The final sentence in Wee Ginger Dug’s column for The National today requires some explanation. Whis meant by “we”? In what ways do we “enable” the Tories to use current inquiries into the conduct of Nicola Sturgeon and her administration against Scotland’s cause?
Presumably the “we” referred to is the Yes movement. Or is it the SNP alone? Perhaps it’s bloggers. Or journalists. After all, Paul Kavanagh counts himself as a member of both these categories. But whoever it is that is supposedly doing the enabling it remains unclear what Mr Kavanagh thinks constitute the enabling actions.
In his article he refers to Ruth Davidson mouthing off about supposed shortcomings of the Scottish Government at every opportunity. But surely she would do this anyway. She hardly needs to be enabled by “us”. So what is it that “we” are doing which enables the weaponisation of the Nicola Sturgeon inquiries by the Tories? Or, more accurately, by the British establishment.
Is there something “we” are doing which were “we” to desist would disable this weaponisation? Surely it would be of great benefit were Mr Kavanagh to identify this something rather than leaving us in suspense as if preparing the market for a sequel. I can’t think of anything I’m doing which might be regarded as enabling the likes of Ruth Davidson. I simply can’t imagine her stopping her weaponising of the Sturgeon affair for any reason at all, far less because I have stopped enabling her in some way that remains a mystery.
If it is merely by discussing the Sturgeon inquiries that “we” are “enabling” the Tories to use those inquiries to attack devolution then presumably the theory is that the attacks would be disabled were “we” to stop discussing them. But that’s not quite right, is it? Not unless the idea is that it that it is only “our” discussions that are doing the enabling rather than discussion in general of the Nicola Sturgeon affair. That hardly seems credible.
The only one who might reasonably be said to be enabling these attacks is Nicola Sturgeon herself. Because it is she who is responsible for initiating the events which are now the subject of two official inquiries. The inquiries are looking at her behaviour and that of the administration for which she is responsible. Had she not instigated the events which even she herself acknowledges are worthy of two official inquiries then there would be nothing for “us” to discuss. Nothing for the British establishment to use in attacking devolution.
Only Nicola Sturgeon could have prevented or avoided the behaviours which are under investigation. Only Nicola Sturgeon had the ability to stop the chain of events instigated by Nicola Sturgeon and/or the administration Nicola Sturgeon leads before those events accumulated the critical mass no being weaponised by Ruth Davidson and the British political elite she serves.
There is no way to look at this whole situation which does not bring us back to Nicola Sturgeon as the one person who must bear responsibility. When Paul Kavanagh implies that “we” enable the use of this situation in attacks on Scotland by the forces of British Nationalism it looks very much as if he is attempting to divert or distribute blame.
Let us think very carefully about who is putting Scotland’s cause in peril. And who is enabling them.
Peter A Bell 
Well said.
PK’s characteristic has been sailing a very fine course among many crosswinds. For the last few weeks I have noticed a greater degree of turbulence.
To use another metaphor he is falling off the fence.
These are febrile times.
LikeLiked by 4 people
Certainly for PK, from what you say.
LikeLike
I completely agree. Look at the scenario if NS was not head of snp which means she is gone.
1. Faithful would still vote snp
2. The snp would gain back many who will not vote bcs of her antics.
3. The Indy voter would look on the snp in a more favourable light ..more votes
4. Gain votes through a clean new look…..getting rid of the old dead wood
Has it reached a point when she is more bad than good for the snp. I think so, especially going into an election.
The snp are much more than their leadership. Surely it’s time she went and let the snp do the work they were meant to do…..independence.
LikeLiked by 7 people
Worth a read.
https://newsnet.scot/news-analysis/its-all-hands-up-for-nicola-sturgeon-bar-tory-voters/
LikeLike
“Even more extraordinary are the lengths Alex Salmond is going in his revenge campaign to damage the First Minister ahead of the most important Holyrood election in the history of the Scottish Parliament.”
Oh look! The author’s a liar. Just like you!
LikeLike
A filter in my brain always replaces the words “Wee Ginger Dug” and/or “Paul Kavanagh” with “King Wheeshter”.
LikeLiked by 2 people
I admire the effort that WGD has put in over the years in the cause of Independence. He has been tireless in this regard and eloquent in putting over his views.
Sadly in his output over the last couple of years has seen him align himself firmly with the ‘wheesht for Indy” camp.
Who does he mean when he says ‘we’? I don’t know for sure. But I do know what Tonto’s response would be.
LikeLiked by 3 people
As a relative newcomer, I very soon dropped the WGD blog. In the early days I made the odd comment or two and was blawn out of the water…how very dare I. It looked to me that he was/is in it for the money. Fair enough folk have to earn a living. However the crowd funder to buy a new house was the last straw for me.
LikeLiked by 3 people
I never understood that crowd funder and I still don’t.
LikeLiked by 3 people
He had a crowd funder to buy a house?
LikeLike
I used to read WGD back in the day. Long since realised he now has little of value to say even before he causes & permits a lot of loud wheeshting BLT on his blog.
LikeLiked by 4 people
One comment. Nicola Sturgeon did not initiate these events.
Salmond did that when he couldn’t keep his hands to himself.
LikeLike
Salmond was acquitted on all charges. Just because Sturgeon sees fit to impugn the verdict delivered by a jury of men and women who had access to all the evidence that was admitted doesn’t mean the rest of us have to follow her deplorable example.
And you’re wrong, anyway. Because it was neither the alleged offence(s) nor the complaint(s) about the alleged offence(s) which led to the present situation, but the way the complaints were handled by the Scottish Government which is headed by Nicola Sturgeon. She is responsible. It was actions she took or failed to take which brought all of this about. It was action taken by her or in her name that caused it. She cannot wriggle off that hook.
LikeLiked by 3 people
There’s a fine line between a sex offender ( which Salmond wasn’t ), and a sex pest.
LikeLike
Alex Salmond isn’t on trial.
LikeLike
The fact that several of these women in question appeared to openly lied in Court, and one definitely did lie, seems to have been lost on some folks.
Also the pettiness of all the complaints is astonishing, and that these ended up in a Court at all, quite a remarkable turn of events.
As for Nicola Sturgeon, she didn’t exactly do herself any favors with some of her recent comments on this saga.
But it will still be noticed that Alex Salmond has not called for her resignation, so far anyway, tho he has called for Leslie Evans to go.
And I don’t see or expect the First Minister to resign, however, she really must start pushing harder for Independence, and abandon the Section 30 charade, if she wants to regain the confidence of many within the Independence movement, and in SNP.
For a large number have been badly let down of late.
LikeLiked by 2 people
”I can’t think of anything I’m doing which might be regarded as enabling the likes of Ruth Davidson.”
You’ve been running Nicola Sturgeon and the SNP down for years now, ”enabling the likes of Ruth Davidson”, long before the Alex Salmond affair. You run them down and no doubt turn the soft no’s off in the process and then demand that everyone should vote for them. Crazy.
LikeLike
I appreciate all the energy and work you have put in over the years on Paul’s blog. but it seems to me he is censoring his blog that stops any debate. I have posted occasionally but they never see the light of day and I can assure you that they have been very polite and I have never attacked anyone on a personal basis. I have opinions, just like you and all others and a right to voice an opinion but not on his blog, it seems.
The message that he is sending out is: If you are not with us, you are against us. Which is totally absurd. Not just that, you get a little nip from his lapdogs if you dare challenge him or from those who have posted comments.
It seems to me that he pampers his following and writing what they want to hear to keep them in his own perfect little bubble.
You could never have found a more pro Sturgeon and SNP government person than me until a few years ago but now I feel ashamed in how the SNP administration has corrupted our movement and contaminated the very essence of our hopes and ideals.
I despise Sturgeon and her cabal for tearing down the beauty of the indyref in 2014.
It hurts……their betrayal
LikeLiked by 4 people
That is a lie. Up until a few months ago I was of the outspoken view that Nicola Sturgeon MUST remain as First Minister. And I have NEVER said so much as a word against the SNP. It is the leadership and senior management that I have criticised – for reasons obvious to all but the most blinkered fools.
We already knew that you were to be numbered among the most blinkered fools. It has now been established that you are a liar as well.
LikeLiked by 4 people
I would concur with all of that Peter. Petra ,The dug, and the Constipated Pony have been peddling their version of the gospel according to the First Minister for Lies to the extent they believe some of it might be true.
LikeLike
I suspect there will be some apologies due from those you mention and their #WheeshtForIndy pals. I strongly suspect those apologies will remain due.
LikeLike
The whole ting is an absolute disaster whatever way you look at it.
All the First Minister had to do was be honest about the timing of the original meeting, and then she could have said she felt the need to do this or that.
Of course once Leslie Evans took it to the Police against both the wishes of the women involved,so we were told, certainly the majority of those women didn’t want it going to Police, it was out of Nicola Sturgeon’s hands. I still wonder at her husband’s involvement too.
At any rate, we now see calls for her resignation from the tories because she “misled” Parliament.
The tories can’t talk about no one, as they ain’t demanding UK Govt. Home Secretary Patel to resign for breaking the Ministerial Code, or for Matt Hancock of breaking the Law.
Or for the numerous times we’ve had Boris Johnson come out with misleading statements in House of Commons.
Nor can Labour say too much as they were happy enough to let Tony Blair mislead Parliament.
And we turn to the Libs, with Carmichael, etc, etc.
Everyone of them have no case for trying to take the moral high ground. And they were also just waiting for that verdict a year back, as well as their fanatical pro London supporters. Of course they never got the verdict they hoped for, and have been bitterly disappointed ever since.
Now they see their golden chance for vengeance!
But as you have said Peter, the First Minister could, and should have avoided this from the beginning.
And also, from an Independence point of view, we wonder what impact this will have, and we see the absolute folly of this wait, and wait forever and ever approach, and the senselessness of it.
Dunno how it will play out from now on in, but we must still focus on Independence as much as possible, but this saga has been so infuriating, and too, when we see the levels of open corruption in Westminster, and they don’t even try hide it any more, to have those very same wretches tell us we can’t govern ourselves, when something like this Inquiry would hardly see the light of day in London, really is insulting.
LikeLiked by 2 people