Category: Uncategorized

Dugdale was born in Aberdeen in 1981. Her father, (a supporter of Scottish independence) is a former Elgin High School depute rector Jeff Dugdale, now retired. Her mother divorced, also a teacher, lives in Dundee, hence her interest in education. Dugdale resides in Edinburgh.

She studied Law at the University of Aberdeen for a time but gave up and  completed a Masters in Policy Studies at the University of Edinburgh.

She then worked for Edinburgh University Students’ Association and the National Union of Students Scotland.

Before entering the Scottish Parliament as a list MSP she was employed as a SpAd working for Lord Foulkes as his office manager and political adviser.

She is a Scottish Labour and Co-operative Member and was elected to the Scottish Parliament in 2011, as Labour’s second candidate on their list for the Lothian Region.

She was appointed to the post of Scottish Labour’s Shadow Cabinet Secretary for Education and Lifelong Learning on 29 June 2013.

In 2014 she was elected as Deputy Leader of the Scottish Labour Party, replacing Anas Sarwar, beating Katy Clark.

Jim Murphy, the leader of Labour in Scotland, was a Westminster MP, meaning that she was de facto leader of the opposition in the Scottish Parliament.

5 Sep 2008; The daughter of an SNP Councillor was pictured on video taken in Pakistan firing a Kalashnikov AK47 assault rifle. The Scottish unionist press demanded Alex Salmond sack him.

The Scottish Nationalists decided not to expel Jahangir Hanif for showing his children how to use the weapon during the trip into the mountains near the Kashmir border in 2005. But his daughter, Noor, pleaded with Mr Salmond, the SNP leader and Scottish First Minister, to throw her father out of the party.

In a letter to Mr Salmond, the 17-year-old wrote: ‘I cannot believe he has been let off. My siblings and I were put in an environment where people were pointing loaded AK47 guns at each other. “I think he should be fired to make an example, so that other people think twice before playing with guns and putting children in harm’s way. “I don’t think the matter has been taken seriously enough. How can a man who can’t look after his children be allowed to represent the public?”

The incident was filmed when aged 14, she was taken with her brother and three sisters in a van with blacked-out windows to a training camp near the Afghan border and shown how to fire the assault rifle. Mr Hanif, a 46-year-old Glasgow businessman,  apologized, pointing out it happened long before he became a Councillor for the city. He said: “I am going through a messy and painful divorce. I’m saddened by the fact my children are being dragged into this situation. The allegations against me are false.”

Political opponents described the decision of the SNP’s disciplinary committee to suspend rather than expel him as “outrageous”.

Dugdale got hold of a copy of the letter, and posted the content full and unedited on her blog. Needless to say the proverbial hit the fan and she was threatened with court action unless she removed the post, which she did. But she then posted a statement;

A Brief Statement – Posted by Kezia Dugdale on 15 Sep 2008

A letter by Noor Hanif (daughter of the suspended SNP Councillor Jahangir Hanif) raised a number of very serious allegations concerning Councillor Hanif’s conduct. This letter was removed from this site after Councillor Hanif’s solicitors intimated their intention to raise a summons in the Court of Session for interim interdict. The firm of Bannatyne, Kirkwood, France and Co., gave me 15 minutes to remove the letter. I complied with that request. I do not have the means or resources to engage in expensive litigation and can only hope that the First Minister Alex Salmond, ( to whom Miss Hanif addressed her letter, will have the courage, conviction and responsibility to respond to the allegations raised therein and take the appropriate action thereto.

Comment: The press may have been right headed in reporting the “Kalashnikov” bit of the story but wrong headed in ignoring the disturbing familial strife  clearly stimulated by malcontent persons for some other purpose. Whilst Dugdale’s  had the right to publish a summary of events her verbatim repetition of the unproven allegations did indeed constitute defamation.

20 May 2009; Kezia in danger of being sued again

Well that’s the last time that Tory Bear (TB the Blogger) puts up a story and then goes out for the afternoon. How charming to return home to being called a liar by none other than Dugdale, personal assistant to the upstanding and honourable Lord George Foulkes.

Torybear put a story up earlier that he spotted on the “Tweet4Labour” Twitter feed this morning. With a simple  “Welcome!  the Chief Whip @nickbrownmp” Tweet4Labour drew Torybear’s attention to the fact that Nick Brown was supposedly on Twitter. He then took a screen grab of Brown’s feed and the rest they say is history. So Nick Brown’s office denied it’s him which is hardly a surprise yet there seems to be a bit of a discrepancy in Dugdale’s logic.

She instantly accused Torybear of foul play: “It’s clearly a black op by Torybear – perhaps even endorsed by Conservative HQ – and it has largely worked.”

Kez!!!! Torybear knows that working for Foulkes can hardly teach positive moral values and a respect for the law, but that is libel plain and simple and it needs to be retracted. You have made a shoddy assumption and you have absolutely sod all to back up your claims. (Torybear)

Comment:  Dugdale acting first and thinking later. This trait will land her in big trouble one day.

14 June 2012; Labour MSP Dugdale savaged after modern apprenticeships attack backfires

A Labour MSP who this week launched a high profile attack on the Scottish Government’s modern apprenticeship scheme been accused of misrepresentation after official figures showed a more than 100 per cent improvement on when her own party were in office.

Labour’s Youth Employment spokesperson Kezia Dugdale had accused the SNP of “massaging” numbers after official figures showed that 39% of modern apprentices had been in employment for more than six months before beginning their training.

Dugdale repeated her attack in the chamber during First Minister’s questions where she asked Mr Salmond to be “straight with the people” She said: “Everyone in this chamber wants to tackle Scotland’s youth unemployment crisis, but to do so we need the facts. “The people of Scotland were led to believe by this First Minister, week after week, that these 25,000 apprenticeships were created to help the 100,000 young Scots out of work. “But now we know at least 10,000 of these went to folk already well-established in jobs.”

In response the First Minister launched a withering attack on the Labour MSP and pointed out that there were now double the number of modern apprentices in Scotland than when Labour left office. “I have to say I have watched Kezia Dugdale over the last few days in what I think has been one of the most disreputable campaigns against the modern apprenticeship scheme.” he said.

Alex Salmond went on to reveal that the system that Dugdale was criticizing was the same one that was in operation when her own party was in office and that the figures for those Scots aged 16 to 24 had dramatically improved.

He added: “I have had a look at the figures” and pointed out that Labour had voted against the SNP’s modern apprenticeship policy of 10,000 places per year.

“I have looked in particular at the very heart of Kezia Dugdale’s complaint, and that is of course if you look at the 16 to 24 year old who dominate the courses … the number who had been in employment for more than six months is 23 per cent.

“That means 80 per cent of new workers going into apprenticeships in the 16 to 24 age group. “I have looked at what is the comparison, what is the figure when the Labour party were in office in 2006. The figure is 49 per cent.”

“In other words, when Labour were in power, with a reduced number of apprenticeships, half of young people had been in a job for six months or more.”

He ended his reply by angrily condemning what he described as Dugdale’s “affrontery” in attacking the current modern apprenticeship scheme.

Commenting, SNP MSP Marco Biagi – a Member of the Scottish Parliament’s Education Committee accused the Labour MSP of having misrepresented the programme and said: “When you’re in a hole, stop digging.

Labour clearly are not content with just voting against 25,000 modern apprenticeships, now Dugdale is intent on trying to misrepresent the Modern Apprenticeship programme itself.

“Ms Dugdale accused the Scottish Government of ‘massaging’ the figures on Modern Apprentices – even though it runs the system in the same manner as when Labour were in power, and that under the SNP the number of apprenticeships has vastly increased.

“Labour’s grand accusation was that some apprenticeships had been in employment for over 6 months – this has always been the case and provides welcome opportunities for many to improve their skills in their workplace. “And as the First Minister revealed today, a far higher rate of unemployed young people have entered apprenticeships than when Labour were last in power.”

The Labour campaign featured prominently on BBC Scotland with TV and Radio appearances for Dugdale.

The story was featured on Sunday’s politics show with news bulletins throughout the day, it also featured prominently on BBC Radio Scotland on Monday and BBC Scotland’s online news.

However, in Thursday’s BBC Scotland broadcast of First minister’s questions the broadcaster cut away from the programme just as Mr Salmond was preparing to highlight the figures from 2006.

On Monday, appearing on Radio Scotland in order to address Labour party claims, Scottish Government Minister Angela Constance twice attempted to draw attention to Labour’s record from 2006 but was prevented from doing so by BBC presenter Gary Robertson. (newsnet)

27 Jan 27 2014; The howls of the cyberbritbrats

Dugdale was pictured in the Mail in an unflattering photo which made her look like a refugee from the former East Germany who had narrowly escaped the Stasi. She was apparently upset that she had ‘recently’ been the recipient of an offensive tweet, although it turned out the tweet had been sent to her over a year ago. The tweet wasn’t helpful to the independence cause and was crass and stupid, but it was not a direct threat. It read “dancing on the head of a pin? I wish Kezia Dugdale would dance on the head of a bayonet”. (weegingerdug)

7 Nov 2014; Newly appointed deputy leader of the Labour Party in Scotland supports retention of nuclear weapons

Dugdale’s website included a statement on nuclear weapons which failed to challenge the proposal to spend £100 billion on Trident replacement. Her views mirror those of official UK Labour Party policy, which is to support Trident replacement.

Dugdale believes that decisions made on the future of Trident should be based on evidence (including cost considerations) rather than on political party interest – and whilst she welcomes the reduction in the number of missiles and warheads that took place after the 2010 Strategic Defence and Security Review, she  would like to see an end to nuclear weapons not just in Scotland, but globally.

But removing nuclear weapons from Scotland would only cause them to be redeployed somewhere else in the UK or abroad, at doubtlessly considerable expense to the taxpayer. Instead, she supported reciprocal international agreements where nuclear and other mass destruction weapons are removed on a permanent basis.

Her position ignores research by Scottish CND which indicated that removing nuclear weapons from Scotland would be likely to lead to disarmament. (banthebomb)

21 Nov 2014; Another reason why Labour lost Scotland

Labour MSP Kezia Dugdale today marked the historic nomination of Scotland’s first female First Minister with a Daily Record column in characteristically sour style, which waited until the second paragraph before sticking in a Margaret Thatcher comparison.

It wasn’t until later that it got confusing. (Actually, that’s not quite true – the very first paragraph opened with the line “I haven’t seen a coronation quite like it since, well, the coronation”.

The Coronation happened in 1953, while Dugdale was born in 1981. But we’ll let that one slide.)

Following on from a stream of disingenuous waffle Dugdale challenged Nicola Sturgeon to act on three polices in her First Ministership:

“Take on the big six energy firms, forcing them to freeze bills and rein in eye-watering profits earned on the backs of working people.”

“Bring back the 50p tax rate for top earners, so those with the broadest shoulders carry their fair share.”

“Tax [bankers’] bonuses and use the cash to create jobs for young people.”

Alert readers will of course have noticed the nonsense. Not one of the foregoing recommended actions were within the devolved competence of the Scottish Parliament. All were reserved to Westminster.

And she is regarded by some as the brightest of Scottish Labour’s young minds. God help them

19 Dec 2014; The Oil Price Fluctuates, Who Knew? – Not Dugdale!

Dugdale is economically illiterate, and in attempting to spout misinformation to the electorate she is just carrying on in the same theme that lying Labour have constantly adopted.  Pick a subject, any subject, look for fault, and blame the SNP Government. It matters not whether it is a devolved matter or not. Labour believe the Scottish public are too stupid to notice. Well, there are at least 1,650,000 of us who no longer are. Labour are devoid of talent and have no future here. Dugdale and Murphy least of all.

How much more ill-judged would this be if you had spent two years telling the people of “Scotlandshire” that they were too useless to manage their own oil resources – an asset which could only be protected by the ‘broad shoulders’ of Westminster? The very government whose £30 billion tax grab had just caused the very uncertainty which has led investors to take a short term view of the North Sea.

And what new depth of hypocrisy would be plumbed by insisting the SNP take responsibility for North Sea job losses, while desperately seeking to keep the necessary powers as far from Holyrood as possible? Clearly, no sane politician would knowingly embark on such a ridiculous course.

19 Dec 2014; Labour Party claim -Kezia Dawgdale “hacked by North Koreans”

The BBC wishes to apologize unreservedly to Labour and their “Scotlandshire’s” Deputy Dawdale for screening her inaugural questions in last Thursday’s FMQ’s.

In the coverage broadcast live by this channel, Deputy Dawgdale appeared to blame the Scottish Government for the recent fall in oil prices and the predicted reductions in both production and investment which is widely predicted to follow. Further, she seemed to claim that the drop in oil prices was somehow a direct result of the projections published by the Scottish Government prior to the Referendum. Naturally, this would be a preposterous position to take, particularly on your first ever attempt at First Minister’s Questions. More particularly if you had just been promoted to Deputy Dawgdale from your previous post of first Fifi le Bon to Lord Ffoulksakes of Tankedupness, and therefore had so very much to prove. (feeltiptop.com)

22 Aug 2014;  Dugdale and friend do not know the difference between the GDP and the Economy

What a disaster for the no campaign trying to manipulate figures to make Scotland look skint!!! We are told we are too wee and too stupid by people claiming to be Scottish on a regular basis by the no campaign. Now they have been caught out big time with lies. Trying to deceive the Scottish public is disgusting. If a large number of Scottish female voters see this they will be furious. And by the way, no foreign oil company owns rigs in Scotland.  They pay for a licence to drill. The UK government control north sea oil licenses.

20 January 2015: Dundee education boss rejects claims by Scottish Labour’s deputy leader that she was snubbed from visiting her old school because “SNP councillors haven’t been yet”.

Former Harris Academy head girl Dugdale said a planned visit to the school, which is being rebuilt, was cancelled and claimed the decision was “overtly political and completely unnecessary”.

But education convener Stewart Hunter said it was “only fair” the school’s ward’s elected representatives, which include a Labour councillor and local Labour MP,  get to see the site first on a planned visit on Friday.

Dugdale said:  “The visit was arranged and then I was told I wasn’t welcome. The reason we were told was that the SNP councillors hadn’t visited the school yet and it wouldn’t be appropriate for me to attend until that had happened. It was overtly political and completely unnecessary. They’re building a new school.  It’s a good thing for Dundee and I want to celebrate it and I want to see Dundee thrive.  It’s a real shame I’m not getting through the front door.”

Mr Hunter responded: “It isn’t actually so the SNP councillors can attend,  it’s locally elected members and that includes two members of her own party. It’s not politicizing it,  It’s just to be fair to local elected members who have been involved with this right from the start. It’s not that we were stopping her. To be fair, we did invite her to attend as well, or come on a subsequent day she could fit in her diary.”  (The Courier)

Locals commented: What a little Liar and Diva. Dugdale heard what she wanted to hear, rather than what was said. A not uncommon problem with her and her labour Party colleagues. Explain why a Labour politician, who is a not locally elected official, should expect preferential treatment in what is not her capacity?  Why couldn’t she just ask to accompany the others on Friday?

Because Murphy told her; ‘Hey Kez, perfect opporchancity to stir it up, go on hen,  get intae them. What, Jim McGovern,  nah don’t worry about his feelings,  he’s out on his a88e soon anyway’  Hence the ‘big story’..  Will be interesting to see what the other political heavyweights like the Courier?!!  say about this non event.

It appears it is Dugdale who is turning a perfectly reasonable suggestion into an anti SNP rant.  She wasn’t barred from the site and actually invited along on the day everyone else is going. It seems it is her ego that has been pricked and she’s throwing a tantrum at having lost a personal photo opportunity. What constituency does she represent?

If its not important who is there first, why is Dugdale so het up about it? I think she needs to get over herself. Until Dugdale went public, who had heard of this ‘snub’?

It should not be a competition but it would indeed appear that it is. Dugdale who is turning it into one and with her own party as well. As Mr Hunter pointed out the proposed visiting party included a local Labour councillor and Mr McGovern, the only Labour MP in Dundee.

I think it only fair that McGovern gets first dibs while he still retains his Westminster seat. It’s ok for  Dugdale, she has until next year before she has to worry about her position. Big hoohah over nothing but I have not seen so high profile coverage of her boss visiting Dundee yesterday.  Both cut from the same cloth sadly. It also begs the question, has Dugdale nothing better to worry about, like getting ready to read up on what Jim tells her to have a go on at FMQ’s?

Odd she didn’t know that there are Labour councillors in situ. Hadn’t done her homework! Those who work in a constituency getting to see the results of the decisions they made ahead of some outside visitor for a photo in a press release? Seems fair. If I were anything to do with Harris academy I’d not want her associated with them in any way,  What a shocking indictment on Scottish education she is.

Just for the record, have checked other periodicals for any mention of the perceived ‘snub’ to the Deputy branch manager, so it would appear that it suits the Courier to bring this up as it suits their anti SNP stance.

Also, nothing mentioned anywhere I can see about the Branch manager visiting Dundee yesterday with the ‘shallow cabinet’. Consequently not sure if Dugdale was there or not. If so she could have nicked up for a wee sneaky peek. It’s the Scottish Labour way usually.

10 Apr 2015: Teacher parents: as if  Dugdale didn’t have enough to worry about

Dugdale went wrong having a teacher for a parent. If I could give one piece of advice to the youth of tomorrow it would be this – never have a teacher for a parent.

Her papa is Jeff Dugdale, retired English teacher and former depute rector of Elgin High. He’s also a keen philatelist, even keener SNP supporter and now has several thousand new Twitter followers after showing his daughter the sharp side of his keyboard.

Dugdale tweeted a link to a news article in a right wing unionist paper (close to her heart) which stated that Nicola Sturgeon preferred a Tory Party election win in England. The source, an alleged leaked Scottish Office memo proved to be abject nonsense. Utter tripe.!!!

Her father responded to her tweet with the teacher parent’s typical staccato sting and utter lack of reticence about humiliating his child in public. Even though she is the adult deputy leader of a political party.

He blasted: “Check facts before opening mouth, Kezia!”.   (The Herald)

1986: Just 17 years old and wet behind the ears a youthful Sturgeon joined the SNP and soon got stuck into political arguments with politicians many years her senior and electioneering with gusto. Her speedy acceptance as a budding politician of note was quite remarkable given her attention was also taken up with studies for a law degree at Glasgow University at Glasgow University and her early days in employment as a trainee solicitor at Drumchapel Law Centre.

1992 The problem politically was that she was universally disliked by many of her political colleagues and the public who viewed her as an aggressive hard-line humourless harpy with an unhealthy preference for trouser suits. But at the time she emerged there was a shortage of young talented Scottish nationalists and she able to apply for and be elected onto the SNP National Executive and unsuccessfully (gained less than 20% of the votes) stood as a candidate for the Shettleston seat in the Scottish parliamentary elections.

1997: She stood as a candidate for the Westminster seat of Glasgow Govan and lost. It wasn’t until 1999 when she finally gained a seat in the Scottish parliament as an unelected list MSP.

2004: John Swinney resigned. Sturgeon was convinced she would succeed him as party leader but her ambitions were dealt a severe blow when in an audacious change of mind Alex Salmond, took the job despite earlier insisting: “If nominated, I would decline; if drafted, I will defer and, if elected, I will resign.” But he was forced to throw his hat into the ring when it became obvious that Sturgeon was losing, badly, to Perth MSP Roseanna Cunningham.

Faced with humiliation Sturgeon abandoned her bid to lead the party and instead submitted her application for the Deputy leader’s job only a few hours before nominations closed, wrong footing Roseanna Cunninghan, who was denied time to muster sufficient support, out of the deputy leader post. Roseanna, who had enjoyed the company of Sturgeon on many nights dining out at Glasgow restuarants was appalled at Sturgeon’s treachery and with her political career effectively blunted she never forgave her. Friendship’s do not survive such betrayal.

With Alex away at Westminster Sturgeon took charge of the party at Holyrood. In an interview with the BBC when asked about her image change she said: “When you’re younger, you take yourself far too seriously – particularly being a young woman in politics, where you feel a pressure to be taken seriously. If I were honest, I was probably a bit po-faced”. Her new found persona confirmed she had dramatically reversed her opinion of Margaret Thatcher since her demeanour was now much more in common with the late Iron Lady than she would admit to. Previously Sturgeon opinioned : “it wasn’t fair, where a man would be judged ‘robust’, she was damned as “nippie”. He might be “articulate”, she would be “strident”.

2007: 21 years after she entered politics she was finally elected to the Scottish parliamentary seat of Glasgow Southside but her success would be attributed to the leadership of Alex Salmond whose electioneering skills and campaigning took the SNP into power in Scotland for the first time ever.

The election also introduced a “new” Sturgeon who had been equipped with effective public presentation skills after media consultants had conducted polls and identified her public weaknesses, which had to be overcome if the 2007 election was to be won. Formally “nippie sweetie” Sturgeon engaged with the public as a smiling, mild mannered and at times flirty young woman. She had been transformed.

2010: The icing on the cake!! Towards the end of 2003 the press revealed Sturgeon was in a relationship with Peter Murrell, Chief Executive of the SNP. After nearly seven years together they married in July 2010. While some within the Party were content with the new but unusual arrangement there were many whose views were much more cynical observing: “She part-controls the political side of things and he completely controls the organisational side of things. It’s a pretty powerful axis to be sat around one breakfast table.” It was her insistence on the continuance of the “special arrangement” when she became party leader that brought about the rift between herself and Alex who advised against it.

Its time the SNP members took back control of the Party

From around 2005, in UK and Scottish elections, at all levels, the Labour Party in Scotland was humiliated by a Scottish electorate who rejected its political policies and aspirations to retain Scotland in a Union which had delivered only pain, suffering and humiliation on Scots. A Party once powerful and unassailable turned its face away from the wishes of the voters and was destroyed. And the nadir of the Labour party will likely be visited upon the SNP who, at a time its popularity amongst Scots was at its zenith permitted a transfer of the control of policy decisions to a small cabal of executives driven by LGBTQ dogma and political and social leanings and behaviour at odds with Party members and more importantly the voters. The Party can be saved but only with the removal of the incompetent controlling “cleek” at its top.

The 2014 Referendum

In the Scottish Independence referendum, the voter list included anyone entered on the current electoral roll, over the age of 16,, whose place of residence was in Scotland, regardless of nationality. The usual caveats about Service personnel also applied.

Voter turnout was 84.59%.

The result:

Yes, 1,617,989, 44.70%.

No, 2,001,926, 55.30%

There is an acceptance that a majority of the 240,000 immigrant voters and many voters of Scottish birth and residence had been forced to vote “no” frightened into submission by a Westminster Unionist politically directed campaign of disinformation.

Indeed not long after the referendum Unionists “screamed from the rooftops” fighting each other for media space each claiming it was their disinformation output that had been the most influential in gaining the “no” vote.

But an award went to a covert Civil Service anti-independence team, funded by the Scottish taxpayers who worked out of Downing Street under the guidance of the late Sir Jeremy Heywood, Cabinet Secretary and Head of the Civil Service.

Postal Voting

790,000 postal voting forms were issued, completed and returned within the notified time period.

But the novel and as yet unproven voting procedure, heavily promoted by the governing authority, was sullied when, just after voting closed, Ruth Davidson, and other influential supporters of the “no” campaign boasted they had known well before 18 September 2014 that postal votes indicated a win for their campaign.

There was a police investigation into the matter but the findings were never notified to the Scottish public who are still waiting for answers, with the result that many Scot’s believe the outcome of the referendum had been fixed ensuring a win for the “no” campaign.

No Country in History has ever rejected Independence – Until Scotland in 2014

Christian Wright – DYSTOPIA wrote:

“On 18th September 2014, for the first time in the long history of the world, a country committed national suicide in front of a live global audience. The voters of Scotland, a land with a thousand years provenance, and seven centuries a nation, declined to take responsibility for their own governance, and instead, entrusted it to a cabal of elitists from whom they can expect naught but sneering contempt.”

Edinburgh University 2014 Referendum Analysis

The largest study of how Scotland made its historic decision on 18 September 2014 found that the votes of people born outside Scotland were crucial to the result.

52.7 percent of native-born Scots voted Yes.

72.1 percent of voters from England, Wales or Northern Ireland backed the Union.

There were more than 420,000 Britons from elsewhere in the UK living in Scotland when the last census was taken and if they cast their ballots in line with the findings of the Edinburgh University study, more than 300,000 of them will have voted No.

That’s a significant number in a contest that ended with 2,001,926 no votes and 1,617,989 for yes.

Voters born outside the UK also rejected independence, with 57.1 percent voting no.

Political scientist Professor Ailsa Henderson, who wrote the study said it showed the influence of “Britishness” among voters born elsewhere in the UK in deciding the result.

She said: “Scottish-born people were more likely to vote Yes and those born outside Scotland were more likely to vote No. But the least sympathetic to Yes were the people born in the UK, but outside Scotland. We think they are more likely to feel British. They are more likely to feel a continued tie to the UK as a whole – because that’s where they are from.”

How the electorate voted (by place of birth) – [Blue = YES] [Green = NO]

52.7 percent of native-born Scots voted Yes

72.1 percent of voters from England, Wales or Northern Ireland voted No.

There were more than 420,000 Britons from elsewhere in the UK living in Scotland when the last census was taken. And if they cast their ballots in line with the findings of the Edinburgh University study, more than 300,000 of them will have voted No.

How the electorate voted (by sex) – [Blue = YES] [Green = NO]

56.6 percent of women voted No

53.2 percent of men voted Yes.

How the electorate voted (by age) – [Blue = YES] [Green = NO]

62 percent of voters aged 16-19 voted Yes.

A majority of voters aged 20-39 voted Yes.

Voters aged 40-49 were split 50/50.

Voters aged 50-70 or older primarily voted No with the majority increasing by age.

How the electorate voted (by social status) – [Blue = YES] [Green = NO]

Yes had majorities among people who classed themselves as working class, people at the bottom of the earnings scale and people in rented social housing.

The highest earners, homeowners, and people who described themselves as middle class were more likely to vote No.

Recommendations for the next referendum

Westminster will use every trick in the book and many not yet identified to deny Scots an independence referendum free of external influences and the Scottish government will need to be alert to state-sponsored shenanigans. Experience before, during and after the 2014 referendum supports the need for major changes to procedures in any future referendum. To ensure a level playing field the following changes are recommended:

Voting is to be restricted to Scottish income taxpayers whose main place of residence is and has been in Scotland continuously from the beginning of January 2015.

Voting rights are to be extended to persons aged sixteen on the date of the referendum.

Voting papers are to be bar coded and checked for authenticity before counting.

Proxy voting is to be restricted to applicants who are able to provide verifiable justifiable reason. eg infirmity or other qualifying illness.

Completed proxy returns are to be retained, unopened, in secure locations in Scotland possibly under the control of the Scottish Police Force.

Proxy votes are to be delivered to counting officers between 2000-2200 on the day of voting, to be opened from 2200 hours, verified for correctness and counted.

Exit polling at voter venues is to be permitted.

State-funded (Westminster or Scottish governments) production or distribution of literature to households, in the course of the campaign is to be deprecated.

The Scottish Government, Scottish Parliament, Scottish public authorities and the UK Government are to strictly observe a 28 day, “pre-vote period” of restriction on publications, (including those which might be published on their behalf, by public media outlets by proxy) relating to the referendum.

A media monitoring panel is to be appointed and authorized to review and instruct amendments to BBC and independent radio and television content before broadcasting. It is to comprise two “Yes”, two “no” supporters and an independent chair and vice-chair, (recruited from The Republic of Ireland and Iceland. The panel’s decisions are final.

The benefits of the Treaty of Union

144 years after the signing of the Treaty of Union the widely promoted benefits to be gained by Scotland from placing their trust with the Westminster government were self evident in Glasgow. The police selected a few streets for a lifestyle analysis for the city fathers. The results told the true story. 182 years later a similar study would reveal that not a lot has changed.

Scotland weather patterns are different to England’s. Our autumns and winters are more severe and lengthier and the cost of heating, light, power and the basic foodstuffs will be beyond the financial means of many thousands of Scots who will be forced to adopt lifestyles akin to those who survived the excesses of Westminster in 1841

Scottish leaders should take Scotland’s unarguable proof of conspiracy by successive Westminster governments to force Scotland to remain a colony of England, gained by conquest, which is contrary to UN statutes.

Sir Michael Hirst

There’s nothing more satisfying to the Scottish psyche than the degradation of the great and the good, particularly when their rise has been accompanied by a large dose of pomposity.

Stewart’s untimely resignation, presented problems but these were soon resolved by the speedy selection of a “safe pair of hands” leading Scottish Tory politico, Sir Michael Hirst, a clean-cut father of three, a partner in a distinguished accounting firm, an elder in the Church of Scotland Chairman of the Scottish Tory Party.

But, within days of his nomination process, stories began to circulate, (reputedly from Tory’s worried his past indiscretions would surface) that Hirst was a closet homosexual, who had betrayed his wife and family by having gay affairs with political colleagues.

Hirst withdrew his nomination, hoping the press and the public would lose interest.(3)  Not to be denied the truth of the matter the press continued to investigate and report on the allegations and the day following Hirst’s resignation (4) it was revealed that he’d not only been involved in homosexual activities with a number of men, he’d been most involved with a man connected to the Tories’ biggest payola scandal.

Conspiracy or malice, events proved the events at Eastwood to be a “masterpiece” of a cock-up. Stewart had a nervous breakdown. Hirst not only withdrew his nomination he was forced to resign, in disgrace, from his position as Party Chairman, (5) resulting in losses at the GE which almost wiped the Tory Party, in Scotland from the political map.

Notes:

(3). Married Sir Michael Hirst was forced to quit as chairman of the Scottish Conservatives as a result of indiscretions (homosexual dalliances).

(4) Hirst’s letter of resignation, read: “I very deeply regret these circumstances which have caused great distress to my family and which may, I fear, cause embarrassment to the Party in the current climate”.

(5) Hirst, life after death: http://scottishlaw.blogspot.com/2011/03/new-chairman-of-law-societys-master.html

Ian Lang

Then Scottish Secretary, (President of the Board of Trade (and Secretary of State for Trade and Industry, 1995-97), Ian Lang was accused of covering up the “Gay” double life of shamed Party Chairman, Hirst.

The allegations were that he failed to follow up on Hirst’s denial of alleged flings with former researcher, Andrew Barnett and personal assistant, Paul Martin. (6) and (7)

It later transpired that at a Party Conference in Brighton, two years before, Barnett had spoken publicly about his affair with Hirst. A senior Tory said: “This goes all the way to Ian Lang.” Astonishingly, some party workers had known about Hirst’s gay secret for ten years.

It was also revealed that Hirst hadn’t the courage to tell his wife about his secret life or that it was was about to be made public.

Jackson Carlaw tried to play down the stunning events and said that many in the party were “distraught” that the chairman had had to resign. But he claimed this had hardened the resolve of party workers to win their target seats.

http://www.thefreelibrary.com/SCANDAL%3b+Tory+top+brass+covered+up+for+gay-shame+Hirst.-a061018638

Notes:

(6). The downfall of the Tory’s in Scotland is a consequence of homosexual intrigues within the party created by a “gay mafia” whose tentacles of power stretched from the party’s grass-roots through to the top of the party.

Scots Secretary Michael Forsyth’s agent, Simon Turner – the man running his election campaign –was openly gay. And it was two other ambitious young gays who brought about the downfall of Scots Tory chairman Sir Michael Hirst. They were his former researcher Andrew Barnett and campaign worker Paul Martin.

Barnett, tried to deny any close relationship with Hirst – but a Tory insider said: “The affair was well-known.” The relationship between Hirst and Barnett ended in tears two years ago.

Devastated that the affair was over, Barnett poured his heart out to Tory grandees at the Brighton conference in 1995.

One Tory source said: “Andrew was made a fool. He was very upset. Heis a decent man and I felt sorry for him.” Another Tory close to the debacle at the time said: “Andrew doted on Hirst. But when it was time for him to move on he, understandably, felt spurned.”

Despite the sleaze that engulfed the party, there were some old- fashioned Tories determined to stick to their tradition of family values. It was they who blew the whistle on Hirst  because they were sickened by his double standards.

The complaint arrived at the desk of Ian Lang, Scots Secretary at the time. Another party insider said: “The matter was referred to Ian Lang, but Hirst denied the affair.”

Barnett’s affair with Hirst began in the early 1990s. The former chairman of the Tory Association at St. Andrews University, was working as a researcher in Hirst’s office. It was the second time Hirst, the promoter of family values, had been embroiled in a homosexual affair with a young Tory hopeful.

He struck up a relationship with Paul Martin who worked in the campaign team in 1987 when Hirst lost the Bearsden and Strathkelvin seat to Labour’s Sam Galbraith.

Martin was given the elbow when word spread that he had been talking openly about his fling with father-of-three Hirst.

Concern was growing within the constituency association and Hirst was advised that Martin had to go to avert a scandal. Instead of taking action against Hirst, they moved swiftly to ensure that he was protected and Martin was sent packing.

One source close to the situation at the time said: “The Association was alarmed at all this loose talk and Michael was told he had to get rid of Martin. “He did, but gave him a very good reference to help him get a job. Soon after he stood down he got a top post in the CBI.”

Martin, had been a Tory Councillor in Edinburgh at the age of 21. Three years before, while employed by the Ministry of Defence, he was at the centre of allegations that he was part of a gay love triangle with English Tory whip Michael Brown and 20-year-old student Adam Morris. He was quite open about his fling with Hirst and boasted about it at a Tory conference.

One insider said: “Martin is trouble. He is a vindictive old queen.”

It has been revealed that the gay links with the Tory party stretch from grass-roots wannabes to the very top of the tree.

Top Tories have always been uncomfortable with Forsyth’s choice of an open homosexual like Turner for such a high-profile job.

They were also critical of other gay appointments made at the Scottish Tory HQ when Forsyth was party chairman. One source told the Record: “There is always the worry that even a whiff of scandal attached to these people would reflect badly on Forsyth.”

As events unfolded in the Eastwood constituency last week, a small band of high- ranking Tories gathered to make sure Hirst didn’t try to replace Allan Stewart. It was they who tried to get Hirst sidelined two years ago when the Barnett affair broke.

One senior Tory said: “We thought if we didn’t get rid of him he would get rid of us. “No-one listened to us although we tried hard to get him moved to a more junior post. The powers that be are now reaping the inevitable result. “It would not surprise me if someone in our own party shopped Michael to the press because of his own open arrogance.”

http://www.thefreelibrary.com/GAY+MAFIA+BURIES+TORIES%3B+Homosexual+links+lead+to+downfall+of+Scots…-a061018639

(7). Tory Ministers face questions over the secret appointment, to the Civil Service, of a Tory advisor, at the centre of allegations about an illegal homosexual affair.

Paul Martin, formerly a high-profile Conservative Councillor in Edinburgh and twice a candidate at general elections, was appointed to the allegedly politically neutral Civil Service.

Martin, a convicted drink-driver, has been suspended from his position as an official in the Nato and European policy secretariat after being named with the Tory MP Michael Brown, in newspaper allegations about a homosexual relationship with an under-age boy. (The Independent)

The Tory Party-post 1997.

The party was wiped out in Scotland in the 1997 Labour landslide victory which brought 18 years of Conservative rule, to an end. John Major resigned as party leader, saying “When the curtain falls, it is time to leave the stage”.

The appalling results led to a number of years of infighting as different factions jostled for power and in result the Party returned only a single MP from Scotland at the 2001, 2005, 2010 and 2015 general elections.

Scots have long memories and would no longer tolerate being ruled by a political party in which power is in the hands of a cabal of sleazy individuals.

2017: Mandelson the malevolent stuck his knife into Corbyn’s back

Blair and Brown loyalist Mandelson was a vociferous critic of Jeremy Corbyn and had been since Corbyn first won the top job in the Autumn of 2015 (confirmed in a second election by party members less than 2 years later) with his utterance: “I am is working every single day to bring to an end to Corbyn’s leadership” was unsurprising.

Corbyn supporters responded with a strongly worded statement: “The thought of Jeremy Corbyn as Prime Minister of a Labour Government implementing policies beneficial to the people absolutely petrifies Mandelson, Blair, Brown and their Labour Left colleagues whose policies brought the country to its knees incurring debts so large that many future generations will be subject to austerity policies reducing their quality of life, health and wellbeing.”

In the 2017 General Election the Tory party was returned to power albeit with a much reduced majority. But the Corbyn led Labour Party made a net gain of 30 seats with 40.0% (its highest vote share since 2001 and the first time the party had gained seats since 1997.

Had the Labour Party, moderate centre-left candidates supported Corbyn, Labour would have won the election by a small working majority.

In naively trusting that the Parliamentary Labour Party would set aside their differences in policy matters, accept his leadership and support him and his shadow front bench team Corbyn suffered badly in the fallout of losing the election and left was vulnerable to attack from the moderate centre-left, a group and their supporters he should have castrated well before the election, starting with:

* Deselecting the 184 labour MPs who did not vote against the 2015 Tory welfare bill that contributed to a massive increase in homelessness and poverty such as food banks. A policy which did not adhere to labour values of defending the weak and oppressed.

* Deselecting those MP’s who failed to oppose the 2014 racist, Tory migration bill (only 6 labour MPs including Corbyn voted against) that removed the presumption of indefinite right to remain for “Windrush” migrants that in many cases lived here nearly all their lives and medical treatment for some migrants. (1)

* Removing Party membership from Labour MP’s that voted for intervention in Syria or for the Iraq war. Wars of aggression are not compatible with labour values.

(1). The lack of opposition within the labour party to the 2014 migration bill also gave credence to those that hold the view that the attacks on Corbyn’s leadership, on the grounds that he failed to deal with racism were contrived by those seeking personal advancement and a return to a more relaxed financial regime, as only six labour MPs, including Corbyn, could credibly claim to be genuinely interested in race issues.

2018: Centre-left politicians and activists routinely briefed and plotted Corbyn’s downfall and removal from office.

Labour Peer Mandelson, former minister in Blair’s centre-left , New Labour government, accused Jeremy Corbyn and his Trades Union supporters of trying to exclude the centre-left from power, saying “throughout our history, it has been moderate-led centre left governments that have delivered radical change in our country, to redistribute power, wealth and opportunity to people, starting with the government of Attlee, Morrison, Bevin and Bevan after the second world war.”

But truth be told it was a large group of disloyal centre-left MP’s, including Mandelson who, only 18 months after his appointment forced a second party leadership election on members whose response was to return Corbyn to office with a much increased majority.

Reviewing Mandelson’s proud claims of the achievements of the last centre-left Labour Government.

This would be the Government that presided over increasing levels of inequality within society through the introduction of punitive measures designed to reduce welfare support to the least able members of society.

Those that were around at that time will remember the centre-left misnamed proclamation of the “new deal” which delivered policies including:

* The centralized control of wage levels through the extension of means testing and tax credits combined with a very low minimum wage.

* The introduction of “work capability assessments” which drove many to attempt suicide.

* The legislation, reducing or removing many disability benefits.

* The high levels of debt permanently transferred to the public through the cheap sale and expensive leaseback (PFI) of the nations capital assets.

* The failure to re-regulate the Tory deregulated financial sector on taking over government and Brown’s stubborn refusal to reverse deregulation despite the 2007/8 financial crisis.

* The condoning of illegal money laundering, through the City of London Financial markets, of Russian Mafia billions.

* The adoption of a foreign policy giving unqualified support to US imperialism engaging in illegal wars of aggression destabilising Eastern Europe and the Middle East for future generations further deepening the widespread hatred of the West from many centuries of imperialism.

2018 Mandelson stepped up the campaign to get rid of Corbyn by hosting a barbecue for centre-left MPs at his home.

The event, held in July 2018, was dubbed the “barbecue boys meeting” and was arranged subsequent to a meeting between Mandelson and Tom Watson following which they joined forces and discussed how to ramp up pressure on Corbyn over the summer, taking back control of the Party amid growing splits on Brexit and claims of a spiralling anti-Semitism crisis and/or the prospects of starting a new one.

Those present did not deny there were political discussions, one added: “It was more about saving Labour than setting up a new party and it was made clear that the meeting, invitees and conversation was not to be leaked.”

Watson later denied he was involved in any plotting, and said: “My kids and I spent much of the occasion playing with Peter’s two wonderful dogs, Jock and Poppy, which would have been far more interesting than idle gossip from the other attendees.”

Not long after, following a public airing by the BBC of televised footage of Corbyn’s attendance at a wreath-laying ceremony for Palestinians over sixty Labour lords, including Mandelson, signed an unprecedented newspaper advertisement portraying Corbyn as soft on anti-Semitism, it read:

“The Labour Party welcomes everyone* irrespective of race, creed, age, gender identity, or sexual orientation. (*except, it seems, Jews).  Corbyn, You have failed to defend our party’s anti-racist values. You have therefore failed the test of leadership.”

The statement echoed the views of eight Labour centre-left MP’s who resigned the Party whip earlier in the year over claims of anti-Semitism and Corbyn’s position on Brexit, a move that angered many centre-left members who wanted Labour to adopt an unequivocal pro-European Union position.

Corbyn hit back with the statement:

“The Labour Party under my leadership totally opposes racism in any form whatsoever. Anti-Semitism has no place in our society, no place in any of our Political Party’s and no place in any of our dialogue. But neither does any other form of racism.”

And a Labour spokesperson later said the party under Corbyn’s leadership stood:

“In solidarity with Jewish people and is fully committed to the support, defence and celebration of the Jewish community. False and misleading claims, hostile to Jeremy, are being orchestrated by politically influential individuals within the Party whose policies in government previously failed the electorate. This powerful group of disloyal Party members is interested only in achieving control so that they can fulfil agendas dictated by persons out with the Party and not to do good things for the voter.”

But the relentless assault on Corbyn was stepped up by centre-left politicians of the Parliamentary Labour Party and their supporters who continued to attack Corbyn’s for failing to address anti-Semitism within the Party and their demand that facts and figures be produced supporting their allegations of widespread and ever growing incidences of antisemitism within the Party.

The information was produced but it did not support their claims of institutional anti-Semitism. The facts:

* 1,100 (approx.) complaints were lodged between April 2018 and January 2019.

* 433 (nearly 40 per cent) were found to relate to non-Labour Party members.

* 673 were investigated.

* 220 were dismissed on the grounds that there was no case to answer since the claims were found to be wildly exaggerated or vexatious.

* 44 members quit Labour while their hearing was pending suggesting that the Labour Party was not a hospitable or comfortable place for anti-Semites. They knew they would be found out and they jumped before being pushed.

* 439 were investigated and this resulted in a number of suspensions and/or written warnings. Twelve members were expelled. A further twenty four are still under investigation or appeal.

Party membership, at the time was approximately 550,000, so the figures represent around 0.07% of the membership.

Parliamentary Labour Party centre-left agitators felt this was much too small a number of expulsions but investigators had heeded a recent report that recommended that re-education should be the preferred first resort and that expulsion should the last.

* Margaret Hodge, one of a number of centre-left senior figures in the Parliamentary Labour Party who actively pursued a crusade against Corbyn submitted 200 of the complaints which concerned one hundred and eleven people, of these ninety-one were not members of the Labour Party.

Hodge was one of those most responsible for false and exaggerated claims against the Labour Party over anti-Semitism. No surprise in that!! So much for the allegations of a Party in crisis.

Corbyn rewarded for thirty years of honest endeavour

In 2010, the financial crisis, brought ended thirteen years of a Labour Government. In 2015, under the “wishy washy” leadership of Ed Miliband, Labour lost again. Miliband resigned triggering a Leadership election. Three former members of Miliband’s shadow cabinet were regarded as front runners and entered the race.

Jeremy Corbyn lodged his application near to the closing date for applications and many doubted he would be able to gain the support of  the 35 MP’s needed to be included in the ballot.  He upset the odds when he gathered 36 nominations.

Standing on a platform of “socialism” his message was dismissed as irrelevant by his opponents, Party insiders and the press and media. Odds of 100/1 were available at the bookies for anyone foolish with their money.

But the Parliamentary Labour Party (PLP) and others misjudged the mood of the nation, following 5 years of austerity under a coalition government and that the election of the new leader would not be a decision for (PLP) to make. The Party membership would decide the outcome of the election.

Corbyn was in his element and addressed nearly one hundred rallies across the UK, speaking to ever increasing crowds each time.

Hundreds of thousands of Labour supporters were inspired by his vision of a socialist Government.

Former party members driven out by New Labour’s neo-capitalist policies and first time voters joined the Party increasing the membership from two hundred thousand to five hundred and fifty thousand in a period of less than six months.

He was duly declared Party Leader having gained an unprecedented 59.5 % of the vote, a larger mandate than any recent leader. But ominously, of two hundred and thirty Labour M.P.s only twenty voted for Corbyn.

The right wing press and media, spurred on by (PLP) members failed to support the Party and spread false rumours of coups to topple Corbyn.  But the plotting failed due to the support of Corbyn by the Labour membership.

Lord “Prince of Darkness” Mandelson, one of Blair’s closest advisers and an architect of New Labour remarked, “we are in a situation now where Corbyn is unelectable in the country but unassailable in the Party.”

Not long after, the shadow “Blairite” cabinet appointed by “peacemaker” Corbyn resigned, forcing yet another election on the membership, which the (PLP) tried to rig, only to be thwarted once again by Party members who returned Corbyn to office.

Having failed a second time the (PLP) started a character assassination campaign to overthrow him. When this tactic failed they cut a deal with the Israeli Government Lobby, the (JLM) and with their assistance and financial backing orchestrated an Anti-Semitism campaign against Jeremy Corbyn.

The Jewish Labour Movement(JLM) Link up with the Parliamentary labour Party (PLP) MP’s to overthrow Corbyn

The Israeli Government psychological warfare campaign against the Labour Party leader included the widespread use of an internet application containing instructions for social media users on how to contribute to the “mission” accusing Corbyn of anti-Semitism.

One such allegation falsely accused Corbyn, in a 2010 meeting, of comparing Israel to Nazi Germany. The truth was that Corbyn had hosted a meeting with Hajo Meyer, titled “Never Again For Anyone”, and it was Hajo, a survivor of the Auschwitz concentration camp and a fervent anti-Zionist who raised the comparison of Israel and Nazi Germany in his condemnation of the Israeli Government’s behaviour and his strongly held views in support of Palestinian rights. He once said of Zionist’s: “An Anti-Semite used to be someone who doesn’t like Jews, now it’s someone who Zionists don’t like”.

Read his moving story here. (https://electronicintifada.net/blogs/adri-nieuwhof/how-israel-lobby-attacked-auschwitz-survivor-smear-corbyn)

Another post invited Facebook users to click “like” to user “Nancy Saada’s” criticism of Corbyn’s “anti-Israeli” remarks which she claimed were used to disguise “anti-Semitism”. But the ploy fell flat when a photograph was published of an Israeli army uniformed “Nancy” posing on an armoured vehicle, draped with an Israeli flag.

The Act.IL application is a product of Israel’s Strategic Affairs Ministry, the organisation that directs Israel’s covert sabotage efforts of any opponent of Israel in the world. At its head is a top civil servant and former army intelligence officer whose organisation is staffed by veterans of various spy agencies.

The so called “mission” is yet more evidence of the Israeli psychological warfare campaign and is an aspect of part of long-term behaviour planning influencing operations by Israel and its lobby groups to smear Corbyn as “institutionally anti-Semitic.”

The operation was also aimed at forcing Labour to adopt and maintain a pro-Israel policy aided by a small but powerful politically number of Jewish MP’s and other MP’s, not of Jewish descent who attach themselves to Jewish political lobby support groups in the Labour Party.

The Jewish Labour Movement, (JLM) is closely linked to the Israeli Government, and was at the forefront of the campaign to discredit Corbyn.

The group is run by former Israeli embassy officer, Ella Rose who admitted that as the (JLM) Director, she maintained close personal and working links to Shai Masot, the Israeli embassy spy forced to leave the UK after the Al Jazeera investigation exposed him plotting to “take down” a senior UK government minister.

Masot was also spearheading efforts to manufacture a grassroots pro-Israel organization within the Labour Party by infiltrating the Young Labour group using a tactic known as astroturfing. ( More on the Act.IL App here: (https://medium.com/dfrlab/how-a-political-astroturfing-app-coordinates-pro-israel-influence-operations-bf1104fa5c7f)

Jewish Labour Movement (JLM) force demands on Jeremy Corbyn.

Adam Langleben, (JLM) campaigns officer, issued Corbyn a list of demands including a requirement that Labour adopt “unamended”, the controversial “International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance (IHRA) a definition of anti-Semitism which would define it as anti-Semitic to accurately describe the Israeli state as a “racist endeavour.”

Corbyn, instead of shutting down the claims as the bad faith attacks that they clearly were continued with his strategy of concession after concession and in return, offered a “dialogue with community organizations, including the (JLM) to discuss their demand that the (IHRA) document be adopted in full, even, as he acknowledged that some of its provisions had “been used by those wanting to restrict criticism of Israel that is not anti-Semitic.” This fuelled further attacks and compromised his position on important matters of principle, such as the boycott, divestment and sanctions movement for Palestinian rights (BDS).

It is also unclear just what Corbyn hoped to achieve in “dialogue” with a group with close ties to a foreign power, hostile to himself and his Party and committed to manipulating his Party members against his leadership, from within.

Unsurprisingly, the (JLM) curtly dismissed Corbyn’s opinion piece as “another article bemoaning a situation.” and followed up saying:

“These measures would have been welcomed, and maybe even celebrated, two years ago, but matters have reached the point of no return. Decisive and significant actions, not words, are the only thing that can bring us back from the brink.”

Just what the actions required by the (JLM) were, is left unsaid, but subsequent events indicate they meant the removal of Jeremy Corbyn from office.

The Independent Electoral Commission

Employed by the BBC for 34 years, John McCormick was Secretary then Controller of BBC Scotland, 1992 -2004  before being  appointed to the post of Commissioner in 2008, with the Electoral Commission, the toothless independent elections watchdog and regulator of party and election finance.

The referendum held on 18 September 2014 wasn’t so much an electoral process as an unfettered festival of jiggery-pokery and gerrymandering since the illustrious electoral commission was headed up by the former Controller of BBC Scotland.

McCormick, claimed he and his independent Commission were well-placed to provide “honest john” support to Alex Salmond’s historic plebiscite.

The people of Scotland faced a historic decision in the independence referendum and needed to have confidence that it reflected the will of the people.

To command that confidence the referendum had be transparent, open to scrutiny and deliver a result accepted by all. (The Scotsman)

The Fallout

An online petition demanding a revote in the Scottish independence referendum nearly reached 100,000 signatures as vote rigging conspiracies gained momentum among disappointed pro-independence campaigners.

It didn’t take long for accusations of voting irregularities to start swirling after Scotland voted “No” to independence. In the aftermath of the result, pro-independence Yes campaigners took to social media in large numbers to complain about reported incidents of vote fraud and to demand a return to the polls.

The insidious dogma of hyper-extremist activists is holding Scottish politics to ransom

Scotland is a colony of England and its politicians are permitted to operate only under the strict control of the Westminster government. Faced with this reality the acceptable face of politics within Scotland has become narrow-minded and focused on encouraging the development of pressure groups with narrow agenda’s who are able to successfully transfer their aims and ambitions across the border to England.

LGBTQ hyper-extremist and fundamentalist activists increasingly exert political influence on society in England and Scotland well in excess of levels warranted by their numbers and mainstream politicians need to be alerted to this since many of the views and demands for change they wish to impose are toxic to the vast bulk of the electorate.

Addressing the issues in Scotland requires an understanding of the modus-operandi of the activists which is to become cuckoos in the nest of the SNP and over time crowd out anyone who failed to accede to their demands.

As of February 2022, the group have grown in numbers and influence and through a process of gerrymandering, internal election processes now dictate and decide SNP policies.

The SNP no longer exists in the form many of its members signed up to yet it strangely continues to promote itself to the Scottish electorate as the party of independence.

The two main LGBTQ activist centres are located in Stirling and Aberdeen and are focussed on the leadership of two SNP MP’s: Alyn Smith and Kirsty Blackman who together with their supporters have done little to progress the cause of Scottish independence and should have the courage of their convictions and leave the SNP too form a new political party and stand for office in a by-election in a new LGBTQ Party.

The Aberdeen faction first raised its head in January 2018 when a small number of LGBTQ activists located in the Grampian Region formed an umbrella organisation the “Aberdeen Independence Movement” (AIM). Its membership comprised:

Co-Chairs:
Fatima Joji: from Westhill, Aberdeenshire, topped the SNP’s North-East regional list for the Scottish Parliament elections.
Kenny Anderson: Longtime SNP supporter. Managing Director and Majority Shareholder, Anderson Buchan Properties Ltd.

Other members
Neil Baillie: SNP Councillor
Vicky Harper: SNP Councillor
Andy Stuart: SNP Convenor Aberdeenshire West

Finance Team:
Virginia Dawod: Manager, Robert Gordon University.

Theo Forbes: Graphics Media And Communications Officer.
2016 2018: Member of the National Executive Committee and National Events and Fundraising Officer, “Young Scots for Independence”.
2017 2021: Employed by the SNP as an intern from September 2020. Attended Aberdeen University studying Politics & International Relations.

Joshua Aaron Mennie: from Aberdeen
2018: 2020: Media Consultant. Intern for Kirsty Blackwood MP.
2019 – 2020: Member National Executive Committee (NEC) and Convener for the official LGBTQ+ wing of the SNP.
2022 – Pres: Communications & Officer Manager to Karen Adam MSP at Holyrood.

Tourette’s Syndrome* sufferer, Mennie is a person to note since his rise to prominence within the Party has been remarkable. In his 3 years of membership, he has been elected as a disabled member of the NEC. Heads the “Out For Indy” group and is the leader of the party within a party, the LGBTQ+ group of the SNP.

• The Equality Act 2010 (‘the Act’) and Disability Discrimination Act 1995 (‘DDA’) defines a disabled person as:

“A person has a disability if they have a physical or mental impairment, and the impairment has a substantial and long-term adverse effect on the person’s ability to carry out normal day-to-day activities.” Tourette’s syndrome is not listed in the Social Security Administration’s Blue Book (the guide used to help SSA representatives determine whether a person qualifies for disability based on their condition)

And the Mennie family are well represented in the party. His sister Jessica was elected in 2019, SNP councillor for Donside in Aberdeen (£18k annual salary). She was also the office manager (2015-2019) to Mark McDonald MSP, who was forced to resign from the Party by its leadership who outlandishly accepted an allegation of sexual harassment against him based on a joke about an autocorrect error in a single text message. It is claimed that she also works for party HQ in a new job which was allegedly not advertised and for which nobody else was interviewed.

NEC Meeting hijacked by LGBTQ activists

The LGBTQ group proposed that the SNP’s eight regional lists for the Scottish parliamentary election should include in top place, either a *BAME or a disabled candidate. Four regions would be allocated a BAME person and the other four a disabled person. The proposal carried the rider that disabled status should be by self-identification with no confirmatory checking being carried out.

The proposal was debated at some length since many members believed it would be illegal to adopt the proposal under equalities law. The matter was deferred and referred to the Party’s legal counsel, Jonathan Mitchell QC who warned that the policy was legally dubious and open to challenge in the courts and any case brought by a person disadvantaged by the rule would probably succeed, and cost the SNP tens of thousands of pounds in legal expenses.

But the LGBTQ group insisted the proposal should be decided by the NEC and its LGBTQ Chair, Kirsten Oswald allowed the matter to be put to a vote.
The vote was tied and it was expected that in compliance with accepted practice the Chair would cast her vote for retention of the status quo. She didn’t and passed the motion placing the Party at great risk of legal and costly claims of discrimination.

Three members announced conflicts of interest before the vote.

• Fiona Robertson who declared that she intended to seek the top spot on the North-East list as a disabled candidate who was in attendance as a substitute for an NEC member who was unable to attend. Did not recuse herself from the vote.
• Graham Campbell, a councillor from Glasgow who declared his intention to stand on either the Glasgow or Lothian lists, both of which were to have their top spots reserved for BAME* candidates under the proposal. Campbell, whose partner is SNP MP Anne McLauchlin, did not recuse himself from the vote.
• Greg McCarra from the Association of Nationalist Councillors (who is neither disabled nor BAME) also declared he was seeking nomination. He did recuse himself from the vote.

• Black Asian and Minority Ethnic (BAME) candidates. The 2011 census identified, 2.66% of the Scottish population as Asian and 0.5% Black and the SNP policy is unfairly discrimatory against Asians. Not a lot of wisdom in directly transferring and implementing American electoral policies in Scotland

Those subsequently included on the protected list for the North East of Scotland included: Fatima Joji, Christian Allard, Fergus Mutch, William Duff, Julie Bell, Nadia El-Nakla, John Cooke, Lynne Short, Gillian Al-Samarai and Joshua Mennie.

Comments on the North East Scotland list candidates:

Joshua Mennie. See before. Claimed to be disabled suffering from Tourette’s Syndrome

Gillian al-Samari: Councillor for Dyce, Bucksburn and Danestone (salary £18K) also worked for Mark McDonald MSP between 2013-2019. McDonald was forced to resign from the Party by its leadership who outlandishly accepted an allegation of sexual harassment against him based on a joke about an autocorrect error in a single text message. Councillor Samari ceased working for McDonald on 23 March 2019 and transferred her employment to Kirsty Blackman MP on 1 May 2019, taking up a position as a caseworker. Her swift transfer was criticised by opposition party’s who accused her of double-dipping” the taxpayer’s purse.

Fatima Joji: Caseworker for Richard Thomson MP. interests: politics and development advocacy. Holds a postgraduate diploma in ‘International Development (Poverty, Inequality & Development). Chair of AIM. Key political statements:

26 May 2021: Unsuccessful in the Scottish election in the North East regional list she tried to address the issue within the party but felt she now needed to speak out after being “harassed for months” with no support from the Party.

On her experience as a candidate for selection in Aberdeenshire West, she said that as a Black candidate it had been mixed. While the local membership was “largely positive” her name had been included in a tweet claiming that Justice Secretary Humza Yousaf had overturned the decision to fail several BAME candidates at vetting, allowing them to stand.

But Joji insisted she had passed vetting without issue. “But I think it did have an impact,” she said of the tweet.

She urged the SNP to address the under-representation of BAME candidates, particularly in areas with large communities of colour through the list system Saying. “I think there is a real opportunity there to turn rhetoric into reality.”

10 Sep 2021: I am SNP because of its progressive and inclusive policies that are built upon the foundations of equality fairness, dignity and respect.

Mennie attacks Kate Forbes

The SNP’s Finance Secretary, Derek Mackay, fell from grace after revelations in the press that he had made sexual advances toward a 16-year-old boy, inundating him with inappropriate Facebook messages and inviting him to meet up.

Mackay resigned on the day he was supposed to present the SNP Government’s budget and the Government’s Public Finance Minister, Kate Forbes, completed the task. Her presentation was excellent and she became the front runner to replace MacKay as Cabinet Secretary for the Economy. But in Mennie’s mind, her proposed appointment, as opposed to Mackay’s resignation, became the controversy.

The zealous monomaniac and ferocious tweeter ignored an actual scandal. Mackay, a 42-year-old minister, was tipped to be the next leader of Scotland being forced to resign for grooming a child, to confront an imaginary one. A church-going minister, tipped to be the next Finance Secretary, who believes, as indeed other non-church going ministers also believe, that the legal definition of male and female ought not to be changed without informed public discussion and agreement. He tweeted: “The last thing our party needs is Kate Forbes climbing the ladder when she has such questionable views on equality.”

As evidence of these “questionable” views, he also tweeted: “I’m always concerned when politicians conflate their personal religious beliefs into their work-life to the detriment of others,” confirming a complete lack of self-awareness. His tweet, (since deleted) was his response to a letter published in the press (https://www.thenational.scot/news/19859777.kate-forbes-calls-tolerance-gra-debate) highlighting concerns over the Scottish government’s proposed changes to the Gender Recognition Act (a law that would replace the legal definition of sex with gender self-declaration).