THE ALBA PARTY POLITICAL BROADCAST

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 easily by clicking on the links in the Home and Blog sections of this website. by doing so you will be joining thousands of other readers who enjoy being notified by email when new articles are published. You will be most welcome.

30 thoughts on “THE ALBA PARTY POLITICAL BROADCAST

  1. That PPB takes me back to when Independence to shape our future was our common aim and that ALL The People of Scotland were Sovereign.

    Now, Sturgeon’s TransCult is dictating our future.
    Votes given and politicians elected in pursuit of Independence are now used to push through legislation that divides us.

    The SNP taking same path that led to the demise of the Labour.Party – “You Vote for US …We decide for YOU”

    Liked by 13 people

    1. We’re collectively over fond of recollecting the eclipse of the Irish Parliamentary Party by Sinn Féin, when there’s a more recent and relevant example to cite.
      In the two Holyrood elections 2011 & 2016, Scottish Labour lost 48% of their seats.
      And for the the same reasons that NuSNP will fail. A wholesale takeover by middle class politics graduates. Self serving, carpetbagging careerists. Just the next generation of the same parasites that burned Scottish Labour to the ground.
      Labour went into the 2016 election with Kezia “never had a proper job in her life” Dugdale at the helm. And how did that work out? They lost 13 seats!
      Sturgeon’s personality flaws leave her simultaneously isolated and blind to the mood on the street and reliant on the (ultimately faux) adulation that the careerists appear to offer. She’s weak, the parasites will hollow out NuSNP same as they did Scottish Labour.
      Perhaps it’s just my social media bubble, but I sense a visceral rage against these woke, middle class leaches.

      Liked by 10 people

  2. I decided to stop calling the New SNP or the Greens a Pro-Indy parties, because there not. I got a year’s free subscription to The National after two months I decided to end my free subscription because there not Pro-Indy and not interested in any other Pro-Indy party, it’s a Rag for the Nicola who’s British and states she’ll always be British even if Scotland becomes Independent, this statement from the FM told me all I need to know about the direction of the New SNP and its supporters. We don’t have a leader we have a self-imposed Messiah, god help us all. Here’s my little phrase Scotland has become more British under the New SNP and the GLAIKIT haven’t noticed it yet or where never bothered. The hate crime bill was a gaging order on anyone who lives in Scotlandshire against anyone questioning the New SNP its leadership and the workings of its government, aye Scotland has changed not for the better of anyone who lives here, worrying times for us all and the cause of Indyref.

    Liked by 11 people

  3. Well I thought that was excellent. Hit the right messages for this time. Indy, women’s rights, poverty and the focus on energy prices. Assuming people watch and don’t just switch off that should surely grab a few votes. Here’s hoping. Scotland can’t afford (in all sense of the word) to delay indy much longer. We have the talent in our country so why are we leaving our politics to whose who serve the colonial power? I must treat myself to Alf’s doon hauden!

    Liked by 13 people

    1. Here’s a quick tour of the theoretical framework from Doun-Hauden, explaining Scotland’s oppressive reality and the rationale for independence:

      Liked by 7 people

      1. Great stuff Alf, Being one who is not in the least academic I find your writing in this book easy to follow and understand. I have for decades tried to argue with friends and family, that Scotland was Englands first colony and will be Englands last colony. Now I have much valued knowledge with which to expand my argument. Many thanks for your work on this.

        Liked by 3 people

      2. Thanks for that, Tunnag-brot. The book is fortunately a merger of theory with numerous practical examples of the way oppression works. Some have said it represented a ‘lightbulb moment’. The realisation by a people that independence is decolonisation should lead to more support for independence.

        Liked by 1 person

  4. Just wish we had Alba or other independent candidates standing in our ward. But, with 2 Independents, 2 SNP, 1 Labour and 1Tory how do I number my vote?

    Liked by 1 person

    1. Maybe try googling or contacting the independents for their policies and views – Martin Keating is an independent on the list for me and he’ll be getting my vote 2 after Alba …

      Liked by 6 people

    2. Adopt a slightly modified version of “vote till ye boak “. This means you put the candidates you LEAST want to succeed at the bottom of your STV preference order,

      My modification? Don’t give either the Greens or SNP your last preferences. Leave blank spaces opposite their candidates so that party scrutineers get the message and take it back to the Murrels.

      Without your local knowledge, I cannot advise you on order. If one or both independent candidates are pro-Indy then it is easy. The difficult part is with the two YOONs, Labour and Tory. Hold your nose and give them 3 & 4. Give the SNP nothing- no 5 , no 6.

      Like

    1. Yes, great song by The Proclaimers to which I provided a link in a post a few days ago. Probably won’t appeal to those who believe in dis-enfranchising non-native Scots though.

      Good broadcast, very professionally done, my only complaint is that being a little hard of hearing I had difficulty in making out what some of the those contributing were saying.

      Liked by 4 people

      1. I’m more than a little hard off hearing, ie somewhere between moderate and severe deafness depending on how high or low the sounds are, and was very disappointed that there were no subtitles and the faces of the speakers were often not visible.
        That combination made it pretty useless for me to understand.
        ALBA should get the message that if they want to influence older voters, many of whom are hard of hearing even if they do not recognise the fact, they must make their material more accessible.

        Liked by 3 people

      2. Apparently there are now subtitles but there were none when I first tried to listen and post my comment below.
        The same seems to happen from time to time with Barrhead Boy’s Prism conversations. No ideaw hy this happens but frustrating not to be able to listen until subtitles appear.
        However, better late than never!

        Liked by 1 person

  5. I don’t think it’s a case of dis-enfranchising ‘non-native Scots’. It’s a case of applying a fair set of rules when holding plebiscites on the country’s constitutional arrangements.

    In 2014 a friend of mine from Yorkshire, who owns a second home in Edinburgh, voted against Independence. He uses his Scottish residence as a seasonal holiday home – do you really think that it is correct that a non-taxpayer, non-resident should get to influence how we wish to be governed?

    The UN doe not have an axe to grind on such matters. I believe it has an agreed rule set that can be employed when a people votes on the constitutional status of their country. We should use them.

    Liked by 11 people

    1. I largely agree. In my view, only those who are permanently resident in and have committed themselves to Scotland should be allowed to vote. That is one of the attractions of a plebiscite election (I’m coming slowly round to that idea!) in that it would be held under UK general election rules which require that in order to be registered to vote one has to be be 18 or over on the day of the election (‘polling day’); be a British, Irish or qualifying Commonwealth citizen; be resident at an address in the UK (or a British citizen living abroad who has been registered to vote in the UK in the last 15 years); and not be legally excluded from voting.

      The 2014 referendum was held under SG election rules which give a wider franchise. To qualify, one must be registered to vote, be 16 or over on the day of the election, be a British, Commonwealth or EU citizen, be resident at an address in Scotland, and not be legally excluded from voting. My understanding is that for electoral purposes a person is resident at an address if it is their permanent home address. When making a determination on someone’s residence, you need to consider the circumstances of the applicant, including the purpose they are present at a particular address for and/or the reasons they are absent. That should exclude second home owners because they are not “resident” in Scotland, but if second home owners and/or landlords are voting then clearly that aspect hasn’t worked.

      This franchise either has or is going to be widened by the Scottish Elections (Franchise and Representation) Bill which will extend the devolved franchise to citizens of any country who are legally resident in Scotland. It empowers
      those with the right to reside in Scotland and who may be paying taxes, own or rent a home and/or use public services in Scotland to vote in Scottish local and parliamentary elections, which if 2014 is anything to go by would include a referendum. As the policy is to enfranchise citizens of all nationalities who are legally resident in Scotland, this will include those whose claim for asylum has been allowed and have been granted refugee status and leave to remain in the UK (usually for an initial period of 5 years). So set up home in Scotland, however temporarily, and use the public library and you should qualify. This goes well beyond my own view that eligible voters should be permanently resident in Scotland and be committed to Scotland.

      Liked by 4 people

  6. @pandapaws

    “I must treat myself …” You won’t be disappointed, *Doun-Hauden* is essential reading for anyone who wants to understand colonialism in a Scottish context.

    Liked by 6 people

  7. I think we have all had enough of SNP lies and one excuse after another to justify their inaction . We now have a champion in Alba to deliver what the SNP should have done with 6 mandates . Soar Alba .

    Liked by 5 people

    1. I see on the Herald Sturgeon is already talking about what she will do “if” she loses an indyref. If she holds one at all it will be because she is sure of losing it – then off she goes to the UN with UKG blessing. The biggest threat to Scotland is this FM.

      Liked by 8 people

  8. The John Smith Centre for Public Service continues to smash through the boundaries of self parody.
    A motion is submitted at Holyrood congratulating the JSCfPS on “the opportunities it provides to young people to enter the world of public service and politics”. The motion is drafted by Scottish Labour MSP (West of Scotland) Paul O’Kane. Who he?
    Young; check. Politics graduate; check. Never had a proper job in his life; check. Gay; check. Promoted to Deputy Convenor of major committee immediately on being sworn in as a rookie MSP; check.
    I’d watch yer back Anas, this wan ‘ill be oan a State Department IVLP trip afore ye ken it.

    Liked by 6 people

  9. Several months ago the ‘National’, which I no longer purchase, had a front page with Stewart Hosie’s phizzog emblazoned on it assuring us that senior SNP figures would be prominent at all AUOB’ future marches. The absolute hypocrisy and cynical nature of this was summed up by the rehabilitation of Hosie as the chosen judas goat sent to charm the uninformed and waverers back to the fold.

    Needless to say, on the back of the Sturgeon Narcissist Project ‘s (S.N.P.) complete silence reigns since her SNP vote 1+ 2 con trick, the AUOB marches have been pitiful in numbers and the appearance of the ‘anointed ones’ unheralded or unwelcomed.

    Now Sturgeon is getting the battle bus out to con the voters again, significantly in the East of Scotland predominantly tory areas. She and they know that they are in trouble. Fast draining electoral support, especially amongst real women. But not enough to get wiped out. However, her description, if correct, by ‘100% Yes’ @ 8.16, of her stating that she will always remain ‘British’ irrespective if Scotland votes for Indy is beyond the pale for me. I hear the sound of an orange drum being rattled in the vain hope that it will pacify the remaining susceptible( are there any?) ‘British’ OAPs and rangers fans , but also an appeal to the ‘New Scots’ (joke) recently ‘settled’.

    Liked by 6 people

  10. Alyn Smith has an article in the National today, saying that Scottish independence needs us “to win that argument for those not yet persuaded.” I wrote up a comment that is far too long to post there, but writing it helped clarify my thinking on the matter of Westminster’s Treaty-breaching, with the idea that the only argument we need to deal with is the abrogation of the Treaty obligation to respect and uphold the constitution of the people of Scotland, as the most egregious breach possible, in that the damage it caused could never be properly repaired, and the only meaningful remedy was the restoration of Scotland’s independence. Looking at it later this afternoon, I saw a different and much simpler approach.

    I am going to ramble a little from here on as I cut, paste, and edit what I originally wrote into a different semblance of order, so please bear with me.

    I started with this, describing Scotland’s constitution;

    “That constitution makes clear that the people of Scotland are sovereign, and that they will only be governed with their consent. If the Scottish people take objection to a government, or a parliament, or a monarch, their consent can be withdrawn, and the authority to govern them removed from the offending government, parliament, or monarch, and the relevant body deposed.”

    Later on, describing how Scotland’s voice in Westminster is always overruled by England’s MPs who own no authority over Scotland, I wrote;

    “The point of Scotland’s representation is that the voice of Scotland’s people is intended to be heard and that voice should have real effect, in the only place where sovereignty is wielded.”

    And then I realised that statement actually follows directly from Scotland’s constitution, and is actually a good summary of that constitution, so let me write it out properly here;

    ‘Scotland’s constitution is that our people’s voice must be heard and that voice must have real effect, or else!’

    And since Westminster is obligated to respect and uphold that constitution via a codicil written in both Acts of Union as an obligatory condition of the Treaty being ratified, it is clear that Westminster’s simple flat majority rule in the House of Commons is, all by itself, a direct breach of the Treaty, because that was the point of the obligation on Westminster to uphold Scotland’s constitution.

    I don’t know how far back Westminster has used the simple majority rule in its House voting, but if there was a vote in the UK Parliament on its first day, where England’s MPs overruled Scotland’s, then it literally breached the Treaty on day one of the Union. And we can’t pin that one on Dicey!

    Liked by 3 people

    1. Corollary to my own comment;

      It is not the case that Westminster has breached the Treaty of Union on many of its articles, instead it is the case that Westminster has repeatedly breached the Treaty of Union on thousands of occasions.

      Liked by 3 people

    2. Second corollary;

      Whether or not the Holyrood parliament is a ‘child of Westminster’ it also represents the voice of the Scottish people, and Westminster is obligated to hear its voice, and that voice must have effect. This means more than just the Sewel Convention having real teeth, it also means that Westminster cannot deny Holyrood whatever additional powers it wants to use in Scotland. Perhaps it might wish to exercise its right to hold an Independence referendum.

      Liked by 1 person

      1. Yes, I know, but what do you propose should be done about it? You say that Westminster is “obligated” to hear the voice of Holyrood, but unfortunately Westminster doesn’t seem to think it is, so how can you require them to accept this view? You say that Westminster cannot deny Holyrood whatever additional powers it wants to use, but unfortunately it does and there doesn’t seem to be any realistic way of persuading them to do otherwise. I entirely agree that under the UN charter if nothing else the people of Scotland are entitled as of right to choose their own destiny and political future, but possibly the biggest problem we have is the people of Scotland, who all too often appear as wee sleekit cowerin tim’rous beesties, who just don’t have the bottle to change things. First you have the considerable problem of getting the people onside, a problem that’s made even worse by the facts that the main stream media is unionist controlled and that the political party that should be doing this isn’t, then we can set about Westminster.

        Like

  11. The UK is safe in Nicolas hands! Making the case for independence water tight should have been done long before now. To suggest that it hasn’t been done is a damning indictment of this administration. Instead of Scotland having to justify its existence why are we not pointing out Englands inabilities to fund itself, to feed itself, to power itself and to provide its people with enough fresh water. Why are we not questioning our contribution to propping up a feudal system, a system of patronage and privilege while Scots go cold and hungry because of the rape of our birth right. What a self serving spineless colonial administration we have keeping us British. Power for powers sake. Its true what they say “power tends to corrupt and absolute power corrupts absolutely.” Scots have to wake up to the only alternative.

    Liked by 6 people

  12. Does the London government seem to imply that Britain is England? Coincidently, ‘Undemocraric Kingdon’ shares the same capitals as their ‘UK’. Scotland’s history is more complex than this space allows to cover; however, the so-called ‘mainstream media’ is owned by the “Filthy Rich”; please remember that Scottish people were and are aliens to London’s mentality… However, before too long, Scotland and England will again be independent nations, and certainly, not before time!

    Liked by 1 person

Comments are closed.

%d bloggers like this: