The world's most-read Scottish politics website

Wings Over Scotland

Jail time for Joanne

Posted on June 08, 2020 by

This site is not terribly inclined towards sympathy for popular children’s author Joanne Kathleen Rowling. We’re still waiting on an apology for her donating a crucial million pounds towards ensuring Scotland stayed ruled by Tories and got dragged out of the EU against its will, on the bonkers premise that voting No would magically put Scots in a position of unprecedented popularity and power within the UK.

As a smart piece of analysis it’s right up there with “They couldn’t hit an elephant at this distance”, and it would have been nice if at some point in the last six years she’d held her hands up and gone “Y’know what, I called that one really badly wrong. Sorry about the whole Tory/Brexit thing, everyone. We all make mistakes”.

(Wings, of course, got it exactly right at the time.)

We still don’t think she deserves seven years in prison, though.

Yet under Scotland’s proposed new Hate Crime And Public Order Act, it’s exactly what she’d be looking at after the events of the past weekend.

Above are just two of the genuinely least-horrific responses from “trans rights activists” (TRAs) to a short series of tweets Rowling made on Saturday expressing the not-terribly-controversial view that human sex is real. If you want some of the really nasty ones, we’re sure you can figure out what sort of search terms to use on Twitter.

(One of the above comes from a “progressive left” US activist and staffer on Elisabeth Warren’s presidential campaign who describes himself as an “intersectional feminist”. The other comes from a convicted thug who’s already violently assaulted one elderly woman for her views on gender – a crime which will have been recorded as being committed by a female even though he’s a man. The judge ordered the victim to refer to her assailant as a woman during the trial and denied her compensation not because she refused, but because she complied “with bad grace”.)

The thread has had over 50,000 direct replies at the time of writing, and many more indirectly. Thousands and thousands of them are indescribably appalling, in all the ways you’d imagine and worse.

But in the Scotland the SNP is currently proposing to create, it’s Rowling who’d go to jail. Because the Hate Crime Bill makes EVEN UNINTENTIONAL “stirring up of hatred” a criminal offence punishable by up to two-thirds of a decade in the clink. And what absolutely nobody who spent any time on Twitter or Facebook this past weekend could dispute is that hatred was stirred up, in truly epic amounts.

In a deeply troubling article for the Scotsman and a letter to The National last month, Justice Secretary Humza Yousaf attempted to reassure people – and the fact that he felt it was necessary to do so is deeply scary in itself – that the new act wouldn’t be used to criminalise opposition to government policy. But his attempted defences were notable for some telling and terrifying uses of the word “or”.

The requirement that any potentially criminal comments must in the first instance be “threatening or abusive” is meaningless, because it’s open to infinite interpretation. We now live in a world where it’s considered to be not just abuse but “literal violence” if you accurately identify the sex of a person claiming to be of the other sex.

So Rowling’s only remaining defence would be that she didn’t INTEND her words to stir up hatred, and nobody who read them could honestly dispute that. Whether one agrees with the views she expressed or not, she did so calmly and sensitively.

But under this law that would do her no good whatsoever. Because even if the court accepted her lack of hateful intent, it was nevertheless overwhelmingly likely – indeed, it was absolutely certain – that the reaction to those tweets from the demented, fundamentalist, extremist ideology of the transcult would be hysterical, and because of the size and intensity of Rowling’s following it would be enormous in scale.

No matter how reasonable a person’s comments, the reaction of TRAs to dissent is always instantly apocalyptic. Rowling would have known that as well as anyone else – she’s been down this road before – and therefore under the new law would have had no valid defence. By any possible measure she would be guilty of the crime as defined and looking at a spell behind bars.

(Yeah, yeah, we know – look at us pretending for the sake of argument that the law in Scotland is applied equally to all.)

This catastrophically ill-conceived and illiberal new law – which has already triggered alarms right across the political spectrum, from SNP loyalist Andrew Tickell through habitual party flesh-thorn Jim Sillars and feminist policy thinktank Murray Blackburn Mackenzie and the National Secular Society all the way to Daily Mail and Spectator columnist Stephen Daisley and right-wing blog Spiked – has no direct bearing on the constitutional debate. Justice is devolved and if the SNP achieve the third successive landslide next year that all polls currently predict, the bill will pass and become law whether Scotland is independent or not.

Readers, this site has said many times that it believes in independence as a principle, regardless of what policies any parties may advocate, and that those are matters to be decided at elections, not in referendums. That remains the case.

But the conduct of the Scottish Government over the last couple of years has become so deeply frightening, so intolerant and authoritarian, so full of arrogant hubris (with worrying side orders of operational incompetence and increasingly open corruption), that our blood runs cold at the thought of what it might do with more power. And the shamefully, disgracefully, farcically pathetic state of all three main opposition parties offers no credible hope of checks or balances, let alone alternatives.

As a matter of principle, independence remains uncontestable. But as a matter of real-world here-and-now practicality, it is becoming harder and harder to advocate, and we cannot begin to express how painfully that breaks our heart.

Print Friendly, PDF & Email

306 to “Jail time for Joanne”

  1. Denise says:

    They only get away with their arrogance and hubris because they can rely on the pro-Indy vote. In an independent Scotland there will be no such cushion. Also, with any luck hubris comes before nemesis and the SNP nemesis will be the Alex Salmond supported by the women’s groups the SNP have betrayed. The reckoning is coming

  2. Muscleguy says:

    I’m getting a bit that way myself. The SNP has long had an authoritarian bent in a paternalistic way and purely for our own good you understand. It goes with the control freakery which saw the Greens form RIC with the SSP as a non authoritarian, let’s scare some horses Yes campaign.

    Last time I told folk on the doorsteps who expressed dislike of some SNP policy that we could vote differently post Independence. That is becoming harder and harder to carry off because of these oppressive, illiberal pieces of stupid fuckwittery.

    Why are GRA and no free speech for us necessary moves now? I get why sedition was removd from the statutes in advance of indyref1 but these do not have that stamp.

    Humza Yusuf’s high handedness and faux reassurances cut no ice. Polis Scotland were guilty of misinterpreting the lockdown rules. They will be guilty of misusing this law too. If you own your own home beware, you won’t get legal aid for your defence. The number of needed legal crowdfunders will engender support fatigue. Some will be deemed to ‘deserve it’.

    We see in the hounding of Craig Murray and Mark Hirst whilst far worse and actually criminal examples get off scot free. Don’t have an opinion, it might prove unpopular.

    Time was failing to answer questions about how you saw the Eucharist could be literally life threatening and your answer might have to change when questioned further down the road or when the monarch changed. Remember Bloody Mary?

    There are elected people like Mairi Black out there who will whip up a twitter storm to howl you down and howl for a legal lynching pour encourage les austres.

  3. Proud Cybernat says:

    She won’t be jailed, Stu. It’s only indy supporters they go after.

  4. Margie Davidson says:

    This article expresses what I have been thinking for some time and it breaks my heart as I now feel helpless.

  5. susan says:

    I agree with you absolutely Stu. Also the sleekit undermining continues despite the postponing of GRA Reform ( the only “reform” needed is repeal), the Gender Representation on Boards Bill has erased biological sex in its redefining of “woman”. Apparently the SNIB has too.
    Add to that this ridiculous Hate Crime Bill and there is something authoritarian and underhand about the way the SNP works.

  6. liz says:

    I agree 100%. The SNP under Nicola’s stewardship is appallingly authoritarian.
    According to her BFF Mhairi Hunter, Nicola did not give her ‘blessing’ to the BLM protest. She quickly deleted after numerous comments, calling that out.

    For the first time in my life, I am also doubting independence.
    Still many people think NS can do no wrong.

  7. Sandra says:

    Time to start that new Indy party.

  8. Joe says:

    First it came with sex/gender.

    If you think this is ugly wait til the hidden hands start pushing this hard with race.

    A people divided?

    A people conquered.

    Time to start taking back our rights to our own thoughts and the rights to our own speech.

    If you are not prepared to actually fight against what the SNP are doing you are in no way a Scottish patriot, you are simply anti British.

  9. Republicofscotland says:

    The laws are way over the top, some of the manic TRA’s are well out of order with the TERF derogatory phrase and threats, and I can’t stand Rowling lock her up, but wait it’s only prominent indy supporters that end up in the dock, unionist mouthpieces especially those with money need not worry about seeing the inside of a court room.

  10. Sharny Dubs says:

    Question is what can we do?

    The SNP no longer work for the good of Scotland.

    The opposition is useless.

    Someone please step up!

  11. FiferJP says:

    This, a thousand times this: “As a matter of principle, independence remains uncontestable. As a matter of real-world here-and-now practicality, it is becoming harder and harder to advocate, and we cannot begin to express how painfully that breaks our heart.”

  12. Colin Alexander says:

    Well Stu, open goal there for you and others who want an independent Scotland.

    Work with them to set up a one-issue party for the Holyrood election and contest constituency seats, leaving the ISP to contest the List seats.

    That one issue being: Establishment of a parliament for Scotland, to exercise and represent the sovereignty of the people of Scotland.

    You say that will take a lot of money. What price national freedom?

    How much money was spent on going to marches, certain court cases etc?

    I believe people are willing to spend the money for the chance of freedom.

  13. Mist001 says:

    She’s a multi-millionairess. There’s no way that JK Rowling would have been looking at any jail time. She would have dramatised the possibility though and milked it, but the reality is that she’d be unlucky if she even got a slap on the wrist.

  14. Rev. Stuart Campbell says:

    “You say that will take a lot of money. What price national freedom?”

    Be warned that I’m really not in the mood for snide trolling right now.

  15. Rev. Stuart Campbell says:

    “She’s a multi-millionairess. There’s no way that JK Rowling would have been looking at any jail time. She would have dramatised the possibility though and milked it, but the reality is that she’d be unlucky if she even got a slap on the wrist.”

    Obviously. But way to miss the point.

  16. lothianlad says:

    Independence is Paramount, because we can create a Scotland that is ironically free from this horrible corrupt SNP and SG.

    As a very reluctant SNP member (who is only remaining a member so I can help boot out sturgeon when there is opportunity) – that breaks my heart

    They have taken so much from the loyal Independence supporters, lets not sacrifice our countries Freedom for them either!!

    This division would be a gift to sturgeons pro unionist plan.

  17. Astonished says:

    Hamza Yusuf has just stored up a whole lot of problems for himself with this legislation. This will never be forgotten and will haunt the rest of his (hopefully short) political career. It is stupidity on stilts. And a transwomen charter to intimidate and further silence the enormous opposition to the ridiculous idea that folk can change sex.

    Mps and especially msps who remain silent on this issue will also be found wanting in the future. Remember what Scots did to the fence-sitting British nationalist labour party.

    As Denise says on the first post – Their Nemesis is coming. And I for one can’t wait.

  18. Merkin Scot says:


  19. Capella says:

    Transwomen, i.e. men, are already protected from Hate Crime in the 2009 act. Biological women are not. They do not intend to add biological women to the list of protected characteristics even though sex is a protected characteristic in the Equality Act 2010.

    This is what happens when policy is captured by certain lobby groups. A judicial review is called for.

    An independence list party would also help to vote for independence without relying on the ultra-woke Greens.

  20. Heather Sibbald says:

    I would very much like to know who is funding the “Woke” movement. For it to have spread so far and so fast, there must be hidden money behind it with a political agenda. Clearly it is ant-feminist in intent and their whole purpise is to exclude and marginalise women and make us live in fear of ever “offending” any of them. This seems to be the Inquisition Mark2. Women were the primary targets then and we are going to be now. This must be stopped. I refuse to live in a country where the fact that I have XX chromosomes makes me a sitting target for every psychotic misogynist.

  21. MightyS says:

    What do we do then?
    If we don’t vote for the SNP in the HR2021, it’ll look like we’ve changed our minds and actually enjoy being shackled to WM – and indeed we will be if the SNP don’t get a majority.
    If we vote them a 3rd term, our women get cancelled out of society and we’ll get locked up for pointing that out.

  22. Effijy says:

    All you say is true Rev but as a Unionist Billionaire
    Ms Rowling will be able to use her contacts and cash
    Not to have the law interpreted negatively against her.

    I do fear that you publishing the words used by others
    and being an Independence supporter would be sent
    To Devil’s Island to break rocks for the next 50 years.

    As I’d mentioned in a previous post regarding the Epstein
    Documentary on Netflix, contacts and money comes with
    A get out of jail card.

  23. Beaker says:

    Can the people who posted some of those comments not already be prosecuted under malicious communications or breach of the peach. Sorry, I don’t understand what the current laws are, but if you called someone a c**t in the street you can be arrested.

    Fine to criticise someone, but threats to safety are unacceptable.

    Some people think they are untouchable behind a keyboard.

  24. Republicofscotland says:

    Yousaf surely must know what he’s doing with this if it goes into law after the stages. Scotland will become a country where you’ll be afraid to criticise anyone for fear of some sort of hate crime.

    As I’ve said before Yousaf is blocking Scottish judges declaring their interests in Scotland, and what are Scottish judges doing in the Gulf States? and who’s paying them whilst there? And will those interests be declared? Not if Yousaf has his way they won’t.

  25. Beaker says:

    breach of the peace…. not peach…bloody typos…

  26. Dan says:

    Ahh, a possible chink of light appears to escape the dystopian tartan future…
    With losing our EU Citizenship against our expressed sovereign will, and the resultant loss of our Freedom of Movement and Capital that went with our EU membership, I’m effectively constrained in Scotland against my and my fellow country folk’s will.
    That was bad enough but with the addition of this new proposed legislation on the way, can I now Self ID as a refugee seeking asylum in another Country or State that won’t jail me for holding views that if expressed here would lead to my persecution.

  27. Neil Mackenzie says:

    I’m hoping she sues Variety magazine for defamation over their article which happily cites “Anti-Trans” (without the quotes) as an unambiguous definition of the content of her tweets. It would be interesting to see if another court would bend over backwards to excuse an author’s expression of a bad understanding as “fair comment” and the resulting defamation as “of no materiality”.

  28. Colin Alexander says:

    Stu Campbell

    I can assure you, my comment was not snide trolling. It’s a shame you took it that way.

    I’m pointing out, people were willing to put their hands in their pockets for AUOB marches, your defamation case and the Forward As One indyref case and Alex Salmond’s case and Craig Murray’s case.

    So, it’s no a personal dig at you.

    You’ve previously stated opposing the SNP in constituency seats will take mega-bucks and suggested such funds would be impossible.

    There’s only one way of testing that to find out how many seats are financially contestable.

  29. Liz g says:

    Well there ye go the men on here who said wait till after Indy to fix this “gender stupidity”!

    If this goes through it now affects you too… Women can’t speak up for their right’s and now YOU can’t say a word about it, anywhere in Scotland!

    Will that shift ye,I wonder?
    Cause you’ll need watch yer words when out and about too when referring to women.
    Learn all the new language,and say not a word when that man follows the females into the toilet…. Or it’ll cost ye 7 years in the jail.

    Now you’re losing rights does it still cause ye tae hang fire over it ?

  30. Rev. Stuart Campbell says:

    “You’ve previously stated opposing the SNP in constituency seats will take mega-bucks and suggested such funds would be impossible.”

    The SNP typically spend £1.5m contesting a Scottish Parliament election. That does not include the considerable extra costs that would be involved in creating a new full-scale party and all its staff and infrastructure from scratch – realistically you’d probably be talking about doubling that figure at a minimum.

    Wings is by far the most successful fundraising entity in the Yes movement and we’ve never come remotely close to that sort of level of cash. In a good year we’ve managed to gather about 1/20th of what would be needed.

    The snide part was the suggestion that we’d instead wasted money on stuff like the Dugdale case. But (a) that was done on the instruction of the readership every step of the way, and (b) there was no reason whatsoever at that time to believe that the SNP would betray the Yes movement in the way they have.

    A list party is one thing, although it increasingly seems a futile idea at this stage. To set up a full-size party to properly compete for power with the SNP, in the absence of multi-million pound funding from some generous benefactor – something the Yes movement is notably short of – is the work of a decade at least.

  31. Vivian O'Blivion says:

    “right wing blog Spiked”. Spiked is the outlet (front?) for what is left of the Revolutionary Communist Party. They have reinvented themselves as radical libertarians who take donations from the Kock brothers (now singular but never mind). ‘Bout the only decent piece of investigative journalism ever committed by Bella Caledonia (and I haven’t crossed that particular web portal in a good six months). What games the old RCP are up to Zeus alone knows.

  32. The General says:

    Excellent Post Stu

  33. Allium says:

    I used to think some of the stranger SNP policies were tactical, but essentially harmless – a strategic means to differentiate Scotland from RUK in legislative terms. Not now.

    I still don’t understand WHY so many politicians have been captured by Wokery. It is the opposite of any of the historic civil rights movements – illogical and intolerant with a sinister hidden agenda. They can’t all be that stupid, or frightened (or can they?) They can’t ALL be MRAs.

    Nicola Sturgeon’s version of the SNP is terrifying in its blinkered authoritarianism.

    Rowling has said nothing wrong. If any senior policymaker can look at the lunatic rhetoric and violent responses to her dignified and factual arguments and not understand that they are arming and amplifying the wishes of militant MRAs against women and against science and against human decency, there is no hope left for this current version of the SNP.

  34. Colin Alexander says:

    Stu Campbell

    And while I’m at it. You’ve never apologised for saying I talk “fucking shite” when I repeatedly warned about the SNP over the last five years.

    But, credit where credit is due, at least you realise I was right about the SNP, even though it was several years too late.

    As for this comment: “…..this site has said many times that it believes in independence as a principle, regardless of what policies any parties may advocate, and that those are matters to be decided at elections, not in referendums. That remains the case”.

    Are you now saying you support independence by election? That is NOT what you devoted a whole article to opposing: “UDI is the answer”.

  35. Capella says:

    Wokism is the agenda of rich American and British billionaires. It has effectively destroyed left wing politics and feminist political advances. It is a handy way, like sport, of keeping us all fighting each other about something which will never disadvantage the elite. In fact, they invest in drug companies and health clinics which make millions from the life long victims of hormone drugs and surgery.

    In the SNP it is Christina McKelvie (AFAIK partner of Keith Brown) who has issued the new guidelines erasing “Women” from protection of the Representation of Public Boards Bill. Christina McKelvie works under Shirley-Anne Somerville who in turn works in the department headed by Humza Yousaf. These are the people pushing the Hate Crime Bill now, probably as a prelude to bringing the GRA reform back once we are all gagged.

  36. Colin Alexander says:

    Stu Campbell

    Brian Souter ( he alone donated £500, 000 according to reports online) and others donated huge sums to the SNP before they became the virtue signalling, woke party.

    It’s possible people like this may do so again, as well as funds from the less well off.

    The point being unless at least enquiries / attempts are made, it’s impossible to know if it’s possible to raise £1 million or more for a one-issue indy party.

  37. Colin Alexander says:

    Stu Campbell

    An alternative to mass contesting of constituency seats would be targetting Cabinet seats, especially Sturgeon’s / Yousaf’s etc.

    It would be a huge embarrassment if Sturgeon had to creep in on the List.

  38. mogabee says:

    With so much political power the SNP could be doing so much good but instead are trying to take us down a route that will lose votes, supporters and credibility.

    Bad enough now but jeez I’d love to knock some heads and clear the air of all this shite but unfortunately what with the pandemic and really questionable MSP’s and MP’s I struggle to see the end point being anything other than electoral confusion and certainly no independence whatsoever.

    It’d make ye despair…

  39. Capella says:

    I have no idea why Christina McKelvie supports the TWAW mantra. There are women in all parties who have swooned into a condition of belief in this delusional nonsense. It baffles me. But I’m from an older generation of women who are immune to this nonsense. We’ve seen it all before.

    As for Shirley-Anne Somerville – she could be an Integrity Initiative asset, planted there to cause maximum damage. Or perhaps she is just delusional. Who knows?

    Humza Yousaf – In February 2008 I visited the United States as part of the US Department of State’s International Visitor Leadership Program. The United States Government met the cost of this visit, which was US $6,710.32.

    Does a US International Leader have to adopt the delusions of the US elite?

  40. Bob Mack says:

    There may well be people out there who think what the SNP are doing is ok, but I am definitely not one of them. This whole thing is absolute insanity from beginning to end.

    People like Schrodingers Cat want us to elect regional reps who will not vote against this because they won’t take their seats at Holyrood.

    I want people who will actively fight this nonsense on our behalf.

    So,we either back the ladies who have stepped forward or we find another way to field candidates who will listen to what we want and vote against this garbage.

    We could back list candidates financially.

  41. shug says:

    Wings floating paper candidates in selected list seats is fine by me provided I hear Mr Salmond say yes.

  42. Capella says:

    Apparently, Neil Oliver has offered his support to JK Rowling for her stance against wokism. Unionists backing each other to highlight this SNP nonsense is exactly the scenario many of us predicted.

  43. jfngw says:

    To me Labour, LibDem’s and Greens all sit in the woke brigade as far as I can see, and the likelihood of me voting Tory is less than 0%. So I’m not sure what the answer is and what difference not supporting independence makes, it looks like it’s coming either way.

    So i will continue to support independence and hope someone sensible emerges to overturn the current damage being done. All legislation can be revoked if we elect politicians rather than virtue signallers craving international plaudits.

  44. Breeks says:

    Rev Stu, it doesn’t need a party set up, just a small group of determined Constitutionalists coordinating themselves and acting as a vehicle for a legal challenge to Scotland’s subjugation over Brexit.

    That’s the wee snowball poised right at the top of the mountain.

    Sovereignty and International Law is not determined by democracy, but finite legal principle. Brexit is unlawful because it constitutes the subjugation of Scotland’s sovereign will, expressed by Democratic majority, by another Nation. We do not require any referendum to contest that, nor do we even need hold a popular majority, to challenge the legality of Brexit. It is a binary and absolute condition. It is lawful, or it is not.

    All the Constitutional body requires is adequate gravitas to be taken seriously by the UN and Council of Europe. It does not take a mandate from a referendum to ensure the rule of law is respected.

    Scotland seems determined to do last, the very thing which it should have done first. Expose the Act of Union to critical judicial scrutiny, and demand explicit clarification of the “fudge” that is UK Government’s Sovereignty by “convention”.

    We need to make clear the distinction between a popular majority declaring Independence, and a single, legal opinion on whether an act of inter-national subjugation is or is not lawful. These are NOT the same things, but the one option can extinguish the Union just as readily as the other.

    If the SNP Government will not stymie Brexit with a Constitutional Backstop, then perhaps a private initiative similar to Joanna Cherry’s appeal to the European Court of Justice, or indeed, the Gina Millar case. Neither of these legal initiatives was predicated by any popular mandate or majority, so why should a Constitutional challenge be any different?

    As for the small group of Constitutionalists, the Declaration of Arbroath declares the sovereignty of Scotland “quorate” supposing there are just 100 of us left alive. Thus, if 100 Scots backed this legal challenge, then in my opinion, the International Community, both the UN and EU would be obliged to recognise the intervention.

    100 Sovereign Citizens of Scotland can still do what the SNP is too rotten or cowardly to do, and formally cry foul on the unconstitutional subjugation of our Nation through Brexit.

    We don’t need a party, but something like a 100 strong Constitutional Senate.

  45. Allium says:


    I think Shirley-Anne Somerville is a true faith delusional. She seems desperate for TRA praise on twitter, going above and beyond to reassure and placate, while utterly ignoring any woman who tries to engage. She’s never been one of the keener minds in modern politics, but Nicola loves her, so not to worry.

  46. The General says:

    List candidates are for the purpose of fighting for Scottish Independence

    No diversions

    SNP members have a mouth, it’s about time they started opening it

    The quieter the membership, the easier it is to push you around

    It’s time for the grassroots SNP members to tell their leadership they will not accept this

    But it should have nothing to do with an Independence Only list Party

  47. Beaker says:

    One question for those who know the legal stuff.

    Let’s assume that the law is passed next year, and someone is prosecuted for it. As we are almost certainly still going to be part of the UK, does that mean the person convicted could appeal to the Supreme Court?

    Imagine the political damage that would cause.

  48. Capella says:

    I asked SNP MSPs to explain why “sex” was omitted from the new Hate Crime Bill while transgenderism is included. I pointed out that this meant women are not protected from hate crime while transgender women (who are, by definition, men) are protected.

    I was told that, although most respondents to the consultation thought women should be included, MSPs deferred to the views of specialist women’s groups who wanted a standalone misogyny bill. I was referred to a report from Engender arguing this case. It would appear that only Engender argued for a different bill.

    Who is Engender? The report doesn’t cite the author. It is poorly written. It argues against including misogyny in a hate crime bill, citing only one example of it being tried and failing, in New Jersey.
    Misogyny literally means “hatred of women”. If that isn’t fit for a Hate Crime Bill then nothing is.—the-case-for-a-standalone-misogyny-offence.pdf

    We all know what the promise of a “better bill” in the future means. We’ve heard all that before too.

  49. WT says:

    Hello Rev – I think you are wrong here. You say “The requirement that any potentially criminal comments must in the first instance be “threatening or abusive” is meaningless, because it’s open to infinite interpretation” – this is erroneous simply because they have to be threatening or abusive. You can apply the term ‘interpretation’ to debunk anything. There is no way that Rowling’s tweets could be viewed as “threatening or abusive”. The retorts of Ben O Keef and Tara Flik Wolf on the other hand certainly could. Look at the material in front of you and anyone can see the difference. I don’t like Rowling, have major concerns around GRA but to say “it is becoming harder and harder to advocate (independence)” calls into question your overall support for independence. Why tie this to independence?

    Transgender laws etc are getting rolled out all over the world and you can bet your boots that the whole of the UK will be no different. We already have the Gender Recognition Law of 2004, Sex Discrimination act 1975 and the Equality act along with others that already give Trans people a wall of legislation to further their rights.

    Hate crime is a difficult area for society as it applies unequally to groups with some groups recognised and others not – I believe Goths for example are now recognised. The CPS England and Wales say “In England and Wales the monitored strands of hate crime are: racially and religiously aggravated; homophobic, biphobic and transphobic; and disability hate crime.” As it stands these laws wherever they are applied are underpinned by ‘interpretation’.

    This rolling out of Trans-friendly laws is occurring across the globe as is Hate Crime Law. Legislation such as the Hate Crime Bill proposed by the SNP is just bad law, and rather than linking this to independence it would be more cogent and useful to tie it to a requirement that Bills are subject to better methods of scrutiny. Perhaps an independent Scotland requires a second chamber? I don’t know, but Scotland does require independence and bad laws doesn’t change that. These kind of laws will be introduced all over the UK in time – you know this – and therefor it is wrong to undermine the argument for independence using this example.

  50. Liz g says:

    Capella @ 1.38
    I saw that too,and that, coupled with Westminster backing off the Gender reforms and pulling the guidance out of some English schools,made my first thought that they are getting their ducks in a row as well.
    Women as a group were hard to persuade in 2014 and this nonsense is a gift to unionists ….. just as we’ve been sayin for the last few year’s…. We run round policing each other so as not to give the British any ammunition and the bloody Scottish Government hand them a Neuk..
    Of course this stuff could wait till after Indy I don’t know anyone who is not willing to have the debate after the union is over..but it’s the SNP that won’t let it… Madness!!!

  51. robertknight says:

    Cracks me up when people I generally despise are at each others throats…

    Ultra-Yoons versus Trans Mafia.

    Pass the popcorn!

  52. Derick fae Yell says:

    “and we cannot begin to express how painfully that breaks our heart.”

    Not alone in that, Stuart, not alone in that

    Independence is coming, but not any time soon
    Plenty of time for stable-cleaning

  53. Mike d says:

    Surely it is not beyond Scotlands Ken to have a new indy party up and running for the 2019 Holyrood elections.

  54. Mike d says:

    Sorry predictive text.2021 HE

  55. Liz g says:

    Beaker @ 1.55
    The Supreme Court isn’t that kind of Court.. Any application to them would …I think … need to be about the new law being accepted on to the books.
    Hideously expensive even if they agreed to hear it,we’d need to prove it broke some other established law or Holyrood power!

  56. Capella says:

    @ Beaker – we are currently protected by the ECHR. Scottish legislation has to comply with European Human Rights legislation. The Westminster Equality Act 2010 brought together UK laws to comply. This is a reserved matter.

    Removing the characteristic “sex” from HR protections contravenes the Equality Act 2010. Women’s groups are currently asking the Westminster minister to investigate this. That’s Liz Truss BTW.

    A judicial review would be useful. Same applies to the Census 2021 bill which is proposing to allow people to answer the “sex” question however they “feel”. Which also contravenes the Equality Act provisions. The Scottish Government cannot amend the Equality Act as it is a reserved matter. That’s why these sneaky little changes to definitions of what is a “woman” are being slipped through the net hoping nobody will notice till it’s too late. But we have noticed.

    Once we are out of the EU jurisdiction – in December if there is no extension – then the UK Government will undoubtedly repeal the human rights legislation if it can.

  57. Colin Alexander says:


    You are right that sovereignty trumps democracy but, as you and I both believe Scotland’s sovereignty is held in common by the people, democracy helps establish the will of the sovereign people.

    (Only a small minority of Scots MPs voted for A50 being triggered).

    But, regarding sovereignty: a clear majority of the people of Scotland who voted in the EU-ref, voted to Remain in the EU. Every vote since then has supported those whose policy is pro-EU, eg General Elections and Euro elections.

    This establishes the will of the sovereign people is to Remain but, Sturgeon bent the knee to UK Parliament as sovereign, despite her declaration that she and the SNP believe the people of Scotland are sovereign.

    For as long as the people of Scotland recognise / accept UK Parliament is sovereign over Scotland it will continue to be so, Declaration of Arbroath or no.

    Contemporary Sovereignty is not by itself confirmed by a 700 year old declaration: sovereignty is about saying AND putting those words into actions that show the world:

    We are sovereign!

  58. lothianlad says:

    Given the way the SNP is going at the present time, and the way sites like this one have exposed the inner workings and strategy of the SNP, I’m be convinced that Sturgeon is controlled by the British Secret service.

    Its no secret either that many in the republican movement in Ireland believe that several high ranking and very high profile figures in the IRA and Sein fhien were and Are, still under MI5 control.

    anyone who has observed Sturgeons rise within the SNP cannot fail to have noticed how all the doors opened for her to get to the top with clockwork precision.

    What better way for the british secret service to control their enemies and threats to the state than by controlling and heavily influencing the leadership of a pro independence party?

    with all the nature denying, and crazy policies and legislation being introduced, whilst conveniently putting independence on the back burner, at best, The british secret service has effectively controlled the biggest threat to the Union.

    It is utterly shameful that with such an opportunity to gain independence, the SNP SG has decided to effectively try and destroy the Independence movement from within.

    The utterly shameful way Alex, Craig Murray and Mark Hirst have been treated, and the silent compliance of a discredited justice secretary, should give serious cause for alarm from even the most naïve sturgeon die hard.

    Unless we can take control of the party again and weed out the nature deniers, careerist and opportunists from within, Independence may be outwith our grasp, despite the poll leads.

    Sturgeon is in a very powerful position. She can wreck the independence campaign from within. That’s why it is so important to reclaim the party and set it on its original pro Independence path.

  59. Mike d says:

    Dont think there’s any two ways about it. The SNP have been compromised. Someone somewhere has got something on someone.

  60. Iain mhor says:

    The cleft stick in a nutshell.
    I was voting for the SNP to deliver Independence and the freedom to vote for Scottish Parties on policy thereafter. That was mutually acceptable until 2014 and we both delivered, until of course Scotland shit it.

    If the SNP have now morphed into a purely devolved party, with Independence the long game (at some indefinite future date) and no longer the prime directive; then they are asking me to vote for them on domestic policies, for the next five to ten years – they won’t have that on these invidious terms. However, neither will any of the other current mainstream parties.

    I personally, do not see clear evidence of Independence as the SNP’s prime directive – that is to say, its end shapes all current policy and action. This may well be an erroneous impression, but if so the fault lies with the messenger.
    Post 2014, in a period requiring a ‘new mutual agreement’ none has been forthcoming. Unless I should consider it to be the interrim ‘Lend the vote to halt Brexit’ (which was a failure to deliver) Or perhaps ‘Lend the vote for a referendum in 2020’ which was also failure to deliver.

    The current plague is a poor excuse for either, for I perceived it as a major opportunity for the SNP to show that Independence was always the prime directive behind every policy. Any driven political party would have used the opportunity to create border checks immediately and normalise border control and independent political action.
    There was no bar whatsoever, to extending current UK national VOSA/ DVSA/ HMRC checks (which occur daily on Scotlands roads and ports) to encompass Police Scotland domestic operations.

    No amount of ‘Do not politicise a crisis’ girning, excuses the fact that is precisely what a crisis calls for. If anyone is in doubt, merely glance at the major restructuring of UK government, policy and regulations occuring right now, which the current crisis affords it. Or look further afield to global politics and observe that no government is failing to take full advantage to push policy.

    If the SNP do not harden their ostensible ‘Prime directive’ of independence and make the message unambiguous and the deal acceptable, then a political vacuum in Scotland lies ahead (if not already upon us) and as ever, politics abhors a vacuum.
    They must choose whether Scotland’s perfidious rejection of the ‘deal’ to deliver independence in 2014, means they are now merely a mainstream domestic party in a Labourite huff (until some vague time Scotland calls upon them of her own accord) or they are still the prime movers of the ideal they once had.

    Unionist parties needn’t rub hands in glee at the souring of the SNP. A disaffection with an ‘Independence party’ is not to be conflated with a disaffection of the desire for Independence – Some interesting times ahead for Scotland…

  61. Capella says:

    @ Liz g – I agree. the Hate Crime Bill can wait till after independence. The main provisions were met in 2009. This is an obvious attempt to shut up gender critical men and women so that reform to the GRA can be reintroduced.

    Anyone who speaks against allowing men in women’s toilets, changing rooms, dormitories, hospital wards, prisons and any other private space can be charged with hate crime and imprisoned for 7 years.

    What a vote winner that will be once the Tories weaponise it.

  62. Auld Rock says:

    While you are all doing the Yoons work for them we are being neatly sleepwalking into a Trade Agreement with the US which will, apart from many other things, allow us to be poisoned by additives that have been banned around the world. I suggest that you all look-up ‘The Orkney News’ and read the essays of Alec Ross writing as ‘Alecross’ and particularly his piece titled ‘Exit Lane’.

    If we don’t stop this and allow this to happen there will be NO SCOTLAND to be INDEPENDENT!!!

    FGS waken-up and get real and pursue REAL problems of the here and now. Do you really want to remain under the Westminster heel or maybe even worse end-up like Venezuela???

  63. callmedave says:

    This might be O/T.

    BBC figures for the three colonial Nations are in + NHSE +WMGov but still not giving any England only figs.
    Only NHSE giving data for England.

    Scotland …….today…00……..Total…….2415….BBC
    N. Ireland……today…00……..Total……..537….BBC

    Seems a bit of a discrepancy there. 🙁

  64. Allium says:

    I suppose looked at in a prudential light, it does make sense for mid-ranking politicians coming to the end of their careers to back this nonsense. Of course, at the top there are the persistent rumours about Nicola Sturgeon and the UN job, but even for much lower fliers there are plenty of lucrative quangos and boards that operate revolving doors for compliant back-scratchers. All these orgs were captured long ago. In away, a self-interest defence would be a relief, rather than thinking so many politicians are actually taken in by this bull, or scared of the TRAs.

  65. Mike d says:

    Capella 2.32pm. “Once the Tories weaponise this” a week before the Holyrood election, there will be no SNP majority, possibly a conlabdem coalition government in Scotland. Was this the goal all along?.

  66. Capella says:

    @ Auld Rock – there is a connection. Edward Snowden in “Permanent Record” and David Talbot in “The Devil’s Chessboard” describe the evil habits of the UK and US secret state and it’s assets. Those governments are run by corporations through lobby groups. Anyone who gets in the way is eliminated, sometimes through reputational damage, sometimes through court cases and jail sentences and sometimes literally.

    American corporations want us to eat chlorinated chicken. Get used to it. Or find a mechanism for neutralising them.
    I would choose independence in Europe.

  67. mike cassidy says:

    Am I missing the point here?

    Surely – under this law

    Only ‘hatred’ inspired in Scotland would be legally relevant

    And anybody in Scotland originating tweets like the ones above would themselves be subject to the same hate-inspiring law as Rowling’s would.

    Can I say in advance that if I’m wrong on either or both of those then we really are heading for genderwoowooland.

  68. Colin Alexander says:

    Much of the equality laws were put into effect to comply with EC / EU Law especially in employment.

    As things stand, EU Law will no longer be directly applicable after December 2020. The UK has long been talking about withdrawing from the European Convention on Human Rights.

    Discrimination is also unlawful under certain criteria because the UK is a signatory to the Council of Europe’s: European Convention on Human Rights which was incorporated into the UK’s laws via the Human Rights Act 1998. This is nothing to do with the EU.

    But discrimination is only considered if it contributes to a breach of the other human rights, such as Article 3 or Article 8 ( as examples). Article 14 discrimination cannot be taken on it’s own as a grounds for legal action.

    However, legal responsibility / competence for compliance with human rights in devolved areas of government is also devolved.

    Holyrood is not sovereign. It’s legislation is open to legal challenge. The Scot Govt think they are above the law but they aren’t. ( Unlike UK Parliament who is above the law).

    The Named Person Scheme never became law, as the legislation was deemed Not According to Law, eg, it would have contravened Article 8 of the Human Rights Act 1998 and Holyrood cannot make laws that breach the law (e.g. human rights law).

    There is guidance /case law on Article 10 right to freedom of expression v restrictions on hate speech, found here:


    Unfortunately, the Scot Govt talks the talk about human rights but in reality there is little opportunity for ordinary people or disadvantaged groups to uphold their human rights when it’s the Scottish or UK Govts or their agents that are breaching human rights. Unless you have loads of cash to spare for a solicitor or are skilled in human rights and litigation.

  69. Scots guy says:

    Sturgeon has this planned, so it delays indyRef2

  70. Paul Eden says:

    If we applied the trans argument about sex to other categories we should be able to self-identify as black or disabled. These would quite rightly be seen as offensive postures, but both race and disability are considerably more mutable than biological sex.

  71. Dogbiscuit says:

    A piece of the usual excellence.The SNP sadly do have big time hubris especially the Justice Minister. Seven years in prison or a day in prison for saying the wrong thing is an outrageous abuse of Human Rights. This is the stuff of tinpot dictatorships. Unfortunately no one would be allowed to demonstrate against this under a political ‘lockdown’. See one of the problems with lockdown? I cannot with any conscience vote for such an illiberal party even though I was once a member. Given the poor performance of all of Scotland’s political parties I’m no longer convinced Scotland is anywhere near ready for Independence.We would need to replace the entire political class as well as the corrupt judicial system. As an old friend of mine once said ‘ we Scots are our own worst enemies’. Alexander Solzhenitsyn was arrested ,in the front line where he served as an Artillery Officer against the Wehrmacht. His crime? Speaking out of turn about Stalin. Solzshenitsyn was overheard and reported. Makes you think .No?

  72. Brian Allan says:

    A lot of anti SNP sentiment being displayed and I empathise with much and in particular what lothianlad says. I recently signed the Digital Scottish Covenant as an alternative possible route for Sovereign Scot’s to gain independence by demanding it of both the English and Scottish governments.

    See information at this website –

    I support the formation of an alternative party for the grass routes for capturing the list votes too. A three prong means of winning independence. It does seem that the third route via the SNP is the weakest one except for the great job Nicola is doing due to the virus. My wife is certainly a supporter now

  73. Capella says:

    @ Mike d – we know from press “leaks” that the Tories are weaponising this issue. Everyone thought it was in order to oppose the Labour Party (as if the MSM hadn’t trashed Corbyn’s reputation enough). But I believe they will use it whenever the need arises.

    The Holyrood election in 2021 or an Independence Referendum would be the time to cover the MSM with pix of beardy blokes in women’s changing rooms gratis the SNP.

    The Unionists were bragging that Nicola Sturgeon would be “gone by April”, perhaps after Alex Salmond was found guilty and she was shown to have met him in secret. That fell through and the Corona pandemic has burnished her reputation hugely so that the SNP are now riding high in the polls.

    Chris Musson of the Sun jumped the gun and published the lurid details about Derek McKay before NS could be replaced by him. Oops.
    The plan is not going to plan.

  74. Dogbiscuit says:

    Oh I meant to tell you maybe I did but you failed to notice but there has been a right wing tinpot political coup by a corrupt mafia gang in London.Its a merging of the military state security apparatus with civil institutions. Sleep well in the New Reich. Sturgeon the Herod to Johnson’s Augustus.

  75. mike cassidy says:

    For those talking about Spiked.

    To coin a phrase, women’s lives matter, despite what woke misogynists might say to the contrary.

  76. Tinto Chiel says:

    So right wing billionaires engender and push the woke virus to destroy various social movements, including our own independence one. I still can’t understand any woman voting for this, let alone enthusiastically promoting it, like those in the SNP leadership.

    If this GR madness becomes law, it will be like living in one of those dystopian Sci-Fi films you could only thole watching because you knew it wasn’t real.

    There is an inner circle in the SNP impervious to scientific truth or reality who will push this even if they are told that people will not vote for a party which enables GRA.

    How do you reach zealots who will not listen? This issue, coupled with the party’s apparent enthusiasm for restricting jury trials, cross-examination and automatic right of appeal will cause many people simply not to vote for them.

    Job done, Establishment.

  77. Clapper57 says:

    I think the problem we have is that the SNP know that currently they are in the position of being a party who are recognised by many voters as the largest Indy party…in others words they have a monopoly… long as they have no real competition they can enforce unpopular bills, irrespective of negative feedback , upon those of us who live in Scotland…..while still remaining confident that the voters who seek independence have no apparent alternative but to vote for THEM in all
    elections….because what is the current alternative if Scots want to gain/promote independence ?…..though I am confused/frustrated/angry as to what they , as a party, are doing to promote it (independence)….or rather NOT doing.

    I seriously think they underestimate the consequences of their badly judged actions and the strength of feeling and opposition many have towards the current strategy they seem so compelled to implement……..while their raison d’etre has been pushed aside and filed under ‘Not to be Opened’ seemingly until when ????

    Who voted for them, as a party, to implement bills such as this but more importantly what really prompted this and when instigated what will ensue ……whose rights and speech will be supported and whose will be lost…..

    If I, as a biological woman, am to be put into the second class citizen category with no recourse to object to blatant abuse and indeed denied my freedom of speech , not to incite hatred, but to stand up for my rights as a woman and then call out those who seem to want to deny me those same rights….then who that I elect will represent me politically ?

    The SNP.. the party that do everything BAR the very thing most of us elected them to do…..are we being selectively gagged or are some of us being selectively shut down ?

  78. Robert Louis says:

    An excellent piece of writing.

    Humza’s ‘hate’ bill, is a bad piece of law, badly written, badly conceived ,and with bad intention. It is frankly appallling that the SNP are even going down this route.

    SNP, what on earth are you thinking? Seriously, what the f*** is going on? If you are not trying to force through terribly stupid (and UNWANTED) gender laws, you are dreaming up this ‘hate’ crime rubbish. And it really is rubbish.

    It is a joke of a law, but wide open, if passed to full-on abuse. With each passing day, it becomes harder and harder to advocate for the SNP vote.

  79. Dogbiscuit says:

    Are we on ‘ lockdown ‘ until the curve of democracy has been flattened?

  80. dakk says:

    I don’t get the trans thing, but all young people I’ve spoken to have been relaxed and accepting about it.

    They separate the sex at birth from the gender issue.

    Old farts (like 99% of us on here),over about 35 have a rod up their arse about it.

    Looks like it’s on it’s way in anyway.Take a look at the latest hyundai hydrogen car ad.Male or female actors???

    Good luck voting with the Conservative and Unionist Party whilst until they adopt it too.

    They’ll look after everybody’s rights, definitely.

  81. CameronB Brodie says:

    I was never what you could call a proper scholar of law, but even I can rip the legal pish out of this authoritarian drive to re-define reality. This suggests those who are driving it are also aware of the illiberal ends to which they are working. That is what is most alarming to me. They appear intent on dismantling the potential for justice, and are doing it DELIBERATELY.


  82. Dogbiscuit says:

    Clapper 57 The problem with the SNP is that they are insufferably ‘woke’ immature degraded debauched fundamentalist ideologues with a distorted view of reality. I still also believe Sturgeon is being worked like a marionette by Leslie Evans on behalf of the Crown. What chance do we have with a leader who is a privy councillor?

  83. Capella says:

    @ Tinto Chiel – in my experience younger women feel a great deal of pressure to be “kind” and accept that it is possible for people to be “born in the wrong body”.

    Many young people are persuaded that this is reason why they feel uncomfortable with their lives. If left to go through puberty they resolve these issues naturally. Most turn out to be gay. But if put on hormone regimes or worse, surgery, they can never resolve it.

    It’s cruel. But it makes a lot of money for some. It also diverts people from realising that their discomfort is actually political. What prospect for a full and productive life do young people have?

    This was the insight of the Women’s Liberation Movement in the 1960s. All those isolated housewives who felt bad about themselves and their lives realised that the problem was political. No amount of new frocks, lipsticks, hairdos, high heeled shoes or rich husbands would cure the problem. (Well a rich husband might but there weren’t enough to go round).

    And that is very bad for consumerism. There’s always a new market to create.

  84. susan says:

    It’s good to see commonsense across the board btl on this issue.

  85. Lorna Campbell says:

    As I understand it, this legislation is human rights-based, but, as usual, in the UK, it is interpreted as widely as possible against the grain. The excuse is that other countries have introduced this stuff and it is working well. Yes, on the face of it, it would appear like that because the real, dee-seated repercussions have yet to be felt, let alone acknowledged. The simple fact is that, if any man at all decides he is a woman, in law that is what he will be. There will be no challenging any behaviour at all because to do so will contravene existing sex legislation designed to protect women. A man with a beard, with full male genitalia, wearing male clothes, because we all know that women wear trousers, will be able to contest every aspect of women’s lives. We already know that sexual predators of all kinds go to enormous lengths to gain access to their potential victims, but, hey, it’s female persons we’re talking about here, so tough. Proper legal models should have been made to take all of these isms to the nth degree to see how they would affect lives. But, no, just rush in and be the first to the ‘look how right-on I am’ self-obsessed, narcissist tape.

    I can barely process the fact that the party I supported for years has come to this. Most of us believe implicitly in equal rights for all, in respect and decency, but this is something else. This challenges the very roots of our humanity. I can see no problem with trans women who have transitioned or who fully intend to transition, but to try and claim that men who are still men and who may never transition, are women, is so insulting to women that it is beyond belief. How can any male person know what it is to be a woman? I can’t possibly know what it is to be a black person just by dyeing my skin because to be a black or Asian person is more than skin colour. It is a lived experience, shared with others. How could I, as a white woman know what it is to be an Asian male? I can try to walk a mile in his shoes; indeed, I should try to; but can I possibly, in any real sense, know what it is to be that person? A trans woman, fully transitioned will live the life of a woman thereafter and will experience much of female existence, if not the early years, and many already seem to be aligned with the sisters. Men who have no intention of transitioning (I understand it is a painful and costly undertaking, and I do sympathize with those who are scared or who cannot afford to transition quickly) are men. If you are so alienated by the male body you feel you do not belong in, how on earth can you insist on living in it and make a fetish of that? It is insanity, but we are about to condone that insanity that will encroach on women’s lives.

    My great fear is for young people who might be persuaded to change gender and, later, discover they were wrong. I am convinced that there are big bucks behind this, and stupid misogynists are emboldened to become activists in a movement that they are foot soldiers in: the women-hating phalanxes. The same could happen with ‘race hatred’ and all the other isms in this Bill. Imagine that genuine one hundred carat racists were emboldened to claim they are activists for people of colour, although they themselves are white, in order to cause alienation and division between the different races? Imagine that they started to claim racism against people of colour because they didn’t invite them to the Mosque or look askance at their wearing African clothes? Couldn’t happen? You cannot legislate for malignancy and madness. If only the SNP were emboldened to rush at independence in the same way. but that would not be ‘right-on’ enough, and we have all those poor NO voters to ‘persuade’ first, poor wee angels, even when they haven’t the slightest intention of ever voting YES. They must come first before YES voters because that’s ‘right-on’, too. Dear Lord!

  86. ahundredthidiot says:

    Dakk @ 3:27

    don’t buy a Hyandai then. or anything else that punts this pish – that’s what I do.

    I’ve also spoken to young people, mostly female, and they’re horrified – particularly the ones with young daughters who might need the loo in the shopping centre.

    It’s the work of the Devil – you can fill your boots, I am going with the other fella.

  87. liz says:

    Engender are a captured group funded by the Scot Gov on the condition that they support Trans rights. All of these lobby groups, funded by the government have to agree to the same conditions.

    They’re fobbing us off, the 2010 EqA is reserved, they cannot legally change it, so they skirt around the definitions. They need pulled up about it.

  88. dakk says:

    As for SNP.

    When they won their first election, I always wondered why they didn’t shout from the rooftops about McCrone and who the real subsidy junkies are.

    Is it because Alex, like Nicola was a privy Councellor?

    Maybe Alex has just gone native (behind the scenes at the moment)and about to spill the beans, after the botched hatchet job SG and the Yoon establishment did on him.

  89. CameronB Brodie says:

    In fact, the Just Minister could not be doing more harm to Scotland than he currently is.

    Empowerment, Citizenship and Gender Justice: A Contribution to Locally Grounded Theories of Change in Women’s Lives

  90. CameronB Brodie says:

    Scottish justice is under attack from those who should be defending it.

    Gender justice and social norms
    processes of change for adolescent girls
    Towards a conceptual framework 2

  91. Colin Alexander says:

    One for Breeks:

    “Par in parem non habet imperium (Latin for “equals have no sovereignty over each other”) is a general principle of international law, forming the basis of state immunity.

    Because of this principle, a sovereign state cannot exercise jurisdiction over another sovereign state”.

  92. susan says:

    You beat me to it @liz. Engender ARE a “captured” women’s group. The clever circularity being that in order to be recognized and receive funding from the SG, you need to accept TWAW. So of course any “advice” Engender gives out is going to be pro-trans and hence anti-women. Very clever way of stacking the cards in your favour.

  93. liz says:

    @dakk you’re talking nonsense. every poll carried out shpow that more younger people are ‘relaxed’ about it but the majority are still against accepting male bodied people in women’s spaces.

    Yong people are more prone to peer pressure, I’ve heard some say they agree with it to keep the peace.
    Also the students of today have complete freedom, they’ve never had to fight for any rights, it’s all been done for them.

    Just wait till the younger ones who’ve had gender neutral toilets, changing rooms, showers forced on to them, have a voice.
    I think very loud and clear they will want single sex spaces again.
    There’s already been complaints by pupils in schools about it.

  94. Dogbiscuit says:

    Notice how most if not all policies across the Western World seem to have a corrosive effect on families and the fabric of society while our civil institutions in the UK are taken over by the Military. I think there’s a concerted plan to atomise fragment frighten and weaken the body politic to make us more malleable and susceptible to so called ‘ strong leaders’ I believe crony capitalism is running out of steam and out of options. What does an automated future hold for the human race? Mass unemployment? How long can bread and circuses keep the peace?Speaking of circuses hello to all the long suffering stoic crazy beautiful lurkers.That thing you’re wearing is just you.

  95. Dogbiscuit says:

    dakk my daughters are teenagers and they’re not buying this transgender crap and they certainly don’t want dicks with tits swinging by in the changing rooms. At least I hope they don’t.

  96. Ottomanboi says:

    Independence, to the true believer, is not negotiable and certainly not over a seeming dysfunctional minority with mega egos. There are physiological reasons why sex reassignment may be necessary but this state has been appropriated and ideologically elaborated by a group for whom the concept of the normative, biological, male/female sex dichotomy represents an affront to personal ‘integrity’, a group on 24/7 alert for offence, a perfect you can’t win situation.
    This law may well have started out with good purpose but truly the road to hell or prison is paved with right intentions.

  97. Juteman says:

    Great polling figures for the SNP, and Wings goes on the attack against them the next day. WTF?
    He now loves Jakey Rowlings.
    I look forward to the next blog post praising Gordy Broon.

  98. Rev. Stuart Campbell says:

    “You say “The requirement that any potentially criminal comments must in the first instance be “threatening or abusive” is meaningless, because it’s open to infinite interpretation” – this is erroneous simply because they have to be threatening or abusive.”

    And I noted why that was in fact the case. TRAs claim that any statement they don’t like is “abusive”, and it’s within a judge and/or jury’s discretion to agree. There have been plenty of cases supporting the supposition that they could or would do so.

  99. dakk says:

    @,liz said

    Just wait till the younger ones who’ve had gender neutral toilets, changing rooms, showers forced on to them, have a voice.
    I think very loud and clear they will want single sex spaces again.

    I was merely giving an account of my own anecdotal experience when asking young people including my daughter and her friends.

    But I do agree that the realities of the situation could lead to a reversal of direction of travel.

    Then again people might just get on with it, and get used to it.

    Maybe it’s just a fad rather than some kind of progressive evolution.

  100. Eoin says:

    Rev Campbell,

    I think you may be labouring under a misapprehension, born out of Mr Yousaf’s remarks being taken outwithout their full context. You worry that JK Rowling (or those of a similar mind) may find themselves falling foul of the Hate Crime and Public Order (Scotland) Bill, but I hope to persuade you that your fears may be misplaced.

    You are no doubt aware that under the Public Order Act 1986, that there already exists an offence of ‘Incitment to Racial Hatred’, upon which the Scottish Government are basing the Hate Crime and Public Order (Scotland) Bill. I’ve reproduced the relevant section below:

    Section 18, Public Order Act 1986:

    (1) A person who uses threatening, abusive or insulting words or behaviour, or displays any written material which is threatening, abusive or insulting, is guilty of an offence if—
    (a) he intends thereby to stir up racial hatred, or
    (b) having regard to all the circumstances racial hatred is likely to be stirred up thereby.

    Note that the offence is committed whether a persons intention is to stir up racial hatred, or if racial hatred is the likely consequence of their words or behaviour. Mr Yousaf’s comments are not any more ominous than the laws we’ve had in place for decades. The rationale here, is that it is virtually impossible to prove intent in cases like these, because unless the accused confesses his desire to incite racial hatred, we cannot prove beyond a reasonable doubt, what his intention was. In the vast majority of cases, we can only look at the likely effect of his behaviour.

    However the key area that I hope I can provide re-assurance upon, is in the distinction between the plain-English meaning of the word ‘hatred’, and the legal meaning contained within the Act. You worry for instance, that the hateful and vitriolic responses that JK Rowling has received to her twitter posts, would constitute ‘hatred’ for the purposes of the law, presumably leading to JK Rowling’s prosecution as a knee jerk appeasement of some angry online mob. This fear is misplaced, as the definition contained within the Act should clarify:

    Section 17, Public Order Act 1986:
    In this Part “racial hatred” means hatred against a group of persons . . . defined by reference to colour, race, nationality (including citizenship) or ethnic or national origins.

    So whilst JK Rowlings remarks may well have sparked some online expressions of ‘hatred’ in the plain English sense of the word, this is immaterial to the question of whether she has committed an offence. The test (by analogy) is whether her remarks would be likely to incite hatred against transgender people as a whole, not whether her comments have incited expressions of ‘hatred’ from transgender activists.

    Furthermore, and just to provide a bit more context to this law, ignorance is a defence:

    Section 18, Public Order Act 1986:
    A person who is not shown to have intended to stir up racial hatred is not guilty of an offence under this section if he did not intend his words or behaviour, or the written material, to be, and was not aware that it might be, threatening, abusive or insulting.

    So even if somebody uses threatening, abusive or insulting words to incite hatred against transgender people as a whole, he still is not guilty of an offence if he did not realise that was the effect of his behaviour.

    The text of Hate Crime and Public Order (Scotland) Bill has not yet been written, and as with all things God is in the detail. We do not yet know whether the Scottish Parliament will merely copy the previous law verbatim and merely modify it as necessary to cover the additional protected groups; or whether they will do something more root and branch. However, I hope my contribution provides some re-assurance that there isn’t anything ominous about Mr Yousaf’s framing of the SG’s position.


  101. CameronB Brodie says:

    This is a terrifyingly draconian direction Scots law is being taken, as it entrenches a legal disregard for the biological differences between the sexes. A legal respect for the human genome is one of the fundamental pillars of human rights, as is a respect for natural law. However, the Justice Minister appears to believe DNA is socially constructed. This is a rather bizarre and minority view, IMHO.

    The party of independence appears to have been captured by interests who approach the law in a way that is coherent with English legal culture, though lacks compatibility with international human rights law.


  102. Bob Mack says:

    @Jute MAN,

    Whats right is right. Women have more than earned the rights to protection whether you approve of not.

  103. Jill Sharpe says:

    There is a plan underway apparently to stand candidates against 2 well known Wokes – probably S.A.Somerville and Rhiannon Spear as a way of informing the electorate at large as to what is going on.

  104. Capella says:

    @ Juteman – Stu is not praising JK Rowling. None of us will forget her shameless duplicity in arguing for Scotland to stay in the UK. Nor has she ever apologised or said that she got that wrong.

    But she is right on this issue and has taken a bold stand in the face of the terrible abuse she knew would come her way. Surely we can give credit where credit is due?

  105. terence callachan says:

    I do not agree with WOS who says of J K Rowlings comments

    “ Whether one agrees with the views she expressed or not, she did so calmly and sensitively.“

    The fact is J K Rowling knew exactly what would happen when she made these comments
    She knew some people would be enraged

    As we all know just because you say something calmly doesn’t mean it’s not threatening
    And for someone such as her with the media following she has to make such comments about such a sensitive subject is anything but “ SENSITIVE”

    JK was troublemaking , not for the first time

    Another thing ….I don’t agree with WOS comments about Ms Wolf

    WOS refers to Ms Wolf as “ a convicted thug who’s already violently assaulted one elderly woman for her views on gender “

    Ms Mclachlan 61 yrs referred to as a “radical feminist “ in the newspaper article WOS linked
    was filming a protest where speakers were stating their piece one of the protesters was Ms Wolf who took exception to Ms Mclachlan filming her and taking close up photos a melee ensued and Ms Wolf was convicted quite rightly of assault but for WOS to present Ms Mclachlan as an innocent is just wrong she was there as an agitator but given WOS views on transgender issues and people it is not a fair report.

    I’m no expert on these issues
    I accept transgender is appropriate for some people
    It’s a fact
    It’s here to stay
    It’s not new
    It’s been around since day one of humans

    The law will make as a good a job of being fair and reasonable to people as possible I’m confident of that , it may develop and change but it’s good to have legislation that gives people rights.

    I don’t believe that women’s rights will be diluted by transgender legislation
    The law will consider risks and legislate accordingly

    It’s not that many years ago people protested against gay men being given rights many many people wanted gay men to be imprisoned and sent for conditioning to change them
    Many many people agreed with common policies of employers sacking people because they were gay, imprisoning two men kissing or having sex banning them from certain jobs and imprisoning them if they were found to be in those jobs.

    This hate against transgender people is the same sort of hate

    It’s time we all remembered that there are good and bad in all

    Take a step back consider the law once it’s introduced and if it’s faulty we can correct it

    When you put people under pressure by denying them rights that they feel will greatly improve their lives you will get knee jerk reactions and sometimes when both sides of a belief meet , such as at a protest or march , there will be trouble.
    It’s not new
    It’s not outrageous
    It’s human

  106. Mike d says:

    CameronB Brodie 3.54pm. ‘Scottish justice is under attack from those who should be defending it’. The Scottish judiciary is unionist to its backbone, always has been.

  107. CameronB Brodie says:

    Mike d
    I’d already discovered you don’t get awarded points here, for stating the bleeding obvious. So it’s just as well I’m remembering how to rip them a new one. 🙂

    The constitutionalisation of the principle of gender equality

  108. terence callachan says:

    This law “ the hate crime and public order act” is closely linked to the equality act 2010

    The equality act 2010 makes it an offence to discriminate against people on certain grounds for example their sex their disability their age their religious beliefs etc

    It also makes it a crime to discriminate against people on grounds of their race

    In U.K. the definition of “race” includes being English Scottish welsh or Irish etc so
    “RACE” becomes “NATIONALITY”

    I think this legislation the hate crime and public order act will be used more often in cases of nationality or religious belief than in transgender issues
    So be carful what you say about people from other countries and people who hold religious beliefs .

  109. Jack Hall says:

    The lack of self-awareness of this sites proprietor bemoaning and I quote “Be warned that I’m really not in the mood for snide trolling right now.” When snide trolling is your standard modus operandi beggars belief.

    I am of the opinion that other than the very small group of individuals that have some chromosomal disorder { Klinefelters / Turners etc }.That these folk are suffering from a psychological disorder that would be better treated with counselling etc than a scalpel. It is largely an irrelevant look there is a squirrel distraction to what matters in the world.

    The fact as you demonstrate { repeatedly} that amongst the transgender world and their supporters that there are are outrageous scum bags . Is hardly a surprise as they are human beings and every subset of human activity has its scumbag element, from the Catholic church to quantum physicists.

    The fact is that every mainstream party will be following the same stance regarding the transgender issue. So who would you suggest we should support ,perhaps those nice neo-Nazi chaps on the extreme right ?

  110. J Galt says:


    There is no more certain process in this world than that “young people” inevitably turn into “Old farts”.

  111. Liz g says:

    Terrance Callahan @ 4.44
    So….Are you saying the Rowling knew exactly what she was doing…..and therefore should ( all thing’s being equal ) go to prison for 7 years….because let me tell ya Terrance that’s what it reads like.

  112. Rev. Stuart Campbell says:

    “However, I hope my contribution provides some re-assurance that there isn’t anything ominous about Mr Yousaf’s framing of the SG’s position.”

    It does not. Whatever the content of a 36-year-old Act may be, my faith in the SNP’s intentions and its competence are both zero, for reasons which should be abundantly obvious from recent articles. The fact that these changes are being presented as an abolition of the crime of blasphemy when they in fact appear in practice to be a very large expansion of it to encompass matters far beyond religion is a case in point.

    But in any event, see the article. TRAs have claimed, in great number and with great venom, that her remarks DO amount to incitement of hatred against them. Whether you or I think that’s obviously insane is rather by the by. I have little confidence that we could reliably make that assumption on behalf of the modern justice system.

  113. Stuart MacKay says:

    O/T but life is never that simple. From CNBC:

    Britain gave Palantir access to sensitive medical records of Covid-19 patients in £1 deal

    Better together, huh?

  114. susan says:

    I think transgender ideology/queer theory is truly despicable. Nothing else I can say, except men can never become women; women can never become men. No one is born in the wrong body. It’s all boundary dissolving bs.

  115. I have read over 40 posts on here so far and only 5 of those use their full name the rest are highland dancers (chancers)

  116. dakk says:

    J Galt says:
    8 June, 2020 at 5:05 pm

    There is no more certain process in this world than that “young people” inevitably turn into “Old farts”.

    True, but by the time they do they can bring about change.

    I don’t get the trans thing, but at the same time I can’t rule out that I’m out of touch now.

    I certainly can’t totally ignore the views of some highly intelligent and qualified young people I’ve asked about it.

    If it’s already in some new schools, is that not already fait accompli?

  117. Joe says:

    If they were serious about independence these kind of policies would wait until after its done. There is no way they can believe these policies can actually increase support.

    So it has to be logically concluded that either they are actively against Scottish independence or it isn’t actually a priority.

    Given the sacrifice the Scottish people will have to make on the Altar of Woke due to these policies if the SNP gain enough votes it begs the question – why are people still intending on voting on them?

    Useful idiot –

    n. One who is seen to unwittingly support a malignant cause through their ‘naive’ attempts to be a force for good.

  118. CameronB Brodie says:

    Time for some vorshborn durch technik?

    The Basic Law at 60 – Equality and Difference: A Proposal for the Guest List to the Birthday Party
    ….Article 3 of the Basic Law is the focus and the title of this essay is “equality and difference”. Many will expect to hear something about gender issues. This probably has something to do with the fact that I am a member of both the Law School and the Centre for Gender Studies at Humboldt University, a rare combination in an academic world that draws neat boundaries.

    But more importantly, most societies are rather obsessed with gender difference as the key social difference. There is data that tells us that we, as members of cultural majorities, orient ourselves by using labels like “men” or “women” when we enter this room; that we focus on gender when we, adding to the long list of constitutional fathers, emphasize the existence of four mothers of the German constitution; that we do not think about a complex web of inequalities when we discuss equality of women and, today in Germany often even more explicitly, equality of men; and that we do not consider
    interdependent inequalities if we turn our often antiquated notions of femininity and masculinity into issues for analysis and debate. We live with the schema of sex-as-difference in our heads.

    Therefore, equality could be understood as a fundamental right to a chosen, not schematized sex, or against the unreasonable demands to be pressed into gender stereotypes. Because of the obsession with sex-as-difference I will try to tell a slightly different story. I do this from a perspective of constitutional history because the Basic Law’s history on the subject of “equality and difference” provides more than anecdotes and jurisprudence on sex equality.

    I also hope to expand our vision of equality because we are all more than women, men, transsexual, or intersexual. This is never all there is to say about a person and if reduced to only this the labels go too far, and may even amount to an injustice. Finally, I look farther than the history of the constitutional guarantee of sex equality because one problematic aspect of constitutional concepts is to always focus on one difference, as the small but ideologically significant “difference with consequences.”3 This method disregards the web of privilege and disadvantage that shapes our lives, best analyzed from a multiplicity of perspectives such as sexism, heterosexism, classism, racism, regionalism, ableism, etc….

  119. Jill Sharpe says:

    terence callachan you appear to have completely missed the point – transsexual women have been accepted for years as JKR points out – now as the current system works very well why did the SNP think it needed changing causing all this hate towards women and causing them harm and distress just to please a few males who think wearing a dress or even just a feeling makes them a woman.

  120. Has there ever been a case of SNP MSPs voting against the whip,


    at Westminster elections you vote for the candidate not the party is this the same in Holyrood constituency seat.

  121. Joe says:

    @Blair Patterson

    We live in a world where people can be fired from their jobs for having the wrong online opinion. People have been banned from using payment systems, social media and now we have proposed hate speech laws that are very much up for interpretation. People like Antifa aren’t above going to homes and encouraging violence.

    The fact that I consider ‘trans’ to be a mental disorder, that there is no such thing as ‘white privilege’ and that Israel is a corrupt and murderous state that should not even exist leaves me with a lot of potential enemies right now.

    If people can use anonymity then they should do so. Its the argument that counts, not the person.

  122. Sandy says:

    Anyone know a breeding transgender?

  123. Robert Louis says:

    The year is 2072. The SNP are set for yet another landslide election win in Scotland. Their leader says, if re-elected, we will have a clear democratic mandate to hold indyref2, and London simply cannot refuse a section 30.

    Away to f***, SNP. Either do it or don’t, but stop wasting all our time.

  124. Dan says:

    @Scot Finlayson

    In my experience “independent thought” is weeded out during consideration of selecting any potential candidate, and the vetting process ensures non slip through…
    Magnolia Persons FTW!

    OT. Good news to see recycling centers up and running again and a big thumbs up and thank you to all those working in the industry.
    We just need to catch up with the backlog of clearing all the fly-tipped shite around our once bonnie land now, seeing as human generated waste processing wasn’t deemed a key area by some bureaucratic administerial assholes…

    One good thing resulting from covid. I’ve really raised my moon-walking game as I navigate my way around the one-way systems in supermarkets.

  125. The General says:

    The problem we have is that about 99.99% of the population of Scotland have NEVER read about this GRA bill or the other criminal bill the SNP are trying to bring in.

    They are completely oblivious to all political matters at this moment in time.

    My twenty year old daughter told me yesterday that Nicola Sturgeon was doing a great job and when will Indyref2 be held.

    I told her of the unrest within the Yes Movement, she was completely surprised and had never heard of any conflicts between Alex Salmond and the SNP.

    I would say she was fairly typical of the vast majority of Scots, who only see Sturgeon on our televisions and think she is doing a brilliant job.

    This will get her a majority next year.

    And on and on we will go with Devolution.

    Sturgeon has lost her Identity,,,she is now just a government official

    With no ideology, no conviction, no heart.

    She has completely forgotten all about the job of fighting for Scottish Independence

    She has now settled into the job of running Scotland as a Devolved Nation

    A job that she was to do on a part time basis, with the majority of her time fighting for Independence.

    And now we find that she has wrote the word “Independence” out of our vocabulary.

    This suits her long term plans of being a Governer in a region of Northern Britain.

  126. CameronB Brodie says:

    White privilege exists, as does Israel. So you appear somewhat confused and unrealistic. Just saying.


    Here’s why neither contemporary British constitutionalism nor the proposed GRA reform and Hate Crime bills, can be considered compatible with a legal respect for human rights. Full text.

    Gender Equality & the Rule of Law

    Women, Equality and the Rule of Law
    The rule of law is a concept which embraces and supports human rights principles. It is stated in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (1948) that the best way to protect human rights is through the rule of law, and that the law should not make distinctions between men and women in their enjoyment of human rights.

    The rule of law does not have anything to say about what laws contain but it requires that laws and legal processes are accessible, clear, able to be followed, and fair so that all people are equal before the law.

    For people to be equal before the law it is well established that:
    • legal processes should be open and accessible
    to all

    • a person has the right to be heard

    • the outcome of the legal process should be based
    on the law, not based on a person’s social status or characteristics.

  127. The General says:

    The General says:

    The problem we have is that about 99.99% of the population of Scotland have NEVER read about this GRA bill or the other criminal bill the SNP are trying to bring in.

    They are completely oblivious to all political matters at this moment in time.

    My twenty year old daughter told me yesterday that Nicola Sturgeon was doing a great job and when will Indyref2 be held.

    I told her of the unrest within the Yes Movement, she was completely surprised and had never heard of any conflicts between Alex Salmond and the SNP.

    I would say she was fairly typical of the vast majority of Scots, who only see Sturgeon on our televisions and think she is doing a brilliant job.

    This will get her a majority next year.

    And on and on we will go with Devolution.

    Sturgeon has lost her Identity,,,she is now just a government official

    With no ideology, no conviction, no heart.

    She has completely forgotten all about the job of fighting for Scottish Independence

    She has now settled into the job of running Scotland as a Devolved Nation

    A job that she was to do on a part time basis, with the majority of her time fighting for Independence.

    And now we find that she has wrote the word “Independence” out of our vocabulary.

    This suits her long term plans of being a Governer in a region of Northern Britain

  128. Famous15 says:

    Did you notice how Joe sneaked in an anti semitic comment to get this site defamed.

    To me what he said was not just anti Israel. Think about it.

  129. Alex says:

    It’s interesting how you miss out the start of Rowling’s transphobic rant, where she starts by mocking a piece on improving period product availability during covid in the developing world — which has seen a mass influx of hateful quotes, in a way which essentially attacks accurate technical inclusive language used for the benefit of trans men and non-binary people — who she might call “women” — in a way which massively, deliberately, stirs up anti-trans-women hatred, and completely ignores trans men, etc.

    The tweets you do include are clearly transphobic — “if you’re discriminated” is a construction that, given she’s never marched for trans rights, is a clear implication that trans people are never discriminated against for being trans.

    That the tweets preceding the ones you present are clearly incendiary and in no way measured or sensitive, and that you ignore this does betray your utter disingenuity on the subject.

    I can’t believe you’ve got to a point where you’re twisting the truth to support JK Rowling and attack the SP

  130. CameronB Brodie says:

    I most certainly did, though I’d suggest anti-Jewish sentiment would be a more accurate description. 😉

    Idealism and Realism in Israeli Constitutional Law

  131. CameronB Brodie says:

    IMHO, you are seriously in need of re-edumication, so please fill your boots.

    Gender, Law and Jurisprudence

    This chapter explores two debates occupying a central place in the jurisprudence curriculum to show how attention to gender can throw useful light on mainstream jurisprudential debate. The first debate engages is the ‘what is law?’ question, to which is bestowed a gendered twist by probing feminist assertions that (the concept of) law is gendered.

    The second is an equally familiar focus of jurisprudential angst, namely, the question of whether there is a right answer to legal disputes. The chapter contributes to the growing literature applying feminist insights into mainstream jurisprudence

  132. twathater says:

    @ Liz g 12.57pm and just looking at the comments btl proves that no matter what NS or her woke cabal does it will be EXCUSED by the same apologists as ANYONE speaking out against the dear leader or her reviled policies is JUST a troll , yoonionist or out to cause division

    BTW it wasn’t just men , there was and is women who were willing to let this pass and see how it played out , indy first was their cry and some were so disgusted that Stu even mentioned it that they left the site to go elsewhere where the exposure was less confrontational

    I have begged and pleaded on here and other sites for the SNP membership to take back control of their party , but according to some members they have complained bitterly about these policies but have been utterly ignored

    Peter A Bell derides the formation of a list party as that may endanger independence seats for a SNP majority in the SG,
    but what is the alternative when you have a leader and a party deliberately and willfully ignoring the outrage and condemnation these policies are creating

    I have also STATED on here and other sites that NS knows the polls are in her favour so is comfortable and happy to IGNORE any and all dissent to these policies

    I have also said repeatedly that due these polls she is engaging in BLACKMAIL , BLACKMAIL , BLACKMAIL and is doing it deliberately because there is no one else to vote for

  133. susan says:

    Alex only women menstruate. If transmen and nonbinaries menstruate it’s because their biological ex is female – they’re women. Get over it.

  134. Dan says:

    @Sandy at 5:55 pm

    Oh, I know this from past studies.
    Remarkably (not really) every person living and ever born required the input from a man and a woman. Historically these “parents” are referred to as Yer Ma and Yer Da.
    On a very basic level as I’m just a spanner wielding idiot, a spermy tadpole from a man need to somehow get into an egg from a woman then BOOM! conception.
    The woman then gets quite fat like she’s become addicted to Crispy Creme donuts over the next nine months, then a noisy new life form makes its way into the world from the special bit inside a woman called a womb, which in case anyone was unaware is why a lady is called Woman.
    Sometimes life throws oddities into the mix either through genetic issues with the blend of DNA from the parents, or for example spending too much time in close proximity to nuclear power reactor cores or microwave ovens whilst heating a Ginsters pasty. These activities can cook yer baws and damage the taddies, presume similar can occur to woman and their special bits.
    Medical advances and techniques can assist in the production of a new life, but back to my intial point, you still require stuff from both a man and a woman.
    Of course nowadays you could probably just 3D print a child to your desired specifications so my oldskool grasp on biology as taught in school by the Scottish Education System might now be considered bollox.

  135. Famous15 says:

    Can anyone explain why an issue affecting a tiny minority attracts so much anger and threatens the rights of a huge majority. It screams “agenda” but who is pushing this?

  136. Scott McC says:

    The great reset.i am a lifelong advocate of independence. I get increasingly worried that instead of a drive towards this, we see more of a manipulation of the people. I hesitate in mentioning 4th industrial revolution. I will put my tin foil cap back on to try to protect me from the angry tirades.

  137. Clapper57 says:

    I think some people are confused about this Gender debate.

    Trans people who intend to or who have already transitioned to the opposite sex are not the issue here….indeed I support them.

    It is those Males who state that they self identify as females (while physically keeping the very things that identifies them as the sex they were born as i.e. Male.with ‘working’ parts).

    And in declaring they self identify as a woman they then want to be allowed access to female only spaces.

    Spaces that include women’s prisons, women’s changing rooms in sports centres and clothes shops, women only meetings… in fact places normally considered as safe spaces for women and women only.

    So in these places that currently are identified as women only spaces……..can you, honestly say that if, as a father, husband, brother, Uncle,Grand father, male friend that you willingly accept, with no concerns, that the safety of a female close to you is guaranteed when sharing a space with a man, who by simply declaring that he Self ID’s as a woman but has NO intention to transition physically into one…. guarantees that because of that declaration…there is no risk to the safety of the female close to you….in other words you accept that there could not be any ulterior motive to ALL individuals (Men) who ,in self Identifying as a woman, expect this declaration to permit them automatic access to women only spaces….a danger free zone…but one with NO vetting of these individuals.

    Currently there are men who self ID as a woman that are being arrested for perverted acts against women i.e. using spy camera’s in female changing rooms, physically and sexually assaulting biological women and this then unbelievably is being recorded by the courts as an act of violence perpetrated by a woman upon a woman…and all because the perpetrator self ID’d as a fun looking at the stats that show an INCREASE in female violence and wonder if this is a true reflection or one skewed by self identifiers..and no this list of abuse is not exhaustive…

    It is also a huge problem that if left unchecked will no doubt get far worse should we, as women, lose this fight against insanity on stilts…..and indeed should the elected Govt give it their blessing…thus normalising it….God Forbid.

  138. susan says:

    Sorry, I’m hardline; transexual males are still male irrespective of cosmetic surgery, hormones etc. It’s being “kind” to these men that has opened the gates to the current nonsense.

  139. susan says:

    Or should I say “sorry, not sorry” I’m not getting on my knees for this delusion.

  140. CameronB Brodie says:

    The SNP appears to have been captured by a men’s-rights movement that is manipulating public ignorance of the significance, and role, that biology plays in achieving social justice. They are also deliberately conflating “sex” with “gender”, and generally breaking the cognitive logic of the law, and so preventing the potential for due legal process.

    Gender Equality

  141. Athanasius says:

    I was going to write something about this, but I’m self-censoring.

  142. CameronB Brodie says:

    Medical science and legal decree CAN NOT transform man into woman, so to suggest otherwise is to endorse magical thinking. The law can not be grounded in fantasy if it hopes to serve justice and democracy.

    Democracy, Gender Equality, and Customary Law:
    Constitutionalizing Internal Cultural Disruption

  143. Fran says:

    And yet the tra seem to think they can bait at will. Some wee snp youth arse randomly came on my twitter calling me cis. Looking for abuse so they can point fingers.

  144. Sandy says:

    Dan @ 6.32pm.
    I’m amazed. I’m 72 & never knew that. Goes to show that your never too old to learn. I now know that stork is a margarine as well as a bird & but had no involvement in my delivery to this earth.

  145. Clapper57 says:

    @ Susan @ 7.20pm

    Sorry Susan I respectfully do not agree with you.

    It is the “current” self ID “nonsense” that has undermined all of those individuals who HAVE fully transitioned or are preparing to transition…..and who want to be accepted and not judged….

    But now they too will get dragged into this debate because many people will be unable to make the distinction between them and those individuals who profess to self ID as a woman….

  146. Robert Graham says:

    Aye the loony’s are out and running a fkn mock . I honestly wouldnt know were to start , its me me me I am downtrodden . I cant get ahead because I am this or that or identify as this or that poor me me me give it a fkn rest .

    Until we are all blessed with some kind of telepathic bloody understanding or awareness how the fk is anyone supposed to know what you are or what you think you are .
    I have only seen one instance of the alphabet sisters work and i am not impressed and i guarantee if the SNP dont drop this shit people can and will drop the SNP ,

    This party only exists with the consent of the members lose that loose everything

    WELL DO YOU FEEL LUCKY snp management there will be only one winner in this and i think know it wont be you the management.

    One last word how deep is the ROT and how high does it reach

  147. Capella says:

    I agree with susan. Your sex is determined by chromosomes, gonads and genitals. If you have xy chromosomes and testes which produce testosterone, and a penis then you are male, however you identify, whether or not you take hormones and have surgery.

    I don’t believe it is kind to support a delusion. There is a well known condition where people are convinced that a limb or limbs do not belong to them. They beg doctors to amputate the limb. They threaten suicide, or that they will remove it themselves.

    Some doctors go along with the delusion thinking it kinder to do the amputation in safe conditions. Others refuse. In the UK the NHS provides treatment for free. But this sort of treatment could be bought from private clinics here or abroad.

    What if there were programmes in schools and the media encouraging people to get this surgery to correct being born with the wrong body? Should children be able to have their legs removed? Should people who say that humans have two legs and two arms be imprisoned for hate speech on the grounds that there are people who don’t have two legs and arms?

    How mad does this have to get before we say “enough”?

  148. Sarah says:

    May I remind everyone that you can have your say on the Hate Crime and Public Order (Scotland) bill on the site.

    NB Deadline for comments 24th July 2020.

  149. Dan says:

    @CameronB Brodie at 7:33 pm

    Ach, rather than fight this from the outside, maybe we should just fully embrace Fantasy Law and wreck it from within.

    “The system” won’t be able to function with the overload of cases.

    Caught poaching on your local river for a tasty trout – Simply Self ID as an otter to absolve yourself of any crime and free yourself from the administrative hassles and cost of obtaining a permit. Anyone says you’re not an otter will be guilty of hate speech, especially so when otters are a protected species…

    Fancy a chicken for dinner, just raid the nearest chicken coup and select and cull the most succulent looking one you can find, as you’re now a protected pine martin what are they gonna do when it was the chicken coup owner’s responsibility to keep out pesky predators.

    “Oi, you can’t swim there mate it’s private” swiftly answered with “Fuck Off! I’m a beaver so go and do one ya radge coz Beaver Lives Matter!”

    I think you’ll all be getting the picture by now.

  150. Sarah says:

    O/T Wee Ginger Crowdfunder on gofundme has opened today.

  151. Beaker says:

    To paraphrase Terry Pratchett:

    “Most people are under the delusion that they are sane individuals…”

  152. CameronB Brodie says:

    I don’t consider myself a legal scholar but I appear to be light years ahead of those who seek to shape the jurisprudence of Scots law. That’s shocking, is it not?


    Legal reasoning has a logic of its own. Its structure fits it to give meaning to ambiguity and to test constantly whether the society has come to see new differences or similarities. Social theories and other changes in society will be relevant when the ambiguity has to be resolved for a particular case… .

    The words change to receive the content which the community gives to them. The effort to find complete agreement before the institution goes to work is meaningless. It is to forget the very purpose for which the institution of legal reasoning has been fashioned. This should be remembered as a world community suffers in the absence of law.4

  153. Joe says:



    Stop slavering pish you uninformed hysterical fruitloop.

    Zionism is a political movement and Israel is its creation. There are plenty of good Jews who detest Zionism and think Israel is against their religion – including official groups of Rabbis.

    There are EVEN Rabbi’s who say the Holocaust is largely a fabrication.

    The Jewish people are not a monolith and are very divided – Haredi Jews get treated like filth in Israel.

    Don’t hit me with your ignorant pish just because you are too dumb or uninformed to argue properly and need accusations to fill the gap.

  154. CameronB Brodie says:

    No, it’s legal fantasy, much like British constitutionalism. 😉

    International Law in a World of Liberal States

  155. I`m assuming whitey liberal woke snowflake will be hijacking the `Black Lives Matter` movement,

    until something else takes their attention,

    climate,gender,trees,wind,cycling,cars,shiny things,dolphins.

  156. susan says:

    Thank you Capella. I can’t express myself very well on a mobile but I’m glad someone gets where I’m coming from.

  157. Liz g says:

    Famous 15 @ 6.34
    I think that it’s two fold…
    Firstly.. there’s the inherent threat that males pose to females and always have. This is seen across all species,and I’d argue, beyond dispute. A few thousand years of civilisation has not reduced that much/enough to dismiss it lightly, And, I’m afraid, some of the reactions to any questions to the Gender Rights Activists seem to confirm this is neither suppressed or seen by them as needing to be,infact the reactions to not getting their way looks like a typical male response.

    Secondly… It seems on further research,that the ” tiny minority ” of Trans people that there are have somehow widened their group to include fetishists of all descriptions.
    This is IMO where the lines got blurred and any serious conversation about Trans people got lost.
    The narrative then seemed to expand to include kid’s which is not just a blurred line it a red line.
    If the majority come across as threatened it’s because we are ….a life time of experience for women and an instinct for decent men have taught to aware wary of predatory men and not to give them an inch!

    The concern is not the feelings of Trans of any description that will always come behind the consideration of Women and children it has to, that’s where there really is no discussion….
    and in the interests of brevity….those arguments against Gay men were as spurious as they were about Witches…this we know….. but Gay men never argued to put anyone at risk by askin to open the door to legal protection for predatory males,they never asked us to deny ourselves anything…they only asked equality.

    I would be curious Famous 15 for your views on the reports that the activists try to make the changes they seek on the downlow?

  158. Colin Alexander says:

    If we are serious about indy we need a single issue AUOB style party to contest constituency seats.

    One policy only: the establishment of a supreme parliament for Scotland that serves the sovereign people of Scotland, by democratic mandate.

    Not pro or anti anything else.

    Not right-wing, not left-wing, not left of centre.

    No economic policies.

    No Trident policies.

    No monarchy policy.

    No socio-economic policy.

    No gender / equality policy.

  159. Clapper57 says:

    @ Susan & Capella

    Fair enough. No worries……..agree to disagree.

  160. Liz g says:

    Dan @ 8.12
    Oh Dan…Ye are a tonic…certi-fecken-fiable!
    but a real tonic 🙂

  161. John Jones says:

    Just read Mr. Wolffe’s article in the National.
    My very humble opinion is it’s a try to get out of gaol free.
    I could tear his logic to shreds, but what’s the point?
    It still looks like an attempt to justify what’s happening before the upcoming hearing on Wednesday on Craig Murray.
    Will be listening in and hopefully not shouting at the phone.

  162. Mist001 says:

    @ Rev. Stuart Campbell

    I didn’t miss the point but she was a poor example to use to make the point.

  163. CameronB Brodie says:

    Sorry for the duplicate but I just posted this in OT by mistake. Oops.


    Honestly peeps, if this GRA reform goes through, and is then protected by the Hate Crime bill, there is no sustainable future for open democracy in Scotland. Without open democracy, Scotland is unlikely to even seek constitutional justice.

    It is not possible to respect human rights without a legal respect for the human genome. That isn’t possible if you insists trans women are women. Simples.

    Integrating Brain Science and Law: Neuroscientific Evidence and Legal Perspectives on Protecting Individual Liberties

  164. Liz g says:

    Capella, Susan & Clapper 57
    I’m agreeing with all of you here…whit am ah like 🙂
    While,yes,absolutely Males cannot become Female or claim to always have been… There are a fair few Trans Woman now speaking up to say just that. ( an example being Rose of Dawn on her..and I do mean her…YouTube channel )
    They don’t buy this nonsense and I take my hat of to them for saying so. They recognise that Women can no longer “notice” that they are around a transwoman and just, shrug,they seem to understand that Now we wonder if it one of those nutters we can’t speak in front of or they’ll kick off, with the law on their side too and we just want to move away from them!
    This is the damage they do to the “actual” transwomen who are trans for their own reasons and didn’t ever want to be pitted against any woman at all!

  165. Col.Blimp IV says:

    susan says

    “…opened the gates to the current nonsense.”

    It’s not the current nonsense that worries me.

    The belief that if medical science can provide it and some hedonistic maniac wants it, the only question to be asked is … who’s going to pay?

    Fifty years ago only fictional super-villains owned Islands and built spaceships …. Now these monsters are as real as you and I.

    “This nonsense” gives the moral go-ahead for the later-day Dr Moreau’s to kick-start their plans to replicate the creatures of Egyptian and Greek mythology and sets a legal precedent to thwart any who object.

  166. Al-Stuart says:

    Fuckingg Hell, and I do not swear often.

    Reading this article, something hit me like a double decker bus.


    Think through the logical progression.

    Humza’s BADLY written law ends up with a TON of folk dragged though the courts and several jailed.

    The media will have an SNP-Bad field day. But that day will last months and years. WoS will waste 7 years helping get dozens of badly jailed TERFS out of Barlinnie.

    It will be like making Stuart Campbell + Craig Murray + Alex Salmond HAVE to spend time chasing “there’s a squirrel” distractions for the next 7 years trying to get innocent people out of TRANS Jail.

    If you doubt my thesis, think on this…

    Alex Salmond just wasted three years of his life utilising his considerable skills defending a toxic, vicious, poisonous witch hunt.

    That was actually a WIN for the Unionists as it hirpled our best YES leader for 36 months.

    FFS. Humza Yousef and Nicola Sturgeon are determined to destroy Scotland’s chances of becoming independent by focusing on matters that are NOT related to Scottish Independence.

    Worse than that, these two Unionist Sleeper agents are now actively working the long game to destroy the SNP. It may not seem like it right now as the SNP are riding high in the polls. But I am sure from working in uniform… the British Empire, the British Armed Forces (and conveniently the U.K. MSM) they build you up before tearing you down.

    Just think this through. Take this dangerous TRANS law to the final logical conclusion. It will be an utter clusterfluck of a distraction from IndyRef2. Jailing innocent people is one of the oldest tools in the British Empire’s arsenal. It keeps the belligerent protesting public distracted to a massive degree.

    Hamster-NaeBrains-Yousef and Nicola-OneMoreMandate-Sturgeon are going to kill of the Indy movement for the next 40 years.

    I would not be surprised if we ended up With Sir Hamza Yousef and Dame Nicola Sturgeon, or more likely Lady Sturgeon of Longshanks.

    Chris Cairns, I suspect one of your next toons will be the Four Horsemen of The Apocalypse. We already have two of them galloping amongst us now: CovidDeath and BorisBloodshed.

    Sturgeon and Yousef look like they have been taking horse riding lessons, though neither will be anywhere near the white horse as both are evil creeps.

    Scotland really is looking like a beaten shit place with these Amadans in charge.

    Poor old JK Rowling. Having to share a prison cell with George Galloway. That will happen as George just self declared himself as a female Voldemort death eater.

  167. CameronB Brodie says:

    Here’s one to highlight the regressive nature of the proposed GRA reform. Scots law appears to be being hobbled rather than developed, IMHO.

    Political Economy of Gender Equality: Case Study of Pakistan

    In the present study an attempt has been made to examine the impact of socio political and economic factors on gender equality in education and employment in Pakistan during 1980 to 2012. An ARDL bond test approach employed to see the long run relationship between the variables but Wald test f statistics left the inconclusive results.

    Finally, The OLS estimation has been done for the empirical analysis, which found that Urbanization, Economic Growth and Foreign Direct Investment jointly with better law and order situation have positive influence while , remittances, have negative affect on the status of women in Pakistan, This suggests that economic and political factors jointly affect the status of women in Pakistan. The study also found that improving the level of gender equality in education and employment would lead toward economic growth.

  168. Joe says:

    There are lots of ‘where does this come from’?

    One good answer is the Frankfurt School of Social Theory. You might have to dig a bit but its all available:

    Pointers –
    – Who set up the Frankfurt School and why?
    – What were/are the objectives?
    – What was/is the underlying philosophy?
    – Does this look like what we have invading our institutions today?
    – What is ‘the long march through the institutions?’

    Here is a nice introductory video:

  169. Joe says:

    Apologies. Messed up the link

  170. terence callachan says:

    Liz g ……it’s a bill , not law yet

    If she went to court I don’t think enraging people would secure a conviction

  171. terence callachan says:

    Jill Sharpe …..legislation is not causing hate , it’s people’s minds that is doing that
    Unfounded hate I believe

    Transgender people have not changed
    They are still there
    The same people you say have been around a long time

    Legislation is changing all over the world for transgender folk
    The new law will not “ break the law”

    It has to be reasonable and fair

    I think it will be

  172. Terry says:

    Excellent article. Spot on.

    Alex. If you’re reading this come back and sort this mess out. Arses need kicked. And good luck to a new indy list party. Plus loving the idea of putting up a candidate re SAS and RS.

    I despair of science denying misogynists and the delusional. What group in history has given up their hard won rights and protections without a fight? Watch out snp. You’ve angered a massive amount of people.

  173. CameronB Brodie says:

    The Frankfurt School of Social Theory has been a source of resistance against totalitarianism since the time of Stalin. Joe has turned his ignorance into hatred. That’s what haters do.

    Are you Blair McDougal (the nasty one)?

    Social cognitive neuroscience of attitudes and beliefs

  174. Liz g says:

    Twathater @ 6 .20
    You are of course correct,it wasn’t just men who didn’t want to deal with the Gender thing.

    But those women who took that view are unlikely to change they,I’m afraid saw it as a wrong they could put right after Indy…
    I’m talking mainly to the men who didn’t really take it as a ” right’s ” issue and now are having rights taken from a government that they are willing to put into power….this levels the playing field between those two group’s…and they cannot have it both ways!

    If Scotland is to have a normal government like every other “normal ” country then said government will take just as much watching…they haven’t even got us all the powers and they think they can suppress our speech without being called out for it— fur whit—- the media will use it?? like they wouldn’t anyway!!!
    Not in my Scotland , Twathater,and I suspect not in yours either

  175. Terry says:

    And while I’m at it what about all that bleeding heart stuff about the EU? “The people of Scotland’” blah blah blah as we were told we wouldn’t be dragged out of Europe against our will. All hot air apart from Joanna cherry. And as for Eu nationals? They’ve been cast adrift. Platitudes are meaningless. They’ve been sold a pup.

    Most of them are a sad bunch. (Notable exceptions being mceleny, Cherry, maskill and MacNeil) Another feeble 50 or whatever labour were. And I’m gutted.

  176. Liz g says:

    Terrance Callahan @ 9.35
    Yes of course…But the conversation was on the Revs article was it no?
    Should the bill become a law in the way the rev described as possible…will Rowling knowing what she is doing merit 7 years in jail…as your response seems to indicate!

  177. Breeks says:

    John Jones says:
    8 June, 2020 at 9:07 pm
    Just read Mr. Wolffe’s article in the National.
    My very humble opinion is it’s a try to get out of gaol free.
    I could tear his logic to shreds, but what’s the point?
    It still looks like an attempt to justify what’s happening before the upcoming hearing on Wednesday on Craig Murray.
    Will be listening in and hopefully not shouting at the phone.

    I agree. It’s very formulaic, and say’s what it has to, but there’s just something hollow and unconvincing about it.

    But having said all that, there are three candles still burning for Scottish justice. First, Andy Wightman actually won his defamation case against the Establishment. I know it’s not relevant in a strict sense, but he won, when I thought the Establishment had the bit between it’s teeth and was going to crush him.

    Second, what Joanna Cherry achieved in rattling the UK Constitution has been massively understated, but understated because people don’t want the ramifications of it being fully discussed. But be in NO doubt, Scots Law put a UK Prime Minister firmly in his place. “Do what you’re told, or else, Sunny Jim!” Do you imagine that’s a strength which Scots Law is likely to relinquish without a fight? Because I don’t.

    Third, Alex Salmond walked free. The Conspiracy failed. I know, I know, it was down to the jury, but nevertheless, the essence of justice carried the day. IF there was corruption at play, it wasn’t absolute or complete corruption, because it failed. It didn’t command the process.

    It seems to be a critical time for Scottish Justice. But maybe we shouldn’t lose hope completely.

    There is also a fourth candle which I’m sure burns brightly in some quarters, and that is, that in the event of Scotland being formally emasculated in a Constitutional sense, actually losing it’s sovereignty, then Scot’s Law will very soon find itself facing it’s own “Brexit-like” Consequentials, by which I mean it will be facing all manner de-regulation and deviation away from Scottish Law principles and standards, in order to impose greater convergence between Scots and UK Law.

    In short, if Scotland loses the protection of it’s sovereign Constitution, then so too does Scot’s Law lose it’s Constitutional protection. If I was a Scottish Lawyer, I reckon I wouldn’t like that turn of events.

    In the not too distant future, I believe push might well be coming to shove.

    We wait. We watch.

  178. Clapper57 says:

    @ Lig G @ 9.25pm

    Hi Liz…how you doing ?

    Good points Liz….as per.


    To live as a Trans woman…via post op physical transformation.

    Against …

    ‘Self identifying’ as a woMAN but still living as a man…one who dresses up as a woMAN but one who is strangely reluctant to lose the most recognisably manly physical parts that make him the man he is… that not just a transvestism ?

    Crazy world Liz….whatever happened to us just trying to get independence for Scotland….what’s next…the mind boggles….sooooooo next…. Lol

    Have a good night Liz

  179. dakk says:

    Everyone wants equal rights to everyone else including those who think their are the opposite of the sex of their birth.

    If they commit a crime they get prosecuted and punished.

    Now get over yourselves you silly old bastards.

  180. dakk says:


  181. Liz g says:

    Clapper 57 @ 9.55
    Night Flapper 🙂

  182. terence callachan says:

    Understand that transgender people are just people trying to make a happy contented life
    Just like the rest of us

    There are criminals ….everywhere in the world…some are dangerous
    Some are lawyers , politicians , doctors , nurses , teachers in fact there isn’t a trade or vocation on this planet that had never had a criminal

    Calling transgender people criminal or mentally ill is as stupid as calling a doctor or a teacher or a politician a criminal or mentally ill just because some other doctor or teacher or politician somewhere on this planet committed a crime some time or other

    People who commit crimes look for camouflage , that’s not new
    Doctors have done it
    Surgeons have done it
    Nurses have done it
    Priests and Ministers and nuns have done it

    We can’t ban doctors surgeons nurses priests ministers etc in order to prevent criminals hiding in those professions

    Likewise making life difficult , painful , intolerable for ALL trans people including honest law abiding citizens in our country to prevent criminal activity by a small number of others

  183. Liz g says:

    dakk @ 9.55
    Nae argument there….which right’s are people amiss??
    Ye see there’s a world of different between equal rights and extra rights,don’t ye think?
    The biggest difference being no more funding for those who made a careers from equal right for gay people after gay people got equal rights.. Funny that….

  184. CameronB Brodie says:

    I’ll put this as simply as I can, the proposed GRA reforms would transform Scottish justice into a legal system that supported eugenics. Such a legal system would be incompatible with international law, such as global health law. So no real significant change there, as British constitutionalism already denies Scots access to human rights (see the Right to Development).

    The Genetics of Sex Differences in Brain and Behavior

  185. terence callachan says:

    Liz g ….indeed the WOS article is opinion about what WOS think might happen
    Presumably , based on their knowledge of transgender issues
    And based on their outlook

    WOS opined that JKR would get 7 yrs in prison for what she said

    I disagree , as is said earlier if she was charged and it got to court , I do not think she would be found guilty , making people angry does not in itself constitute a crime what she said could be construed as prejudiced but not criminal it had to be both for it to be a hate crime

  186. mike cassidy says:

    Well this will blow a few fuses among the WOS trolls.

    How will they cope with a black American Jewish social worker helping LGBT people cope with homelessness?

    ‘Believe us’: Black Jews respond to the George Floyd protests, in their own words

  187. Jill Sharpe says:

    Terence does not understand there is no hate – like JKR I have transwomen friends, they refer to themselves as transsexual not the nonsensical transgender – folk who call themselves that are to be pitied not hated – outaw pity speech?

  188. terence callachan says:

    Liz g ……what are “ extra rights “ ?

  189. terence callachan says:

    Jill Sharpe…..has not read this article properly or has not understood it,

    Hey Jill it’s about hate crime

    Which contains the word “hate”

    You must have missed it

    Go read it again

  190. Famous15 says:


    You are the devil incarnate .Holocaust denier !

    You are filth and your wretched opinions do not sit well on this site.

    You wish to besmirch the yes movement but we see what you are up to.

  191. terence callachan says:

    Hey Jill..Apparently…transgender and transsexual are not the same thing

    Transgender people have a gender identity or gender expression that differs from their sex assigned at birth. Some transgender people who desire medical assistance to transition from one sex to another identify as transsexual.

    Transgender – Wikipedia

  192. dakk says:

    Was called a white bastard, and to fuck off with my black b’s by a white woman at Nelson column at rhe Green couple hours ago.

    Had politely asked her husband to stop letting their dogs pee over the BLM placards at the column.

    The protests have certainly touched a nerve in the deeply conservatives among us.

  193. defo says:

    Thanks Stu, if you’re a tad scunnered right noo, then console yourself with the knowledge that this is what you’re for.
    A purpose.

    The lines are being drawn.

    Wtf do they want more powers for anyway?
    The ones we already have are more than adequate to silence dissent & stifle challenges to established power, it seems.

  194. Liz g says:

    Terrance Callahan @ 10.05
    That’s quite a mash up of issues there Terrance.

    At no point did I or I think the Rev ever indicate that Trans People are criminals…I thought I took time not to.
    Please look again at what I said…

    No one is arguing that Trans People should not have every right and privilege of every other citizen.

    The concern is only “Predatory Males”’s always only ever been “Predatory Males” and giving them an open door.
    I cannot see why that’s so different to understand..

    Let me try to be clear…
    The Unintended Consequences of what the Trans Right’s People are asking,has the potential to open the door to predators that Women have struggled to keep shut.

    You don’t need to tell us that Trans people aren’t a threat..we already knew that…!
    But we also know from where the danger comes….as do Trans People or they wouldn’t think twice about the more uncrowded men’s spaces..aye?

  195. Bob Mack says:

    Next they will outlaw Rabbie Burns and his illegal poetry.

    Apparently a man will no longer be a man for a that.

  196. Sarah says:

    @ Liz g at 8.52: well put. Thank you.

    As you say, gays were called criminal and imprisoned.

    Trans people don’t need a law change of that kind – they aren’t criminalised.

    It boils down to the truth [like so many other issues]. Should biological males be treated in all respects as if they are biological females if they wish? And the rest of the world be obliged to say they are women?

    I really cannot bring myself to accept a lie. Of course people may dress and behave as they wish but they may not alter facts and they may not impose their wishes on others.

  197. terence callachan says:

    Liz g… your point is against predatory males

    Then say so

    Transgender people are not predatory males they are transgender people

    Transgender people need rights to transgender peacefully and without difficulty should they wish to do so

    If your issues are with predatory males leave transgender folk alone and move on

  198. terence callachan says:

    Hey Liz

    Should women transgendering to men be prevented from doing so just because some people think that men transgendering to women may be predatory .?

  199. terence callachan says:

    Liz g and Jill Sharpe are you one and the same person ?

  200. Liz g says:

    Terrance Callahan @ 10.14
    Think about what you’re sayin…IF she got charged = such a law on the statute books…can you no see any mission creep here??
    And @ 10.16…. Seriously? If they are no looking for “extra right’s” then whit are we even talking about ?
    Trans People have all the right’s I have so why the need for any change….if there is a change then surely that’s an extra right??

  201. Daisy Walker says:

    @ Terrance Callachan ‘The law will make as a good a job of being fair and reasonable to people as possible I’m confident of that’.

    Judges and I quote Sheriff Drummond when he gave a lecture at a Wildlife Crime Conference to Police and Partner Agencies including the Fiscal Service, Scottish Gamekeepers, RSPB and numerous others… Judges have a duty to implement the law, AS IT IS WRITTEN, and NOT AS THEY WOULD LIKE IT TO BE’. (sorry for shouting – but in fairness Sheriff Drummond was not averse to a bit of shouting himself…)

    Poorly drafted and ill thought out laws (with no malice aforethought) is a fact of life – one which all responsible parties – Police, victims of crime and miscarriages of justice, lawyers, judges, lobby groups, charities, MPs, MSP’s Councillors, Union Reps and Governments – ALL play a part in and have a duty to try and ensure the laws are well drafted, well thought out, fair and responsible – PRIOR to being ratified, as it is incredibly difficult to fix it once in place.

    Prevention is better than cure.

    It is why the above concerns about this new legislation are so incredibly important. The cost of democracy is eternal vigilance and the time for that is now.

    ‘The law will make as a good a job of being fair and reasonable to people as possible I’m confident of that’.

    You may be confident of that, but any person who has had any dealings with legislation , from any side, taking even a cursory glance at the new legislation – can see straight away deep, and extremely problematic issues with it.

    If one puts to one side personal beliefs and aims with regards GRA reforms – from the point of view of competent Law making – the proposed new legislation is deeply incompetent.

    Kind regards. I don’t mean for the above to come over harshly – as I say, there are times when Judges are not in a position to do what is fair and reasonable – because the law is poorly written and they have a very public duty to interpret it as Written, not as they would like it to be.

  202. Colin Alexander says:

    Scots Law:

    The legal system that did nothing to protect our sovereignty.

    The legal system that allowed another country to take control of our country.

    The legal system that still upholds the subjugation of Scotland by the parliament of England, euphemistically called UK Parliament.

    Scots Law, an antiquated, backward legal system, unfit for a sovereign people in the 21st century.

    Dragged into the last century by EU Law and other European legislation, such as the ECHR.

  203. terence callachan says:

    Liz g

    You said

    “ Trans People have all the right’s I have so why the need for any change….if there is a change then surely that’s an extra right??“

    But Liz …you are not transgender , transgender need the right to transgender more easily than at present …to make life better for them

    Nothing stopping you taking up your right to transgender if that’s what you want to do
    It’s not an extra right it’s one you already have

    Just because you choose not to take it up
    does not mean you do not have it

  204. Liz g says:

    Terrance Callahan @ 10.36
    Have I no spent all day sayin so…
    And I’ll be more than happy to leave transgender males alone!
    And right back at them…I’ve no problem staying in my own lane…
    And did you just mis person me by the way?
    Not Susan..just Liz…as always!

  205. terence callachan says:

    Daisy Walker……

    There are bad judgements made in law
    And mistakes happen

    The law is supposed to be fair and reasonable

    When things go wrong it’s nearly always because of user error….law being interpreted incorrectly and law being applied incorrectly

  206. Liz g says:

    Terrance Callahan @ 10.47
    Then we’re right back where we came in..
    There are only two sexes and every single members of those two sexes have the same right’s….anything else is extra

  207. terence callachan says:

    Liz…use any lane you want to use …within the law of course

  208. Liz g says:

    Terrance Callahan @ 10.51
    🙂 If course….every time .. lol

  209. Jill Sharpe says:

    I do not mention predatory males because the fact is that if self ID is all that is needed to have access to spaces for women then harm will be done

  210. terence callachan says:

    Liz …there are no extras in law

    It applies across the board…as I said earlier law is supposed to be fair and reasonable
    If it’s not it’s usually because it’s misinterpreted or applied incorrectly

    You have the same rights as transgender folk

  211. cirsium says:

    @Al-Stuart, 9.28
    Worse than that, these two Unionist Sleeper agents are now actively working the long game to destroy the SNP. Yes, it looks like that. The whole dismal situation puts me in mind of the Iranian PM Mohammed Mosaddegh’s comment on the UK government as it was plotting to overthrow the democratically elected government of Iran which had nationalised the oil industry to allow the Iranian people to benefit from Iranian oil not BP –
    “You do not know how crafty they are. You do not know how evil they are. You do not know how they sully everything they touch.”

  212. Liz g says:

    Terrance Callahan
    Anyhoo….you never did directly answer my original question!
    Were you sayin JK Rowling should get 7 years in jail????

  213. CameronB Brodie says:

    terence callachan
    Gender-ideology diminishes the cultural status and respect capable of being afforded to biological women. As such, introducing it into jurisprudence would facilitate the legal entrenchment of misogynistic patriarchy in the practice of law. You don’t appear to understand the scope of this issue, so I suggest you fill your boots.

    Handbook on European law
    relating to access to justice

  214. David says:

    The problem is trying to re unite the Yes Movement

    Sturgeon is splitting us wide open

    All part of the Grand plan

  215. Liz g says:

    Terrance Callahan @ 10.53
    Yes I do have the same right’s….but transgender film seem to want to reduce mine and enhance theirs…they seem to believe they have a case to do so…but it’s like drawing blood from a stone to get them to make it

  216. Liz g says:

    Trans Gender *Foke* ..obviously!!!

  217. terence callachan says:

    Liz g….you said I did not answer your original question..,,

    I DID….

    This is what I said at 1014hrs

    Liz g ….indeed the WOS article is opinion about what WOS think might happen
    Presumably , based on their knowledge of transgender issues
    And based on their outlook

    WOS opined that JKR would get 7 yrs in prison for what she said

    I disagree , as is said earlier if she was charged and it got to court , I do not think she would be found guilty , making people angry does not in itself constitute a crime what she said could be construed as prejudiced but not criminal it had to be both for it to be a hate crime

  218. Patrick Roden says:


    A Rabbi is a teacher, so if they are teachers they will have a school of students.
    So who are these Rabbi’s and who are their followers who deny the Holocaust?

    There are a lot of Israeli’s who don’t like the term Holocaust, but that doesn’t mean they deny it happened.

    There’s a huge Holocaust Museum in Isreal that give details of the development of National Socialism right through to the Holocaust, as well as one section in which a single candle, reflected in a mirror multiple times creates over one million lights representing the children who died in the holocaust, each ones name is echoed out through loudspeakers using their name in Hebrew as well as the language that the child’s country of birth used.

    Do you think the Israeli’s have invented these names, Joe?
    If you don’t then you have a problem explaining what happened to the children’s parents, because the Germans who were meticulous at recording the death of Jews, never reported children being exterminated without at least one parent present.

    Far better brains than you have tried to deny the Holocaust happened at the rate claimed by Israel (6 Million deaths) and a test case was taken to court, with the deniers of large scale exterminations losing the case.

    It happened Joe, and if you think that the people who are running countries today wouldn’t be quite prepared to see millions dead if it suited their agenda, you haven’t been paying attention.

  219. terence callachan says:

    Hey Cameron…I understand it alright

    I’m just not prejudiced

    I guess that’s why I have no fear of the hate crime bill that so many on here are worried about

  220. terence callachan says:

    Liz g …transgender people don’t want to reduce your rights

    You are worried about predatory males

    If you send all the transgender people to the planet ZOG you will still have predatory males to worry about

  221. John Thomson says:

    Rev need to ask question

    What happend to the message HR 2021 vote SNP 1 and Indy or Wings party 2, providing a super majority to Scottish parliament.

    1 year to go and he clock is ticking, can you confirm position of wings regarding 2021.

  222. Sarah says:

    Sort of O/T:

    Everybody who wants independence must email their MPs, MSPs, SNP officials now to protest at what Keith Brown has said in reaction to the Scot goes Pop poll results revealed tonight.

    Brown is saying [just as Nicola has] that nothing but a referendum on independence is “legal”. A vote for Holyrood elections on a manifesto commitment for independence would not be “legal” according to him.

    This is nonsense and it is dangerous nonsense. I’m beginning to think there may be something in these fears about the priorities [if not the principles] of many people among the SNP MSPs.

    Any thoughts about what else we can do to get our message across?

  223. Liz g says:

    Terrance Callahan @ 11.04
    Yes ( not something I’d ever wish to do ) but if I sent all the Trans gender foke to Zog….I would indeed still have to worry about predatory males..
    But I wouldn’t have to worry about Trans Gender Folk making laws that suit predatory males down to the ground..
    Now do you see!

  224. terence callachan says:

    Liz g…goodnight I’m not downplaying your fear of predatory males honestly I’m not , I just don’t think transgender is where they are…okay some are…but look elsewhere for the 99.9%

  225. CameronB Brodie says:

    terence callachan
    You don’t appear to have a clue from where I’m looking. In fact, you appear to want to deny science in order to be partial towards men’s rights. Prove me wrong.

    Structural connections in the brain in relation to gender identity and sexual orientation

  226. Joe says:

    @Patrick Roden

    Fuck off

  227. Joe says:


    Fuck off

  228. dakk says:

    I used to think this site felt bit like the new enlightenment.

    Now, however I think I’m beginning to smell an odorous reek of Calvinism and unionism.

  229. CameronB Brodie says:

    History Woman?

  230. Joe says:

    Im tipping my hat to WOS and keeping quiet on any of these topics. You couple of ignorant cunts can attribute whatever you like to me.

    If you like then link me a free speech space and ill happily converse. Not here though. I can use gab if you care for it?

  231. Liz g says:

    Terrance Callahan @ 11.10
    I was just about to bow out too Terrance.
    Thank you for staying decent during our conversation.
    You made many good point’s.
    I’m sure that it’s ( pardon the phraseology ) not beyond the wit of man to find a solution….and if it’s not beyond they buggers 🙂 women will sort it nae bother….
    We just need to keep talking…
    Good night fellow Winger 🙂

  232. Dan says:

    @ Al-Stuart & cirsium

    Or they / the SNP are doing it deliberately to agitate the Indy pot and thus create the vacuum and counter GRA and Hate Speech policy positions for a Pro-Indy Regional List Party to form and fill that void, and thus ensure the removal of a number of Unionist leaning dross from Holyrood.

    That said, even if they / the SNP aren’t deliberately intending this to happen, the situation has manifested that way so no point Indy-minded Scots doing their usual bickering and frittering away time to snatch defeat from the jaws of victory.
    There’s been more words and discussion on this GRA subject today than there were on the Pro-Indy List Party chit chat the other week.
    Anyone know how that Pro-Indy Regional List Party is developing? Coz there’s an open fuckin goal needing the ball tapped in so we can get some reasonable folk into yon Holyrood building.

  233. dakk says:

    Or is it Knoxism?

  234. terence callachan says:

    Cameron….I’m a man , I have none other than those of other men and women .
    Transgender rights will not become law if they contradict other laws

    Interpretation is the thing

  235. CameronB Brodie says:

    Here’s one way of countering Scotland’s Calvinist bias, which is antagonistic to a respect for Natural law, so is really quite unhelpful to our best interests, frankly.

    Law and Neuroscience

  236. bipod says:

    Dentists are reopening in some form in England on the 15th of June and here are the procedures that they have to follow.

    Remote consultations using video calls (not sure how thats supposed to work), procedures that generate aerosols are to be avoided (that means drills), and only 1 patient per hour effectively killing NHS dentistry and probably tripling the fees for a private dentist. These are not reasonable conditions that a dentist can meet. Its extraordinary how the administrators and bureaucrats have decided that no other diseases or illnesses exist and aren’t important enough to be treated, everything needs to take a back seat or made more difficult because of covid.


  237. Clapper57 says:

    @ Sarah @ 11.08pm

    Hi Sarah …hope you are well.

    Re ” Any thoughts about what else we can do to get our message across”?

    Other than what you suggest and any peeps who are members and currently , due to lockdown, are taking part in area Zoom SNP meetings passing on these concerns….then cannot think of anything else…sure they know, via backlash by some peeps on social media, what some people are thinking/wanting.

    People also do write letters in The National voicing concerns on current strategy of SNP….which I believe some SNP MP’s/MSP’s read…so that at least is one way to voice publicly your opinion via a supposed pro Indy newspaper….whether it will fall on deaf ears I do not know….I’m still a member of the SNP not been to a meeting for ages though…..sorry.

    Have a nice day tomorrow…..

  238. CameronB Brodie says:

    terence callachan
    I must have picked you up wrong, I thought you were suggesting the GRA reforms should be allowed to proceed. I’m amazed it has gotten as far as it has, as it is anti-democratic in the extreme.

  239. Sarah says:

    @ clapper 57 at 11.38: thank you for the sympathy and support. I’m despairing – talk of not giving Scotland a chance, the SNP for some reason is just not speaking up for our freedom. I’m in the SNP and my first aim is independence – we’ve done the “competent government” bit for long enough – and now that is looking dodgy.

    The National has had a lot of good letters lately on this subject so I can write one to them plus to MP etc etc but I really think we need a mass Yes movement challenge to the status quo.

  240. David says:

    Our First Minister said the other day that she is not interested in talking about Scottish Independence, because she is spending all her time concentrating on this virus.

    We will be out of the EU completely in six months time,

    Is it not about time we started planning our own future, one that doesn’t have us chained to a basket case called England.

    Six months Nicola!!!

    And all we are talking about is this crazy man/woman shit

  241. robert graham says:

    Ok all you smart arses Question
    How many list seats did the SNP get in the last Holyrood election and how many votes did it take to earn these seats, and was this comparable with the amount of votes that labour or the Toerags (i.e.) if the SNP secured 10000 to get one seat how many votes did the other parties need to get a seat , might tip the balance of how another list party is desperately needed , also gives me ammunition to argue with someone who is dead against voting anyone apart from SNP
    Thanks for any information

  242. Sarah says:

    @ David: GRA is an example of the choice of priorities – indy supporters want indy first. We must make more of a fuss – I shall email MSPs and MP to start with. If we all did that they might begin to realise that they must change their methods and priorities.

    I used to think they knew more, and better, than me about what would work but now I’m not so sure!!

  243. Joe says:

    RE: SNP and alternate routes to indy

    If you were held prisoner in a room where the door couldnt be locked, your captors would have to convince you somehow that the door is NOT the way out.

  244. CameronB Brodie says:

    I agree, the proposed GRA reforms are crazy shit and an unhelpful distraction from the protection of Scotland from Brexit. The two issues are internally linked in legal thought though. Both deny a legal ‘inferior’ the right to a legally defensible identity.

    The Cognitive Foundations of Formal Equality: Incorporating Gender Schema Theory to Eliminate Sex Discrimination towards Women in the Legal Profession

  245. CameronB Brodie says:

    Without a legally defensible identity, it is not possible to make effective claims to human rights (see Brexit).

    European equality law review
    European network of legal experts in
    gender equality and non-discrimination

  246. Brian Doonthetoon says:

    Hi robert graham at 12:10 am.

    You typed,
    “also gives me ammunition to argue with someone who is dead against voting anyone apart from SNP
    Thanks for any information”

    Have a look at the article by Gavin Barrie, published on WOS, in September last year.

  247. Beaker says:

    @Sarah says:
    8 June, 2020 at 11:08 pm
    Sort of O/T:

    “Everybody who wants independence must email their MPs, MSPs, SNP officials now to protest at what Keith Brown has said in reaction to the Scot goes Pop poll results revealed tonight.
    Brown is saying [just as Nicola has] that nothing but a referendum on independence is “legal”. A vote for Holyrood elections on a manifesto commitment for independence would not be “legal” according to him.”

    I think what the SNP leadership is scared of is losing another indyref. Being in power for so long doesn’t help.

  248. CameronB Brodie says:

    This is a critical time for Scots law, which is already stunted in its’ capacity for the protection of human rights. This is a consequence of standing under Parliamentary sovereignty, rather than developing a legal culture that is compatible with international law.

    Law 202/2002 on equal opportunities for women and men

  249. robert graham says:

    Thanks Brian I thought I had a grasp of the numbers the link just confirmed my suspicions , I believe anyone arguing against another party either has alternative motives or hasn’t looked at the surprising results it’s as they say a no brainer , thanks again , this is what Wings used to look like , exchanging information . Aye I remember them well the only one that’s missing is that grumpy old bugger that kept everyone in their place , best wishes to him by the way he is missed I think you know who I mean , if I mention his name he will probably appear and start a long lecture ha ha

  250. MorvenM says:

    More woke drivel from the Independent.

    The journalist, Roisin O’Connor, states “I have yet to see Rowling make any public statement expressing solidarity with victims of transphobic abuse, not even after multiple attacks on trans people last year in her home country of Scotland.”


    I’ve asked her if she has any evidence for this, but won’t be holding my breath waiting for a reply. Looks like, if you’re a self-styled “progressive”, you can publish any old lies in a “quality” newspaper.

  251. dakk says:

    Whilst the anti woke bedwetters on here were fretting about gender self id I was warning of Covid back in February.

    UK now world champion covid death rate of ptob 60k.

    How many have the wokeists killed?

  252. Polly says:

    I agree with Susan and Capella and other women above on this issue, and with you too Stuart. You did indeed get the Unionist reaction to us voting no correct before the fact unlike Ms Rowling, as you seem to have done about the self ID issue too, despite coming in for criticism for speaking out with your views. What I respect about you, and even more what makes me trust you, is the fact you are uncompromisingly blunt and honest in your appraisal of people and situations. It is important to have friends who will be brutally honest, since anyone and everyone is capable of being brutally honest with their enemies. It also takes a wise leader to surround themself with this type of honest, uncompromising friends. Nicola Sturgeon does not have that wisdom, which I feel is her greatest failing.

    As for J K Rowling, she may be a unionist, she was certainly wrong in her assessment of the Union and she might support the Union next time despite all that – but she has taken a stand on this issue, putting herself at odds with much of her fan base, she has taken abuse and is being vilified while behaving fairly and sensitively with the issue (despite the drama in some responses), she hasn’t been cowed into backing down as some others have in similar situation. That takes courage and integrity. I am growing to admire and respect her too for the way she has been handling this. Always liking so called classic literature meant I was never a fan, but I’m thinking of buying her books now to give them a try.

  253. Joe says:

    Just made a visit to indy twitter. Its like a bunch of clever Brits got together to do an insane, mocking parody of the Scots along the lines of Monty Python.

  254. CameronB Brodie says:

    You simply don’t see the big picture, do you? How can Scotland advance the interests of Scotland, if Scots law is to adopt an approach to the law that is even more incompatible with international law? You can forget about democracy and human rights if you are blind to natural law, which these proposals are. As is contemporary British constitutional practice.

    Human Rights, International
    Economic Law and
    ‘ Constitutional Justice ’

  255. Joe says:

    All we need to do now is create the National Scottish Party, keep talking about how we need less talk and more action and the self humiliation will be pretty much complete.

  256. Joe says:

    If I was some wealthy banking heir or something for the sheer shits and giggles of it id fund the creation of the NSP and the slogan would be ‘we hate the SNP’.

  257. call me dave says:

    From Friends of Wings twitter:

    Frustrated MSPs demand Scottish Government files in Alex Salmond inquiry

  258. CameronB Brodie says:

    Time for a bit of political realism?

    Political Realism
    Realism is an approach to the study and practice of international politics. It emphasizes the role of the nation-state and makes a broad assumption that all nation-states are motivated by national interests, or, at best, national interests disguised as moral concerns.

    At its most fundamental level, the national interest is generic and easy to define: all states seek to preserve their political autonomy and their territorial integrity. Once these two interests have been secured, however, national interests may take different forms. Some states may have an interest in securing more resources or land; other states may wish to expand their own political or economic systems into other areas; some states may merely wish to be left alone….

  259. twathater says:

    @ Sarah different posts , Sarah I emailed at least 35 SNP MP’s and MSP’s a while back including NS and KB re the way the wokists were behaving towards females on twatter , in those emails I included screenshots of their reprehensible comments and threats . I received 3 responses from office staff acknowledging my emails but no responses from ANY MP or MSP

    I also emailed at least 35 SNP MSP’s and MP’s highlighting a concerted attack on James Dornan from sectarian nutjobs I again included screenshots I recd 2 acknowledgements of receipt and one from JD thanking me for decrying these people but NO other responses
    From people who say they are SNP members on twatter they have complained to the SNP re these bills but no response I think it is CLEAR Sarah that the SNP are NOT listening and are NOT interested

  260. twathater says:

    This to me encapsulates the danger we all face in the acceptance of the new normal

    Transgender people have a gender identity or gender expression that differs from their sex assigned at birth.

    A GENDER identity ASSIGNED at birth WTAF

  261. CameronB Brodie says:

    I’m not trying to get the last word in, I just know a bit about defending the rule-of-law. Sorry for the length of this excerpt, though I think it will support the beliefs of many of the WOS readers.

    The Future of the Rule of Law
    On 3 July 2007, Gordon Brown announced a green paper, entitled The Governance of Britain, in the foreword of which he and Jack Straw state that their aim is:

    To forge a new relationship between government and citizen and begin the journey towards a new constitutional settlement – a settlement that entrusts Parliament and the people with more power.1

    The green paper sets out a group of proposals, the principle of which JUSTICE has largely welcomed – subject to caution about the subsequent detail yet to emerge.2 It ends with a final paragraph which acknowledges that the task of ‘renewing our democracy … does not fall to government alone’.3

    ….Recently, the demands of modern government have been marked by too little concern for the core values of the rule of law. Ministers have wanted to get things done and be seen to get things done. They have had a tendency to be impatient with process. At the extreme, we have witnessed the production of inaccurate dossiers to influence votes on going to war and apparent connivance with actions of the United States which manifestly breached human rights, Geneva Conventions and international law.

    But, more widely and more subtly, we have experienced a lack of regard for appropriate decision-making processes that amounts to a degradation of the rule of law. This is more than a political point against a particular government. Behind this casualness with principle lies the ’constitutional deficit’ in our system of government: the executive has too much power. This has given rise to unease for some time. It was, after all, the Conservative Lord Hailsham who coined the phrase ‘elective dictatorship’.

    In addition, British governments have been reluctant to give up international military adventurism, whether or not in defiance of the international rule of law. JUSTICE was founded in 1957 at a time when the credibility of the United Kingdom’s commitment to the rule of law in international affairs had been shredded by the ill-advised Suez invasion of the year before: 50 years later, much the same issues arise as a result of the invasion of Iraq. Thus, our current constitutional arrangements and conventions give too much power to the party in government – it can act without too much concern for domestic constraints by the legislature, on the one hand, and international law and treaty obligations, on the other.

    The UK Prime Minister has much greater power within the political process than, say, the US President. Tony Blair, in particular, was criticised for his style of individualised power exercised through ‘sofa government’ that challenged the paradigm of collective responsibility through cabinet. But this is an issue bigger than personality. The British form of parliamentarianism means that all too often governments see Parliament simply as an obstacle to be negotiated on the way to implementing policy….

  262. twathater says:

    Can anyone tell me how to bold sentences when posting Thanks

  263. Rev. Stuart Campbell says:

    There’s a bit of a clue right above the comments box…

  264. Willie says:

    This is a law designed purely to provide the legal mechanism to pursue, harry and potentially convict individuals for expressing no more than a political view.

    And of course, as the Alex Salmond trial, and now the actions against Craig Murray and Mark Hirst show, the legal trigger to be pulled against individuals is in the hands of the pursued opponents.

    Consider Murray’s alleged contempt proceedings as a hate crime, and then ask why Gravelli et al are not being prosecuted and you see how easily the hate crime legislation could be selectively applied.

    And of course Mark Hirst is another example of selective pursuance on allegations of intimidation. With the hate crime bill on the statute books the opportunity to judicially pursue, Harry and convict becomes even easier.

    I do not think therefore that anyone should have any doubt that this is legislation that will be selectively used with all the bias and unfairness that the Salmond, Murray and Hirst cases have shown. It is a weapon to be selectively used.

    We need to fear the SNP in its current form. It is an authoritarian party with tendencies not out of place in 1930s Spain, Italy or Germany, and folks should not fail to realise that we are turning that corner.

  265. Oneliner says:


    You’re way too clever for this site go back to your perceived world order.

  266. Jill Sharpe says:

    There is no other definition of woman other than adult human female – the same cannot be said for transgender so how can it be included in legislation if no-one knows what it means?

  267. Dave says:

    We’re literally standing in front of the door to Independence with the key in our hand and yet its about to be snatched out of our hand over an argument over whether some men have a right to put on a dress and make up and call themselves Gladis.
    In the end it wasnt fake news about the economy or currency or borders or resources that broke the back of the Indy movement it was men in skirts.
    Oh the irony.

  268. susan says:

    @Jill Sharpe, it’s just virtue signalling and authoritarian with it. Denying biological reality to pander to a psychologically disturbed minority. Harsh? If you believe you’re born into the wrong body then you have serious psychological problems, irrespective of what WHO now says.

  269. susan says:

    And if you state that your transgender status doesn’t involve gender dysphoria then your motives are suspect. That’s how I view it.

  270. Breeks says:

    twathater says:
    9 June, 2020 at 2:32 am
    Can anyone tell me how to bold sentences when posting Thanks

    You need to use HTML tags.

    That is;

    open bracket, type strong, close bracket.

    Then write your text. When finished your text…

    Open bracket, forward slash, strong, close bracket.

    ‘strong’ makes your text bold.
    ‘em’ makes your text italic.
    ‘Strike’ makes your text struck through.

    The brackets by the way are the > kind, not the ( or [ kind.

    If that’s not clear enough, just google HTML text and you’ll probably be taken somewhere useful which explains it better.

  271. Dan says:


    On this site you can simply use small case b , i , or s in the brackets to get bold, italic, or strike through.

    Advancing Land Reform might be a policy a Pro-Indy List Party might want to consider.

  272. Breeks says:

    Sarah says:
    8 June, 2020 at 11:08 pm
    Sort of O/T:

    ….This is nonsense and it is dangerous nonsense. I’m beginning to think there may be something in these fears about the priorities [if not the principles] of many people among the SNP MSPs.

    Any thoughts about what else we can do to get our message across?

    You’re spot on Sarah.

    My suggestions are;

    1] To remove the whole issue of Scotland’s Independence from the clutches of weak and dishonest politicians by adopting a hard line and immoveable Constitutional fallback position. Scotland’s popular sovereignty is an absolute condition, unalterable by fickle political interpretation or ephemeral whim of democracy.

    2] Provided point 1 is secured, then the SNP’s capacity to injure Scotland’s interests is greatly contained, and the ‘rogue’ SNP can be dealt with at the ballot box, or purged by the genuine membership who care about Scottish Independence. Frankly I don’t care about anything except securing Point 1.

    Point 1 is everything. After that, the SNP can go and play in the traffic for all I care.

  273. Jill Sharpe says:

    This is a useful read for men not quite sure what this is all about and some women – hope this works, apologies if not.

  274. Breeks says:

    Thanks Dan. Didn’t know that. 😉

  275. stumac says:

    8 June, 2020 at 1:20 pm
    Wokism is the agenda of rich American and British billionaires. It has effectively destroyed left wing politics and feminist political advances. It is a handy way, like sport, of keeping us all fighting each other about something which will never disadvantage the elite.

    I believe it started with some forms of extremist feminism which were actually damaging to real feminism, and now GRA is the latest. Right wing have overtly and subvertly (is that a word?) been using – as you say – movements like this, which are no real movements, to attract young radical people (who let emotions overcome their ability to think things through) and redirect their anger and energy away from the real problems of our society onto completely artificial ones. They are aided in this by the modern habit of too many internet users nowadays to react in thoughtless anger about something rather than examine arguments in a clear and logical way.

  276. Ottomanboi says:

    COVID-19 disease will not kill you.
    Death may occur as a result of an impaired/weak immune system and complications arising therefrom.
    The SARS-CoV-2 virus itself is not a killer anymore than the so-called common cold viruses.
    It is all a matter of comorbidity.
    A purely personal health matter.
    Not a concern of the state or the Scottish Nannie Party.
    We need to get the shills of intrusive big government out of our private spaces.

  277. Effijy says:

    For some strange reason the Covid Death stats over a weekend don’t
    Seem to be accurate and it takes until a Tuesday before larger numbers
    are presented I presume to include fatalities missing from the previous days?

  278. David says:

    This is a very frightening time we are entering

    We are being lead in Scotland by a jumped up Dictator who will not listen to any reason what so ever, and in the UK we are lead by a leader who will equally not listen to any reason what so ever.

    As I say, we are in frightening times.

    Six months to go before we loss all connections we had with the EU

    We have laws and Bills being rushed through our Parliament against the will of the majority of Scots

    And neither Nicola Sturgeon nor her administration are going to be diverted from the path of destruction they are on.

    We don’t have any alternative to the SNP, so we are stuck with the political conundrum of not voting for the SNP which would open the door to Unionists, who would only too gladly give away more powers back to London.

    Somebody somewhere must have a plan to get us out of this f***in nightmare we are entering.

    Sturgeon has developed this “Talk to the Hand” attitude.

    And I can’t be the only one who sees that Nicola Sturgeon is on one massive power rush, her ego is going through the roof and she hears no one.

    Any suggestions are most welcome, because I am totally pissed off with the position we now find ourselves in.

    How the fuck did we end up driving down this Cul de Sac?

  279. Famous15 says:


    A knife in the ribs will not kill you it is the comorbidity of exsanguination and zero oxygen to blood stream.

  280. Col.Blimp IV says:

    Willie says

    “Consider Murray’s alleged contempt proceedings as a hate crime, and then ask why Gravelli et al are not being prosecuted and you see how easily the hate crime legislation could be selectively applied.”

    If what Justice Secretary Humza Yousaf said of the application of the Bill is correct – “…with an intention to stir up hatred, or where it is likely that hatred will be stirred up.”

    This Law would be pointless unless the intention was to apply it selectively.

    Because being in a public place, while in possession of a Black Face, Limp Wrist, regalia that might associate you with a particular faith or clothing that could cause others to suspect you are posing as a member of the opposite sex …

    … Must all be, either deliberate actions calculated to stir up hatred in others OR actions taken with little or no regard of whether hatred would be stirred up or not.

    If this is not the case … what is the purpose of this law?

  281. Julia Gibb says:

    @Auld Rock

    I visit the site to read the well argued and thought provoking articles by Stu. I do not always agree but I cannot fault his structure or evidence based approach.

    The problem lies with the posts. Two polarised camps have taken over
    a) The Unionist Trolls
    b) The “ego/vanity” virtuous brigade. A dozen “experts” who will shape Scotland for us. No need to consult us.

    A great many people no longer post here and I valued their contribution as much as Stu’s articles.
    The “ego brigade” have actually caused much mor damage than the Uniont trolls.

    I know as I hit post the ego brigade will be unable to resist responding. Look at those we have lost from this site and look who has replaced them with volumes of guff devoid of the detail demonstrated in the article.

  282. Mrs Grimble says:

    The SNP is increasingly reminding me of the Sandanistas – saviours of the people when they were fighting US imperialism, but the same old corrupt,intolerant, power-hungry politicos once they achieved independence (for ecample, they made Nicuragua one of only two or three countries in the world to declare abortion illegal under any circumstances).

  283. jfngw says:


    Cancer will not kill you.
    It is the failure of organs that kills you. Only those with a propensity to develop cancer will die.

    Time for the Scottish Government to cut out all these screening programmes, this is a purely personal health matter, do you feel lucky.

    Very few things kill you directly, it is always failures of organs that ends it for you.

  284. CameronB Brodie says:

    Julia Gibb
    Your a laugh. 😉

    Law on ensuring equal opportunities for women and men (2006)

  285. CameronB Brodie says:

    Julia Gibb
    You appear to be confusing technical insight with egotism. That’s not particularly sensible, IMHO.

    Brexit and the Common Law Constitution

    This article considers the implications that Brexit holds for the UK’s “common law constitution” – the body of principles and norms that the courts have developed in case law on EU membership, fundamental rights, and devolution. Focusing on the Supreme Court’s ruling in Miller, it argues that Brexit may have paradoxical effects within the case law.

    These start with the fact that the Supreme Court rationalised EU withdrawal in terms of Parliamentary sovereignty, but in a manner that perhaps also casts doubt on the utility of distinctions between “internal” and “external” law. However, this reliance on Parliamentary sovereignty as UK law’s “rule of recognition” is seen as more problematic in the context of rights and devolution, where the article notes a number of tensions in the law.

    In relation to rights, these are a result of an apparent retreat from a line of case law that had previously indicated that the courts might impose substantive limits on the powers of the Westminster Parliament. The tensions around devolution are a result of the subordinate role that the rule of recognition accords to devolved institutions and its inability to accommodate any conception of “divided sovereignty”.

    Key words
    Brexit; Supreme Court; common law constitution; Parliamentary sovereignty; rights; devolution.

  286. Ron Maclean says:

    @ Julia Gibb 9:31am

    Welcome to the club of unionist trolls and the ego/vanity virtuous brigade. The club is run by a committee of a dozen experts overseen by the Supreme Leader who can sometimes be without mercy.

    I’m fairly sure I can identify the ‘heroes’ of the past whose names crop up from time to time. In my view they were mostly abusive bullies with far too much to talk about and far too little to say. They didn’t take us anywhere. They took the huff because they couldn’t take the heat. They’re gone and best forgotten.

    I doubt whether there are many posters on this site who think they can shape Scotland without consulting Scotland. I admire those who put forward ideas which might shape Scotland even if occasionally I don’t agree with them.

  287. CameronB Brodie says:

    I sometimes wonder why did I bother going to school?

    Law, constitutionalism, and world society: Kjaer, Kratochwil, and global (dis)order

  288. Capella says:

    @ stumac 8.34 – you’re right that much of the nonsense about genderism seems to have been promoted by Judith Butler. I have never read Judith Butler and don’t intend to. Much of what I have read about “intersectionality” reads like word salad to me.

    I appear to be a 2nd Wave feminist. The 1st Wave was the Pankhursts and Co campaigning for the vote. The 2nd Wave said, OK we can vote but we aren’t equal, can’t get a job or own anything and get battered. Sort it. Hence Equal Pay Act and Women’s Aid.

    No idea what the 3rd Wave were about, but the 4th Wave appear to be young women who have reaped all the benefits of previous struggles, have no idea what all the fuss was about and now want to throw it all away in order to seem “kind”.

  289. Corrado Mella says:

    Bring back Joanne Lamont and her “Scots are not genetically programmed to be independent” or whatnot.

    She had foresight.

  290. CameronB Brodie says:

    I feel a bit cheeky here and hope you appreciate I’m not mansplaining. 😉

    Third-Wave Feminism and the Need to Reweave
    the Nature/Culture Duality

  291. Capella says:

    @ CBB – thx – will read, in spite of “reweave the nature/culture duality” (whatever that means). 🙂

  292. Dave says:


    Have you personally tried to contact or speak to the FM about your concerns or brought them to her attention in any way shape or form?

  293. Dave says:

    @Mrs Grimble

    “The SNP is increasingly reminding me of the Sandanistas – saviours of the people when they were fighting US imperialism, but the same old corrupt,intolerant, power-hungry politicos once they achieved independence (for ecample, they made Nicuragua one of only two or three countries in the world to declare abortion illegal under any circumstances).”

    And you came to this conclusion based on how they acted the last time they ran an Independent Scottish Government?

  294. Iain More says:

    7 Years isn’t long enough for her quite frankly.

  295. Sarah says:

    @ twathater at 2.13: I realise that an individual’s emails can be ignored, as mine have been. And I sympathise – I have never sent as many as 35 emails!

    What I was suggesting was a torrent of emails – that would be harder to ignore and the message would get through. I wouldn’t want or need an answer, I just want a reaction shown by a policy change and a behavioural change.

  296. twathater says:

    Thanks Breeks , Dan and that other chap whatsisname for your answers , I will endeavour to follow the laid down unstructions but am no promising to get it right , Cheers

  297. Clapper57 says:

    Well we have all been on a journey…since pre/post 2014.

    Looking at Kirsty Blackman’s Twitter account today I see that her journey seems to have ended stuck in a diagram of interlocking circles that, to her, clearly demonstrates her point she makes in this tweet :

    “The word menstruator is used to describe people who menstruate. This is not the same as women.”

    Note the diagram that shows interlocking circles with Women and Humans and Menstruate….with menstruate in the middle of the interlocking circle….to display both Humans and Women menstruate….cause in Kirsty’s head there is a clear distinction between the two but both menstruate…Huh ?????

    Now THERE IS a NEW argument we can use in the next independence referendum campaign…..we know WHO this will appeal to…clue…minority new recruits aka Woke brigade…however I think it might be a HARDER sell to your average Joe and Jo-ess that this is the way forward for a progressive independent Scotland…..who needs to imagine parallel universes when with certain SNP politicians we can feel we are already living in one….is an independent Scotland under SOME of the SNP politicians going to be like living in a McTwilight Zone ?

  298. Jill Sharpe says:

    So Shirley Anne Somerville stands up to speak and a unionist holds up a picture of Katie Dolatowski or Karen White and says this is who the SNP thinks are women – madness.

  299. Clapper57 says:

    @ Jill Sharpe @ 9.28pm

    Exactly Jill….will they be telt though…NO.

    Have a good day when the sun comes up…IF it shows itself


  300. 60 is elderly? LOL. Good piece but I request you don’t link to that Evening Standard article when there are far more accurate accounts like this one:

    And my own:

  301. Ruby says:

    I first became suspicious of the SNP when Mark MacDonald ‘resigned’

    My choice is very limited either I vote for this ‘holier than thou creepy party’ who claim to support independence a Unionist party or just not vote.

Comment - please read this page for comment rules. HTML tags like <i> and <b> are permitted. Use paragraph breaks in long comments. DO NOT SIGN YOUR COMMENTS, either with a name or a slogan. If your comment does not appear immediately, DO NOT REPOST IT. Ignore these rules and I WILL KILL YOU WITH HAMMERS.

↑ Top