Marchmont and Morningside

This National story, on "Yes surveys" by local groups in hope of getting through to undecideds and "mibbes" - comes from the experience of a local group in a No-voting and affluent part of Edinburgh - from Yes Marchmont and Morningside, Of interest because they also have a guy claiming expertise in international law, who was on their Meadows Festival stall.

So as well as doing the surveys they can put in writing anything that voters need put in writing. Specifically, that guy can get Yes to issue in writing in Scottish govt's name, what he told me only in unrecorded speech at the Meadows Festival. That our treaty obligations in Europe, to Council of Europe not just EU, will guarantee that citizenship by parental descent will be unrefusable. That the strand of nats who are racist against that, who were the dominant voice in ref1, won't get their way.

History is full of states breaking treaties: I can't take his word that any treaty will enforce it. Can only be sure you will observe it when as an internal action within Scotland you directly write it into our proposed state's red line human rights standards. According to him you have to. But can he put your pen where his mouth is? That is my survey question back to Yes Marchmont and Morningside.

/div>

No new case for nowt

Right - now that we've seen it online, we know it contains nothing but economics. Economics shown to be opinion, as it is argued over by columnists from both sides. The more militantly optimistic nats feeling let down by its recommendation that we go for a fiscally powerless unauthorised use of the pound, which they had not thought good to argue for in indyref1! Clearly the hired opinion makers for a new case for optimism have run scared of optimism in the fiscal cost + potential austerity of committing to try to create a currency.

Anyway - "Scotland:a New Case For Optimism" IS NOT A SECOND WHITE PAPER. The Herald had tried to bill it as one, ahead of it coming out. It contains no plans for a Scottish state outside its economic strategy. Mpst importantly it contains nothing on rules for citizenship. While it has a pro-immigration sentiment, it says nothing about remofing the bigoted racist atrocity against a section of Scots, that was in Yes's offer last time round, + making citizenship by parental descent unrefusable.

So it has changed nothing, as yet, around that moral reason to vote No. That supervenes over all the document's economic thoughts regardless of their merits.

nat rally pathetically fading

Yesterday's annual, intended to be mass, nat rally at Glasgow Green was shrunken and declined in every way, compared to last year. Smaller turnout, fewer stalls, fewer performers, even pathetically few speakers, only 2 who the public have heard of, Tommies Sheppard + Sheridan.

Farcically, nats on Facebook are now slagging the Sunday Herald for Unionist spin to play down the rally. Like saying they showed the wrong photo of the encounter with Union Jack demonstrators, that failed to show Saltires streaming back down the road. But the Sunday Herald is famously the nat- supporting Sunday! Yes, NATS ACTUALLY SLAGGING THEIR OWN PAPER THE SUNDAY HERALD + ACCUSING IT OF UNIONIST REPORTING !!

When even the Sunday Herald has to go with a count of only 35K marchers, you know it was a flop and the TREND IS DOWNWARDS.

All ths SNP deputy leader candidates declined speaking invites, to the compere's frustration, + chose not to be there. No Greens or SSP either - clearly "All Under One Banner" is exactly what it's not. It's just a ritual by one set of the nat faithful, not driving any momentum towards anything.

Under the M8 footbridge at Garnethill, traffic jammed up chaotically at crazy angles was stopping a sirening ambulance from driving.

bridge parting troubled waters

The absurd declaring unsound and closing of 2 modern road bridges on the Forth-Clyde Canal, breaking the through navigability of the canal, and even trapping some boats in the middle section unless they can be removed overland, and no word on timely repairing of modern built bridges that must be repairable! Whwt a shambles of running a country that is not yet the state they want it to become! To break up one of its travel networks, the one associated with the engineering star of the Falkirj Wheel!

It shows they can't be planning to need canal boat owners' votes in a ref any time soon.

in bed with the Tories !

Since the indyref, nats of all their parties have repeated and repeated unto infinity their wrong accusation that Labour damaged itself by being allied to, or "in bed with", the Tories in the No campaign. Keep repeating something to generate a left wing doctrinal peer pressure to accept and believe it.

Today the now annual demo of Scottish feeling against Brexit was held at Holyrood. The speakers included Joanna Cherry, SNP, Patrick Harvie, Green, and - Struan Stevenson, Tory. The organisers the European Movement in Scotland praised cross party working for the objective of trying somehow to stop Brexit. Cherry thanked Stevenson for his participation and celebrated that she had shared a banner with him in this demo.They celebrated their working together on a single issue.

They were right to do that. But by it, they proved Labour also was right to do it in the No campaign. TO ANYONE WHO HEARD OR RECORDED WHAT THE NATS SAID AT TODAY'S DEMO, THEY HAVE EXPLODED AND FINISHED, UTTERLY REFUTED, THEIR MALICIOUS JIBE ABOUT LABOUR JOINING WITH THE TORIES IN THE INDYREF. THE SAME AS WHAT LABOUR DID, THEY ARE NOW DOING THEMSELVES BY THEIR PUBLIC ADMISSION.

spurious leap

What is this assertion by the National, that the Brexit crisis over the Irish border proves there would be no hard border with a Scottish state?

They never argue out any substance behind this, because they have none. The deduction does not follow. They just want it to stick from getting repeated.

We don't even have the certainty yet of no hard Irish border. DUP stepped in against the apparent deal. We always knew that most sides wanted to avoid an Irish hard border, it was no big news at all that the British govt reached a point favourable to making such a deal. It establishes nothing about Scotland's situation at all. There are (1) no peacekeeping rationale and (2) no economic relations with an EU member neighbour, to drive what would happen to the Scottish border. We are not the same situation as Ireland. It remains as possible as ever it was argued in the indyref, for disagreed policies to cause a hard border.

Not indy but exactly from within the Union! is where we should be able to copy any EU-friendly alignment of regulations that NI opts to have, without a hard border for us if without one for them.

back of the queue ?

Today's news on disastrous long queues at airport borders in Europe, between us and the Schengen area: because in the same miserable world trend as Brexit, oppositely to rationality, Schengen borders have recently been made tighter and even non-Schengen EU cou tries' citizens now have go be checked against a database on terrorism alarms. Scottish Yes always said it would stay with the British Isles Common Travel Area and not Schengen. Does this now undermine its whole case to be the way to keep our familiar comfortable place in the EU at all?