JUDAS KISS? 

THIS WEEK’s article from Yours for Scotland regular columnist Mia. It is a longer article than normal as it deals with a very important issue affecting Scotland today. In my judgement well worth the read.

On 23 June 2016 Scotland was trapped in a referendum where all chances for Scotland to win had been deliberately removed.  That referendum is the excuse why Scotland finds itself out of the EU today, watching our own laws being rewritten to stop us returning. 

The more you look into this, the more it becomes evident this level of vandalism on Scotland’s democratic rights could have never taken place without cooperation from those who were elected precisely to stop assaults like this, happening.

It seems this referendum was strategically designed to do two things.  First, to act as a tool to frustrate Scotland’s intention to remain in the EU.  Secondly, to give England MPs a veneer of legitimacy over their blatant assault on Scotland’s Claim of Right.

The EU referendum was undemocratic by design because its objective was never to find out what Scotland wanted. Its objective was to hide what Scotland wanted, because only by silencing Scotland this UK union can survive.

Considering England has more than 10 times Scotland’s population, it was evident that without democratic safeguards, Scotland’s vote was going to be completely drowned by England’s. This was obvious even to a child, so it could not have escaped MPs either.

On 9th June 2015 Sturgeon had the opportunity to demonstrate how much of a pro-independence leader she was and how much she respected Scotland’s democratic rights.

Turned out that it was either very little, she was totally out of her depth, or she had already secured her bounty up her sleeve, therefore all what the SNP MPs might have been meant to do that day was to make voters in Scotland believe they were fighting to keep Scotland in the EU, rather than enabling the precise opposite.

On 9th June 2015 England MPs voted to decide if an EU referendum was going to take place. This was the first crucial parliamentary vote that would sentence Scotland to exit the EU against its will.

Before that vote took place, Mr Salmond tabled an amendment asking for the EU referendum bill to be rejected because, among other things, it lacked a double majority provision to prevent any nation of the UK being dragged out of the EU against their will. 

As it could have been predicted England MPs crushed Mr Salmond’s amendment and voted overwhelmingly for the referendum to go ahead, without any democratic safeguards for Wales, Scotland or NI.

Plaid Cymru MPs chose not taking part in the vote. This was, in my view, the route any political party refusing to legitimise an assault on the democratic rights of Wales, NI and Scotland, should have done. Most SNP MPs however, took their seats in parliament that day, and by doing so, in my view, legitimised the vote on behalf of Scotland as a “UK” vote. 

Mr Salmond also presented a bid on the 16th June, asking for a quadruple lock, which, if passed, meant the UK could only leave the EU if the four nations voted for Brexit.  But, by then, the horse had already bolted. Once the SNP MPs had legitimised the vote on the 9thJune, predictably, the bid was crushed by England MPs.

By voting against Mr Salmond’s bid, England MPs were, in practical terms, giving themselves the absolute right to force any UK nation to leave the EU on England’s saying so. In my view, our SNP MPs legitimised that assault on Scotland’s Claim of Right by taking part in the vote and, once again, making it a “UK” vote.

Only somebody very naïve could have ever thought this bid was going to survive if the strategy taken to enforce it was simply to apply to the democratic principles of a deeply undemocratic establishment thriving on silencing Scotland, imperial baubles and patronage.

Just a glance at the opinion polls at the time tells you Mr Salmond’s bill was rejected for practical reasons. Every single one of the 7 polls conducted in Scotland from February 2013 to May 2015 was very, very comfortably for remain (1). With polls like that, if Mr Salmond’s bid had been passed, Brexit would have not stood a chance. 

These polls suggest whips knew there was not consensus in the UK, therefore if that referendum was ever meant to be a democratic plebiscite, it should have never been allowed to proceed as a “UK” vote without the safeguards Mr Salmond was asking for. But it was never meant to be democratic. It was meant to be a tool to justify the self-harming removal of the UK from the EU for the sake of the new EU tax avoidance laws.

England MPs did not vote for a “UK Wide” EU referendum that day. What they were voting for was to give themselves the right to force Brexit on Scotland, Wales and NI. In other words, that day it was clear the result of the EU referendum had already been decided even before we approached the polls. The willingness to drag every nation out of the EU independently of what their electorate wanted, tells us the only acceptable outcome of that referendum for England MPs was to keep Scotland welded to England while the latter left the EU. 

It is not credible that 56 pro-independence MPs were duped into legitimising this vote by taking part in it without knowing what they were doing. The fact that an amendment was presented by Mr Salmond on the day and also a bid a week later, suggests the SNP already knew the referendum was an undemocratic trap. This is supported further by the commitment in the 2015 SNP manifesto itself to request a “double majority requirement”, whereby each of the four nations of the UK would have to vote for Brexit before the UK had to leave the EU.  The above was published by Brooks in The Guardian on 20 April 2015, and she inserted a comment immediately after this acknowledging that it would be very unlikely such proposal would ever be accepted. So everybody and their dog knew this bid would not be accepted if the SNP MPs just were going to ask for it nicely, following Westminster’s rules.

So what was the purpose of this futile political posturing by our SNP MPs?

There is no doubt the SNP “missed” one of if not “the” greatest opportunity for a constitutional stand off right there. This was just a month after Scotland handed 95% of its Westminster seats and over 50% of the vote to pro-indy parties. It was at a time when the SNP also held the majority of the seats in Holyrood. Flexing Scotland’s muscles and a stand-off was the proper thing to do if they had any intention to keep Scotland in the EU.

A constitutional stand-off would have made the unelected English establishment face a very, very difficult choice: either the integrity of the union or avoiding new EU tax evasion laws.

I suspect such standoff would have either stopped Brexit keeping Scotland in the EU, or would have put us on course for imminent independence.  Any of them far better outcomes than the precarious situation we are in today thanks to the inaction and complacency of a loser in control of the SNP and thanks to her having spectacularly failed to capitalise on each and every single opportunity in 7 years to deliver independence.

That SNP MPs had been whipped to vote against the bill might have just been political posturing for the benefit of the membership. This seems to be supported by Alyn Smith’s address to the party conference in November 2014.  According to The Guardian,

“Alyn Smith MEP moves to a topical motion on an EU referendum. He says he thinks a referendum is inevitable. SNP MPs will try to amend any legislation to ensure that all nations in the UK would have to support a decision to leave the EU” (2). 

Mr Smith is referring to the amendment and bid presented by Mr Salmond.  Please note the words “SNP MPs will ‘try’ to amend”. Given the democratic deficit of Scotland in Westminster, telling someone that the SNP “will try” anything in Westminster is the same than saying the effort was going to be pointless and a waste of time.

This address by Mr Smith to the conference was six months before the general election 2015, and yet, from the Guardian article it seems Mr Smith thought an EU ref would be inevitable. I wonder how he could have known that.

If you look in Wikipedia, around 149 polls were conducted from the 1 August 2014 to the 14 November 2014, the day of the SNP conference. Only 12 put the conservatives ahead for the GE2015 (3). Labour opposed the referendum. So, how did Mr Smith know on the 14 November 2015, the tories were going to win 6 months later so an EU referendum would take place?

If Mr Smith was already talking about “trying” to amend legislation to make the referendum democratic, it can only mean the SNP leadership already knew, 7 months before the vote in the commons the referendum was going to be a disgusting undemocratic trap. If they knew this, then they knew that playing Westminster’s game by sitting in England’s parliament to cast a vote against the bill was going to be futile, so why did they chose that path?

On the 31st October 2014, that is just one and half months after the independence referendum, and two weeks before the SNP conference of November 2014, Peter Kellner, president of YouGov, published an article suggesting the SNP was on course to get a majority in the 2015 GE (4). Considering Scotland’s democratic deficit in Westminster, it stands to the obvious, that a much more effective way to stop the undemocratic EU referendum bill would have been refusing to take their seats and using the SNP majority to deny legitimacy to the EU ref bill vote on the 9th June as a UK vote, unless the safeguards to make it democratic were in place.

If already in October 2014, it was known the SNP was on course for a landslide, doesn’t it stand to the obvious that if Sturgeon really wanted Scotland to remain in the EU she would have immediately protected Scotland’s back by securing the inclusion of independence in the manifesto instead of just including her version of Gordon Brown’s Devo Max, rebranded as “full fiscal responsibility”?

On 20th April 2014, when introducing the SNP GE 2015 manifesto, Sturgeon said this (5):

The pledge I make today to the Scottish people is this:

If you vote SNP on May 7th, we will make your voice heard more loudly than it

has ever been heard before at Westminster. We will stand up for Scotland’s interests and always fight your corner

Well, on the 9th June 2015, less than 2 months after she delivered those words, nor the SNP voice nor ours was heard in Westminster, we were silenced.  On that day, the SNP did not stand up for Scotland’s interests either.  By legitimising with their participation the vote as a “UK vote”, and by allowing Scotland’s voice to be crushed, they in fact stood up against the interests of Scotland.

On that day we and our MPs should have learned a lesson:

Scotland’s voice can only be heard for as long as you are shouting OUTSIDE Westminster and refusing to legitimise it as the “UK” parliament and the votes of England MPs as “UK” votes. The minute Scotland’s democratic representatives enter Westminster, Scotland will be silenced due to an unsurmountable democratic deficit specifically designed to ensure only England’s voice is heard.

That day, it was proven to everybody that soundbites like “Stronger in Westminster” or “louder voice at Westminster” or “standing for Scotland in Westminster” are nothing but deceiving fallacies.

The only way Scotland could have retained its voice that day was by our MPs refusing to take their seats, refusing to legitimise that vote as a UK vote, and using the weapon of independence to hold Westminster to ransom. Weapon that Sturgeon had already swiftly removed as a preventative measure on the 20th April 2015, leaving the SNP politically toothless and unable to fight for Scotland to remain in the EU.

On the launching of the 2015 manifesto Nicola Sturgeon also said (5):

the SNP would always support independence. But this election is not about independence. It’s about making Scotland stronger

Supporting something is not the same than actively pursuing it. The 2015 manifesto did not include a mandate for a referendum either. It contained an awful lot of nice things, but that only a political party with control over the England MPs could actually deliver, so that manifesto was in fact a mirage. Even Sturgeon’s version of Gordon Brown’s Devo Max was a mirage as it would have to be voted by the England MPs which actually crushed it a few weeks later. The only thing that a majority of SNP MPs could have ever delivered is Scotland’s independence, and that was precisely what Sturgeon left out of the manifesto, rendering our 56 majority of SNP MPs totally worthless. Removing independence from the manifesto did not make Scotland stronger, it made it much weaker.

Was this a strategic blunder of astronomic proportions, or was it a deliberate move by Sturgeon to help Brexit take place by keeping Scotland trapped in the union?

Well, by October 2014 it was already predicted the SNP was going to win by a landslide in May 2015. At that point the new manifesto saying a vote for the SNP was not a vote for independence had not even been released, therefore it is safe to assume all those people that were going to vote for the SNP already in October 2015 were going to do so assuming their vote would count as a vote for independence.  This means the claim that removing the independence from the manifesto was what increased the vote simply does not fly. It does not sound therefore like a strategic blunder. It sounds more like a strategic move to remove the wheels of Scotland’s political vehicle for independence to stop it going anywhere while the undemocratic EU referendum was put in law.

So, after looking back to all this, frankly, I do not know how we can be expected to still believe Sturgeon ever had any intention for Scotland to remain in the EU.

From where I am standing it very much looks like by the 20th April 2014 Nicola Sturgeon had already sold Scotland to the brexiteers and tied the hands of the SNP MPs at the back (metaphorically speaking) to stop them attempting to keep us in the EU. By the 9th June, the participation of the SNP MPs in the EU ref vote in Westminster, sentenced Scotland to leave the EU some four years later.

It is my personal opinion that if the SNP had been really acting to keep Scotland in the EU, they would have not wasted time presenting any amendment/bill in Westminster that everybody knew England MPs would trash.

I think the 56 MPs should have revolted on the 9th June, refusing to take their seats, threatening with denying legitimacy to the vote as a “UK” vote so the EU could not interpret such vote as constitutional under the requirements of A50, unless, either an amendment that ensured Scotland could not be taken out of the EU against its will was immediately added to the bill prior to the vote, or the Union was ended to allow England to pursue its future out of the EU and Scotland hers in the EU.

The SNP had majority in both parliaments, meaning they could give their position strength by starting to pass an Act to end the union in Scotland’s parliament, making it impossible for the UK to ever use that referendum as an excuse to trigger A50 constitutionally. In other words, had they wanted, they could have brought right there and then, the whole Brexit charade to an irreversible halt unless the union had ended.

They had enough justification for such approach. For starters, forcing Brexit on Scotland with a rigged referendum was forcing absolute rule over Scotland which contravened Scotland’s Claim of Right, one of the pillars of the Treaty of Union and therefore unconstitutional. Secondly, such revolt would send the message that abusing Scotland as if it was England’s possession was no longer acceptable, surely something any nationalist worth their salt would want. Thirdly, it would have left no doubts as to who holds power in Scotland, an opportunity to draw a line on the sand any serious nationalist would jump at. 

With her piss poor strategy, Sturgeon lost us that day our EU membership and the first best opportunity to flex Scotland’s muscles to become an independent state. She also lost us our dignity as a nation and by removing independence from the manifesto, the credibility of the SNP MPs as anything other than politically worthless pawns now seemingly whipped to work against Scotland.

In retrospect, the realisation that just a handful of evolution denying DUP MPs had far more balls to fight for NI than all our 56 SNP MPs combined ever had to fight for Scotland, is deeply embarrassing.

I have always wondered if the votes on the 9th and 16th June had been staged because the decision of the UK leaving the EU might have already been made some time before with the blessing/compliance of the SNP. In November 2013 there was an STV televised debate between Nicola Sturgeon and Alistair Carmichael (6).  Nicola Sturgeon said:

The risk to Scotland’s European membership is not independence, it’s the In-Out European referendum that the government of which you’re a part is proposing.”

“you went on television Sunday and in direct response to a question, you said you couldn’t guarantee Scotland’s continued membership of the EU if we stayed as part of the UK because there’s going to be an In-Out referendum.

“We could find ourselves in the position where the UK as a whole votes to come out and we (Scotland) vote to stay in but we get taken out against our will. You can’t possibly defend that.” (6)

8 years on, you notice immediately these:1. She already seemed to know, 3 years before it happened, that there was going to be a EU referendum.  Again, how? If you look in Wikipedia not one, let me repeat this again, not a single poll put conservatives ahead in 2013. According to Wikipedia, we are talking about an excess of 400 polls conducted in 2013 (3).2. She already seemed to know the EU voting intention of Scotland was different to England’s3. She already knew the EU referendum was going to be a trap and  the intention with that EU referendum was to force Scotland out of the EU even if voting against leaving the EU

What this tells us is that Mr Salmond’s amendment to the bill of the 9th and his bill of the 16thhad been set to fail from the point of its conception.  It was designed to go nowhere. Considering that by 2013 Sturgeon and Carmichael seemed to already know an EU ref was going to take place , if you are a cynic like me you would have started to wonder by now, if they might have already known as well what the result of our indyref would be in a year’s time from that TV debate.

If it was true what “better together” were telling us that Scotland would pushed out of the EU if it left the UK, then, considering the UK is a 1:1 bipartite union, if by becoming independent Scotland would leave the EU, so would England. 

If England was to leave the EU on the event of Scotland becoming independent, then there would be no point for such EU referendum.  Surely the pertinent referendum would be for England and Wales to decide if they were going to “re-join” the EU. Therefore the assumption that has to be made here is that if all these politicians were so fixated on the EU referendum it had to be because a) they already knew the tories were going to win even before the election had taken place, and b) they already knew yes would fail in indyref even before the ballots had been printed.

You don’t need to be an economist to realise the only possible way England could afford leaving the EU is if it had at its disposal Scotland’s market, revenues and assets. What this means is that if the “better together” were telling us porkies and ending the union would not mean Scotland leaving the EU, then it stands to the obvious that if Scotland had become independent in 2014, England would have never been able to even contemplate that EU referendum. Trying to exit the EU on its own, without Scotland’s market and assets as a life jacket, and with a hard border between her and Scotland, Ireland and France would look like economic suicide for England.

It does not matter if better together were telling the truth or not because, in both cases, it seems that it would be only within the context of “no” winning in 2014 and Scotland remaining in the UK that such EU referendum would have ever made any sense at all.  In other words, Brexit was hinging completely on Scotland remaining in the UK.

So, how badly did the UK establishment, the tax havens and the taxdodgers wanted Brexit? Enough to justify rigging our indyref, by faking a no vote? In how many other political events in Scotland since that EU ref took place the UK establishment might have stuck its dirty hand in to ensure Scotland remained welded to England so Brexit could take place?

Considering in June 2015 Sturgeon had control of 56 MPs, which represented the 95% of Scotland’s seats, it is simply not credible that Scotland was simply dragged into this trap without her consent. The only thing she had to do was to whip the MPs to boycott the vote, refusing to accept it as a whole UK vote.

Looking at all this retrospectively, the only plausible conclusion is that we are out of the EU today not because we were trapped in a deliberately undemocratic referendum.  We are where we are because Sturgeon and the SNP did not stand up for Scotland and let our voice be heard OUTSIDE Westminster. They chose to enter Westminster and whisper inside so 600 England MPs could mute us in order for Brexit to take place.

What lessons can we learn from this trip to memory lane?• To never again trust a political “leader” who tells us they will make Scotland’s voice stronger IN Westminster, or their party will be stronger for Scotland IN Westminster.  Considering the huge democratic deficit, if a politician tells us something like that we should wonder if what they really mean is they intend to use our vote to continue legitimising England’s MPs abuse, exploitation and silencing of Scotland.• To never again trust a political party whose leader, MPs and MSPs claim to “support” independence but they have removed the pursuit of independence from the party’s manifesto. • To never again trust a political party whose leader claims to pursue independence but they are not serious about independence enough to include in the party’s manifesto and constitution a majority of pro-independence MPs or MSPs as a mandate to immediately end the union. • To never again trust any pro indy-politician who claims a particular vote “is not for independence”.  We should immediately interpret that as a warning that such leader might be planning to remove the main weapon of the party to keep Scotland trapped in the UK while England MPs force on Scotland something nasty.

If there is something I think we should be thankful to the current loser in control of the SNP for, is to have demonstrated to us that the only way for a political party to give Scotland the opportunity to choose its own future is by stopping any of its MPs entering Westminster to legitimise as ‘UK’ votes what is at all practical effects, England MPs’ voting to force absolute rule over Scotland.

Clearly Sinn Fein had the right idea.  It is just a real shame it is taking Scotland’s MPs so bloody long to acknowledge they have been wasting seven years of Scotland’s precious time because playing Westminster’s game by Westminster’s rules equals to accepting Scotland will always lose.

References:(1) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opinion_polling_for_the_United_Kingdom_European_Union_membership_referendum(2) theguardian.com/politics/blog/live/2014/nov/15/snp-conference-nicola-sturgeons-speech-politics-live-blog?page=with:block-54676e44e4b049b4b226cbe8&filterKeyEvents=false#liveblog-navigation(3) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opinion_polling_for_the_2015_United_Kingdom_general_election(4) https://yougov.co.uk/topics/politics/articles-reports/2014/10/31/labours-scottish-nightmare(5) https://web.archive.org/web/20220122222255/https://www.heraldscotland.com/news/13210531.full-nicola-sturgeons-snp-manifesto-launch-speech/(6) https://www.theneweuropean.co.uk/brexit-news-westminster-news-nicola-sturgeon-scottish-independence-debate-brexit-6863294/

BEAT THE CENSORS

Sadly some sites had given up on being pro Indy sites and have decided to become merely pro SNP sites where any criticism of the Party Leader or opposition to the latest policy extremes, results in censorship being applied. This, in the rather over optimistic belief that this will suppress public discussion on such topics. My regular readers have expertly worked out that by regularly sharing articles on this site defeats that censorship and makes it all rather pointless. I really do appreciate such support and free speech in Scotland is remaining unaffected by their juvenile censorship. Indeed it is has become a symptom of weakness and guilt. Quite encouraging really.

FREE SUBSCRIPTIONS

Are available on the home and blog pages of this website. A subscription ensures you will be notified of all future articles and you will be joining thousands who have already done so. You will be very welcome.

53 thoughts on “JUDAS KISS? 

      1. The SNP grassroots need to open their eyes. The extraordinary thing would be if the UK state did not have place men in the SG. The tragic thing is there are too many of us who refuse to believe it. Lets look:
        YES has been as high as 59% at points over the last years. During that time:
        The ring fenced indyref funds were spent elsewhere
        No secret plan or any kind of plan for indy was in place
        Figures were not updated
        Key questions were not examined
        The unlawful pursuit of Salmond – an unaccountable number of years after events – split YES
        The SG embraced divisive and extreme policies without any meaningful democratic mandate to alienate many voters – accident or design?
        Sturgeon repeatedly claimed that our right as a nation to self determination required the permission of the UK state – something untrue in international law and something th eUK themselves have rejected as a concept.

        I believe Sturgeon is a traitor.

        Liked by 3 people

  1. ” playing Westminster’s game by Westminster’s rules equals to accepting Scotland will always lose. “.

    I think a campaign of civil disobedience is long overdue. I would start with non payment of the BBC’s liar tax. And the shunning of their quisling “news” presenters. This requires political leadership which says any police action against non-payers will result in significant consequences for those policemen. Trust in police Scotland’s hierarchy is at an all time low – they are frankly genderwoowoo brownshirts. This is to our advantage.

    Our current crop of cowardly SNP MPs and MSPs are a disgrace. Sturgeon must go – she is utterly useless and compromised. They have all destroyed the SNP as a political force.

    Using the next westmonster election as a plebiscite on independence is simply the best way to achieve our aims. And to that end I suggest we start putting forward the idea of YES candidates.

    On a happier note – Anyone else hearing that the SNP membership is collapsing – fast ?

    Liked by 22 people

    1. I wholeheartedly agree with you Astonished , I don’t want to appear negative but ALL Alba MP’S are doing is CARPING from the sidelines , they are doing precisely what nsnp mp’s are doing at WM .
      WE All agree that it is wrong for train operators to close stations early and decrease staffing levels , WE ALL agree that sturgeon GIVING AWAY our seabed renewables and now our mining is outrageous , WE ALL agree that the nsnp sg having to pay some insurance company £5million pounds compensation for their COLOSSAL F***up with Fergusons yard is outrageous , BUT these things are the TIP OF THE ICEBERG and will continue and Alba MP’s carping and complaining about it won’t change anything
      The ONLY thing that will change anything is for the 2 Alba MP’S to CHALLENGE WM in the Scottish Supreme Court that they have breached the TOU by Brexshit and are still doing so by altering Scots Law , similar to the Martin Keating sabotaged case where it was thrown out because it was theoretical and Martin had NO STANDING , Brexshit has HAPPENED and Scotland is suffering massively and still sturgeon DOES NOTHING to protect its citizens

      But Kenny MacAskill and Neale Hanvey do HAVE STANDING they are elected representatives of THE PEOPLE they CAN CHALLENGE WM in Scotland’s Supreme Court about TOU breaches in Brexshit and Scot’s Laws and if for some inexplicable reason the Scottish Supreme Court rules against them they can then OFFICIALLY approach the UN and ECJ

      So Kenny , Neale , Alex are you willing to WIN THIS BATTLE FOR SCOTLAND or are you going to just moan and complain whilst sturgeon and her coven of LIARS sit idly by whilst our citizens SUFFER

      Liked by 4 people

  2. This appears to be conflating 2 issues. The SNP were trying to amend the legislation, rightly so. I presume there was an element of expecting Labour to support it. Moving an amendment, logically meant that the SNP MP’s had to attend and support it. ( How would it have been portrayed if the SNP didn’t turn up to vote on their proposal?)
    To then say that this tactic legitimatised the vote as ‘UK’ wide is mistaken. There is only one place where this legislative proposal could have been altered, Westminster. To have not attempted to amend the legislation would have been tantamount to abandoning Scotland to its fate. SNP MP’s were there to represent the views of Scotland and if they hadn’t done that, then there would have been an outcry.

    Liked by 2 people

    1. There a fatal flaw in the boycott Westminster approach. Sinn Féin is working on both sides of the border to re-unify Ireland. Scotland has no such external support.

      Boycotting Westminster can only take you down one road and the SNP certainly don’t have be bottle or the desire to take it.

      Liked by 7 people

      1. “Scotland has no such external support”

        Scotland is in a political union with England. It can end that union at any time. Delegitimising Westminster to continue as the UK parliament when it is acting as England’s parliament is the starting point. Calling a vote to end the union among Scotland’s MPs is the next.

        I think you are absolutely right. Sturgeon’s SNP never had the bottle or desire to take this route because it seems she never even contemplated to take this route, only to close it. Otherwise she would not have claimed before the GE2015 that a vote for the SNP was not a vote for independence. At that time they already knew the SNP was going to win by a landslide. If the vote had been for independence she would have had a clear mandate to end the union. Clearly she and her masters did not want the world to see that mandate.

        We already saw her running like fire away from the supermajority and the plebiscitary Holyrood election. Again, had she helped with that supermajority and she would have an undisputable mandate to end the union. Now get ready to watch her running away even faster that the prospect of making the next general election a plebiscite on independence emerges.

        I have noticed the National has been pumping all sort of propaganda to restore indyref’s credibility since the fiasco with the Devo Max. The propaganda pumping has intensified with the prospect of a new General Election around the corner and the potential demands for it to be a plebiscite on independence. Such claims would render the indyref carrot worthless as a tool to continue procrastinating on independence.

        But as all the propaganda we have been fed about the referendum for the last 6 years, none of these articles actually gives a date for the referendum. So what exactly is it that they are working towards? Removing from the table any other alternative that would take us to independence faster.

        There was even an article from Black demanding Jack to protect devolution! Jeez, when “the party of independence” mourns devolution instead of pursuing independence, you know what you have in front of you is no longer the SNP but rather a version of labour.

        Liked by 16 people

    2. “There is only one place where this legislative proposal could have been altered, Westminster”

      Sorry, I do not think that is true. We have seen for 7 years that the only thing that happens in Westminster is the legitimisation of assault after assault on Scotland by means of votes that have all the appearance of having been arranged before hand. Seemingly Smith, Sturgeon and Carmichael knowing Scotland was going to be dragged onto this well before the vote took place, well before the general election 2015 and, by the look of it, in the case of Carmichael and Sturgeon, even before the 2014 referendum had taken place, points in that direction.

      Countless times we have had “rebels” from Labour or Libdems voting with the tories or abstaining to ensure a particular nasty vote passes through. Is that a coincidence? Yeah, right. The idea that there is a party of government and a functional opposition in the UK as it is necessary in a democracy, the idea that there is any honesty in that sewer and that the votes are nothing but theatricals to give a veneer of legitimacy to the continuous assault on democracy is, in my honest opinion, delusion.

      The UK died on the 8th May 2015. Sturgeon and the SNP in collusion with the English state has been keeping the UK corpse on life support. We have had general elections after 2 years. Well a little bit over 2 years have passed since the last one and already we see the signs of the state engineering its way to call another one with the excuse of the fall of Johnson, when the things that are coming to light just know have been known by the people who have been prompted to release it now, for years. How long has Sue Gray known about that infamous email about the party? So why did it surface it now?

      “To have not attempted to amend the legislation would have been tantamount to abandoning Scotland to its fate”

      Who said anything of “abandoning Scotland to its fate”, you did, I most certainly did not.

      Who writes those pieces of legislation? Somebody has to write them before they get voted. Who tells the people who writes them what to write? Somebody has to. Well, the person who wrote the piece of legislation and those who told them what to write to put a deliberately undemocratic referendum in law must have known what they were doing, as each and every single one of the England MPs who vote to give themselves the right to force brexit on Scotland, knew. When was that proposal written? Was it already written in 2013 when Sturgeon was debating Carmichael on TV?

      It is precisely at the point of writing a new piece of legislation that the SNP can do anything to change legislative proposals. If the proposal is not acceptable, walking into Westminster and voting against it is doing nothing for Scotland other than political posturing that invariably results in crushing Scotland’s will so England can continue taking advantage of this union for its own interests. We have seen it for 7 years, time and time again.

      Refusing to take part in the vote and refusing to legitimising the abuse as being done “on behalf of Scotland” until the piece of legislation is acceptable for Scotland is the only way to stand a chance in changing anything. That stands to the obvious.

      7 years have demonstrated that, for all practical purposes, entering that parliament and allowing Scotland’s views to be crushed is precisely the way of “abandoning Scotland to its faith”. What exactly has that failed strategy achieved in 7 years? How many votes did Scotland won? ZERO. Thanks to that strategy, Sturgeon and her SNP has lost us our powers, has lost us sovereignty, has lost us assets, has lost us businesses, has lost us people, has lost us our EU citizenship rights and has made a complete mockery of Scotland’s expressed democratic will and right to self determination. If that is not abandoning Scotland to its own faith, what is.

      I remind you that on the 9th June 2015 the amendment of Mr Salmond was voted down first, before the other vote took place. At the time it was rejected the SNP MPs could have simply left the chamber and refusing to legitimise the second vote. So why didn’t they?

      No matter how you look at this, something is clear. For 7 years we have been duped into believing Sturgeon was doing anything with those majorities to represent Scotland and all what she and the SNP have done is to play Westminster’s game so she did not have to do anything to protect Scotland’s interests.

      As per the SNP being in any position of changing legislation, is also complete delusion, and if the average Joe can see that, a woman that has allegedly been supporting independence since she was 16 years old should have known that since the day she took over the leadership of the party. 56 MPs against 600 is not a position from where you can change anything. Again, for 7 years we have seen this, time and time again. The EU referendum stitch up was just an example. There are many, another being how this woman did nothing when A50 was unconstitutionally triggered on behalf of Scotland just because England MPs gave themselves the right to do so crushing our Claim of Right. Allowing the Withdrawall bill passing was only possible by this woman and the SNP MPs looking the other way while the English convention of Westminster sovereignty was put in UK law. Again, this only happened because the SNP MPs took their seats and legitimised that vote.

      The UK can only be called UK parliament with the consent of Scotland. And that consent needs to be given with every single vote. That consent is given when a majority of Scotland’s MPs sit in that parliament.

      There is only two things a majority of SNP MPs can do successfully, by themselves, for Scotland:

      1. to declare independence by demanding a vote among Scotland’s MPs to end the union
      2. to deny legitimacy to that parliament as “UK” parliament and threat to end the union BEFORE A VOTE that if a particular piece of legislation is not changed.

      The idea the SNP can ever persuade 600 Kingdom of England MPs to vote to benefit Scotland from inside that chamber is delusion if not a bad joke.

      “SNP MP’s were there to represent the views of Scotland and if they hadn’t done that, then there would have been an outcry”

      No. The outcry is because for 7 years they have been pretending to represent the views of Scotland and all what they have been doing is legitimising as “UK” every single assault the English establishment has decided to force on Scotland, brexit included for the sake of a ruling elite.

      Acting as an MP does not mean exclusively to take the futile route of warming the seats in Westminster to pretend representing Scotland. It means standing up for Scotland wherever the fight is. And the fight is at the desk where those effing proposals get written. Entering that parliament when you know Scotland’s voice is going to be silenced is not representing Scotland, is failing to represent Scotland to its most advantage and a way of avoiding representing its interests. The SNP knows this, otherwise they would not be constantly reminding us (and themselves) that they were there to settle up, not down.

      Well, for seven years we have been waiting for a single one of those SNP MPs to settle up and lift their backsides out of that place. All what we have seen is them sinking those backsides in the green seats a bit more with each passing day.

      Liked by 27 people

    3. could they have presented their case and, before the vote but after their proposal was knocked back, walked out of HoC – thus not giving legitimacy to the vote being ‘UK’ wide?

      Liked by 4 people

  3. Regarding the reasoning of the SNP MPs in 2015 maybe they were confident there would be an overall UK wide majority for Remain – the English would not be mad enough to bite that hand that feeds them would they?

    Or, perhaps more plausibly, the SNP thought that an English Leave vote and a Scottish Remain vote – the latter being more or less copper fastened given opinion polling – this would force a constitutional stand off and bring Independence to the fore once again. Hence, the 2016 Holyrood election manifesto commitment to hold another referendum if ‘material change such as Scotland being taken out of the EU against its will’ or some such came to pass.

    If the strategy was to force the Independence question in this event then it really begs the question why this was not pursued. Was it:

    Leadership loss of nerve
    Incompetence
    Devolutionist Holyrood MSPs
    Comfortable Westminster MPs
    Gradualist party hierarchy caution
    British inflitration of the party
    other

    Or some combination of all of the above?

    Liked by 19 people

    1. “Regarding the reasoning of the SNP MPs in 2015 maybe they were confident there would be an overall UK wide majority for Remain”

      Personally, I doubt it. If you take a look at the polls, the tendency was clearly for leave during 2010, 2011, 2012 and the best part of 2013. Sturgeon knew in her debate in 2013 against Carmichael that if England voted leave, Scotland did not stand a chance.

      If the majority of the political parties wanted to remain, then they would have ensured the referendum was democratic, Scotland was very clearly for remain and, had the vote been democratic, would have stopped brexit on its tracks. Instead, they chose to close the door to remain by opening the one to brexit.

      Mr Salmond’s amendment of the 9th June and his bid on the 16th June 2015 were free get out of jail cards he was handing to Cameron to ensure the Uk would remain in the EU. Labour, Tories and Libdems not only rejected, but crushed those get out of jail cards. They could not have wanted the Uk to remain in the EU that strongly when they were locking doors to a remain win.

      Another blank card that Cameron flushed down the toilet of course was the franchise of the referendum. If he really wanted the Uk to remain in the EU he would have allowed the 16-17 year olds, EU citizens in the UK to vote and also the ex pats living out of the UK for more than 15 years. He removed from the franchise the three groups that would have changed the result.

      You do not reject three free get out of jail cards unless you don’t want to leave the prison.

      Liked by 17 people

      1. Agreed.

        And that is why I followed up by stating my opinion that “perhaps more plausibly, the SNP thought that an English Leave vote and a Scottish Remain vote – the latter being more or less copper fastened given opinion polling – this would force a constitutional stand off and bring Independence to the fore once again.”

        Liked by 6 people

  4. After reading this it all seems to make a lot of sense. Nicola Sturgeon sold us out with her complete inaction and her deliberate inaction disabled our aspirations. She is part of our problem and certainly not the solution to achieving our independence. Dreadful stuff from hwr and the SNP. Theyre far too comfy in their troughs to go for independence. Why chamge a lucrative winnining formula for theirselves. To hell with the rest of us. Sell outs!

    Liked by 21 people

  5. The SNP gov. is a puppet administration. If it were otherwise it would assume the powers it needs by virtue of being a body representative of the Scottish people and to hell with the potential «consequences».
    Petioning London for any «new powers» could only make sense to a body comfortable with its minor legislative status. The psychology of subordinacy made manifest.
    At the Union, 45 placemen were squeezed into old St Stephens chapel, England’s quaint parliament edifice. The semiotics could not be more blatant. The Scotland purchase done and dusted.
    The SNP gov. has hidden behind legalism and Covidism to frustrate any advance.
    That English establishment sense of entitlement will have no effective opposition until Scots quit the English parliament.

    Liked by 19 people

  6. “Was this a strategic blunder of astronomic proportions, or was it a deliberate move by Sturgeon to help Brexit take place by keeping Scotland trapped in the union?”

    I’d have previously said the former, but am now convinced it’s the latter. I’ve no inside knowledge but I wonder if seeing that his successor was making an absolute mess of things, Salmond tried to salvage something with the amendment. It wouldn’t pass given the English built in majority but it was a marker that Scotland wasn’t going down silently.

    Interestingly the “unlawful, unfair and tainted with apparent bias” investigation happened soon afterwards AND after the triggering of article 50 to leave the EU. Maybe the timing is coincidence or maybe it isn’t. I don’t know and now we’ve left the EU does it matter? What does matter is getting Scotland independent, with it’s own currency and central bank and into EFTA tout suite before we are faced with a referendum “offering” an undefined devo max and a Catalonia clause meaning the UK (actually GB since the GFA allows Norn Ireland to leave when it wants to) is indivisible and Scotland can never leave the union. I wouldn’t put it past HER.

    Liked by 21 people

  7. there is a lot of truth in what is said in this blog, but if you go back to 1963 and listen to the words of Brian Walden (Labour MP) in those days, he said
    “The two front benches (in Parliament) like each other and dislike their backbenches. We were children of the famous Consensus. We were spoiled, of course, because the electorate, which was even more irresponsible than we were, could be relied upon to grow bored or disenchanted and turn the opposition into the government. It made little difference, for we believed much the same things.”
    Has anything really changed apart from the SNP being now part of the game? Sturgeon is kept in power because that is what the Tories want for Scotland (Every SNP MP is not a Labour MP) it’s that simple. Do you really believe that the Tories, that Labour or the SNP MPs care a shit about Scottland or her problems? As long as Sturgeon and the SNP play ball at Westminster they will be kept in power in Scotland – rock the boat and lookout. This is exactly what happened to Scottish Labour feet under the table at Westminster climbing the greasy pole as for places like Springburn in Glasgow they had a big blowhard sitting in the speaker’s chair with a grace and favour house, did he give a moments thought to the starving in his constituency? We have third world poverty in many parts of this country, high fuel pills, and a high cost of living, we are outside the EU and have to go cap in hand for handouts from a Tory Buffon at Westminster, who cares as much about the people of Scotland as I do about the dark side of the moon. There is an acute lack of decent housing, and just wait until the government puts a cap on housing benefits as they did in London and Edinburgh like London will see ethnic cleansing too. Yet all I hear is a party at number 10, or how Russia is going to invade Ukraine – Wake up Scotland to what is going on, and fight for your country – that is if you really wish to keep it.

    Liked by 23 people

    1. Scotland is maybe one of the least developed countries in Europe, powerhouse to poorhouse in a few generations.
      England has a bad cold, Scotland gets pneumonia. That’s the way of the powerless.
      That is if you fall for the nonsense that political power depends on and is in the gift of politicians.
      It is in the gift of the people, if only the people wised up.

      Liked by 18 people

      1. This is THE crucial point Otto . The * learned hopelessness/powerlessness * of 300+ years of external dominance is a formidable obstacle to overcome : but not insurmountable

        Liked by 5 people

  8. So Mia is proposing that far from accepted wisdom, Sturgeon is in fact a master tactician and a great political thinker, outfoxing us all. Having read this I now wonder if it was in fact Nicola who persuaded Salmond that it was time for him to go, playing the poor sop with his own loyalty…because lets all be honest, that’s the biggest mistake of his life, the worst thing ever for modern Scotland. Then again, how is it that working with Nicola for all those years, so closely, mentoring her, preparing her, the he couldn’t see what we all now see, a union worthy, one of the ‘Loyal’….or was it deliberate, was he perhaps part of the same plan, what too ‘Mia’?
    You can’t have feckless Nicola and Nicola the great long term strategist both. What is clear though is that both Sturgeon and Salmond have let us down, worse than badly.

    Like

    1. “So Mia is proposing that far from accepted wisdom, Sturgeon is in fact a master tactician and a great political thinker, outfoxing us all”

      Actually no. What Mia is saying is that she thinks Sturgeon is a Westminster puppet who follows a pre-written script, and who was put conveniently in charge of the SNP at the precise time when simultaneously removing the wheels off the SNP, and removing Mr Salmond from front line politics, was the only possible way to stop the irreversible end of the union before England’s last hooray of forcing brexit on Scotland while ransacking Scotland’s assets and powers to survive its own folly and to stop Scotland returning to the EU anytime soon.

      There is no doubt in my mind that had Mr Salmond had control of the majorities of SNP MPs, the union would not have lasted 24 hours after the EU referendum.

      Liked by 22 people

      1. I agree that Salmod falling on his sword was the worst thing that could have happened to Scotland. the reasons for that are unclear, maybe he felt it was the honorable thing to do? there is little point in thinking what could have been, we must take the power of the Local Authorityes away from the SNP – that really is the starting point for a new scotland, for they control so much we depend on daily. Povery in the sixth riches country in the world tells us all that the SNP stand for. what we need is a conservative effort to persuade the poor living on the bread line to get out and vote, they are the silent majority – the once that would benefit most from a free scotland and sadly they are the onces missing from the register or never bother to vote, believign nothing will change for them whoever they vote fore and at present that is the truth.

        Liked by 10 people

      2. I think, at the end of the day, she has little choice if she wants to stay where she is or move on to greater things. Any Scottish leader is in the same boat. The difference is that Sturgeon leads the party of independence. It is incumbent upon her to mitigate Scotland’s dire situation by getting us out of the Union if she can, and, metaphorically speaking, die trying. She evidently doesn’t believe it’s worth the candle. I don’t believe that she is a plant, but she does submit to every humiliation because there are plants around her and because she does not have the toughness required to take Scotland to independence. She is like so many in Scotland: och, we’re no sae bad, eh, so let’s no rock the boat yet… ? Independence is a pipe dream as long as that mentality persists.

        Liked by 4 people

  9. I’ve come to assume that the ever rightward shift of the neoliberal establishment made brexit inevitable – and it is likely that experienced politicians knew this. The deep establishment we’re projecting Nigel Farage onto our screens on a regular basis thanks to the BBC. This probably wasn’t used enough before 2014 because ‘project fear’ wasn’t part of the YES playbook. Still our politicians haven’t even suitably warned the Scottish public that the privatisation of the NHS is inevitable- whether labour or the tories are in power. That dye was cast when labour endorsed the neoliberal ideology to gain power in 1997.

    But what about independence?

    I don’t know the motivations of those in the SNP. I don’t know how likely (or not) it is that the FM, or someone else, is a plant, or which of her advisors are mischief making. None of us really know. What I have assumed is that London, post 2014, would put as many obstacles in place to stop Scotland ever walking away from the union. A shock doctrine is a principle where events/actions, previously thought unthinkable, are put in place to create confusion and division. We seem to be watching this play out now with all the ‘curved balls’ and sub-plots – whether down in London or up here in Scotland. No10 parties, the ‘thought’ police, selling of energy assets etc..

    It all feels like a ‘great unravelling’ and it is very much succeeding in taking our eye off the ball. A certain politician talks about ‘playing the baw where it lies’. Right now when the ball seems embedded in deep gorse, the most important thing actually, is to keep playing the game.

    The goal is independence, and we need a laser focus on that and it needs to be separated from the daily actions of the incumbent govt at Holyrood. So let’s assume the worst and that there will be perpetual ‘promises’ of independence with nothing behind it and it’s ALL being controlled by London. That should make zero difference to the YES movement. It has to operate independently of the political establishment. If politicians want to hop on board, then fine.

    We need to play the ball where it lies. 2023 indyref? Fine, let’s do it. Let’s march, let’s hold the rallies, the toon meetings and let’s hold them to it. Let’s also talk about an election post indyref – the policies of the SNP are not the policies of independence but a choice on one direction Scotland may choose after we choose self determination – because that is what the vote is all about.

    The bickering, division is here by design, And exactly what they want. Who’s they? Who cares?
    If it is all a lie, let’s ‘big up’ the lie. Let’s give it so much momentum that it becomes unstoppable. What if we get to the end of 2023 and there’s no referendum? Such is the momentum, unity and positivity behind indyref, it is more likely that those having marched to the top of the hill would very much back a plebiscite election. It would be a short 6 month run-in and we would be ‘tooled up’.

    If the SNP failed to endorse a plebiscite election after this momentum, they would lose ground, perhaps even implode, but that cannot be the end of the independence movement. This is why part of a new YES campaign would have to include a big emphasis on things like the digital covenant, constitutional conventions etc, to show to the world the strength of the movement.

    It feels like we are being played. We need to take to the pitch.

    Liked by 19 people

    1. Excellent points. I am fed up us playing the game of these sly no-marks. We play our own game in accordance with our rules* to attain the prize

      * this might include going along with our opponents or ploughing our own furrow to cause most inconvenience to them – it is after all ‘oor baw’

      Liked by 9 people

  10. Very well said Mia, since Sturgeon has taken over as FM and SNP leader, have we taken one step closer to independence since, or have we actually gone a bit backwards, in my opinion the latter appears to be the case. The evidence speaks for itself that Sturgeon and possibly quite a few of the SNP MSPs and MPs don’t want independence but prefer the status quo.

    If the willful discarding of independence was a trial in a court of law, the evidence against Sturgeon and her MPs/MSPs on holding back or knobbling Scottish independence would be overwhelming, and a swift conviction by a jury (Juryless in Sturgeons Scotland) would be the outcome.

    The evidence against Sturgeon for NOT wanting Scottish independence is there for all to see.

    Liked by 12 people

  11. Excellent article by Mia. The main matter of discussion seems not unrelated to what I proposed below to SSRG as a possible remedy to the ongoing injustices suffered by the Scottish people:

    If Scotland’s forcible and undemocratic withdrawal from the EU is regarded as unconstitutional insofar as Scotland is concerned then this must be tested in a Scottish court. Brexit for Scotland is no longer a hypothetical issue, which means a court would be expected to consider the matter, and give an opinion on it. And, as pro-independence MP’s have ‘standing’ then logically it is they who should bring such an action, supported by other groups as necessary e.g. SSRG, SIC etc. Is this then a role for ALBA’s MPs? Would a Scottish court deny that our sovereignty exists? Would ALBA MP’s not wish to test this?

    Such a case would therefore demonstrate either that:

    a) Scotland’s enforced brexit was unconstitutional, did not respect Scottish sovereignty and must be remedied, or;

    b) that Scottish sovereignty cannot be asserted, i.e. does not exist within the treaty.

    The main question here is that Scotland’s enforced withdrawal from the EU against the expressed wishes/votes of the majority of Scots AND also the majority of Scotland’s national representatives is unconstitutional and therefore unlawful; this must be tested and a Scottish court would seem the place to test the matter.

    If Scotland’s enforced brexit is deemed as lawful then we will know that ‘Scottish sovereignty’ is virtually meaningless, as is the Treaty of Union, and that Scotland’s status in the UK is more or less that of a colonial territory of another power; i.e. there is no ‘union of equals’.

    If, on the other hand, Scotland’s enforced withdrawal from the EU was deemed unconstitutional and therefore unlawful, then this would require to be remedied. Such an outcome may (or should) be considered as sufficient violation of the Treaty to end it. Either way, Scots would know whether we are in law a sovereign people and nation or not, as well as whether the Treaty of Union is a ‘union of equals’ or merely a fraud.

    There would surely be plentiful support among the independence movement, SSRG, SIC and other groups for even two ALBA MP’s (though preferably all pro-indy MPs) as Scotland’s national elected representatives, to pit Scottish sovereignty against an enforced brexit to the Scots Law test; and who better to test the force and effect of the treaty than the Scottish Justiciary given the latter’s continued existence, status and privileges (which are increasingly being undermined within the union) depends solely on articles written within that very same treaty.

    So let the Scottish people test the force and effect of Scottish sovereignty, and see whether it really exists, or not.

    Liked by 23 people

    1. Good points Alf, however no one in the Scottish government would dare take this forward, just look at how hard Sturgeon and the Lord Advocate opposed Martin Keatings, on the S30 matter, that alone in itself proved without a doubt that Sturgeon is against independence.

      Liked by 13 people

      1. But this is another way the yes movement can apply pressure and help expose their true motives.
        The insistence by Pete wishart that a plebiscite election is a non-starter is interesting, given his WM leader was a candidate in the 1997 election – in itself a plebiscite.

        Liked by 12 people

      2. Thanks RoS.

        The main difference between what I am proposing and Keating’s case, aside from it being an entirely different matter, is that:

        a) the matter in question (i.e. Brexit) is no longer hypothetical, and;

        b) elected MP’s have sufficient ‘standing’ to bring such a case and to seek opinion of the relevant court in the matter.

        Liked by 10 people

    2. So let the Scottish people test the force and effect of Scottish sovereignty, and see whether it really exists, or not.

      Liked by 6 people

    3. The problem I see with that is that it was the UK Westminster government that voted and took us INTO the EU Union. My reading of it is that the combined UK WM parliament can then take us out of it. It is , as per the treaty of union acting on the UK behalf as voted for by Scottish Parliament members at time of Union.
      To me , the only things that could be challenged are subjects specifically “reserved” to Scotland such as law and education and over reach by Union in these areas. .
      I think the EU withdrawal is a stretch. More fruitful ground would be Constitutional matter such as indyref where the very act of Union can be challenged.

      Like

  12. Put this in the context of Ukrain and «Global Britain»
    https://www.opendemocracy.net/en/opendemocracyuk/britain-is-world-centre-for-private-military-contractors/
    Ukania is desperate for relevance and favour in the US/Nato playground, full support from SNP too.
    Russia & friends BAD, America and friends GOOD, Nato RIGHT, WRONG, ANY WHICH WAY!
    (Ladybird Book..How to be a Politician, and get away with it)
    As used in Korea, Vietnam, Cambodia, Yugoslavia, Somalia, Lebanon, Afghanistan, Syria, Libya….

    Liked by 5 people

  13. No matter how you look at it the SNP MPs have failed to uphold Scotland’s sovereignty. That is crystal clear from their actions and inactions over the last seven years.

    Some excellent points made in Mia’s piece with some further excellent suggestions from a Mr Baird.

    We are however where we are because of circumstances that have silenced and neutered what should be our Independence Party. And there will be reasons for this ranging from blackmail to bribe to timeservers settling in rather than settling up. The British establishment has a very dark hand and it plays it well.

    We need therefore, aside of setting up a sovereignty committee, to send a message to the SNP that they need to change. In just over twelve weeks we all have the opportunity to vote in the Council elections. We should use that opportunity to vote Alba, or ISP or for good independents. Anyone but the SNP.

    Send em a message in May and vote em out. Independence for Scotland has not gone away, only the once Independence SNP has.

    Liked by 15 people

  14. There was certainly talk of a EU referendum in 2013, and David Cameron set in motion the report by Crawford and Boyle at that point, the intention being to challenge a YES vote by claiming that Scotland had been subsumed, so the groundwork was already being done for the EU referendum which the Tories could not afford to lose. Scotland, and Scotland’s resources, absolutely had to be part of the equation for a withdrawal from the EU and a closer relationship, in trade terms, with the US, first and foremost, and the Commonwealth.

    A fundamental and fatal lack of understanding of both the British State’s and English priorities lies at the root of Scotland’s problems. These people are past masters at manipulation of any and all political moves and they would have, and did, argue that, as a constituent part of the UK, Scotland could not step out of line on its own account. By 2013, I’d suggest that plans for even the Tory One Nation State (England and the rest) was also already underway. If you listen closely to speeches from that time, they were all about regaining ‘British’ (i.e. English) freedom from the nasty Continentals, but, as Mia says, new legislation due to appear in the EU, and related to much greater control of tax avoidance and parking money off-shore, was on its way.

    England is far more attached to American values than Scotland is or ever was, which should be no surprise to anyone as the earliest colonies in the New World were English ones and they brought English mores, culture, law, etc. with them. There exists, at gut level, an understanding between American mores and English ones, that Scotland, NI and Wales simply do not have – particularly Scotland, which had, until, 1707, been very much a European nation, its mores and laws based on sound principles of pan European understanding. For generations, we had been trading with Poland, Russia, the Baltic States, Continental Europe and the mainly German Hanseatic League. We attempted to expand our trade to the English colonies (we, the Scots and English, were, by then, ruled under one monarch), but England deliberately stymied that, as it also blockaded our European trading routes and sank our merchantmen which set off from Scottish ports. Little has changed except that they don’t sink our ships anymore, probably because we have so few and very few trading routes either these days, but they do allow us to export from their ports.

    When the 2014 referendum was lost, everything else was, too. Westminster was never going to allow Scotland to sever ties with the UK over Europe if it could do anything in its power to prevent that. Even Mr Salmond, had he still been leader of the SNP, would have had a fight on his hands, the difference being that he would have been up for it. Until the Scots, as a whole, understand that the British State, and England as its proxy, mean to do all in their power to prevent independence, by fair means or foul, and ensure Scottish compliance by keeping us economically trussed and hog-tied, helping themselves to our resources, this administration in Edinburgh will do nothing to beard the lion in its den. Nothing. The promise of another referendum is window dressing of the most deliberate and manipulative kind. It is going to take a very different approach to independence to succeed now and too many of this lot lack the bottle or the nous to get to grips with what it will take to break free. Any other party offering independence has to understand that offering up the same old-same old, will not work either. A new approach, totally and fundamentally at odds with the pervasive American-style predatory capitalist mentality is required, and the 10-year plan does not cut the mustard. Not by a long chalk. Neither do the established constitutional routes to independence. Neither does the supine attitude to Scotland’s resources.

    Liked by 13 people

  15. It’s amazing what can be achieved if you have leaders committed to the cause.

    Did Ghandi let London set the rules. (Traveling to South Africa in 1893, Gandhi soon discovered that the ruling white Boers, descendants of Dutch settlers, discriminated against the dark-skinned Indians who had been imported as laborers. Gandhi himself experienced this discrimination when railroad officials ordered him to sit in a third-class coach at the back of a train even though he had purchased a first-class ticket. Gandhi refused the order and police forced him off the train)

    Rosa Parks was fined for breaking the Law. (The Montgomery Bus Boycott was a civil rights protest during which African Americans refused to ride city buses in Montgomery, Alabama, to protest segregated seating. The boycott took place from December 5, 1955, to December 20, 1956)

    On the 31st March 1990 in Glasgow, 50,000 people marched peacefully through the city centre as part of the city’s poll tax protests. A campaign of organised resistance made it impossible for the councils to enforce the tax, and physically impossible for police to arrest mass defaulters. The blockading of housing estates and private homes from court-appointed sheriffs was a key part of the Scottish struggle.
    The English and Welsh drew inspiration from Scotland’s fight but the outcome was not as peaceful. A London march resulted in the worst riots in the city for over a century with 340 people arrested and 113 injured.
    Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher was widely criticised for the political and fiscal disaster, and eventually resigned

    The Suffragette victory in Britain followed years of protest, struggle and inconceivable hardship. Each woman chose her role and every role was important.

    Gurindji tribal elder Vincent Lingiari led two hundred pastoral workers away from the privately owned Wave Hill cattle station in the Northern Territory, as a protest against low pay, poverty and decades of abuse. The ‘Walk Off Mob’ formed a new settlement at Daguragu, refusing an order to vacate. The strike lasted seven years.

    Dick Leitsch, a pivotal figure in the fight for gay rights, accompanied by three friends from the Mattachine Society—John Timmins, Randy Wicker and CraigRodwell—entered Julius’ bar in Greenwich Village, declared themselves homosexuals and asked to be served. This is thought to be the first organised act of civil disobedience by gay people.

    In 1970, Culebra islanders undertook a series of protests against the United States Navy for its use of the island for military training exercises.
    The Navy expropriated 2000 of the island’s 7000 acres for bombing practice. Homes were torn down, and targets erected. A three mile exclusion zone was set around the island, making prisoners of the island’s 700 inhabitants. Little fishing remained and any cattle were grazed on navy owned land.
    LIFE magazine reported ‘the crunch of 500-pound bombs…the whine of jets, echoing machine gun fire, screaming rockets and the triple-throated boom of naval shells.’ Protestors stated that the bombing missions, which often occurred seven days a week, placed Culebra in a ‘deplorable situation.’
    Unwilling to withdraw claims to the whole island, protestors built a chapel in just three days on Flamingo Beach, a restricted, major target area, using only crude tools. US Marshals ordered them to leave but they refused and six people were arrested. Six days later, the navy demolished the chapel.

    In the first ever tree-sitting protest, activists Steven King, Shirley Guildford and others from the Native Forest Action Council led the action against the decimation of the Pureora forest.

    In 1987, a local news programme enlightened the Estonian people to Soviet plans to construct a huge phosphorite mine in Virumaa. The Soviet Estonian leadership had in the past been severely criticised for concealing information and this news unleashed an extensive protest campaign known as The Phosphorite War.
    The protest culminated in spring 1987, when brave students from Tartu University organised two peaceful demonstrations. Placards and T-shirts bore the slogan ‘Phosphorite – No Thanks!’ Declarations and newspaper articles were distributed. Estonian musicians joined the protest, singing songs that became symbolic of the struggle.

    In 1999, José Bové, along with 300 collaborators, dismantled a half-built McDonald’s in Millau (Aveyron). This was a symbolic action to protest against globalisation and the loss of food sovereignty to multinationals—that is the right to healthy, diverse and culturally appropriate food produced through sustainable methods. It was an action taken, not only on behalf of traditional French producers, but for those from all over the world.

    Liked by 16 people

    1. I honestly believe it’s going to require something like those actions you list to bring an end to the paralysis we’re enduring under this hopeless , clueless , spineless appeasement regime

      Liked by 4 people

  16. Impressive contributions , information and so much knowledge from you all. With people like you there should be no stopping Independence – it is only a matter of pulling it together, educating and mobilising -simples 😀. Thank you

    Liked by 9 people

  17. The betrayal from Sturgeons SNP just gets worse daily ,what can you add its oh so depressing. We have been manipulated and sold out by this rat of a woman at every opportunity. She’s right at the top of Scotlands horrible list of traitors. Let’s hope Alba can get us out of this corupt coercive rotten to the core Union. We need to be mindful of sleeper agents of the British state at every turn. There is no democracy in this place it is not a proper country.

    Liked by 6 people

    1. Yes Alistair, sleeper agents you say at every turn. I couldn’t agree more. Folks should look at what went on in Northern Ireland and they’d soon get a view of how deeply the British state interferes in its colonies.

      Read Brigadier Sir Frank Kitson’s books Gangs and Counter Gangs, Low Intensity Operations, and the Bunch of Five and you’ll get a good view of how the security machine infiltrates and watches everything from local residents groups, to trade unions, to independence parties, how they influence the media or create their own media if needs be, how the law is to be used to take out political opponents – everything in fact up to what Kitson describes as all out symmetrical warfare.

      Practiced by the British in their ex colonies around the world bribery, blackmail are but the small tools of the colonialists. Murdering political opponents like NI lawyers Pat Finnucane and Rosemary Nelson through the deployment of loyalist thugs, or should we say counter gangs armed and informed by shadowy undercover British military units like the Force Research Bureau ( FRU ) a stage beyond again. Or as in the case of the struggle for independence in Rhodesia, the placing of a bomb on a school bus by SAS to discredit the independence movement the foul military strategy knows no morality. Using the law to try and jail Alex Salmond, Mark Hirst, Craig Murray, et al was play stuff by comparison. But again look at Ireland, and you can see the colonial apparatus in full swing.

      Meanwhile on TV last night I heard the odious Liz Truss proudly boasting of the U.K. government’s donation of “ lethal aid “ to Ukraine. A bit more overt than normal in this big international struggle to dominate, but illustrative on how getting lethal weaponry to support counter gangs against someone, or something, or a country is the standard stock in trade – albeit that the Ukraine thing is undoubtedly now more of the symmetrical warfare thing that Kitson talked of when more covert ploys fail.

      Anyway, sleepers at every turn here in Scotland. You bet Alistair. You bet!,

      Liked by 6 people

  18. Mia is a rottweiler in the faux-” Stronger For Scotland ” poodle-parlour .

    You don’t have to agree with everything she says to appreciate the ferocity of her defence of our country against the wolves of the * British * ( read English ) State AND the sheep of Sturgeon’s NSNP

    Keep snarling sister

    Liked by 6 people

Comments are closed.