The world's most-read Scottish politics website

Wings Over Scotland


Nothing but surrender

Posted on October 10, 2022 by

Sometimes even fools and liars and charlatans speak the truth.

Thing is, we rather liked it when the horses south of the border were frightened. Things happened in those days. But to coin a phrase, those days are past now.

Print Friendly

    264 to “Nothing but surrender”

    1. P says:

      Amazing – now I’m wondering why he said that?

    2. Geri says:

      Why? They’re not our horses.

    3. Anonymoose says:

      Interesting way of saying that your own party leader lacks the political skills, ability & will to force our unionist opponents into dialog by asserting Scots sovereignty on behalf of the people.

      A damp squib in other words, a fake, a political imposter.

    4. Iain More says:

      The SNP has a mandate. The Wokist ("Tractor" - Ed)s are treating us as stupid.

    5. sarah says:

      I can’t bear to watch nor listen to this disgraceful excuse for a democratic politician. Has he really said something that I ought to know?

    6. craig sheridan says:

      That’s a blatant Freudian slip and it’s absolutely correct. She’s never landed a blow on them, she’s perfect for the preservation of the union. I’m done with them, I already left. There’s no plan. We all know what Supreme Court will say and yet the SNP are cornering themselves with the ‘legal route’ limitation and handing all cards over to the very people saying they will never agree to a ref and in fact now refuse even to talk to us. It’s shameful, the fact more people are not angry has become my biggest worry. We’re a cowed uneducated rabble that’s politically illiterate. The happy clappers are a cancer who don’t realise they’re the ones killing the movement.

    7. DaveL says:

      She’s got carrots for the horses. The horses love her.

    8. Saffron Robe says:

      In other words, she’s a damp squib – no freedom fighter and no threat to the Union whatsoever. Surrender at every turn.

    9. Scott says:

      Does anyone know how many £Scot should be sitting in Scotland’s Treasury, the one that pre-dated the union and was to continue….??

      By my reckoning, it should be equal to every £GBP in circulation…and all the Govt debt. [value of the coin was to be equal, innit]

      That’s a lot of pound notes.

      I’m off to write to the King, I’m done with politicians doing fuck all of substance.

    10. Rab Davis says:

      In early 2017 Alex Salmond was pushing for IndyRef2 in September 2018, with us joining EFTA instead of the EU (which is still my preferred option).

      It was then that (unknown to him), Sturgeon and Murrell started plotting his downfall.

      And we all know how that plot panned out.

      Regards the plot,,,It didn’t really matter that Mr Salmond got found not guilty, because Sturgeon just has to insinuate what might have happened,,,and that is enough to give the impression that he is still a danger to women everywhere.

      And she in turn, loves to give the impression that she is the saviour of women everywhere.

      She is a nasty piece of work,,as is her kiddie on man.

      The damage is done.

    11. twathater says:

      Let’s be honest what that arsehole said isn’t news to anyone on here or really anyone with 1 brain cell

      The PROBLEM is that even when there is an election and a vote PEOPLE feel TRAPPED, WHO do they vote for, do they vote for a shower of proven unionists to get rid of these woke morons or do they carry on regardless voting for sturgeons spineless troughers in the vain hope that we might get independence via some unionist mistake

      Unfortunately SHE is back in power despite her incompetence , corruption and BLATANT lies due partly to the fact that the great tactician Alex Salmond encouraged voters many who new better to vote ALBA 1 and the nonce party 2 , unfortunately sturgeon’s spinelessness only works against the scum in WM , against anything related to Salmond she is relentless in her pursuance of the deliberate wanton denigration and destruction of his existence

      The belief that this evil driven amoral entity would have any weakening of revulsion and hate against anything to do with Salmond has cost Scotland dearly

      How I long for politicians who are honest and brave enough to publicly EXPOSE and name and shame the lies and corruption being acted upon Scots and Scotland

    12. Rab Davis says:

      Scottish Labour didn’t disappear,,, they have morphed into the SNP.

      They are quite content to bounce along the bottom of a devolved Scottish parliament for ever more.

      And therein lies the problem.

      That is what we are up against.

      Sturgeon is their perfect leader,,,they just love her.

    13. robertkknight says:

      Of course Nicola Sturgeon doesn’t “frighten the horses south of the border”.

      Her purpose is to hobble the SNP donkeys north of it!

    14. Cuilean says:

      Before he was an MP, John Nicolson came to a hustings at an SNP only members’ meeting to elect a candidate for the next General Election (then in 2015) for North Ayrshire & Arran. This was held in the local sports pavilion, Brodick, Isle of Arran. The SNP candidiates were 1. John Nicolson, 2. local MSP Kenneth Gibson’s shoe-in wife, Patricia Gibson, then a secondary English teacher, 3. an excellent local Arran doctor, 4. a woman (not from Arran or North Ayrshire) who sounded like a ‘Bunty’ – the ‘almost’ affectionate Arranach descriptive for Kilmacolm & Edinburgh Tory types, who descend to their (all too many second) Arran summer homes, complaining that the bakery does not sell sourdough and 5. an Irvine secondary headmaster, who appeared to be the token working class, whom I instictively liked for his no-nonsense urgency that we had to beat these Tory over lords or pay the price.

      Nicolson, we were subsequently told, but only after voting, bailed, to stand in West Dunbartonshire, which, as we all know, the SNP took, at the 2015 SNP landlside election.

      The headmaster (my first choice) also pulled out, but only after we voted; for health reasons, we were told.

      The voting method was to list candidates in order of preference so when counting the results, all those votes for the two bailed candidates, were simply discounted and your third choice could then become your first choice etc.

      I found this slightly suspicious.

      I was therefore not really surprised to learn that the said MSP’s wife won. Patricia Gibson, in my opinion, gave a nervous, querulous address of rehearsed sound-bites. She had been my last choice.

      Apart from my own impression, I am always against a husband and wife team sharing too much political power. (See Sturgeon/Murrell) What happens in a potential ‘conflict of interest’ scenario? Will husbands and wives challenge each other, even if it adversely affects their family, or do they place family over constituents? Well why take that risk at all?

      I remember thinking, where on earth had John Nicolson sprung from, Topsy-like? A smooth, cultured voice. Tanned, just back from some holiday abroad, and a lot thinner then. Ex-BBC? Sorry, as soon as I hear ‘ex-BBC’, alarm bells sound.

      It struck me then, that for a predominately working class area of North Ayrshire, (the sitting MP back then was Corbyn Labour’s left wing Katy Clark), most of the SNP MP candidates were middle class.

      That was the first time I suspected the SNP high heid yins were pulling strings and the ordinary members were simply pawns, in an unknown and unknowable game. Of course, what do I know?

    15. Luigi says:

      If it’s a “slip” it’s a deliberate one. It’s called walking back on a promise as slowly as ye can so as not to be obvious and not upset too many people at the same time. Let the people down gently- that’s the name of the game. Watch put for more “slips” from politicians in the coming months. It’s all carefully coreographed and orchestrated. You better believe it. Maybe we should start a “slip” count lol.

    16. Luigi says:

      Anyone here inspired to be strung along for yet another four years and vote SNP at the next election, with lots of rhetoric but no real movement toward independence? If yes, I have a large bridge going cheap that you may be interested in.

    17. James U says:

      He always did talk a load of pony!

    18. Geoff Huijer says:

      She’s in the stable with them.

    19. Robert Hughes says:

      One thing you have to concede about these people is their capacity to surprise you ; just when you thought you couldn’t hold them in any more contempt , they go right ahead and prove you wrong – evoking more contempt that you thought possible .

      ” Scare the horses….” – Sturgeon couldn’t scare a WM mouse with a nervous disposition . Not that she’d want to .

      But she should scare anyone seriously interested in Independence and how it can be achieved .

      Anyone concerned about the welfare of children – their education , physical and psychological well-being and the nature of the Society they will inherit .

      Anyone who believes gender is immutable – Male + Female . That’s it . Everything else is fantasy , psychic aberration , sexual kink , ACTUAL misogyny .

      What could be more misogynistic that the total erasure of the category Woman ?

      The list goes on . And gets longer all the time .

      Corporate Power . Quangos . Law * Reformers * . Deviants of various kinds . Those who believe every National problem has ( only ) a Global solution . Those who think the solution to bloodshed is more bloodshed .

      None of those have anything to fear from whatever that is masquerading as an Independence-seeking Scottish National Party

    20. Ruby says:

      If there was a serious political campaign to force their hand then I missed it. Sending the occasional letter to the occasional Prime Minister doesn’t cut it nor does fulminating at Westminster about what Scotland will or will not stand for and then doing absolutely nothing Alex Salmond

      The occasional letter to the occasional Prime Minister isn’t going to frighten even Larry the cat!

      But hey if they don’t give her what she wants demands in ‘her occasional letter to the occasional Prime Minister’ she could try having a tantrum and screaming
      ‘I hate you! I hate you! I hate you!’

      PS What is drag bingo?

    21. Ruby says:

      Supreme Court hearing starts today but don’t get too excited results won’t be heard until the end of the year.

      Maybe around the Christmas holidays when everyone is busy with Christmasy things.

    22. Ottomanboi says:

      Is this
      https://archive.ph/lWMxN
      Worth this.
      https://archive.ph/b0Zsv
      Even from Qatar the answer must be negative.
      US ethnic meddling in Iran likewise dangerous.

    23. Ian Brotherhood says:

      @Dorothy Devine –

      Yesterday you asked about the capacity of that conference venue.

      The image here may help put it in context. (I haven’t heard any attendance figures.)

      https://twitter.com/zulfikar_sheikh/status/1579513784900939776

    24. Hatuey says:

      If there was a snap general election in November, I’m guessing that most of you would vote for Nicola’s party.

      Psychologists call that ‘conflicted’.

      Philosophers call it ‘bad faith’.

      I call it ‘rigged’.

      The very thing most of us are urging the SNP to do, we won’t do ourselves. What do I mean by that? I mean we should break the chain of contempt which assumes we will all keep voting for a party that offers us nothing and treats us like shit.

      And that’s essentially what we are urging the SNP to do in relation to the British Government and its rigged deck. We are urging them to respond in a way that forces the British government to come to terms.

      In normal circumstances we’d simply vote against a party that let us down and pissed us off so badly, just as we did before with Scottish Labour.

      I’m not suggesting we abstain, I’m suggesting we vote in each constituency for the party most likely to beat the SNP.

      You don’t need Alba to punish the SNP. You can use whatever party has the best chance of beating them. Politics is just a game; if you know how it works and are willing to give up on childish notions of team loyalty, you can win. It’s a game but not football.

      And if the SNP sees enough people going down that road, they’ll change tack and do what we have been urging them to do — honestly fight for independence.

      Those English horses like Nicola because we keep voting for her and she keeps giving us nothing. They like you too.

    25. Tinto Chiel says:

      @Cuilean 5.34: interesting post. Of course we had ex-BBC Blair Jenkins in charge (along with NS) of the official (and lacklustre) Yes campaign.

      What could possibly go wrong?

    26. Breeks says:

      I always thought the Groundhog Day movies was a comedy, but it’s beginning to dawn on me, it’s actually a horror story in disguise.

      I will rejoice with greater enthusiasm and relief whenever Sturgeon is booted out of office than when Thatcher got her P45. And that, believe me, is saying something.

      The longer we have to wait however, the more harm is done to Scotland, the more resource is robbed from us, and another year of things getting better is sacrificed for another year of stagnancy and exasperation. Another year’s harvest of everything Scottish goes to the Westminster sorting office, where it’s hammered into a pittance and sent back to us.

      How on earth can Scotland be ready for Independence when we are powerless to depose such a brazen, warmongering charlatan and fraud, who lies to our face and sells out our nation to suit her own petty but twisted agenda?

      Truth be known? I’d be more than content for SALVO to hold Independence in abeyance for a year, take a time out, and dedicate their resources towards the formation of an Impeachment Protocol to sack Scotland’s betrayers and deny them the protection of Holyrood for as long as Holyrood remains a colonial outpost.

      I’m not kidding. I am genuinely disturbed that Scottish Independence delivered through the Claim of Right might be surrounded by these same, self serving political parasites, like nighttime bugs are drawn towards a streetlight.

      Impeached, at least they could be banned from ever holding public office.

    27. Lad says:

      In his defence it seems like he meant that the SNP is adopting a cooperative approach so that Westminster (probably Labour gov) gives in later this decade and grants Scotland more powers or an indy referendum.

    28. Ian Brotherhood says:

      @Breeks (9.52) –

      Dunno if you subjected yourself to that ‘speech’ yesterday.

      One of the loudest cheers she got was when she said she intends to remain leader ‘for some time to come’ or words to that effect. I couldn’t make out how many attendees didn’t stand for the ovation but the response seemed pretty unanimous.

      I don’t understand those people. They feel as alien to me as the old duffers who warm the seats at Tory gatherings. At least those Tories know why they’re there and what they’re supporting. The idea that all those hundreds (surely not thousands, based on available footage) of independence supporters believe the tripe they were served up is embarrassing. Worse is the fact that they appeared to welcome no end to it.

      Impeachment of the office bearers is one thing – getting shot of these biddable throbbers is another.

      🙁

    29. Colin the Keelie says:

      UK Supreme Court case begins today at 10.30am live streamed.

      http://www.supremecourt.uk/live/court-01.html

    30. Ian Brotherhood says:

      Link for the ‘referendum’ court hearing.

      Scheduled to start at 10.30.

      Case summary
      Issue

      (1) Does the Supreme Court have jurisdiction to determine the Lord Advocate’s reference? In any event, should the Court decline to determine the reference as a matter of its inherent discretion?

      (2) Does the provision of the proposed Scottish Independence Referendum Bill that provides that the question to be asked in a referendum would be “Should Scotland be an independent country?” relate to reserved matters? In particular, does it relate to: (i) the Union of the Kingdoms of Scotland and England; and/or (ii) the Parliament of the United Kingdom?

      Facts

      The Scottish Parliament has the power to make laws for Scotland (section 28(1) of the Scotland Act 1998 (“SA”)). However, a provision of an Act of Scottish Parliament is not law so far as the provision is outside the legislative competence of the Scottish Parliament (section 29(1) SA). A provision is outside legislative competence is it “relates to reserved matters” (section 29(2)(b) SA). Whether a provision “relates to” a reserved matter is determined “by reference to the purpose of the provision, having regard (among other things) to its effect in all the circumstances” (section 29(3) SA). Reserved matters include both “the Union of the Kingdoms of Scotland and England” and “the Parliament of the United Kingdom” (paras 1(b) and (c) Schedule 5 SA, respectively).

      The SA allows the Lord Advocate to “refer to the Supreme Court any devolution issue which is not the subject of proceedings” (para 34 of Schedule 6 SA). A “devolution issue” includes “any other question arising by virtue of this Act about reserved matters” (para 1(f) of Schedule 6 SA).

      This reference concerns the Scottish Independence Reference Bill. The Bill makes provision for a referendum on Scottish independence (clause 2(1)). The question would be “Should Scotland be an independent country?” (clause 2(2)). The key issue in this reference is whether the proposed provision relates to reserved matters.

      http://www.supremecourt.uk/cases/uksc-2022-0098.html

    31. JockMcT says:

      Round and round we go. Who do you vote for in a GE? Surely the party that stands on the single issue of Independence. The SNP will play their carrot games over and over. Someone mentioned Groundhog day, yes it is here for sure. I said last time, no more votes for SNP, and there will be none. I will never, ever, vote for a unionist party either. So, come on Alba and the other Indy parties, get together and stand for Indy and hopefully we can get rid of the lot of them, including sturgeon and her husk of a party. She might not scare the horses down there, but she scares the bejesus out of me.

    32. stuart mctavish says:

      Cue Salmond with sombrero, shades and salvo’s giant carrot

    33. Lenny Hartley says:

      Cuilean , first time i have seen the term “Bunty” used in writing ?
      Next time I meet he person who first coined it about forty years ago , i will tell him that it has spread far and wide, not that he will have read it here being a yoon.
      Btw Bunty is an abbreviation, its actually a “Bunty Hi Ho”
      There was even a shop in Brodick named Bunties as the clientele were manly of that type.

    34. Hatuey says:

      My expectation/prediction is that the Supreme Court will not come to a decision, effectively kicking it and us into the long grass for a few more months.

    35. Ian Brotherhood says:

      Bain has just done a Pilate, put her hands up and said it’s nothing to do with her, she doesn’t have the power.

      But she does think the court has that authority.

      So why all this palaver? Why doesn’t the court just send her packing, throw out the case and stop wasting abody’s time?

    36. Dorothy Devine says:

      Thanks Ian – Aberdeen Pict answered the query on the previous thread, he’ll have a missed a response from me as this thread has turned up, not that he will be missing much.

      The photo certainly tells a story.

      A’body, may I re recommend Grousebeaters site talking of the unmentionable!

    37. Republicofscotland says:

      Of course she doesn’t frighten the horses South of the border, for they know fine well that she isn’t interested in liberating Scotland from this union.

      Oh she and her MSPs MPs make a lot of noise about independence but that’s all it is noise. The likes of Nicolson, MacDonald and Smyth revel in their activities at Westminster, and have taken to their roles like ducks to water, so when Nicolson lets this slip, we can be sure that he’s speaking the truth.

      We’re going nowhere under Sturgeon the betrayers tenure as FM.

    38. Stoker says:

      “If the Supreme Court says no, we will put our case to the Scottish people in an election”

      If the Supreme Court says no there should be massive demonstrations as they will have officially confirmed that there is absolutely no political democracy in Scotland.

      They will have also confirmed that London/UKGov cannot be trusted to stick to agreements that they, and all other parties, signed up to

      A no would also confirm that Scotland is truly under the control of a dictatorship in the form of England’s Houses of Parliament and England’s legal system.

      If anyone has the knowhow, they should see to it that each of the five judges deciding our fate are sent copies of these as a reminder because i wouldn’t trust the current SNP to remind them:

      https://indyposterboy.scot/wp-content/webp-express/webp-images/doc-root/wp-content/uploads/2020/01/smith_commission-1200×865.jpg.webp

      https://indyposterboy.scot/wp-content/webp-express/webp-images/doc-root/wp-content/uploads/2020/01/claim_of_right-1200×865.jpg.webp

    39. AberdeenPict says:

      Dorothy Devine says:
      11 October, 2022 at 11:05 am
      Thanks Ian – Aberdeen Pict answered the query on the previous thread, he’ll have a missed a response from me as this thread has turned up, not that he will be missing much.

      Hi Dorothy, I managed to catch your response in the other thread. As Ian has pointed out with the photo in the link, the venue can hold a load of folk, but they obviously centered it in the middle of the hall and makes the crowd look a lot bigger from certain camera angles.

      P.S. I currently work in Grandholm next to the old Crombie Mill. Quite a place back in the day, a well renowned textile mill that employed loads of folk. They even made jackets for the confederate soldiers during the American civil war.

    40. Bob Mack says:

      Are we for the SNP or Independence?. They just don’t seem compatible at this time.

    41. Astonished says:

      Sadly, Hatuey I think you are dead right – the long, long grass.

      I am looking forward to seeing the Nicolson charlatan booted out on his fat arse. Hope I don’t have long to wait.

    42. Stoker says:

      Here’s how i think it will go – one of two ways.

      The Supreme Court judges will either conduct an exercise in fence-sitting and leave the matter still hanging out there or…..

      They will support the UKGov stance, and we will witness an immediate taking to the airwaves by several top Tories announcing how the UKGov is not saying no. That they are just saying not at this moment in time because priorities (insert a multitude of reasons from focus on the economy to Mad Bad Vlad) etc.

      And there will be a ready-made public audience just ready and willing to lap it up. Sturgeon’s masterplan has come to fruition, she’s on her way to another term in office moaning about big bad Tories blah blah blah.

      CARROTS! GET YER CARROTS HERE! BUY ONE GET FIVE FREE! CARROTS! GET YER CARROTS HERE!

    43. Nally Anders says:

      Wonder if John is regretting very recently giving evidence to the Charity Commission in support of ‘Mermaids'(vs LGBA) seeing as a board member has emerged as a long established Paedophile apologist.
      This is a children’s charity remember.
      John also admitted he had just ‘skimmed through’ the Cass Review which recommended the closure of the child gender service Tavistock’. Serious failures of safeguarding being an issue.
      No wonder these days it’s called the Scottish Nonce Party.

    44. Christopher Pike says:

      Stoker says:
      11 October, 2022 at 11:29 am
      “If the Supreme Court says no, we will put our case to the Scottish people in an election”

      A no would also confirm that Scotland is truly under the control of a dictatorship in the form of England’s Houses of Parliament and England’s legal system.

      ——————————-

      The decision will be made under UK Law and not English Law. Despite the fact that Scotland and England have separate legal systems, there are still UK Laws in existence, such as the constitution.

    45. Daisy Walker says:

      If the court says, ‘naw ye cannae’ it provides up-to-date evidence of Scotland’s colonial status…. in addition to breaching the Claim of Right principles within the Treaty of Union.

      That would have actionable consequences, a People’s Convention set up, action with the UN (potentially), and principly the starting gun on making the next GE (or perhaps HE) a plebiscite on Indy.

      So, for all of the above reasons, why would they?

      But then again, Liz Truss is incredibly stupid.

      Their second option is to repeat the Martin Keatons result, of, with no bill passed in Holyrood specifying the exact terms, the whole thing is too hypothetical.

      And there it goes, into the long grass, enabling Nikla to ‘reflect’, and postpone a Pleb Indy GE.

      Meanwhile, regardless of the result, months will pass before it is announced, so, more inertia.

      They say it’s always darkest, the hour before dawn… they forgot to mention, it’s also the coldest hour.

    46. Ian Brotherhood says:

      Is anyone else having trouble accessing Craig Murray’s blog? I can’t get it at all.

    47. Dan says:

      @ Ian B

      It’s working fine for me.
      Plus here’s a link back to an article from Craig’s blog from about two weeks ago seeing as the Supreme Court case started today.

      https://www.craigmurray.org.uk/archives/2022/09/dorothy-bain-incompetent-or-corrupt/

    48. Ian Brotherhood says:

      @Dan (12.35) –

      Cheers D, that’s the very one I wanted to read!

      😉

    49. Dan says:

      Nae bother Ian, since I recently started Self IDing as a telepathist I knew it would be! 😉

    50. Scott says:

      Christopher Pike says:
      11 October, 2022 at 12:21 pm

      The decision will be made under UK Law and not English Law. Despite the fact that Scotland and England have separate legal systems, there are still UK Laws in existence, such as the constitution.

      There are 3 separate legal systems within the United Kingdom of Great Britain & Northern Ireland.

      Scots law
      English law (as applicable in England & Wales)
      Northern Irish law

      All have equal standing wrt the constitution, which is a personal matter of the monarch.

      The Treaty of Union was supposed to make the business affairs of Queen Anne easier.

      There is no such thing as ‘UK law’ – laws enacted at WM that apply to Scotland are recorded at the Court of Session in Edinburgh, and are worded differently to laws applicable in England.

      The current case is focused on the Scotland Act, but the SNP by virtue of having status also represent any Scot with the same view on the matter due to common standing in Scots law. As each case turns on its own merits up here, all may be to play for, or referred to Court of Session.

      And there’s still no UK law….

    51. Hatuey says:

      She’s no Camille Vasquez, that’s for sure…

    52. Stoker says:

      @ Scott on 11 October, 2022 at 12:42 pm

      Thanks, Scott, i will, for the avoidance of doubt and the benefit of Private Pike, restate the most important fact in your post:

      There is no such thing as UK law.

      BTW, is that not like that other one that gets banded about occasionally, “International Law”?

    53. Hatuey says:

      Well, Scott, all good but you forget international law. And international law matters in connection with the question of independence and self determination.

      You’re welcome.

    54. Hatuey says:

      I see the war on the east is heating up somewhat. Oh well.

      What’s SNP policy on sharing toilets in nuclear bunkers with transvestites that have covid?

    55. Stoker says:

      @ Dan on 11 October 2022 at 12:35 pm

      https://www.craigmurray.org.uk/archives/2022/09/dorothy-bain-incompetent-or-corrupt/

      Thanks for reposting that link, Dan. I’ve read it before but was worth reading it again. Craig really does, with very little effort, expose both Sturgeon and the current situation.

      Whilst reading the article again i got a little spark of hope. But by the time i had come to typing this comment my feet were very firmly back on terra firma. A result of experiencing too many false dawns. Then i’m ready for lift-off again as i read Scot saying it all might still be to play for. Jeezus! Just call me YoYo.

    56. Rab Davis says:

      Message from Sturgeon to Supreme Court regarding decision:-

      “Take as long as you like, we’re in no great hurry. Just before next UK General Election will do just fine”.

    57. Robert Hughes says:

      The only reason the ( unlikely ) decision of the UK Chicken Supreme Court is that Jockshire can hold a kid-on Ref would be preferable than it saying it can’t is it could mean Sturgeon can then say she’s delivered and , hopefully , fuck-off to whatever ” nice little earner ” position within the Global Cuntocracy she’s hoping to be offered : HEAD OF LAUNDRY @ DAVOS sounds about right.

      I doubt the Court decision either way will make much difference ; we’ll still be stuck with fat , self-satisfied , wastes-of-space like Nicolson , Robertson , Blackford et al , none of whom would sacrifice as much as a pie-supper for Independence – let alone put their precious careers at risk .

      Not to put too fine a point on it , and excuse me for stating the blindingly obvious ….

      We’re fucked .

      At least for foreseeable ; the possibly terminally , unless something unforeseeable happens

    58. Robert Hughes says:

      ” the ” = typo

    59. sarah says:

      @ Robert Hughes: “We’re f****ed”.

      Can’t disagree SO just do what we can do in the small hope that enough of us will enable the hardest-working folk in Yes to get us somewhere nearer independence.

      At the moment the small step we can all take is sign the Edinburgh Proclamation – on salvo.scot and liberation.scot. And then pass the word on to some friends.

    60. Ian Brotherhood says:

      @sarah –

      I would like to see Sara Salyers’ take on all this.

      If – as seems the case to this untrained eye – Bain is flagrantly ignoring the same Claim of Right which ‘our’ new king took an oath to uphold only a fortnight ago then there *must* be legal recourse.

      How is that done in practical terms?

      I don’t know, but I’m sure SSRG/SALVO will have people who do. And if they can map out a solid course of legal action which squarely takes on Sturgeon and her creepy buddies, I’m sure the rest of us could undertake the Mother of All Crowdfunders to make it happen.

      The appetite is there to do it if for no other reason than to avoid having to listen to more of the same pish we were subjected to yesterday.

    61. Robert Hughes says:

      Sarah

      I’ve done that – signed the Edinburgh Declaration

      Salvo + SSRG are the only two things that offer a glimmer of hope , as far as I can see .

      I think we need to , if not abandon , then not continue looking to , an exclusively Party Political route to Independence .

      As I think we all – here – agree , the SNP as currently constituted are – worse than , useless . Damaging .

      ALBA are trying but are severely handicapped by low visibility and IMO ” other things ” – one thing in particular .

      ISP , again , are trying to offer some alternative choice , but it’s visibility isn’t even ” low ” – it’s non-existent . Alas .

      As others have suggested – the alternative ( to SNP ) Indy Parties would be better amalgamating into one , unified entity , to have any chance of making a breakthrough

    62. Dorothy Devine says:

      Aberdeen Pict , my Grandad was head finisher at the mill followed by my uncle.

      Every time I saw Gorbachev on the telly I realised he was wearing a Crombie coat. They traded with Russia in far off times.

    63. sarah says:

      @ Ian B and Robert H: the only thing keeping me still relatively sane is the existence of similar minded folk on the true Yes sites and Salvo/SSRG.

      I learned today that my letter on the subject to my local A4 sized newspaper garnered a signature to the Proclamation from a very decent and very capable man who has battled for 3 years to enlighten local Greens and SNP to the self-id issue – he says today that he is now confining himself to worrying about things he can affect rather than those he can’t. So we are not alone in being ground down by the size of the obstacles to progress. Nevertheless we are all still trying to help the cause and as you say, Ian B, come a crowdfunder we will pile in.

      @ Robert H – you will remember that there was a vehicle for combining all pro-indy parties under an umbrella. Dave Thompson’s Action for Independence party but Alba was launched outwith that and AFI withdrew and then dissolved to give Alba a free run. It was a great shame to my mind as it was the perfect answer – SSP, ISP, Scotia, Alba – could all have combined under the AFI umbrella at elections so no indy votes would have been wasted and the profile would be higher. Perhaps lessons will have been learned and AFI revived in some form.

    64. Scott says:

      Dorothy Bain spoke to the expressed will of the people of Scotland, something the monarch is bound to accept. (the Northern Irish question from the 20’s is a red herring, it does not and cannot bind Scots law in litigation, as each case turns on its own merits. If the Scotland Act was bound to it, it would be in writing.)

      Advocate General (created in 1999 v Lord Advocate 1483) is just waffling in response. Is he really suggesting that Holyrood shpuld go through the palava of passing a Bill into law, only to be hauled in front of UKSC at will? Fuck off, fascist.

      No law can bind the people’s voice – I can run a referendum on any subject in the form of a petition, with state funding (by statute) but can’t due to health reasons.

      Holyrood can pass legislation for a referendum on subject A that then forces Local Authorities to allow it to happen, they have to assist the private individual too.

    65. Robert Louis says:

      So, there we have it an admission from the SNP, that Sturgeon doesn’t scare London. Hardly a shockeroonie, is it? Perhaps that is because time and time and time again, she has allowed England to dictate what Scotland can or cannot do, and backed down on each and every occasion. Despite endless democratic mandates she still sits wittering about ‘permission’, when we all know Scotland does not need permission from England to pursue independence.

      And now, we hear, she will respect the decision of the English pretendy ‘supreme’ court, in London England, regarding Scotland’s right to independence. That pretendy English ‘supreme’ court, literally created by Tony Blair in 2009, and wholly outside the terms of the treaty and respective ACTS of union.

      A nonsense, all of it. If Mr Salmond were First Minister, we would have been out of this decrepit undemocratic so-called’ union’ when England arrogantly decided to forcibly strip every single Scot of EU citizenship wholly against their wishes. Indeed, we would likely have been out by the end of 2015.

      Nicola Sturgeon needs to wise up. No matter how the pretendy English ‘supreme’ court in England rules, England will just change the rules again to prevent independence. It is for very good reason that they are known world over as perfidious Albion. In that respect, is Nicola Sturgeon just politically naive, stupid or complicit??

    66. Ian Brotherhood says:

      @Robert Louis (4.10) –

      ‘Is Nicola Sturgeon just politically naive, stupid or complicit?’

      ‘Politically naive’?
      She’s been doing ‘politics’ her entire adult life and wasn’t, apparently, much use at anything else.

      ‘Stupid’?
      That’s a tricky one. She seems quite comfortable playing the role of an intellectual (Ted Talks, Edinburgh Fesitval gigs etc) but doesn’t exhibit much knowledge of Scottish history and/or culture. Her choice of reading material is significant (She seems to be unaware that so-called Tartan Noir is not regarded as serious ‘literature’, not even by many of its best-known practitioners.) But she does have the same kind of primal cunning she would’ve witnessed at close quarters in pre-2011 Scottish Labour – her performance yesterday exuded that same cock-sure gallusness we used to get from the likes of Donohoe, Ian Davidson, Foulkes etc.

      That leaves ‘complicit’.

    67. Derek says:

      …and PM (Radio 4) wheel out Henry McLeish for a bit of SNP-baddery; just because, probably.

    68. Republicofscotland says:

      Like I said we’re going nowhere as long as Sturgeon the betrayer resides in Bute House. A real pro-indy FM would’ve appointed a real pro-indy Lord Advocate, not some puppet unionist.

      It won’t matter a jot what Westminster or the UKSC says when a real pro-indy FM takes the reins in Scotland, simply because it’s up to the people of Scotland to decide their future, I’d also say that Brexit cut clear across the sovereignty of the Scottish people as pointed out by the Ex-Welsh FM Carwyn Jones, that action alone never mind many other occasions when Westminster has broken the Treaties of Union is enough to dissolve this union immediately, however Sturgeon the backstabber that she is kept her mouth shut and her head down and tried not to draw attention to it.

      But again, we have treacherous shit squatting in Bute House, and England will continue to have its way with Scotland until she’s booted out.

      Sturgeon the betrayer will go down in Scottish history as a modern day John Menteith.

    69. Shug says:

      What will the SNP do if they win all the seats in a Westminster election but only 48 percent of the votes.

      Are mp seats really worthless

    70. Shug says:

      Anyone got any suggestions

    71. Bob Mack says:

      @Ian Brotherhood,

      You raise an interesting point. Bear with me here.

      The UK is a constitutional monarchy and as such the Monarch lays out their government plans for that parliamentary term.

      Any laws passed must then be given Royal Assent before becoming law. The last refusal was around 1910 by Victoria’s son Edward.

      With what authority does the Monarch give consent on behalf of Scotland? Claim of Right is about exactly that

      They are answerable to the people of Scotland rather than the noblesse oblige in England. Some say it is just ceremonial but as point out Charles had to take an oath on the issue.

      Perhaps our referendum should be on the suitability of the Monarch in Scotland rather than our individual rights.

      That may make some ears pick up!!

    72. John Main says:

      @ Robert Louis says:11 October, 2022 at 4:10 pm

      “England arrogantly decided to forcibly strip every single Scot of EU citizenship wholly against their wishes”

      Oh give over Bob.

      It can’t be wholly against our wishes when 1,018,322 Scots voted tae get the fuck out.

      https://www.electoralcommission.org.uk/who-we-are-and-what-we-do/elections-and-referendums/past-elections-and-referendums/eu-referendum/results-and-turnout-eu-referendum/eu-referendum-results-region-scotland

      Yet another passing-reasonable post rendered shite by fact-free, spittle-flecked ranting.

      Get a grip.

    73. 100%Yes says:

      What I witness, was a vindictive speech attacking everyone who’s spoken out against her, proclaiming her dying devotion for thee late English Queen and with positive glee knowing that she’s going to remain as leader of the New SNP and that tomorrow court case will be lost and there is nothing anyone can do, including the Alba party.
      This is the fate Scotland and its people look forward to. The rest of the speech was the same as previous years EU citizens being replaced by Ukrainians and Boris replaced by Liz Truss. Before the New SNP conference had even started she was offering to work in coalition with the Labour party, so much for a genuine plebiscite.

    74. Republicofscotland says:

      Shug @6.21pm.

      Shg.

      Get Alba MPs in at the next GE, and we will watch them walk out for good. Get Alba in come 2026, and hopefully they’ll declare the union dissolved with immediate effect.

      Vote SNP at any of these two coming elections and you’ll be voting for the status quo or worse.

      Sturgeon the betrayer has Police Scotland and the Lord Advocate in her back pocket, so it very unlikely that she will be removed that way, in such as the Covid Inquiry in Scotland, which has fallen apart.

      she might be offered a lucrative job abroad afterall she’s been very vocal on calling for WWIII, via no-fly zone over (404) and on other matters on (404) and of late on Belarus as well. However, the top job at the NuSNP would probably be taken on by Angus Robertson and the status quo, or worse would remain.

      We have to remember that the NuSNP isn’t the independence movement, we are, the NuSNP ceased to be a party for Scottish independence when Sturgeon the betrayer chose to try and save the English from Brexit instead of saving Scotland from the union.

      She’s been working against the indy cause ever since.

    75. solarflare says:

      “Shug says:
      11 October, 2022 at 6:20 pm
      What will the SNP do if they win all the seats in a Westminster election but only 48 percent of the votes.

      Are mp seats really worthless”

      Celebrate? It’s probably their dream scenario – getting to send a load of MPs to Westminster with no mandate to do anything. Just another 5 years of saying “Tories baaaaaad”

    76. 100%Yes says:

      Sturgeon declared she would remain leader of the biggest Unionist party in Scotland for a very long time to come, that’s not someone looking to make Scotland independent anytime soon.

    77. Dan says:

      solarflare says: at 7:10 pm

      Celebrate? It’s probably their dream scenario – getting to send a load of MPs to Westminster with no mandate to do anything. Just another 5 years of saying “Tories baaaaaad

      They cannae dae that anymore though as it breaches their Indy campaigning code of conduct, and there are Conservatives YES group and individuals tae.
      And they also can’t wriggle out of it eel stylée by saying “It’s jist SNP politics” either, as everything the SNP do is deemed as campaigning for Indy as the “missing” 600k was spent on that premise.

    78. John Main says:

      @solarflare says:11 October, 2022 at 7:10 pm

      “Just another 5 years of saying “Tories baaaaaad””

      Naw.

      It’s Starmer’s turn, no later than Jan 2025. Maybes a lot sooner.

      If you don’t believe me, get down the Bookies tomorrow and back your “higher understanding”. You stand to make a killing.

      [chuckles]

    79. Robert Hughes says:

      @ Sarah

      ” It was a great shame to my mind as it was the perfect answer – SSP, ISP, Scotia, Alba – could all have combined under the AFI umbrella at elections so no indy votes would have been wasted and the profile would be higher.” . Indeed .

      This is the perennial problem of Political Parties and their tendency to compete against themselves – even if they’re aspiring to the same ends ; their inability to – as they see it – concede their autonomy , in the interest of creating a united front against the common enemy .

      The Parties you refer to have not been too prone to that – squabbling among themselves , as far as I know ; but there does seem to be a reluctance to give-up their little domains ( and egos ? ) and create something of genuine * weight * and potential to challenge the SNP’s – undeserved – dominance

    80. John Main says:

      @ Robert Hughes says:11 October, 2022 at 7:42 pm

      “This is the perennial problem of Political Parties and their tendency to compete against themselves – even if they’re aspiring to the same ends”

      Or, we could consider anew what I have been saying – the route to grow support for Indy in Scotland is to ensure Indy is a broad church.

      For example, Indy seems to be determined to exclude monarchists and Brexit supporters. Both of these groups can be counted in the millions in Scotland.

      Further narrow the franchise by excluding realists on defence and law & order, and Scots who are looking for opportunities to graft to better themselves, and you are left with a rump, insufficiently numerous to get a majority for Yes.

      By all means cling to your ideological purity, but don’t be surprised if many others are not much interested.

    81. Merganser says:

      How many people watched Bain’s performance today?

      I watched an hour and a half of day 1 part 2 and squirmed with embarrassment. I didn’t have the heart to try and find part 1 to watch that.

      It re-enforced what Alex said about only appointing a Lord Advocate who was going to back your legislative proposals.

      Talk about shooting yourself in the foot. Oh the shame.

      The only chance is if she gets the sympathy vote. And the whole exercise is completely pointless anyway

      Perhaps she should change the spelling of her name from Bain to Bane: check out the dictionary definition.

    82. Robert Hughes says:

      ” For example, Indy seems to be determined to exclude monarchists and Brexit supporters. Both of these groups can be counted in the millions in Scotland.” . I’ve already – more or less – agreed with you on this John . It’s an ill-advised , unnecessary potential YES vote loser .

      ” Further narrow the franchise by excluding realists on defence and law & order, and Scots who are looking for opportunities to graft to better themselves ”

      We’d have difficulty agreeing what constitutes a ” realist ” on Defence . You don’t have to be a Pacifist to be sick to death of the Forever War – the endless suffering and wanton destruction .

      If accepting all this , rationalising it as ” Human Nature ” , just what humans do makes you a Realist , fuck THAT .

      If succumbing to blatant propaganda because it’s for the benefit of the * Good Guys * makes you ” on the side of the Angels ” – fuck THAT too .

      A degree of pragmatism & guile will be necessary to achieve Independence : but not at the expense of any sense of aspiration to create better country . Aye , I know …..” better ” means different things to different people ; but I think we could all on agree on certain , fundamental things that could be bettered

    83. sarah says:

      @ Robert Hughes at 7.42: “Political Parties tend to compete…”

      Well not in 2021 – the indy parties I named all stood aside for Alba. But the problem was that the voters probably didn’t catch on to the reasoning and that fact of 3 parties standing aside, and just saw Alba, a few weeks old, standing as Alex Salmond’s vehicle. If the 4 new/newish parties had stood under an umbrella which preserved their identities and individual policies, I think the response from voters and the media would have been stronger.

      Nowadays Alba’s line is that if there is a plebiscite election there needs to be a single independence candidate in each seat. So although there wouldn’t be a single party, there would be a single, agreed representative for indy voters.

      Problem is that it takes two to agree – and the SNP currently don’t seem to be in a co-operative mood.

    84. Lorna Campbell says:

      That was less of a slip as it was a promise, a declaration of intent. He knows, she knows, we all know why Salmond was removed.

    85. Robert Hughes says:

      Sarah

      ” So although there wouldn’t be a single party, there would be a single, agreed representative for indy voters. ”

      The problem again is the lack of a distinct identity – from the public’s POV . If candidates from 4/5 different Parties are standing would it not be likely to lack a cohesive * Brand Identity * ?

      Unfortunately , that’s the way contemporary Politics * works * now . More Marketing , Image/Information Manipulation , ” Personalities ” than anything that might be construed as genuinely held conviction .

      That said ….there may be a ” gap in the market ” for a Party that DOES have genuinely held conviction – and is prepared to struggle to uphold them . Not sure it needs to be conventional Political Party though . Think we’ve maybe had enough of them

    86. Ebok says:

      sarah says:
      11 October, 2022 at 9:55 pm
      ‘the indy parties I named all stood aside for Alba’

      Yes, they did Sarah, and now the splintered Indy movement needs to get a grip and re-unify.
      When Alex made that unilateral decision to launch Alba in a calculated gamble to take charge of Indy, it was surely in the knowledge that support for him could only come from existing Indy groups. And there was great rejoicing on WoS when Alba was launched eighteen months ago, in expectation of a serious challenge to Sturgeon and SNP.

      So Alba needs to own this disorder and confusion in the public perception of Yes groups, and to stop the starry-eyed approach to SNP. They are the enemy, not old friends.

      The reality is that Alba has stagnated, and any challenge to SNP will come from unionists, not Alba or YES. Stu’s graph on the previous thread shows that 98% of Scots would vote for mainstream parties and only a combined 2% for all others. The current strategy is just not happening. There’s no rage, no fire, little passion.

      For that to change, the whole movement must act as one and get on a war footing: no more Mr Nice Guy – this is no longer a debating game, we are fighting for our lives. It’s time to (belatedly) get the gloves off. To fight dirty. If politics in Edinburgh is like a wee village and EVERYONE knows what’s going down, it’s high time the rest of the country knew. The village people need to start talking!
      Let the evidence see the light of day; show the public every nasty deceitful detail of how those in the highest offices in the land use and abuse their powers – and the system.

      It’s time for our leaders to speak as one and expose everything they know, to lead us, to fight for all their worth, and who knows, we might awaken this country and stop it sleepwalking towards perdition. There is nothing to lose.

    87. Brian Doonthetoon says:

      We’ve all read Craig Murray’s reports of the defence evidence during Alex Salmond’s criminal trial (if not, we should have!) so it’s up to us to explain the stitch-up, naming names, specially the complainer of attempted r-ape.

      The media can’t report the info but there is nothing to stop us sharing the info verbally. The court order doesn’t cover peer-to-peer conversation.

      When people, specially women, have explained to them who the complainers were, they get it.

      Alex shouldn’t have his reputation tarnished by innuendo. The truth should be spread as widely as readers here can manage.

      https://web.archive.org/web/20200320002318/https://www.craigmurray.org.uk/archives/2020/03/your-man-finally-in-the-public-gallery-the-alex-salmond-trial-day-7/

      https://web.archive.org/web/20200319185638/https://www.craigmurray.org.uk/archives/2020/03/your-man-finally-in-the-public-gallery-the-alex-salmond-trial-day-8/

      https://web.archive.org/web/20200321113156/https://www.craigmurray.org.uk/

      And this satire from the archives…

      https://www.craigmurray.org.uk/archives/2020/01/yes-minister-fan-fiction/

      By word of mouth, we have to furnish our friends, neighbours, work colleagues, and so on, with THE TRUTH about the Alex Salmond stitch-up.

      When you see the names of the complainers in the Alex Salmond trial, it all falls into place.

      CLEAR HIS NAME!

    88. Robert Hughes says:

      @ Ebok

      Well said . 100% 🙂

    89. Rab Davis says:

      If Sturgeon is so convinced that it is necessary to go down the supreme court route to clarify the law regarding IndyRef2,,,then why the hell has she waited until now?

      Why wasn’t this done immediately after the Brexit vote?

      Why is she not being asked that very question today?

    90. Christopher Pike says:

      Scott says:
      11 October, 2022 at 12:42 pm
      Christopher Pike says:
      11 October, 2022 at 12:21 pm

      The decision will be made under UK Law and not English Law. Despite the fact that Scotland and England have separate legal systems, there are still UK Laws in existence, such as the constitution.

      There are 3 separate legal systems within the United Kingdom of Great Britain & Northern Ireland.

      Scots law
      English law (as applicable in England & Wales)
      Northern Irish law

      All have equal standing wrt the constitution, which is a personal matter of the monarch.

      The Treaty of Union was supposed to make the business affairs of Queen Anne easier.

      There is no such thing as ‘UK law’ – laws enacted at WM that apply to Scotland are recorded at the Court of Session in Edinburgh, and are worded differently to laws applicable in England.

      The current case is focused on the Scotland Act, but the SNP by virtue of having status also represent any Scot with the same view on the matter due to common standing in Scots law. As each case turns on its own merits up here, all may be to play for, or referred to Court of Session.

      And there’s still no UK law….

      ———

      Incorrect. Overarching these systems (the three legal systems you mentioned) is the law of the United Kingdom, also known as United Kingdom law (often abbreviated UK law). UK law arises from laws applying to the United Kingdom and/or its citizens as a whole, most obviously constitutional law, but also other areas – for instance, tax law.

    91. craig murray says:

      Brian,

      I admire your enthusiasm, but the lawyers say Lady Dorrian can slam you in the pokey for just telling people face to face.

    92. twathater says:

      Ebok @ 10.45pm I wholeheartedly agree with your comment , it does seem like Alex and others still cannot believe nikla is as evil and corrupted as she is showing herself to be , so consequently they are NOT on a war footing , I was one of the commenters BTL who was ecstatic and delighted when Alex came back in to action as it appeared we were doomed , BUT the fire is missing which is totally disappointing and worrying

      @ Shug 6.21pm ( anyone got any suggestions)

      I believe that the ONLY tool available to us at present is the legal route BUT it would have to focus on the SSRG and SALVO it would also have the benefit of removing WM from Scotland and the removal of sturgeon

      There must be many Scottish companies and farmers who are on the brink of failure due to their inability to access the European market , caused by the FORCED removal of Scotland from the EU by WM and totally UNOPPOSED by the FM and her Scottish government

      How about the same Scottish companies and farmers aligning with YES groups under the umbrella of SALVO and the SSRG and launching a crowdfunder to take WM and the Scottish Government to the united nations , citing WM refusal to agree to a referendum and citing the FM and her government’s abject FAILURE to PROTECT Scotland and the Scottish People

      Whether business people or farmers are independence supporters or tory voters they ALL want to survive and PROSPER and TBQH surely they cannot be happy with WM or the SG performance

      If Sara Salyers is reading WOS and thinks this proposal has any merit I would suggest contacting the farmer Alex Cross from the islands an independence supporter who would advise if farmers would be onboard

      The wanton destruction of our economy by the tories and the lacklustre performance of the SG AFFECTS everyone

    93. Breeks says:

      Rab Davis says:
      11 October, 2022 at 11:01 pm
      If Sturgeon is so convinced that it is necessary to go down the supreme court route to clarify the law regarding IndyRef2,,,then why the hell has she waited until now?

      Given that Westminster formally recognises the Claim of Right, the new Monarch swears fealty to the Claim of Right, and SALVO informs us the Claim of Right is a precondition of the Union, Scotland’s Constitutional sovereignty is incontrovertible. The people are sovereign.

      So what legal distinction is the UK’s Supreme Court actually trying to determine?

      It is attempting to lock Scottish Independence into the restrictive protocols of the UK “system” where Scotland’s sovereignty allegedly needs a UK court to give it permission to exist. Why are people going along with it?

      This whole Supreme Court exercise is a sham in a constitutional sense, because it’s only untying a knot when Westminster holding both ends of the string anyway.

      Once again, an ambiguous precedent over the power (or not) of Westminster’s devolved assembly in Edinburgh is being hyped up and misrepresented as if it’s an ambiguous precedent over the power (or not) of the sovereign Scottish People to canvas an opinion of themselves.

      This is how the Westminster Establishment “use” Holyrood as a false idol we Scots are all expected to revere and obey. It is all a fallacy. It is a contrived and false reality. The Scotland Act is the small ‘c’ constitution of the Holyrood assembly. It is NOT the Constitution of Scotland!

      What may or may not be binding on Holyrood is NOT binding upon Scotland’s sovereign people.

      Whatever Tony Blair’s Supreme Court decides, Scotland’s people can, and should tell it to shove it’s unconstitutional, colonial adjudication up it’s arse. The UK is not sovereign in Scotland.

      Scots must open their eyes and start seeing the tendrils of UK colonialism trying to assert and entrench powers they do not have! “We” are sovereign in Scotland. “They” are not.

    94. stuart mctavish says:

      @Merganser, 8:49pm

      I wouldn’t worry too much about apparent lack of bias from LA (assuming that’s your complaint)

      If the extremes of dispute resolution can be simplified as constituting a punch in the face at one end to time heals all wounds at the other it makes eminent sense for the legal profession to add as much meat to the bone as possible to give the adjudicator(s) something tasty and interesting to chew on whilst the warring parties come to their senses.

      In this intent based case the SC, having assumed enough authority to listen to whatever the AG has to say today, cannot now decide to defer judgement in full or part on grounds that SG is bluffing .

      Accordingly, whilst its easy to see why the Lord Reed might want to take months and months indulging the panel with deep dives into an incredibly rich history (such as a review of all the so called obsolete, spent, unnecessary or superseded enactments withdrawn under the 1964 Scotland act as a precursor to Scotland’s oil/ entry into the EU/ the eventual Scotland Act 1998, etc) the final judgement must indeed be final

      In that regard, whether instructed to or not, he need only look under Art 35 para 1 section (b) of Part 1 of the Scotland Act to realise that, even in respect of reserved matters, the secretary of state may only intervene if they have REASONABLE ground to believe the bill will have an adverse effect on the operation of the law ;

      It being self incriminating nuremberg style for a legal establishment to believe democracy will have an adverse effect on the operation of the law (ie without parallel prosecution of that part of the establishment honoured for making war with the express intent to spread it), the only reason left to hear the AG arguments* must be for purposes giving Westminster time to apologise profusely/ fully articulate its ballot rigging concerns, etc 🙂

      * (unless and to extent the plan to take months over the decision is driven by intended malfeasance – at which point any decision can be rejected on ground of misconduct, and preempted by bringing the bill forward in any event..)

    95. X_Sticks says:

      Have I got this right?

      If the SC decides Holyrood can’t hold a referendum legally then Sturgeon is going to use the general election as a plebiscite.

      If we use the UK GE as a plebiscite then that would surely disenfranchise all of the 16-18 year olds and EU citizens from voting.

      It would also mean the Electoral Commission would be in charge of the election for the whole UK. Holyrood would have no control whatsoever over the EC as they had at the 2014 referendum.

      Wouldn’t that be a recipe for disaster?

      Wouldn’t it be much better for the SNP government to resign and force a Scottish election where Holyrood would have control of the election and it would be run under Scottish rules?

      Can anyone shed some light on this as it’s bothering me. I fear we might be walking into an electoral trap. The $64,000 question is *who* is setting the trap? I don’t trust any of them anymore.

    96. Scott says:

      Ian Brotherhood says:
      12 October, 2022 at 8:18 am

      Craig M’s take on that farce yesterday.

      Like a lot of people, he misses the point entirely about Dorothy Bain’s submission.

      Those saying she hasn’t the confidence to pass the Bill within confines of Scotland Act, ergo there’s nothing in law making it ‘legal’, ignore the fact that she hasn’t dismissed it entirely.

      If she’d only presented one side of the argument, she wouldn’t have been stood there in the first place.

      When seeking clarity on a point of law, it is standard practice to use a flow chart method when presenting your case. If X is the law, Y fails; If Y is the law, X fails.

      [See Judgements on http://www.scotcourts.gov.uk Scots law is fascinating in its simplicity of application]

      UK Government shouldn’t really have been allowed to oppose what amounts to a Judicial Review request, not from Scottish Government’s top lawyer, but His Majesty’s Advocate – one of the most powerful offices of state on these islands. Any challenge to a Bill laid before the chamber is a different kettle of fish entirely.

      We’ll see what today brings, but the proof will be in the final judgement issued from the bench.

      Ultimately though, the sovereign people of Scotland can hold their own referendum on matters. And state funding is available for whoever decides to do so.

    97. Alf Baird says:

      Breeks @ 3:19

      “Westminster’s devolved assembly in Edinburgh is being hyped up and misrepresented as if it’s an ambiguous precedent over the power (or not) of the sovereign Scottish People to canvas an opinion of themselves.”

      Yes, the Scottish Gov is undertaking ‘consultations’ all the time in order to seek public opinion on matters of health, education, and even ferry service provision. So why not seek public opinion on a constitutional matter such as the elected national government’s stated policy of Scotland leaving the UK alliance? Its not as if the SG ever deliver the wishes of the public after consultations anyway and policy delivery is always a separate matter. The UKSC will have to come up with a good reason to block a simple one question consultation exercise on an elected government’s policy.

    98. Scott says:

      “Wouldn’t it be much better for the SNP government to resign and force a Scottish election where Holyrood would have control of the election and it would be run under Scottish rules?”

      If Scottish Government resign, Tories/Labour/Lib Dems would offer to govern, and dangle some aduki beans and religious literature in front of the Greens, so the current session can be concluded on schedule. Possible 64 v 64 if no SNP members defect (PO is neutral now)

      It’s a stupid idea insofar as seeking a new election, no matter what your view on SNP or personality of any member.

      If the sovereign public wanted a new election, they have the power to collectively petition. The court would have to be convinced of a point of law to give effect, but in principle there’s nothing in law to prevent such action against the Scottish Ministers (or UK Govt).

    99. Ruby says:

      Derek Bateman wrote an article called ‘An Auld Sang Gang Wrang’ on 26 March 2014. I wonder if that is still available somewhere.

      It was about the two lawyers ‘Crawford & Boyle’ employed by the UK Gov who told us that Scotland ceased to exist in 1707 and became lesser England.

      Here’s David Mundell agreeing:

      https://tinyurl.com/3535ay9p

      It sounds as if Dorothy Bain is saying the same thing.

    100. craig murray says:

      Scott,

      “If she’d only presented one point of the argument, she wouldn’t have been stood there in the first place”.

      Precisely. She would have certified the Bill and we would be on our way to Independence. Instead of which she is stood in front of the Supreme Court spouting union lines and stating that Scotland no longer exists as a nation, and the right to self determination has no legal effect (the latter is in her written pleading).

      And you accuse me of missing the point!

    101. Ruby says:

      This is from the Derek Bateman article ‘An Auld Sang Gang Wrang’

      There is a lesson in here for the Better Together strategists and they just don’t get it. Yes has been telling them since the start and they just don’t get it. The voters are now telling them and they just don’t get it. They need to get their knuckles off the ground and instead of paying lip service to optimism, actually try to find some. Here’s a suggestion. Reject the legal advice. Say it was a mistake. Say the government is not convinced it’s correct and it was insulting to say Scotland ceased to exist. Why? Because to say so is to deny the very thing they’re fighting for – the Union. I talk about what I call principled Unionism which works only if you accept your country is in voluntary partnership with England. Remove that concept and we become, as the lawyers indicate, little more than an adjunct to England. Not even a Unionist who claims to love Scotland can vote for that. The British might lose this Union because they failed to stand up for it.

      The same applies to what Dorothy Bain said.

      If Scotland isn’t a nation then there is no Union.

      Why are the idiots at Westminster fighting to save the precious Union?

      Why all this pretence about a Union?

    102. Republicofscotland says:

      Ian B @8.17/18am.

      Thanks for the links Ian, very drepressing.

      This farce couldn’t be any clearer, in that Sturgeon and Bain are not interested in Scottish independence, and are actively working against it.

    103. Dorothy Devine says:

      Ian , thanks for the links – wish I hadn’t read them , they have made a mood matching weather moment.

    104. Republicofscotland says:

      From Ian B’s link, the Robin McAlpine one.

      For those who believe that the NuSNP is still a progressive party, and they passed some good policies at their recent conference.

      Here’s an eye opener for you lot.

      “What of substance happened? Mainly the usual – the delegates pass progressive-going-on-radical policies while the SNP’s leadership team brief the media that none of this is binding. Not binding? This is the official policy-making body of the party. The leadership is contemptuous of its own party now.”

    105. James Che says:

      There is no problem in going to the supreme court for the snp.

      The realise that they are working in a managers position in a english legislated scottish devolved government, and that their bosses are the Westminster parliament.

      It is us that do not understand the legal concept of that.

      Both are under english legislation, statues and laws. Therefore the supreme court,

      I do not expect english laws decisions to go against english law sitting in holyrood through the Scotland Act,

      It will be up to the supreme court to decide wether their judgement will rely on law, or be based on political motivation of retaining the union.

    106. Ian Brotherhood says:

      @Scott (8.53) –

      Those of us who aren’t familiar with constitutional complexities have to take what we see at face value. And what I watched unfold in the Supreme Court yesterday was another embarrassing display of unsolicited obsequiousness. We saw enough toe-curling deference from Sturgeon during *that* funeral, and then again in Dunfermline.

      But it seems that Sturgeon isn’t content just to expose herself as a keen subject of The Crown – she has to prove her gold-standard loyalty by making sure everyone associated with the Scottish Government behaves likewise.

    107. Republicofscotland says:

      A tad more from Ian B’s excellent Robin McAlpine link for those too lazy to click his link.

      At the NuSNPs conference.

      “John Swinney said something about how the membership can go and whistle, but only said that to journalists.”

      “So let’s cut to the chase. Motions are non-binding, Codes of Conduct are permission for a public fist fight, audiences are optional, corporate sponsors are the real players and speeches contain nothing of any substance ”

      And on Sturgeon the betrayer.

      “She kicked off the weekend talking about how much she detests political opponents, then tried to stretch credulity way past breaking point by suggesting that ‘the Tories and all they stand for’ wasn’t about Tories. Grammar and the meaning of words be damned!

      (Why no-one points out how many time she voted with the Tories during her first term as leader or how much of her agenda was delivered via a coalition with the Tories remains a mystery to me.)”

    108. James Che says:

      Scott.

      I understood the case in point of why both sides were put forward as I listened yesterday,

      But it must be difficult for the supreme court of the Uk to make decision that is not political in its result as being in favour of no damage to the union as a future effect as a result of their decision in a few months time.

      The future effect may even have causation to change other laws relating to the Uk laws for themselves should they find favour with Scotland’s question.
      It possibly opens a can of worms for businesses and corporations, land, and sea court debates in courts as a effect.

    109. Ian Brotherhood says:

      Alex Salmond explaining why the Scottish Govt’s behaviour re Supreme Court is wrong.

      He and others ‘developed a strategy over 25 years which was highly successful (his words) but it appears to have been ditched.

      Sturgeon was with him for most of that time. So, she either has a better strategy, or is sabotaging a quarter-century of development.

      twitter.com/AlbaParty/status/1579928399099072512

    110. Scott says:

      Ian Brotherhood says:
      12 October, 2022 at 10:25 am

      @Scott (8.53) –

      Those of us who aren’t familiar with constitutional complexities have to take what we see at face value. And what I watched unfold in the Supreme Court yesterday was another embarrassing display of unsolicited obsequiousness.

      You expose the flaw in your own reasoning.

      If you don’t understand something, how can you objectively analyse it?

      Leaving everything to the interpretation of others and encouraging others to do likewise isn’t really a winning strategy.

    111. Ian McCubbin says:

      I watched this live and this poor excuse for my MP is embarrassing. His predecessor Luke Graham was better at least he showed up in the Constituency and had a local office.
      We need a new Scottish government with Alba and ISP MSPs ASAP.

    112. Ian Brotherhood says:

      @Scott (11.38) –

      Why get so annoyed?

      I’m happy to confess that I’m not great at ‘detail’ and I won’t be the only one. So yes, I do trust others to interpret stuff and provide alternative analyses. That applies to your take as well as Craig’s, Rev’s, or anyone else’s.

      But I also reserve the right to make observations of my own. They may be based more on gut feeling than you would prefer but hey-ho, wouldn’t do if we were all the same, eh?

      😉

    113. Scott says:

      Ian Brotherhood says:
      12 October, 2022 at 11:49 am

      @Scott (11.38) –

      Why get so annoyed?

      I’m not annoyed.

    114. DJ says:

      Scott @ 11:38 am

      You expose the flaw in your own reasoning.

      If you don’t understand something, how can you objectively analyse it?

      Same for everyone, is it not? A vote for any political party and their myriad of policies, for example, surely does not imply understanding of all the nuances involved before casting a vote?

    115. Stoker says:

      In 2014 Unionists repeatedly denied a ‘No’ vote would see Scotland taken out of the EU. As we all know very well that was one of the Unionists biggest lies of IndyRef2014. On this point alone the 2014IndyRef should be declared null and void.

      A piece of London territory, Northern Ireland, was given special preferential treatment over Brexit yet during The Smith Commission it was regularly stated in the conditions that nothing could be considered that gave Scotland any sort of advantage, financial or otherwise.

      These facts alone show Scotland is at a constant disadvantage whilst under the dictatorship of Westminster and the City of London.
      __________

      In other news: The BBC in Scotland was enthusiastically declaring just the other day that the judgement of the ‘famous five’ judges of England’s Supreme Court could be known in “only a matter of days or months”. My money is on months. If it’s any quicker i will be truly surprised.

      Just as an extra bit of info, here’s what the BBC web page states about 2 of the judges:

      “It would be foolish to speculate about how the judges will assess these arguments. The current president of the court, Lord Reed, and his deputy, Lord Hodge, are both Scottish [STOP LAUGHING AT THE BACK] and indeed former Court of Session judges. They will be well versed in the matter of devolution, and have stressed the importance of judicial independence and impartiality.”

      In short? This story will end with Enid Blyton’s ‘Famous Five’ siding with the UKGov. More Ena Sharples than Enid Blyton!

    116. Ian Brotherhood says:

      @Scott –

      Good.

      Neither am I.

      Happy days.

      🙂

    117. Ian Brotherhood says:

      From comments on Craig Murray’s most recent blog –

      ‘Vivian O’Blivion
      October 12, 2022 at 09:17

      Senior Judges in Scotland are almost eight times as likely to have been privately educated than to have been State educated in comparison to the general public (David Hume Institute; Elitist Scotland?, 2015)
      .
      Both Dorothy Bain and her husband (Lord Turnbull) are State educated, but then those striving to gain entry to an exclusive club often display the greatest zealotry as a price of admission.
      The Scottish elite caste is perhaps proportionally smaller than its southern equivalent due to our more egalitarian history.

      What it lacks in size it makes up for in elitist viciousness.

      A review of the Scottish aristocracy and ennobled Lords from the 1930’s and 40’s, reveals them as having been the very worst of the worst.

      Archibald Maule-Ramsay, Scottish Unionist Party MP for Peebles & South Midlothian was interned from May 1940 to September 44. They let Oswald Mosley out before Maule-Ramsay.

      Sir Thomas Hunter, Scottish Unionist Party MP for Perth campaigned against allowing Jewish refugees from Germany.

      Walter Douglas-Scott, 8th Duke of Buccleuch, Scottish Unionist Party MP for Roxburghshire & Selkirkshire led a racist campaign against Honduran forestry workers being shipped to Scotland to assist the war effort.

      Our elitist caste are perhaps more viciously inclined towards their fellow country folk because they are more aware of the hot-breath of revolution on the back of their necks than their southern counterparts.

      The Anglo-Irish aristocracy was particularly callous towards their own.

      Our elitist caste are strident in their opposition to independence as they perceive independence as threatening their relative privilege. Tellingly, their material advantaged status would be unlikely to be impacted, it’s the thought of the peasants gaining political power that repulses them.

      Their position as colonial administrators secures their hereditary, unearned privilege.’

    118. stuart mctavish says:

      Seems its JE (James Eadie) rather than Attorney General that’s contesting the clarification request but one upside of AS & CM forgetting about the Scots’ Law doctrine of intent that caused them so much harm could be that, according to Philip Sim, JE has just wasted all morning havering about procedural incoherence.

      Hopefully, in adition to the affore mentioned, this can be partly explained by the absence of previous clarification from a superior Scottish Court together with any and all advice he received from practicing Scots lawyers having been spiked, ignored, or contemptuously dismissed – thus implying an additional excuse for the hearing continuing into today being light entertainment for all the Scottish judges involved.

    119. P says:

      *Rev, I seem to have slipped out of the mailing list again!

      Re Bunty – apologies for being a pedant…

      Meaning of Bunty
      A vintage term of endearment in both England and Scotland. Possibly taken from a Middle English term for a little lamb or derived from buntin, a Scottish term meaning “plump.”

    120. Breeks says:

      Why analyse anything if you understand it already? Analysis is designed to learn something you didn’t know, and being vocal about it often helps other people to learn a thing too.

      It’s also acceptable as far as I’m concerned to posit a theory you’re not absolutely sure about to fly a kite so to speak and see what reaction it provokes. I do that all the time. It’s often nice to be corrected if it’s done constructively so you learn something you didn’t know.

    121. DJ says:

      Breaks, well said!

    122. DJ says:

      That should read:

      Breeks, well said!

    123. Confused says:

      The BBC is updating this court case LIVE as if it was a football match – will there be substitions – will Lord Chief Grand Wizard HAALAND turn up and score a hat-trick in 3 minutes?

      – is there a lawyer equivalent of Haaland? – and how can we hire him, how much is his hourly rate?

      What happens if the Supreme Court decide our case is “Not Proven”? Is that extra time and penalties. Dorothy Bain in the Octagon.

      I, for one, am completely happy for my nation’s self determination to be determined by a gang of high ranking paedos in widow twankey outfits in-between port farts.

      – this is what democracy and rule of law means.

      It’s in magna carta, the code of hammurabi, the talmud, morals and dogma – all the founding documents of our society.

    124. Breeks says:

      Ian Brotherhood says:
      12 October, 2022 at 10:52 am
      Alex Salmond explaining why the Scottish Govt’s behaviour re Supreme Court is wrong….

      Where was that Ian? Was it broadcast media or Indy Media?

      I think this whole fishing expedition to the Supreme Court is a huge red herring, but I don’t see any pressure or jeopardy being heaped upon the Scottish Government as the price to pay for failure.

      Everybody seems profoundly curious about something which I find profoundly banal, because I have as much contempt for the Scotland Act as the Scottish Government has contempt for the Scottish Constitution and the Claim of Right.

      If we want to go to court, test the Claim of Right in the International Court at the UN and secure a meaningful distinction. Alex Salmond is spot on; the Scottish “Government” is asking the wrong question at the wrong Court.

      Who cares about what Holyrood can or cannot do through the dull and somewhat colonial detail of Westminster’s Scotland Act? It doesn’t advance Independence an inch, nor save us a single day’s march getting there.

      When the Union and Westminster rule is swept aside upon Independence, the Union’s mini-me assembly, Holyrood, together with it’s Scotland Act colonial instruction book, will be swept away on the back swing.

    125. Ian Brotherhood says:

      @Breeks (1.34) –

      It’s an Alba Party video, tweeted last night.

    126. Hatuey says:

      I had a couple of wee looks in on the Supreme Court. Correct me if I’m wrong, but it looks like a bunch of English aristocrat types are sitting discussing the future of the Scottish people. In the background their pals are helping themselves to our resources, making sure Scotland’s children will live and die in poverty, as their parents and grandparents did before them.

      When I looked in earlier they were referencing the Keating’s case. Correct me if I’m wrong, but Keatings attempted to establish in law that the Scottish Parliament could hold a referendum without Westminster’s consent and Sturgeon instructed her lawyers to fight him. I understand that these English aristocrat types are now using the same arguments that Sturgeon’s lawyers used against Keatings, and in doing so are hoisting Sturgeon’s government on its own petard.

      Sturgeon, of course, is on the record as saying the only route to independence was through a section 30. It’s hard to imagine anyone being more compromised on these issues.

      Her position is untenable and she should resign today.

    127. DJ says:

      What a tangled web, eh Hatuey?

    128. ben madigan says:

      Stoker says:
      12 October, 2022 at 11:58 am

      “A piece of London territory, Northern Ireland, was given special preferential treatment over Brexit”

      Even though both Scotland and NI voted Remain, that happened because of the following circumstances, none of which applied to Scotland:

      1) The Good Friday Agreement/British Irish International Treaty, which was hard fought for and hard won, removed the hard border between NI and the ROI.
      Comment:No one, not the ROI, the UK govt, the EU or the USA wanted it put back – except for the DUP, of course

      2)The GFA allows NI citizens to be British, Irish or both so the Republic of Ireland was able to argue for the Irish citizens in NI. The ROI started its amazing diplomatic work as soon as the Brexit Ref was announced.

      3)The USA is a guarantor of the GFA and the Irish American lobby is very strong in the US and cuts across all parties
      Comment: Scotland had no one fighting its corner- Sturgeon certainly didn’t

    129. Stoker says:

      Well worth a repeat:

      From Ian Brotherhood on 12 October 2022 at 12:33 pm
      “From comments on Craig Murray’s most recent blog –”

      ‘Vivian O’Blivion on October 12, 2022 at 09:17

      “Senior Judges in Scotland are almost eight times as likely to have been privately educated than to have been State educated in comparison to the general public (David Hume Institute; Elitist Scotland? 2015)”

      “Both Dorothy Bain and her husband (Lord Turnbull) are State educated, but then those striving to gain entry to an exclusive club often display the greatest zealotry as a price of admission.”

      “The Scottish elite caste is perhaps proportionally smaller than its southern equivalent due to our more egalitarian history.”

      “What it lacks in size it makes up for in elitist viciousness.”

      “A review of the Scottish aristocracy and ennobled Lords from the 1930’s and 40’s, reveals them as having been the very worst of the worst.”

      “Archibald Maule-Ramsay, Scottish Unionist Party MP for Peebles & South Midlothian was interned from May 1940 to September 44. They let Oswald Mosley out before Maule-Ramsay.”

      “Sir Thomas Hunter, Scottish Unionist Party MP for Perth campaigned against allowing Jewish refugees from Germany.”

      “Walter Douglas-Scott, 8th Duke of Buccleuch, Scottish Unionist Party MP for Roxburghshire & Selkirkshire led a racist campaign against Honduran forestry workers being shipped to Scotland to assist the war effort.”

      “Our elitist caste are perhaps more viciously inclined towards their fellow country folk because they are more aware of the hot-breath of revolution on the back of their necks than their southern counterparts.”

      “The Anglo-Irish aristocracy was particularly callous towards their own.”

      “Our elitist caste are strident in their opposition to independence as they perceive independence as threatening their relative privilege. Tellingly, their material advantaged status would be unlikely to be impacted, it’s the thought of the peasants gaining political power that repulses them.”

      “Their position as colonial administrators secures their hereditary, unearned privilege.”

      Thanks, Ian! Of particular interest to me, as i live in the area and didn’t know this, is the paragraph about ‘The 8th Duke of Buccleuch’. Nasty bastards the lot of them.

      Mind you, i have regularly in the past, both on here and on Twitter, made it known that the ‘No’ side has far more hate-groups attached to it than the ‘Yes’ movement does. I mentioned that fact at every opportunity, like when they accuse us of being anti-English etc.

      I’d always accompany my evidence with links to EnglishScots4Yes etc. Amazing how easy it was to send the inbred ignorant morons running for cover under their Mammy’s aprons, butcher ones no doubt. 😉
      __________

      Anyone else notice the stampede to correct ‘Hatuey’ at 2.58 pm?
      No, me neither! That’s because Hatuey is spot on.

    130. Stoker says:

      @ ben madigan on 12 October 2022 at 3:41 pm

      Thanks for the finer detail, Ben, handy for others to learn. And yes, you’re absolutely correct, nobody fought Scotland’s corner, Sturgeon certainly didn’t and by all accounts she never really has since being crowned Queen of WooWoo (leader of SNP).

      Still doesn’t escape the fact NI got something advantageous whilst Scotland gets what London decides. Just another stand-alone reason why Scotland desperately needs to take back its right to self-determination.

    131. James che says:

      DJ.
      Just like laws and legislations made, they often contain hidden agendas not put to people prior to voting,

      We were never told for instance that the devolved government To Scotland was set up to prevent any particular political party gaining all the traction in Scotland.
      Therefore independence straight out on who you voted for would not easily come about,
      The fullness of the Scotland Act purpose thus had a hidden purpose in law.

      It was also left unsaid that english laws, legislation etc would and could over ride The Scottish Constitution through the devolved government similar to england introducing their marine laws to Scotland just prior to the treaty of the union acts went through.

      The snp, or Ian Carmicheal case are good examples of what the people are not told before a election or vote in Scotland
      A ommission is just as damaging to result of the peoples vote,

      NS never mentioned she would consider a coalition with the green party prior to the last election or that trans issues, reducing freedom of Speech in Scottish peoples homes just as she never mentioned that she would talk up war with nuclear weapons sitting so close to Edinburgh and Glasgow like someone with a insane ideology.

      That would be her first priorities before Scottish independence.

      Just as the Ian Carmicheal case bought to our attention the omission we did not know, that politicians were allowed to lie to their Constitutuents during political Champaigns.

      It is a hard sell to tell people years later that they should have known the hidden truthes kept from them by deliberate omission,

      This is the case with the Scotland Act,

      It trashed the treaty of the union articles and over legislates english law into Scotland Scots law by not fully informing the electorate in Scotland on what they were voting for.

    132. Ian Brotherhood says:

      In today’s edition of UK Column News, at 45mins approx, a short report from David Scott about the mysterious resignation of the judge and government lawyers handling the Scotgov ‘covid’ inquiry into the handling of the crisis.

      The ‘suggestion’ is that Big John ‘Bawbooter’ Swinney has been busy behind the scenes and the beaks don’t like it. And it’s not the first time he’s done it *allegedly*.

      Given the newest news emerging about the Pfizer deception and msm celebrities now queuing up to apologise and/or claim they were duped, this could be the issue that finally finds Sturgeon painted into a corner – just 48 hours ago she was using her conference speech to reiterate the very pish that has now been exposed by Pfizer’s own panicky people under questioning by MEPs i.e. ‘get jabbed to protect others’ was just scaremongering rubbish. It was and is a lie which was never based on science because there were no test results to base it on.

      http://www.ukcolumn.org/video/uk-column-news-12th-october-2022

    133. sarah says:

      @ craigmurray at 12.53 a.m.: “…Dorrian can slam you in the pokey for telling people face-to-face.”

      Craig, I agree with Brian that the truth about the Alex Salmond trial would boost our chances of independence hugely because it would wipe out all the negative views that many people currently have which prevent them voting for Alba. When I was leafleting for Alba in Ullapool in April/May 2021 several people said things to me that showed they had swallowed the lies hook, line and sinker. I did say that the jury had believed the defence witnesses but it made no difference to those people.

      Do you know of any way that this injustice can be remedied and Alex’s reputation restored? Because we need everything and everyone available to get Scotland out of the Union as soon as possible.

      Surely there is nothing in law stopping a Scottish newspaper printing a summary of the defence evidence minus any identifying details? It is “only” the journalistic will that is lacking.

      I would like to see e.g. The National, print a report for 12 days on each of the “Not guilty” charges stating why the jury came to their decision. For example Woman H’s rape allegation that she graphically described when there were witnesses to her not being in the building at all.

      I would be interested to hear your view on whether it would be helpful if an overseas paper published either a limited report of the defence evidence or a detailed one including names. We often mention this idea btl but we don’t have the legal or practical knowledge to know what is possible or useful.

    134. Confused says:

      Top lawyers and judges RUNNING SCREAMING FOR THE EXITS from, ostensibly,

      BIG CASES THAT CAN REALLY MAKE YOUR NAME

      – always looks dodgy. I mean all these people spent decades furthering their career, now they want to “spend more time with the family for personal reasons”

      You can have Lord Dulux of Whitewash producing the Nothing-to-see-Here-Report

      or sometimes they try to stitch up

      Lord Judas Goat doing the Defect-the-Blame enquiry.

      Didn’t they get a New Zealnd woman to head up the “elite paedo” thing, but then she ran away “for reasons”

      I’M JUST THE PATSY!!!

    135. Ian Brotherhood says:

      @Stoker (4.03) –

      Cheers.

      😉

    136. James che says:

      Stoker.

      The Anti- English rhetoric has been spoon fed to people to in Scotland through politics the media outlets for centuries, some have grown to believe this in the same way that some believe soaps personalities are real peoples lives, it is the power of psychology as a weapon.

      Equally we see people in England holding a hatred in their hearts for scottish people through media and politics, that they do not know,
      A good example of this propagated rhetoric can be found in BJ printing a repeated poem about Scots as vermin,
      Another long standing attitude towards Scots are found in the verses of the British national anthem were it mentions the “Scots to crush”
      Again we see the hatred towards Scots in a very recent video recording at Westminster at the end of Through a Scottish Prism two weeks past, where the woman politician talks and jokes of shipping modern day Scots of to modern Colonies.

      This propaganda, of Scots hate English, and English hate Scots is deliberate spoon fed by media and politicians for hundreds of years.
      The same propaganda is ramped up for other divides, wether football, religion, or ruskies, or sadam weapons of war,

      It is to maintain the control of governments over people.
      A few believe their governments and paid for Msm by government.

      But most of us live peaceable along side our neighbours on a day to day basis, year after year when left to our own decisions.
      The average person when realising he is been manipulated and psychologically trained to think of his neighbour as a enemy soon drops fulfilling the governments politics of animosity as prophecy.
      And then treats and entitles his neighbour with the same flaws of nature, and character as his own.

      People are weaponised against each, but all the people suffer from government politics and decision,
      People are more like their fellow human being (country neighbour) than they think they are and less like the governance trying to divide them for control,
      When I speak of English the sentence is referring to governance of the elites rather than the actual people.
      The elites just run roughshod over people, bully them, use them and abuse them , legislate and tax them for their own pocket making Schemes.

      Only The people are made to think they are each others enemy, and their neighbour has a better life than themselfs.

    137. Ruby says:

      sarah says:

      Surely there is nothing in law stopping a Scottish newspaper printing a summary of the defence evidence minus any identifying details? It is “only” the journalistic will that is lacking.

      Whatever stopped them during the trial will stop them now.

      When I was leafleting for Alba in Ullapool in April/May 2021 several people said things to me that showed they had swallowed the lies hook, line and sinker

      The question I would ask about these people is are they stupid or are they Unionists.

      My experience of people who claimed to have swallowed the lies hook, line & sinker was that it suited their political agenda they are Unionists.

    138. sarah says:

      @ Ruby: One was a Yes voter and not stupid, the others aren’t stupid and I don’t know if they are No’s or not.

    139. Andy Ellis says:

      @Stoker 4.03 pm

      Anyone else notice the stampede to correct ‘Hatuey’ at 2.58 pm?
      No, me neither! That’s because Hatuey is spot on.

      If it’s a stampede you’re looking for, I doubt this is the place these days sadly. 12 comments BTL since Hatuey’s, half of them from people posting 2 posts. The days of pieces on here getting hundreds of comments from many different people in a day or two are long gone.

      I know fixating on Sturgeon’s removal is the new idée fixe of many of the usual suspects in here, but it doesn’t really get us much further. Sturgeon could be hit by a meteorite tomorrow and nothing much will change.

      One of her underlings would simply assume the mantle, and we’d face the same situation until the SNP membership wake up and change the leadership, or until Scottish voters realise they’ve been had and give the SNP a bloody nose at the next elections.

      My money’s on the latter, but then I’m not the credulous type attracted to shiny “cunning plans for indy”, which are about as likely to be real as the SNP’s carrots.

    140. Ruby says:

      sarah says:
      12 October, 2022 at 4:25 pm

      @ craigmurray at 12.53 a.m.: “…Dorrian can slam you in the pokey for telling people face-to-face.”

      Do you have a link to where Craig said that? I’m interested because Craig backed me up when I said that the rules regarding naming the ‘Alphabetties’ didn’t apply to conversations between friends. I was arguing that if one person knew the names then it would be possible for everyone in Scotland to know their names. As it was their were a fair number of people at the trial and Craig said that their real names were used in court.

      I guessing a lot of people know their names but it means absolutely nothing as who knows the names of civil servants? People in Scotland would be hard pushed to name their politicians far less civil servants or folk working for politicians.

      It’s not as if they are famous if they were then there might be more interest from the international press.

    141. Hatuey says:

      Ruby, he said it above, on here, in response to Scott.

    142. Ruby says:

      sarah says:
      12 October, 2022 at 5:28 pm

      @ Ruby: One was a Yes voter and not stupid, the others aren’t stupid and I don’t know if they are No’s or not.

      It’s amazing the power the media have over ‘intelligent’ people.

    143. Ruby says:

      Hatuey says:
      12 October, 2022 at 5:51 pm

      Ruby, he said it above, on here, in response to Scott.

      So he’s changed his mind. You can be put in jail for a conversation you have in the street. Are these surveillance cameras and spies the SNP plan to use to track down benefit fraud going to be used on everyone. Is Big Brother watching?

      Dan recently taught me how to post a link to comments. It would be great if everyone learned as it can be quite time consuming tracking down posts.

      This is what Dan wrote:

      @ Ruby

      Re. Linking to specific posts. Hover over the date and time stamp at the bottom of a particular post, then right click and copy link, then paste it into your new comment.

      Pass it on!

      Re stampede to correct your post
      https://wingsoverscotland.com/nothing-but-surrender/comment-page-1/#comment-2706961

      I’m pretty sure John Main will be along soon to point out your errors.

    144. Ruby says:

      sarah says:
      12 October, 2022 at 5:28 pm

      @ Ruby: One was a Yes voter and not stupid, the others aren’t stupid and I don’t know if they are No’s or not.

      Was your Yes voter a fan of Nicola?

    145. John Main says:

      @Stoker says:12 October, 2022 at 4:03 pm

      “Anyone else notice the stampede to correct ‘Hatuey’ at 2.58 pm?”

      Gie us a break, Stoker. Some of us have lives to live, and that doesn’t leave enough time for jetwashing pebble dash.

      But, just for you …

      “Hatuey says:12 October, 2022 at 2:58 pm

      I had a couple of wee looks in on the Supreme Court. Correct me if I’m wrong, but it looks like a bunch of English aristocrat types are sitting discussing the future of the Scottish people.”

      It “looks like” versus it “is”. Or maybes it “is not”. Nothing to see here without research, which “book burning” Hatuey famously doesn’t believe in.

      So if we replace the current bunch with a bunch of Scottish working class types, why the assumption that a different verdict would be arrived at?

      More than half of Scots at the last vote, voted No. There just ain’t enough aristos in Scotland, English or otherwise, which means that a hell of a lot of Scottish plumbers, benefits claimants, pensioners, beauty salon proprieters, taxi drivers and accountants, etc. etc. must have voted No.

      If the Supreme Court were to be packed with a random selection of Scots, the likelihood is that it would be split 50-50 between adherents of Yes and No.

      Hatuey’s post is symptomatic of the carpet baggers that infest the Indy movement. Sure, they bang on about Indy, but the reality is that only their preferred Indy flavour is acceptable, and that has to be republican, pro-EU and a child of red Clydeside.

      The last three are anathema to millions of Scots, but when it comes to toning down these sideshows in the interests of expanding the Yes franchise, the carpet baggers prefer that Indy go whistle.

      What do we want? Ideological purity!

    146. John Main says:

      @Breeks says:12 October, 2022 at 1:34 pm

      “When the Union and Westminster rule is swept aside upon Independence, the Union’s mini-me assembly, Holyrood, together with it’s Scotland Act colonial instruction book, will be swept away on the back swing”

      Ah, it’s a nice image.

      Day 1 of Indy, I intend to jump in my taxi, max it out en route to Tesco, do a trolley dash through the store, and exert lethal force against anybody who gets in my way.

      With the garden tools I liberate, I will finally settle the hash of my annoying neighbour and enslave his family to work my allotment.

      Day 2 I am keeping free.

      Alternatively of course, it may be that everything currently on the statute books will still be on the statute books on Day 1, Day 2, Day 1000 of Indy. Come to think of it, everybody maxing out their cars, stealing from Tesco and slaying and enslaving their neighbours might not be sustainable post-Indy.

      Back to the drawing board, Breeks.

    147. Ian Brotherhood says:

      The latest SNP party political broadcast.

      I lasted 41 seconds.

      How long will YOU last?!

      twitter.com/theSNP/status/1579847778859188227

    148. Ian Brotherhood says:

      Copied from a tweet:

      ‘Tory MP on Liz Truss’s appearance at the 1922 Committee: ‘It was like someone trying to light a fire using a magnifying glass. Using damp wood. In the dark.”

    149. Dan says:

      @ Ian B at 7.35 pm

      Nae danger I’m even going to bother clicking the link!

      Another link for “Show me the money” Main. He hasn’t responded to me asking why we should stick with oor current money seeing its value is going down like a jobbie circling the pan.

      http://robinmcalpine.org/how-scotland-could-provide-a-genuine-alternative-to-the-uk-financial-chicanery/

    150. twathater says:

      As I posted earlier afaic the only way out of this mess is through the international courts , How fucking stupid does sturgeon think the people of Scotland are when they cannot remember her sabotaging our Keatings case with her lord advocate pushing for it to be dismissed because it is only in draft form , now we have eadie forcing her own t raitorous words down her own throat
      If Alex Salmond knows something he should be working with SALVO to get it to the international courts of justice and get a crowd funder started

    151. Confused says:

      The supremacists (?!) have just said “thanks for that – we’ll have a proper read at it, when we have the time … and get back to you”

      Dorothy Bain described the other side as “so unfair” which is a killer argument; I think she also described ukgov as a

      “bunch of meanies”

      – thankfuck we sent the A team; the B team of Donald Findlay, Johnny Cochrane and Lionel Hutz are waiting on the bench. Jacques Verges corpse is on retainer.

      they should have had this court case in edinburgh just so they could hand down the judgement

      “You’ll HAVE -HAD- your referendum …”

    152. Hatuey says:

      Andy, you say someone would take over if Sturgeon left and it wouldn’t change anything.

      I don’t know who you have in mind but I can’t remember anyone else saying the only route to independence is through a section 30, and I can’t remember anyone who might succeed her saying a referendum was a once in a generation affair…

      Certainly nobody other than Nicola instructed Scottish Government lawyers to attack Keatings and his case, the very same case her lawyers are making and trying to win today.

      It’s farcical and she only gets away with it because the BBC and British State want to keep her in power. She thinks she’s Machiavelli or something, ducking and diving and outmanoeuvring opponents, and it’s pure delusion. Her position is completely compromised, by herself no less, she is totally bankrupt, and she keeps the job because she is a useful idiot to the British State.

      I don’t care about that in itself but I care that every time there’s a discussion these contradictions are used to undermine the argument for Indy. With her gone, that at least would change — for starters, they wouldn’t be able to use the ‘once in a generation’ line, or any of her other very obvious contradictions and flaws against us.

      In normal circumstances she would be gone. She’s a crap politician, nobody can stand her. The British have been propping useful idiots like that up all over the world for centuries.

    153. John Main says:

      @ Dan says:12 October, 2022 at 8:28 pm

      “Another link for “Show me the money” Main. He hasn’t responded to me asking why we should stick with oor current money seeing its value is going down like a jobbie circling the pan”

      Two reasons Dan:

      1) I didn’t see your question.

      2) I am convinced by the argument that an Independent country needs an independent currency. I don’t recall ever arguing to the contrary, but it’s possible that I did a few years back. My position now is as I just wrote.

      Regarding 2), nae Euro. Yay! (Euro going down like a jobbie circling those holes in the floor with pre-cast footprints on each side)

      Maybes Wings BTL can put up some ideas for who we should feature on our Scottish banknotes.

    154. John Main says:

      @ Hatuey says:12 October, 2022 at 8:47 pm

      “She’s a crap politician, nobody can stand her”

      FFS Hatuey. Even though it might be that Starmer has recently beaten her into second place, there are still hundreds of thousands, possible millions, of Scots who can stand her. Many believe she towers head and shoulders above every other Scottish man and woman in politics at this time.

      Looking at the competition, I can sort of see why that belief is widespread, because the far and away best politician, AS, remains tainted to many.

    155. Andy Ellis says:

      @Hatuey 8.47 pm

      I don’t have anyone in mind. I don’t give a flying fuck at a rolling donut who succeeds Sturgeon, nor am I interested in the minutiae of SNP “Kremlinology”. You and others need to stop fixating on Sturgeon as a person: the SNP isn’t magically going to transmogrify in to something different just because she goes. The rest of the cabal will still be there, clinging on for dear life. They won’t just give up their sinecures and cosy life because Nicola leaves or is deposed, they’ll fall in line behind Robertson or whoever else is acclaimed leader.

      I have little patience for the conspiracy theorising about her motives or status, or airy assertions that the only reason we’re not independent now is that she’s either an asset or a useful idiot. Even if true, it’s still a cop out for the movement asa whole not just growing a pair and taking the necessary action.

      Yoons are never going to stop using the “once in a generation” trope. Sturgeon’s deposition won’t change that. The British nationalist elite will find and exploit flaws and contradictions in any “new” SNP leadership too.

      I agree that in “normal circumstances” she’d be gone, but I think we can all agree these aren’t normal by any stretch of the imagination. Sturgeon may be a crap politician, but her replacement may be no better, or even worse.

      The $64,000 question for the independence movement as a whole, is whether it can build a majority for independence and just as importantly use that majority to deliver an actual declaration of independence. That still implies a role for the SNP in the short to medium term. Hopefully that’s a reformed SNP and/or one without Sturgeon’s cabal, but if not it has to be one that has at least been cowed enough to form a common cause for plebiscitary elections.

      If you don’t think the SNP is ever going to change of its own free will, then the logical concomitant of that is a much longer term project to totally destroy and replace the SNP with a new party à la IPP being replaced by Sinn Fein.

      I dunno about you but I’m not prepared to wait that long.

    156. Scott says:

      “Maybes Wings BTL can put up some ideas for who we should feature on our Scottish banknotes.” – Main

      What’s wrong with the people on them now,

      Bank of Scotland – Sir Walter Scott

      Royal Bank of Scotland – Nan Shepherd, Mary Somerville, Catherine Cranston, Flora Stevenson

      Clydesdale Bank – Sir William Arrol, Rabbie Burns, King Robert the Bruce

      and where’s your suggestions, ya beg-the-question fetishist?

    157. sarah says:

      @ Ruby at 6.35: “was the Yes voter a fan of Nicola?”

      Not as in an SNP member – but was comforted by her daily fronting of the Covid report.

    158. Shug says:

      Nicola did a good job during COVID but now Salmond is the only one with a plan and talking any sense.

      Any guesses as to the names of the unionist plants in her office

    159. Effijy says:

      Have a look at this please.
      Why wouldn’t SNP be all over it???

      https://twitter.com/PhantomPower14/status/1580244300150886401?t=C4MJ5Cwr_OJMLc4C2fQbJA&s=08

    160. George Ferguson says:

      The Scottish pound existed before the Union. In fact since the 14th Century. Known as the ‘Pund’. Divergence between the Scottish and English Pound started with the divergence of the respective economies. 5 Scottish Pounds to one English Pound or 8 or 12 depending on what your baseline is. To say the pound is not Scottish is nonsense which is what Alex should have said to Darling during the Independence debate. The pound is clearly a Scottish currency it maybe devalued wrt to the English Pound but it is a historical Scottish currency none the less. If only we had a Scot Gov that concentrated on the economy and not women with dicks or daft Supreme Court cases.

    161. Merganser says:

      Own goal?

      The Supreme Court gave Bain an easy ride and seem to favour accepting the case to make a judgement on it, despite the ‘Keating’ argument (amongst others).So there could well be a substantive ruling on the competency point.

      Things look rather different here, and it looks like they will rule that any sort of referendum is not permissible, even one that would have no effect.

      Looking ahead to Sturgeon’s next step, the so called de facto referendum, where would that stand in the light of such a judgement? How would it have any validity?

      The decision to go to the Supreme Court could put even more obstacles in the way of independence.

      As for Bain’s performance, I cannot see her lasting very long as Lord Advocate. It was painful for me to watch what was happening to Scotland’s future in those hands.

    162. Hatuey says:

      I agree with about 95% of that, Andy, but please don’t insult me by suggesting I have any hope that the SNP can be rehabilitated. I’ve devoted a few thousand words in the last week alone urging people to vote to get rid of them. They deserve to be punished for what they have done to the Indy cause and they should never — ever — be forgiven.

      The Indy movement and arguments for independence would be stronger without her. That’s all I’m saying. And it’s not even intended as an insult when I say nobody can stand her — it is a statement of fact. That’s why membership is collapsing. People say she has won so many elections. It isn’t true. British state propaganda and protection won those elections.

      It’s not up to us though. It’s not up to her either. When she no longer serves the purpose of keeping the Scottish rabble in line, someone will flick a switch and she’ll be dismissed. At that point you might get about 8 seconds of honesty from Scottish journalists, which is about all we really have to look forward to on the scorched political landscape she leaves behind.

    163. Stoker says:

      I’ve just rediscovered why i gave up watching “Scottish” political programmes long ago. Tried to watch the BBC’s ‘Debate Night’ and the amount of guff being peddled by the panel, especially the red Tory, blue Tory and that guy ‘Noon’ who briefly led the Yes campaign. The theme of the programme seemed to be an attempt to push the “compromise” position on the constitutional question. Devo by any other name.

      They even allowed one old fella to spout he’d rather stay in the Union but with more powers devolved. Not one single person on the panel responded with “What, so they can take them off us again whenever it suits them?” etc.

      They allowed the blue Tory to get away with, twice, stating but we already let them [Scotland] have their say in 2014. Not one person on the panel replied about all the lies the Scottish electorate were exposed to by the Unionists and their media.

      Gordon Brown was even mentioned in glowing terms but not a single person mentioned about his lies, especially the despicable Great Ormond Street lie. Nor about his tendency to promise the earth when he has absolutely no power to deliver it and how when he had the power he wouldn’t entertain the guff he now tries to sell to the Scottish electorate.

      I lasted just under half-an-hour, a record by my standards, but it’ll never happen again. For anyone who missed it they are repeating it on BBC ONE Scotland from 1am to 2am. If you suffer from blood pressure problems my advice to you is give it a miss, it’s an hour of your life you will never get back.

    164. twathater says:

      @ stoker 11.21pm , you did better than me at lasting , as you said what a collection of dross and morons , there certainly were a few unionists bumping their gums

    165. Robert Louis says:

      So, Westminster is literally falling to bits and dragging Scotland with it. So, where is Nicola Sturgeon, and her legions of SNP zombies? They witter on about independence, but NOW is the time for action. They should be banging a drum httng every single political talk show in the land, with one clkear message, Scotland needs independence NOW. It is urgent. Then make it publicly clear that indyref2 WILL be hel;d with or without the ‘permission’ of the made-up, pretendy ‘supreme’ English court in London, England.

      Scotland simply cannot be ruled by these fascist clowns in England any longer. The UK is a failed state. It is time for us to leave. Time to stop England telling Scots what we can or cannot do, like weans.

      London is literally on its knees, with ZERO international sympathy. They are a global laughing stock. NOW is the time to stick the knife in, Nicola. This is no time for fearties. If you won’t do it, then move over, because Scotland needs independence NOW, not next year.

    166. Andy Ellis says:

      @Hatuey 10.35 pm

      I agree the indy movement and arguments for indy would be stronger without her, but we are where we are. She’s going nowhere as she just said at their conference, but even if she did it would make no difference short term without root and branch reform of the SNP. The past few years demonstrate that’s hardly likely.

      You say “nobody can stand her”, but that’s simply wishful thinking on your part. We’ve all seen the slavish acolytes on line and at their conference in Aberdeen. Many otherwise non-political types still hold her in high regard. The challenge for those of us who don’t is to ensure that she doesn’t have things all her own way.

      If the SC finds against the SG, the scales may fall from folks eyes then, but the proof of the pudding is in the eating. If we don’t see an up-kick in support for Alba, or pressure from within the SNP to push for early Holyrood plebiscitary elections or a much more “united front” approach to the next WM election, then we’re in for a much longer haul than many would like.

    167. stuart mctavish says:

      @merganser

      You’re fishing for it but I’ll bite anyway because in a week cursed by the detestable stupidity and mainly self inflicted* shiteness of being Scottish, Bain’s star shone brighter than many.

      Her appeal to fairness and righteousness (of scots Law) in the summing up was not dared countered meaning SC has no choice but to side with SG or expose the UK governments own malicious intent in establishing it (something Lord Reed alluded to in passing when mentioning something about dilemma between an obligation to act in the court’s self interest (ie the King) and that of the public interest (ie as directed by UK government))

      Accordingly sooner the result comes through, sooner SG can send LA back to demand custody of Assange under Schedule 5 articles 7, 9, and, especially, 10 and maybe help restore some dignity to the joint.

      *had English for yes complained about ‘corrupt’ tories in Aberdeen their anti Scottish bias might have been less obvious

    168. Ruby says:

      https://archive.ph/DkST5

      Self-evident that Scottish referendum decision is for Westminster, Supreme Court told

      He later told the court the proposed bill was “self-evidently, directly and squarely” about a matter reserved to Westminster, the Union between Scotland and England.

      He said: “The impacts and effects of Scottish independence would be felt throughout the United Kingdom. All parts of the United Kingdom have an interest in that issue, not just Scotland.
      “It’s obvious why it’s reserved to the United Kingdom parliament. It’s of critical importance to the United Kingdom as a whole.

      It’s of critical importance to the United Kingdom as a whole.

      This is something we don’t hear much about.

      The question ‘If Scotland is such an economic basket case why is the RUK so keen to hang onto Scotland?’ was asked many times but was never answered.

      I expect the colonies were of critical importance to the UK too.

      We are not in a Union we are a colony.

      Either we are a colony or Scotland ceased to exist in 1707 and became ‘Lesser England’

    169. Republicofscotland says:

      Effigy @.58pm.

      The MoD is already polluting the West coast of Scotland with their nuclear subs, not to mention visiting foreign nuclear subs doing the same, God only knows what’s in the mountain at Coulport (nuclear waste wise) and then whatever the MoD is doing at Cape Wrath testing wise.

      Looking at a map that supposedly showed the areas that would be fracked in Scotland, the most populated area on the chart is the central belt with most of the voters.

      Sturgeon is a treacherous shit, who doesn’t give a toss about Scotland, keeping her party in power is what matters to her more than anything, so I doubt she’d lift the moratorium on fracking, as she’d take beating at the polls.

    170. Republicofscotland says:

      “Nicola did a good job during COVID but now Salmond is the only one with a plan and talking any sense.”

      Shug @9.56pm.

      Really!

      Tell that to the sons, daughters, brothers and sisters of those folk that died in carehomes after people with Covid were sent to carehomes, causing the deaths of many in the carehomes.

      Also ask yourself, why the chair and all the lawyers have resigned from the Scottish Covid Inquiry.

    171. Ruby says:

      Eadie said it was not that “the lord advocate, in this case, cannot answer the question” about whether the bill was in the legislative competence of Holyrood, as set out in the Scotland Act.

      “The difficulty is that she can answer it and has done so. The problem for her is that the Scottish government do not like the answer that she has given on competence.”

      This is true!

      We need Westminster to give us a section 30 as they did in 2014.
      Why is Sturgeon not doing something about getting us a section 30?

      Why are Westminster reluctant to give us a section 30?

      Is it because Scotland is of critical importance to the United Kingdom as a whole?

      I’m fed-up with the SC nonsense, the de facto referendum nonsense.

      Sturgeon only has one job and that is to get us a section 30. ‘sending the occasional letter to the occasional prime minister’ doesn’t cut it.

      Nor does having a tantrum and screaming I hate you! I hate you! I hate you! over and over again like a spoiled child.

      Her failure to get is a section 30 is a good enough reason to demand her resignation.

    172. Republicofscotland says:

      Another very informative article on Scottish independence, and the ludicrous stance of our Lord Advocate at the UKSC.

      “Defying UK law will not affect Scottish recognition by the international community: as the UK government stated in the Kosovo case “Nor is compliance with the law of the predecessor State a condition for the declaration of independence to be recognised by third States, if other conditions for recognition are fulfilled. The conditions do not include compliance with the internal legal requirements of the predecessor State.””

      https://www.craigmurray.org.uk/archives/2022/10/the-white-flag-hearing/

    173. stuart mctavish says:

      @Ruby

      Its self evident that Scotland can never be seen as a colony for the simple reason that it was only residents of Scotland who had the vote in 2014 (and not UK as a whole) which begs question, if, as testified, its opinion of itself is of such critical interest to united kingdom as a whole (which presumably, by definition, means members of parliament for English constituencies), how much corrupting influence must the UK state have been tempted to indulge itself in before, during and since the referendum..

      Perhaps the brilliant Lord Advocate Bain can be tasked with heading an inquiry in to that particular can of worms as well.

    174. Ruby says:

      I’m focusing on one thing

      Sturgeon’s failure to get us a section 30

    175. Ruby says:

      https://wingsoverscotland.com/nothing-but-surrender/comment-page-1/#comment-2707015

      Very good question Stuart.

      What would be the implications of an inquiry which found that the IndyRef2014 was corrupt and that the UK Gov/Better Together lied to us?

      Result of IndyRef2014 declared nul and void and re-run to take place asap?

      If that were the case the UK Gov would have to ditch their ‘once in a generation’ nonsense. 🙂

      Also it could prove that we are a colony and the IndyRef, devolution and all the rest is just a way of trying to disguise the fact that we aren’t.

      It’s colony or Scotland ceased to exist in 1707.

    176. Dan says:

      @ Ruby

      The “Once in a generation” term is just simplistic shit certain minded folk cling to and fling about to distract from other very important material change is circumstances stuff that happens (leaving EU single market) or doesn’t (eg. implementation of “The Vow”).
      You’ll rarely if ever hear the twats that bring up OIAG complaining about the removal of the Westminster fixed term parliament act…

    177. Ruby says:

      The Brexiteer fuckers have the cheek to suggest that the UK Union is the same as the European Union.

      Imagine if the European Union said no you can’t have a referendum because the United Kingdom is of critical importance to the European Union as a whole?

      Maybe that was part of the Brexiteers argument and maybe the fact that
      ‘Scotland is of critical importance to the United Kingdom as a whole’ should very much be part of the YES argument.

      You would probably need facts & figures to prove that argument and I expect the UK Gov would not be prepared to reveal current facts & figures until 30 years from now.

      I would have no hesitation in voting for iScotland to be part of the EU because if it didn’t work out you can actually leave without the EU’s permission. The EU unlike the UK Union isn’t the Hotel California.

    178. Ruby says:

      https://wingsoverscotland.com/nothing-but-surrender/comment-page-1/#comment-2707018

      The “Once in a generation” term is just simplistic shit

      This ‘simplictic shit’ seems to be growing legs!

      https://archive.ph/f4yWU

      “I’m very clear that in 2014, when there was a referendum, we said it is once in a generation.” Liz Truss

      Now it’s not just Alex Salmond & Nicola Sturgeon who said it according to Liz Truss the Tories also said it.

    179. Hatuey says:

      Embroiled in a hopeless and needless war, ripped out of Europe and deprived access to markets, living costs and inflation rocketing, unemployment expected to surge, interest rates going up, mortgage costs going up, another covid crisis brewing, blackouts inevitable, massive cuts to public spending in the pipeline, the value of Sterling tumbling, and national debt at record levels…

      A mess almost entirely attributable to UK government stupidity which is why the international markets have singled the UK out.

      The case for independence has never been more of a cakewalk. Staying in the UK is officially the equivalent of saying “I want a really shit life for my children and myself” and then saying “yes” when they ask if you want to go large with that…

      But here’s the funny part. When I say funny mean so tremendously depressing and dark that the only rational response is to burst out laughing.

      Put all that UK shit mentioned above on one side of the scales. Now put Nicola Sturgeon’s SNP on the other side. The scales are balanced. That’s how useless she is. Her uselessness balances the scales. In other words, she alone is so crap at her job that she neutralises the situation, effectively destroying our chances of strolling out of this mess.

      And the proof of that? The polls on support for independence have barely moved. The needle trembles but it hasn’t moved.

    180. Merganser says:

      stuart mctavish @ 7.52 ‘Bain’s star shone brighter than many’

      Have you read Craig Murray’s article which he posted today?

      Republic @ 9.45 gives the link. I don’t always agree with what Craig says, but I’m with him on his assessment of Bain’s performance and his prediction of the result of the case.

    181. James Che says:

      If Scotland ended in 1707
      Then Englands parliament is is a treaty by itself, and with itself.

      That is the obvious answer.

      Only the english parliament entered the treaty of the union without ending its session as the English parliament until 1708.

    182. James Che says:

      The lord advocate in the supreme court brings nothing new or substantial to Scotlands side of the argument on behalf of the Scottish people.

      It brushes around many important legal matters, as to why Scots law is subservient to Uk laws of the Supreme Court, through the Scotland Acts in the creation of devolved government.

      It should be questioning, IF the union treaty was to be upheld by westminster government, and this is what the westminster side legal team seem to be arguing for.

      Then the restrictions of the Scotland Act on Scots law breaches the treaty of the union.

      As a result it brings the uk law (english law) under the crown over Scots law…which was to be retained to Scotland in the treaty of union.

      The much later addition of the Supreme Court to the treaty of the union itself breaches Scots Law.

      The lord Advocates arguments for the right of Scottish people to hold their own referendum are feeble Pettyfogging.

    183. Breeks says:

      Merganser says:
      13 October, 2022 at 11:09 am
      stuart mctavish @ 7.52 ‘Bain’s star shone brighter than many’

      Have you read Craig Murray’s article which he posted today?

      Republic @ 9.45 gives the link. I don’t always agree with what Craig says, but I’m with him on his assessment of Bain’s performance and his prediction of the result of the case.

      I’d mostly agree, but he uses that dreaded “s” word, secession.

      Scotland will not be seceding from the UK, it will be ending the UK. It is not an act of secession. Ending the UK cannot produce a Seceding state of Scotland and a Continuer state of UK, because that is neither the constitutional nature of the Union, nor will it become the nature of the dissolution.

      The UK only exists as a Union between Scotland and England. Scotland leaves, or England leaves, there is no UK left in existence.

      The comparison is marked in it’s dissimilarity to Brexit; the EU might be considered a “bespoke” Continuer State following the UK’s secession. But the UK’s exit from Europe didn’t end the European Union. The EU by definition, continues. Scotland’s exit from the UK ENDS the UK, with no “Continuer” UK state created.

      Even if England wanted to style itself a Continuer UK State, I believe that would require Scotland’s consent, and while it might be “a” Continuer UK state, I don’t believe it would properly qualify as one.

    184. James Che says:

      The lord Advocate appears to be stating that under Scots law, the lord Advocate is helplessly confused and not intelligent enough to know Scots laws.

      That if a question is put to her regarding the rights of of the Scots, under the claim of right, as a pre-nupt to the treaty of union, and under the present right to self determination, she cannot find that her brain works.

      However the hidden factor here is that she is not asking the question to the supreme Court for the Scottish people.

      But rather is asking the question of behalf of the english legislated devolved government in Scotland for permission from the english legislator parliament of Westminster to have a bit more sovereignty for itself.

      The Scottish peoples Sovereignty is deliberately becoming encapsulated and converted to the SNPs devolved governments issues of seeking parliament sovereignty.

      The people of Scotland already have the ability at this moment in time ( to ask ) themselves if they wish to have their own referendum under the “claim of right ” with out breaking any law,

      However the Scottish devolved government appear to wish to convert this under the pretense of asking the Supreme Court on behalf of all Scotland,

      Is the Scottish devolved government attempting to turn loaned sovereignty of the Scots into parliament Sovereignty.

      I suspect I have not worked it out one hundred per cent,
      But I am trying to fathom why the SNP have taken it upon themselves at such a late date in office to even approach the Supreme court with this Question,

      If Westminster and the future UK king have already acknowledged [Scots Claim of right]
      Something is amiss here.

    185. Merganser says:

      Breeks @ 12.18

      Fair enough.

      I was concentrating just on how Bain performed and the likely outcome, which will impact heavily on the decision to go for the Plebs Biscuity election.

      On the off chance that the Supreme Court do say it’s ok to have a referendum, and it produced the right result, (very doubtful) what would that achieve, being as it has already been conceded it would have no effect? If it failed to get the right result that’s us stuffed for years.

      But the likelihood is that the Court will say ‘No’, so on to the ‘de facto referendum’/election we march. Again the chances of winning this on the criteria set by Sturgeon are remote. Result: stuffed again. And if it is won what then?

      The Court will have already ruled any sort of referendum not permissible, so easy target to rubbish it, it’s ignored, and on we march.

      This strategy is designed to achieve two things:

      1. To let Sturgeon say ‘I delivered on my promise that there would be a referendum’

      2. To ensure that the SNP are voted back in for another term.

      It’s a trap and too many people have fallen for it who should know better given Sturgeon’s track record.

    186. Willie says:

      Why was my comment about the cancellation from tommorow of all elective surgery requiring blood support put into moderation Rev?

    187. Breeks says:


      Merganser says:
      13 October, 2022 at 1:27 pm

      It’s a trap and too many people have fallen for it who should know better given Sturgeon’s track record.

      Absolutely this.

      There’s an outside chance that a referendum going ahead, even when it’s been conceded that is has no effect, might still be recognised Internationally as self determination, but really, that’s clutching at straws. The UN will never do the heavy lifting. It’s the three white lights if the lift is good that’s their job.

      This whole thing, cover to cover, is a scam and a sham.

      Why must a sovereign people go through this farcical rigmarole of empowering (or not) a devolved assembly, to run a proxy referendum which those same sovereign people could hold any time they liked?

      The whole thing is theatre, nothing but pointless theatre, and the only sensible thing anybody has said is that it’s all irrelevant naval gazing anyway.

      The only thing being “empowered” in any of this is the roll of Tony Blair’s colonial Supreme Court.

      Drop the pretences, stop all the fking about, and go for the jugular.

      I could quite happily go to my grave never knowing, or caring, whether a devolved Holyrood assembly could hold a referendum. I’d red card the whole team for time wasting.

    188. Breeks says:

      Willie says:
      13 October, 2022 at 1:44 pm
      Why was my comment about the cancellation from tommorow of all elective surgery requiring blood support put into moderation Rev?

      Don’t take it to heart, I’d take a guess you mentioned a banned word Willie. There’s a list of words which automatically put some posts into moderation.

    189. wull says:

      Scotland, or the Scottish people, will not and cannot ‘declare independence’ from the Union. What the Scots can, and maybe will do, is declare Scotland’s ‘withdrawal from the Union’, thereby ending the Treaty of Union and the entity known as ‘The United Kingdom’ which resulted from that Treaty.

      The point is not simply pedantic. It affirms the continuous existence and sovereignty of the Scottish people and their nation over many centuries. We will be exercising rights that are already ours, not acquiring new ones. Nor are we creating a new nation that does not yet exist.

      Scotland’s nationhood and the sovereignty of its people are not a recent or new thing. They were clearly documented and internationally recognised during Robert Bruce’s reign, but that does not mean that they started only then. To the contrary, Bruce and his supporters were only affirming something that clearly existed long before them.

      Those of us who wish to see Scotland exit from her current political Union with England are not the only Scots in Scotland. We are campaigning among our fellow Scots in the hope that they will become convinced of our view, and therefore freely exercise their already existing rights in order to bring the Union that was created in 1707 to an end, so that both the Scottish polity and the English polity which formed that Union of Nations called the UK become, once again, two nations which are politically independent of each other.

      Legally speaking, and politically as well, this case has nothing in common with ‘decolonisation’ and the principles which the UN developed around that process. Identifying the quest for Scottish independence with the decolonisation process of the mid-20th Century is to distort the political issues involved, and obscure what is really at stake.

      Bringing the previous imperialism – the French and British Empires, in particular – to an end, the concomitant creation of many nation states that had never existed before, and the entry of these new nation states into the concert of nations, was a very different matter from what pro-independence Scots are trying to achieve today.

      We should not confuse the two things. As Scots, we cannot pretend that several generations the majority of our ancestors did quite freely acquiesce in the Union, and supported it. This is particularly true in the 19th Century and the 20th as well. Nor can it be denied that Scotland and most of the Scots, especially during these two centuries, fully supported the British imperial project. There were no doubt occasions when individual Scottish voices were raised in opposition to this or that aspect of the matter, but these were isolated and scattered, and there is in no evidence that they were the majority view. Scotland, as a nation, did acquiesce in British imperialism, supported it, contributed to it and shared in its profits. There is no getting away from that. It is just a fact. And we have to face it.

      Our cause cannot be compared to the nations that were colonised.

      I am not of the opinion that everything in colonialism and even imperialism was automatically always bad. If much or most of it was, it also has to be acknowledged that some genuinely good things were also done. And not everyone involved in the colonial enterprise was automatically evil. Perhaps we are still too close to it all to make a balanced assessment, but whatever the case, the fact is that that era is well and truly over. And the further fact is that it was already over, and a new configuration of the world’s nations had already emerged, when Scottish nationalism and the desire to break up the political Union with England began to rise once again among the Scottish people.

      In other words, modern Scottish nationalism arose in a completely different world, a completely different context and situation, from that of the massive independence movements in the global south of the mid-20th Century. It also had very different historical roots from these movements.

      Without denying that everyone in the global community can learn good things from each other, and that we ought to listen if we want to learn, comparison between these two quite different things provides distortion and obfuscation rather than clarity. Equating them, even more so.

      We have to face our own past, not bury it; own it, not flee it; see what was bad in it as well as what was and remains good. Foster the good, acknowledge the mistakes and try not to continue in them. Also, see what is particular and worthwhile.

      Scotland and her history, including her articulation of her own sovereignty in the course of that history, are sui generis. Compare her with whoever else you like and the comparison will only go so far – it will eventually break down. Scotland is not quite the same as anywhere else. That may be true of everywhere. The particularity of each place or people does matter. History matters. Including the particular history of each place and people. Whatever comparisons you make, and despite the well-known adage, it never simply repeats itself. In Scotland, this may even be more than usually true. She has existed almost continually on the edge of extinction, and yet she is still there. And those who want to extinguish her really hate her history, and don’t want Scots to know it. For the powerful, it’s a dangerous history. And Scotland always has not just powerful but also dangerous enemies, both within and without. Those who want to extinguish her, and her history, altogether.

      This ‘sovereignty of the people’ business, especially if used to moral purpose, certainly is dangerous. Of course, it can also be twisted and used to immoral purpose, in which case it will achieve immoral ends. More often, when taken seriously, it is likely to become a serious threat to the immoral uses of political power. Even when these are frequent and seem to be firmly in place, they are never secure if the people really are sovereign.

      Scotland was the first nation to articulate that reality, and the Scots the first to make it the basis of their constitution. It’s about time we realised it, and drew the consequences more consistently. Always with the caveat that the same sovereignty can be used immorally, for immoral and even evil purposes, in which case it ceases to be valid. The history of the world offers too many examples of mass illusions, fomented by those evilly inspired, which wreak havoc and must always be resisted. Sovereignty of the people is not carte blanche for every impostor who can manipulatively gain for himself – or nowadays herself – a following.

      But that is quite different from a free people exercising their sovereignty freely, in a responsible way, for their own good and that of other nations too. That is the goal we ought to be aiming for. In trying to get there, we also have to be careful about the means we use to achieve the end. Some means may seem to achieve the end, but by employing them that intended end is already destroyed, even within us. Scots who still support the Union are not the enemy. We have to engage with them in a reasonable, responsible and respectful manner. The bitterly divisive mode of contemporary politics militates against consensus, but that is what we seek to build. A consensus for an independent Scotland for everyone’s good – Scotland’s, of course, but also England’s, and the good of the rest of the world as well. The modern world needs Scotland’s voice to be part of it. And we Scots need to grow up and take responsibility for ourselves, so that our voices become less shrill and more constructive and useful not only for ourselves, but also for other nations, and the peace of the world.

    190. Republicofscotland says:

      The once in a generation promise is utter bollocks it wasn’t written in the Edinburgh agreement.

      The equivalent of the above would be holding a General Election every twenty-five or so years, which is totally unacceptable to the public.

    191. Socrates MacSporran says:

      I have thought, for some time now – the Holyrood Parliament has little or nothing to do with the fight for Independence.

      Holyrood is a devolved assembly, and as the likers of Enoch Powell and Tam Dalyell, who knew how Westminster worked, were quick to point-out: “Power devolved is power retained.”

      So, maybe we should allow Nicola Sturgeon and the SNP to think they are running Scotland, but, getting genuine ruling status for Holyrood has to be achieved at Westminster.

      We do this by invoking the Claim of Right, and by telling Westminster: “A majority of the Scottish electorate at a Westminster General Election have voted for Independence – so, we are off.”

      We reinforce that by all the pro-Independence MPs withdrawing from Westminster until the wishes of the Sovereign Scottish People are reespected and England and Scotland are once again separate, Independent nations. Meet in the old Royal High building to reinforce their stance.

      Getting Holyrood onside would help, but, it’s not really their fight. Similarly, we could reconvene a 21st century Convention of the Estates – and have the local councils involved as well.

      But, if we are to wait on Sturgeon and her kid-on referendum being allowed by Westminster, then I am afraid I, and I suspect quite a few other Wings regulars will be deid before it happens.

    192. Alf Baird says:

      wull @ 2:02 pm

      “Our cause cannot be compared to the nations that were colonised.”

      On the contrary, the ‘colonial condition’ of Scots is hardly an aberration and don’t forget also the theory of ‘Internal Colonialism’ or the fact that many oppressed and exploited peoples were handed a wee treaty which was immediately violated. Scotland’s continued cultural, economic and political exploitation and oppression over centuries is little different.

      The goal of independence/decolonization aye remains the same – liberation from oppression – or alternatively cultural assimilation and with that ‘a people’ and their culture and nation ultimately perish. This is why independence is always ‘a fight for a national culture’ (Fanon) as well as removal of an oppressor power/culture.

      The main problem here is that the peoples understanding of their wretchedness remains rudimentary and they need to better comprehend why independence / decolonization is necessary:

      https://wp.towson.edu/iajournal/the-socio-political-determinants-of-scottish-independence/

    193. Merganser says:

      Wull @ 2.02 ‘The Scots can declare Scotland’s withdrawal from the Union’

      I read your post with great interest. For the purpose of this declaration, do you think it has to be a majority of the Scots? If so, the challenge is, as many people have said previously, to get onboard a lot more people. If ‘the Scots’ means a majority, then at present it means that a declaration of withdrawal cannot be made.

    194. Ruby says:

      Breeks says:
      13 October, 2022 at 1:55 pm

      Willie says:
      13 October, 2022 at 1:44 pm
      Why was my comment about the cancellation from tommorow of all elective surgery requiring blood support put into moderation Rev?

      Don’t take it to heart, I’d take a guess you mentioned a banned word Willie. There’s a list of words which automatically put some posts into moderation.

      There is a list of banned words like:
      man-uscripts
      tetan-us

      imput-ing
      comput-ing
      disput-ing

      Why you might ask are these banned words?

      an-us – I presume this is banned because posters were misspelling Anas (current leader of Labour in Scotland)
      pu-tin – Due to 24/7 never ending bin fire discussion about Uk-raine?

      It’s not just these words that are banned but any word that contains these words. The same would apply to other banned words although I don’t know if there are words that contain Uk-raine and sett-lers.

      I’m wondering if ski-er is banned. I got caught by the ‘mod bot’ when I posted Scottish ski-er. Could be names of banned posters trigger moderation.

      There are a whole load of words that contain ski-er.

    195. Ruby says:

      My post contain the word

      ris-kier went into moderation.

      This banned word game is better than scrabble.

    196. Ruby says:

      Testing

      Mist

    197. stuart mctavish says:

      @merganser

      Yes, looked a bit harsh tbf, but way I understand it (once stripped of hyperbole) is that Lord Advocate made the argument from within the confines of the written legislation (ie Holyrood being a devolved assembly) whereas Craig made it from the perspective of the situation in event SC finds itself unable to make right and fair judgement in accordance with Scots Law.

      Personally I wouldn’t be too concerned over the timing since (I think) there is a substantial (albeit theoretical) community benefit to giving time for a political solution to render the judgement obsolete – in which respect having it all done and dusted by January would be great – but I’m not at the sharp end of any of it, so inclined to defer to those preparing for a snap de-facto referendum regardless.

    198. Republicofscotland says:

      They say there’s no point in crying over spilt milk, however this should make every Scot angry knowing that we were robbed and are still being robbed, and will continue to be robbed by a foreign government, and that our current FM is okay with that as long as her party is in power in Scotland.

      “Oslo expects to bring in about $109 billion from the petroleum sector this year — $82 billion more than in 2021. Much of that will go to the country’s sovereign wealth fund, a national nest egg worth more than $1 trillion.

      https://twitter.com/tveitdal/status/1580291216184606720?cxt=HHwWgIDU5aCfqe4rAAAA

    199. Republicofscotland says:

      Meanwhile House Jocks, infest many of Scotland’s universities and live high on the hog.

      https://twitter.com/PhantomPower14/status/1580475192995852288/photo/1

    200. Luigi says:

      I really hope that the Scottish government have a clever plan for every possible SC decision and that includes the real possibility that the SC will simply refuse to say Yay or Nay but treat it as irrelevant since it has not yet been put before Holyrood (cart before horse argument). If we are simply expected to vote SNP at the next election, for another five wasted years, count me out.

      “Just five more years and they cannot possibly ignore us this time!” Aye right.

      Not interested.

    201. James Che says:

      Why are the Scots trying to free themselves from a treaty they never entered?

      1: There was no vote( ever) held not then or since, or put to the nation and people of Scotland to join the Treaty of the Union.

      2: All of Scotland protested against doing so, including the shires petitions.

      3: The Scottish parliament closed it doors before the British parliament was created. Cancelling the Scottish side of the Treaty of Union.

      4: The Scottish parliament members could not have entered into the British Parliament as successive Scottish parliamentarians. Having ended [ their parliament session ].

      5: The English parliament entered into the British parliament successively as the English Parliament with out a break in session until 1708.

      6: This leaves private Scottish merchants…. [not under any Parliament session ]….entering into a Treaty of Union with the English Parliament.

      7: Their is no evidence that the Sovereign nation of Scots people joined the Treaty of the Union.

      Add to this.
      The question the monarchs roll, of giving royal assent to any Scottish side of the Treaty of Union that England may have ratified in 1707 as it did not have valid authority.
      Being as the “Scots claim of right” removes sovereignty of the Monarch in Scotland and predates
      The Treaty of the Union.

    202. Dan says:

      If “nothing in this report prevents Scotland becoming an independent country in the future should the people of Scotland so choose.“, then the Smith Commission Report was a bit of a half-arsed job if it failed to address the rather significant matter of foreseeing “Supreme Court” interference denying Scottish folk the opportunity to make that future choice.
      But if the report did factor in “Supreme Court” interference, then it classes the “Supreme Court” as nothing, ergo any judgement produced by said Court is not something, so can therefore be ignored.

    203. Republicofscotland says:

      The opinions of English people asked if Scotland should be an independent nation during the Bain sellout at the UKSC all say Scots should decide their own future and it shouldn’t be left to an English court to do it.

      Are you listening Bain and Sturgeon you pair of treacherous b*stards.

      https://twitter.com/ChrisMcEleny/status/1580275098338021376?cxt=HHwWgMCqvYn1oe4rAAAA

    204. John Main says:

      @ Merganser says:13 October, 2022 at 2:44 pm

      “I read your post with great interest. For the purpose of this declaration, do you think it has to be a majority of the Scots?”

      I note nobody has answered, so I will. Seems obvious to me, a majority of No-voting Scots won’t accept what a minority of Yes-voting Scots want to enforce on them, whether it’s “for their own good”, or not.

      You could take the attitude of a few on here, and simply dismiss the No voters as house Jocks, or some such insult, and hope that will be sufficient when we go cap in hand to the UN, the EU, etc. asking for recognition.

      No doubt it will do for the Russtis and the government of Chad. For all the good that will be to us.

      “If so, the challenge is, as many people have said previously, to get onboard a lot more people”

      Indeed. You could explore a few ways of doing that on here, but prepare for insults, mockery and vilification if you do. Most posters seem to favour ideological purity, rather than pragmatism.

      I favour showing us the money.

    205. Ruby says:

      John Main is going to show us how to get more people on board.

      The stage is all yours John Main.

      Start with what you would say to undecided voters then move on to the hard core NO voter.

      Show them the money!

    206. John Main says:

      @ wull says:13 October, 2022 at 2:02 pm

      Cracker of a post. Much to think over and much to agree with.

      One tiny niggle (sorry):

      “the fact is that that era [the colonialism era] is well and truly over”

      But it’s naw, is it Wull? My take is that the urge to grab other people’s stuff (which, when it involves crossing national boundaries and staying there is colonialism) is universal and eternal.

      Ask any citizen of Kiev if colonialism is dead. But that’s just one extreme, where the colonisers come with tanks and bombs.

      Sometimes they come all smiles and giving peace signs. A few decades later, the effect is much the same.

    207. Ruby says:

      I hear the sound of slow hand clapping!

      C’mon John Main don’t let your audience down.

      We need you to show us how to get more people on board.

      Slow hand clapping is getting louder!

    208. stuart mctavish says:

      @merganser

      PS If SC does wait months to announce its decision despite no effort from UK government to mitigate then it would certainly give the lie to the UKG argument about SG wasting SC time – but not necessarily its implied complement (which was also advanced*) about opening floodgates to UKG splashing the barnet formula on SC largesse..

      *Surprisingly so, since it betrayed complete misunderstanding of the matter/ mechanism in dispute!

    209. Merganser says:

      Stuart @ 7.35.

      I think that there’s a good chance of a decision before Christmas. The Court will try very hard to do this. The hard point seems to be whether to accept the reference from the Lord Advocate before an Act is passed, because that would set a considerable precedent. As I have previously stated I think the Court will rule in favour of accepting it.

      Thereafter it will be an easy task to find that the Act is not within the competency of the Scottish Parliament.

    210. fionan says:

      Sarah “When I was leafleting for Alba in Ullapool in April/May 2021 several people said things to me that showed they had swallowed the lies hook, line and sinker”

      Bear in mind that the media had been painting AS as black for a good many years before the referendum and long before the disgraceful set-up of the accusations and trial. According to the mainstream ‘journalists’ of note, As was supposedly ‘arrogant’, ‘smug’, ‘bombastic’ and other negatives which painted him as a bully and self-serving right back to the days when he succeeded in removing labour from the Scot Gov. All this was in reaction to the hugely powerful threat he posed to the unionists and wm control.

      This in itself caused some confusion in some less political minds as to AS’ integrity, not enough to damage his following but enough to ensure that when sturgeon dug the claws in and created the false accusations and subsequent court case, people were more easily swayed to believe the accusations because they were already primed to have some negative reaction to him. Add in the complete failure of the MSM to print any part of the defense case, and AS didnt stand a chance where public opinion was concerned. That is the tragedy.

      Now I see commenters seeking a means of getting foreign media to assist in clearing AS’ name, while completely ignoring and allowing to die, our very own mainstream media who have struggled to give us our own voice since 2014 and before. Why go to a foreign medium when you have for example, iScot? Couldnt you just as easily, more easily in fact, approach Ken with a suitably safely worded summary fo the defense case in the Salmond trial?

      Along with a pyschological summary of how and why independence supporters were so easily persuaded to turn on and savage the very man , the hero, who took us to a referendum while bringing the very idea of independence and support for independence out of the dark ages, out of the fringes of society? Right into the mainstream thinking and idealogy, to this point where many now see indy as inevitable, yet have been brainwashed against the best means of getting there, and still hang onto Sturgeons apron strings?

      We Scots, we Yessers, already have a mainstream media of our very own, it is only our own apathy and lack of support that is preventing our own Scottish media from flourishing, growing and developing. We hang onto the English/british MSM like babies with our comfort blanket, instead of bigging up our own media. I often think, too wee – NO, too poor-NO, too stupid…???

    211. Shug says:

      Republic @9.25
      Yes really her communication was quite clear.
      The problem was the BBC airing the right wing unionist mask and vaccine deniers and if cours Boris and hancock
      Care homes with 2 or 3 relatives visiting and staff in the community was always going to be a problem as you well know

    212. Republicofscotland says:

      Who gives a flying f*ck what the UKSC thinks, it has no bearing on Scotland choosing to become an independent nation, its only in the frame because the treacherous shit Sturgeon instructed Bain to let the UKSC handle it, instead of going straight to our court of Session which would have rubber stamped it and boom it would’ve shaken the foundations of this rotten union to its core.

      There’s NO route out of this rancid union via Westminster none whatsoever, there never has been and never will be we mustn’t try to legitimise the UK construct the UKSC. The current UKSC shenanigans on whether Scotland has the right or not to hold an indyref is all smoke and mirrors for the uninitiated, we have the power not some 2009 court in England, we’re only in this state because Sturgeon the betrayer of Scots want Scotland to remain under the thumb of Westminster, with her party governing in Scotland.

      Why else do you think the indy movement is stuck around 47% and has been since the betrayer took office, Salmond took it from the low twenties to forty-five percent in a short period of time, Sturgeon is doing her best to destroy that, we need her out, and until she’s gone, we’re going nowhere anytime soon.

    213. Republicofscotland says:

      “Care homes with 2 or 3 relatives visiting and staff in the community was always going to be a problem as you well know”

      Shug.

      The problem was that folk were being sent to carehomes from hospitals, the hospital staff knew these people had Covid, and so did Sturgeon and her Health minister Yousaf.

      Watch as a Scottish government friendly is manouvered into the chair position of the Scottish Covid Inquiry, and also watch out for missing documents, or heavily redacted documents presented at the inquiry, this SNP government has form on that, if the inquiry ever gets going that is.

    214. Dan says:

      @ RoS

      Without googling, can you name the black marker pen wielding individual who is The Cabinet Secretary for Covid Recovery.
      Though I’m not sure if The Great Redacto (sponsored by Sharpie) is just “recovering” the individuals and their antics that got us into this mess, or society in general.

    215. ben madigan says:

      Stoker says:
      12 October, 2022 at 4:11 pm
      @ ben madigan on 12 October 2022 at 3:41 pm
      Sorry for the delay in replying – been busy at work etc

      ” Scotland gets what London decides”.
      As I said because Scotland was not in a position to call on any international allies like the Irish were.
      You may have noticed the DUP are currently creating havoc with the protocol and the NI Assembly because Sinn Fein got more votes than they did in the May elections – for the 1st time since NI was set up 101 years ago it does not have a Unionist in charge.

      “Just another stand-alone reason why Scotland desperately needs to take back its right to self-determination”.
      Totally agree. Scotland needs out of this pernicious Union ASAP.Like 6 years ago when Brexit was “won”.
      But I am so not convinced by FM Sturgeon’s “strategy”.
      It’s got more holes than a collander!

    216. Confused says:

      Dead on wings, and why not – everything has been said, multiple times by someone. Or maybe the shills are still in mourning about Lizzie Battenberg, or some football game (- why? they are all Partick Thistle fans)

      But there are disturbances in the force out there; I am thinking of a film about an english queen who reigned for 7 days – Liz Truss has beaten that and won’t be beheaded but it seems they are already queuein up to get rid of her. Amazing.

      During the hustings this – spectacularly dim woman – just wibbled on about “tax cuts” (catnip for tories, a wink and a “fuck the poor”) and in the end she came through the middle as the rest of them damaged each other.

      So, they do this mini budget – and the basic observation is this : it is a bribe, a big payoff to all the tory voters. The mail and telegraph love it, the day after they are licking kwasi’s arse – but (they didn’t think it through)

      Something spooked the markets, something they said; I think it was this –

      borrowing to fund tax cuts

      SAY WHAT!?

      At that moment the city sharks realised “these people don’t know what they are doing” and then they just went for it – time to make some profits. Sell the pound. Short the market.

      (not thinking things through; pension funds about to go bust or blow up the gilts market, or people and tories with mortgages about to see their payments rocket, on top of food, fuel, energy)

      Kwasi gets hauled in by the bigwigs for “the talk” and the IMF are sending a stiff letter to his parents. This is humiliation.

      Kwasi’s best hope

      http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o7Q4fM5y_1I

      “one more move (on the pound) and the nig …. ”

      NB the way Truss and Kwasi have been yanked by their collars shows conclusively where the power lies in this land – and it is not the polticians – the financiers rule, and no one voted for them. Oligarchy is the word, so I am told.`

    217. Willie says:

      Meanwhile in bloodless Britain the NHSBT service has issued the following statement –

      ” If you are an O-neg group blood donor, please call our customer-contact centre to book a priority appointment – we are asking all other blood donors to help by filling the appointments available in the coming few weeks at our permanent donor centres.”

      Most interesting that customers no less, and 0 customers at that can now be given appointments to donate to ameliorate the shortage of blood supplies that has arisen. Presumably the other blood groups that are in short supply, but not as much so as O will continue with shortage.

      But what is it that is causing this never before blood stock shortage. Has there been a major disaster that has used up our supplies that we are not being told about.

    218. Dan says:

      @ Willie

      The reasons given for shortages sounds plausible.

      Maintaining blood stocks has been an ongoing challenge in the aftermath of the pandemic primarily due to staff shortages and sickness but also due to a change in donor behaviour as people are less likely to visit collection centres in towns and cities. NHS Blood and Transplant has been working through a raft of measures to stabilise the situation.

      https://www.blood.co.uk/news-and-campaigns/news-and-statements/amber-alert-issued-on-blood-stocks-existing-o-neg-and-o-pos-donors-asked-to-make-appointments/

    219. Dan says:

      More to think about. Though for anybody building or renovating a house at this time of limited stocks and economic challenges, choosing the absolute best material and product for the job is a bit like choosing the expensive organic food product over the basic stuff.
      Plus I don’t really buy into this fitting of solar panel arrays and air sourced heatpump stuff on a small percentage of suitable homes which puts the onus on the individual to buy and maintain the systems.
      Using economies of scale we could have every existing and future property in the land using renewable power supplied through the existing grid connections if the will was there, so being green wouldn’t just be a virtue signalling bragging point to a select few.

      https://commonweal.scot/burning-money/

      A wee bump as the above link was picked up from the fine resource that is.

      https://www.voices.scot/

    220. Hatuey says:

      Confused, there’s another aspect of the mini budget that the markets don’t like. A lot of Tories don’t like it either. And to my knowledge nobody has discussed it here or anywhere, except on one or two over-achiever forums such as those I frequent myself.

      Straightforwardly, the idea that government should intervene to help poor people pay their electricity bills is at odds with everything Tories and free marketeers hold dear. Those who saw Brexit as an opportunity to recreate Victorian Britain — and there’s a lot of those types out there — are quite enraged.

      Nobody is saying that because it’s not a good look. It’s basically an argument for letting people freeze and starve. Instead they’re cloaking their discontent in the terms you mention and borrowing to fund tax cuts for the rich is, after all, quite diabolical.

      Here’s a question for you, though. Can you point to one UK budget in the last 20 years that didn’t give rich people tax cuts and didn’t rely on government borrowing?

      I suspect Truss and Kwarteng thought tax cuts for the rich would serve as a spoonful of sugar that would help the medicine (relief for the poor) go down and it backfired.

    221. Ruby says:

      Why did the Tories give poor people money to pay their electricity bills?

      Did they think OMG if we don’t do this there are going to be riots and people in our three colonies will be demanding independence.

      We must hang on to Scotland
      ‘It’s of critical importance to the United Kingdom as a whole’

    222. Stoker says:

      These:

      Andy Ellis says on 13 October 2022 at 7:50 am:

      “If we don’t see an up-kick in support for Alba, or pressure from within the SNP to push for early Holyrood plebiscitary elections or a much more “united front” approach to the next WM election, then we’re in for a much longer haul than many would like.”
      __________

      Ruby says on 13 October 2022 at 10:54 am:

      “I’m very clear that in 2014, when there was a referendum, we said it is once in a generation.” Liz Truss

      Someone needs to get her reminded that’s exactly what her former boss, Bozo, repeated several times throughout the 2019 General Election campaign, once in a generation etc. Several different versions of it too.

      Unionists are perfectly happy not to adhere to legally binding agreements they sign up to when it suits them, but they expect everyone to adhere to throwaway remarks. A serious point here is this truly shows the ineptitude and complicity of the UK media when those politicians saying these deliberately deceptive soundbites are never challenged on them.
      __________

      Republicofscotland says on 13 October 2022 at 6:13 pm:

      “The opinions of English people asked if Scotland should be an independent nation during the Bain sellout at the UKSC all say Scots should decide their own future and it shouldn’t be left to an English court to do it. Are you listening Bain and Sturgeon you pair of treacherous b*stards.”
      __________

      James che says on 12 October 2022 at 5:20 pm:

      “The Anti- English rhetoric has been spoon-fed to people in Scotland through politics and media outlets for centuries, some have grown to believe this in the same way that some believe soap personalities are real people’s lives, it is the power of psychology as a weapon.”

      Well said, James!
      __________

      And finally, Unionist arrogance personified:

      Effijy says on 12 October 2022 at 9:58 pm:
      “Have a look at this please. Why wouldn’t SNP be all over it?”

      https://twitter.com/PhantomPower14/status/1580244300150886401?t=C4MJ5Cwr_OJMLc4C2fQbJA&s=08

    223. Hatuey says:

      Scotland was undoubtedly a major consideration in the decision to provide relief on energy.

      Can you imagine having a banana colony and the people there who are up to their necks in bananas cant even afford to eat a banana or two?

      Even the BBC Scotland propaganda service would struggle with that… probably. Well, maybe not actually.

      http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8QqkrIDeTeA

    224. Ruby says:

      OK the Tories have covered the cost of electricity crisis but what about all the rest mortgages, cost of food, power cuts etc?

      Are they going to borrow more money for all these things.

      Is it still the case that Westminster is 100% responsible for the debt? Did Danny Alexander not tell us that during the 2014 IndyRef?

      Is it ‘of critical importance to the United Kingdom as a whole’ to hang onto Scotland in order to help pay the debt?

      Craig Murray tweeted (sorry can’t find it) that civil servants in Westminster were suggesting that Truss was forking out for electricity bills to prevent support for the UK-raine war diminishing.

      I didn’t quite get that but I suppose it’s possible.

    225. Ruby says:

      https://tinyurl.com/bd7d6jk8

      Are people in Scotland very easy to brainwash? Do they not question what they read in the press?
      That is quite scary.

      Do they even read the press or just the headlines.

      Kenny Macaskill says he knows everyone involved in the case, he knows all the accusers and that is why he never doubted Alex Salmond would be acquitted.

      He also says ‘Scotland is like a village’ and that is true and that is why I don’t believe the ‘Alphabetties’ are anonymous.

    226. Willie says:

      Dan @ 8.58am.

      You link the BBC report that now says blood shortages are due to the pandemic.

      That’s a different line from a few days ago when the blame was being put on staff shortages.

      And now Scotland that didn’t have a shortage of blood now admits it has but that unlike England, Scotland isn’t cancelling operations. Scotland is however now making a call for donations.

      Clearly something has arisen these last weeks that has changed a previously stable blood bank and my suspicion is that blood is being sent to the conflict but that the government’s in Scotland and England are not admitting it.

    227. Ebok says:

      @Willie
      ‘But what is it that is causing this never before blood stock shortage’

      Perhaps a factor is that donors are no longer welcome if they refuse to complete big brothers recently introduced intrusive questionnaire about their sexual identity, habits, and other very personal questions.

    228. Jack Murphy says:

      OT. TODAY. I see Craig Murray is suggesting some Tory MPs should cross the Floor and join what is still quaintly called the Labour Party. [no laughing in the back! ]
      Ready for the next General Election where they would fit in just nicely.

      The Great Crossing:
      https://www.craigmurray.org.uk/archives/2022/10/the-great-crossing/

    229. James Che says:

      The blood doner issue,

      What happens to those whom thought they did not want vaccines that had not finished being trialled in their blood.
      Perhaps those people would fall foul of the vaccine through blood doners. Should they need an op.

      Indirect hit.

    230. James Che says:

      OT. See britains rocket launched from iceland failed and went into the Norwegian Sea.

      The Company is based in Cumbernauld, near Edinburgh, and the rockets has strong connnections to Uk rain,
      Boy does she support other dodgy countries before ours,

      So NS does not tell the Scots, all quite on the northern front
      mentions nothing about who and where the taxes for such a company goes, or who provides the money, Uk treasury? UK rain ? Iceland,?
      Or the purpose made but questionable type of rockets that could have such close connection to UK rain during a proxy battle of britain.

    231. James Che says:

      The rocket launching story is from the Telegraph.

    232. Hatuey says:

      Just heard the news… someone has thrown tomato soup over Van Gogh’s “Sunflowers” and glued themselves to a wall in London’s National Gallery.

      Anyone know where Ellis is?

    233. James Che says:

      OT again but interesting.

      I see some MSM outlets suggesting that old pension scareing story of what would happen to Scottish pensions if Scotland went independent?

      The deliberate omission of information by MSM scaremongering ?

      Uk pension funds nearly completely collapsed just a few weeks ago.

      The UK stole women born in the 50s pension funds without informing them legally of the changes,

      British pensions for those ex pats was selective after Brexit.

      Yep, Scotlands pensions would be saver under a independent Scotland it seems

    234. Breeks says:

      http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ho181-k9lv0

      No sympathy from me Mr Marr. Scotland could have been free and far removed from all of this “shite”.

      Are you squirming and embarrassed about the BBC’s bias over Scottish Independence? Of course you’re not, so suck it up.

      If only, if only, the “wings” of the SNP were scratching their heads on how to get rid of Sturgeon Do Nothing.

    235. Willie says:

      James Che @12.50

      Pray tell more. Are you suggesting that one now needs to just about complete a criminal records check to donate blood.

      That would certainly be a change from simply asking about a donors health.

      Not sure what to take from your comments. They are certainly interesting. One thing I did however notice from recent press statements is that the NHSBT in England is asking that donors contact the ” Customer Centre”

      Now I don’t know about you but CUSTOMER is not the word I’d expect from what was the blood transfusion service. And so, with NHS privatisation, and with blood and blood plasma having a commercial value, maybe the NHS blood transfusion has been selling the blood as an export business.

    236. Confused says:

      George Floyd

      Emmett Till

      now – Kwasi

      Black Lives Matter will be supergluing themselves to the Bank of England

      maybe Kwasi will go “the full Kanye West” now

      http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uo14xGYwWd4

      we should hire this guy for his obvious financial acumen

      this time, next year, we will all be millionaires

      I wish things would slow down a bit, almost too fast to take the piss out of.

    237. Daisy Walker says:

      Some very good articles over on Craig Murray’s site in the last week (they’re always good to be honest, but these ones particularly relevant).

      His summation of the Supreme Court/SNP pathetic farce is definitive, and thankfully saves any of the rest of us having to wade through the transcripts to highlight the fraud being played on us.

      (Be useful to know who the 20 SNP MP’s are, who protested about Niklas presentation enough to have another one amend it. In these times of sell out, such actions would indicate authentic Indy credentials amoungst the rest of the SNP/MP gravy troughers.)

      His latest, about the potential for mass crossing the floor of tory MP’s to Red Tory Stammer party is very interesting.

      I wonder though, if perhaps, the orchestrated chaos throughout Britain might not call for a Government of Unity to see us through such a ‘state of emergency’, with a prominent place at the table for oor Nikla, who would of course shelf all and any talk of Indy, until the crisis was over.

      A prominent place for KCIII of course, to bed him into the affections of the people.

      Obviously such a Government would need a high profile project to rescue the ‘nation’. A New Deal for the new millenium…. and we can kiss Scotland’s water goodbye as that one gets rolled out, and the Scot’s get rolled over once again.

      I wonder what the cure is for a nation suffering from Stockholm Syndrom.

    238. James Che says:

      Willie.

      Nowadays truths are so well disguised under rhetoric pushed in news you have to decide on the your choice of psychology news war games in MS.

      I used to be a regular blood donor myself for many years.
      But would I accept Blood from donors after the many mistakes that came out in court case that blood was not checked before given to patients.

      I thought it strange to say the least during the virus lockdowns that I could not get appointments at my local surgery after my recent op, everything was cancelled, only telephone or internet consultations were running, cancer patients were not even taken care of,

      But myself and partner were regularly called into surgeries to give blood under other pretexts,
      So were other members of my family living in other parts of Britain,

      Perhaps privatisation of the NHS is on sale in more ways than one.
      Blood like organs may have a sale price.

    239. James Che says:

      Daisy.

      Orchestrated chaos,

      You have your answer right there, one government, eventually one world order.

    240. Tinto Chiel says:

      @Daisy Walker 2.10: your nightmare vision may not be unlikely as some might think. Starmer (aka Stumer north of the border) has long had links to the Trilateral Commission and Nikla seems to have fallen into the WEF orbit, so a Government of National Unity to see us through the impending financial and political turmoil would be a globalist’s dream.

      Scottish independence is kicked further down the road and the great asset-stripping of our resources can safely continue.

    241. gregor says:

      NationalScot (2019): Angus Robertson: We should introduce a Scottish Digital Citizenship:

      “Science fiction fans know that the future has already arrived…

      Thank goodness much of the dystopian world in the movie has not come to pass…”:

      https://archive.ph/n2WoR

    242. gregor says:

      World Economic Forum (14/10/2022): On The Agenda: Digital Identity:

      https://www.weforum.org/agenda/digital-identity/

    243. gregor says:

      BBC (14/10/2022): Who is Jeremy Hunt? New UK chancellor who backed Sunak in leadership race:

      Jeremy Hunt: The basics:

      “…he became the first Western foreign minister to visit Yemen since conflict there began…”:

      https://archive.ph/Ai7hA

      Guardian (2021): British arms sales prolonging Saudi war in Yemen, says Oxfam:

      https://archive.ph/AfAlo

    244. gregor says:

      World Economic Forum: People:

      Jeremy Hunt:

      https://www.weforum.org/people/jeremy-hunt

    245. gregor says:

      World Economic Forum: People:

      Kwasi Kwarteng:

      https://archive.ph/3hDMA

      World Economic Forum: People:

      Rishi Sunak:

      https://archive.ph/LHEjK

      World Economic Forum: People:

      Liz Truss:

      https://archive.ph/puHwO

    246. gregor says:

      World Economic Forum: People:

      Olafur Ragnar Grimsson:

      https://archive.ph/lqxYL

    247. gregor says:

      World Economic Forum: People:

      Nicola Sturgeon:

      https://www.weforum.org/people/nicola-sturgeon

    248. gregor says:

      Gun: Word Up:

      “Yo pretty ladies around the world
      Got a weird thing to show you
      So tell all the boys and girls
      Tell your brother, your sister and your mamma too
      We’re about to go down
      And you know just what to do…”:

      https://tinyurl.com/mr3asxvj

    249. gregor says:

      Guardian (02/03/2022): Tackling inflation is ‘top priority’, says Biden in State of the Union address:

      “Getting runaway prices in America under control is “my top priority” Joe Biden told Congress on Tuesday in his first State of the Union address…”:

      https://archive.ph/t7KeR

      Wikipedia: Inflation Reduction Act of 2022:

      “The Inflation Reduction Act of 2022 (IRA) is a landmark United States law which aims to curb inflation…

      …passed by the 117th United States Congress and signed into law by President Joe Biden on August 16, 2022…

      …introduced as an amendment to the Build Back Better Act…”:

      https://archive.ph/XK8ay

      ScotGov (January 2021): Education: What Scotland Learned: building back better:

      https://archive.ph/whltF

    250. gregor says:

      Scotsman (08/10/2022): Cost-of-living crisis: Why people in Scotland are worried…:

      “…we are facing a growing injustice, where more and more people will be simply unable to afford to stay warm in their homes this winter…”:

      https://archive.ph/tspUf

      Bloomberg: (13/10/2022): Core US Inflation Rises to 40-Year High…:

      ‘Prices excluding food and energy increased 6.6% from year ago’

      ‘Shelter, food and medical care contribute most to broad rise’:

      https://archive.ph/6jjcy

    251. gregor says:

      Guardian (13/08/2022): ‘The world is my oyster’: Nicola Sturgeon…:

      “Nicola Sturgeon won’t take “no” for an answer…

      …She was called “Elsie McSelfie” on Twitter after posing with celebrities at last year’s Cop26 climate conference in Glasgow…”

      Nicola Sturgeon:

      “There was a period where I was trying to lead the country through a global pandemic, and at the same time trying to withstand a full-frontal assault by my predecessor to bring me down,”…”:

      https://archive.ph/LTQE1

    252. gregor says:

      Time (2017): Joe Biden Is Warning About the Collapse of the ‘World Order’ as He Says Goodbye:

      https://archive.ph/uzGew

    253. gregor says:

      Time (18/01/2017): Joe Biden is warning about the collapse of the ‘World Order’ as he says goodbye:

      https://archive.ph/uzGew

    254. gregor says:

      Jeremy Hunt (04/11/2021): Twit:

      “Bill Gates was one of the few who warned far in advance we weren’t ready for a pandemic so have we learned or will we still end up fighting the last war?

      Sobering assessment in my Policy Exchange interview.”:

      https://tinyurl.com/v8fdab38

    255. Dan says:

      Willie says: at 11:27 am

      You link the BBC report that now says blood shortages are due to the pandemic.

      For accuracy it wasn’t a BBC link, it was a link to the NHS Blood and Transplant site.
      The pandemic will undoubtedly have had an effect on blood donations for several reasons.
      Due to the massive Covid coverage folk will have altered how they live their lives. I’d imagine blood donors by nature are pretty sensible and caring folk so may want to limit potential exposure to germs and viruses that they would then carry and spread to others in their lives.
      My late mum spent the best part of two years locked down and severely limiting social interaction and received various “vaccines”. She managed to avoid catching covid, but guess what, she went to hospital for radiotherapy and caught covid…

      Other factor in blood shortages could be the engineered “cost of living existing” crisis kicking in and folk battening down the hatches. Plus with winter on the way there are more folk crammed into warm buildings so virus spread more likely to increase again. Folk could just be being prudent with finances and also limiting their risk factors.
      Blood products have limited use by times so stocks need constantly replenished.
      I’ll ask my nurse neighbours and a couple of doctors in next few days to see if they know the reason for the shortage.
      Also commenter George Ferguson on here has a son that works in frontline healthcare so he may chip in if he reads this.

    256. Brian Doonthetoon says:

      What we, pro-indys need is a weekly (Saturday?) free newspaper, funded by ads and crowdfunder, to expose the stuff that the MSM are swerving from.

      The Labour Party did it for a couple of years in Dundee in the late 70s/early 80s, with quite a good circulation in Dundee.

      It had some decent investigative journalism by a Scots journalist whose name I can’t recall (Duncan Campbell?).

      How about a “Scots News”, handed out in the street on Saturdays?

      I’m sure there are one or three readers of WOS who have the knowledge, experience and wherewithal to do the needful.

    257. gregor says:

      NewsBusters (14/10/2022): Soros Gave $30M to Groups Urging Censorship of So-Called Disinfo Before Midterms:

      “…The Soros-funded Leadership Conference on Civil and Human Rights (LCCHR) spearheaded an Oct. 13 open letter signed by 11 other liberal groups pining for Big Tech to “take immediate steps to curb the spread of voting disinformation in the midterms and future elections and to help prevent the undermining of our democracy.”

      The letter agonized over how “the 2022 midterm elections are only a few weeks away, but online disinformation continues to confuse, intimidate, and harass voters, suppress the right to vote, and otherwise disrupt our democracy.”

      The groups addressed the letter to Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg, Google CEO Sundar Pichai, Twitter CEO Parag Agrawal, YouTube CEO Susan Wojcicki, TikTok CEO Shou Zi Chew , Snap CEO Evan Spiegel and Instagram CEO Adam Mosseri. Soros gave a whopping $30,325,500 to at least seven of the 12 total signatories between 2016 and 2020.

      The letter doesn’t only target election-related posts on Big Tech platforms. It also demands that actions be taken against political candidates:

      …Many of the bad actors and election deniers have continued and stepped up their online spread of false information since 2020, and some are even on the ballots for elected office in 2022. The policies and actions by platforms must do more to specifically combat these trends in 2022 and beyond…”:

      https://archive.ph/QkNBf

    258. gregor says:

      BreakingNews (15/10/2022): Creepy Joe Biden is molests an underage girl again. He tells her:

      “no serious guys till you’re 30”:

      Video:

      https://tinyurl.com/fs4fnnhh

    259. gregor says:

      World Economic Forum (2020): Agenda: SDG 17: Partnerships for the Goals:

      A little chaos could be just what the SDGs need…:

      https://www.weforum.org/agenda/2020/11/a-little-chaos-could-be-just-what-the-sdgs-are-lacking-here-s-the-sense-behind-it/

    260. gregor says:

      BBC (14/10/2022): Will the UK financial chaos spark a wider meltdown?

      “…As the sell-offs collide with high inflation, rising interest rates and the war in (redacted), they have raised fears the turmoil in the UK could set off a wider crisis…”:

      https://archive.ph/9Hwkn

    261. gregor says:

      Meltdown:

      “An extremely dangerous situation in a nuclear power station in which the nuclear fuel becomes very hot and melts through its container and escapes into the environment.”

      “A complete failure, especially in financial matters.”

      “Financial/economic/market meltdown.”

      “The last few months have seen the progressive meltdown of the country’s political system.”

      https://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/english/meltdown

    262. Dan says:

      Tack these on re. Blood chat

      https://twitter.com/alanferrier/status/1581604144598900737

      Archived article links from previous two tweets in Alan’s thread. Quoting this first tweet of Alan’s as don’t want 4th link to kick this post into moderation.

      A reminder that Jeremy Hunt, when Health Secretary, sold the state-owned NHS blood plasma supplier – Plasma Resources UK – to Bain Capital, a US company co-founded Mitt Romney, in a £230m deal.

      Bain Capital then sold it on to the Chinese Creat Group. For £820m.

      From 2013 – “Is there no limit to what this Government will privatise?’: UK plasma supplier sold to US private equity firm Bain Capital

      https://archive.ph/Up7Ee

      From 2019 – “How Bio Products, our blood plasma supplier, ended up with China
      https://archive.ph/zCceO



    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