Anything But That
The SNP really really don’t want to have another independence referendum, but if somebody somehow FORCES them into one, they DEFINITELY don’t want to have it in circumstances where they’d be starting the campaign with a 16-point lead.
(We must conclude from all this, incidentally, that John Swinney LOVES the Tories, because he had no problem accepting an indyref from a right-wing party in 2012.)
If Scotland leaves the UK, who might be the Prime Minister of the remains of it is none of his business, and certainly shouldn’t be a dealbreaker in achieving independence.
If there’s anyone left in the SNP with a shred of integrity (and if there is they must be very deep undercover indeed), Swinney ought to be challenged for the leadership at next month’s conference and replaced with someone – the Lord alone knows who – who’s actually willing to pursue the party’s supposed primary goal, because Swinney has now dismissed every possible route to it out of hand.
(Even though he loves Reform winning seats the rest of the time.)
We know Andy Burnham won’t give him a referendum and we now know he won’t accept one from Nigel Farage, so it would appear that the whole idea is off the table until at least 2034 (by which point the SNP will have about 17 members left on their current trajectory).
That’s a lot of time for a lot of grifters to slurp up a lot of gravy, but the rest of us are in for a depressing decade.
Swinney is a true fascist, refuses in democracy and working with other democratically voted parties. A total arse wipe of a politician _ used loosely.
The fact that most smaller nations in Europe operate on consensus politics seems to have escaped Swinney’s vision, his view of “it’s ma ba'” is narrow minded, the phrase a broad church has been buried !
“Swinney has now dismissed every possible route to [Indy] out of hand”
Hmmm.
Is that bad? My interpretation of the consensus from the BTL comments on the last thread is that Swinney’s playing a blinder by doing so.
The consensus is that it’s a trap, and even if it’s not, far more importantly, it fails the ideological purity tests.
It’s surprising to see Wings BTL content to settle in for the status quo until 2034, just as it’s astonishing to see Wings BTL in lockstep with the tractors of the SNP, but there we have it.
Every day a school day.
“My interpretation of the consensus from the BTL comments on the last thread is that Swinney’s playing a blinder by doing so.”
SP needs to do a re-read.
“Divert, distract, divide” etc etc.
All day, every day.
Yer maw needs to tak yer smutty picture books awa – force ye tae learn tae read.
How about if you link to one BTL post, just one, under the previous thread that says Swinney is wrong, Rev Stu is right, and Indy needs to seize this chance for Indy Ref 2?
Here’s what Rev Stu wrote:
“After years of simply stalling on the pursuit of independence, the SNP now appears to be in full headlong retreat, running for the hills as fast as their legs will carry them with the Daily Record and George Foulkes and Reform and Uncle Tom Cobley and all running after them going “Come back! Don’t you WANT a referendum?””
So here’s your chance to forever become a legend in your own, pishy nappy. Point to just ONE BTL post agreeing with Rev Stu.
In your own time, once yer maw has done yer feed and change.
Nice try, schmuck.
Read btl again and come back to me.
No matter how much Honest John and the other Fabians stamp their feet, if Reform form the next UK government (quite likely, according to polls) then they’ll HAVE to work with them, whether they like it or not.
But we all know Honest John’s completely against independence and is just in it for the gravy. Oink oink.
If reform form the next english government, they wont have to work with any party in Scotland, you’ll be totally ignored as you are irrelevant in westminster and will be slapped into knowing your place, what will you do about it?
I never thought I might be recommending Mr Churchill to Mr Swinney, for I have no time for Mr Churchill, or indeed the Devil, but the former said there were circumstances in which he might at least give the latter a favourable mention in the House of Commons. I commend this pragmatism To Whomever It May Concern!
‘If Hitler invaded hell..’
I heard about a story yesterday, I believe by Sartre, about a trio of progressive, lefty politicos who were sentenced by the courts of a nazi, fascist regime to be hideously tortured unto death.
They were incarcerated in a comfortable cell, with good air and light, and en suite facilities, and nutritious meals were pushed under the door three times a day, as soiled dishes were collected.
After a few weeks, they realised with mounting horror that their exquisitely cruel torture consisted of them having to listen to each other tracing out ever diminishing ideological purity spirals for the remainder of their lives.
Sartre was pretty clear that: elites who become ‘an accomplice of colonialism’, those ‘who profited by colonial exploitation’, the ‘high minded liberal’, all are ‘the enemies of mankind’.
And, as we see with what passes for governance or justice in a colony society, this elite ‘shows itself in its true colours – it is nothing more than a gang’.
Colonialism, we are reminded ‘is only kept up by the agents of colonialism’, spread as they are like a cancer throughout every colonial institution.
Ultimately, however, ‘there is only one duty to be done, one end to achieve: to thrust out colonialism’, for only this means independence.
And, as we know, ‘the native only cures himself of colonial neurosis by thrusting out the colonizer’.
We might say Sartre learned a lot from Fanon and vice versa, so you are on the right track, Hatey.
Who’s this “we”, Alf?
You’re free to say what you like about Fanon, etc. but leave me out of it.
Whilst I might not be averse to “thrusting out” a few colonisers myself, I’d much prefer to thrust them in. Into the sea within wading distance of the French coast where so many of them come from.
At least it’s easy for me to identify the real colonisers. You interminably go on about your pretendy “colonisers” but you’d struggle to pick one out in an identity parade.
Satre, that’s a new one, where have you been hiding them?
This whole “enemies of mankind” thing sounds a bit Hutu power radio however Alf.
Reforms membership is now at 12,000 and rising. Who says Reform want to do a deal? The time the election comes around Farage may have a majority in Westminster and the SNP are left begging at the door. Let’s not pretend Scotland has any cards to play in the future negotiations of a majority Westminster government. Let’s not forget that it was the Scottish electorate that emptied the Nats from Westminster.
The dynamic of politics has changed. The SNP ideology is in par with the rest of the woke juggernaut. What have the SNP got to offer Reform? Threatening to tear up the union failed ten years ago leaving Scotland bitter and divided. Sturgeon left Scotland with it’s knickers round it’s ankles.
I’m minded of what that famous black quine wrote:
“There is a tide in the affairs of men,
Which, taken at the flood, leads on to fortune;
Omitted, all the voyage of their life
Is bound in shallows and in miseries”
“…On such a full sea are we now afloat,
And we must take the current when it serves,
Or lose our ventures.”
There is indeed a tide in the affairs of men, and boy did wee Nikla and honest John make sure they steer us up a creek before a low, low tide.
Giving The Swinster the benefit of the doubt, perhaps he realises there is no competent captain on board, and a wretched, lazy, incompetent crew, and if he sets sail for the bright future on a rising tide, he’ll sink the vessel.
Whilst I dream of Scotsmen in control of their own destiny, using their best of wits and best of character, I sure as Hill ain’t voting for independence while any of the current muppets in Holyrood remain at their stupid desks.
SNP policy has put a raft of weak candidates into office thinking somehow every walk of life should be represented even when they have no qualities in leadership or management.
Many of these representative would struggle to get a job paying average wages so they ain’t going to let go of £80,000 a year by becoming pro independent when push comes to shove.
“JOHN Swinney has said he will probe whether the Scottish Legal Aid Board was right to fund a case by an American woman over a row about her dog not being allowed into a cafe.”
link to thenational.scot
—————————————-
But he didn’t probe the legal aid for Murrell did he?
Ah, c’moan noo, x.
How could Murrell keep his loot (mind there’s still around 1 million quid unaccounted for) if he had to spaff it on lawyers?
I dare say his missus could have charged him mate’s rates, but then she was never much use at the lawyering.
Swinney’s a trougher. The latest outrage:
“A Freedom of Information release revealed a total taxpayer-funded bill of £98,442 for Swinney’s trip to the US for the 2026 World Cup.
Total Cost: £98,442 covering flights, accommodation, car hire, and other expenses for trips to Boston, Kentucky, and Miami.
More than £45,000 was spent on business-class airfare for Swinney and two senior aides. Swinney’s ticket alone cast £17,893!
The care hire exceeded £10,000 for Swinney’s visits alone (£7,878 in Boston and £2,217 in Kentucky).”
You wouldn’t dealing with Farage you’d be delivery on the mandate’s the SNP have been given since 2015 for a referendum.
I ask what wouldn’t anyone do to deliver Scottish Independence?
The SNP new slogan should be “We want Independence when it suite England” at leased we would know.
The only conclusion that can be drawn from this is that several SNP politicians/members of the Scottish Gov, including Swinney are agents of the UK Gov
If not that, then the UK Gov has significant dirt on a few of them to keep them in place, similar to the Murrells
Everything the SNP do is just enough to keep up appearances but nothing is ever pushed that would significantly increase support for Indy if people were fully aware of how much we get shafted e.g. Grangemouth, Elec Transmission Charges, refusing to go to regional electric pricing keeping Scotland’s energy prices high. Pointing out how energy rich Scotland is. We should be screaming from the roof tops every time Miliband states ‘with control of our own supplies (elec, oil, gas), we will have cheaper utility bills’ that Scotland has an abundance of these fuels, massive surpluses yet don’t have cheap energy prices
Having quit the SNP a few years ago, I’m beginning to see the error of everyone that had had enough and left the SNP. Over 60% gone in just a few years. I realise now that that’s exactly what they wanted, easier to control the party with the sheep that’s left
Perhaps a mass recruitment drive for ex members, to the point where we have enough right thinking people to make the changes required
We just can’t go on like this
When I heard Mary Lou McDonald the other day, what I heard her say was ‘Listen Burnham, that ‘off the table’ pish might wash with subservient Scots but don’t try that shit with us Irish’. We could do with someone of that ilk
The trouble we have with the membership SNP is everyone is either to frightened to speak out in the fare of being bullied or expelled from the party or their seeking to advance themselves while standing on the rest of us.
Rape and attempted rape statistics for Glasgow City centre have been removed from Police Scotland’s web page. According to Google there was 71 cases reported so far this year.
Remember when violence gainst women and girls was (rightly) a constant talking point. Now it is on the increase it is barely reported even hidden away-what changed ?
I don’t know. Ask professor Baird.
Now the Islamists are taking over the lion’s share we just have to respect and even celebrate their cultural and religious norms.
Besides, if we make too much of a fuss about them beating and murdering their own women and girls, they might start in on us.
Even more so than they have already.
The narrative is that sex crimes have sky rocketed in the last 3 years and the furriners are to be blame despite that fact that Glasgow has been accepting them since the late nineties.
Of course no police patrols around the city centre, the jails being full, crazy court decisions concerning sex crimes and allowing under 22’s free bus travel for the last 3 years has absolutely nothing to do with it?
I know the last point is controversial but anybody who has been up to Glasgow and been around the St Enochs centre, Argylle street area, full of young neds and bams knows what I mean.
Sure, Bilbo, they’ve been coming here since the late nineties.
Meaning that numbers and percentages have been what the mathematicians describe as monotonically increasing.
With the change from tiny minority, through minority, to large minority, with the goals of parity and then majority in sight, guess what! Confidence increases and the willingness to act in defiance of the host country’s norms does too.
The concept of “critical mass” applies, but none of this is rocket science.
Examples clutter the pages of every history book.
@ Hatey
Ye have some imagination on ye, Hatey ma boy.
It was at the point where the rising rape statistics in Glasgow were being blamed on free bus travel for the Under 22’s, that I realised that I had gone down a particularly bizarre internet rabbit-hole.
Surely a whole chunk of the UK (Scotland) no longer voting in Westminster elections in a way that doesn’t benefit Reform.
Also, Farrage is an English nationalist. Ignoring various deluded people, rUK still subsidizes Scotland from the Barnet Formula — and now England has just realised they have their own massive ned (Middlesbrough) and budget problems, an English nationalist will want that money so they can claim it for the English.
Not everyone in England wants to be part of the UK, either.
“..rUK still subsidizes Scotland from the Barnet Formula…”
LOL.
Chrisst A’michty. That’s a brave thing to state here…
Sitting back with my popcorn awaiting the incoming storm from the Siol nan Gaidheal activists, incensed at some Angleman “Yoon” spreading colonialist agitprop. Grrr, Bloody English. Grrr, Yoons. FWIW I politely disagree re: Barnett but be aware other responses may not be so… Polite.
If the UK in whatever shape or form it takes (with or without Scotland) is to arrest its Warp 9 descent into a dystopian Communist hellscape then a federal system is the way forward, decentralising from the M25 cesspit of incompetence and malevolence.
Speaking of which, up here we could also do with decentralisation from the dungheap at the bottom of Arthur’s Seat which, like its big brother in SW1, represents everything that stands against the ordinary men, women and children of this nation.
Aye you spooks based at Vauxhall Cross are caring benevolent well wishers to Scotland, ain-cha?
The truth upsets your Anglo-centric sensibilities I know, but hey, keep repeating the tired old unionist Pish, you’ve gotta earn your pay after all and it’s all you’ve got.
John Jappy;
“As a civil servant in London in the 1960s, and being part of the establishment, I always accepted the general view that an independent Scotland would not be able to survive on its own without financial help from the London Exchequer.
However, when in 1968 I was able to closely examine the UK’s “books” for myself in an official capacity, I was shocked to find that the position was exactly the opposite: that Scotland contributed far more to the UK economy than its other partners. And this, of course, was all before the oil boom.
I realised that the Treasury would wish to keep this a secret, as it might feed the then-fledgling nationalistic tendencies north of the border. I decided to keep an eye on the situation to see how long it would take for the true facts to emerge, which I felt would only be a short time. However, the machinery of Westminster, aided and abetted by the media, did an excellent job of keeping the myth about “subsidised” Scotland alive.
In fact it took another 30 years before the first chink in their armour appeared.
This came unexpectedly on 13 January 1997 when, in reply to a series of questions put by Alex Salmond (then an MP) to the Tory government of the day, Treasury minister William Waldegrave admitted that Scotland had paid a massive £27 billion more to the Exchequer than it had received since the Tories came to power in 1979, or around £5,400 for every Scot – a statistic which received barely any media coverage.”
James. To quote your favourite reply, “LOL”. I actually entirely agree with you, for once; perhaps WordPress’ formatting skewed your understanding.
Anyway, as expected, the Siol nan Gaidheal agent revealed itself with Yoon this, English that. I’m waiting for the 77th footsoldiers to show up soon with their opposite garbage soon. Plenty popcorn at the ready. Munch munch.
“Aye you spooks based at Vauxhall Cross”
Aye James, aw thay skivers aye lat ken thairsels as suin as thay appen their mou’s an thair colonial deceit fa’s oot.
Thay aye gie thairsels awa whaniver thay abuise Scots fowk’s cultur an langage(s) an quaisten oor abeelity tae rin oor ain naition.
Sartre telt us whit tae dae wi oor abuiser.
As always, Alf, I question your “abeelity” to make yourself understood even to a majority of your fellow Scots when you start speaking/writing like that.
Which is, of course, why you revert to the King’s English every time you have a serious point you are trying to get across.
I guess me pointing out some home truths will be logged as “abuise” but what the hell. Indy without the freedom to speak truth won’t be worth anything.
Are we talking Lowland Scots or Broad Scots here? Something we, er, “Teuchters” as you lowlander plastic Scots call us, up here in the Ghàidhealtachd don’t speak.
And let’s not get into the Gàidhlig and its variances, away from the overly genericised homogenised plastic variant peppered on the road signs in very non-Gàidhlig regions.
Ochone, Spartan!
Professor Baird has a special beef with the Gaels.
But he’ll tell you himself.
S117 @ 2.10
“Plastic”!!
Plastic?!
Steady on there laddie-buck!
I recount;
“The first blow that Lord Forbes struck
The blade ran in an ell,
The second blow Lord Forbes struck,
The Great MacDonald fell
Wi a dirrum ..
etc
Sic a crie came frae the Hieland men
When the saw their leader fa’,
They cairtit him and buried him
Alang by Reid Harlaw!
Wi a dirrum.. “
etc
The Battle of Harlaw 1411.
History is a wee bit skewed in this classic but you should get the gist Johnnie Heiland man..
Caw canny who ye call “plastic”..
if the scotch were left alone with excess revenue from copious oil, gas, wind and renewable energy they would not know what to do with it, wasting it on diazepam, buckfast or advanced infrastructure programs like tunnels, bridges or worse still, bringing pensions up to the level of european norms, i.e. double
– this is why we need the wise, firm but fair “pimp hand of the anglo”
remember that a pimp’s love is a special kind of love, when he hits you its for your own good cuz you bin gittin outta line
I can’t take a shit without an englishmen telling me when to push and my skidmarks are not that bad
I bless the english for their largesse and generosity
I’ve got a good job, the system works – why oh why can’t you jocks understand that; you are all anglo saxons anyway, putting on an accent pretending to be aboriginal pictish gaels and tuatha de danaan
C
That made me smile 🙂
Alert readers can stop at the copious oil and gas tripe.
Quit living in the past, Confused.
Sadly, no mention of colonising, hotpot-wielding M15 operatives with their fiendish slow cookers and sinister Le Crueset pans at their side, nor shadowy “77th” spooks ever lurking in dark corners, ready to pounce on the unwary. Standards are slipping.
C-
Re. Accusations of living in the past…
Alert readers can view this linked to site of the GB Grid, and you can see the makeup of how electrical energy is being produced to meet demand.
Just the 30% of grid power being produced by Combined Cycle Gas Turbines at the moment…
link to gridwatch.templar.co.uk
And also ponder where all the diesel comes from to power the tractors, harvesters, lorries that produce and deliver the food you eat that keeps you alive.
The fact that you are still living and reading this, and not deid and a part of history kind of proves that consumption of oil and gas is not living in the past.
Every day massive amounts of oil and gas are still being extracted from fields within Scotland’d geographic area.
Aye, economics play a part in where fossil fuel derived energy products are extracted, refined, and consumed, but much of that is “economics” that best suit the big corporate interests over that of the peoples in any given area they operate.
Hatey – why? There is indeed plenty of Oil & Gas (plus coal), largely squandered by decades of dreadful short-sighted policy; the rest is being deliberately left alone, purely for ideological reasons.
The industry has been destroyed by the Commies, EcoNazis and terminal incompetents within the M25, willingly aided by their chums at the foot of Arthur’s Seat. Aberdeen has been hollowed out these past few years as the money’s disappeared.
CC – joking aside, I’m convinced there’s a couple of 77th accounts trolling here. They’re pretty active on politics blogs/comments sections, particularly right-wing/pro-democracy ones. Guido Fawkes used to be absolutely hoaching with them (and probably still is – gave up on that Tory shilling mouthpiece a good while ago).
The repeat prescriptions must be coming through like clockwork, CC.
Shame. But that’s just me being selfish. Although the “episodes” are amusing on here, they can’t be much fun for the professionals and others working at Ground Zero.
Honestly Spartan, I’ve gotta say I think it’s all the preserve of the Bacofoil headgear wearers! 🙂
It does provide hilarious reading at times though. I could be wrong of course!
As Dan says, consumption of oil and gas is very much not living in the past.
And indeed the North Sea is not finished, as the ongoing shitshows over Rosebank and Jackdaw show.
But the big bonanzas are gone. The UK will never be self sufficient again. Scotland might be, but simple economics and standard extraction techniques tell us the fields would still be depleted at much the same rates, with any surpluses likely sold to generate much needed foreign exchange.
Hence my objection to “copious” in Confused’s rant.
But hey! I’m aware that oil and gas is yet another subject where faith holds sway over facts, so I’m not going to get excited over it.
People are welcome to believe that Aberdeen is being shuttered by greedy, grasping multinationals and evil, rapacious colonialists, just because.
And that the noggies are diversifying out of oil and gas because they passionately hate their own sovereign wealth fund.
Lunacy of course, but isn’t that most of what faith is all about?
Effijy,
The problem is that Scotland probably do not keep voting the SnP muppets in. We have no control on our elections,
A good example of that is when the prime minster BJ state there had been interference in the 1014 referendum,
Westminster knowing that the result had been interfered with in Scotland, if a Demoratic Country would have re run the referendum, but did not.
Being more contented the outcome results was to Westminsters liking.
The interfered results in Scotland was left alone by Westminster parliament and taken as satisfactory gospel.
When Scotland actually is in Control of its elections, there is a excellent chance there would be no sitting SNP in the Westminster – devolved governance over Scotland,
And we may eventually even have a Scottish parliament. Not a pretendy one.
That’s a new one, James.
So if we Scots don’t vote the SNP into power, who do we vote for?
And what’s the story with all the Scots who believe they’ve been in the polling booth, putting their X against the SNP candidate?
I’m on the edge of my seat here!
Hatey
Why respond to an obvious nutter? Nothing you say will ever change it’s deranged mind.
Aye Hatey all that could be said has been said. The Leftys are self combusting at an incredible rate. General election next year.
Confused,
A different kind of silver, the elites are very picky you know,
One from Scotland purses and one from Englands purse strings.
Confused.
The finances have to be converted from Scotlands finances to Westminsters bank of England finances before the snobby elite will accept it as a English payroll.
The English establishment today celebrates an artefact depicting their conquest by a foreign «power», Normandy.
Eccentricity is a national trait but isnt that overworking the characteristic?
The wily normans were quick to realise the potential of their acquisition. The Domesday book inventory of land, property etc, another thing England celebrates.
.
It is odd, TURABDIN.
Somebody on here is forever claiming that every English defeat gets airbrushed out of history.
You read some strange stuff on here but this comment is one of the oddest. You think England should still be so resentful of an invasion of one thousand years ago that it should churlishly refuse to put an incredible, unique tapestry from the time (made originally in England btw) that depicts the invasion on show?
And who are the English anyway? I know you are fond of equating them solely with Anglo-Saxons, but I have news for you, the Normans combined with them and others here prior to the Anglo-Saxons and after the Normans, to create what the modern English are, a people of mixed heritage (as very many ‘peoples’ are).
It is true that the Normans did some major things that the country arguably still suffers from (and many that no doubt benefitted the place) but the idea that we should boycott a thousand year old artwork because of that is risible. It is the artwork that is being celebrated, not an invasion.
What next, somehow try and wheedle out all the Normans and ‘send them back’?
Careful, you’re applying logic to the illogical.
The Siol nan Gaidheal activists will be along shortly to give you what for. Grrr, English. Grrr, Colonisers. If you listen carefully you can hear the knuckles scraping along the ground and the grunting as they approach.
I’ve met a few Normans in my time and every one was a busturt so yes, send them back.
Daves too. And Wilmas.
But Colins. Don’t get me started on Colin’s. Sending them back is too good for them cants.
TURABDIN how dare you insult a magnificent depiction of history, next you will be saying that it is nothing but ANCIENT GUFF, the Bayeux tapestry illustrates great engerlish historical imperialism and how to defeat it, I think the king should ensure it doesn’t leave Engerland
I see the famous Bayeux tapestry is out on loan and will be viewed today by T’ King of Oop Norf Aunty Burnham, The King of Windsor C3 and Vive L’Emperor!! Macron.
Aunty Burnham is claiming one point for a score draw oop Norf, C3 ruminated at length on the advisability of wearing eye protection whenever in the south east of Engerlund and Macron with Gallic charm chided them both for not speaking in the Emperor’s French claiming 3 points for a win/ thrashing.
King Hakon of Norway, in a diplomatic slur, was not even invited so is allegedly preparing to invade again to show “de Enngloosh arselinges vot for”..
Thanks YL. Must admit, I giggled at that.
That’s another diplomatic slur.
It’s King Haakon VIII.
HMcH
Maybe explains why he didn’t receive his invitation, doesn’t spell his name right..
Double a’s, I ask you!
🙂
PS
At the Dan Sahf reception following the viewing they were treated to Dan Sahf cuisine; pie mash and jellied eels.
The chef (clearly of Reform voting orientation) managed to get some half dissolved eel eyes especially prominently presented on the Emperor Macrons plate, who on seeing this staring up at him recoiled uttering “Mon Dieu! Zut Alors!! C’est Le Cthulhu!!!”
He had a bag of Frog Leg scratchings with him so didn’t go hungry, allegedly..
🙂
Now that’s funny!
Although Mrs Spartan (from Dahn Sahf) cannot stand jellied eels, pie and mash acceptable but a full roast dinner preferable 🙂
East End Essex here. 🙂
Never done jellied eels, pie and mash is OK but wouldn’t seek it out. Always loved the ol’ seafood though – oysters, whelks, cockles, mussels, clams, scallops. Oh, and most especially Scottish langoustines and salmon. 🙂
Back in the day, oysters and the like were considered peasant food; cheap as chips yet so nutritious and good for you. Used to have a guy turning up regularly at the pub to sell all manner of seafood.
I blame the French, though. My first (and only) trip abroad with our school was to Boulogne as a day trip when about 14 – everyone else was buying “stumpies” small bottles of French lager, but I went to a cafe and tried super garlicky, super creamy moules mariniere and frites and crusty bread to mop up, all washed down with a glass of dry white French table wine. I was hooked for life. 🙂
@ CC
Sod eating quite so many molluscs that will be filtering and capturing so much of the effluent and other chemical pollutants humans have and continue to put into their ecosystems.
And sod chomping “Scottish” farmed salmon too with its cheap-ass production methods. I prefer to eat younger fish that live higher up in the sea which are less likely to contain build up of nasties compared to older bottom feeders like cod.
Wild salmon fishing is dying on its arse too in Scotland to the point few beats are financially viable with folk not prepared to spend their dosh to practice casting all day with barely a fish nibbling their lure.
The drop in numbers of fish over the decades is astounding. Used to see dozens of fish jumping during spawning, and dozens of kelts on their last legs at side of river or dead, but now lucky to see a single fish jump and haven’t seen a single kelt at side of river for several years, and I spend a fair bit of time at the river.
Not a great situation for sustaining rural jobs when punters can fly abroad to fish places they can catch decent fish.
But years of pumping untreated effluent into our once pristine and productive rivers was always going to degrade them and impact the ecosystem.
Slow handclap for the likes of SEPA and the poundshop Scottish Parliament which have done little to improve matters whilst their well remunerated taxpayer funded staff sook hard on the gravy whilst not trying very hard to enforce existing, or develop and implement ecosystem improving policy.
CC/ Dan
Haven’t been fishing Wolf Clyde this year as Mrs YL has been poorly (but improving).
I really miss the wild caught brown trout, absolutely beauties!
@Dan
I can see your point to a degree. I was always told not to eat bivalves like oysters, clams and mussels whenever there’s an R in the month, as due to stuff like this and the “red tide”. Like most old wives’ tales there’s probably some truth in it, but hardly a complete solution? All I can say, I honestly enjoy this food and makes me feel great (especially oysters and good champagne – yes I know I’m a total ponce), and as for spaghetti vongole…. stuff of dreams for me!
Completely agree with you (and very saddened by) what you say about the rivers and SEPA. We really do seem so “good” at shitting on our own doorstep in the UK, while other countries jealously guard and conserve their habitats? Too many useless public sector bureaucrats, tea-drinkers – not helped by a burgeoning population of incomers.
@YL sorry to hear about the missus. 🙁
*Sorry – meant to say only eat oysters, mussels etc. when then *IS* an R in the month (i.e. autumn, winter and early spring only)
Ah, that takes me back about 25 years to that occasion on which I decided to sample some crab. I found the meat to be quite pleasant and that being so, I went ahead and cleared my plate.
Oh man, was I ever not prepared for what was to come only a quarter of an hour later…
Let’s just say that my stomach gave a very firm thumbs-down to crab 🙁
Mussels thrive in polluted, shitty water, rapidly converting the effluent into succulent, delicious seafood.
The trick, if you wish to eat them, is to farm them on portable frames, moving them to a clean location for the final week or so before harvesting.
Following this strategy, any toxins in the mussels will have been washed away.
MH 8:47
Cleared your plate, eh?
Thicko twat numpty. Ye’re nae meant tae eat the shell 🙂
Feck, that takes me back…
I remember doing that with a bag of pistachio nuts when I was either 17 or 18, this obviously being for a stupid alcohol-induced bet. I received £10, some brutal indigestion and some fearsome jobbies but I survived 🙂
LOL @ “fearsome jobbies” 😀
Yup, unfortunately raw seafood is the most perishable substance known to man, if shellfish are not kept live & raw fish perfectly fresh and meticulously refrigerated, it sure can spell BAD trouble “both ends” as it were.
Wife and I went to the Maldives a couple of years ago; our bedroom had an open plan bog and bathtub (just WHO thinks that’s a good idea, readers?), and yes, the “curried crab” lead to quite the most humiliating experience of my life. The poor, poor missus, man alive. A “memorable” holiday for all the wrong reasons.
The Great Tapestry of Scotland is now in Galashiels in its own building.
It is about twice the size of the Bayeux Tapestry and depicts much of the history of Scotland.
The design of each of the 160 panels was done by Andrew Crummy and the stitching of the tapestry by many volunteers. Over 50,000 hours of stitching were done to make the tapestry, one of the largest community artr projects in the UK.
link to greattapestryofscotland.com
S
Good stuff, need to pop over and see it.
Back in 2024 there was a man who secured the required signatures to lodge nomination papers to contest the coronation of John Swinney as leader of the SNP.
He was persuaded not to continue with reportedly cast iron guarantees that the party under Swinney would move to secure independence.
Thereafter with the coronation of John Swinney the NEC moved to change the rules to hugely increase the number if signatures required across all the branches to make in near nigh on impossible to secure the required signatures within the timescale to secure a nomination save for those in the gang.
link to archive.ph
Yes, Billie. And conference went along with the change of rules – it used to need 100 signatures with signatories from 20 branches, but now it is [1.5%?] of the entire membership.
Graham McCormick was the one who stepped back from the challenge following a phone call from Swinney. What a mistake that was.
When they skipped the lite fandango, they didnt know the cartweels would make them fall so hard!
the time to reap is upon them, and it may not be kind!
Just read that twat from scot goes pop ( what kind of a frucking name is that anyway) saying the SNP is the only game in town! So hes basically advocating to stick with a party, he knows, that is opposed to any progress on independence strategy!
More of the same wont get independence twat!
Stick with it Stu!
ANYTHING BUT WHAT & WHY.
link to theguardian.com
No surprise there then. Unshocked am I that the omniclusterfuckpermashambles don’t have a kcufing clue (or “claim” not to) what’s going on whilst this Devilish technology that represents a very real threat to civilisation on multiple levels is blithely rolled out by Western TechBro oligarchs.
“Devilish technology that represents a very real threat to civilisation on multiple levels is blithely rolled out by Western TechBro oligarchs.”
“multiple levels” Oh do tell.
“blithely rolled out” hmmm?
“Devilish technology” This a got a 1979 Iranian revolution sort of feel to it.
“represents a very real threat” You will scare yourself with that one!
“TechBro oligarchs” OK I’am beginning to see where you are coming from now.
I thought one of the purposes of AI data centres is to eventually route everything you try to do online through them.
Then everything you try to do online can be chargeable.
They’re spending trillions on the things. Is there anybody still believing they intend to let us use and interrogate them for free?
The technology is close to the point where its use will be unavoidable for just about everything we do. That’s the perfect time, when we have no alternatives left, to stop it being free.
Guarantees from John Swinney, either in public or in private are as good a bit of used toilet paper.
A bidet to clean the bums is what is needed.
Guarantees from John Swinney, either in public or in private are as good a bit of used toilet paper.
A bidet to clean the bums is what is needed.
I think it’s an enema that’s sorely needed to flush oot all the keech, followed by an industrial-level disinfectant.
You’ve had the opportunity to, but missed the moment
In 1916, the Irish Parliamentary Party lost over 70 Westminster seats, leaving them with 6, and the perceived collapse opened the door for the more radical Sinn Fèin. The IPP never recovered, and Ireland was on course for a somewhat bumpy ride to Independence.
In 2024, the SNP, from a high point of 56 out of 59 seats, lost 39 seats, leaving them with 9. Sadly, there was no popular shift towards ALBA, the more radical party poised to take over strategic leadership when the gradualist strategy was exposed as impotent. 56 to 9 isn’t enough of a disaster to warrant the Domestos approach apparently.
The Independence movement is currently, (for the moment), stagnant and moribund behind talentless and delusional “leadership” which has neither the drive, intention, nor ability to resurrect an independent Scotland, and few, bar the exception of Donald Trump, have shown such unfathomable capacity to demean and alienate potential allies.
The sad conclusion confronting modern Independentists, real ones anyway, is that when 56 out of 59 MP’s means absolutely nothing, the lesser win of 9 out of 59 MP’s means pretty much the same, – SFA. The twisted irony being that those most wilfully blind to the impotence and futility of Scots in Westminster or Holyrood, tend to be the most vocal condemning and being dismissive of Scotland’s constitutional rights and the Claim of Right. Funny that eh?
Sadly, it seems Scotland isn’t ready to be radical, for the most part remains constitutionally illiterate, and reluctant to do what needs to be done. The reason why is far more perplexing than the political futures of those fickle, carpetbagging wankers in the SNP.
Ooop, sorry, typo. I didn’t mean to call them fickle carpetbagging wankers. Damned autocorrect! I obviously meant to say three cheers for the SNP and unity! Be more unity! Your country needs unity! Honest John is lovely. Drink more Koolaid! God save the queen. Both votes for John-John!
….Yeah. Now now somebody pass me the sick bucket.
Nutzlose Essen or Useless Eaters was a term in the 30s to describe certain classes of persons.
But using the term today without the sinister shadow of 1930s Germany the term could well be reinvented to describe our current crop of SNP troughers – and or others in other parties exactly of the same ilk.
But that is where we are sadly. Saddled with those who eat trough plenty but deliver nothing.
This says it all.
link to spectator.com
P
Couldn’t read it all as I don’t and won’t subscribe to the Tories favourite comic.
And let’s be honest; Daisley is a tw8t writing what Spectator readers want to read anyway.
Another crank of the wheel..
A link to a less partisan publication giving the current devolved “administration” a kicking would have been better received, otherwise it’s taken as seriously as the National Rag..
It doesn’t say much for me except ‘give us a pound’.
ask mummy to show you how to click on the “x”
I
Assuming that is that you are actually on X..
Who do we vote for in Scotland,?
It appears does not matter much anymore, as we don’t get to count the votes nor decide if interference in our election should be classed as valid results,
That decision and investigation is and was decided by Westminster. Whom said it was the ruskies.
When acknowledged it was interfered with by reports from the Prime minster BJ at the time, does not result in corrections for Scotlands voters,
Nor a non interfered re run referendum, in fact it is being refused like it is a plague from Westminster,
So going to the polling stations in Scotland is for Westminster to decide the results, which explains our rather strange results in our elections today,
when most Scots cannot stand the SNP for years, the results always come out in favour of the SNP staying in Control over with drawing themselves as the reason for the independence party in the pretendy parliament.
In years to come no doubt Scots will be informed that our elections were interfered with yet again, when the ” to close for comfort risks ” rears its head again in Westminster. Another investigation will have done, but not re run.
It is an interesting scenario that Scots keep getting what did not vote for, but being told they did vote for it,
Scotland needs to run its own elections each result being counted locally on site, by Locals, without interference,
Because if Westminster knows there is interference, at the time do an goes forward with investigations, finds it to be true,
Then tells the world SO What!
The elections in Scotland at the polling Stations run by Westminster are not worth it, if it is allowed to remain a tampered with election result.
Perhaps we should keep re running it like the EU and Westminster do with Brexit until the results are the ones we require, or ignore the results like Westminster and the EU are doing. As you do not get what you voted for in Britain unless it is a manipulated result.
Good Lord, James Che, where to start? Perhaps a simple, demonstrable piece of rubbish.
“Perhaps we should keep re running it like the EU and Westminster do with Brexit until the results are the ones we require, or ignore the results like Westminster and the EU are doing. As you do not get what you voted for in Britain unless it is a manipulated result.”.
The Brexit result was the opposite of what the then Prime Minister, David Cameron, wanted and campaigned for. He did not rerun it. He did not manipulate the result. He did not ignore it. He accepted the democratic decision of the UK referendum. He resigned his job primarily because of it. The result was then put into effect.
Nonsense comments like yours give Independence supporters a bad name. Please give it a rest.
Indeed, Call Me Dave campaigned for Remain (which was the official Government policy of the time) and promptly scarpered when the result went the other way.
As an important note however, ever since that vote the M25 omniclusterfuckpermashambles has persistently strained every sinew to block Brexit as far as possible, with current efforts to completely renege on Brexit. They didn’t want it, it couldn’t be seen to be a success or their beloved EU empire they are in hock to would collapse as other countries would see the light and vote with their feet.
Would be interesting to note if the same would also happen with Scottish independence, I’m willing to bet there would be plenty who’d happily collaborate to ensure failure.
Please, stay calm…..
But wasn’t it funny how Fish face was never off the telly during the Brexit campaign, thoug? Was it during that time that he got chased out of Edinburgh?
Course, Brexit was rejected by 63%+ in every Scottish region. Just saying, like.
And it’ll be EFTA for us, thanks all the same.
Please stay calm.
Wasn’t it funny how Fish Face was never off the telly during the Brexit campaign, though? Was that the time he got chased out of Edinburgh?
Course, every region of Scotland rejected Brexit by 63%+. Just saying, like.
And it’ll be EFTA for us, thanks all the same.
EFTA, eh?
Your certainty suggests you see yourself as a kingpin of the negotiating team, flown out (business class, natch) to “fight Scotland’s corner”, all expenses paid, in Brussels.
I really can’t wait to see you deploy your legendary debating skills in front of the world.
Long as they’ve got Ace on ice, SP, I’ll be happy.
Now, now WWW. Use its proper name.
8 Ace.
When you know your elections have been interfered with and are told they were openly.
Then those results are not valid.
However,
It is something Scotlands voters should be aware of, that we do not get what we vote for here in Scotland,
We have to abide by the interfered with elections results that Westminster parliament investigations discovered.
Not Scotlands voters choice, but Westminsters, as it will always be.
Scotland as the only other Country in the treaty of union if ot a hoax that created the Great Britain parliament.
Then Scotland has equality to run its own Countries elections,
Otherwise the Great Britain parliament creation is a falsehood as the parliament for England and Wales transferred into the Great Britain parliament actively vote for England and Wales and still pass laws for England and Wales today,
Scotland is a Country in the treaty, not a region,
A Country has the right to run its own elections, have its own media,
It is this sort of conspiracy led guff that turns folk away from independence.
The only way to get another referendum is to start getting mainstream support, which isn’t there at the moment, and demand another one which a majority then vote for.
If enough folk vote yes it will happen, even “interference” if it exists, has its limits.
I voted yes last time but don’t want another vote at the moment, it would be a pointless exercise because there is not enough public support for independence at the moment, and the vote was very divisive.
Instead of all the guff about “colonisation” “we was robbed” “a big boy did it and ran away” and other various fantasies, why don’t hardcore independence supporters do what the SNP did and start a party and try and convince folk to vote for them, after all it worked eventually. If as some think there is support then it should not be that hard, although I think the biggest issue maybe finding a suitable charismatic and non lunatic fringe leader.
Agreed 100%
Considering how much worse things are in the UK and Scotland than they were the last time, this time it should be easier to garner support and build a new consensus party.
After all, it’s the deteriorating situations in other European countries that’s supposedly behind the rise of the popular new movements and parties in them.
So why would Scotland be any different?
Well, yes. This is the problem.
There needs to be a cogent, logical and factual argument as to the benefits and drawbacks of independence, presented to the public free of bias and full of all the facts, good and bad.
Unfortunately, there are too many who treat it like a religion or a football team and can’t think rationally or critically, unwilling to see the other side’s points or accept any disagreement or alternate views.
Hysterical fringe stuff like “colonisation”, “Yoons” or “they English cants, grrr” just ruins any argument, as does the other side with their “ye Cannae dae that” illogic.
“There needs to be a cogent, logical and factual argument as to the benefits and drawbacks of independence, presented to the public free of bias and full of all the facts, good and bad.”
Given our ongoing colonial status should that not be ‘dependence’ instead of ‘independence’? What are the benefits and drawbacks of Scotland being or remaining a ‘dependency’ of England-as-UK?
link to salvo.scot
Wibble. Hysterical fringe, Exhibit A.
You speak of “colonialism” yet complain of “Scotland being dragged out of the EU against its will”. The EU literally *is* a beacon of colonialism and represents everything you claim to be against.
No wonder few of us, including the owner of this blog, take you seriously.
Alf;
“…they didn’t answer…”
Not answering is Alf’s MO.
But I can easily list one benefit of sticking with the status quo.
We’ll be treated to “all you can read” pearls of wisdom from Fanon, Cesaire, Memmi and the rest of the gang.
This whole “Scotland is a colony” theory is only accepted by a tiny minority of largely irrelevant fringe voices. I don’t think many Scot’s see themselves as downtrodden natives or Scotland as a dystopian occupied territory. It’s a very negative viewpoint to have of your own country.
Ultimately – those proposing independence are those proposing to change the status quo, so the burden is on them to set out how it would work and what the benefits would be. That’s after all what the Wee Blue Book aimed to do.
Any news from the UN BTW? You can hardly claim that the UN (at least as an organisation) is unaware of your campaign by now, given the various submissions that have been made.
“The EU literally *is* a beacon of colonialism and represents everything you claim to be against.”
What nonsense is this I see laid out before me?
The EU is not ‘literally’ a beacon, and it is a beacon that is not a beacon that is also not colonialist in nature… it is a bad idea, though. It is a bad idea for a number of reasons, but one good reason for the EU not existing stands above all others. But I’ll let folk work that reason out for thersels.
Under no circumstances should an independent Scotland give the slightest consideration to joining that deformed monster of entangled half-nations.
Being screwed by England is bad enough… being screwed by the EU looking for sloppy seconds is not a desirable outcome for Scotland after independence.
I mean the United States is a sort of EU… and look at the disaster for the world that’s turned out to be.
All unions are evil and must be cast out of Eden.
Aww, Adrian, back again?
Here’s today’s crossword clue, just for you;
A country that has no controls over its own resources or borders, and which has to ask permission from the country next door to have a vote on its own future.
6 letters.
C_L_NY.
So every region of every country everywhere in the world is a colony is it James? What about those poor exploited people in the colony of London? Spare a thought ey.
“I don’t think many Scot’s see themselves as downtrodden natives or Scotland as a dystopian occupied territory.”
Scots, and yersel of course, clearly need to read up on their actual history of what occurred, after they were ‘bought and sold’ (i.e. enslaved) in 1707, and which confirms that:
“The Garrison State the English Colonial State Built in Scotland with the Highest Density Occupation & Pacification Apparatus in the English Empire with 650 army posts.”
link to decolonise.scot
So it’s the English empire now, Alf?
What you doing here? Channeling your inner Trump? He likes to rename stuff too.
It was always England’s empire.
You never hear of Britain’s “Green and Pleasant Land” or “There’ll Always Be a Britain” or “The Bastard King of Britain” or Gilbert and Sullivan’s “He Remains a Britishman” or Billy Braggs “A New Britain” do you?
No… it’s always like England this and England that and England’s brilliant and England’s great and England’s the best and England invented everything (when it says in the history books that England invented something it really means it stole someone else’s idea, innit).
It was only called the British Empire so the English could name the Scots, Irish and Welsh – three of the first peoples England press ganged – *Impressment, to give the legally sanctioned practice its proper name – into serving as its accomplices in helping England subjugate other peoples and steal their stuff tae.
It’s common practice among the criminal fraternity to blame their crimes on their associates when they get nicked by the rozzers.
* Impressment, colloquially “the press” or the “press gang”, is a type of conscription of people into a military force, especially a naval force, via intimidation and physical coercion, conducted by an organized group (hence “gang”). Much as the Scots, Irish and Welsh have been press ganged into a union they don’t want to be in called the United Kingdom nowadays.
Personally, I don’t really mind the English Empire being called the British Empire because either way… it’s over and done with.
I have this theory, Northy, that you spout shite in inverse proportion to the likelihood of Scotland becoming independent.
On those days when you think you may yet live to see Indy, you have the good sense to keep your more farcical claims to yourself.
But on days of black despair, like today seems to be, you give vent to your impotent rage with a post like that one above.
You’ll be chuntering in faux Scots next. Why not drown your sorrows in a dram of Scotland’s finest, watered to perfection with your own tears?
Yeah again I think most people can get over the events of 300+ years ago.
Within some people’s lifetimes, the USA literally dropped two nuclear bombs on Japan, yet the two nations and peoples can be friends now.
“… yet the two nations and peoples can be friends now.”
Setting aside this logic falling victim to the fallacy of False Equivalence and therefore simply wrong, I would think that the Scots – despite being treated very badly by England for centuries – being a magnanimous, forgiving and friendly people will eventually find it in their hearts to forgive their errant neighbour… after the completion of a suitable “Truth and Reconciliation” process, perhaps.
Scotland and England might even live side by side in perpetual harmony as completely separate peoples firmly belonging to two completely separate countries – and just like the distinct peoples and cultures of Japan and America are now great pals, so might the distinct peoples of Scotland and England someday be too.
Of course, I would think that Scotland will insist on a robust border separating the two friendly countries… just to be safe – I don’t think there’s ever been a recorded case in history where a leopard has changed its spots.
We get it Northcode, you hate the English.
“…you hate the English.”
They hated me first!
But, seriously, I don’t hate the English… I don’t hate anyone.
I don’t hate mainly for selfish personal health reasons.
Studies show that hating people can have several negative effects on mental health and overall well-being.
It can lead to low self-esteem, self-confidence, shame, fear, guilt, and hopelessness.
These feelings can complicate one’s life and lead to depression, anxiety, and other disorders.
Thankfully, I suffer none of those conditions… being up ma ain arse at the mere thought o’ masel.
So, no, I don’t hate the English… I do find their various accents a bit loud and annoying when in echoey public spaces, though, or in Tesco when doing the weekly shop. But that doesn’t mean I hate them. I mean a few Scottish accents are quite annoying, too. That up itself Edinburgh twang gets right on ma tits, for example – and let’s not even get started on thon Aberdonian, fit.
Having said that I don’t personally hate the English, it’s a fact that many peoples around the world do.
It’s so common, in fact, that the term “Anglophobia” has been coined to describe the phenomenon.
While Anglophobia is common in parts of the world it certainly isn’t universal.
Though, why Anglophobia is so prevalent in certain parts of the world we can only speculate.
I asked Google:
“how many countries or peoples can be described by specific English words by those who hate them”
Answer:
“English contains formal dictionary-defined terms for at least 30 to 40 major countries or distinct cultural groups that describe a specific hatred, fear or aversion towards them”
It then went on to list some of them. If you’re interested, put the effort in yourself.
TBH, I didn’t see a specific anti-Scottish word, so perhaps the institutionalised hatred is indeed all one way.
Then again, perhaps the AI answered accurately within its own parameters, listing major countries and distinct cultural groups only.
Hey everybodee…
England gets the revenues.
Scotland gets the nukes!
Yaaaaaay! Rejoice!
You’ll be fine, Wee Wally.
Scotland still gets the top shelf mags.
@Aidan;
“Ultimately – those proposing independence are those proposing to change the status quo.”
And so they absolutely should! The status quo is fundamentally fraudulent, and has been since the Treaty was signed — even before it was ratified by the two parliaments. Just because most Scots are unaware of their true constitutional history doesn’t mean such an outrageous constitutional crime should get a free pass.
No person or institution that took part in negotiating, agreeing, signing, or ratifying the 1707 Treaty of Union ever held or owned the lawful authority to dispossess the sovereign Scots of their sovereignty, their constitution, or their territory.
This assertion is exceptionally simple, is easily shown to be factually accurate, and is thus irrefutable. It depends solely on the authenticity of the Scots’ legally-titled ownership of their kingdom’s sovereignty — and that ownership cannot sensibly be disputed.
It cleanly eviscerates the authenticity of the Treaty, of its two Acts of Union, of the Union itself, and all of its 319 years of governance.
It is the One Argument to rule them all.
A status quo built on an unlawful foundation can never justify its continued existence — it is an ongoing and unchallenged wrong, and patently abusive to Scotland, and only to Scotland.
Ex injuria jus non oritur clearly applies.
If it’s irrefutable Xaracen – then why not argue it in court where these matters are properly determined?
@Aidan;
The question of lawful authority in 1707 is not a matter for judicial discretion. It is a matter of constitutional competence. No court can retroactively grant powers that the negotiators and parliaments never possessed.
It was the lack of powers that voided the Treaty, and it cannot become valid after the fact because a court is asked to bless it.
“No person or institution that took part in negotiating, agreeing, signing, or ratifying the 1707 Treaty of Union ever held or owned the lawful authority to dispossess the sovereign Scots of their sovereignty, their constitution, or their territory”
I see. So when a Sovereign Scot negotiates, agrees, signs, or ratifies something impinging on sovereignty, constitution or territory, they instantaneously lose their sovereignty.
I’m reminded of Pratchett’s speculations on monarchy and how the crown passes to the heir on the death of the incumbent. Pratchett mused on whether the transfer exceeded the speed of light.
So quickly, perhaps, does Scottish Sovereignty vanish when one Sovereign Scot does something of which another Sovereign Scot disapproves. Or maybe vice versa.
Tell us true. When Scotland was in the EU, and subject to the rules, laws, regulations and restrictions passed down from Brussels, were all the formerly Sovereign Scots who were in favour of this arrangement automatically stripped of their Sovereignty?
In fact, for those memorable years, were the only true Sovereign Scots in Scotland those who opposed EU membership and voted to get out of the damned place?
By your definition, the answer is, of course, YES.
And again by your definition, having clarified that for 47 years, during which Scotland was in the EU, all Scots supporting this situation were no longer Sovereign, perhaps we should re-evaluate all the decisions usurped by un-entitled, non-Sovereign Scots over that period.
Nonsensical, of course, but hey! You started it!
So if you reject the authority of the courts, are you proposing for your ideas to lead to a violent revolution?
@Aidan;
Rejecting the idea that courts can validate an act that was void ab initio is not rejecting the authority of the courts, and it is certainly b>not proposing violence. It’s simply recognising the limits of judicial competence.
Courts interpret law; they can’t manufacture powers that never existed, nor can they retroactively legitimise a constitutional act that was unlawful from the outset — Void Ab Initio.
Pointing out that the Union was created without lawful authority is not itself a call for revolution — it is a statement of constitutional fact.
Of course that is a wholesale rejection of the rule of law in society. What you appear to be proposing here is that the courts have no ability to determine whether the Acts of Union legislation is law in the UK, with all of the profound consequences that flow from that.
That is;
a) clearly a issue that has to be addressed;
b) an issue that can only be addressed by the courts.
So in your weird world, we have an issue right at the core of our constitutional structure that is apparently unresolvable. We know, of course, the real reason why you are contorting yourself into these intellectual knots is because the courts have;
– considered these issues in great depth many times; and
– wholely and completely rejected your theory in a way that is unambiguous.
@Aidan;
Recognising that courts cannot validate an act that was void ab initio is not a rejection of the rule of law. It is an acknowledgement of the limits of judicial authority. Courts interpret and apply law; they do not create sovereignty, they do not grant powers retroactively, and they cannot cure an ultra vires constitutional act after the fact.
The question of lawful authority in 1707 is not a judicial question. It is a question of constitutional competence at the moment of the Treaty. If the negotiators and parliaments lacked the authority to alienate Scottish sovereignty, no court centuries later can manufacture that authority or declare the act valid.
Courts have never ruled on the competence of Scotland’s pre-Union constitutional authorities. They have only interpreted the consequences of the Union as a political fact. That is not the same thing as determining whether the Union was lawfully created.
Pointing out that courts cannot cure a void act is not rejecting the rule of law — it is applying it.
“If the negotiators and parliaments lacked the authority to alienate Scottish sovereignty”
Wow! Just look at all the heavy lifting that “If” is doing there.
Perhaps the Scottish negotiators and parliament were 100% Sovereign Scots. It’s really difficult to see how they couldn’t have been.
But let’s debate by your rules for the moment.
I notice nobody is gonna deal with the point I raised the other day.
If the Sovereign Scottish negotiators who agreed the Treaty Of Union in 1707 immediately annulled their Scottish Sovereignty by doing so, how is that different to the Sovereign Scottish voters who agreed for Scotland to join the EU, and the Sovereign Scottish voters who voted against Brexit?
It’s an immensely relevant question, hence I don’t expect any answer will be forthcoming.
Nobody is asking the courts to “create sovereignties” because that phrase has no meaning in the English language.
However, what the courts can do, and are the only body that can do, is to determine questions of law such as the applicability and effectiveness of legislation. The consequences of your argument would necessarily be that the Acts of Union 1707 are not effective as legislation in Scotland (or elsewhere in the U.K.). That is a question of constitutional law which the courts have to determine.
If you want to pose a separate ethical question – then sure, we can debate whether morally the commissioners had the right to commit Scotland to the treaty of union and the merger with England, on those terms. However, even if we concluded that entering into the union was morally wrong, that would not mean the Acts of Union were not legally effective. You cannot have it both ways – by making a legal argument and then claiming the courts have no right to determine it. Those two things are contradictory.
Just to re-centre the discussion for anyone following the thread, the point I originally made — and from which all of this flows — was simply this:
“No person or institution that took part in negotiating, agreeing, signing, or ratifying the 1707 Treaty of Union ever held or owned the lawful authority to dispossess the sovereign Scots of their sovereignty, their constitution, or their territory.”
Everything since has been about that single question of constitutional competence in 1707.
The 1707 Treaty of Union, lacking lawful authority at its creation, has never possessed constitutional legitimacy. That remains the case today, regardless of the political history that followed.
Sure, Xaracen, most of us understand how sunk costs work, and how the years of endless posts and uncounted words you’ve devoted to your theory mean you can never give it up now.
Just as most of us understand that after 300+ years of reality and events, none of your claims of constitutional illegality and denied sovereignty amount to so much as a hill of beans.
Shame. Maybe you could have devoted your energies to something useful. I guess you still could, but then the sunk costs rear their ugly head again.
So you won’t.
Yes, absolutely Hatey.
Put more simply: sometimes in life, you have to wake up to the fact that you’ve been pissing in the wind. Them’s the breaks.
At the time of the treaty of union in 1707, England as a Country not have a written Constitution,
At the time of the treaty of union in 1707 Scotland as a Country did have a written Constitution,
The Country of England that entered the treaty of union in 1707 must remain without a Constitution as it was to be valid in the union,
And The Country of Scotland that entered the treaty of union in 1707 must retain its Constitution from 1707 as it was,
Scotland as a Sovereign Country in a voluntary union with England has the right to make decision for Scotland,
The Country of Scotland was not consumed by England in the treaty of union, otherwise there would no treaty in of itself existing,
Wether its is laws of Scotlands Country., voting in present day , policing, the Courts of/ for Scotland, private rights, the Claim of right, education, stated religion, these are part and parcel of Scotlands Constitution.
The pretendy parliament devolved from Westminster parliament cannot alter the Constitution of the Country of Scotland.
What it comes down to in legalities.
There is either a 1707:treaty of union that binds England to Scotland.
And a 1707 treaty of union that binds Scotland to England,
To create the STATE of Great Britain.
The State of Great Britain legally Cannot Change either of the two Countries Sovereign Constitutions written or unwritten that went before it to create Great Britain. Without Great Britain ceasing to Exist from that two very valid constitutions.
Yeh I know unionists, globalists and the Fabian Society will all try to attack the messinger, rather than the legality of the message.
The State of Great Britain only exists due the the Sovereignty of both Countries remaining in tact as they were, wrote into the 1707 treaty of union,
There is either a created State of Great Britain of two individual Countries or there is not,
There is either a 1707 treaty of union or there is not.
It can’t be both a union and…not a union,
Great Britain and …..not Great Britain, it cannot be both.
@ Phil 2 September, 2026 at 9:07 pm
While the Spectator is a Tory rag as Young Lochinvar says, it does tap into the suspicion that the only strategy the SNP has for independence is to centralise as much power in Scotland. I can only hazard a guess this is to reduce the influence of internal political blocs like COSLA and the public trade unions. It could also creates a notion in the eyes of the Scottish people that the only realistic political options is between the Scottish Parliament and Westminster.
It ties in with the SNP’s gradualist mentality, but there is two things here.
The constant argument against independence is that if it happened, the SNP would dominate an iScotland. The SNP as a party would no longer exist but the politicians who belonged to it would completely be embedded into the political fabric of our society that they would still rule even if they formed a new party.
Besides, this gradualist approach gives that big fish in a small pond mentality. Would any SNP politician actually go for independence even if they exercised total political power in Scottish society?
I see that the trolls are out in force.
As the saying goes, Dogs bark but the caravan moves on.
Unlike the campervan.
NC notes
“All unions are evil and must be cast out of Eden”
But surely Scotland as we know it is a union? Was it not created by the Union of disparate kingdoms that Malcolm Canmore, among others over time, did so much to bring about?
John Swinney blames Westminster for Glasgow homelessness crisis that threatens to bankrupt city, its always Westminster Westminster is the SNP its no me policy.
The SNP get out of blaming me policy, is Westminster.
67% of all available housing must go to immigrants(not people seeking refuge or folk from abroad who have found themselves on their arse, people you could make an argument for). That was on a letter sent to all housing associations in Glasgow. It came from the top officials (golden goodbyes for me, wage cuts for the staff) not the councillors. While the housing associations have pushed back to a degree they have conceded in practise to the principle which discriminates against Scots for one of life’s necessities with all its cascading, mundane tragedies. Treating people the same is racist? I go into work in the town centre every day as I have done for 25 years. It is a disaster. I have never ever seen it as bad, not even close. Travel in at 6am and you’ll see the true scale of it, before those who are ashamed to be seen get up before people start coming through for work. A year ago the profile was almost exclusively Scots males, 55 – 65. One guy who I speak to is over 60 and had been on st vincent street for well over a year in a makeshift tent. Younger Scottish people are appearing on the street now, almost all Scots, I spoke to 1 poor English guy in the past 2 years. The only period of rapid mass immigration we have experienced in my life time has been between 2022/2023 to date. The alarming rise in rape and sexual assault overwhelmingly associated with Glasgow city centre and its immediate surrounds matches this period. The Scottish justice minister made a statement a couple of days ago on the subject citing ‘toxic masculinity’. Source was Scottish Legal News.
Conclusions? The Scottish elite now despise the Scottish nation and its people, they perform or go along with experiments on us. The dominant ideology amongst the elite group here and elsewhere (including England) encompasses a disdain for nation and the ordinary citizen. When these experiments on our country fail catastrophically they admit to nothing and instead point to the ephemeral rather than address the reality. Things with no objective reality are preferred to dealing with the reality that people have to face, homelessness and sexual assault sadly, for example. For the elite group their are spin offs, quangoes, many of them fighting an open ended fight against things that only exist in people’s heads. They don’t intend to DO anything about ant of the pressing, issues of the day no matter how urgently they need addressed. They will get away with as much as they can for as long as they can get away with it. It is as bad as that. Self interest is utterly dominant now in elite circles, nothing is impacting them personally at the moment to change that. Just stop this pish about Independence, no political party anywhere near power supports it or has any interest in delivering it.
By the way, the people I see on the street, actually sleeping on the street I have never seen drunk or on drugs, never in the last couple of years all sober. The people I have seen daily or regularly are sober every day, often penniless apart from what they can beg. The commonly heard refrain that they mainly have mental health and drug problems does not match rthe reality of recent events, I testify to that. That is not to deny that drug addicts beg on the streets, I am talking about the current homelessness problem. I believe that refrain is becoming a trope inviting us all to believe that ‘nothing can be done’.
Unless of course they are actually lining us up for a vote we are in an utterly dire position to compete in…dominated by the state… run by people on both sides who want Scotland to lose…on a franchise that guarantees humiliation.. leading to another 20 years of post referendum destruction ..until there is nothing left that evens resembles Scotland,,,I’m getting paranoid now..
@GM
“67% of all available housing must go to immigrants(not people seeking refuge or folk from abroad who have found themselves on their arse, people you could make an argument for). That was on a letter sent to all housing associations in Glasgow”
Do you have a link or reference to back up that claim? A report in a newspaper or similar?
This is a disgrace if true and I will bend people’s ears about it every opportunity I get.
But I need to have evidence.
The SNP disgusts me – nothing new then
Alf Baird @ 4.06pm – thanks for the link. I was in Helensburgh last month and looking out at Gare Loch – made me ponder on the benefits of instantaneous death in the event of nuclear conflagration – Glasgow and the Firth of Clyde being a target for immediate destruction. Why would anyone want a slow lingering death in a nuclear Winter far away from all the action? And then I remembered that Faslane leaks like a radioactive sieve into Loch Long and Gare Loch. Perhaps the population of West Central Scotland is already enjoying the benefits of radioactive effluent? Keeping all the oncologists in a job? Ho hum.
Benefits to who?
@ Marie – I live overlooking Gareloch and have fished there with my sons and eaten mackerel that we caught. I obviously take an interest in the water quality.
For information:
AI Overview
Official documents released following freedom-of-information battles confirm that low-level radioactive tritiated water from aging pipe infrastructure at the Royal Naval Armaments Depot at Coulport (part of HMNB Clyde) leaked into Loch Long following floods in 2019.
“freedom of information battles”. Personally I wouldn’t eat the fish – but I’m only an ex-cancer nurse.
WhaTever happened to McNeilly the whistleblower?
Westminster is nervous… and for good reason.
The main event that could trigger a great upsurge in Scottish demand for independence has not yet happened.
And with some polls showing an even 50/50 split the question, “Should Scotland be an Independent Country?” isn’t going away anytime soon.
Westminster understands something many independence activists and commentators miss: Scotland is not apathetic… Scotland is latent.
And latency can become active very quickly.
Westminster’s strategists know the pattern well.
Scotland is a nation with a democratic tradition, a constitutional identity, a history of sovereignty, a latent independence movement, international sympathy, and the capacity to mobilise rapidly.
The ‘empire’ has lost enough overseas possessions over the last century to recognise the danger.
Westminster knows the rupture event is the threat.
It knows Scotland is not content… merely stable for now.
It knows a single misjudged slip could internationalise Scotland’s desire for independence.
And so Westminster is cautious, because one mistake could turn Scotland’s simmering frustration into a boiling, democratic demand for independence.
Once that demand becomes visible and overwhelming, the international community will pay attention.
And once the international community pays attention, the UK loses control of the narrative… and that could mark the end of Scotland’s 300-year stint in the ‘Better, for England, Together) Union.
Could it be that an upsurge in support for Scottish independence is far more likely to be triggered by Westminster than by any Scottish independence activist?
How odd that you don’t want to pose the question in Scots, Northy.
Got to say, I’m pissed that according to you and Alf, Scotland is once again going to get the shitty end of the stick.
Other cults promise The Rapture. You’re offering us The Rupture.
WW3 & the AI loonies…..
link to theguardian.com
El Niño too.
Keyboard Tourets
The term “keyboard tourettes” is not officially recognized, but it describes a phenomenon where individuals, often in online or texting conversations, may type random or inappropriate words or phrases without conscious control.
This behavior can occur when someone is annoyed, bored, or unable to think of something to say.
It is a common occurrence and is not a medical condition.
I wonder if some folk in this place suffer from such an affliction… I know I don’t.
How about the rest of you?
For the pedantic, “Keyboard Tourets” should read “Keyboard Tourette’s”
Thair – sortit.
… or even “Keyboard Tourettes” for those who think the possessive term is misplaced.
Perhaps i do suffer from keybored toorette’s efter aw.
Well, you are a Pict. A thousand year old, space traveling one at that. Whether in reality, or just self-identified, we have insufficient evidence to tell.
What does your vet say?
Well, you are a Pict? Probably.
what is it in your Indigenous language?
Better a Pict than a “Prick” though eh, SP?
Should have known you’d stick up for Northy, Wee Wally.
What with Tourettes being the verbal equivalent of w@nking.
Food for thought.
It is not a case of if but when will Reform take power and when they do will they use the same tactics against the people who disagree and protest against them as Labour and the woke machine have done?
I for one will write a stunning book about all the good things the British Empire has given the world. With extra long chapters about why they couldn’t have done it without Scotland. I will then follow up with a book about white slaves being taken from their country and sold to Muslims. By that time I will have my own TV show and a world tour sponsored by Persil.
Ach, c’moan, Mark.
Long before Reform have taken power, the UN decolonisation committee will have gifted us our freedom.
If you ever write your book, you’ll have to write it elsewhere. I doubt any of us will ever see it, unless you can arrange for a Scottish publisher to bring out a foreign language translation in Scots.
MSM reporting Jackdaw and Rosebank to go ahead:
link to theguardian.com
Who knows, it may actually be true!
If it is, Scotland can thank Miatta Fahnbulleh, the Labour energy secretary, for finally having the guts to do something that will materially improve the lives of Scots. Both by providing us with much needed jobs, and by providing us with much needed oil and gas.
Compare and contrast with the disgraceful sitting on the fence by Swinney, the SNP’s very own “doughty fighter for Scotland and the Scots”, who lacks even the courage to say that Scotland’s oil and gas should never be left in the ground, that Scotland’s skilled workforce should never be sacrificed to the progressive, trendy, lefty shibboleths, or that Scotland’s people should never go cold while there is energy available to help keep them warm.
Pathetic, farcical and yellow.
I fully expect that, sooner or later, some cretinous talking heid from the SNP or its fan club will pop up to bleat that “Scotland’s oil and gas is being stolen from beneath Scotland’s waters agin oor will”.
It is on. Stop Oil have glued their genitals to the tarmac. Expect more from the nutty putty brigade of seriously fucked up beatniks and aging hippies.
Well I am laughing an thise union minded people that cannot confirm there is a 1707 treaty of today,
But insist Scotland is not a Colony.
Nor can the define which are the [two Sovereign Countries ] that are the foundation stones the created state of Great Britain.
Not a Country by the way, but a State of Scotland and England.
The issue of carbon emissions is a huge one and it certainly seems that the world climate is warming with all the issues that this bring.
Going green is good. That I think is widely accepted. But how quickly and at what cost is the big question. Most certainly without a doubt the world will be relying on oil for many years to come. Think aeroplane, think lorries that transport everything from goods to services that fill our shops, think agricultural machinery, think construction plant, think quarry plant, think buses and ambulances, think ships and so much more. Is that going to change overnight. Well of course not – unless you want to live in a cave.
And think of the economic impact. Plain and simple, we are going to have to continue with oil for some time yet, and if we don’t produce and refine it, well we’ll just buy it from someone else who does. And what about plastics the big sister of big oil – or fertilisers from oil, or the fertilisers that feed our battery farm so called Scottish Salmon which too are made from oil.
Ah well at least the Scottish Government were pushing the food additive for cows that reduced their farting, or at least pushing it till the dairy farmers rebelled big time. Green washing do I hear someone say – like we’ll not produce Scottish Oil but will buy oil from where ever else.
And so we then move to other emblems of our Scottish Government and their green credentials. Anyone heard of waste to energy incinerators. The latest one in Glasgow is being built in near Govan just beside the M8 and the QEUH hospital.
Burning rubbish is better than landfill but despite the incineration process now being much better than incineration of old it still produces waste toxins. But everything is a trade off.
But here’s a point with this new 350.000 tonne per year waste facility bringing Glasgow’s incineration capacity if to around an annual million one would anticipate that the new plant a) had carbon capture capacity and b) made use of the surplus heat generated to provide district type heating.
In the case of district type heating, the absolutely huge QEUH hospital could certainly take a bit of that. But does the new plant, being built by a Nordic company provide for either carbon capture or district heating type heat recovery. Of course it doesn’t. Will green washing from our greenest of green Scottish Government do I hear someone say.
And it goes on, the bull that comes from our Scottish Government is world class. But the foregoing are just some examples of the spin and lies spread by an utterly non performing government on a hapless populace.
All of that said, I would proceed with more North Sea extraction for the time being but at the same time I would accelerate the transition to greener technologies.
Now what was it that Alex Salmond talked about a decade or more ago about carbon capture and the disposal of carbon down into depleted oil and gas strata?
Well said Wullie.
“Plunder Scotland (UK) is a carpetbagging operation largely owned by non-Scottish, foreign ‘investors’ and overseen by Westminster who takes a cut of the vast profits the sector generates.
It was registered in London in 1707 as a commercial plundering enterprise and has been plundering Scotland these past 300 years and more.
Strangely – or perhaps as part of its design – the Scots do not benefit much from the plundering of their country’s highly valuable natural resources; being given only a fraction of the profits in the form of pocket money, baubles, trinkets, and English titles for Scotland’s elite.”
extracted form ‘The Truth’ that underpins Scotland’s ‘union’ with England.
So, Plunder Scotland (UK) – it’s nothing personal, you sweaties… it’s just business.
Dear Slave,
Shut up and eat your porridge or we will stop your privileges.
Yours faithfully
Sir Biggus ‘Fluffy’ Dickus OBE VC.
President
Plunder Scotland UK
Shafting the sheep shaggers since 1707
“highly valuable natural resources”
Odd that nobody, either in Scotland or outside, knew we had any highly valuable natural resources prior to around 1970.
Fish perhaps. But we’d already made a decent job of plundering that ourselves by 1970.
Coal for certain. Of course, England and Wales were hoaching with the stuff too.
But don’t let me stop you watering your dram with your bitter tears, Northy. I’m sure you’ve come to quite like the taste.
Willie,
Jacob rees Mog was on his podcast yesterday praising that should the lights go out, not to worry as all of the United states of Great Britain have their very own North Sea Oil,
Aye, James, breaths there as many as even ten True Sovereign Scots who have not, on reading your post, redoubled their sacred vows to prove him and all his ilk wrong.
FFFrrrreeeeeddddddooooooommmmmmmm!!!!!!!!!
Erm.
Haud oan noo. It’s Friday afto and we’ve got plans for the weekend.
Speak later. If we forget, remind us again on Monday.
There is ni UK parliament concerning Scotland, as the UK parliament has a start date of origin of 1800,
When the Great Britain parliament was Dissolved in 1800.
Respect to the Norwegians.
They’re rediscovering their inner Viking and taking back control of the seas around their coastline.
All in accordance with International Law, of course.
It will be interesting to find out if International Law, which is often described on here as Scotland’s friend, will be honoured by the Orcs, or just smashed to pieces, as per their usual MO.
The court in The Hague reckons the Orcs owe $4.22 billion plus interest and legal costs. The Norwegians have seized an Orc ship to auction in settlement of part of that bill.
“The court in The Hague reckons the Orcs owe $4.22 billion”
Small beer, or the cost of one dodgy aircraft carrier, compared to the £150+ billion a year that Anglo colonialism is costing Scots:
link to yoursforscotlandcom.wordpress.com
Seems like hardly any time since you were telling us it’s £200 billion a year.
Whatever, what’s £50 billion between friends?
I’ve said this before, Alf, but you’re in no position to accuse others of being repetitious. So I’ll say it again:
If there is anybody who genuinely believes in this £150+ billion a year figure, if it’s not just something like what was written on the side of the Brexit Bus, WTAF are they incapable of using that figure as the means for lighting a pro-Indy firestorm?
I mean, it’s something like £27,000 for every Scot in Scotland.
£27,000 EVERY FUCKING YEAR!
“If there is anybody who genuinely believes in this £150+ billion a year figure”
Well here’s another quite detailed analysis suggesting the cost of colonialism could be even higher, and certainly places a free liberated Scotland’s GDP-per-capita up there with our near neighbour ‘small’ independent states, which is where we will be when colonial plunder is ended. Which explains why nae country iver wants tae go back tae colonial rule, Hatey:
“On a decolonised GDP of £420 billion to £520 billion across a population of 6-6.5 million, Scotland’s Gross National Income per capita lands between roughly $85,000 and $115,000. Unlike the colonial figure, virtually all of it is retained income rather than production booked to foreign owners. That places a liberated Scotland above Norway, above Denmark, level with Switzerland, and among the four or five wealthiest nations on earth per head of population.”
link to decolonise.scot
The usual mince from the supposedly learned professor.
Figures plucked from thin air and a conclusion that does not stand up to anyone with any financial nous.
Your wee, thick, bitter acolytes will, of course, lap it all up.
However, some good news, the UN will be deciding Scotland’s fate any day now. Once they stop laughing!
“places a liberated Scotland above Norway”
Wow, fifty years of Scotland’s oil wealth being “plundered by England”.
Fifty years of Norway’s oil wealth being “wisely invested”.
But we’ll still be richer than Norway after Indy!
Ah hae ma verra real doots, Alf.
What is it with you lot? You can never restrict yourselves to presenting sane, sober figures that might pass the plausibility test.
It’s always straight to the hyperbolic flights of fancy, and all credibility crashes and burns.
Yes Alf – your tautological proposition is:
– if Scotland was wealthier than Norway (because) then Scotland would be wealthier than Norway.
I fail to see the detailed analysis. I do see the usual mince. Figures plucked out of thin air yet again. No explanation of how your GDP figures are arrived at. Wishful thinking again.
You are shit in anything financial Alf. Stick to quoting your hero’s Fanny and Mummi. You excel at that.
oh, Yoon pile-on.
As usual all they have is inults.
Keep going, Alf, you’re getting to them.
Truth hurts and all that.
Oh it’s “James” – this should be good
Adult nappy.
@ James says: 4 September, 2026 at 9:33 pm
“all they have is inults”
Side splitting for two reasons, the humour is, in this one.
And it puts me in a quandary. I can’t decide which of the two hilariously funny reasons is actually the funniest.
Haud oan though, it’s funny for a third reason. I’m willing to bet a quite substantial sum of money that when he reads it back, James will only be able to see one reason for why it’s funny.
Cheers, girls; you’ve proved my point. As expected.
Baby Swinney says
“We are going to make the NHS great again. Believe me. We’re going to march down there and sweep around the dedicated NHS staff and they won’t even notice. A change like no one has ever seen. No one can shake something like us. Fourteen health boards into two. A revolution in number division, simple, radical, very much a game changer. Only I can do this.”
“Fourteen health boards into two”
Why two?
Theoretical mathematicians argues there are only 3 numbers worth dealing with: zero, one and infinity.
We can’t have an infinity of health boards, and having zero health boards would go down badly with the voters (OK, maybe not with SNP voters – nothing ever goes down badly with them).
So there should be ONE health board.
Two is daft.
Water was hived into East , West and North before it it was fettled up to become Scottish Water.
A bit like the gas boards aggregated into whatever it is now.
So why two health board you ask Hatey? Setting the NHS for privatisation perchance?
2+2=5.
Water was hived into East , West and North before it it was fettled up to become Scottish Water.
A bit like the gas boards aggregated into whatever they are now.
So why two health board you ask Hatey? Setting the NHS up for privatisation perchance? And by what electoral mandate does king John Swinney exercise his authority?
Burnham gave him a wee piece of Manchesterism to play with.
Said “Here you go, John, you can be King of North Britain”.
Another link to educate people to the damage progressives do
link to markacollett.substack.com
A good link, twathater.
One tiny criticism of your post, if I may be so bold.
You could have also provided a link to the government’s recent publication entreating migrants not to rape and/or murder us. Every little helps!
Lest anybody chooses to condemn me as wacist, can I also issue an appeal to all indigenous Scots reading here.
As you go about your legitimate business this weekend, resist all urges to rape and/or murder a migrant.
It’s wrong, so just don’t do it. Ask your mammie if you won’t believe me.
And don’t get taken in by all this prisoner early release bollocks either. You’re still gonna do a couple of years inside.
So why is John Swinney reducing our health boards from fourteen to two.
For the answer you need to look at what his masters in England are doing.
Put very simply NHS England is undergoing its own separate, major structural downsizing under the Health Bill 2026.
[1] (link to bbc.co.uk
[2] (link to gov.uk)
The key changes happening to England’s healthcare structures include:Consolidating Local Boards: England’s 42 Integrated Care Boards (ICBs), which plan and fund local NHS services, are being reduced through mergers to around 26 or 27 ICBs by 2027/2028.
[1] (link to theukcatpeople.co.uk),
[2] (link to bma.org.uk)Abolishing NHS England:
The overarching arms-length body, NHS England (NHSE), is being completely abolished, with its powers moving directly into the government’s Department of Health and Social Care (DHSC).
[1] (link to commonslibrary.parliament.uk), [2] (link to gov.uk)
Staff and Cost Cuts: Alongside these mergers, ICBs have been directed to halve their running costs, resulting in a targeted 50% headcount reduction across NHSE and ICB administrative staff by March 2028.
[1] (link to commonslibrary.parliament.uk),
[2] (link to theukcatpeople.co.uk)
So in summary NHS England is being abolished, the regioal England is having its NHS, the local health boards reduced from 42 to 26, with budgets cut and the direction to cut 50% of the administration staff
Looks like a shape up for privatisation with Swinney.implementing a similar plan.
And that multiple conversations is the point,
Because nothing belongs to The state of Great Britain in wealth obtained from Scotland land and sea unless the 1707 treaty of union is as was and unaltered.
Other wise The rest is as what Alf states over the years, As the points Alf makes eventually join up to be proven correct,
Or the points I have made over the years are correct.
For Scotland and its people are either a Colony of Westminster Parliament because Westminster parliament ignore the 1707 treaty,
Or Westminster parliament must apply and be seen to have always applied an followed the treaty of Union since 1707.
Yoons wanting the Country and people of Scotland to abide by a treaty supposedly holding the created state of Scotland and England of Great Britain together as a legal entity
Without that treaty being visible and active to the people of Scotland, then they the ,
people of Scotland are not obliged to follow it,
not obliged to pay taxes,
not obliged to Share its mineral wealth,
not obliged to follow the pretendy devolved parliaments and SNP back door laws,
not share Scotlands finances with the bank of Englands national debt,
not obliged to inform Englands Westminster parliament its on its own.
Not obliged to land and sea laws of England,
So numpty think tanks and Westminster parliament make Scotlands case as becoming obvious for being a Colony to the world and the UN, but also to the people in the Country of Scotland, Ireland, Wales and in England,
This is what happens if there is no treaty of union being applied and upheld and followed to the letter,
Alf Baird is proven correct or I am orrect,
“not obliged to pay taxes”
You mind me of the boy who occasionally pops up on here to tell us we should impeach the tractors occupying Hollyrood. He interprets the ancient scriptures anointing us as Sovereign Scots forever much as you do – there is no law in Scotland but what we, the Sovereign Scots, declare.
I’m in favour of these policies. Impeach the cants and stop paying taxes.
And I’m a Sovereign Scot. Wha daur meddle wi me? So when do we start? Why don’t you set up a WhatsApp group to coordinate things?
“not obliged to pay taxes” “ not obliged to follow the pretendy devolved parliaments and SNP back door laws”
That’s wonderful news, I’ll save a fortune!
Just a quick question, when I get arrested which inevitably what will happen, do you have a number I can call so someone can explain to the arresting officers that the law no longer applies? They might not read Wings BTL so they may not be aware of this development.
What will NOT happen is that the ( Westminster parliament of England) is proven Correct in legality laws,
With either of those result Scotland need not apply to leave the treaty of union at all. Or a Colony, it simply ignores the impositions and laws placed upon Scotland.
Does not any longer require permissions
Scotland just ignores Englands Westminster parliament and goes about setting up a real Scottish parliament in its own Sovereign Country, applying laws of Scotland,
So a treaty of union that is applied by Westminster parliament and England to both Scotland and England as a union,
Or Scotland as a proven Colony of England in international law,
Let’s have a wee game this morning.
It’s called………..Spot the loony!
Union minded people will only reap what they sow,
And if Scotland turns out to be a Colony, there are reparations owed to Scotland from England in international laws that still apply,
And it does help Scotland when unionist can’t help dirtying in their own nest.
In claiming historic ‘reparations”, presumably James Che would also agree that Scotland would have to repay rUK the £billions due in compensation as a consequence of the monumental trade tariffs that Scotland did not have to pay over 300 years of imperial trade with all parts of the globe as a result of the equal trading terms of the Act of Union?
I can see lawyers and accountants licking their lips…
There wouldn’t be an rUK, nor a continuer UK state at all.
There would be Scotland, and there would be England.
After one or other signatory in the bilateral treaty revokes the treaty, the UK will have ceased to exist.
During the current time line unionists and think tanks are volunteering to make themselves look like backward groups, not capable of applying joined up thinking, and illiterate as to what binds two Countries together if it is in a 1707 treaty.
No part of that 1707 treaty agreement can be altered or falsified by the parliament of the Two States that created the parliament of Great Britain,
For Scotlands parliament of 1707 holds, nor created or made no treaty, with the parliament of Great Britain or the UK parliament as neither of those two parliaments existed when Scotland made its 1707 treaty of union with Englands parliament.
And only with the parliament of England,
Scotland did thanks Chas,
This tecnology is on its last legs, it pleases itself, no doubt I will at some time have to update it,,
Meanwhile, it will have to do,
Hatey,
If the treaty of union is not being followed, by the parliament of England, which gives specific mention of Taxation for Scotland, then I would presume you would stop paying taxes from the time line of when the 1707 treaty failed to be active or used in the context that is wrote down between the two parliaments of Scotland and England.
For Scotland made no 1707 treaty of Union with the parliament of Great Britain, only with the parliament of England,
When you personally apply it is up to you.
Mind you with Westminster parliament thinking of applying a mansion / house tax which also dictates you can not refuse entry to HMRC or Government to your house, and taxing people’s savings and also pensions including State pensions, a lot of people may decide in Scotland, England, Wales and Ireland that excessive taxation by the Great Britain Parliament may be an excellent reason to end the UK/ Great Britain parliament.
When three of those Countries hold no written treaty between GB parliament with themselves.
“We know Andy Burnham won’t give him a referendum and we now know he won’t accept one from Nigel Farage, so it would appear that the whole idea is off the table until at least 2034 (by which point the SNP will have about 17 members left on their current trajectory).”
The Rev is spot on here. We also now know that the route to independence is not via the colonizer’s political process, it never was and never can be.
Which explains why most former colonies now UN member states were decolonized via the UN self-determination route and related international law.
Which leaves Liberation Scotland’s UN decolonization initiative as the only game in toun fowks:
link to decolonise.scot
Can your cock touch your arse?
yes? Go fuck yerself ya parasite.
Mark, I think that comment crosses a red line.
I enjoy many of your “alternative POV” posts on here. You can do better than this.
MB having an Ezekiel 23:19-20 moment all to himself there..
“the only game in toun”
Naw. I’m wi Ash Regan.
She explained how a plebiscitary party could arrange things to deliver a clear, sustained, democratic mandate for Indy.
That’s the only real game in town. Or even toun.
Alf’s game inevitably founders when the UN or whoever ask if the petitioners can demonstrate a clear, sustained, democratic mandate for Indy.
To which the answer is “Naw, there’s just a few thousand of us claiming this unfathomable and likely erroneous concept of Scottish Sovereignty from 300+ years ago”.
Hear hear Alf.
The rigged political system will never allow Scotland and its people to choose independence. The process is an utter sham and a sham which folks increasingly recognise.
Britain colonised the world, slaughtered millions after millions, in everywhere they went. Tasmanania, India, Kenya, the Carribean, North America, Kenya, Ireland. And they would kill hear were it not for their rigging of the political system. And yes, they have selectively killed here too
So yes, it will take international intervention to help bring about independence.
“So yes, it will take international intervention to help bring about independence.”
So you have just admitted that you are a band of bandidos who would do a deal with anyone to get your way. The Scottish people told you the answer in 2014. Nice try with the post colony crap. Look what happened to the nutcase professor Arday. The schmuck killed himself. One lives in hope.
and No it will not work but don’t let me stop you trying.
“Britain colonised the world”
If only, eh?
“they would kill hear were it not for their rigging of the political system. And yes, they have selectively killed here too”
Just imagine if that was true. You’d have just painted a big, bright target on your own back!
“it will take international intervention to help bring about independence”
But, but, but, then Britain will kill the Scots fronting Indy at this end, because they’ll be “unrigging” the system. You just said so yourself.
As mentioned it is not the parliament of Great Britain or the parliament f the UK that Scotland has a treaty with, only the parliament of England,
This means that it is the parliament of England that is refusing Scotland the “right to self determination” ,
The parliament of England ignoring Scotlands ” Claim of right “,
and the parliament of England ignoring the text and laws of a 1707 international treaty of Union, ,
Do you really hate the Rev that much. Maybe you think you are getting at us but you insult the work the Rev has done. You insult the people who actually did something constructively for their cause. You are Mental Health, probably a Transvestite or some other sexual deviant.
Alf.
Adding the two positions of a Scotland Colony under the parliament of England or a 1707 treaty of union between Scotland and England not being applied or followed by the parliament of England,
for the parliament of Great Britain did not Exist at the date the 1707 treaty of union was made between Scotland and Englands to Sovereign Countries,
It is a created State of Great Britain not a Country,
The same as America, it would be classed as the united states of Great Britain for as long as the 1707 treaty is applied between Scotland and England.
Not between the parliament of Great Britain and the parliament of Scotland, which ceased to be over three hundred years past,
The united States of Great Britain fails miserable in it continuation after 1707 to exist if,
1. the 1707 parliament of Scotland and independent Country of Scotland cease to exist.
2. the parliament of England presumes it is the Sole sovereign Country in the treaty of union that refuses Scotland the right to Self determination, the Scots Claim of right,
3. The results of The parliament of Englands behaviour is that it makes Scotlands nation and Sovereign Country a Colony of the The parliament of England,
Not of the parliament of GB or of the UK parliament,
Those already taken actions by the parliament of England supplies Scotland with the required Information to the UN and rest of the world, that the parliament of England is in and acted as the sole parliament in the 1707 treaty and Colonised the Sovereign Country of Scotland without legal merit to do so,
As it breached and ended the original international 1707 treaty of terms, conditions and agreement
Between two sovereign Countries.
That must sound great in your head. Repeating something just waters it down. Like inbreeding. If you keep using the same DNA stamp. Not that I’am suggesting that your Mother is your sister, far from it, it’s probably your auntie Alf.
Mark please stop this towards Alf.
‘STUC general secretary Roz Foyer and actor Kate Dickie have both signed Sturgeons open letter 600 women and groups’.
Can anyone spot what’s wrong with this statement.
“The women have also called for the SNP Government to launch an “emergency response” focusing on “effective and accountable” policing of the far-right.
Groups signing the online letter include Rape Crisis Scotland, One Parent Families Scotland and Muslim Women’s Resource Centre.
Crime author Val McDermid and TV presenter Jean Johansson have also backed the call.”
And what is wrong with this statement? Anyone?
Can anyone else smell the fear?
We need an investigation to find out how many intact blokes are hiding in plain sight within the Muslim Women’s Resource Centre.
Without evidence, I can no longer decide if the answer is zero, or, they all are.
“Rape crisis Scotland” Enough said.
‘STUC general secretary Roz Foyer and actor Kate Dickie have both signed Sturgeons open letter 600 women and groups’.
——————————————————–
It is not “Sturgeons open letter” – it is open letter published by Women Against the Far-Right Scotland.
Sturgeon and 600 others have signed it.
“Women Against the Far-Right Scotland.”
Only 600? More people sign a ‘Stop Dog Fouling’ campaign on a wet Tuesday afternoon.
The fact that they are doing this shows how scared they are. They know it will be game over in the Gravy Boat. Every Quango every Woke club paid for by the Tax payer. Be afraid Be very afraid.
Apparently over 3000 have signed it now.
The port of Dover appears to be blocked by reportedly 300 men claiming to be English and asserting that England is their country.
Michty!
It’s impossible to predict how this one will end, but I would place a small wager on another 300 wife beaters, child abusers and serial, big money fraudsters being turfed out of jail early, to make room for some “real” criminals.
“Dover protest ‘disgraceful’, says Jenrick
Speaking to reporters at the Reform national conference, the party’s Treasury spokesperson said:
I’m sick of people disrupting life in this country.
I hope the police take all the actions as necessary to get the port open as quickly as possible.
It’s completely disgraceful that businesses and individuals are having their lives held up by those people.””
—————————————–
Reform don’t like it!
It’s a little rich of Jenrick to girn when we consider his appalling track record on matters of asylum and migration, but whatever… 🙄
Well they’d better come up with some hardcore policies on asylum and migration then. I think that’s what the people want these days, is it not?
Wearing a mask in this country should be instant arrest. A thug is a thug.
My mask self-identifies as a letterbox.
Works fine in Scotland, not so good across the border.
If they get arrested they can just say ‘I’m with Stop Oil’ and the police will help them put up their barrier.
In actual news, the SNP just lost two by-elections in Edinburgh.
To the Greens and Labour. In seats the SNP had held.
Not sure the change (to Labour and the Greens) is for the better, but at least it’s a change.
” Into the jaws of death rode the six hundred”
and not a horse in sight!
The Open Letter: More than 3,000 people—including prominent politicians, trade union leaders, and artists like Nicola Sturgeon and Hannah Lavery—signed an open letter against the far-right. Groups like Rape Crisis Scotland also backed the statement.
———————————————–
Update.
(although I doubt the description of Sturgeon as an “artist”)
You’re gonna need a bigger campervan!
With Nicky No Comment on board how could you possibly lose?
If we make the same assumption the elites will make, that each of the 3000 of the “correctly opinioned” deserves a golden vote equivalent to 1,000 ordinary, unwashed, bigoted, penny votes, then they already have a majority for whatever it is they plan.
“including prominent politicians”
I need to sit down for this!
Eh! Duh! Who? name names.
“Con-artist” perhaps?
King America, the immature, paranoid & seriously deep in debt boss of «the west»
link to dailymail.com
Patrick Grady seen at Holyrood but an official SNP statement said that no one spoke to him. His best chum didn’t even know he was there.
Let’s start a petition and an Open Letter!
Keep the sex pest out of Scotland!
I bet Simon Weston is happy that the penguins remained British, by God.
link to archive.ph
a fascinating tale, full of spicy little titbits; the falklanders have more authority than the Scots have and are setup for a decent cut of the take. Nice.
Illuminating in all sorts of ways; and it shows the scam of netzero = destroy perfectly good infrastructure to create artificial demand and corporate profits, all that – if we were serious about “net zero”, well first of all india, china, USA, the pentagon need to be shut down, but that’s not happening – instead we endure all that shite about rosebank and jackdaw and middle class twats having their performative days out … nah
– there is too much real wealth around the falklands right now and with modern tech we can finally get to it.
Looming in the background are the argies, noticing we don’t have a navy anymore – for example :
no one can pish it up a wall like the anglos
youtu.be/EWZPJK91X1I?t=572
– and now the yanks are saying they don’t necessarily recognise our sovereignty. Oh dear. What if Milei has more support in washington than the brits? He is fully jewed up –
“Argentine President Javier Milei is one of Isr a el’s strongest and most vocal international supporters. He has famously described himself as “the most Z10nist president in the world”
– beautiful realpolitik there, nice triangulation; if only Scots politicians had the wits to play these games. What if a Scots FM “had more support in Washington” from a president who was a half-scottish golf nut? Imagine. Imagine Scotland scoring at an open goal for a change.
It gets worse though; you see the falklands oil is just an appetiser, the real find was down in antarctica off the peninsula, in the part we claim as “ours”. It has a whopping 500B barrels; cf the North Sea has had about 50B barrels taken out of it on our side (we split it with Norway and look how rich they became). No one is going to just “leave it in the ground” for the climate emergency and the net zero. A UK with the Falklands – great place for a base of operations – and a recognised claim would be laffing, but what if no one else recognises it? And we don’t have the gunboats any more to make anyone pay attention to us.
The antarctic treaty is a bizarre anomaly in international relations; people seem to take it seriously and obey it, but at some point it will get ripped up, then it’s a competition among the great powers. Which does not include the UK.
– of course if the earth is hollow and it’s where the nazis escaped to in their flying saucers, we’ll really be in the shit.
The Falklanders should worry.
The Argies are the descendants of the most genocidal colonists on the stolen and ethnically cleansed South American continent.
If the Argies run true to their genetic inheritance from their murdering, thieving Spanish, Italian, German, English, Scottish and Welsh ancestors, they’ll slaughter the Falklanders in cold blood.
Needless to say, the likes of Confused will be cheering them on and cramming his hole with popcorn as he does so.
It’s the position usually adopted by the bottom feeding stratum of Scottish Nationalism. Other peoples desiring freedom, independence and self determination must be ruthlessly crushed.
There go’s the holidays in Spain.
Whatever you do, do not talk about the Status of the treaty of union between Scotland and England as Unionist do not like the Scrutiny,
and change the topic as soon as possible from it not being a Colony of the Westminster parliament subject or a treaty of union with the Westminster parliament of England subject.
If none of the above then Scotland can just end the the union that does not exist, walk away from a Colony Status without the need or requirement for permission.
But then that is why the avoid defining of the situation, and try back to school name calling instead,
Their brain appears to be stuck at primary School level.
“Whatever you do, do not talk about the Status of the treaty of union between Scotland and England as Unionist do not like the Scrutiny”
You say this, but it seems like you do little else. Every day, every few hours there is a barely comprehensible word salad setting out essentially the same point. Very rarely does anyone respond positively to any of these posts, I think most of us have resigned to the fact that we have no defences against your campaign of terrorism against Wings BTL and the best strategy is to just ignore it, to the extent that this is possible.
I appreciate you are elderly and you have lost your partner, and you have my sympathy in that. However, there are societies and interest groups where you can exchange your views with other like-minded people, and you may find a lot more intellectual fulfilment in that than you do by, let’s be honest, annoying people here.
Factchecker,
Scotland would have to pay the rUK billions.
How did you work that one out,
Scotland has never entered or made a treaty of union with the rest of UK,
Only with the parliament of England.
Polish police now allowed to shoot illegal immigrants and the AFD set to gain power. That’s going to take more than an Open Letter to stop.
Factchecker.
You may also need to check some other facts such as ,
1: the old parliament of Scotland was dissolved, …from the union by England and the monarch of England. Not subsumed.
2: the old parliament of Scotland also withdrew from the union treaty under Sine die,
3: the parliament of England has 11 missing days to its side of the union, for year 1752. But Scotland already followed that calander, so no missing voluntary days to Scotlands side,
4: the parliament of Great Britain was dissolved in 1800.
5: the Anglo/ Ireland parliament was created in 1801/ 1802. [the rest of the UK as you eloquently Stated] which Scotland never made a treaty with. Because….
6: which did not include the dissolved parliament of Scotland, as that took place almost a hundred years previously.
I will leave you factchecking.
Alas, there are no facts here to check, merely your incomprehensible meanderings around historical events using terms like ‘sine die’ that you don’t seem to understand.
And of course Scotland never made a treaty of union with the rest of the UK – the UK didn’t exist.
However, my suggestion was that if, as you claim, the Act of Union is not valid, then Scotland’s free trade with the rUK and the rest of the Empire was also not valid. It was the Act of Union that permitted this free trade access. If you wish to demand reparations from rUK, it would seem equally valid for rUK to demand Reparations from Scotland.
Please just stop – you expose Wings and the independence movement to ridicule
These are the reasons that Stu has difficulty holding anyone to account like the SNP under the Crown of Westminsters parliament for England and Ireland.
Praying that Reform win a huge majority of seats in England and damn all in Scotland. That’ll learn the ‘proud Scots but’ for 2014.
Talking of which, Sir Chris Hoy is in my neighborhood tomorrow.
Better Together, eh Chris? My arse!
UK Prime Minister Nigel ‘Brown Shirt’ Farage? LOL!
I guess if Farage ever does become PM, he’ll have far more of a democratic mandate than Burnham has.
I’m intrigued by the bombshell revelation announced at the start of the Reform conference. When did the recorded conversation occur? Surely not the day before the conference started?
This story bears all the hallmarks of dirt mined, and then kept carefully aside until it can be revealed with maximum effect. A sting, in other words.
The question is, what group is ultimately behind it? Might be an established political party. Might be a pressure group that prefers to work without the inconvenience and legal hazards an established political party would give them.
That doesn’t excuse or condone Reform’s stupidity and amateurism. They need to wise up and realise that their enemy, the ones taking over this country, are very well organised, integrated, funded and determined.
Our enemy too, obviously.
I would like yo start a crowdfunder to get James Che laid. The only condition is that he can only choose from the two available genders. I know a person who would do it for free but that would defeat the purpose.
Your posts here today have been appalling. Grow up.
I wouldn’t restrict such an astute observation to today…
Mark !
Behave yourself !
“James Che” is actually a very old lady who is sadly suffering from the onset of dementia..
She has no short term memory left and will continue to repeat the same drivel, day after day, week after week……
Nothing anyone can do to help……
‘Onset of dementia’
Sorry but you are wrong Insider. The ‘onset’ took place years ago. It is now full blown.
Mark,
Its a same when politicians cant convince the electors and have to resort to violence to get their own way,
Luckily no body is Making threats to Scotland and its people within Scotland as it would upset every other treaty and Country around the world,.
The easiest solution of course with Scotland would be for England is to abide by the written agreement of the 1707 treaty,
Making every Country much happier.
There’s a lot of talk in this place, and elsewhere, suggesting that because of Scotland’s sovereign past and how the Treaty of Union was forced on the Scots and how the Claim of Right, all taken together, entitles the Scots to simply walk away from the United Kingdom.
The problem with that argument is that it’s unwinnable in international law.
The Scots cannot make a unilateral declaration of independence (UDI) and expect the international community of nations just to accept it… well, they could, but neither the UN nor the rest of the world would acknowledge it – and the UK parliament certainly wouldn’t.
I think it’s important folk understand the reality of Scotland’s current status as the rest of the world sees it.
Scotland’s historical sovereignty doesn’t equate with contemporary legal sovereignty.
Scotland was sovereign, once, that is an undeniable truth.
And it’s true that the 1707 Treaty of Union was shaped by elite interests, coercion, bribery, and political pressure.
And it’s true that many Scots justifiably felt betrayed by their own leadership when their country was sold to a foreign power from under them.
These are historically valid arguments.
But — and this is the key point — historical sovereignty does not automatically translate into contemporary legal sovereignty.
International law recognises current constitutional reality, not historical grievance.
And today:
That means arguments about illegality, coercion, or historical sovereignty have no operative force in modern international law.
They may be emotionally powerful.
They may be historically interesting.
But they do not create a legal route to independence.
The fact is that the sovereignty of the Scots won’t be reclaimed by shouting about the past… it can only be reclaimed by persuading the present.
Historical validity does not create modern legal authority.
Scotland’s history can certainly inspire independence, but only contemporary democracy can deliver it.
Good post.
See, Northy?
You CAN post sensibly when you make the effort.
I’ll gloss over the fact that much of what you wrote is simply paraphrasing and polishing the work of others.
Regardless, you’ve still over qualified yourself for the position left vacant by Professor Arday.
Thank you.
The National ran a piece on the repeated breaches of the 1707 Treaty. The piece makes a distinction between the 1707 Treaty which, it claims, has been breached many times by the UK government and the Acts of Union which have not been breached.
link to thenational.scot
What the article plays into is Scotland’s continuing grievance about the Treaty of 1707
” Only a virtuous people are capable of freedom ”
Benjamin Franklin
The full statement reads: “Only a virtuous people are capable of freedom. As nations become corrupt and vicious, they have more need of masters.”
“corrupt and vicious”
That sums up Scottish nationalism.
@agentx
FRANKLIN’s country may be counted among the least virtuous and most hypocritical on the planet, albeit «anglosaxons» do hold pole position in that field.
All men are created equal……except the ones unwilling to do our bidding.
E,g. Persian scum, Iraqi monkeys, towel heads etc.
Ah well, TURABDIN. As it happens, I was just reading about a pair of Ir@nian sisters in the Guardian online this morning.
Taken from their beds by masked thugs of the IRGC.
Visited in prison by a relative who scarce recognised them. Bruised and bloodied, broken bones, little hair left. The system of “prisoner transfer” consists of knocking the lassie to the floor, then dragging her by the hair to the destination.
Anyhoo, sentences have now been pronounced for their “crimes” of being opinionated lassies. 25 years for one, death for the other.
I fully understand your pressing need to be acknowledged as a representative of some kind of civilised, humane, learned, sophisticated culture, TURABDIN.
It’s just that examples like this one, plus countless others, suggest that every one of the contemptuous epithets you list are justified.
Oh dear just been reading about the decline of a once bastion of the British car industry.
Seems that due to declining sales the Jaguar Land Rover company, which is actually Indian owned is needing to make 4,000 workers redundant and save £1.7 billion over the next two years.
Dear oh dear indeed the economic superstardom promissed by Brexit doesn’t seem to be happening. And government debt too seems to be an issue as it climbs to nearly 3 trillion. Dark dark days indeed as we ram0 up for war with Russia w hilst the Argies say tgey are going to reclaim the Falkland with Donald Trump agreeing.
Its a sair fecht and one could be forgiven for thinking that the mighty Great Britannia is going down the pan. Thank goodness however they have Scotchland to help em and take perchance a bullit for them.
Off to sing Rule Britannia, land of Hope and Glory.
Mark Beggan says:
6 September, 2026 at 12:14 am
“corrupt and vicious”
That sums up Scottish nationalism.
Meanwhile wee Mark’s favourite set of corrupt LIARS Deform are busy SCREAMING that they have been the target of entrapment and targeted in a setup to make them look CORRUPT and CRIMINAL hahahahaha, Nige and Jenrick are furious that these revelations have come out
EH NAW Nige and Jenrick are furious that they have been CAUGHT
Apparently the normal????? rank and file at their conference were extremely angry that they appeared to be just like the rest of the corrupt lying bastard parties. who’d have thunk it
Don’t worry Marky Mark nothing will happen to your favourite GREEDY BASTARDS they ARE part of the establishment so it will quietly fade out, because you and your moronic unionist pals will keep voting for them
” Worry” I’ve forgotten about it already. They are not my pals they’re just people who care about our country. I never discuss politics or religion with my friends.
Swinney is looking more reptilian everyday. I do believe he is shedding his skin.
His shed skin, stuffed and cosmetically improved by a talented funeral director, will make a superb figurehead for the SNP faithful to revere and follow in the years to come.
There are credible reports that poot and xi intend to prolong their lives and their dictatorships far belong the normal human lifespans.
Perhaps Scotland could share that ambition too, and what’s more, do it on the cheap!
“I do believe he is shedding his skin”
Maybe its the shock of finally realising the cost for Scots of the colonial hoax the SNP administration is covering up on our oppressor’s behalf:
link to youtube.com
I thought it would be obvious. He has the woke disease. The symptoms can be quite easy to spot; Constant denial of reality, psychotic repetition is the main symptom. James Che is in the late stages and I fear he has not got long before he starts identifying as Maximilien François Marie Isidore de Robespierre’s wife.
@Mark Beggan
«they’re just people who care about our country».
«our country» being?
Do give it a name?
Shut up and eat your Lembas bread. You pointy eared trouble maker.
Supporters of Scottish independence – especially the more active kind – often talk about the Claim of Right as if it exempts the Scots from proving to the international community that independence is what they desire as a people.
This is the rhetorical flaw:
They treat history as if it were current legitimacy.
They treat symbolism as if it were international law.
They treat past sovereignty as if it were current.
And they treat grievance as if it were some kind of legal authority.
It’s emotionally understandable – the Scots have been exploited and treated very badly by their close neighbour for centuries – but misaligned, hyperbolic rhetoric does not strengthen Scotland’s legitimate pursuit of independence in the eyes of the world.
International law only recognises current constitutional reality.
And currently, regardless of how it came about historically:
No UN body, no foreign government, no international court will treat Scotland as sovereign based on a 1689 document.
They will treat Scotland as sovereign only if the Scottish people demonstrate overwhelming, sustained democratic will.
Not historical will.
Not theoretical will.
… Democratic will.
More good sense.
Additionally, I would suggest that the Claim of Right was in reality simply a political negotiating tool of its time.
Despite the its claim of the historical ‘Sovereign Scot, I am not aware of any time in Scottish history when the wishes of the individual ‘sovereign’ Scot were given any importance by the various unelected (in a modern democratic sense) rulers and ruling bodies that controlled the country. Indeed, they were not even asked for – there was no mechanism to do so.
This was the situation throughout Europe.
But… another one
” We, gathered as the Scottish Constitutional Convention, do hereby acknowledge the sovereign right of the Scottish people to determine the form of Government best suited to their needs, and do hereby declare and pledge that in all our actions and deliberations their interests shall be paramount.
We further declare and pledge that our actions and deliberations shall be directed to the following ends:
To agree a scheme for an Assembly or Parliament for Scotland;
To mobilise Scottish opinion and ensure the approval of the Scottish people for that scheme; and
To assert the right of the Scottish people to secure implementation of that scheme.”
The Convention declaration does not change the legal position.
The claim of right was debated in the HoC and Sec of State,v David Mundell, said: “On 4 July 2018, this Parliament debated a motion to endorse the principles of the claim of right for Scotland.
This debate was an opportunity to discuss the democratic tradition in Scotland, of which both the 1689 and 1989 claim of right documents form a significant part. The claim of right, set out by the Scottish constitutional convention in 1989, was a key part of a process which ultimately led to the devolution of powers from the Parliament of the United Kingdom to the new Scottish Parliament in the Scotland Act 1998.
The claim of right sought to mobilise and secure the approval of the Scottish people for a new Parliament and then to see that Parliament established. The referendum of 1997 resoundingly secured that approval and the new Parliament was convened in 1999.
While this debate on 4 July secured the UK Parliament’s endorsement of the principles of the claim of right, with the Parliament and the Government voting to support the motion, the UK Parliament has already demonstrated its endorsement quite clearly by legislating for the existence of the new Scottish Parliament in the first place.
FC
Is that a fact?
Just checking.
FYI: all sorts were at it feathering their nests at a time of crisis, church, law, nobility and even royalty yet you seem to glide so smoothly over these, how shall we put it “inconveniences” to your argument/ viewpoint masquerading as teacher doing the doctrinal marking..
It was a hard nosed take over on the back of a financial hit that Queen Anne- the well ploughed field- had no little input in creating then controlling to suit Londons ends.
If you can’t recognise that then mater and paters financial support during your education was wasted.
Money, coercion, ultimate threat of force not long either after Scot’s had helped the coalition forces in Marlboroughs wars is simply stinking, as is you and your fellow site spoilers on here attempts to define our position as some sort of laudable, ever legal and inescapable entrapment.
I’m sure barren Anne would be so proud of you, but then again isn’t that all “ancient guff”?
Site spoilers, Auld Lochnagar?
Posters laughing at you for charging about wielding your plastic claymore, and raising a glass in memory of disputed skirmishes 800 years in the past are ruining things for you, eh?
You should get yersel yer ain site.
HMcH @ 8.56
Try the de-caff..
NC
The UK Constitution..
A bit of a myth that, point me to the stirring single document will you?
I’d be surprised if you can.
The UK so-called “Constitution” is a bouillabaisse (oops sorry- a pie mash and jellied eel gravy culinary crime against humanity) of all sorts of cobbled together different bits and pieces to suit, such as (ahem); “works of authority”- ie “respected HISTORICAL and legal texts written by constitutional experts”.
Ancient guff (to use a phrase popular here amongst the site contrarians) such Magna Carta even gets debated..
Suppose “ancient guff” is different when it’s “English ancient guff” eh?
Brut of Troy is probably in there as well somewhere..
“The UK Constitution…A bit of a myth that, point me to the stirring single document…”
I’m not sure of the point being attempted there, but the UK constitution is hardly myth.
A constitution is simply the set of fundamental rules that determine how a state is governed.
Those rules can be codified (written in one document), uncodified (spread across many sources), partly codified, or entirely customary.
Many countries have uncodified or partly uncodified constitutions and the UK is not unusual in that its constitution is uncodified, flexible, and spread across statutes, common law, conventions, and historical documents.
The UK constitution is fully recognised as a constitution in law, politics, and international practice.
Every state on Earth has a constitution… even if it isn’t written down.
A constitution isn’t defined by being a single document.
A constitution is defined by being:
The set of fundamental rules that determine how a state is governed.
The UK’s constitution is recognised by the UK Supreme Court, Parliament, international bodies, constitutional scholars, and political scientists.
The UK constitution isn’t “less real” because it isn’t in one document… it’s simply distributed rather than consolidated.
NC
Stopped reading at “the UK constitution is recognised by the UK Supreme Court”.
Kind of says it all really..
Whatever country it is – it’s definitely NOT Scotland
North code,
The comment you made was a bit contradictory in its overall veiw on international treaties.
The old treaty between Scotland and England will be taken into the eqaution of historical facts,
But the historical cacts also record that Scotlands old parliament was dissoled from tht union by the Westminster parliament, not subsumed into the Great Britain parliament.
Here lies the double Standard of picking and chosen what suits the narrative,.
Both the treaty of union records and the dissolved Scottish parliament records must apply for a completed union,.
And here you are implicating that the treaty of union has passed its sell by date. So what happens now the treaty of union has passed its sell by date, and been converted to null, void, does not apply any longer?
We usually throw out something that has passed its sell by date.
History is history in totality, not in selected few points or pieces only to satisfy a small number.who want the union to be the Law of GB parliament but at the same time tell us it doesn’t count as a treaty,
A interesting perspective for results with other Countries treaties with the GB parliament. Just claim their treaties are old and they are no longer in a treaty with the GB parliament.
I am actually liking your take on treaties that are no longer running to be lawful treaties in international law.
“So what happens now the treaty of union has passed its sell by date…”
Well… we could have it framed and hung in the entrance lobby of the Holyrood parliament building for tourists and school groups to look at.
What’s the point?
Even if we managed to fit it up for serious sexual assault, it would be out again in a very few years.
Plus, it might be forcibly converted to Islam while inside. That’s another practice rife in the 2026 UK.
@Hatey McHateface
I am no apologist for the theocratic system currently gripping Ir@n but that system is not Ir@n per se. Persian culture is no more barbaric than any other of the like. Ir@n did not invent the concentration camp or the «Abu Ghuraib» version.
Struggling to exclude the snares of whataboutery from the theme, i do wonder however about the role the west played in installing this system after the downfall of the Pahlevi monarchy, a monarchy that was out of favour with US regional interests and the rather spoiled & mercenary middle classes of the same country who now grow pistachios in California….
The «régime change», western involvement in Afgh@nistan & Ir@q is a signal example of where meddling by the uninformed leads. Even T E Lawrence might spin in his tomb.
Re.the subject country I know something of this for a branch of my extended family, in the orient families tend to the extra extended variety, lives there. I can assure you they are neither scum nor bloodthirsty demons and are nauseated by such cruelty. They, unlike my Christian side of the family, are Shia muslims.
As for towelhead, wore the bedouin headgear once, at age 6….i look cute in the picture…a kilt might have gone well with it!
Cross-fertilized culture, the future……?
Any relation to Darius the Great?
“subjugated Thrace and forced Macedon to become a fully subordinate client kingdom within the Achaemenid Empire; it had been a Persian vassal as early as the late 6th century BC—probably in 512 BC”
That’s the guy and his sons who also tried to colonize the Athenians. Achaemenid Empire ring any bells?
So no more agreeing with Alf. I don’t think your ancestors would be very amused would they?
No point interacting with wee guttersnipes like Beggan.
So the 1707 treaty of union that is wrote down on old parchment paper no longer exist as a treaty between Scotland and England regardless of actual historic records that, that treaty states for evermore and hereafter in it.
Or that Scotland automatically became a Sovereign country and nation again when that treaty had run its course to its end day,
When was the date by the way that the 1707 treaty of union had its sell by date?
so it can be discarded.
The truth is this:
The Treaty of Union is no longer a live international treaty.
It’s a historical document whose provisions have been fully absorbed into domestic UK constitutional law.
That’s the reality.
It’s not an international treaty anymore.
In 1707, it was a treaty between two sovereign parliaments.
But today:
The ToU has been domesticated… absorbed into the UK’s internal constitutional framework.
This is why folk who talk about “withdrawing from the Treaty” are wrong.
I was thinking about Prof Alf Baird’s posts about how an independent Scotland wouldn’t be burdened with the financial ambitions of the United Kingdom.
While the current Middle east conflict highlighted the inadequacies of the Royal Navy’s readiness, the United Kingdom will still be in the top 10 countries most powerful navies in the next decade.
As well as that the UK is in the top 10 of countries with spending on military.
Despite all that, people can come over on boats to our island and claim asylum despite crossing numerous countries to do so. What is the point of spending so much on the military where as a nation, Westminster can’t even have a secure border which allows only legal routes for asylum?
It seems Westminster is spending money on the wrong things. Could an independent Scotland spend it’s limited resources on things that truly benefit it’s citizens and at a lower cost than the Westminster system currently does?
Of course! Duh!
But it requires a hard-nosed realism at odds with the feel good vibes that an entire generation of entitled fantasists has come to expect.
Take “the boats” for example. Farage claims he will instruct the RN to stop them (a farcical claim in its own right, as some armed landlubbers on fast launches could do it in a week).
I don’t believe serving RN personnel will obey orders because slavish adherence to human rights shibboleths will leave them looking over their shoulders all of their lives.
The rot has gone so far that as Dominic Cummings famously observed, few of the levers that can be pulled by government ministers are attached to anything that works.
Scotland is no different. Possibly even worse, as our public sector is proportionately bigger.
It will take a Trump-style disruptor to achieve real change. Move fast and break things. After, we will need somebody capable of building back better. That part of the job that Trump is spectacularly useless at.
@ Hatey
I was clumsily trying to make the point about how Westminster is trying to make the UK look like a global power with all the military spending yet can’t even do something that a functioning society should expect in having secure borders.
Since I had linked UK naval power with the immigration debate in my post, I will address your fair point.
It is madness for any government to use military personnel in civilian matters that has legal implications. Wouldn’t it make more sense that Westminster poured resources in Border control institutions instead?
B
Top ten in spending on military eh?
I wonder how much of that is spent on the money-pit “nuclear deterrent” and more mundane stuff such as wholesale married quarters reconstruction after the peace dividend era was used as the excuse to leave that to deteriorate?
Then there’s the money wasted on the Ajax “brain scrambler” armoured personnel carrier, the vast stocks of gear and ammunition gifted to others in proxy wars and on and on?
Things being so great they now are being told to restrict training due to costs!
People can point at the expenditure but we are long relegated out of the premier league from days gone by..
Has Westminster parliament informed the UN that the 1707 treaty between Scotland and England has come to its end date?
And When did Westminster parliament inform the the Scots and Scotland by declaration that its 1707 treaty of union ended with the parliament of England?
Was it before the parliament of Scotland was dissolved three hundred years ago?
So many questions from Scotland wanting to know if it is a Colony or in a treaty of union with England.
Perhaps it is a legal slip up not telling the other half of the only two Countries in that Treaty there is no treaty,
Bilbo.
Here is another thought to mull over,
If Scotland is a independent Country since the 1707 treaty of unions sell by date, then so is England.
The UK parliament would be deceitful statement, unless it refers to the Anglo/ Irish parliament of 1801/ 1802.
Bilbo,
Without a active 1707 treaty between Scotland and England, Scotland is not in a national debt situation with the Bank of England or its treasury. w wEr8 spsessssd ps
For those who might have fallen under the delusion that the United Nations is planning to liberate the Scots from English oppression soon… here’s what it’s actually doing for Scotland.
Right now? Nothing.
The UN is not planning anything.
The UN is not preparing anything.
The UN is not considering anything.
The UN is not reviewing Scotland’s status.
This is the reality… Salvo’s/Liberate Scotland’s petition submitted to the C-24 is symbolic.
It has no legal force.
It will not trigger UN action.
It will sit in the UN system, acknowledged but inert.
This is exactly what happens to almost all civil-society petitions submitted to the C-24.
International law’s core principle is “State Sovereignty” and is built on one foundational rule:
The UN cannot override them.
This means that the UK decides Scotland’s constitutional status and the UN can’t challenge that.
The UN cannot intervene.
The UN cannot recognise Scotland unilaterally.
The UN cannot force negotiations.
The UN cannot “free” Scotland.
It’s tempting for folk to imagine the UN as a higher authority.
It isn’t.
States are the higher authority.
Ultimately, If Scotland wants independence, it must demonstrate overwhelming democratic will… not rely on historical documents or UN symbolism.
The UN exists to keep the world stable, talking, and cooperating – not to liberate nations or override sovereign states.
But… if the Scots overwhelmingly and consistently demonstrate that they want independence, the UK cannot stand in their way… not politically, not legally, and not internationally.
So it’s true then: Alf’s much-vaunted UN delusion will achieve…
… “Hee-Haw”, to coin a phrase.
I’m sure much of the Wings readership is truly shocked by this revelation. 🙂
Who knew that getting independence requires hard graft and winning hearts and minds (with detailed, cogent arguments and illustrations), rather than magic beans?
Bloody hell, Northy !
You’re beginning to talk sense for a change !
What happened to you ?
The starship to Alpha Centauri left without him.
The next one’s not due for 500 years.
So he has no choice but to pipe down and try to fit in. Quite right too. Who would want 500 years “assisting with enquiries” in Area 51.
Ultimately, while pro-independence groups look to the UN Charter as an overarching moral and political justification for independence, the UN’s legal architecture operates on the rule that self-determination for a nation like Scotland must be achieved internally and cooperatively through the UK’s domestic constitutional framework, rather than via unilateral international intervention.
IN THE IDEALIST’S UNIVERSE MAYBE.
In the messy actuality any minority within a larger state cannot rely on the principle even being acknowledged.
The big powers and their agents decide the agenda. Top of the list, the UN shall not interfere directly in matters of ethnic minority rights within constituent states, no matter how bad the treatment.
With Scotland locked into the British state, an entity created well before the concept of international law was thought of, even a resounding yes in a referendum might have little effective weight.
The UN itself, as an overseer of a plebiscite, would need to be involved. The British state, or any other, would never allow such interference in peacetime.
All of which returns to the status of Scotland within the UK. Burnham has hinted that any referendum or plebiscite ought to be considered «unconstutional» as it threatens the integrity of a sovereign state, consequently a referendum is probably off the table.
What should Swinney do? wait for a more compliant régime in London possibly.
Time is rarely on the side of the «right-thinking» petitioner, even in favorable times.
Interesting…
TURABDIN is chasing symbols:
AgentX is describing strategy:
I said in an earlier post that, “Independence requires maturity, realism, and strategy… not grievance, fantasy, or rhetorical noise,” and that contrast in attitude is clearly visible here:
AgentX = maturity
TURABDIN = grievance
AgentX = realism
TURABDIN = fantasy
AgentX = strategy
TURABDIN = rhetorical noise
Also, there can be no place in the ‘movement’ for fatalistic narrative – fatalistic narrative is the most disruptive, self-sabotaging force a movement can generate… it kills momentum faster than opposition ever could.
Wow, Northy!
The bridges are in sheets of flame today.
I hope you’ve found the courage and decency to tell Alf face to face.
And not just left him to hear about your betrayal from others!
Amen.
The UN is the record keeper of war. They list the conflicts in the world, keep records, take statements, give food to people who never receive it and have the best debating chamber in the world. Apart from that it’s the Titanic of Gravy Boats and we all know what happened to her.
I think your final paragraph needs to be amended. Scottish people need to be able to hold a referendum at intervals to determine whether the Scottish people wish to secede.
That is the opinion at least of the European Journal of International Law.
link to ejiltalk.org
“The actual issue for Scotland is therefore not whether it somehow fits into the category of constitutional self-determination. It clearly does. The actual question is whether the central government can unreasonably withhold from such an entity the opportunity to actualize that right through a referendum.
However, having raised the issue of self-determination only in order to illuminate the very technical question of UK law concerning reserved powers according to the Scotland Act (1998), the SNP invited the Supreme Court to address this issue in an incidental and somewhat cursory way. Hence, it has ended up with a highly condensed and brief treatment by the Court—a treatment that might be misunderstood as denying the application of the right of self-determination to Scotland altogether.
In reality, of course, the Court has merely found that Scotland is not a classical colony. Hence, the classical right of unilateral secession does not apply. Scotland cannot simply declare independence and leave if it wishes to obtain the benefit of a legally privileged secession in international law as a constitutional self-determination entity—in fact a practical necessity given Scotland’s hope to achieve widespread recognition and EU membership as an independent state. But if it enjoys constitutional self-determination, Scotland should be entitled to assess the will of its population at reasonable intervals. And if there is a clear majority in favour of independence, both sides would be obliged to negotiate the divorce in good faith.”
“I think your final paragraph needs to be amended…”
No – it doesn’t. Read it again.
” That is the opinion at least of the European Journal of International Law.”
Who cares? You still do not get it.
sam likes to present ideas as evidence and conjecture as fact. He never quotes any source until he’s satisfied its bias aligns with his own.
It’s a typical EU ploy to insist that when a binary decision is to be democratically made, one choice will be decreed as settled, final and irrefutable. Whereas the opposite choice must be revisited for as often as it continues to be made.
As for the statement that Scotland “hopes to achieve EU membership as an independent state”.
Even if we gloss over the obvious contradiction between EU membership and Independence, a moment’s thought tells us that no sane, rational Scot could ever support joining the EU without some prior knowledge of what the pros and cons of Scotland’s membership will look like.
sam and his ilk like to pretend it will simply be a “rejoining”. But with an economy one tenth the size of the UK’s, without the Hated Thatcher to fight for rebates and opt outs, and no choice over our currency, the deal put on the table by the EU will be different and worse than the one we had before.
That’s even before we start to consider Alf’s extra £150+ billion per year, which the cash strapped EU will be salivating to get its teeth into.
It’s precisely because of considerations like these that Iceland just told the EU to sling their hook. But that’s not something sam will want to talk about.
I support Scottish independence, but I’ve grown weary of the flawed rhetoric deployed in its name.
When a movement clings to magical solutions, it abandons the only path that works… and in doing so, it becomes its own worst enemy.
Flawed rhetoric is counter-productive; magical solutions, absolutist claims, historical shortcuts, and ego-driven “legacy building” do not strengthen a movement… they weaken it.
Why?
Because it diverts energy away from:
and into:
Movements collapse when they chase symbols instead of strategy.
Independence requires maturity, realism, and strategy… not grievance, fantasy, or rhetorical noise.
If Scotland wants independence, it must replace symbolism with strategy, grievance with persuasion, and myth with maturity.
And if that maturity can’t be found in Scotland’s Parliament – and currently, it can’t – then it must be found within the movement itself.
The path exists… but the movement must get itself together and choose to walk it and not wander off only to get lost in some fantasy of independence.
I don’t know how you’re doing this, Northy, and I don’t care that much.
Just stop reading my mind.
Just repeating this because it’s the best summary I’ve seen in years. Well done, Northy.
“Independence requires maturity, realism, and strategy… not grievance, fantasy, or rhetorical noise.
If Scotland wants independence, it must replace symbolism with strategy, grievance with persuasion, and myth with maturity.”
Alex Salmond knew this. It’s been forgotten since in the bitter grievance politics that Sturgeon and her brainless acolytes have made into a part of our way of life.
Strategy and a preternatural understanding of the opponent.
WOW….if only.
Salmond new how difficult the task to unite Scotland internally would be. Everybody was on board on the anti English establishment boat but he knew well how divided Scotland really was and how much a prisoner of her past she was and still is.
Well said Northy. Better late than never, about Ten years late, but none the less. Seriously! That is something that can be built on. If anyone here and now is serious about Scottish Independence then they must be resigned to the fact that we are laying the foundation for future generations to build on. Instant Indy is not on the menu. The EU is Achtung Verboten!! No short cuts or deals. Hard work long term with no fruits for your labors. See how many are still in the room and the ones that are left are the team.
Missing person appeal!
Will the real Northcode come forward please, his account here has clearly been hacked and it appears to be by the likes of Tory Scotchland HQ or similar..
Or maybe it’s Aunty Burnham?
Certainly got the site spoilers and Reform orientated on here having a good one handed read..
Keeps them off the streets I suppose.
🙂
No biggie, YL, you can continue to raise your glasses to the warriors smiting with their claymores in the Middle Ages.
It’s not going to solve anybody’s cost of living crisis, pay anybody’s pension, or put more front line nurses into the SNHS.
But for anybody one-handedly hating the English, your posts may well help keep them up until the happy ending.
Far better that they do that in their bedrooms behind closed curtains, than in the local park.
Usually I scroll past much of what is btl comment regarding it as shite.
A good deal of that shite comes from Main and Beggan, whose name, of Irish origin, betrays his small stature and likely his similar intellect.
Main is on here from morning to night and surely has no friends, no job and no wife.
Upthread, he imagines I would wish an independent Scotland to rejoin the EU. I said nothing about my views on rejoining the EU. I was quoting from the article to which I linked. The point of the article is the final two sentences.
“Scotland should be entitled to assess the will of its population at reasonable intervals. And if there is a clear majority in favour of independence, both sides would be obliged to negotiate the divorce in good faith.”
Scotland, independent, will need links to Europe. My preference is EFTA if it will have us.
Slugger O’Toole runs a better blog than this. It has volunteers from among the readership to monitor what is posted and ensure there is no “playing the man”- only “playing the ball”. The site moderators can issue yellow and red warning cards and suspend posters if they stray from the guidelines.
There are few women who post on here and probably few who read the crap. there’s a reason for that.
Main is a cyber bully. Constantly he attacks people for the views they hold. He and Beggan contribute nothing. Any moderator would not tolerate such behaviour from these two.
Neither would say to me face to face what they say online for fear of the skelping they would get.
Northcode, I have always enjoyed your posts.
It is Mr Beggan to you. You dont decide anything about this page. Threats of violence Sam is the squeak of a loser. Jog on to woke page. I am easy to find by the way.
Well, well. I predicted there would be a few things you wouldn’t want to talk about, sam.
And my prediction came true.
Interesting that according to you, nobody dares debate with you face to face. Perhaps that’s why you can’t hack it on here. You lack the opportunity to shut up anybody who disagrees with you.
Boo fucking hoo.
You’re a typical progressive lefty, sam. Utterly convinced you’re planted on the moral high ground. Contemptuous of anybody who dares question your narcissism. Determined to silence, cancel or cast out anybody who fails your ideological purity tests.
You should start your own blog and permit only sycophantic comments from yourself.
No friends, no wife, no job. Just hatred and Beggan.
Can’t you read, sam?
It’s Mr Beggan to you.
Seriously, though. Do you honestly believe you rate being hated?
Get real 🙂
HMcH
Ford Focus.
The settled down ageing badly hairdressers car!
Not bad mpg, nae room necessary for the (non existent) wains..
See, Auld Lochnagar?
Isn’t life so much simpler and easier when you stay in your comfort zone?
“Northcode, I have always enjoyed your posts.”
As do I yours.
Man up, Northy!
Don’t let sam intimidate and cow you into agreement and obedience. Stand tall!
Besides, even if he does start his own site and grant you permission to comment, he’s bound to rescind it soon enough.
There’s no escaping the progressive, lefty, ideological purity spiral.
I would like to read more of what you wrote today. You are on it. Ideological europhiles are yesterday. The wokes are going to get a whole lot more aggressive as their ideology and power base gets dismantled democratically. They have lost the argument and they do not like it. Now they are going to get removed from power at all levels.
What you wrote isn’t a million miles away from what the Founding Fathers were struggling with in a different time and place.
Well, allow me to chime in too, Sam: you are indeed an obnoxious, depressingly verbose metropolitan lefty (and a complete thicko to boot, with a completely unrealistic inflated opinion of his non-existent debating skills), all as summed up nicely by Hatey’s impressively succinct and wholly accurate summary.
You’re welcome. 🙂
All that you say there is correct, CC.
But it has to be added, that sam routinely and regularly posts links and quotes from economic and health studies that always attribute outcomes to lefty shibboleths, such as the sustained public spending that sam likes to label as “austerity”.
And never so much as even hint that the enormous demographic changes in recent decades may be contributing factors.
Societal poverty, for example. Are we expected to believe that the arrival of millions of third-world impoverished doesn’t affect the figures?
Health outcomes. Why do indigenous kids get dozens of vaccinations if millions of unvaccinated arrivals makes no difference to public health?
Once you’ve seen these obvious blind spots in sam’s posts, the obvious question of why is he pretending, who is he trying to fool, and what demographic does he hope to benefit by urging even more resource transfer in their direction, become clear.
Yes, absolutely Hatey. That’s the principal reason I hate the Woke/Metropolitan Left so very much: it’s penchant to purposely ignore what it sees as inconvenient truths which otherwise disprove their increasingly perverse (in every sense of the word), demonstrably failed, utterly moribund beliefs-system, zealotry and ideology.
Many innocents have been thrown under the wheels of that particular red bus.
@ Sam
I wouldn’t worry about Beggan. Wee shites like him has a big mouth but his bottle completely goes in real life with the first bit of confrontation.
Let him run his mouth off in here, that’s about all he can do.
As to his reply about going to a woke page, if he wasn’t about in the old days of this site, he’d be ripped to pieces, greetin and snorters that he’s getting bullied 😂 😂 😂
Auf Wiedersehen, Pet
Who would have thought a perfume salesman would change German history. It is the end of the EU as we know it.
I’am now compiling a list of names of Untermenschen for the Unterscharführer.
There’s a precedent.
Ribbentrop was a champagne salesman.
If anyone turns up declaring that they are chicken farmer then we should really begin to panic.
MB
We used to call the Germans “box heads”, they called us “island monkeys”
Whits yer hat size Beggars?
12×12 cms??
No they never. You just made that up. It was a Jerry helmet and a Japs eye. That’s why all white men are Fascists.
MB
Wrong (yet) again..
You probably never heard those insults on yer air cadet “Lionheart deployment” in ‘84 (to make up numbers) and be ration thief’s while the real soldiers got on with it.
They say a size 5 hat size/ German 16x16cm is the sign of a true hero..
Try not to stand on yer other foot when at attention or march like a Girl Guide..
I dont remember much about operation lion-heart. I was drunk in a whore house most of the time. Deutsche girls are wunderbar. You could say I was keeping the end up for Queen and country.
MB
Nah!
Not allowed into those sorts of establishments till you were 18 years old.
Air Cadets “Verboten” (spelling apols)..
I think there’s a bit of vicarious “memory” going on here..
A big brother was it by any chance while you were at Girl Guides summer camp brushing up on yer needlework?
Do share!
Call Quality Polis!!
Hatey has Northcode locked up in his basement and has stolen his log-in details!!!
It’s like a soap on tv the missus watches..
What’s that you say, Sooty?
What would Auld Lochnagar ken aboot a TV soap that only his missus watches?
You’re so right, Sooty. We’re not gonna get an answer to that one.
HMcH
Corrie and Emmerdale..
Sigh!
Such is life Sweep (or is it Parsley the Lion) to keep a happy marriage.
Not apparently that you’d know “old boy”!
Remember to feed Northcode down in “mothers fruit cellar” and provide toilet provisions ya naughty boy..
What is it now, Sooty?
Auld Lochnagar always quick to get the shirt lifting accusations in early?
Well, he did volunteer to spend his formative years cooped up with hundreds of other young lads. With no women anywhere near.
No surprise he’s had to spend the rest of his life compensating.
HMcH
Yer projecting again “old boy”..
As for my post;
Not at all!
I was merely making mild oblique reference to your (never-denied) “in this world or the next” or come to think of it that’s your Scotchland Office Tea trolley official secrets act vow isn’t it – correction – your civil ceremony (will presumably have been time barred to an easier) “till death us do part” vow (you are unco into vows after all)..
No offence intended, just following up on unrebutted suggestions by several on here before..
Or do I miscrie?
Doubt it. As long as yer “proud” “old boy” eh?
Mind and give Northcode some supper and a toilet visit before your lock down tonight..
Naughty Hatey..
“Jenny Gilruth is being groomed as a potential successor to John Swinney”
link to scottishdailyexpress.co.uk
——————————————
Could there be a more inappropriate caption for a phot?
It is refreshing to see a bout of common sense and realism breaking out on Wings and…….. from an unlikely source!
The learned professor must be in tears. The UN fiasco was only a means for some to feel important about themselves. They undoubtedly preferred to go down this route rather than doing any campaigning for the recent Scottish elections.
How long before the usual numpties revert to the 300 year old mince and the colonialism tripe.
To the Cow (Chas) from the Confused dot com tv add:
“Who’s That Whistling!!!
Lighten up FFS..
Here and now,
For a State to exist
It must contain an agreement of a union,
For the State to continue the agreement must continue.
Scotland has not, and did not install a expiry Date on the union that created the two State union.
However Englands Westminster parliament appears to have done so.
Westminster parliament, politicians, and think tanks also seem to be implying the that the union between Scotland and England has expired an ended. Without a public Declaration to the people of England, Scotland, Wales or Ireland ever taken place.
For The union this is bad news,
For the UK this is really bad news
For the whole of the UK people this is new and confusing news,
Do People in England, Ireland,Scotland and Wales know there is no United kingdom foundation any longer,
Surely if there is no longer a union treaty being followed it effects all FOUR Countries. And all Four nations would need to have been informed of the expiry date and year,
Or perhaps Westminster and the monarch of England that is changing his faith, the faith of his Country feel its better to keep it a secret from the four Nations.
Now all four Countries and nations in Britain will be thinking “is our Country a Colony also if the 1707 union has a expired date.
Is that why the great influx of migration into the four nations, as they have no laws outside treaties,
There would be no united kingdoms Constitution any longer, and this is where all four nations in these Isles realise that laws of there people and nations have been abandoned and no longer applicable,
It is interesting politics for every Country when treaties no longer apply,
Does that also make Englands nation a independent nation from its UK government.
Maturity, realism, and strategy.
The foundation of any draft to a constitution or Bill of Rights for a nation working towards self standing must have God , Truth and Justice at it’s core. Maturity , realism and strategy are the tools by which this can be achieved.
Oh dear another emblem of British decline has just hove into tje public view with the announcement that foreign owned Jaguar Landrover is in decline and financial trouble
Not a good look at all as our fable post Brexit Brittanic economic power house continues to slump. And then one learns that foreign student numbers to our universities is in decline with a reduction of 10% in fee income in 2024/2025 with and even bigger drop this year.
Scotland has certainly tied itself to a sinking ship. But we know that. Scotland may be resource rich but it is being bled to keep the faltering UK afloat.
Doesn’t take an Einstein to realise then why Scotland is being told it has no right to hold a referendum to leave our cossetted cared for position in the United Kingdom.
And with the abolition of the NHS in England, and the living off off of health boards into some 26 ICB’s that will be merged into a central government deoartment for health and social care does anyone here think with thr changed announced here things are going to be much different.
Bye bye JLR and bye bye NHS. Our Grande Bretange golden era is now in full swing.
Take your blinkers off, Willie.
European and indeed western automotive industries are being decimated by the Covid Spreaders. It’s part of their plan to destroy and subjugate everything in the world that isn’t theirs.
The trade deficit between the EU and the CS is now running at one billion Euros every day.
It’s beyond belief that you can’t have noticed Chinese cars on our streets and Chinese car ads on your TV. In a very few years time, all of our “rich resources” will be flowing in one direction only as there will nothing for us to buy, other than basic foodstuffs, that won’t be coming from Covid Central.
I can’t argue with you on that, but should you not be assigning at least some of the blame to those consumers who are doing the capitalism-y thing of opting for a less costly product?
Sure, MH, but with so many products now, that ship has sailed.
For just about all homeware, electrical products and electronics, for example, you buy Covid, or you do without.
With automotive, European options are still available. Ditto for parts. But the writing is on the wall unless our elites act fast. VW is planning to shed 100,000 jobs.
China, now there’s a country that developed and grown its economy to where it is today.
Yes around one in ten new cars in the UK are now Chinese. The Chinese car industry has succeeded whilst Grande Bretagne’s has failed.Just like all the other GB industries that have failed and disappeared.
And when it comes to constructing anything in GB there is a huge skill base. Just look at Britain’s biggest engineering project the Hinckley C nuclear power plant and ask yourself what country’s company is building it and who is financing it.
Or British warships. How many Romanians and Filipinos are building these ships. And what about strategic defense base.initiatives being cancelled due to engineering shortages.Seems that we are woefully short of skilled workers. Lots of coffee house and burger bar skills though.
So why is this. Why is Great Britain a country on the slide. Its a good question..This was supposed to be Britain’s Golden era of prowess and success.
And why is Health Service England being abolished this year. And will.Scotland follow suit. Good questions but for me I more than think Britain is a hollowed out busted flush.
Or am I blikered and missing something?
@Northcode
«TURABDIN is chasing symbols:
UN intervention
external validation
geopolitical rescue
fatalistic narratives»
«AgentX is describing strategy:
democratic legitimacy
internal constitutional pathways
political persuasion
realistic mechanisms»
My point is rather more nuanced than your assessment however the strategy you vaunt , hasn’t that model been running for decades with little advancement nearer the goal? The British state can sleep easily if all the ScotNats have to offer is a politically wet behind the ears concept of legitimacy, pathways, persuasion and mechanisms…..clichés all.
If the intention is to inure people to failure a spendid job is being done.
Rule Britannia….forever?
Seems rather defeatist, T.
Surely it should not be beyond the wit of roughly 50% of the Scottish people to convince around 10% of the rest about the benefits of independence? That’s all that is needed. That’s what Sturgeon suggested latterly in one of her few rational statements.
Our resident professor assures us that we will benefit by c. £200 billion per annum. That’s over £33,000 for each of us, every year, for ever, just for ticking the right box. Should be an easy sell.
Even in the real world, surely roughly 50% of the economists in Scotland can put forward between them a convincing economic case? That would convince the 10% of soft ‘No’s needed. Positivity. The way ahead. Assuming there is a convincing economic case.
“Assuming there is a convincing economic case.”
Well, quite.
Said case needs to be credibly and comprehensively made, preferably by someone who knows what they’re talking about in economic, financial, legal and business terms, with an impressive personal track record. (Ergo, not some swivel-eyed lefty who makes Corbyn look credible).
From an Indy perspective, it is unfortunate indeed that such a manifesto and route map has been conspicuously absent since 2013 (and actually, well before then too).
“Assuming there is a convincing economic case”
We should not forget that ‘independence is a cultural emotion’ (Fanon), which explains why ‘the solidarity of the independence movement depends of the oppressed ethnic group’ (Hechter), i.e. primarily Scots speakers.
This implies that some colonially-minded people may reject their own liberation totally irrespective of any ‘economic case’, as arguably occurred in 2014; clearly many voters in the indyref ‘did not necessarily view independence through a monetary lens’ (Bond).
Either way, the economic under-development of a colony and the colonial mindset of its people are both a consequence of colonialism, for which ‘the only remedy is liberation’ (Memmi).
“This implies that some colonially-minded people may reject their own liberation totally irrespective of any ‘economic case’, as arguably occurred in 2014”
The point you repeatedly (willfully) miss is this: there was no credible, adequate ‘economic case’ made in 2014 – which is why you lost.
The 2013 White Paper was risible and fell apart barely as the ink was still wet, yet even this is the sum total output for all the time that has elapsed since. No, I’m afraid THAT is the problem from an Indy perspective – not some laughable grievances about “oppressed ethnic Scots speakers” and the like.
One of your biggest problems, Alf (one of many) is that you are incapable of putting yourself into others’ shoes – normal people with jobs, houses, careers, kids, pensions. Stakeholders, basically. These people are generally going to need a great deal more hard evidence and quality information, vastly beyond your powers I’m afraid.
Surely if you believe the oppressed ethnic group are primarily Scots speakers, Alf, there’s little point in quoting Fanon, Hechter, etc in the King’s English?
In fact, if you believe the postcolonial boys are so relevant, why not publish Scots translations of their seminal works?
You could even plug them on here!
“The point you repeatedly (willfully) miss” again and again is that ‘independence is a cultural emotion’.
Independence cannot be primarily about the economy for the simple reason that the UK economy has been in a zero growth, rising debt and therefore declining relative position for as long as any of us can remember and is therefore logically not worth voting for, if it ever was.
As the post referendum survey found, voting for or against independence depends on whether you hold to a Scottish or a British identity, which is culturally (and linguistically) driven.
“The point you repeatedly (willfully) miss” again and again is that ‘independence is a cultural emotion’.
Independence cannot be primarily about the economy
Wrong. WRONG. You’ve obviously never heard that oft-quoted, exasperated political quotation “It’s the economy, stupid!” …?
I mean, you have to laugh don’t you? I accuse you of failing to empathise with mainstream, ordinary working people who are worried about their jobs, livelihoods, young families, pension pots, the NHS and whatever – and here you are once again right on cue, ably demonstrating that very thing – “Independence cannot be primarily about the economy” – the mark of the true, unthinking zealot and fantasist, for sure.
Well, it’s all very easy for you to say, perhaps with “hee-haw” but maybe a couple of marbles rolling around that aged, wizened cranium of yours, but not so easy for 20- and 30-something young, aspiring professionals, nor strivers, stakeholders – with much of theirs (and their children’s) lives in front of them et al. No, I think you’ll find these people are going to need a lot more by way of hard evidence than endless misappropriated quotations of Memmi & co. endlessly parroted, “ancient guff” and/or being told that their futures, money and prospects are all somehow largely irrelevant.
FC
Join Chas hiding behind the settee keiching himself feart unless gifted ratified gold standard insurance backed guarantees of instantaneous financial betterment (that no govt provides) otherwise their NO votes just continue to contribute to holding us in the here and now with zip chance of betterment..
PS The sky isn’t going to fall on our heads.
Read McCrone FFS..
CC @ 8.34
“Well hold on there Bald Eagle!” 🙂
Emotion is exactly what motivates political moves.
Think;
Immigration
Support for “U”
Brexit
Falklands War
Nuclear deterrent
2 world wars (be honest now)
Introduction of the welfare state after the sacrifice in above mentioned two world wars.
Versailles treaty and restructuring of Europe.
The Napoleonic wars
etc..
Emotion is the no. 1 driver in societies with full voting franchises, followed by ideology at second top spot with full effects of economics diluted into certain key criteria (healthcare, welfare for example) in 3rd.
Whether you or I agree with it or not, not everyone is an entrepreneur or captain of industry after all.
“voting for or against independence depends on whether you hold to a Scottish or a British identity, which is culturally (and linguistically) driven”
Just imagine if that was true. You could also say:
“voting for or against EU membership depends on whether you hold to a Scottish or a European identity, which is culturally (and linguistically) driven”
And you’d end up with a small number of Scots wanting to be in the EU, because only a small number of Scots feel a European identity, driven by language.
Yet, we’re told that a majority of Scots want to be in the EU. That can only be (and who has ever argued to the contrary anyways?) because they believe that they and the Scottish economy will be richer.
And so we see:
“voting for or against independence depends primarily on whether the voter expects to be better off as a result” (Hatey)
As evidence:
“It’s Scotland’s Oil – We’re being robbed”
“It’s Scotland’s Wind – We’re being robbed”
“It’s Scotland’s Whisky – We’re being robbed”
Etc.
““Well hold on there Bald Eagle!” ?
Meh! Always makes me laugh, that. 😀
But yeah. I do take your point about the power of emotion and passion, as distinct from the rather more prosaic “pounds, shillings and pence – and what’s going to happen to my house, job and pension pot”. Maybe I’m just a mercenary tosser. 😀
I daresay, the truth of the matter lies somewhere between our two positions. It’s undeniable that when push comes to shove, a credible route map and sufficiently detailed explanation beyond soundbites and pamphlets is going to be key in pushing support across the line – for the middle class, median “rump” of working stakeholders. On the other hand of course, there are many for whom independence is such a burning priority for its own sake – to such an extent that talk of money, currency, allocation of debt etc. is viewed (rather unfairly) as simply being a ruse to stick a spoke into the wheel.
As a complete outsider, I would argue that it has empirically been shown to be thus – in 2014? Indy had a consummate politician in Salmond, genuinely feared (and admired) by Unionists for good reason, an articulate communicator, master strategist and demonstrated political skills especially during his SNP minority government, e.g. working with the Tories for the greater good, whilst Labour threw stones at him. (Ideological cul-de-sacs were not his thing, and he was surely all the better for it).
Yet even with Salmond at the helm (and not a great post-austerity UK backdrop in 2014), the Yessers fell c.11 points short – and I can only attribute this to the main weakness of the Yes campaign – lack of a detailed, credible and comprehensive explanation on key areas such as currency and other areas. This made it much easier for the No campaign to raise questions of credibility, which, given the length of time the SNP had to get their ducks in a row beforehand was actually a serious error IMO.
Post 2014, I think it is unarguable that the Yes movement has gone backwards, not forwards, with much splintering and factionalisation – the “big tent” fashioned by Salmond has long since been taken down. Worse, there are an awful lot of other fringe groups who have hitched their bandwagons and agendas onto the Yes juggernaut and (IMO) have certainly succeeded in emasculating it. From where I’m sitting, there are no “green shoots of recovery” evident, far from it in fact. It was a big opportunity (possible THE big opportunity) missed.
CC @ 9.03
“We’ll hold on there Bald Eagle”. 🙂
Agreed.
Only thing to point out though is that it was incredibly difficult to set out financial matters in guaranteed detail given the “other half” in potential divorce proceedings was ad-hoc claiming ownership of everything and refusing to in any sense to act in a grown up manner (and discuss) over basics like currency (it’s our ball mentality).
There is some confusion surrounding the Claim of Right and many folk don’t fully understand what the 1689 document actually was, what the 1989 document actually is, or how completely different their purposes are.
Even for those interested this post might seem quite constitutionally dry… but it’s worth reading it if one wants to understand the purposes of both Claims of Right and how they differ.
The Claim of Right 1689 was a constitutional statement by the Scottish Convention of Estates declaring that James VII had forfeited the Scottish throne because he had violated the conditions under which a monarch could rule Scotland and inviting William and Mary to take the throne under new constitutional limits.
It was not a “declaration of sovereignty” by the Scottish people.
It was not a “contract between nations.”
It was not a “standing assertion of Scottish independence.”
It was a constitutional justification for replacing a monarch.
In modern terms, it was:
A legal argument explaining why James VII had broken the rules of Scottish governance and why Parliament could remove him.
That’s its true nature.
The Claim of Right 1689 and the Claim of Right 1989 share a name and a sentiment, but they are completely different in nature, purpose, legal status, and constitutional meaning.
Once the contrast is clearly seen, modern Scottish constitutional rhetoric makes sense.
The Claim of Right 1689 was a constitutional act of revolution – a formal constitutional document produced by the Scottish Convention of Estates as part of the Glorious Revolution settlement, but its purpose was specifically to articulate the legal grounds for declaring that James VII had forfeited the crown.
In short, it’s purpose was to justify removing King James VII from the Scottish throne.
It declared that the monarch must: govern according to law; that James had violated Scotland’s laws and liberties thereby forfeiting the crown; and that Parliament could lawfully invite William and Mary to rule instead.
It’s core function was as a legal and constitutional instrument used to depose a monarch, define limits on royal power, and assert parliamentary authority.
It was not a declaration of popular sovereignty.
It was not a statement of national self-determination.
It was not a proto-independence document.
It was a constitutional justification for regime change.
The Claim of Right 1689 is still extant – it remains part of UK constitutional law, but only functions today as a historical constitutional document rather than a source of modern legal authority as its provisions are now largely spent because they relate to the specific circumstances of 1689.
In contrast the Claim of Right (1989) is a political declaration of democratic principle.
It was not a parliamentary act, it isn’t legally binding, and it isn’t a constitutional instrument.
It’s purpose is to assert a political principle:
That the people of Scotland are sovereign, and have the right to choose the form of government best suited to their needs.
But this is a moral and political statement, not a legal one.
It did not: create legal sovereignty; override UK parliamentary sovereignty; bind Westminster, or confer rights under international law.
It was a political declaration designed to shift public mood and build civic momentum for devolution – it was also intended to demonstrate civic unity behind the principle of devolution.
The Claim of Right (1689) had legal force, the Claim of Right (1989) is politically symbolic and has no legal force – they share a name because they both express the idea that rulers must govern with consent… but they operate in completely different constitutional universes.
Many folk conflate the two documents.
They treat the 1989 Claim of Right as if it were: legally binding, constitutionally entrenched, internationally recognised, a sovereignty clause, and a modern equivalent of CoR 1689.
It is none of these.
The 1989 Claim of Right is political rhetoric, not constitutional authority.
The 1689 Claim of Right is historical constitutional law, not a modern sovereignty clause.
This confusion fuels a lot of fatalistic and magical thinking.
To summarise:
The Claim of Right 1689 was a constitutional document used to depose a monarch and define lawful governance.
The Claim of Right 1989 was a political declaration asserting democratic principle and supporting devolution.
One had legal force… the other was political symbolism.
A Tolkienian metaphor:
One emerald tapestry of stories woven from the past,
One land of songs and dragons,
One untamed spirit wrapped in mist and mountain,
One thorned rose to find them all…
and in ignorance confine them.
Know the stories beneath your feet… they unbind the illusions of the present.
For the past is a lantern and no shadow of the present can bind those who carry it.
I mind when I learned that Tolkien was invalided out of the front line in the Great War and never fully recovered after.
So much that had puzzled me became clear.
Were you perchance at the Somme, Northy?
And whilst we are talking about British economic success stories like JLR shedding thousands of jobs due to declining sales and burgeoning costs let us not recognise that the long established Whitbread company.is today closing all of the remaining 89 Brewers Fayre restaurants and next week all 106 Beefeater restaurants.
Its a huge blow with tens of thousands of job losses across the UK and sadly another indicator of a British decline.
And whilst we are talking about British economic success stories like JLR shedding thousands of jobs due to declining sales and burgeoning costs let us not recognise that the long established Whitbread company.is today closing all of the remaining 89 Brewers Fayre restaurants and next week all 106 Beefeater restaurants.
Its a huge blow with tens of thousands of job losses across the UK and sadly another indicator of a British decline
Some see it as a very clear indicator of an over regulatory state pursuing a punitive taxation regime in order to buy off its ever growing client base of shirkers and grifters.
But yes, the end result is the same – inexorable decline.
However, if the interpretation in the first para is correct ( spoiler alert – it is ), that decline can be arrested and reversed by a new government with the guts to decisively act.
Its an interesting concept that of shirkers and grifters. No doubt the captain of wealth and influence would never come into that category. Lady Mone to Prince Andrew to suggest a few. Or what about the political classes. Perchance more than a few grifters there.
But the soubriquet of shirkers and grifters is usually reserved for those who are described as clients of the state, not that Lady Mone as an example could be described as that.
Very possibly you might have been expressing the sentiment of the descriptor Nutzlose Esser, or the more severe sentiment of lebebensunwertes leben which caught hold in the 1930s.
Such a conceptalso took hold in Ireland during the engineered am Georta Mor and of course in the Scottish clearances. Yes it is critical that everyone contributes to tbe extent but how corrective policies are deployed and to who is a big political question. Those who blindly decry certain classes may not realise that the might be the real target going forward.
Or is it that the Clearances are a policy still to be fullfilled? I hope not.
What can I say, Willie.
People a lot smarter than you or I have calculated the sustainable human population for our only world. We’re over it by a few billion. One way or another, the surplus will be got rid.
The strong, the smart, the advantaged, the well armed, etc are jockeying to ensure they don’t end up in the “got rid” category. The moral high ground occupiers, proclaiming “nobody left behind” will result in fewer survivors, not more. They’ll be got rid with the doomed they’re trying to help.
It’s foolish to claim it didn’t have to be this way. Study history, study nature, look at current affairs, and you’ll see it’s encoded in our very genes.
HMcH @ 5.17
Looks like his Hatiness is leaning towards phrenology!
What’s to save you eh, running a self confessed failing business because your eyes not on the ball but on here every (ward) waking hour 6am to midnight?
Check out those cranial bumps Hatey, they’ll be inherited because heaven forbid you ever participated in group sports; just loitered around the shower blocks with your “dilator” -apparently they’re called- you’ll know all about that of course!
🙂
Never mind about all that, Auld Lochnagar.
How come you’ve never denied that you’ve been secretly giving extra sedatives to your missus when you bring her her meds last thing before beddy byes?
That fuss about the French woman was because it’s wrong, sordid, disgusting and a betrayal. It wasn’t publicised so that the likes of you could get ideas.
Anyhoo, they must have kicked in by now. Give her an exploratory poke to make sure before you get down to business – can’t be too careful!
Why not come back here around 2:30 AM, sick with shame and self-loathing, and so all worked up to post a good one?
Oh, and mind you don’t leave any device open on Wings BTL. Just in case she reads this. I know you must think that because she was daft enough to hook up with you that she’s never gonna twig. But why take the chance, eh?
Just because she’s ill, doesn’t mean she can’t kick you out.
HMcH @ 12.22
Isn’t this past your bedtime.
Apart from having no idea what yer babbling about I will let Mrs YL see what you’ve disgracefully done there and watch smiling as she, how shall I put it? Ah yes corrects your nasty spiteful hissy-fit typical gay tirade if ever we cross paths.
Yer boyfriend can come along and hold yer jacket.
All in, frankly no less than I’d expect from a non-man like you..
East Kilbride isn’t it Main?
🙂
To be fair, the hospitality industry is on it’s last legs.
Even without the increased rates and wage costs, the industry is suffering from high energy costs and the general public having even less disposable income where it’s getting to the point that eating out and night outs are regarded as a luxury only afforded once in a while.
Besides, people are drinking less alcohol now and with streaming services, there is less incentives to want to go out on night outs anyway.
North code.
I like your turncoat attitude more and more.
In your explanations you are quite thorough in Stating that anything Scotland made in contributing towards the 1707 treaty of union is void, spent, expired.
And that today Scotland only thinks through a lack of maturity that anything it wrote down towards that 1707 union was not Truue for Scotland only for England, and that Politics and Westminster can decide how to interpret or twist what the Scottish people meant.
There is no spent treaty valid today, but Scotland has to abide by that invisable law of treaties.
I think that is called Fraud.
Fraudulant concept not just for Scotland, but for England, Ireland and Wales. as All four nations in these Isles have never received a declaration that the Treaty of union had a spent expiry date that has expired.
That none of these four nations have to contribute to laws outside a treaty, wether that concerns National debt as mentioned regards the treaty,
Or wether that concerns taxation as mentioned in the 1707 treaty,
Unless of course there is no cleared cut of date for that expired spent 1707 treaty of union,and none has been declared, come to light or informed the for nations peoples Countries,
I have to admit that mythical immature reasoning that there is a 1707 union with Scotland and England and there is not a 1797 treaty of union with Scotland and England,
And if there is a spent Expired union, as with the old Claim of right equally so it displaces the Monarch of England from Scotland, as that 1707 treaty of union agreement is also spent and expired.
What was the old mythical undeclared time line date that threw England, Scotland, wales, Ireland out of the spent expired 1707 treaty of union?
What date were the four nations no longer obliged to pay taxes and revenues to that Spent expired and voided 1707 treaty of union?
“I like your turncoat attitude more and more.”
Thanks, James. Your agreement with my structural analysis of ‘no longer relevant ancient Scottish history’ is appreciated.
It’s all quite simple, really.
People get confused because Scotland and England exist as separate countries, but not as separate sovereign states.
Those states were extinguished and replaced with something new… the brand?new (and shiny, at least in 1707) United Kingdom.
The once ‘sartorially resplendent’ UK – strutting the world in its Anglo-finery and wearing its newly acquired, slightly too short, Scottish kilt – is looking a tad tattered now after all these years, but that’s another story.
Here’s how the 1707 British Isles re-structuring project went down: The Treaty of Union — an agreement — led to the Acts of Union, which enshrined that agreement in Scots and English law.
Together, they created a political union between the two countries.
Both Scotland and England transferred their sovereignty to the new United Kingdom for safekeeping in the shiny new political union’s shiny new parliament.
Two countries.
One political union.
One government.
One sovereign parliament.
If you think about it, the creation of the United Kingdom was more of a cost/benefit exercise than anything else.
A bit like John Swinney reducing the administrative burden of Scotland’s health service from many boards down to just two
But it wasn’t a shiny new parliament was it?
No it was the old English one whose Speaker (unbroken tenure through all this I think) formally stated “we have catched Scotland and will hold her close”.
AI NC; discuss the speaker of Westminster in 1707s statement above with a view to providing a Unionist slant..
There’s precedence by the way, J6s great “Bwitish” idea didn’t ameliorate major English institutions like the so called Prince of Wales or the still prevalent Westminster post of the Duchy of Lancaster eh?
And hey! They still perform the garter and stockings nonsense in “parlayament” of Black Rod an’ that, undiluted from pre 1707 English Parliaments flummery.
Yer having a laugh, bring back the real NC or be on yer way..
There’s what is, and what should be. Damned are the proponents of the former as wordsmithery clerkly apologists.
“be on yer way”
There ye go, Northy, Stu has spoken his final word.
Although quite why he would choose to do so via the persona of one of his most ignorant, bigoted, obnoxious, damaged, and therefore most Scotland-shaming BTL regulars must remain open to conjecture.
But who are we, or you, to question his commands once handed down from on high? Bye, Northy. Seriously, it’s mostly been fun.
See you on WGD? 🙂
HMcH @ 7.34
Wow!
You have just described yerself to a “T” there old boy!
I take it that it’s a pelter you deservedly and fulsomely received on another site comments section and you’ve been desperately holding onto it in the hope of using it on someone else regardless of inapplicability to make yerself sound clever 🙂
I’m sure you’ll fit right in over at WGDs site, he’s gay too apparently so you’ll get on like a house on fire scratching each others eyes out 30 times a day each and every day.
No wonder yer business is failing, yer heads “elsewhere”..
Now, jog on and write some more posts desperately pretending you’ve got friends on this site to make you feel a bit better about yer pathetic contrarian self..
Or do I miscrie? Though I sure doubt it..
🙂
Haud yer horses there, Auld Lochnagar. I’ve got that gen you were looking for.
The French woman is called Gisele Pelicot. It was discovered that her hubby had been sedating her for years before raping her. He had also invited dozens of strangers to join in while he filmed the assaults.
There’s lots of information online that tells about the mistakes he made that eventually led to him getting caught. Obviously I’m not going to leave that kind of online trace by checking them out, so you’re on your own there.
Since then a lot more similar cases have come to light, some of them in the UK. Women who often feel woozy, tired and “out of it” are becoming suspicious, perhaps rightly so. Ask your missus (without being too obvious) if she’s noticing any of these symptoms.
Hope this helps. Good luck!
The 1707 treaty of union had economics and financial collections, taxation and revenues, Treasury benefits wrote into it that benefited the Westminster parliament,
However if that 1707 treaty of union is Spent, exhusted then so is the itinary listed of and as the 1707 treaty of union,
Then Taxation and revenues collection changes for all the [ four Countries in these isles.]
I have to admit I am enjoying the mythical theory that Scotland, England, Wales and Ireland hold no such 1707 treaty of union and are therefore not obliged to follow the treaty and the laws under it. at all.
For without the 1707 treaty of union still being valid and recognised in full , none of the four nations
May feel obliged to uphold its laws or revenues that were stipulated in that treaty, which also stipulates the king of England as the king of Great Britain Sovereignty in the Westminster parliament
Indeed the State of Great Britain of two Countries Scotland and England also ceases to exist, becomes spent, expired and voided.
Sovereignty of England may return to England only, if the 1707 treaty is spent, releasing not only Scotland, but Wales and Ireland too,
As the in the 1707 treaty of union they are specifically mention as being in the 1707 treaty of union between Scotland and England,
It untangles many obligations, not just one.
Including Scotland, Wales or Ireland requiring permission to remove themselves from a spent treaty.
What date did the treaty of union find it was spent and expired, can anyone that states it is no longer used provide a date timeline,
Or is that to mythical a question posed on the factual information provided on Wings here these last few days,
As I am sure that Wales, Ireland, England, and Scotland want to know, with all this influx of possible? …law breakers entering their Countries nations.
“What date did the treaty of union find it was spent and expired…”
1st May 1707.
I feel that my previous reply was a tad flippant and lacked sufficient explanation to be of much use in helping folk understand.
Allow me to expand on it.
Once both Acts of Union (Scotland’s and England’s) received Royal Assent and came into force on 1st May 1707, the Treaty of Union ceased to have independent legal significance.
It became:
The Treaty was the agreement; the Acts were the law; the Acts created the new state.
I don’t think it’s possible to be any clearer.
Scotland will always be in the state it is in whilst it clings to the socialist ideology that has enslaved it and prevented it from rising to it’s rightful place in the world.
The reality check by Northcode on here yesterday was nothing more than a light bulb popping it’s last gasp. Today it’s back to bullshit as usual. Fantasy government with the panel of experts in full rant mode. ‘The Bureau Supply for ageing men.. with snorting heads they gaze to the shore’ ‘meanwhile the world outside goes on all around you”.
How many Scots can you hypnotize with a tin of carrots?
North code.
Just a we correction to the old belief you quoted,
That those two states were extinguished,
Scotland parliament was extinguished by the parliament of Great Britain from the Treaty,
Factually and in Records, the State of England and its old parliament were not extinguished but Transferred… by the Monarch of England into the parliament of Great Britain, prior to the 1707 treaty of union became activated, that was the last session of the old parliament of England converted but still in existence rebranded as the parliament of Great Britain,
The parliament for Great Britain acting also as the parliament for England and Wales still passes separate laws and legislation for England and Wales,
So the parliament for Great Britain also acts as the parliament for England and Wales, being one and the same parliament and state of England still in existence today,
Only the State of Scotland and parliament of Scotland was dismissed and dissolved from the 1707 treaty of union, by the parliament for England and Wales acting as the larliament of Great Britain,
This is just as relevant in modern times due to the parliament of England and Wales still existing and not ceasing to Exist to procure a finalised agreement on the 1707.treaty of Union,
And the parliament for England, Wales and Great Britain united as one parliament today deciding that the Treaty of union is spent, for Great Britains England and Wales parliament,
Which does not include the parliament of Scotland, This has been the construction of Englands Great Britain parliament for over three hundred years to present day.
To cherry pick some old history to make a narrative fit for the sake of the parliament of Englands ….transferred… parliament into the Great Britain parliament does not do justice to your intellect,.
As those combined and united parliaments of England, Wales and Great Britain do not make a parliament of all Great Britain.
For there is not a Scottish parliament in it at all,
The Scottish parliament ceased, ….the Country did not.
The English parliament DID NOT cease. Nor did the Country of England.
But they never became united as one and the same parliament because of these two separate events taken place,
And the 1707 treaty of union never concluded as one is ceased parliament ( Scotland ) and the other continues active today as the sole Great Britain ( English parliament continuation ).
There is a lot of finger pointing going on in Germany today. What is German for ” It was your fault “. The tide has turned and the centre left party are standing with their dick in their hands or maybe it is someone else’s dick.
Who would pay to watch Jenny Gilruth mud wrestling Alice Weidel?
Just watched footage of AUOB march on the Royal mile. My Cring Meter just went off the scale. Nothing as sad as a bunch of fat, middle aged civil servants pretending to be bikers. To think most of those that attended will be dead soon. The real killer is the smug look on their faces. What in the name of grievance, fantasy and rhetoric have they got to smirk about.
Sam said,
“Neither would say to me face to face what they say online for fear of the skelping they would get.”
You know Sam, has a valid point here. When was the last time people sat around and discussed the issues or the strategy? The internet has brought us closer and at the same time it has pushed us apart. Or are we relying on the net too much and have abandoned our natural instinct to commune with each other. Men like horses are social animals.
But he hasn’t got a valid point. He’s making the unevidenced claim he’s capable of dishing out a skelping. That may be summarily dismissed with no evidence needed.
There are serious people who sit around discussing issues and strategy. They go into politics to do so. After a few years of work, if they have any aptitude, then like every other apprentice, they may become skilled enough to actually achieve something.
If they do put in the years of study necessary to understand their brief, then they rightly become contemptuous of the know-it-all amateurs for which every problem can be solved in minutes with a glib answer starting “But surely, all you have to do is …”
There’s a reason why great politicians and great leaders are few and far between. Yet utter eejits continue to insist that the job’s so easy even they could do it.
Looking beyond the skelp. My point is the face to face issue that Sam the bam pointed out. Repeat posts. Would you stand in front of someone and repeat like James? There is no discussion just opinion. One up on the other guy. They wonder why the girls don’t bother. Girls are smart. Ten years Hatey Ten flippin years and what we got is Rant and the Time Travelers with a chip on the old shoulder.
There’s another point. We have fallen into the trap that higher education produces higher minded people. ” I’ve been to Uni so I must be right. ” Ever listened to a second year student on politics? I’s hard work. That’s why I prefer the opinion of a three year old. They make more sense. We have stopped using the rational side of our brains for the emotional reactionary side. Sitting on the moral high ground has given them piles.
Experts are being used in the most disgusting ways to back up ideology and selfish agendas. The snobbery of academia is making it impossible to think. You cannot buy knowledge you earn it through practical application and experience.
Politics is a career move. Journalism is a hobby. Discussion and debate have been replaced with activism.
I feel it’s important to clarify the constitutional reality surrounding Scotland’s political union with England as there seems to be much confusion surrounding what is actually a fairly simple constitutional mechanism to understand.
There’s an important distinction here between countries and sovereign parliaments.
Scotland and England absolutely continue to exist as countries — culturally, geographically, historically — but their sovereign parliaments did not continue after 1st May 1707.
Both the Parliament of Scotland and the Parliament of England were extinguished when the Acts of Union came into force.
A new sovereign legislature — the Parliament of Great Britain — was created.
That’s why both Acts explicitly state that the new parliament would begin on 1st May 1707.
It’s also worth noting that the modern UK Parliament passes:
This is because of devolution and legislative competence, not because the old English Parliament still exists somewhere in the background.
If the English Parliament had continued unchanged, it would have passed independent laws after 1707… but it hasn’t passed a single one in over three centuries. It can’t, because it ceased to exist.
Finally, the Treaty of Union stopped having independent legal force once the Acts were passed.
The Acts absorbed the Treaty’s provisions into domestic law, and the new state took over.
That’s why modern courts treat the Treaty as historically important but legally spent.
So the countries remain, but the old sovereign parliaments do not… they were replaced by a new one in 1707 — exactly as the Acts intended.
Also, only Scotland and England formed the political union in 1707. Wales was already legally part of England and therefore entered the Union automatically as part of England.
The Kingdom of Ireland did become part of the United Kingdom, but only in 1801. It was not part of the 1707 Union between Scotland and England. Ireland was a separate kingdom until the Acts of Union 1800 created the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland.
After partition in 1921, Northern Ireland remained in the UK. Southern Ireland became the Irish Free State in 1922 — a self-governing dominion similar to Canada or Australia at the time. It was no longer part of the United Kingdom, though it remained within the wider British Empire/Commonwealth. This is when the UK changed from the “United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland” to the “United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland.” Northern Ireland remained; Southern Ireland left.
They do not want to understand it. That gives them nothing to rant with. Without that rant they are empty.
If you think that the succinct and accurate post will deter the likes of Che, i fear you will be mistaken. I suspect Wings readers will suffer more of it’s drivel.
Yes that is true. Student politics. Let’s play government, you be the lawyer and I will be the minister. We can back it up with an academic. Play time!
It is not confined to Scotland. There are a whole set of people of various ages and social standing who have lost the ability to use the right side of their brains and replaced it with the left side.
Northy is a borderline case, he is self balancing. and James is … well what can I say?
MB
Hmmmm..
Did you write that while still fantasising about politicians mud wrestling??
Rev, I’m very pleased indeed to see that you will be at the SSRG conference next month. I think that your skills will be very useful and contribute a great deal.
FOA Sarah
I’d never heard of a D-Notice. England is very worried!!
I’ll be attending SSRG.
link to theaimn.net
Just needed to check.
Are you aware that 18 September 2025 was nearly a year ago?
A D Notice has not been issued, that’s total paranoia, or more likely an excuse for lack of media interest (or just self aggrandisement). The current list of D Notices is here, missing from the list is “tiny fringe conferences” you’ll see;
link to dsma.uk
@ 100%Yes: I look forward to hearing your comments after the Conference.
“Once both Acts of Union (Scotland’s and England’s) received Royal Assent and came into force on 1st May 1707, the Treaty of Union ceased to have independent legal significance.”
I beg to differ. Scotland’s ratifying Act of Union did not complete its full passage to formal legitimacy, so it couldn’t legally have come into force, and thus neither could the Treaty.
The Scottish Act received the parliament’s assent by majority, and received royal assent just minutes later. But it never received the assent of the sovereign Scots people, either implied or direct.
In 1707 most Scots didn’t have the vote, democracy not really being a thing then, but that didn’t mean they were powerless, not at all.
They had Scotland’s sovereignty, they had a constitution, they were perhaps the most highly-educated people in Europe, and importantly, they had Salvo.
Scots law required a Salvo session to be held after the close of every session of the Scottish parliament. The Salvo session provided a legal forum for the sovereign Scots to challenge any legislation passed during that parliament’s session. The Scottish parliament had the right to pass legislation, and could assume its legitimacy by default, but that assumption was required to be open to challenge from a higher authority, hence the obligatory Salvo session.
If a challenge succeeded, the offending act would be struck down. If the challenge failed, the act’s legitimacy was deemed confirmed by the highest authority in Scotland. Any act that reached the end of the Salvo session without challenge was also then deemed to have acquired or retained its legitimacy.
In 1707, such was the level of dissent for the Union across Scotland and at every level of society, that it was almost a nailed-on certainty that the Salvo session would have called a sitting of the Convention of the Estates, Scotland’s other parliament, to consider and vote on the Act of Union, and it was equally likely to strike the Act down, killing the Treaty and the Union stone dead.
But staunch advocates of the Union had no intention of risking that possibility, so they conspired to block the 1707 Salvo session. And they succeeded; it never sat. Though the session was formally called only minutes after the Act of Union was passed and received its royal assent, the writs to call the MPs to the session, “and all others having interest”, ie the sovereign Scots, were never issued, and troops were stationed to block anyone attempting to attend it anyway.
Both actions were constitutional crimes: both were intended to deny the sovereign Scots their right of challenge.
But ironically, the very evasion of the challenge of the Salvo session voided the Act’s constitutional legitimacy anyway, by never having completed its formal passage through all of its legally required stages.
With no legitimate Scottish ratification, the English ratification was meaningless, itself left void, depriving the Treaty of Union of any lawful foundation, and the resulting Union thus also null and void.
It is also important to remember the importance of the status quo ante prior to the Treaty, as that provides the context that must be presumed where the Treaty is silent on a matter.
If England’s MPs weren’t entitled to overrule Scotland’s MPs in 1706, then they were never entitled to overrule Scotland’s MPs in the Union unless the Treaty specifically allowed them to. It doesn’t. In fact nothing in the Treaty obliges Scotland’s MPs to defer to England’s on any basis, and neither does anything in the Treaty specify the use of the constitutionally inappropriate Single Majority Vote currently in use at Westminster.
The UK Parliament’s governmental authority over Scotland is constitutionally fraudulent, and has been since its inception. When is international law going to address that outrageous crime instead of empowering it?
Just to clarify for anyone following along:
The idea that the 1707 Union is invalid because a “Salvo session” was supposedly required is not supported by any recognised historical or legal source.
There is no evidence in the Records of the Parliament of Scotland, the Convention of Estates, the Court of Session, or any mainstream constitutional scholarship that such a veto mechanism existed, or that Acts required popular ratification in 1707.
In 1707, sovereignty in Scotland — as in England — was vested in the Crown-in-Parliament.
Royal Assent completed the legislative process.
There was no constitutional requirement for a popular vote, no mechanism for popular ratification, and no legal procedure by which “the sovereign Scots people” could veto Acts of Parliament.
Referendums were not used anywhere in Europe at that time.
Both the Scottish and English Acts of Union received Royal Assent, and both parliaments were legally extinguished on 1 May 1707.
A new sovereign legislature — the Parliament of Great Britain — was created exactly as the Acts specified.
Modern courts, including the UK Supreme Court, treat the Treaty of Union as historically important but legally spent, because its provisions were absorbed into domestic law once the Acts came into force.
Arguments based on a supposed “blocked Salvo session” or an implied popular veto mechanism don’t appear in any recognised legal text, historical record, or judicial interpretation.
They come from a modern political narrative rather than from the constitutional reality of 1707.
The Union may be politically contested today — that’s entirely legitimate — but its legal foundation rests on the Acts passed and assented to in 1707, not on procedures that never existed in Scots law.
I’am sorry to be rattling at the door of your ivory tower Northy. But this just can’t wait. I think some of the Indy supporters at the Indy march in Edinburgh were born in 1707.
You spoke of the things than can destroy any political movement but you failed to point out what is staring us all in the face. The majority of people at that march were over 60. The absence of youth is a warning sign that the movement only has a few summers left. No new blood you see.
AI Overview
The Salvo session provided a legal forum for individuals to present private petitions or legal grievances that the Parliament had not been able to resolve before its official closure.
Formally known as the Act Salvo Jure Cujuslibet (meaning “saving the right of everyone”), this session was a crucial mechanism in the pre-1707 Parliament of Scotland.
Purpose and Function: Protecting Private Rights: Because the Scottish Parliament passed numerous public acts and private ratifications quickly, these laws could inadvertently infringe upon the existing rights, property, or privileges of citizens who were not present to object.
Provisional Passing: The Salvo act essentially declared that all legislation passed during that parliamentary session was subject to future legal challenge.
Recourse to the Courts: It ensured that anyone whose rights were harmed by a new act could still take their case to the Court of Session (Scotland’s supreme civil court) to seek redress, preventing parliamentary decisions from being absolutely final when private interests were damaged.
It is likely right, as Aidan says, that the Act of Union will have little to do with whether Scotland becomes independent.
it is important to get the history right. The Act of Union was presented as an equal partnership, freely entered into. That’s just a lie.
The Aliens Act of 1705 threatened Scotland’s exports of coal, cattle and linen to England unless Scotland agreed to negotiate an Act of union by Christmas day 1705. These exports to England and colonies were about half of Scotland’s trade.
The act provided that Scottish nationals in England were to be treated as aliens, and estates held by Scots would be treated as alien property, making inheritance much less certain.
The Act was repealed. Scotland appointed commissioners to negotiate the Act of Union.
@ Xaracen: this is an excellent exposition of the Scottish constitution and the failure to comply with it in 1707. Your comment makes it clear to all readers that the Union has been operated illegally from the very beginning.
I am sure that this subject will be covered at the SSRG Conference that the Rev is attending. With a full complement of pro-independence brains and energy present at the Conference I look forward to the report in due course.
S
Agreed, well done Xarcen!
Good to see the Unionist AI bot masquerading as Northcode gas just been shown to be spouting the usual (constantly) rewritten history to suit Unionism nonsense.
Also; Free the real Northcode!!
Down with the Unionist AI Bot fake Northcode!!
A succession of it’s, buts and maybes.
Still, it keeps the fanatics happy
C (for confused dot com ad)
“WHO’S THAT WHISTLING!!”
“When is international law going to address that outrageous crime instead of empowering it?”
Wonderful news, Xaracen!
September 2026!! This year!!! This very month!!!!
13:00 hours (1 PM GMT) on the 31st.
Xaracen,
Many thanks for setting that procedure on the correct path,
North code is showing his true colours nowadays, one suspects many other Danial de Foe characters to come out of the closet as time goes forward, although I have no doubt that the old parliament of Englands members directly transferred into the entirely new GB parliament without elections continuing the parliament of England and Wales will receive a whitewash,
One wonders why the treaties and agreements for England and Wales ( previous to the treaty of union) held onto maintaining a validity, but English records and laws continued, if Englands parliament ceased,
while any the Scottish treaties and agreements (previous to the treaty of union) ceased and disappeared along with Scotland records and laws,
Perhaps this is due to the old parliament of England members being Transferred and continued inside the new parliament of GB.
I’ve supported Alf Baird’s work for a long time — I’ve promoted Doun-Hauden here more than most, and I’ve consistently supported the Scots language through poetry, stories, and discussion.
So the idea that I’m suddenly showing “true colours” or acting as some kind of Defoe character doesn’t really fit the history.
My position hasn’t changed because of politics; it’s changed because I’ve looked more closely at the historical and legal record.
My only aim here is to keep the constitutional facts clear for readers who may not be familiar with the period.
Political views on the Union are entirely legitimate, and folk will naturally disagree on its merits, but the historical and legal framework of 1707 is what it is.
I still support Scottish independence — that hasn’t changed — and I’m not here to attack anyone.
I’m simply keeping the discussion grounded in what historians and courts actually recognise.
Let me just fix that for you, Northy:
“I’ve promoted Doun-Hauden here more than everybody else put together”
What’s this rumour I hear that there’s been a falling out over the divvying up of the royalties?
AI (deep fake) NC;
“I’m simply keeping the discussion grounded in what (errata- Unionist) historians (sic) and (errata – Unionist) Courts actually (errata- choose to) recognise (errata – or not airbrush out of history as inconvenient truths)”..
Bring back the real Northcode!!
I’m very much the same Northcode — just discussing the historical and legal record as clearly as I can.
Folk will naturally disagree on politics, that’s the norm, but I’m not interested in personal labels or conspiracy framing.
I’m only interested in keeping the conversation real for readers who want to understand.
Fake AI NC
That’s what AI would say..
Anyway
Bring back the real Northcode, it’s a travesty!!
““I’ve promoted Doun-Hauden here more than everybody else put together””
Well, it is the only academic book presenting a research-based theoretical framework that fully explains what Scottish independence actually means, Hatey, why it is necessary, and the only remedies.
And here’s a free summary of the framework and research findings to save you a tenner:
link to cpb-us-w2.wpmucdn.com
Absolutely Northcode – there is nothing anti-independence about recognising these eccentric and almost entirely meritless legal theories do nothing to advance the cause of independence in any way, and are actually quite a significant distraction.
– the courts are not going to strike down the Acts of Union 1707;
– the UN is not going to declare that Scotland is a Non-Self Governing Territory.
Those two facts are very clear and obvious, and you have succinctly laid out many of the reasons why. Meanwhile in the real world, the SNP zombie keeps stumbling on through elections, largely for want of a better alternative, taxes go up and yet services get worse, and incompetent people acting in bad faith get promoted to ever more senior positions.
Cheers, Alf!
As I may have indicated before, I see little congruence between most of what you write and reality.
Take this quote:
“The rise of an independence movement reflects the ethnic solidarity of indigenous (Scots) language speakers”
Having chosen to write and publish Doun-Hauden in the King’s English, what is your rationale for excluding the indigenous (Scots) language speakers from your target readership?
Wings is a Scottish Independence supporting site. Wings BTL is a forum for Independence movement supporters to make their opinions known. Why is there so little indigenous (Scots) language posts BTL? How is it that there are seldom (never?) any Scots language guest articles?
Regarding my questions above, I’m left with two conclusions, neither of which are favourable to the position you have adopted:
1) Indy is about ordinary, apolitical Scots seeking a way to improve their ordinary, apolitical lives. As somebody pointed out – “It’s the economy, stupid!”
2) If Indy really is about “the ethnic solidarity of indigenous (Scots) language speakers”, they’re not prepared to waste their time plootering about here. In which case by doing so, you’re wasting your time too.
My preference is 1). The route to Indy remains unchanged from when Alex Salmond mapped it out. Demonstrate with concrete, tangible examples to ordinary, apolitical Scots how government solely from Edinburgh will materially improve their lives. Indy will surely follow as sure as night follows day.
No better time to start than now, Alf.
(OK, 12 years ago was a better time to start – but there’s that missing time machine problem again 🙂 )
““The rise of an independence movement reflects the ethnic solidarity of indigenous (Scots) language speakers””
That’s Prof Hechter (and others) telling us this, Hatey. You will also find that ‘peoples in self-determination conflict are always linguistically divided’.
In ither wirds, oor ain cultur an langage IS the main difference between Scots and all other peoples, the English included.
Or wad ye raither be Englis? Which for Scots means cultural assimilation.
In colonialism, because native language is neither valued nor learned, the language becomes a ‘rusted tongue’ and a ‘moribund culture’, or even ‘the dregs of culture’ (Fanon); but, as oor langage comes fae oor verra saul it aye forms the basis of our national culture and our identity.
Language is a lot more than simply the way fowk communicate; oor langage defines wha we are an differentiates us fae awbody else:
link to yoursforscotlandcom.wordpress.com
I’m too old to become literate in what would be a new language for me, Alf. Given its minority status, that probably applies to a majority of potential Indy voters.
And once again, you haven’t addressed my very obvious point that there’s very few posts in Scots on here. Whilst I remain one of the few who has actually called for there to be more!
As I’ve made abundantly clear, I don’t agree with your logic on much of this.
I certainly don’t see much evidence of a growing groundswell in use of and support for Scots to match what we have seen for Indy.
Hence, I disagree that the two are inextricably linked.
Naw, it’s the economy and governance that must drive Indy. As the rusted tongue declines into a state of permanent seizure, with literacy within the population approaching that of Latin, how could it be any other way?
The constitutional position I outlined earlier is based on the recognised historical and legal record — the Acts of the Scottish and English Parliaments, the Records of the Parliament of Scotland, and modern judicial interpretation.
None of these sources contain any reference to a mandatory “Salvo session” with veto power over legislation, nor any requirement for popular ratification of Acts in 1707.
I repeat… in 1707, sovereignty in Scotland was vested in the Crown-in-Parliament.
Royal Assent completed the legislative process.
That was the constitutional framework of the time, and it’s the framework recognised by historians and courts today.
Both Acts of Union received Royal Assent, both parliaments were legally extinguished on 1 May 1707, and the new Parliament of Great Britain was created exactly as the Acts specified.
Political views on the Union are entirely legitimate — people will naturally disagree on its merits — but claims that the Union was “illegal from the beginning” rely on procedures that don’t appear in any recognised legal text, historical record, or judicial interpretation.
Folk can of course explore any perspective they wish, but it’s important to distinguish between modern political narratives and the constitutional reality of 1707 as understood by historians and courts.
Formally known as the Act Salvo Jure Cujuslibet (meaning “saving the right of everyone”), this session was a crucial mechanism in the pre-1707 Parliament of Scotland.
Is this sovereign citizen? The epidemic of road side lawyers sweeping America. All of them were arrested many were tasered and sadly a few were shot to death where they sat.
So remember kids don’t try this in Texas.
Just to keep things clear for readers:
Salvo jure cujuslibet is a standard legal reservation clause — essentially a safeguard allowing individuals to pursue private remedies in the courts if their personal rights were affected by new legislation.
Salvo jure cujuslibet was a private legal reservation available only to people with recognised standing — not a public veto mechanism and not accessible to the general population.
It was a technical legal reservation used by people who already had legal standing — typically landowners, burgesses, charter-holders, and corporate bodies — not ordinary Scots.
It wasn’t a parliamentary session, it didn’t have veto power, and it wasn’t part of the constitutional process for ratifying Acts.
There’s no record of any “Salvo session” in the parliamentary or judicial sources from the period.
That’s all I’m pointing out here: the historical and legal record doesn’t support the idea of Salvo as a constitutional stage with the ability to strike down Acts of Parliament.
“Act salvo jure cujuslibet
23 December 1669
Our sovereign lord, taking into consideration that there are many acts of ratification and others passed and made in this session of parliament in favour of particular persons, without calling or hearing of such as may be thereby concerned and prejudiced; therefore, his majesty, with advice and consent of the estates of parliament, statutes and ordains that all such particular acts and acts of ratification passed in manner foresaid, shall not prejudice any third party of their lawful rights, nor of their actions and defences competent thereupon, before the making of the said particular acts and acts of ratifications; and that the lords of session and all other judges within this kingdom shall be obliged to judge between parties according to their several rights standing in their persons, before the making of the said acts, all which are hereby exposed and declared to have been made, salvo jure cujuslibet.”
The text you’ve quoted is about private acts and acts of ratification — the kind passed in favour of particular persons.
The “third parties” it protects are people who already had recognised lawful rights that might be affected by those private acts.
That’s why the Act directs the Court of Session to judge according to the rights people already held before the private act was passed.
This is a safeguard for private rights, not a constitutional stage, not a public veto mechanism, and not a process for challenging national legislation like the Acts of Union.
It doesn’t apply to public Acts, and it doesn’t give the general population any role in ratifying or vetoing parliamentary decisions.
I have to confess to an error re the Salvo session. Yes, it was a mandatory requirement after the end of a parliamentary session, but it wasn’t open to all adult Scots as I understood it, only to those with ‘lawful standing’.
The rest stands!
The link below describes the importance of the blocked Salvo session
<a href="link to angrypict.substack.com Line of Struggle by Angry Pict
and more helpfully, this comment on it from its author;
“The adjournment wording is the key. It summoned not just members of Parliament but “all others having interest.” That phrase activates the sovereign capacity of the Convention of the Estates – and crucially, it opens the floor to the Scottish people themselves. Under Scots constitutional law, any person with lawful standing could appear at a Convention sitting and invoke salvo jure cujuslibet – the unrepealed legal safeguard preserving all fundamental rights from statutory override, embedded in the Acts of the Scottish Parliament from 1594 onwards. A single valid invocation suspended the Union’s legal validity pending adjudication. Hundreds or thousands of invocations would have paralysed it entirely.
We know at least 20,000 names were already on petitions objecting to the Union. The Parliament members weren’t going to produce a volte face, the petitions were – the people had never supported Union in the first place. That is precisely why the sitting couldn’t be allowed to occur. The danger wasn’t another vote by those who had already voted. It was sovereign jurisdiction being activated through the people’s own constitutional right of intervention.
On the venue question – the answer is three-layered.
The first and most fundamental mechanism was administrative, not military. No writs of summons were issued by the Clerk Register. Without writs there’s no constitutionally valid call to assemble – anywhere. This preceded and was entirely independent of any troop deployment. If someone had gathered an alternative meeting at a tavern on the Canongate, it would have had no more constitutional standing than a private gathering, because the legal machinery that converts a meeting of persons into a Convention of the Estates – the writs, issued under proper authority – had been deliberately withheld.
The second layer is the military presence. Troops didn’t simply secure Parliament House. Contemporary accounts confirmed in the Melville/Leven papers describe soldiers at the approaches to Parliament Close, sentries on the High Street and Canongate, dragoons near the Netherbow Port, and mounted troops kept ready to move. This was area denial across the entire civic space in which any assembly could form – not targeted protection of a specific building.
The third layer is constitutional. Even setting both of those aside – even imagining the members had gathered somewhere else with no military interference – a Convention of Estates derives its constitutional legitimacy from proper process. The writs issued by the Clerk Register under lawful authority are what converts a gathering of people into a body with sovereign competence. The legitimacy resides in the procedure, not simply in the presence of the individuals. An informal assembly at an alternative venue, without writs, would have been constitutionally inert regardless of who turned up.
So the suppression worked on all three levels simultaneously:
– the administrative machinery was withheld
– the physical space was controlled, and
– the constitutional basis for an alternative assembly didn’t exist without the writs.
The silence that followed wasn’t accidental. It was engineered.”
What did I predict about Xaracen?
Sunk costs.
I’m far more concerned about the Bolshevik Revolution of 1917. Not only was that unconstitutional, but it’s had a far bigger effect on my life than the events of 1707.
But hey, that wrong isn’t gonna be righted either.
Aside from the historical records, I think it is extraordinarily unlikely that in pre-1707 Scotland an act of Parliament passed by the Scottish Parliament could be delayed by a SINGLE person with standing objecting to it. That would effectively make the passage of anything but the most uncontroversial pieces of legislation impossible, given than anyone negatively affected, or indeed who ideologically disagreed, could make an objection at Salvo.
Aidan said; “I think it is extraordinarily unlikely that in pre-1707 Scotland an act of Parliament passed by the Scottish Parliament could be delayed by a SINGLE person with standing objecting to it.”
Who said SINGLE, and who said delay? The outcome would be decided by the Convention of the Estates if it was called, and not by the Salvo session itself, or anyone in it. And the CoE couldn’t just delay, it could strike down.
The Convention of the Estates was Scotland’s other parliament, and it was the higher authority of the two parliaments, so it had the power to do what it was expected to do, which is why it was blocked. It was the CoE that was the ultimate target of the unlawful blocking measures.
Also, I had fumbled the link to Angry Pict’s site. This one should work:
The Line of Struggle by Angry Pict
That does not accord with the records provided for when the estates and parliaments sat, for example:
“In the period from 1603 to 1689 there were seventeen parliaments and about fifteen conventions of the estates”
“ An unusual feature of the meetings of the estates, especially in the sixteenth century, was the convention of estates that could be summoned by the king without the long period of forty days’ notice required for a full parliament and usually only to agree taxations. However, these assemblies met less frequently in the early seventeenth century as they became more formal and largely addressed the issue of taxation”
link to rps.ac.uk
Above you also said that 20,000 complaints would have paralysed the legislative process and prevented the Act of Union becoming law. Yet now you’re telling us that the Convention of the Estates could simply dismiss those complaints? So which is it?
Aye, Xaracen, that link gives us the names we sorely need.
Perhaps we could desecrate their graves, or, even better, dig up their rotted corpses and put them on trial before juries of Sovereign Scots.
The verdicts will be foregone conclusions and we need have no squeamishness about handing down the ultimate penalty for every one of the tractorous cants.
You know it makes sense, Xaracen!
Keep posting the shite Beggar Boy – we’ll get you a Jim Fixed-Me badge. Another leg-humper, soon to challenge the master leg humper, main. And you shits complain about james che posting incoherent meandering garbage – at least he/she has dyslexia or something.
Northcode is full of shit. Read Angry Pict. Or even that Lucy Worsley prog about Queen Anne.
The UK constitution is like the emperor’s new clothes, they all pretend it’s real and can – describe it – in vivid terms, but try to put a hand on it, it disappears. What there does exist of this “ancient guff” does at least contain the union acts/treaty. NB if you don’t think the treaty is real then we are occupied by a foreign power and have the right of resistance under international law – I would ask trump for some F-15s (the new models).
The UK constitution is not worth the paper it is not written on, and therefore, should you try to exert some protections under it, you come up sucking your thumb; unlike the americans who take that sort of thing seriously.
Constitutional lawfare was always a tactic, not expected to succeed on its own, but it is capable of damaging our opponents as we shine a light on the dark corners from which they gaslight us.
Ah, c’moan noo Confused.
Dinna pretend ye’re nae partial tae a wee bitty leg hump. Ah mean, fit ither action de ye ever see?
“we are occupied by a foreign power and have the right of resistance”
Man, I heard the braw skirl o the pipes swelling even as I read that. But dinna gang aff wi yer Spandau half-cocked – fit’ll ye dae if they stoap yer benefits?
Think, man, think!
C
Well said..
Ask Rev Stu if he’ll pass on the details of the supplier where you buy your plastic claymores.
You’d have to let C have a bigger one than yours, though, so maybe naw if that’s gonna be a problem.
“and have the right of resistance under international law”
You really need to explain what you are going to do exactly? Really? Refuse to do what exactly? Are you going to glue yourself to something? I need to see this resistance, wave a placard? Say rude words? WTF are you on?
” sucking your thumb ”
I think that is what you’ve been doing for some time now.
So what are you and the gang going to do with this new found legal knowledge?
“They all pretend its real”
WOW!! WOW!! WOW!! OK! Good luck with this cunning plan guys. I won’y say another word.
I’m not interested in trading insults with anyone.
I’m only here to discuss the historical and legal record as clearly as I can for readers who want to understand the period.
Folk will naturally disagree on politics — that’s fine — but personal abuse doesn’t really add anything to the constitutional discussion.
“I’m not interested in trading insults with anyone”
Me neither. I’m giving mine away for free.
We understand the period. What we don’t understand is why are you wasting time on it in the first place. I live in 2026 not 17- oatcakes. If it is a premise or foundation from the past look to America and the founding fathers. If all you have to offer is technical legality’s of hundreds of years ago then the audience has fallen asleep. What are they going to do now, here and now?
I think the future will not only judge the players in this badly but the followers who fueled the demise of their own country and movement.
Great job NC – keep it up!
farage is on telly milking the anne widdicombe murder; death by hammers, indeed. (Does anyone know the whereabouts of THOR at the time?)
– if the guy who did it was just some nutter, I think she would be proud of the fact it was the tories who rid us of asylums decades ago, replacing them with “care in the community” where the deranged can roam at will, one missed anti-psychotic away from a hammer-time … just watch this …
I also see nige is immediately pissing on his natural demographic down in that portsmouth; like many a so-called hard cunt, he talks a good pagger, then shites it. Watch lowe eat his lunch. Maybe if they brought back fighting at the football there would be less of this, or just “stopped the boats”. Personally I think half time fighting would be a welcome addition to the sport, and maybe worth getting the top sky package for. Tactical systems have destroyed creativity in the game.
I think the real solution for england and the english is return to your homelands, where you will be more comfortable, and people can understand your accents and don’t hate you, and then you can embrace islam and lobby for a second union, a unification with pakistan. Anglo-Pak-Shire. Some say ChuckyBoy #3 has already embraced it on the down-low.
NB Pakistan has its own genuinely independent nuclear deterrent and so you would be protected under its umbrella. The asian business miracle can revitalise the (grey) economy with much of “cheap cigarettes”, “losing the VAT” (never pay retail) and that old favourite “my cousin will sort you out” (they are all cousins)
Anal Sadwad has taken ermine and is now styled Lord Kebab of Infibulation
link to youtube.com
I wonder what is going to happen when the balaclava boys darn sarf discover – drones and home-made incendiaries – and start flying them over and into the riot cops. Watch it on the livestream, subscribe to the channel, leave a like – it helps with the algorithm. Who said “the revolution will not be televised”?
Northy spent ages building up a good case and you have just destroyed it in two comments.
I have never met you Confused or know what you look like but if you ever came within twenty five meters of my person the hairs on the back of my neck would stand up and I would have this overwhelming urge to run in the opposite direction.
I would not follow you MB.
Confused is the centre of his own counter-cultural universe. Ignore him at your peril and pity the poor priest who takes his next confession.
“we have catched Scotland and will hold her close”
This is clearly an expression of England’s love for Scotland. Only the heartless would interpret it as kidnap.
Lang syne past when Scotland was a young lass she was lonely, and so she searched for a suitable significant other.
The Vikings turned out to be violent misogynists who left Scotland with a deep-seated fear of… well, Vikings.
And the Picts?
Don’t even go there.
And so, after long years of solitude – with only the company of teuchters to amuse her (and they aren’t all that amusing) – Scotland at last found love in the shape of England.
It was a match made in heaven and it wasn’t long before the two lovers consummated their willing marriage.
She, Scotland, accepted that England already had an illegitimate child in the form of Wales, but she yearned for a child of her own… and so after a time Northern Ireland was born.
England and Scotland – with their children, Wales and Northern Ireland – set about making the British Isles their forever home and to this day they live in peaceful harmony sharing, equally, everything north of the soft, gentle border that nestles lovingly between them.
Forget treaties. Forget acts of union. Forget ancient dry and dusty documents; those parched parchments penned in lies.
This is the true story of Scotland’s love affair with England… and their joyous life together in bliss-filled matrimony.
Far from being catched… beautiful bonnie Scotland, and her wholesome handsome, though slightly controlling, husband were joined forever in the enduring tight embrace of a great love.
And remember, as Erich Segal tells us, “Love means never having to say you’re sorry.”
Guid, lad, Northy.
Ah kent that wisnae really Stu telling ye tae FO.
Ah had faith ye wid ken that tae 🙂
Noo neither o us has tae plooter aboot on WGD. Oh happy day!
An interesting article about the clampdown on reporting of the Nepalese flooding disaster from the Covid Spreaders:
link to theguardian.com
The Covid Spreaders’ number one colony, Tibet, was also gravely affected by the glacial collapse. But on the Tibetan side of the Nepal-Tibet border, the CS authorities have suppressed reporting of the story. There’s an estimated 1000 people missing, almost certainly dead. The Spreaders have acknowledged 43 so far.
It’s straight out of the denial playbook they followed after they had cooked up Covid in their Wuhan lab, carelessly let it escape into human circulation, then clamped down on victims trying to report what was happening as people started to drop like flies.
The denial playbook they continue to follow to this day. Hundreds of millions world-wide dead or with permanent health injuries. Trillions of dollars worth of damage to the world economy.
Not so much as even a contrite “Sorry, folks, we screwed up” from the Covid Spreaders as they continue to steal our futures out from under our feet.
George Square 1919
Tiananmen Square 1989
Plus ca change
North code,
May I enquire how you missed the records that the parliament of England did not cease to be, but was Transferred into the parliament of Great Britain,
Afterwards in Recorded history of Westminster parliament and on google, the Westminster parliament of Great Britain with the parliament of England at its helm
Set about dissolving the Scottish parliament from Great Britain parliament,
Westminster parliament for Great Britain,…note: with the parliament of England resting in the Westminster parliament
Union with Scotland ( Amendment ) act 1707,
That the Privy Council shall have the same powers and authorities as the Privy Council of England lawfully had used and exercised at the time of the Union and none other.
The act came into being in 1708.
There are lots of wee gems like this in the Westminster parliament amendment acts of Great Britain with the old parliament of England bias displayed.
The interesting anomoly is that the parliament of England Transferred into the Great Britain parliament has no definative separation behind Westminster doors with both parliaments being one and the same,
But no Sottish parliament.
The recorded facts of the non – union between Scotland and England.
The old parliament of England did not cease, but was transferred,
The old English parliament of Westminster palace did not cease, but continued.
The Scottish parliament did cease to Exist from the union treaty in 1707 as the English parliament resting in Great Britain parliament claimed that the union for Scotland caused them to self delete their parliament of Scotland,
To ensure that the Scottish parliament never entered or continued into Westminster parliament of Great Britain it was then dissolved by the parliament of Westminster and by the Monarch of England declaring it closed officially.
The union that officially never took hold between Scotland and England with the parliament of England sitting in the same parliament of Westminster of Englands Great Britain.
The old English parliament of Westminster is also one and the same as the Great Britain parliament of Westminster,
Not just because it is in the same building.
But because the old parliament England did not cease to Exist, but was Transferred.
A genuine question Che.
What do you hope to achieve by writing the same shite, every day, umpteen times?
This may be easier for you to understand:
link to youtube.com
6 consecutive posts! Perhaps more to come!
Could be a personal best.
From what I can gather about the capabilities of the latest AI models, setting one the task of regularly posting on here, having outlined a parameter set first, should be child’s play.
Truly, the best is all behind us.
There’s been a lot of fuss over a famous political commentator (forget his name) who has admitted he now gets AI to write his columns. Subscriptions have been cancelled as a result.
His defense is that if he uses a calculator or spreadsheet to do math, in what way is using an AI to do English qualitatively different? He reviews what it has written and if any corrections are necessary, he makes them.
The cancelling subscribers opine that they too can get an AI to write a column in his style. And it’s free.
Meantime, in other news, the Orcs are now deploying fully autonomous, AI reasoning, personnel killing drones. Incorporating Covid Spreader supply chain components, natch. Perhaps our future fate is that we will all get to see one of these eventually, but briefly, and only the once.
Every Scot that whom enters Westminster parliament past or present enters the Westminster parliament of Englands Great Britain parliament for it was never a totally newly created union parliament, while holding transferred English parliament members already sitting there.
To complete the union that did not happen,
The Scottish parliament self deleted itself by joining the union, but not the parliament of England by also joining the union,
An interesting concept to retain in theoretical terms that there was a union in 1707
With only the two parliaments of England and the parliament of Great Britain.
If there is one persistent record that Westminster parliament continue to state through out time in as many ways as possible.
Is that the parliament of Scotland did not join or unite with the parliament of England or with great Britain,
We have been dissolved.
Spent.
Expired
deleted,
And self deleted.
The results which ever version Scotland wishes to choose or accept from Westminster parliament is that there is no Scottish parliament in the parliament of Westminster,
Alfie Boy
I NEVER open any links posted on an open forum. To do so is inviting all sorts of crap into your PC or phone.
I do know that any link posted by you will inevitably be mince. 9 times out of 10, the link provided by you, will be to some written shite by someone called Alf Baird!
99% of all Scots have no real interest in what did or did not happen over 300 years ago. The other 1% are rabid fanatics with one track minds. You and the likes of Che prove this beyond all doubt.
Don’t underestimate them, Chas. If independence negotiations ever happen, they will be deployed to bore the arse off of the English diplomats.
After a few minutes of that onslaught, they’d be giving Scotland whatever it wanted!
You have been picking on Alf’s prodigy. He has spent great resources grooming James for the cult. You see Alf and the cult are running out of consenting adults. The fascists are on to him and he knows it is just a matter of time. The war has begun.
If independence negotiations ever happen, they would bore the arse of of English diplomats,
Surely the diplomats would be British if a union had taken place.
460-odd posts, the vast majority of which are by the same 4 or 5 individuals boring the tits off everybody with the same old shite, all day, every day, rehashing the same boring and failed non-arguments, with some puerile attempts at insults flung in. 180 degrees off-topic into the bargain.
It’s getting as bad as Guido Fawkes here of late.
“180 degrees off-topic”
There’s a topic? Nobody bothers about that after the first dozen or so comments.
“There’s a topic?”
Gie the Rev a wee bittie credit, Hatey, the ‘topic’ is clearly aboot the rapid ‘disintegration’ of a national party that has been ‘brought under the wing of colonialism’ (Fanon), and the realisation of the now ruptured movement that the path to liberation cannot possibly be via any political or legal process of the colonizer.
Which explains (just for you, again!) the recent UN/international law initiative of Liberation Scotland/Salvo to decolonize (i.e. to make independent) Scotland:
link to liberation.scot
It will be over our dead bodies Alf.
Naw, Alf, your memory’s playing tricks on you.
I’ve re-read the article at the top. It makes no mention of “disintegration”, any word including “colon”, “UN”, “Fanon”, or “liberate”.
“Rupture” is another word noticeably absent.
The article does make it clear that the SNP is running scared of a second referendum.
That’s because they know they lack the ability to carry us forwards to Indy. And because they know that we know they lack the ability to carry us forwards to Indy, and so we’ll vote No.
Again. And then it’ll be Game Over.
Nothing to do with Fanon at all.
I note the replies to my comment came from three of the prominent BTL spammers, two of which between them have contributed at least 50% of the almost 500 comments BTL here. Plus yet another self-plug from Alf’s pet obsession.
And they say it’s the Yanks that don’t get irony.
Be honest now, Spartan.
What earthly use would replies from some of the other regulars be to anyone?
If the 1707 treaty of union is spent, then the foundation of the Great Britain parliament also ceases,
As its very foundations are based on a spent and ceased 1707 treaty of union,
What are the foundations of Scotland?
What is there to stop the Highlands or Islands walking away or selling themselves off to the best offer?
There is nothing good to come out of centuries old arguments and legal minutia. Independence stands or falls on offering a better future.
“What is there to stop the Highlands or Islands …selling themselves off to the best offer?”
Scotland’s imposed Anglo feudal and colonial land ownership legacy suggests this has already been done long since. Why did you think Scots need independence if not to reclaim their sovereign land?
Been thinking … the England Pakistan Union is a no brainer and I hope GCHQ will forward this to the home office for their mandarins to run the rule over : think of the massive benefits – you get nuclear protection, massive economic boost, you can fill the british army with jihadists and the paks know how to deal with afghans, since they are deporting 1.5M of them.
As for the religion thing – the english were never much into that anyway, their hoor-maister king Henry just started to make shit up and said “I’m head of the church” – they made up their own thing, which is just what islam is, except muhammad did it rather than Henry8.
Think of how islam will sort out the woke. Put it this way, I can’t remember the details, but there is some poison for which the antidote is another poison; each on its own will kill you, but it all cancels out. Woke-ism/Identity Politics added to islam; you might get a “normal society”. If you know chemistry, think of an acid added to an alkali, it fizzes for a bit, then neutralises. Or maybe its the diacriticalectical martialartial-ism with the anti-synthesisers.
They always said the english were a nation of shopkeepers – now it will be : corner-shop keepers.
Don’t worry about the money – with the falklands / antarctic oil we can afford to pay the welfare benefits of almost literally N to the power of infinity browns. Also, once we are full of paks, no other BAMs will want to come here anyway. Like a spider dealing with the flies.
I don’t think we should get all preachy about the groomers – child rape is an anglo institution – the english have been attacking children since whenever; their ruling class were formed by the bummings in the public schools and childrens homes are mainly brothels for tories and the like; elites main hobby is freemasonry and kiddie fiddling. The abduls will fit right in.
And it will all be democratic, one man, one vote – the gold standard. The new combined parliament will be in islamabad though, to reflect the population centre, with a 1/4 of the MPs from england.
Naturally, there will be tariff free trade and visa-less travel. This could all be done quickly and easily through the commons and royal assent, without recourse to the Lords, or a referendum.
Anyone who doesn’t like this plan is a FUCKING RACIST PIECE OF SHIT and should be banned, cancelled, de-banked, lose their job and fuck off to trump land with all your evil nazi trumpist shitlords. Wrong side of history mate, and likely one of the kuffar. Inshallah.
the english are all about the UN and international law and the international community and the rules based order – they are all about it – they love it, it makes them feel important, getting their photie taken with the americans and chinese … well, if you got your guys at the UN to give them a public spanking, embarrass them, better – to humiliate them, to make them look bad, like the lawless fucking pirates they are right down in their DNA – it helps the cause.
– look at the little chagos islanders; they have no real leverage over them other than embarrassing them, but it matters to them, for they have to cling to this fantasy that “we are the good guys … really … we ended slavery and gave the hottentots the railroad … you’re not still going on about that ancient guff are you … water under the bridge … lets not play the blame game … ”
But you have to stand up in public : it’s like say, trannies – every time you see a tranny you should say
YOU’RE A FUCKING UGLY BASTARD OF A BLOKE IN A SAD WIG AND STUPID MAKEUP – you were UGLY as a man, now you are UGLIER as a woman – and no creature on earth, man or woman, will want to fuck you; people look at you with horror and pity only.
– likewise
the ANGLOS ARE THE MOST EVIL FUCKING CUNTS IN HUMAN HISTORY (with one competitor) and responsible for almost every act of evil in the world because when you look where it is, it is where they have been (counting causes both direct and indirect); the anglos have been kicked out of 65 countries and no one ever asked them back in. Everyone hates them, and is right to. They did not create the modern world, they turned it into a perversion of what it should be. And karma is coming for them – so don’t be tied to them when they go down. We, the Scots, have had enough of them and deserve a rest from their predations. We need indy, and we need them all gone, to try and fix what they have almost ruined.
Scotland at the UN could be the equivalent of the battered wife turning up at the big family gathering showing the open bruises on her face and arms.
We need to destroy the reputation and credibility of the UK on the international stage; it improves our position and gains supporters and works as leverage in future negotiations.
“We need to destroy the reputation and credibility of the UK on the international stage”
Noo jist haud oan there, Confused. Baby steps first, walk afore ye run, etc.
Hoo’s aboot ye first destroy the reputation an credibility of Indy on this wee stage here.
Ye’re doin a grand joab, dinna get me wrang, but mair is needed.
This ‘care in the community’ malarky has not really worked.
It is better for society, as a whole, that the mentally deranged are kept away from the sane amongst us.
I wonder why it calls itself Confused? Any ideas anybody?
How many taser guns do you think they will need to take C down?
Can you get a laser that fires a beam the same colour as Buckie?
Confused will try to neck it down.
This is all very well, Confused, but might I ask your opinion on the following?
Given the changing of the seasons, I am seriously considering preparing a hearty meal using diced neck lamb with a little extra dripping for flavour, together with sliced brown onions, chunky carrots, a good chicken stock, bay leaves, Worcester sauce, a good grind of black pepper and a generous sprinkling of Malden sea salt flakes – all topped off with a neat layer of thinly sliced Maris Piper potatoes brushed with butter. 🙂
Very tasty in the AGA Baking Oven for sure; the Le Creuset pot will handle this nicely.
TIA! 🙂
FOR INFORMATION:
link to bbc.co.uk
& the guys in Edinburgh say……zzzzzzzzzzzz
Welcome to Scotland or rather, Wilkommen in Schottland
Europe’s third world territory for exploitative opportunities esp. of the covert militaristic kind.
I suppose this is what Burnham means by getting closer to Europe
Aye, TURABDIN, jobs, technology, investment.
Anathema to Scottish Indy supporters, eh?
I’m with you. Nae cant should be allowed anywhere near something like this until she can write a ten-page essay, in Scots, on the crimes of 1707.
With an uptick of 10% in her final mark for three genuine quotes from three of the postcolonial boys.
Quotes relevant to satellite based technology, natch. Let’s keep it real!
But Spartan don’t you have to re hash the old guff treaty of union to persuade the Scots that this is real, and sound Why there is Great Britain parliament with in that the parliament of England proof.
Oh I forgot with being diagnosed by a poster on Wings from afar with having dementia and all that, that the 1707 treaty of union is old guff wrote on ancient parchment paper, that is Spent and ceased as a treaty between Scotland and England.and no longer applies legally.
Do I worry that I have been diagnosed as having dementia by a poster, from afar, not one bit, as all independence supporters have been identified with a problem by unionists,.
What they fail to do, is diagnose Scots problems with the Westminster parliament of Englands Great Britains spent parliament derived from a spent treaty.
Not very good qualifications held by unionists further advanced than Quacks.
You do know that the fascists are coming James. Your name has already been forwarded to Berlin. We are waiting on orders coming through any day now.
@ Hatey Mc
FROM THE HORSE’S WHATEVER on the Saxa Vord scheme.
«The UK Government said its new space strategy is backed by a record £7.8 billion until 2030.
It said it brings together the government’s “space investment and activity under one plan to drive growth, strengthen security and back the technologies that underpin modern life”.
The government also said UK funding will see British tech offer “earlier warnings of potential satellite collisions, hostile activity and solar storms, helping protect the power, communications and navigation services people rely on every day”.
(UK gov.) Business, innovation, science and trade secretary Jonathan Reynolds said: “As space becomes a new frontier of economic and military competition, this plan will help keep Britain secure by strengthening our ability to launch satellites, detect threats and protect the services people rely on every day.
“At the same time, this plan will enable our excellent UK industry to seize the boundless opportunities of this new age in space, creating skilled jobs, driving growth and improving connectivity for all of us»
Praemoneo de Periculis (Premonition of Peril) is the radar station’s motto.
So apposite in these sabre rattling times.
I trust the folk in «Hjatland» sleep easy in their beds knowing Westminster cares for them, body and soul…. and will pray for them at the hour of their potential incineration.
I jest, of course.
“Praemoneo de Periculis” (‘re’ might be preferable to ‘de’) means “I give advance warning of dangers” – not a bad motto for a radar station.
@TURABDIN
According to the WEF, the global space industry is projected to reach a value worth something between 1 and 1.25 trillion USD by 2030.
Is it just Scotland that risks incineration by attempting to access a slice of that pie, or will the same fate befall every country that gets mixed up in it?
A good thing.
In Northern Ireland the signs of colonialism continue to manifest themselves.
Segregated communities, separated by “peace” walls, sectarian tensions (e.g. Drumcree), separate schooling, political division along religious lines.
There is talk, again, that Stormont may fail, so dysfunctional has it become.
link to sluggerotoole.com
“The general vibe is that both parties are keen to find any justification to walk out of the assembly and Drumcree has come along at just the right time to give them the excuse they need. The simple truth is it’s easier to sham fight the cultural battles than it is to get on with the boring business of government and delivering for the people.
With a collapsed Stormont both sides can blame the other and rile up their base in anticipation of next year’s election. The media and radio shows have got the big story they need to attract readers and listeners. People love a good crisis here.
Some insiders are predicting that Stormont will be down by Christmas. The question many of us will be asking is, will we even notice such is the ineffectiveness of the place?
When it all comes down to it, both sides just don’t like each other. They also do not have the will, aptitude, or experience to tackle our big problems so it’s easier just to fall back on the comfort of protest politics and blaming the other side.
Will the electorate punish such incompetence? Of course they won’t as every election in Northern Ireland is a sectarian headcount so they will all still get their vote next year.”
Seeing as the fashcist threat against James is duly noted from Mark Beggan whom states they are awaiting orders from Berlin,
One better stick with copying the Westminster parliaments defining that there is no Scottish parliament in Westminster parliament of Great Britain in 1707 or in todays 8h September 2026 Westminster parliament according to their parliament site,
UK parliament , parliament . UK.
By agreeing to the Union the Scottish parliament had also voted for its own Extinction,
You can read the rest for yourselves now that you are pointed in the right direction,
So all fascist waiting for their orders from Berlin threatening people in Scotland like a terrorist, must first head for Westminsters parliament in London as that is where the horses mouth is.
Wish you well Mark Beggan with your open terriorist threats to people on the British Isles and Westminster parliament for posting on their site.
Tell us more about Rubbleland James. Mossad have been asking questions.
I never gave them your name. Apparently they already had it.
If only Scotland had it’s own MacTrump. We would be independent by now. Not only that but we would have signed a deal with England that would be the envy of the world.
Under MacTrump Aberdeen will be the Dubai of the North. The Chinese will be forced to take back their windmills.
Scotland will drill the North sea for every ounce of black gold.
McTrump will on day one make Trans a mental health condition. The LGB will have the same rights with a few changes. TBA.
Education is at the heart of MacTrump. Children will be given proper education and outdoor activity. They will be taught proper Scottish history with all the mis-information about Charlie put right. The fantasy Scotland will be given the bin. Children of the future will understand the truth about their country’s history the good bits and the bad bits. I reckon a few headmasters will be jailed during MacTrumps big education bigger than ever before Bill.
Law and Order
ICE, armed police. minimum height and fitness. People will respect the police under MacTrump.
The Death penalty for terrorists. Life without parole for certain monsters.
Fraud in public life!
The penalty for this will be so severe even thinking about it will bring people out in a cold sweat.
Abortion!
Forget it girls. It aint happening. Next question.
Foreign policy
Under the MacTrump administration Scotland will mind it’s own business.
Youth unemployment
The Neds and grifters will be running to get a job quicker than you can say ” your benefits have been stopped”.
Women!
Respect them. You don’t have to like them but if you don’t we will castrate you.
Reparations ??
Speak to the hand cause the face aint listening.
Well that about covers it for today. I will be back on tomorrow with the same but more extended version of a dream I had.
God Bless Scotland.
I almost forgot!
Higher Education.
It will be mandatory for all students to wash on a regular basis. All the Mickey Mouse courses are to be replaced by Technical colleges. Teaching useful skills.
The Universities will be cut to the bone. Social engineering will come under the Scotland Terrorism Act.
Yes! Scottish students will come first and on merit. Meritocracy is MacTrumps baby.
We will do a deal with England and America for really clever and clean students
There will be a few arrests at certain Universities. You know who you are!
Make Scotland Normal Again !
Duncan MacTrump
Here on this Wings article btl at 8.25 a.m. 8.9.26 is a youtube link that gives all the information to show why the Union as operated is completely unjustifiable.
Any doubters about the strength of our case will have their doubts resolved. Happy days!
10.25, not 08.25.
Family
Family will be at the heart of MacTrump policy for Scotland. The focus will be on encouraging working families with Tax relief and a whole host of goodies. Grandmothers in the future will not be dying their hair pink and taking out their frustration on society. (A bit of Granny slapping maybe needed when this new law comes into effect.) They will be enjoying the time with their grandchildren.
Make Scotland Normal Again
Breed Baby Breed !
Duncan MacTrump
Law and Order
The MacTrump administration will issue a warrant for the arrest of Nicola Sturgeon. An application to the English government for the extradition will also be issued. Her citizenship and passport will be withdrawn and she will then come under Gary Glitter status and be deported.
The administration will open all files of the previous government with the Salmond files being at the top. Arrests will be expected to follow.
Believe in your country
Make Scotland Normal Again!
Duncan MacTrump
@Mark
Your policies tick a lot of the right boxes.
But I see you’re making exactly the same mistake that torpedoed Indy in 2014.
You’ve left the currency question open!
[Also, there would be an additional 2 votes you could hoover up if you were to just mention Fanon or Memmi]
I never left the currency question open I just haven’t come to it yet. But I can say off the record that those two half wits have no place in The Awakened Scotland. Ideology and jealousy have no place in our society. The motivation of such grifters is envy. They hate us. Why didn’t they right a book of made up rules for their own country or culture. They are without soul. They should be thanking the host nation for teaching them how to read and write. Would they have been taught that in their culture? It is a wicked hatred that has manifested in the left wing and it is our duty to expel it.
OK, Mark, I’ll look forward to reading your currency proposals.
I’ve written before about how quickly other countries manage to kick-start new political movements and parties, and now we’ve just seen Patriot Platform come from nowhere to front page prominence overnight.
Looks like they’ve snaffled the black uniform look for themselves, so you’ll need something contrasting. If you want to hark back to Nazi-era aesthetics, Trump’s Space Force has got in there first.
So there’s no time to waste. Just don’t choose anything including kilts. That’ll dilute the anti-tranny message in the “minds” of the unsophisticated and confused.
Oh dear another emblem of Britain’s first world infrastructure as the National Air Traffic system collapses.
With thousands of aircraft grounded and dislocated together with hundreds of thousands of passenger around the world impacted you do have to ask why this has happened.
And it’s not NATS first big system collapse. There was a big system failure back in 2023 but as the NATS CEO declared yesterday that was a different system failure – so there!
Britain it seems at its world best again and the world knows it.
“you do have to ask why this has happened”
DEI?
That’s what was blamed when the US NAT system screwed up.
And another comment if I may. What will be the cost of yesterday’s NATS global disruption. The law suit damages claims will be enormous.
And will it, like the decline of Jaguar Landrover or the broken and busted new RN destroyers and aircraft carriers just bensomething we all have to just live with.
But yes, what is the cost of all this?
“The British supercar manufacturer McLaren is to create 1,000 jobs in a welcome boost to the UK’s struggling automotive industry.
The carmaker is creating the jobs as part of a £450m investment in its technology centre in Woking, near to the plant where it manufactures all of its vehicles.
McLaren, which merged with the premium UK electric vehicle startup Forseven Holdings, currently employs 2,500 staff. The new jobs will include indirect and agency workers, according to the Financial Times, which first reported the investment.”
link to theguardian.com
An ideal opportunity for Burnham to promise a McLaren in every postcode.
Careful Willie or you to might end up on the fascist hit list of fanatics from Berlin headquarters for elimination, like poor James, Alf and Westminster parliament.
Wrong city. The capital of the fascists was Rome. Germany was a National Socialist dictatorship. Benito Mussolini would have to ” a slap a your face “, with his glove for such an insult.
It sounds like some people may now be on the anti Terrorism watch list,
Just those who don’t agree with you.
Maybe it’s just me, but the upcoming SSRG conference has a particular vibe to it.
I’m not claiming any special insight… just sharing how it feels from the outside looking in.
The speaker list has the feel of a middle-class vanity project: credentialed, respectable, self-important, but emotionally hollow.
It’s the “feelgood charity donor” psychology applied to national destiny.
And then there’s the edgy outsider invited to make the event feel more dramatic.
It’s a classic bourgeois move: bring in one “controversial” figure to give the conference a sense of danger without actually risking anything, because the environment is still safe, polite, and overwhelmingly middle-class.
To me, the whole thing smacks of “radical chic”.
In a lineup of professors, authors, policy thinkers, a Labour peer, a broadcaster, and Salvo/Liberation Scotland, the ‘controversial figure’ becomes the firebrand — the truth-teller, the provocateur, the outsider invited inside — but in a bourgeois setting this role is more performative than structural.
This is, of course, just my personal impression, and perhaps I’m wrong — but I don’t think so.
I don’t doubt the earnestness of the conference’s ‘performers’ and I don’t think they’re bad people; and I’m certainly not saying the conference is a bad thing.
I’m saying the vibe is bourgeois earnestness dressed up as national destiny; it feels more like a show staged for the benefit of the ‘cast’ than something that will move Scotland even a millimetre closer to independence.
Anyway, I’ve no skin in that SSRG game… just putting my opinion out there, for what it’s worth.
The Elite.
“move Scotland even a millimetre closer to independence”
Sorry, Northy, but no True Sovereign Scot uses the metric system.
Prior to the forced transition to the English system of measuring length after 1707, Scots used the Scottish inch, fit, yaird, ell, faw and mile, all of which differed in some degree from their English equivalents.
Uniquely Scottish units also existed for measuring area, volume and weight.
I’m frankly astonished you don’t seem to know this.
And I’m scunnered beyond my ability to express it that you don’t seem to care.
Aye Northy never trust the French. A wee eighth of a Scottish inch or a baw hair ken.
“differed in some degree from their English equivalents.”
Which system would be the more accurate? Was the transition to the imperial system at the cost of science?
Mark,
Measurements of length have always been relatively arbitrary and it has only been in recent times that it has been possible to relate them to unchanging physical phenomena. For example, the speed of light in a vacuum is constant and a standard meter is now defined as the distance light travels in a specific fixed time.
Compare and contrast with the standard meter of Napoleon’s day. A metal bar subject to changes in length with changing temperature.
Regarding the Scottish ell. It was based on the average measurement of the adult male forearm (hint: elbow) and different ells were in use in England and most continental and Nordic countries.
A fact to keep in reserve for when you next have to thole listening to some progressive, lefty twat earnestly claiming that “race is a social construct”.
The Neolithic Yard is another interesting concept. Absolutely no direct evidence for its existence has been found. Yet the dimensions of every remaining Stone Age structure are multiples of a single length, which has been christened the Neolithic Yard.
I wonder how Muslim archeologists would rephrase what I just wrote there?
“professors, authors, policy thinkers, a Labour peer, a broadcaster, and Salvo/Liberation Scotland”
I wonder if they will be taking questions.
After forensic analysis of the speakers’ backgrounds, I’m confident that I would be able to identify plenty of shortages and even exclusions from the progressive, lefty list of prioritised minorities.
So my question would be:
“Given that progressive lefties insist that the services and support systems ordinary people rely on must be compromised by the prioritised inclusion of inadequate candidates from their preferred list of “marginalised” minorities, why do they not apply the same consistent rules when arranging something that’s important to them?”
A Labour peer, eh? What more need be said?
SSRG is perfectly fine – if it was a middle class wankers circle wank setup there would be a whole lot of “workshops” (by people who have never really worked) for writers, poetry sessions, interpretational modern dance and folk music (not scottish folk music mind, but from eritrea, the sudan and the malays); instead its pretty practical – NATO, the currency, a focus on the economy, EFTA. Indulgent fluffery seems to be at a minimum.
I guess you didn’t read this.
“OUR MISSION
The Scottish Sovereignty Research Group was formed in December 2020, when it became increasingly evident that Scotland achieving its independence was an increasingly forlorn prospect.
While the May 2021 Scottish Parliamentary elections have produced a pro-independence referendum majority, there is neither a clear route to holding a referendum which would be legally binding under the Westminster-based Scotland Act, nor seemingly any preparation by the Scottish government nor Parliament for what kind of state Scotland would become upon achieving independence.
This has been the primary motivation for the formation of the SSRG, and we are seeking to perform the following functions:
Research means to become independent which will be legally recognized other than through a Westminster sanctioned referendum
Continue to develop a written constitution.
Organise from time to time a Conference inviting specialist groups to come together to help develop Scotland’s future.
Hold a broad survey among Scots to determine what kind of country they would like to see, modelled on link to debatconstituent.cat for Catalonia.
Seek out researchers in specialized areas to develop policy papers in the following domains:
Currency
Pensions
Foreign Policy
Defence”
Not a bad program for the myopic.
Nothing specifically about G@za. I guess it comes under Foreign Policy, but I’m sure I speak for all Sovereign Scots when I say it really should be a line item in its own right.
At the head of the list.
The rest of the minor detail should wait until we get that sorted.
OK, so I’m having a laugh. 🙂
But just look at the other omissions from that list of domains:
Energy & Energy Security.
Agriculture, Agro-chemicals, Food Security and food chain resilience.
The inalienable human rights of Scottish citizens.
Welfare and Health.
Immigration management & control.
Taxation.
Re-Industrialisation and the severing/shortening of strategic global supply chains for raw materials.
Climate Change mitigation.
These omissions makes me conclude that somebody else is having a laugh.
Mark Beggan.
I wll retain my politeness as I have done on wings for the sake of he host of wings and myself,
However I do wish to draw your attention to the fact that my personal opinion has very little to do with the information.
As the information nearly always come through the Westminster parliament site from debates held, from Hansard and their own records for the simple reason that Scotland does not retain these records.
And it is Westminsters site to the public and world, that openly states that there is no old Scottish paliament in the GB parliament due to it Scotlands being extinguished.
It was ended by the monarch of England Queen Anne by a official Declaration on the 28th April 1707, prior to the Treaty of Union taken place on the 1st May 1707.
These are Westminsters opinions and records out in the public domain.
beggan is a just a turd with an 85IQ, here to disrupt. He is reminiscent of another turd, Mark Boyle, similar name.
– there is a lot of this going on from a wider perspective, persistent irritant handles who come and go; ASA for example disappeared completely, but the style is similar to “Aidan”.
You are dribbling your Buckfast.
I respect that James. But it is too high brow, technical, academia land. We plebs need meat on the bones
I do not vote so neither left or right. Or even in the middle.
When politics and election improve from source then I will vote.
The EU is moving at its usual glacial pace towards shutting out Covid Spreader unfair competition within its markets:
link to theguardian.com
Unfair because virtually everything you can buy from China has been subsidised to a greater or lesser extent by the Chinese state as part of its plan to drive all competing industrial enterprises to extinction.
Unlike within the EU, Sovereign Scots can freely choose right now to boycott Chinese stuff at every opportunity that presents itself.
Think of any additional cost you might have to pay as an investment in the long-term sustainability of our industries, jobs, and the revenue-earning tax base that our social and health services rely on for their continued existence.
everything is made in china (more or less) ya fucking tit; let’s all buy english flatscreen tellies and english computers with english RAM and SSDs
– it was deliberate policy to deindustrialise the west – thanks thatcher and the neoliberals – in order to boost corporate profits. You think buy british is going to work now? You think you can fix 40 years of managed decline?
As for china, its banking sector is setup to make productive loans for real economic enterprises, not pointless market speculation and the pumping of asset bubbles which make us all poorer. China isn’t really communist its nationalist (economically national-socialist).
The only western country allowed to have industry was germany, but this is reliant on cheap energy, which it has declined. Now the chinese produce almost everything, just as good, for half price. Are you going to tell all those fragrant middle class english arseholes to ditch their chinese fake-rovers for ranger rovers double the price?
As for your hero, farage, his big plan is to deregulate markets, not rebuild industry – that and “crypto”. He is a failed metals trader without a scooby.
Michty!
Is it breakfast time already?
leah has a good blog, connecting scottish nationalism into wider geo politics
link to archive.ph
– she is an american woman and thus has no “cringe” and looks down upon the english as washedup hasbeens of no consequence, as they are
– nice graphic halfway down of the gas prices
reap what you sow – the UK is in real bother over gas
link to archive.ph
– getting it as LNG is an expensive and baroque method; the ideal situation would be if someone sent it down a pipe, to your door, on long term low cost contracts … if only BUT MAYBE “I KNOW A GUY”!!!
the AFD got in in a regional one there; if they were in power they intend to revitalise german industry, which means rus han gas, which means the pipelines are back on. All to the benefit of all normal people.
with privatised water, what could possibly go wrong :
link to x.com
– this is the basic point of neoliberalism – the means of life itself end up in the ownership of some very rich guys, so you end up living on their whim; these privatised companies, which should be public utilities, are too important to be allowed to fail, which means the owners can get up to all kinds of shenanigans; they have the public by the balls and with no one stopping them squeezing as they like. Farage would have more of this.
“which means the pipelines are back on”
Good one! Biggest laugh of the day so far.
Perhaps to be exceeded if I decide that you actually are being serious and believe what you just wrote!
You just don’t get it, do you Confused. Your world view has brought you to a place where you are trapped, no longer able to discern the outlines of reality, as they are blocked by the parapets of delusion you have constructed around your bunker.
sez the UK parlyment
England which has about 90 % of UK surface water has problems, to put it mildly, with pollution. sewage pollution, agricultural pollution and industrial pollution.
14% of England’s water has a good ecology – meaning good water quality and aquatic diversity of wild life and fish.
0% of England’s water has a good chemical rating. All waterways have chemical pollution.
“Forever chemicals” in lakes and rivers constitute a lasting hazard. England’ waterways could be like Sellafield’s toxic mess without the radioactivity if PFAs discharges into rivers are not curbed.
“the basic point of neoliberalism” and of course liberal imperialism and its colonial procedures.
A colonized people suffer from territorial alienation and thus experience immense wealth extraction due to the loss of sovereignty, for which the only remedy is to reclaim sovereignty:
link to youtube.com
Naw, Alf. In as much as neoliberalism has an agreed definition at all, its meaning has nothing to do with colonialism.
Unless you’re going to claim that all those western countries experiencing popular disquiet with the adverse effects of neoliberal policies are colonies of somewhere or other.
That would be daft.
you can never win a game which is controlled by your opponent, which is why you need external support to create something of a level playing field; the UN is one aspect of this, but the real method is “realpolitik”
– the argies have demonstrated beautiful realpolitik and triangulation; they have done political judo, manipulating more powerful actors than them for support – they have played the US and China off against each other.
link to archive.ph
only ruined by one dumb paragraph
Yet the irony is that Mr Milei’s ambitions to turn Argentina into an indispensable regional ally of the United States would be better served by not falling out with Britain, whose military presence in the South Atlantic complements Western efforts to counter China and Russia.
correction :
Mr Milei’s ambitions to turn Argentina into an indispensable regional ally of the United States are independent of Britain, whose military presence in the South Atlantic IS IRRELEVANT
What indy politician, other than Salmond, has ever demonstrated the necessary sophistication to be able to get in a room with the big boys and get something out of it (other than getting shafted, giving away all the treasure for peanuts)? I remember that meeting Sturgeon had with the CFR, but that was little more than the new graduate trying to bluff a corporate job interview, she was well out of her depth – they let her in the porch for a quick look at her, that was all.
The basic situation here is that since 1945 the UK has been a vassal state of the US – you deal with the organ grinder, not the monkey. It is just tragi-comic that Trump is prezident – he is “one of us” and he should be “Our Boy”. The parallel discussion here about the UN and international law, misses the point entirely
– “international law” comes in 2 flavours, each with an entirely different level of potency : IL with the USA in support, and IL without USA support (even when just and moral and right) – the former is powerful, serious and instantaneous, the latter is weak, ineffectual, a form of high minded international virtue signalling. This doesn’t mean the UN tactic is irrelevant (it can do damage), but just don’t spend too much time on cultivating sierra leone, burkina faso and paraguay (no disrespect to them).
You go where the power is – trump could declare scottish indy and that would be that; what would england do – it rents nukes off america and its new jet fighters are all running US systems (NB all military exports are backdoored). And the sad thing is – trump doesn’t like the english – he absolutely humiliated them in public over lack of support for his wee war – he pointed out, rightly, the british navy was crap and “we don’t need them”. That sort of thing stings, and you are never meant to say it in public. Having Trump on our side should be pushing at an open door.
Oh dear, news just breaking of the appalling developing country engineering standards in Scotland has just emerged.
Seems that in June the absolute engineering bucket that is the hundreds of millions of pounds boat the Glen Sannox had a very serious gas leak when nearly a tonnes of gas escaped in a 12 second leak.
Here is what the BBC has just reported.
” A faulty valve on a CalMac ferry led to a sudden and uncontrolled release of highly flammable methane gas last summer, BBC Scotland News has learned.
The operator’s investigation found that 700kg of the gas – enough to fill a four-bedroomed house – was vented from the side of MV Glen Sannox over the space of 12 minutes while it was carrying 82 passengers from Arran to the mainland.
So much methane was released that some of it was sucked into a ventilation intake, setting off gas alarms in the ship’s generator room.”
Gas explosion when gas reaches concentration of the explosive air and gas ratio is what causes big gas explosions and here we have gas being sucked into the engine room.
Just another emblem of the pig poor low skill economically slumping country that we are.
It used to be the developing countries that had these problems – but we are very much in the grouping ourself.
Third world but why has it taken nearly three months for the accident to emerge.Trying to keep the lid on it one suspects.
Sounds like they were very lucky they didn’t have 82+ incinerated corpses bobbing in the ocean.
I guess “lessons will be learned” so it’s all good.
An investigation into how many of last summer’s crew are still on the ship might pay dividends.
Perhaps the appropriate lesson would be “Maybe we should have used an off-the-shelf design with a conventional power plant”… :/
An investigation into how many of last summer’s crew are still on the ship might pay dividends.
“Stephen Flynn says he was unaware of ferry gas escape”
——————————————————-
No surprise there then!
700kg of methane could fill far more than the volume of a four bedroom house, unless it had a double garage, snooker room, dining room, and a very large conservatory.
The Math Breakdown:Methane Volume: \(700 \text{ kg} \div 0.657 \text{ kg/m³} = \mathbf{1,065.4 \text{ m³}}\)
Average UK 4-Bedroom House: A standard family home (~120 m² of floor space with 2.4-meter ceilings) has a total internal volume of roughly 288 m³.
Average US 4-Bedroom House: A larger home (~2,200 sq ft / 204 m² with 2.4-meter ceilings) contains a volume of roughly 490 m³.
This means 700 kg of uncompressed methane would easily occupy 3.7 average UK homes or 2.2 average US homes.
—————————————-
You can’t beat some maths to prove a valid point.
OK we’re talking methane, not propane, therefore a lower calorific value and all that jazz, but fuck me, 700kg of the stuff…?
The big ol’ green Calor Gas patio burner cylinder holds 13kg of liquified gas when brim full (and they cost £75/each – assuming you have an exchange cylinder, more if you don’t). So, round numbers, that’s 54 big gas cylinders’ worth spaffed all at once, which would cost you over four grand.
Marvelous. These “SNP ferries” are really quite something, aren’t they; it’s what happens when you have a bunch of talentless numpties in charge who’ve never earned a single pound between them that wasn’t given to them from the public purse.
Given the gas was unburned, the CO2/greenhouse gas impact would have been horrendous. Roughly the same as driving an average car round the Earth – five times over.
“John Swinney nightmare as Westminster launches probe into Peter Murrell’s crimes and Lord Advocate’s role in Cabinet”
For details read link to scottishdailyexpress.co.uk
Wow! Looks like some big, bad, English basturts really are gonna do it.
But this time I don’t think they’re gonna run away.
I see the SNP are already circling the wagons.
I hope people aren’t being distracted by a smirking bald guy and a whole lot of gas. Who would fall for that old squirrel? Some idiots fell for the painted windows.
Maybe he is smirking as he gives you all the finger as did the previous minister and the previous minister before that. There is stupid and then there is Scottish nationalists.
Out of all the Shires in Scotland Aberdeen seems to produce an altogether unique form of stupidity and arrogance. Lowest in the class for sums and top of the class for aggressive self importance. It must have something to do with the granite
Every time someone asks Andy Burnham a question he does this amazing goldfish out of water impersonation.
Swinney’s response shows that the SNP are Leftists first, Indy supporters second.
In a attempt to give you more meat on the bone, I will have to refer you to the Westminster parliament site once again,
The SNP and the devolved governance are run and organised by the “Scotland Act/s From Westminster parliament,
As the Westminster parliament state there is no actually Scottish parliament in the parliament of Great Britain in 2026. Since 28th April 1707,
Perhaps with Westminster parliaments own Site throwing this information out as factual for rUK and to a world wide audience is Why Scots and other Countries carry the believe that Scotland is not in a voluntary union with England,
And others believe that Scotland a Colony,
this information comes via Westminster Parliaments own voluntary verbal and written construction on their parliament sites.
I came to the information out on the public domain sites and forums including Westminsters as I do metal detecting and had to check some historical records for identification and dating objects prior to approaching musiums
What ever the case maybe, this information has been on -display to the World for many years now, and still is,
You have to decide if the Westminster parliament is telling porkies to the World or not,
Metal detector? Find anything interesting?
Does Scotland have any legal right (As the law now stands) to open embassies?
Man, must be 35 years since I last opened some embassies.
Happy days. But glad I stopped.
I see the Telegraph is suggesting that Andy Burnham is running the parliament similar as a boy Scout leval.
As the Devolved governance parliament in Scotland from Westminster parliaments “Scotland Act,”
The Westminster parliament has every right to launch a probe on its branch office headmaster.
Not adverse to people being held accountable.
I personally think that John Swinney and Andy Burnham have a lot in common in how they run Countries.
Duncan MacTrump says;
Currency:
That was the question that sunk Big Eck. Great guy, treated very badly by very nasty women. The British pound is our currency let’s make no mistake about that. The English called him out at poker and he blinked. They played a good hand. Alex was a bad poker player were as I’am the king of poker. At the next game we hold our aces and play our knaves. Ye? Still with me? It is a game of brinkmanship.
Now! let’s get to the gravy. Our Angled neighbors are smart and they are bigger than us but we are smart too. They have got about as much to lose out of a bad deal as we do. And that is what it is. A deal. If Alex had prepared the ground he could have went on the offensive first. Don’t wait for them to ask that. You get right in there and point out all the problems they are going to have if they don’t do a deal. They have to go on the defense. Alex then lays it out in the Treaty. Talking Treaty for everyone’s benefit, pull Everyone into it. Everyone loses and only a Treaty would solve such a calamity. Alex slaps them with it first and puts them on the hot foot. The currency problem is easy it is the poker game that counts. The detail is for the bankers and lawyers. If they are happy then the rest is just kilts and bagpipes and a new mint in Scotland.
My gut instinct is that the YES campaign was deliberately designed to fail. I suspect that pressure was also applied to Salmond to pull his punches.
The White Paper proposals set out mutual co-operation with imperial England / rUK:
A prime example being sharing the Pound Sterling (controlled by the Bank of England). (Jim Sillars had already researched and proposed a credible alternative which was rejected out of hand).
Salmond wisnae daft. He would have known a glaring weakness of these proposals, (shared with UK Parliament well in advance of the campaign), is that a hostile imperial England would say No to co-operation , which would blow a huge hole in the credibility of the pro-independence campaign.
One thing even his biggest critics recognised: Salmond was a sharp debater; one of the best ever. Yet, his performance in the first head to head debate with Darling was abysmal, exacerbated by the fact that his opponent, Alistair Darling was a dud (I meant to say dud, it’s not a typo).
In an attempt to address the subsequent criticism, Salmond later asserted he had mistakenly followed advice to tone down his debating style. (I don’t think that’s the full story but hints at the truth).
I can envisage a few Indy scenarios that don’t entail mutual co-operation with England.
Every one of them is catastrophic for Scotland.
Anybody seriously planning to alienate our biggest market and piss off an adjacent power 10 times our size in population and economic heft, and maybe 20 times our size in military capability, needs to be taken away and locked up for our national safety.
That’s before we start to consider the consequences for, and the possible actions of, the hundreds of thousands of Scots and English that will be on the “wrong” side of the border post-Indy, if anybody is daft enough to play hardball.
This isn’t the fifteenth century any more. Sane, rational Scots aren’t prepared to exchange their notional first-world comforts for Indy, plus an economic wasteland, or worse.
He may have been given bad advice but I think his bottle crashed. Alistair Darling! A snake in the grass if ever there was one with the IQ of Confused.
These glaring weaknesses were England’s glaring weaknesses as well. They were better at poker.
England stood to lose it’s standing in the money markets. It was losing the flag and the name. It was up shit creak. That was Scotland’s Ace. The fear factor works both ways. To give them credit in their dirty tactics, because that is what politics is, They played the fear card and Scotland should have turned that on them. The timing was everything. To get in their and pick the “killing ground” which England very cleverly did.
Hope over Fear ? It should have been;
Don’t fear nothing but fear itself.
Did I find any thing interest?
Yes I suppose depending on what a person is interested in, every thing from copper and silver coins mostly copper corroded but datable , some allowed to keep , lead solders and toy areoplanes A, bronze age tripod pot, ( not allowed to keep, in musium ).
world war two bullets , a few old petrol lighters, pocket knifes, iron Celtic Shawl pin, more round lead ammunition and bird shot, a few brooches and braclets, spoons, forks and knifes
And things you would turn up in the soil you had not expected to find, like golf balls, bottles and occasional plates, perfume and alcohol bottle. and fishing lures.
Plenty of old rubbish and old cans to take home to put in wastes bins after each metal detecting day,
Bronze age tripod. That is interesting. What would that be for? Are you detecting on specific areas? Historical sights.
Forgot dozens of horse shoes and tools,
A interesting hobby because its like a lucky dip, some days you come home disappointed soaking wet and freezing cold, other days you may be running around and jumping with delight.
Much like dogging.
Hence my interest in researching historical records, maps, buildings, old battles and history in general began,
James,
I hope this is of interest to you. Across Europe from 16th century the petition was a means of communication. They were present in times of war and in everyday things such as tax, welfare and litigation.
In Scotland, they were present around the time of the Union. Here is a bit of research done and the link to it.
link to eprints.gla.ac.uk
“Some prints used female voices and figures to speak for or represent the nation. In 1706, the parish minister in Kilmarnock, William Wright, wrote an allegorical pamphlet on a proposal of marriage between ‘Fergusia’, a venerable matron representing the Scottish
kingdom founded by the mythical King Fergus, and ‘Heptarchus’, a ‘Stout’ and ‘Valiant’ man named after the medieval Anglo-Saxon heptarchy. Because Heptarchus had abused his sister Juverna (Ireland), keeping her ‘as a conquered Slave’, Fergusia hesitated to enter into marriage with Heptarchus, preferring instead the terms of federal union established by the Solemn League and Covenant (Wright, 1706). Another clergyman, James Clark of Glasgow’s Tron Church, used a maternal national figure to make similar arguments against
incorporating union in a broadside pamphlet entitled Scotland’s Speech to her Sons (1706). On the pro-union side, an invented petition presented a message in favour of incorporation
in the broad dialect voice of female textile workers. The ‘Shank Workers and Fingren Spinners of Aberdeen, and Places thereabout’ argued that ‘the Eenion’ would improve export sales of their woollen goods (Anon., 1706).
Conclusions: The Union of 1707 and National Opinion
The making of the United Kingdom helped to elaborate a rhetoric of Scottish national opinion. Opponents of the union argued that parliamentary votes for the treaty did not represent the views of the nation at large as represented in petitions. Robert Wylie, a
leading clergyman from Hamilton parish, insisted that the treaty betrayed ‘the publickly expressed mind of the nation’ and that the people therefore had an obligation to resist the treaty in arms (Bowie, 2015). William Johnston, marquis of Annandale, protested that ‘this nation seems generally averse to this incorporating union’ and John Murray, duke of Atholl insisted that Queen Anne should be told that the union was inconsistent with ‘the inclinations of her people’ (Records of the Parliaments of Scotland to 1707, M1706/10/15, 1706/10/212). In reply, supporters of the Union contended that parliament’s votes outweighed extra-parliamentary views. As Sir John Clerk of Penicuik put it, ‘the will of parliament, strengthened by mature deliberation, was considered of more account than the will of the people’ because the opposition had ‘laboured tirelessly to confuse public opinion’ (Clerk, ed. Duncan, 1993, 106-7). The important point is that both sides in the union debate acknowledged the existence of extra-parliamentary public opinion, though they disagreed on how well informed it might be or how far it mattered.”
Hatey,
I don’t think anyone enquired about your’e personal life.
I made no comment about my personal life, James. 🙂
Yes you did. In fact Hatey everyone now sees you as a dirty old man sitting in his Ford Cortina in some roadside car park flashing his headlights.
You lack style and class, Mark. As well as smarts.
A spacious and comfortable campervan is de rigueur if you don’t want your dogging sessions to attract dogs.
Che spambot in full flow, I see.
Give it a bloody rest, will you?
James, Hatey and Mark displaying they have nothing else in their empty lives to do than sit on here all day, every day spamming absolute yad, aside from the odd interesting point.
Ah, c’moan noo, Spartan.
Ye’ve goat a wee touch o’ green aboot ye cos naeboady’s paying ye fer yer posts.
Ah’m prepared tae pit in a wee wurdie in yer favour, bit first ye’ll hae tae up yer gemme.
Thanks Spartan 117. I try my best. I agree Hatey and James are a pair of sad old bastards. I don’t know why you even bother. I certainly don’t. What does 117 stand for?
@Spartan
It’s all subjective of course, but I generally enjoy Hatey’s posts, often a lone voice of sanity and reason in the face of lunacy, idiocy, spamming, weapons-grade ad hom, pompous, abject nonsense and drivel – and sometimes all at the same time.
I don’t want to speak for him, but I know he’s said in the past that he doesn’t want any casual reader of the site to believe that some of the outrageous stuff said BTL goes seemingly unremarked and not rebutted.
So no bloody wonder he’s here all the time then!
Thanks Alf.
For those that missed it ,link to youtube.com.
from their own mouths, the carpetbaggers are happy, and that’s all that matters
link to archive.ph
– unstated, but you can read between the lines … “lack of the brown”
Scots should be proud to offer their country as a lifeboat to all the little englanders who shat up their ain midden
– also note the anglo reality distortion field strikes again; mentions how Scotland is “sparsely populated” (fails to mention WHY)
“well harriet, the brigadooners were out one day hunting the haggis and a wormhole appeared transporting them to ex regio (slavery in the carolinas)”
fuckin sweeno as some kind of blofeld mastermind …?
link to archive.ph
– you wish; I can see him, face hidden behind a screen, stroking a white cat asking Number 2 about the “welsh operations”
– tories writing tory shite for a tory shite rag are embarrassing themselves, someone from MI5 needs to clue them in :
“SNP work for us, hitting it over the crossbar from the 6 yard line since 2016”
Idiot.
a govt which prioritised its own citizens welfare would not suffer this
link to archive.ph
– we would be on long term low cost gas supply right down a pipe to your door from uncle vlad
– and the stupid irrational energy pricing “market”-mechanism would be fixed
imagine a country, a politician who said : all other countries, all other peoples in the world can go get fucked – OUR PEOPLE WILL HAVE CHEAP OIL AND GAS AND LECCY, will get great value low cost goods from china, plus we are having zero migration from now on, and foruns who do crime get deported to eritrea
energy is fundamental, and the knock on effects universal; consider the poor cunts on the universal credit – most of that will go straight back out to the energy companies and the council, then you hope you have enough left to get some food at aldi – in a squeeze you hit the infamous “heating or eating” choice
anyone with any sense needs to get ahead of the curve – you need to reduce your energy bill to zero and the systems you will need are – solar AND wind plus a battery/inverter plus a modest heat pump (the type which can double as an air con in the summer); you can use the juice, or sell it back to the grid. Played right, you can even make money. You want to be insulated from whatever the gas/leccy price is down the line; its not going down, and the datacentres will be wanting all the power.
– do this now, if you have the resources. It may seem expensive now (shop around, try the plug in solar, loads of youtube on this), but it will pay off so well in the future. You are doing risk management, like a smart person.
NB, if enough people do this we could see a societal change; all the peoples houses become one large power station and storage device – it will literally change the energy landscape. And this is what the govt are supposed to be doing – creating “energy security”.
Yes let’s fund a war by Uncle Vlad – that’ll help solve all of our problems
(shop around, try the plug in solar, loads of youtube on this),
All made in China with slave labour. The adverts are hilarious and sinister. All part of China’s plan to undermine Western economies. It is people like you they target.
“you will need are – solar AND wind plus a battery/inverter plus a modest heat pump (the type which can double as an air con in the summer); you can use the juice, or sell it back to the grid. Played right, you can even make money.”
Do Not Try This At Home Children!
Of course, most grid connected home systems using solar panels and batteries don’t work in a power cut. If they did, the workers trying to fix the cause of the outage would be at risk of electrocution.
Of course, any economy choosing to purchase all manufactured items from overseas, and sell its own energy resources cheap to its own people, would have to sell everything not nailed down and nailed down in order to keep the imports coming. Is anybody seriously believing the Covids are running a charity?
But don’t take my word for it. Both the UK and the EU are currently giving this idea their best shot. We’re all going to witness how it ends quite soon.
Of course, as I pointed out yesterday, any pipeline from poot becomes Target #1 on Day #1. Confused has picked a bad day to try his deluded theory out, when the first Siberian gas plant has just gone up in flames as the long range cruise missiles go into use.
But again, as I pointed out yesterday, Confused is quite incapable of absorbing what the “winds of change” mean for his familiar, comfortable shibboleths.
Who wants to take a bet that Labour will never be in government again after the general election.
Nah. Give it 20 years or so, enough time for the next “crop” of wet-behind-the-ears numpties to buy the lefty snake oil schtick all over again, with insufficient numbers of counter-voters who remember how disastrous they were last time around. So it was ever thus.
In Scotland (and Wales) it is even worse: wall-to-wall lefties get elected overwhelmingly every single time, despite overwhelming evidence showing what an absolute fist of everything they make. You can lead a horse to water etc.
We don’t have 20 years.
That’s true whether you’re a yoon or a die-hard blood and soil Scottish nationalist.
There is no metric any Scot or any Brit can plot on a graph that’s heading in the right direction.
I see the point. There is a whole generation of young students who are totally brain dead. The foot soldiers for the Elite, however, they are as thick as mince with no spine. They are fodder for the Right and will be swept aside by anyone with basic common sense.
They don’t realize that the Right haven’t been sitting watching Nazi films but planning, brain storming, mobilizing, forming strategy. The woke children are going to get what they very much need for their own benefit.
No Labour will never come to power again.
Labour and the Tories are right wing parties, so much so that Thatcher took credit for the creation of New Labour.
It’s been nearly half a century of right wing governments, with right wing politicians coming up with right wing policies.
There is absolutely no difference between Labour and the Conservatives in terms of trajectory, it is a simple mater of how fast.
Ultimately,the vector is rightwards.
It’s very much the same on the other side of the Atlantic, there is no meaningful difference between the Republicans and the Democrats.
The UK and the US have no means of paying of our enormous national debts and no intention whatsoever to do so.
The UK are bankrupt, refuse to admit it and have been keeping the debt collectors from our door by selling off as many public assets as possible and emptying the North Sea of as much as possible.
Nearly 50 years of selling the family silver has gotten us to exactly where we are, all with zero help from socialist politicians.
The Blue Party and the Red Party will have exactly the same agenda.
People are of course, entitled to believe what they will but the hard truth is that we have only ourselves to blame.
“Labour and the Tories are right wing parties,” was as far as I got.
To be fair to BP, if believing there’s only two sexes and that they differ in many fundamentals from the chromosomes up is “extreme right wing” then just about everything else you view through your Overton Window will appear “right wing”.
Of course, BP may claim that he abhors the tranny woowoo, but then as Scotland’s former Mammie opined, that makes him a racist.
My point? Most of these common labels have been overused and mis-applied to the extent they’re now useless. Essentially they are just code words utilised by the ill-educated and unimaginative to abuse people deemed to be of a different tribe.
Which tribe does BP belong to? Perhaps we spot a clue when we observe his deployment of another pejorative code word – “Thatcher”.
“My point? Most of these common labels have been overused and mis-applied to the extent they’re now useless. Essentially they are just code words utilised by the ill-educated and unimaginative to abuse people deemed to be of a different tribe.”
Indeed, Hatey, even regular deodorant users and individuals who occasionally launder their coats are dubbed “Far Right”® these days. It’s all so exhaustingly tiresome, childish and pathetic.
Most Wings’ readers wish Scotland to be restored as an independent state.
To understand the reasoning behind Salvo and the other groups that are convinced that there is no legal foundation for the Union as practised since 1707, watch the youtube of SSRG TV titled “UN Professor Robert Black”.
This explanation by Prof Black is crystal clear. It proves that the Union hasn’t a leg to stand on and that Scotland is in the same position as other countries that were annexed by a larger neighbour e.g. the Baltic states. That position can be rectified for Scotland just as it was for the Baltic states.
Well that’s great news – I appreciate you aren’t able to respond to even the most mild of challenges so I don’t expect any response, but for others reading.
If the union had no legal foundation, then the end of the union could be brought about simply by bringing a challenge in the courts to the lawfulness of any piece of legislation passed in the last 300 years. The argument would be that since the Acts of Union have no legal basis, any subsequent act of the U.K. Parliament could not therefore apply in Scotland. That would of course create a constitutional crisis whilst Scotland tried to deal with the resultant vacuum and establish its own governance structures, but it would mean Scotland could be independent in a few years. There would be no need to fanny around wasting donors money in Geneva or New York.
The reason that this challenge won’t be brought is that it would be very quickly and very publicly struck out, on the basis it contains no arguable grounds. I have no doubt Robert Black KC knows that.
If I am wrong answer me this:
a) the SSRG say the union is unlawful;
b) the courts determine questions of law;
c) the SSRG have the capability and resources to bring a case that would allow a court to determine that the union is unlawful;
d) the determination that the union is unlawful would allow the SSRG to either completely achieve their objectives, or at least very substantially advance them.
Yet the SSRG haven’t brought this case, but have spent time and money on other apparently far less likely initiatives, so why is that?
Most interesting comment about the legal position of the so called union. Professor Black is absolutely clear on the matter, as is international law.
Against this background, and the UK repeatedly dictating that Scots have no right, and or are not entitled to hold a referendum on their future, it is interesting that Prime Minister Burnham appears to have now about turned on the matter by saying that a referendum could be held if public opinion suggested demand for it.
A most interesting about turn altogether since Burnham had previously said that a second referendum was ‘ off limits ‘
So what has brought this about. A realization of the legal position and how it could proceed internationally. A recognition of the internationally agreed Good Friday Agreement that provisions for an Irish border poll.
Something has brought this change about and I would be bold enough to suggest that the so called Union may now be being recognised as no union at all, that Scots have the right to choose their future – and that Westminster knows it.
Shifting sands, our day will come, and maybe sooner than we think.
You will not get a referendum but what you will get is more government and more civil servants. Burnham is containing his power base in Scotland with the help of Swinney. They both swing Left. They both want power above all else. The ” about turn ” is for the carrot eaters.
Why don’t you just get an AK47 and a few stun grenades and be done with it. Storm Starbucks.
Have a listen to Gayle Miller on this Wednesday of Scottish Prism and the lady has posted a more detailed version on Roddy’s site of “THE POST-60-DAY MASTER PLAN FOR SOVEREIGN RESTORATION
?A Step-by-Step Execution Strategy Following the Perfected VCLT Treaty Default”.
link to barrheadboy.com
youtube.com/watch?v=ckzEluI2Q8k
@ 100%Yes:TASP hasn’t attached the video, so far as I can tell. Have you managed to find it somewhere else?
Sam,
I had read the gist of that history, but many thanks for providing more details.much appreciated as all history has a story behind the events leading up to it.
Mark Beggan.
Also many thanks for your response on my behalf, I had visitors in so was a bit occupied.
Much appreciated all the same,
Spartan 117,
All responses are appreciated thank you,
And no I do not get paid to post, which is the reason why I go by what is wrote down in Westminster or what is public in all news, I have a love of history, and friendly debates and discussions, as many others do here on wings After all that is what STU’s site is for.
I try keep Comments clean and non abusive to others no matter which side of the debate they are on, as it reflects on Stu’ site, which gives both sides a view and opinion, but also supplies more information on many other subjects.
Boring it may be, but often helpful.
I Learn’ t a lot myself today,
I’ve read Black’s legal opinion in detail, and he doesn’t argue that the Union is invalid or that Scotland was annexed.
His view is about Scotland’s internal constitutional identity within the Union, not external sovereignty.
Black’s is an interesting minority interpretation, but it’s not a claim that Scotland retained external statehood.
@Northcode – you’re generally right, however Professor Black contends that because Scotland was effectively amalgamated into a greater England, this makes Scotland a non-self governing territory.
However;
– the circumstances around the formation of a state hundreds of years ago are largely irrelevant to the determination of whether a territory is an NSGT; and
– none of the factors that ACTUALLY determine whether a territory is an NSGT are analysed.
I watched the footage of the 2025 meeting. You only see the back of the heads of the audience. Very private and aloof. To be honest it was disgusting. An arrogant old woke with his virtue signaling.
Northcode
In the youtube video linked up thread, at 18 minutes and 47 seconds Professor Black states that Scotland was annexed.
Today annexation by one country of another is unlawful. His statement if widely accepted means that Scotland may be regarded as a NSGT or colony
The Kilbrandon Commission which considered devolution the best means of resolving disquiet and rising nationalism in the 1960s said devolution was the delegation of central government powers without relinquishing sovereignty.
My earlier comment was referring to Professor Black’s formal legal argument (for example in “For England, Nothing Changed”).
In that context he doesn’t argue that the Union is invalid, nor does he present annexation as a legal claim.
His position is about Scotland’s internal constitutional identity within what he sees as a continuing English state.
In informal settings — interviews, videos, conferences — he sometimes uses the word “annexed” as a descriptive shorthand.
That’s not part of his legal reasoning, and it doesn’t imply NSGT status or UN decolonisation criteria.
So there’s no contradiction: I was referring to Black’s legal argument, not his informal phrasing. They’re different things.
Also, Kilbrandon is a domestic UK commission and has no bearing on international law or UN decolonisation procedures. It describes devolution as the UK understands it, not Scotland’s status under international law.
The English people are not the enemy of Scots.
Nor are the Scots the enemy for England,
Think about it, this is What were taught even in history.
Its the politicians that stir the muddy waters, it saves them and the elites having to do the dirty work out in the open,
The same with Ireland,
The same with France and Great Britain migration, paying France to keep them in France and give the migration RNLI support at the same time to get them here.
Rule and divide, divide and rule.The set senario.
It is All due and down to politicians and goverment….the people do not run the Country
It is even more frightening when the government try’s to change history to fit their ideology.
Good post. Well said.
North code.
Indeed, Prof Black does not go as far as Westminster parliament in 2026 in Stating there is Not a Scottish parliament in the Great Britain parliament as it was extinguished on the 28th April 1707.
For a learned professor he seems to be dodging some rather direct facts in recorded history written down and put out in the public domain by Westminster parliament.
Aidan,
Surely a supposed created State hundreds of years ago is still relevant to both Scotland and England today.as neither holds Sovereignty at the moment.
As England is being governed by Europe and the EU,
If Scotland is recognised as Sovereign, not in a treaty of union, the same by logic applies to England.
Both return to their previous States, both regain control, and both regain their own Sovereignty of their parliaments.
Now you have to ask yourself whom and Which Control freaks would fail to benefit if this happened, China, ruskies, Europe, the EU, America,
Whom wants ultimate Control, and financial gain from a purposely down graded Sovereignty of England or Scotland.
Take your pick.
divide and rule your own Sovereignty of parliament, laws and Countries makes the target much harder to achieve,
@James – firstly thank you for engaging rather than just projecting, but secondly what do you mean by sovereignty?
The two sovereign nations sign a Treaty of mutual respect in practical terms that will be the envy of the world. A blueprint the rest of the world can learn from. Each nation protects the other in the new war waged by China and the EU. Each nation follows it’s own destiny being fully aware we share the same island. We have to make Scotland and England normal again before this can be achieved. A divorce is only successful if the children are happy.
Mark Beggan,
Ideology seems to being doing a lot of damage nowadays,
Because Scotland does not run the Government in Scotland,
And England does not run its government any longer,
Somebody else advises it to give Chagos Islands away, someone else gives Westminster parliament directives, and laws to follow that were never Englands or Scotlands and the treasury appears to be in control of some idealogical foreign policies.
But is the Same in Scotland,
None of us believe or can see our taxes are even spent in Britain and none of us can see the benefits to our Communities any longer.
Scotland and England would benefit tremendiously if they became Sovereign nations again . And not governed from afar.
Perhaps Scotland an England could write a new treaty retaining each their own Sovereignty, parliaments and governments, no more of this devolved parliaments to Wales, parts of England, Ireland and Scotland.
Just agree in that treaty not to interfere or attack each others Countries,
A much more simple and basic treaty the better,
But politicians and elites get greedy, that will always be a problem, the people are just fine,
The key to that holding is teaching the children. Teach them the truth. Teach them the christian principles. Teach children to believe in themselves and in their country. Invest in Scotland’s future. No virtue signaling or catchy emotional statements. Do it!
Children of the future will not want to leave their country. Our ancestors gave us what we have. We owe them.
A good post Mark (and James above).
Destructive unnatural ideologies specifically designed to break the Human spirit and democratic rule offshored/outsourced overseas to non-democratic autocratic organisations is the current Western way.
Despite my handle here I’m a committed pacifist and believe firmly in living in peace with our neighbours near and far. Part of the destructive anti-Human ideology above is not only sowing dissent and division but constantly fanning the flames of war instead of making every effort to secure peace.
Most admirable, Spartan.
Is your brand of committed pacifism reciprocated by the people you call puerile, shite-posting idiots, or do you find them to be unsympathetic to your idealism?
AN TEACHDAIRE PÀRLAMAIDEACH
Naidheachdan Pàrlamaid na h-Alba
Scottish Parliament news 10/09/2026
link to campaign.emailblaster.cloud
HIISTORY OF GAELIC-MEDIUM EDUCATION
Informative but sobering 2023 audio interview –
« Donald MacNeill, chief executive of Comunn na Gàidhlig (CnaG), describes the progress and the challenges associated with Gaelic?medium education in Scotland. »
Interview in Inverness, 2nd August 2023
link to youtube.com
@ Fearghas M: one has to ask why isn’t the Scottish executive following the example of Wales in requiring all public notices etc to treat Welsh and English equally.
Northcode,
You say: “In informal settings — interviews, videos, conferences — he [Robert Black,KC] sometimes uses the word “annexed” as a descriptive shorthand.
You are not yet a mind reader so you don’t know at all if his use of “annexed” is as you say.
I can find him online saying that one country ceased to exist – the other country did not and increased its territory. There [Facebook] he is saying clearly enough that Scotland was annexed in the legal context.
“Annexation can be done by the conclusion of a treaty.Unlike other treaties concerning territorial changes, such treaties involved an element of compulsion. This means that the ceding State had been forced to sign a peace treaty after a military defeat or to agree to a transfer of territory as a consequence of a threat of force or that it had been represented by a puppet government prepared to accept the annexation. In contrast to the situation under present international law, such use of compulsion or the involvement of a puppet government were previously not considered as sufficient grounds to render the treaty in question legally invalid.”
Yes indeed Sam, Professor Black confirmed his conclusion on the ‘takeover’ and ‘annexation’ of Scotland by England during the SSRG conference and then also at the UN HRC Geneva event of Liberation Scotland, I was at both.
At the UN Geneva event Scotland’s Non-Self Governing Territory (NSGT) and hence colonial reality was also fully explained by myself and others, and all the evidence of this is provided here:
link to jpti.ch
Did you pay your own costs? Or did you rely on the donations from the mugs, sorry supporters of your mickey mouse Party?
“The evidence points to only one conclusion: Scotland was annexed
into a continuing English state.”
(Prof Robert Black, ‘The Takeover of Scotland’)
“The story of the 1707 Union is not one of a voluntary, mutual partnership. It is a story of annexation, absorption, and the enduring consequences that flow from this. And this is critically important when the assertion that Scotland is not a dependency, or colony, of England today rests entirely on the representation of the union as a voluntary partnership. What occurred was a takeover of Scotland by England.”
(Prof Robert Black, ‘The Takeover of Scotland’)
Does the professor also subscribe to the “And With One Bound Scotland Was Free” notion, or does he admit that some solid, preparatory graft, along with a sustainable, democratic mandate, will be needed for Indy?
After all, a little rational thought must surely tell him that even if every Scot alive in 1707 was bought or coerced, there’s been a lot of water under the bridge since.
Plus many generations of Scots who, by and large, didn’t give a scooby.
Chas@11 September, 2026 at 8:08 am
I’ve donated to Savlo and Liberation Scotland, we all know why we are donating and what it’s for.
I don’t believe any is a mug who donates or travels on Scotland’s behalf.
I also donate to UNICF and Oxfarm does that make these organization mugs, NO.
Don’t you donate to anyone Chas?
I was wondering how are you helping Scotland’s cause, being a keyboard warrior sat at home criticising everyone and being total idiot.
It’s easier to criticise when your sat on your arse and never do anything to help anyone other than your selfish self.
This site is for people who want and support Independence, we are talking up Scotland not bring her down and listening to your crap just isn’t welcome.
I am absolutely gutted by your response. Well, not really.
Who I donate to is none of your business.
It is very easy to criticise when I see exactly the same crap day after day on Wings. Look at the comments from any article on Wings say 3 or 4 years ago and compare the names of the contributors to those of today. It is not difficult to surmise that lots of people no longer post as they do not want to be associated with the endless reams of dross that now appears.
The learned professor seems to think that an approach to the UN will pay some sort of dividend in writing off 300 odd years of history. I will confidently tell you what the results will be. Absolutely fuck all!
If the wee mickey mouse independence parties want to change anything they would be better trying to convince their fellow Scots to want change. Something that they appear to have no interest in as evidenced by the lack of any campaigning in the recent Scottish elections.
Continue reading the shite from Baird, Che, Confused, The Twat amongst others and all will be dandy in Scotland. Won’t it?
I like listening to Alf Baird and to be honest I could listen to him until the cows come home.
It’s quite simple, if you don’t like what someone is saying then just don’t read there post, you’ll feel a lot calmer at the end of the day.
The point I was making is, people donate because they aren’t in a position to actively do something themselves towards Independence and by donating it makes them feel as if they are doing their part towards securing Indyref2.
Your such a angry person why and for what reason I don’t know, just calm down.
Maybe some people don’t like what they’re hearing, as due to the bigotry openly on display? An intense dislike of ordinary, blameless rank-and-file English folk, for example, who have precisely zero handle or influence on governance and such matters, simply just trying to get on with their lives in increasingly difficult circumstances?
This has been openly challenged on multiple occasions, but on each occasion to my memory, no explanation nor apology has been forthcoming; merely stonewalling and then repeating same again at a later date, unabated and without mitigation.
Personally, if I found myself yearning to listen to that kind of thing “till the cows come home”, I’d be seriously considering a full frontal lobotomy.
For clarity, and because Professor Black’s work is often invoked in different ways, here is my understanding of what he actually argued — and what he did not argue — about Scotland’s constitutional history.
First, I support independence.
My concern is that independence built on distortion will not serve Scotland well in the long run.
As Cardinal Lawrence says in the movie “Conclave”, certainty is the enemy of unity… certainty is the enemy of tolerance.
Truth matters.
Here’s what Professor Black actually did argue:
These points are constitutional and historical.
They’re serious, and they deserve to be understood accurately.
What Professor Black did not argue:
As I’ve said previously, Black sometimes uses informal words like “takeover” or “annexed” in interviews or commentary, but these are rhetorical descriptors, not formal legal conclusions.
His formal argument is constitutional, not colonial.
Scotland’s situation today is shaped by constitutional law, democratic practice, and the precedent set by the Edinburgh Agreement — not by UN decolonisation doctrine.
I’m not criticising anyone’s motives. But I believe Scotland deserves independence built on truth, not on interpretations that Professor Black himself did not make.
Scotland helped build the modern world. Its future credibility as an independent country matters.
The truth strengthens independence… distortion weakens it.
We don’t need to distort the truth to achieve independence… the only thing the people of Scotland need to do is say YES.
Indy built on truth – amen to that.
The first truth is that Indy has to be the “broad kirk” that Alex Salmond always envisaged. Narrow minded tribalism, such as hatred of the English, or Student Grant collectivism, will never get traction with Scots who find individual English to be no worse people than individual Scots, and believe economic success comes through value-adding work, not benefits.
As for eternally trying to force the future into a shape defined by a selective interpretation of convenient parts of the Ancient Guff, get real FFS.
I agree, Hatey — independence has to be a broad kirk, rooted in democratic legitimacy and grounded in reality rather than selective readings of the past.
My point is that Professor Black’s formal argument is constitutional not colonial, and I think independence is stronger when built on truth rather than interpretations he didn’t make.
Scotland’s credibility matters. We win independence by persuading enough people to say YES.
Truth persuades; distortion repels.
Well said Northy: the truth matters.
How much better would the world be if the sanctity of the truth was honoured, not denied or considered a “hate crime”. Orwell was right.
Northcode,
You say: “He did not classify Scotland as a colony under international law.
He did not argue Scotland is a Non-Self-Governing Territory (NSGT).
He did not argue Scotland was annexed in the legal sense used by modern international law.”
This is what he did say.
“Today, Scotland’s status is not that of a partner in a union, nor a component part of a new unitary state. It is, in effect, a territory with limited self-governance, annexed by a larger country and with its resources (including its abundant carbon-based and renewable energy resources) exploitable and exploited by the larger country for its own benefit and purposes.
Understanding this history is crucial to understanding the political realities of today. The story of the 1707 Union is not one of a voluntary, mutual partnership. It is a story of annexation, absorption, and the enduring consequences that flow from this. And this is critically important when the assertion that Scotland is not a dependency, or colony, of England today rests entirely on the representation of the union as a voluntary partnership. What occurred was a takeover of Scotland by England. Views may differ on whether that takeover was hostile or friendly. But a takeover is what it was.”
It was hostile.
The Aliens Act used to get the Commissioners to sign up to negotiate the deal threatened about half of Scotland’s trade.
English warships were in the Firth of Forth and along the Scottish coast. English troops were in Scotland, in the Borders and in Edinburgh. The presence of ships and troops was to ensure that the Act of Union went through.
Quit it northcode – stop interpreting a man’s words we CAN ALL READ FOR OURSELVES (thanks sam) – and your personal interpretion seems unsupported to me.
Merger, acquisistion, annexation, c0lonisation, invasion, “rough wooing” – you are playing games with words; Lloyds, Halifax, Bank of Scotland – do they still exist? They are all the one thing now, and the names are merely brands. I want a Scotland that is more than a brand. You live in a country occupied by a hostile foreign power, by a people who hate us, who hate anyone who is not them, really think thay are the master race – and they use our wealth, our resources, our labour, our invention – for their own purposes. Then 3 centuries of being dragged into whatever evil enterprise they had in mind, spending our blood like water.
You can stick whatever label you want on it. NB reframing the bullshit aka sophistry aka gaslighting is the main tool of the oppressor these days; don’t be fooled.
– they even send their moronic woodentops to annoy us if we attempt to discuss it.
“Stop interpreting a man’s words by reading”
Yeah, perish the thought eh.
Idiot.
Keep up at the back.
“stop interpreting a man’s words we CAN ALL READ FOR OURSELVES”
Northcode was doing a bit of mind reading rather than actually reading what Professor Black wrote. Which do you think is likely to give an accurate picture?
“Which do you think is likely to give an accurate picture?”
Hmm, well, since you pose the question, Sam, let’s think about it for 50 milliseconds.
On the one hand we have Northcode – not someone I agree with very often, but an intelligent and articulate poster nevertheless, and someone who has clearly set out his stall with sound reasoning and as using a commendably neutral (and intellectually honest) frame of mind.
On the other hand we have Confused, someone clearly beyond all medical help or intervention, and yourself – a woke, low-wattage metropolitan lefty, probably an SNP drone and someone who refers to normal, sane people as “Far Right” on an hourly basis.
So y’know, I’m minded to listen to Northcode on this occasion.
HTH. 🙂
Yes indeed, colonial denial is soon enough forced to shift to such desperate denials as Cesaire’s ‘the moon is made of cheese’ and whatever other spurious arguments of the colonialist in defence of the un-defensible.
Prof Black is clear, as is Liberation Scotland submissions to the UN: there never was any ‘union’, there was only a ‘takeover’ and ‘annexation’ by a more powerful state over a weaker one, making Scotland a ‘dependency’ and occupied territory, i.e. a colony.
Which confirms precisely what Scots see and experience every day: that there is no ‘union’ and therefore there can be no ‘unionists’.
As in all colonial situations ‘there is only the colonizer and the colonized’ (Memmi) and the reality that ‘colonialism is force’ (Fanon).
link to salvo.scot
you can never win a game which is controlled by your opponent, which is why you need external support to create something of a level playing field; the UN is one aspect of this, but the real method is “realpolitik”
– the argies have demonstrated beautiful realpolitik and triangulation; they have done political judo, manipulating more powerful actors than them for support – they have played the US and China off against each other.
link to archive.ph
only ruined by one dumb paragraph
Yet the irony is that Mr Milei’s ambitions to turn Argentina into an indispensable regional ally of the United States would be better served by not falling out with Britain, whose military presence in the South Atlantic complements Western efforts
correction :
Mr Milei’s ambitions to turn Argentina into an indispensable regional ally of the United States are independent of Britain, whose military presence in the South Atlantic IS IRRELEVANT
What indy politician, other than Salmond, has ever demonstrated the necessary sophistication to be able to get in a room with the big boys and get something out of it (other than getting shafted, giving away all the treasure for peanuts)? I remember that meeting Sturgeon had with the CFR, but that was little more than the new graduate trying to bluff a corporate job interview, she was well out of her depth – they let her in the porch for a quick look at her, that was all.
The basic situation here is that since 1945 the UK has been a vassal state of the US – you deal with the organ grinder, not the monkey. It is just tragi-comic that Trump is prezident – he is “one of us” and he should be “Our Boy”. The parallel discussion here about the UN and international law, misses the point entirely – “international law” comes in 2 flavours, each with an entirely different level of potency : IL with the USA in support, and IL without USA support (even when just and moral and right) – the former is powerful, serious and instantaneous, the latter is weak, ineffectual, a form of high minded international virtue signalling. This doesn’t mean the UN tactic is irrelevant (it can do damage), but just don’t spend too much time on cultivating sierra leone, burkina faso and paraguay (no disrespect to them).
You go where the power is – trump could declare scottish indy and that would be that; what would england do – it rents nukes off america and its new jet fighters are all running US systems (NB all military exports are backdoored). And the sad thing is – trump doesn’t like the english – he absolutely humiliated them in public over lack of support for his wee war – he pointed out, rightly, the british navy was crap and “we don’t need them”. That sort of thing stings, and you are never meant to say it in public. Having Trump on our side should be pushing at an open door.
Come oaf it Confused.
You’d fight tooth and nail against any policy that attempted to make the UK, or Scotland for that matter NOT a vassal state. Speak softly and carry a big stick. The very idea’s anathema to you and your ilk.
As for the idea that the genocidal colonialists of Argentina have some claim over the Falklands, why not take some time out to find some indigenes from within the borders of modern-day Argentina whose ancestors were speaking Spanish prior to Columbus setting sail?
What is it with so many self-identifying Scottish Indy supporters that they instinctively side with the imperialist, colonialist crushers of the small, Independent peoples?
One point where I have to agree with Confused.
Trump could declare Scotland Independent.
I seriously wonder why SALVO isn’t hatching a plan to get an atlas into Trump’s hands, spring loaded to fall open at a map of the UK, along with a marker pen with the cap already removed.
Cos that’s about the sum total of Trump’s effectiveness and utility these days. Colouring in bits of picture books. Whether he can keep within the lines remains a highly classified secret. I suspect he can’t.
I also suspect that if Trump was to offer each of us $5000 to vote for annexation by the US we’d vote 95% in favour on a turn out of 125%.
But Trump is finished. The low bar by which all lame duck presidents must forever be judged. The evil he unleashed on the world will outlive him as his lasting reputation.
trumpton calling …
sargon calls for the anglo pak union
link to youtube.com
– this is progress, the way of the future; inshallah, no more anglos anymore
farage now wants to ban balaclavas – can he afford to lose the votes of the rape and bank-robbing communities? But will burkas be legal, and will the balaclava boys then identify as women, muslim women.
for the dover boys
link to youtube.com
a classic
link to youtube.com
To change the dial just a little but how many people know that in May this year the Standards Commission Scotland announced a change to their documentation policy whereby data relating to hearings against councillors is going to be destroyed after one year instead of being retained.
Whether this is legal is a big question but the decision to destroy documentary and audio evidence comes in the light of the Fiona Higgins Court of Session judicial review decision where the Standards Commission Scotland had been found to be acting illegally.
This decision it seems has caused huge concern with the Standards Commission and the Scottish Government since it now appears that there are many many sanctioned councillors set to launch appeals in the light of the illegality ruling of the Court of Session.
It is most definitely not a stretch of the imagination to view this revised destruction data policy as a huge attack on democracy. Indeed, can you imagine a court destroying all records of a case. But that is what is being done.
And moreover in Northern Ireland just over two weeks ago the ex Chief Executive of Mud and East Antrim council was found guilty in the Limavady court of attempting to destroy evidence and alter documentation in relation to information to be provided under freedom of information. Convicted and fined £1,500 the case is maybe a salutary lesson to any public officials who would tamper with information. Again, perchance a consideration when deciding to revise retention policies and destroy case records lest action could be taken against council officials.
I mention the foregoing because there is now the very distinct smell of a thoroughly rotten burgh here in Scotland. The stye it seems needs to be very much cleaned out and disinfected.
But in the meantime many councillors and members elected onto public bodies who have been sanctioned by the Standards Commission will now be making requests for disclosure of documents of the evidence before the Commission destroy the evidence.
100%Yes says:
11 September, 2026 at 10:45 am
“I like listening to Alf Baird and to be honest I could listen to him until the cows come home.”
Oh dear !
Once you begin considering our nation through a perspective of colonialism everything starts to make a lot more sense:
link to youtube.com
Murrell
“The proceeds of crime action against him was set to call on Monday, September 14. But a high court judge sitting in chambers late on Thursday night agreed to put the hearing off after both Crown Office and defence lawyers asked for the hearing to be adjourned.
A court official confirmed the new development on Friday morning. The judge, who wasn’t identified, agreed to postpone proceeding and assigned a new date. Murrell will now be brought to court to face the proceeds of crime action on December 7, 2026 – the day before his 62nd birthday.”
———————————————-
link to scottishdailyexpress.co.uk
Just how many times have hearings been postponed and moved in this whole shambles of an affair!
“Just how many times have hearings been postponed,..?”
======
The number of The Beast?