Letter to First Minister Sturgeon re her support for Hillary Clinton

Ms Nicola Sturgeon

First Minister

St. Andrew’s House

Regent Road

Edinburgh EH1 3DG


Dear Ms Sturgeon

I write to protest in the strongest terms your pubic endorsement – ‘I’m with her’ – of US presidential candidate Hillary Clinton. For the record, I trudged the streets putting ‘I’m with Nicola’ leaflets through hundreds of doors.

I am appalled that you think it appropriate use your position to express support for such a deeply-flawed, corrupt, malignant, politician and by implication, associate me, SNP members and other Scots, with your, hopefully, ill-informed personal views.

Hillary Clinton is on record as being opposed to Scottish independence but, worse, she is a well know foreign policy ‘hawk’. She was instrumental, recently, in a series of anti-democratic acts in Honduras, Palestine and Libya. Who can forget seeing her sitting applauding the torture, rape and murder of President Gaddafi, guffawing and exclaiming: ‘We came, we saw, he died?’ This woman is like many leading politicians in larger militaristic, expansionist nations, a cruel psychopath. Is it really enough for you that she is a woman? Will any woman do?

As with Thatcher, just any woman won’t do for me. You could argue easily that the kind of women, macho psychopaths, able to break through the constraints of patriarchy in large imperial states like the UK and the USA (not Scotland) are the kind of women prepared to play its game. True feminists, female or male, might have the sense to recognise that the kind of politics patriarchy allows in these countries is just not for them.

As a committed supporter of Scottish independence, activist, and SNP member, I have tried to avoid comment which could be seen to harm the unity of our movement. However, there are limits. Is it possible that, in this instance, you have forgotten what the number one priority for the leader of the Scottish National Party is?

Dr John W Robertson

Professor (Retired)

Monday 7th November 2016

53 thoughts on “Letter to First Minister Sturgeon re her support for Hillary Clinton

  1. Anne Duncan November 7, 2016 / 4:44 pm

    I agree with you John. Our First Minister’s post stopped me in my tracks this morning. Both Trump and Clinton are bad news and best left as ‘no comment’. Hillary Clinton is everything you said and more. Not fit to hold office at any level. I was already shocked at the negative remark about Russia during Nicola Sturgeon’s closing speech at the recent SNP conference …(clearly not up to speed with the true situation, only the msm propaganda version) …now this on top is a potential game changer for me. Sad day!


    • johnrobertson834 November 7, 2016 / 6:43 pm

      Thanks. I’ve been worried for some time but this time she’s gone too far.


  2. Clydebuilt November 7, 2016 / 5:54 pm

    It’s a good letter John. But in publishing it you’ve joined the ranks of Bernard Thompson and Alf Baird over on newsnet.scot…..
    If one of our side makes a mistake surely better to point out privately, (hopefully they’ll learn from their mistake) minimise the damage.


    • johnrobertson834 November 7, 2016 / 6:45 pm

      She is the First Minister. She has abused her position. I’m not attacking our side. I’m attacking her personally and her undemocratic betrayal of our side. What good would a private letter do. i’d just get another standard reply not even written by her.


    • johnrobertson834 November 7, 2016 / 7:06 pm

      CB you wrote this:

      November 7, 2016 / 10:57 am
      What’s the worst characteristic of each of the 2 candidates….. One likes to pinch ladies bahookies ..and create employment via a wall building programme…..The other might start WW3.

      John Pilger. No Clinton fan. http://www.counterpunch.org/2016/10/28/inside-the-invisible-government-war-propaganda-clinton-trump/

      During the Indy Ref and since never been able to find anything he’s written about Scottish Politics.

      Don’t you agree that Nicola’s intervention is a step too far?


      • Clydebuilt November 7, 2016 / 7:34 pm

        I think her intervention is misjudged, a mistake. Where we differ is publicising it. So you might have got a standard reply. BUT if she saw the letter then I’d like to think it would have registered. I don’t think her Heid is up her ass. Or too big for her (brass) neck. I don’t think the independence cause has anything to gain from undermining it’s leader. That’s the job of our media.

        Don’t you think it’s strange that Pilger has (apparently) had nothing to say about Scottish independence.


  3. Bryan Weir November 7, 2016 / 7:57 pm

    Whatever anyone thinks, publishing this criticism of the FM is a gift to the Unionist media. Watch this space for a headline tomorrow or soon.


    • johnrobertson834 November 8, 2016 / 10:51 am

      Absolutely no sign at all in the press that anyone cares about my or others’ complaints. You see, they might have to admit the SNP is not totalitarian but rather democratic.


  4. johnrobertson834 November 7, 2016 / 8:42 pm

    Or SNP support increases as First Minister concentrates on the day job? Some things are too important to ignore. The horrors of the Blairs, the Clintons, their Saudi and Qatari backers, the deaths in Yemen and in Syria should be understood by sturgeon. If she doesn’t get it she’s not fit to lead. As for the unionist parties and the media they support Clinton.


  5. johnrobertson834 November 7, 2016 / 8:46 pm

    There’s time for a real leadership challenge. That youngster from Paisley. I’ve been worried for some time about the presidential style of Sturgeon. This is an attack on that not the party. She isn’t the party.


  6. Alastair Naughton November 7, 2016 / 11:13 pm

    I agree with you John. This was a step too far. I have written a letter to her personally outlining why I was so appalled. Will await her response. This cannot go unchallenged. We will just be accused of being like sheep blindly following the leader, or worse, hypocrites, if we don’t call this out.

    Liked by 1 person

  7. caltonjock November 7, 2016 / 11:35 pm

    The SNP and Nicola in particular benefited greatly from the backlash of the Scottish electorate to the outcome of the 2014 Referendum. Scots no longer perceive the Party to be one of protest but one of government. Best judge therefore Nicola’s comments against those of Teresa May who is diplomacy personified.

    Goodness Clinton isn’t even certain of winning and, as John observed she is most definitely a supporter of rough justice. Her political behaviour over 40 years has been appalling and her personal life and that of her husband beggars belief.

    Scots, and I include myself, John and others who are uneasy, have fully supported Nicola from the time she took on the task of leadership of the Party but the very strength of the SNP government is it’s weakness and just might bring about it’s downfall. Nicola and her team must avoid the accusation of arrogance in office. The days of “all for one and one for all” need to be discarded in favour of open discussion, in committee and in public. The Party has nothing to fear from conducting an open dialogue.

    Addressing Nicola I am well aware her background dictates her conduct and to her credit she usually exercises care in her public statements but there have been occasions in recent times when she displayed a lack of prudent hesitancy before speaking providing opportunity for others to express criticism of her judgement.

    Liked by 1 person

    • johnrobertson834 November 8, 2016 / 7:36 am

      Yes, all of what you wrote and the presidential nature of her appointment and the conference were worrying indicators. I’m not ‘with Nicola’, I’m with the SNP,


  8. alanski November 8, 2016 / 12:41 am

    Big error of judgement by Nicol Sturgeon, hope she learns her lesson.


    • johnrobertson834 November 8, 2016 / 10:40 am

      Power corrupts. I’ve been getting more and more worried about her for some time.


  9. johnrobertson834 November 8, 2016 / 7:46 am

    I’ve been banging on about independence, first, second and last. I’ve slammed others, not in the SNP, as posturing on the fringes and weakening the cause. Now I’m accused of the same, wrongly. I’m accusing the FM of lack of discipline and egotistical posturing on the fringes of the campaign and now weakening it. Not only is Clinton an appalling figure for the FM to be seen supporting, the act of doing so is utterly irrelevant to the campaign. No US president will ever support us so what point is there in coming out to support a candidate? It looks like knee-jerk ‘sisterhood’ loyalty and thus deeply disturbing. Has she seen Susan Sarandon on the topic? If not she should: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cF2M2_Z_plk


    • Bryan Weir November 8, 2016 / 9:11 am

      John, I agree with the point you are making and you are perfectly entitled to make it. All I am saying is that doing it in public could result in damage to our cause. The Tories seldom criticise their leader in public and that is one reason they are in government, despite her total incompetence.


      • Bryan Weir November 8, 2016 / 9:15 am

        “When anger rises, think of the consequences.”


      • johnrobertson834 November 8, 2016 / 10:36 am

        Confucius was a conservative, elitist, establishment figure so….?


      • johnrobertson834 November 8, 2016 / 10:39 am

        The reasons they are in government are the electoral system and the actual appeal of nasty policies to many in the population, sadly. Discipline is important I agree but the leader needs to remember that too. Was her statement approved by the cabinet?


    • Clydebuilt November 8, 2016 / 9:46 am

      John. Yes you have stood up for the party , whilst others have tried to create splits.

      “The act of doing so (supporting Clinton) ) is utterly irrelevant to the cause” ……..exactly, so stop damaging the FM over a mistake that few people will have heard off and is “utterly irrelevant to the cause” ,

      You say it’s about the leader and not the party. But damaging the Leader damages the party ……. Voters don’t like divided parties. How do you think the SNP ever got to where they are today, with the entire Establishment against them.

      Why have Labour been doing so badly in the polls……. Infighting over who should be the Leader…… That’s where all this is going.


  10. johnrobertson834 November 8, 2016 / 11:29 am

    ‘How do you think the SNP ever got to where they are today, with the entire Establishment against them.’

    Answer: The collapse of the Labour party as a whole, the gradual effects of Scottish history teaching in schools and universities from the 70s and social media.

    ‘Why have Labour been doing so badly in the polls……. Infighting over who should be the Leader’

    Answer: Recognition that they have failed to deal with inequality, siding with the Tories, corruption in local government……

    ‘That’s where all this is going.’

    Answer: Or, the SNP reverses it’s trend toward becoming the establishment,drops this presidential style of leadership and gets more popular?


  11. Jeanette McCrimmon November 8, 2016 / 12:10 pm

    Three times yesterday I wrote of, and then discarded, my horror and shame of our FM’s support of Clinton for President. I didn’t want to publicly call her out for fear of damaging our common cause of Independence for Scotland.

    Why she publicly supported Clinton is beyond my ken. As has been pointed out, independence for Scotland will never be endorsed by a US President. With no horse in the race, the FM should have come out for, in my opinion, Dr. Jill Stein, who has common cause with the SNP, against neo-globalism.

    A life-long supporter of indy, I joined the SNP on the 19th September as an act of defiance against the devastating result. Today, I’m pulling my membership and will channel my effort into a new indy2 website,

    Independence is above and beyond party politics, especially those of another country.

    Liked by 1 person

    • Clydebuilt November 8, 2016 / 1:06 pm


      If the SNP are not to be the party to deliver Independence. Then the cause will have been put back decades.
      Are you sure that’s what you want.


      • johnrobertson834 November 8, 2016 / 1:55 pm

        I fully understand Jeanette’s anger and decision. I will stay a member and fight internally because as you suggest only the SNP can deliver victory.


  12. Frank Wallace November 8, 2016 / 2:13 pm

    Susan Sarandon summed it up beautifully when asked if she would back Hillary Clinton because she was a woman. She replied that she wouldn’t as she didn’t vote with her vagina and that rule should have equally applied to our First Minister. The view that Nicola should have kept her own counsel on America’s choice as POTUS seems to be the most sensible.

    Nicola might want to ask why on what grounds Hillary Clinton should even stand for the presidency in the first place. Being the wife of a former POTUS is surely no justification for being a presidential candidate- America is not the Philippines or India where family dynasties seem to rule unhindered. Can you imagine the uproar in the UK, if Cherie Blair or Denis Thatcher had ever stood for PM purely on the basis of being the spouses of former PMs. For that matter, can you imagine the outrage in Scotland if Peter Murrell ever sought to become First Minister.

    Sadly, I believe the FM displayed poor judgement on this occasion especially by declaring her support for a woman who previously stated her opposition to Scottish independence. Hillary Clinton is no friend of freedom-loving Scots- now or in the future.


    • Bryan Weir November 8, 2016 / 3:31 pm

      Don’t take this as support for her but it has to be said Hillary Clinton served as elected senator for New York. She was also US Secretary of state for four years and this is the second time she has run for the presidency. I doubt that Trump has even been on the local bowling club committee. 😉


      • johnrobertson834 November 8, 2016 / 6:54 pm

        I’m not sure how any of this changes what she has done


      • Bryan Weir November 8, 2016 / 9:19 pm

        It doesn’t but the analogy was Cherie Blair and Dennis Thatcher neither of whom had any political experience.

        I would say that being senator for New York and four years as the US secretary of state makes her a valid (note that I did not use the word worthy) candidate. I am not comfortable in trying to defend her but I am a damned sight more comfortable than I would be in trying to defend Donald Trump, who I see as an inarticulate, obnoxious buffoon not fit to be elected to my bowling club committee never mind as president of the US of A.


  13. ic1809 November 8, 2016 / 3:15 pm

    I have posted a comment on your article ‘Scotland and Hillary Clinton: Will any woman do? Not for me’. My comment was long (and still is!) so I cut out a reference I had made to Nicola Sturgeon, the SNP and Brexit.

    The deleted comment was a warning to the SNP of the dangers of committing the party wholeheartedly and without sufficient qualification to a particular outcome. But in this article you have more than adequately expressed my concern about the wisdom of what Nicola Sturgeon has done. As I said of Kevin McKenna: ‘If Clinton wins, Mr. McKenna may come to regret his effusive endorsement of her. When you nail your colours to a lollipop stick the only thing that’s going to get blown away is your credibility’.

    I am surprised though at the vehemence with which you expressed criticism of Ms. Sturgeon. Flak time for you Professor Robertson!


    • johnrobertson834 November 8, 2016 / 3:18 pm

      Thanks ic. I felt very very angry in the light of what should be common knowledge of the bloody consequences of Clinton’s actions.


    • Clydebuilt November 8, 2016 / 6:15 pm

      There was coverage of this on Drive Time Radio Scotland, before 6. The FM was interviewed and explained her reasons for backing Clinton.

      The case against Clinton is based on her past links to military action and hawkish views on Syria. Its unlikely that our MSM will want this made public.

      Is this a case of tough shit.


      • johnrobertson834 November 8, 2016 / 6:55 pm

        Thanks. Was she pressed in any way to justify support for an opponent of scot indep?


      • mcglashanann November 8, 2016 / 8:41 pm

        this must be what it was like to look in upon Bedlam.


      • johnrobertson834 November 9, 2016 / 7:34 am

        Mind you the folk in Bedlam were innocents by comparison with Clinton and Trump.


  14. Clydebuilt November 8, 2016 / 9:09 pm

    ‘How do you think the SNP ever got to where they are today, with the entire Establishment against them.’

    Answer: The collapse of the Labour party as a whole, the gradual effects of Scottish history teaching in schools and universities from the 70s and social media.

    well that is part of the answer, the other part is the party are disciplined, they dont go in for airing their dirty linen in public. Not giving their friends in the media ammunition.

    ‘Why have Labour been doing so badly in the polls……. Infighting over who should be the Leader’

    Answer: Recognition that they have failed to deal with inequality, siding with the Tories, corruption in local government……

    After Corbyn Replaced Milliband, Labours poll ratings improved (In England) they started winning by-elections, Corbyn likes to take credit for his mate Khan becoming the London Mayor. Then the coup started followed by another leadership election the parties ratings tanked.

    ‘That’s where all this is going.’

    Answer: Or, the SNP reverses it’s trend toward becoming the establishment,drops this presidential style of leadership and gets more popular?

    isn’t Niocola the most popular party Leader in the UK…..

    I can agree with you that a bit of tinkerring as you’ve suggested wouldn’t go wrong. then again that’s a personal opinion

    Did you hear the gent on call Kaye this morning, several times getting out Biased Broadcasting Corporation, accusing them / her of never doing their homework. she tried to put him down…. didnt work then at his beckonning agreed to investigate how much Marks and Sparks paid into their pension scheme last year

    Liked by 1 person

    • johnrobertson834 November 9, 2016 / 7:29 am

      Thanks CB
      We’ll need to agree to differ on things neither of us can be absolutely sure of.
      Now, do you agree the SNP leadership have another lesson to learn now – don’t get too comfortable, don’t seem closer to other foreign political elites than you are to your voters, don’t have any secrets, keep the personal income limited and open, don’t make a clint of yourselves?


  15. James Ross November 8, 2016 / 10:29 pm

    This needed to be said. As another long term SNP member I completely agree with you


  16. johnrobertson834 November 9, 2016 / 7:10 pm

    No mention of this in MSM. Why? Like Sturgeon and Salmond, they see Trump’s homophobia and misogyny as worse than Clinton’s war crimes?


  17. johnrobertson834 November 11, 2016 / 3:51 pm

    Acknowledgement received. Will post any reply. I see today that Nicola will stand up to Trump if he behaves badly again. Presumably she’ll be standing up to Chinese homophobes, misogynists, racists and ablists. There’s a lot of the latter, disability hate crime, in China, I hear.


    • Bryan Weir November 11, 2016 / 5:55 pm

      Don’t forget Russian homophobes and Saudi torturers!


  18. johnrobertson834 November 11, 2016 / 9:08 pm

    Yes, the Saudi torturers who gave Clinton £25 million and who executed a poet as she campaigned.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com 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