Alibi
-
Posts
1,266 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
5
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Tartan Army Message Board News
Media Demo
Posts posted by Alibi
-
-
19 minutes ago, Orraloon said:
You do realise that he isn't on the same side as you?
Really? What side is that? Wings is still on the side of independence; it's the deeply corrupted SNP that he has a problem with. As an SNP voter all my life, I tend to agree with much of what he says. He has called most things correctly for years, often with stuff that I found hard to believe but generally he has been spot on.
Just heard something on Radio Scotland about Swinney saying he still wants to get self ID pushed through. That doesn't sound like a leader who wants to achieve independence. Self ID is the main reason the GRA is so unpopular - if Swinney had any sense he'd just let the whole thing drop. Is it stupidity or malicious sabotage?
-
19 hours ago, RanelaghScot said:
On the topic of confrontation, the "good wee parliamentarians" act of the SNP MPs was/is quite boak inducing. Basically each of them is ripping the tap aff it at the chance to say "the right honorable gentleman" and be included in the grown ups' event.
Until they agree to a referendum I'd have every MP turning up with a vuvuzela, set of bagpipes, fart machines, letting them all go off until that C* Lindsay Hoyle pushed himself over the edge to the point of needing medical assistance.
Yes, rather than co-operate in the unionist wankfest that is the British establishment, they should be kicking up shit every day, disrupting the house of commons and generally making a nuisance of themselves. Make the UK parliament itself ungovernable. Lots of unparliamentary language. Would achieve a lot more than "being good wee parliamentarians". stop co-operating and start resisting.
Mind you, having seen the "new" Scottish Government cabinet with absolutely everyone unchanged apart from the removal of the minister for indy and the forced inclusion of Kate Forbes (she's the only positive in this "re-shuffle"), I'm not expecting much. Swinney will probably be daft enough to persist with prioritising the Greens' perversions rather than introducing vote-winning policies. I have a strong feeling that Sturgeon is pulling his strings (not sure who's pulling hers).
-
1 hour ago, mariokempes said:
Shared : Interesting fact picked up by Alf Baird yesterday with regards to Jon Swinneys briefing in the metropolitan capital the other day. There was no doubt about it - Swinney was at Queen Anne’s Gate - the site of the English imperial Home Office.
He made his ‘impromptu’ statement having emerged from the doors of the Resolution Foundation, a Right Wing (default Unionist) ‘think’ tank.
No attempt was made to hide that fact – indeed it seemed that they were keen to create those very ‘optics’ – no doubt to reassure their colonial masters.
The message that ‘Independence is over’ could not be more brazen – amplified all morning by the BBC.
Have you got a source for this? I would have thought it would be all over social media. Wouldn't surprise me one little bit tbh.
-
4 minutes ago, TDYER63 said:
Waste of time.
Branch conclusion : Kate is intelligent but naive , cost us votes on her performance at last leadership contest, polarising.
John is fantastic.Not surprised. I'm sure my branch (if I was still a member) would similarly still be full of unimaginative Sturgeon loyalists who would prefer to be discussing the next Saturday's street stall than actually making sensible decisions that might steer the good ship SNP away from the iceberg.
-
17 hours ago, phart said:
The point still stands if they won't switch their vote.
I want Forbes to run and win. Although not because I think she will a miracle worker, but to show the opposite of that. It's done for now. There isn't a mechanism to independence that isn't through permission by the UK goverment.
I'd like to see what she does, what ideas she has. She might be smart to wait it out a bit, get her family up a bit. Get a cabinet position in Swinney's government and take it from there.
That is a point that needs to be dealt with. If we are in a voluntary union, the question should be basked of unionists over and over again: "What is the mechanism by which Scotland can leave the union?" If the only answer is "you can't", that should be made absolutely clear to the people of Scotland. That would be confirmation that we are not in a union but in a prison. Meanwhile SNP politicians talk about "building support" and similar bland non-statements. What's the point of building support if the ultimate destination is "No, you can't have a section 30". No wonder so many independence struggles around the world have involved violence.
Anyway if it's Swinney, we will get nowhere. That's why the media are promoting him. Kick the can down the road. Fuck that. Swinney represents taking the ball to the corner flag to waste time when your team is 1-0 down.
-
If they go with Swinney, the party will be in the doldrums for ages. We need someone who will shake things up. Swinney is not that person, which is why he is being promoted by the MSM and BBC Scotland. I'm a devout atheist but I'd vote for Forbes in a straight vote between her and Swinney as I don't believe she would prioritise her own beliefs over what she knows the public want and to me the SNP needs a fresh start - which Swinney isn't. Ridiculous that she is being demonised for her beliefs when Yousaf pretty much got a free ride. Hmm, maybe should rephrase that last bit...
-
12 hours ago, exile said:
So you don't want indy sidelined, but your first question of a candidate would be nothing to do with independence at all.
Given the damage that allowing the toxic Greens to dictate policy has caused, and indeed given the neutering of the SNP NEC as a representative body under Sturgeon's watch, then yes, it is of vital importance so that we can see if they're going to keep digging the hole they've got themselves in, with stuff like gender issues and wood burning stoves taking priority over everything else, especially indy.
I note that Kelly Given seems to be popping up all over the place on radio at the moment - she was initially saying that Jenny Gilruth was the only sensible choice for leader, but has since dropped that line to avoid ridicule and is backing Swinney. Call Kaye this morning is like a roll call of all the yoons - all of whom if pressed go for Swinney. That tells you all you need to know. If Swinney returns to the front line, it should not be as FM or leader.
I would assume that all candidates are pro-indy, though these days you can't guarantee that - Kirsty Blackman for instance and there are a few others who want to park it for years.
-
2 hours ago, PapofGlencoe said:
Salmond is by far the most canny and charismatic politician in Scotland in my eyes but he's lost credibility in the eyes of too many. For example, my wife is appalled I still give him an ear. She can't see past the allegations, no smoke without fire blah blah.
a lot of folk like that, for right or wrong.
what they probably should do is listen to his tactics and stop viciously attacking him though.
Agreed, there is no way he will be able to make a full political comeback, as the relative lack of success of Alba maybe shows; however as a sort of elder statesman figure, he would still be invaluable to the indy movement as a whole (no pun intended...)
-
If Swinney gets shoehorned in, I can't see him advancing the cause of independence any time soon. He's too bland and isn't going to inspire anyone. He has a role to play but it's not as leader.
Kelly Given was on Call Kaye this morning rooting for Jenny Gilruth. That would be a disaster unless you want even more wokeism.
The best person to be SNP leader, even after being away from the job for nearly ten years, is still Alex Salmond. He puts every other politician in Scotland, and indeed in the entire UK, in the shade. Nobody can put incisive points across like him. No wonder Sturgeon connived to have him assassinated politically. He's the benchmark that we really need to aim for in selecting a new leader, and currently I can't think of anyone who comes close to that level of political nous. Of the main contenders, I'd say Kate Forbes would probably be the best option as she comes across well. However, freeports? Hmm...
-
Please not Swinney - he may be a "safe pair of hands" but if that's the level we're seeking would be better with Craig Gordon. I think he's being pushed by the mainstream media for a reason - namely that he's a safe pair of hands for the union in that he won't get us any nearer indy. I've also heard Jenny Gilruth being mentioned - Kelly Given was on the radio this morning bigging her up which should probably tell you all you need to know - more wokeness and gender shite, and indy sidelined.
The logical choice would be Kate Forbes, if she wants the job, and I've been quite impressed by Steven Flynn at times and I think he'd be prepared to take a fairly aggressive stance on indy, although his current location might be a problem.
The first thing I'd ask any candidate is "define "woman". That should give you a fair idea of who to eliminate from any sensible shortlist for an election for leader.
Rather a pity Ash Regan jumped ship. She talks sense and her commitment to indy is genuine. I voted for her last time & I still think I made the right choice, although a lot of people didn't rate her. She was certainly better than Yousaf but the powers that be wanted a weak puppet.
As for Mhairi Black, please no. Been a huge disappointment.
-
Delighted to hear this news. I wonder if Yousaf will now resign, given that just yesterday he was saying the BHA was a good thing.
I can see polling figures for the SNP rising as a result of this. Even better if the SNP moved away from some of the unpopular policies that resulted from the Greens being included in government - the woke stuff, plus the DRS that Slater made such a mess of and a few other things as well. It's an opportunity for the SNP to press the reset button, although I think for that to happen we would need Yousaf himself to be ousted.
-
Someone from the SNP needs to come out and say unequivocally that they agree with the Cass report. aYousaf has avoided doing that. Patrick Harvie is painting himself into a corner with his utterances, and pandering to him by not disagreeing with what he is saying is crazy. If they could just accept what about 99% of the world acknowledges, that it is not possible to change sex and that trans people, while living as someone of the opposite sex, do not not actually miraculously become the opposite sex, we might get somewhere. As it is, it's just another bad decision which will lose votes. Why do they persist with this electoral suicide at every turn? Surely it can't just be stupidity? is it a deliberate strategy?
I think the time for political parties trying to claim they are the vehicle for independence has maybe passed. They always put their own restraints on it (for example the SNP insist on EU membership which, while I personally tend to support it, divides opinion). We need an organised independence movement that is a civic organisation, and if it is necessary to stand for election to implement that, it should be on a simple one line manifesto "independence for Scotland". We can sort out the other stuff once we have indy regained, with a general election with any parties that want to stand.
-
Good grief, he is utterly hopeless. Next thing he'll be condemning the Cass report so as not to upset his wokeists. The wheels have come off genderwoowoo and all sensible folk are running a mile from it, but Humza's carrying on regardless.
-
27 minutes ago, Ally Bongo said:Many of us thought that Harvie was a 'wrong un' from the outset. His opinion about Cass raises questions about child safety in Scotland. How did someone with these views insinuate himself into the government of Scotland?
The sooner the SNP drop the Greens the better. Preferably before the Greens resign from government (which they probably won't because they like the money). If the SNP don't drop the Greens, they will look indecisive and may even be tainted by the inference that they don't disagree with Harvie's views on Cass.
I expect Yousaf will plead with the Greens to stay. He has a talent for doing the wrong thing at every opportunity.
-
Bit of a clusterfuck. Would be quite funny if it turned out that Murrell was in the pay of the British state all along.
I know all governing parties come up with some daft policies, but it seems to me that the Sturgeon version of the SNP have brought forward almost nothing but unpopular policies - even the recent 30% increase in minimum alcohol prices during a cost of living crisis could have been thought up specifically to lose votes. I'm becoming more and more convinced that it's deliberate - malice rather than incompetence. Those promoting these daft policies know exactly what they are doing.
-
On 4/9/2024 at 2:28 PM, hampden_loon2878 said:
seems to have been a theme since sturgeon took over,, destroy independence supporting industries.Oil&Gas , the fishing industry, the arts and buisness in general while bending over backwards to please the identity politics nut jobs whos numbers are probably less than 2000,, anyone if they could explain the logic behind this, please shed some light on this
Sabotage?
-
4 minutes ago, Squirrelhumper said:
Be as well just voting for parties taking independence of the the manifesto then. Only reason a lot of folk vote SNP is as a route to independence.
Who cares if they got pelters for it? They get pelters off the unionist press anyway. They are making a rod for their own back with some of their policies whilst also being scared to mention indy, never mind push for it. It's no wonder their vote share is about to fall off a cliff. Many just won't vote, many soft SNP will go back to Labour and it's entirely predictable. Some of us have been saying this is about to happen. They've gone from a huge membership, a seemingly united party, a clear fight for their main goal of indy, huge support amongst the young voters, to now looking likely to have less MP's at Westminster than Slab.
Spot on. The current SNP leadership with a few (very few) notable exceptions are a bunch of bland nobodies. Scared of their own shadows, scared to rock the boat, scared to say anything that the MSM might take exception to. Meekly accepting whatever WM say - and in doing so, showing they are happy with Scotland being held prisoner in an abusive, coercive union. I don't recall any of them asking directly - and getting a proper answer to the question - "If this is a voluntary union, what is the procedure for leaving it". And the answer is not acceptable if it includes any English veto over Scotland doing just that.
-
1 hour ago, Squirrelhumper said:
I think his point is that SNP aren't strong enough on independence. Plenty of people will vote Yes if it came to it but feel the SNP aren't doing anywhere near enough to push the case for independence.
Yes, that's exactly what I meant. If they don't major on indy, they don't really offer anything to attract those who want indy. In a UK election where the SNP can never get in power, they have to demonstrate a reason to actually vote for them. Nobody is enthused to vote for being allowed to be told "Section 30? Fuck off. Back in your box". Which in essence is what they seem to be offering nowadays. They need to stop being good wee parliamentarians and go down there and kick up fuck at every opportunity, but they won't.
-
14 minutes ago, Caledonian Craig said:
I just find that poll is too far off what other polls recently have predicted so cannot be taken as verbatim. Going from polling at high to low 30 seats in other polls suddenly down to 19. And the only thing of note to have happened in that time was passing of Hate Bill which I couldn't see making that much a difference (or shouldn't) as the rest of the UK has similar bills without any hoo-hah.
Probably to do with weighting. Not the first time a large poll has come up with nonsense when it is applied to Scotland because the raw figures are wrongly weighted.
In any case once Labour are having to defend brexit and a load of other stuff (Sarwar will likely have to support tuition fees and prescription charges for example) their vote will likely fall back. Nobody likes Starmer, and Sarwar just tries to be everything to everyone - campaigning for fair pay and in support of waspi women while his family business pays poverty-level wages and his party spent millions in Glasgow opposing these same women. Labour support is being shored up by the MSM and BBC Scotland. Fuck them.
-
If the SNP sideline independence, they will get hammered - not necessarily by folk voting for yoon parties but more by folk just not voting. Right now they don't have an appealing set of policies to pursue and in fact they don't seem to have anything to offer, indy aside and they are clueless about how to achieve that - Yousaf asking people to vote SNP and they will ask for a section 30 again doesn't cut it. Oh how we need a leader!
I reckon Yousaf has been manoeuvred into place by the British state. He must be like a dream come true for them. He has no drive. He focuses on the wrong issues. With Yousaf in charge, indy is withering on the vine - people are just getting fed up waiting and nothing is happening. We need better.
-
17 minutes ago, Ally Bongo said:
Well worth a read.
-
I will be voting SNP at the UK general election. Under no circumstances could I ever vote for a party that didn't support independence for Scotland. Independence is the main reason I vote. A party's other policies are of course of importance but as long as they are reasonable it's unlikely to be a great problem. I could never vote Labour because despite the line taken by the MSM and BBC Scotland, they are not a slightly left of centre social democratic party (as the SNP were until they became infiltrated by folk intent on destroying the indy movement from within).
Labour are pro-brexit, anti-indy, anti democracy, in essence pretty much like a Tory party from ten years ago. Sir Starmer is a particularly slimy snake of a man. I don't believe what has happened to the SNP is accidental - someone somewhere has masterminded the actions needed to corrupt the party and remove any semblance of voting power from the members. I disagree strongly with some policies brought to the fore by the SNP, mainly the contentious ones that no sensible leader would have considered, let alone championed, and I regard the Greens as a collection of weirdos who should have been dropped long ago. alba have a lot of good ideas and I have nothing against them, but it would probably be far better if they all rejoined the SNP and changed it from within if that were possible. And I think that Salmond, sadly, would be better stepping back and becoming an elder statesman rather than leading a party that is gaining little traction. Problem is he is still by far the best politician in Scotland by a country mile, but his best role would be as a leader of the indy movement, above party politics.
Those who say they won't support the SNP are on the wrong track. Any vote for a unionist party will be weaponised and used against the indy movement. Give them half a chance and Holyrood will be closed down or reduced to an impotent shell of a parliament.
Finally, we need the SNP to give us a reason to vote for them. Nothing vague or half hearted. The manifesto needs to make a clear statement that a vote for the SNP is a vote for indy - and not just for another feeble request for a section 30 order. That won't get us anywhere and is conceding defeat before a vote is cast.
-
That hate crime bill looks like a horrific piece of work - although supported by all parties except the Tories, it will be the SNP that are criticised for it. Also I see the groups "protected" are quite limited, but of course "transgender" is one of the groups included. Be interesting to see what transpires (see what I did there?) on Monday when it comes into force. First to be the target of the wokerati probably JK Rowling.
-
IMHO the SNP (if they can tear themselves away from all the unpopular legislation they seem to be prioritising) should modify their EU policy to allow EFTA (or whatever it's called now) membership as a stepping stome to neutralise the "Scotland will never be allowed to join the EU" rhetoric from yoons. EU member ship in any case should be subject to a post-indy referendum or election where parties make it clear whether they will apply for EU membership. The fewer conditions put on indy, the better, so that everyone who wants indy can vote for it without ruling it out because they might not want EU membership or some other diktat that is appended to the indy offering. Sadly, indy doesn't seem to be a priority for the SNP at the moment.
As for freeports, presumably if they are a bad thing or an obstruction to membership of the EU, they could be abolished after indy, but any decision should be for the people of Scotland, not a cabal of bullies at Westminster who have a financial interest in them.
General Election 2024
in Anything Goes - Other topics not covered elsewhere
Posted
Starmer is right of centre, pretty much a Tory if not quite as extreme as the current Tories but not far off it. There are so many issues which could be exploited at the GE to destroy Labour in Scotland.