One of the most obvious anomalies of the recent SNP ELECTIONS was the fact that while the Party could not find enough candidates to fill the NEC places there was an overload of candidates anxious to serve on the Conduct Committee and Conduct Appeals Committee!

It seems that working on the THOUGHT POLICE DIVISION within the Party is very attractive to some. Looking at many of the successful candidates it is clearly attractive to the Woke Cult within the Party.

What will they be doing? Well I can answer that with some certainty because while normal People have been getting on with their fellow citizens those involved in the SNP Governance Review were busy setting out an initial menu of offences (there are more to come) to create “business” for the above committees, where these wannabe dictators can pass judgement on others and where political correct extremes will be expected at all times.

It is going to be a very hazardous business staying away from their clutches as the written rules are littered with catch all phrasing that allows the committee to interpret your intention even when it is not immediately apparent. Not sure how that can be achieved or proven but clearly they think they have such mind reading abilities.

I publish below, without any editing or amendment the initial menu of offences the Thought Police will be looking out for. In the best traditions of an oppressive organisation the accuser, or accusers can do so anonymously with their identities kept secret, while the accused name shall be available to all. Remind you of anything?. This formed Appendix C of the report.

Appendix C: Discrimination Definitions 

MISOGYNY: Discriminatory or prejudiced language or actions related to women. 

These may include, but are not limited to: 

  • Excluding women from conversations or meetings, overtly or by continually organising them at times known to be difficult to arrange cover for care responsibilities. 
  • Assuming that mothers are going to be less committed because of their children in situations where that assumption is not made about fathers. 
  • Enforcing gender stereotypes such as expecting women to make the tea, or take on administrative duties during meetings. 
  • Making sexual jokes or comments about a woman, or telling jokes or making derogatory comments invoking sexual or physical violence. 
  • Using gendered slurs to refer to women. Egregious examples include ‘cunt’ and ‘bitch’, while gendered insults are often used against women in positions of authority, such as ‘harpy’, ‘shrill’, ‘hormonal’, ‘time of the month’. 

RACISM: Discriminatory or prejudiced language or actions related to someone’s race. 

Racism is such a challenging concept to define in one sentence. It is often simplified to discrimination against a person or group of people based on their race. Many still think, and certainly the law in many countries still defends this notion, that racism only matters when it is intentional. This is very limiting. 

It is often forgotten that racism does not only disadvantage some people based on race, it also privileges people based on race. Some believe that racism cannot be limited to racial prejudice; racism takes place when a group of people with power are able to act on their racial prejudice in a harmful way. 

It can be helpful to break it down into three categories (by no means the only possible categories): 

  • Interpersonal racism – prejudices and discriminatory behaviours where one group makes assumptions about the abilities, motives, and intents of other groups based on race. This set of prejudices leads to cruel intentional or unintentional actions towards other groups. 
  • Internalised racism – when members of stigmatised groups are bombarded with negative messages about their own abilities and intrinsic worth, they may internalise those negative messages. It holds people back from achieving their fullest potential. 
  • Institutional racism – when organisations, businesses, or institutions like schools and police departments discriminate, either deliberately or indirectly, against certain groups of people to limit their rights. The Stephen Lawrence Inquiry defined it as “The collective failure of an organisation to provide an appropriate and professional service to people because of their colour, culture, or ethnic origin. It can be seen or detected in processes, attitudes and behaviour which amount to discrimination through unwitting prejudice, ignorance, thoughtlessness and racist stereotyping which disadvantage minority ethnic people” (Macpherson, 1999). also provides an interesting breakdown of racism that links it more simply to privilege and social oppression: 

  • Racism = race prejudice + social and institutional power 
  • Racism = a system of advantage based on race 
  • Racism = a system of oppression based on race 
  • Racism = a white supremacy system 

Racism2 is different from racial prejudice, hatred, or discrimination. Racism involves one group having the power to carry out systematic discrimination through the institutional policies and practices of the society and by shaping the cultural beliefs and values that support those racist policies and practices. 

ABLEISM: Discriminatory or prejudiced language or actions against disabled people or those who are perceived to have disabilities 

Manifestations might include using a person’s disability as a way to insult them. However, not all criticism of a particular disabled person, at the same level and frequency as criticism of abled people, is automatically ableist. Disabled people are frequently represented as either childlike, innocent and in need of control for their own protection, or as sinister and evil and in need of control for others’ protection. These ideas are expressed in speech, writing, visual forms and action, and employ stereotypes and reductive character traits. 

Contemporary examples of ableism in public life, the media, schools, the workplace, and in the religious sphere could, taking into account the overall context, include, but are not limited to: 

  • Calling for, aiding, or justifying the killing or harming of disabled people in the name of eugenics or ‘mercy killing’. This is particularly important in cases where caregivers/parents murder their disabled family member and it is cast as sympathetic. Making statements which indicate a death is less tragic because the person was disabled. 
  • Structural barriers including, but not limited to, inaccessible offices, documentation or events; paying disabled people less or expecting them to volunteer as ‘offering them work is an act of charity’; fewer opportunities to build networks and relationships because of inaccessible social and after-hours practices; failing to take into account the extra costs disabled people face; not making reasonable accommodations for accessibility or medical needs. 
  • Making mendacious, dehumanizing, demonizing, or stereotypical allegations about disabled people — such as, especially but not exclusively, disability or illness making a person automatically unfit for public office, not credible as witnesses, malevolent (particularly regarding mental health conditions), dangerous, pitiful, unable to understand an issue. 
  • Using a disability or illness as an insult, or wishing disability or illness on someone as a ‘punishment’, including using the need for personal care as an insult. Egregious examples include slurs like ‘retard’ and ‘cripple’. Other examples include ‘lunatic’, ‘cretin’, ‘gimp’, ‘moron’, and any insult which is based on intellectual, physical or mental disability. 
  • Accusing disabled people of lying about or exaggerating their condition or impairment in order to gain perceived benefits or sympathy. 
  • Stating or implying that disabled people only reach higher-status positions because of box-ticking. 
  • Using accessibility requirements as a way to exclude disabled people from events or opportunities. 
  • Denying the history of the persecution of disabled people through widespread support of eugenics, both as victims of the Nazi regime and at the hands of governments around the world who forced sterilisation, forced treatment and forced institutionalisation on disabled people. 

BIPHOBIA: Discriminatory or prejudiced language or actions related to someone’s actual or perceived bisexual orientation. 

Examples may include but are not limited to: 

  • Implying that a person is not bisexual if they are in a mixed-gender relationship, most commonly used where the bi person is a woman married to a man. 
  • Implying that bisexuality is not real, is a ‘trend’, or is a way to seek attention. 
  • Implying that bisexual people are inherently unfaithful or hypersexualised. 
  • Implying that bi people – in particular bi men – are really gay but too cowardly to commit to it. 

HOMOPHOBIA: Discriminatory or prejudiced language or actions related to someone’s actual or perceived sexual orientation. 

LESBOPHOBIA: Discriminatory or prejudiced language or actions related to someone because the are or perceived to be a lesbian. 

Examples of homophobia and lesbophobia may include but are not limited to: 

  • The use of stereotypes about gay and lesbian people to imply moral failings. 
  • Implying that gay and lesbian people do not or should not have families or children, or are dangerous to children. 
  • Implying an individual is only a lesbian as they have not found the right man. 
  • Implying there is a perceived and acceptable image of a lesbian ie: if you are too feminine you are not a ‘real’ lesbian. 
  • Implying that the general reality of gay and lesbian relationships and families is sexualised. 
  • Using labels or terms about gay and lesbian people as insults or slurs. 
  • Making jokes about or implying all women who play sports are lesbians. 
  • Expecting gay and lesbian people to adhere to stereotypical behaviours or interests, saying they are ‘acting straight’ if they don’t adhere to these expectations. 
  • Assuming gay men are hypersexual and indiscriminate in their interests. 

AGEISM: Discriminatory or prejudiced language towards others related to someone’s actual or perceived age. 

Ageism affects everyone and often intersects and exacerbates other forms of discrimination including those related to sex, race and disability. 

ISLAMOPHOBIA3: “Islamophobia is rooted in racism and is a type of racism that targets expressions of Muslimness or perceived Muslimness. 

Contemporary examples of Islamophobia in public life, the media, schools, the workplace, and in encounters between religions and non-religions in the public sphere could, taking into account the overall context, include, but are not limited to: 

  • Calling for, aiding, instigating or justifying the killing or harming of Muslims in the name of a racist/ fascist ideology, or an extremist view of religion. 
  • Making mendacious, dehumanizing, demonizing, or stereotypical allegations about Muslims as such, or of Muslims as a collective group, such as, especially but not exclusively, conspiracies about Muslim entryism in politics, government or other societal institutions; the myth of Muslim identity having a unique propensity for terrorism, and claims of a demographic ‘threat’ posed by Muslims or of a ‘Muslim takeover’. 
  • Accusing Muslims as a group of being responsible for real or imagined wrongdoing committed by a single Muslim person or group of Muslim individuals, or even for acts committed by non-Muslims. 
  • Accusing Muslims as a group, or Muslim majority states, of inventing or exaggerating Islamophobia, ethnic cleansing or genocide perpetrated against Muslims. 
  • Accusing Muslim citizens of being more loyal to the ‘Ummah’ (transnational Muslim community) or to their countries of origin, or to the alleged priorities of Muslims worldwide, than to the interests of their own nations. 
  • Denying Muslim populations the right to self-determination e.g., by claiming that the existence of an independent Palestine or Kashmir is a terrorist endeavour. 
  • Applying double standards by requiring of Muslims behaviours that are not expected or demanded of any other groups in society, eg loyalty tests. 
  • Using the symbols and images associated with classic Islamophobia (e.g. Muhammed being a paedophile, claims of Muslims spreading Islam by the sword or subjugating minority groups under their rule) to characterize Muslims as being ‘sex groomers’, inherently violent or incapable of living harmoniously in plural societies. 
  • Holding Muslims collectively responsible for the actions of any Muslim majority state, whether secular or constitutionally Islamic.” 


  • “…the perception of the other as foreign or originating from outside a community or a nation. 

However, manifestations of xenophobia can occur against people of identical physical characteristics, even of shared ancestry, such as when people arrive, return or migrate to States or areas and are considered as outsiders.” 

“Another definition of xenophobia proposes the following aspects: “attitudes, prejudices and behaviour that reject, exclude and often vilify persons, based on the perception that they are outsiders or foreigners to the community, society or national identity.” 


“… sectarian prejudice based on the accused’s demonstration of hostility towards the victim’s perceived: 

  • Roman Catholic or Protestant denominational affiliation, 
  • British or Irish citizenship, nationality or national origins or 
  • a combination of (a) and (b).” 


International Definition of Antisemitism 

“Antisemitism is a certain perception of Jews, which may be expressed as hatred toward Jews. Rhetorical and physical manifestations of antisemitism are directed toward Jewish or non-Jewish individuals and/or their property, toward Jewish community institutions and religious facilities. 

Manifestations might include the targeting of the State of Israel, conceived as a Jewish collectivity. However, criticism of Israel similar to that levelled against any other country cannot be regarded as antisemitic. Antisemitism frequently charges Jews with conspiring to harm humanity, and it is often used to blame Jews for “why things go wrong.” It is expressed in speech, writing, visual forms and action, and employs sinister stereotypes and negative character traits. 

Contemporary examples of antisemitism in public life, the media, schools, the workplace, and in the religious sphere could, taking into account the overall context, include, but are not limited to: 

  • Calling for, aiding, or justifying the killing or harming of Jews in the name of a radical ideology or an extremist view of religion. 
  • Making mendacious, dehumanising, demonising, or stereotypical allegations about Jews as such or the power of Jews as collective — such as, especially but not exclusively, the myth about a world Jewish conspiracy or of Jews controlling the media, economy, government or other societal institutions. 
  • Accusing Jews as a people of being responsible for real or imagined wrongdoing committed by a single Jewish person or group, or even for acts committed by non-Jews. 
  • Denying the fact, scope, mechanisms (e.g. gas chambers) or intentionality of the genocide of the Jewish people at the hands of National Socialist Germany and its supporters and accomplices during World War II (the Holocaust). 
  • Accusing the Jews as a people, or Israel as a state, of inventing or exaggerating the Holocaust. 
  • Accusing Jewish citizens of being more loyal to Israel, or to the alleged priorities of Jews worldwide, than to the interests of their own nations. 
  • Denying the Jewish people their right to self-determination (e.g. by claiming that the existence of a State of Israel is a racist endeavour). 
  • Applying double standards by requiring of Israel a behaviour not expected or demanded of any other democratic nation. 
  • Using the symbols and images associated with classic antisemitism (e.g. claims of Jews killing Jesus or blood libel) to characterise Israel or Israelis. 
  • Drawing comparisons of contemporary Israeli policy to that of the Nazis. 
  • Holding Jews collectively responsible for actions of the State of Israel.” 

CLASSISM: Discriminatory or prejudiced language or actions related to someone’s actual or perceived social class. Classism is held in place by a system of beliefs and cultural attitudes that ranks people according to economic status, family lineage, employment status, level of education, type and location of residence or even judgement about a person’s clothing. 


“The Scottish Government defines Hate Crime as crime committed against a person or property that is motivated by ‘malice or ill-will towards an identifiable social group. You can be a victim of a hate crime if you believe that someone has targeted you because of their prejudice against certain characteristics. 

In Scotland, the law currently recognises hate crimes as crimes motivated by prejudice based on: 

  • Race 
  • Religion 
  • Sexual orientation 
  • Transgender identity 
  • Disability 

You do not need to be a member of a minority community to be a victim of hate crime. The law is quite clear that the identity of the victim is irrelevant as to whether something is a hate crime or not. The motivation of the perpetrator is the key factor in defining a hate crime. 

Hate Crimes can take a number of forms, including, but not limited to: 

  • Threatening behaviour 
  • Verbal abuse or insults including name-calling 
  • Assault 
  • Damage to property 
  • Encouraging others to commit hate crimes 
  • Harassment 
  • Online abuse on sites like Facebook or Twitter” 


Now of course none of the above is pleasant but the phrasing is exceptionally loose. Who decides what someone’s intention was in a situation where you were not present? What qualifications do those doing the judging hold to enable them to do so? What about their neutrality on each issue? Some of those elected to these committees are already guilty of some of the offences listed. Like abuse of others on Facebook and Twitter. Where and to whom do I report them lol? Also no mention of discrimination against Hindus or Sikhs just Muslims. Seems strange?

If I was an SNP member I would be very wary of all this. It is a method of control. What do I mean by that? Let me give you an example. It is not a guess, it comes from the last selection round before the last Scottish elections. You have a constituency where the leadership would like to place a favoured candidate however local intelligence suggests that if a certain local candidate makes the centrally controlled candidates list then it is likely that candidate, rather than the favoured one, would be selected. The solution? A complaint is lodged against the local candidate from an anonymous source. The complaint is not dealt with speedily but the selection panel are made aware of the complaint. Much of the candidate selection interview is devoted to the complaint even though its veracity had yet to be established. The outcome is not revealed until the last minute, a couple of days before the constituency selection voting is to be held. The local candidate is told her application has been unsuccessful. They appeal and local members create a quick petition indicating they want the local candidate approved. The ”appeal” is chaired by someone who will be a rival candidate for a list seat in the same region. They are rejected once again following an appeal dominated by the complaint. Members vote, minus the local candidate and the leadership favoured candidate wins. The full complaint is never heard. Its objective has already succeeded. The favoured candidate fails to win the seat by a mile, many activists leave the SNP and join Alba.

What is more the new committee set up to ”help out” in the complaint process has the right as part of the new Governance operation to interfere in any constituency to advise on any complaint. All they need is an anonymous complaint, from anyone and before you know it they are in questioning, intimidating local office bearers, imposing compliance with all their recommendations. The alternative, a guest spot at the Conduct or later the Conduct Appeals Committee.

It is now going to be very dangerous to be an SNP member and be subject to the judgement of these Woke dictators, who are being given powers, very loose powers, to control and interpret your thoughts and actions, and convict you of any ”offence” real or imagined, perhaps trashing your reputation on a much wider basis than just Party Membership. Is it worth the risk? My answer would be no but people need to decide for themselves.Have a look at those people on those committees and ask “ Can I trust them to be fair and just in all circumstances?”

It is all very sad in what used to be a wonderfully democratic party, totally controlled by its members and branches. No more. Controlled by the cult!

I am, as always

Yours for Scotland


Unfortunately a number of pro Indy sites have turned out to be merely pro SNP sites and have blocked a number of bloggers, including myself. We have managed to frustrate these efforts to close us down through our readers sharing our articles and building our audience.Sharing is very important and helps the Independence message to reach a much wider audience. In addition many have taken out free direct subscriptions. I very much appreciate this support.

Free Subscriptions

Are available on the Home and Blog pages of this website. By taking out a subscription you will receive notification of all future posts. You will be most welcome.


Grousebeater is a great writer. His new book is called “Essays” containing some of his best essays. Available from Amazon.


69 thoughts on “YOUR RIGHT TO KNOW

  1. I would say that the party itself, given its policies, is both ageist and classist so their committee wil have their work cut out. Having sid that, couldn’t they just ask that people be polite to each other rather than try to control people’s thoughts as well as their actions? This is creepy.

    Liked by 22 people

    1. Barking Sturgeon and the howling anti-civil rights cult. Disguised as an equalities agenda policies are designed to strip us of our rights and curtail our ability to protest. In the meantime the colonisation of Scotland accelerates and the last of our public assets and services are offered up to US corporations in return for nothing more than appearances on US chat shows and photoshoots in glossy mags.

      Liked by 24 people

  2. Interesting that they couldn’t be bothered making up a list of examples of Ageism. It’s clearly perfectly OK to sneer at lifelong SNP members who have now defected to Alba.

    Liked by 21 people

    1. Just got round to reading the “letter” + booklet from Scot.Gov. re the NHS. Although they contain info I’ve known since childhood I understand that some people may need to be reminded BUT the letter would have been sufficient. Sturgeon certainly knows how to waste our cash.

      Liked by 14 people

      1. Yes I was thinking the same. And a waste of good wood too.

        However, it did refer to how busy some of these services are. But if you can treat yourself, rather than utilising the services, that would help. So I was thinking I could study medicine at day school, dentistry at night school, grow my own herbs at the weekend, and pop a few more vitamin pills in between.
        Might as well, what with privatisation just round the corner……

        Liked by 5 people

    2. The kids took over in Cambodia – or Democratic Republic of Kampuchea as it was known – between 1975 and 1979.

      If you spoke French or were “a member of the bourgeoisie” – or just SUSPECTED of having done so AT SOME TIME – you were criminalised.

      10 year old children, “untainted” by the country’s colonial past – were the arbiters. We all know what happened next.

      Liked by 17 people

  3. A once great, democratic party brought down by a cult. A cult whose members are guilty of all of the so-called ‘crimes’ they accuse others of. Led by the most narcissistic, egotistical megalomaniac since Hitler.
    Not one MP nor MSP seems willing to speak out against her. Why? Perhaps because they know that it will end with them in court on some spurious, trumped up charge.

    Liked by 21 people

    1. “Also no mention of discrimination against Hindus or Sikhs just Muslims. Seems strange?”

      Iain I refer you to the above comment!

      Liked by 10 people

    2. There is no genuine desire for a fair and equal society in this. It is designed to do two things:
      Allow those who hold power to bring charges against anyone they want – no-one is pure enough to avoid prosecution under these laws so all you can do is avoid the state desire to prosecute you.
      Pander to their own agenda – trans, the worst face of Islam etc.

      By her actions Sturgeon appears to be a Rainbow Green who has hijacked the SNP. Both votes SNP was a policy designed to fail – she immediately declared a slimmed down cabinet to leave room for the Greens and then assured everyone cabinet would vote on bringing the Greens into power. There is a reason Scotland does not vote the Rainbow Greens into power and this excellent article lists many of them.

      I thought the common weal MSPs were supposed to be better than this – what happened?

      Liked by 16 people

      1. Just saying: if you are going to cross the floor to ALBA then the sinister school sex survey would be an excellent trigger for that and one that is likely to be appreciated by every voting parent, grandparent, informed citizen … and it would get ALBA into the eye of the public which is very much needed.

        Liked by 20 people

  4. I’m going out this morning, so I have only had time to skim through this. From what I’ve read, we will all soon be living in a strait jacket.

    Fascism indeed, and of a particularly weird kind. If they get away with this then the prisons will soon fill up.

    As Wee+Chid says, creepy.

    Liked by 16 people

  5. All very interesting and sadly true, but is it really a big revelation? think back to the start when Alex Salmond was attacked by this – cult as you put it – and ask “Who signed off on the directive?” Sturgeon, it is at her door they blame squarely lies. If the SNP party members are truly interested in taking back control of the party, then they will start there, by sacking Sturgeon and the power behind the throne – her husband.

    Liked by 22 people

  6. “Using gendered slurs to refer to women”

    Does that include TERF which the Wokerati are very fond of using? And it’s sexed slurs. Women are not a gender; we are a sex.

    Liked by 26 people

  7. Anonymous complaints should never be allowed in the first place. When I was making up Index 1 to the Scottish Government’s submitted evidence to the Committee on the Scottish Government Handling of Harassment I came across guidelines for dealing with harassment complaints.

    It stated the following:

    It is difficult to properly investigate anonymous complaints because the subject NEEDS TO KNOW THE CASE THEY HAVE TO MEET. In the interests of fairness, it is important that complainants and witnesses identify themselves.

    The fact that a member of staff making an allegation, or a witness, simply does not wish to be identified will NOT BE SUFFICIENT CAUSE TO WITHHOLD IDENTITY. It may mean that the investigation cannot proceed if the person is not prepared to have their identity disclosed to the person who is the subject of the complaint.

    This should be fully explained to the complainant but they should be reassured that they will not suffer any adverse consequences as a result of taking forward the complaint.

    There is also a section on vexatious or malicious complaints:

    How should departments handle vexatious or malicious complaints?
    Vexatious or malicious complaints are rare. The presumption should be that a complaint is made in good faith even if it is not upheld.
    All cases must be considered on their individual merits. It will not be possible to make any judgement that the complaint is vexatious or malicious until it has been properly investigated. Where this has been established, departments should follow their existing grievance and discipline/misconduct procedures. HR and legal advisers should be consulted in all such cases.
    However, it is important to be aware that action taken against a person for raising a complaint of sexual harassment or harassment related to a protected characteristic may result in a claim of victimisation under the Equality Act.

    Notice how it says all cases must be considered on their own individual merits? What happened with Ms B though is her complaint was added to Ms A’s by Investigating Officer Judith Mackinnon to try and establish a ‘pattern of behaviour’ from the former First Minister. There is nothing in that SG Procedure that allows the IO to do that.

    Liked by 24 people

    1. Every man (in the star trek sense) has the right to face their accuser.

      Rights won in ancient history are being stripped from us and we are too civilized to drag the offenders from office.

      Liked by 20 people

      1. Agreed Marion.

        It was hard not to laugh reading the emails when one of the original two complainers mentioned that it was important that the SG put out a statement to show that their procedure was fair.

        Yeah good luck with that one.

        Liked by 14 people

  8. >>Internalised racism – when members of stigmatised groups are bombarded with negative messages about their own abilities and intrinsic worth, they may internalise those negative messages. It holds people back from achieving their fullest potential.

    They should be taking that up with Boris Johnson and Alistair Jack on behalf of the Scottish people.

    Liked by 17 people

    1. The scientifically-challenged SNP office bearers in their farcical wee ‘Conduct Committee’ punishment bubble writing about ‘Internalised Racism’ don’t even understand that this very ‘condition’ is one of the key features of oppression levelled against the ethnic minority in the UK known as ‘the Scots’, nor it seems do they know that the colonialism which Scots are subject to involves racism; this is what gives rise to calls by ‘a people’ for their independence (i.e. decolonisation) and escape from oppression:

      “The predominant racism or ethnic issue in the context of Scottish independence and indeed affecting Scotland more generally, is not therefore colour race, the latter more prevalent in England due to its quite different population mix, nor is it anti-English sentiment; rather, racism in Scotland primarily and extensively occurs as a consequence of colonialism and the resulting ethnic oppression of Scots is due to the imposition and institutionalisation of a dominant Anglophone meritocratic elite in what is a socially and ethnically stratified society; an added feature of this (colonial) racism is the development of Appropriated Racial Oppression (or internalized racism), a psychological condition with multiple adverse health impacts which is suffered by oppressed peoples.”

      Liked by 11 people

      1. Not easy to get the above into some heads, Alf. But gentle persistence usually works! Certainly, in my parents’ case, though both were from generations of Scots, the last war had a great deal to do with their adoption of “Britishness”. However, I’m glad to say they finally acknowledged history and the truth.

        Liked by 5 people

  9. Jeeeze, there’s a few making these so called rules that better watch out.
    A number of them have fell foul of the above before it even kicks off!

    Liked by 16 people

  10. As a basis for a code of conduct a lot of the “criteria” are perfectly reasonable. However it’s very amateurish in general and the bias of the writers are clear for all to see. I’d say that sectarianism was a problem that pretty much dwarfed almost everything else in day to day live but it receives scant attention.

    As Iain points out it’s not the rules but how they will be applied that is the most important aspect. You can pretty much hang anyone with that list and that’s exactly how it will be used.

    That there was a long line to join the conduct committee tells you that there’s going to be a lot of blood spilled. I doubt the SNP will survive it.

    Liked by 25 people

    1. Stuart you keep saying this , when will it happen , at 70 I don’t want it to be much longer , and unfortunately unless AS exposes publicly what evidence he has , or we get organised and storm the castle , I don’t see she/her/it leaving gracefully , she will need prised out

      Liked by 7 people

      1. Twathater, it’s likely wishful thinking and also off the cuff – I never check back with earlier comments to ensure what I am saying is consistent 😉 What is motivating me to say this all the time is the organisational damage that will result.

        The SNP rank and file are completely cut off from the leadership. With a gang of teenagers hell-bent on revenge / purging the party of undesirables the damage is likely to be severe. It’s a similar trajectory to the Labour Party which is only surviving through inertia that comes with size. The SNP being much smaller with a much smaller base will likely self-destruct in a much shorter time-frame.

        I’m always happy to be wrong but everything that Iain has published shows the situation with the leadership is getting worse not better and there’s nothing on the horizon that will put the brakes on this. Cherry will be gone soon and then there will be nothing worth saving.

        Liked by 4 people

      2. Yes Stuart it is wishful thinking on my part also , I sincerely hope Santa Salmond or Cherry Reindeer can magic up some fairy dust (oops can I still say that or will the hate committee come after me ) and expose AULD NIC for the despicable monster she is

        Liked by 2 people

  11. Wow. Flaming Nora, will we be allowed to breathe do you think? Some of the folks making these rules need a good hard look in the mirror before judging other folk. Oh wid some power the gift tae gie us as the bard once said.

    Pleased I have had nothing to do with this shower for a long time now, I reckon that they will seriously implode at some point. Sooner, rather than later I hope.

    Liked by 22 people

  12. I tried to read the specifics… and I’m not untrained in reading through dense legislation… wow, student politics meets the teenage working group, unworkable, longwinded crap. Wonder who got to wield the felt tip pen and the flip chart.

    On the basis of sanity, I’d quite like the ‘youth wing’ of all political parties to fuck off and go and get some real work experience. But if that doesn’t burst your bubble, reality check for the youth wing of several parties out there, including the SNP…. you’re the shagging fodder for the inadequate MP’s and MSP’s.

    Liked by 23 people

  13. These committees will justify their existence by initiating show trials on behalf of Nicola and Fiona Robertson. Who will be up before the committees? They will probably have a few trial runs with ‘minor’ figures, then they will go after Joanna Cherry.

    Anybody who values democracy, civilised values, and independence for Scotland – you are feeding the monster and should step away from this mess as soon as possible.

    There is a body of like-minded people waiting to welcome you into Alba.

    Liked by 17 people

    1. I think you make a good point – if Joanna Cherry does not cross over to Alba soon then the SNP will use their internal processes to destroy her.

      Liked by 18 people

      1. Joanna should stay. Make them expel her then take them to court. They’d lose BIG TIME. They know it, she knows it. Also how many SNP members would walk at that point? I just hope she has enough support to help her cope with the toxicity they send her way.

        I stand with Joanna Cherry.

        Liked by 13 people

      2. Definitely. The Scottish nation needs her inside the camp for now. I think she has stood up well I’m proud of her actually.

        Liked by 7 people

      3. Panda: It is my belief that first they will destroy her with their lies and then they will turf her out. Where Salmond went she too will go … anonymous accusers committing perjury are hard to defend against and that is exactly what is being facilitated here. But the mud sticks! We have seen what this SNP leadership is capable of.

        Liked by 10 people

      4. Marion without being unfeeling I DO hope they expel her , it may wake up the DRAGON and FORCE her to fight back and EXPOSE the corrupt lunacy and perverted deviance at the head of the tree , she has been denigrated threatened and abused by lunatic perverts uncontrolled by the head pervert and really needs to confront these MONSTERS legally to get any kind of peace and to let NORMAL SCOTS see the rancid fetid scum that governs them

        Liked by 5 people

  14. Naive and otherworldly people, totally taken by the imported social-fascism and rhetoric of the American Left might well be expected to produce such a document. Stale, turgid prose devoid of innovation, ambition or any spark of national ambition. Plainly the work of a small and unconsciously colonized collective, with too much time on its hands.

    Liked by 19 people

    1. I am sure there are some who actually believe their nonsense but their strings are pulled by those with a very different agenda.

      Liked by 14 people

      1. Aye, I think so too Marion. They would have been ripped to pieces by our unionist press by now if that was not the case.

        Liked by 7 people

  15. If you have any doubts about your moral compass simply buy a copy of “The Blind Side” based on a true story. A well-to-do, Leigh Anne Tuohy, played brilliantly by Sandra Bullock, takes a black homeless teenager into her (all white family) home, becoming his legal guardian. In a conversation amongst her, upper-class white female friends she is asked if she is not concerned about a Big Black Boy sleeping under the same roof, – what about Collin (Leigh Anne’s teenage daughter) – on her return Leigh Ann asks her daughter,

    “Are you uncomfortable with Michael staying here?”

    Collin answers, “I don’t listen to what those stupid kids at school say”

    Leigh Anne, “What do those stupid kids from school say?”

    Collin, “It’s really not worth repeating.”

    This is where I am on this – we should not, as grown-up adults, need people to tell us what is right and what is wrong. If people call me names then it is they that have the problem, not me.

    Before you go changing laws that can put innocent people in the dock, try better education in our schools.

    Liked by 9 people

  16. I hope they do not engage this lot in writing the programme for the transition to independence, silly me, I forgot that is not on their agenda. Should these idiots not be at school anyway?

    Liked by 12 people

    1. The thought of this lot writing the program for independence is putting off the soft YES/NO vote – Sturgeon and her creepy cabal have to go!

      Liked by 16 people

      1. Yes I agree, the sooner we are rid of the lot of them, the sooner we can concentrate on the job in hand.

        Al Capone said the biggest mistake he made was not getting into the White House and to run his affairs form there, Sturgeon must have read that as well, now I can do anything I like attitude.

        The jigsaw liars should lose their anonymity so that we can put them under the same microscope that Alex Salmond had to endure. That way we might get to the truth if they thought that jail for perjury was waiting, hopefully the real culprit might also be exposed. Wasn’t it strange that certain persons we are not allowed to name were running around Holyrood and Westminster trying to get any morsel of anything in their panic to get at the most YES person around, remembering the Westminster gang had chased him for Thirty years to no avail. I think the SNP dirty tricks department used the one thing that is almost impossible to defend against. They showed their ineptness in this also.

        It is alleged a certain Mr Clegg had an article ready to publish on Nicola, that article was dropped, was this the reason for the panic by certain people to suggest we can give you a much bigger fish, a greater threat to the union. I wonder if the linked article had any baring on the redirection of The Daily Record and it’s agenda.

        Anyway she should just go and spend her time salivating over her selfies. Personality politics is outdated and belong with another shoe fetishist, also a political failure.

        Liked by 13 people

  17. It looks like you’d better not open your mouth and saying anything about anything, or you may find yourself in the disciplinary crosshairs of SNP thought police.

    I expect to see an ongoing purge in the SNP, no more votes for the SNP for me.

    Liked by 15 people

  18. I should’ve added that the vile attacks on Joan McAlpine and Joanna Cherry by SNP employees have gone unnoticed by the SNP’s thought police.

    Liked by 15 people

  19. I see something very sinister in this. OK, maybe I’m hyper-sensitive, as someone with cerebral palsy, but here goes. Look at the first couple of paragraphs of Racism then the first couple of paragraphs on Ableism. Do you see the fundamental difference? These committees seem to have wide latitude to decide what is and is not ableist. So, do only the “sexy” disabilities – the ones that get you to the top of a list for a well-paid job, for instance – get a hearing? Time will tell, but it is not a good look.

    Liked by 10 people

  20. Nicola Sturgeon inherited something good. A Yes movement that remained undefeated in spite of the referendum result. What did she do with it? She has worked relentlessly to divide it, weaken it, and ultimately, to destroy it.

    She has failed. She seems to have destroyed the SNP as the instrument of independence, but the movement has survived and is weathering the storm. We can only get stronger now as more people turn from the SNP and make their way towards ALBA. But we need the likes of Joanna Cherry and Joan McAlpine to make the break and come over to ALBA so that the party can grow and take hold of people’s imagination. Then it can take over from those who have let us all down so badly

    In the long term Sturgeon will lose, and bringing in crazy restrictive laws such as these won’t prevent that.

    Liked by 12 people

    1. Agree resipole with everything you have written, we had 56 out of 59 MP’s that was lost by her fecklessness and failure to strike while the iron was hot.

      Joan McAlpine was my MSP, I have met her at a few SNP meetings and local campaigns. I think she has nothing to loose by coming over to the light where women don’t get abused by people like Alyn Smith, Kirsty Blackman and their gang, she would be very welcome in ALBA I’m sure. She owes the SNP nothing!

      I was met with hostility at meetings when I suggested we would ultimately need more yes party’s after independence to curtail the excesses of single issue extremists. Some people did not see the risk in a one party state, for the reasons in this article that neccesity should be apparent.

      We should be looking forward to a multi party Scottish Government like exist in most Scandinavian countries where the members work for the best outcomes, not for conflict as at the moment in Holyrood and Westminster, it is a system we inherited from Westminster as did the USA, enough said about both of them.

      At one Craig Murray local meeting, Craig said we needed to become a new people for independence to work, very wise words. Sturgeon and her gang want to continue the politics of conflict, Scotland needs better.

      The present SNP do not seem to realise the dangerous enemy that we will face in our fight for freedom. We need the very best of our people to win this, then to negotiate our departure not a bunch of second and third division idiots.

      Liked by 12 people

      1. “we needed to become a new people for independence to work”

        Craig’s view is on the money, as ever. This also relates to the need to cast out our ‘colonial mindset’. How ‘they’ colonise is to make the colonised have a ‘depersonalised self’; to be an ‘imitation of the coloniser’, to adopt his language, culture and values, and cast ours aside. A country under colonial domination therefore requires ‘liberating the mind’ (Fanon). A people can be totally brainwashed by colonisation, because ‘colonialism is a disease of the mind’.

        Liked by 14 people

      2. and we need to lose the influence for cash and all the corruption that goes with it. One (well paid) job each, outside interests tightly controlled, and be good enough to survive and thrive – by delivering for the people who elect you. Is that too much to ask?

        Liked by 7 people

      3. A NEW PEOPLE for independence to work , ABSOLUTELY , we have to take more of an interest in what these people are proposing (mistakenly and dubiously) in our name , the GRA and HCB should be an AWAKENING for the electorate that we CANNOT trust these people to behave with honesty or integrity , they feel and appear UNTOUCHABLE , I filled in a consultation by the SG asking how long a government should be elected for , I responded that I believed 3 years would be sufficient , as it would allow the electorate the ability to gauge their performance , and if they were shit we vote them out , the result came back that 5 years was the preferred view (or was it) to enable the effect of their policies to settle in and show benefit .
        What we are now facing is a SG and a narcissistic despot who feels empowered for the next 5 years to INFLICT any old policy on our citizens without any recourse or constraint on her
        Any politician will vote to govern for decades (example wet pishfart 20 years of doing fcuk all ) we have to wise up and hold OUR EMPLOYEES to account , we have to force a methodology on them that if they are corrupt liars or working against the common weal they will be gone , and NO party leader can save them , this determination of guilt or innocent by a party leader gives them too much power which they should NOT HAVE , they are OUR EMPLOYEES and we should decide guilt or innocence

        Liked by 1 person

  21. Time is surely running out for any ‘good guys’ left in the SNP to move over to ALBA. Staying put and doing nothing to change the party’s mystifying and deceitful focus means you share the same dodgy ‘values’ of the leadership.

    “Truth is that which hurries on the break-up of the colonialist regime; it is that which promotes the emergence of the nation. In this colonial context there is no truthful behaviour: and the good is quite simply that which is evil for ‘them’.” (Fanon)

    Liked by 15 people

    1. Honest, committed, able people will be viewed as a threat in this political environment. That is a certainty.

      Liked by 14 people

  22. Yep, keep reading this nonsense, and keep getting annoyed about what the SNP have become.

    But they’ve crossed a Rubicon in all of this and come next may at the Council Elections the SNP are going to be in for the biggest shock of their bloated comfortable existences when they get voted out big time.

    Anyone but the SNP seems to be the sentiment extant all around. Folks are sick of the nonsense and will send them a message. It’s the only way folks will turn this nonsense and get the party back on track.

    Liked by 9 people

    1. As any sane person would say “But they’ve crossed a Rubicon in all of this and come next may at the Council Elections the SNP are going to be in for the biggest shock of their bloated comfortable existences when they get voted out big time.”

      But unfortunately Willie there are still those who know they are BLACKMAILING and treating INDY supporters with contempt that will STILL vote for them in the misplaced belief that they will change and they are still BETTER than a unionist SG , for those people PLEASE show me the difference

      Liked by 9 people

  23. As the parent of a child with severe disability who has been failed at every turn by the SG I despair at the double standards and tokenism rolled out here regarding discrimination. Can’t they see that failing to provide basic services that every child/ person has a right to is a bigger and more fundamental crime than using the wrong language or stereotyping? My son , at 15 has had his whole life governed by an SNP administration that has failed him in education provision, transport provision, care provision, health provision and most recently in child mental health provision. The future is an extremely worrying thought for us as his parents. Challenge on his behalf and it’s the council or Westminster’s fault. An independent review of their failed 10 year ‘Autism Strategy’ would show how much meaningless rhetoric has been employed to fill the vacuum of proper services for this most vulnerable of groups. Discrimination illustrated by language and attitude is something to tackle when the basic needs of those with severe disabilities have been met and is both an insult and a distraction from the state of many ‘statutory’ services. By way of our struggles and those of others like us I saw through the ‘social justice’ of the SG many years ago now. Their direction of travel these days is not entirely a surprise, heartbreaking as it is.

    Liked by 18 people

  24. I worked in Health & Social Care and I can only empathise with every word you say. Let’s discuss the Mental Health (Care and Treatment) Scotland Act 2003 which, controversially, included people with learning disabilities and autism from the outset. People, including myself, have campaigned to have these groups removed.

    In July 2014, I was involved in a consultation with the MWC regarding – guess what – the removal of people with learning disabilities and autism from this Act (I remember the date clearly because on my way back to my office in Glasgow, I fell in George Square surrounded by Commonwealth Games regalia and broke my hand)

    In 2015 there were amendments to the Act – those groups were not removed

    In November 2019 the independent review of the inclusion of learning disability and autism in the Mental Health Act said :

    “We think that Scotland’s mental health law needs to change for autistic people and people with learning disability.”

    The Scottish Government should have responded to this review by April 2020 but……….. You know, Covid

    2003 to 2021 and we are still waiting for the removal of these groups from this Act

    But misgender a man in a dress and all hell will apparently break loose

    Liked by 15 people


    “… sectarian prejudice based on the accused’s demonstration of hostility towards the victim’s perceived:

    British or Irish citizenship, nationality or national origins

    That’ll go down well in a referendum campaign when national identity is central to the entire thing. Are they a nationalist party?

    Liked by 8 people

  26. Re today’s article ” questioning Pupils ” about the Scottish government questioning 14 year old’s about their sexual habits – and a piece that has now unexplainedly been removed with remaining links indicating Oops – cannot be found.

    And why stop at asking fourteen year old’s about how often they indulge in vaginal or anal sex.

    How about asking how often they indulge in oral sex and if they indulge in fellatio after unprotected anal sex. Or what about other sexual peccadilloes. Urolagnia or coprophilia, I mean let’s not hang back now it’s all in the lexicon of behaviors that we need to ask fourteen year old school children about.

    Welcome to the vile perverted world of the SNP government.

    Vote them out in May council elections. Send them a message. Better still, take the issue to the door steps of the ministers who are imposing these vile policies. Time they were told no.

    Liked by 6 people

  27. A PHOBIA is fear of something as in agoraphobia, hydrophobia not a dislike.
    Take Islamophobia for instance, where I was conceived in a much abused Mid Eastern state, many had good cause to feel wary of certain manifestations of that religion. That, however, did not constitute hatred of an entire religion and its adherents.
    I do not believe it is possible to legislate prejudice away, other than preventing prejudice from turning violent.
    Insults and slights most people ought to be able to handle.

    Liked by 6 people

    1. Thank you for pointing out, at last, what a phobia is. There are so many people and organizations in this country who seem to be confused about this. They are semi-literate.

      Liked by 4 people

  28. Well Done Ottomanboi!

    A PHOBIA is a fear, sometimes irrationally, of something and is often confused with a dislike or hatred of the same thing. Many phobias are so misused – as in woke-speak SNP.

    For example, many brave people hate injustice but are able to stand up to it fearlessly.

    Liked by 4 people

Comments are closed.

%d bloggers like this: