Wings Over Scotland

As usual Chris, brilliant.

Whilst I am here has anyone seen Common Space? They have given a whole section to Labour (Red Robin.) The Unionists bought our country from under our noses, now they appear to be slowly “buying” our few media outlets. Loki, Haggerty, all bought and paid for.

Money ,fame, and mixing with those who can progress your career or personal ambitions appears to be a heady brew that few can resist. Sad.

@JLT says: 3 March, 2018 at 9:56 am:

“As the last year has progressed and the failure of talks, I’ve had this underlying feeling that the EU, rather than just telling the UK to ‘eff off’, that they now intend to maximise the pain onto these islands.”

Nah! JLT, you are over complicating a fairly simple and straightforward matter.

The European Union began with a simple purpose and added to that basic purpose but has never wavered in the basic purpose that began it.

The basic reason behind the birth of the European Union was to prevent the previous European history of almost constant wars ending with the two World Wars that resulted in the ongoing threats of Nuclear conflict that could end a World inhabited by the human race.

Europe then sat between the USSR nuclear threat and the USA nuclear threat that seemed, and still seems, unaware of the threat they are to the entire World.

In ending the constant European conflicts they have largely succeeded and with the fall of the Berlin Wall they began to dismantle the USSR threat but Russia still remains in a much weakened military threat.

The next stage of the EU development was to create the biggest free trade market in the World and thus to lessen the growing threat from conflicts between the Eastern bloc and the USA which, due to the United Kingdom’s, “Special Relationship”, with the USA saw the Westminster Establishment inclined more and more towards the USA and less inclined towards the European Union.

Which brings us up to date with Westminster attempting to divorce itself, and thus also dragging Scotland, Wales and part of Ireland along with them, towards closer links the WTO and the USA.

From the outset the United Kingdom was a outlier among the European nations and never forget De Gaul’s firm opposition towards the United Kingdom’s membership of a place in Europe.

Westminster’s next move was to turn its back on the Commonwealth Countries that had steadfastly stood by them throughout two World wars and actually beg to join the European Union. Even then they thought themselves as exceptions to the rule and demanded special exemptions from certain EU rules.

On the EU side of things they have fallen over themselves to accommodate the UK who have remained since joining a thorn it the side of the EU. In this the EU have never changed their views that the red line of the four freedoms must by met by all EU member states and any state who cannot/will not meet those conditions would, at best, only get some of the membership benefits and would be denied a say in EU decisions while paying EU dues. In this they are being consistent by applying the same conditions to the BRUKEXITeers.

They are no more trying to punish Westminster than they are such as Norway, who pay EU dues but have no EU voice. It has been EU policy and it hasn’t changed – no one can cherry pick from the EU Freedoms. If they do not accept them all they cannot be, or remain, as EU Member States.

One of your best ever, Chris. British nationalists treat Scotland, the north of Ireland, and Wales like crap yet demand we support them in their xenophobic Britnat ambitions.

Aye, right.

Never mind Colonel Blimp and her landmine photo-op, we’ve got to continue laying our own political landmines under the rotten stinking foundations of this so-called precious united kingdom.

Pro-EU Remain voters in England have no one to vote for. So … why don’t the SNP put up some candidates in England? At least in certain target areas to begin with, for instance constituencies that include places like Berwick … or Corby Town … or wherever …

Even in some London constituencies, which were very pro-Remain, pro-EU … And as soon as possible, once it gets better know, across the board, throughout England (but leaving Wales to its ally, Plaid etc.). Moreover, on all fronts, local elections as well as Westminster ones.

I don’t see any disadvantages. And of advantages there could be many.

I do see it as an important way of getting it known across the whole of the UK what kind of Party and political force the SNP really is. Including just how reasonable the SNP are. Of course there would be plenty of attacks and lampooning from the gutter press, but that wouldn’t matter. With good candidate selection, the SNP would be able to give the lie to that propaganda in the long run.

Why should the SNP leadership leave the rabbid English Press to misrepresent and mis-portray them at every turn? What would prevent reasonable, articulate pro-Remain, pro-EU voters from turning to them? Not just as a protest vote against the current madness, but as the voice of reason. And indeed of democracy.

It’s not only English Remainers who need a Party to vote for. What about all the European nationals who are still living and working in England, and hoping something will change?

I don’t think it would take long to organise this, and properly organised, it could make a bigger impact than we might at first imagine. And it would puncture one of the (admittedly false) arguments that the BBC used to plaster our tv screens with Nigel Farage, while keeping the SNP off them. They said UKIP was a UK Party was a UK-wide Party because it was standing in so many seats, while the SNP was only a local thing, and therefore did not deserve the same kind of representation on televised debates etc.

Well, if the SNP has UK-wide candidates, that’s an end to that piece`of BBC chicanery. And if anyone down south pretends the SNP is too ‘Scottish’, Scotland is still part of the UK isn’t it. Besides which, in England SNP could be thought of with commas between the letters, re-tweaked to mean … ‘Scottish, National and Pro-european’.

The SNP is obviously pro-Scottish, but even in UK terms it has been standing up for the true National interest in a way that none of the other main Parties in Westminster have been. That should be made known and clearly publicised throughout the UK.

And the SNP is and always has been pro-European. So the suggested ‘tweak’ of the meaning of SNP will do fine.

The SNP undoubtedly has a media problem. Not just in terms of the constant hostility we know about, but even more in regard to simply being ignored. The BBC being a main culprit in that regard.

I can see why some will think otherwise, but I think going UK-wide would in the end give the SNP a lot of the publicity it sorely needs. The anti-SNP stuff would continue, and no doubt increase, but as more people across the UK got to know the reality of what the SNP is like, and what it’s about – its reasonableness and principled politics – the hysterical anti-SNP Press lobby would sooner or later puncture its own balloon.

There might even be real support in papers like the Guardian, once the SNP can’t just be shunted off into its tiny (fundamentally irrelevant?) ‘Scotland’ section …

So funny and reply from the 3: Oh yes we are!

wull says:

I remember Alex Salmond after a speech down south, he publicly said “we could do well down here!”

It amused me and probably others at the time. However I have often thought about such a move, and how it may serve our purpose.
If we turned into a full blown entity, I am sure it would bring in decent numbers, as yes there would be media coverage, but likely the totally rabid kind, racism would certainly be aimed
at us.

However, I do think it would work better at least initially in Northern England, these people are suffering from Tory ideology
too, but have little choice of ways out.

That would still bring the usual Media response, but not sure these people would be taken in much by them, as they are sick of the same things that we are.
But it would not half shake England up, when they compare our policies with the Tory agenda or Corbyn’s either.

Depending how that went in voting terms, we could then think bigger or not. Problem is we want/need Indy now.

Great new characters Chris.

Clootie
“Great work as always…however you will upset the “Bruttish Bigots” of NI with your one character representing Ireland”

You have a point, might I make the anthropomorphic suggestion of a jaundiced penguin with a bowler hat. 🙂

@Bill not Ben says: 3 March, 2018 at 11:46 am:

“so if anyone thinks that being part of this union will stop wars, then all i can say is, wake up and face reality.”

What utter pish! Why do you imagine the Berlin Wall came down?

Take your neocom bullshit and shove it.

In my previous post, besides a few obvious typing errors, let me correct what I meant by using commas and re-tweaking what SNP means. That should have read, quite simply, as pointing out that SNP can stand for ‘Scottish, National, Pro-european’.

As a kind of slogan … (I don’t know Gaelic, but a friend of mine who claims to do so told me that ‘slogan’ is one of those relatively few Gaelic words that made its way into English, and that its original meaning is ‘battle-cry’ … Maybe someone on this site more knowledgeable than me could confirm whether that is correct …)

Anyway, battle-cry or not, that slogan – Scottish, National, Pro-European – would set out the Party’s main agenda in a clear way for English voters. Even the ‘Scottish’ part of it, along with the other two parts, would help English voters to see that the SNP is not, as such, an anti-English Party. It would be a good thing, even for the SNP in Scotland, for it to be seen as a Party which which ordinary, decent English men and women can identify with and vote for. They too can be pro-Scottish, pro-National and pro-European.

In actual fact, even in its promotion of Scottish independence, the SNP has always believed that this would in the long run be good, even very good, for England too. So long as I have known it, that has generally always been the case.

And it happens to be true anyway. In the light of more recent events, Yes winning the 2014 referendum, and Scotland becoming independent, would have been hugely in England’s best interests. There would have been no Brexit if that had happened, and England would not be in the mess in which it now finds itself.

As so aptly and accurately portrayed in today’s cartoon from Chris.

I am not suggesting that the SNP changes its name in England. It has to be clear that it’s still the same Party as the one operating in Scotland. I am simply suggesting that the letters SNP, re-tweaked in the manner indicated, would become themselves the best way of promoting the Party among English voters. That would be the slogan: ‘Scottish, National, Pro-European’.

It could be a game-changer, even a winner.

(Just to be clear, let me add that I am not a member of the SNP. Simply a long-standing SNP voter. Maybe SNP members could pick up this idea, and run with it within the Party … There is a huge void to be filled in England, and the SNP could be just the Party, and political force, that is needed down there, at this precise moment in time …

Great cartoon.

I wonder if the Rev could if not himself get some guest writers to pursue the next stage for independence. As time moves on I am more than convinced that brexit (soft, hard) will impose greater ethnic brutishness being forced upon the peoples of Scotland. A David Dimbleby, Boris Johnston, Rees-Mogg view of brutishness which lets not kid ourselves is of a hard imperialistic and colonialist England. Reading Bella Caledonia with the National today the gentle suggestion that cosy Corbyn labour are somehow the good guys is a fallacy. Corbyn may believe in Irish self determination but he views Scotland as a colony. Ultimately he will line up with Mundell and Davidson to ensure north Britain succeeds over this ancient nation of Scotland

Get the snow out of the way and then we should start to ratchet up our possible final fight for this country’s freedom. It is as serious as that.

alexicon says:
3 March, 2018 at 9:03 am

Sorry to hear that they only have about 800 signatures.

I am sure I signed it over a year ago and hoped it would have at least 2 million (Scottish Independence supporters) by now.

Just as a matter of interest I will not in future be buying the Saturday National that includes the Bella Caledonia magazine.

wull says:

As I pointed in my previous answer in this regard, we need Independence now. Should that happen, and I do believe it will.

Then, we could speak to others in northern England and find out if they had any interest in joining Scotland.
Places among some you spoke of who may look to the North with some envy at our more social society.

Carlisle, Berwick on Tweed, Even Newcastle and others could be perhaps interested in doing so, if that was the case they hold their own referendum to establish they would want to do that.

That is much less risky as it would not effect Scotland if they voted no, but would enhance us by population if they said Yes.
After that, who knows how far south it would creep.

@jfngw says: 3 March, 2018 at 12:08 pm:

“Although it seems like an interesting idea I’m not sure how this could work.”

The answer is that it wouldn’t work. You cannot have your main policy as leaving a United Kingdom and then joining it. In any case the area that swayed the referendum to leave was the North Of England. Furthermore it is sheer twaddle that they have no one to vote for.

Neither had Scotland until they started parties that stood for independence. Then these parties fused into the SNP. There were other Scottish parties that claimed to stand for Home Rule.

Kier Hardie began in the Scottish Crofter’s Party, got sponsored by the Scottish Liberals then stood in England before becoming the very First Labour MP?
However, here is a brief history of the Labour party we know today:-

In 1900 the Trades Union Congress (the national federation of British trade unions) cooperated with the Independent Labour Party (founded in 1893) to establish a “Labour Representation Committee”, which took the name Labour Party in 1906.

The North of England has had ample time to start any kind of opposition party they desired. Sedgefield, in Durham elected Tony Blair. The North of England has only itself to blame. As, of course, has Scotland who have not yet given the SNP enough support to be able to claim to speak with the people of Scotland’s sovereignty.

Some folk should read more books. The origins of the EU was to stop war and starvation after 11WW. To stop Germany (or others) re-arming. Germany was not allowed to re-arm. Neither was Japan. Germany, Russian, Europe economy was devastated. 26Million Russians died saving the West.

It is US/UK that get involved in illegal wars. Causing the worse migration crisis in Europe since the 11WW. The Europeans have to sort out the mess. Costing £Billions.

Independence in Scotland would make the north of England better off.

O/T

Total chaos on ‘Any Questions’ , audience booing, hissing, cheering, shouting rubbish, Fraser Nelson roundly laughed at and ridiculed; Discussion on Irish border causing almost total breakdown of programme.

BC R4 link to bbc.co.uk

Anna Soubry being very vocal too.

No further discussion in H o C until May??? Not sure I heard that correctly…

Johnathan Dimbleby struggling but managing to retain control..

Assume Mrs May’s speach was delivered on a Friday afternoon to avoid criticism from those in Brussels. Typical of Mrs May, a wee feartie!

Problem with this is ithe criticism mounts up over weekend and will hit her like a tidal wave on Sunday or Monday. GOOD!

Latest wheeze from Mrs May was we should all unite a make brexit a success. My response to this is to continue to buy Scottish goods first & foremost, to avoid English products and buy EU products, if from Ireland, all the better!

Direct action is required, I hope Nicola piles on the pressure next week.

Personally I’d go for a vote Scottish Parliament to reject the EU bill just as Mrs May sits down with EU leaders in three weeks time.

Make the tories’ lives hell, they are happy to make everyone else’s lives miserable!

Can’t see anyone having highlighted this tweet ….

Nicola Sturgeon
@NicolaSturgeon
Spoke to PM last night. Reiterated @scotgov position on continued membership of single market/customs union. Indicated our desire to reach agreement on Withdrawal Bill but emphasised again the issue of principle at stake – we will not agree to a power grab on @ScotParl

TMay might stop the ‘power grab’ but it now seems highly unlike she will deliver ‘continued membership of single market/customs union’.

As long as the four countries of the UK keep subscribing to the criteria that the country with the largest population even when wrong must be right because of weight of numbers however disadvantageous that may be to the other three countries there can never be democracy in any meaningful sense, what you have created by subscription is voluntary acquiescence to dictatorship by the largest entity in that Union

The population of that largest country can then at will decide on anything they choose or assess at anytime to be good for their part of that Union and thus it has always been and if there is detriment to other parts of the Union those other smaller parts have no redress other than to send outnumbered representatives to speak but never to win any reasoned argument of their part of that Union

If you were to use sporting metaphors it’s three lightwieghts versus the heavywieght but only one at a time because the heavywieght makes the rules of the contest and is also the referee

I was born in the forties so well used to the dominance and duplicity of this system of governance created by and on behalf of the largest country in the Union

Simply put if any country were to be offered the opportunity to join such a system today in this modern age no country on earth would ever undertake to signing up to this obvious unequal insanity where all decisions were made adjudicated on and proceeded with by the largest country purely on the basis of trust that that largest country would always make the decisions which suited it and not the others

Which is why the EU who is faced with the problem of disentangling the UK from their Union that member (UK) who have never known any other way than being in charge of everything is insisting that the UK (England who sees itself as the UK) commits every single detail of their intentions in legal text, because the EU are fully aware and have said clearly, the UK (England) cannot be trusted on rhetoric alone as demonstrated by their treatment of the countries within their own Union (UK)

Hence the absolute and overwhelming necessity for the Continuity Bill now proceeding through the Scottish parliament and why a number of UK Union representatives in the Scottish parliament have and will vote against every stage of that Bill because their intent is to once again undermine any and all representation of a smaller part of what they see as their United Kingdom

In 1707 I cannot believe that when the people who took the decision to sell Scotland into this Union with England ever suspected this would be the result, for if they did they would surely have suspected their names would go down in historical infamy for ever committing such a crime against a people

The SNP represents Scotland they know this history to be true thus they will never repeat what has gone before and put themselves in that historical position

That’s why the SNP can be trusted whereas the UK (England) can never be

Apologies for the long post I needed to get this out

Lol, I can’t help from get the feeling that Nicola is itching for Theresa May to give her an opportunity to call #ScotRef, no matter how small.

Theresa, I would tread very carefully if I was you, but then I’m not, so by all means feel free to jump in head first if you fancy.

OT something I noticed in WoS twitter and worth highlighting.

HMG is ‘proudly’ telling us that in 2016/17 defence expenditure in Scotland was £1.6billion.

link to mobile.twitter.com

Firstly, total defence spending was £35.3billion.

Secondly, according to GERS, Scotland was charged £3.8billion as our contribution towards defence.

Any BritNat who claims Scotland isn’t being ripped off, or worse believes it is subsided, needs to have this presented to them!

According to the BBC Scotland web site the circulation of The Scotsman continues its relentless (hee hee) sail Down The Swanee.

The declared circulation of 20k consists of 10k paid sales, 5k subscription sales plus 5k given away free.

So only 10k people actually buy a copy over the counter.

It used to be the case that as far as Births/Marriages and Deaths it was the norm to put an announcement in The Scotsman.

With only 15k people now buying the rag what is the point of paying for an announcement which will be seen by so few people.

This situation is a real problem as there now seems to be little chance of finding out when somebody one knows but with whom has not been in regular contact dies.

@TC –

As you know, I’m not easily ruffled, but that screed really got my hackles up, reminded me of post-indy, the fuckin mess caused by RISE, the utter shite some of them used to come out with to justify what was – as far as I could tell – pure entryism.

But what do I know? I’m one of the ‘male, pale, stale’ brigade who were so despised by young thrusters like Boyd and Shafi.

It all reminds me of someone we discussed very recently. If you haven’t seen this before please stick with it for a couple of minutes. It’s Limmy, with Malcolm Malcolm of The Politics Bar. I wish we knew who he based this character on but I suppose we can all ‘see’ our fave hipster radical in there somewhere…

link to youtube.com

Great drawing once again Chris 🙂 I do love the two new friends of Hamish.

Found this…explains another reason for the “power grab”
link to truepublica.org.uk

Here’s another

link to truepublica.org.uk

We have to get out soon!

@Cactus says: 3 March, 2018 at 2:34 pm:

“Two things ah wiz wondering about…
1) Have the two new characters been given names, as of yet?
2) How auld is oor Hamish (when wiz he born?)
Ye could start a ‘competition’ for the naming of the two new number ones.
Cuddly toys all round”

If they do have a competition they will have to ban Englanders from it or, by sheer weight of numbers the dragon will be named Taffy and the wee Irish leprechaun either Pat or Mick.

The English have a derogatory name for every nation on Earth except, of course an English person.

Robert Peffers says:
3 March, 2018 at 12:02 pm
@wull says: 3 March, 2018 at 11:28 am:

“Pro-EU Remain voters in England have no one to vote for. So … why don’t the SNP put up some candidates in England?”

Aw! Cummon! The party that wants to be independent from England standing candidates in the country/kingdom that it wants to leave? It is two faced and would only lose them voters in Scotland.

Robert, I always read your posts with interest, and agree with you on many, indeed most things, but not always. This is obviously one of them!

Maybe it all depends on whether you believe that Scottish independence will genuinely be good for England, or not. I think that when independence does happen it’ll turn out to be a ‘win-win’ result on both sides of the border, for Scotland AND England both. You seem to think otherwise. That’s OK – we can agree to differ on that one.

Others might ask: Why do I think our independence, and therefore the break-up of the UK, will be as good for England as it is for Scotland? Basically, both countries / both nations will re-discover themselves. In fact, both of them will re-discover their better selves. That ‘better self’ – in both instances, not just in England but in Scotland too – had been buried, lost sight of and covered in grime during three centuries of what is best described as Unionist Imperialism.

Becoming independent from each other is basically about rubbing all that old Imperial grime off from ourselves. From our two selves, that is, because Scotland was at least as much involved in that old Imperial Project as England was.

Since that rotten old Project collapsed – I remember being fascinated as I watched it finally falling to bits when I was a boy – Scotland has adapted to the new situation much better and more quickly than England.

That, at least to me, explains a huge amount about contemporary differences between Scotland and England. And also about the present political climate in the UK. Brexit, and differing attitudes towards Brexit and indeed towards Europe and Europeans, are part of this. So too are various developments over the course of my lifetime, not the least of which is the rise of the SNP and the more general movement for Scottish independence.

There is a very simple reason why England is miles behind. It did not properly adapt to the loss of Empire, and Brexit is the ‘last hurrah’ of the doomed and long-since-defeated Imperial Project. What we re witnessing is really tragic, so much so I find it both unbelievable and very hard to watch. It’s a sad sight indeed. Has it come to this?

England, really and truly, needs to be saved from itself. And it was – and still is – up to us, Scotland and the Scots, to mount the rescue. How? By becoming independent.

The fact that we very nearly did it in 2014 cannot be taken as any consolation; we should be blaming ourselves for not going the whole way. It was our moral duty to dig our neighbour out of the awful pit they had made for themselves, by becoming independent. Instead, we left them there, deluded with (and consoled by) their illusions, which then gathered strength and turned into the Brexit Tragedy which is now unfolding before our eyes.

Scottish independence was, and is, the only blow to the English psyche which will be sufficient to save England from herself. No other medicine will ever be strong enough to spring her out of her delusional fantasy-land. Nothing else can force her into the modern world, and make her the positively contributing nation she can and should be once again.

In England, the result of the 2014 referendum was experienced as a victory for (what in our view is the wrong kind of) English Nationalism. That strange and long outdated English Nationalism, which had manifested itself in the Imperial Project then swelled and carried on like a river in spate. It took heart from that (apparent) victory over the Scots in 2014 in order to launch its new campaign against the Europeans. Gaining that further apparent (but entirely Pyrrhic) victory during the Brexit referendum two years later.

Having gubbed the Scots, a rampant England had now gubbed the Europeans as well. It is perfectly obvious that if the Scots had won in 2014, neither the Tories nor anyone else in England would have risked a Brexit referendum in 2016. The whole idea would have become unthinkable, and would have been shelved for good.

In that case, none of the present nonsense would have existed, and England would by now have been coming back to its senses, quickly recovering from having been dazed and confused by the knock-out blow delivered by the Scots in 2014.

Scotland would have been independent, England would have begun to adapt in a new and much better way to the post-Imperial world, and both countries – I am quite sure – would have been fellow members of the European Union, and good friends with each other.

The reason that did not happen – and the reason why England is now self-evidently in such an enormous mess – is simply because we Scots did not win the independence referendum of 2014. As I said, I believe Scottish independence is and will be the best thing that ever happened to England. It will save the English nation from its own deluded past, to which she has remained far too beholden, shackling her with a totally false image of herself and of her place in the world which prevents her from making the positive contribution which ought to be hers. And which makes her – I am sorry to say it, but I think it is true – a danger both to herself and to others.

There is a logic in all of this. Legally, the Scottish perception of what the Union is, as a partnership between two nations, is correct. Whatever the questionable nature of that Union’s origins, and how it was actually brought about, legally it is a Treaty between two equally free entities and, as such, it can be ended by any one of the two Parties. However, the legal reality is one thing, and what happens in a nation’s psyche is another.

What some of us had known or thought for a long time became perfectly obvious during the campaign for the 2014 referendum: contrary to Scottish assumptions and the legal reality, in the English psyche the Union of 1707 was presumed to have been a victory for the imperial project of Edward I, as pursued at the end of the 13th and beginning of the 14th Century.

There is a straight line between that medieval project of the English crown in regard to Scotland (where it did not succeed), as well as towards Wales and Ireland, the beginnings of the English Empire in the 16th and 17th Century in America etc. prior to the creation of the UK, and the ongoing and expanding Imperial Project which continued apace after the 1707 Union.

I would suggest that in the buried-away corners of the English psyche all of that subsequent imperial development roots back and has its foundations in Edward I’s project, especially towards Scotland. Scotland is the key to the English imperial mindset, with which Brexit is entirely bound up, so much so that it may be called the contemporary expression of that mindset.

Edward I’s project was to subject Wales, Ireland and Scotland to England, but it wasn’t just that. Scotland was the key element all along, even though it was the one he tackled last, because he had to wait till the opportunity and circumstances he needed arose. It was the most difficult, because it meant eliminating an established Kingdom. Annihilating – that is, reducing to nothing – the already existing Kingdom of Scotland and its kingship, which meant its reality as a political entity, was the crux of his imperial project to subject the whole of the British Isles to his, the English crown.

If I am right, and that is the basis all the subsequent development of the English Imperial Project throughout the world, you can see why holding on to Scotland is so important to the English psyche. If Scotland goes, the whole Project goes.

And England will have to change radically. Literally, ‘radically’ – in her roots. … Think of the English Imperial Project – or rather mindset / (political) psyche – as a tree, in the roots of which lie the absolute need to control and subject Scotland. Cut the roots, and the whole tree falls. Not only falls, but dies – with the roots gone, the tree is drained of its sustenance.

No wonder there is such a dread of Scotland becoming independent. The depth of that fear, especially among the English establishment and those too easily influenced by it, became apparent in new ways during the independence campaign. So much so it surprised even me.

At the same time – and this is one of the reasons why I think the SNP should get involved in England – I think there are a lot of English people who, today, have really had enough of that old imperial mindset. They are desperate to get rid of it, and we can – and should – help them. What the establishment see as their identity, and their very lifeblood, they see as a cancer which needs at long last to be cut out, once and for all.

Painting with a broad brush, you could say, in psychological terms (in terms of the psyche), that that is the real difference (the root difference) between England’s Remainers and her increasingly mad and delusional Brexiteer fundamentalists. We ought to be helping the Remainers, even in England, not just washing our hands of them and leaving them to their fate (which means handing them over to the Leavers, and the looniest wing thereof).

There is a conflict going on down south between the ‘England First / Make England Great Again’ brigade (a la Trump) and that sweetly reasonable, moderate and tolerant Englishness which everyone in his right mind admires. Even in terms of Scotland’s future, and our future relations with our immediate neighbour, we should be doing all we can, even now, to ensure that the latter come out on top.

The SNP putting up candidates in English constituencies would, in my opinion, be a laudable and constructive move towards that end. Why should reasonaable Englishmen be deprived of the possibility of voting for the most reasonable Party with substantial representation at Westminster. This would not be hypocrisy, but good common sense. The SNP does not simply seek independence from England – a phrase which could be taken to imply that it is currently subject to England, which is not the case, but I know it was not at all meant in that way – it wants Scotland’s future relation with England to be positive and entirely amicable, and set on a different and much firmer foundation than has been the case in the past.

And why would Scottish independence be against the major interests of the inhabitants of any English constituency? Maybe there are some, but I can’t think of any particular place in England that is directly dependent on Scotland in economic or any other terms.

In that regard, it seems obvious to me that Nicola Sturgeon, for one, will do everything in her power to ensure there is no hard border between England and Scotland. She may not have said it explicitly, but it is clearly the main reason why she has downplayed the long-standing SNP policy of an independent Scotland being a full member state of the EU. It is surely concern to keep the English border open after independence that is causing her to toy with – or, at least, to allowing other SNP members to toy with – the idea that a Norway-style arrangement (customs union, single market etc.) might be enough, or even better.

If that is the only way to keep the open border with England after independence, irrespective of my own opinions on the matter, I am almost certain that that is the way the SNP will go.

I don’t think putting up SNP candidates in English constituencies is either hypocritical or two-faced. Instead, voting SNP – whether here or there – would be a matter of doing what’s best for both of us.

Promoting the SNP down there would be a way of propagating the reasonableness of its policies, many of which certainly do affect the whole of the UK. And most of these are policies which no other major Party in Westminster supports. For instance, opposition to the renewal of Trident, and the abolition of nuclear arsenals generally.

English voters deserve the chance to vote for such reasonable policies just as much as we do; these policies currently affect their own country no less than they affect ours.

And after independence? Well, if the SNP is doing well in some places in England it could just continue. It would presumably do so as a new, purely English Party, with a revised name, but continuing to pursue policies similar to those of the SNP and in something of the same spirit. And maintaining friendly links with its sister Party in the country to the North, without being in any way dependent upon it. Who can doubt that it would be useful to an independent Scotland if such a Party could indeed enter successfully into mainstream English politics?

England too will have regained her independence at that point, and will be better able to be her true – that is, her better – self. With psyche duly purified of all these old imperial illusions. It might just be this Party, now truly English, with its origins in the SNP, that leads England back into Europe … Personally, I would love that … !

Allow me the fantasy – even just for the smallest of moments – of victory eventually going to ‘sweet reasonableness’, in the end.

The EU was created in order to prevent any further outbreak of war in Europe … That must surely include a cease to the hostilities between Scotland and England. That is why I say let us never stop doing, as best we can, what is best for both our nations. Others are welcome to disagree, but I think our becoming independent from each other, at this particular juncture of history, will be the best way to serve that end. And – again, others may disagree – I would prefer that we would both do so as full members of the EU.

I also think that in this respect the SNP operating in England as well as Scotland would be a very positive development. Promoting the independence of both Scotland and England and laying out how lastingly friendly relations can be secured and guaranteed between the two nations is something that urgently needs to be put across. People, on both sides of the border, need to be convinced that this is really what will happen.

The SNP has a hugely positive role to play in banishing English fears, and garnering English support. Even for an independent England, not at all of the Brexiteer type – but, instead, building an ‘England in Europe’ mentality. That is what is needed to replace the old Imperial English mentality from which we all have suffered, England included.

This pro-English aspect of the matter, if taken on in the right spirit by the SNP, would also be good for Scots generally and for SNP voters, members and sympathisers in particular. Being pro-Scottish, and pro-independence, even fervently so, is not about being anti-English.

Even among thinking pro-Union Scots, one of the things that makes them suspicious of independence is that they perceive the whole movement, and especially the SNP, to be anti-English. We know that that is a false perception, but that is not enough. We have to be able to demonstrate to such people that their perception is wrong, and convince them to change their minds, and come on board for independence.

Being pro-Scotland and in favour of her independence has to be re-conceived in such a way that it is also about being pro-English. What we are proposing for Scotland is genuinely in England’s best interests. For anyone who has eyes to see, or a mind to understand, the Brexit mess is clear proof of that.

Let England be herself (her true self), and Scotland too. Both of them free and independent, within the concert of European nations. And both of them making a positive contribution there, and to each other.

Robert Peffers says:

The English have a derogatory name for every nation on Earth except, of course an English person.

Funnily enough, I can’t think of a Scots name for them.

There is Sassenach, but that really refers on a southern non Gael so could well include Lowland Scots.

The rest of the world certainly has names for them – Pom, Limey, etc..

My favourite is the German … Inselaffe … meaning island monkey, which given Brexit is unnecessarily offensive to innocent monkeys everywhere!

Keep yer hands off me lucky charms, to be sure.

I don’t know if anyone else has posted this but here it is again just in case no one has.

Scotland in Europe Update: 2nd March 2018;
link to alynsmith.eu

@ Wull says,

‘I think there are a lot of English people who, today, have really had enough of that old imperial mindset. They are desperate to get rid of it, and we can – and should – help them.

The SNP has a hugely positive role to play in banishing English fears, and garnering English support. Even for an independent England, not at all of the Brexiteer type – but, instead, building an ‘England in Europe’ mentality. That is what is needed to replace the old Imperial English mentality from which we all have suffered, England included.

Let England be herself (her true self)’

Dear Wull, you make very interesting points, which are in effect a variation on the ‘labour/socialist’ theme of ‘not abandoning the poor, working man of England with whom we have so much in common’.

Very nice English people continue to vote en mass for Conservatives, and by a majority (however much you disagree) for Brexit – however much you don’t like this I respectfully suggest this is an expression of England’s ‘true self’.

I’ve met many a nice English person who does not and will not face up to the realities of British colonising, as the money from the asset stripping of other countries kept rolling in.

They didn’t know much – and thats how they liked it – but they kent whit side their bread was buttered.

If they truly are ‘ desperate to get rid’ of their current system of government – we’ll see some evidence of them protesting, organising, educating’. But like self determination – this is not something other people from other countries can do for them, on their behalf. We can and we should butt out.

And in the same vein – I was an admirer of The Canary, who were one of the few English media sites that wrote about Scottish Indy and the SNP fairly…. right up until Corbyn came onto the agenda, then they couldn’t forget us quick enough. Socialist Solidarity my erse.

The SNP have a big job to do, sorting out England’s democratic deficit is not it.

@ Ian & the Cat, spot-on anent this self-appointed quartet of egotists, give them nuthin!

Fairly missed my National this week but not read Bella yet. Alan Hinnrichs from Dundee never disappoint on the letters front, wonder if he posts on Wings?

@ Wull, for a guy who posts half a yard & hasn’t joined the SNP is a bit odd! Stick yer haun in yer pooch man!

@schrodingers cat –

I went back and read that piece again. It’s really difficult to nail what’s so infuriating about it, but it’s more to do with the tone of voice than any specific fact or detail.

There’s a patronising self-satisfied undertone to it, a presumption that the reader either shares the writers’ internationalist agenda or has yet to ‘find’ it.

Well, fuck that.

I don’t ‘share’ Shafi’s vision and I honestly don’t know anyone who *does* who isn’t also a blinkered ideologue. The same people who are fucking thick enough to confess to voting Labour while standing on a Yes platform are those who utterly wrecked the SSP and, with that, any hope of unifying the Left in Scotland. I had an exchange with Mike Small about this just the ther day after he took exception to a comment I made about CallKaye. He asked if I now, like so many others, ‘hate’ BellaC. I assured him I don’t, and that’s true *but* it’s well-nigh impossible to defend the publication of that shite from Shafi & Jamieson.

Many of the trendies who will have nodded away to themselves this morning while reading that piece conform to the stereotype so accurately sketched by Tinto Chiel (3.27), but their ‘spokespersons’ are far from the endearingly dense character created by Limmy. They are dangerous exploitative narcissists who haven’t even the common decency to set their stall out honestly – instead, they clamber onto any platform which has a microphone and, preferably, generous limelight.

The Yes movement does not need these fuckers. Most are identifiable e.g. if they’ve been approved for live studio appearances in Pacific Quay then they’ve already been vetted and are considered ‘safe’. Yes groups should always work on the assumption that the trendies have an anti-SNP agenda, then leave the individuals to prove otherwise. If they can’t or won’t, have nothing to do with them – don’t give them anything, especially your precious time, because they will waste as much of it as they can get away with.

yesindyref2 says:

some leisurely way forward that would take about 10 years

Indeed. The aspect which they seem oblivious to would be the omnipresence of a hostile Greater England nationalist WM doing their damnedest to thwart Scotland at every stage!

My own feeling is that holding IndyRef2 and winning it is a big challenge, however after that WM won’t make things at all easy.

With these Brexit so called negotiations, we’ve seen the usual antics of perfidious Albion combined with indecisiveness. This is ‘only’ about withdrawing from the EU. We can only barely imagine how it will be when they turn to ‘negotiating’ the dissolution of their beloved UK!

Scotland will be forced to move ahead without cooperation and by necessity unilaterally. Well, we will need friends but I somehow don’t think we will find them in London.

I believe when the time comes to setting up the apparatus of state for iScotland, we won’t have the luxury of time!

Here are some characters from an alternate universe: (Hi LM xx)
link to wingsoverscotland.com

…commented upon 180 times, so far, good darts, SSG 🙂

Take a wonder and then ponder this new readers:
link to wingsoverscotland.com

Let’s get Scotland back to normal.

iAye.

@galamcennalath
The timing of Indy Ref 2 is getting to be about right, with the shambles of the Brexit negotiations even Leave voters might be getting worried.

And apart from that, why spend 10 years preparing for Independence to avoid a transistional period which is nonsense anyway, why not go for Independence and have the transitional period then rather than before?

I’m not convinced they understand the meaning of the word “Independence”.

@Ian brotherhood

I’ve had a look at these ‘independence’ sites, they are the go to commentators for the MSM so that should immediately raise alarm bells. Never visit them now or ever likely to contribute.

I have no interest in some commentators that advise me that I can gain independence by voting for a party 100% opposed to independence.

What normally happens is if you try to criticise them you will then be outed in a tweet or article accusing you of some unacceptable behaviour to try an silence you (or even reported to the police). This is quite well demonstrated today by a particular tweet doing the rounds.

gotta agree ian
i was going to say that they are not ideologically driven but i think they are nothing more than opportunists.

being part of the chatteratti means they have to be continually noticed, controvesial etc which is why they criticise the yes supporters (wos, snp etc) it is their noteriety within this org that has given them oxygen.

it also means they will tow the britnat line and become the exceptable face of yes, right on cue, 5 mins ago i see a feed on my twitter where loki is being interviewed by owen jones in the guardian.

this ice ax is making my ears burn and i intend to do something about it.

kat boyd
angela hagerty
jonathon shafi
loki
? jamison

at next local yes group I intend to introduce a motion to make these people persona non grata
i.e. we will have nothing to do with any rally, publication or movement that promotes or gives these individuals any air time.

enough is enough, time for a clear out

Andy McKangry says:

People who would put their own wee personal ultra leftie agenda before Scottish independence every time.

they arent though andy, they are furthering their careers by doing this, any socialist or independence agenda is a secondary to their own personal gain

@Valerie says:3 March, 2018 at 1:56 pm:

“I for one, do not want to see their focus diluted, where decisions on policy would have to have a UK dimension?

Which was actually the point I was, rather more clumsily, making. If my memory serves me well I remember Margo Macdonald saying to my late wife and I that the best thing Scotland could ever do for the good of our English friends was to gain Scotland’s independence. She said because, by doing so, we Scots would benefit everyone in the United Kingdom.

I took it at the time the reason was that the union setup was holding the entire United Kingdom back. It made sense as London was closing down manufacturing, mining, shipbuilding and the nationalised industries by the use of North Sea oil & gas revenues and boosting the London financial services.

We found out the folly of such changes when OPEC flooded the markets with oil & gas and prices fell and the bottom dropped out of the oil & gas markets.

Aye now keep a compass by my bedroom window.

SO aye can see the weather blow in.

From the east side.

Or N or S or W.

Talkin’ aboot compasses, do y’all know what your political one is?
link to en.wikipedia.org

To learn, here.

Wull @ 3.38
But what you are suggesting (albeit for different reasons)
is that we share our politicians…..
That’s the whole problem in the first place Wull!
We’ve tried that…..we dinny like it..

For 300 years plus the Inglis have outsmarted the Scots. Shameful and cringemaking but…..
We’re not alone. It took the Irish 800 years to be free, but not quite, of anglosaxon dealings. The history of the Near East is replete with Brit double dealing, a good deal of which is responsible for that region’s current state. We ought to be much smarter in our methods. Assuming that things will ‘get sorted’ is irresponsible wool gathering.
We maun ding doun the Britis estait! Richt nou!

schrodingers cat @ 5.14pm

Bingo!

Here’s that Mackena Saturday Herald thing, it goes paywall after 5 views here so, get ready for a toryboy rag mention of Wings over Scotland. How many times will the WoS blogger ever be seen on any BBC or ITV politics show, is not consider here, shock. Its for toryboys only, msm broadcasting.

Odd photo of oooooooold Jeremy Corbyn and Leonard nobody, at a podium…

By aligning himself with Jeremy Corbyn’s message, Richard Leonard has wisely decoupled the party in Scotland from the passive attitudes that forced many supporters to flee to the SNP.

43 comments
ONE of the most persistent axioms in Scotland’s mainstream publishing outlets is that the new media platforms which proliferated in the slipstream of the 2014 independence referendum campaign must be disparaged. These were generally viewed as untutored brigands, rough as a badger’s fundament and regarded as emblematic of how nasty and divisive the referendum had become. Three (Wings Over Scotland, Bella Caledonia and Common Space) have endured to become the Yes movement’s most authentic barometers of Scottish Nationalist thinking and support.

The daily readership of each stands comparison with the mainstream media publications and, without them, the Yes vote would not have travelled from 28% to 45% in less than two years. Those of us among the so-called mainstream commentariat who have been taken to task by Wings or Bella have too often reacted with ad hominem attacks of our own. If only they could play nicely and abide by the rules, we’d plead.

Instead they persistently refused to kick the ball out of play when one of our players was down and injured. We really had no cause to complain, though. Many of us had spent our entire careers in a bubble, protected from the barbs of incandescent readers by kindly Letters Editors who acted as gate-keepers of our newspapers to ensure we sensitive souls rarely had to encounter anything other than mild criticism. When the levee broke with the advent of social media there was a lot of pent-up anger on the part of those whom we had deemed too unruly to join our private glee club.

As the pattern of ownership of the national titles remains overwhelmingly Unionist it was only to be expected that much of the frustration found willing homes in pro-independence sites. It wasn’t so much the Word made Flesh but the word off the leash. My thoughts on this are that most of us are paid handsomely to eviscerate politicians and public servants and thus are hardly in a position to object too much when we are slaughtered in return. In the words of the great US song-writing trio Van Halen, Van Halen and Roth we ought instead “to roll with the punches and get to what’s real”.

Characteristic of Scottish Labour’s dismal failures of leadership and strategy during the past few years was its Gadarene rush to condemn the Nationalist social media warriors and attempt to link them with the SNP leadership. Under its last few leaders the party had forgotten that it was only by being loud and irascible that it had first made itself heard when challenging social injustice, an issue that does not lend itself to meekness and calm reflection. Rather than produce anything resembling a sustainable policy of their own they allowed themselves to become detached from their roots by wrapping themselves in the Union flag. It didn’t get them very far; indeed they went into reverse and were soon passed by the gleeful Scottish Tories who couldn’t believe how acquiescent their former sworn enemies had become in promoting the Union at any cost. Now though, a week before its national conference in Dundee, the Labour Party in Scotland at last appears to have learned some of the bitter lessons of the past 10 years. There is even a new social media platform called Red Robin which seems eager to give a voice to the party’s Left, a grouping which, until recently, had been treated with some disdain and suspicion by Scottish Labour chiefs. I’m not sure it will ever become as rebarbative as Wings Over Scotland (though I hope it does) but it’s made a solid start nonetheless.

The party under new leader Richard Leonard travels to the City of Discovery in fine fettle and having re-located part of its soul. Mr Leonard has yet to distinguish himself at First Minister’s Questions against Nicola Sturgeon but who has? By aligning himself with Jeremy Corbyn’s message, For the Many Not the Few, he has wisely decoupled the party in Scotland from the benign, passive attitudes that forced many of core supporters to flee to the SNP, giving such succour to Ruth Davidson.

Mr Leonard’s next step is to exert his authority by doing something about the Anas Sarwar problem. Mr Sarwar, who lost out to Mr Leonard in the Scottish leadership election, has not gone quietly. He remains close to Alan Roden, the party’s former director of communications and avowed anti-Corbynite and is blamed by several in Mr Leonard’s inner circle for fomenting tension in the party. Mr Leonard, though, will have been buoyed by the recent upsurge in donations to the party and by the success of grass-roots campaigns such as Period Poverty and ending the SNP’s foolish Offensive Behaviour at Football legislation. These are the building bricks of authentic socialism and are a rebuke to the SNP’s recent descent into gesture politics such as Named Persons, smacking, minimum unit pricing for alcohol and gender-fluidity. All are well-intentioned but are produced in a middle-class bubble that insulates its inhabitants from the far more pressing issues of child poverty, inner-city deprivation and inequality in health and educational attainment. Scottish Labour also heads for Dundee following several polls indicating that it has pushed the Scottish Conservatives into third place. It seems that no amount of appearances on London television panel shows by Ms Davidson can divert attention from political hobgoblins and gargoyles who comprised much of the recent Tory intake at Westminster and in town halls throughout Scotland.

Mr Leonard, though, would do well to ditch the self-pitying tone of his poor, little Englishman act. His recent insistence that he was a victim of anti-English racism during the 2014 referendum is redolent of the faux outrage deployed by one of his predecessors, Jim Murphy. The SNP and the Labour Party in Scotland have been served well by many fine English men and women, as well he knows. Those same voices who are alive to Mr Sarwar’s stratagems would do well to advise their boss to leave the victim narrative behind and stick to what is expected of a real Labour leader: highlighting health and educational inequality on the big stage and making small differences locally.”

Mackenna’s coming it as per, Westminster politics is endless liars lying. And then their UK media distils their endless lying for us saps.

BBC r4 Week in Toryboy Politics this morn were very pleasantly fluffing future Prime Minister Rees Mogg, but he was lying like a tory twat right the way through the half hour.

As in, Rees Mogg went on and on about how the EU never gave the UK and Cameron anything at all, when they asked the EU for help to placate the Leavers of teamGB. So its the EU’s fault you see really.

Except EU could not have bent over backwards any further to give UKOK tory creeps anything and everything they demanded.

Oh to be a toryboy, pleasantly fluffed by your beeb gimps on a Saturday morning.

As usual, beeb r4 gimps total SNP blackout continues.

heedtracker says:

future Prime Minister Rees Mogg

Oh PLEASE let it come to pass prior to IndyRef2!

I see he is bookies’ favourite for the next one in the job.

As PM he has to be worth an extra 2-3% swing to YES.

Great cartoon – a propose names can I suggest:

Hamish the Lion, Dewi the Dragon (David) and Ruari the red-headed Leprechaun.

I heard ‘Grees Fogg’ on the radio t’other morning after John Major’s intervention.

I thought Mr. Major at least made sense when he spoke – more than he had ever done as PM, but ‘Grees-Fogg’ was most unpleasant and damning with his rapid put-down of Major’s view basically saying that he made a hash of things when he was PM and didn’t know what he was talking about now so his remarks were irrelevant.

I thought he was downright rude about John Major, in a very sneering way too.

I thought he was downright rude about John Major, in a very sneering way too.

Yes but the tories are in a very hot civil war, why we got given Brexit ref1 and now no longer EU citizens.

Its only because of tory msm domination, its not being made a big deal of. Why would they.

Stop deluding yourselves about the SNP standing in England.

The SNP vote at the last election in Scotland was 37%, down from 50% previously, with a loss of half a million voters and 23 MPs.

@Robert Peffers

Hi Robert. Possibly I am, but I can’t help feeling that there’s more going on with the EU’s intentions over Northern Ireland than it appears. Either the UK folds and gives way on an open border between both countries (which then infuriates the DUP, half of England and both Scotland and Wales), or the UK sign a deal that basically makes it nothing more than a vassal state to the EU.

‘From the outset the United Kingdom was a outlier among the European nations and never forget De Gaul’s firm opposition towards the United Kingdom’s membership of a place in Europe’.

Can’t remember if it was Andrew Marr’s book on A History of Modern Britain, but the author noted that De Gaul did want Britain in on the EU from the start …on one condition – that the UK severed all ties with the USA. De Gaul did not want to have Britain at the table but hearing an American voice coming from the British representatives. When Britain refused, De Gaul resigned himself to keeping Britain out. But the way our press have it, it was all De Gaul’s fault because he hated England. The truth was, he didn’t. De Gaul was looking at the bigger picture and feared that if the USA got a foothold at the EU table, then Europe would be signed up to every war going. It was also America’s aim to have influence over the EU (which it failed to do), because to lose influence in Europe would mean that America’s imperial policy would have to recede back over the Atlantic …and well, they couldn’t have that now. So in the end, they would throw the UK the odd bone about the ‘special relationship’ and have the UK become its eyes and ears within the EU. No wonder Washington DC was deeply unhappy at Brexit. Brexit meant that America lost its pet lapdog at the EU table.

As to my earlier post and the fall of the Prussian State. The historian Norman Davies discussed Brirtish foreign policy towards Germany in a chapter in his book Vanished Kingdoms. Davies subtly explained how imperialist Britain could never tolerate another rival in the house (Europe), and therefore were determined to beat them in WW1. After the scare by Hitler through WW2, the determination to remove all Prussian-Brandenburg imperialist intentions from Germany and in greater respect Europe was done intentionally so by Britain by removing the German Royal Family; the German army and navy and the destruction of Prussia completely by removing it from the German map. However, the greatest reprisal by Britain was to remove the Juncker class (nobility) and impose Federalism. In doing so, they removed the entire German Establishment.

That was why I mentioned in my post today as to whether some EU politicians look upon what Britain did to Germany, then look at us (and especially England with its demented vision of itself and the rest of the world, and go ‘it worked there in Germany …maybe it’s high time to do the same to Britain by weakening the Establishment political structures’

It wouldn’t be a bad thing if one ponders on it.

bob not bill

so many halfwits– are you 1/2, 1 or 2? I think you should find out.

JLT @ 8:10 pm

You write: “… there’s more going on with the EU’s intentions over Northern Ireland than it appears. Either the UK folds and gives way on an open border between both countries (which then infuriates the DUP, half of England and both Scotland and Wales), or the UK sign a deal that basically makes it nothing more than a vassal state to the EU.”

I have no problem with the UK ‘folding’ and giving way on a open border between e.g. NI and the Republic. My concern then is what Scotland needs and must demand – or take. I would not wish to oppose a sensible open border on the island of Ireland – I’d welcome it.

I find your concept of a deal in present circumstances that makes the UK or any part of the UK a ‘vassal state’ (a hugely pejorative term!) to the EU difficult to understand. I find the concept of EU institutions, especially the Parliament, accepting anywhere having the status of a ‘vassal state’ hard to conceive. Is Canada a vassal state of the EU – are EFTA countries vassal states of the EU? Care to elaborate?

Robert Peffers

Just had to give you a mention by name, not all wars are in europe maybe you have not noticed what’s going on in Syria, maybe your so busy writing all the statistics down for us that you don’t have time for anything else, i personally just scroll by long winded mind numbing posts like yours, so do me and others a favour, when i post you can just keep silent, you and the Mac seem to be a double act of disrespect and i am sure other people on wings do not want this kind of thing, so from now on, i will not react to your stupid comments about me, cause to be quite honest, your boring with your book length posts, and i am sure quite a few here silently agree with me.

Sorry Mr Rev, i will just ignore the people who get personal, respect for another person is important, you might not agree with me, but calling me an idiot and saying i write pish is not the way to get respect back, so i will just say sorry for going down to their level of debate, it will not happen again, i am a very nice person really, but i let my standards slip a bit when replying to certain people, who will not be named in the future.

Hamish 100

Does your name refer to your haircut, stick to the day job, cause comedy is certainly not your forte

I will ignore the disrespectful people here, its getting tedious now, i hope they ignore me and i will do as i have been doing until they started their pointless crap, ignore them

Bill not Ben :8:58

Why pick on Robert Peffers for accusing of you of “writing pish” when it’s so obvious to all.

Kindest regards

“finally got round to reading that article in Bella, Ian, and I can fairy easily dissect what it was that I anyway reacted against.”

Just been reading it. Quite lazy journalism which is a pity.

Fails to talk about the GE result for the SNP maybe being down to the fact that they actally played down indy and didn’t get the vote out.

Corbyn described as anti war – but failure to mention hes pro nuke and the fact that he should be miles ahead in the polls.

heedtracker @ 18:47,

So the Great McKenna writes:

Mr Leonard, though, will have been buoyed by […] ending the SNP’s foolish Offensive Behaviour at Football legislation. These are the building bricks of authentic socialism

Whit? It seems that when McKenna writes for The Herald he can’t help but occasionally lose his marbles and write delusional clap-trap like this. What a great parliamentary triumph that was. Once upon a time his pals were in power and they aspired to strive harder to tackle the cancer in our midst that is sectarianism. Now they depend on it to get elected!

“Authentic socialism” bollocks. Leonard whatsisname is a NorthBritLab patsy who is even less memorable than his hypocritical puppetmaster Corbyn, and won’t do any more for their Northern Accounting Unit than the hapless Murph (or any of the others) did.

Better to realise that right now than waste another generation or two finding out the hard way, as we had to do.

Robert J Sutherland @ 9.11
That’s exactly how I read that article too.
I was also thinking that it doesn’t address the asset striping that’s been going on since 2014.
Westminster either try to rule it or wreck it….and we don’t have 10+ year’s to play nice.
Especially when the constraints of EU membership are removed.