ON the one hand we have a Conservative and Colonial party ex-MSP publicly state that laws need to be passed to ensure Scotland stays in the UK, thus taking us from a country joined in a Union to a country of near colony status. Such action would of course completely rip up the findings of the Smith Commission report, which then leaves a small number of conclusions to be had from the statement by Adam Tomkins:
1. He has never read the Smith Commission Report so has no idea what he is talking about.
2. He knows exactly what is in the Smith Commission Report but has not a care for it because it is not the legally binding stuff that he concerns himself about.
3. He deliberately chose the phrases he used to cause the Scottish Government to go way too early with the independence referendum.
4. He deliberately chose the phrases he used to get the hotheads within the independence movement to commit some sort of civil disobedience/unrest.
READ MORE: Tory MSP says Scotland should be legally forced to stay in the Union
Out of those conclusions I am thinking option four is the most likely because with civil unrest comes closure of the parliament, thus the end to the dream of independence.
I have spoken out against UDI and armed insurrection on many occasions and my opinion has not altered one bit. Worryingly for this scenario is the appearance in recent weeks of the populist leader Alex Salmond.
His return to a “political party” must be viewed for what it is: nothing more than a focal point, a lensing if you will, of all that is unsavoury within the Yes movement, and that is not to say all that have flocked to his banner are unsavoury. But certainly we now see the reason behind all the smear, fear and tears from his party bloggers prior to their open declaration of loyalty, those who now make no pretence of liking the SNP leadership and indeed are more than happy to commit to print any story that they choose and the more mud it contains the better.
READ MORE: Threat to forcibly keep Scotland in the UK is not just disgusting – it will backfire
Their egotistical mindset sees them sitting above and beyond reproach, with their leader all powerful and preaching the only true path to independence. Indeed their manifesto contains a worrying paragraph urging civil disobedience, although the word peaceful is used, but it was clearly drawn up by someone who does not know or does not care how quickly a supposedly peaceful demonstration (in a pandemic) can turn violent, especially with the “grab the claymore, close the border we are sovereign extremists” that Salmond has attracted.
I do not believe in coincidence so find it very peculiar that the Oxbridge sow starts to ramp up the hostile takeover rhetoric and a failed populist leader reappears weeks before arguably the most important parliamentary elections in Scotland’s history.
Fortunately the traction the populist sought has not materialised, and Scotland has moved on past the Salmond era. Unfortunately, as we get closer in to May 6 I fully expect the banshee bloggers to become even more hysterical in their wording. Stay focused folks, eyes on the prize. Both votes SNP.
Cliff Purvis
Veterans for Independence 2.0
I AGREE with Tomkins. We need a new Act of Union, as the current one is not fit for purpose. It must be laid before the people of Scotland and all other three constituent nations, for explicit consent. If not granted by all, the Union automatically ends.
What, he wasn’t meaning that?
B Campbell
via thenational.scot
REGARDING Cliff Purvis’ Picture of the Day in Wednesday’s paper. A sunset would indeed be quite stunning if it was in the east. Hang on though! Isn’t Coulport just over that hill? Have they had a slight accident?
Coinneach mac Raibeart
via email
Why are you making commenting on The National only available to subscribers?
We know there are thousands of National readers who want to debate, argue and go back and forth in the comments section of our stories. We’ve got the most informed readers in Scotland, asking each other the big questions about the future of our country.
Unfortunately, though, these important debates are being spoiled by a vocal minority of trolls who aren’t really interested in the issues, try to derail the conversations, register under fake names, and post vile abuse.
So that’s why we’ve decided to make the ability to comment only available to our paying subscribers. That way, all the trolls who post abuse on our website will have to pay if they want to join the debate – and risk a permanent ban from the account that they subscribe with.
The conversation will go back to what it should be about – people who care passionately about the issues, but disagree constructively on what we should do about them. Let’s get that debate started!
Callum Baird, Editor of The National
Comments: Our rules
We want our comments to be a lively and valuable part of our community - a place where readers can debate and engage with the most important local issues. The ability to comment on our stories is a privilege, not a right, however, and that privilege may be withdrawn if it is abused or misused.
Please report any comments that break our rules.
Read the rules hereLast Updated:
Report this comment Cancel