YOU HAVE JUST BEEN PLAYED!

MASSACRE OF THE STRAW MEN

I have just read another defence of Section 30. Never have so many straw men arguments been created and slain in the one article. If you criticise the SNP for anything you are immediately accused of trying to destroy the SNP. It’s ridiculous and the last desperate defence of people who cannot justify a single point and have an overwhelming need to smear opponents in the hope that the innocent and naive don’t look too closely at the evidence.

You must never ever point out the reckless, totally destructive and divisive behaviour of the NEC. They have to  get a free pass on their interference in the vetting and selection procedures, on GRA, Hate Crime legislation etc that will be at the forefront of the Unionist campaign against the SNP next year. A agenda provided to them free of charge by the Woke Alliance and which divides the SNP membership from top to bottom all the time. Of course that does no damage to the SNP. It’s approved by the NEC!

To complain about this is to be accused of wanting to “get rid of the SNP.” No it isn’t, nobody wants to destroy the SNP, certainly not me, but equally I want to see members regain some control over their own Party. I do want to see the overbearing influence of the Woke element severely reduced because it, not me, is destroying the SNP.

Members have just witnessed the previously fair, honest and balanced vetting and selection procedures being grossly abused keeping good candidates off the lists, favouring those of the woke faith, and controlling even the ability of constituencies to organise their own fair hustings. Operations that worked fairly and efficiently for decades became a huge mess instantly the NEC muscled in and took unfair control.

Look at what’s happening at the moment. Conference is coming later this month. In a fair and honest Party this would be the opportunity to discuss all these problems, debate the options, take measures to reform the NEC, ALL INTERNALLY.

Are my critics witnessing this, this is me arguing to sort it all out internally, you know what my critics have been saying should happen for months? Well I am sorry but that is NOT going to happen.

Instead the leadership have safeguarded themselves by taking measures that ensure members and branches can’t do that, worse the measures ensure all the free seats on the NEC for Woke, stay for AT LEAST another year, irrespective of members views.

How did they do that you ask? Simple, they have taken all resolutions submitted By branches on making constitutional and rule changes, every one, and barred them from Conference discussion by handing them to Keith Brown’s recently created Review body, which has to report before the 2021 Conference.

How clever to set that Review Body up just a few months ago, ready to receive all these difficult questions? It’s that easy, they could see the members opposition building calling for sweeping changes, they couldn’t be sure they could defeat them at Conference, easy solution,, just don’t let them be discussed. Even better, describe anyone who objects as a troublemaker and say they are trying to destroy the SNP. How easy was that?

Now the hope here is that members don’t realise they are being played by their own side. Many will fail to recognise setting up the Review was the pre planned catch all tactic where all problems with the NEC, Vetting, selection procedures could be conveniently dumped if necessary, rather than being debated. Another year for the status quo secured, perhaps a few changes of personnel on the margins, but no more than that! Even better they have screwed money for delegates passes out of you before revealing the blandest agenda imaginable. How easy was that?

It’s the same with discussing Plan B. Can’t risk that being debated in case it won support so what is being done? Well it won’t make the Conference Agenda either, but they offer a wee discussion at a specially called National Assembly in January. No risk in that, Conference decisions form policy, outcomes at National Assembly don’t. See how easy that was? How many know that significant distinction between National Conference and National Assembly?

It is unfair political control, indeed the loyalist element, my party right or wrong, will probably think it clever and as usual will support it, not realising it is their future rights that are being trampled on as well. Worse, when I discuss this with these Party loyalists and I ask them “do you really believe a section 30 will ever be granted” around two thirds, did you get that, two thirds, answer “no but we must not divide the Party”. My question is “why not unite the Party round another option that has much greater potential to succeed and unite, rather than this dead duck proposal?” Frankly it is treating the entire membership with contempt denying proper debate. What has happened to the previously most Democratic, open and transparent party in the UK?

The outstanding weakness of the Wee Ginger Dug’s case was his argument that we need yet another clear mandate before we look for alternatives to a Section 30 order. How many mandates do we have already, stored in the big Mandate cupboard at HQ? What point is another? 

What happened to the last one, the one that was tied to Brexit, you know the issue that Nicola has majored on for the last four years? We have left the EU and are weeks away from being outside the Single Market with no deal. Tens of thousands are going to lose their jobs, thousands of businesses will be adversely affected. They are looking for action, they thought they had voted for it, and that we would “not allow Scotland to be dragged out of the Single Market against our wishes”. That is what they were told by the SNP, time and time again,that is why they gave us the mandates to stop it. What have we done to honour our word? Why should they trust another message of give us another mandate when we have done diddly squat with all those that have gone before?

I hear a lot about “we have never been nearer”. Sorry we are not. The nearest we were was the 18th September 2014. We have not moved an inch nearer since then. What about the polls I hear you say? Well they are nice, comfortable even, but they mean nothing if you have no mechanism to translate that support into real votes. So while the polls have moved in our favour, the possibility of securing a Section 30 has diminished at the same time, those polls no doubt playing a leading role in that disappearing option. So if your faith is in a Section 30 order you have been moving backwards. During that time while you have been waiting, Westminster has moved from having a Government struggling to have any majority, to a Tory Westminster Government with a majority of eighty, led by right wing Brexiteers who have no interest in what’s “morally indefensible”, or any other of the straw phrases gradualists constantly clutch to, to excuse their inaction.

We have a Democratic route to freedom, it’s there if the will exists to exercise it. We announce we are intending using the constituency vote in next May’s election as our alternative referendum UNLESS Westminster issues a .section 30 order no later than the end of January 2021. That removes the straw man arguments that we must fully exhaust the Section 30 process before moving to a Plan B position. We put it in our manifesto and seek the other pro Independence parties to do the same that a majority of seats secured in May will be regarded as the mandate for Independence. Should Westminster want the outcome determined by votes rather than seats then the Section 30 must be delivered by the January deadline. It is perfectly democratic, it allows us to demonstrate that Westminster has had every opportunity to act if they wanted to and it is more than sufficiently democratic to win widespread International democratic support.

You will note that in this article I am pointing to actual events, real examples to make my points, about how members are being played. This article is largely fact, not opinion. It is constructive, it offers a definite alternative route.

There is no point gradualists arguing this all should not be discussed on a public forum. Firstly you need to recognise that it is your leadership decisions that have made internal debate impossible, they have barred it, and secondly what happens within the SNP is hugely important to the entire YES movement and that makes it everybody’s business as continuing on the current path will result in yet more wasted years.That badly affects the whole movement. The YES movement need an effective SNP but the SNP also need the electoral support of the Yes movement. It’s not, or it should not be, a one way street.

Finally I find it amazing that for complaining about the snail like process of delivering Independence, some people prefer to attack me, rather than the snails! No matter I can take it, time is on my side as the snails are going to need to dramatically speed up or eventually be hopelessly exposed. The big problem however is the people of Scotland are facing economic disaster and for many their time is running out!

I am, as always

Yours for Scotland

If you valued this article why not take out a free subscription to this site. These are available on the Home and Blog pages of this website. You will be most welcome.

LATE NEWS…

This is a press release from David Henry, a candidate for National Secretary who is calling on Members and branches to act to demand that a resolution on these Internal matters is selected for debate. If you want a copy of the resolution contact David by email at dhenry@rapturetv.com

Press Release: Immediate
With the publication of the SNP draft agenda last night, which contained only 6 resolutions out of over 130 that branches submitted and not containing any that address the SNP’s internal or operational issues. There is grave concern that this will erode trust both in the party and the party leadership.
The SNP National Conference is the supreme governing & policy making body of the party. The failure to include any of the resolutions that would address the internal operations of the party is both unconstitutional and unprecedented. The SNP membership is being denied their basic rights to have a say and the delegates at the next SNP conference (which is to be held online from the 28th-30th of November) are being denied their constitutional rights to have a vote on these important and pressing issues. Branches didn’t propose, draft and vote to support these resolutions for them to be excluded.
All members of the SNP and all branches are urged to demand that the SNP Sighthill/Stenhouse Branches ‘Transparency’ resolution in particular is placed on the Conference agenda by sending you demand to conference@snp.org and to peter.murrell@snp.org.

Virus-free. www.avast.com

Please share widely on Facebook and Twitter and lets make sure every Member and branch knows about this. Thank you.

80 thoughts on “YOU HAVE JUST BEEN PLAYED!

  1. Oh Iain, you say it as I see it. Here we all were thinking the only opposition we have is the Union. So sad that we are battling with our own, or we think they are our own. This is so disheartening. Thank you for your blog.

    Liked by 7 people

  2. It seems to me that the only way out of this logjam is for Nicola Sturgeon to resign. That’s why I have my fingers crossed for the Salmond enquiry to bring her down.

    Liked by 5 people

    1. But Peter the Mole Murrell, her husband &
      CEO & Cabal Leader of the SNP, Must Also go! It is The Mole who really controls the Current FM & SNP NEC!
      He hates The Chief and Will Do More harm if He is Allowed to stay!!!

      Liked by 2 people

      1. If Sturgeon goes then Murrell is toast. They both know this, he cannot survive without her. The rest of the party loathe him. They want someone who is competent and responsive in post. He is neither.

        Liked by 3 people

    2. Andygm 1 If you bring Nicola Sturgeon down as you say the SNP will implode and you will have done Westminsters job for them because then you can kiss Scotland’s independence goodbye !!! 😦

      Like

  3. A few observations
    Boris has softened his position as he knows ultimately the people will decide
    If the next election brings a good result and he refuses the country and people will be galvanised
    The park is open after that
    Re wokism times are changing 50 years ago a gay could not stand now we would say why not. Gender is clearly variable and reflects biology, phychology, hormones, behaviour and background and chemistry. We have to get over church induced stereotypes. What the bulk of the population will vote for is changing although slowly. Kids today are much more accepting and tolarating. We must judge character as we see it.
    We have to accept and follow the leaders an until it fails at this stage. It is a reasonable plan
    Post indy I am fine with throwing anyone involved is the salmond case in jail regardless of position

    Like

    1. I don’t think you understand you won’t get Independence as it’s not on their agenda. I am not against all these issues but I am strongly against any organised group wresting control away from the membership.

      Liked by 8 people

    2. What? There is prejudice and there is delusion, Andy. Gay people never, ever claimed they were of the opposite sex. You evidently understand nothing of the trans debate, of GRA reform, or you wouldn’t write what you do. Like the shrill, nasty worst elements of Stonewall and the Trans Alliance, you think it’s just dandy to bring in legislation that will, within a generation, see women eliminated from all areas of public life. That is what will happen if you allow natal men to infiltrate women’s spaces. Nobody in the female opposition to this deluded nonsense would wish harm or alienation on a genuine trans person – those who suffer from body dysphoria, a very distressing condition – but to ask us to deny biology and science is just stupidity on stilts. Trans rights should be trans rights, not women’s rights.

      Women fought hard for the rights and spaces they have; they didn’t hide behind anyone else as trans people appear to do. The reason they did that was because they were not allowed access to public life, by men. Body dysphoric people are a tiny minority of the trans movement which covers many other lifestyles that people are mostly unaware of right now. If men prevented women from access to public life in the past, what is to stop them doing it again? Most of the trans lobby will not be taking hormone treatment or surgery, but will be fully-functioning natal men. Are you trying to say that these men will not try to displace women? Have you read the filth, the rape threats, the non-platforming of women, the forcing women out of work by this viciously masculine lobby? Evidently not, when you think they are harmless geezers who like to wear frocks and high heels. This whole thing is a mass delusion that has been prompted by big money in the background and by something a whole lot darker. Not a shred of evidence has been proffered as to why the laws protecting women should be railroaded out of existence, when even the original human rights legislation that brought trans rights to the fore (and, yes, they have all the same rights as you and I, although they maintain they are fighting for them) states that women’s spaces should continue to be protected.

      As far as I am concerned, this mass delusion of the Emperor’s New Clothes variety is dangerous to all women and girls – physically, psychologically, and in relation to THEIR human and civil rights – and it is on a par with other atrocities perpetrated against women. Even now, in Poland, we are seeing women’s rights being curtailed – always the first action of an authoritarian regime, whether of the right or the left. Independence will not come until the pseudo ‘woke’ faction is cleared out of Holyrood because it suits their purpose for independence not to happen. They want to remain in power forever, probably introducing ever-more deluded and insane ideas, selling them to a gullible public who do not wish to be seen to be in any way not ‘right-on’. This issue is not about tolerance or acceptance because they were never at issue. This is about natal, male-bodied men gaining access to women’s spaces and rights. Offer them any compromise you like, they will remain silent, because it is PRECISELY and ONLY about gaining access to women’s spaces and rights, not about standing up and being counted as a trans person. They are far too cowardly to fight their own corner as trans people. They want the easy route, the route that was fought for by women – right through women’s sex-based rights. There may be several genders – over a hundred at the last count, wasn’t it? – but there are only too sexes, and they are immutable.

      Liked by 9 people

      1. Lorna as always thanks for your patience and ability to explain this insidious, demanding capture of women’s rights , freedom and safety , you are much more pleasant and patient than these people who continuously deny what is in multitudinous evidence if they cared to LOOK deserve, and this continual WHEESHT FOR INDY is TOTALLY INSULTING to people who CRAVE independence but are NOT willing to SURRENDER their integrity to satiate deviants and LIARS

        Liked by 7 people

      2. Thank you, Robert. I try to keep calm and grounded, but some of these trans lobbyists would drive you to curse and swear. I don’t believe I have ever heard of a lobby group like this one. They post vile threats of death or rape, un-platform women, have forced a number of women out of their jobs, and the language they use is so masculine and misogynistic that anyone with a modicum of sense would understand that they are not men who are desperate to be women (i.e. not body dysphoric) but men who want access to women’s spaces and rights for a very different set of reasons. Their agenda is driven mainly by gay men who appear to hate women, but narcissism, self absorption and me-ism play a huge part, too, as do fetishes. Having read several pieces by psychiatrists and psychologists, I believe we are being conned by the majority of these people, and it is only the genuinely body dysphoric who have a right to be heard in this context, not the cross-dressers and the fetishists who all come under the trans umbrella. I sometimes think that Nicola Sturgeon has flipped her lid, I really do. On this, and other issues. Is this stuff what we voted for? Where is our independence?

        Liked by 3 people

      3. I often imagine this is what comments on a Trumpian site would look like. Not sure what it has to do with independence though. Seems like folk have let themselves become distracted by other people’s agendas.

        Like

    3. Trans is all about the gender stereotypes you want the churches to lose. Those are the ones they want to adopt. Trans women go for hyper femininity. They don’t want to be the women who wear jeans and a top. Trans men want big muscles and deep voices and think aggression is good as though the term toxic masculinity never existed. It is all so regressive, not progressive.

      Trans say a boy who is a bit sensitive must be a Trans woman, he can’t just be a sensitive boy. Tomboys must all become pretend real boys. Trans isn’t transgressive, it regresses to a stultifying, unrepresentative mean.

      Liked by 6 people

      1. Absolutely agree, Muscleguy. This trans mania that has gripped the West is every bit as destructive as the religious wars and witch finding of old. It is also, I think, a denial that it is male aggression that needs to be curbed, that patriarchy blights the lives of men every bit as much as it does those of women. I knew several really sweet and sensitive boys at school, and they were’t gay or trans, just not big beefy types. They actually seemed to like girls, in the sense of liking them as human beings, as well as becoming emotionally entangled with them. I shudder to think that these lovely boys might nowadays be brainwashed into believing they are trans. This movement, while using genuinely body dysphoric people as the excuse, are motivated by things that we are just not seeing right now, but will see the moment they get their way, legally. It is a very regressive and dangerous delusion that so many people are being duped into believing in. It breaks my heart to listen to young girls talk about trans because they just do not understand what it will mean for them and their daughters. They seem unaware of what happens when you afford legal status to people who wish to have you out of the way. I have been called hysterical – the ultimate in male patronizing denial – but, if men invade women’s spaces such as hospital wards, rape crisis centres, changing rooms, toilet facilities, sports, boards, parliament, etc., because the law allows them to do so, women will move out – which is what they want.

        I was waiting for a bus one day a couple of years ago, and I idly watched people going in and out of the toilets (and before anyone asks, no it is not a perversion; I am an observer of humanity). The men were in and out very quickly, while the women had to queue, forced to hold their bladders closed for lengthy periods). I mentioned the difference to another woman sitting beside me, and she said that she would rather queue and risk wetting her knickers than use a unisex toilet where men were free to hassle women and girls, which she had seen on more than one occasion (there wasn’t a unisex one, anyway). Imagine a hospital ward with x number of beds, and half of them go to self-ID trans women. Women’s medicine will suffer. This will happen right across the board with women’s facilities. The original human rights legislation never, ever intended for this ridiculous situation to happen, and specifically states that women’s sex-based spaces should be honoured in any new legislation. The SNP government has done the exact opposite. I loathe those people at the top of the parliamentary party who have created such deep and ever-widening divisions instead of concentrating on independence, and I will never forgive them for their crass and wicked neglect of half the population.

        Liked by 7 people

  4. Hi, does the hard scrutiny of the SNP, justified or not, is helping the Independence fight when there is no practical, appliable alternative given ? I cannot cast a vote for you, for wings nor Alex so is that really worth it ? In a sport team in any team, what happens in the changing room must stay in the changing room. Every time it does not the team blows up and have to be reconstructed. Do we have time for that ? I guess that money is an issue to start your Indy party or what ever you could call it. Ask independentists and others to give to a future fundraising, then you will see whether what you are doing is relevant or not in helping Independence…

    Like

    1. Civilised comment that deserves a reply. There is no team in the dressing room. There is no game arranged or any ability to get it on the future list. This is fantasy football. There will not be a game until those in charge make it a priority. That is not happening.

      Liked by 11 people

    2. My memories from the past, as a radical spark, listening and talking to bourgeoisie left, yet they voted right.
      Nothing changes.
      People make change not politicians.
      What to do?
      Onwards and upwards
      🐼🐼

      Like

    3. The SNP themselves do not want Indy to work yet – so there needs to be a way of getting Indy Prioritised – one way is to vote ISP on the list – other ways are actively being acted against by the SNP.

      Liked by 5 people

    4. You have Democratically e-Mailed your thoughts in Your Reply!
      Peter the Mole Murrell is actively Stopping comments at the Forthcoming SNP National Conference!
      We pay His Salary & Not the Other way
      Around!
      If The Mole gets his way at the Conference then his name Must change from the Mole to Chairman Mao, such
      Will be His Non-Democratic Power!

      Liked by 4 people

    5. Yes the hard scrutiny is justified. Do you believe that the SNP in it’s present form is going for independence? Are you advocating that the SNP should become even more secretive? Have you been following their activities for the past six years? You’re not trolling are you?

      Liked by 3 people

      1. No I am Not Trolling! YES I Do Not think that the SNP Want Independence in 2021!
        Why? Because they have spent nearly £600,000 on The Chief’s Legal Bill &
        On Alyn Smith’s Gaff with the Brexit Party!

        Liked by 3 people

      2. alspals01: they had already decided that independence was not going to happen on their watch, and that is why they felt safe in using that money in the way they did, having said it would be ring-fenced for the referendum. I am now of the opinion – and, of course, I could be very wrong – that Nicola Sturgeon never intended us to go for independence after she took over from Alex Salmond. She has done nothing to advance it. Nothing. Alex Salmond kept us aware that the campaign was proceeding right up until 2014, and members were leafleting and door-stepping for months beforehand. Yes hubs were set up and manned by members to answer questions, etc. I never had the slightest doubt that Alex Salmond would keep his word on independence, and he chose the S30 Order route for a very different reason than Nicola Sturgeon has. It was the easiest and best route at the time, and would have ensured that Westminster stuck to the bargain. It is being used to put the brakes on indy this time because she must know that it will never be granted. After 2014, Westminster will never again agree to a straightforward YES/NO referendum and honour the result. What I have heard is that the GRA reform and the ‘hate crime’ legislation are being brought forward again for 2021. In order to do that, the SNP needs to be in power and it needs to be in power for several years. Where does that leave indy? A big win will propel this stuff through and on to the statute book, but indy will not be anywhere in sight, I think. For the first time in my voting life, I am hesitant about giving them my vote; for the first time since I was 13, I am wondering if this is the same party I joined all those years ago? What has happened to it?

        Liked by 4 people

  5. Both e-Mails sent. I have also informed Peter Murrell, CEO & Top Mole of the SNP,
    that if the Transparency Resolution is Not Debated And Voted on in the Forthcoming Conference that I Will inform My 13,000 Friends on Twitter, Instagram & FaceBook to Not Vote for the SNP in the May 2021 SGE! It’s The Mole’s choice!!!

    Liked by 6 people

    1. And you expect this tactic to lead to independence? Its this sort of malcontent nonsense that will see independence killed stone dead. I see a certain “ecclesiastical”, allegedly pro-indy blogger now appears to see the desirability of the SNP NOT getting a majority in Holyrood next year. Perhaps finally realising the list vote pop-up parties he has been advocating CAN actually damage the SNP significantly and he needs to reposition himself to say he knew that all the time and its a good thing. Many malcontents may just be getting carried away with the rhetoric of rebellion, but some are most definitely “malign”. Independence is not their goal.

      Like

      1. Couple of points. I could take you seriously if you used your own name. Bungo Pony suggests you want to take us for a ride. Second point I have never promoted any other pop up party.

        Liked by 6 people

      2. Are you expecting that ignoring it will lead to independence? Have you been following the “progress” of the SNP for the past six years? The SNP are trying to kill independence stone dead. Are you another troll?

        Liked by 4 people

      3. Hi Iain,

        I never said you had supported pop-ups. Unless you are also of a faux “ecclesiastical” bent. And why only pick on
        me for my name? I’m not the only one on this thread with a pseudonym. Am I hitting to close to home 🙂

        Like

      4. And there is MBP with his usual “malcontents” slur , a slur he was well known for over on WOS, as he was also known as an adamant proponent of the WHEESHT FOR INDY meme rather than FIX the issues he prefers to IGNORE them

        Liked by 5 people

      5. As I said on WOS, “malcontents” is NOT a slur. Its just an apt, “catch all” adjective for those who are unhappy about a situation and are actively working against it. That “malcontents” (sic) found it insulting was, at first, puzzling, then funny and finally tiresome. Get a dictionary and get over it.

        Like

  6. Spot on blog as usual and two emails sent. Cannot agree at all with alspals01 above and the silly suggestion of telling 13,000 “friends” not to vote SNP. That is not putting independence first. If the SNP vote goes down next May, that’s the end of independence for now and probably in my lifetime.

    The time to change the party is not when an election is looming and the best we can hope for are some modest changes in the NEC at conference. After next May, the party needs reorganised from the bottom up.

    Liked by 1 person

    1. Agree! Keep the heed!
      T’is more noble to forgive and more manly to despise.
      Franklin.

      If you cannot get revenge, get even.
      Lol
      Onwards and upwards
      🐼🐼

      Like

    2. If the SNP get in with a majority next May as looks likely you won’t get a chance to ‘reorganise the party’. If they get away with what they are doing for this conference, expect to find it getting progressively worse at subsequent conferences. Why should they care then if the membership are upset, they will have their extra 5 years to get the hatecrime bill through (and other equally repressive bills) whilst squandering the mandate and allowing Scotland’s economy to be ravaged by Brexit. Then the Murrells will simply sail off to some other cushy post in the UN or equivilant. Independence? They’ll manage to delay that until at least the following term by which time the wave of opinion could well be against us again – there are too many who are swing voters who’s reasons for independence
      can easily swing the other way.

      Liked by 6 people

    3. It’s more than possible that, considering their GRA and Hate bills, they are attempting to not have a total majority, which would leave a referendum attempt pointless. SNP on the gravy train, though.

      Liked by 5 people

  7. Adding to my above comment, when contentious legislation such as Hate Crime comes before Holyrood, surely some of our SNP MSP’s have the backbone to vote againnst it and not merely abstain. WE do not seem to have any rebels in Holyrood – they must be very cowed.

    Liked by 7 people

    1. They are or they are of the same ‘woke’ faction, which is precisely why they don’t want any big hitters from Westminster coming into the Holyrood parliamentary party. There are one or two who are very anti the GRA and hate crime coupling, but they are shouted down by the vociferous trans lobby that Shirley-Anne Somerville calls ‘colleagues’. I am also sure that there are those who do want to push independence, but they will remain on the back benches if they step out of line. Iain, for example, wouldn’t last five minutes in a ministerial capacity today.

      Liked by 5 people

    2. Most are hand-picked, sheep. Happy to eat grass, take the money and do as they are told…..or else you might get a visit from Ian McCann !

      Liked by 2 people

  8. Iain Lawson wrote:
    “Worse, when I discuss this with these Party loyalists and I ask them “do you really believe a section 30 will ever be granted” around two thirds, did you get that, two thirds, answer “no but we must not divide the Party””.

    Apparently, at least to the malcontents, I’m a “Party loyalist”. A “Sturgeonista” even. I’m not really. I’ve been to two SNP meetings since I was lucky enough to be present at one in Broughty Ferry when a newly re-elected leader, Alex Salmond, gave his first speech as such in 2004. And I’ve never even met Nicola Sturgeon.

    However, I believe a S30 has to be asked for, even in the expectation of refusal, in order to show Scottish voters and the World at large that the independence movement has given the UK govt every opportunity to do things by “their” book. The answer the UK govt gives is largely immaterial after the request is made. If they accept, great, we get a cast iron referendum the result of which cannot be denied by Unionists. If they refuse, so what, they got the chance to accept the will of the Scottish people before the eyes of the World, blew it, and we go for a Holyrood mandated referendum instead, with the support of the people and a sympathetic international community. I don’t care that the SNP have not laid out in detail their exact plans in the event of a refusal (and therefore understand why they would not want to be tied to specific “Plan B”). I wouldn’t expect them to. Why set up a target for Unionists to take pot shots at for the next 18 months?

    It has nothing to do with “not dividing the party”. The malcontents are doing a good enough job of that already. Its about convincing the people of Scotland that indies are the “good guys” when they organise a Holyrood only referendum and not the reckless “bad guys” Unionists would paint us if we didn’t at least go through the motions of what they would call “due process”.

    Like

      1. Hi Iain,

        It’s irrelevant how often we have asked for a S30 up to now. Had it been granted before now we would likely have lost, given the polls at those times, so we dodged a bullet there. As I said previously, the response to S30 orders is largely irrelevant. Its being seen to ask that is important both nationally and internationally. The more intransigent the UK govt is seen to be, the better it is for indy when we finally go for it. I fully expect a post May 2021 request to be denied as well. But this time, if the malcontents haven’t buggered everything by then, there will be a SNP majority in Holyrood and, far more importantly, a majority in the electorate for independence. A very different situation from previous years. And every mandate is grist to the mill as far as the eventual vote goes.

        Like

      2. I don’t see it that way and it matters only if it matters what the response is. Anyway, leaving aside the emotive “begging and pleading” bit, it’s the starting position of every would-be independent state. Unless things are so bad they go straight to revolution, the first port of call is usually an appeal for a civil, mutual route to independence. When the appeals to their democratic values 《guffaw》go unheeded, and the stars are aligned in indy’s favour (as they currently look to be), that’s when to say “screw you Westminster” and do our own thing; all the time highlighting how we gave the UK govt every opportunity to do the decent thing and accede to the wishes of the Scottish people for a referendum.

        Like

  9. 100% with you on this Iain . If any the Tectonic Platists have read your post and related comments could you have the honesty to attempt a refutation here ? We would be interested in hearing would they might be

    Liked by 4 people

  10. Ian, I enjoy your posts and agree with most. I will be going to the conference as a delegate and I know you gave a list on one of your posts of woke members of the NEC and non woke in highlighted black type. I would be grateful if you could email that to me just as a guideline as I have only been a member for a couple of months. I am not sure where I stand on the GRA or the Hate Crime Bill but I would like to read more on what some of the NEC say to inform me on these topics and some of their priorities re Indyref 2 and the section 30 order attempt

    Thanks

    Tommy Hutton
    ________________________________

    Like

  11. iain – just been on My SNP to vote and on looking at the nomination format it is difficult to see that you have indeed nominated. EG I pressed the button to nominate Craig Murray for president. But nothing happened. So I pressed again and nothing happened. Then when I pressed another couple of times the screen but changed to ” remove nomination. ”

    Maybe someone could explain the process. This must be confusing for many folks

    Liked by 2 people

    1. Willie. Press it once then refresh your screen. ‘remove nomination’ means you have successfully nominated the person

      Like

    2. Willie, keep trying. The system is slow but will eventually go from “nominate” to “remove”. You can go back and add or remove your nominations until the deadline. You can nominate as many as you wish for each committee. I’ve had a dig around and found a list of ‘recommended’ nominations (ie individuals we can trust to prioritise independence and to have independent minds themselves). Some of these I know personally, some are recommended by others I trust.
      I’ve verified the list as far as I can.

      here they are:

      Allison Graham
      Amanda Burgauer
      Brian Lawson
      Caroline Keenan
      Caroline McAllister
      Catriona MacDonald
      Chris McEleny
      Chris Hanlon
      Ciaran McRae
      Corrie Wilson
      Cynthia Guthrie
      David Henry
      Delia Henry
      Dot Jessiman
      Douglas Chapman
      Dylan Roberts
      Ellen McMaster
      Frank Anderson
      Gordon Miller
      Graeme McCormick
      Joan Hutcheson
      Joanna Cherry
      John Green
      Kate Monaghan
      Kenny McLaren
      Kirsteen Currie
      Laura Mitchell
      Lynne Anderson
      Morgwn Davies
      Munro Ross
      Neale Hanvey
      Robert de Bold
      Robert Thomson
      Roger Mullin
      Rory Steel
      Sameeha Rehman
      Susan Katherine Sanders
      William Mills

      Liked by 3 people

    3. Hi Williie, the “remove nomination” on the screen confused me at first too. I have just rejoined the party to nominate Craig for president. I was about to join the ISP but will still vote for them in the List vote

      Liked by 1 person

  12. Hi iain. I am very very concerned about who has taken control of the party. I always boasted to doubters that this was not a party run by an elite. In the SNP, the members came to conference and told the party where to go. No more, it seems. I am very much opposed to the loss of basic human rights since lockdown. It infuriates me that I am not supposed to visit my family and give them a hug. Need a pass to shop without a face covering and so much more. A year ago we would have laughed at the suggestion that these things could be taken from us by our own beloved SNP. I am just about to buy a delegates pass but I wondered if there was any way to join a movement that wants to save the party. Should I save my ,,£30, will we have a chance to speak as normally we do at conferences? Yours Helen Slimmond

    Liked by 1 person

    1. Mrs Slim, I was outraged and shocked when the Scotgov suggested earlier in the year that they were considering getting rid of juries. Now that is a very worrying sign of a gov that is moving towards an authoritarian approach to governing. Thankfully they backtracked.

      Liked by 3 people

  13. They have lost me, The greens will use my vote properly
    I’ve always voted SNP and I’m in my 50’s now
    but how many mandates can you give to a party only
    to be asked for another, you’ve been infiltrated like New Labour and the current Fascist party
    doubt I’ll ever return

    Liked by 1 person

    1. James to be honest the greens are just as bad as the SNP if not worse when it comes to the GRA , they have advised members and prospective members not to even bother raising the GRA situation , as far as I know some green members have been forced to leave due to their opposition to the GRA, so if that is NOT to your liking join the rest of us with no constituency party to vote for

      Liked by 1 person

  14. Some continue to ask this question : Whatever happened to the Party I knew?
    Answer : Simple. The Party got hijacked by a bunch of fraudsters, Who jumped on the Indy train. Okay.so they lied. They are, after all, politicians. So who were they and what was their main objective? They wanted to move politics to the centre. So they are centralists. Keir Starmer is an example of a centralist. The Labour man with Sir on the front. That’s a joke. Biden is another. Macron is another. So there are a few examples but centralist politics hasn’t been shown to be that successful. So where does that leave the SNP and it’s members? Without Independence, unfortunately. It doesn’t fit in with centralist policies. A bit like Jeremy Corbyn and the Labour Party. It remains to be seen if the SNP can be rescued by it’s members. So far, Sturgeon and her troops have galloped into Holyrood castle and raised the drawbridge. Will the members manage to scale the ramparts and burn the gates down? Or will they have to wait until Sturgeon’s army runs out of ammo and food? Sadly, there’s little time for either option. On a cheerier note. We have a new Indy party announced this week. Scotia Future. And their website is up and running. Worth taking a look….

    Liked by 2 people

    1. Yeah, that’s right, vote splitting. That’ll get us independence. Assuming that’s what you want yourself Mr …. err …. UK.

      Like

      1. I have voted SNP for 50 years because there was no alternative party offering Independence I won’t be voting SNP again as long as the Murrells are in charge. If I want criminals leading my party and Scotland, I can find them on any street, and for a lot less money than the charlatans we’ve got! Next year, I will vote for whatever party that convinces me they will push hard for Independence. “Splitting the vote” as you call it, is not the fault of betrayed SNP voters like myself. That blame can be laid fairly and squarely on the present leaders of the SNP. And I’m not convinced they even care because all that matters to them is their careers, their money, their future, their “self”. Scotland deserves much better. It really does….

        Liked by 3 people

      2. There are no criminals leading the SNP. Its turd like that that makes people roll their eyes in exasperation at the malcontents.

        Like

  15. According to Mungp Jerry, there are no criminals leading the SNP? Maybe he would be better telling the Parliamentary Inquiry Committee not to waste their time grilling the principal players in the Salmond Stitchup. I’m sure they would take him seriously, pack up and all go home. Mind you, if they did, I know a man that would take up the banner to prove their was criminal intent and that it did indeed involve people at the seat of government.
    In the meantime, the Lord Advocate, the ministerial legal advisor to the government in all it’s affairs has resigned. And his department, the COPFS continue to refuse to release all information held by them in the Salmond affair, requested by the Inquiry Committee, I wonder who is instructing them to refuse? If this was a court request COPFS would be held in contempt for withholding evidence. What a bizarre set of circumstances and suggests the structure at the head of the legal system in Scotland, sits in the pocket of the leaders of government. It badly needs reviewed, restructured and strengthened. By the way….. according to Google, “malcontent” means dissatisfied. and rebellious. Someone who is discontent with the social structure. So that’s includes all of us that want independence, so I am happy to be called a malcontent…… .

    Liked by 3 people

    1. Quite the rant there Mr UK. Got any actual evidence for your claims. And innuendo and finger pointing doesn’t count as evidence by the way.

      Like

  16. Sorry, I thought you were used to ranting. I personally am not privy to the names, but even if I was I wouldn’t tell you, would I? But rest assured, they are known to Alex Salmond, his legal team and his close supporters. Naturally, he can’t disclose them for legal reasons. The Inquiry Committee is ongoing. As you may or may not know, most of the government staff that have been called so far have been found wanting. A mixture of statements that convey an unwillingness to answer truthfully. Rather obstructive, misleading, erroneous, forgotten, don’t knows or not sures ..And because of that unwillingness to co-operate fully and truthfully, the Inquiry Committee will continue to dig to get at the truth. So be patient. Where there’s smoke, there’s fire…. .

    Liked by 2 people

      1. I read Mr Dangerfield’s blog. His “incredulity” seems to boil down to this;

        “The “totality of the Investigating Officer’s dealings with the complainers”, according to the Scottish Government, was a totality of exemplary HR professionalism and investigatory rectitude. Nevertheless, it had to be conceded that this surely most unreasonable of “reasonable observers” would, for reasons that remain utterly mysterious, see bias”.

        I can only assume he has led a very sheltered, pedantic existence. People can act within the limits of a policy and perform their duties in an “exemplary” manner but still give a perception of possible bias. Only last week, I represented union members at a Grievance hearing in which the the HR officer and management rep who carried out the investigation (that led to the conclusions being appealed) defended their conclusions. Both were perfectly eligible to be appointed according to the “rules” and management assured us they carried out their investigation diligently. Perhaps they even believed they did. However, the fact that the management rep works closely with the mgt team whose actions led to the Grievance obviously leads to a perception of possible bias (and I’m sure there was).

        Ms McKinnon, according to the Scottish govt, was perfectly eligible to be appointed to the case and, they believe, carried out her duties in “exemplary” manner. However, they realised her previous contact with two complainants would give a perception of possible bias. It’s not that hard to understand. If this is the kind of “evidence” the malcontents believe will “Get Sturgeon”, they’re going to be very disappointed.

        Like

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: