Wings Over Scotland

Unfortunately I don’t have a vote in Scotland, but I’d back you to the hilt if i did.

And answer came there none!

It’s days like today, having read the above, that I have serious difficulties with SNP 1 ALBA 2.

I agree with some posters on here. Govan only,
Sarwar 1 Alba 2 . Get rid of this abomination on Scotland. I cannot now stand the sight of its twisted face.

Is the source of “wokeness” simply this:

There are men high up in Scottish politics with a sexual history they are anxious to make legal?

As our host made clear here

link to wingsoverscotland.com

the woke agenda has within it the aspiration to reduce or even abolish the age of consent.

Fantastic – well done you three – keep up the great work.

I cannot for the life of me understand why this is not openly debated – I believe that many women have no idea this is going on and that our rights are being eroded by a very few MEN who want access to womens’ spaces.

Stuart MacKay says:
16 April, 2021 at 8:27 am
You can play with words all day and it’s going to get you nowhere. Their commitment to this madness is greater than yours. Stop appealing to their better natures for they have none.

Time to break out the chalk

Reply

Well said Stuart!

Nicola Sturgeon & Kirsty Blackman don’t have any answers!

They are a pair of androids who haven’t been programmed with answers.

Ex SNP candidate hopeful Mridul is for many the ultimate example of the chick with the dick working in a woman’s safe space organisation.

With no GRC he typifies what this SNP Government is all about. Not that I’ve checked but by all reports he is an unreconstructed man with all the genitalia of a man. So how is he a woman, or is he just a drag artist, a cross dresser, or a transvestite. I don’t know, nor do others, but it doesn’t take much understanding to realise why this type of thing, in a so called position where men are to be excluded, causes so much concern in the population.

So, to go back, this is a guy who lied on his job application, holds himself out to be a woman when he is not, and then gets vetted and accepted by the SNP voting committee as a parliamentary candidate ( or worse was he rejected by the committee only to be approved by a senior SNP Minister over ruling the rejection )

We never got who the alleged minister was that approved this guy with a dodgy job application history – and Nicola’s not telling, but it gives an insight into what drives the party, and it’s not traditional Mom and apple pie.

Anyway, folks have the opportunity to choose in the near future. In the meantime keep paying your taxes to support a party in government who provide millions is support to organisations who align internationally to a body that supports legislation to allow sex from ten years of age.

New SNP, New Order, with at ten, maybe even eight, children might be allowed to change their sex.

It’s a strange old muddled up mixed up world that’s Nic Ola.

A thousand times yes.

This is a global effort to gaslight people, hell NZ’s Minister for Women has just petitioned their parliament redefine the word ‘woman’ to include Trans Women (men) so as not to hurt their feelings.

F*ck their feelings. If all the women went out on strike and filled the streets for a few days/nights…we could stop this asshollery in its tracks. But we have to organise.

My family stands with you. Always.

link to thecritic.co.uk

Worth reading!

“In most cases, to get a certificate a person will need confirmation from a specialist doctor that they have gender dysphoria, have been living in the acquired sex for two years, and that they intend to continue doing so. It is not necessary to have undergone surgery. Anyone issued with a certificate is entitled to a new birth certificate in their acquired sex and to marry someone of the opposite gender to the acquired gender (equal marriage had not yet become law). There are caveats, such as sport. The Act allows sports bodies to exclude those with a certificate if the sport is “gender-affected”: that is, where strength, stamina or physique provides an unfair advantage.”

How quaint this all sounds today.

Winifred McCartney,
Debating this in public would show the GRA and those who argue for it, up for what it is, utter garbage spewed by idiots.
Compounded by the HCB which will make it illegal not to worship at the alter of the GRA church.

People believing that they are Napoleon with a hint of Marilyn Munroe is one thing, but it is beyond the ridiculous to expect the general population to believe it too, under pain of prosecution no less.

At this rate we’re going to end up in a place were the only acceptably recognized attribute of biological women is the ability to breed. Never mind patriarchy this is moving towards a dystopian transarchy. To adapt a famous poem (bot not by much):

First they came for the socialists, and I did not speak out—
     Because I was not a socialist.

Then they came for the trade unionists, and I did not speak out—
     Because I was not a trade unionist.

Then they came for the LGB, and I did not speak out—
     Because I was not LGB.

Then they came for the WOMEN, and I did not speak out—
     Because I was not a(n actual) WOMAN

Then they came for me—and there was no one left to speak for me.

This really is making it very difficult not to spoil the constituency vote.

Nicola Sturgeon is a fraud.

She claims to be a pro independence leader, yet with her actions she proves she is neither pro independence nor a leader. She has taken the wheels off the SNP as a vehicle for independence and transformed it instead in a compliant arm of the British state. Meanwhile, she allows unelected, dodgy organisations to take the lead of our policy making.

She claims to be a feminist. Yet her actions prove she rather impose policies that will deliberately damage women and reduce their rights. She looks the other way when what are meant to be the democratic structures of the party she claims to lead deliberately block a female from a seat so a worse male candidate is allowed a free run. She looks the other way when males in her own ranks verbally abuse and threat her female MPs. She looks the other way when some ignoramus among her ranks openly demean, discriminate and insult females by calling them “menstruators” rather than what they are: women.

She claims to protect children. Yet she subsidises at our expense organisations that embrace a worrying charter seeking to reduce the age of consent destroying the protective legal barriers around our children and potentially legalising paedophilia.

She claims to be a democrat. Yet for 5 years she has found every excuse to deny us our democratic mandate for a referendum, she deliberately ignores the wishes of the majority of the people of Scotland, forces on us the most toxic policies in the democratic world against the will of the majority happily endangering our rights and freedom of speech. All because she is so shallow that is determined to force males in female safe spaces and putting women at risk possibly so she can get artificially get her 50/50 quota women/men. Never mind that in reality what she is doing is making that quota totally meaningless because with the policies she is forcing on us it could become 50/50 male/male and she would still consider it a fair and equal representation of women.

She claims to seek a progressive Scotland. Yet she is endorsing and allowing unelected organisations access to determine policy that will deny the progress of science, the rights women have fighting centuries for and will get rid of the protecting barriers against children exposing them to legalised abuse.

She claims to want to give BAME and disabled candidates a fair chance to be represented in parliament. Yet she allows those who simply “identify” as such, rather than being able to prove they are, to jump to the top of the list and take from those groups the opportunity of that representation.

She claims to be always ready to listen. Yet when she is asked to listen she unleashes her political troll dogs to quash dissent by bullying or worse, unleashing the Lord Advocate to call for unnecessary and uncalled for prosecutions. When she has the weaker argument, she happily shares the strategy of labour of calling yes supporters racist for example for quite rightly wanting Scotland’s borders closed to stop the virus getting into Scotland and causing more unnecessary deaths and grief. Alternatively, she abuses power by bypassing democracy and forcing back into the NEC candidates that were specifically rejected by the members, just because she can.

She claims to seek transparency. Yet when she has the opportunity to provide transparency, she rather has her cabinet ministers and COPFS tarnishing completely their reputation and credibility by menacingly and forcefully suppressing incriminating evidence that should see her and others in her circle out of politics and the civil service for good.

She claims to not being prepared to having to pay for the mistakes of a man. Yet she expects that same man to pay for her own mistakes.

She claims to be a safe pair of hands. Yet that pair of hands has lost the taxpayers 600,000 pounds in a civil case, tens of thousands of pounds in coaching corrupt civil servants in the art of obfuscation and deflection to derail a parliamentary inquiry, millions in unleashing a malicious attempt to send to prison an innocent man, 600,000 pounds of ring fenced money and what could be a hundred million pounds in malicious prosecutions. Yet, instead of sacking the culprits to remove from taxpayers the burden of having to continue paying a salary for corruption, she keeps them in the job and to add salt to the injury, she increases their salary at our expense.

She claims to seek justice. Yet she is desperately fighting to deny us the justice of having a fair trial with a jury in court cases. It stands to the obvious that a judge is much easier to corrupt and bend than an randomly selected jury.

She criticises Johnson in the way he has handled the pandemic. But she just follows exactly the same script with a few cosmetic changes to keep the pretence that she is operating autonomously.

She claimed to seek to eradicate the virus in Scotland or at least contain it. Yet at all times she has deliberately left wide open the main port of re-entry for the virus in to Scotland. In the meantime, she denies us the freedom to interact with others, demonstrate and meet with the excuse that the virus must be contained.

She sent yes supporters “to convert” no voters for 6 years but she denied them the two indispensable tools for them to do their job successfully: a deadline and a campaign. In other words, she deliberately set them to fail.

She claimed that before calling a referendum she needed to be sure Scotland wanted independence. There is now more than 20 polls putting yes ahead and yet this coward refuses to call the referendum. It seems she is waiting for the polls to change and put no ahead so she can justify her inaction.

She continuously tells us that Scotland should have the right to choose. Yet, when that time to choose has arrived many times over, she rather undermines our popular sovereignty by embracing English convention, she hands over to England’s government a free veto and even sides with the British state in derailing the Keatings’ case to deny us our right to self determination.

She claims to want to increase Scotland’s autonomy. Yet she has handed to Westminster more powers, rights and asset control than all the previous FMs combined, even the unionist ones.

She demands from SNP members absolute loyalty and would immediately send her trolls to bully them out of the party if they dare to dissent. Yet she betrays the party, the raison d’etre of the party, the voters, democracy, justice and Scotland at every turn but has abused power to remain in post even happily throwing some ministers, MPs, MSPs or candidates to MP under the bus to protect her own arse.

She claims to want to protect us. Yet all the time she is deliberately endangering us.

She claims to seek to protect Scotland’s interests, when at all times she is putting England’s and USA’s interests before Scotland’s own.

The woman is a fraud and jeopardising the credibility of the party. So why is she still allowed to lead it?

A very good article. Which highlights Sturgeon’s modus operandi, for other issues as well as women’s rights.

Introduce legislation by stealth, legislation which wasn’t made clear, or even mentioned, in the manifesto. Brush aside concerns. Refuse to engage with dissenters in any civilised manner. Instead try to undermine them, often in the most nasty way. Create an aura of semi-holiness around the leader.

This is pure New Labour. Actually even worse, it’s taking it to a lower level.

The genderwoowoo mysognists will never argue, never debate, never defend their position.

They will lie, lie and lie again. They will manipulate anyone to obtain what they want. And what they want is total control of women and children to obtain their personal desires.

They do not, and never will, care about the feelings or thoughts of anyone but themselves. They have, and have always had zero empathy.

They behave as toddlers – throwing tantrums when they do not get their way. As this has previously achieved results.

They should be treated as the toddlers they are : never indulged and never, never ever allowed to win by throwing a tantrum.

And that is why the genderwoowoo and their handmaidens (male and female) should be expelled from the body politic of every country.

“But we have to organise”

What we need is the real men that see sense on our side so we can all fight the minority of arseholes behind these toxic policies.

That should not be difficult but we need strong commitment and a will of steel:

That is it, no sex until the fraud is ejected from the driving seat and her army of political trolls sent back to under the rock they came out from.

How does that sound for a plan?

Every day we see more examples of why the corrupt New SNP is morally bankrupt and completely unfit for office; here they are now effectively erasing 50% of the population to keep some hairy arsed blokes in dresses happy because they are good at organising twitter pile on’s.

Meanwhile the mindless drones on the SNP1+2 and SNP 1 crowd endorse this shit because they have been effectively lobotomised by never ending New SNP cult conditioning and are unable to think for themselves. What will it take for these people to get some self respect? Sturgeon raping and murdering a child live on TV?

@mia

Yes Sturgeon says a lot of stuff and you are endorsing all of it with your SNP 1 bullshit. Sort yourself out before telling others what they need to do.

“It is not my job to attempt to find proof…” says Kirsty Blackman.

You don’t have a job. Being a legislator isn’t a job. You have no rights of tenure beyond the term you were elected to serve for. Also please note the word serve.

@ shocked

Nobody reads your crap. They see your latest label and skip past.

@SNPleftme

Aye the SNP left you so you’re still campaigning for them and the lying criminal Nicola Sturgeon. We see you sturgeonite fake.

@Effigy 16 April, 2021 at 9:17 am

“NHS Wales contract awarded to a Company Matt Hancock
and his Sister have shares in.
This is an outrage!
Why hasn’t his local Bar manager friend who was handed an NHS PPE Contract
got shares in this? Has he? ”

Does your outrage only go as far as your own rose tinted Glasses FGS ? link to thetimes.co.uk , link to scotsman.com

“Meanwhile the mindless drones on the SNP1+2 and SNP 1 crowd endorse this shit”

Actually those voting SNP 1 + Alba 2 are quite possibly the only ones voting AGAINST “this shit”.

Did labour found the balls to vote against the hate bill that silences women and endangers freedom of speech?
No – they cowardly abstained and in doing so colluded into passing it giving a sense of multi party support for the bill. Clearly they do not give importance to women nor freedom of speech.

Did Libdems vote against the hate bill to protect women and freedom of speech?
No – they voted for it, colluding with the SNP into silencing women and denying us freedom of speech. Clearly libdems do not care about women, children or freedom of speech either.

Did the Greens voted against the hate bill?
No, they voted for it actively silencing women and actively jeopardising freedom of speech. No concern for women, children or freedom of speech from this party either.

Did the SNP voted for the bill. Yes, not a single one of them voted against the bill, betraying women, children and freedom of speech.

The only ones who voted against the bill were the tories. Do I think they did that because of commitment to women and freedom of speech?

You have to be joking. I believe the whole thing was staged as a political strategy to give the illusion of multiparty support for the nasty bill while giving an opportunity for the tories to gain credibility:

It stands to the obvious the only way a decent number of unionists can remain in Holyrood is if they pool together the no vote. Having labour and libdems endorsing or simply abstaining something as toxic as this bill will see many labour and libdem voters (and SNP ones) voting tory in disgust to give the libdems, SnP and labour a bloody nose (metaphorically speaking). But the whole thing is a political farce. No party currently in Holyrood gives a sht about females.

There is only ONE party that is actively and openly protecting Women’s rights. That party is also the ONLY ONE that actually seeks independence rather than kicking the can of self determination down the road or denying it altogether.

That party is ALBA.

In order to get as many ALBA MSPs as possible, you have to vote SNP1. It has nothing to do with endorsing the SNP’s toxic policies. On the contrary. It has to do with strategic voting, with cool and calculating heads to follow a necessary path to send to Holyrood a real opposition to both the British state and a rogue SNP. Tories, labour and libdems have been using strategic voting for decades. Dugdale even encouraged voting tory.

A constituency seat that the SNP loses is potentially a list seat that ALBA loses. If we want women’s and children’s rights and freedom of speech protected, we need ALBA in Holyrood and we need it in numbers. If we want “this shit” seriously opposed and burned, we need to vote strategically and whether we like it or not, this time strategically means SNP 1.

If you want to see what men get up to in womens toilets and changing rooms I suggest you take a peek at “gay” porn. There you will find men, straight or otherwise, leaving all sorts of deposits in women only spaces.

I make no suggestion these are trans, they are men with a fetish and they must be delighted Nicola Sturgeon is on their side.

As for bloke working in a rape centre, he is collecting wank material for his fantasies.

Could those Alba voters who can’t commit to the party’s strategy of giving the first vote to SNP, please keep it to themselves? It is a party matter, not an individual one. That’s how collective action works.
In short , if you support Salmond, do as he asks.

I know… Definitely SNP 1 and ALBA 2….

But what if you have an excellent candidate like Bonny Prince Bob standing against Angus Robertson? That is doing my head in. For a number of reasons. Mostly because they are chalk and cheese on social issues.

Am currently planning Bonny Prince Bob 1 and ALBA 2…

Bob in that parliament would be amazing.

Like all weak leaders, Nicola Sturgeon chooses “divide and rule”. She’s used GRA firstly as a brilliant test of loyalty to herself and also as a cowardly way to undermine the MSPs and MPs who took their seats with NO expectation of all this unnecessary fuss about a fairly obscure issue.

@mia

You lost me at this,
“Actually those voting SNP 1 + Alba 2 are quite possibly the only ones voting AGAINST “this shit””

Really no point reading beyond that as you are clearly deluded if you think that. Just you carry on in your campaign to endorse the erasing of women.

I agree with the content of the article. However, I spent a few weeks sharing a house with a young woman who at the time identified as ‘lesbian’. She was a nice, well-balanced young woman. She subsequently transitioned to male and while I no longer see him (he emigrated) I hear of him second hand. He appears to be a happy young man with a family.
The tranistion process allows time for consideration. Self ID does not allow that. Hence, as a previous comment says, there is potential for a lot of damage to a person which could last a lifetime.
Those who are pressing for the more extreme options in the process are suspect. Is this just the fashionable bandwagon at the moment which will be abandoned when something new pops up? I think it is a dangerous aspect of life to play with as the potential for harm is enormous.
I have no respect for those who aggressively push the notion of self ID, especially as they seem to accompany it with threats to those who disagee with them.
Finally, women have fought hard in the past to get human rights and I have no wish to see their efforts and achievements squandered by a government which will not listen to honest dissent.

Well argued piece which sums very well the SNP’s attitude towards not only the gender debate, but also to any questioning of their ill-thought out ideas. They brook no dissent or challenge. It is an insult to any semblance of democracy that the consultations and debates referred to here were not attended by or considered by the people who insist on passing legislation for which they have no mandate.

Kirsty Blackman’s arrogant dismissal of any attempt at debate is also typical of their presumption that they know best and there is no debate to be had. Perhaps, such is their assumption of absolute power in Scotland, she has not noticed that there is an election on, in which it is customary for candidates to be questioned closely on their policies, and for them to justify such policies with detailed answers and explanations.

But no, some slogans is all you are going to get, slogans which sound ‘progressive’, as if that was all that is needed. No consideration of the complexities of the issue, or the concerns which are far more articulated and coherent than her own airy dismissal of them. The mediocrity of such responses and the general intellectual climate which Sturgeon encourages should be enough for any Scots citizen to question whether giving these pretenders absolute power for another five years is a good idea.

Their whole manifesto is exactly like Blackman and Sturgeon’s fairytales of future Scotland. It is Brigadoon politics, all feelgood sounding promises with absolutely no detail, no economics and no recognition of the current landscape. It is fluffy PR, glossy brochures and jam tomorrow. You could laugh at it, or feel patronised that we are being talked to like children, with Queen Nikla promising a golden future which only she can see. It is superficial, candy-coated drivelling nonsense from the queen of lies and obfuscation, as well as the spender of money you haven’t got.

@Liz
I have the same challenge of conscience.
Joanna Cherry wanted to stand here… and wasn’t allowed… And Bob is an independent.
So… That’s why I don’t think voting for the bonny prince will damage the strategy.. otherwise, I would definitely be SNP 1 ALBA 2.

Can’t vote Angus, couldn’t vote Nicola… I would find an alternative too.

While on the subject of the «freaky»
Something to really scary.
link to inews.co.uk
China as petrie dish, again..
Scientific «progress» must not be a slave to ethics in our world of brave scientists.

Ian Mac says:at 10:54 am

“Well argued piece which sums up very well the SNP’s attitude towards not only the gender debate, but also to any questioning of their ill-thought out ideas.”

Your whole piece is so good, Ian Mac – this is as good, if not better, than anything I’ve come across on the ‘attitude’ of the Scot Gov.

Very impressive. Well done.

Stuart MacKay. 10:49

Martin Luther was a rabid antisemite who supported the suppression of the peasantry. He may also have suffered from acute bowel problems.
link to knowledgenuts.com
link to wikimili.com

O/T

What a horrible man that Adam Bolton is while he’s interviewing Alex Salmond right now on Sky News .

A couple of years ago some womens rights group in England held a meeting to discuss this and the meeting was attacked by trans rights activists who blocked the exits and attempted to throw a smoke bomb at the women. The police had to be called and the women said they were in genuine fear at their metting beign stormed by mostly men, some in womens attire.

One of the ones who was caught on camera engaging in the most aggressive, threatening manner was given a column in The Guardian to write a sorry/not sorry piece in which he promised to think about other peoples feelings more in the future but he was still in the right.

The Womens Library in Bridgeton banned a womens group from meeting at it after they fell foul of a non womens group who were also using it.

One of the tactics of The Frankfurt School is to weaponise minorities against the majorities in the countries they wish to take over. Instill a sense of victimhood in these groups even when things have improved for them and maintain this constantly with the adherents of TFS posing as their saviours. Have any criticism of what is happening labelled as hate speech and if possible have it made illegal, ring any bells?

The Alba crowd funder has reached it’s target. I know everyone has dug deep to get this one over the line. However it it worth considering this from the crowd funder page on the stretch target:

Any extra funding will go right to the coalface, helping grassroots ALBA Party activists the length and breadth of the country to share the Independence #Supermajority Strategy with all those who hope for better governance and a better future for Scotland.

Anyone from the grassroots side care to comment on whether this is important or simply nice to have.

link to crowdfunder.co.uk

@Ottomanboi says: 16 April, 2021 at 11:09 am

While on the subject of the «freaky»
Something to really scary.
link to inews.co.uk

Was already successfully carried out in Dunfermline in 1985:

Kirsty Blackman is a horrible bully. It is all her way or noway.

This is not acceptable when the subject requires to be discussed as dispassionately as possible.

Just watched a video of the ultra tory, Peterhead skipper John Buchan, saying he will be voting for Alba in the election, on the Alba North Highlands facebook page. He said if Boris Johnson appeared in Peterhead now he would be thrown in the harbour as the fishermen feel totally betrayed by the tories.

Oh well it took a long time for the fishermen to see the light but what a message this sends. To hear John Buchan backing Alex Salmond is quite remarkable. The momentum is now definitely with Alba and despite the media blackout we should feel thoroughly encouraged going forward.

OT, 16000 postal votes been sent out in Moray. There’s room for vote manipulation if ever there was.

Interestingly the evil Tories are against this insanity, yet no one will countenance voting for them. In essence, holding the nose for independence comes at the price of literally, cancelling women.

Ottomanboi

Oh dear, tedious nitpicking I’m afraid. Next you’ll be telling me that Luther’s proclamation was an expression of male hatred oppressing all those women the Catholic Church and contemporary society had locked up as nuns because they were inconvenient.

Benhope
The trawlerman’s conversion is encouraging especially if it is indicative of a larger shift from Tory to Alba in the North East.

We’ve seen this before but I tweeted link and have been getting a lot of folk saying they’ve never seen it before.

A young Brian Cox giving it big licks!

‘Scotland’s Story – The 1707 Union with England’

link to youtube.com

@minekiller

These people are cancelling women and holding their noses for the New SNP, not independence. These people idea if independence is so far removed from my ideas as a long term independence supporter it’s frightening.

I believe in freedom, liberty, justice, they believe in protecting the party leadership at all costs and spreading the lie that a vote for the SNP of a vote for independence. It isn’t. Independence is nothing but a carrot that the corrupt gangsters who run the New SNP dangle to con the flock. As for Salmond he’s lost a lot of respect from me, he went from telling the truth about Sturgeon to now saying let’s all forget about it, it doesn’t matter that the country is corrupt as long as he gets his 15 minutes on the TV. I wish he had stood in the constituencies and gone for the jugular, maybe he wasn’t organised, Alba seems a rush job to me.

Finding it really difficult to vote SNP 1.. infact I cant!

colin beattie is the candidate. However, maybe if he told us honestly where the missing indy ref fighting funds went, he would have more integrity!

Shocked at 12:11pm:

”
…
As for Salmond he’s lost a lot of respect from me, he went from telling the truth about Sturgeon to now saying let’s all forget about it, it doesn’t matter that the country is corrupt as long as he gets his 15 minutes on the TV. I wish he had stood in the constituencies and gone for the jugular, maybe he wasn’t organised, Alba seems a rush job to me.”

I agree about the rush job but bear in mind the timings of the investigation processes.

As far as AS is concerned, do you have specific quotes where he says “it doesn’t matter that the country is corrupt”? AS and Alba need to get votes and seats before they can change things and the legal situation is such that tackling the corruption head on is not an option.

My view is that, with his personal experience of SNP corruption, AS will be very motivated to expose and tackle it but he has to operate within present constraints. I’d be shocked if he has ever played down the significance of corruption but if you have quotes and examples, please supply them.

“because if you can suffer trawling through the rambling word salad the message is vote SNP and vote for Nicola Sturgeon”

Vote SNP 1+ ALBA2.

I don’t know how many here remember the first time Stu floated the possibility of generating a Wings party that would only run in the list. The main aim was to eject the unionist seat warmers that had entered Holyrood by the back door and that were maintaining the status quo and the illusion that Scotland supports subjugation in this union. In other words, they were stopping a huge number of yes votes in the list to capitalise into seats, that is, hiding the real extent of the pro indy vote.

Some of us, not so gifted as STu, took a while to understand the logic behind the Wings party. However curiosity provoked by the deafening and embarrassing wails of outrage coming from the unionist factions and even from the SNP careerist and devolutionist wing, led you to find out a bit more what the outrage was all about. Once you started to crunch the figures and you started to look at how few votes Greens, labour or even tories in certain constituencies needed to get a list seat, Stu’s strategy made perfect sense. So much so that some of us actually wondered why the hell nobody thought of it before when the unionists with 3 parties have been capitalising on this strategy for 20 years. And more importantly, why the SNP careerists felt so threatened by it.

Let me repeat it again, the main strategy that such a party would pursue was to remove unionist list seats and transform them into yes seats.

In 2016 we delivered a mandate for indyref. This mandate was pished all over by the unionist parties in Holyrood that ganged up against our democratic rights and self determination rights claiming that only a SNP majority was a mandate for indyref.

We know this claim is a blatant lie because Davidson is in record in a youtube video saying that “what democracy is all about” in Scotland was for the SNP to negotiate with other pro indy party in Holyrood to ensure the indyref bill would pass.

But because we have a political fraud leading the SNP and a bunch of devolutionists advising her, she not only let them get away with that blatant lie, she actually embraced the lie because it appears it was convenient for her own agenda.

In other words, the reason why we have seen this fraud letting our indyref mandate expire instead of delivering it, is because there was not actual opposition in Holyrood, and by opposition I mean a party that actually represents yes voters rather than blindly the interests of the British state no matter how harmful these may be for Scotland.

We will never get a real opposition in Holyrood that will chop down the excesses of a political fraud in control of one of the yes parties by giving unionists free seats. We will never be seen as wanting independence if we continue to hand seats to overtly anti-independence parties by the back door to hide our yes votes so they can use those seats against us.

If this is so obvious, why should our strategy change when we are so close to achieve it?

ALBA runs in the list and fights for both independence and Women’s rights. The two things the political fraud has betrayed and that need proper opposition in Parliament to be corrected. None of the overtly anti independence parties has actually defended women’s rights and freedom of speech apart of paying a bit of lip service. We need real opposition, not this farce.

ALBA’s strategy is in a nutshell the same as the Wing’s party: to take away the seats from the unionist seat warmers by capitalising on the yes vote.

In order for that strategy to work we need to get the SNP locked in the constituency seats and in as many constituency seats as we possibly can to stop them getting any list seats. Why? Because the SNP is today the most popular party in Scotland, sadly, despite having a political fraud as a leader.

Popularity of the SNP means lots of votes, votes both in the constituency and in the list. So if the SNP does not win a constituency seat, it will win at least one of the list seats for that area. A list seat for the SNP may potentially mean a list seat less for ALBA.

The ideal scenario for us would be that every SNP voter would vote ALBA in the list. That would ensure lots of ALBA MSPs. But no matter how much sense that would make, we know it is not going to happen. A lot of SNP voters, particularly those obsessed with GRA and Sturgeon, and those following chancers like Black, Blackman, Smith or Wishart and the careerist and chancers themselves will vote SNP2, effectively sending their yes list votes to the bin.

If you deny the SNP a constituency seat, you are opening the door for the SNP to get a list seat denying that list seat to Alba. It is as simple as that.

Even worse. If you deny the SNP a constituency seat by voting for an overtly anti independence party like Labour, you are at all effects completely kiboshing the strategy:

Our strategy is to take away list seats from the unionists in order TO REDUCE their presence in Holyrood. By voting for a unionist party in the constituency, you may be taking a list seat away from them but you are handing them a constituency seat. That is a failure of the strategy. You at all effects have maintained the number of seats that unionist party has and potentially taking a seat from ALBA. What is the point of the strategy if you are not prepared to follow it? The unionist party ends up with the same number of seats and you are back to square one.

We should keep our eyes in the price and in the big picture. The big picture is an absolute pro indy majority in Holryood. Before you indicate, quite rightly, that the SNP under Sturgeon and her careerist cronies is no longer pro indy, just think that to the eyes of the majority of the electorate, to the international eyes and the yes of the wnkrs at Westmisnter, the SNP is still a pro indy party and a vote for the SNP is counted as a pro indy vote.

Before the idea of a yes party in the list was flaunted, Westminster’s strategy to maintain the status quo and the presence of the unionist parties in HOlyrood was to get the supporters of those parties to vote strategically to capitalise on the list votes while relying on most SNP voters to vote SNP 1 and SNP 2. That cosy arrangement was helped by the SNP themselves, which rather have a bunch of unionist parties as opposition than a real pro indy party showing them off for the unionist they have become. If ALBA’s strategy worked and most SNP 1 voters voted ALBA 2, unionism in Holyrood would be reduced to a rump, threatening the position of the leader of the SNP as the leader of yes.

So what reaction do we see?

We see a desperate attempt by unionists to stop the yes supermajority:
a) initially by relentlessly silencing and smearing ALBA
b) now by flooding blogs with trolls upping up the insults against the SNP to stop us voting SNP in the constituency in order to allow the unionists that will lose their list seat because of Alba back into Holyrood by getting the constituency seat instead.

Let’s bear in mind that this is detrimental for us at several levels:

1. A list seat in the SNP is a seat that will always act following the whip, or running the risk of being expelled from the party. A list vote is a party vote, not a candidate vote.
2. A list seat in the SNP cannot defect to ALBA.
3. If we vote unionist in the constituency we will not be reducing the number of unionist seats, effectively we would be swapping a unionist list seat for a constituency one.

We also see a desperate political fraud that cannot face the presence of a real yes party openly seeking independence by any route available to us and openly protects women’s rights. Why can she not face it? Because ALBA is a much more attractive prospect for yes women than her own party. Her wicked strategy to deny independence and to attack our females’ rights only works if there is not effective opposition. With ALBA there is now a functional opposition.

Why is she desperate to stop Alba getting in? Because ALBA is going to expose her for the charlatan and political fraud that she is and because ALBA will not be silent like she was when the rump of unionists in HOlyrood attempt undemocratically to stop indyref again. She will have nowhere to hide and either she delivers that effing indyref, she will be pillored (metaphorically speaking) until she delivers or she will have to walk. If ALBA gets in and in numbers, all she has is 2 years to deliver. If she does not deliver, Smith, Wishart, Black, Blackman, Blackford, Oswald and a few more gravy train passengers can say their goodbyes to the green seats.

I stand by each and every one of my words:

The only way to have a REAL opposition to the excesses of this political fraud and the toxic influence of the Greens is by getting ALBA in Holyrood.

The only way to ensure that we get the most ALBA MSPs is by stopping the party that has got the most list votes in the last election to have any chance of getting a list seat. That party is the SNP. The only way you can lock the SNP off the list seats is by ensuring it gets as many constituency seats as possible.

As per Sturgeon’s constituency, I completely understand you want to get rid of the fraud. But don’t do that by handing the unionists, particularly those who could not find the balls to vote against the hate bill, a free constituency seat bypassing our strategy to eject from Holyrood unionist seat warmers.

Remember that Glasgow women are going to still have in mind the betrayal of Labour with regards to the equal pay. That surely is going to lose them a few votes. Are we going to help Labour now recover those lost votes by handing to them SNP votes for free?

What advantage is that going to give us?

If you cannot bring to vote for the fraud, then by all means spoil your constituency ballot and write her a message loud and clear on it telling her the piece of work she is. But for goodness sake do not hand your vote to the unionists so they can then use it against us to “demonstrate” to the world that we don’t want independence.

It is clear as day that some elements of the SNP are deliberately kiboshing an SNP majority. Give them a bloody nose (metaphorically speaking) by forcing them to deal with a majority that must deliver indyref, not by allowing them to get away with not delivering indyref and to blame us because we refused them that majority.

If somebody here needs ejected from their seats is the Greens. Those are the seats we have to deny to stop any attempt of the fraud to form a coalition with them.

Eyes in the price. Our price is independence. We would not be where we are today, out of the EU against our will, with less powers and with our female and children’s rights threatened by opportunistic and unprincipled individuals, if Scotland was an independent state whose political parties were not seen as fair game for vested external interests’ trojan horses to hijack to stop our right to self determination.

All the tory old pals corruption with cameron in england, and now hancock and his sister with shares in an NHS contracting firm. All the bribes and backhanders with the ppe deals, over 127,000 dead with covid and the brexit shitstorm ,and boris johnson is apparently 14 points ahead in the polls. The mind f*ckin boggles at the peanut brained intelligence of the average english voter.

Gender reassignment, and also race, are ‘protected characteristics’ as I understand it, under the UK Equality Act (2010).

So, if this new SNP definition of ‘woman’ includes someone who identifies as such irrespective of biology, does the same apply to a white person who may identify as black? It should.

Could we see public bodies, boards of corporations etc who have committed to racially inclusive ‘diversity’ policies to include people of colour, see their numbers swelled by white people who identify as black?

Kinda defeats the object doesn’t it?

Personally, I want to self-ID as the First Minister and have Sturgeon locked up as an imposter.

Lyn Hay

Indeed. I have already stated that Mia and Breeks long posts are read in full by myself.

Sad not to have contributions by Mr Robert Peffers any more.

Ottomanboi says:
“Martin Luther was a rabid antisemite who supported the suppression of the peasantry.”

His antisemitism seems to have occurred toward the end of his life, and was mixed with antipathy toward Roman Catholics, Anabaptists and other Christian sects. He lived the last 20+ years of his life having been excommunicated, which was probably as dangerous then as being the subject of a fatwa is nowadays.
I have no idea whether his bowels caused him torment, but his attitude toward the peasantry was probably shared by the majority of the priestly types back then, who relied on the patronage of the aristocracy and so were hardly likely to side with the poor.
But, you’re probably right inasmuch as the comparison with Luther was not wholly complimentary, however intended.

Mikey D says:
“All the tory old pals corruption with cameron in england”

And you don’t perceive any parallels at all here in Scotland?

Mia,

Your long posts are worth every word.

However perhaps mix long and short or even put a tl;dr; (too long, didn’t read) summary at the top to keep those short on time or attention happy.

link to tinyurl.com

Adam Boulton interview.

Kirsty Blackman was always a dimwit even before she took up the cause of transwomen. When she was made deputy leader in Westminster she was promoted beyond her capabilities. ( Mind you, look who is leader, Windbag Blackford.) She was regularly exposed in interviews as not in command of her brief.

Eventually, of course, she had to stand down but now seems to have found her niche as champion of trans rights – perhaps easier for her, as all she has to do is trot out the cult’s beliefs with no real understanding of consequences.

The sad thing is, that in every generation when women have tried to progress their status, there have always been women like Kirsty and Sturgeon and her clique who have been keen to oppose them. There is no such thing as the sisterhood. Quite often, when trying to gain equality, there have been men who have been greater supporters of women’s rights than these Auntie Thomasina’s, since they at least had an understanding of natural justice.

Kirsty and her tribe of unthinking handmaidens prove that women can be misogynists too. I distinctly get that feeling when Sturgeon speaks on the subject. There is a strong whiff of the Head Prefect about Sturgeon. I can imagine her presiding over the Sixth Form at Mallory Towers with her band of sneaks and acolytes, making life miserable for the other girls, using smears and gossip to isolate those who defied her authority and slanted reports to the Head to bring any recalcitrant girls into line. ( One more black mark for you, Angela, and you’ll be sent down in disgrace!)

Mia @ 12:32 pm

“Vote SNP 1+ ALBA2”

A thorough explanation of the dilemma. Clearly it is far better to see SNP MSP’s squirm than listen to unionist MSP’s haver.

Haud yer nebs fowks. #Supermajority.

Stuart Mackay: you are absolutely spot on – they have no conscience. There can be no compromise; no giving ground at all, anymore. This fight, for women, is an existential one. I hope I am not being pushy or know-all when I suggest that ForWomen are engaging in the wrong fight: the international community has already accepted that a trans woman IS a woman, so the judge’s hands were tied, and there was no leeway to rule that placing trans women on boards (even though they had not transition in any way physically) was illegal or breached the rules – as they stand.

Now, what has to be done is that the existing human rights at the UN and European levels have to be challenged specifically on: a) the question of usurpation of another vulnerable group’s rights and safe spaces; b) the fundamental question of whether any man, transitioned physically or not, can possibly represent the female life experience (puberty, period, conception, childbirth, breastfeeding, menopause, etc.); and c) on the question of science and biology, where getting the right medication/health care, mental health treatment, testing of medicines, placement of prisoners in the female prison estate, etc., could be compromised by a refusal to acknowledge biological sex as the primary determinant.

It is of little to no use now to try and challenge the maxim, ‘a trans woman IS a woman’ because the law already states that the person is a woman (same goes, in the opposite direction, for trans men and men, but with fewer problems on a purely physical level). The insanity of this maxim is now accepted law when men/women can change their gender on every legal document that oils the machinery of social existence. This affects men just as much, but differently, on a physical level, as it does women.

The fundamental questions are: 1. was the human rights legislation intended to allow one vulnerable group to compromise the boundaries of another?; 2. can, in reality, trans women (or trans men) represent the opposite gender in that opposite gender’s physical and biological reality?; 3. does equality to the letter blur the lines of biological and scientific reality and place people in real, physical and mental danger by creating a false reality of gender determinant over sex determinant?

Having 50% trans women and 50% men on boards might seem like a small example of human rights transgression, but it goes to the very heart of what a woman, or man, for that matter, is in reality. Legal fictions are not unheard of, but, in this case, they are directly contrary to perceived reality and cannot be allowed to determine how the vast majority of people are allowed to live their lives.

Daisy Walker
My comment was well intentioned.
I’ll forgive you’re bile because it is out of character.

So all you “SNP 1” enthusiasts,,, you still think she is going to spend her time having a civil conversation with Salmond about Scottish Independence?

Not a hope in hell!!!

The woman doesn’t do “talking to”.

Sturgeon is a power hungry sociopath.

She only does “preaching”.

Why do you SNP voters find that so hard to accept?

Why are you all so afraid to stand up to her?

The only way to defeat a bully is to stand up against them.

With so many Snowflakes rolling over and giving her your support, she will only use and abuse you all the more,,, knowing that she is under no threat from such a weak opposition.

Vote SNP all you want, but don’t start squealing when her evil policies become a reality.

@unsigned

Every time Salmond says vote SNP1 he is endorsing corruption, criminality, the banning of freedom of speech, the erasing of women and the blatant theft of money from people who can ill afford it and let’s not forget that is only the tip of the iceberg. I watched his evidence session, I heard what he said (under oath may I add) and I’ve looked at the evidence myself and know who conspired with who and what they did. My principles will not allow me to offer any support to the corrupt New SNP, none of them should be anywhere near power and all of them need to face the consequences.

Once you start giving corruption and criminality a pass you are on a slippery slope, that is something I will not do and all the SNP 1 sturgeonites can say what they want and slaver paragraph after paragraph but it won’t make any difference because at least I can go to bed at night with a clear conscience. No compromises, no excuses, no favours to anyone. Everyone is equal and if you are a criminal or corrupt you face the consequences no matter if you dangle a big fat indy carrot in front of me or not because let’s not forget that it is the indy carrot that got us into this mess with a corrupt gangster government. A lot of people need to take a long hard look at themselves.

link to tinyurl.com

Peterhead Skipper John Buchan Backs ALBA

Just watched that Bolton interview. Thought AS was superb against such hostile questioning at the start. It then settled down into a proper interview.

Only thing I might have said was when Scotland is independent, there is no UK

Ottomanboi says:
16 April, 2021 at 8:41 am

“Birth sex is less important now, with same-sex marriage and equal state pension ages.

——–

What an ignorant statement.

Same sex marraige confirms the reality of “birth sex”.

A marraige is called same sex because the two partners have the same “birth” sex.

Lorna, you are not correct that it is legally accepted that TWAW.

The 2010 EQA, which BTW, the SNP have stated in their manifesto, they will uphold, clearly states that gender reassugnment and sex are two PCs, seperate, distinct catagories.

GR is about legal sex, sex is about biological sex.
TW with a GRC can be legally excluded from women’s single sex spaces.
It’s just that they never use these legal exemptions because they are pushing TWAW.
So whether you realise it or not, you are believing the propaganda.

That is why FWS went to court, the legal definition of woman needs to be enforced.

The press keep asking Alex Salmond if he will,

‘now issue a public apology for what he did’.

Alex makes good reference to the Trials, but in addition the following line of response might be,

‘I never did anything to the public to apologise for.

And with regards the non-criminal incident from 2013, I took full responsibility and apologised personally to the individual, at the time, and it was accepted – exactly how many apologies do you think should be issued, over how many years, or is it just whenever a journalist needs an angle.

I appreciate that in this ‘virtue signalling’ era that we live in, a ‘public apology’ is an easy thing for the media to cry out for, but in terms of taking personal responsibility towards an individual (which I did at the time) – I’d suggest it is an empty gesture, that serves no purpose other than PR.

Meanwhile, Scotland has Covid, and Brexit (an English/Westminster imposed Brexit) to deal with, and the Alba party is putting forward constructive plans to tackle both.

The economic fall out from both – represent a clear and present danger to the people of Scotland.

To that end, we need champion fighters, world leading economists, experienced civil, LGBT and womans rights activists, business people, etc, etc.’

Any thoughts.

Mikey D 8.44
Is the problem not that voting that way makes it more likely the SNP person would get in on the list pushing the Alba candidate out? I’m with you by the way. The idea of voting SNP at all sends shivers down my spine but I will do it this one more time. Never again though.

Ignore the questions marks Daisy typing without glasses

Al Stuart

I have abused no one.

So stop the ametuer dramatics.

It is you who keeps having issues with all my posts,,,and it is you who goes out of your way to keep highlighting EVERY post I make.

So I would say it is you who is trying to abuse me.

You want more to be Weeshit for Indy.

Don’t mention the war.

Well I will not be silenced by a Sturgeon Roadie.

So my advice to you is to Scroll on by when you come to anything I post.

So please stop contacting me in any shape or form,,,and I will do like wise.

I sincerely hope this is the last contact I will have with you.

So please stop harassing me.

Remember,,,SCROLL ON BY.

LET’S DRAIN THE SWAMP

DON’T VOTE FOR THE SNP,,, EVER AGAIN!!!

GLASGOW SOUTHSIDE,,,

SARWAR 1 AND ALBA 2.

THIS TACTIC CAN BE USED THROUGHOUT SCOTLAND.

YOU KNOW IT MAKES SENSE!!!

@Al Stuart

Oh Al, you old sturgeonite you, if you only bothered to pay attention and went back a few articles in this website you’d see a comment by Rev Stu btl where he said himself that he’d struggle to vote SNP if he had a vote.

So park your pro- Sturgeon pro-corruption pro-criminality nonsense. It is people like you who created the criminal Sturgeon and your transparent attempts to keep her in power make you an enemy of anyone who believes in a truly free Scotland.

“Voting SNP 1 is against all principles, but…”

It sounds so much like,,,

“I’m a proud Scot, but…”

No ifs OR buts,

Just don’t vote for the SNP.

No excuses,,,they are a shower of Evil Bastards.

Mark Boyle: thank you. I think Jo is spot on.

Grouser – well-balanced people don’t convince themselves that they are, or can be, the opposite sex.

Because they’re not and they can’t.

I’m sure there are some lovely people who believe that they are Napoleon, Jesus, or Michael Jackson. But it’s not a kindness to indulge mental delusions – it’s bad, dangerous and off the wall.

Poor Andy – still trying very hard I see – all in vain lol. But keep it up mate – you are our best recruiting sergeant thus far:

SNP 1 Alba 2

Ye know it makes sense. 🙂

Portrayed by Unionists as arrogant and self-serving, he confounded his critics when under his stewardship Party fortunes recovered dramatically and on a platform of fighting for Scottish independence he led it into government in 2007 and in a barnstorming election campaign in 2011 he achieved the impossible getting the Party back into power with an overall majority of MSP’s.

link to caltonjock.com

Stuart MacKay 11:56
Grüss Gott!
Admit Stu, you’re not too keen on the papists…how old «Scottish» and so divisive.
Suggest you read up on Father Martin. A rather unpleasant and totally theologically mixed up guy who inspired capitalists, German romantics and nazis and who wrought great damage across western Europe, religious, political and social.
For example in Germany:
link to en.m.wikipedia.org
His published antisemitic writings are enough to condemn him.
Ein fester Burg ist unsre Unwissenheit.

@ottomanboi

Father Martin was fairly catholic. He accidentally started a new religion.

Mungo, i would hope a big enough list vote for alba in govan would get them through, i’d be prepared to take that chance just to get rid of sturgeon, and 3 yrs ago i used to think the sun shone out this womans a**e.

John Martini
Some accident..and such «collatéral damage».

Shocked – thanks, reply noted

Adam Boulton – if you or Sky News read here: You are not the sort of media I want to represent me. Pathetic and pitiful standard of journalism. The only thing I am any the wiser on following your interview with AS is that you really are a stupid and offensive man totally out of touch with the job you are supposed to do.

Sky News – does a finding of “not guilty” mean anything to you? Have you any idea how stupid you appear with your coverage of this topic? Pathetic.

Here is a message to all those traditional “reporters” and who insist in making fools of themselves by embarrassingly continuing to demand from Mr Salmond an apology to women he, those reporters claim, offended:

Those women you demand an apology for are not victims. They are accusers. Victim and Accuser is not the same thing and it is very dishonest to attempt to blur the boundaries of both terms.

Those accusers were not recognised as victims by a majority female jury. Their claims were not believed by that jury. Some of them even demonstrably did not tell the truth under oath claiming Mr Salmond did something to them when they could not even prove they were even in the place they claimed such event took place. Witnesses put them somewhere else.

Therefore, you are demanding Mr Salmond to apologise to some accuser who could be construed as, at least, creative with the truth. If an apology was ever required, it is evident that such apology should have been issued to Mr Salmond.

So when are you going to ask those accusers, that not victims, to actually apologise, not just to Mr Salmond, but actually to all the taxpayers like me who are now forced to pay an unnecessary costly bill because of their actions that we could do without?

When are you going to demand those women to apologise to the Scottish people for insulting our common sense and for undermining our juries and courts of law and treating them as an embarrassing circus?

When are you going to demand those accusers to apologise to the rest of the women that because of them bringing to court ridiculous accusations like a hand on a knee or touching somebody’s lock of hair, have completely undermined ACTUAL serious sexual harassment cases because every woman now attempting to bring such a case will be doubted and questioned for their motives thanks to the negative precedent those accusers have established?

I don’t know about the rest of the women in Scotland, but as a person who suffered harassment in the past, I most certainly do not appreciate my sex being abused as a political weapon to destroy the political career of a man undermining our rights to have a fair sexual harassment case. I appreciate even less unscrupulous reporters trying to psychologically blackmailing me into believing those accusations were true when a jury has already trashed the case.

Just in case you did not realise, we are in the middle of an electoral campaign. We, Scottish women do not want to hear you droning on about demanding unnecessary apologies to accusers with the aim of re-floating a case that sunk like a led balloon in court because of its complete lack of credibility.