Sturgeonland

[Mason89]

All three took dogs abuse at the time & one still does. Not for their political policy but because they were a lesbian, looked like a lesbian or a lesbian Kim Jong Un. One of them ended up in court against a former poster on here - RevStu, formerly of this parish, but now full time in Bristol being a wee ball sack unionist plant milk drinking w@nker. Hiya pal

Until we live in a country where a female leader can cheat on their cancer ridden husband, can’t say how many kids they’ve got or shag using public money, then I’ll continue to point out the unfair balance.

I noticed RevStu, the Bath based ball sack, Salmond fan boy & darling of the Alt Right porridge punters, has said he's voting Tory next election. The milk drinking weirdo is one of the main pushers of the Trans hate (non) issue, which seems to have firmly split a once fairly united independence front.

Now can anyone join the dots here, or does it just bust yer baws too much to admit I was right?

[stewarty27]

I noticed RevStu, the Bath based ball sack, Salmond fan boy & darling of the Alt Right porridge punters, has said he's voting Tory next election. The milk drinking weirdo is one of the main pushers of the Trans hate (non) issue, which seems to have firmly split a once fairly united independence front.

Now can anyone join the dots here, or does it just bust yer baws too much to admit I was right?

You're not right as per usual, What you are is a reactionary gum bumper. I'll let the esteemed Journalist Kevin McKenna say my piece.


THERE’S “glacial pace”, then there’s the rate at which the SNP party machinery moves. On November 22 last year, Nicola Sturgeon announced that she’d be announcing an “extraordinary meeting” to determine what next steps should be taken following the UK Supreme Court’s decision to block Holyrood from organising a referendum.
Six weeks later, the First Minister duly announced that March 19 was the chosen day for this “democracy conference”. Now maybe this is just me being a curmudgeonly churl. But I kinda thought that the detail of the “next steps” might already have been worked out at some point in the last couple of years.
There’s not a bookmaker in the country who’d have taken bets on this most Conservative of Supreme Courts deciding that Holyrood wasn’t competent to organise a referendum on independence. In my naivete, I’d assumed that as soon as their Lordships had duly kicked Holyrood in the knackers, that the SNP would have clicked into gear with a shiny plan all oven-ready and reinforced with details, timings, process. You know: all the stuff they’ve said they were doing in the eight and a half years since the first referendum.
Indeed, during this period, loyal members even entrusted the hierarchy with more than £600k of donations for the purposes of fighting a referendum. There weren’t even any strings attached.
Several Yes supporters I’ve spoken with during this time simply trusted the party hierarchy to use the money as best they could.
We also know that the salary and expenses bill for special advisers and all the other back-office functionaries has risen very steeply (£1 million and counting). The donors and foot-soldiers had an expectation that at least some of their workload would include strategies covering all eventualities.
It’s not as though they hadn’t had several suggestions – made over several years – about what those next steps should be. Various individuals at several levels of the party had been advocating making either a Westminster election or a Holyrood election into a de facto vote on Scotland’s future. Among them were Angus MacNeil, MP for Na h-Eileanan an Iar, and Chris McEleny, formerly the SNP group leader on Inverclyde Council and now deputy leader of Alba.
But when these party stalwarts attempted to have their ideas debated at national conferences, they were howled down and verbally abused by hand-picked knuckle-draggers occupying the front row. The abuse aimed at McEleny in particular became so bad that he migrated to Alba.
How democratic the conference itself will be remains open to question. Will it be stage-managed to ensure that only SNP-approved groups get to have a say? Will think tanks such as Common Weal be permitted inside the tent? You’d like to think so.
After all, they’ve provided a much more thoughtful and joined-up vision of what an independent Scotland could look like than anything so far produced by the party.
Will Wings Over Scotland, by far the Yes movement’s most influential independent website and discussion forum, be permitted to attend? Again; you’d like to think so. The website – along with Common Weal – was crucial in providing aspiring and existing SNP politicians with the arguments and detail to combat Unionist propaganda in newspapers and television.
During the first referendum campaign, the Wee Blue Book became required reading for supporters of independence whenever they were asked to make the case on any media panel discussions.
Wings Over Scotland still retains a massive following of those who, for various reasons, feel their views have been marginalised by the professional SNP. So, if the SNP are genuinely serious about hammering out a strategy for making another referendum happen, then Wings Over Scotland should be there.
In yesterday’s National, Karen Adam, the MSP for Banffshire and Buchan Coast, penned a thoughtful and startlingly self-aware column addressing some of this: “The Yes movement, to use an old term, is a ‘broad church’, and we obviously have many differing views on the visions for the future we have in mind. Mine, I am sure, differs greatly from some who are reading this right now, but ultimately don’t we all want that debate to be between us and us alone?”
I couldn’t agree more with Ms Adam. And I’m sure she’d welcome the inclusion of Wings and Common Weal and some of the others within the “broad church” of the Yes movement who have “differing views for the future we have in mind”.
Surely some time on March 19 will be devoted to matters that can be broadly defined as “diplomacy and statecraft”. This is how grown-up statesmanship on the international stage works. It involves opening up back channels of communication with your adversaries where red lines can be moved backwards and forwards and you can speak more freely than perhaps you would in front of a television camera.
ONE of the SNP’s best practitioners of this was Joanna Cherry, whose formidable debating skills and work on various Westminster committees gained the admiration of many at the top of the UK Government. Ms Cherry should also be invited to make a major contribution to her party’s “Democracy Conference”.
As she proved during the prorogation proceedings in 2019, she knows how to defeat the Tories in their own backyard and by a fierce knowledge of the law as it affects both Scotland and England.
It was depressing that she was never consulted about the wisdom of approaching the Supreme Court in the first place.
I’m sure though, that if the SNP leadership is serious about any of this, then they won’t want to make the same mistake twice and that an invitation to the MP for Edinburgh South West to address the delegates in March will soon be forthcoming.
Although, it might help if someone in the SNP hierarchy reached out to her and expressed support for the ordeals she’s recently had to face – namely the violent and threatening behaviour she’s encountered online from party activists for merely standing up for women’s ***-based rights.
I’d also like to see some Alba figures being invited along on March 19. A recent breakthrough poll suggests that the party could win as many as 20 list seats at the next Scottish election if Yes voters ignore the SNP’s self-defeating instruction to make it both votes SNP.
Before any “next steps” are taken, a process of healing must take place within the SNP. The party has become hollowed out by a deeply unpleasant and abusive core of activists who have made it their business to attack and delegitimise female members who campaign for women’s ***-based rights.
The Democracy Conference on March 19 should also be a conference of reconciliation.

[Donanddusted]

I'll let the esteemed Journalist Kevin McKenna

Esteemed, you say?

Maybe by the Jungles in his pieces in their magazine.

No credibility whatsoever if you like either of the cheeks.

[stewarty27]

Esteemed, you say?

Maybe by the Jungles in his pieces in their magazine.

No credibility whatsoever if you like either of the cheeks.

Jings that's a bit cryptic DD.. wot u mean min ?

[Donanddusted]

Jings that's a bit cryptic DD.. wot u mean min ?

He's a Herald journo with no interest in Scottish independence.
He hates the Tories (who doesn't? Sorry/not sorry Jupiter).

He'll put his spin on his articles to suit the rag he's writing it for.

And he's a Celtic supporter.

[stewarty27]

I noticed RevStu, the Bath based ball sack, Salmond fan boy & darling of the Alt Right porridge punters, has said he's voting Tory next election. The milk drinking weirdo is one of the main pushers of the Trans hate (non) issue, which seems to have firmly split a once fairly united independence front.

Now can anyone join the dots here, or does it just bust yer baws too much to admit I was right?

Not heard that one before, Campbell gonna vote Tory. Do you have a source please. Was it Neil Lennon again

[Mason89]

Not heard that one before, Campbell gonna vote Tory. You're source please.

Are you ok with it not being in the Scotsman?

[stewarty27]

Are you ok with it not being in the Scotsman?

Your just making stuff up again aren't you ? You haven't worked out that if you come on here with unsubstantiated angry warped statements you must be able to back them up, So I ask again what's your source for this latest gibberish ?

[Mason89]

Your just making stuff up again aren't you ? You haven't worked out that if you come on here with unsubstantiated angry warped statements you must be able to back them up, So I ask again what's your source for this latest gibberish ?

If you're referring to your embarrassing fluffing of Neil Lennon yesterday, it was you parroting Neil Lennons lies about our support that was falling short in evidence. The reason being because it was entirely made up.

As for the angry incel in Bath, I'm going to have to trawl through the very worst corner of the internet to get the source, as it was that bought & paid for Tory gimp himself that said it. Would you be happy with that as a source, before i start?

[stewarty27]

If you're referring to your embarrassing fluffing of Neil Lennon yesterday, it was you parroting Neil Lennons lies about our support that was falling short in evidence. The reason being because it was entirely made up.

As for the angry incel in Bath, I'm going to have to trawl through the very worst corner of the internet to get the source, as it was that bought & paid for Tory gimp himself that said it. Would you be happy with that as a source, before i start?

Just for the record Mason I'm no fan of Campbell these days. But I'd have to say his "wee blue" book was inspirational during IndyRef1. I look forward to your internet search I tried but to no avail. Reluctantly returning to NL you made a claim and produced not a shred to back it up. I don't mind your bile filled rants I'd just like them to be true