The world's most-read Scottish politics website

Wings Over Scotland


With the bomb lighting

Posted on October 11, 2019 by

A certain independence blog has written FIFTEEN articles in the last month-and-a-bit about Wings, with a steadily-increasing tone of purple-faced rage, since we passingly suggested the idea of setting up a 2021 Holyrood list party if and only if the SNP had failed to deliver a second independence referendum by then.

Now, we do understand and empathise. There’s really not a lot to talk about in Scottish politics at the moment, with the political scene having been utterly consumed by Brexit for the last two years, and trying to attribute significance to some piddly meaningless subsamples of UK-wide polls can only take you so far.

But since over the past few days we’ve been starting to fear that they might have some sort of aneurysm if they get any more wound up, we suppose we ought to finally reveal the results from the first of a series of polling questions we’re intending to ask on the subject of the notional party.

And let’s be clear from the outset – we started with a soft one, couched in deliberately general terms because all we were really interested in at this point was finding out how many SNP voters are absolutely implacably opposed to the idea of giving their regional list vote to someone other than the SNP.

And given that the SNP has spent most of the last decade banging a big “Both Votes SNP” drum, that number turned out to be much, much lower than we expected.

Only 14% of people who said they planned to give the SNP their constituency vote in 2021 responded that they would definitely comply with the party’s demands to also give it their regional vote. (We were anticipating something more like 50%.) Everyone else – 86% – was at least open to the idea to some degree.

That doesn’t even remotely mean they actually WOULD vote for another party, nor that they would specifically vote for a Wings one, but we were quite taken aback that six out of every seven SNP voters was at least willing to think about using their list vote for someone else if it might deliver more pro-indy MSPs, with a massive 56% saying that it depended what the new party’s other policies were.

One in five, meanwhile – or 19%, to be precise – were prepared to go further, saying that they’d DEFINITELY consider it, with no qualifiers.

Which is an interesting number, because particularly alert readers may recall Gavin Barrie’s detailed expert analysis from last month which found that the “tipping point” at which SNP voters voting for a Wings list party would likely produce a sharp increase in pro-indy seats was a mere 12%.

So there we go. It’s only the first question of several, it doesn’t even mention Wings by name (although given the vast media coverage of the suggestion it seems likely that a significant proportion of the sample would have known who it was talking about), and it only asked people what they might consider, not what they would definitely do. It is, by design, a question it was easy to say yes to.

But nevertheless, these are figures some distance beyond our wildest expectations of what that specific question might generate. It’s an extremely encouraging start. The answers to the future ones will be very interesting indeed.

It’s worth saying once again that we hope this is an idea that never comes to fruition. This site will be the happiest on Earth if the SNP do deliver a second indyref before 2021 and we can stick to the vastly preferable task of trying to win that. Independence is going to be a much easier thing to get people to vote for than a snarky website run by a sweary man, and we can’t think of a more miserable job than being an MSP.

But, y’know, these are odd times, folks. Hope for the best, prepare for the worst.

Print Friendly

    1 Trackbacks/Pingbacks

    1. 11 10 19 18:56

      With the bomb lighting | speymouth

    184 to “With the bomb lighting”

    1. Lenny Hartley says:

      Lets hope its not needed, but sadly i do think i will be placing an X against the WOS partly in the regional vote in 2021. I can say with confidence that I would no longer be a member of the SNP by that election if we dont have a referendum in this Parliamentary session.

    2. Den Cairns says:

      Lateral solid advice. I’ve got my bread maker and am stocking up on flour and yeast. No deal Brexit and another extended Beast fae the East and things could definitely take a step backwards. My faith lies in Nic to get another Vote and hope We grab it just in time. Then when we achieve Indy Nirvana the Earth will go into meltdown. And serves Us right n’aw.

    3. John says:

      It would depend on who you found to stand for your party, and whether they were dentists, or some other form of butter. Basically your candidates would have to stand on their own merits to distinguish them from the other pro independence alternatives.

    4. John says:

      That should of course be entryists or some other form of nutter:-) damb autocorrect

    5. Dr Jim says:

      There’ll be a referendum next autumn so all a bit moot

    6. Republicofscotland says:

      Very encouraging indeed, looks like, if the policies are good, that folk realise more pro-indy voices are needed at Holyrood, if need be.

      It would be worth it just see the likes of Murdo Fraser or any others from the unionist parties at Holyrood miss the gravy train.

    7. Mist001 says:

      I didn’t get asked but for the record, if the Wings project comes to fruition, then they’ll definitely get my list vote.

      Has to be quick though, as an overseas voter, I only have three years left!

    8. dadsarmy says:

      @Rev
      Just checking, that’s a base of 1,007 respondents, but did they all say they were SNP voters? I.e., no “don’t knows” amongst them already?

    9. Jon Drummond says:

      John says:
      11 October, 2019 at 5:19 pm
      “That should of course be entryists or some other form of nutter:-) damb autocorrect”

      Thanks for your clarification there, John.

      As a dentist I was just about to saddle up my high horse. 🙂

    10. dadsarmy says:

      Anyways, I’m one of the 56%, and on a scale of 1 to 10 where 10 is definitely, I’d be about a 9. Too many policies would drop that, and if the only policy was to support Independence I’d be one of the 19% “Yes, definitely”. Banning Gaelic would make me reconsider 🙂

      And yes, this IS if there’s no Indy Ref by 2021, something some people elsewhere seem to fail to realise.

    11. I want independence, nothing more, nothing less. If this what we have to do to get it, bring it on.

    12. Bryan Weir says:

      sorry but there is no way I would vote for a new independence party and certainly not one headed up by someone who chooses to live in England.

    13. frogesque says:

      If a WOS type party were to stand for Indy and against all the gender piffle then I’m in: SNP 1, WOS 2

    14. dadsarmy says:

      Incidentally, the long list of parties proposed elsewhere to make the question “fair” is absolutely incorrect in the context of this proposal and part of the survey. It’d be like a survey on internet banking asking whether people would prefer to be paid and pay in coloured beads or bags of salt.

      And the certain detractor elsewhere can take THAT to the bank from someone who’s processed surveys and even set a couple in a previous life. Including for banks as it happens.

    15. Juteman says:

      “Would you like to see more pro-indy MSPs.”
      Of course most indy voters would like that.
      A very leading question imo.

    16. dadsarmy says:

      @Juteman
      It says in the article:

      because all we were really interested in at this point was finding out how many SNP voters are absolutely implacably opposed to the idea of giving their regional list vote to someone other than the SNP” (my bold).

      Presumably there are “non-leading” questions still to come.

    17. robertknight says:

      At least I’d have someone I could vote for.

      If, after all that’s been said, (as opposed to said’n’done), by the SNP over the last three years amounts to bluff, bluster, and the square root of bugger all, I’d be hard pressed to vote, period.

    18. defo says:

      Given the clarity and logic of your proposal, i’d suspect the intellect or motivation of anyone against.

      Sounds of veins popping, off in the distance.
      Jealousy’s an awfy self destructive emotion. 😉

    19. Colin Dawson says:

      It might be more attractive to more voters if it was called the “Yes Party” or something equivalent. Wings is a bit like Marmite. I like it but some independence supporters don’t.

    20. Linda McFarlane says:

      I’ll be in the 19%. No way will I give the SNP my second vote. Not after the way the Party is going to sell women down the river.

    21. Robin Ross says:

      A “Wings” party would get my list vote for two reasons:

      1: To remind the SNP that Scottish Independence is the reason for their existence.

      2: To help save the SNP from itself when it comes to all this self-ID gender nonsense.

      In the case of the latter, I’d be happy to see a “Wings” party voting against any SNP / Green legislation, even if it meant siding with the Unionist Parties.

    22. Capella says:

      A promising start.Even if there is a successful Indyref2 next year it would still be a good idea to increase the number of independence MSPs in Holyrood to prevent the unionist parties scooping up all the regional seats then blocking progress at every turn.

    23. Alison Brown says:

      Providing the Wings party’s policies exactly mirrored the SNP manifesto you would definitely have my list vote.

    24. HandandShrimp says:

      I would consider it so I think I would be in the 56% – assuming we are facing a 2021 election without a shot being fired (metaphorically).

      Policies and the individuals on the list would be key. I’m centre left so I found Rise a tad Tooting Popular Front. I like the Greens but I’m not quite ready to knit my own underwear out of rafia. Sane list MSPs would also be nice. Clones of Stephen King’s “It” would unnerve me.

      So in the words of Bob, Yes I think this could easily be done out on highway 61.

    25. While you guys are amusing yourself as the world implodes, I read an interesting tweet about Mumsnet being the hub of transphobia, prompting the makers of Flora to withdraw sponsorship.
      Mumsnet?

      Below is the story:=

      “Upfield, the owner of butter brand Flora, has ceased its partnership on parenting forum Mumsnet due to brand safety concerns.

      The parenting site was founded in 2000 and boasts more than 10 million users of differing views. Its forums are the home of heated debate and advice.

      In a 2018, a Vice article( Vice is a New York based ‘media’ outlet) described Mumsnet as a ‘Toxic Hotbed of Transphobia’ and detailed how the site had been used to organise anti-trans campaigns and protests.

      Flora, a ‘Mumsnet Rated’ brand, was recently alerted to discussions that *one Twitter user* said may conflict with Upfield’s commitment to “Diversity & Inclusion” and “Community & Stakeholder Engagement”.

      From Wiki :-

      “Upfield is owned by KKR and Co, who took over Flora and a range of vegetable spreads from Unilever in 2017.

      KKR & Co. Inc. (formerly known as Kohlberg Kravis Roberts & Co. and KKR & Co. L.P.) is an American global investment firm that manages multiple alternative asset classes, including private equity, energy, infrastructure, real estate, credit, and, through its strategic partners, hedge funds.

      The firm has completed more than 280 private equity investments in portfolio companies with approximately $545 billion of total enterprise value as of June 30, 2017.

      As of September 30, 2017, Assets Under Management (“AUM”) and Fee Paying Assets Under Management (“FPAUM”) were $153 billion and $114 billion, respectively.

      The firm was founded in 1976 by Jerome Kohlberg, Jr., and cousins Henry Kravis and George R. Roberts, all of whom had previously worked together at Bear Stearns, where they completed some of the earliest leveraged buyout transactions.

      Since its founding, KKR has completed a number of transactions including the 1989 leveraged buyout of RJR Nabisco, which was the largest buyout in history to that point, as well as the 2007 buyout of TXU, which is currently the largest buyout completed to date.[8][9]
      KKR has offices in 21 cities in 16 countries across 5 continents.

      The firm is currently headquartered in the Solow Building (9 W. 57th Street, New York, NY), but in October 2015, the firm announced its intention to occupy a newly constructed 30 Hudson Yards.

      In October 2009, KKR listed shares in the company through KKR & Co., an affiliate that holds 30% of the firm’s ownership equity, with the remainder held by the firm’s partners.

      In March 2010, KKR filed to list its shares on the New York Stock Exchange (NYSE) with trading commencing four months later, on July 15, 2010.” ends..

      Now we can guess who is behind the Transphobia Twitter storm over here in little old Scotland.
      Big Global Yankee money.

      It didn’t take long to discover the rotting kipper hidden in the folds of the trans curtain.

      It is not a bunch of poor misguided souls who want to be me’.

      Smashing the EU and scuppering Scotland’s Independence is worth losing 10 million Mumsnet customers?
      hat takes the backing of the 1%.

    26. Bob Costello says:

      I honestly believe that if we reach 2021 without a referendum after this Brexit mess, we will need a new mainline party, not just one looking to sweep up the regional votes. I would also imagine that Nicola Sturgeon will no longer be the leader of the SNP

    27. TJenny says:

      Youv’e got my vote Stu, even if you only have two specific policies, viz. indy and defending women’s rights against the woke brigade.

    28. Bob Costello, @ 6:07 pm.
      There shall be Indyref 2 long before May 2021.
      I ‘honestly’ believe that.

    29. dadsarmy says:

      @Bob Costello
      Indeed, and it wouldn’t just be the regional vote people might want not to give to the SNP.

      However, it’s clear Sturgeon is aware of this from what she said yesterday (and other times), just as she’s aware of those who say Cherry is manoeuvering to be party leader, so I’d have to presume she’s not worried for some reason – like indeed, a strong Plan A 🙂

      Meanwhile, I personally see no harm in keeping up the pressure.

    30. Skip_NC says:

      OK, so I’m looking at this from 3,000 miles away so forgive me if I have missed some nuances. If we get to 2021 with no action from the SNP on an independence referendum, do they deserve to remain the vehicle for that? In that case, has the cause of independence been set back by years? If that is so, why stop at the list? Get in there and stand in the constituencies. Yes, it means some rebuilding of the independence movement, but if the SNP won’t deliver, we may as well get started on building a movement that will.

      Of course, as others have noted, this may (hopefully will) be moot.

    31. TJenny says:

      Juteman says:

      ‘Would you like to see more pro-indy MSPs.”
      Of course most indy voters would like that.
      A very leading question imo.

      This a poll of SNP voters, not SNP members. Not all SNP voters want indy, so yes, indy voters would like more indy MSPs, but some SNP voters, hmm, not necessarily.

    32. Rev. Stuart Campbell says:

      “While you guys are amusing yourself as the world implodes, I read an interesting tweet about Mumsnet being the hub of transphobia, prompting the makers of Flora to withdraw sponsorship.”

      It’s literally ONE DAY since we had a post covering the trans issue.

    33. Rev. Stuart Campbell says:

      ““Would you like to see more pro-indy MSPs.”
      Of course most indy voters would like that.
      A very leading question imo.”

      Which would be an absolute belter of a point if that was the question that we’d asked.

    34. Rev. Stuart Campbell says:

      “If a WOS type party were to stand for Indy and against all the gender piffle then I’m in: SNP 1, WOS 2”

      I can 100% assure you of both of those things.

    35. Rev. Stuart Campbell says:

      “sorry but there is no way I would vote for a new independence party and certainly not one headed up by someone who chooses to live in England.”

      Don’t, then.

    36. Rev. Stuart Campbell says:

      “Just checking, that’s a base of 1,007 respondents, but did they all say they were SNP voters? I.e., no “don’t knows” amongst them already?”

      Like it says – 1007 people who all said they were going to vote SNP on the constituency vote.

    37. liz says:

      You’ll get my vote.

    38. A great many ("Quizmaster" - Ed)s are jumping on to Wings bandwagon.

    39. defo says:

      Sorry William, I’m guessing a few are after Murdo’s pay packet.
      I’d be just as useless, but pro indy

    40. asparagusnextleft says:

      At the last two Holyrood elections, I’ve given my second vote to the Scottish Greens. It’s a no-brainer under the D’Hondt system.

    41. Heart of Galloway says:

      O/T Interesting wee cameo with Billy Connolly on BBC 6pm news.

      Asked about his country’s prospects, Billy said: “Politically Scotland is in extaordinary shape. It’s beginning to stand alone and they won’t take crap any more.
      “They don’t want to settle for whoever England votes for.”

      Will Gompertz: “Would you like to see Scotland independent? Billy: “If Scotland would like it I would like it.” Gaun yersel’ Big Yin.

    42. Rev. Stuart Campbell says:

      “That should of course be entryists or some other form of nutter:-) damb autocorrect”

      I really was scratching my head and leafing through my Big Book Of Secret MI5 Plant Codes for a minute there.

    43. george wood says:

      Well, I need a new home since I won’t be voting for the SNP again as long as they insist on their abhorrent medievil view of woman’s rights.

      If I think that this will be the fate for woman in an Independent Scotland, I won’t vote for that either.

    44. Liz g says:

      This is encouraging…
      While I still think and hope.
      Although it’s now more hope than think Indy Ref 2 will be next year.
      It’s good to be planning our own plan B… 🙂

    45. Bob Mack says:

      I’ll vote for your party.

    46. dadsarmy says:

      If this did happen for the 2021 elections it would be sad as it would mean there’d been no Indy Ref 2. But there is an irony here.

      If the tipping point was reached, say 15% of SNP voters, then many of the people who continued to vote SNP on the list would actually REDUCE the number of pro-Indy MSPs.

      Yes, this is the statement of the bleeding obvious that’s the whole point of the party, but it’s also a different way of framing the proposal.

    47. Name (required) says:

      for all that you can be (and are) an annoying prick you annoy all the right people in a way i very much approve of (not that that counts for anything).

      there are not enough people prepared to actually stick there neck out and say what needs to be said in this world anymore, far to many frit of reality.

      keep up the good work and you can look forward to my vote too.
      (lets hope its not required, unlike my name)

    48. Gordie says:

      A section 30 order is being prepared the the Scots parliament and there is a general election in the offing. If we stop voting for the SNP then Independence is over. Voting for a Wings party is nonsense. Self ID as it is described here is a red herring.
      The pish peddled recently by this blog can have no other outcome than to reduce the SNP vote in the coming general election. Wake up.

    49. dadsarmy says:

      Like it says – 1007 people who all said they were going to vote SNP on the constituency vote.

      The point is that it is 100% people who haven’t said “don’t know”, so when they say “don’t know” to the Q22, then they can legitimately be included as NOT being “absolutely implacably opposed” as per the article.

      Yes, I did half follow that discussion in another place about the don’t knows, by someone who is now banned there. Join the club! Saves wasting precious time anyway.

      Back to my mini Q box which doesn’t work from a Sky booster from the main Q box which is ethernet cable connected to an Edimax access point connected by wireless to my Fritz box which is in same room and works fine itself, and the question from that mini Q box unable to assign IP address have I disabled DHCP no I haven’t. Not even sure the booster is getting a signal even though the “connected” light is on on the booster, and manually assigning an IP address hasn’t so fa …

      … sorry about that. Aaargh. Testing now all in the same room, I’ll win in the end …

    50. dakk says:

      ‘leafing through my Big Book Of Secret MI5 Plant Codes for a minute there.’

      Was intending furnishing your incipient party with my vote.

      Ancient chinese saying’many a true word said in jest’.

      Not sure now.

    51. starlaw says:

      If there has been no move by the SNP by 2021 I will consider them to be the same as the old Labour party, all talk and no action and will be looking for somewhere else or not voting at all.

    52. Bob Mack says:

      @Gordie,

      Could you think its you thats asleep ? Im very awake and very clued up thanks verh much.

    53. Obviously you have had a reaction from those seeking Scottish Independence,

      but have you had any reaction from any in the British Nationalist side.

    54. mike cassidy says:

      Gordie 7.15

      Read the article.

      Its ONLY about the use of the second vote in the next Holyrood election.

      If there is one.

      And your ‘red herring’ remark is fishy.

      Its as if you haven’t read up on that either.

    55. Andrew (Andy) Crow says:

      “Upfield, the owner of butter brand Flora, !!

      Since when was Flora butter ? It’s an industrial lubricant.

      If mums(net) canny tell crap from butter what else are they poisoning their children with ?

    56. Alex says:

      “Which is an interesting number, because particularly alert readers may recall Gavin Barrie’s detailed expert analysis from last month which found that the “tipping point” at which SNP voters voting for a Wings list party would likely produce a sharp increase in pro-indy seats was a mere 12%.”

      No — Gavin said that the tipping point was 12% of the population. Assuming the SNP get a generous 42% of the vote, that’s 28% of SNP voters. — ie. should less than 28% of SNP voters go elsewhere, even on a good night for the SNP in constituencies, they will be wasted.

    57. Bob Mack says:

      @Andrew Crow,

      I cant believe its not butter !!

    58. callmedave says:

      Rumours of a deal now emerging that lets NI have one foot in the EU and the other in UK giving them an advantageous trading position.

      So suck it up DUP and that other place..er…Oh aye! Scotland. 🙁

      As many predicted almost 3 years ago.

    59. Colin mccartney says:

      Yawn, and not in a unionist way

    60. Liz g says:

      Gordie @ 7.15
      Which bit of….
      A Wings party for the HOLYROOD election standing on the LIST ONLY don’t ye understand?

    61. Andrew (Andy) Crow says:

      I’d be torn between giving Wings my list vote or giving it to the greens.

      Even if a Wings list party doesn’t win enough endorsement to take off, this proposal has highlighted the De Hondt system mechanism and the importance of placing the second vote to best advantage.

    62. Col.Blimp IV says:

      Bob Mack

      But can you say Saskatchewan without starting to stutter?

    63. mike cassidy says:

      OT

      But Perfidious Albion strikes again

      https://twitter.com/ThomasPride/status/1181831273322561536

    64. Mist001 says:

      I can’t believe it’s not stutter.

    65. Liz g says:

      Andrew ( Andy ) Crow @ 7.50
      Well if it’s any help there’s a lot of women done with the Greens and once those women get campaigning there will be a whole lot more.
      The Greens could potentially be no more use for Indy!

    66. Common Neil says:

      My teeny SNP monthly sub is just staring me in the face, begging you to get this up and running, as I only keep it to rub in Mhairi H and others’ faces when they accuse me of disloyalty. My branch is given as ‘head office'(wherever that is, probably London), and it has a neat membership number.

      SNP’s open contempt for those who don’t fall under the category of ‘woke, spotty youth, or social-climbing inner-bubblers’ has done it for me, although Nicola Sturgeon’s personal page could be seen as a grand Nicola’s Book Club / Meet-and-greet photo-op page. Too many good people with good ideas are getting shut out (or chucked-out) for even asking if there IS a plan.

      Get this thing done. (Please).

    67. mike cassidy says:

      Maybe Japan can help with the technical problems of a hard border.

      https://twitter.com/_youhadonejob1/status/1182595018248331264

    68. Bruce Hosie says:

      Really bored with James kelly and his rants about the idea of a list party and his take on your poll. It’s all been so personal and he has really went down in my estimations of him. Pity but it is what it is.

    69. Gary says:

      It would take MASSIVE campaigning and publicity to get such a party to the point where you got 12%. ALL of the other parties have an existing platform from which to START.

      Being UNDER the threshold could cause SNP to lose list seats without this party GAINING any.

      So MASSIVE publicity (for an Indy party) prior to campaign season and massive campaigning at a grass roots level when it DOES start.

      But,such publicity doesn’t happen in a vacuum, does it? A party called Wings would forever be associated with you personally, Stu. That would, understandably lead to accusations of this being a ‘vanity project’ It would lead to people pointing out that you live in England but want independence for a country you don’t live in. And THEN there’s all the smears they’d launch. The Dugdale Case which was always reported as a win for her despite her being ‘wrong’ about the homophobia and essentially using stupidity as a defence. BUT add to that all of your recent articles on transgender issues, misconstrue them (only slightly) and we have an excellent starting point for a smear campaign ensuring no right thinking individual would vote for the party.

      So, here’s an idea. Don’t call the party ‘Wings’ and don’t be the public face of it either, maybe don’t even join it. Publicise it, help to fund it yes. I’m not saying this to be personally cruel but because this is such a good idea and you are such an open goal for a smear campaign that could kill this idea before it gets started.

      The bigger picture is MUCH more important..

    70. Common Neil says:

      P.S. Although I don’t ‘follow’ you in twitter terms (football, you get to eat decent stuff – I don’t), I do follow you by checking in regularly for the stuff I SHOULD have been getting from the Party. Standing order sub waiting for the word.

    71. Gfaetheblock says:

      If a wings party is overtly anti self ID, logical as this is, would it not make it an anathema for many voters (maybe half based on recent polling). Surely a true one issue party that abstains on all other issues is the best way to promote Indy?

    72. wull says:

      I think the SNP do need to be pressurised to produce the goods – Indyref2 – within the time-frame of this Holyrood parliament (BEFORE mid-2021). The prospect proposed here does provide that pressure.

      I am also against GRA, and not just because of the women’s issue involved, which is of course also important. To me there’s a very big ‘reality issue’, and this concerns the limits placed (by the nature of reality) on legislators.

      According to my understanding – please correct me if I am wrong – no matter which treatments are applied or which surgical interventions undertaken, it is at present a biological impossibility to change a man into a woman, or a woman into a man. This has consequences.

      There is no way that lawmakers can oblige citizens to recognise something that has not happened. No government can take to itself the power of forcing us to pretend that something has happened when – in actual fact – it hasn’t. And no government can criminalise its citizens for refusing to go along with that pretence.

      When a government over-reaches itself in this way, thinking that it can do such a thing – forcing us all to recognise a scientific impossibility as if it were a reality – it will be well on the road towards becoming totalitarian. In fact, it could be argued that it will already be totalitarian, simply by acting in that way. It will be obliging its citizens to ‘recognise’ things that are not true.

      Once that starts, there will be no end to it. A government which imposes one untruth, and is allowed by its citizens to get away with it, will then feel empowered to impose, according to its whim, another untruth … and then another … and another … and another.

      It’s a slippery slope … And if we don’t put a stop to it early on, before we know it’s happened we will have skidded all the way down it … into the deep pool of mud at the bottom. With very little possibility of a reverse movement, or even applying a break.

      One thing (or untruth) leads to another … and another … especially in what seems to be, ever increasingly, a ‘post-truth’ political world.

      Is it not also totally irresponsible for government to mislead young people, or indeed people of any age, into thinking that it is possible for them to change the gender with which they have been born, when in fact they can’t? How many younger people will opt for this kind of thing at a young age, only to regret it later on in life?

      We can have every sympathy with those who experience real suffering on account of their gender, or of their perception of what gendered reality means. And of course everything that is genuinely possible should be done to help them.

      But the help that they are offered must surely accept reality as it is. Is it really helping sufferers to offer them a make-believe way out of their suffering? A supposed way out which is ultimately based on an illusion, and not on the reality of their gender.

      In the end, in reality, whether we like it or not, there are areas in which we cannot just be or become anything at all that we want to be, or would like to be. As I heard Germaine Greer say a few months ago on the radio: ‘Just because I think i am a cocker spaniel, it doesn’t mean that I am one.’

      Of course, if science did discover a way whereby a woman could genuinely be changed into a man, or a man into a woman – in the full sense of these terms – then that would be a different situation. At that point, there could indeed be a need for governments to intervene, passing legislation that would regulate when and in which circumstances someone could undergo that change, how such a change would then be registered and define the consequences in terms of how society as a whole ought to recognise it.

      That would, basically, be OK. But we are not there. And if you wish to add a ‘yet’ to that last statement, you will also have to add that there can be no legislation about this until we actually get there (if we ever do).

      Of course, the government could set aside funds for research into the matter, in the hope of discovering techniques that would in fact bring about the change in question. Not just the appearance of such a change, but its reality. But until these techniques are found, it cannot legislate on the (false) assumption – indeed, scientifically speaking, the illusion – that they already exist.

      Whether or not it would be money down the drain, trying to find something that doesn’t and will never exist – or whether the quest would prove successful – is a moot point, and remains to be seen. Would it be worth the investment?

      Opinions will differ on that one. Personally, I am a bit sceptical about such a quest ever finally succeeding, but accept that I could eventually be proved wrong. As far as I understand it – and again, please do correct me if I am wrong – at the moment there are treatments which can make a man SEEM more like a woman, without making him actually BECOME one, and likewise for making a woman SEEM to be a man.

      Legislation surely deals with what actually is, things as they are, not just whatever they might seem to be, but aren’t. Governments need to get real, and their legislation needs to pertain to reality.

      I don’t know if the following absurdity is apposite, or not. But I suppose it might be. And other absurdities like it can perhaps be imagined. If someone claims to be a woman when in fact he is a man, is he going to be able to sue his doctor for not recognising him as a woman and for treating him as if he were a man – which is what he actually is?

      And – to make it still more absurd – what if the person is suffering from a specifically male disease? What is the doctor supposed to do then? (Or, if it were the other way round, what happens when the doctor treats a specifically female disease in a person who now claims to be male?)

      Will the doctor be a criminal for failing to recognise the gender that is now written on the patient’s birth certificate, after the patient changed it? Or if the doctor does recognise that the person concerned is actually a woman, albeit a woman with a specifically male disease (which women can’t get), will he be a criminal if he decides not to treat that (specifically male) disease because the person with it is (supposedly) a woman (and therefore couldn’t possibly have that disease)?

      Whether that kind of example holds or not, I don’t really know. But it seems to me self-evident that GRA, taken to its logical conclusions, will eventually lead to all kinds of absurdities, especially in law. Which – if I am right – means it is very bad law, and should not be countenanced.

      I disagree with Nicola Sturgeon on quite a few things, but I do not doubt that she is a highly intelligent and generally very reasonable person. And well able to argue reasonably and intelligently whatever position she takes on most topics. On this one, however, it seems to me she has got it entirely wrong. I don’t understand how that happened, and why. In fact, it baffles me. The only explanation I can think of is that she knows trans people who suffer, and who see GRA as the only way out of their suffering, and she genuinely wants to help them.

      If that is the case, it makes her position understandable – but it doesn’t make it right. Or workable. And – objectively speaking – I think it has to be opposed. Moreover, very publicly opposed. I would be glad to see a pro-independence Party that was clear about this.

    73. Bob Mack says:

      @Mist001,

      Your God is a vengeful God.!

    74. Ken500 says:

      The SNP got a majority before. With support rising even higher. It is more than possible it can be done again. The unionist vote fading away and SNP support rising,
      .
      The post haste rush to get an IndyRef before the 2021 Holyrood election is misguided. To get people to vote for a YES victory. Then a year later they have changed their mind in giving the Party of Independence support. It makes no sense. The danger is a 2020 IndyRef could be lost without enough support. Then what. It could even. Be better to wait till the 2021 election to get a reinforced IndyRef vote. Then go for it. The best time to have an IndyRef is when it can be won. The demographics are changing. Support growing as predicted. To be sure. Independence is not just for Christmas. Independence is for life.

      If there is a Wings Party get on with it. It might be difficult to set up in such a relative limited amount of time. Just do it. Get on with it. The organisers might have to be resident in Scotland. The monies raised in Scotland. Purdah recognised. Do not criticise other main Independence Parties, it is just counter productive. One or two other candidates might be all that is needed. Scotland would be Independent now, without the illegally imposed D’Hond’t system, without a mandate. It lets third rate losers in.

    75. ahundredthidiot says:

      dakk @7:19

      you’re a zoomer – and that is not in jest

    76. TJenny says:

      Andrew (Andy) Crow says:

      ‘I’d be torn between giving Wings my list vote or giving it to the greens.’

      The greens are so pro trans self id, that if you are a member of green party not on board with the self id nonsense, they will throw you out of the pary. They will not stand up for preserving women’s rights, and therefore many women wont vote for them, ergo a WOS party is needed to gain more pro indy MSPs.

    77. dadsarmy says:

      Jeez, if there’s any genuine friends of SGP could they please take him out for a couple of days and feed him a few gallons of Tennents of whatever his tipple, and give him a break?

      Indy Ref 2 is going to need him, and it won’t be long now.

      We all go over the top at times, sometimes it’s hard to climb back down again.

      Seriously.

    78. stonefree says:

      I find myself in a strange position, being evicted from the SNP. In the Scottish elections I gave the second to the Scottish Greens, so not a problem giving that to a Wings Party.
      It’s the first vote I have a problem with.If Alex Salmond has a comeback or there is a referendum before an election, then that problem is eliminated

    79. dadsarmy says:

      And please, don’t retaliate. It only takes one to drop it.

    80. Jim McIntosh says:

      Personally I think if the SNP don’t get an IndyRef before 2021 they’ll be out on their ear in large numbers both at WM and Holyrood. We had “we’re the only party that’ll get you xxxx” from Labour for decades, I for one aren’t falling for it again so I wont be voting SNP. It might seem counterintuitive but it’s because I desperately want Independence.

      Too many people are far too happy with the status quo, where are the firebrands, where’s the passion?

      We need to remember even if people stop voting SNP they’d still vote YES at a referendum. The SNP losing an election should shake the Party up, clear out the dead wood and hopefully get them to refocus on what we voted them in to do.

      Unionist policies being imposed on us in full for a full term might also wake some people up to what we had, and what we could have with full independence.

      I would vote for an Indy party like Wings, but if what I say above comes to pass, ironically could this reduce Indy seats even more?

    81. Bob Mack says:

      If people STOP voting SNP, there never will be a referendum.

      You can bet your house on that.

    82. Kenny J says:

      Quite a few election cycles ago I actually phoned the SNP, must have been HQ, to ask where should my second vote should go, no greens then.
      Obviously the person said them.
      Last election, I stood outside a polling station telling folk they could vote Green with the list one. Although I was’nt happy about it.
      A wee story, some time before the Indyref, I was at a question and answer meeting, and asked the panel how they viewed Scotland.
      Mr. Harvie replied that he did’nt care if Indy happened or not as long as he got what his aims were.
      That gave me food for thought.
      A Scottish Independence Party winging it’s way to you, bring it on.

    83. Kenny J says:

      dadsarmy says:
      11 October, 2019 at 8:30 pm

      Jeez, if there’s any genuine friends of SGP could they please take him out for a couple of days and feed him a few gallons of Tennents of whatever his tipple, and give him a break?

      I believe it’s hot chocolate.

    84. Ronnie says:

      bit uneasy about all this. Huge respect for both Wings and James, and this can only harm the cause, surely

    85. Ken500 says:

      If people stop voting SNP. Scotland will be badly run and there will be no IndyRef ever.

      If people want Independence desperately they will vote for it.

      It is difficult to understand why people who want Independence vote for unionist Parties. These Parties do not support it.

    86. Bob Mack says:

      @Ronnie,

      Ask yourself which party would be more inclined towrads indy between Green and Wings ? We are talking about list seats after all.

    87. Ken500 says:

      Political Parties elected/Reps can’t tell voters to vote for another party. It is illegal. Ie if they are elected/reps of another Party. They are supposed to support their Party. Under electoral rules. That is why party members can be throw out for publicly voting for another Party.

      It is all secret anyway.

      Labour elected/reps were telling people to vote Tory. Dugdale et al. That is against electoral rules.

    88. Geordie says:

      I hugely appreciate and value the work done by WoS on exposing media and political hypocrisy. Hell, I’ve donated money to the site. But would I vote for a Wings party? No. Why? Well, I genuinely mean this respectfully, but Stu you’re a c**t. That’s a great attribute for the media work, but it means I can’t trust you. Too much ego at work. Frankly, I fear you’re more likely to disrupt and antagonise than advance the Indy cause.

    89. Helen Yates says:

      Strangely enough I had discussions with family members, I come from a large family, siblings, cousins and also friends who all vote SNP on giving they’re list vote to a new Independence party, big majority in favour of doing so but also almost all of them of the opinion that 2021 will see the demise of the SNP if no movement has been made on Indy by then. like you say, Hope for the best, prepare for the worst.

    90. Kris Duthie says:

      You are now officially plan B.

    91. Cubby says:

      Bob Mack @8.52pm

      Good post Bob. Nothing like getting straight to the heart of the matter.

    92. Fergus Green says:

      Get that party launched Stuart.

      If not you, then who?

      You have my list vote.

    93. Ian Brotherhood says:

      Those dissing the idea of a WOS ‘party’ as nothing more than an ego trip should mibbe take a minute to consider whether we would ever have had a SNP (and possibly even a Labour Party?) if it hadn’t been for one guy called Robert Cunninghame Graham.

      Here’s a link to the Wiki entry for him. Seems he was a bit (!) of a character and was noted for his skill in dealing with ‘hecklers’.

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

    94. Joe says:

      A 2nd referendum, eh? So given that EU nationalists have caused and are still causing massive problems by not respecting the outcome of a referendum you can expect a 60% majority requirement. Right? We dont want ‘chaos’ like Brexit, hm? And if you do win then ‘you wont have known what you were voting for’. Will you? Do unto others as you would be done by.

    95. Joe says:

      As a note im not referring to Stuart or a WOS party. Im referring to the pro EU indy movement in general. Mr Campbell has shown a lot of integrity

    96. Cubby says:

      The Buckaroo Principle is alive and well among Independence supporters.

      Do some people really really want an independent Scotland. Achieving an independent Scotland will entail all of us making sacrifices. It’s not exactly dying for your country. It’s just holding your nose if you want independence more than you hate some SNP actual policy or potential policy and voting SNP and yes. After independence Scotland will get the government it voted for and be able to control all its own revenues and resources and put them to the use in the way the people of Scotland voted for. Never vote SNP again in an independent Scotland if that is how you feel but all political parties will be Scottish parties. No foreign political parties allowed.

    97. Robert Peffers says:

      @Ronnie says: 11 October, 2019 at 9:03 pm:

      ” … bit uneasy about all this. Huge respect for both Wings and James, and this can only harm the cause, surely”

      Yes, Ronnie, and that is the first sensible comment made on this entire thread so far. As a lurker all I’ve see over the entire course of this matter is bitter divisiveness and it is only heading towards becoming even more divisive.

      Red Herrings everywhere as well but I could see it coming a mile away when the idea was first mooted and I’m hardly able to see the print on my computer screen just now.

      The pity is that it could be a great idea but the number of total numpties picking up Red Herrings and running with them makes it a a lost cause before it begins.

      For God’s sake weeks ago we had comments that the commenter would vote Wings but couldn’t bring themselves to vote SNP.

      Carry on arguing among yourselves, I’m away back to lurking.

    98. Giving Goose says:

      I’ve been chatting with my colleague who is an SNP member and a former SNP candidate.
      We are both committed 100% to Independence.
      We both agree that Stu’s proposal is both positive and workable. It is also very welcome.
      The SNP have gone stale. I totally understand the challenges of being both a devolved government and representing the hopes for Independence.
      I understand the electoral system.
      But I am completely sick to death of unionist British Nationalist politicians holding my country back, while voted in on a handful of votes.
      I’m disappointed with the oh-so-nice approach of the SNP to Independence.
      I want to see some injection of passion and common sense.
      And as Stu says, if might not come to fruition but then that is something that the SNP have total control over. Don’t they?
      Remember that a new Independence Party is in the gift of the SNP, or not.

    99. Bob Mack says:

      @Robert Peffers,

      Your age grants you a degree of immunity. However your manner is appaling at the best of times. Every comment uxually opens with a derogatory remark towards someone for having the audacity to have an opinion different from your own.You seem to be more intent these days on venting your personal frustrations on this forum than actually contributing anything relevant.

      Keep lurking, its the best place for you and your unpalatable attitude problem.

    100. dakk says:

      @ ahundredthidiot

      And that coming from a self confessed eejit too 🙂

    101. Liz g says:

      Cubby @ 10.06
      Yes Cubby ” the buckaroo principal is indeed alive and well among Indy voter’s ” and sadly a lot,a very lot are still one issue voters.

      The SNP benefits from this over Indy but I’m telling ye now they are risking it with the GRA leapfrogging over it in 2021.
      A lot of women are only sticking with the SNP because of Indy and are done with the Greens.
      We cannot afford any of that vote to go Unionist
      If as we suspect,the British Nationalists weaponise the issue it could damage the Indy majority in Holyrood…

      As far as I can see the Rev is sayin the Constituency votes will hold for the SNP. But as far as I can tell the Greens won’t get the women against the GRA vote and that is a big risk for independence if we haven’t had the Referendum and Mibbi even if we had.
      We need a failsafe place to put our list vote that doesn’t harm Independence and could credibly be placed to stop the GRA.

      Two things to consider
      Firstly…. GRA supporting Ruth the Mooth has left the stage and Liz Truss has kicked the GRA into the long grass in Westminster.
      Secondly…. Mum’s Net as pointed out above are being more or less sanctioned by large corporations for not getting on board with the GRA… Mum’s Net with -10 million user’s – internationally.

      Doesn’t this demonstrate to you that when this hits the mainstream and the campaigners in Scotland get going with it campaigns could turn on it up to and including the independence campaign.
      This is a massive issue in AND outwith Scotland Cubby!
      And
      Wouldn’t you be very surprised if Better Together mk2 didn’t use it?

      Wings track record on this is beyond dispute among the opponents of the GRA in Scotland…. Which makes a Wings party a safe place to put votes of those who want to stop it without harming independence…. Actually an elegant solution wouldn’t ye agree!

    102. Zen Broon says:

      Sure, but Stu’s massive problem is actually the 56% “depending on the new party’s other policies”. Folk arena daft, and already this is not a simple protest vote. He must develop an hastily-cobbled-together slew of policies thar are alternative to the SNP (and therefore by implication attack the SNP manifesto, which will have the Unionists wetting themselves in delight). And if the WoS party is remotely successful, then the splitting and fractiousness will start. This is just politics, folks.

    103. velofello says:

      i never ever thought I’d state this, but…

      Nicola Sturgeon has proven herself to be an extremely good manager but Scotland now needs someone – an entrepreneur, a lateral thinker, free thinker, a rebel, to address the situation that exists. The Treaty between Scotland and England has been broken by England so many times and we need someone to “call it out”. Scotland voted to remain in the EU. If Nicola cannot say it, then lat some other state –

      Scotland is not leaving the EU.

      ” Oh, the international community will not recognise an independent Scotland without an S30″. Well so what, we are self sufficient in power, oil and gas, food, water. And we would learn quickly who are friends are.

      The only Brexit solution is for NI Ireland is to remain in the EU Customs Union and Market. and …so logically also for Scotland. A border between Scotland and England, will be easily managed.

    104. Fireproofjim says:

      Just received an email from Angus Robertson on behalf of Progress Scotland saying that the results of a new poll on the Brexit question, which they have carried out, will be in tomorrow’s National.

    105. galamcennalath says:

      I have always felt that if we reach Holyrood2021 and we haven’t had IndyRef2 and won, we’re f’cked. We will have lost the opportunity.

      The BritNats will throw everything at denying us an Indy majority. Online manipulation, dark money financed campaigns, lies, threats, false promises, accusations, personal character attacks, ….. you name it, expect it.

      Most of all, YES supporters will feel disheartened, disappointed, and disinterested. There is a huge risk that having not had IndyRef2 while conditions were suitable and the mandate strong, they will just stay at home.

      The SNP NEED to sweep the board on the constituency vote again. Will a repeat promise of “a referendum in this parliament, honest, we mean it this time” get the backing it needs?

    106. Derek Rogers says:

      Rev Stu, you’re the scourge of peaceful Friday nights! – you got me wondering how JKelly would respond to your latest poll result. Here’s the relevant thread:

      James Kelly October 11, 2019 at 9:08 PM

      If his “gaming the system” theory was right [i.e. that Wings would take seats only from Con and Lab], the SNP would have nothing to fear from a Wings party, and the “threat” of it wouldn’t motivate them to get off their backsides, would it? It’s a bit of a self-defeating argument.

      Derek Rogers October 11, 2019 at 9:56 PM

      Is this your considered response, James? If Wings fails, then obv nobody cares, but if they look like succeeding and turning an SNP minority into a coalition government, then the SNP will be very interested indeed. Also crucial will be the Wings policy on transgender. Are these not issues in your thinking?

      My post got bombed in short order, obv, because I expressed it badly. What I should have said was, “Anyone who thinks that if the SNP got a minority of seats, and the balance was held by an aggressive, sharp-witted party that was implacably opposed to transgender, the SNP would not be interested, is clearly the most crackpot political commentator this side of Betelgeuse. Engage brain, James.” But you wouldn’t want that to leak out to the acolytes, would you? Best delete it. I despair of his intellectual dishonesty.

    107. Capella says:

      @ Wull 8.09 – great post. It annoys me greatly that Scotland, home of the Enlightenment and Land of Inventions, is now expected to abandon science, declare biology is bunk, and swoon into a condition of belief in voodoo ideology.

      No. I’m not going to do that.

      It is not possible to change sex. It is not possible to be born into the wrong body. We have to find another way to help individuals who cannot accept reality.

    108. Derek Rogers says:

      *Apologies for wrong indentation – last para should be full width. No preview on posts, Stu?

    109. Cubby says:

      Liz g@10.51pm

      I have absolutely no problem with what you say in this post. Hopefully independence will be secured before 2021 and even then if British parties have not been kicked out of the Scottish parliament before the Scot parliament elections there would be value in having Wings party to ensure there is no backtracking on independence and negotiations etc. There is value in having more Scottish parties anyway after independence.

      Going back to my main point which is if people do not vote SNP now then the case for independence is diminished. Another poster upthread actually posted it would be a good thing for Britnat parties to regain control of Scotland – unbelievable.

      Similarly if people do not vote SNP for the constituency vote in a Scot parliament election in 2021 then the vote for Wings in the regional list may not work out as hoped for.

      I would vote for a Wings party in the list in 2021 after or not after independence ( posted this previously). If it was after independence I would say put down a full manifesto. If it was pre independence I would say keep the number of policies to the bare essential minimum or the Buckaroo Principle will come into effect.

      If criticism of the SNP at this point in time leads to people not voting SNP in an early GE then this risks the whole independence push. Therefore this is where I do for once disagree with some of your other posts. It is a tactical approach not a forever thou shalt not ever criticise the SNP approach. I do wish that the SNP members would park, as I believe is the case at present, and then get rid of alI this self ID policy. This represents the dangers of devolution for an Independence Party – namely getting into issues that are a danger to what should be the core policy – independence.

    110. Dr Jim says:

      There is an Island in the Dominican Republic called Salinas where children are born female but become male when they reach their teenage years, the local name for this is Guevedoce, translated as *penis at 12*

      This condition is quite common particularly in that region where the chromosomes are confused before birth resulting in mostly girls being born then in later life some change by themselves to become boys, the people of that region accept it as quite normal and pay no particular attention to it, and apparently the children themselves don’t appear to suffer any psychological ill effects

      There could be a few reasons for that inasmuch as the villagers don’t make a fuss about it so the children are accepted as normal and or they don’t have mobile phones and the internet for folk to tell them any different or abuse them

      It’s all a bit of a head slap but life finds a way as Geoff Goldblum said in Jurassic Park

    111. Davy Shillinglaw says:

      Most folk answering that question would have thought they were asking about the Greens. Nothing to see here.

    112. Footsoldier says:

      @Bob Mack 10:39: Could not agree more on Robert Peffers who is pretentious and patronising which spoils some good comments he makes.

      In particular, he adopts the position of sage as if his age entitles him. There are plenty of us from the esteemed university of life who have completed the course which includes communication and empathy and I would commend it to him.

    113. Liz g says:

      Zen Broon @ 10.53
      As far as I remember…. The Wings Party would vote with the SNP on most things,especially the budget….and with the exception of the GRA… So a manifesto would be pretty straightforward…
      That a newly formed Wings Party would struggle to make an impact so quickly and that Farage’s Brexit Party could hold the balance of power can’t both be true Zen.
      And while different voting systems to be sure…..
      An electorate long immersed in both systems cannot be both immune to and on board with the concept…. That’s the voting public Zen…..

    114. Liz g says:

      Dr Jim @ 11.31
      Ah but what’s their domestic violence and sexual assault statistics like?

    115. Sinky says:

      O/T But can anyone remember the three day feast BBC Scotland made over Labour’s expenses scandal in Edinburgh?

      Edinburgh’s Labour vice finance chief at the centre of a taxis expenses scandal has resigned – as it emerged she was previously sent a letter from her own authority asking to pay up council tax that she owed.

      Labour Cllr Lezley Marion Cameron was set to be sacked by her party colleagues next week after her group leader, Cllr Cammy Day, urged her to consider her position after losing the support of her political group. It is thought Cllr Cameron will take on a different role in the administration – but it is not yet know what that could be.

      Cllr Cameron was under pressure to quit after the Evening News revealed she tallied up almost £1,500 on taxis in the last two years – including two trips to the cinema, the Vue at the Onmi Centre and Cineworld at Fountainbridge. She also charged taxpayers for a round trip to the Barrellhouse Bar and Grill on London Road and to a political Labour meeting. It has now also emerged that Cllr Cameron was one of four city councillors who owed the authority council tax.

      https://www.scotsman.com/news/politics/taxi-expenses-row-vice-finance-chief-quits-as-it-now-emerges-she-had-to-be-chased-to-pay-council-tax-too-1-5022407

      Double standards from so called neutral media in Scotland.

    116. Mist001 says:

      I wish there was a like or dislike button on this site. It’s late Friday night and I’m reading some stuff that I agree with and some stuff that I don’t and at the same time, I can’t be arsed typing out a reply and getting involved.

      A simple Like/Dislike/Agree/Disagree button would be handy for a lazy git like me.

    117. ScottieDog says:

      I think a mix of pro-Indy parties is a very good thing – assuming we haven’t had indyref before 2021.

      I’ve been mulling over all the arguments about what the SNP are doing at the moment. I’m no longer a member and have plenty criticism with them over a fair few things but I think NS is playing the only game in town at the moment. That game is nationhood. Everyday that passes where she continues to play a straight bat against the U.K. govt I believe if it’s international recognition she is after, the Scottish govt only grows in stature – as the U.K. diminishes. This is nation building as we speak – maybe not in terms of a tangible vote, but certainly in terms of how Europe sees us.

      Will there be casualties. Yes, unavoidably so, and folk far more insightful than me predicted that in 2014. Remember we are still the in the post Indy period and I’m sorry to say we are reaping the whirlwind of our collective vote in 2014.

    118. dadsarmy says:

      From elsewhere:

      https://news.gov.scot/speeches-and-briefings/statement-on-gender-recognition

      One particular area of concern that has been raised about gender recognition reform – both during and since the consultation – is the impact it will have on the provision and protection of single sex or women only spaces and services.

      Presiding Officer, it is vital to be clear on this important point.

      The Equality Act already allows trans people to be excluded, in some circumstances, from single sex services where that is proportionate and justifiable, including where a trans person has legal recognition. The Government’s proposals to reform the Act will not affect that position.

      which seems to be pretty clear really. There does seem to be a lot of heat and little light about this issue, I’m back on the fence – as long as these spaces like hospital wards ARE protected. But any Act needs to be explicit and not leave it to interpretation.

    119. Bob Mack says:

      @Mist001,

      So would your bed.

    120. Like I said when Stu first floated this idea – it depends on 3 key factors;

      1. – what policies the new party espouses (Stu-style SNP baad would not work)

      2. – Could the candidates be trusted? How would they be selected? would it be seen seen as a ‘cult’ like the Brexit party with uno Duce, uno voce. An innocent Salmond would work but a self important Stu would not

      3. – what would the governance of the party be in the Scottish Parliament? – would they know they were borrowing SNP votes and act accordingly? or would the show the same arrogant ‘know better than everyone else’ attitude that Stu generally displays in a very non-political way? Would they be ignorant of how difficult it is to run a government in Scotland with the media, the 3 English Tory Parties and a parliament made up of 50% anti-SNP MSP’s who would never win a constituency vote all against them?

    121. Dr Jim says:

      @Liz 11:38pm

      I guess you’re having a laugh Liz but I honestly wouldn’t have a clue if they even have much violence in places like that, mostly indigenous peoples in isolated areas do tend to be much less aggressive than us brainy but murderous whiteys because we’re much more cultured and have tastefully refined our murder and violence into respectable reasons for doing it and the folk who live in far flung places have cottened on to that so keep a low profile in case they’re next for the chop

      I guess from time to time they must have had problems but there’s generally so few of these peoples left in the world they’ve figured out that doing each other in or bashing up their spouses means it’s over for them

      Before the internet did we have problems or did we not know about them, it’s the bear in the woods

      We have enough to eat so we invent other things to do, like deliberately create poverty to give people something else to think about so that people don’t focus their attention on the real causes of who’s creating that and more importantly how much money they’re making from diverting the worlds attention away from it, and if the people begin to notice we’ll invent the threat of war to scare them into forgetting about problem 1 and so on

      We’re very inventive and refined in diverting and manipulating the masses, we’re an ugly lot us whiteys

    122. DaveL says:

      Has ‘Lurker’ been redefined now as well? I see posts quite often by someone claiming to be such.

    123. Liz g says:

      Cubby @ 11.29
      I see what your saying Cubby and I agree…
      I am personally not criticising the SNP I am warning ( I hope) the best I know how…. Which is here on Wings…
      I do see the big picture and I’m doing what I can to keep all the Women I can on board.
      They know that they need to vote SNP in the General Election.
      I don’t think that is in any doubt…

      But the powers that be are not letting the SNP park this issue and it’s one push, after another, after another from within the party, and the members and activists are just about holding on.

      While the British State will use this it’s not coming from them directly it’s going on in all Western Democracies….

      That’s why the Women see it as so important,I suspect that if the SNP leadership could have stood against it they would have by now, but right now each individual Government are being portrayed as the poster child for it and It’s bloody scary…..

      A Party that doesn’t give or have to give a shit about Cooperate interests in a small northern democracy might be the only way of stopping it all,here at least. And if Scotland can stand against it others will too… That’s mainly why I’m on board…

      I don’t know how deeply you’ve delved into this issue Cubby,but if ye believe a word I’ve ever said… Trust me now you want this stopped…. This is Corporate Social Engineering built around what you must teach and allow to be taught to your children…… that the state can take And medicate them in life altering ways and speaking out will be illegal. Why do you think Mums Net are the international bulwark against it? can you see now why the Rev gives so much time to it?
      And it’s creeping in Cubby,while everyone argues about toilets….

    124. TJenny says:

      cadogan Enright:

      1. Why would he do that? You’re projecting your opinion of Stu there.

      2. Trusted to be pro indy? It would be their raison d’etre.

      3. Unless the candidates have been living in a cave for the past umpteen years, I think the answer to all is yes. Exceptt for ‘or would the show the same arrogant ‘know better than everyone else’ attitude that Stu generally displays in a very non-political way?’ Again your projecting.

    125. Liz g says:

      Dr Jim @ 12.04
      Only half joking Dr Jim…
      I’d say in places like that cooperation with “everyone” is a matter of survival ,and a wonderful lesson we in so called civilisation seem to have forgotten.
      Which tacks back to what I said on the last thread..
      “What we now call Trans People have always been with us” and it stands to reason they must have played a part in the survival and success of humanity.
      We must value their humanity and include them without fear of favour….
      But this gender stuff is something different,something dark and should not be allowed to damage the progress we’ve made … Any of Us…

    126. Dr Jim says:

      It took the SNP over 80 years to get to where they are now, in that time every English British political party, every branch of every media and television in England and Scotland printed the foulest of headlines on them and slated demeaned and dismissed them as all manner of Nazis and anything they could think up

      So here we are now, and while anybody is perfectly at liberty in a supposed free country to set up a political party how does anybody think the same English British parties and the same English British media are going to treat any new party that espouses Independence for Scotland

      And given that this new party would be entering an arena in which the Green party has consistently claimed their list votes from, the Greens will attack this new party also

      And given that the SNP faught for their position for 80 years tooth and claw do we think they’re going to extend the hand of friendship, well without too much thinking about that’s a definite big Naw!

      So any new party would have to fight not three parties at Holyrood and the media but five parties at Holyrood and the media, and being this new party would possibly be spearheaded by *controversial blogger from Bath* if I were Stu I’d want my health thoroughly 100% in rock solid shape before I took on a challenge such as this in case I dropped dead from the mental hellish torture of it

      Lest we forget how people behave

    127. John Graham says:

      Do not call the
      new List Party ‘Wings’ call it the YES PARTY.

    128. Dr Jim says:

      @Liz 12:27am

      I would encourage everyone who has even a passing interest in human development to take a look at an animal called the Bonobo, a branch of the great Apes for all purposes in appearance a Chimp yet not quite a Chimp

      The social Interaction of this animal is astonishing, but unfortunately they are in danger of extinction

    129. TJenny says:

      Dr Jim – do you not think Stu will have thought of all of that and more. Plus, the new party is only if we’re not indy before next HE. I think Stu and all of us are hoping we will be, but it does no harm to have a plan (B). ;-

    130. Liz g says:

      Dr Jim @ 12.30
      I suppose it all depends on how bothered ye are about what people say..
      I’m pretty much… I’m in ma hoose, I’m warm and dry and I have an off button…
      Fill yer boots I’ll be bored or amused and quite smug I bothered some stranger that much and I personally don’t believe internet bullying of adults is a thing…
      And Stu is a much stronger person than I.
      He’ll be fine. Nicola copes!

    131. Liz g says:

      John Graham @ 12.34
      I think that option may be gone…
      All we’ll get is Wings Over Scotland’s “so called” Yes Party.
      Like we were yon terrorists from a few years back!

    132. Liz g says:

      Dr Jim @ 12.38
      Will do Dr Jim it is indeed an interest of mine.
      Thanks…

    133. dadsarmy says:

      That link and quote from the speech of Somerville to Holyrood back in June, was from a poster who posts here occasionally, or used to. I don’t give names cross-forum usually to protect the innocent!

      I think we need to actually see the draft GRA Bill, which is what’s being sent out for consultation end of the year.

    134. Liz g says:

      Dadsarmy @ 12.27
      Oh we definitely need to see it…
      But in the meantime take a look at some of the Mermaids stuff.
      They are the group who designed the leaflets to guide the teachers in our schools…. Right now… Pre the ACT.
      Your a quick study so you’ll be able to see the pitfalls.. You could ask questions on their website to clarify …but do be careful …and I’m being serious…

    135. Dr Jim says:

      @T Jenny 12:44am

      I don’t believe it will be something that’s needed, I’m happy to take Michael Russell and the FMs word there will be a referendum next autumn, and that plan A is the whole of the plan because last time allowing talk of plan B allowed the opposition to rubbish it and by doing that diminished the effectiveness of plan A

      I know many folk think it all depends on just saying please but I don’t, I believe there will be a tad more to it than just please because the UK already agreed to the handing over of a section 30 order if the Scottish government *officially* requested it in November 2014 of the Smith Commission where it said

      “It is agreed that nothing in this report prevents Scotland becoming an Independent country in the future should the people of Scotland so choose”

      Signed by the UK government all interested parties and witnessed by Lord Smith of Kelvin

      I’m thinking it might have something to do with that or backed up by other legalities. I just cannot see someone as careful and cautious and smart as Nicola Sturgeon blowing this after waiting for 35 years to get her chance

    136. TJenny says:

      Dr Jim – well here’s hoping, so no need to get too fashed about The WOS Party yet, then, aye.

    137. Chick McGregor says:

      The cautionary note is that in the 2011 election a significantly higher percentage of SNP voters would have required to transfer their list votes to another list party to guarantee a significant increase in total pro indy MSPs.

      I.e. It also depends how list votes split between Tory, Slab and Libdems.

    138. Liz g says:

      T Jenny @ 1.20
      Well said, that’s what I’m hoping too… ( although another Indy party at the negotiation wouldn’t be a bad thing)

      Nicola also said “when the people of Scotland demand it” well this grumbling is,I think, a way of demanding it too…
      considering a off shoot Indy party demonstrates we’re seriously demanding it and that Edinburgh March says it all really.

      I think Scotland will surprise it’s self swinging in behind the campaign when the date is called.
      And I also think we will all be surprised at how much of the foundations of Indy Scotland have been laid since 2014.

      I’ve never thought Nicola and her team were doing nothing about Indy…. If I’m right and we add that to how good the Yes movement have gotten at organising… I’d say..
      ….It is Time…..
      One thing I do struggle a bit with though…
      Do you think we should drop a wee thank you note to Theresa May (after the vote of course) for giving us what is apparently going to be our slogan?
      Any thoughts 🙂

    139. Breeks says:


      Dr Jim says:
      12 October, 2019 at 12:30 am
      It took the SNP over 80 years to get to where they are now, in that time every English British political party, every branch of every media and television in England and Scotland printed the foulest of headlines on them and slated demeaned and dismissed them as all manner of Nazis and anything they could think up…

      Yeah, and who’d have thought they’d be the ones to choke in sight of the finish line and turn their backs on Scotland’s Constitutional Sovereignty in its hour of direst need, when presented with a gaping open goal to deliver Scotland its freedom. Oh yeah, it’s a Scottish Government…

      What sickening arrogance that they won’t even contemplate the mere possibility of underpinning their own massive gamble to win an independence referendum they don’t know how to win, with mandates and majorities they’ve already had before and squandered, with a binding legal Constitutional Backstop to match Ireland’s, asserting that Brexit is anti democratic colonial subjugation of a sovereign Nation’s people, and is unlawful contrary to International Law.

      They could easily deliver that safety net without even compromising their own misadventure, but no, for reasons unspecified, it’s essential they put all of our eggs in their basket.

      At least with a legal Backstop, when the SNP run another shabby “can’t be bothered to turn up” campaign, Scotland will at least get something from the exercise.

      They make me sick. Vote for them? Fucking make me. Or better yet, sure, I’ll vote for them – the very day after the election. Quid pro fucking quo.

      Go ahead with your next Wee Book Rev Stu. Make it about Sovereignty so a million households get to learn how they’ve been short changed by another parcel of self serving rogues.

    140. Steve the pirate says:

      I really don’t like the idea of forming a party just to exploit the voting system. People elected would actually have a job to do at Parliament and we know zilch about who a wings party would be and what they would do in parliament, other than ensuring a pro Indy majority.

      There is already another pro Indy party out there though, and it’s the reason pro-indy has a majority just now- from none other than the list vote last time around. Folks may not agree with everything the greens do- I was certainly v unhappy with their part in removing the offensive behavior act. However they are a legitimate pro Indy party and if people use their party vote for them then there will be another pro Indy majority, no doubt.

      If I’m missing something then please help me understand, but if the sole purpose is creating a pro Indy majority, I don’t see why controversially creating a new party to exploit the voting system and splitting list votes is better than just encouraging people to vote for an existing party that can help achieve that same end.

      ??

    141. defo says:

      Could you trust Harvie & co. on putting indy first?
      Probably
      Could you trust WoS ?
      indubitably!

    142. twathater says:

      I would definitely vote for wings as a regional vote , we have been so conditioned to accepting that there should only ever be one independence supporting party and one party who will basically only lend their support on condition of blackmail

      I only seldom visit SGP but I am outraged at the usage of gaming the system , is it okay for the 3 brit nat parties to collectively and illegally DENY Scots the ability to determine their own future , is it right that they collectively can ignore the wishes of at least 50% of Scottish citizens , I would say that that is more of an outrage that JK should be shouting about

      I am enthused and delighted that Stu has raised this prospect I only wish it had been done sooner and I hope that irrespective of the 2020 promises he goes forward now with setting up his party

      We have paid too much attention to what the brit nat parties want and are willing to accept , their objections to this idea and the collusion of their partners in the MSM and BBC is due to their FEAR that a vociferous and uncompromising indy supporting party who is unafraid to expose their bias and wrongdoings will educate the undecideds and hasten their extermination

    143. twathater says:

      I would hasten to add that the SNP should adopt a neutral stance on the proposal , they should welcome an ally in the quest for independence , let’s face it we all would like hauners

    144. Liz g says:

      Twathater @ 3.44 & 3.50
      Yer right this is getting embarrassing 🙂
      But it has to be said…
      Yer absolutely right we didn’t make the rules and they cannot complain that we succeed within them!!!
      ……………………..
      Steve the Pirate @ 2.46 am.
      Are you kidding me!! ( see above )

      Have ye looked lately at the fools who are actually in both parliaments??
      Golden tip… Pick a subject, any subject ye know a wee bit / or a lot about, and watch the politicians speak on it.
      Some of them are so fucking dum ye wouldn’t believe it!
      Honestly… Try it!!

      Wings ( the web site ) has an impressive pool of people from all walks of life,if only a fraction agreed to participate in Holyrood Scotland would be so much better fur it..

      You seem to be coming from the point of view that politicians need to be politicians as a profession..
      IMHO they don’t,,, and the fact that most do is the problem!

      Our politicians should “” Serve “” and as a career break too, much like maternity leave …. Bring yer expertise to the Parliament and achieve something fur yer country… I’d say is the way forward??

    145. Liz g says:

      Breeks @ 2.24
      Fir goodness sake Breeks!!??
      Stay the course man.
      You cannot yet claim that Nicola/the SNP/the Scottish Government have compromised yer Sovereignty..
      If, and when, they do I’ll be right behind ye in condemnation and in exploring what’s to be done.
      No matter what Independence is never off the table.. Aye?
      I’ve discussed with you before, that you are correct in your view…. But pointed out that’s not the path we are currently on…
      Alex Salmond said himself that there are many roads to a country’s Independence!
      So like the song says
      Keep Right on to the End of the Road… ( That’s this road Breeks )
      And don’t you dare not vote SNP at the General Election..by order 🙂

    146. Dorothy Devine says:

      Liz , do you never sleep ?

      Btw, the only thing I know about the Bononbo monkey is that by way of good morning, good afternoon or good evening as opposed to shaking hands they have sex – so goodness knows why they are endangered.

    147. Ian B says:

      Rev Stu, the man who used to expose Unionist media lies and now (sadly) uses his own website to manipulate polling figures to his own end.

      “With the intent of increasing the number of pro-Independence MSPs” – Just how loaded can a polling question be?

      I had you down as divisive (which you undoubtedly are) but I think embarrassing is more suited given the shite you’re posting on here now.

    148. gullaneno4 says:

      Please correct me if I am wrong in saying that the proposed Wings party will only be a second vote choice.
      Is that permitted by the voting process or do they have to have put up both options available.[1st and 2nd votes]
      If they can only stand on second votes it is a no brainer,if not then I can see why some folk on here are concerned about splitting the Independence vote.

    149. Ahundredthidiot says:

      Ian B @7:41

      Just let me know who the big bad bully is who makes you come here, and I’ll have a word….

      …..or just do one

    150. Ian B says:

      Bob Mack @ 10.39 11 Oct

      “Your age grants you a degree of immunity. However your manner is appaling at the best of times. Every comment uxually opens with a derogatory remark towards someone for having the audacity to have an opinion different from your own.You seem to be more intent these days on venting your personal frustrations on this forum than actually contributing anything relevant”.

      Judging by our wee exchange a couple of days ago I think you might want to practice what you preach #hypocrite

    151. Ian B says:

      Ahundredthidiot @ 7.51am

      Usual abuse from Rev Stu lovers. Why do you want to close down debate?

      I’ve supported Scottish Independence for +30 years and have a right to challenge the dangerous game Rev Stu is playing.

      Get your head out of Rev Stu’s arse and learn to think for yourself.

    152. defo says:

      The exit door’s top right.

    153. wull says:

      Dr. Jim @ 11.31 pm writes concerning gender on the small island of Salinas, in the Dominican Republic. This is an interesting phenomenon, and it is good to bring attention to this. However, it is important NOT to confuse it with GRA, which is something quite different.

      What happens in Salinas is that a small percentage of the babies born in Salinas SEEM to have female genitalia when they are born. Later on, however – around the age of twelve – a penis which has been there all along, but was not visible since it was somehow tucked away, suddenly appears.

      It is thus discovered that these children are not females after all, and never were. They are actually males, and always have been. Dr. Jim notes that from the moment the penis appears they are raised as males. He also notes that there does not seem to be any major psychological ill effects ensuing from their having been mistakenly to be females in the years prior to their penis appearing.

      In such cases, it would of course be correct and perfectly appropriate to change the gender on the birth certificates of these children. They had been mistakenly registered as females at birth when they were in fact – already at that time – males. There must indeed be the legal possibility to rectify such a mistake (moreover, in a way that would acknowledge the original mistake, and indicate why the rectification is necessary).

      I also actually know someone who was registered as female by the registrar when in fact he was male. He was not from Salinas but from an Asian island, and it was not a Salinas-type case. When he was born he was obviously a boy. But his mother kept saying how ‘adorable’ he was. She then decided that he was so ‘adorable’ that that (‘Adorable’) should be his name, even though no one had ever used it as a name before. Unknown to the mother, the registrar simply presumed that such a name would only be given to a female, and therefore – without looking – designated the child as female.

      It was only when he was in his late twenties, when he applied for a passport in order to travel outside his country and had to supply a birth certificate for that purpose, that the now-bearded Adorable discovered that he had been mistakenly registered as a female. So he had to start a process in order to get the registration changed and, after what I presume was a fairly rudimentary (not to say ‘obvious’) test, the necessary change to his birth certificate was indeed carried out!

      GRA has nothing to do with cases like that of Adorable, or of the Salinas children mentioned by Dr. Jim. Like my friend Adorable, these children were in fact always male anyway. No change of gender has actually taken place in any of them. The change in the birth certificate is simply recognising the fact that they are and always have been biological males.

      There is no question in any of these cases of someone who is biologically female wanting to be recognised as male – or of someone who is biologically male being recognised and designated as female, when IN FACT – YES, plain, scientific, biological FACT – they are no such thing.

      As Capella says @ 11.05 pm ‘It is not possible to change sex. It is not possible to born into the wrong body. We have to find another way to help individuals who cannot accept reality.’

      By ‘another way’ Capella clearly means SOME WAY OTHER THAN GRA. The truth is that GRA will not help such individuals to face up to reality, and will instead encourage them to continue to deny it. It will also force the rest of us to confirm and even promote the illusion – basically, the untruth – that people can change their gender, when in fact they can’t. Changing one’s gender is a biological and scientific impossibility. According to our present biological and scientific knowledge, we have no way of doing this.

      The law should not be encouraging people to thinking something which we are quite unable to bring about in reality can be brought about by simply making a legally accepted declaration about it, and changing a birth certificate. We have to live in the real world. Not a magical one of our own invention.

    154. Ahundredthidiot says:

      Ian B @8:06

      oh I’m sorry, what debate were you starting?….and there was me thinking you were just throwing mud.

      and being an indy supporter for 30+ years qualifies for what exactly?

      thank you for your yes vote when the time comes.

      No one makes you come here though.

    155. wull says:

      Liz g @4.25 a.m. You are dead right that our politicians ought to ‘serve’, and that they ought to do so as a ‘career break’, and NOT as ‘career politicians’.

      I would add that while they serve they ought to be given the SAME SALARY as they had when they were working in their normal career. (Albeit with an upper limit, and with annual or other increments during their time as parliamentarians which will be EXACTLY THE SAME as those obtained in the same period of time by the colleagues they used to work with.)

      They should also be given a guarantee of returning to work in their former profession, pretty much at whatever level they had reached when they were first elected to the parliament. Or, maybe, they could in some cases, return at a slightly higher level, insofar as their parliamentary service might be presumed to have prevented them from getting promotions they would otherwise have achieved.

      But not above what it would be reasonable to expect. We want the ‘servants’ to keep their feet on the ground, and not get carried away with themselves. It will be quite sufficient that they get their old life back. We don’t want them getting ‘above’ themselves.

      It may be mistaken, but I read somewhere a long time ago that that was originally meant to be the American system. Though it maybe didn’t take them (the ones who got power) long to change it.

      Like you, I don’t believe politics is a profession. Nor should it be a way of enriching oneself, or feathering one’s own nest. Honest service is what is required … Yet it seems so hard to find. And, unfortunately, so many who begin with the best of intentions and highest of ideals seem to get lost along the way …

    156. Dorothy Devine says:

      Wull , you have obviously read Yes Minister – exactly as your last sentence states.

      And all together now , ‘The road to Hell is paved with Good Intentions’

      BTW , I am getting teacherly annoyed by the sniping , could we give it a large rest ?

    157. Golfnut says:

      @ Wull.

      We want honest, hard working, thinkers, planners, committed people who will over the years gain experience in government, the law, finance, and social justice. We need professional politicians. We need more Nicola’s and cherry’s.

      To achieve that we need to nurture and train, make sure that the selection process is robust.

      We need a Written Constitution, approved by us, that ensures that Parliament and Government knows exactly the limits of its interaction with the electorate.

      We need our own ‘ remembrance’, sitting in Parliament, reminding our elected representatives that they are there to serve and not to rule.

      We need a Parliamentary court, not committees, to act against those politicians who lie and mislead parliament and the electorate.
      We need a system whereby politicians can be recalled by constituents.

      You need system where People come before party.

      We need to reward them for their service and punish them when they forget why they are there.

    158. Rev. Stuart Campbell says:

      “Most folk answering that question would have thought they were asking about the Greens. Nothing to see here.”

      Please learn to read properly. “NEW pro-independence party”.

    159. Rev. Stuart Campbell says:

      “No — Gavin said that the tipping point was 12% of the population.”

      Please learn to read properly. Gavin’s article is absolutely clear and explicit that it’s referring to percentages OF THE SNP VOTE.

    160. Cubby says:

      Gullaneno4@7.45am

      Happy to assist. You are correct and yes you can stand only on the regional list if you want. It is a bit of a no brainer but based on the fact that you are not sure highlights the problem – people understanding the system and how it works.

    161. Cubby says:

      Liz g@4.40am

      A perfect example of what I was saying about the Buckaroo principle. There is a head of steam getting up that so many Independence supporters with their own individual grievances threatening not to vote SNP. How does that achieve independence. What is more important independence or each individuals grievance.

      The SNP is not the Labour Party.

    162. robbo says:

      Dorothy Devine says:
      12 October, 2019 at 7:17 am
      Liz , do you never sleep ?

      Btw, the only thing I know about the Bononbo monkey is that by way of good morning, good afternoon or good evening as opposed to shaking hands they have sex – so goodness knows why they are endangered.

      Right that’s it.Stuff being wan o these human things, I want to be a bononbo monkey!

    163. doug says:

      The independence campaign needs to harness and forment outrage against the Government in England. It needs more targeted attacks on hypocrisy and lies from unionist politicians, supporters and donors. It needs to use the electoral systems imposed on us to its advantage.

      The SNP, Greens and Rise aren’t to do any of these.

      Until the second or third election after independence I’ll be voting SNP as our squeaky clean vanguard party. But where it makes sense I’ll also vote for a minor independence party. We don’t just need a party like WOS if there is no indy vote by 2021; we need one in any Holyrood style election where the yoon parties can sabotage us.

    164. Ahundredthidiot says:

      If I were a Unionist I would be bricking it at the prospect of a Wings party looking to hoover up list votes from the SNP.

      If I was a paranoid Unionist, i would be convinced that the SNP would be silently complicit.

    165. Terry callachan says:

      Vote SNP in all elections / referendums up to and including the year 2021

      differences of opinion on the subject of self ID will be used against people in Scotland when election time comes

      The media in Scotland will always try and put a wedge between Scottish independence supporters to weaken the cause

      Once Scottish independence is achieved we can introduce new laws and scrap old ones we will even be able to hold referendums whenever we want to like they do in Switzerland , we could even have a referendum on the question of self ID

      Now is not the time to split the Scottish independence vote
      Right now we need togetherness

      Having said all that there is no harm in planning for the future which is all that this proposal by wings is doing

    166. Black Donald says:

      I really not comfortable with talk of a Wings party, at this point in time.

      I have faith in the SNP. I’m not a member, but I’ve always had a soft spot for them. They have actually improved my life and my self esteem as a Scot.

      There is huge risk with a Wings party. The danger of splitting the movement. The danger of hardening unionist support against the Wings “extremists”. (I know).

      We cannot go for a referendum until Brexit is in place. They would just call off Brexit to “Save the Union”. They will say anything to win. We would lose the referendum.

      Then they would do what they were going to do anyway. We would be trapped as a despised minority in a facist state outside of Europe. The focus would then need to be on protecting our families, with the lifeboats gone. The future would be a slow genocide with economic ethnic cleansing. They will continue to impoverish our people and continue to shut down and relocate our economy.

      We are dealing with Machiavellians who are capable of the unthinkable.
      Precipitate action, with the odds still against us, is also unthinkable.
      This is a survival issue for Scotland and Scots alike.

      I trust the SNP. I trust that we will act soon within the optimal background of actual Brexit implementation. I can’t see a much better chance in the future.

      Having said all that, a Wings over Scotland party would be just great. I love the idea. I’m thinking of the movie. ‘Wings over Scotland”. The story of the Scottish independence struggle.

      Scripted and produced by Grouse Beater, it opens with a scene of a computer game, with lots of swearing. Then the story of the British propaganda. The treatment of Scotland. The story of the Wee Blue Book. The joy, the hope and grief of the first referendum. The victims of the British mob in George Square. The resurgence. The court cases. The Twitter storms.

      Finally the joy of the eventual victory. And the world a better place for all.

      Lots of World Class swearing mind, but a blockbuster!

      The SNP have done most for independence, but Wings will carry us over the line. If things don’t work out then maybe the Wings over Scotland party. I think this is in line with the Rev’s thinking.

      But as the boy in Gladiator said. “Not yet. Not yet.”

    167. peter says:

      FFS, can’t you and Kelly debate this issue without the personal insults and baiting? It’s an important question you are raising and needs to be debated – the personal aggression/defensiveness is not just a distraction, it shows a depressing lack of objectivity.
      Now we have btl comments on both blogs sniping at the other in personal terms, like hangers-on to school gang leaders in the schoolyard trying to impress the leader.
      Just play the ball, not the man for Christ’s sake. Other views are allowed, you can let your propositions be challenged, surely?
      What does it tell us if opposition and criticism of your view is taken personally and triggers personal aggression?

    168. wee jock poo-pong mcplop says:

      What Peter said at 12:31 above.

      I find it deeply unsettling to have my two “go-to” Independence sources sniping at each othetr like this. What a gift to the Yoons.

    169. Liz g says:

      Dorothy Devine..
      🙂 I sleep in fits and starts…. I blame Wings totally… even the state of the house is his fault 🙂
      Every Time I think I’m out they dragg me back in 🙂 🙂 LOL
      ……………………….
      Cubby
      Yes,the Buckaroo Principal is alive and well.
      All we can do at the moment is work to mitigate it!!!
      ………………….
      robbo
      I have nae problem with you being a bononbon monkey,but you must tell us what are yer pronouns? LOL 🙂
      ………………….

    170. Ian B says:

      Ahundredthidiot @ 8.33am

      In answer to your incredibly childish response the debate’s about Rev Stu manipulating polling data to suit his own personal agenda.

      Being an Indy supporter +30 years entitles me to an opinion, simple as that.

      Your final comment “no one makes you come here though” is just laughable. I decide where and when I want to post comments.

      You’re no different to the ultra Unionist fuckwits on some other media forums who are not interested in listening to anything they don’t like and prefer instead to hurl abuse and shut down debate.

      As I said earlier grow up and learn to think for yourself.

    171. SilverDarling says:

      @Wull 8.26 am

      I agree – the Salinas boys have been socialised as females and their maleness delayed. The defect they have means when they go through puberty they often have underdeveloped genitalia which is still ambiguous and many are not fertile.

      The important factor is they are no threat to the female population as they have learned female socialisation and little threat to the male population as their fertility is sub par. The genetic defect is however exclusive to those with a Y chromosome.

      Their masculinity is not toxic or threatening, hence there is tolerance for what they are.

    172. Dr Jim says:

      Interesting stuff you find when noodling around the internet, apparently a study has found that 62% of 12 year olds are better educated and more informed than 40% of their parents

      At first I laughed, but then I thought, eh maybe that’s not so daft as it sounds

    173. Bob Mack says:

      @Ian B

      If only we had your level of intellect. Evolutionary process
      would eventually evolve us into being as high as cabbages.

      Progress

    174. Ghillie says:

      And potentially 81% could be voting SNP SNP 🙂

    175. Ghillie says:

      Black Donald @ 11.56 am

      Heart felt brilliant post 🙂

      And YES folks, LOVE IS EXACTLY WHAT WE NEED =)

      Keep the heid and remember, love your friends, and even love your enemies too =)

    176. Ian B says:

      Bob Mack @ 2.39pm

      Another quality well considered post BM.

      What is it with people like you that you can’t bring yourself to listen to or even tolerate the opinion of another?

      I genuinely feel sorry for you that you have nothing to offer apart from snide comments.

    177. Rev. Stuart Campbell says:

      “FFS, can’t you and Kelly debate this issue without the personal insults and baiting?”

      Oh fuck off, Peter. He’s written SIXTEEN articles of abusive and extremely personal ranting, I did two paragraphs of mild snark in an intro that didn’t even mention anyone by name.

    178. dadsarmy says:

      @Liz g
      They are the group who designed the leaflets to guide the teachers in our schools…. Right now… Pre the ACT.

      I checked up that Mermaids thing:

      The overall purpose is to reduce the number of incidents of HBT (homophobic, biphobic and transphobic) bullying in primary and secondary schools in England by transforming the culture of how schools prevent and respond to HBT bullying in a sustainable way. ” (my bold)

      Not our schools, Liz g. It’s an English group.

      https://www.mermaidsuk.org.uk/transgender-training.html

    179. Bob Mack says:

      @Ian B,

      Reserve your sympathy for yourself. I think your need is greater.

    180. Ian B says:

      Rev Stu @ 7.11pm

      That post sums you up. Angry and incapable of listening to reason.

      James Kelly has not been abusive towards you but he has completely deconstructed your biased polling.

    181. bobajock says:

      So I will be happy to stand in the next SGE on a Wings ticket, and simply say that I will reflect all of their policies etc.

      I will consider each individually of course, but I wont diverge on anything like major policies.

      All provided its a ‘list’ option only, and that we explicitly say this is to avoid ‘unionist’ parties ran from England.

      The SGE voting system is broken due to the ‘4 England based’ parties soaking up a vote.

      If only we could get Green to to as Wings …

    182. James Barr Gardner says:

      Stu you have my vote and I will volunteer to assist who ever the Wings Part puts up in my area.

    183. Graham says:

      Maybe you should find a different figurehead for the wings party. Stick to blogging.

    184. Willie says:

      Last night’s Bastards Broadcasting Corporation dedicated a huge amount of it’s 10.00pm progranme slot to England’s football team getting catcalled by Bulgarian fans

      And that folks was the main plank of the Bastards Broadcasting Corporation.

      It’ll have the lumpen baying for blood. Dirty European bastards, national outrage, and a chorus of Rule Britannia.

      Fight em on the beaches, stoke the hatred against Europeans, all good stuff for Boris’s EDl to have a go.

      The hatred genie is being pushed out the bottle.



    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