Indyref 2 (2)

[Alibi]

2 hours ago, aaid said:

If your views on independence are predicated on a particular form of politics that you think would be followed or - even worse - individuals who would have power or influence which would seem to be his big problem then you are not an indy supporter in my book unless you're one who doesn't believe in democracy.

If you start off with the fundamental principle of self-determination meaning that decisions about how the country is run are best made by those people who live there then there can be no *but* around who those people are.

My view is that indy takes priority and should not come with any rigid policy conditions attached - we can decide everything for ourselves after indy.  In particular although I am very pro-Europe, I believe that our relationship with Europe post-indy should be a matter for the electorate to decide, whether EU, EFTA or outside.  At the first post-indy election, we can elect whichever party or parties we judge to have the best policies.  I think in Wings' case, he has judged that the current and recent leadership of the SNP have put things other than indy at the top of their priority list, and it's hard to disagree given the pernicious attitude of the wokerati who seem to want to link indy directly to LGBT etc. issues and who seem to have captured the previous FM and bound her to their cause for whatever reason.  Why that has happened is the million dollar question but without a doubt it has caused immense harm to the indy movement, at least in the short term.  for reasons for all this, probably, as usual, follow the money.

[aaid]

35 minutes ago, Alibi said:

My view is that indy takes priority and should not come with any rigid policy conditions attached - we can decide everything for ourselves after indy.  In particular although I am very pro-Europe, I believe that our relationship with Europe post-indy should be a matter for the electorate to decide, whether EU, EFTA or outside.  At the first post-indy election, we can elect whichever party or parties we judge to have the best policies. 

A pro-Indy mindset

 

Quote

I think in Wings' case, he has judged that the current and recent leadership of the SNP have put things other than indy at the top of their priority list, and it's hard to disagree given the pernicious attitude of the wokerati who seem to want to link indy directly to LGBT etc. issues and who seem to have captured the previous FM and bound her to their cause for whatever reason.  Why that has happened is the million dollar question but without a doubt it has caused immense harm to the indy movement, at least in the short term.  for reasons for all this, probably, as usual, follow the money.

And for those reasons he wouldn't vote Yes.  Not a pro-Indy mindset.

[Alibi]

On 9/16/2023 at 2:35 PM, aaid said:

A pro-Indy mindset

 

And for those reasons he wouldn't vote Yes.  Not a pro-Indy mindset.

I think when we get to the point of actually being able to vote on it, he will vote for indy.  Criticising the utter clusterfuck that the SNP leadership are making of the whole thing at the moment is a reasonable reaction.  I do it myself.  However when it comes down to it, we who actually want indy will all be voting Yes.

[PapofGlencoe]

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-scotland-politics-66812774

Is this real or mischief making from the BBC?

the same people rubbishing the defacto vote of 50% plus one now with a straight face pushing negotiating independence off a majority of seats? They've lost the plot.

I have been an independence supporter my entire life but if we demand negotiating independence when our people haven't by majority voted for it, I'll change sides.  

Not that this would even happen because the plan is idiotic and would falter at the first serious interview, never mind our own people would not accept it, and never mind the belly laugh from London.

I can't believe my eyes what i'm reading here.  Surely this isn't a real proposal?

 

[StirlingEgg]

59 minutes ago, PapofGlencoe said:

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-scotland-politics-66812774

Is this real or mischief making from the BBC?

the same people rubbishing the defacto vote of 50% plus one now with a straight face pushing negotiating independence off a majority of seats? They've lost the plot.

I have been an independence supporter my entire life but if we demand negotiating independence when our people haven't by majority voted for it, I'll change sides.  

Not that this would even happen because the plan is idiotic and would falter at the first serious interview, never mind our own people would not accept it, and never mind the belly laugh from London.

I can't believe my eyes what i'm reading here.  Surely this isn't a real proposal?

 

It looks a bit vague going by Glenn Campbell's analysis at the bottom. A majority of seats leading to "democratic effect" on a range of possibilities??

Meanwhile, Liz Truss inexplicably is given publicity again. Her pishy acknowledgement of last year's wilful incompetence included these words; 

"We reared, fattened and slaughtered the pig on the same day" 😳😳😳

It's like the UK is one big wind-up and the Scottish Government is desperate so just coming away with anything that sounds like a plan. 

 

Edited September 18, 2023 by StirlingEgg

[aaid]

1 hour ago, PapofGlencoe said:

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-scotland-politics-66812774

Is this real or mischief making from the BBC?

the same people rubbishing the defacto vote of 50% plus one now with a straight face pushing negotiating independence off a majority of seats? They've lost the plot.

I have been an independence supporter my entire life but if we demand negotiating independence when our people haven't by majority voted for it, I'll change sides.  

Not that this would even happen because the plan is idiotic and would falter at the first serious interview, never mind our own people would not accept it, and never mind the belly laugh from London.

I can't believe my eyes what i'm reading here.  Surely this isn't a real proposal?

 

It is seats and it is real however, since most people don’t read beyond the headlines they don’t get the nuance.   
 

As I understand it “empowered to begin immediate negotiations with the UK government to give democratic effect to Scotland becoming an independent country” means negotiations around the next IndyRef, it’s not a definition of UDI.  Obviously, the bigger the margin of victory the bigger the mandate.   What’s different?   Well I think the SNP are going to make it unequivocal in their manifesto that a vote for the SNP is a vote for independence and if you don’t want independence don’t vote for the SNP.  You would think that would be obvious and wouldn’t need to be spelled out but this is the Westminster parties and their client media we are talking about.

Edited September 18, 2023 by aaid

[PapofGlencoe]

13 minutes ago, aaid said:

It is seats and it is real however, since most people don’t read beyond the headlines they don’t get the nuance.   
 

As I understand it “empowered to begin immediate negotiations with the UK government to give democratic effect to Scotland becoming an independent country” means negotiations around the next IndyRef, it’s not a definition of UDI.  Obviously, the bigger the margin of victory the bigger the mandate.   What’s different?   Well I think the SNP are going to make it unequivocal in their manifesto that a vote for the SNP is a vote for independence and if you don’t want independence don’t vote for the SNP.  You would think that would be obvious and wouldn’t need to be spelled out but this is the Westminster parties and their client media we are talking about.

hmmm.  okay, cheers that's a bit worrying.  those words, to me, mean sitting down for negotiations to give democratic effect to Scotland BECOMING an independent country.  

If it means asking for another referendum or negotiations for how to ask the question again, that's what it should say.  neither of those things mean we are effecting "becoming" an independent country.  

we should be being clear with our own people if nothing else. 

What a change from end of last year and Sturgeon's plan.  Like a different party. 

[Ally Bongo]

Can we have a referendum now since we won most seats ?

No

[Alibi]

I'm coming to the conclusion that Yousaf isn't very bright.  It used to be the case that a majority of MPs was accepted as being the threshold for independence but the goals keep getting moved to make indy as unachievable as possible.  Unlike PapofGlencoe I wouldn't change sides but the strategy needs to be better defined, and with clarity.  What threshold in a general election would be acceptable?  We can be sure that even if we got 50+ % of the votes, Westminster wouldn't co-operate.  They will never co-operate. 

 

[aaid]

By-election this week in South Ayrshire as a result of an SNP member standing down.

It’s in a three man ward where the SNP were third behind an independent and a Tory though.

Would be a stretch to win there.

[PapofGlencoe]

17 minutes ago, Alibi said:

I'm coming to the conclusion that Yousaf isn't very bright.  It used to be the case that a majority of MPs was accepted as being the threshold for independence but the goals keep getting moved to make indy as unachievable as possible.  Unlike PapofGlencoe I wouldn't change sides but the strategy needs to be better defined, and with clarity.  What threshold in a general election would be acceptable?  We can be sure that even if we got 50+ % of the votes, Westminster wouldn't co-operate.  They will never co-operate. 

 

the majority votes route, even if its worst detractors would claim it a fairytale, at least has moral standing and can be defended, a building block whatever..  a threshold lower than that has no chance

[hampden_loon2878]

On 9/16/2023 at 2:35 PM, aaid said:

A pro-Indy mindset

 

And for those reasons he wouldn't vote Yes.  Not a pro-Indy mindset.

Brought to you from middle England 🤣

[Squirrelhumper]

On 9/16/2023 at 1:58 PM, Alibi said:

My view is that indy takes priority and should not come with any rigid policy conditions attached - we can decide everything for ourselves after indy.  In particular although I am very pro-Europe, I believe that our relationship with Europe post-indy should be a matter for the electorate to decide, whether EU, EFTA or outside.  At the first post-indy election, we can elect whichever party or parties we judge to have the best policies.  I think in Wings' case, he has judged that the current and recent leadership of the SNP have put things other than indy at the top of their priority list, and it's hard to disagree given the pernicious attitude of the wokerati who seem to want to link indy directly to LGBT etc. issues and who seem to have captured the previous FM and bound her to their cause for whatever reason.  Why that has happened is the million dollar question but without a doubt it has caused immense harm to the indy movement, at least in the short term.  for reasons for all this, probably, as usual, follow the money.

I don't think Wings was ever arsed about Indy - he saw it as a cash cow. 

The same way he see's the anti woke stuff as his latest cash cow. 

[Squirrelhumper]

1 hour ago, hampden_loon2878 said:

Brought to you from middle England 🤣

Touche

[aaid]

1 hour ago, hampden_loon2878 said:

Brought to you from middle England 🤣

Actually I’ve been in Scotland for the past week. 

[mariokempes]

5 hours ago, Squirrelhumper said:

I don't think Wings was ever arsed about Indy - he saw it as a cash cow. 

The same way he see's the anti woke stuff as his latest cash cow. 

I think you are so wrong. But I understand your conclusion.  

 

I've read wings and loads of others for years and he's been 100% consistent on his views.  And the first  to hilite the gender id insanity.

[Alibi]

On 9/18/2023 at 1:46 PM, PapofGlencoe said:

the majority votes route, even if its worst detractors would claim it a fairytale, at least has moral standing and can be defended, a building block whatever..  a threshold lower than that has no chance

I don't entirely disagree; However a majority of MPs in a FTTP vote was accepted as being what was required - the difference being that at that time the establishment parties believed that it was an impossible target to reach.  Simply put, rule britannia, britannia waives the rules.  If we ever got another referendum and support was at 70% in the polls, they would make it a 90% threshold.  They will do whatever it takes to prevent indy - up to and including killing people.

[Alibi]

23 hours ago, Squirrelhumper said:

I don't think Wings was ever arsed about Indy - he saw it as a cash cow. 

The same way he see's the anti woke stuff as his latest cash cow. 

Wings produced the wee blue book in 2014 ffs.  He's not against indy, he's against the stupid unpopular shite that the SNP has been pushing since Sturgeon took over.  The real question here is why Sturgeon and her cronies decided to fuck things up when they had everything going for them.  Is their GRR obsession really worth it or is that just a wrecking ball tactic?

[Squirrelhumper]

18 minutes ago, Alibi said:

Wings produced the wee blue book in 2014 ffs.

Made plenty of cash off the back of it too. 

[PapofGlencoe]

Not to get into the ins and outs of the proposal but in my opinion, the Lord Advocate is all over the place in the court of session this afternoon.  I cannot believe this was the best operator to defend Scotland's right to determination: A cause of hundreds of years standing.  No harm to her but absolutely out of her depth.

 

[aaid]

16 minutes ago, PapofGlencoe said:

Not to get into the ins and outs of the proposal but in my opinion, the Lord Advocate is all over the place in the court of session this afternoon.  I cannot believe this was the best operator to defend Scotland's right to determination: A cause of hundreds of years standing.  No harm to her but absolutely out of her depth.

 

Out of interest, are you following the coverage directly?

[PapofGlencoe]

32 minutes ago, aaid said:

Out of interest, are you following the coverage directly?

Just based on from what I saw myself on the bbc website.  granted i did not watch all four hours, but the smattering I did see, not impressed.

[Caledonian Craig]

19 hours ago, PapofGlencoe said:

Not to get into the ins and outs of the proposal but in my opinion, the Lord Advocate is all over the place in the court of session this afternoon.  I cannot believe this was the best operator to defend Scotland's right to determination: A cause of hundreds of years standing.  No harm to her but absolutely out of her depth.

 

Any higher above her and you are sure to be looking at English-bias courts.

But in any case it is not going to matter as once it goes to Westminster-biased courts they will do the same again - rule in the British Government's favour regardless of the ethics of it.

Edited September 20, 2023 by Caledonian Craig

[Ally Bongo]

Another clanger from the SNP regarding the "special" treatment of Patrick Grady 

Trying to force Lisa Cameron out because she did not agree with the leadership

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-scotland-politics-66896183

[aaid]

9 hours ago, Ally Bongo said:

Another clanger from the SNP regarding the "special" treatment of Patrick Grady 

Trying to force Lisa Cameron out because she did not agree with the leadership

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-scotland-politics-66896183

She’s the female John Mason.