Oor Nicola Sturgeon thread.

[HTG]

31 minutes ago, thisal said:

Now that they have a leader that has achieved a consistent majority for independence in the polls all these people who have supposedly always voted SNP are going to no longer vote for them because of this. Agent Provocateur don't just sell scants. 

In the context of Scottish independence this is a non story. Gender recognition debates are taking place the world over. There are all sorts of perspectives and why anyone should think that Scotland is unique in managing those perspectives is beyond me. If there are people who are content to put this above the question of whether Scotland should be run by a right wing unelected (in Scotland) govt in Westminster or should be run by the people elected by the population of Scotland, they need to give themselves a fucking shake. 

[alta-pete]

11 hours ago, Carnoustie Young Guvnor said:

Thank you.

And I do not spam, spamming is posting lots of stuff irrelevant to the subject being discussed.

This is a forum, I am entitled to air my views, and I do so without targeting other posters.

I have been called a bigoted cretin, a piece of shit, god knows what else on this thread, and that's apparently okay.

 

10 hours ago, Carnoustie Young Guvnor said:

I'm actually Ip banned from posting on Wings site for giving him shit.  Cause he's a bit of a fanny.  So to call me a Wings apologist is wrong.

Dugdale is vermin. Everyone can be nice in interpersonal interactions. Stalin was known to be incredibly charming when he wanted to be. She is someone who regularly insulted half the population of Scotland and told people to vote Tory, before leading Labour to 14% in the country that founded it. I don't doubt she can be nice and is probably well intentioned, but she's a dangerous idiot far too sure of her convictions and motivations, and I guarantee you a million per cent she doesn't even know what socialism is.

Ask her to define socialism (bearing in mind she is from the right of the party and baulked at many Corbyn policies as being too extreme) and she wouldn't be able to do so. But an entire country has to be subject to Tory governments we reject at the ballot box three quarters of our lives cause she's a 'socialist'.

Sturgeon I've always liked.

I don’t have any skin in the game in this particular debate and I do have a certain admiration for posters like yourself who are prepared to doggedly fight against the hive mind that can sometimes be found in here. 

The name calling pointed at you is not warranted. However you do yourself a disservice by then going on to call someone ‘vermin’. 

[Ned Nederlander]

Jesus suffering f'ck

Twitter is an utter shitshow just now - if I were a Yoon I'd have the popcorn out

Is anyone NOT going to vote SNP in May because of the Salmond or Trans issues?

Thank f'ck most folk are totally oblivious to it all.

[NotThePars]

It might be a non-issue to most people but it’s been handled piss poorly and also acted as a proxy for an internal fight that goes well beyond which gender some people should be legally allowed to identify as. Sturgeon choosing to comment so publicly on it is pretty significant.

The thing I will say is that this shadowy cabal of Stirling Uni socialists and queers don’t appear to have any pretensions to the leadership of the party whereas Cherry and co (either as a proxy for Salmond or in their own right) clearly do fancy themselves as the successors to Sturgeon whether that’s in 5 years or in May.

[Genuine Hibs Fan]

7 minutes ago, NotThePars said:

It might be a non-issue to most people but it’s been handled piss poorly and also acted as a proxy for an internal fight that goes well beyond which gender some people should be legally allowed to identify as. Sturgeon choosing to comment so publicly on it is pretty significant.

The thing I will say is that this shadowy cabal of Stirling Uni socialists and queers don’t appear to have any pretensions to the leadership of the party whereas Cherry and co (either as a proxy for Salmond or in their own right) clearly do fancy themselves as the successors to Sturgeon whether that’s in 5 years or in May.

This is pretty much where I am as well. There is a pretty calm and considered conversation going on about trans identity issues on the whole while the coverage is mainly of twitter fights between people who are incapable of seeing another point of view.

What I would say is there's a clear pattern of those with genuinely deranged issues with trans people trying to reposition themselves as only having some genuine concerns i.e. using the specific issues people have with the GRA as a smokescreen to spread greater fear and othering of trans people as a whole.

The shadow war is pretty obvious at this point when you have people rushing to describe themselves as very concerned about misogyny in regards trans people but perfectly happy to identify sexual offences accusers to support the special independence boy. 

That said, VT is right in that the timing is pretty abysmal, and seeing guys like Wightman leaving the Greens/young people leaving the SNP over what should probably be a free vote at the moment is pretty shitty.

[Carnoustie Young Guvnor]

2 hours ago, DeeTillEhDeh said:

Ah, so he just leched a little bit?

He admitted to one consensual, reciprocated, fully clothed cuddle while both parties were slightly tipsy. He accepted this was inappropriate as he was this woman's boss.

She was offered a transfer to any department within the Scottish government she wanted, on equivalent salary. She chose to remain where she was. 

She did not want the matter referred to the police, objected to it, and it was done anyway by Leslie Evans.

If that makes him a lech you are too.

That is the only incident he and the court accepted did actually happen, the rest were fabrications.

1 hour ago, alta-pete said:

 

I don’t have any skin in the game in this particular debate and I do have a certain admiration for posters like yourself who are prepared to doggedly fight against the hive mind that can sometimes be found in here. 

The name calling pointed at you is not warranted. However you do yourself a disservice by then going on to call someone ‘vermin’. 

Kezia Dugdale doesn't post here, if I was speaking to her I would temper my language appropriately. However, I do think people attempting to block a nation's democracy are worthy of the description vermin.

[Dunning1874]

On 27/01/2021 at 22:58, virginton said:

There's no valid reason why this inconsequential non-issue in the Grand Scheme of the Priorities of Scotland in 2021 should be having this sort of effect in any political party. It is a complete nonsense wedge issue that the SNP should be leaving well alone, regardless of what a handful of folk on Twitter might have to say about it. 99% of people do not actually care about this either way.

Leave it to parliamentary committees and a free vote to determine, it's that straightforward.

 

 

On 27/01/2021 at 23:13, virginton said:

I completely agree with this - the point of this debate is to suck in all the oxygen in the room over a non-issue. Just like the Parnell divorce scandal undid the Irish Home Rule movement in the 1890s when it held the balance of power to determine the terms of Ireland's exit from the UK. History doesn't repeat itself, but it rhymes well enough.

I'm not convinced that it will derail independence itself because - unlike that scandal - next to nobody gives a toss about this issue. It's also too politically toxic to be used directly in an election/referendum campaign without backfiring badly. There needs to be an adult in the room though to knock Sturgeon, Cherry, Salmond etc.'s heads together promptly and remind them that isn't actually about them or some Wars of Religion-esque attachment to bathroom access. It is this absolutely fucking pointless infighting that could undo the independence cause, not the issue itself.

These posts are predicated on the assumption that everyone in the SNP has been sucked into this argument with well-meaning but misplaced good faith arguments, with the other parties/whoever else made it a live issue to suck in the oxygen sitting back and chuckling at the havoc it's causing the SNP at a time when independence is receiving record support. If we were to accept that premise then the adult in the room knocking heads together to stop infighting would be a reasonable solution and the GRA legislation could then proceed and pass or not by a free vote like any other piece of legislation.

However, in reality the issue wasn't thrown in then blown up from outside the SNP by some nefarious actor wanting to derail them and independence. It was turned into such a huge issue within the SNP directly by Joanna Cherry and the rest of her nutter wing containing such intellectual powerhouses as Angus MacNeil and Chris McEleny.

That's because, while they do sincerely hold the position they espouse on GRA, they actively wanted to cause a massive amount of infighting over it. They want to do this as they disagree with Sturgeon's strategy on independence and want to create wedge issues to force her out and install Cherry as leader so they can do something far more intelligent, like UDI based on the results of the 2011 election or something equally batshit.

That's why it does have the potential to derail independence regardless of the fact that the vast majority of people in Scotland aren't impacted and don't care in any way (although for those it does impact it's literally an existential issue). Sturgeon rising above the fray and not getting involved in it therefore isn't an option, because while Cherry and acolytes sincerely believe what they're saying on this issue their real motivation is forcing Sturgeon out as leader, so even discounting the moral argument of what's the right or wrong thing to do, purely in terms of internal party politics she has no choice tactically but to get involved to try to shut Cherry down.

Otherwise they'll just move on to another proxy battle emboldened by winning this one, just as they've been emboldened by the initial softly softly, go slowly for more consulation over legitimate concerns they took over GRA in the first place that stopped it simply proceeding to a vote as you suggest years ago.

In the meantime, more SNP activists who actually get out and campaign and are therefore an important part of the electoral machine would be leaving the party as they couldn’t stomach seeing what they perceive to be bigotry going unchallenged, for the sake of appeasing people whose contribution amounts to tweeting Wings articles and accusing anyone who doesn't want UDI yesterday of being yoon plants. The dream Unionist scenario of Joanna Cherry as leader would become ever more likely.

In that context, silence from the leadership wasn't an option.

Edited January 29, 2021 by Dunning1874

[Dunning1874]

25 minutes ago, Genuine Hibs Fan said:

The shadow war is pretty obvious at this point when you have people rushing to describe themselves as very concerned about misogyny in regards trans people but perfectly happy to identify sexual offences accusers to support the special independence boy. 

Yeah, an anti-abortionist like McEleny setting himself up as deeply concerned about women's rights is really something.

[SANTAN]

Can't be bothered to wade through the trans phobic shit show that was occurring yesterday, anybody posted or read this? 

https://www.craigmurray.org.uk/archives/2021/01/my-sworn-evidence-on-the-sturgeon-affair/#click=https://t.co/kTnz1csjnW

 

[renton]

27 minutes ago, Stormzy said:

Can't be bothered to wade through the trans phobic shit show that was occurring yesterday, anybody posted or read this? 

https://www.craigmurray.org.uk/archives/2021/01/my-sworn-evidence-on-the-sturgeon-affair/#click=https://t.co/kTnz1csjnW

 

Any chance of a brief summary?

[NotThePars]

Can't be bothered to wade through the trans phobic shit show that was occurring yesterday, anybody posted or read this? 
https://www.craigmurray.org.uk/archives/2021/01/my-sworn-evidence-on-the-sturgeon-affair/#click=https://t.co/kTnz1csjnW
 

I got the impression from Twitter that while you can debate whether or not it should be legal to identify victims of sexual offence cases it is definitely illegal and Murray was either deliberately dropping clear hints as to their identity or was too stupid to realise that’s what he was doing.

No idea if that had any relevance but I’m sure regardless he’ll have a crowd of sycophants desperately trying to convince everyone that he’s a key component in Scotland winning it’s independence like Wings was supposed to be.

[SANTAN]

9 minutes ago, renton said:

Any chance of a brief summary?

Laying out how this was a stitch up. It's very detailed and perhaps some of the pro Indy guys would appreciate the guys contacts more so than me but it's very damning if credible. I'm aware this guy is a friend of Salmond as he says so himself. 

It's a very intriguing read for the people that were saying nobody cares about this story etc, if they can read that and seriously believe people wouldn't care about it then they're completely at it. It's explosive if true. 

[SANTAN]

10 minutes ago, NotThePars said:

 

I got the impression from Twitter that while you can debate whether or not it should be legal to identify victims of sexual offence cases it is definitely illegal and Murray was either deliberately dropping clear hints as to their identity or was too stupid to realise that’s what he was doing.

No idea if that had any relevance but I’m sure regardless he’ll have a crowd of sycophants desperately trying to convince everyone that he’s a key competent in Scotland winning it’s independence like Wings was supposed to be.
 

 

Aye he explains that he wrote some satirical piece where he hinted at revealing who people were but he thought it would pass as it was satirical, the guy started losing me at that point tbh but the opening 1-50ish points are frightening if true. He does seem like he's on THAT side of the pro Indy debate but the content he's posted is outwith the tribal factions of the SNP as I said if true then it's massive. 

[Dunning1874]

I'm reminded of this whenever I see his name.

 

[welshbairn]

19 minutes ago, renton said:

Any chance of a brief summary?

Here's an excerpt. A tale of two egos, both suffering from diminished relevance.

Quote

I was strongly inclined to believe Alex Salmond. I am of much the same generation of the Scottish political class and it is a small country. We tend to know each other or of each other. I had never in forty years heard a hint of gossip surrounding Alex Salmond and sexual behaviour, with the single exception of a rumoured romantic attachment redacted attachment with redacted. But that had not involved any rumour of unwanted advances by Mr Salmond, quite the opposite ; it was rather widely believed in nationalist circles that she had set her cap at him. The common joke was that redacted was a booby prize.

17. It had been impossible to follow the judicial review case without concluding that a very unfair process had been undertaken against Alex Salmond, and that it was impossible this could have happened without the knowledge and approval of Nicola Sturgeon. That was a shocking realisation to an Independence supporter like myself. But what Alex Salmond was now telling me went further, which was that Nicola Sturgeon was involved in the orchestration of fake complaints against him. This was fairly astonishing on first hearing.

18. I asked what the motive could be. Alex replied that he did not know ; perhaps it lay in King Lear. He said that he had genuinely intended to quit politics and had lined up a position as Chairman of Johnstone Press, which had fallen because of these allegations. But he had retired from the party leadership before, and then come back, and perhaps Nicola had concluded he needed a stake through the heart. He had made plain to her that he was not happy with her lack of progress towards an Independence referendum following the Brexit vote.

19. Alex Salmond was plainly very unhappy. He said that he believed that Nicola was banking on his loyalty to the SNP and to the Independence movement, thinking that he would not split the party by revealing what or who was behind the allegations against him. At this crucial time, a Salmond/Sturgeon split could derail the chance for Independence and have a truly historic effect. I asked him directly whether this meant he did not want me to publish this information at the moment. He confirmed I should not publish. This conversation was in confidence but, as my blog was highly influential within the Independence movement, he thought it vital that I know the truth as matters develop.

20. I told him that Sturgeon’s hostility towards him seemed to be longstanding. I recounted a story I had been told by Robin McAlpine, of an occasion shortly after his resignation when Alex Salmond had arrived at the Scottish Parliament for a function and the First Minister’s Office had refused to sign him in. Alex replied that this was true ; it was particularly embarrassing as the occasion had been to hand over a large cheque for funds raised for charity following a campaign he had initiated as First Minister. They had been forced to do the photoshoot in the rain outside instead.

21. I advised Alex Salmond that he should continue to fight any allegations vigorously and should not worry in the least about any consequential damage to the SNP or the Yes movement, which were both very robust. If the SNP leadership were behind the attacks on him, it was much better that people know.

22. I also told him I knew exactly how he felt, having been myself subject to false accusation when as British Ambassador I blew the whistle on UK Government collusion with torture in the War on Terror. To be subject to a fit-up, particularly by those you knew and considered friends, was extremely disorienting. I was probably one of the few people in the UK who knew precisely how he felt.

23. The meeting concluded with Alex making the observation that he blamed himself for having established far too centralised a system of power in Scottish Government and the SNP, and not taking account of how far that was open to abuse by a person of ill-will.

 

[SANTAN]

10 minutes ago, welshbairn said:

Here's an excerpt. A tale of two egos, both suffering from diminished relevance.

 

Not exactly a summary but. 

[Dawson Park Boy]

1 hour ago, Stormzy said:

Can't be bothered to wade through the trans phobic shit show that was occurring yesterday, anybody posted or read this? 

https://www.craigmurray.org.uk/archives/2021/01/my-sworn-evidence-on-the-sturgeon-affair/#click=https://t.co/kTnz1csjnW

 

Yes - this is devastating!

The Murrells are on ‘a shoogly peg’.

1 hour ago, Stormzy said:

Can't be bothered to wade through the trans phobic shit show that was occurring yesterday, anybody posted or read this? 

https://www.craigmurray.org.uk/archives/2021/01/my-sworn-evidence-on-the-sturgeon-affair/#click=https://t.co/kTnz1csjnW

 

 

[John Lambies Doos]

Jackie Baillie getting her arse handed to her from Nicola

[John Lambies Doos]

Baillie now just making it up.

[SANTAN]

3 minutes ago, John Lambies Doos said:

Baillie now just making it up.

Hawl, you've spent months saying nobody cares about Sturgeon forgetting a date and now there is something noteworthy posted you're double posting about some trivial shit. 

I'll no be having that, address my post please.