they understand the whole is greater than the sum of its parts. Their power augments your power.

      Now take those principles of collective strength, but swap out the militarism and replace it’s focus with trade, mutual prosperity and raising of standards, and don’t forget too that the foundation of the EU was a reaction against war, militarism and imperialism, meant to make war harder and to bring about peace and stability in Europe… and in that respect it has been a tremendous success.

      It is my firm conviction that Scotland should be an active participant in that alliance, and in the collective looking out rather than alone out in the cold looking in, and worse than that, suffering from the deeply rooted colonial aspirations of our Southern neighbours, with it’s pugnacious attitudes towards Europe already stoking resentment.

      The UK is an embarrassing throw-back to a 19th Century colonial mentality which spawned war after war and global instability, but that’s an ugly mentality which Europe has mostly grown out of. Scotland’s heart and soul is European, not least because we’d be ‘stepping up’ a level to be respected as a nation and an equal, rather than subjugated, exploited, and derided as a despised colony.

      Scotland’s place in the European collective would reflect our choice, progressive aspirations and mutual respect, and bear no resemblance to Scotland’s exploited captivity and derision locked in to the UK and it’s toxic indoctrination and cultural assimilation. There is no like for like comparison.

      Winston Churchill (I know, I know…), Winston Churchill said, “The only thing worse than fighting a war with allies, is fighting a war without them”. Churchill actually meant a shooting war, but many of the collective principles work for trade and prosperity… Scotland aches to be rid of that 19th Century colonialism. Scotland belongs IN the EU.

    213. John Main says:

      @Breeks

      “Question for you John, suppose your Nation was going to war, would you prefer to do it with or without allies?”

      With allies, of course, it’s a no-brainer. Haud oan though. Are we talking about an enemy bigger than us, the same size, or smaller? Who started the war anyway? Are enemy soldiers converging on our capital right now? Could be we don’t have the time to spend months trying to work out an alliance. Military situations have a habit of deteriorating rapidly when you sit about talking. What if our putative allies extort an agreement from us that we will in turn assist them against their enemy, currently our biggest trading partner? Who was it said “Independent sovereign nations don’t have friends, they only have interests?”

      Dammit Breeks, it’s complicated!

      But I have tried to answer your question and as you wrote, the EU is supposed to be about peace, not war. I will be polite and not bang on about Yugoslavia and The Ukraine here. Maybe you could address my concerns (you glossed over them first time around):

      “hand control and most decision making over to Brussels”

      Looking at Greece for example, the fiscal policy adopted for the Euro has beggared the Greeks and wrecked Greek economic and employment prospects. Will Scotland be in the Euro? What effect will the de facto management of the Euro to maximise the economic benefits for German exporters have on the “independent” Scottish economy?

    214. Alf Baird says:

      Hatuey

      Who really is being “dishonest” here? Consider my evidence on the long established scientific connection between language and thought (Wittgenstein 1953) and then present whatever it is you base your biased and insulting opinions about the Scots language on. Up till now you have presented nothing of any substance to reject the notion that the desire for independence is dependent on “cultural emotion” (Dorling & Tomlinson 2019; Cambridge Analytica). Here is more:

      “Language is resoundingly more than a mere means of communication; it is the means by which humans can claim diversity and define their identity” (Shaw 2001).

      “Language is often the most common rationale for peoples seeking self-determination” (Lipski 2008).

      (on colonisation) “the language of my education was no longer the language of my culture” (MacKinnon 2019)

      “Language is one of the factors that serves most effectively to define and unite a nation” (Scots-English Dictionary).

      “Scots language is a crucial and integral part of Scottish culture and identity” (Open University)

      “it is linguistic perceptions that directly determine national attachment” (Medeiros 2017)

      “..identity is very much ethnic driven rather than civic” (Henderson 2007)

    215. Hatuey says:

      Alf, you know there’s a strong correlation with class and levels of education, so that poorer people are generally less well educated and vice versa. That’s so obvious and clear that we could call it a truism.

      And, all around the world, the less well educated are more likely to speak slang and be more relaxed about formal rules of language, grammar, etc. Again, that’s totally normal all over the world.

      If you find any of that insulting, you’re in the wrong game.

    216. Saffron Robe says:

      Hatuey, we are all entitled to our opinions, and we all have a right to express them, but we must also be able to listen to and respect our peers, even if we don’t always agree with them.

      If you had followed the discussion between Alf and myself you would have realised that Scots is most certainly not slang and neither is Scottish pronunciation of English. By doing so you have accepted the oppressor’s cultural mindset.

      However, you are quite right that the class dimension cannot be separated from politics. Under colonialism, the indigenous people are generally subjugated and downtrodden, and therefore either working-class (need to earn a living by manual labour) or considered to have no class at all. (We can only really have a class if we can be slotted into the oppressor’s class system.) In this sense you and Alf are arguing the same thing. It is no coincidence that the basis of the “yes” vote came from the working-class, particularly in the ex-industrial cities of Glasgow and Dundee, which coincidentally now have the highest rate of drug-related deaths in Europe. Therefore under colonial oppression it is the poor and working-class who suffer the most and who, for the reasons given above, form the greater part of the indigenous population.

      And that is perhaps the greatest tragedy to befall Scotland under Nicola Sturgeon, apart of course from the persecution of innocent people. The Growth Commission report made it clear that the SNP had sold out their supporter base which, as explained above, is the working-class population of Scotland i.e. the indigenous people – the Scots themselves. Why do you think Nicola Sturgeon has never appeared on an independence march? She is ashamed to show her face to the people she has betrayed.

    217. Hatuey says:

      Saffron, if the people of Scotland don’t engage in slang, which is what you and Alf seem to be suggesting, that would make Scotland completely unique.

      Slang isn’t a derogatory term of insult or abuse. It can’t be since it is a word used exclusively to describe language rather than people. Only in the context of this bizarre conversation is it considered an abusive term.

      And, so, there’s the challenge for you. Show me where Scottish slang has gone. Maybe Alf can help. It seems to have been “disappeared”.

    218. Saffron Robe says:

      Hatuey, one simple example:

      Let us say we were to call a woman a “coo” as a derogatory term.

      Its use in this context is as a slang word but the word itself is not slang. It is the legitimate pronunciation of the word “cow” in Scots.

    219. Saffron Robe says:

      PS. It is not a “bizarre conversation”. As Alf has tried to patiently explain, language is crucial to our identity and identity is crucial to our self-awareness as a people and a nation.

    220. Alf Baird says:

      Saffron Robe

      Aye, as in ‘hoo noo broon coo’, aw braw Scots wirds.

      An, thon’s ‘a braw bricht moonlicht nicht’

      Anither guid Scots wird mebbe – ‘baw-heid’

      Naw, Scots isnae a leid at aw, thon’s aw ‘slang’ ye ken, juist ‘awfu puir Englis’, accordin tae Hatuey (an mony a Anglophone dominie in Scottis schuils) onywey, yon chiel wha kens naethin aboot Scots.

    221. Hatuey says:

      Saffron Robe says:
      7 January, 2021 at 7:38 pm
      Hatuey, one simple example:

      Let us say we were to call a woman a “coo” as a derogatory term.

      Its use in this context is as a slang word but the word itself is not slang. It is the legitimate pronunciation of the word “cow” in Scots.

      ————–

      Technically it’s the vernacular form, which doesn’t make it a language.

      If Scots was a language, people would go to college etc. to learn it. They don’t.

      But you refuse to answer my question: will you give me an example of Scottish slang or not?

      You seem to be suggesting that Scotland doesn’t have any slang — according to you it’s a language.

    222. Dan says:

      @ Hatuey at 10.18pm

      Before you start giving folk grief for refusing to answer your question, gonnae answer mine?

      Dan says:
      5 January, 2021 at 5:59 pm

      @ Hatuey

      You have been fairly consistent btl in your attempts to steer folk away from, or have been dismissive of folk, that try to promote or highlight Scot’s sovereignty or cultural matters in discussions.
      If you have spent any serious amount of time campaigning with the wider public to promote Scotland returning to a status of self-governance you would know that you need a range of topics and angles to converse with the diverse range of punters that reside in Scotland.
      Why are you trying to reduce, or diminish in importance, the number of potential aspects activists could utilise?

    223. Brian Doonthetoon says:

      An example of Scottish rhyming slang, that a guy from Paisley taught me decades ago…

      That’a bra’ pair o’ winners yiv bought!”

      Winners and losers = troosers.

    224. Alf Baird says:

      Hatuey

      “If Scots was a language, people would go to college etc. to learn it. They don’t.”

      You don’t appear to realise that linguistic imperialism is about intentionally depriving a people their own language! More than that, it is about linguicide, i.e. the intended extermination of a language. A state does not teach a language it seeks to eradicate and replace, that is why the Scots language is not taught or given authority in Scotland.

      Language deprivation forms a major part of the cultural and economic oppression suffered by the Scottish people under colonialism, also representing a concerted effort to alter their national identity and sense of belonging.

      The British state kens fine weel if it ‘allowed’ Scots fowk an bairns tae lairn thay’re ain langage in schuils, thay fowk wad tak thay’re ain naition bak, swith lyke tae.

      Language and cultural assimilation has been a key plank of colonial policy for many centuries. Is this really news to you?

    225. Dan says:

      Jist happened tae stumbleclick ontae these earlier so will tack ’em on to promote growing the culture. 😉

      https://twitter.com/ColinBurnett16/status/1347175854372171777

      https://www.colinburnett.co.uk/post/the-scottish-cultural-cringe

    226. Saffron Robe says:

      “If Scots was a language, people would go to college etc. to learn it. They don’t.”

      Hatuey, a language is not defined as a language only if it is taught in schools. There is a reason why Scots is not taught in schools which Alf has explained. You can’t in all honesty be saying that Scots is not a language? Robert Burns wrote in Scots and is recognised the world over. Are you saying Robert Burns didn’t exist? Or “Auld Lang Syne” doesn’t exist?

      And it is not that I haven’t answered your question, you seem unable or unwilling to grasp my answer. If we describe a woman as a “coo” it is slang because a woman is obviously not a cow. If we call a woman a “coo” it is slang (i.e. “coo” is slang for a disreputable woman), if we call a “cow” a “coo” it is using a guid Scots wird. There is an overlap between Scots and the Scottish pronunciation of English, but the distinction would be clearer if the Scots language was taught in schools. And in my comment above regarding the Scottish pronunciation of English words, Scottish pronunciation is actually “purer” or more proper and correct if you like. There is no ‘r’ sound in “saw” or “bath” for instance which a lot of English English speakers add. That is also something which is not taught in schools.

      PS. Dan, I loved your use of the word “stauner” in a previous comment. It had me in stitches and brought back memories. We used to use it a lot in primary school but I’ve not heard it used much since then!

    227. Hatuey says:

      Okay, so the whole world is in on this English conspiracy to deprive Scottish people of their native language…

      “Robert Burns wrote in Scots and is recognised the world over. Are you saying Robert Burns didn’t exist? Or “Auld Lang Syne” doesn’t exist?”

      I’m saying his work was written in a Scottish dialect, like Doric.

      As for the cringe, if anyone is encouraging people to cringe, it’s you guys. There’s nothing wrong with speaking properly, indeed, it’s constructive in that it helps people understand what you want to communicate.

      In an ideal world, we would all speak the same language. That said, English comes pretty close.

    228. Saffron Robe says:

      Hatuey, I think we will just need to accept that you are an Anglophile.

      What is proper to one person may not be proper to another.

      “Burns was skilled in writing not only in the Scots language but also in the Scottish English dialect of the English language. Some of his works, such as “Love and Liberty” (also known as “The Jolly Beggars”), are written in both Scots and English for various effects.”

    229. Dan says:

      Saw this Doric weather forecast a while back.
      (That’s “saw” as in watched, rather than cut in half using a serrated blade seeing as words are so confusing).

      1 min vid

      http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0lhOnmH-7N0

      As bairns we used tae huv tae put berries in oor luggies.
      (That’s “luggie” as in basket / bucket, rather than sticking rasps in oor ears which would obviously be a stupid thing tae do). 🙂

    230. Alf Baird says:

      Dan @ 11.49

      Thanks for that. I’ve read Colin Burnett’s excellent essay on the Scottish Cultural Cringe before and it is helpful to read it again. I certainly agree with him that Scots are in a ‘war of culture’, which is arguably the case in all instances of self-determination decolonisation.

      Colonialism results in two levels of racism, one emanating directly from the imposed culture, the other becoming internalized by the colonized; the latter is what we term the ‘cringe’. These and other aspects of ethnic oppression are explored in my book ‘Doun-Hauden’, which actually re-defines the Scottish Cultural Cringe by its scientific name(s) – i.e. ‘internalized racism’, or ‘Appropriated Racial Oppression’.

    231. Saffron Robe says:

      Alf and Dan,

      I was thinking about cultural imperialism and it occurred to me that it is a sad fact of life that very often it is the abused who become the abuser. To put it in a Scottish context – what Alf would call Appropriated Racial Oppression – the victim becomes an advocate for, or even a ‘celebrant’ in, their own oppression.



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




    ↑ Top