The following appeared as a btl comment on the current Wings Over Scotland post:
wingsoverscotland.com/a-delicate-art/
(For those unfamiliar with COINTELPRO, the Wikipedia entry at the foot of this page is a useful basic introduction.)
'An addendum to Mark Hirst’s excellent prognosis.
To test the theory we would benefit from a suitable “Litmus test”. For that, we should reference COINTELPRO.
Are the hierarchy of the SNP good faith actors seeking to deliver Scottish independence or have they been captured by the British Security State?
If they were truly acting against the fixed interests of the British Security State, they would presumably be subject to COINTELPRO or a modified variant there-of, updated to incorporate the Internet age and an environment where msm has been reduced in bandwidth and systematically forced under the control of a tiny coterie of oligarchs.
COINTELPRO originated in the pre-Internet world. Nonetheless it remains the basic instruction manual for covert, counterinsurgency as practiced in the developed world. Some additional tactics may have evolved to suit the present day as revealed by the Al Jazeera documentaries on Nu Labour. Equally, some techniques may have been modified (as we shall see).
Mark states that the intent of the Security Services is to Disrupt. I would suggest that this can be subdivided to give, Distract, Divert and Divide.
From the original COINTELPRO document there are six key tactics. We can take them in turn, each time asking the question; is SNP HQ being subjected to interference in this form? The examples given in the original document relate to radical, racial and class based activism in 1960’s America.
Analysis: At this point, the hierarchy of the SNP are if anything protected by the Security State. Sturgeon’s inner circle have mair skeletons in their cupboards than the Natural History Museum, yet breeze through life unconcerned by potential exposure by either the State or msm. The COPFS repeatedly stymie progress on Branchform. Also from the latest development, we know *** ***** must be protected at all costs.
Alex Salmond on the other hand was clearly subject to a complex conspiracy to damage him, incorporating various branches of State and its compliant msm.
Analysis: This may at one time have been a tactic directed at the SNP. As with tactic number one, there is little evidence at present of State infiltration of the SNP to create internal strife and division. We are beyond that stage, the British state owns the hierarchy of the SNP. The Stalinesque control exercised by a pathologically “cautious” HQ on ordinary members renders this technique simultaneously unworkable and redundant.
Analysis: This may very well be applicable to the broader, Yes movement, but hardly applies to the SNP. The management board of AUOB was fractured by such rumours. I question the State’s dogged pursuit of the Natalie McGarry case, v’s the COPFS‘ catatonic handling of Operation Branchform. Could the SNP suffer collateral damage through such State activity, for example through decreasing membership subs? Yes; but if the hierarchy has been captured by the State, it is hardly in a position to complain.
Analysis: With the SNP, the contrary applies. Party finances are substantially supported by the State through Short money. For financial year, 2023/ 24, £1.3m not inclusive of individual, Committee allowances that may be clawed back by HQ, and a tithe of MPs salaries kept the party finances afloat. Short money is not discretionary and is dependent and proportional to electoral performance. However, the Security Services can funnel additional resources to individuals on an ad hoc basis for example through all expenses paid trips using the US State Department’s International Visitors Leadership Program and the British American Project.
Of note; Short money isn’t ancient Parliamentary practice, it was first introduced in limited form in 1974 and has subsequently expanded. Its inception was justified on the grounds of enabling “research and policy development”. How many policy papers have the SNP generated in these last few years? This degree of blatant misuse of Short money should be actionable, but there doesn’t appear to be an auditing function in the secretariat that manages the system. I suspect this suits the British state just fine, Short money is the bait for the trap called Dependency (yet another D).
Analysis: Again, the contrary applies. The State doesn’t seek to restrict the campaigning of the SNP. Rather, SNP controlled Glesga Cooncil is less than welcoming to AUOB. SNP high heed yins are conspicuous by their absence at AUOB marches or any other grass roots demonstration. The attendance of an SNP First Minister at the Edinburgh or Glasgow, annual Pride march is all but guaranteed, and we ken weal the Permanent State promotes Poststructuralism through Identity Politics.
Analysis: Oh the irony. The specific examples offered apply exactly to the opponents of the current SNP hierarchy within the Yes movement.
So, in summary the hierarchy of the SNP is not the victim of a programme of Security State, covert, malicious activity. Rather, that description is applicable to the Yes movement with SNP HQ playing the role of State sponsored agent of Disruption.
Should this feel all very conspiratorial, the stuff of tinfoil hats, I would strongly argue to the contrary.
Such covert, anti-democratic, State activity would in fact be LEGAL.
The Covert Human Intelligence Sources (Criminal Conduct) Act 2021, allows for, criminal conduct to be ‘authorised’:
Reference section 5.
5) A criminal conduct authorisation is necessary on grounds falling within this subsection if it is necessary—
(a) in the interests of national security;
(b) for the purpose of preventing or detecting crime or of preventing disorder; or
(c) in the interests of the economic well-being of the United Kingdom.
If the Security State has shown itself capable of Disruption, Distraction, Diversion and Division, is it in its interests to proceed to the final D; Destruction? The assumption has to be; No. A permanently divided Yes movement presents the ideal scenario for the Security State. Cut down a diseased tree and a new, vigorous sapling will take advantage of the gap created in the canopy.'
No spam or ads, just the latest posts and updates from Scotland's newest pro-independence blog.
.png)
