Spot The Problem
Posted on
August 27, 2026 by
Rev. Stuart Campbell
See if you can identify why this isn’t an ideal way to run a justice system.
We’ve put a couple of clues in for the slower folk. Answer below.
Still, the Crown Office IS at least theoretically accountable to Parliament, so as long as the governing party is full of strong, independent, fair-minded MSPs willing to stand up for justice even against their own party leadership then everything will be oh wait right yeah we remember now.
Unlike England and Wales, there isn’t really the possibility of a private prosecution in Scotland either.
Dear God, It’s like a corrupt process Donald Trump has cobbled together.
Did you hear that Trump has sacked everyone in the US Electorate who check that elections are conducted in in a fair manner?
Could be here next as it looks like we are already on stitch up street.
No, I didn’t hear that – because it’s not true.
A simole search confirms that.
DT is a nightmare President, but making things up is just grist to the mill of his “Fake News” narrative.
The same lax attitude to the truth got us where we are now in Scotland. Let’s be better than They are.
“resolution would more likely come through … sustained external pressure”
Maybe 100,000 Sovereign Scots on the streets every Saturday, demanding resolution, would swing it. Big demos in every city and town in the land. That’s how it’s done in every other country when the people really, really care about something.
What was the last thing Scots really, really cared about, other than Floyd? The Poll Tax?
Thanks Rev – that provoked a laugh. Thanks also for your continued coverage of what is actually going on in Scotland.
The Fabian Society are the think tanks advising all the governance of Great Britain and Crown officials under employment , this would include Scotland for as long as we have and accept a devolved government
Knowing where the problem lies is half the battle won,
The Fabian Society does not advise all the governance of Great Britain or Crown officials, as it is not an official government body. Instead, it is an independent, left-leaning think tank and membership society explicitly affiliated with the Labour Party.
The organization operates alongside hundreds of other competing think tanks across the political spectrum.
The society has zero formal authority over Crown officials, civil servants, or the overall governance of Great Britain.
If you believe any of that, you must be incredibly naive.
Fabians have infiltrated every strata of the state apparatus and have been actively implementing their agenda over the past 30 years. Even during the supposed “Tory” years the British state remained fully captured by Fabian dogma.
This Fabian Society think tanks for the governance of Great Britain is where the ideas are formed on more than two genders
So the Crown as in the English Crown and its structures – the Scottish Crown has not been passed –
has total immunity in Scotland.
There a name for that.
“There a name for that”
Prof Elkins refers to Anglo-imperial rule over annexed territories as ‘legalized lawlessness’.
Westminster and its colonial administrators have a gey lang history. Here we are reminded that: “The colonial regime owes its legitimacy to force” (Fanon)
Scots are beginning to notice that ‘justice’ in the colonies always differs from that in the metropolitan capital.
Grrr, colonisers.
There was me thinking that Two Tier Britain was entirely a creation of the Fabians based on favouring certain races and religions over straight white men, Christians, Agnostics, Atheists etc. “Gradual change” and all that, in step with the
Fabians’ aims.
The metropolitan capital is largely a lawless Wild West full of warring ethnic gangs, the streets awash with firearms and illicit substances and the population left by the, ahem, “powers that be” (not be) to the mercy of the various violent factions and their doings, left to be mugged, shot and jibbed at will. London is the template they want for the rest of the country…
Alf probably watches Aliens with a deep sense of satisfaction as the Xenomorphs kick the colonists’ backsides, colonisers getting what they deserve and all that. Blooming cheek, going to someone else’s planet and colonising it. I’m sure Fanon etc al have quotes explaining the massacre on LV426 and blaming it all on the colonists, or something (ironically, the story is about corporate greed and the abandonment of morals or care for fellow men in pure pursuit of profit, which does have colonial parallels).
You’re on speed, right?
“You’re on speed, right?”
Me or Alf?
Can’t speak for the Prof but for me it’s worse. I’m autistic…
The Fabian Society are not in only one governance of Westminster due to being under the Westminster parliament of Englands legislation and Statues of the Scotland Acts for their devolved government to Scotland.
Aidan,
What you say is true,
This is the way Scotland is run by the Westminster parliament legislation and Statues under the Scotland acts,
It’s nothing to do with the way Westminster runs Scotland. Scottish law has never provided for private prosecution (unlike English law), and Westminster has not interfered to introduce it.
That’s not entirely true. Private prosecution used to be relatively common in Scotland before the growth of police forces in the first half of the nineteenth century. Of course, until 1747 we also used to have what you might call private judges; great landowners with heritable jurisdictions, all the way up to the right of pit and gallows. Naturally Westminster abolished them, yet now we find they might be quite useful. Supposing an erring Lord Advocate or First Minister were to wander into the jurisdiction of some clan chief who didn’t approve of the way they behaved…
“the Crown Office IS at least theoretically accountable to Parliament”
Aye, an in Ashis Nandy’s ‘subtradition’ colony that has ‘digested’ another ‘gatecrashed’ culture we aw ken wha’s Croun an wha’s Pairlament an thair jubous ‘values’ remain soverane.
Aye, Alf. The Lord Advocate’s authority is enshrined in the Scotland Act 1998, and the Lord Advocate exercises these responsibilities independently of any other person.
No minister — Scottish or UK — can instruct COPFS on prosecutions.
The Lord Advocate’s independence is absolute and constitutionally protected – the office was specifically designed to be such.
The Scotland Act 1998 was primarily created and steered by UK Government ministers in Tony Blair’s first Labour administration (1997-1998) — especially those responsible for constitutional reform and Scottish affairs.
The key figures were:
These ministers collectively drove the legislation through the UK Parliament and shaped its content.
Also, The Lord Advocate is appointed by the King (of England), on the recommendation of the First Minister, with the agreement of the Scottish Parliament.
This is set out explicitly in section 48(1) of the Scotland Act 1998.
Enoch Powell said, “Power devolved is power retained,” and in the Scotland act we can plainly see how those powers operate.
The central government retains ultimate control and influence over those powers, ensuring that sovereignty and authority remain effectively with Westminster.
In the structure you have described “Westminster” plays no role at all.
It is the Scottish FM and the Scottish Parliament who have authority to remove the Lord Advocate.
“In the structure you have described “Westminster” plays no role at all.”
Apart from the fact that the structure was designed and approved by Westminster and passed by a UK Parliament with the help of its Anglified Scottish servants in the first place.
“It is the Scottish FM and the Scottish Parliament who have authority to remove the Lord Advocate.”
And they do, technically… but in practice it would be very, very, very difficult, and any attempt by Holyrood to do so would most likely cause a constitutional crisis.
So it’s unlikely Swinney, who appointed the current Lord Advocate, Ruth Charteris KC, would sack her.
The First Minister and Scotland’s Parliament can remove a Lord Advocate… but only together, and doing so would be politically explosive.
The system is designed to make removal possible, but rare – ostensibly to protect the independence of Scotland’s prosecution service, but actually to keep Westminster’s grip on Scotland tight.
It’s so rare, in fact, that it has never been done – and I suspect it never will be while Scotland answers to Westminster.
It seems to me that you don’t yet understand who really runs Scotland.
Here’s a clue – it isn’t Swinney and it isn’t Holyrood and it isn’t the Lord Advocate and it isn’t Scotland’s Solicitor General.
Power devolved… and all that.
So what you’re saying is that because it’s politically explosive Holyrood could never remove the Lord Advocate, but somehow the U.K. Parliament could? (Even though that would be politically explosive and require primary legislation).
In fact, it would be entirely possible and foreseeable for Holyrood to remove the Lord Advocate, most likely in response to some scandal, were MSP’s to feel strongly enough about it. In practice, the First Minister would likely remove the Lord Advocate themselves rather than risk the embarrassment of such a vote.
Yet again, the failure of Scottish MSP’s, elected by Scotland’s people, is blamed baselessly upon England in a classic case of “it wasnae us”.
Oh give it a fucking rest, Northy.
This has already been done to death.
The Scottish Parliament can remove the Lord Advocate from office quick as it likes by passing a vote of No Confidence.
The Scottish Parliament can refuse to ratify as many proposed replacement candidates for the post as it likes until it gets one it finds acceptable.
Stop insulting our intelligence, FFS.
“…Holyrood could never remove the Lord Advocate, but somehow the U.K. Parliament could?”
Your reading comprehension appears to be somewhat lacking.
Quote where I said that in my comment, or even hinted at the idea, and prove your assertion.
Although, now that I think of it, Westminster probably could get shot of a troublesome (troublesome to Westminster, that is) Lord Advocate by instructing Holyrood to bin them on its behalf. </P.
Scotland's Parliament giving the job to a candidate troublesome to Westminster is highly unlikely, though, when one gives the idea even a scrap of thought.
“…In practice, the First Minister would likely remove the Lord Advocate themselves rather than risk the embarrassment of such a vote.”
Yet another profound lack of knowledge on how such decisions are made.
The First Minister cannot sack a Lord Advocate on their own.
According to the the Scotland act 1998, it must be a decision agreed by both the FM and Scotland’s parliament.
Neither Scotland’s parliament nor a First Minister can sack a Lord Advocate without the agreement and consent of the other.
A Lord Advocate cannot be removed without a parliamentary vote on the matter and the First Minister’s agreement – the Scotland Act 1998 makes this explicitly impossible.
I get you, Northy.
Even of HR did something you approved of, it would be for the wrong reasons, so as a point of principle, you would have to object.
@ Northcode says: 27 August, 2026 at 5:06 pm
“Neither Scotland’s parliament nor a First Minister can sack a Lord Advocate without the agreement and consent of the other”
Usual Northy pish.
Still, it’s an advance on his earlier posts which implied that removing/appointing the Lord Advocate was all down to the underhand machinations of Westminster.
To get rid of the LA, a VONC by the MSPs does it. That’s the nuclear option.
The less explosive option, of the FM and HR agreeing, is also available, as Northy says, but it’s not the only option.
And, as we recently saw with our fighting friends in the east, it’s also perfectly possible for citizen power to apply the pressure needed to hire and fire popular and unpopular government appointees. It’s not exactly rocket science, but it does require Scots to get engaged and not just sit on our arses.
One interpretation is that we Scots don’t seem to have these political instincts.
Another interpretation is that outside of this pointless points scoring silo, few Scots actually give a shit.
“It’s not the only option.”
Legally, it is the only option.
The Scotland Act 1998 provides for a single legal mechanism for removing a Lord Advocate.
There is no alternative legal route.
A Vote of No Confidence (VONC) cannot directly remove the Lord Advocate.
It can only collapse the government, which then might, indirectly, create conditions for removal.
The comment is describing political reality, not constitutional reality – the two are not the same.
Public pressure might influence Holyrood’s decision, but it can’t bypass the legal process.
The only formal legal mechanism for removing a sitting Lord Advocate is this:
So, FM + Parliament = removal mechanism.
This is framed as if this is a simple option, when in reality it’s constitutionally required — there is no alternative to the legal process described for removing a Lord Advocate.
OK, Northy, so now you’re saying:
1. The LA is part of (an appointee of) the Scottish Government.
2. A VONC dismisses the SG.
3. But the VONC doesn’t dismiss the part of the SG that is the LA.
4. When the new SG is constituted, after the VONC, and goes to appoint a new LA …
5. Aw naw! Noo there’s twa o’ the cants.
Sorry, Northy.
The Lord Advocate is also a government minister and serves as the principal legal adviser to the Scottish Government and holds ministerial responsibilities.
I suppose they would lose their ministerial post if the government collapsed after a VONC… they would still be Lord Advocate, though.
Only an FM + a functioning Scottish Parliament can remove them from the office of Lord Advocate – it is a very secure and powerful office… it was deliberately designed to be so.
A new government might keep them… or remove them and get a a brand new shiny one (after checking with Westminster if the one they prefer is acceptable), but there would still only be one Lord Advocate – there can be only one, as The Kurgan would say.
Goalposts shifted again.
So the Scottish Government could dismiss the Lord Advocate.
But the Scottish Government would just appoint a new one chosen by Westminster.
You could have posted “We’re doomed!” right back at the start and saved a lot of time and trouble.
But thanks for participating in the charade, Northy. Got to say that as long as your kind of negative, “no hope” attitude continues to be all pervasive, the “dark forces” of Westminster, MI5, etc. can stand down.
You’ve already defeated yourself before you start. Why would “the coloniser” even bother showing up for the fight?
Well Northcode – a rare event has occurred, you are right and I am wrong. It is as you say, the Lord Advocate can only be removed on the approval of both the FM and the Holyrood Parliament, a usually strong protection for a government minister.
As you set out below, should Holyrood feel strongly enough about the position of a Lord Advocate, they could hold a VoNC in the FM, and appoint a new FM solely to replace the Lord Advocate. That obviously has significant political ramifications, but equally when you consider that the governing party in Holyrood generally does not have an overall majority of MSP’s, it’s not entirely unforeseeable.
As for Westminster, the U.K. Parliament has unlimited parliamentary sovereignty and which means that it can achieve any objective in law provided that the objective is physically achievable, and is capable of being defined in primary legislation. So yes, it is possible for Westminster to remove to Lord Advocate, but not through any established or accepted process, and it would be very difficult to see a circumstance where that would occur (outside of perhaps a profound deadlock that could not be resolved in Scotland).
The reality is that for most MP’s who represent seats outside of Scotland, they don’t care who the Lord Advocate is or what they do. It’s not an issue for their constituents. The Scottish system provides for a way to remove the Lord Advocate so why would non-Scottish MP’s want to get involved.
It is not surprising that most people outside of Scotland think the Scottish government is actually a Scottish government.
But the devolved governance of Scotland is run and ruled by the Westminster parliament of England and wales and Ireland government in which they State Scotland as a (Sovereign, my personal research analysis ) Country in a voluntary union . Cannot alter or amend the 1707 treaty of union,
Whilst they retain reservations to themselves in those acts, under the Scotland acts.
To produce the Scotland acts the Westminster parliament [ must ] have been acting as the parliament of England and Wales,
As Scotland has never made a treaty of union with the parliament of Great Britain.or the UK parliament.
“most people outside of Scotland think the Scottish government is actually a Scottish government”
FFS, James, the Scottish government levies taxes on Scots (and others) living in Scotland. Income taxes. Property taxes. Purchase taxes. If that’s not the definition of government, then WTAF is?
It’s a crying shame you hardly pay any tax. If you did pay what working people pay, and still persisted with your “government hoax” line, you could then get agitated about something that actually matters – the “theft” of Scots’ hard-earned cash by the ideologically deluded, incompetent, criminal, troughers infesting HR.
Crikey. Even English parish councils – with whom the then Scottish Executive was tellingly compared – can levy taxes.
Good spot, am firinn.
Would it be fair to say that even English parish councils are usually bundled in with what we colloquially call Local Government?
Perhaps you’re implying that because HR and English parish councils both levy taxes, that proves HR isn’t a government.
I hope you’re not, because that would just be daft.
“Watchdog goes to Supreme Court over secret Whatsapps in Sturgeon row
Scotland’s transparency watchdog is to take the Scottish Government to the Supreme Court in the wake of a ruling in a freedom of information battle relating to the inquiry into whether Nicola Sturgeon breached the ministerial code.”
———————————————-
David Hamilton, the Scottish Information Commissioner – is the only person prepared to take on the Scottish gov and officials.
additional information:
” The appeal announced today by the information commissioner relates to a judgment made by the Court of Session ruling of 26 March 2026 when it found in the Scottish Government’s favour.
It found that the government was right to withhold Whatsapp mesages and communications surrounding the case.
However, the SIC disputes this position.
It said today: “It is the Commissioner’s view, however, that the ruling goes on to give legal professional privileged information a status beyond that afforded by the FOI Act.
“The Commissioner considers that this ruling steps beyond Parliament’s clear intention behind the exemption in the FOI Act and erodes the importance of public interest considerations.”
Mr Hamilton stated: “My decision to seek leave to appeal this ruling to the Supreme Court has not been taken lightly.
“It is my view that this ruling runs contrary to the Parliament’s clear intention behind the FOI Act. There are significant implications and risks placed on the public’s right to access information because of this ruling – it is therefore clearly in the public interest that I seek to challenge this at the Supreme Court””.
————————————————
link to archive.ph
I’m reminded of the Biblical quote about a house divided amongst itself being unable to remain standing.
Once again, in plain text the state protecting its own in this post-democratic autocracy.
Good points above regarding Fabians and the utter ruin they have inflicted across Britain, including their present and persistent warmongering against Russia – another awful anti-Human autocratic entity – and involving ourselves in conflicts that have nothing to do with us and we should stay well clear of. Iraq wasn’t enough for them.
So let me get this right. The COPFS commits murder but the system is if it decides to do nothing then nothing can be done.
Rip roaring fine and dandy that. Ponzi schemes ya-bass.
But yes, murder analogy aside, solicit money for a cause and then blow it, and Ponzi scheme ya-bass as the Glasgow gangsters used to say. It’s cowboy country and there ain’t nothing you can do about it.
All those poor diddies that donated money are just that in the eyes of cowboy country – diddies if I may inelegantly and offensively opine.
High time we changed the rotten sheriff.
Stu,
This is the complicated position you are having to deal with when it crown to the crown offices and laws of and in Scotland.
The people of Scotland and old government of Scotland have never entered into a treaty of union with the parliament of Great Britain or the UK government,
We only temporally held a treaty with the parliament of England and Wales. Not the new created parliament of Great Britain, however the new parliament of Great Britain dissolved the Scottish parliament from the parliament of the new created Great Britain,
Leaving just the old parliament of England and annexed Wales.
So while the Crown offices come under the jurisdiction of the Crown of England as in the act of settlement,
I am not surprised that pinning them down to the laws of Scotland in Scotland becomes extremely difficult as the parliament and crown offices of England, when we have no 1707 treaty with the Great Britain government or UK government that applied a Scotland act to Scotland.
The smoke and mirrors that Scotland holds a 1707 treaty with the parliament of Great Britain leads Scotlands people into a illusionary world of make believe when they think that Scotland holds such a treaty
We only have or did have…a 1707 treaty of union with the parliament for England and Wales.
And thats when it becomes complicated for those living outside of Scotland or in foreign Countries to understand,
The crown applies only to England under the Westminsters parliament acts ” The act of settlement “
“The crown applies only to England under the Westminsters parliament acts”
This should seem obvious, James, but is taking time to register, as some btl here still believe in the ‘union’ hoax, and that ‘the moon is made of cheese’ (Cesaire).
Westminster’s ‘Scotland Act’ merely confirms Scotland as a ‘dependency’, i.e. a colony.
So if devolution had never happened, Alf, Scotland’s status as a colony could never have been confirmed.
Crivens! And you would never have been able to post endless screeds about Fanon, Memmi, Cesaire, Elkins and the Jonesy boyo. Oh, and new kid on the block, Nandy.
And we would have been forever denied my favourite, the “cheese” quote.
Phew! Quite a narrow escape when you think about it.
“And we would have been forever denied my favourite, the “cheese” quote.”
Dinna forget Fanon’s prediction that a national party ‘co-opted by colonialism’ surely ‘disintegrates’, much as we now see:
link to thenational.scot
Postcolonial theory is immensely valuable because it tells the anti-colonial (i.e. ‘independence’) movement aw it needs tae ken aboot the difficult path tae leeberation, including that ‘the colonizer hates theory’ (Memmi), which means the colonizer hates the truth, Hatey, and clings tae the colonial hoax tae the bitter end.
link to yoursforscotlandcom.wordpress.com
“the colonizer hates theory’ (Memmi), which means the colonizer hates the truth”
“Theory and truth are not the same thing” (Hatey).
“clings tae the colonial hoax”
So it’s a crushing oppression, merciless exploitation, racism, fascism, and a hoax as well?
Who’s the actual coloniser here, Alf? You’re getting yourself so tangled up in this that you’re arguably claiming that the colonised is the coloniser. Or perhaps vice versa.
“The frustrated and exhausted cry out for an end to the bullshit” (Hatey).
Oh, fuck – I ran out of toilet paper… the 1707 treaty must be to blame…
It’s a verifiable fact that nobody’s fingers ever went through the bog roll while wiping a runny one until Thatcher.
Ran oot o’ bog roll?
I assumed you buy it in bulk….for obvious reasons.
The offences of ‘misfeasance/misconduct in public office’ do not, as I understand it, exist under Scots law; however ‘Scots law features a comparable common law crime of ‘wilful neglect of duty by a public official.’.
As it seems to me, if a person in public office-say a leading Minister, politician or CEO of a national body who had knowledge of, and responsibility for the finances of such a body- would not the deliberate or reckless misrepresentation of the finances of such a body by such a person be ‘wilful neglect of duty’ ?
North code.
Scotland has never entered into a treaty of union with the Great Britain parliament at any time in history.
The Scotland acts can therefore only be created by the parliament for England and Wales, if the temporally parliament of Great Britain had not been ended but the 1707 treaty did end by dissolving the old parliament of Scotland from the newly created parliament.
Which England, Wales and the monarch of England did do.
Thereafterwards there is no such position to be held by the Crown of England in Scotland,
And I repeat, Scotland has never made or created a treaty of union with the parliament of Great Britain, nor with the parliament of the UK.
Aidan,
Scotland has never throughout history made a treaty of union with the Great Britain parliament or with the parliament of the UK.
Westminster as the parliament for England and Wales applied the Scotland Act. and also the crown of England passed as acts by the Westminster parliament for England and Wales under the the act of settlement .
What section do you not understand that Westminster plays no roll in Scotlands devolved government,
The words “devolved government ” should be clear as a bell.
Where do you think it was devolved from?
Tommo,
Well done for checking out Scots laws, seeing as the money spoke of is mainly Scots finances that were given for a destination and cause that was named.
The referral to the Supreme court is under the Crown of England under the The UK parliament which Scotland holds no treaty with.
“James Che says:
27 August, 2026 at 3:20 pm
The referral to the Supreme court is under the Crown of England under the The UK parliament which Scotland holds no treaty with.”
—————————————————————
You are wrong. (again and again and again…)
Reverend, is there going to be yet another letter from yourself or is this the end of the line?
Maybe David Davies should mention it in parliament…
“Maybe David Davies should mention it in parliament”
Maybe the Scots who care should take to the streets. And not sit around expectantly waiting for favours from people they’ll insult in the next breath by calling them abusive, oppressive, colonialist basturts.
Just an idea, based on observing the behaviour of “normal” concerned citizens in “normal” democratic countries.
It’s hardly a great advert for Indy when so many Indy supporters still seem to want some big grown up to fix things for them.
@Hatey, I am not an indy supporter 😉
Two of a kind, then.
You can mark your own homework?
Damn! If only I’d known when I was at school.
Still, I recon a Banana Protest is more fitting than a Judicial Review…
Rev Stu crowd funds to deliver a dozen boxes of bananas outside COPFS HQ in Chambers Street and Holyrood every day.
No need for anyone to sign for them – just dump them on the kerbside.
If we’re going to be made to live in a Banana Republic we might as well own it!
Marking your own jotters is De Rigeur these days, it’s one of the central pillars of Big State Socialism.
Rev Stu…
Can you encourage David Davis to raise this in the HoC that a bent FM and a bent Lord Advocate are effectively above the law in the Banana Republic formerly known as Scotland?
Cheers!
Since it is now abundantly clear they is no “official route to getting this into court, when does the judicial review kick and when does the crowdfunding start?
There’s more than one way to skin a cat!
What goes around comes around!
Just don’t blame someone else for your own country’s disgrace.
Absolutely!
Like all these people who don’t take responsibility for the decades of coercive behaviour, gas lighting, financial abuse and physical assaults at the hands of their supposedly loving partners.
How dare they blame someone else for their own circumstances.
Disgraceful!
“physical assaults” Bob?
Are you saying some big, bad, English barsturts roughed you up?
Did they run away afterwords, or just stroll?
Aha…site prick arrives, right on cue.
Read up on a 1000 years of history genius and even you’ll run out of fingers and toes counting the occasions when the neighbours decided en masse to take a blade to a Scot, and you’ll get nowhere near 1746 before you’ll have had to take your socks off.
Ethnic cleansing of Highland Gaels in the 17th and 18th centuries ring any bells?
Tanks secreted away in cattle market sheds in Glasgow in 1919 for why? To help the bin men?
Could’ve been worse I suppose – we could’ve been Irish…
A good analogy, except for the unavoidable fact that it’s our own fellow Scots who are entirely at fault here, rather than the incompetent and malevolent mob Dahn Sahf inside the M25. No amount of handwringing, philosophical quotes or blaming “They Inglish” can cover this fact.
Spartan…
Back to the here and now, and irrespective of the useful idiots with Scottish accents, of which there are legion. if you don’t see the grubby paw-prints of the British State all over the catalogue of events which began with the attempted fit-up of Salmond, then it’s clear that you’re not paying attention.
You need to grow up, Bob.
The adults have forgiven far worse people for far worse things far more recently.
Still sore about things that happened centuries ago? Get a grip.
Are you going to pretend you hate the Germans for bombing Clydebank? Or the Japanese for torturing and killing our POWs?
I very much doubt it.
Adults you say, Hatey?
Look in a mirror… You’ll not find one there!
That’s a wonderful gift you have there, Bob.
Stamp your foot, wrinkle your nose, and you can transport yourself backwards and forwards, between those delightfully uncomplicated and blissfully unsophisticated days in the primary school playground, and 2026.
Me? I lost the knack when I grew up.
Robert @ 6:33pm
I would not be surprised if the M25 omniclusterfuckpermashambles was involved in some way, even if they are cripplingly incompetent. Interesting how Mrs Murrill did decamp to within the M25 following the events that transpired, off move for someone claiming to be a Scottish nationalist; one does ponder if she’s being looked after by her handlers doon there.
Spartan 117 says: at 6:13 pm
“A good analogy, except for the unavoidable fact that it’s our own fellow Scots who are entirely at fault here, rather than the incompetent and malevolent mob Dahn Sahf inside the M25. No amount of handwringing, philosophical quotes or blaming “They Inglish” can cover this fact.”
The trouble with what you state is that it isn’t that cut and dry though for various reasons.
You have to look at cause and effect.
EG. Why do quite so many Scots think and vote the way they do?
Only a complete idiot would try to deny or hide the massive influence of the Pro-union MSM and “Newspapers”.
There’s a reason the likes of this site exit, which is one man’s attempt to enlighten more folk to what is really happening; Because there is no way the pro-union MSM or “Newspapers” will publish the kind of journalism you get on Wings. Though you may get some watered-down version years later.
If broadcasting was devolved to Scotland rather than reserved to London Rule, we might have a more up the curve electorate. But we don’t, and as has been said many times previously, most Scots are like mushrooms… kept in the dark and fed shit. Plato’s Cave allegory is fitting.
The poundshop “Scottish” Parliament is another fudge farce, and only exists as a result of the Scotland Act at Westminster. The electoral system used for Holyrood is a joke few comprehend, it may be portrayed as more fair and proportional, but it jist allows a load of cuckoos in the nest from English Political Parties.
That David Davis has to use his parliamentary privilege position in Westminster to highlight matters pertaining to Salmond because no equivalence exists in the “Scottish” Parliament, shows that there are significant differences in the important structural setups of separation of powers and our institutions.
Where is the devolved English Parliament for us to view and see how things are so much better run there…
Every day the site prick whines on endlessly about all sorts of shite that Scots can actually do fuck all about because all the major powers are reserved to Westminster.
When the Queen died, all we got was a rushed process to get a new monarch quickly installed without Scots even getting a chance to question and consent to the process; When that would have been the natural time for a discussion to be had on ongoing monarchy.
And with less than 50% of Scots being supportive of ongoing monarchy, why does the Crown still hold such a prominent place in our country’s structures, at what point do we get an opportunity to alter this paradigm we exist within.
Spartan…
Well, if it was good enough for Burgess, Maclean and Philby to piss off to Moscow, then why not London in Sturgeon’s case?
Perfectly reasonable behaviour when you think about it.
Dan & Robert – I can’t disagree with anything in your posts. All good points.
“there is no way the pro-union MSM or “Newspapers” will publish the kind of journalism you get on Wings”
The majority of people these days don’t get their news or their opinions from the MSM or newspapers.
“If broadcasting was devolved to Scotland rather than reserved to London Rule, we might have a more up the curve electorate”
See above.
“most Scots are like mushrooms… kept in the dark and fed shit”
Jeezo. No internet or mobies in Scotland, is that so?
“The electoral system used for Holyrood is a joke few comprehend”
See above. Are we too lazy to investigate? Or just too thick to understand the answers?
“it may be portrayed as more fair and proportional, but it jist allows a load of cuckoos in the nest”
Aye, Dan, it may be more fair and proportional, but then the darn thing goes and delivers more fair and proportional results.
“That David Davis has to use his parliamentary privilege position in Westminster to highlight matters pertaining to Salmond because no equivalence exists in the “Scottish” Parliament, shows that there are significant differences”
It also shows the completely useless nature of all the SNP and Scottish MPs at WM, cos they have exactly the same parliamentary privilege. But let’s give them a free pass, eh?
“Every day the site prick whines on endlessly about all sorts of shite that Scots can actually do fuck all about”
We’re all doomed. We’re all colonised. It’s all hopeless. They’re all agin us. And we hate Hatey most of all because he says we’re none of these things, if we’d just get off our arses.
“When the Queen died, all we got was a rushed process to get a new monarch quickly installed without Scots even getting a chance to question and consent to the process; When that would have been the natural time for a discussion to be had on ongoing monarchy”
WTAF? The natural time is every fucking General Election, when one or more parties can put in their manifesto that they intend for the current monarch to be the last. Then it becomes settled policy for the natural lifespan of the monarch, that on his/her death, we become a republic, if that’s what the electorate want.
You want to scratch around for a president or whatever at zero notice when somebody dies?
“at what point do we get an opportunity to alter this paradigm we exist within”
Jeezo. Every 5 years or less at WM and every 5 years or less at HR.
In summary, the usual defeatist sob story from Dan, interspersed with some playground insults cos that’s the only way he can make himself feel better, some playground policy ideas, and some deluded fantasies.
Stick to making soup, Dan.
Desperate stuff from the site prick there as he tries to deny, ignore and gloss over the massive influence and control the pro-union MSM and “Newspapers” have over our society.
A fitting example to highlight jist how manipulatable the wider electorate are by the influences and machinations of the UK State can be seen by the change in polled voting intentions to the reality of what a Salmond led Party actually then achieved after years of atrocious antics and smearing.
Something significant certainly happened to turn a polling intention of about 45% down to virtually fuck all, and it clearly played into the hands of the UK State.
link to wingsoverscotland.com
And of course, there is no way any Party could put multiple significant decisions like returning Scotland to self-governance, and becoming a republic, into their manifesto every election and expect that such big changes would not impact their vote share through division of views of the electorate because these “radical” policies would get the monster treatment of some sort from pro-union State defenders similarly to what Salmond received.
And there would also be the contention of certain aspects being reserved powers rather than devolved to deal with.
Plus twisted sophist cunts like yourself would then argue that even if a Party gained a position of power, any one matter would not have a proper mandate to act on because there were multiple other matters in the manifesto so it blurred consent to any one particular aspect: But not forgetting that the next day (or more likely hour), you’d then be arguing that Scots voted for everything that was in the manifesto…
This would be why where possible in democratic societies referenda should be held for certain decisions, so the campaigning on either side of a particular decision is more focused and voting intentions are more accurate and legitimate to act on.
But when you’re not allowed a referendum on something even when a unionist states you have a mandate, you know the goal post are going to keep getting moved, and you are clearly being denied a right to self-determination.
link to wingsoverscotland.com
Well for starters get your own patter.
” These people” who are these people? and more to the point what the hell are you talking about? My comment was directed to the usual subjects. You know the ones who can’t come to terms how buried and dead the Indy movement is.
The glorious Soar Alba, Pure Yessers movement has turned to poison quicker than lager turns to pish. You lot punched yourselves into a corner while the SNP dipped your handbags.
The main topic on here is the Colonial fandom. Watch how quickly that gets viciously ditched after Arday. The last ten years for Scotland has been perverts at the expense of women and children. Now it’s how bad we white people are and the third world was a Nirvana of happiness until the white man turned up.
We live in the greatest civilization the world has ever known. Freedom that most of the world only dreams of. The Left are the danger to the world, the cancer on humanity and here comes the cure by the man you love to hate. The man who protects those very freedoms. The greatest president since George Washington.
@ Dan says: 27 August, 2026 at 11:03 pm
“prick”
“cunts”
Got something on your mind, Dan?
Maybe your next pot o’ soup, somebody better slip something into it.
Just noticed the site bawbag and keen typist swerved addressing the main points of my post, and instead tried to divert away dealing with them because I used naughty words.
Didn’t deny he is a twisted sophist though…
Prick AND bawbag, Dan.
Yet you still expect to be taken seriously?
OK, I’ll do it. What kind of soup you got on the go today?
Does anyone else find it amazing that in the past 300 odd years no historian, scholar, or politician has realised that the union we entered into is in fact illegal and should be abondoned immediately.
Only James Che or Cheyne has discovered this and advises us of this ‘fact’ umpteen times every day!
Of course, it could be argued that Che or Cheyne is simply a nutter! Who is going to leap to it’s defence? The learned professor maybe? Sam, Confused the Twat and others will surely be champing at the bit to get stuck in.
I commend your efforts and persistance Stu but think that you are banging your head agsinst a brick wall, unless someone within the circus breaks ranks and tells all. Fingers crossed.
“no historian, scholar, or politician has realised that the union we entered into is in fact illegal”
Too busy stuffing their faces with Memmi’s “moon cheese”.
Yum!
What’s even more amazing Chas, is that when this very question was being considered by the Supreme Court, which it has been many times recently, neither counsel nor any of the judges (including in the lower courts) realised it.
LOL.
This story just appeared on the BBC website:
link to bbc.co.uk
Don’t hold your breath…
Agent Sturgeon has friends in high places.
At my age, I wouldn’t dare.
I am no longer living in hope.
Hatey,
The Scottish government levies taxes in Scotland, as indeed HMRC do in Scotland from England,
Except in Scotland having a devolved government from Westminster and Westminster parliament government in Scotland taxes are levied from two governing bodies on Scots both attached to Westminster.
Alf,
You are correct in your analysis the Crown belongs to England under the acts passed by Westminster parliaments Of England ” Acts of settlement.”
And it still does not register with a lot of people, especially as the following history occurred, as the old Scottish parliament withdrew their parliament from the political parliamentary union treaty,
While England went further still and dissolved the old Scottish parliament from the political parliamentary union altogether.
No going back from that one,
The monarch of England also thought she had the right to close and end the Scottish parliament from a parliamentary union.with England.
A Scottish parliament that has been declared closed down from a parliamentary union with the parliament of Englands parliament means no treaty continued ended, voided, extinct,
And therefore cannot legally be consumed while being extinct by the parliament of England or the parliament of Great Britain that was to be created if the parliament of Scotland had remained, but from that timeline onwards is no longer a participant to the union.
No going back on that one either,
You’ve got to ask yourself, why is Nicola Sturgeon being protected like this?
She’s not clever, she’s not charismatic, she achieved nothing in government except to make things worse. She’s a political Lilliputian who would have been out of her depth as a local councillor. And the coverup of her, in my opinion, obvious criminality is very damaging to the reputation of Scotland’s institutions.
So why is Nicola being protected in the same way made men in the mafia are?
I think I just answered my own question. They’re feart of opening the can of worms because Nicola could never have done this on her own. They’re protecting her because if (when) she goes down, she’ll sing like a canary to save her own backside. There’s no loyalty among thieves.
Something is deeply rotten in the state of Scotland. And very senior officials are up to their brass necks in it.
I have no faith at all in anyone associated with the SNP or their horrible Green pals. But surely there must be at least one Labour, Liberal, Reform or Tory MSP who isn’t part of the gang of crooks and who has the courage to demand answers and refuse to be fobbed off?
And if not, when are we going to set up a party that represents the Scottish people? We’re like hostages in our own country now.
“she achieved nothing in government except to make things worse”
Ah, c’moan noo, Red.
How can you have forgotten the Covid Years when Saint Nicola stood between us and certain death? Those nights when everybody tuned in to her TV broadcasts to hear what she had done that day to keep us all safe from harm?
Are you now denying that as you used to drift off to sleep, you used to offer up a wee prayer of thanks for Scotland’s Mammie?
If you didn’t laugh you’d cry Hayley 🙂
A good post Red, summing up why things are the way they are.
It’s not “Colonialism” or “They Inglish” (by “Inglish” they mean of course the fetid mess within the M25 who are so incompetent they couldn’t arrange a pish-up doon the local boozer, never mind orchestrate a Colonial plan worthy of the 18th Century, or the Galactic Empire, or the Romulans), it’s our own kind who, once they got ensconced within the Golden Trough, did the usual Commie thing of getting their own people into all the institutions and ensuring continuity of the gravy train for their benefit.
It’s utterly astounding how many Scots seem to be unable to accept the uncomfortable truth that we were shafted by our own who claimed to stand for us, whilst doing the very opposite, just like their counterparts within the M25 toilet.
LOL.
ALL of them are “crooks” Red. Any budding politician with courage or conviction is dispensed with long before the candidate selection shortlist is drawn up. Every major political party is compromised in this fashion. Others run the crooked show.
C’moan, Marie!
Spill the beans. Dinna be leaving us hanging.
If they believed you were important enough to “neutralise” they would have done it long since.
You’re perfectly safe to identify the “others”.
This thing we call a parliament needs to be closed down. It will deny the political class in Scotland and its multitude of hingers on further opportunity to do harm to the Scots and Scotland. The pounshop elite despise both country and people. It needs to go. Get these racist scumbags off the trough!
Red…
“But surely there must be at least one Labour, Liberal, Reform or Tory MSP who isn’t part of the gang of crooks and who has the courage to demand answers and refuse to be fobbed off?”
Forgive my stating the obvious, but they’re Unionist, so why would they be interested in cleaning out the SNP’s stalls for the benefit of genuine supporters of Indy who might make competent politicians?
As Bonaparte supposedly said…”Never interrupt your enemy when they’re making a mistake”. Or in the case of the SNP, a catalogue of mistakes.
One of the few honourable Unionists it has to be said is David Davis, who on the face of it puts principles before politics. A rare breed indeed!
To change the dial a tad I’ve just been watching the horrendous pictures of the Himalaya floods arising from melting glaciers. Panic is now that there are hundred more that could be ready to drop.
Certainly makes you think about ” drill baby drill “. And makes you think too about good old greenwashing little old Scotland who are just finishing off a a 350,000 tonne a year waste to energy incinerator. And does the nice new green incinerator have carbon capture added or even use waste heat for district heating that could be used by the huge Queen Elizabeth University Hospital.
Well of course not, of course not. And then you think of Alex Salmond over a decade ago who was promoting carbon capture using defunct oil and gas fields.
Anyway, thankfully we don’t have any melting glaciers in Scotland – eh? so it doesn’t effect us – and its a myth anyway is it not.
Anyway, apologies for the small digression. I’m off to feed my cows anti fart supplements now quite extant in use across Scotland. We are green
“Certainly makes you think about ” drill baby drill “”
All those folks with gas or oil heating, or petrol or diesel vehicles, that shop for stuff delivered by diesel rail or road transport, should think a lot.
Anybody keen to install a heat pump, buy an electric car, and boycott shops that don’t get all their deliveries via electric vehicles, should tell us how much they had to spend to get virtuous, and how it’s all working out for them.
City centre, high rise flat dwellers, reliant on on-street parking, are particularly welcome to share their vehicle recharging stories.
It’s not that people don’t want to go green. It’s just that they have to shell out large sums to make the transition to a place where they have no more comfort or ease, either at home, or when traveling, than they had before.
While the people who lack those large sums have to suffer a drop in their standard of living once they’re green.
And do their costs go down? Electricity prices continue to rise. As for electric vehicles, having suckered enough people into buying one, the government now intends to hammer owners with pay-per-mile charges.
Not a few people have crunched the numbers and realised they are now better off with a 10 YO smallish petrol or diesel vehicle.
And a mix of home heating; gas, leccy and logs, allows you to pick your source depending on prices, or if another Storm Arwen flattens things for half a week. As the Climate Change boys say is going to be an increasing reality.
As you say, makes you think.
link to google.com
Remember the SNP are a COMPANY !
LAWYERING WITHOUT LAW (1 May 2026)
“What Does Legal Authoritarianism Look Like?”
link to youtube.com
The National doesn’t make good reading for people wanting Independence or the SNP membership.
It states “SNP members’ fury as party ‘blocks independence strategy debate at conference'”.
To the SNP membership!!! loyal Independence supporters have been trying to tell you for twelve years about Sturgeon and the SNP but would you listen. I can under stand your loyalty, but I’ll never forgive your stupidity and its because of your stupidity Scotland is in the mess its in.
The English PM says Irish border poll of the table who gives him the right. Please people do not talk about Celtic unity the SNP wouldn’t have any idea of it.
Do you know, I am pretty sick of the “colonists” are to blame for everything, the union was illegal, the UN will fix it and all the other daft arguments put forward here constantly. Essentially we have our own fuckwits in charge and for a number of years they have needed no outside help to screw us all over and feed from the trough
This is here and this is now.
What are we going to do about it? History has it place feeding into present day but it shouldn’t replace current reality and solutions.
Sensible answers on a postcard please, without recycling the same old tired arguments!
It’s quite simple you vote them out. If you don’t then the responsibility is yours. Unfortunately the very clever system imposed by Labour to prevent the SNP never gaining a majority means that you have cunts like Greer deciding policy.
“This is here and this is now.”
That’s a good start for a look at Scotland as an independent entity. That’s a premise that can be built on. That’s the most common sense I’ve read on here for ages. The only thing in the past we should be looking at is the mistakes and skulduggery by SCOTS that has went on. Nothing else.
Our neighbours are our friends and our partners and they are bigger than us.
There’s another good start!
No one ever succeeded in this life by blaming someone else.
“sick of the “colonists” are to blame for everything, the union was illegal, the UN will fix it and all the other daft arguments put forward here constantly”
Precisely, Rob.
Not forgetting the “we fucked up the first referendum so now we’re entitled to another but Wah! Boo! we’re no allowed”.
The way forwards has been clear since Ash Regan.
Plebiscitary elections fronted by a new, un-corrupted plebiscitary party. A party consisting of rational people who are determined that if Scotland grants them a democratic mandate, then they will be serious about ending the very real Union.
This solution ticks all the right boxes:
1 A majority democratic mandate from the Scottish electorate.
2 A sustained mandate, repeated at every HR and WM election.
3 Answers to the big questions – constitution, currency, EU, NATO, etc – supported by that same democratic mandate from the Scottish electorate.
4 Notification to the UK and the world that we’re serious.
5 The legality to engage with external actors for support, due to 1 and 2.
Of course, what this solution needs is sensible, mature, sustained, dedicated hard graft to make it work. Like all successful revolutions, it will be an effort taking years, not weeks.
Enthusiastic wavers of banners, who knock off early to hit the pubs, would need to be kept at arms length.
You are not alone in your thoughts Rob.
The ‘Wings’ comments section has evolved into a forum where bitter, twisted individuals are allowed to post the same repetitive shite umpteen times every day. It is getting almost as bad as the WGD site!
It appears that Scotland and its people are not to blame for our current situation. It is always someone else’s fault. The English, MI5, the media, the Establishment are the real culprits. The likes of Che or Cheyne, depending on the day of the week and Baird are unable or unwilling to answer any direct question. I seriously question their mental status. Stu has warned them in the past but that does not stop them from continually posting the same drivel.
Not to worry, the UN will be sorting things out any day now. No Scot will need to do anything.
In the absence of any meaningful separation of powers, it would seem that only a constitutional crisis can bring about a remedy. However, as you point out, Stuart, there are no Scottish politicians of the necessary calibre or mettle—they are all too feart. After all, a force for good is the enemy of the status quo.
An interesting article “Canada-US trade war has exposed a Brexit double standard”:
link to unherd.com
The author is pointing out that Canadian PM Carney is being lauded for protecting Canadian sovereignty against Trump by much the same people who lauded him when, as Governor of the Bank of England, he supported gifting sovereignty to Brussels so that the UK could remain in the EU.
“The script across so much of the commentariat seems to be this: if the EU does something, it’s good and fine, while those who resist it are nasty or deluded. If the Trump administration does [much the same thing], it is wicked and idiotic, but those who resist it are heroic and virtuous”
Interesting, because for some time, that’s been one of my gripes with the Indy supporters, simultaneously acclaiming Scottish inviolable Sovereignty, whilst bleating about being “dragged oot the EU”.
As the article puts it:
“commentators have not been arguing from a point of principle but instead from a kind of motivated reasoning, depending on the ideological valence of the actors involved”
Precisely.
Sparten 117,
Thank you for your knowledgable intervention yesterday regards the Fabian Society infiltration into the position of governments advisors.
It is interesting that agentx attempted to mislead the conversation, when one can fined multiple references to their foundation, and establishment in Britain and what they do in crazy modern governance.
am firinn.
It really is a treat to find intelligent responses to some of the misleading information projected towards the people of Scotland,
Well done
Your comments yesterday regards the Monarch of England “self declaring ” the position of king of Scotland
It helps to remember that the Act of settlement makes him king of England,
It also helps to remember there never was a queen Elizibeth 11 of Scotland.
On that two bases alone king Charles is king of England and by line of descent cannot inherit a fake Queen Elizabeth 11 of Scotland crown,
Only the Crown of England.
Add to that information that the old Scottish parliament was dissolved from the Great Britain parliament treaty by the monarch of England and by the transferred members of parliament of the England into the Great Britain parliament,
Hence the parliament of Great Britains England claims it is a Sovereign parliament from the crown of England,
As Scotlands Crown was not Sovereign over the parliament or people
The two Crowns could never unite or rule as one due to having two separate constitutions in two separate Countries.
And we will never see the monarch of England subjecting themselves below the crown of Scotland.
Everything is carried out behind closed doors and without consent of the Sovereign people in Scotland,
Its one of those smoke and mirrors situation like the crown judgements in Scotland.
It is delightful however to see Scotlands people beginning to realise that Scotland has very little to do with being subsumed by England or in a treaty that dissolved the Scottish parliament by the transferred parliament of Englands and Wales monarch and discontinued.
“Scotlands Crown was not Sovereign over the parliament or people”
If you put it like that, James, there’s absolutely no need for it. So it makes no sense to get exercised about the “disappearance” of something less useful or necessary than the proverbial chocolate fireguard.
Of course, the flaw in your reasoning is that Scotland’s Crown did fulfill a necessary function in the workings of the Scottish state. As Peter Hitchens has observed, the monarch occupies a more or less equally disliked (by all sides) position on the political chessboard, and by so doing, prevents anybody else from occupying it. The genius of our unwritten constitution is that our ancestors removed any real power from the monarch’s role whilst leaving the monarch in place, thus neutralising the religious bloc, and avoiding civil war.
As we can see in the USA, the absence of a monarch has facilitated the usurping of the monarch’s position by Trump. That’s not going to end well. What we see in Orcland is even further along that road – a Tsar for life – with another unhappy ending coming.
But to get back to Scotland. The idea that because some high ranking Scottish nobles and ecclesiastics possessed a tenuous veto over the holder of the Scottish Crown, that us descendants of the powerless serfs of the time do also, is ludicrous.
It would be great fun to own a time machine. We could send the “Sovereign Scot” believers back to the Middle Ages. We could take wagers on how long they lasted, spouting their Sovereign Scot bollocks, before some noble, possessing the right of life or death over all low-born, cut out their tongues.
The monarch was ultimately appointed by God, James. The people of the time overwhelmingly accepted that view. To seek to undo God’s work on Earth was sacrilege deserving the harshest punishment.
History from the past creates the present history, the present history creates future records and history,
Disassociating one from the other in history is a interesting concept, so we may start history from today onwards I presume,
and declare that Scotland is a independent Sovereign people, nation nation and Country from England, no history attached.
Always the best way, James – Day Zero of Year Zero.
As a Sovereign Scot, I hereby declare myself outside of any laws, customs, rules, limitations, etc. carried over by the craven from the previous, discredited regime.
As is my absolute right, I will now live by my own beliefs, the paramount one being that there are no other Sovereign Scots. How can that not be true when it is part and parcel of the very meaning of “Sovereign”?
Please submit to me, James, by close of business today, a complete list of all your possessions. As a Sovereign Scot, it is my right to take any of these I fancy as my own.
In the event that you wish to retain something I might covet, your house perhaps, I MAY apportion a suitable (non-negotiable) rent for you to pay. If it suits me. A Sovereign Scot doesn’t have to compromise or negotiate.
Which part of “Sovereign” is difficult to understand?
Thanks in advance for your co-operation. Haha, that’s just me being polite. I’m a Sovereign Scot – you have no option but to do what I say.
I have long suspected that the SNP have considered the institutions of the State as primarily answerable to the party, rather than fulfilling their duty to the people. Scottish Police, Crown Office and Scottish Civil Service, all seem to be dysfunctional. But what is really appalling is the indifference of the Scottish media, both print and broadcast. Whither then their claim to be champions of a free society, the harbingers of truth and honesty in public life, rather than kowtowing to a quaisi-authoritarion political administration. The SNP scandals should be top line stories every day until the Augean stables are purged of their poison. Kerr
The SNP is Company first and foremost.
Its a Company running Scotland,
Where is that company registered?
Can we use Scots law against a Company?
I forgot the SNP were a Company,
Thanks for the reminder.
So laws against a Company could differ considerable compared to laws against a political party if embezzling public finances.
So the SNP are a Company, passing laws onto the Scottish people using the devolved parliament from Englands Westminster parliament under the Scotland Act from the Westminster parliament of England and Wales and Ireland.
Which we hold no treaty with the UK parliament or the Great Britain parliament.
There has to be a catching illegality in there somewhere.
Hatey,
I have never worried about the Crown of Scotland,
In Case you have never noticed it is England that persist that the Crown, any crown is important.
That is where Englands parliament down south claims to derive its Sovereignty of parliament from.
So they worry that they will lose their parliamentary Sovereignty over the [ people ] of England, Wales and Ireland.
I see the Turnberry Seven are up before the beak on Monday.
It’s illuminating to peruse the list of names. Trying to cast my mind back to those days listening to my primary school class roll call, I think maybe 3 names on the list would have passed without interest.
The other 4 would have raised searching questions in the playground.
It should be interesting to watch this case proceed. We have Scotland’s greatest half-Scot expatriate son ranged against those posturing about history’s most half-hearted genocide.
We have what seems to be a group of majority immigrants desecrating one of Scotland’s iconic secular sites, representing what is one of Scotland’s great gifts to the world – golf.
We have a bunch of people presumably believing that their vandalism will do more good for their “cause”, than, for example, getting paying jobs, and remitting their wages to Medecins Sans Frontieres.
In short, inchoate, clueless, arrested development lefties choosing the “look at me” option over the hard graft one that might actually provide some real benefit to their “cause”.
Roll on Monday!
Hatey.
It is possible to win an argument/debate with a genius but it is absolutely impossible to win one against a nutter.
You should know that.
Sure, Chas, but this site’s byline is the “world’s most read Scottish politics site” or something like that.
It’s important for Scotland that any of those billions in the world, who may be curious enough to come here, see that BTL isn’t just the sole preserve of the nutters.
Or, if that’s putting it too strongly, that visitors are shown that many different varieties of nut thrive in the jungle of the Sovereign Scot safari park 🙂
There’s more to Scotland and Indy than the ludicrous, leftist lunacy that passes for much of the debate on here. Not for nothing was the SNP referred to as the Tartan Tories – strangely enough – back in the days when their star was in the ascendant.
“Not for nothing was the SNP referred to as the Tartan Tories – strangely enough – back in the days when their star was in the ascendant.”
Well, quite.
QED.
(Not the any hapless, dyed-in-the-wool lefties care much for empirically demonstrated truths, of course. For them, the Moon is eternally made of cheese, and all the persuasive evidence in the world won’t make a blind difference to their blinkered, cult-like zeal).
The records that give evidence the king or Crown was not Sovereign in Scotland comes from the acceptance of the approach that Englands parliament and monarch of England treated claim of Right for Scotland as reality,
which was inclusive and part of the Treaty of union in 1707, which was shortly afterwards abandoned and made void by the parliament of England & Great Britains of Englands parliament dissolving the Scottish from the treaty,
Worrying about Scotlands crown or monarch is for the birds, as Scotland has not had a monarch for over three hundred years,
And the parliament and monarch of England would never allow the head of the crown of England to become a subject sitting below the Crown of Scotland displacing Englands claim of Sovereignty under the acts of settlement of the English crown,
And yes it still is relevant history today as that is the confusion and complicated issue that Stu is having to deal with Crown prosecutors.
And which country do they belong too.
The Crown of England resting in the Westminster parliament of England, Wales and Ireland also resting in the crown of Englands and transferred members of the old English parliament to the rebranded parliament name of GB.
Or the Country of Scotland under a Scottish Crown,
If not Scotlands, equally so it cannot be Englands.
Go and see a doctor
What some folk can’t seem to understand is that outside their own bubble the majority of folk don’t care about the endless blame game, the conspiracy theories, the union is illegal/didn’t exist/was never signed arguments.
The only way that this country will ever become independent is through a referendum.
You need to convince the voters that you can
1. Win so as to make it worthwhile having a referendum
2. You have a competent government and plan to implement the result.
3. Convince enough voters it is what they want so they vote for it in sufficient numbers.
None of these conditions exist at the moment.
Inwhich case it won’t ever happen; not even a rigged one like last time which ran them close.
England needs our revenues.
Ooooh yes rigged heavily was it. Let me guess “MI5 in the polling stations” “ballots counted in England” “people who were only flying on a plane over Scotland being allowed to vote”
I think you’re forgetting the undoubted malign influence of 5G phone masts and flu vaccines, Aidan, not to mention “Humphrey being about” in all those polling booths.
I read about it on some crackpot YT channel with 8 followers, so it must be true.
Ah; Pricks 2 & 3, right on cue as booked.
Got air con in there, girls?
Well, we all know you haven’t, Fatty.
Unless you call a park bench “air conditioned”.
It’s all true CC, but it’s alright James can put a tin foil hat on his oversized head to protect himself.
The aircon is fine in the BA business lounge James, the nice thing about being here is the aircon but also, there’s a security to prevent obnoxious, abusive men like yourself coming in.
LOL. [at you, not with you].
Well, I’m sure we’re all devastated, Fatso.
(“LOL” – definitely at you pal).
Rob – you speak pure logic and sense, unlike some of the other witterings here.
Regarding the genius of our unwritten constitution,that term is a contradiction the genius is that the term is believed by so many,especially in politics and the media
A real written constitution would guarantee jury trials.
The thing about recorded history, is you don’t get to pick and choose only the bits you like,
It is what it is, all of it, it comes as a packaged bundle. Errors and mitakes made included.