Image result for darling, rennie, davidson

Truly lovely people: four paid handsomely to block Scotland’s democratic progress 

There is a lot of clearing up to be done when a nation throws off its colonial masters, banishing traces of the old order from indigenous institutions, reopening old mysteries, firing the inept. One among many tasks is to organise ways of purging individual and national guilt without jailing thousands of people that betray a nation’s humanity for personal enhancement. The therapeutic benefits are the same as those we are expected to derive now, told Scotland must atone for its past sins exploiting the slave trade. 

‘Collaborator’ need not be a dirty word

There are good reasons for mounting truth sessions: they reintroduce betrayers and flaky placemen into society ensuring the worst are neutralised from repeating their behaviour in a liberated Scotland, and it stops the unscrupulous blackmailing them.

Nelson Mandela was not the first to advocate public confessionals as a means of allowing those who had committed atrocities, or lesser crimes such as theft from the public purse, to enunciate their mistakes and become free men and women again. They were called ‘Truth and Reconciliation’ groups. Samora Machel of Mozambique was one of the first African leaders to utilise this system, once he had overthrown his country’s Portuguese invaders, a man greatly admired by Mandela.


Who are to be considered collaborators? –  those who live in Scotland or own property or land in Scotland and did all they could to keep Scotland a colonial territory. I imagine none consider themselves as anything other than loyal British patriots.

The smartest upped and died some time ago, such as the Labour MP George Cunningham – Labour, the party of the people – who turned democracy on its head by introducing his amendment demanding a minimum of 40% of the populace vote for Scottish devolution, a tally that included the dead. For perverting the course of democracy, he remained unrepentant until the moment of his final breath in 2018.

There are those walking among us who are morally obliged to explain why they betrayed the democratic principle. If they wish to take their place in society with dignity, an explanation of their behaviour is the least they owe us.

What do you mean, do you really, really mean?

Before baleful unionists and over-sensitive Scottish Nationalists throw their hands up in horror at what they think I mean, (they will do it no matter what I write) I shall explain exactly what I mean.

I do not mean we revert to the reprisals we saw all over Europe when the Nazis were defeated and collaborators were dragged into the street by ugly mobs, had their hair shorn from their heads, their faces spat upon, their bodies kicked and beaten, their clothes torn off their backs, and men urinate on their naked bodies.

Nor am I talking about the barbarity of tarring and feathering that was the practice in English colonies in early modern times and in America too, including this century.

What I mean is this: I would like to see a humanitarian system put in place where people are asked to step forward and confess what they did was disreputable, repugnant, venal, unlawful – whatever they and we feel to be the case – knowing that it caused people hardship, loss of earnings, livelihoods, loss of civil rights, or even death.

The British state holds not dissimilar confessional sessions but they do not include forgiveness. Individuals are brought before a government committee and interrogated by our elected representatives, a place where bellicose bullies explain their behaviour, a recent example Sir Philip Green, a man accused of looting his own empire.

In the system I propose there is no threat of punishment, other than those named who avoid telling the truth are not excused. I propose a system of forgiveness.

How do we forgive?

Foregiveness; there are two ways to accomplish this task. Both require a degree of voluntary involvement. If that is not forthcoming we can always resort to naming names.

The first way is for the elected administration to call bigwigs to the table to admit their wrong doings, press and television cameras present to record their deliverance. The second is for local councils to do the same for miscreants in their area. Better still, sessions can be held in workplaces, bosses called to account.

If we are genuinely agitating to create a better society, is not weeding out the betrayers and collaborators to give them a chance to right wrongs a good beginning? The people I refer to are Scots plus a few English settlers.

No reprisals, no revenge

Such confessionals should have a time limit on them to avoid running over into reprisal, perhaps one year at the most, to allow those with a conscience not bereft of all integrity, enough time to gather their courage and come clean.

Without realising it, the SNP touched upon the idea when Jim Sillars warned the bullies of big business to stop leaning on their workers, demanding their staff vote against their constitutional rights. (An action illegal is some countries.) He was then deputy leader of the SNP. With days to go before the 2014 vote, voters apparently neck and neck, the unionist press true to form, called Sillars’ statement an “act of revenge”.

What was his crime? Sillars cautioned company CEOs with a “day of reckoning”, a pretty mild reproach considering some company bosses had acted like Armani suited dictators.

Company bosses threatening staff with redundancy unless they did as they were told in the polling booth – blackmail is an unlawful act. They were not condemned by the press. Sillars singled out the CEO of British Petroleum. He felt an independent Scotland might be moved to nationalise BP if the company acted like a state within a state.

We will have to be on our guard against the fly-by-night in the oil industry. As soon as oil becomes a dirty word, a backlash amid a climate change world, how many of those rich on it will declare themselves bankrupt? This will happen told they must pay for radical alterations and clean up? And when they do, how do we bring them to book, to public consciousness?

Truly lovely people

Readers who feel we live in a highly civilised society where public confessionals are not necessary are kidding themselves. The United Kingdom is one of the most corrupt nations on the planet. Scotland is infected by association.

Collaborators allow tax evasion as a legal activity; approve shonky companies dumping workers on the dole for boss and investor profit; drawing down of pension funds, signed PPI deals putting Scotland in hock for decades, placing police as moles into protest groups, employing private companies to remove welfare rights from the poor, the sick and the vulnerable, turn a blind eye to religous groups molesting children, allow the purchase of democracy, the poor imprisoned, the rich go free. 

What have collaborators to do?

I’d like to see people talk about their past, talk frankly about what they have done, and to give details, details recorded for the history books. If they come clean, they should be accepted back into society as good human beings, nothing more said about past deeds.

I want to see sessions deal with people in a humanitarian way, allowing them to speak openly and honestly, and be pardoned. Those invited to take part who exhibit arrogance or defiance, the facts staring them in the face, should not expect forgiveness.

If they leave having denied culpability, shouted down questioners, those around them can judge the depth of their principles and know what their real standing should be in a new Scotland. Democracy demands liars and cheats are met with relentless questioning.

Spoiled for choice

Who would I like to see clear their conscience? (Sexually and mentally abusive priests and archbishops deserve prison sentences.) Here are a few at national level.

Sir Ian Wood: Multi-millionaire, wealth made from North Sea Oil. What was he hoping to achieve telling the nation our oil reserves were running out when he knew it untrue? Why does he then turn around to glory in new oil fields discovered? Why did he want to own the centre of Aberdeen and refashion it?

Gavin McCrone: McCrone argues he did nothing to suppress his official Report for thirty years that explained how the oil bonanza would make Scotland a wealthy nation and give a huge boost to the nationalist movement. He avers he ‘only handed it to senior colleagues’. Why did he not alert the electorate? Where was his conscience?

Murray Foote: As editor of the scumbag Scottish Daily Record he placed the phony ‘Vow’ on the front page and backed it to the hilt. Now a reformed man he still needs to confess why he conspired to defraud a nation of its rights.

JK Rowling: the world renowned children’s author uses her vast wealth and influence to block the civil and constitutional rights of the nation that adopted her.

Sir Nicholas MacPherson: Former permanent secretary to the UK Treasury; he is supposed to remain impartial, but he chose to enter the public fray over independence by publishing his advice to the cabinet stating independence would not be good for ‘the markets’. He also forgot to mention his family’s land investments in Wester Ross. What made him want to work for the SNP?

Brain Souter: His homophobia; selling Dennis when he had no need of greater wealth.

Kate Watson: the Scottish Labour candidate, former Better Together boss, to explain her links to the 77th Brigade, a “military propaganda unit” within the British Army, a branch now operating in Scotland. All political candidates seeking to represent the public should be transparent about their affiliations and commitments.

Gordon Brown: Hard to know where to start: for financing the illegal Iraq war; never visited the Scottish parliament; bag man to crooked banks; continues to lie about Scotland as a super-federal state; the pitiful ‘Vow’, and so on, ad nauseam.

Blair McDougall: for a litany of lies and fabrication sustained even in the face of glaring facts to the contrary, uttered without embarrassment prior to the 2014 Referendum.

Muriel Gray: as chairperson of the Glasgow School of Art board of directors, why did she endorse the whitewash of a Report on the first fire, and take no moral responsibility for the fire as guardian of the institution, nor for the second fire? And please, where is the £50 million that was meant to rebuild the Mackintosh out of the first carnage?

Brian Spanner: not his real name, an odious snivelling Internet creep protected by the British press; his associations with the Orange Order, who finances him; why he felt able to be close to JK Rowling.

Jill Stephenson: better known as ‘History Woman’; a neurotic harpy who berates the SNP at every turn with blatant lies and Nazi slurs; called a female SNP MP a ‘slut’, yet continues to describe herself as an academic. She owes Edinburgh University an apology.

Ian Lang: Baron Lang of Monkton; Tory former Secretary of State, for the dog’s breakfast that is GERs, designed to confuse political opponents but specifically, “the SNP” – his words – from knowing the real economy of Scotland.

David Mundell: ‘Fluffy’ Mundell, another secretary of state working on behalf of the British state against Scotland’s interests, wanted for mendacity, blocking Scotland’s progress, doing more turns than a whirling Dervish.

In conclusion

There are lots of others I could add to that list, as readers could too, journalists moonlighting for espionage reasons, ‘patriotic’ civil servants, BBC bosses, but I concede those who feel we live in the best of all possible worlds will think my proposal outrageous.

However, the betrayers I draw attention to approved the killing of innocents in Iraq and Afghanistan and Syria, endorsed rendition flights taking suspects to be tortured outside the USA, rubber stamped the sale of weapons to countries they knew would be used to murder civilians, allegedly in our name to ‘protect’ us.

Lest smear mongers get an erection from concocting some lie to make this thesis on imperialism laid bare sound sinister, I repeat the essentials of my case…..

Imperfections pardoned

Nobody’s perfect, everybody makes mistakes, but some who hold power and influence make serious errors of judgement to the brutal detriment of others and undermine the common good, errors that have repercussions for years to come.

If we believe we want independence to see the beginning of a better society, among all the other necessities we shall have to attend to, one of the most important is to help cleanse the walking wounded of their gangrene.

What was good enough for Nelson Mandela is damn well good enough for Scotland.



This entry was posted in Scottish Independence Referendum, Scottish Politics. Bookmark the permalink.

21 Responses to Collaborators

  1. Tony Hughes says:

    Cracking piece, sir. Well thought out and reasoned. It will be difficult to counter.

  2. Grouse Beater says:

    If we do not single out the betrayers of our rights they will regroup after independence and cause a new Scotland no end of trouble.

  3. This piece will get a few people thinking and realising that they’ll very soon have to stake their all or nothing bet on Scotland’s future.

  4. Grouse Beater says:

    Aye, that’s so. I can’t see what I propose happening there being few if any politician with the leadership qualities to implement the idea, but then I cannot see why the process should not happen, considering it’s a system of forgiveness even for the worst betrayals, the opposite of trials and hangings.

  5. Derek Grainge says:

    Things didn’t work out too well for Quisling after the second world war. Now that would be a dangerous road for Scotland to travel. Maybe we could banish a load of odious lying politicians to a remote and barren island. Rockall would be my favourite. No? Alright then.

  6. Grouse Beater says:

    They could always be sent to repopulate St Kilda to live off fish from the sea, and the birds eggs from the cliff face assuming they’re good at holding on to thin stone wedges with fingers and toes. 🙂

  7. graemeorab says:

    A great article and one which I hope people will read and understand fully. I believe the truth and reconciliation trials of Nelson Mandela in South Africa were an act of kindness to a defeated Regime. In Scotland I believe it is only those who have been in a position to influence/blackmail ordinary citizens through politics or business who should confess their sins. Whether those requested to purge their sins and crimes see themselves as a former regime puppet is another matter.

  8. broonpot says:

    I believe we will need something like the SA truth & reconciliation commission. Contentious, with the devil always in the detail when proposing something so radical.

    My initial thoughts are that like SA we will need to give importance to formally hearing from those individuals & groups who were wronged, perhaps as an objective and evidence based approach to encouraging people to come forward to seek amnesty.

    The SA commission is regarded as a success but I cannot recall to what extent this has been confirmed / documented subsequently particularly by high profile individuals who cleared their conscience.

    The absence of warfare deaths & gross Human Rights crimes in Scotland’s Independence struggle may make a Scottish system better able to provide amnesty & a coming together with less risk of compromising the need for justice through the courts.

  9. Grouse Beater says:

    Sentiments appreciated and admired, BP. 🙂

  10. Scott Surgener says:

    I’m 100% with you on this Grouse Beater. If we manage to create a new society in Scotland we have to be sure that we make provisions so we never suffer the injustices of the past again. Your suggestions would be vital towards that goal. Then a restructuring of how we govern ourselves, to take power from individuals and move it towards a locally based system. I know this isn’t a new idea but it’s the right way. Power and greed, as always, are our enemy.

  11. Colin Courtney says:

    Would it not be more fitting to make those traitors who do not agree to regret their actions, uproot and move to the life they aspire to? It seems unfair they should be allowed to enjoy the eventual benefits of an Independent Scotland. We will be a friendly Independent Country, but not a haven for freeloaders that just want to TAKE from us,,as has been the Unionist mantra.

  12. Grouse Beater says:

    I avoid using the term ‘traitor’ because it carries unpalatable connotations. The people I talk of adhere to group beliefs but know many suffer as a consequence. And I don’t want to see anybody forced to do anything but appear at the sessions to relent. If they do not, then life in their immediate community may be uncomfortable, their job not worth the lack of respect. That in itself might become motivation to leave.

  13. Donald McGregor says:

    I’ve waited a while to respond to this piece, as I am going to offer a supportive but dissenting voice, and would like this dissent to be as cleanly and clearly expressed as I can.

    I have at least as long a list as this of prominent people that want to see humbled by our Independence, but I am perturbed at the idea of lists of people that ‘we’ want to ‘do things’ or ‘have things done to’. It feels too readily able to be twisted and used against us.

    I would hope and work towards an Independent Scotland simply growing away from these people and casting them into the oblivion of political irrelevance. Appreciate this is more difficult for business figures, but really, we need from them no more than Ruth Davidson said in 2014 (and has never repeated); that she would ‘of course’ work in an Independent Scotland, for the good of Scotland.

    We have grown to understand that the message aimed at undermining support for Scotland’s Independence is delivered by the politicians and msm mainly to those that do support or express support for the UK /Union in a torrent of words – but it is consumed, digested and understood on the basis of headlines and tone. It is not a message that stands close reading, and such is generally not invited. It appeals to fear, emotion and inertia.

    And thus will this message about truth and reconciliation be received and digested. No nuance is permitted. If we start, then at what level will we ‘not’ demand a recanting of views?

  14. Although I concur with your sentiment GB, I feel in my bones this cannot or will not happen. Much as I wish it to happen, still I feel it is wishful thinking. Even South Africa’s turmoil lasted less than Scotland’s at the hands of the infiltrators. The tendrils of the invader are centuries deep. I hesitate to suggest it, but purge is more apt. I am, by nature, a gentle and forgiving soul; but some treachery can never be forgiven. The last 5 years of my life have been highly illuminating. It gives me no pleasure to state these things.

    One thing that has puzzled me since it was first presented; “Company bosses threatening staff with redundancy unless they did as they were told in the polling booth – blackmail is an unlawful act.” In what way could anyone tell how someone had voted in the privacy of the polling booth? As an individual – and presented with the threat of disciplinary measures if I voted contrary to my employers wishes; common sense would dictate that I would comply with that wish in person, but would vote as I saw fit in that booth. Who would know? How could they? Unless we were happy to accommodate a wild conspiracy that all company bosses could access the voters roll, the votes cast in every region they had an interest, the names of their employees cross referenced against those rolls, no-one could know how you’d voted. So, to the boss; “I’ll vote no to Scottish independence.” In the booth, tick YES. Who would know?

    You are too kind to the British state, to describe it as one of the most corrupt in the world. It is THE most corrupt ever to have existed. It took its’ first lessons from the Roman Empire. It developed all of those lessons to the worst degree in building the Empire on which the sun never set. It learned from the Nazi scourge of the early 20th century and developed those ideas into the abhorrent state in which we now live. I say, unequivocally, that the British state is the most evil entity which has ever existed. It is THE most corrupt and corrupting influence in the whole of human existence. Our enemy is strong. Scotland will prove itself when we defeat that enemy, of that I have no doubt.

  15. Grouse Beater says:

    To answer Donald and Neil: The emphasis is on forgiveness. The system is without punishment. If an individual goes out of their way to condemn a new Scotland, or refuse to discuss why they undermined a nation’s hopes, they won’t be universally accepted into the community. In other words, they make their own choice and they live with that.

    As others have commented without knowing how to curb counter-insurgency, those people will most definitely regroup and form Trojan Horse organisations, just like Scotland in Union. If we don’t out them, they will cause all sorts of damage to the development of a new society. We must begin as we wish to continue.

    “In what way could anyone tell how someone had voted in the privacy of the polling booth?”

    To answer Neil specifically: How bosses did it last time was to threaten to close down their company or institution and move it to England or elsewhere. They usually added, no jobs were guaranteed in any move. That had a tremendous bearing on how a person cast their vote in the polling booth.There is no other way to describe it but ‘blackmail’. Yes, an individual could resist unwanted pressure and vote by conscience and politics. By all accounts many did not. And their unions often supported the bosses … see my essay on the GMB union.

  16. Amandine Guise says:

    Macpherson is now “Rt. Hon. The Lord Macpherson of Earl’s Court GCB” . Life peerage awarded in 2016 when he left The Treasury to become chairman of Hoare’s Bank, a bank for very wealthy individuals.

  17. Grouse Beater says:

    Ah, the rewards for selling humanity cheap are fulfilling.

  18. Derek Cameron says:

    As fresh as the day it was written Thank you.

  19. Motor Boat says:

    Maybe some of these “collaborators” don’t need to “clear their conscience” of anything other than disagreeing with SNP orthodoxy. Scotland’s real original sin, as ever, it its inability to refrain from puritanism.

  20. Grouse Beater says:

    Motor Boat: Read the essay again: “What was good for Nelson Mandela is good enough for Scotland.” We even named a city square after him, so much did we admire his policies!

Leave a Reply

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s