A senior SNP elected representative told me a couple of weeks ago that the party hierarchy were intent on making sure there would be strict control over debate at the upcoming conference. The leadership fear pressure from the membership on holding another Independence referendum, using the mandate won at the last Holyrood elections. You will recall that the SNP was elected on a promise of a new referendum in the event of a significant change in the status quo, specifically including Brexit.
Being well aware from the AUOB marches and other events that the grassroots are ready for another campaign, and with the opinion polls very encouraging, it seemed to me that the foot soldiers deserved at least to be able to voice an opinion on when and how they went into battle. So I suggested back to my friend that, as I am attending as a delegate, I would hold a fringe meeting within the Conference venue on the routes to Independence. This might include how we get a new Indyref in the face of Westminster opposition, its timing, and lessons learned for the Yes movement from 2014 on how to win it. The idea was also to explore other potential routes to Independence including a National Assembly.
They replied that I would not be allowed to hold a fringe meeting on Indyref2. I thought they were being over-dramatic. So I asked my friend the doughty Peter A Bell to join me as a speaker (he agreed in principle), and I was planning to ask James Kelly and Stuart Campbell as well, but first applied for a room in the Conference Centre so I could give them a date.
It didn’t go well.
So I can hire a room on the SNP fringe for the purposes of commercial promotion, but not to promote Scottish Independence.
The Scotsman or the rest of the Unionist media can hire a room for a meeting, but the pro-Independence new media is not allowed to hire a room – even though its readership is bigger than the Scotsman’s.
I am not asking to speak in the Conference, but just to hold a Fringe meeting. The Conference Fringe is where members can discuss things that are of political interest without claiming to be dictating, or in line with, party policy. I am a delegate offering to pay the going rate for the room, and rooms are available. As it happens, the policy we wish to discuss, Independence and how to use the mandate from the last Holyrood election, is bang in line with official party policy anyway.
I went into this with genuine innocence, not believing my friends’ prediction that a fringe event on Indyref2 would not be allowed. I do not imagine for a moment Ms Slider was giving her answers without consultation with Chief Executive Peter Murrell, who is also Nicola Sturgeon’s partner. When a party becomes so Stalinist in its organisation it will not even permit mildly dissenting voices – or just not totally subservient voices – even to express themselves on its fringe, it is not really democratic.
If anybody has managed to book a fringe meeting, and is looking for a speaker?
Seems in line with frustrating the movement to force them to demand a referendum.
Independence will never be won with the SNP fronting it. It must be done by the people and for the people.
It’s nothing new. Nicola has said it herself.
Quite clever really. Wonder if it’s connected to not being able to set up shop at Holyrood park I.e. Fiona Hyslop?
“Independence will never be won with the SNP fronting it. It must be done by the people and for the people.”
The above is another of those statements which sound great but which leave the reader perplexed. What does “done by the people and for the people” actually mean in this context in the real world?
Palabras, palabras……
The Gestapo asked less questions than you do.
Do you focus an intense beam of light at the screen when reading off replies to your questions, Charley?
Silly response.
The people don’t want independence
A unionist poll a month ago, showed they do.
Have you got a link? You should put a reference into the Wikipedia article, which for the period since March 2017 shows no poll which had a majority for independence. The average lead for the union since that time disregarding undecideds is 10.4%. (If you count undecideds as backing neither option, the average lead is 9.4%.) The union won the 2014 referendum by 10.6%. There has been no shift in opinion: Scotland opposes independence.
Discussing the when and how of independence in public would be a gift to defenders of the Union.
Limiting this subject to an inner circle isn’t Stalinist, when a political party is up against the might of the UK then why should anyone expect the normal democratic process
Well said Clydebuilt.
How about setting up a pop up fringe meeting outside the building? I’m sure a lot of conference delegates would be interested in taking part in an indy dusc
*discussion!
For the SNP timing is everything. Bit like a Tory leadership challenge.
I don’t doubt Nicola Sturgeon’s intentions on this remain the same as they were in 2014. But the costs of getting it wrong or getting ahead of public opinion a second time, would really kibosh independence hopes possibly … for a generation- using that oft.misused expression from the last campaign. The nervousness in SNP ranks is therefore understandable. Victory has to be almost assured. The outcome of Brexit negotiations should clarify everything, one way or the other.
There’s a word for only fighting when ‘victory is almost assured’
Cowardice
Not against the formidable foes against independence. The British establishment got the shock of their lives last time as the polls got closer. Support for independence started at around 30% at the start of the campaign , Cameron thought it’d be a walkover to put the issue to bed.
Peter.
Turkey didn’t declare war on Germany during WWII till 1945. Finishing on the winning side, almost without firing a shot, cowardice or hedging ones bets?
Wait till we know the outcome of Brexit, if the SNP don’t move for indy , then we can let them know how we feel.
There are several other words, sensible, wise, intelligent.
Wonder what the best word for a small force with limited options taking on a giant at the wrong time would be, . . . . How about Fuckin Stupid.!
Indeed, the lull is tactical rather than a cooling on independence itself. The SNP need to be seen as reacting to public demand rather than leading it.
I do think the SNP can get there, but it’s hugely complicated by Westminster refusing to give permission again, because of the closeness of the result last time.
‘Westminster refusing to give permission’ – this isn’t an option: the Claim of Right, ratified again in Westminster this year, and enshrined in international and scots law, and everywhere, says that the people of Scotland have the right to have their say regardless of Westminster. The SNP are paying attention to popular opinion because it is that which leads their ability to hold a poll. It is the people’s choice and however much louder (so that is what you hear) the BritNat establishment shouts, there is very much a strong desire within the general population to have a poll on independence.
“Westminster refusing to give permission again, because of the closeness of the result last time.”
LOL! Was it “Westminster” that took the SNP’s majority at Holyrood away from them in 2016?
Was it “Westminster” that has rigged every opinion poll that I am aware of since Nicola Sturgeon requested a section 30 order in March 2017, to show that Unionism retains a lead of around the same as the 10% it got in the referendum?
In ‘The Art of War’ Sun Tzu said, “There is no shame in withdrawing your army to await favourable battles. The shame lies in sending your army to certain defeat.” To do-or-die is mostly a desperate situation, or jingoism from politicians who won’t be doing the dying.
I am sympathetic to Scottish independence and I’m convinced the vote was rigged against them. They wuz robbed.
No mandate for another independence referendum was won at the 2016 Holyrood election. The SNP stood on a platform calling for one in the event of something big like Brexit but they did not win a majority of the voteshare and they lost their seat majority too. You want a mandate for a second independence referendum? Then call a Scottish general election to try to get one.
The SNP minority government in Scotland has a mandate to administer Scotland within Britain and if it doesn’t want that mandate it should leave office.
N_, the mandate only relates to devolved matters. In reality, all the real powers remain in Westminster. This type of devolved set up is just a Mickey Mouse stepping stone on the journey to full independence.
I can sense a level of animosity in your posts. Are you against self determination?
@JOML – The SNP stood in 2016 on a platform of holding another independence referendum in the event of something big like Brexit. It was perfectly legitimate for them to do so, and they won a significant amount of support from voters. Had they won a majority of votes and seats, they would have had a mandate for another independence referendum and I would support one.
“In reality, all the real powers remain in Westminster. This type of devolved set up is just a Mickey Mouse stepping stone on the journey to full independence.”
That’s not reality. There are many levels of local government in Britain.
Would you support an early Scottish general election? If the SNP had more respect for voters, that’s what they would push for – and they’d probably get it too, with Green support. Then stand on a platform of another indyref and there could be independence within a year if they could persuade enough voters (which might require working out what currency an independent Scotland would use, and sterling might not be a good idea, given Brexit). Instead they xenophobically whinge that “London” and “Westminster” won’t let them do what they want. The hell with that. Try to win a mandate in Scotland.
Bottom line N, you cannot govern a country without all, the levers of power. Independence is the only way forward for Scotland.
N_, the SNP and the Greens are both pro-independence and therefore there is a majority at Holyrood voted in with that independence ticket, so a mandate exists and Holyrood have already voted on this matter.
Also, the Holyrood set up is for fixed term, so it’s not an option to call a “Scottish general election”.
@JOML – In the Greens’ 2016 manifesto the route that they argued for to bring about another independence referendum was a petition “signed by an appropriate number of voters”. If they had said the same as the SNP, i.e. a British vote in support of Brexit should mean another independence referendum (which the SNP said very clearly), I would agree that there is a mandate for it.
The Scottish Parliament is dissolved if the First Minister resigns or loses a confidence vote and the Parliament does not elect a replacement within 28 days. (Perhaps the Westminster Parliament doesn’t have as much power in Scotland as you think?)
Winning the greatest number of seats at the 2016 Holyrood election allowed the SNP to fulfil their manifesto promise of bringing a vote to the parliament. The mandate was achieved when it was voted upon in the Scottish Parliament back in March 2017, and the Parliament formally backed it.
Anything from RT on this story yet?
I’m waiting to see how Craig spins it. The photo is doctored, Bellingcat is a neocon propaganda outlet, etc. The trouble with being a conspiracy theorist is you have to keep digging. You can’t go back.
It would help yourself if you could actually read coherently and comprehend simple words.
craig writes ”it could possibly be x”, Anon1 wildly concludes from what craig states – ”y did it” wrapped up in extremism.
You are an extremist Anon1. A lonely extremist.
Cheer up. Stop visiting that site. Its not healthy for your mind.
You’re wasting your time on that one.
JOML opts for the “we’ll never really what happened” defence below, while “ramblings” goes for the “Craig’s only sin was keeping an open mind” approach above. This latter is, of course, what Craig himself will resort to once the conspiracy theory can no longer be maintained.
The “lonely extremist” attempt at an ad hominem merely confirms your anger and frustration that you do not have an argument.
You’re misquoting me there, Anon1, and I’m not defending anyone or anything, other than it’s a minefield of pish.
I’ll be interested in how Putin spins it. If this guy turns out to have served in the GRU, when did Putin know? Did this guy leave the army? If so, when and to do what kind of work?
Craig kinda went back on the allegation of airport timestamp forgery that the Russian foreign ministry had also come out with.
I’d be interested to know why you are publishing under the name “ramblings”. Don’t lie, it’s your style to a T.
Are the SNP actually in the business of Scottish independence?
Is your brain actually in the business of thinking?
That your reply? All right, slimer, I’ll explain it in simple terms, especially for you. Politics is an uncertain business; sometimes you have to roll the dice; right now the odds are as good as they’re going to get; the SNP is doing everything it can to avoid making its move. So I’ll repeat – are the SNP actually in the business of Scottish independence.
@Athanasius – Good question! Their support for the monarchy and the BBC makes a person wonder. Once Nicola Sturgeon was asked whether there would be Scottish passports after independence and she replied sure they can have “Scotland” written on them when they come up for renewal. One doesn’t have to have had much of a political education to know that of course independent countries have their own citizenship.
Anon1, my first thought on this latest instalment was, if this guy truly is a decorated professional, why are the Skirpals still alive (assuming assassination was the goal)? Whatever the truth, there’s a minefield of pish all over this event from the outset and I don’t think anyone not directly involved can be confident about anything.
This is genuinely funny.
Like a surrealist convention which requires submission to bourgeois conventions of behaviour.
Or a tory conference where delegates can only discuss socialism, or a new labour affair where socialism may on no account be discussed.
hmmm….. tricky
I am struggling with them in many areas an look forward to independence when we can all break free to align as we wish. Its getting too big and unaccountable and very factional. Too many have become too grand and too important forgetting SNP roots.
But at the same time I do not wish to split the electorate
My own position on Scottish independence is that I am in principle against it. One of the reasons is that I am suspicious of the line which assumes that smaller countries are better guarantors of various freedoms, a liberal social outlook, economic prosperity and a “decent” foreign policy, etc. The reality has often turned out differently.
Nevertheless, if a majority of the Scottish people want it, then why not, let them have it. Any referendum in Scotland should however, in order to truly reflect majority opinion on such an important question, be carried by at least 50% of the electorate (eligible voters).
That said, I would now like to hear the position of other regular commenters on independence for Scotland.
Some are known (Republicofscotland, reel guid, etc) but I do not recall various other regulars giving us their views. Hence I am particularly like to hear from John Goss, Sharp Ears, Giyane, N_, Christopher Rogers, SA, Hatuey and Paul Greenwood with a clear indication of whether they favour or oppose independence for Scotland.
”One of the reasons is that I am suspicious of the line which assumes that smaller countries are better guarantors of various freedoms, a liberal social outlook, economic prosperity and a “decent” foreign policy, etc. The reality has often turned out differently.”
Israel would be a case in point?
save in highly unusual situations such as genocide where needs must (in which event why even vote just do) something so significant as independence should never be on a simple majority but should be at at least akin to a special resolution of shareholders i.e. 70% but not of the electorate but of those who actually vote.
Although I support Celtic languages and a degree of regional self determination I have a romantic or sentimental attachment to this piece of rock from Lands End to John of Groats and think of it as one mass. Best to keep it together.
After Scotland gains its independence, the Island currently known as Britain will be known as Britain. And will remain one piece of rock from Lands End to John O’Groats.
The important difference being the population of Scotland will be out from under the jackboot of Westminster’s Tories and will always get the governments it votes for.
“One of the reasons is that I am suspicious of the line which assumes that smaller countries are better guarantors of various freedoms,”
Charles.
You are of course tainted by the dark cloud of Israel. Stop using it as a marker to the success of small nations, and you’ll be fine.
As for my opinion on Scottish independence, who better to decide for the Scottish people than themselves, via a Scottish government.
I’m opposed to Scottish independence because I don’t like nationalism and xenophobia. There is not a mandate for another independence referendum at the moment. One should only be held if a mandate is acquired. If the First Minister and her government are not prepared to resign so as to begin the process leading to the dissolution of the Scottish parliament and the holding of a Scottish general election, in which the SNP can if it wishes stand on a platform of holding a very rapid independence referendum, they should shut the hell up and get on with running the policy areas within Scotland that they, as a minority government propped up by the Greens, just about have a mandate to run. Much of the SNP is deeply xenophobic. All xenophobia is based on ignorance, and some may be surprised at youngsters whose minds have been addled by SNP propaganda into thinking things like “we in Scotland didn’t get a vote in the Brexit referendum” and “the unionist parties are branch offices of English parties”.
If a mandate is acquired and an independence referendum held, a majority among actual voters should determine the result. Overriding a majority of voters in an independence referendum because they are a minority among the electorate is a recipe for nightmare.
If an independence referendum is held, it should come about after a process that respects both legitimacy (see above) and the law, in the sense that all serious people whether they support or oppose independence are willing to acknowledge the plebiscite’s legitimacy and legality. That happened in 2014 in Scotland but it did not happen in Catalonia.
Alec Salmond’s gloating that the Leave result in the EU referendum in 2016 put “the stars” in a propitious alignment for Scottish independence was a measure of what a cynical arsehole the man is. It was reminiscent of the saying that “England’s agony is Ireland’s opportunity”. Indeed the whole SNP policy on “Brexit should mean Scottish independence” is cynical and shows contempt for Scottish people’s intelligence and for the fact that Scotland’s main trading partner in the event of independence and Brexit would be Rump Britain.
I also believe it is pathetic that no major British party has done anything serious to strengthen the union of the home countries since Scots voted in 2014 to stay in it.
That said, if the SNP did have the guts to try to acquire a mandate to hold another independence referendum, I think they’d fail and they probably know it. They hit the limit of how far they could get selling sunshine, and as economic calamity approaches the market for sunshine is contracting.
There is a mandate and nothing you say will change that!
Craig’s article has brought out the usual crazies against a former independent country regaining her independence again. Nice try ‘chaps’ but nae coconuts fer all the conspiracy theories!
Actually there’s three mandates.
“There is a mandate and nothing you say will change that!”
It’s the Scottish people who are denying the SNP a mandate for another independence referendum, and it is appallingly contemptuous governance for the Scottish government to waste public money calling for another referendum, refusing to listen to what the Scottish people are saying, namely “we don’t want another independence referendum”. As I said, try to seek a mandate.
N.
You haven’t a clue, you’re just repeating unionist mantra. It’s clear you don’t live in Scotland, or you’d know better.
Linking Scottish independence to “nationalism and xenophobia” is specious. If anything, Brexit garnered a lot of xenophobic voters, so the contrast between SNP and Tories (who embraced Brexit and absorbed most of the single-issue Brexit voters) is not “xenophobes versus nice English folks and nice Scottish lasses”. The political attitudes predominant to the north of and south of Tweed differ as much as between USA and Canada.
One can make a case that it would be better to have a single North American state, or that it would be better to have two states on Britania island. As an EU citizen who lives in USA, I have rather theoretical view on the issue. IMHO, “bread and butter issues” are more important than nationalist abstractions, but centralized and doctrinaire government in London can be adverse to bread and butter interests of the people in Scotland. Perhaps it already is, I do not know details. So one can sketch a two-pronged strategy: pursue a coalition with progressive elements in England (not Blairites, mind you) and have independence as Plan B that does not have to be hidden.
It is not serious to smart to hide such a profound issue as independence and pull it out from a hidden safe when the situation changes. One option is to declare that Scottish independence is a faulty cause, sorry for what we did recently, another option is to declare that it is a necessary option for Scotland in the eventuality that UK is misgoverned even more than now, another option is to pursue the cause regardless. SNP would not be the only party on the island with overt diversity of opinions.
“Linking Scottish independence to “nationalism and xenophobia” is specious. If anything, Brexit garnered a lot of xenophobic voters, so the contrast between SNP and Tories (who embraced Brexit and absorbed most of the single-issue Brexit voters) is not “xenophobes versus nice English folks and nice Scottish lasses”.”
The turnout in the EU referendum was 67.2% in Scotland and 72.6% in the rest of Britain. Brexit wasn’t such a big issue in Scotland as it was in England (73%), Wales (72%), and Gibraltar (84%). By that I mean fewer people were bothered about what the result of the EU referendum was, either way. (In Northern Ireland there was even less interest: turnout was 63%.)
“The turnout in the EU referendum was 67.2% in Scotland and 72.6% in the rest of Britain. Brexit wasn’t such a big issue in Scotland as it was in England (73%), Wales (72%), and Gibraltar (84%). By that I mean fewer people were bothered about what the result of the EU referendum was, either way. (In Northern Ireland there was even less interest: turnout was 63%.)”
Another interpretation would be that much of the tiny Scottish electorate stayed at home in the fond delusion that all would be well, whereas in Great England the Brexiteers wanted to make the most of their chance and so came out in force.
Charles Sir,
Christopher Rogers favours a massive Constitutional upheaval of the UK, that said, I’m no Republican, so I’d retain the Constitutional Monarchy part, although one more in line as our our European neighbours run their Constitutions. So, what does Rogers support, in a nut shell I believe that the UK as its presently constituted is an ideal candidate for a Federal Structure of Governance, on that embraces full PR, so, our Lower House would still be the HoC, but our upper Chamber would be elected and represent the newly created regions, among them Scotland & Wales – Northern Ireland is the thorny part as I’d prefer a United Ireland.
As for Scotland running another IndyRef, well that’s a no brainer to me, if a majority of the Scottish desire another Vote then I support the Scottish right to do so, the same applies to my own Country of Wales.
At this juncture in time this is what I support, however, if the actions of the Malcontents within the PLP ensure we fail to get a radical Left-of-Centre Labour Government, instead, continuing as we are with a Tory administration wedded to neoliberal economic prescriptions and wanton warfare, then I too would likely make the move into the Welsh Independence camp.
As for the economics, the facts are that both Scotland and wales are viable as fully functional independent states as long as they are monetarily sovereign, that is, they can create and tax in their own currency – if that currency is linked to the Euro though, afraid to say all bets are off.
I trust that answers your enquiry as to where I sit presently and be advised I’m still pushing for an actual Socialist Labour Government, one that will focus on our dire economic position, the environment, massive Constitutional Reform and a overseas foreign policy similar to that that Robin Cook desired before he was shafted by Tory Blair.
Northern Ireland isn’t that thorny, the Good Friday / Belfast Agreement dealt with that issue – regardless of your personal feelings.
@IrishU
For the Unionists, specifically the DUP, a United Ireland is a thorny issue, including Northern Ireland in any Federal structure would give ammunition to the DUP and deny Unification, which a clear majority on the Island of Ireland desire – no issues with Ireland itself joining any UK Federation, alas that would deny Irish independence, so it is a thorny issue for multiple reasons, but, as a Democratic Socialist I’m obliged to support a United Ireland.
Thanks Christopher.
Yes a United Ireland is a thorny issue for unionists but the inclusion of Northern Ireland in a federal UK is not, that is my point. I follow the logic of your argument but the GFA made it quite clear that any alteration to the constitutional status quo i.e NI in the UK, was a matter for the people of Northern Ireland. Currently there is no clear majority for unification here in Northern Ireland and ultimately that is what counts.
Mind your own business. What I think has NOTHING to o with you.
..to do with you.’ Not to you Christopher Rogers but to Bostock @ 20.50 yesterday.
Sharp Ears
You seem to spend half of your days telling us what you think about a wide variety of things, people and events.
Apologies for thinking you might wish to share with readers your opinion on whether Scotland should become independent.
Of course I can’t oblige you to answer but readers might be forgiven for asking themselves why you’re being so coy on this particular question?
We’ve already guessed, so at least you do both have one opinion in common. “Qui ne dit mot consent.”
I have been advocating the SNP divest themselves of both Nicola Sturgeon and her husband Peter Muriel in the interest of independence for some considerable time now Craig
I support the timetable Bob, have done all the way: “until the terms of Brexit are known”, with “known” becoming more and more difficult by the day unfortunately, or even if it’s going to happen.
But break the mainifesto, the wording of the passed Holyrood Motion if you’ll pardon the expression, and I’ll be shouting loudly along with you, Craig and Peter. Until then I’m with the timetable, which so far has been kept to.
Just one small problem, it doesn’t make sense.
I am appalled at this Craig, in fact it doesn’t send a very good
Picture of the inner workings.
Looks like the people are going to have to take the initiative.
Regards
??
@JOML
Why did the SNP not try to reform the council tax when they had a majority in Holyrood then? A policy is abandoned because “they did not have a majority”, then later they had a majority and did not follow through. This is what I mean’t about the SNP becoming, basically, like an extension of the state.
The Tories got in at Westminster thanks to:
A: The collapse of the Liberal vote in Devon / Cornwall / South West
B: The swing to the SNP in Scotland.
BBC Radio 4 news was not “Corbyn is the devil” tonight for a change, so it would seem the worm has turned possibly, as the Labour conference has been more sensible about Brexit.
Anyone anti-Tory in Scotland are wasting time voting for SNP in Westminster elections.
Malachi, when the SNP won with a majority, they didn’t have the reform of the council tax in their manifesto. You’d need to ask the SNP why didn’t introduce change from outside their manifesto, like you suggest they should have.
As for transferring the 35 SNP seats to Labour, this still would not put Labour in government.
Also, anti-Tory in Scotland also means anti-Red Tory.
Maybe better to delay another independence referendum, until some of the old arses who voted against it before, have joined the spirit realm.
Same goes for Brexit, if there is to be another vote. Let more of the old bigots pass on first. lol
“I am persuaded that diversity of opinions is nearly as natural as diversity of countenances, and wherever in a numerous deliberative body no such diversity appears, I do not consider silence, except on self-evident propositions, as evincing uniformity of opinion, for that would be unnatural, but rather as a proof that their deliberative authority is merely nominal, and that they are in reality overawed by some superior power.”
Words spoken by my 4xGreat Grandfather, Richard Hodgson in 1798. Minutes later he was arrested and imprisoned for three years without trial. He had been campaigning peacefully for constitutional change.
Admire the Irish,they did not ask for Independence they took it and will be celebrating their Declaration of Independence in 2019.
Not really, the Tan War led to the continuation of the Ascendancy by other means (with an Oirish accent). That’s the sort of “independence” the Snats want.
Em not really.
The old Anglo-Irish families were a spent force, politically, by the end of the 1920s and were economically spent by the mid-50s.
2019 seems like a strange year to celebrate 100 years of independence:
1916 – Easter Rising and proclamation of the Irish Republic
1918 – General election. Sinn Fein MPs refuse to take their seats and establish the Dáil Éireann
1919 – Start of the War of Independence (no declaration of independence of war issued)
1920 – Government of Ireland Act
1921 – Truce and Anglo Irish Treaty signed
four points:
1. Political parties don’t do open debate; maybe they should, but open debate poses risks for party policy and long-term success. So this Fringe wasn’t the right forum.
2. We still need an open debate, so that activists can know which direction the movement is going in, and because that will get the attention of softer anti-Indy voters. The SNP leadership doesn’t have to reveal the strategy it formulates after listening to that debate, but it can’t listen to that debate unless we have it.
3. We can’t wait until we “know the outcome of Brexit”, because we may never know it. (We’ll know it if we have a hard Brexit, but only a complete social shit would plan on that outcome.) A soft Brexit will lead to a two-year transition period, with no unambiguously attributable outcomes.
4. Given that the Brexit outcome won’t provide certainty, our key date is still 2021, when the mandate expires.
5. How in fact *are* we going to get to independence, if the SNP isn’t on board? That’s why we need a dabete, and a Plan B.
You tried to make a political statement to a low clerk. That’s not how things are done in the UK. He has a guidebook and your application has to comply with these guidelines. You sort of forgot, Craig, that clerks are not hired to think but to tick boxes on computers.
Get a real company to apply. Put the event’s theme as “Impact of central policies on Scottish economy” or similar bs. Put your name on this. You will have the room packed.
The secret is to understand how clerks think and work and help them to do the work in the way you need.
This one is for Clark. The guy who used to be the moderator on here. No I am not stalking you. You posted a link here yesterday, and revealed your pesonal folder by your link. You never did anything wrong, and your personal folder revealed to me, nothing much that I didn’t know before (you are such a good looking guy) except one completely extraordinary photograph – which you have in extraordinary high definition.
Please post it again, I think it was some place in the USA next to a Nuclear Reactor or wanna know how to make safe this radioactive sh1t, and not really having a clue all I could see was acres and acres of containers from above all in their neat squares with lanes between them going on for miles. It was somewhere in the USA…There were not many cars nearby.
You know which one I mean. I suspect it is not a photoshop, cos I have seen an earlier slightly smaller and blurred image too.
If the Russians wanted to take that out..it would not even require a nuclear bomb – cos its sat there on American ground. The Yanks are so fckin stupid, they will probably let it off thesmelves by accident or neglect – oh sh1t that pile is getting a bit hot, and its not raining.
I don’t want to frighten Americans living right next door in their hometown to this catastrophe just waiting to happen – so you Clark post the link…if you want to. It fightened the sh1t out of me, and I have never been to the USA.
You are a very clever man. Just go with it….
Tony
Hello Tony, you’re lucky I saw your comment – there are so many comments these days, and with threaded comments they end up all over different pages. This site must be a nightmare to moderate since it got so busy.
I deliberately leave my home folder accessible so that people can browse all the content. A lot of what’s there is just stuff I’ve posted so I could link to it in comments. I don’t want to go to all the trouble of making an index, with explanations, and updating it each time I add another snippet, so I just created home.html instead of the usual index.html; that way, visitors’ browsers don’t have an index.html which they would automatically render, and instead they produce a directory listing from which visitors can browse.
I used to look OK. Getting wrinkly and dentally challenged these days. I should post some more recent photo’s.
I think you mean the following photo. I never found it in particularly high resolution though:
http://www.killick1.plus.com/pictures/aerial_paducah_yard.jpg
The cylinders contain depleted UF6 – uranium hexafluoride. It’s not very radioactive, and it’s not near a nuclear power station. Uranium is fluoridated into UF6 to make it suitable for the enrichment process, which has two products; enriched UF6 and depleted UF6. Natural uranium is only slightly radioactive. The enriched stuff is slightly more radioactive, and the depleted stuff is slightly less.
But the radioactivity isn’t the danger. Like most heavy metals, uranium is horribly toxic chemically. That doesn’t matter much for uranium metal because it’s barely soluble in water, so it has no way of getting into living organisms. But UF6 is a salt, and it’s highly soluble in water. It’s also highly corrosive, and those ageing cylinders are all rotting away; I’ve never been able to find a high resolution picture, so this has to do:
http://www.killick1.plus.com/pictures/DUF6_cylinder_leak.gif
See, it costs money to defluoridate the UF6 back into uranium metal, so they don’t bother. They just store it instead. What they should really do is disperse it into the oceans. That sounds awful, but uranium salts have been washing into the oceans naturally for the entire history of Earth, and dispersing our little bit would raise the concentration by less than 1%.
As usual, I expect the problem is the polarisation, the argument. I expect there’d be an enormous outcry from the environmentalists if the US government tried to disperse that UF6 into the oceans. So instead it sits in rotting cylinders on land, just waiting for a general strike or a really bad recession, the workers stop patching up the cylinders and it leaches into the fresh water supply instead.
The UK has its own nuclear horror at Sellafield. “Dirty Thirty” or Building B30, the most contaminated industrial site in Europe. It was the cooling ponds for the “spent” fuel rods of the UK Magnox power stations. During the first coal miners strike, the UK government ran the Magnox reactors in overdrive, to minimise power cuts. “Spent” fuel rods arrived at Sellafield faster than they could be handled properly, so they all just got piled into the cooling ponds.
But “spent” means about 2% of the nuclear fuel has been used; the 98% is the disposal problem. Because of the heat from the radioactive rods, the water grew organisms like crazy. Because of the radioactivity, people had to keep away so maintenance was neglected. Loads of stuff started living in there. Sea birds land on it to feed and for the warmth of the water, so when they leave they take contamination with them. Fuck knows how they’ll ever clean it up; the estimated cost is tens of billions.
As an American, may I say that it’s somewhat heartwarming to discover that there are still places in the world where people are able to imagine that they might, as individuals, be permitted to express themselves on the fringe of a major political party.
(I mean, without being confined under armed guard to a “free speech zone” half a mile away from the meeting.)
Thank you Craig: stalinist indeed! and good on you for trying. I guess it creates a space to make fun and I would suggest a cartoon or two, perhaps even a cartoon and slogan competition/exhibition at a virtual site or parallel offsite platform with a grog or two hosted by Festival Beveridge and Property Services. Team up with a wag that has great projection equipment and splash scrolling contributions over the side of a large building perhaps.
And a badge for good folk to wear with the url and some SPLASH colour to see them in the crowd circulating at the conference. Remember the merry pranksters always have a voice.
Perhaps the SNP leadership fancies itself as a coalition partner in a Labour-led Government if the latter emerge as the largest party in a hung Parliament? Just asking.
Have you really forgotten what happened the last time? Just replying.
We need to wait for the court judgement which won’t come till after the conference at the end of October, deliberately by the London government. Nicola needs our support as after the supreme court finds against us which it will, it will go to the eu court who will find in our favour in our favour. That’s when we’ll have a vote free of Westminster interference and with international legal support.
The disagreement is on how powers returning from Brussels get distributed, or not distributed, between the British and Scottish parliaments after Brexit. That’s got nothing to do with the EU court.
Regarding Anatoliy Chepiga, and if he is the guy who called himself Ruslan Boshirov, what did Putin know, and when did he know it?
Putin said the two men had been found and that they were civilians. According to the Guardian, the two-headed monster of Bellingcat and Insider is saying that Chepiga is a “veteran”. Now as I understand it, a veteran is indeed a civilian. So, when Putin said these two men were civilians, did he know that one of them had been a colonel in the GRU? Was he deliberately saying nothing about whether they, or at least Boshirov, may have served in the armed forces in the past? Note that whereas British politicians play with words a lot, Putin doesn’t. Which makes it an even better question to ask him.
First of all, of course, can he confirm whether or not Boshirov actually is Chepiga?
The Guardian’s write-up is pathetic insofar as they do not seem to understand the difference between a veteran and a serviceman. Thus first they say “The online investigative sites Bellingcat and the Insider uncovered information identifying one of the two suspects – previously named as Ruslan Boshirov – as Col Anatoliy Chepiga, a special forces veteran” and then they say “The naming of Chepiga eviscerates claims by the Russian president, Vladimir Putin, that the two men are civilians and have no links to Russian state intelligence.” But actually when you leave the armed forces you do become a civilian. Which far from making the two guys as pure as the driven snow, should lead anybody who’s really interested in this affair into thinking about undercover networks, the relationship between the state and private military companies (mercenaries), the mafia state, and if this was an official job, then what was the motive? Interesting stuff like that.
Poor Nikolai Glushkov won’t of course be saying anything about the matter.
Last thing: although the standard of “journalism” in such pieces is dreadfully low, there is at least one thing that some western-based journalists have got right as background to Petrov and Boshirov’s RT interview – the references to the practice of “vranyo” (враньё) in Russian culture – a type of lying where the person on the receiving end is fully aware, as is the giver, that what is being said is a complete load of old bullshit. Cultures of lying vary. They are not the same in England, Ireland, and Russia. (I can, however, confirm that the habitual barefaced lying by thieving scumbag small contractors in the building trade is practically the same in rural Scotland as it is in the London area.)
It will be hilarious if the Chepiga story is false 🙂
Defence Secretary Gavin Williamson’s tweet today saying the “true identity” of one of the Salisbury suspects has been revealed to be a “Russian Colonel” was removed after a few hours.
C’mon Putin, say something!
highly decorated Colonel in Russian Military Intelligence who received 20 military awards serving with Spetsnaz and awarded Russia’s highest military award ‘Hero of the Russian Federation’ personally from Putin nervously cracks up on telly under pressure from questions by RT editor Margarita Simonyan, the comedy continues.
There aren’t any Chepigas in the list of Heroes of the Russian Federation
http://megabook.ru/article/%D0%A1%D0%BF%D0%B8%D1%81%D0%BE%D0%BA%20%D0%93%D0%B5%D1%80%D0%BE%D0%B5%D0%B2%20%D0%A0%D0%BE%D1%81%D1%81%D0%B8%D0%B9%D1%81%D0%BA%D0%BE%D0%B9%20%D0%A4%D0%B5%D0%B4%D0%B5%D1%80%D0%B0%D1%86%D0%B8%D0%B8%20(%D0%BF%D0%BE%20%D0%B3%D0%BE%D0%B4%D0%B0%D0%BC)#2014
I can’t read the following page, so I have no idea whether it’s authentic or not:
http://www.dvocu.ru/index/alleja_geroev/0-36
Bellingcat article seems to be based on this:
https://theins.ru/politika/118927
Further dredging here:
https://www.craigmurray.org.uk/archives/2018/09/the-incredible-case-of-boshirov-and-petrovs-visas/comment-page-4/#comment-788217
Megabook lists nobody called Chepiga as a Hero of the Russian Federation. Megabook is an encyclopaedia published by a company called Kirill and Mefodii (Cyril and Methodius wrote the alphabet for Old Church Slavonic, known as Cyrillic), a private-sector firm that is part of the R-Style group.
Dvocu.ru does list a Chepiga as a recipient of that award, at the bottom of that page together with Aleksandr Viktorovich Popov, both of whom are stated to have received the award by decree of the President of the Russian Federation. Unlike with the other medalholders named on that page, nothing else is said about those two guys.
Dvocu refers to, and may or may not be run by, the Far Eastern Higher Military Command School (DVOKU), an institution of the Russian Ministry of Defence. But note that the above-mentioned page is on the domain dvocu.ru, not the main DVOKU site which is at the official military domain dvoku.mil.ru.
Theins.ru states that Anatoly Vladimirovich Chepiga was born on 5 April 1979 near the Chinese border and enrolled at DVOKU aged 18, graduating with honours and then serving in the 14th Brigade of the GRU Spetsnaz (special forces). They say that his unit (74854, previously 20662) fought in the second Chechen war, and that Chepiga was awarded the Hero of Russia medal (as they call it) in 2014 by President Putin.
Тheir key link is to this page, which appears to be a website for the Amur region branch of DOSAAF, an army-related sporting organisation. Between 1991 and 2009 it was called ROSTO, the Russian Defence Sports-Technical Organization ROSTO, and its history goes back at least as far as the 1920s. DOSAAF supports activities in sporting halls, swimming pools, and (can you guess?) gyms.
That page at dosaaf28.ru records that Anatoly Vladimirovich Chepiga, who did three tours in Chechnya, has won more than 20 decorations and that in December 2014 Colonel Chepiga was awarded the title of Hero of the Russian Federation for his peacekeeping role, which, according to theins.ru, is a reference to “the invasion of the Ukraine”. (That phrase says a lot about theins.ru.)
Theins.ru also show a photograph of a monument to Konstantin Rokossovsky, the Soviet military officer who commanded a major campaign against German forces in Belorussia in WW2 and after the war served as Poland’s Defence Minister. A wall to the side of the monument carries among other names the name of A V Chepiga. The wall has at its top a representation of the Hero of the Russian Federation medal, so presumably the named personnel are or were recipients of that medal. Why someone who is still alive should have their name recorded on such a monument is unclear.
There is a page at warheroes.ru that lists a Iuriy Yakovlevich Chepiga as a Hero of the Soviet Union but that is someone completely different who received the medal in 1945.
I do not know the source of the photographs, allegedly of Anatoliy Chepiga, which show a man who looks very much like a younger Ruslan Boshirov. So it is possible that Chepiga and Boshirov are not the same person and that the photos show Boshirov and not Chepiga. What is the source of these photographs? Having asked that question, I suspect that the Russian Foreign Ministry or another Russian state body would have responded by now to deny that they show Anatoliy Chepiga if in fact they do not show a real person of that name.
Anybody who does not realise that intelligence agencies, probably more than one, are involved in the Boshirov-Chepiga story should give themselves a gentle slap to the face.
RE Clark at 2.11 Google attempts to translate the page you can’t read here:
https://translate.google.com/translate?sl=auto&tl=en&js=y&prev=_t&hl=en&ie=UTF-8&u=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.dvocu.ru%2Findex%2Falleja_geroev%2F0-36&edit-text=
indeed no, my first reaction on seeing photo of ‘Chepiga’ is that facial features are different to Boshirov, despite msn taking Bellingcats ‘findings’ as gospel i do not believe the photos of Chepiga and Boshirov are same person the facial features do not match, forehead and nose are different shapes.
“Was he deliberately saying nothing about whether they, or at least Boshirov, may have served in the armed forces in the past?”
It’s hard for me to imagine any set of circumstances that would have led Putin to comment on the matter. Military service is mandatory for young men in Russia, as it was in the Soviet Union. As I understand it, the most common exceptions are university enrollment, which doesn’t seem to have been the case here, and poor health, which wouldn’t be anyone’s business. The common assumption would be that they served; if for some reason they didn’t, what purpose would be served by gratuitous comment on the matter?
What’s your basis for believing Boshirov and Petrov did not attend university?
Think of it like Wallace & Bruce with Yes being the former and SNP the latter. One is fighting for its right to self determination, the other to maintain political office. A symbiotic relationship if ever there was one, but at the end of the day YES is the more able to win the battle. Who needs an hour at a two day conference when you have every hour of every day between now and Indyref2?
I get your frustration but, at the end of the day, we are all striving to win the same battle.
Goose makes a very relevant point btw
You could try this:
“We are being asked to believe that it is beyond the realms of possibility that a Russian Colonel of the GRU masquerading as a nutritional supplement salesman on holiday in Salisbury at the same time an attempt was made on the life of a Russian dissident could have been an innocent tourist. I want to make the case that he was.
This Russian colonel had a passionate interest in Norman spires. He desperately wanted to see Salisbury, but he could not travel under his real name because of his career in Russian military intelligence. He therefore faked his identity so that he could travel to Britain and fulfill his desire to see the great Norman spire of Salisbury cathedral. This is corroborated by the fact that he has an almost encyclopaedic knowledge of the proportions of the building. Only a committed spire spotter could have given such details in the interview.”
Feel free to use this.
This is an utter disgrace Craig the people want Indy Ref 2 soon 91,000 marched in Glasgow, Inverness and Dundee. We have to be listened to
Why?
Told you Craig, the Snats are Syriza.
I am almost totally convinced that The Scottish People voted for Their Independence, and that the vote was bent by The British Intelligence Services (Postal vote stuffing) and The Scottish Labour Party officials who were mostly counting the votes. I watched them almost live on numerous videocams. I wasn’t that interested in the vote (though I would prefer to have the Scottish people on our side – even if they always cheer for the Germans when they are playing us.. (Us English always cheer for The Scotch. We rather like Irish too).
I just wanted to see a fair Democratic result. It didn’t happen. You Scottish were robbed, but at least you are still part of the UK. We need your help to take on the rest of the cnts – especially The USA., The CIA and The unelected Bastards in control of The EU and The BBC..and everything they stand for and brainwash you with.
Even you lot wanted to keep The British Pound, so you must like us English a bit, and we Really like You..
Yes, She is very nice and eloquent, but she is not working for Scottish Independence. Most Scottish people I mention her to, I get the same kind of reaction like mentioning Margaret Thatcher, during the poll riots. I strongly suspect she is not working for you. I wil not mention her name again.
However, I really like Mhairi Black.
Nicola Sturgeon – Nah – I have been told.
Tony
Most English football supporters will support Scotland against any team from outside Britain and Ireland, whereas unfortunately many Scots will support whoever is playing against England.[*] HOWEVER, that is NOT true of ALL Scottish football supporters, or all native Scots, some of whom do not have a preference when England play against such a team, and some of whom will support England. Quite a few Scots supported England in the most recent World Cup, for instance. Some of them even encouraged me to, when I told them I wasn’t interested in football.
(*) That’s where a large part of the “Scotland loves the EU” idea comes from. There wasn’t much love for the EU in Scotland before the Brexit referendum, except when rich fiddlers could get grants out of it.