FREEDOM!!!! [4]

wow! people are to be prosecuted for hate speech, IN THEIR OWN HOMES. nice.

https://www.spiked-online.com/2020/10/29/sending-the-thought-polis-into-scottish-homes/

{{ Um you do know Figg youre back on the kool-aid- the Hate Crime Law was passed over 2 years ago with cross party support and there has been no fuss about it since. Nor does it do the things that ludicrous story says it does.
Hold on Ill test it!.....yup just shouted and swore about all sorts of people in my own home, no police so far just a rather shocked cat!

Although that story does highlight one thing very well, it was written in 2020, 1 year before the bill had finished passing through Parliament, and it demonstrates well the hysterical gulf in reality between the attacks of the right wing media and the real bill nearly 3 years after it was passed. }}}}

Nope it proves that the loony SNP even thought of going there, and it was championed by 'you know who'.

{{ Its been law for over two years never mind going there, and it shows how far down the rabbit hole you seem to have plunged if you believe that article (I cant call it news because it doesnt contain much facts, and the one actual fact it does contain- that  it repealed the blasphemy act- thus increasing free speech, is true. It did do that. Im wondering when you became a loony Unionist spouting anti-SNP conspiracy theory devotee. Does it really all just stem from your dislike of trans folk having rights?}}

Pettytyrant101 wrote:{{Im wondering when you became a loony Unionist spouting anti-SNP conspiracy theory devotee. Does it really all just stem from your dislike of trans folk having rights?}}

 No. It stems from me wondering just where you draw the line on the silly billies. I reckon at this point if the SNP was to decree that all toilets had cameras installed to check whether there was enough bullshit exiting people's bums, you would say, "sounds legit, I am all for it".  Just how mad would they have to be before you drew the line?

fyi I am all for Independence, and trans folk can have the same rights as the rest of us.

{{ There is plenty about the SNP I have issue with, particularly on ferries and transport and the SNP financing - thing is they are real things. Real policy issues.

The stuff you have been putting up, well its utterly divorced from reality.
There is much to complain about, but it should be real stuff not imaginary made up right wing nonsense and outright lies.}}

{{ Been watching the SNP leadership hustings. I like the format, its very open, its party members asking questions they want answers too, and the tone has generally been good.
But, like much of the country I feel I go into this without a particular favourite in the fight and waiting to see if someone emerges above the others.

So far of the three I'd say it was a two horse race between Forbes, who has been confident, and clear and passionate in her answers, and Yousef, who is the most professional in his presentation and, as you'd expect of someone whose served in government for some time, the most competent and experienced. But he is dull with it.
I think Forbes also has her sex on her side, I think there is a sizeable progressive wing of the SNP that rather liked having a female party leader and may want to see that continue.

The third contender, Regan, her problem is she can be hesitant in giving answers and isn't as clear and well worded as her opposition are, her lack of experience shows. She is also the most hardline in forcing a referendum. I just dont see her pulling it off and winning. }}

{{ This reporting made me chuckle. The Scotsman ran with a front page story about 'in-fighting' in the SNP at the leadership hustings. In fact 4 separate Unionist, Tory rags use the word 'in-fighting' in their main story, they must be word-sharing!

Problem is I've been watching them and no there hasn't been, there's been differences as you'd expect, but its not like say the Tory leadership contest where they just slagged each other off and leaked negative stories about each other to the press. So far as these things go its all been very polite and civilised in fact. So what are they on about?
Well what made me chuckle is how they justify 'in-fighting' in the main text of the article, you have to get 2/3 of the way through it first to get to the wonderful truth-

'The hustings were characterised by in-fighting between members in the online comments section.'

They are having to go to an online comments section to find some dissention, a comments section, on the internet, quite possibly the worst place on the planet to go for anything. You couldnt make this up. Well you could clearly, if youre a Unionist rag. }}

{{ The Tory papers are all over the announced drop in SNP membership, but boy are they only telling a tiny part of the story, which is to be expected by now.

The membership has gone from 104,000 members in 2021 to 72,186.
Not that the Tory rags are using that 2021 figure, instead they are using figures from 2019 when membership peaked at 125,691 to make the drop seem larger.
And they are solely attributing it to folk leaving over the gender reforms in order to further stoke the culture war as a political tool, a very nasty evil one.

What they don't tell you is that all party membership is down over the same period, and while I am sure some left because they disagreed with the gender reforms the far more likely reason is the same reason it's dropped across all parties - the cost of living crisis. Party membership costs money and the SNP, far more than most parties, has a membership made up of ordinary working class people, the very people most affected by the cost of living crisis. It's hardly surprising therefore when figuring out how to save money that dues to membership of a political party is among the first things to go.

The other thing they aren't talking about is how the current figure of 72,186 is still way out in front of all other parties.

Labour for example has 16,467 members in Scotland, the Greens 7,500, the Lib Dems 4,185 and the Tories? Well they are refusing to even say what their membership in Scotland is probably because it's in, at best, 3 digits given they have only 1 MP.

The truth is the other parties would kill to have that size of membership.

Whilst the Tory press is spinning this as a disaster all it really shows is the SNP remain far and away the largest party in the country. Just don't expect the right wing biased news media in this country to tell you that. }}

Your parties have membership dues? I suppose it makes some sense because only those who donate have much influence.

{{ Yeah if youre a party member you get to vote on the party leader. So for example in the current SNP leadership contest only party members get to vote who will be Scotland's new First Minister, as in a parliamentary democracy you dont vote for a leader, you vote for a party so if the leader changes you dont need to hold a general election open to all, as the party hasnt changed, just whose head of it. The party picks their leader.
Its same reason since the Tories got elected to Westminster we've had Boris, May, Truss and now Sunak as PM- without the public every getting a say unless they are a fully paid up conservative party member.}}

{{ Well the SNP have a new leader, and it was a tight vote. Humza Yousaf (Sturgeons own preference) won the day by 52% to 48% over Kate Forbes.

He is not yet First Minister of Scotland as that requires a vote in the Scottish Parliament today. We can expect Tories and Labour to not support him, but assuming his own party do and the Greens who are in coalition with the SNP and also backed Humza do then he will get the numbers.

Given how close Forbes ran him though he cant ignore her or her followers, she is currently Finance Secretary but I think he will boost her up the cabinet ranks, possibly as far as Deputy First Minister.

So what do I think of Humza? Well its pros and cons really-

pro- lots of experience in government and as minister in important roles such as Health and Education
cons- those have been two of the hardest jobs to do in the economic climate and with constant Tory cuts to the Scottish budget in both areas, so he has a lot of baggage that the opposition can easily go for.

pro- he's less focused on social issues than Sturgeon and more on the economy
cons- the Greens would rather he was focused on the social issues and that the economy comes second to the environment, and they need the Greens to maintain a majority and pass budgets

pros- the first non-white and Muslim leader the country has had
cons- the right wing coverage has already had very thinly veiled racist undertones to it, and the more extreme right its open hostility on both his skin colour and religion. That sadly will reflect a certain percentage of the population making it harder to persuade them of the merits of independence when they are racist to the messenger.

pros- he's popular within the SNP party and may be able to unite the different sides
cons- hes less popular with the general population than his leadership rival Forbes, and both are considerably less popular than Sturgeon was.

So it comes down for me, and I think a lot of people, to what he does next. Its a tricky balance, he needs to both find a way to keep what has made the SNP an election winning juggernaut that has wiped out the other major party in Scotland in 8 consecutive elections, whilst also changing it enough to unite the internal factions and regrow popularity.

Overall I think the main issue the SNP have had in recent years is putting the horse before the cart in a number of areas. They pushed ahead withe Gender Recognition Bill, which was and is the right thing to do, but they did it without first explaining and getting understanding from the population as to why they were doing it or even what the bill actually did (this is a difficult task in a country where 99% of the press is Unionist and anti-SNP).
The same goes for independence, the numbers have barely changed significantly since the referendum as the SNP have spent the time arguing with Westminster about process and how to call another, before they have set out the arguments and made the case to persuade the so far unpersuaded of the case for independence.

So for me what he needs to do is make the arguments on merits first, show what can be done with devolution in the meantime and good governance, and use the grass roots of the party to hit the campaigning on independence hard in trying to persuade people. }}

He has a terrible track record for incompetence in each of his ministerial jobs, he is as thick as a brick, arrogant and an anti-white racist.

He joked to a group of Ukrainian women "where are all the men" which shows he is either a fool or tone deaf insensitive.

He went on a racist rant about 'too many white people'. In Scotland.  

I will lay you a bet now that he will preside over a divisive shitshow.

He has a terrible track record for incompetence in each of his ministerial jobs- Figg

{{ Thats just Tory crap. He had transport, but its major problems, particularly the ferries were before he took over, he inherited the mess- and it is a mess, I live somewhere reliant on the ferries that we still dont have. But it wasnt Humza's fault and he couldn't legally just get out all the contracts already signed up to. These matters are always a lot more complex than just waving a magic wand- look at the overspend by Westminster on a host of projects from the high speed rail to the massively over budget aircraft carrier. They arent hundreds of thousands over budget they are millions and in some cases billions over budget.

On health the NHS across the UK is screwed after over a decade of Tory cuts, austerity and public sector wage freezes, and privatisation in England which Humza and those before him in the SNP Health have blocked here, so our health service is still public sector only.
Across the majority of metrics however the Scottish NHS is doing better than any other part of the UK, junior Doctors and nurses are on higher wages and less tax, and there has been no days lost here to industrial action as Humza treated them with respect and negotiated with the unions, unlike Westminster who name called everyone and refused to even talk to them - as a result our NHS reached a settlement without dispute or industrial actions- they are still striking in England.

'He went on a racist rant about 'too many white people'. In Scotland.'- Figg

The racist rant is your biggest joke yet Figg- that is exactly an example of the thinly veiled racism directed at him. And Im pretty sure we went over this already, the quote is taken out of context of the debate in which it was held and ignores everything else he said and has said. Its a Tory slur.

'He joked to a group of Ukrainian women "where are all the men"' - Figg

Um key word there is joked, in fact it was more than a joke it was a deliberate dig at England and its anti-immigrant racist rhetoric about how all the immigrants who come here are dangerous young men. More stuff out of context. More Tory slanders.

But even if you dont want to admit to yourself Figg lets be honest, you are a Tory. You spout right wing and Tory rhetoric.

As to if he will be any good as First Minister, I have no idea. But I am willing to actually give him a fair chance in the role to find out first, and if I dont like how things are going I will switch my vote to either the Greens, or an independent candidate who supports Scottish independence, thats the end aim. Who delivers it has always been less important than it being delivered.}}

"you are a Tory"  that made me giggle. Nah I just think he is a tit. I'll tell you what, lets make a bet, if you win I will scrape your barrel for a year, and if I win I don't have to scape your barrel for a year. The bet is I reckon he will have made a complete arse of himself by the end of the year.

{{ Seems fair to me as all you have done recently is to regurgitate and spout right wing and Tory propaganda. Everything you said about Hamas are Tory and right wing attacks that come from the right wing press and are all a twisted version of the actual truth. Twisting truth to attack an individual you dont like, that sounds pretty Tory to me.

The bet is I reckon he will have made a complete arse of himself by the end of the year.- Figg

As I have already said I am waiting to see how he does. If he does well, and I hope he does as I want independence for my country and away from Westminster all good, and if he doesn't then it will be reflected in the votes at the next election, including my own vote. I don't have a party in the sense that I don't vote for one side just because they are my 'team', I have to agree with what and how they are doing a majority of things.
But judging him after half a day in the job is silly and premature and seems a rather childish way to judge a person. And basing it off what the right wing press says is even more daft (and slightly nauseating)}}

{{ This speaks volumes to the Tory attitude to Scotland- from the BBC Daily Politics on the day the SNP election was due to be announced. The presenter points out that there is 80% support for independence amongst 18- 45 years old, the Tory ministers response is, well its incredible really }}

Pettytyrant101 wrote:{{ Seems fair to me as all you have done recently is to regurgitate and spout right wing and Tory propaganda. Everything you said about Hamas are Tory and right wing attacks that come from the right wing press and are all a twisted version of the actual truth. Twisting truth to attack an individual you dont like, that sounds pretty Tory to me.

The bet is I reckon he will have made a complete arse of himself by the end of the year.- Figg

As I have already said I am waiting to see how he does. If he does well, and I hope he does as I want independence for my country and away from Westminster all good, and if he doesn't then it will be reflected in the votes at the next election, including my own vote. I don't have a party in the sense that I don't vote for one side just because they are my 'team', I have to agree with what and how they are doing a majority of things.
But judging him after half a day in the job is silly and premature and seems a rather childish way to judge a person. And basing it off what the right wing press says is even more daft (and slightly nauseating)}}

Nope, the implications that he is incompetent come from the Guardian. I don't think they are a Tory propaganda machine? In an article yesterday about him the journalist said that the members had a choice, continue with "progressive agenda" or go with competence, and the members chose the progressive agenda, which implies that he is not the competent one. Also his record speaks for itself.

Also by definition a Labour MP is not a Tory.
Ms Baillie (deputy Labour leader) laid into Mr Yousaf during her speech to the Scottish Labour Party conference, which is taking place in Edinburgh.

Ms Baillie, her party’s health spokeswoman, told activists he was “without a doubt the worst minister I have ever had the misfortune of shadowing”.

She added: “But conference, I hear the most astonishing news. Having been the worst health secretary on record, his condition has deteriorated further.

"He now aspires to be the worst first minister on record. The lack of self-awareness might be considered by clinicians to be delusional.”

{{ Labour are Unionists, there is nothing between them and the Tories when it comes to attacking the SNP, never has been since they stood shoulder to shoulder with the Tories at the referendum. Thats why they died as a serious party in Scotland. In fact its very true to say Labour hate the SNP even more than the Tories do as it was their safe seats in the Scottish heartlands the SNP took.
And if you want incompetence have you seen Douglas Ross? The Tory leader in Holyrood? His own party at Westminster called him 'a lightweight figure' who lacked 'substance and importance'. He is the single worst leader of a political party I have ever seen, and that includes Boris and Truss! }}

The point being...

I am not a Tory,

I am not 'spouting' Tory propaganda,

and I am not getting my information from the Tory media. (Because I never read it).

Which are all the accusations that you dealt out.

My info comes from the Left when it comes to politics, and calling someone right wing just because they don't agree with you seems to be a thing.

{{ I think reading a lot of the press in Scotland, there is a mistake being made in seeing the Independence Movement and the SNP as one in the same.

The stat of 80% of 18-45 year olds being in favour of independence, and its even higher in the 16-25 year old category as they are the generation who have grown up within a devolved Scotland, I think points to something very different than support for just the SNP.

A rather clever thing the SNP did was to put how devolution and the Parliament worked and what powers the devolved government did and did not have into the education system. And combined it with, for the first time in generations, Scottish history, denied of previous generations such as mine by a Westminster set National Curriculum.

This generation of Scots are well educated on what the Scottish Parliament can and cannot do, how things like the Barnett Formula for funding work, workers rights, human rights and what Scotland's resources are and how environmental we are in comparison to others.

And they look and what we can do, and then and what we can't and they ask why can't we? And the Unionist side hasn't really presented any real case of why we can't. They talk of Union, and being one big family, then they point to where shared economy has meant they could help bail us out by all pulling together in emergencies like Covid, and they imply Scotland needs England to keep it afloat financially, without them we'd have no economy.
But this generation have been taught the balance sheet, and they think a lot more is going out than is coming back in, and they look to other small European nations of comparable size, and they seem to manage often with less natural resources not only fine, but often better.

And all their lives they have known a Scotland who has voted one way, left of centre, and got a UK government of increasingly right wing Tories no one here voted for in charge. The very people who didn't want Scotland to have a devolved Parliament at all. And they just cannot understand why that should happen either, they've been told Scotland dis supposed to a democracy, in a Union of Equal Partners, but have never once in their lifetime got what they voted for. It just doesn't make sense to them.

And those who had a sibling a few years older than them in school, they would have exchange trips to Europe as regular yearly feature, thanks to free movement, science classes were in associations with others all across Europe, art classes could go to Paris see art with their own eyes. Universities were linked in shared resources, funding and students. My home town had one proud saltire atop Castle Hill, but the main street itself was, all along it on both sides, flags of the nations of Europe. And that sentiment of unity with European neighbours, in peace, working together, was like that all across different sectors in Scotland.

And then Brexit. Something else Scotland roundly rejected but got anyway, happened.
And the kids coming up a few years behind their siblings suddenly weren't going on exchange visits any more, and they cant go on holiday so easily without freedom of movement, and students from Europe aren't coming over on exchange any more, and the universities don't have that funding or sharing of resources, or flow of students from the continent. It's all been cut off.

And that was the tipping point that pushed support for independence so high in that group. They gained nothing from Brexit and they lost a lot that those immediately before them had taken for granted, and worse they had made Scotland turn its back to nations it considered friends and allies and cut ourselves off from them. And insult to injury we were being made to do it by England, to solve an English problem of the rise of UKIP. And that was their final straw.

And that group is not all politically aligned, it has Labour supports, Green, even small c conservatives (as Katie Forbes 48% shows in the SNP leadership race).
Even during the last referendum there were both Lib-Dem and Labour for Independence groups and even a small but existing fringe Conservatives for Independence.

If Labour get any sort of comeback in the next election in Scotland it would be a mistake to think it was defeating the desire for independence among that group. Many will feel Labour are more likely to yield to an eventual 2nd referendum than the Tories, who never will. They may prefer whatever policies Labour offer at election time, or feel if England is going labour better to align with someone you at least agree with most of stuff they offer, than not be heard again, without having to change their mind about independence.
More likely it would just make the Labour for Independence group of the Scottish Labour party larger and so more influential within Scottish Labour.

For Labour to make any sizeable comeback to anything like their old dominance the SNP would have to fall from what is a massive starting point however, all but a few seats in the country are SNP, they can afford a hefty blow of lost seats and still find themselves the party at the top.

I've been lucky in that one of my brothers is of the generation of only knowing a devolved Scotland, and between knowing him and his friends and doing care work, where you work with a lot of that generation, as many go into care in their late teens or early twenties you get to hear their opinions on a lot of stuff.
And they see things very differently.

The arguments Figg and I have about trans for example is totally alien to them, they just accept gender can and is varied and even fluid as an obvious fact of life. In exactly the same way my own generation thought that yes, it was a good idea to have free condoms in the sixth year toilets, especially during an AIDS epidemic, and free sanitary products, and maybe also a good idea to acknowledge gay people actually exist and to also maybe tell us about the AIDS thing too.

The same inability to understand that and the moral outrage that came from my parents generation up to great grandparents is the same incomprehensible reaction to the current generation they see in Figg and I's thoughts about trans. They don't get why its even an issue that needs talked about. We cant see what is obvious to them and they cant see why we cant accept it as obvious.

And they are like that on a lot of things, from politics to environment, workers rights and health care, they have their generational understanding of how things work.
Its like on the environment, they don't care if there is a human financial or even living standards cost to meet climate targets and save the planet, because the alternative, a dead planet and no future for anyone is so obviously worse than any possible sacrifice that might need to be made to stop it happening is still better than the alternative.
And they just don't understand what the problem is with the older generations that they cant make this simple self evident calculation too.

They see what's going on, they just are not happy about the why it's going on bit. And that seems to be true for a lot of things for the younger generation.}}

I am not 'spouting' Tory propaganda,

and I am not getting my information from the Tory media. (Because I never read it).

Which are all the accusations that you dealt out. - Figg

{{ They are not quite accusations, they are observations. As almost most of what you have said are the exact talking points and narratives of the right wing press attacks on the SNP printed daily.
However, I grant you some of it is is quite possible you could have got from the left, as the Sun in Scotland is Labour not Tory aligned, they defected years ago to side with devolution and popular mood, then again to side with the SNP for the referendum, then a slow sort of less announced slide back to Labour since.

The connection their is of spouting Unionist attack stories, just ones the Scottish Sun can present in a more left appealing way, but there is both coordination of stories across the Unionist papers briefed by the Tory government, and selective leaks of course, which in fairness leaking is at least an old government tactic of all stripes. But either way it can sometimes be a multipronged attack but put from different political perspectives, but still in the end telling the same narrative.

And, sorry but your still favouring in number I'd say the right wing press narrative over the left sided attack narrative I'd say. The arguments you have been making align more with how papers like the Mail or Express, or GB News have presented the narrative on the SNP and Humza than how the left have made their attacks on the SNP over it all.

The left for example in Scotland fully supported the gender recognition bill, and voted overwhelmingly for it. As did the left of centre Greens and to a lesser leftist extent the lib-dems. Scotlands left was unanimously in favour.
Your stance on it is much closer to that heard from the right and the opposite of the left.

On Humza talking about representation in the Parliament being presented as either an attack on whites or lack of knowledge of the population, that attack only came from the right, the left didn't go with it because that sort of thing plays well with their audience, so they just reported on, criticised the SNP for something unrelated instead or in extreme cases just didn't report it at all.
Your take on it aligns exactly with how the right presented it, out of its full context. Your views on these subjects seems to come mainly from the same viewpoint as the right wing press does, not from the left. }}

{{ Mhari Black nails Rabb in the Commons over the Lead by Donkeys sting on Tory and Labour MP'S demanding huge fees from a fake foreign company for 'consultant' work.}}

{{ Breaking news that Sturgeon's husband, former party chairman Peter Murrell, has been arrested as part of an investigation into party funds.
This has been building away for some time and confirms a growing view that Sturgeon choose her exit as she knew it was coming down the line.
In her departure speech she said something that struck at the time, that she was becoming the focus and the narrative on every policy, and it was not about policy but about if you liked her or not, and that she didnt want the party to get damaged by that focus.
If she had still been party leader this of course would be even greater a disaster than it is for the SNP. But both Sturgeon and her husband having resigned their posts takes some of the heat off the current party. A politician to the end, making a political calculation even as she went out the door. }}

"A politician to the end, making a political calculation even as she went out the door."

Did she know?