The world's most-read Scottish politics website

Wings Over Scotland

The Screw

Posted on July 08, 2019 by

We’ve just received the verdict in the hearing over costs in our court case against Kezia Dugdale, and it’s an incomprehensible one. The sheriff has awarded costs in full to Dugdale, plus a 50% “uplift” mainly on the grounds of the “complexity” of the case, despite Dugdale having employed the services of perhaps Scotland’s highest-paid specialist defamation QC.

Full costs were awarded despite the sheriff having found that the core complaint on which the case was brought – namely that Dugdale had unjustly defamed me with a damaging and wholly false claim that I was a homophobe – was in fact wholly upheld, and that I had indeed been so defamed.

No explanation was given with regard to the supposed complexities from which the uplift arose. The case was in fact a quite straightforward one in defamation terms: an allegation was made, no supporting facts were provided for it and it was found to be entirely false, but the defender was excused liability on the grounds of honest belief – despite being unable to provide the sheriff with any rational basis for that belief.

That’s just about the bare minimum of complexity that could ever possibly exist in a defamation case, and readers might understandably feel that it ought to have been well within the normal skill set of the defender’s representatives, particularly given that the document comprising the entire core of the case was a single tweet of less than 140 characters.

Apparently if you’re a lawyer who’s been paid tens of thousands of pounds to debate a single tweet you also deserve a 50% bonus by way of extra compensation for all the stress and trauma of, um, doing your normal job.

Kezia Dugdale at no point before, during or after the case apologised for or withdrew her remarks – indeed, after our initial complaint she repeated and expanded them, leaving us with no remedy but to pursue the matter in court, and to compete as best we could with the astronomical sums spent on Dugdale’s defence by external parties and approved by the court even though the sum being sued for was relatively modest.

We don’t yet have a final bill, but we expect it to be in the rough vicinity of £100,000 as previously advised. We’ve already polled readers on their desired response in that event, and received an overwhelming majority of 9:1 in favour of filing an appeal against the substantive judgement on the case.

(The verdict on expenses cannot in practice be appealed itself, but were a substantive appeal to be successful the expenses verdict would automatically be overturned.)

We intend to carry out that decision, but any further views are welcomed.

Print Friendly, PDF & Email

7 Trackbacks/Pingbacks

  1. 09 07 19 13:10

    Wings Over Scotland blogger ordered to pay Kezia Dugdale’s legal expenses – SimpleNews

  2. 09 07 19 13:31

    Wings Over Scotland blogger ordered to pay Kezia Dugdale's legal expenses - Latest wordwide news headlines celebrity gossip magazines online -

  3. 09 07 19 13:33

    Wings Over Scotland blogger ordered to pay Kezia Dugdale's legal expenses -

651 to “The Screw”

  1. wee jock poo-pong mcplop says:

    Go for it. If another fundraiser is required, you will not be left on your own.

  2. Den Cairns says:

    My holiday slush fund will be getting compromised (don’t tell SWMBO ;o)!!

  3. Jason Smoothpiece says:

    Unsettling business. Very strange stuff. Appeal, you must.
    Go after them, for it is them, not her, like a dug eating budgies.

  4. Jason Smoothpiece says:

    Meant to add happy to donate.

  5. ClanDonald says:

    So Dugdale is allowed to defame anyone she wants and if you complain they say “tough, she’s allowed to” and you pay all her costs?

    Sounds like the Scottish legal system breaking the rules to protect one of their own. I’m predicting you’ll lose the appeal too if this is how they operate.

  6. GEORGE S GORDON says:


    Did the court say how much of the uplift was due to “reason” (c)?

  7. Dr Jim says:

    I’m going to be controversial here and say I believe you’ll lose again, because they don’t like you and no matter what it takes they’ll make sure you can’t won’t and don’t win

    It’s not about right or justice

  8. John Jones says:

    Totally irrational decision or further evidence of the establishment trying to exact revenge for daring to stand up for your rights. If you appeal I will donate what I can to any fundraisers if needed.

  9. Fixitfox says:

    Take it all the way. We’ve got your back.

  10. Dave tewart says:

    I haven’t commented on this , leaving it to the people who put their cash up.

    This just shows the law is indeed an ass.

    I will contribute to a fund raiser.

    An appeal is warranted, IMHO.

  11. Jon Drummond says:

    Seems like the Establishment continue to be hell bent on closing Wings down; via bankruptcy or otherwise. Who knew!

    Fuck ’em.

    Onwards with the appeal.

    Sick of acquiescing to these pricks.

  12. winifred mccartney says:

    Absolute disgust and outrage but Dr Jim is right, they will move heaven and earth to make sure you don’t win but that does not mean you should not try. It is a David and Goliath situation, nothing to do with right and wrong or justice.

  13. Mr. James Munro says:

    I’m with Dr Jim, they can’t let you win, so don’t play their game. We have the moral victory, time to move onto more pressing matters.

  14. Meindevon says:

    This all just seems so unjust that I want to say fight it to the bitter end.

    However at the same time, this is probably going to be one of the most important points in Scotland’s history. Do we want you distracted and mentally and possibly physically stressed by what will no doubt be a long drawn out affair against the establishment.

    I think this needs to be your decision not ours.

    Whatever it is, I know we will back you 100pc.

  15. Wulls says:

    Go for it. I’m In for the fundraiser

  16. Republicofscotland says:

    A very unsettling decision by the judge how on earth can the judge justify an uplift on this occasion, it doesn’t seem right.

  17. Bob Mack says:

    They seem determined to penalise you financially for not being homophobic. How odd and perverse When the system is after you,they leave no stone unturned. I would imagine the old Masonic lodge has had its dirty paws in this, as it permeates the Scottish legal system.

    Interestingly enough did you realise the Orange Lodge was founded by the Masons? Part of the Establishment you see,

    I will contribute when required.I have no doubt others will as well.

    The Establishment is a very, very, tight entity indeed, but we are legion these days.

  18. Jeff says:

    They don’t like it up ’em. Go for it.

  19. Rev. Stuart Campbell says:

    “However at the same time, this is probably going to be one of the most important points in Scotland’s history. Do we want you distracted and mentally and possibly physically stressed by what will no doubt be a long drawn out affair against the establishment.”

    As I said previously, an appeal would be almost entirely a matter for lawyers – I’d have very little to do with it and wouldn’t have to come to Edinburgh again.

  20. auld highlander says:


    There is no justice.

    They are out to break you young man, plain and simple.

  21. Liz g says:

    I don’t think they will let you win either Rev,but I still say go for it!
    I’ll chip in and take the view that it’s cheaper that the cost of an advert for Wings…. And the more bizarre the verdict… The better the chance of showing the system up..

  22. Golfnut says:

    You won’t lose, the Scottish justice system won’t hang itself to dry or make a mockery of itself for Dugdale or the state. This is as far as they want it to go, which is why you should pursue it.

  23. Fairliered says:

    Seems like a political decision to me. Possibly influenced at the highest levels of government?

  24. Doug says:

    The British nationalist establishment is clearly out to get the Rev, and, by association, the independence movement in Scotland.

    The British nationalist establishment must be fought.

    Go for it!

  25. George Falconer says:

    The establishment closes ranks. Not to help a none too bright puppet, but to dangle a possible vindication in front of you to tie you in knots; a red herring. It appeals to your desire to be proved right, but this is hubris I’m afraid. Karma will resolve this; she will be dropped in the shit when she is no longer useful or gets mouthy.

  26. INDEPENDENT says:

    All the way with you Stu.
    I don’t always agree with you but this decision
    Is an absolute disgrace.
    Aye their all better togethe, sack of ferrets springs to mind.
    Start the fund raiser and let’s all chip in to see a terrible wrong, righted.
    That includes all the lurkers out there

  27. Merkin Scot says:

    Hope you are able to overturn this perverse judgement.

  28. Frost says:

    Happy to chuck in a few quid to a separate fundraiser for an appeal. FWIW it’s worth I don’t think they are going to allow you to win but I don’t want to see your ability to do your work compromised.

  29. faolie says:

    Ok, this is just weird now. So the defamation’s upheld but you’re landed with all the expenses PLUS another 50% for some unexplained ‘complexity’? Go for it Stu. Happy to chip in more to fight the establishment

  30. Iain Crighton says:

    The mind boggles , how they can get to this conclusion is baffling. The costs awarded against yourself when the substantive point was that she did in fact defame you should have seen this off. Quite happy to donate to get this sorted.

  31. Fireproofjim says:

    The decision of the Sheriff seems totally unhinged.
    He actually says that you were not guilty of anything, and were defamed. But the defamer claims victory and all the costs plus 50%.
    Sounds corrupt. I suspect a few quiet words were had between legal parties in the court coffee shop along the lines of “let’s slap down this troublemaker”.
    Your appeal should win if there is any justice. If it doesn’t it merely confirms that corruption is rife in the establishment. What does your lawyer think?
    I’m in for a contribution.

  32. Terry callachan says:

    The original decision by the judge does not make sense it was not a “reasonable” decision
    it was not the conclusion that could reasonably be made by a reasonable person
    for that reason I think you will win your appeal however,

    What you are seeing in the award of extra expenses is an effort to damage your
    “ Scottish independence fighting fund”.

    Even if they eventually have to give you the money back it will be money unavailable to your fighting fund for a considerable time which makes it attractive to the opposition.

    Taking this case as far as it can go could take a very long time , the opposition will see this as worthwhile if it dampens your day to day Scottish independence campaign.

    I think it was predictable I wish you had not taken action in the first place but now that you have I believe it is important to see it through

    Justice is something that the UK Brags about but history shows that when the state wants someone to fail in court they will find a judge that is prepared to sell his soul to the devil just look at what had happened to Assange and friends and what has happened to Puigdemont and colleagues.

    Justice doesn’t always prevail but it does highlight injustices when they occur.

    Go for it.

  33. Al Dossary says:

    Appeal all the way. Set up a new fundraiser, my donation is waiting. And this time take the bastards all the way – the decision is completely absurd, Period.

    The establishment clearly don’t like crowd-funded legal cases as it means that they can no longer price the little man out of the court case. Just look at what they are trying to do to Andy Wightman!

  34. Patsy Millar says:

    I try to avoid swearing on public forums but bloody hell. Backing you whatever you decide and will contribute but I’m afraid you’ll have to wait for my modest contribution till after the holidays!

  35. Brian Powell says:

    Yes, it is a very strange decision. The sheriff only said she had been able to make the comment as ‘fair comment’ not that she was right in the comment.

    So the punitive award seems very suspicious.

  36. Fionan says:

    The Scottish legal system is a joke. It exists only for the elite – the rest of us get hammered if we seek justice. Just one of the areas which need to be overhauled after independence.Judges must be made accountable. All of them!

    Even if they had not awarded costs to the dirty dug, you would have had a moral victory and could have walked away.

    However, I think as others have said,this is a politically driven verdict, and they aren’t on your side. But we cant just sit back, sigh and do nothing. So I will back your decision to go for it, and although I cant afford much, I will donate what I can to at least question this abominable decision.

  37. Oor Steve says:

    Political skulduggery? Looks like they are trying to diminish your potential. Happy to subscribe to a fighting fund.

  38. CameronB Brodie says:

    Best of luck though I think the state has just indicated justice is not impartial in Britain, and that human rights are not universal.

  39. SilverDarling says:

    The perversity of the original judgement followed by the celebration and promotion of Dugdale as some martyred heroine made this almost this inevitable.

    Would your appeal would be the original judgement? Then go for it. Happy to contribute to a separate appeal to add funds as well. They have made it almost impossible not to appeal by this decision.

    What a cosy bunch of establishment ‘Jeremy Hunts’.

  40. winifred mccartney says:

    The establishment needs to know we will fight to the bitter end – even if we lose we will go down fighting for justice and let everyone else see how rotten the system is. Call another fund raiser specifically for the appeal.

  41. William Wallace says:

    I can’t help but feel the judiciary is being interfered with in this case. I thought the initial verdict was sketchy but this is downright sinister.

    Appeal it and set up a new and ongoing crowdfunder (ideally with recurring payments). I would happily contribute a little each month to a fighting fund for this purpose and think it might be a better way to build up a kitty over time rather than having a time limited one.

    The decision in this case makes a mockery of the Scottish legal system and needs to be challenged.

  42. Margaret E says:

    I did not vote on this issue, being happy enough to leave this decision to others. However, it is perfectly clear that this decision is deeply flawed and actually incomprehensible, as others have expressed. I will be more than happy to donate as much as before to a new crowd funder. There is no doubt that you are seen as a target and bankrupting you will serve this purpose (they tried this with Craig Murray too). There is no point in wishing you good luck. Luck has nothing to do with this situation.

  43. gus1940 says:

    Go for it Stu – I’m in for a fundraiser.

  44. Giving Goose says:

    Dugdale is being protected.
    I’m not surprised.
    This case is about more than defamation.
    Quite simply the Scottish legal system is proved to be corrupt and working on behalf of the British Establishment.

    It’s an indication of your profile and importance to the Independence movement that this has happened.

    I have conflicting thoughts about how to go forward.

    Part of me wants you to take this as far as you can and not give up.

    Another part of me thinks that you should not fight a battle you cannot win. The Scottish judiciary’s impartiality has been compromised in favour of British Nationalism.

    Consider walking away and concentrate on other things. It’s not as if you’ll have to suffer the indignity of unfavourable headlines in the MSM, that’s a given.

    Your readers know the score.

    It’s almost as if you should wear this as a badge of honour.

    Anyway, whatever is decided, I’ll contribute where I can to a fund.

  45. AdamH says:

    Unbelievable. Gotta try the appeal. I’m in for the money.

  46. Socrates MacSporran says:

    Just because you are paranoid, does not mean they are not out to get you.

    And, from this latest decision, it is clear, The Establishment is out to get you Stuart.

    Keep fighting, this one stinks to high heaven – still, I don’t suppose the Sheriff will be too bothered, once he gets he wee promotion – for services rendered.

    Meanwhile, Dugdale, having failed abysmally as a politician, gets to swan-off to her wee sinecure in the groves of Academia.

    As my Sainted Mother used to say: “Aye Son, it’s an ill-divided world.”

    However – noli illegittemi carborundum.

  47. Portjim says:

    I wish I had Golfnut’s faith.
    The original decision was baffling, and this just seems to be adding insult to injury.

    I find the way the whole business is playing out a bit scary. I know it is a mistake to confuse the law with justice, but when the courts start handing down judgements which, while they may be legally correct (?!), seem to lay people to be arbitrary, illogical and to fly in the face of natural justice, they are encouraging people to view the law with contempt. That way lies anarchy!

    You might think that our esteemed “national “ broadcaster could usefully fulfil the “educate” part of its charter, and explain how a court could reach these decisions.

  48. Fionan says:

    Independent at 3.10pm.

    I am a lurker, and one with a very low income. But I still donate to Wings fundraisers when I can, and to other indy causes and to animal causes as well – I dont fund any establishment media at all, whatever I can spare goes to my two dearest causes – indy and abused animals. Please don’t assume that lurkers don’t pay their way, many would indeed comment if they didn’t find the unpleasant responses from some regulars so upsetting and even cruel at times.

  49. Ginty says:

    Never commented here before, but have donated to the site a couple of times.
    Anyway, more than happy for my previous and future donations to be used to fight this.
    A message needs to be sent that the establishment cannot de-legitimise the pro-indy viewpoint with libel.
    ‘Mon the rev!

  50. Balaaargh says:

    Wow. The law is an ass.

    I was previously in favour of going for a no-financial-loss scenario but that judgment is taking the piss. If you go for the appeal, I am more than happy to chip in a few bob more.

  51. Meindevon says:

    Rev Stu @ 2.59

    That’s good news if you do go ahead Stuart.

    I’ll donate whichever way you go.

    Expect they’re trying to bankrupt you and put you ‘out of business’. They’ running out of ideas on how to stop you. Hopefully!

    Good luck whatever you do.

  52. Fionan says:

    The last fundraiser was a record-breaker – it would be one in the eye for the corrupt establishment if this one was an even bigger record-breaker. That would really send them a strong message, regardless of whether the appeal was upheld or not. And it would ensure that the Wings indy fighting fund was maintained in a healthy position also. Lets do this, even as a previous commenter has suggested, a regular payment rather than one-off, although for myself I do enjoy the excitement of the fundraiser.

    Stuart, in spite of your hammers which can be quite painful, although funny when someone else is on the receiving end, I am truly sorry that you are having to deal with this shit on top of all the daily crap that gets flung at you. I am rooting for you to wipe the smarmy grin off that woman’s face.

  53. dakk says:

    Evidence if it were needed that the sheriff was indeed a yoon prick whose bias and motives are now transparent.

    Whether the ‘scottish’/north british legal establishment will countenance a just outcome to your appeal I very much doubt.

    But neither shall we countenance your financial handicapping by this shower of british nationalist human filth.

    Fuck them,and count me in. Again!

  54. carjamtic says:

    Subject to your Legal Teams Advice, I stand ready to match this years donation, (£200; TV licence fee plus a VAT, bargain by the way) if/when you decide to go All In.

  55. Helena Brown says:

    Definitely appeal, this is the law being made a mockery. If they cannot see this then all I can say that we need to fire them all. What ever it takes, do it.

  56. pa_broon74 says:

    Don’t normally comment.

    But will say, I assume you’ve spoken to your own legal people, so the best you can do is go with their advice.

    It does all seem rather unfair, I’d be interested to hear (or read) someone on Dugdale’s side justifying this decision – or get an unbiased opinion from elsewhere. (Peatworrier?)

    I voted to appeal if this happened, my vote hasn’t changed. She defamed you, the court accepted that she defamed you. The court then mitigated that with ‘fair comment’ or a belief clause.

    At the very least, each side should have been left liable for their own costs given the judgement.

    So, I’d appeal.

  57. Ahundredthidiot says:


    Also, if you are notdoing so already, start taking sensible security measures.

    Dont want them doing a Bob Crow on you.

  58. Black Joan says:


    Time-and-a-half for doing the already very highly remunerated day job and, in the process, actually establishing the truth of your claim: that the defendant was wrong to call you a homophobe? Funny business, the law.

    If your legal team says appeal, please appeal, all the way to Europe if possible/appropriate.

  59. red sunset says:

    Set up a separate crowdfunder for this. Definitely. Don’t let it chew up any other funds that might be there for Indy purposes.

    This verdict says only one thing – that the establishment is determined to batter down anyone who takes on one of their own. And batter them down relentlessly.

    This is an attack on all of us – not just Stu. Not just Wings. Unless some respected legal figure comes out to justify this action, I cannot believe it is anything but a vindictive attack to put “the wee man” in his place.

    Win or lose, no matter, get a new crowdfunder to share the pain.

  60. Bibbit says:

    If both had been told to bear their own expenses then I would have said ‘enough of the numpty Dugdale, you have bigger fish to fry’.

    But this is so palpably unfair. Appeal and be damned.

    ‘Come what come may, time and the hour run through the toughest day’. MacBeth

    and ‘Faint heart never won fair defamation appeal’.

  61. The Man in the Jar says:

    I’m prepared to dig deep for this. To me, it’s obvious that The British Establishment has a hand in this.

    The establishment’s opinion of us Independence supporters is that we are nothing more than ill-educated tenement dwelling oiks and that we would only spend the money on deep-fried Mars bars and heroin anyway.

    Shitehawks the lot of them!

  62. Golfnut says:

    @ Portjim.

    The justice system can’t afford to leave dodgy decisions on the books regarding the indy movement, post Indy might see a complete overhaul of the system and a cull of those currently safely hiding under its umbrella. This is about headlines and bragging rights, the media circus getting a few more days at wings bashing and Dugdale paraded as the victim while the Rev and his supporters are left with egg on their faces, at least that’s their best case scenario. Worst case is a reversal, but you won’t hear much about that except here.

  63. Jon Drummond says:

    I’m not normally too vociferous when it comes to matters such as this; but I am fucking raging.

    We have to stand firm against Yoon belligerence.

    I have continued to campaign since 2014 for fairness, equality and especially justice in our country.

    This smacks of NONE of these things.

    If I simply stand back as an observer to this clusterfuck of a debacle I am fucking done!

  64. gerry parker says:

    Bang on Giving Goose and Socrates MacSporran – Extremely strange verdict. Is this the establishment saying “we control the law and we will do what we want with it”?

    Definitely appeal, I’ll back you to the hilt any way I can.

  65. birnie says:

    This affair stinks to high heaven and constitutes a prima facie case of political interference and corruption at the heart of the Scottish legal establishment.

    This affair should be given the maximum publicity possible, continuously referred to as a “legal assassination conspiracy”. The identities of the offending sheriff/s should be made known, the cases in which they are presiding should be publicised and they themselves referred to as, at the least, “controversial”, given tne irrationality of the judgements.

    Personally, I shall refer to them as “the asinine sheriffs”.

    Time for us to wield the metaphorical knuckledusters and hobnailed boots!

  66. gerry parker says:

    The man in the Jar – good to see you posting again.

  67. Gizzit says:

    Appeal – and instigate a fundraiser – I’m happy to contribute.

  68. John McLeod says:

    I am raging as well. This seems complelely unreasonable. Happy to contribute to a fundraiser. But at the same time hoping that all this goes away as soon as possible, so you can get on with what you do best.

  69. Lollysmum says:

    You are being used as a warning to others not to even consider taking on politicians through the courts. You are being punished for your lack of guilt in this case.

    The Sheriff would have found you guilty if he could have done so but he knew he couldn’t get away with that one. This additional costs punishment for being innocent (by any other name including complexity) smacks to me of trying it on. They don’t think you will appeal. If they get away with it against you then anyone else from the indy world will be fair game but they probably won’t have the support that you have.

    That is so wrong-complexity no way there is none here. They’ve searched the law books to find probably the only excuse to pin extra costs on you. This is so out of order & by this action of adding 50% costs, the powers that be have just demonstrated that justice doesn’t exist under the Scots legal system.

    You of all people will not see justice in these courts as you are too valuable a prize & as others have said above, they will try anything to bring you down. You’re an oik Stuart but you’re our oik & we’ll watch your back if only to p**s the establishment off.

    The decision is up to you Stuart but I’m in for a crowdfunder.

  70. Name (required) says:

    if you fight you might lose
    if you do not fight you will lose

    your call,

    seem an “odd desicion’ which ever way you look at it

  71. Name (required) says:

    seems ffs seems

  72. Achnababan says:

    Appeal of course – can you go all the way to the European Court?

    There, at least, you might get a fair hearing?

  73. The Man in the Jar says:

    @Gerry Parker.

    Thanks Gerry I’ve been taking a back seat for now. Haven’t missed a single article though.

  74. Alison Brown says:

    This is Scotland today! Justice? Forget it! This is about Unionists against ‘vile’ separatists. Can you have the appeal heard by someone unbiased? Doubt it.

  75. Jake Gittes says:

    Know you’ve raised £170K but a chunk of that, in part, is for WBB(2). Clearly a brazen effort to silence and humble you. New fundraiser required which many of us will rally round to donate. You’ll be angry and frustrated Stu but take it as a compliment to your effectiveness.

  76. sassenach says:

    If this ‘judgement’ does not help to open the eyes of Scots to what tyranny they are up against, then I don’t know what will.

    For God’s sake, wake up and see what the British establishment (via the Scots legal system) is doing here – it is a crucifixion of a major Indy player and if we let it happen we are all doomed anyway.


  77. maureen says:

    Well, there’s an awful lot of us supporting you in this, so good luck with them trying to bankrupt you, as the ptb are going to have to go through us to try and shut you down.
    You are far too valuable for us to let that happen.
    As many have said, start up a new fund-raiser and appea,I’m good for a few quid.

  78. A C Bruce says:


    Go ahead.

    I would make a financial contribution, if necessary.

  79. David Smith says:

    It would appear that the judge is just yet another corrupt Masonic bastard.

  80. Michael McGurn says:

    You can’t let this go Rev! There’s no way you should be paying costs in the first place so this extra 50% is a joke. Fight it all the way and we’ll have your back.

  81. Fraser MacKintosh says:

    If you appeal I am more than happy to contribute.

  82. mumsyhugs says:

    Purse open – just give the word.

  83. Ian McLean says:

    Do I have this right?
    If you quit now its -£100k. Consider that gone.
    If you appeal and lose its -£150k so the worst case it makes things worse by £50k.
    Appeal and win would potentially get £100k plus £20k damages and the £50k extra stake returned.
    The return would be like a bet at 12:5.
    I guess it depends on whether you and your legal team think the chances of winning are better than the odds.
    I believe you’d lose because the establishment, through a Sheriff, will look after it’s own.
    Sod em. If your brief thinks it’s worth a pop, I’m in for what I can manage.

  84. Trunbulldrier says:

    This doesn’t suprise me, I’m sorry to say..

    I said appeal and I’d chuck in some cash.. still stand by that.

  85. call me dave says:

    Include me in too!

    I suggest another fundraiser but there is some, in part, in the last one which you already have ‘permission’ to dip into. 🙂

  86. Capella says:

    It’s a political decision. The sheriff said that, had he awarded you damages, it would be £100. A derisory sum. Now he’s acting as if you had been proved to be homophobic. It seems that, in Scotland, defamation is not only fair comment, it is to be rewarded.

    Appeal, and make a great deal of noise about it. Show up this system for the glaring parody of justice that it is. I will certainly contribute again if necessary.

  87. Jon Drummond says:

    It’s the stagnantly corrupt Yoon establishment v’s us.

    The epitome of why we strive for Scottish Independence.


  88. Proud Cybernat says:

    I said go for it last time, Rev and with this latest decision against you my resolve has only hardened.

    Kick off a Free-the-Bath-One or Wings-For-Justice Crowdfund Campaign and I most certainly will be giving you what I can in terms of monetary hauners.

    They have to realise, they are few and we are many. They have to realise that money is no longer an obstacle for the ‘poor’ to access justice.

    It’s no over yet, Kez so I wouldnae be going on any wee spending sprees just yet, doll.

  89. chocolass says:

    This is too weird,
    Will support you in any appeal.
    Good luck ,Stu- our hero!

  90. Studhog says:

    Long time lurker, first time poster.
    Happy to donate my TV licence fee.

  91. I’m mainly a lurker on the group but i will chip in a few quid to help with any expense claim. The mutt needs taken down a peg or two and shown it’s place in society. If it were you or me making the same comments about her it would be a different matter!

  92. Petra says:

    Avalanche made some interesting points about appealing at 12:51pm on the ‘Loose End’ blog. Well worth considering.

  93. Stan Wilson says:

    I am struggling to comprehend how the Scottish law officers can be allowed to “corrupt” our laws and justice, so openly, at the behest of a politically poisonous elite. One can only assume they are politically motivated and looking after their own skins. I honestly believe that is a fair comment, so would help fund any appeal that brings this out into the open. Have had my say and will return to “lurking” with intent. (Smiley face thingy).

  94. Alabaman says:

    I’ll contribute as and when necessary Stew,
    This is not about law proceedings/ deliberations/ verdicts,
    It’s about “get Stewart Campbell and Wings over Scotland ” , two for the price of one, as far as the establishment is concerned, law impartial?, not when it comes to constitutional matters, (Wings — Dugdale (former Labour Branch office leader).

  95. Petra says:

    Oh well that didn’t work. If you’re interested it’s the 7th post from the bottom.

  96. A.Bruce says:

    Go for it Stu. It’s an attack on us all.

  97. Arthur Thomson says:

    If your legal advisors think you have a chance then appeal. I will contribute.

  98. skintybroko says:

    I was all for appealing but given the ludicrous 50% uplift can only determine the establishment are out to get you – would be happy to contribute but equally happy for you to draw a line under it and use the current fund to settle if that’s what your lawyers advise.

    You’re more important to the ongoing journey towards independence. Whatever you decide your health and state of mind all need to be considered but rest assured whatever the decision you will have my support and am sure that of the majority of contributors.

  99. Meindevon says:

    Proud Cybernat.

    I like that…Wings Over Justice Crowdfunder. It needs something specific to get the attention of the bias media. I think that would work.

  100. JMD says:

    Recently I’ve been making a few contributions to a few pro indy crowdfunds including WoS and had decided that for the time being to give the credit card a rest.

    However this absolutely stinks and so I’m prepared to contribute again. I want them to know that whatever they try to do to silence people isn’t going to work.

  101. Bill McLean says:

    This crap must be flushed out of Scotland. Ready to support an appeal if your briefs think you should!

  102. shug says:

    have a dig around the Sheriff’s past and you night find the answer

  103. katherine hamilton says:

    Hi Rev
    Couple of questions.
    In which court is the appeal held?
    Without giving anything away how extended are you? (We.Always we!)

    We’re almost certainly weeks from a GE, then a referendum next year. If more than 1% would contribute you’d be a shoe in for enough resources. But it appears they are unable.

    Fine. If you go for it, I’m in. If you don’t and more is needed to pay this outrageous bill. Fine I’m in. If you need more for the fighting fund. Fine I’m in.

    My view? Take the hit. There’s a lot to gain for sure, but they’ll keep screwing us.

    Eyes on the biggest prize of all. Jings, ye can nearly smell it.

    Behind you all the way, whatever that way is.
    Good Luck.

  104. mogabee says:

    That is so, so wrong that there really is no other option than to appeal.

    I hate unfairness and this is atrociously and obviously unfair.

    Go get ’em tiger!

  105. Graf Midgehunter says:

    To appeal or not to appeal?

    Will the appeal be before a different, higher judge?

    What’s more important, spending money and hoping, against the system, to reverse or at least lower the “political fine” or using the fire in the belly of us all and a further fundraiser to get the WBBs and other stuff out and so get the Brit Nats on the run.

    Revenge is sweet when you play your own game and not what they think you should.

    This battle won’t lose the war for us, it’s costly but they won’t get any further with it apart from the bragging.

    Our time and lots of delicious threads will come sooner than we think… 🙂

  106. Valerie says:

    FFS. I’m happy to contribute, but having read through most comments, I too find this turn of events weird and unsettling.

    I find it disgusting on one hand, they find you not a homophobe, the core complaint, but then give you a kicking.

    I suppose you will have to see what lawyers say as to feasibility of appeal.

    Good luck. I’m sorry it’s like this.

  107. chossy says:

    Carmichael had to go to court due to a leak and essentially he was in a similar situation as I remember it? he pleaded incompetence? didn’t he win the case go for damages / costs and get one pound from the judge?…. Maybe this would be a good opening gambit for your lawyers to consider.

  108. EphemeralDeception says:

    What is your own legal advise about how to approach the appeal and its outcome?

    I think the writing is on the wall. A successful appeal would not go down well and I believe the judge would need to have been found to have made an error in law or procedure or something vital omitted?

    Even if I think it will not succeed an appeal may still be well worth fighting if it results in a Pyrrhic victory for Dugdale and the establishment. This is also a remote possibility now though since Dugdale has been put on a pedestal in the media with no right to reply.

    TL;DR. Go for it, expecting to loose but see where it goes.

  109. Marie Clark says:

    What an extremely strange finding. Oh well Stuart, if your legal team reckon that you should appeal, get stuck in boy.

    I tend to agree with others, have a separate crowdfunder for the appeal. I’ve already said that I will donate, double what I contributed to the last one.

  110. Juteman says:

    I don’t know what you should do, but there are loads of new posters telling you what to do.
    Watch out for the 77th brigade getting involved.

  111. Nation Libre says:

    I find this absolutely astonishing. You are left with no choice, this can not be allowed to stand. There’s more than justice being handed out here

  112. CageyBee says:

    I am another one saying appeal and we will chip in as needed. The elite are definitely trying to silence us before turning the screw to enslave us all

  113. Robert Peffers says:

    If this judgement demonstrates anything it is that there has been an obvious miscarriage of justice. It is time for Scotland to become independent and to change the old order in the Scottish legal system. Sweeping away the dead wood at the top out of a legal system that could come to such an obviously incongruously wrong judgement.

    There is something very wrong when the judgment says you were indeed defamed but then goes on to not only find against you but then to award costs against you. A system so obviously corrupt needs changed and system. This case only demonstrates that changes at the top are required for this is a very obvious miscarriage of justice

  114. vlad (not that one) says:

    I appreciate Petra’s point(about this case potentially snowballing all the way to the ECJ), but I’ll support it as best I can.

    Stu, please start a separate crowdfunder, and I am sure we the 3000 will back you up.

  115. leslie ross says:

    So how does the Sheriff think you could refute the charge of being homophobic without resorting to court proceedings?

  116. Peter says:

    I entirely agree that the ruling was perverse and that you are being unjustly treated.
    But the message is clear, isn’t it? You did not defame Dugdale but the court found a way to give her the win. Now costs in full go to Dugdale with an uplift. The message is: You will not be let win – there will simply be more costs and further bad publicity in an appeal.
    Like others I worry about the harm to you as an asset for the independence movement. It is not just the diversion of funds or the distraction of your attention and energy [which points you have addressed] – I am concerned about damage to The Wee Blue Book, its association with bad publicity.
    So I say draw a line under this, heed the message, learn the lesson, take the medicine and move on.
    I know you won’t, though. So good luck with the appeal.

  117. Wull says:

    The original point at issue was important, and you were right to make the challenge. You were certainly entitled to do so, and the judgement (as quoted above) confirmed this.

    It seems to me that this is now about to morph into something much bigger, and of even greater importance. Not least for the future of political debate in Scotland.

    If common sense suggests that the judgement was already flawed in terms of natural justice, this award of expenses seems still more so. If that is the case, there is something seriously awry with our legal system which needs to be highlighted. So that pressure will be brought to bear to put right as quickly as possible. Without delay.

    It is important that natural justice be upheld, and that the legal system be seen to work effectively to this end. That is the purpose for which it exists. So far, in regard to the issues raised in this case, the evidence provided by both the judgement and the award suggests that it is not fit for purpose.

    When you appeal, it will – rightly – be our legal system that is on trial. You are bound to win. If not financially, then morally. And moral victory is very important, especially in this case.

    Because when you win, so do we all.

    If those who judge your appeal throw it out, they will make a complete fool of themselves and – more important – of the law, or legal system, in whose name they act.

    Then the campaign to change the law in regard to the various issues the case raised will begin in earnest. These issues will be out in the open, they will become a matter of public debate, and – sooner or later – our political elites will bow to the pressure from below.

    The law will at long last be changed accordingly. It should have happened ages ago. Not least after the judgement in the Alistair Carmichael case. Which gave politicians a licence to tell lies and deliberately, knowingly, spread falsehoods about other people.

    Politicians will not be able to duck away from these issues any longer. That includes politicians of every hue … They will have to legislate against themselves. At last. All of them.

    It is time for us to bring home to them, and for them to realise that the same standards of decency that apply to the rest of us apply also to them, … That they can no longer get away with slandering people, when and as they please … That using defamation and character assassination as political tools in order to achieve their ends will not go unpunished, … That there is no place in public life for the deliberate lying and deceiving which has come to infest so much of what now passes for political discourse … and so on.

    There are other issues as well, and they too are important. Not least how to guarantee both freedom of speech and the quality and kind of discourse in all fields – including politics and ethics – which allows everyone in the whole community to participate in a mutually respectful fashion, even when disagreement runs deep.

    This should apply in parliament as well. When Holyrood was inaugurated we were promised a different and more mature kind of debate. Where the members would be heard without all the braying and interruption and knockabout posturing of Westminster. Sometimes we got that, but hasn’t there been a considerable decline in standards in recent years? Especially from some members in the opposition parties? As for the standard of journalistic comment and the behaviour of some interviewers in the Scottish mainline media – enough said.

    It wasn’t because Alex Salmond and Stuart Campbell agreed with each other on everything – they didn’t, in fact – that we recently had the pleasure of seeing and hearing a political discussion that, for once, was truly fit for purpose. It was because the whole tenor of that interview was geared to being genuinely informative. Alex asked searching questions, and he let Stuart speak. The listening and watching public was allowed to hear what was being said, and we were left to judge for ourselves what we thought of it. That’s how it should be.

    About time the politicians remembered the people of Scotland are sovereign, and started respecting us – all of us – properly. They are our servants, not our masters. So they shouldn’t be trying to manipulate and deceive us. What useless servants they become if they do that kind of thing. Who wants lying and deceitful servants?

    Just inform us, instead … Tell the truth; and shame the Devil.

    Besides gaining independence, we need to change the political culture of this country. And overturn all these bad habits so many of our public figures seem to have learned by being part of something supposedly ‘Greater’ – and certainly ‘Uglier’. Come on, Scotland – time for a new era.

  118. Clootie says:

    An attack on you is an attack on us all. Ready to contribute

  119. McDuff says:

    We all know what this is really all about and it’s nothing to do with the the law.
    I know you dont need this Rev but take it all the way, we will donate and donate again.
    I am so angry that the law can be used like this in my country.

  120. Karmanaut says:

    +1 for appeal. This decision can’t stand.

  121. alwi says:

    FFS! Looks like they’ve really got it in for you. I for one will support an appeal. Take it as far as you can.

  122. Cubby says:

    Bloody unbelievable decision.

    I said appeal previously and I stick by that. I contributed to the last fundraiser for the ugly dug case and will gladly contribute once again. Scotland does not need politicians like the dug and British Labour in Scotland have far too many of them.

    If the British Labour Party was extinguished in Scotland I would not shed a tear. In fact I would open a bottle of bubbly to celebrate.

  123. Marcia says:

    You should appeal. This is the Establishment fighting back.

  124. Gary says:

    The disgusting British state reaches far and wide with its hypocrisy. The couts are bought and judges appointed. Queens council etc… truth is suppressed but it’s still the truth as well explained by rev.
    Expect not to be awarded justly, but challenge anyway!!
    We support you !!

  125. Mac says:

    1. This is poker and they have doubled down deliberately to frighten.

    2. The 50% is in response to the success of the CrowdFunder. They know what you ‘can afford’

    3. It should be noted that this action is against you personally and not the WOS fund. How was the uplift justified? And is this a normal action? I assume you had to disclose your ‘salary’.

    4. This needs a top Advocate or QC

    5. There was never any doubt that there was political involvement here.

    6. The full story will come out one day.

    7. Is it possible to get this to the European Courts? This is the only solution.

  126. Liz says:

    That is a fucking disgrace. She lied under oath when she said you didnt offer to settle of court.

  127. Wull says:

    Maybe the previous crowdfunder could be ring-fenced for direct IndyRef2 work (the Book, running the site, your own livelihood etc.). Then another crowdfunder just for this appeal could be launched. Then see what it raises.

    If it covers the expected expense of the appeal, even if the appeal is eventually lost, then it’s all clear to go ahead. If it doesn’t, or if the amount gained proves unnecessary anyway because the appeal is won, the understanding could be that the proceeds will be used, precisely, for … other Indyref2 work, and the production of further Indyref2 material.

    Just a suggestion.

  128. Heaver says:

    Do what they least expect.

  129. CmonIndy says:

    So far I see no evidence that the Court will stop playing for the Union. On this basis I expect an appeal to fail.
    Only your counsel can advise on more reasoned probabilities of success.

  130. MJC says:

    Bastards, Unacountable feking Bastards. No ammount of bullshit explainations will ever convince me and most fair minded folk that this decision was made in the interest of justice, in fact id say the decision was made before the feking trial. Rock n a hard place. Call out establishment, get fucked for the trouble.

  131. Golfnut says:

    If the Rev raised 150k through the crowdfunder, that would be some message to send to the establishment.

  132. Artyhetty says:

    Bloody hell, I sat aghast reading this. They really are putting the boot in, awarding the lawyer damages effectively? What the heck.

    I will contribute whatever I can to help with this, utterly disgusted today, but, should not be surprised. The justice system then favours the moneyed and powerful, or at least those with friends in places who are moneyed and powerful.

    I thought Scotland’s justice system was more well, just than this, naively.

    Kezia Dugdale should be the one paying out, it’s a suspect and sinister outcome imo.

  133. ronnie anderson says:


    A P P E AL .

  134. sandycraig says:

    I don’t believe I’m super intelligent, but I do think I’m not exactly thick, and I don’t understand how someone who was defamed, but lost the case on some spurious wishy washy technical pish of not understanding the words spoken is beyond me.

    I still think you should sue but take heed of your counsel because the establishment do not intend to let you win.

  135. Garrion says:

    Couple of ifs here. IF indyref 2 is running in parallel to the timeframe of the appeal, they’ll likely back off or try to quiet it down as it’s a clear and tangible example of the oppressive tactics of the British state that they know will galvanize voters against them, so it would be worth looking strategically at some relevant parallels with larger events.

    If it goes to appeal they have less decisive leverage. Regardless of their reach, it’s not a given that they can bend the outcome again, and there is greater uncertainty of outcome in their favour. They will also be aware that, if handled correctly as an ongoing story by Indy friendly media, it will be a touchpoint and rallying cry for the indy movement.

    IF the delightful Fifi realises that in the event of it going against her she is decisively of no further use to the establishment. She also knows that at that point her utility may not be seen as worth financially supporting anymore, and then she will be truly boned. She might bottle it. So there’s that.

    IF you appeal and there is a need for another flurry of inconveniently amazing support from ‘the people’, that is also a story that they don’t want told, especially if there is another referendum in the works.

    This is easy for me to say, but my gut says appeal. I’ll chip in.

  136. K1 says:


    So the ‘respected’ Deutsche bank is having to ‘restructure’ costing 18,000 jobs worldwide, because they quite simply are a shower of devious, money laundering corrupt pieces of shit, but they attacked our movement in 2014 and got wide coverage stating that it would be an economic disaster for us to become independent.

    DEUTSCHE BANK: Scottish Independence Would Be One Of The Greatest Blunders Ever, Leading To Years Of Misery

    So there we have it, another shower of corrupt bastards who got wide coverage from the msm collapsing under the weight of billions of pounds in fines that they have been charged from Libor rate setting to money laundering that date back to pr 2014, given loud hailers and huge platform to undermine our right to self determination.

    What went wrong at Deutsche Bank?

    Why anyone could or would ever be taken in by these bastards is beyond me, but sorry as I am for those at the bottom end losing their jobs, they can get to fuck telling us anything related to our right to self determination.

    Fucking sick of the utter corruption at the heart of this establishment.

    As for that squalid little creature Dugdale and the Daily Record and Labour and the Scottish legal system they can all taking a flying fuck. Appeal and then sue the fucking cunt for attempting to ruin you.

  137. Astragael says:

    Sheriff N A Ross may be thought to have previous – see

  138. Bobp says:

    Agree with posters on here, happy to donate, but I wont hold my breath on seeing justice done. The judicial system is as twisted as harold shipman’s mind was.

  139. Helen Yates says:

    This is downright ridiculous, do a fundraiser so you can afford to hire the best lawyer available, your supporters will see to it that however much is needed to ensure you take this all the way it will be there for you, when they attack you they attack all of us, fuck the cost take them all the way

  140. robertknight says:

    No quarter should be given – just say the word re. £££

  141. Graham A Fordyce says:

    There are only two factors to consider here in deciding whether to appeal:
    1. Ignoring the views of your supporters on here and elsewhere, what advice have you received from your legal advisors about the prospects of an appeal?
    2. Ignoring the advice of your legal team, what do you hope to achieve by marking an appeal?

    You – and only you – have to decide which answer is more important, and proceed on that basis.

    As a lawyer myself, I fully appreciate the financial risks. There is a legitimate debate to be had about the cost of justice and the interests of justice, but I suspect you will have the financial backing of many, many folk and I sincerely hope that justice will ultimately be served.

    Ultimately, this is all about control and how that is exercised in a free society. That, for me, is the most important aspect to this case and it very important that if Scotland is to take its place among the other nations on the planet, that we start as we mean to go on. Good luck!

  142. Mountain shadow says:

    It appears this Judge actually wants you to appeal.

    Who knows why?

  143. Mac says:

    Pojnt 10. This is a very open, transparent and accessible forum. They almost know your every thought and step.

    Talk to Alex Salmond, he is the best person to advise. He will understand exactly what is going on.

  144. Neil Mackenzie says:

    That stinks, stinks, stink-stink-stinks.

    That 50% “Uplift” looks a lot like a euphemism for “bump” or “bribe”.

    The sheriffs earlier jibe about a £100 worth of damages is looking more like a tell of bias than ever, now.

  145. Rick Guthrie says:


  146. Sharny Dubs says:

    The target is obvious. They are scared shitless of The Wee Blue Book 2 and the impact it will have soon (going by the performance of the first one) and will do anything to try and cripple it including by reduced funding.

    Of course they knew we would appeal given such blatant provocation.

    Appeal the bastard!!

    Hand on cheque book.

  147. frogesque says:

    I’m in!

  148. Alistair Donaldson says:

    My heart says go get them. My head says follow the advice of your counsel. Whatever your final decision, I would be happy to contribute further, matching my previous contribution either to the fundraiser or to the appeal, dependant upon your final decision.

  149. Mac says:

    Dugdale, as you read through these comments, you should recognise the truth. And everyone sees you for what you are.

    You got it wrong. And are where you are, only due to a corrupt abuse of power by the establishment.

    You started this idiocy and you were too stupid and egotistical to stop it. Whichever way it goes, your name will be forever connected with this perverted attempt to damage someone who has done much to further the cause of Scotland’s right to govern itself.

    This perversion of justice, takes the monies from pooper people in Scotland who have donated.

    You are a disgrace to Scotland.

  150. Daisy Walker says:

    In disputes over rent – one can set up an account in the name of the landlord, put the payment into it… but hold onto the release/account number, so that they cannot access it. In this way one is seen to be acting in good faith (and actually having the money) and cannot be pursued for bankruptcy – settlement comes after the dispute is sorted. And I’d suggest you let them fight you for the payment if that is possible.

    That might be one way of putting this onto a very long back burner – and not being provoked into a reaction, rather than a response.

    I’m very shocked at this new verdict – this is an add on after the event – most unsightly. And at a time when you’ve been shining a light on areas the SNP senior management would rather you didn’t.

    You have to fight this – you just don’t have to make this the main battleground.

    The place to kick them is right in the balls, and that means educating Scotland’s voters in the best way you know how.

    And since its probably too soon for WBB2, I’d suggest Billboards – home grown if necessary.

    Appreciate it if you can ring fence the different funds. Will be donating again – I didn’t really need a holiday anyway.

  151. Mac says:


    You may well be right.

  152. cynicalHighlander says:

    This reeks of politics by a corrupt judicial system here in Scotland nothing less. Willing to donate again.

  153. Clydebuilt says:

    Is the costs decision a trap, to goad you into appealing, then the expected loss, taking money out of the Independence support.

    Whether the above is true or not, my heart says appeal. My heid isn’t so sure

    I’ll contribute.

  154. Bob Mack says:

    Stupid says appeal will go to same judge. Will he change his mind? Not a hope in he’ll. How do you go beyond that if he refuses leave to go to higher court? Beyond the looking glass.

  155. ronnie anderson says:

    I wish people would stop mentioning the WBB Stu’s not stupid that money is ringfenced , any new Crowdfunder would be for a Legal Appeal solely & that appeal as Stu say’s can only be on the original judgement not on costs .

    I hope everybody that reads WoS site Contributes as they can afford .

  156. Mark Fletcher says:

    Fight it to the end. Launch the fundraiser. Money will roll in. The Establishment is insane but it tends to have the whip-hand. Principles, however, are important.

  157. Sheriff Nigel Ross accusing Russia of corrupt legal practices,

    `In a written judgment, Sheriff Ross said:

    “I accept that there is evidence throughout Russian society of corruption…

    Of particular relevance in this case are three issues, namely prosecutions to order, lack of judicial independence, and negligible acquittal rate.

    “All of these systemic features would be enough, in my view, to amount to clear, cogent and credible evidence that Dr Shapovalov’s right to a fair trial has, or will be, breached`

    what a fricken hypocrite,

    not sayin the Russian legal system is beyong reproach,

    but Sheriff Nigel Ross to complain about `prosecutions to order, lack of judicial independence` and then come up with this peice of legal garbage that vomits in the face of Justice is a fricken abomination.


  158. Athanasius says:

    1 – open a separate crowdfunding appeal specifically to fight this; don’t allow that … PERSON to drain the fighting fund.

    2 – I’ll put my hand in my pocket for this.

    3 – Make it clear that the people are behind you and Dugdale is draining THEIR resources, not yours.

  159. frogesque says:

    OK, back from Ayr and finished a cuppa.

    Further to my previous “I’m in!”

    Has Dugdale prejudiced any appeal by mouthing her gub off?

    Will an appeal stop any further comment by her until heard?

    The current situation lacks any moral compass, all Dugdale had to do was make a simple apology at no cost to anyone other than her own pride and self importance. Indeed an early apology might indeed have earned her some respect, dear knows, she could do with it.

    Instead she prostituted herself through the court courtesy of other peoples’ money. It has to be stopped or anyone, especially Indy supporting A. N. Other, is fair game.

  160. Terry says:

    When they attack you they attack us.

    I’d only one concern and you’ve answered it – As I said previously, an appeal would be almost entirely a matter for lawyers – I’d have very little to do with it and wouldn’t have to come to Edinburgh again.

    They’re trying to rub our noses in it. No chance. Let us know what you need.

  161. Achnababan says:

    This stinks of a political show trial. Can someone do a big of digging on the Sheriff in the case?

    As it is very political then it may be that he may have loyalties that could usefully be exposed … Rangers fan, lodge member, tory friends in high places etc. etc

  162. starlaw says:

    Success stories of appeals against a Judges ruling are as rare as hens teeth. Judges will not hear tell of another Judge being wrong, it just does not happen.

  163. Maria F says:

    I am disgusted. Truly disgusted and frankly ashamed. This is not justice, this is abuse of the weak and I do know how that sheriff can see themselves in the mirror and still claim they have been just. They haven’t. Not from where I am standing. In my opinion they have opened a pandora box because this comes across as as nothing other than an act of bullying, the powerful state bullying the weak dissenter into silence just because they can. Unacceptable and unjustifiable when the same sheriff acknowledged that the tweet was not homophobic and that the accused crossed the line.
    This is not justice. She should at least pay for her own costs.

    When Scotland becomes independent I think a serious spring clean up of all the corruption at the Scottish courts must start. No corner should be left unturned.

    I will be contributing when you open the fundraiser. Just say the word.

  164. Gary says:

    This uplift of expenses makes no sense, neither would awarding her expenses make any sense on its own. The original decision made no sense either.

    ONLY in one way does it make any sense. You are in favour, very vocally, of Scottish Independence. THAT makes you an enemy of any court in the land. Kezia Dugdale, poor wee thing, only has access to the media, her own newspaper column and the backing of the Labour Party and her newspaper. A big scary blogger has come (with no political party or newspaper to fund him) and been annoyed that she has defamed him. What sensible court could have judged otherwise (I’, being sarky BTW)

    No court will EVER find in your favour on anything whilst you are in favour of Indy. You’re getting the same level of justice as Julian Assange, and for the same reason – political.

    You won’t win an appeal, but in doing so you make it more awkward for them, they have to come up with more dodgy excuses as to why SHE can defame YOU but YOU can’t get remedy for it.

    It’d feel wrong however NOT to bring up your recent couple of articles on rights of trans people etc. I’m not sure if these could be used in evidence in an appeal but if they can, you’re DEFINITELY snookered. Whilst Kezia’s original statement WAS wrong she could point to this as some kind of ‘pattern of behaviour’ without much difficulty. I feel like you’re determined to shoot yourself in the foot with those articles…

  165. george wood says:

    I’m for appeal and am willing to contribute.

    I think the awarding of costs has been designed to put you off appealing. The sheriff knows you would probably win an appeal given the dodgy nature of his judgement.

  166. Dane says:

    Like most on here, I can’t believe this bizarre judgment. Speak to your legal team, Stu. I will contribute to your fundraiser if going to appeal. A point to note, as most of Dugdale’s costs were covered by Daily Record/Mirror Group. If anyone on here still reads the gutter rag, time to stop. Even online, every hit gives them coppers of revenue. If our tech-savvy folk on here can Archive IS any relevant articles, it would avoid being click bait for them.
    No matter our personal feelings about the Sheriff, it might be prudent not to air them on here. You can bet this forum is being monitored.
    Oh one more thing Dugdale, as I assume you or your fan club will be reading. It is my honestly held belief that you are a corrupt liar. I’ll try looking up the thesaurus, just to check what it means.

  167. hopper69 says:

    It’s your call. If you go for it I will donate.

  168. William Habib Steele says:

    This is just plain wrong! I’m angry!

  169. Graf Midgehunter says:


    If you get to read this thread, any chance of you helping out here to stop the disgusting abuse of the Scottish Law for political means.

  170. ALANM says:

    Sorry Stuart, my only surprise is that you’re surprised.

    I’ve long since given up lining the pockets of expensive Edinburgh lawyers via crowdfunding appeals initiated by supporters of the independence movement. The truth is we never win so what’s the point? All that legal action ever achieves is diverting much needed funds away from good causes towards bad causes.

    To top it all, in this particular case you were swimming against the riptide of political correctness from day one.

  171. CameronB Brodie says:

    It’s the time-stamp link under the comment that you need to copy, if you want the go strait to the comment your talking about.

  172. iain MacGillivray says:

    count me in, you have to fight this all the way.

  173. Maid_in_Scotland says:

    Daisy Walker @ 7.11 “I’m very shocked at this new verdict – this is an add on after the event – most unsightly. And at a time when you’ve been shining a light on areas the SNP senior management would rather you didn’t.”

    Are you suggesting the SNP is behind this? Or am I misunderstanding your meaning? Some clarification would be apposite.

  174. Angela Connor says:

    I’m happy to contribute, this is the establishment trying to take you down.

  175. Ahundredthidiot says:


    Let history be the Judge.

  176. Col.Blimp IV says:

    Can’t the appeal be postponed until it can be dealt with some kind of dystopian(From a Unionist viewpoint) post-revolution tribunal?

    Where the likely outcome would be the Sheriff, Dugdale and her Lawyers being sentenced to be boiled in big cauldrons of rancid porridge.

  177. Muscleguy says:

    This uplift just goes to show the Unionist establishment will not just defend its friends but punish uppity oiks who get above themselves in challenging things.

    This is manifestly unjust. If anything, as you say you should have gotten at least a 50% reduction for winning on the substantive issue.

    ‘Complexity’ obviously means ‘lots of meetings to decline despite reasonable offers from the plaintive to settle in advance of court’.

  178. Lochside says:

    The Orkney Four ( Frenchgate ); Craig Murray; Alex Salmond; Prof. John Robertson; the Rev. All targets of the Britnat State forces. And now the conclusive proof that ‘Scots law’, one of the supposed institutions that defined our continuing sovereigty is in the hands of corrupt , politically motivated protectors ( at all costs) of the Union.

    In addition, journalists such as Lesley Riddoch and Paul Kavanagh ( Wee ginger Dug) cast out into the darkness of deliberate excluded mainstream work at the expense of charlatans and place men and women.

    Our institutions: the Law; the Churches; the media, all working against our movement or remaining silent while our spokespeople such as the REV are hounded by politicised decisions masquerading as justice.

    From the minute the ugly birth of the Supreme Court was facilitated by the demonic midwife Tony Blair, I knew and stated on here many times that our Scots Law had surrendered its legitimacy and that the Act of Union was automatically sundered by it.

    I would echo others Rev,. Take advice on this. Consider the financial and emotional attrition this ordeal has caused you. Meanwhile Dugdale gets a bent decision and a bigger payoff for apparently being intellectually challenged ( Fair Comment?). Plus an establishment sinecure. You get am almighty boot in the balls.I will support you in a separate crowd fund to the utmost. An attack like this on you is an attack on us all.

  179. X_Sticks says:


    Video on Scotland’s Democratic Future: Shaping Scotland’s Citizens’ Assembly, hosted by Electoral Reform Society

    This is worth a watch if you want to understand the Citizens Assembly initiative.


    hope this link works..

  180. Jim Wands says:

    Take your lawyers advice but I for one will help again and keep helping.

  181. galamcennalath says:

    It’s being played out as if SHE was the aggrieved party!

    Appeal! We have your back.

  182. Capella says:

    Astragael says:
    8 July, 2019 at 6:35 pm
    Sheriff N A Ross may be thought to have previous – see


    One side effect of an appeal is that it allows for the kind of exposure of the legal system that is long overdue. Every issue is a campaign issue.

    Thomas Muir was deported to Australia for advocating democracy. That meant changing the constitution to allow ordinary people to vote. The Hingin judge, Lord Braxfield opined that the British Constitution was perfect and could not be improved.

    Before juries packed with loyalists, Braxfield missed no opportunity to announce that the British constitution was ‘perfect’ and strongly adhered to the dominant view of the time that government should be restricted to landowners who had a tangible link with the nation.

    The trials for sedition sealed Braxfield’s reputation for bullying coarseness and he is said to have been the inspiration for the villainous character of Lord Weir in Robert Louis Stevenson’s unfinished novel ‘Weir of Hermiston’.

    Looks like we have our modern Hingin Sheriff sitting in Edinburgh.

  183. Elmac says:

    In common with all other comment here I am utterly disgusted at this travesty. There is no basis in common sense or fairness for what this sheriff has perpetrated. We are witnessing naked corruption and abuse of the judicial process for political reasons and possibly personal advancement as well. I will happily contribute to any fundraiser to right this wrong. When we have done so, and when independence follows shortly thereafter, there must be a full and proper investigation of what has transpired here and any wrongdoing on the part of the sheriff subject to dismissal from office, financial restitution to the injured party by the sheriff, and criminal prosecution followed by jail time. We need to let these a***holes know that they will be called to account for their crimes. Make them think twice before they risk it.

  184. JP AoM says:

    Fight it all the way. I’m in. Leave the indy fighting fund in place, we’ll all back you in a new crowdfunder specifically for this. Enough is enough.

  185. fillofficer says:

    this must be taken all the way
    they are trying to humiliate you (& us)
    how can a MSP, who is a former law student, not know the meaning of words
    this reeks to high heavens
    who will hear the appeal, i wonder
    funds guaranteed, if required

  186. Wee folding bike says:

    I’ll chip in. It will delay my purchase of a new concert ukulele and thus help out Scotland in two ways.

  187. CameronB Brodie says:

    As far as I’m concerned, the original verdict was unsound, as there is a vanishingly small probability that KD didn’t understand what “homophobic” means. This ruling on costs simply compounds the original injustice.

    Personally, I can’t see you wining an appeal, as Scotland’s judiciary appear ambivalent about the rule-of-law. It might still be worthwhile getting tore into them though.

    Proof on the balance of probabilities: what this means in practice

    Before asking what proof on the balance of probabilities means in practice, it is helpful to know what it means in theory.

    In a family case (Re B [2008] UKHL 35), Lord Hoffman answered that question using a mathematical analogy:

    “If a legal rule requires a fact to be proved (a ‘fact in issue’), a judge or jury must decide whether or not it happened. There is no room for a finding that it might have happened. The law operates a binary system in which the only values are 0 and 1. The fact either happened or it did not. If the tribunal is left in doubt, the doubt is resolved by a rule that one party or the other carries the burden of proof. If the party who bears the burden of proof fails to discharge it, a value of 0 is returned and the fact is treated as not having happened. If he does discharge it, a value of 1 is returned and the fact is treated as having happened.”

  188. Col.Blimp IV says:

    Your comment is awaiting moderation.
    8 July, 2019 at 8:04 pm
    Can’t the appeal be postponed until it can be dealt with some kind of dystopian(From a Unionist viewpoint) post-revolution tribunal?

    Where the likely outcome would be the Sheriff, Dugdale and her Lawyers being sentenced to be boiled in big cauldrons of rancid porridge.

  189. velofello says:

    I’m not for retiring from the field, the issue here is greater than the defamation case, and needs to be pursued. Lawyer friends had expressed the view to me that Sheriff Ross had “bottled it” in his judgement. His perverse damages decision has surely “unbottled” a principled debate – as described by Rev Stu above- that We The People – require justice to be seen to be done.

    Wings Fundraiser for Justice, I like that. Rev Stu has advised on occasion the numbers that view Wings, running into 5 figures. A fiver from each would raise a mighty Justice Fund.

  190. Terry callachan says:

    The Scottish law commission changed the law relating to defamation in 2017
    I attach a paper on their findings and consultation

    It applies very strongly in this wings / Dugdale case

    It’s a long paper to read but very informative
    If you want a quick hit to convince you it’s worth reading go straight to chapter 3 which discusses a defence of “truth” and goes on to discuss and determine how that should be determined .

    I’m not a lawyer but it appears to say that if defence submits that what was said was what the defendant truthfully believed , it has to be “reasonable” that they really did believe what they said was the truth

    For a judge to find
    that a gay woman
    a top politician no less
    who is well educated
    passing opinion on laws of her country
    did not know the proper meaning of homophobic
    does not strike me as being a reasonable judgement

    See what you think

  191. Wobbly says:

    Not at all surprised by this. I will happily support another fund raiser if you decide to appeal.

  192. Terry callachan says:

    Looks like defamation law in Scotland in some respects was brought into line with the law in England and Wales
    My reading of it anyway
    If true
    Make sure you have an English lawyer and a Scottish lawyer

  193. CameronB Brodie says:

    There is no way on earth that KD didn’t understand what homophobia means. She is qualified in law and policy studies and is a lesbian. If she is genuinely ignorant of such things, would that not preclude her from her recent appointment in Glasgow University?

    Subsequently, this Sheriff doesn’t appear to be a rational liberal. More like a friend of the New Right and (white) British nationalism.

    Kezia Dugdale

    Early life and education

    She studied Law at the University of Aberdeen from 1999–2003, and completed a Master’s Degree in Policy Studies from 2004–06 at the University of Edinburgh.[1]

  194. Christine Sinclair says:

    This is obvious skullduggdalery. You absolutely must fight it, one day soon they will make a film or at the very least a tv programme about their very obvious biases. I will happily contribute to your appeal and Im not thriving at all in this union. Im utterly bamboozled by the utter shamelessness of their prejudices and how they have distorted justice for their own ends. They must be shown up as what they are, lying, cheating swines.

  195. CameronB Brodie says:

    Terry callachan

  196. Iain mhor says:

    Yeah, I have a few bob spare.

  197. Doug McGregor says:

    Wish I could upvote Terry Callachan.

  198. TJenny says:

    Stu – With you all the way, whatever you decide and I kinda like:

    Wings Of Justice Over Scotland.

    Plus if the judgement is saying she doesn’t understand words, after studying law and being an MSP, should she ever again be allowed out without a carer?

  199. Petra says:

    Forget it and move on Stu. You’ll never beat the Establishment and will be throwing good money away (Wings supporters) hand over fist, especially if an appeal leads to an appeal, leads to an appeal etc, etc. The legal and political system in Scotland is akin to a Tory / Labour / Libdem spider’s web. One that I’ve had first hand experience of with tentacles that also lead directly to London. You just have to take note of the number of politicians alone who were previously solicitors in Scotland. Then there’s their brother-in-law, cousin, mate and so on all interconnected. Thousands of people, anti-Independence, involved in the corrupt setup.

    If you ask me they want you to appeal with their 50% “uplift.” Goading you on. Are they just looking to screw even more money out of you (us) or do they have something else in mind? Using your your next “loss of case” to humiliate you further or damage the Independence movement overall? And do you really think that you’d win an appeal? The “fair comment” defence, seemingly unfair, has been used in other cases to the detriment of people like yourself. They have the Law on their side, like it or not. So what will change on appeal?

    In the eyes of the people you won your case. You proved that you weren’t / aren’t homophobic. In the eyes of the people Kezia Dugdale was / is a nasty piece of work who used her position as a politician / journalist (you could easily dispute both) in an attempt to bring you and the site down. Her main aim of course was to damage Nicola Sturgeon / the SNP and the Independence movement, however for as long as she lives, wherever she goes and whatever she does with her life she’s damaged goods. A known out and out liar, troublemaker and bully: Revengeful, jealous and petty. There’s more of course which if included would fill the page.

    Focus on the one thing that will hurt them most of all, take the wind right out of their sails, and that will be through playing a key role on getting us our Independence. Following that we’ll find ourselves in a more advantageous position to deal with the corrupt Scottish Establishment, in particular legal system.

  200. John says:

    Now we know , a Scottish judge comes up with crap and we have supposed to accept it , no chance , the establishment are out to get you Stu , the judge would have been “direted” , start your appeal , we will crowdfund it !.

  201. CameronB Brodie says:

    This ruling is an affront to legal reason, IMHO.

    Policy Studies, M.Sc.


    What are the factors that shape the policy decisions taken by governments at supranational, national and local levels? How do these decisions interact and impact on society and on the economy? Answering such questions effectively requires an inter-disciplinary understanding of the field of public policy, drawing insights especially from politics, sociology, and economics. With a particular focus on the social and economic policy fields that are at the heart of modern welfare states, the MSc Public Policy offers an advanced understanding of the political, social and economic context of policy-making and government activity in modern societies.

    The degree, based in the School of Social and Political Science, draws on the School’s multi-disciplinary expertise across different fields of public policy, with a focus that ranges from the local to the global.

  202. Footsoldier says:

    Great news, I think we may already be independent.

    Been watching Panorama on BBC1 “No Deal Brexit – Are we Ready?” presented by Jane Corbin who said at the start she was visiting every part of the UK but there was not a single mention of Scotland.


  203. Jockanese Wind Talker says:

    What @Wull says at 5:42 pm

    Sheriff Ross’s original judgement certainly appears unsound and sets a dangerous precedent (in that anyone can commit defamation but then claim they “believe what they said was truthful” regardless of education level (including in The Law itself) etc. as per @Terry callachan says at 8:45 pm in respect of “reasonable judgement”, “relating to defamation” in Scots Law

    Then to top it off he awards 150% of costs vs the stated £100 he’d have awarded to you if you’d won!

    As per most BTL it definitely smells suspect

    I wonder if the Daily Record have ‘front page splash, career ending, jail time serving material on the good Sheriff?’ – This last sentence is I believe a “reasonable comment” but feel free to delete it if you don’t Rev.

  204. Effijy says:

    These judgements stink of corruption to the high heavens.

    My first thought is whether the judge has been promised great rewards
    Or threats for throwing justice out the window.

    I’m reminded of books and films I’ve come across where innocent
    African Americans are convicted by corrupt racists who hold high office.

    Forgive my naivety for the law but is there any possibility taking this to the Court
    Of Human Rights in The Hague?

    There is obviously no justice for independence supporters while Westminster’s
    Network deceit encompasses all UK divisions of power.

  205. Kenny J says:

    As I have said before, I hardly ever comment. Others are far more erudite, and quicker than I.
    However, I think before Dugdale ever uttered a word, as soon as it was read, this Twitter joke would have been gamed by the unionists to see if if it had any mileage to see if it could be used to smear Stuart. She didnae stand up on her hin legs at Holyrood and just spout. It would have been rehearsed and tweeked, and rehearsed again, and then stuck in her Record piece.
    This decision is the Establishment protecting it’s own, and dealing a blow to the enemy, which is what we are. This is a low-level war, and as an aside, I don’t think N. Sturgeon is a good general, administrator yes, war leader, no. Eh, Boab.
    Perhaps Keith Brown might be the man. BTW, they think the Tories will blink on a Section 30. I’m no so sure.
    So, this HAS to be fought, I’ll contribute as I have done for the past 5 years, and hope to do till we prevail.

  206. Cubby says:

    Dane makes a very good point – namely don’t buy the Daily Redcoat. I would add to that – don’t buy any of the Britnat papers.

  207. Kenny J says:

    Meant to add to post at 9.13, are there any National staffers reading this saga.

  208. TJenny says:

    Stu – could we bring a class act, all WOS readers, appeal? (I ah know yir a class act), but as this verdict has classed us all as homophobic by association.

  209. Col says:

    I’m not as well off as I was this time last year but doesn’t mean I can’t stay out of the pub for a week and contribute 30 quid. They think they can push the little man around but even if the appeal fails we can further highlight the corruption that is done in the name of the so called union with England

  210. ScottieDog says:

    Reeks of establishment chicanery.
    Up to you stu. Personal decision.
    Will do what I can.

  211. Al-Stuart says:


    You are lucky if this money penalty is all you get SCREWED for.

    Pick several examples of the UNION SCREW at random….

    Alex Salmond has been SCREWED by the State. To all intents and purposes one of the biggest hitters for IndyRef2 in the persona of Alex Salmond has been NEUTERED.

    Next… A regular SCREW of SNP MPs and MSPs results in the majority being cleared, but effectively SCREWED to the point they might as well have been taken to the vets and been NEUTERED like Alex.

    You already had your computer kit seized as your PRE-SCREW WARNING.

    Stu., YOU can be sure that the secret squirrel lot are watching you VERY closely. No that is not paranoia. 10,000 people employed by the Ministry of Secret Squirrels to protect the British State are there precisely to watch people like you.

    I know, I used to be a Student Union president. I did my job. Then took a bizarre turn and became a police officer (too much Taggart + Hamish MacBeth). I was mildly appalled when, at interview, a very stern Inspector presented who looked awfy like Vinegar T**s from Prisoner Cell Block H threw a buff coloured “file” from a Shaun Connery-esque department at me. “EXPLAIN THAT” said the personality-bypass person grilling me like burnt toast. There followed some VERY probing questions about whether I spoke Russian. There were photographs going back years. Including those during the time I served in an elected office, with lurid pictures of myself and a girlfriend in congress at the time.

    Please mark my words…

    The closer Holyrood gets to navigating past a Section 30 Order and the more often YES tips over 50% in the polls the DIRTIER and more SCREWIER things will get.

    Independence for Scotland will NOT come easy. 2014 was a picnic as the British State believed YES would limp home at 25% maybe 30% and that would be it over for a LONG period.

    Instead, Daniel Craig’s lot got such an almighty scare that they ain’t going to take any prisoners this time around.

    Gird Yer Loins old Stuey.

    What Longshanks did to William Wallace is no that far removed from the likes of Dr David Kelly and the modern way one of the greatest empires the world has ever seen STILL operate.

  212. Bob Mack says:

    Dugdale is an educated lawyer. There is therefore no excuse of being ignorant of law or fact. The judge awarded costs because he believed that as a gay woman Dugdale could feel that the joke was homophobic. Much is made of the ability of people reading the joke because how they would interpret it would be affected by their level of education and life experience. However the ordinary man is not being sued here.
    It is a trained officer of the law who stated you were homophobic.

    The sheriff cannot on one hand state you are not, and then allow another law officer scope in how she interprets that joke because she is gay. Being gay is no defence in this instance.

    This smacks of insider trading and the law courts protecting a high profile member of the bar. You must appeal. We may lose, but at least we are saying we will fight this injustice to the very end.

  213. Cubby says:


    Go on hold your breath.

  214. Robert Louis says:

    Throughout all of this, I have thought it is not insignificant that Dugdale’s partner, rather bizarrely is an SNP MSP.

    The judgement was quite, quite wrong, in every way, and this decision on charges further compounds that error. I think that if your lawyers think it worthwhile, and you can crowd fund enough money, you should appeal.

    However, I think it is a tricky decision as to whether appeal or not. Money is finite, and it is realistic to assume, that every penny donated to this appeal, is one less penny for some of the other VERY important indy groups who are trying to raise funds.

    Now a straightforwards decisions in my opinion. I genuinely think things will really kick off as soon as Boris Trump is made our new Prime Minister by the Tory party membership. I think things will move very quickly, including a general election.

  215. Proud Cybernat says:

    The truly risible thing here, of course, is that the ‘Establishment’ will think that they have won. Oh boy. Where to begin.

    Even IF Dugdale wins the appeal, the ‘Establishment’ will have LOST.

    They really, REALLY don’t get how these things work.

    Bring it on. (But only if you’re up to it Rev – and I’m sure you are. Think about it – it really doesn’t matter if your appeal is not upheld. You/we will have made a MASSIVE point to these feckers. As far as I’m concerned, this is a win-win situation even if the appeal is lost).

    This case is WAY BIGGER than Dugdale and will, in time, reverberate throughout Scottish society. They can close ranks; they can circle the wagons but ULTIMATELY the ordinary people of Scotland will call them out for what they are.

    They WILL lose in the end. And that ‘end’ is Scottish Indy and their actions (injustice) will have helped bring that wee bit closer.

  216. Giving Goose says:

    This is an Appin Murder for modern times.
    Another James Stewart.
    Another grave injustice.
    All acted out on behalf of the London Establishment.
    It’s wrong. It’s sad. It’s cringingly embarrassing to watch the Scots legal establishment crawling on it’s knees to their English masters.

  217. Robert Louis says:

    Giving Goose at 957pm,

    Quote ” It’s cringingly embarrassing to watch the Scots legal establishment crawling on it’s knees to their English masters.”

    Indeed, and they have been doing it for centuries. on the on hand supposedly proud of their different ‘Scots legal system, but on the other hand, getting a gig down in Old London town at the English pretendy ‘supreme court’ is worth so much more.

  218. MorvenM says:

    Perverse and outrageous decision. Appeal.

  219. Daisy Walker says:

    @ Maid In Scotland – in reply to your question – I don’t know, but I think we should be prepared for the possibility, or more likely its something they don’t need to involve themselves in, others will do the dirty.

    What do we know. We are now weeks away from a No Deal Brexit, with the chance of a People’s Vote now non existent, or a managed Deal Brexit – also nowhere to be seen.

    Once that is through, there will be chaos, from that a state of emergency, from that Holyrood closed (initially bypassed). From there No Indy Ref2 Vote, and from there bye bye NHS, bye bye all of Scotland’s assets (and public services). (And for the supporters of GRA – how does no NHS help any transgender person? How?)

    The official reasons for Brexit never held water. None of them.

    Save the Tax Havens, save the Establishment – THAT made sense, if you follow the above trail of actions thereafter.

    So what are the blocks/dangers preventing that happening? increased popular support for Indy in Scotland – and some form of democratic vote. The establishment could not stop the recent EU elections, and the Scottish result has scared them shitless.

    They’ve managed to put Indy Ref 2 on hold due to S30.

    And they’ve managed to prevent the SNP from campaigning over the last 2 years to tell people what an absolute cluster fuck Brexit is going to be, and how we should all just wait and see how it all pans out, and get pulled out of the EU like its no big deal at all.

    Cast your mind back 2 years and there was a timescale and a plan, remember when Pete Wishart announced – we should all just wait to get pulled out of the EU and let the next HE come around, just all sit on our arses until then. It caused outrage, but then by hook or by crook it became the default schedule.

    No the great big threat is a GE or a HE – in order to rig that, they have to get the SNP to shoot itself in the foot from within, and become unelectable to a large section of the population. Step forward GRA.

    Another threat is Alex Salmond – well he’s now got one hand tied behind his back – awaiting his ‘trial’. That won’t be getting heard any time soon now will it.

    I think we can look forward to embarrassing disclosures in the near future with regards some of our younger elected politicians. I’ve seen people misuse drugs before – I’ve never seen anyone ‘rub kitkat into their gums’. Any person from the SNP misbehaving in the slightest manner will have been filmed doing so and is now compromised.

    And most importantly – Wings. He has not been nullified, or compromised, or controlled.

    The above legal message is huge – they’re saying in great big actions – we can make it up and move the goal posts as much as we like, we don’t care if anyone see it.

    The British Establishment cannot afford to lose Scotland – if they haven’t put the frighteners on some of our SNP movers and shakers, and bribed or blackmailed others – then they haven’t been doing their job properly – and when it comes to dirty tricks they wrote the book.

    I’m not saying any of this to take the wind out of anyone’s sails. I’m saying this so we can be prepared. Expect the above, all of it and worse. Not IF, WHEN. Then go round the problem.

    We absolutely need the SNP to win, but we need them demonstrably honest in their intentions. Don’t bin your membership, (that’s kind of what they want) go dig out the rule books, get your local MP’s, MSP’s and councillors to give a clear stmt of intent for how we are going to campaign and win – and if their answers are not up to scratch – hold a vote of no confidence and replace them.

    We are running out of time.

  220. SOG says:

    One wonders what Labour’s few remaining supporters will think of this. If they hear about it.

    My opinion is – go for it. It’s as important as the Carmichael case.

  221. Cat says:

    Outrageous. Go for it. We’re right behind you Stu. This has to stop.

  222. Bobp says:

    Cubby 9.27pm. You stalking me again muppet.

  223. Alex McMahon says:

    Looks like the endgame is in play with the BritNats. Someone in the National on Sunday had the wit to mention the Glen Douglas arms dump that supplies the nuclear subs etc, That alone would cost billions to rebuild even if you could fine somewhere else to build it (probably need to be abroad somewhere).
    We’ve got Wings back, I’ll chip in. Might as well go for it, the troops will stump up the cash and it’s good publicity.

  224. Tatu3 says:

    I like what Petra said @ 9pm.

    Independence FIRST

  225. Capella says:

    It may well be that this insult from Sheriff Ross is a provocation designed to goad us into backing an appeal. But we contributed to the Orkney Four even though the prospect of them winning was remote. The principle was compelling. Now Alistair Carmichael is forever condemned as a liar. The Parliamentary Standards Committee is shown to be corrupt. It’s another nail in the coffin of the British Establishment.

    The Presiding Officer should have reprimanded Kezia Dugdale for launching a defamatory attack on a private individual from her privileged position as an MSP. But he didn’t. Another nail is hammered in.

    There’s not much left to do but arrange the funeral. Most of us will fund that gladly.

  226. Cubby says:


    Hey Kermit, just hold your breath. It’ll stop all the insults and crap from pouring out.

  227. Colin Alexander says:

    Aw come oan here.

    In no way am I saying I agree with the ruling.

    However, Stu is no William Wallace or Joan of Arc. Get a sense of perspective please.

    He’s a blogger who writes some really good articles and gives space to others to write really good articles and btl comments.

    But, who is his own worst enemy with his Achilles heel of resorting to profanity and abusive comments on Twitter.

    Rightly or wrongly, you decide for yourselves, it’s been made clear the SNP Establishment despises him almost as much as Kezia and certain others do.

    But, this is no an indy v UK State battle.

    Despite the guttermouth distractions on Twitter, Stu also tells it how he sees it. He is willing on occasion to hold the SNP / Scottish Govt to account too, for their failures and lack of action.

    I’m sure in the coming days Nicola and the SNP big shots will also be glad if Stu’s Wings get severely clipped. Especially now that it’s been made clear to Stu that the SNP’s loyalties lie with Kezia.

    Politicians and the legal and business Establishment all pee in the same chanty. The SNP are no different in that respect.

  228. Bobp says:

    Aye gubby, you’d know all about insults you obnoxious cretin.

  229. mike cassidy says:

    Daisy Walker 10.09

    “The above legal message is huge – they’re saying in great big actions – we can make it up and move the goal posts as much as we like, we don’t care if anyone see it.”

    I presume you meant “great big letters”

    But even if you didn’t.

    You may be spot on.

    But in a world where Trump has followed the Rolling Stones in turning in to his own tribute act

    its hard to avoid the feeling that

    Things fall apart

    The centre cannot hold

    Mere anarchy is loosed upon the world

  230. Pete Barton says:

    Who’s down a gunner grand?


    Who needs their money back?

    Because without this ‘Reimbursement’ for supporting the status quo,

    Somebody may find themselves unable to fight the good fight.

    Richard Leonard will know.

  231. Sue Varley says:

    You have to appeal, this is ridiculous. Either you will get justice, or it will be plainly shown that justice is not to be had in the Scottish Courts wrt defamation. Either way it will be worth it. Obviously would prefer you to win! We will contribute to any appeal fund you feel is necessary.

  232. mike cassidy says:


    as somebody much wiser than me once said

    jar spoon jar spoon jar spoon

  233. ElGordo says:

    I’d leave it.

    Let it go.

    Dugdale has been removed.

    The appeal will fail.

    Time and funds best spent elsewhere.

    Yes it’s corrupt but,

    Would have won on website persona but twitter persona introduced shades of grey.

    A hole that one might wank into will go down in history, worth contribution for that response alone

    But time to move on, else could appear vindictive or ego driven and detract.

    You did win after all.

    And we shortly could.

    Nearly there.

    Big prize.

  234. Stookie1967 says:

    Sound advice to Stu but I can’t agree that “the people” know he won.
    WoS/WGD readers know he won but the Dead Sea scrolls all reported it as tho’ he lost.
    Kez’s Oscar performances on radio shortbread added to the lie.
    I believe if the cards are folded now then the Yoons will not stop baiting us with the result

    So in balance I say Stu- Appeal and start the crowdfund. I’m in

  235. Katie says:

    So Jeremy and Boris on Scotland Tonight…… I despair!!!

  236. James Barr Gardner says:

    £100 pounds Scots fur you Stu, skulduggery wull nae prevail in my name !

  237. Charlie Magee says:

    We know they’re out to stop you. You have my support for what it’s worth

  238. manandboy says:

    The Establishment/Sheriff Ross/Kezia Dugdale v Rev Stuart Campbell.

    Let me think, in a case like this, is the judiciary, at every level, likely to be on the side of the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth?

    Not in a thousand years.

    The Yes movement, including myself in the first instance , must and will support the Rev.

  239. Skybolt says:

    This is ridiculous and is NOT how the people of Scotland wants their justice system to behave.

  240. Cubby says:


    Hey Kermit, just hold your breath. It’ll stop all the insults and crap from pouring out.

  241. Ken500 says:

    Appeal. Start a fundraiser. It is worth it just to get rid of Dugdale.

    Another one gone, another one down, another one hits the dust. The lies do not work. The liars won’t work.

  242. CyberMidgie says:


    Ready to contribute to an appeal fundraiser as and when.

  243. Essexexile says:

    I usually laugh at all the comments about MI5, unionist plants and dark money that litter these pages. They’re so infused with raw stupidity that they’re not worth the time of day.
    However, I do feel you are being backed into a corner by the establishment here Rev. Rather like AS, they are trying to keep you distracted.
    Ignore Dugdale now. She’s a rapidly fading star.
    But, what does the establishment least want you to do now?
    Answer: Pay up and go hell for leather for independence.
    That would hurt them most.

  244. Confused says:

    I keep thinking of that film – Cool Hand Luke
    – the man with no eyes
    – “getting my mind right, boss”
    – a “failure to communicate”
    – harry dean stanton singing that song, the chorus … “… you get in trouble with the Man” …

    the establishment are certainly sending the Rev a message

    or, more old films, in Shane where Wilson, the bad gunslinger, tells the sharecropper

    “pick up the gun … ”

    – you dont want to pick up the gun
    – there never was a fair shout in this –
    maybe at trial, the rev should have taken his oath to
    – the great architect – jahbulon
    swore it
    – so mote it be, hello sailor
    then made the sign of distress

  245. Sarah says:

    Rev, take your lawyers’ advice, NOT ours. They understand the system and most of us do not.

    Many of the ” pro-appeal” votes were subject to what your lawyers advise.

    Scotland cannot afford to lose your influence on our campaign. We have already lost Alex Salmond. And the dirty tricks are multiplying.

  246. CameronB Brodie says:

    Given KD’s educational background, it is disturbing that the Sheriff accepted her claim of ignorance. It looks like Scotland’s legal system hopes to deliver justice, while abandoning coherent legal reason. This was a utilitarian application of the law (i.e. the ends justify the means), and undermines justice and democracy.

    Legal Reasoning and Coherence Theories: Dworkin’s Rights Thesis, Retroactivity, and the Linear Order of Decisions

    Coherence and holistic theories of truth maintain that a proposition is true if it fits sufficiently well with other propositions held to be true. Philosophers developed coherence theories in an attempt to avoid inadequacies in foundationalist accounts of truth and justification offered by traditional empiricists. The empiricist program to construct a theory of knowledge that explains all truths as inferences from general first principles and particular experiences has proven to be difficult.1

    There are serious objections to all of the major attempts.2 Led by Professor W.V.O. Quine’s powerful arguments,3 coherence and holistic theories of knowledge and justification predominate in current Anglo-American philosophical circles, and foundational empiricist theories are on the wane.4 Coherence theories are more easily characterized by their denial that knowledge has the linear structure that foundationalist theories assert, than by a full-blown positive doctrine, as unfortunately happens all too often in philosophical disputes. A complete and convincing coherence epistemology has also proven elusive.

    There is agreement that the relation of coherence among propositions is more strict than logical consistency, yet less strict than logical entailment. But it is unclear where coherence lies between the extremes of consistency and entailment.5 Nevertheless, the force of the criticism of foundationalism, together with the suggestive and illuminating beginnings by coherence theorists, has caught the philosophical imagination.

    Coherence theories of knowledge,6 justification,7 perception,8 truth,9 and ethics,10 to name a few, have been proposed or developed in recent years. Coherence theorists have been a powerful, and perhaps the predominant, force in modem philosophy….

  247. boris says:

    In his summary the Judge stated: “Had I been awarding damages to the plaintiff, those damages would have been assessed at £100”

    Clearly his judgement was that Dugdale was guilty.

    Disgraceful to award costs to the guilty party.

    See my earlier post on the matter.

  248. Morag says:

    I’m going to be controversial here and say I believe you’ll lose again, because they don’t like you and no matter what it takes they’ll make sure you can’t won’t and don’t win.

    This, basically. This is how the legal system works. If you’re the person or the side that’s in favour they’ll find some way so you win. If you’re the side that’s despised, no matter how well-founded your case, they’ll find a way so you lose.

    That doesn’t mean I’m totally against an appeal, just pointing out the reality.

  249. TJenny says:

    Morag – and ‘This is how the legal system works. If you’re the person or the side that’s in favour they’ll find some way so you win. If you’re the side that’s despised, no matter how well-founded your case, they’ll find a way so you lose’, is surely what must be challenged.

  250. Cubby says:

    Best reason for appealing. – Dr Doom has consistently said don’t appeal.

    Independence is doomed doomed I tell you if you appeal says Dr Dooooooomm.

  251. Ken cairnduff says:

    Go for it, we will help as much as we can.
    I don’t always agree with you but I will fight to the death for your right to say what you want.
    (To misquote)

  252. robertknight says:

    If and when you have to part with any ready cash, DON’T send it stuffed inside a plain brown envelope – it’ll just get lost amongst all the others!

  253. CameronB Brodie says:

    I don’t think the Rev. will win an appeal. I suppose I’m a doom spreader as well?

  254. Clapper57 says:


    I cannot believe ( yes I can ) that nobody in the media is not mentioning this leak of the UK Ambassador memo is an obvious Brexit coup…think..what journalist wrote the story….the one who is pals with Farage, Banks, Ashcroft……..Isabel feckin Oakshott.

    Watched Dispatches with moronic darn sarf Tory voters warped opinions and also the prominence of the far right young shits Turning Point in UKOK ( who are supported by Reese Mogg & Patel and probably other ERG twats)and watched Channel four news with the Brexit party’s Richard Tice….he said same thing as Farage …a businessman should be next ambassador…was asked would you do it…and he said he would but laughed…..he also sided with Trump against UKOK Ambassador…

    Sir Bill Cash yon auld Brexit fanatic in HOC was slagging off the feckin UKOK Ambassador and siding with Trump…all the brexiteers are siding with Trump…….against a UKOK Ambassador….taking back control my arse…this is a Brexit driven coup and money and business interests are involved big time….and conveniently Trump NOW tweets will not deal with this UKOK Ambassador obviously paving the way for one of Farage/Banks mob to slot into this role.

    Now if Bojo wins and he does replace the UKOK Ambassador to US and chooses anyone connected with Farage then one has to ask is it a case of some people in Tory party have been sleeping with dogs and are now covered in fleas…..unable to delouse because the scandal that could potentially ensue by breaking ranks and spilling the beans would surely bring down this government..because those dogs they chose to sleep with in the great Brexit propaganda campaign, they will bring them down if they themselves go down..I refuse to believe that what is happening is beyond MI5 or feckin MI6…or whoever… to shut this down…unless they are really really shit….let’s not forget Bannon who has met with Farage and Bojo…..this shit surely goes deep.

    Just think of how arrogant Banks and Wigmore were before and after their questioning at the HOC select commitee…too confident as if they knew they were untouchable….wow I cannot understand why Scots want Independence this is very much stability personified this Better Together malarkey !

    Diminishes those smug Scottish Tories arguments for staying in the (non) Union….big time…those broad shoulders have shrunk and are unable to carry feck all never mind a ‘family of feckin nations’….democracy ?….not this time you deliberately clueless idiots…do you think us real Scots are morons ?

    On topic

    Meanwhile…here in Scotland…just to top it all off we are expected to believe that the Sheriff has decided Stuart Campbell is to pay the costs …..another BritNat coup ?

    Off and On topic

    This UKOK is finished….they know it and we have known it long before they pandered to the extremism of all of those right wing chancers and clowns ….hell mend them….they are well and truly f**ked…..what comes around goes around.

    I’d eat popcorn if I wasn’t so pissed off with it all !

  255. I’m appalled at this decision, which seems to me to fly in the face of natural justice.. nay, rather to be standing brazenly slapping natural justice about the face with a few very hefty red herrings.

    May I suggest that one Kezia might aptly be referred to henceforth as ‘Dugdale the Defamer’ (in sundry persons’ column inches, in personal media posts, in emails, on demo placards, etc.)

    That moniker ought to be easily defensible, if challenged, on the grounds that she has in fact been found to be such, in law.

  256. Wattie says:

    Dearest Rev,

    The uplift is an uplift from prescribed Sheriff Court rates for representation. It will almost always be awarded in cases where the complexity of the case warrants the instruction of counsel (as opposed to solicitors alone), as your case did. It’s not an uplift on the individual lawyer’s own appearance rate. In fact, it’s likely that the uplift won’t actually cover the fees charged by Kezia’s counsel, which she’s still due to pay (or have paid on her behalf by The Daily Record) in any event.

    Your problem is that, although you were defamed, Kezia managed to persuade the Sheriff that she was entitled to the ‘fair comment’ defence. The success of any appeal would depend on your being able to persuade the Sheriff Appeal Court (or, potentially, the Inner House of the Court of Session if leave to appeal directly to the Inner House were granted) that the Sheriff erred in finding that Kezia was entitled to rely on the ‘fair comment’ defence.

    There aren’t many defamation cases that make it through the Scottish courts, so the law isn’t particularly well developed in terms of having lots of previous decisions to go on. This is especially so when it comes to the fair comment defence. Also, Nigel Ross happens to be an intelligent, thoughtful and well-regarded sheriff (Clara Ponsati’s case was in good hands), which doesn’t mean to say he definitely got it right in this instance, but it makes his decision that bit harder to overturn.

    Only your Counsel can advise you on the likely prospects of success of an appeal. As much as I enjoy and admire many of the commentators on this blog, this all relates to a fairly nuanced question of law rather than a matter of public opinion. My own view is that, unless your advocate is saying there’s a better-than-60% chance of winning on appeal, then pony up. It will cost you less in the long run and you will have many here that supported your original stance who will be prepared to help lighten the load.

    You may have to content yourself with a moral victory here, but that beats pursuing a Pyrrhic one.


  257. TJenny says:

    Clapper57 – and what if Trump insists he’ll only engage with Farage as UK Ambassador? What then? I think UKGOV would acquiese.

  258. Cubby says:



    Nothing to do with whether the appeal is won or not.

  259. Clapper57 says:

    @ TJenny

    Well TJenny….nothing would surprise me with this lot….they seem confident they are dealing with a moronic pliable electorate so hey Hell yeh…..and Farage is a supposed lapsed Tory at heart ….might be interesting to have a ("Quizmaster" - Ed) as UKOK ( England’s ) Ambassador to US….greed and both self promotion and promoting his benefactors interests would soon kill off the inner Tory in him….

  260. Clapper57 says:

    Quisling not bloody quizmaster in my above post !

  261. CameronB Brodie says:

    No probs.


    The reason I doubt the chances of an appeal, is Scotland’s judiciary appear ambivalent to natural law and and natural justice (see admitted ambivalence towards the full English Brexit). I’m not aware of how common this view is among our judiciary, but lack of a concerted effort to defend Scotland’s constitution leaves me feeling extremely vulnerable. Constitutional law is meant to defend the vulnerable from the excess of political power, though not in Scotland, apparently.

  262. CameronB Brodie says:

    If the law is to deliver justice, it needs to relate coherently with reality, as well as existing legal doctrine. So does the Sheriff’s judgement suggest a coherent interpretation of reality and law? Not from where I’m looking it doesn’t.

    Interpretation and Coherence in Legal Reasoning

  263. chicmac says:

    What Wattie said.

    Except I would add that the Scottish judiciary has since the Treaty of Union acted almost entirely in the favour of the British State on matters in any way related to potential constitutional change, however tenuous that potential might be.

  264. Sarah says:

    Rev, what Wattie said at 12.50 a.m. is very convincing. I’d follow that advice if it were me. It’s the same advice I gave but comes from someone who actually knows what they are talking about!!

  265. Al-Stuart says:


    This seems a binary choice. Pay up or appeal and risk paying up a lot more. At best break even.

    Maybe we are all missing a point here. A tertiary course of action.

    Press Hamza Yousaf the Justice Secretary to sort out Scots Law on this dubious area? For that matter, the independence of the judiciary should come within an anti-Indy bias inquiry into the current judiciary. There is an awful aroma of Masonic Lodge with the law lords refusing to declare. Reference Lady Isabella McColl refusing and then avering the Tony Blair plea in mitigation: “Trust Me”… if I were (or rather my husband) was a Mason I pinky-promise it would not affect my judgement. Aye Right M’Lady. Forget about the ultra vires problem with writes and Scots Law etc.

    This is important given the ultra pro Unionist elements in the Masonic Order.

    Surely Humza Yousaf could pilot a Bill through Holyrood to ensure that Masonic judges identify their membership of that order and through new statute? Thereafter Masonic judges are REQUIRED to resile from cases where there is an Independence-v-Unionist element?

    Even the threat of a Scottish Parliamentary investigation is likely to cause the evacuation of certain law lords’ bowels and possible changes behind the scenes, rather than this current uncomfortable Kezia is guilty but we let her off because she is stupid. And Wings Over Scotland can pay £150,000 into the bargain. Even though they won.

    We have to get smarter with this current institutionalised Unionist bias across he law + the media etc.

    That means we need more lateral thinking and pro-active action.

  266. Al-Stuart says:

    P.S. Previous law lord excuses about Masonic membership not having any bearing or bias on judgements handed down…

  267. TJenny says:

    Clapper57 – the ‘Quisling’ not bloody ‘quizmaster’ is a filter set up by Stu.

    Re Farage as ambassador, ok, tin foil hat time, let’s not forget Boris was born in the USA, and ergo eligible to run for POTUS. Given his ego…?

  268. Clapper57 says:

    @ TJenny

    Yep TJenny, I’ve been filtered by Stu’s filter before Lol

    Hoping my tinfoil hat protects me from wee Green men and Whitehall men penetrating my brainwaves….LOL

    Well currently Bojo seems to be president of the Diddy men that make up Brexit faction within the Tory natural progression..ego seems to be the current obvious trait for the presidency now….me bad….always

  269. twathater says:

    I clicked the link posted upthread re the esteemed sheriff and the alleged claim of corruption by a pursuer seeking reparation from a auction house , the post was made in 2016 with no update to reveal the outcome of the accusation . The reading of the circumstances and the accusations of deliberate legal interventions appear to be well argued and illustrated yet the alleged irregularities appear to have been ignored

    Petra 9pm I may be misunderstanding the rev’s explanation but if he is being asked to pay the dug’s costs that would be in the region of £100,000 plus a 50% uplift would be a further £50,000 = £150,000 how can that be fair or justified , I donated £25 but explained in my posting my personal experience of judicial fairness , and cautioned the rev on his health and wellbeing , but let’s be honest this is the complete opposite of fairness and justice , it is untenable and contradictory that he could be found not guilty of being homophobic and the dug had defamed him yet the not guilty party was PENALISED for attempting to protect himself from a damaging slur

    Rev set up a crowdfunder to appeal this unjustifiable travesty , I will donate again

  270. Sunniva says:

    It sounds like it is the original decision of excusing Dugdale on the basis of ‘honest belief’ which is fundamentally faulty and must be challenged. If I have an honest belief (unfounded) that my neighbour is attacking me or my friends and family, so I attack them, then I am still liable for that assault, even if I was under the influence of alcohol at the time, or my belief and actions were impaired due to some condition like paranoid schizophrenia or learning difficulties which affected my judgement. There is a notion of ‘diminished responsibility’ in such cases; but basically, if you assault somebody without just cause, it is still assault. That is what the Rev needs to argue.

  271. Sunniva says:

    I’ve just read Wattie’s intelligent and well argued post. @12.50. However the excuse of fair comment cannot be allowed to go unchallenged. It is analogous to someone battering somebody because they honestly believed they had done something wrong when if turned out they hadn’t and being let off for it. But somebody still got battered. That is the more fundamental point. By analogy that argument would allow assault to go unpunished in almost all instances where the assailant ‘honestly believed’ the object of their assault had done something wrong and deserved a battering. Defamation is a form of assault. Wattie says that the law here is not well tested. Perhaps it is about time it was clarified. There is a public interest here because twitter storms are increasingly becoming and issue so about time there was some real netiquette.

  272. Capella says:

    An appeal could establish a precedent which will be very useful for all of us. Surely we can all think of a few public figures we would like to accuse of very damaging things. We don’t have any evidence for it. But either they allow the accusations to go unchallenged, or they go through lengthy and stressful court proceedings in a futile effort to protect their reputation.

    Best of all, even if we’re found to have defamed them, THEY will have to pay all the costs.

  273. Joe says:

    While im no great fan, if you want a case of real state persecution and mass media lies then Tommy Robinson takes it. I dare anyone to watch ‘Panodrama’. But wait, in this instance the MSM is only reaffirming certain other ‘enemy of the state’ bias. I know. Im a Nazi. Etc

  274. Robert Louis says:

    Wattie at 1250 am, seems to offer pretty sound and fact-based advice. Maybe, it is time to ‘let it go’? The odds do seem to be against you. Although I do caveat that with the fact that we do not know what the advice of your own lawyers is/was.

    We are about to have one almighty stooshie going on in Scottish politics, as soon as Boris Trump is made the UK Prime Minister by members of a single political party. We will need ALL guns firing on that.

    Unless your lawyers advise otherwise (and very strongly), run a crowdfunder to pay the fees etc. and move on.

  275. Robert Louis says:

    Having watched a few important interviews and Channel 4 news and Dispatches last night, it is now abundantly clear who ‘leaked’ the comments of the UK/US ambassador.

    In my opinion, it was either via spooks in the US Government on the orders of Trump, or via pro-Boris SENIOR (cabinet) members of the UK Government. The rest is a charade.

    Boris looks almost certain to be undemocratically appointed as PM, and he wants to ‘cosy up’ with the US (his country of birth – NY), during brexit. He will need his ‘own man’ dealing with the USA, and no doubt feels that the Current US/UK ambassador could not do what he wants him to (i.e subvert democracy and the rule of law), so the ‘leak’ is so he can be removed, when Boris becomes PM.

    Make no mistake, as seen on Dispatches last night, their are seriously dark forces (scientology) and others now working 24/7 to subvert UK democracy and political functioning. And, I know it sounds far-fetched, but do not underestimate the fruitcakes who call themselves Scientologists.

    You are literally witnessing the undermining of democracy in the UK in real time. And the so-called ‘good people’ really are doing nothing.

  276. nycgype says:

    I’d agree with Watties wise counsel. Err on the side of caution unless you are being advised by your lawyers that you have a very strong chance of success. I think this is a trap designed to goad you (us) into a course of action to waste valuable resources.

    I can tell by other responses that this is not a popular opinion but I’d be minded to take the moral victory and draw a line under it. I don’t think any thing more that can happen in this case will help the cause of independence or greatly change public opinion.

    I’m sure it won’t be long until the next person comes along to blatently defame you anyway….

  277. Vronsky says:

    You will of course need to heed your legal advice. If they don’t have their heads in the sand they will advise you that you cannot win an appeal for precisely same reason that you could not win the initial judgement against Dugdale – it would award a serious financial and PR win to a punter against a member of the establishment, and that can never be permitted.

    So paradoxically I think you should go ahead and appeal anyway, and force the bastards to a decision that drags them out into the daylight. My cheque book is ready.

    Assuming I’m right and they rule against you again, what are the prospects of taking this to the European Court of Human Rights?

  278. Effijy says:

    It is my honest belief that the Judge is corrupt.

    There is no justice in this case and the level of costs
    To the wrong person absurd.

    I also honestly believe that an advert in today’s newspapers
    That I don’t buy offers free 50 inch TVs to all contributed to the
    WoS web site.

    If anyone stops you we can use Judge Dread above so you can
    Keep the Telly and get a vast sum from Curry’s to cover you costs.

    It’s as banal as this and they try to call in law, justice ,fairness???

  279. Phronesis says:

    Economic murder here put that on the side of a bus.

    ‘The U.K. government has been accused of “economic murder” for implementing tough austerity measures during the recession that have been linked to nearly 120,000 deaths since 2010, according to a landmark study’

    America of a similar mindset.

    In his latest book ‘Dying of Whiteness’ Jonathan M. Metzl travels across America’s heartland seeking to better understand the politics of racial resentment and its impact on public health. Despite Trump’s promises to restore greatness to white America, Metzl’s systematic analysis of health data dramatically reveals they did just the opposite: these policies made life sicker, harder,
    and shorter in the very populations they purported to aid.

    In contrast, Danny Dorling’s work considers key inequality issues in the UK including politics, housing, education and health. In the book ‘Peak Inequality’ he explores what the future holds for Britain, as attempts are made to defuse the ticking time bomb while we simultaneously try to negotiate Brexit and react to the wider international situation of a world of people demanding to become more equal.

    Economic murder, political suicide, the death of the British state. Devolution is over – it’s time for Scotland’s independence. That can also go on the side of the Brexit bus as it goes over the cliff edge.

  280. Donald J says:

    In for a penny, in for a pound

  281. Willie says:

    Kangaroo court, kangaroo judge.

    This has all of the hallmarks and more of a compromised judicial system. But we know that. The Diplock Courts, Julian Assange’s year’s jailing, the failure to investigate Willie McCrae’s death, etc all confirm how rotten the system is.

    Indeed, if you read Brigadier General Sir Fran Kitson you will realise how the legal system is to be deployed against enemies of the state. And you Stewart Campbell are an enemy of the Great British state.- and the judgement reflects that.

    Like NI there is a secret war going on, a war waged by the extensive apparatus of the state who are determined to undermine democratic Scottish sentiment towards Independence. And they will ramp it up all of the way to physical force to maintain control.

    Read Kitson a soldier well versed in resisting colonial desires for independence.

  282. stu mac says:

    @Joe says:
    9 July, 2019 at 6:50 am

    While im no great fan, if you want a case of real state persecution and mass media lies then Tommy Robinson takes it. I dare anyone to watch ‘Panodrama’. But wait, in this instance the MSM is only reaffirming certain other ‘enemy of the state’ bias. I know. Im a Nazi. Etc

    Yep, truth at last, you are. Being charged for breaking the law isn’t persecution. No one is allowed to take pictures far less film in court without permission – no one. And especially where the judge has made a specific point (since it was a highly sensitive case) that it shouldn’t be done. Robinson did this blatantly – in fact in way sticking two fingers up to the judge. Robinson is a nazi – a chancer mid you using stunts like this to get publicity and support, making money for himself, but still a nazi.

  283. A Scandalously unbelievably farce
    I stand by ready to contribute again , if required
    Best wishes

  284. Abulhaq says:

    On another self-styled “phobia”.
    Can’t for the life of me think why…what have they done to deserve such treatment?
    Not just “modern Islam” as my now silent dhimmi Syriac ancestors would in anguished tones confirm.
    Religion of peace, as long as you’re halal Sunni…..
    Halal HGBTQI…..XYZ anybody?

  285. Vronsky says:

    Thought Experiment: If the roles were reversed and Dugdale had sued Wings for accusing her of being a liar, would a plea from Stu of ‘fair comment’ have been accepted?

  286. stu mac says:

    Should have added that comparing Robinson’s actions with the Rev’s situation is really disgusting and tells everything about you. You called yourself out well.

  287. North chiel says:

    Costs decision is demonstrably unfair . Your legal advisors advice should guide you as to your decision ( although they too have a financial interest obviously) . Will contribute of course if you decide to proceed .
    Getting back to the Brexit fiasco, it appears to myself that the Westminster establishment are now at this “stage of the game” having to admit what I have suspected all along “ the precious precious union ( which they have deliberately downplayed throughout most of the “ Brexit campaign” ) is now front and centre of the Brexit conundrum closely followed of course now by “ the backstop” and the Irish dimension. They really are in an utter shambles and of course will do what they and their “ media lackies “ always do in such dire circumstances , and that is to attempt to “ bluster & bluff” their way through . The usual “ bluff & bluster topic” to keep the masses docile is of course security , defence and of course “ the official secrets act” together with M15 , M16 and James Bond thrown in for good measure, threats from Iran, China , Russia , North Korea and on it goes. Of course they will install the “ biggest bluffer in the Tory party “ to lead them through ( Boris of course) , and will thereafter close their collective eyes and cross fingers that it will all go away so we can all go back to watching cricket and eating cucumber sandwiches ( normal service resumed).
    The Westminster establishment ‘s aim all along was a “ hard Brexit” and to simoultaneously stymie Scottish Independence . Thereafter , once free from EU scrutiny they could “ roll back” on devolution and get back to the “ good old days” of Centralist Westminster full governmental control . Scotland and our FM “back in her box” with the lid firmly nailed down .
    However, they were not banking on support for independence rising and now it would appear that “ the games up” and they know it now.
    Thus , despite all the “ bluff& bluster “ around the 31st Oct. deadline and a “ hard Brexit” , I am of the opinion that they will NOT exit the EU . A general election looks increasingly likely and it could be that will mean basically Farage, Bojo and the Tories against the rest who will probably go all out for a second EU vote. With the “ precious precious union” in mortal danger the second EU vote ( and a remain option) , might get them off the hook , but this is by no means certain as the electorate down south have been severely brainwashed with anti immigrant/ anti EU rhetoric and it could go either way. Bearing in mind that our SNP government “ mandate “ for Indyref2 , mainly ( but not entirely) is linked to the Scottish people’s “Remain decision “ is it now possible that our FM might use the forthcoming GE to seek a mandate for Indyref2 notwithstanding whether the U.K. exits the EU or otherwise ?? After all the devolution settlement has been shredded , the Treaty of union has been wilfully disregarded ignored and broken over decades of Centralist subjugation and our country’s population has been deliberately minimised and controlled through forced emigration , lack of employment opportunities for our young people , asset stripping of our resources etc etc. Only after our EU membership and direct intervention from Brussels has the decline in our country been halted. The Westminster government has deeply resented the EU policy of using the London treasury EU contributions to directly assist Scotland with infrastructure projects ( especially in the Highlands& Islands), farming subsidies , Educational and social funding , research and development grants to our universities etc etc . The Tories especially have absolutely hated the Europeans spending what they view as “ their money” being “ given back” to where it was originally “ acquired”. A general election could present our FM with the opportunity to mandate a second independence vote even if there is no Brexit . Thereafter, In the absence of any section 30 agreement perhaps a pro independence Holyrood majority could be her preferred mandate to end the union ,and an Independence declaration ?? Make no mistake the Westminster establishment will fight “ tooth & nail” to hold on to their “ cash cow” . We in the Independence movement need to be united, focused and steadfastly resolute in our determination to free our country and restore our people’s sovereignty to our Homeland parliament in Holyrood.

  288. jfngw says:


    Not a very good comparison since it would be the easiest thing to prove Kezia Dugdale is a liar, so much evidence out there. In this case the judge agreed that Stuart Campbell was not homophobic but still awarded against him.

  289. Abulhaq says:

    [Thou shalt not critique the social order, even when that order be dysfunctional and flies in the face of logic and common sense.]
    Scotland, the home of the philosophical notion of ‘common sense’ ought to have zilch to do with alien social ‘nu-think’.
    Lets focus on Independence, very much a matter of common sense.

  290. Sharny Dubs says:


    sound clear thinking and you obviously know what your talking about, but if the law is not very well developed / defined in this particular field surely all the more reason to fight the ruling to avoid it becoming a reference ruling in future cases.

  291. jfngw says:

    @North chief

    Even if we send a majority of SNP members to Holyrood, Westminster is still going to say that Holyrood does not have the competence to change constitutional matters.

    If we send a majority (preferably with more than 50% of the vote, tall order in a multi party election) to Westminster with a independence mandate then they cannot deny Scotland has decided. My opinion is if we can achieve more than a 50% vote in a Westminster election on an independence ticket then there is no need for a referendum. Whereas a majority at Holyrood could only secure a referendum.

    Whichever route we take we need to achieve more than 50% or I suspect it will not be recognised internationally (some, the US in particular, may not even then want to recognise it, especially when they have their eyes set on a trade deal to their benefit).

  292. Capella says:

    From Stu’s twitter – Alex Cole Hamilton wades in with a smug comment. He rejoices in the fact that people without loads a money can be prevented from seeking justice. He thinks asking a politician to refrain from defamation is “vexatious crowdfunded litigation”.

    i know he looks like he is living in the 18th C but now he also sounds like it. Liberal, much?

  293. Colin Stuart says:

    Just outrageous; perverse in the extreme, and maliciously punitive. Just announce the fundraiser and I’m in

  294. jfngw says:


    Well according to the judgement that ACH is celebrating we can say what we want about him as long as we firmly believe it, this presumably would fall under the ‘fair comment’ ruling.

    The best reply was the person who described him as a master baiter, ACH not the judge.

  295. shug says:

    I smell a trap to use the money.

    What about leaving until after independence and at that point ask for an inquiry in to the background communications that Sheriff has had relating to the case.

    Any time a report appears relative to the case you always start with the sheriff confirmed she did defame me.

  296. Dan Yell says:

    As someone who doesn’t like you but nonetheless sees you as an asses to the Indy cause: don’t do it. For God’s sake, don’t do it. In the off-chance you are given leave to appeal, you will lose. This was a straightforward application of the, contrary to what you seem to believe. Do not waste funds or goodwill on this. I repeat: YOU WILL LOSE ANY APPEAL

  297. Fabby Burns says:

    I know from personal experience that English law does not like an individual to represent himself and what I said (taking action against a company which did not want to pay for services satisfactorily rendered) was ignored however Deane appears to be charging for what I would consider ‘part of the service’.

    Complexity of the cause and the number, difficulty or NOVELTY of the question – How often has this been used in the past 100 years?

  298. Dr Jim says:

    The law was designed to control the people by the people, not to represent the people if that representation leads to the people controlling the law

    You can buy the law as long as it does not diminish the appearance of the power and authority of the law

    Because this case is crowdfunded by the people that is even more reason for the law not to submit

    The law is the state, if the law falls to the mob then the authority and power of the law is in question of its value by the people

    The law is what they say it is or there is no power of the state

    If Stuart Campbell had been a private individual and not a public political person with views opposed to the state he might have won

    Jeremy Hunt denied the First Minister of Scotland British consular support, even though Scotland pays for it, because he doesn’t agree with what she says yet others recieved that support because he does agree with what they say

    No media no press no TV was outraged by this blatant display of dictatorship, why? because no one is or was surprised to see a power exercise its power, no matter how unjustly

    We don’t live in a democracy, we are controlled by the haves and we are the have nots and if you’re a have why would you relinquish that willingly if you can keep inventing ways of crushing the have nots by smearing your own colours of truth and justice all over everything so that enough of the cowards and the weak minded in society will support you in order to negate those who would oppose what they know to be undemocratic

    This is not about Stuart Campbell alone this is about power of the state versus power of the people and the people cannot be allowed to assert control or the fall of the state is inevitable

    Stuart Campbell winning this case isn’t a private matter it’s a symbol of them and us, Stuart Campbell has a famous name, they must kill his name thereby killing the will of those he represents

  299. Capella says:

    @ Dr Jim – I agree with your analysis. But it is also important to let the state know that we, the people, will not be intimidated. Today the courts, tomorrow the ballot box.

    Roosevelt famously told the oligarchs that, by loosening up their tight hold on state power, he had saved them from the pitchforks. Obama said the same when he first became president.

    The Orkney Four took a stand against liar Carmichael. They lost the battle but won the war. His reputation is forever diminished by his own duplicity. I believe it was the same solicitor who defended him, Roddy Dunlop. He also defended the Scottish Government (i.e. the Civil Servant Leslie Evans) against Alex Salmond. He lost that one.

  300. kapelmeister says:

    “Our courts must never become a weapon for political movements with deep pockets” tweets Alex Cole-Hamilton.

    Everyone has the right to use the civil courts whatever their politics. Anyone who opposes that right is an authoritarian by definition.

    Alex Cole-Hamilton the yellow authoritarian.

  301. Petra says:

    @ Wattie at 12:50pm …..

    Excellent post Wattie, however I’d like to add that you can’t always trust your legal team either as they’re making money out of this too. Stu of course should have a fairly good idea if he can trust them or not.


    @twathater says at 3:07am …. “£150,000 … how can that be fair or justified?”

    That amount of money is just a drop in the ocean to them and will become meaningless if Stu appeals and loses or the case goes from appeal to appeal. Stu’s no doubt asked his legal team about approximate future costs, if he loses again. I wonder what figure they came up with? As to being fair or justified there are hundreds of cases being heard across the UK every day that lead to many outcomes being considered to be unfair and unjustified. Stu is not on his own here.


    @ Capella says at 9:53am …….”Alex Cole Hamilton.”

    His tweet gives you some idea of how the media will run with this story …”Nicola Sturgeon’s cybernats trying to overturn the rule of Law through crowdfunding” …… with there being no mention of unfairness and injustice and of course they would play down the fact that Dugdale had big backers such as the Labour Party and the Daily Rag. That alone (crowdfunding) should tell you that there is no way that Stu will be allowed to win an appeal.

    Time to give up. Taking this forward won’t change the Law or set a precedent, as it looks as though they are in the process of changing the law right now (fair comment) to bring Scots Law in line with English. In the pipeline long before the Campbell v Dugdale case.

    Time to focus on getting us our Independence by supporting the only political party that’s capable of doing so. That’s the SNP. Seems as though this site has lost it’s way, imo. It’s sense of direction. Dealing with corruption, etc, will be best dealt with in an Independent Scotland. Not one that’s being controlled by the Union.

  302. call me dave says:

    Short bread website:

    Wings Over Scotland blogger ordered to pay Kezia Dugdale’s legal expenses

  303. ScotsRenewables says:


    The establishment have tendrils everywhere.

    This judgement is fundamentally flawed, and obviously unjust. Get over it. There is no reason to assume an aoppeal wojuld be any fairer, and it would almost certainly waste more of our money.

    Like everyone else here my heart wants you to appeal Stu, to get justice, to overturn this travesty . . . but my head says this is so obviously a ploy to

    a) Distract/decoy/damage the single most powerful indy engine
    b) Encourage said force/engine to squander its funds/fuel

    Write it off, pay the money and run a second fundraiser NOW, not for legal expenses but for the new WBB – we ned to get one to EVERY household in Scotland this time, well before D-Day.

  304. Luigi says:

    Instead of continuing this fight in the courts, how about making
    this political (which it is anyway).

    A petition to parliment? Surely we can find 100,000 signatures to force em to discuss whether there has been a gross misccairage of justice here?

    Let’s think outside the box. Hit em where they don;t expect it?

    If we fight em on their chosen ground, usign their rules and laws, they will just keep moving the goalposts. It’s wot they do. 🙁

  305. Milady says:

    I was one of those who, on balance, initially thought maybe you should let it lie and not appeal. Get on with your life and the other fights yet to come etc etc. Naturally I assumed, given the verdict, at worst you’d both bear your own fees. This decision is nonsensical bollocks and outrageous. No fair minded person could condone it. Fight on, I’ll happily help fund your costs.

  306. Fireproofjim says:

    Few of us here are competent to make a judgment on what the likely outcome of an appeal would be. However if your lawyer thinks there is a reasonable chance of overturning this totally perverse verdict then you should go for it. All life is a risk but surely this must have a chance of succeeding.
    As I wrote before, I will contribute. (even more than the regular crowd founder.)

  307. RobertTheTruth says:


    In case you haven’t noticed this took place during the SNP watch. The FM was asked directly to comment on the Rev by Dugdale – no one in the the SNP has defended him or commented on how inappropriate question was in Parliamentary time.
    Her partner and ‘support’ is in the SNP.

    You try to control the narrative here constantly, telling the Rev and others what they should and should not post,telling the site owner he has lost his way, what an absolute cheek you have!

    You use this site to shill for the SNP promoting them and using this site to tell people how to vote and berating them for bringing up other subjects. You use this site as a proxy for the SNP when it is no such thing.

    You have constantly tried to dissuade The Rev not to pursue his case.

    Are you sent here by the SNP to divert attention from an appeal? Are you here to dissuade people from giving money for an appeal? You are so negative, bringing your doom filled stories of your own litigation to poison the well. You insinuate about the money constantly, as if it it yours. You know what the Rev does, he has not changed but you want him to.

    Is it embarrassing for the SNP, is that why you keep trying to shut it down?

    To coin a phrase on this site ‘We see you’.

  308. Frank Gillougley says:

    All the way.

    There have to bigger fish up higher up that tree.
    The judgement is well out of order.

  309. Juteman says:

    She called you a homophobe. The sheriff said you are not in a court of law. She was wrong.

    Time to move on, even though I would love you to win an appeal.

  310. Cubby says:

    “Her comments were fair, even though incorrect.” So says the sheriff.

    The sheriff and deputy dug. What a pair. An embarrassment to Scotland.

    My comments on the other hand are both fair and correct. My honestly held opinion.

    This travesty needs to be appealed. If the comments are incorrect then the dug should lose the case. The dug was the one who ran with this case – the Mundells kept clear. She debases politics and the best thing she ever did was resign from the British Labour Party in Scotland. It says everything about Britnat politics that she then picks up a job with an institution that purports to promote better standards in politics. What a joke.

    Don’t buy Britnat papers and for goodness sake never vote for the totally useless British Labour Party in Scotland. Look at the quality of the people they have elected as their leader in Scotland. Total numpties the lot of them.

  311. Proud Cybernat says:

    If someone makes an unfounded claim as a result of their stupidity, why should anyone expect that you should be penalised as a result of their stupidity?

    The Law showing itself to be a complete ass. This really needs sorted. Your call tho, Rev – lot’s happening in the not too distant and we will need you fighting fit.

  312. Heart of Galloway says:

    If the appeal goes ahead all will turn on this part of Sheriff Ross’s judgement: “No doubt Ms Dugdale does not like Mr Campbell and what he does, but I accept her evidence that the article was motivated by genuine dismay at what she understood the tweet to mean and not by malice.”

    That Dug the Defamer acted out “genuine dismay” and not malice when composing the article, given her history of being mercilessly and frequently lampooned by Stu for her now legendary economies with the truth, is questionable to say the least.

    And “What she understood the tweet to mean”, as has been pointed out many times, basically equates to being too daft to grasp the import of what she was writing.

    Is this, given KD’s background, remotely credible?

    It seems to me the sheriff has grabbed a fair comment fig leaf from his legal tree of knowledge where fairness and justice are fruits to be handed out or withheld according to establishment rules.

    And as others have correctly pointed out, the Scottish legal establishment is overwhelmingly hostile to our cause.

    FWIW, an appeal is only worthwhile if it furthers the independence cause. Win, lose or draw if the message gets across to the wider public that one of its foremost proponents has been done an grave injustice then count me in.

    That is a big if – but there is a second strand to this. And that is if the law is being tied in knots to protect those whom the establishment wishes to protect then that must be challenged, for all that is right and just and for all our sakes.

    Martin Niemoller on opposing Nazism, said in 1946: “First they came for the Communists
    And I did not speak out
    Because I was not a Communist

    Then they came for the Socialists
    And I did not speak out
    Because I was not a Socialist

    Then they came for the trade unionists
    And I did not speak out
    Because I was not a trade unionist

    Then they came for the Jews
    And I did not speak out
    Because I was not a Jew

    Then they came for me
    And there was no one left
    To speak out for me.

  313. Scott says:

    All I have to say on this it is one big fff stitch up by the establishment and courts and if the sheriff said what was reported he should be reported,oh but he wont because he was only saying what he thought using the Dugdale way.

  314. cirsium says:

    Rev – It was an action for defamation, it was confirmed that you were defamed yet costs have been awarded to the defender. The decision is so perverse that the words of “The Gambler” come into mind, “you’ve got to know when to fold ’em and know when to walk away”. This is one of these times.

    It would be a waste of your time and resources to proceed any further than this.

  315. Wrecksiteer says:

    Modern legal systems in general, and those in Britain (and thereby Scotland) in particular, exist for two reasons. Firstly they maintain the establishment, preserving above all the position of the rulers. Secondly, they maintain order amongst those who are ruled, ensuring the good behavior of the wage slaves.

    The law is a stranger to justice, any time the legal system delivers justice it is for the sake of appearances or a coincidence. Any system which requires a priesthood (lawyers) to navigate it’s occult machinations can’t hope to be just, particularly when spending more money increases your chances of success.

    Willingly engaging with the legal system bolsters it’s pretense of legitimacy. Like all monsters it’s best to ignore it as much as possible while still avoiding it’s clutches.

  316. Col says:

    I think after my initial anger at this I’m coming round to the idea that the money would be better spent on fighting the indy cause also. They’ve shown how they can twist the law to suit their own agenda and it would no doubt be a waste of money. We know they’re in the wrong and I do believe they wish us to waste more money on the case. Draw a line and move on. Do another poll maybe and do another crowd funder too so we can further show our support. That will annoy them more than anything. Let’s fight them on the streets and not their chosen ground.

  317. RMK says:

    Dont appeal, you will never get justice with the establishment against you like this – the Scottish legal establishment has shot itself in the foot here – come independence they will all be replaced. We will just have to wait and watch for Dugdale to trip up somewhere down the line.

  318. Bob Mack says:

    “Human progress is neither automatic or inevitable. Every step towards the goal of justice requires sacrifice,suffering and struggle; the tireless exertions and passionate concern of dedicated individuals” Martin Luther King.

    We all know this is a stitch up, but to let it go unchallenged weakens our morality in our fight for freedom.

  319. geeo says:

    Vronsky says:

    9 July, 2019 at 8:57 am

    Thought Experiment: If the roles were reversed and Dugdale had sued Wings for accusing her of being a liar, would a plea from Stu of ‘fair comment’ have been accepted?

    Emmm…no, you blitherer, the defence would be FACTUAL COMMENT !

    She IS a liar, she IS a liar in the case under discussion AS WELL.

    She called Stu a Homophobe, and the JUDGE STATED THAT WAS FACTUALLY INCORRECT, or if you prefer, A LIE.

    You need to be a special kind of thick to not get that.

  320. IZZIE says:

    The lasting legacy of this debacle is that ‘fair comment’ is now a legitimate defense. It is galling that Dugdale and her cohorts have got away with this but take heart Wings must be a thorn in the flesh of the establishment for them to have gone to such lengths. I also think we wingers should shrug this off and turn our ire and efforts into securing a second referendum.

  321. Dr Jim says:

    The decision to pursue this case is Stuart Campbell’s and his alone, if the people decide to help by funding it is also their individual decision, but people must be aware that by allowing the Judiciary an opportunity to beat him they’ll look for a way to do it thereby defending the state and the resultant publicity by the media will ensure once again that Stuart Campbell representing the Independence movement (because that’s how they’ll portray it) has lost again to the righteousness and truth of the Union as embodied in the personna of Kezia Dugdale

    I personally have no faith in the legal system ever looking or seeing the truth of this because to do that means their British state comes out badly

    Lawyers will always take your money but Stuart Campbell must find a way of assuring himself that their advice is sound and reasonable, no lawyer will guarantee anything but percentages of risk and only Stuart Campbell can assess the worth of that in discussions with them

    There might be one other avenue to be pursued in that if the appeal is based upon previously missed or unpresented evidence giving grounds to that appeal does Miss Dugdale have to engage the services of the Daily Record’s legal team again and will they choose to finance her a second time

    That might be up for question, because even if Stuart Campbell loses there might be a possiblity of vengeance by crippling her financially just like Liberal Democrat Alistair Carmichael threatened to do to the Orkney four

    Alex Cole Hamilton has airbrushed that statement from history in his support for Dugdale against the vexatious Stuart Campbell and his supporters

    Justice can only ever be achieved by the sword but we’re not allowed to do that anymore because we’re civilised now and *subject to the rule of law* *subject* to the *rule* of *law* that we designed so then wealthy people could buy it and pervert its meaning and use

  322. Bob Mack says:

    @Izzie and Dr Jim,

    Dug dale relied on a fair comment defence, but in order to prove that it is fair comment it has to pass 3 tests.
    1, The comment was expressed as a clear opinion and not fact.
    2. There was evidence to back up that opinion,probably from previous quotes by the Rev
    3. That a reasonable person would for the same view from the article in question.

    On no point does Dug dale pass the threshold. The sheriff himself stated Rev was no homophones, the very thing Dug dale called him. Therefore the Sheriff acknowledges that the opinion does not match the fact. This is important.

    For Dugdales case to hold water she must evidence that the Rev has prior for in homophobic messaging. Not just an opinion. Cases in England which utilises the same law, have fallen on this very point.

    Opinion need not be evidenced,but facts must.

  323. Dr Jim says:

    @Bob Mack 1:27pm

    Democracy is what they say it is when they have the power to decide, the law is no different, facts mean nothing if you’re the wrong people, and Stuart Campbell is the wrong people

    I hope he wins if he does it, but what he wins might not be what anybody hopes for

    We don’t live in a democracy with democratic people to oversee truth and justice, we live in a dictatorship who create their own rules and laws then break and bend them to suit their purposes

    The Scottish government have no control over the judiciary either, sure they can make laws, but the judiciary interpret those laws any way they see fit and for whatever purpose they see fit

  324. John says:

    You know it will be a long drawn out battle against the establishment but its one you must take head on. You should take strenght from the victories won by Tommy Sheridan against the Murdoch empire and their legal lackeys on at least four occasions, in the highest courts in the land. Yes they damaged Tommys reputation throughout the process but he has come through it and can hold his head high in the knowledge that he could not be bought or cowed by the establishment. Take them on Stuart, you will have the Yes family behind you.

  325. Republicofscotland says:

    Woman assaulted and spat on by Orange Order in Glasgow last Saturday, her henious crime trying to cross the road.

    The O/O are vile creatures.

  326. Bob Mack says:

    @Dr Jim,

    Then what are we fighting for if not to create something better in spite of the obstacles put in our way ?

  327. ScotsRenewables says:

    cirsium says:
    9 July, 2019 at 12:41 pm
    “you’ve got to know when to fold ’em and know when to walk away”. This is one of these times.

    Yep. It’s too much of a distraction.

  328. Effijy says:

    What would happen if there were no funds to pay out on this disgraceful abuse of the law?

    I heard of a crook who stole a fortune and claimed he spent it being given forever to pay it back at a stupidly small sum per month.

    The guy was unlikely to live long enough to ever make a dent on the money.

    Rest assured I’m with you Rev for fundraising, on the barricades
    or whatever else it takes.

  329. aulbea says:

    Veteran lurker & TV licence donated – first post. As the saying goes ” control the coinage & the courts – let the rabbly have the rest”.Let’s rabble the fuck into them. I’m in.

  330. Bobp says:

    North chiel 9.04am. Very good post.

  331. David Graham says:

    I agree with others above, even if legally, morally & philosophically correct you have no chance of beating the British establishment (Scotland branch)
    This is, like Salmond, an attempt to neuter the effective players in the independence movement.
    Let it go & beat them through helping to achieve independence, then we can have a judicial review when the independent republic of Scotland is constituted.

  332. Tatu3 says:

    This case has made a mockery of Scots Law. Get them where it will really hurt them instead.
    It really is the only answer.

  333. Scozzie says:

    Not sure if this link will work. Attached, Defamation in Scots Law Consultation document (January 2019). Part 4 honest opinion (fair comment) pages 34 – 37. Consultation closed April 2019. Might be an interesting read for some.

    I’m no legal geek and not sure what the current Scots law on fair comment is.

    But happy donate to a crowdfund for an appeal all the same.

  334. Jack Murphy says:

    I’ll abide by Stu’s decision whatever that may be, and if necessary WILL DONATE from my not very deep pockets.

  335. Vestas says:

    I’ll get the “2 x license fee” payment sorted next week. That’s assuming you are appealing.

    To others – I think this is a more important case than you think.

    As things stand a precedent appears to have been set in Scots Law whereby you can defame somebody, claim fair comment and then get your costs?

    Thats surely perverse?

    I can to some extent understand the “fair comment” (I don’t agree in this case) however if you’ve defamed someone and got away with it via “fair comment” then I cannot understand how costs can be awarded to you at all.

    We need this clarified. One way or another.

    If that’s the way Scots Law is going to be then you have to wonder WTF we’re campaigning for.

  336. bittie45 says:

    The combination of the fact that the pursuer was found not to be homophobic and yet an uplift awarded apparently beyond what the defence costs were, really amounts to punitive damages being awarded to the defender, and sends out several messages. Take your pick:

    1. That because of the evidence presented, the judge is forced to rule the pursuer was not homophobic, but really the message must be delivered in some way that the pursuer was homophobic.
    2. That it was a really good thing what the defender did, that this behaviour really should be encouraged.
    3. That was a really bad thing what the pursuer did, to take action against a politician, no matter how terrible the behaviour.

    And no matter what the future outcomes of any court appeal is, the payload has been well and truly delivered on behalf of the establishment.

    So there we have it. If this isn’t an example of “get back in your box”, then I don’t know what is.

  337. wullie says:

    Hard tho it may be I would forget an appeal, whatever you raise for an appeal is what your costs will be money down the drain. The Scottish legal system in my humble opinion has been working against the common person for centuries. All of this can be dealt with after independence.

  338. Jason Smoothpiece says:

    I am aware that some on here say give in and concentrate on the fight for independence. I understand and respect that view. However I see this as a part of the struggle and not a distraction.

    I also think we have little chance of winning this particular battle but by fighting we cause the Regime discomfort and raise the independence profile. Free advertising if done correctly

  339. Bobby McPherson says:

    If you decide to appeal I’ll send you my Licence fee meanwhile monthly direct debit set up. This is a war now unfortunately the media tycoons are well pissed off with you. Dugdale is a blairite and he is a Murdoch buddy and we don’t read their papers anymore. You print the truth well researched and informed. They hate that. Fight back.

  340. Giving Goose says:

    It appears that the Rev has been effectively fined for having the audacity to stand up to British-Nationalist- Establishment bullying via the courts.
    Who does he think he is?
    A free thinking, democratically minded Scot with a penchant for Independence which would deliver a better society?
    Come on…….

  341. Dr Jim says:

    Bob Mack

    I believe until we get our country back we’ll control nothing because at the moment despite all we say and do we live in the British state and coming shortly they’re going to attempt to ram it down our throats

    I also read in the National that Stu has gone ahead and filed his appeal

  342. CameronB Brodie says:

    Don’t confuse Scotland’s judiciary and legal system with the will of Scottish public. The judiciary’s lack of action in defense of Scotland’s constitutional rights, suggests our judiciary hold justice and democracy in low regard. Our judiciary and legal system appears to has submitted to the supremacy and immutability of English legal doctrine.

  343. mike cassidy says:

    If the bottom line legally is overturning the ‘fair comment ‘ defence

    then the legal team are the ones who will have to be relied on as to whether that’s a credible line to pursue.

    It’s easy to get caught up in the emotional injustice of it all – me too –

    But there’s no point in going all charge of the light brigade if the odds are against such an overturning.

    If this is a ‘bite the bullet’ moment for WOS then so be it

  344. CameronB Brodie says:

    I reckon Scotland’s judiciary support the Union, as they know there will be a dramatic shift in power following Scottish independence. This is called democratisation and our judiciary will fight tooth and claw to resit it.

  345. Al-Stuart says:


    This is difficult to write. I have read the dozens if BTL posts and many have wise advice for you.

    I now believe you would be wise to consider another vote on whether and how much Wingers are willing to fund the legals on this defamation saga.

    I am happy to donate to WoS to fund WBB2 and WoS and your remuneration. Sadly, I decline to donate to Kezia Waste of Space and the luxury lifestyle of rich Edinburgh lawyers.

    I decline to donate to the Union wishes to bankrupt you and this this website by the Union legal-baiting you into the quicksand of deathly legal fee spiral.

    Before I was keen to donate, but this latest UNION SCREW demonstrates you cannot win when playing in their RIGGED game. The Union aim is to bleed you dry and destroy/bankrupt Wings Over Scotland.

    Even if you were to win an appeal, it would be spun against you by the media.

    I believe there are FAR more EFECTIVE uses for £100,000 or £200,000 or £300,000 which is what your legal costs will exsanguinate of you.

    * Sue BBC Scotland for breaching their legal obligations of their charter?

    * Print 100,000 extra WBB2.

    * Petition the Scottish Parliament to review the defamation system and injustice in Scots Law.

    One of my friends took the Scottish Executive to HM Court and then the appealed to the EU. He was an ex-cop and did all the legals himself (no solicitor). An extraordinary result as he won his case and it was into the millions in costs against the Scottish Government (SLAB/JackMcConnell/LibDem Scottish Exec days). The judgement in his favour made things better for a LOT of people. Win, win. He told me he won because he “picked his battles” and this was one he could win. This phrase has been said by many.

    My point to quote a great Indy person…


    Stu., please consider taking that hard decision…. drop Dugdale. She is yesterdays person and matters no more.

    You are far too important to get extinguished by Union games drowning you in a cesspool of lawyers fees and debt.

    Read Sun McTsu and The Art of The Haggis In War my friend.

  346. Clootie says:

    Wullie @ 2:52pm

    You miss the point completely!

    Not fighting this case is giving in to Unionist forces. It is not the easy option it is the right option.
    If you don’t want to contribute – don’t.

    I suppose you will not back Manny (AUOB) either if he is taken to court?

  347. Robert Peffers says:

    @Morag says: 9 July, 2019 at 12:14 am:

    “I’m going to be controversial here and say I believe you’ll lose again, because they don’t like you and no matter what it takes they’ll make sure you can’t won’t and don’t win.”

    Without getting over involved in the semantics, what this sheriff is ruling boils down to, “I have decided this person has indeed defamed you but as I do not like you I’m awarding the guilty party costs and you, the person I have judged to have been defamed will pay the guilty party’s costs.

    If ever there was a miscarriage of justice then ruling a guilty person gets awarded the costs must clearly be it.

  348. Socrates MacSporran says:

    JUST seen this on Facebook, and thought it was worth sharing:

    “SCOTTISH DEVOLUTION AND THE LABOUR MYTH! The EU forced Westminster’s hand on the question of Scottish, Welsh and N. Ireland devolution.

    When the EU monitoring committee on pluralist democracy got round to the UK in June 1996 its report was politely damning. The most humiliating of all was that it bracketed the UK! In with former communist states of Bulgaria, Croatia, Latvia, Moldova and Ukraine as one of six states having “major problems in meeting EU standards of devolved pluralist democracy.”

    The Council of Europe issued a statement making it pointedly clear that failure to abide by the international norms of pluralist democracy “would be incompatible with membership of the Council.” The Tories had stubbornly dragged their feet over the UK’s accession to the Charter of Local Self-Government.

    But then, in March 1997, a few weeks before the election that brought Blair’s Labour government to power, the Council of Europe pointedly spelled out the sanctions that would be applied, in a series of escalating steps, to any European state that did not “fully and swiftly comply with the basic democratic principles that are at the heart of the European Ideal.” In plain language, get Scotland, Wales, etc. sorted out or be expelled from the Council of Europe in the most humiliatingly public manner – a step that would have had devastating international consequences, especially just a few weeks before the UK presidency of the European Union.

    Total capitulation followed. With the entire international diplomatic corps breathing down its neck, the new Labour UK Government signed the Charter on 3 June 1997 (the last one in Europe to do so) and brought in bills for devolution to Scotland and Wales – to written approval by Strasbourg, but described by Blair as “a damnable nuisance.”

    The fulfilment of this foreign policy obligation was therefore a diplomatic and not a political decision. but new Labour spun Scottish devolution as their idea!

    Now with Brexit wee Fluffy Mundell is looking to close the devolved Scottish Parliament at Holyrood.”

    The posting also included a quote from Fluffy, from 18 January, 2017:

    “and I said this in the autumn, this will be a significant change for the Scottish Parliament. Because devolution to Scotland and other parts of the UK was predicated on membership of the EU.

    We won’t be in the EU and therefore that will bring change with it.”

    Holyrood – they are coming for you.

  349. Dubai_Scot says:

    Oh! The delicious irony yet to come.
    Take it to the court of human rights! LOL!

  350. bittie45 says:

    Rev, for what its worth, from my own past experiences of the court system, you will loose any appeal.

    But the Uplift has turned from this from a defamation case into something entirely different. Because of the injustice, it has now become the Establishment against the People exemplified by the glee with which Radio Scotland news presenter reported your case – it just oozed out of the radio.

    Even with the outcome almost certain defeat, this outrage should be resisted if at all possible by setting up a crowdfunder entirely separate from the Wings fund to deal with this court case with the target of the worst-case-scenario cost. If you reach this target then appeal. If you don’t, then don’t appeal, and instead use that crowdfunder to help pay for costs so far.

    Then you will have done all practically all you could have done.

  351. Cubby says:

    There is another explanation for the costs being awarded in this way. As in a game of poker the sheriff thinks he will lose the appeal so he is upping the financial ante hoping that you fold.

    There is no justification for the initial verdict and the costs decision is a complete disgrace.

    Call or fold?

    A complete embargo of the Daily Redcoat should be a minimum course of action by all independence supporters.

  352. Moonlight says:

    I am not sure about any of this. Had it been me who was defamed by Dugdale I doubt I would have bothered to retaliate by the use of the law. There are other ways to make a politician of her low calibre really suffer loss of credibility.
    However we are where we are. I feel that the advice given by Wattie is very sound. Only Stu´s counsel can properly advise on the wisdom of an appeal, whether on a point of law or on a perverse judgement or whatever.
    In the next few weeks we may well face a General Election or referendum on which all our futures may depend. It is perhaps very likely that the Wee Blue Book will need to be financed and put out. Funds held for that purpose need to be preserved carefully, this is after all in pursuit of the goal which we all desire.
    I greatly value Wings and its content, especially the links, it is invaluable to me and I expect to many 1000s of others. I would deeply regret any interruption to its output. It’s a matter of keeping the eye on the ball, that is to bring to bear every possible argument for independence.
    Very soon I shall lose my European citizenship, I may be subjected to the indignity of being a citizen of a country forced to be servile to the majority voters of another country. A clown is likely to become the organ grinder of this farce. Our limited cache of retaliatory weapons must remain intact.
    So what I am saying is, maybe it´s time to step back, pay the money and go on to win the big prize. Not my decision of course, but in strategic terms maybe the wise thing to do.
    I stand ready to make a contribution should this be required, I in no way grudge it and am totally supportive of doing whatever is necessary to keep Wings fully operational, so good luck with whatever the chosen path is.

  353. Doug McGregor says:

    She seems to have got off Anglo- free on all counts , this is the Labour politician who knowingly defamed you , refused to apologise or correct her libels against you when confronted with the truth of the matter as confirmed by the sheriff.The intransigence shown by her at that point should have earned her at least a half share in costs,

    Does this sheriff know what he has unleashed in his ruling? We are now free to print any scurrilous nonsense about anybody , claim fair comment in the sure knowledge that any expense incurred will be picked up with interest by the victim of our smears.

  354. Golfnut says:

    @ CCB.

    It’s not often we agree, but on this we do.
    The law should be the servant of the people, its there to protect their right, justice should be transparent. When it can be manipulated in such a way that injustice prevails it is a bad law and needs to be struck down. That never happens unless and until it is opposed and brought into the light.

    @ Dr Jim

    Roll on independence, well to be honest it won’t make much difference to us as a population unless and until we really do control the system.
    Lord Cooper’s opinion that ‘ the principle of Parliamentary sovereignty is an English principle and not one recognised in Scots Constitunional law ‘ should be a warning to us all. A warning because the Parliament of 1707 signed us into servitude for 300 yrs with dubious authority. Unless we really do establish ‘ the will of the people ‘ as the absolute authority over Parliament and the law then abuses will occur.

    We either follow Switzerland’s example with referendums or establish a system whereby proposed actions of government can be stopped in its tracts if a majority is against it, or force the government to act if they fail to do so of their own accord.

    Many on here may have thought that when I advocated ordering, using petitions, the Scottish Parliament to carry out certain actions that perhaps I had come off my meds or was some kind of radical. I’m not.

    The Scottish Parliament has never in principle been sovereign, and it won’t be when we repeal the Acts of Union and withdraw from the Treaty. Sovereignty rests with people, and the dubious assertion that we send our Sovereignty to Westminster via our Parliamentarians came from where exactly. I say dubious, because nobody asked us the sovereign people, and when we vote in the Referendum that won’t be on the ballot paper. Breeks is right to want our Sovereignty tested and confirmed, but I doubt that any UK court could be trusted, nor indeed competent to adjudicate. It’s for us to assert, ordering parliament to say repeal the Acts of Union asserts our Sovereignty( if enough of us sign ), and gives authority to a Parliament to act on our behalf. It would establish the principle in Scotland of just exactly who rules the roost.

    Sorry about the long post.

  355. Petra says:

    My post is in moderation? What for I wonder?

  356. JPM says:

    As a lurker and financial donater I see this unfair and cynical court decision as a diversionary tactic by the Establishment, and given the volume of responses it seems to be working. Perhaps, however, it’s taking us away from our primary aim of independence. A more appropriate response might be to channel this justifiable energy and anger into a serious crowdfunder specifically ringfenced to ensure that every Scottish home receives a copy of the Wee Blue Book.
    Achieve our main aim of independence and we can sort out the injustices later.

  357. Alabaman says:

    I wonder how much did the sheriff give to the thought regarding the power of the press, and its combined abilities to deride his decision,should he not install a very substantial fine.
    For me the judiciary are not independent as such, they/it must have one eye on what the public think of their decisions, and the public nearly always learns the outcome via the media.
    (One of the reasons why I thought that Stew would find the court case difficult, was when the Daily Record became involved).

  358. twathater says:

    Contrary to what I wrote last night and reading through the posts particularly wattie’s ( who claims experience in judicial law ) and Dr jim’s comments I have had a change of heart . Obviously this whole judgement is wrong from the outset with bbc jockland taking great pleasure on the 1o’clock news by highlighting the expense result , but as I mentioned previously even if you won the appeal it would be hidden from the public by ALL the msm

    It really really angers and upsets me that I have to change my mind but the bastards have control for the MOMENT , WE are working towards a BETTER country and system for the citizens of our land , we MUST choose the battles that we can win , this is a diversion that will suit the establishment

    A suggestion , pay the bastards what you owe , and as others have said set up a separate crowd funder under the heading


    In the cause of independence that will be more beneficial to our future and will be a bigger FUCK YOU to the establishment , then we can sort out the corruption within our various organisations

    And BTW I will still donate my £25

  359. Capella says:

    @ Petra – I’ve had a couple of posts held in moderation lately. One was a reply to Dr Jim on the previous thread and the other was a reply to Cassandra a few threads back. That was particularly annoying as she had just announced she wouldn’t be back.

    Taking Stu’s advice, I did not try reposting but waited for them to be released. That never happened. Anyway, nobody is going to return to an old thread on the off chance that I’ve responded to a point.

    I couldn’t see any “bad” words in them. So I’ve no idea why they were held up.

  360. CameronB Brodie says:

    Great, though I’m interested in what way my perspective isn’t agreeable to you. Hope it wasn’t that lame joke I made about golf, some time back. 😉

    Your feedback could help me improve my argument and I’m genuinely curious.

  361. Bobp says:

    Golfnut 4.30pm ‘it would establish the principle in Scotland of just exactly who rules the roost’. I think everyone knows that the Scottish legal establishment are Englands bitch.

  362. Bobp says:

    Golfnut 4.30. Good sensible post which i enjoyed reading.

  363. Dan Yell says:

    Doug MacGregor said: Does this sheriff know what he has unleashed in his ruling? We are now free to print any scurrilous nonsense about anybody , claim fair comment in the sure knowledge that any expense incurred will be picked up with interest by the victim of our smears.

    This is nonsense. I could launch into an explanation of why this is nonsense, and will do so if challenged, but for now I just want to reiterate what I posted this morning: I strongly urge you, Stuart, not to pursue an appeal. If given leave to appeal, you will lose. And I highly doubt you will be given leave, because despite how counterintuitive, if not perverse people here find the decision, you will have difficulty showing that there is a reasonable chance the Sheriff has erred on the law. No precedent has been set by the judgement. The case law relating to fair comment is sparse, but it is also clear. The Sheriff’s judgement is highly coloured by the principlestare decisis. Chalk it up to a rigged system if you must

    I’m one of the Indy supporters who doesn’t like you, Stuart, and I know I’ll have scant credibility with a lot of the BTL folk here because of this. But I’m asking you in all sincerity not to use any more funds pursuing this matter.

  364. Dr Jim says:

    See when the Redcoats are marching up tae Holyrood wae big keys in thur hauns there’ll still be folk sayin Naaaw! cannae be, they widnae wid they?

    BTW The poll that the Tories commissioned on support for Scottish Independence that David Lidington blocked the release of has been challenged and demanded to be released by Stephen Gethins SNP MP because public money was used to commission it

    The UK claim it’s not in the public interest even though they spent our money on it

    There was a leak that suggested the figures were 57% for Independence but nobody can seem to confirm where that leak came from

    Anybody know anything?

  365. tarisgal says:

    I agree that the judgement is APPALLING and reeks of Indy supporter quashing. There is more to all this than meets the eye. I don’t know what it is, and to be honest – it doesn’t really matter. It’s just another attempt to redirect valuable resources away from the Indy movement, particularly one of the more valuable main players in getting the facts and truth out.

    My initial reaction was ‘take them all the way to the Hague if needs be!”. But I’m calmer now. And I’ve read all the above comments that have helped me to think it through more clearly. And I THINK I’m now coming from the, ‘don’t bother, they just won’t let you win’ line of thinking.

    HOWEVER, I’d have that 2nd Fundraiser – and I’d shout from the rooftops that while you may not be able to get justice from the Court system for a very flawed judgement, you WILL get your own form of justice – Wings will put on a Fundraiser & EVERY SINGLE PENNY WILL GO TOWARD MORE WBB’S!! Make it clear here, there & everywhere – Independence supporters know what the unionists game is and that the Indy supporters crowdfunding of more WBB’s trumps their dubious Court ruling. Hence – YOU WIN.

  366. sassenach says:

    There has been a wealth of advice to the Rev as to whether he should appeal or not, but the final line of his blog said

    “We intend to carry out that decision, but any further views are welcomed.”

    The decision HAD been made! Go Rev, Go!

  367. Scott says:

    Sorry O/T but could anybody help.

    SNP bring in Ofcom over Jeremy Vine show ‘guff’ on independence

    How can I get a link for the program,reason being told my son in Australia about it so he wanted to see it HELP.

  368. Gary says:

    Too many great comments above to read them all . One however stick with me .. an attack on you is an attack on us all!

    GO FOR IT!!!!

  369. Bobp says:

    Dr jim 5.23pm. That poll when finally released will have been heavily doctored.

  370. Bobp says:

    Robert peffers.3.44pm. Mr peffers, that is exactly it in a nutshell.

  371. Capella says:

    @ Scott – the Jeremy Vine clip was in the Prop Up Your Jaws article on WoS. Here’s a link to the youtube clip

  372. Iain mhor says:

    @Petra 4:32pm
    Moderated posts can be filtered for innocuous things.
    I had one I went over multiple times to find the problem and then spotted the word scra*ed (as in Scotland scr*ped a win against the Faroes)
    The word contains the proscribed and filtered word “r*pe”
    I’m not even sure I’ll get this post by the filter lol.

    Anyway, you get the idea.

  373. Petra says:

    @ Capella at 4:59pm ….. “Posts in moderation.”

    It’s really annoying Capella especially when your post contains no links, no taboo words or is too long for that matter. To make matters worse I’m not at home right now and the weather has been playing havoc with the Wifi for most of the day to the point that I posted a reply to RobertTheTruth from my phone ….. took ages …. and then it was put into moderation. And as you say, IF it’s ever removed from moderation everyone, including whomever you were posting to has moved on. When this happens you can see how Nana was scunnered when it was happening to her on a regular basis, latterly.


    Potential changes to the Law including dealing with “fair comment” which will probably metamorphose into “honest opinion” which doesn’t sound too promising either.

    “A statutory defence of truth should be introduced, lol.”

  374. Petra says:

    @ Iain at 6:07pm ….. “Words like scr*ped fire you into moderation.”

    I’ve been through all of that too previously, Iain, including searching for the culprit for ages. Transpired it was a wee, pesky gr*pe, lol.

  375. Republicofscotland says:

    Socrates McSporran @3.54pm.

    I’m gobsmacked I had no idea that Labour didn’t voluntary push for devolution. The Labour yoons often bleat about how their party fought for and won devolution for Scotland, now that looks like a lie as well.

    Is it any wonder then all the talk of setting up a unionist office in Edinburgh to deal directly with Westminster. Rolling back devolution altogether, and in the process killing independence, and Holyrood forever.

  376. Petra says:

    @ TheRepublicofScotland at 6:32pm ……”The Labour party’s devolution lies.”

    And then to add insult to injury they, the Labour Party, were involved in handing 6000 sq miles of Scottish seas, that encompassed 7 oil fields, over to Westminster the night before our Parliament was reconvened.

    And it looks as though it wasn’t just Dewar and Blair that were involved either.

  377. velofello says:

    Sheriff Ross deemed Rev Stu to have been wrongly accused of being a homophobe, yet awards the case expenses to Dugdale. I described his decision as perverse in an earlier post and so why not consider an advertising campaign – billboards? – to bring this Scottish Legal perversity directly to the public? Advertising and publicity needs funding, set aside funds and move the advertising campaign before deciding on an appeal.

    Example, for discussion:

    “Stuart Campbell’s dilemma – to appeal Sherrif’s Ross’s decision, at considerable financial risk – it could happen to anyone of you reading this billboard – or meekly accept this ruling by your Scottish Legal authorities?”.

    The money at risk is not Rev Stu’s money, it is the resource of all who contributed and so he is not alone burdened by the decision of whether to appeal. Rev Stu and us, should accept his legal team’s advice.

  378. James MacLean says:

    I would go for an appeal if the grounds are there. If you do find the grounds, I would advise before any hearing, to make a disclosure application to the court, on whether the presiding judge is a member of the Freemason Society. And I ain’t joking, this nonsense still goes on. I’m with you on any funding appeal if you do decide to take them on.

  379. Iain mhor says:

    @Bobp 5:57pm

    Pretty much that seems the sentiment, but it may not be quite as simple as that in law. The problem as I understand it, is that the defamation had to be in context of intent. The ruling appeared to me, to be that she was too stupid to know what she was saying and did not have the intent to defame. A defamation did occur but it was done ‘accidentally’. So she wasn’t guilty of deliberately defaming – no malice aforethought if you will.
    Yes, even that is a serious stretch. Unfortunately there was more evidence that she was a clownshoed f*ckwit, than there was that she was in posession of intelligent faculties.

    I may be wrong (IANAL) possibly the Sheriff was constrained by the law around defamation as it is currently written. Although in law there can be considerable leeway of ‘interpretation’ (which is often where case law comes in) a law may be definitive enough that such leeway of interpretation cannot be taken.
    The findings in summary appears to suggest that. The Sheriff took the opportunity in the findings, to clarify that a defamation actually occured but that he had to find for Dugdale. I interpreted it as being constrained in law. It may well require that the law around defamation needs revisited and amended. Unfortunately that amendation can’t occur around a case, only after the fact if you will.

    There are many cases where laws have been amended as a result of clamour around obvious ‘miscarriages of justice’. The law tries but cannot allow for every eventuality and scenario. It’s when they are ‘put to the proof’ in court cases that discrepancies can arise. It may well be that this particular case will result in an amending of defamation law.

    For all we know, the Sheriff may well be at the forefront of that. I don’t know much of the legal profession, but I do know they hate being made to look like a total tit, so you never know. Courts in the near future will be referencing ‘Campbell vs Dugdale’ – either as “Dumbfu*kery is a valid excuse, or “Shit for brains is not a valid excuse”. Which is I suppose, a certain level of immortal notoriety. Whether it’s worth the candle is another question I suppose.

  380. schrodingers cat says:

    once again, no justice for yes supporters

    what makes you think you will win next time??

  381. Lochside says:

    Socrates MacSporran @ 3.54 says:

    Glad you brought that point back up. Several years back this was discussed on here and the absolute joke of the ‘Blessed’ Dewar’s statue being erected in the city centre of Glasgow in celebration of this clown’s association with what was actually an EU directive to set up the Scots Parliament.

    The self same colluder in handing over 6000 square miles of our maritime territory to England, in secret. A tr**tor and dissembling dithering waste of space.

    But the point is Holyrood is a direct creation of EU interference, not English beneficience or even Scottish courage. Thus, this is why I and many others, such as Breeks, have cautioned the precarious nature of its ‘sovereignty’.
    The ‘Claim of Right’ will be accepted by the English ascendancy on the basis only of the 2014 Referendum. They will ignore and close down Holyrood as an expensive drain on the NATIONAL INTEREST.

    All our so-called institutions including our ‘parliament’ and ‘legal system’ are bogus empty vessels with no sovereign basis until we assert ourselves electorally via Independence and dismantle them and replace them with democratic answerable institutions that are loyal only to the Scottish people.

  382. Lenny Hartley says:

    O/T re Trump and the UK Ambassador in The USA. Its becoming clear to me at least that this has been set up. As far as I can ascertain there is no timescale given for when these cables were transmitted to the UK. i think they were probably received when Boris was Foreign Secretary, his people have leaked them in order to cause this Diplomatic Crisis and get the current Ambassador removed. Boris will give the job to Farage, therefore getting him out of the way and as a bonus destroys the Brexit Party.

  383. ALANM says:

    As things stand the law is an ass. Let’s just leave it that way. It’s not our job to sort out their laws for them. Accept that things are the way they are (as we do with the BBC).

    Don’t rise to the bait. Don’t allow the UK establishment gobble up any more of our precious pro-independence fighting funds.

  384. Petra says:

    I would imagine that Stu’s legal team would have to prove that Dugdale’s actions were in fact malicious to win an appeal. His team didn’t manage to do that the first time around and I doubt that they would be allowed to submit further evidence, if there was any, to dispute this and overturn the ruling now. Just a thought and I may be wrong of course. If an appeal does go ahead it’ll be interesting to see how Stu’s legal team takes this forward.

  385. Bobp says:

    Iain mhor.6.57pm. Thoughtful post iain , someday it’ll all come out in the wash. Dont know what way the rev should go. But i’m happy to contribute if needed.

  386. McDuff says:

    This judgement is akin to a burglar found guilty of robbing a house and its the owner who is sent to prison.
    Its just as bizarre as that.
    Its a whole new ballgame now.

  387. Sinky says:

    I trust Stu is getting top sound legal advice before appealing this.

    Meanwhile The National is looking for 1000 new subscribers.

    Next target for us is 8000 subscribers – at which point we’ll launch a Unionist fact-check and rebuttal service. Now that would be something! Sign up here:

    If we really want a regular antidote to the Unionist press on the newstands, more need to step up to the plate.

  388. Mac says:

    Dan Yell (Daniel?) @5:22

    “I’m one of the Indy supporters who doesn’t like you, Stuart, and I know I’ll have scant credibility with a lot of the BTL folk here because of this. But I’m asking you in all sincerity not to use any more funds pursuing this matter.”

    Is that you, Duggie?

  389. Bill Hume says:

    Every penny that the British establishment can prise from the fingers of Scots who want freedom, is another penny that won’t be used against them….that’s how they think. They think they can buy Scotland (they did it over 300 years ago).
    Well, if you need more funds to appeal…..thousands of us here on Wings are ready to back you with our hard earned cash.
    GO FOR IT.

  390. Robert Louis says:


    I see the SNP MP’s were happy to overrule devolution in N.Ireland today, and vote for law changes there. Such folly. No matter how noble the cause, in this instance, mark my words, this will come back to bite them hard.

    Just because Stormont is closes right now, is ZERO justification.

    Now, it is easy for Westminster to overrule Scotland’s Government, as it pleases. If the SNP complain, they will merely remind them what they (the SNP) did to N.Ireland.

    I am utterly astonished at the political naivety within the SNP. The vote would have been won without the SNP voting.

    Utter, utter clowns. They are all online bragging about how they overruled N.Ireland devolution. With every passing day, the SNP seems to be even more firmly attached to Westminster rule. So far as I am concerned, SNP MP’s do more harm than good for independence. They have all become too involved in Westminster, and now are playing the games, This is how Westminster corrupts good people.

    Sinn Fein have the right idea.

  391. Terry callachan says:

    If we are to accept that the judge made a reasonable and sound decision that K Dugdale did not understand the meaning of homophobic.
    And if we accept that the judge believes she was telling the truth

    Then the only way K Dugdale could have been found guilty of defamation in Scotland is if she had said in court that she does actually understand what homophobic means
    It would appear to me that her lawyer would have told her that in no circumstances should she admit that she knows the proper meaning of homophobic

    Job done

    Which begs the question

    How did the judge reach his conclusion that K Dugdale did not understand the true meaning of homophobic ?
    What questions did he ask her about homophobia if any ?

    Or did he just reach his conclusion from what she said in her twitter debate with wings ?

    Perhaps a lawyer somewhere could explain how the judge reached his conclusion

  392. Capella says:

    Re posts in moderation – I just checked back my reply to Dr Jim on the previous thread and it is OUT OF MODERATION. REJOICE.
    So this one’s for you Dr Jim – if you’re still interested.

    @ David – just noticed your reply re the Herald article on Jim Sillars Moscow adventures. I was really just having a laugh at the Herald’s expense. All it’s good for.

  393. Terry callachan says:

    To Robert Louis your post at 8.03pm

    I agree with you… a point
    But don’t you agree that if it was something extremely important a life and death situation for example , it would be wrong for SNP to not vote ?

    I believe this vote was about something that could be life and death

  394. Cag-does-thinking says:

    I haven’t commented on this site for a while but I do believe you are looking to see how the land lies before considering an appeal.

    Firstly, although I believe the judgement to be deliberatly perverse to the point of provocation I supect that these are not the actions of a “rogue sheriff”. I believe that he knew exactly what he was doing when he made this judgement which leads me to the only conclusion I can come to is that greater agencies of state were involved in it’s construction.

    In many ways I believe you may have fallen into a trap to try to derail the site and the independence movement into being involved in increasingly complex legal appeal to denude you of funding and most importantly time at a point where something may lead to a second referendum. By setting in train an appeals process the timing of which will largely be decided by the same judiciary it would not surprise me if the case was to keep coming before the courts at key dates in the independence debate. It would keep you occupied from being the effective platform which you have been and shows just how scared the establishment are of this site, The authorites of the UK hate not being in control of the debate and you have been a threat to that. Yu should look at the big picture as to whether the whole episode was planned to negate that threat.

  395. Dan Yell says:

    @Terry callachan, I’m not a lawyer, but the key part of the judgement that answers your question:
    Objectively, and applying the common sense approach enjoined by Massie, not everybody will take Mr Campbell’s approach to a joke about homosexuality. It is common sense that the analysis applied by a heterosexual (a dispassionate application of logic based on the dictionary meaning of words) may be entirely different from the analysis applied by a homosexual person (a dismayed search for justification for an unnecessary joke at the apparent expense of a homosexual man). It is not possible to dismiss the latter as less worthy, or less rational, or less fair, than the former. It is the kind of subjective, rational and honest reading of the tweet, leading to a subjective, rational and honest public comment, which will be protected by the law as fair comment. Accordingly, the comment was fair, because it can be rationally justified from the underlying facts.

    So, the Sheriff ruled that it was not possible for Dugdale to show Campbell is homophobic to the legal standard of veritas, but that this is neither here nor there because Dugdale was making a value judgement, not a statement of fact. To that end, he is opining that it is, as a matter of perspective, it is possible for one person to reasonably infer that the tweet was homophobic where another would not. That being so, because he considered Dugdale’s opinion to be rationally formed, and notwithstanding that he ultimately disagreed with it, it met the standards of fair comment.

  396. `Honest belief` is used in r@pe trials where the accused can site it in regards to having consent to sexual intercourse,

    in Scots law,

    a criminal act consists of two elements, the factual act done and the `mens rea`,the intention or knowledge of wrongdoing that constitutes part of a crime,

    Kezia done the criminal factual act but Sheriff Nigel Ross used the `get out` of Honest belief that Kezia didn`t beleive she was wrongdoing,

    can Stu/lawyers prove Kezia was knowingly wrongdoing,

    it`s like the `get out` that Lord David Spencer Burns, Senator of the College of Justice gave Andy Coulson who he found to have commited perjury but decided that the perjury didn`t influence the case,

    it seems in Scots law you can be guilty and innocent at the same time,

    but only if you are part of the Scottish establishment,

    fricken joke Scottish judiciary is becoming.

  397. Andrew Gordon says:

    Oh My God, Fluck and Law please come out of retirement and get spitting image back on the tv !
    Leaders debate tonight is true comedy gold, please please get writing again and there will be a long line wanting to broadcast it.
    Politics now is actual comedy, very worrying !

  398. mike cassidy says:

    Terry Callahan 8.08

    I would like to know that too.

    Because to be blunt about it.

    There’s no fecking way that a gay, university- educated msp did not know the meaning of the word ‘homophobic’.

  399. Capella says:

    @ Andrew Gordon – Jonathan Pie does his best to report on the leaders debate:

  400. Andrew Gordon says:

    Sorry, that was a bit off topic everyone.
    Kezia story is some of the most obtuse law i have seen practised, i am happy to fund an appeal but as others have said, and i parafrase ” they dont like it up em” for our younger viewers you might need to look the ref.up and for the easily offended i dont give a ….

  401. Andrew Gordon says:


  402. Dan Yell says:

    Scot Finlayson the case concerned civil law, not criminal law. I’m sure you knew that of course and were just trying to use an entirely appropriate analogy by reference to the law on r4pe.

  403. Giving Goose says:

    Doug at 4.28

    Nailed it.
    We can say what we like about whom we like now.
    And get them to pay for it.

  404. Sandy says:


    Just switched on PM debate, arguement, call it what you wish.
    What a hill market. A prevaricated buffoon and a nazi. God help the English.

  405. Juteman says:

    @Robert Louis.
    I saw that earlier. What the hell are the SNP playing at voting on NI devolved issues!

  406. Giving Goose says:

    O/T is there an update on the Emergency Kitten?

  407. Liz g says:

    Juteman @ 8.56
    RE… N. Ireland vote.
    At a guess I’d say it’s because the Women are coming here to Scotland to access the service!
    They get to sit in Stormont playing to their own gallery and all they are really doing is playing Nimby…
    So yes if we ( not as much as the Women obviously) are to pay a price too…. Then we get a say!!

  408. crazycat says:

    @ Giving Goose

    If you donate to the crowdfunder (, you will receive regular updates 🙂 .

    There have been 4 so far and it seems she is no longer an “emergency” case, but there’s still a long way to go.

  409. Ken500 says:

    It was worth £100K – £150K to get rid of Dugdale. Another one down, another one gone, another one hits the dust. No more lying nonsense. Illegally telling folk to vote Tory.

    All the other hinger on liars, looking on, will keep their gobs shut. In case they are sued as well. Win, win.

    Findlay, Tavish Scott going. How many unionists will be gone next GE. The Tories are toast. They could not make a bigger mess. What a muck up. They have 3? of a majority. 30 oppose (a no deal) Brexit. The Westminster unionist imbeciles are a total embarrassment. A world laughing stock. The Brexit mess is staggering.

  410. mike cassidy says:

    SNP and Northern Ireland vote

    Common Space reporting of it

    Justifiable human rights issue

    The Scotsman reporting of it.

    SNP U-turn

  411. Ken500 says:

    NI has had Scotland’s Oil revenues, The £Billions of funding because of the troubles caused by Westminster unionists. The illegal Partition. Ireland wanted Home Rule/Independence. Instead it got Partition. DUP racists, bigots and misogynists. The Masonics. Secret societies. Black balls. Injustice and murder. British state control.

  412. Scotspatriot says:

    Juteman 8.56

    NI DUP have voted against the SNP in Westminster too many times to mention. This was long overdue !

  413. Liz g says:

    Mike Cassidy @ 9.42
    No surprise there Mike,but,had the SNP MPs refused to vote.
    Then the Headline in the British Nationalists media would have been a diatribe about how the SNP were hypocritical and not really progressive after all…
    So when they are going to spin against the SNP anyway they may as well do the right thing for the women of N.Ireland!

    As to treading into devolved matters… Well no one is forcing Stormont not to sit and if Westminster takes advantage of that it’s certainly no the SNPs fault…
    The DUP know by now that Westminster shits on everything.
    And if they don’t know by now they should
    On the positive side…
    If the DUP really want to save all the zygote’s then they better get back into their Parliament and reverse this…
    They need to make a choice Irish Language suppression or Irish woman suppression…..
    Difference is though choice is exactly what those nutters still have…..

  414. Legerwood says:

    The votes on abortion and gay marriage in NI were free votes, that is it was considered a matter of conscience and mPs were free to vote as their conscience dictated not as their party dictated/whipped you to do.

  415. Ealasaid says:

    Dr jim 5.23pm.
    I saw the 57% poll result quoted as being from Scottish Tories for YES, however reliable you would regard that. I think it was mentioned in some comments in The National around the time two Tory leadership contenders were up in Perth. However it was a ‘somebody said’ type of comment.

  416. stewartb says:

    Legerwood @ 10:40 pm

    You wrote: “The votes on abortion and gay marriage in NI were free votes, that is it was considered a matter of conscience and MPs were free to vote as their conscience dictated not as their party dictated/whipped you to do.” Very important point to make. Thanks.

    And from Hansard, the proposer of the relevant clause Conor McGinn (St Helens North, Lab) said:

    “…. I was not old enough to vote for the Good Friday agreement, but everything I have done in my personal life and political career has been about supporting that—supporting the principle of consent, supporting power sharing, supporting peace on the island of Ireland, and supporting reconciliation between people who live in Northern Ireland and between Ireland and Britain. I am a passionate defender of the devolved settlement and a devolutionist. I think that, despite the ups and downs we have had, it has been a force for good in Northern Ireland, and my priority, and what I want to see, is the Assembly back up and functioning in Stormont.

    As I have said, it is my strong view that, given the way the new clause is crafted—it has been selected by the Chair—it does not impinge upon the devolved settlement; it explicitly recognises that this is a devolved power. At the minute, however, the Assembly and the Executive exist in the ether, or as a concept, not in reality, so if they cannot make this law, we will make it here, because, as I have said often, rights delayed are rights denied. We will make the law here, and then when the Assembly is back up and running, the power remains its to change it.”

  417. Graf Midgehunter says:

    To me this whole verdict smells too much of a set-up with an attempt to lure you into making a bad call, an appeal which takes up time, wastes money which is badly needed elsewhere and provides headlines for the Brit.Nat media. Sorry, No.

    I’ll bet it really stung you because you thought, like we all did, it’ll be probably 50-50, each carries their own costs.

    Well, better we all know at first hand what they’re trying to do.

    I’ve already said it and lots of others too, don’t let the anger cloud rational thought. What they are doing won’t be forgotten, bide your time cos they’ll get cocky/arrogant and they’ll start to make mistakes again.

    Hound them with threads, show them up, get the dagger in and make them squirm. They def. won’t like it because we’re still there and better than ever.

    Get the WBB and loads of other stuff out, be active.

    Have you thought about doing a tour of the Scottish YES groups as an inspirational frontman, motivation speeches…??

    After the 18 Sept. 2014 we were all smashed on the floor, BUT we all got up again and look where we are now.

    You won the def. case and it cost some money – bad luck, we lost the skirmish but that’s all it was.

  418. kapelmeister says:

    Jeremy Hunt was an entrepreneur. We know this because he tells people about every 28 seconds.

  419. Dr Jim says:

    What makes anybody think Nicola Sturgeon didn’t pick up the phone and have a word with Sinn Fein and others to see what they thought before they voted

    I would have and I reckon they’re politically more on the ball than me

  420. Dr Jim says:

    Folks, Stuart has already filed

  421. Mollie says:


    Can’t remember if it was here I read it but in 2005 Virginia Bottomly had been the Conservative MP for South West Surrey and when she retired who stepped in but her cousin Jeremy Hunt .

    Northern Voices has quite a detailed resume of Mr Hunts riches to riches story

  422. carjamtic says:

    Cold Hard Truth On Scottish Independence.

    Odds checker :

    Yes 1/1
    No 1/1

    and Yes campaign hasn’t even started……….and Brexit is coming.

    Remember odds May fluctuate bet please bet responsibly..

  423. Confused says:

    Sheriff Ross has made his judgement available in video format

    also, in passing, presentations made to scotgov on tranny silliness

  424. Cubby says:

    Republic of Scotland@6.32 pm

    “Now that looks like a lie as well”

    Britnats lie and they lie all the time about nearly everything. The British Labour Party in Scotland has always been a party of liars, full of deceit and self interest.

    The best approach with Britnats is to assume they are lying unless you can find evidence to the contrary. I’ll be a happy man the day Dewar’ s statue is removed from Buchanan st and sent down to Westminster – its only fair as he was their man in Scotland.

  425. CameronB Brodie says:

    Forget whether you feel the initial judgement sound and the subsequent uplift proportionate. How does the case reflect upon the most important aspect of law, i.e. an ethical commitment to and respect of the human condition?

    P.S. The Rev. ain’t Caliban though he is a disreputable Other calling out the effects of ‘tyranny’.


    The portrayal of Caliban communicates much about the ethical component of the law. Caliban is the archetypal ‘other’. Arguably he represents the uncivilised inhabitants of colonised lands, the ‘wilde Irish’ and the racially abused. This exploration shows poethics aiding the understanding of dilemmas in law and ethics at the time of varying productions.

  426. Cubby says:

    I refer people to this post. – Rev Stuart Campbell@2.59pm

    A lot of people are still posting worried that an appeal will take up to much time be stressful etc.

    Also please note that the decision to go ahead with the appeal has been taken.

    ” We intend to carry out that decision,….”. See last sentence of main post.

  427. Capella says:

    I’ve just found what put my post into moderation in the previous thread. The word was gr*pevine.

  428. chicmac says:

    You gotta know when to fold em Stu, especially in a rigged game.

  429. geeo says:

    Robert Louis @8.03pm

    True colours shining bright there.

    The latest unionist/britnat/concern troll mantra is this..

    “The SNP are too ‘comfy’ at WM”

    “Getting too used to the good life at WM”

    And so on.

    And imagine our total surprise to find YOU indulging in this latest “essenpee bad” tactic.

    Who knew huh ?

    Well, pretty much everyone really.

    Devolution is suspended in N.I. so if WM are voting on an issue concerning N.I. in their absence of an assembly, Scottish MP’s work at WM parliament, so are perfectly entitled to get involved in a WM issue.

    If N.I. politicians want to keep Scotland out of their affairs, then they should get their arses back into Stormont.

    We already have English Votes for English Laws, so are we to have N.Irish Votes for everyone bar Scottish MP’s ?

    What next, ban Scots MP’s on everything ?

    Away wi ye, fooling nobody.

  430. Breeks says:

    geeo says:
    10 July, 2019 at 2:05 am
    Robert Louis @8.03pm

    True colours shining bright there.

    The latest unionist/britnat/concern troll mantra is this..

    “The SNP are too ‘comfy’ at WM”

    Yes, yes, yawn, but any comment on what Robert Louis actually said Geeo? Specifically where the SNP can now be accused of overruling devolution in Northern Ireland, yet at the same time argue that Westminster should not be overruling devolution in Scotland?

    What’s SNPGood about that? Care to give us the SNP angle on that Geeo? It’s not a case of boo-hoo-SNPbad, (not that you’ll listen of course), but yet another genuine case of “SNP WTF were you thinking???”

    So I’m gonna Press you for an answer Geeo, (and I bet I don’t get it). Why has the SNP broken it’s own protocol to impose it’s will on Northern Ireland and circumvent their devolution to impose direct rule?

    Feel free to spin it as “SNPGood” as you’re able Geeo, don’t hold back, but to all those who are not dazzled by the brilliance of SNP sunshine however, the SNP has just made a very damaging rod for its own back made from weapons grade hypocrisy.

    Please come back Alex Salmond. You’re strategic thinking and leadership foresight is sorely missed. Your country needs you. Or is saying that now SNP-bad too? What ya think Geeo? I’m all ears.

  431. Jimmy says:

    This is a fight we can’t afford to give up on. This must be fought ALL the way. I’m also a practising Freemason, SNP member and long time supporter of Wings and others, and I’m not the only one, so please lighten up on the conspiracy comments people.

  432. Ken500 says:

    Conspiracy theory 101. The Masonic secret society. Racists, bigots and misogynists have no place in a democratic society. The handshakes and the winks. Unequal, unfair and unjust. Black balls. Exclusive not inclusive. Against equality Laws. Ruining the economy.

    The DUP want to be a part of the UK but not enforce UK Law. A Law unto themselves. With special entitlements and Illegal practises.

    UK Law legalised abortion and same sex marriage Laws. To give people equal rights. Thwarted in NI by a racists, bigots and misogynists living in the past. DUP embezzling public money. Black cash illegal electoral practices and inequality.

    The SNP voted for people’s fair and just rights. The DUP are thwarting democracy in Ireland supported by Tory unionists.

  433. Ken500 says:

    The SNP supporting equal rights in Scotland and equal rights for others. Quite consistent. Voting against the illegal DUP and Tories. Trying to impose Brexit on Scotland and trying to ruin the Scottish economy. Better to vote on principles for others than sit on your hands. Supporting rights and justice. The corruption of Westminster unionist devolved policies. The DUP corruption. Black money.

  434. Juteman says:

    For those saying the NI vote was on life and death issues.
    Will they be happy when Westminster takes over the Scottish NHS for ‘life and death’ issues?

  435. frogesque says:

    OK, looks like the decision has been taken.

    Could Stu please get the crowdfunder up and running and let us get on to more important issues than yesterday’s hasbeen?

    The navel gazing is getting tiresome and after last night’s farce with Johnson and Hunt (neither Scotland nor Wales merited even a passing mention) we have a huge fight on our hands to defend Scotland from the puppet masters.

    Suits are being pressed as I write and we are in very real danger.

  436. naina tal says:

    Jimmy at 6.15 am
    Well said Jimmy. I’m not a Freemason myself, but have many friends. Some are Masons some are not. Some I don’t know whether or not. Doesn’t really matter to me. I have to say that among my Masonic friends the Aye/Naw split is roughly 50/50, probably about the same as the general population.
    There does seem to be a trend on this site to conflate Masons and the Orange Order. Two totally separate organisations. I have no friends in that organisation at all but from people of my acquaintance the split would trend 100% toward the Naw side.

    Just trying to say we need to be careful not to alienate ANY potential supporters of Self Determination regardless of possible personal prejudices.

  437. Capella says:

    Just read a brilliant speech by Brendan O’Neill, editor of Spiked, from May 2018.

    We should heed the words of Robert Ingersoll, the 19th-century American lawyer and politician and defender of free thought. He said:

    ‘Heresy is the eternal dawn, the morning star, the glittering herald of the day. Heresy is the last and best thought. It is the perpetual New World, the unknown sea, toward which the brave all sail. It is the eternal horizon of progress. Heresy extends the hospitalities of the brain to a new thought. Heresy is a cradle; orthodoxy, a coffin.’

    Heresy is a cradle. That’s it. Difficult and supposedly dangerous ideas are precisely the ones you should expose yourselves to. That is the New World of thought and debate you should venture into. So stop No Platforming, stop hounding heretics off campus, stop treating ideas as diseases and disagreement as violence and dissenting speech as hate speech. Instead, say what you believe, and let others say what they believe. Express your true thoughts. Give voice even to your heretical beliefs. Here’s mine: bread can never become flesh, and a man can never become a woman.

  438. Ahundredthidiot says:


    shooting from the hip does our cause no good.

  439. Legerwood says:

    stewartb @ 10.53pm

    Thank you for the extract from Hansard relating to the abortion and gay marriage amendments voted on last night.

    I hope people read it especially this bit:
    “”… it [Stormont] has been a force for good in Northern Ireland, and my priority, and what I want to see, is the Assembly back up and functioning in Stormont.

    As I have said, it is my strong view that, given the way the new clause is crafted—it has been selected by the Chair—it does not impinge upon the devolved settlement; it explicitly recognises that this is a devolved power. At the minute, however, the Assembly and the Executive exist in the ether, or as a concept, not in reality, so if they cannot make this law, we will make it here, because, as I have said often, rights delayed are rights denied. We will make the law here, and then when the Assembly is back up and running, the power remains its to change it.”

    No power has been removed from Stormont. If it ever gets up and running again then it can change the legislation.

  440. boris says:

    William Hague voiced the official position of a UK government was to retain a right to reverse any or all aspects of power that might be devolved to a Scottish parliament.

    The Scottish nation should heed the warnings of history, a , “no” vote in the forthcoming referendum would send a resounding message to Westminster that Scotland wished to embrace all, “National” aspects of UK government policy.

    This would lead to a creeping reverse of, “devolution” in respect of a number of powers at odds with and giving difficulty to a Westminster government.

  441. Abulhaq says:

    SNP, very, very bad, meddling in NI devolved matter just like a colonialist Brit party. A precedent set to haunt the corridors of Castle Sturgeon.

  442. Ken500 says:

    The DUP who want to be part of the UK. Do not want to obey UK Law. They are a Law unto themselves. They have been getting away with it for years. Bigots! Racists and misogynists getting away with it. Embezzling public funds and dark money. Corrupting the electoral system.
    Scotland has to pay funds and oil revenues for DUP corruption. While Scotland has to do without.

    Total corruption of Westminster unionists, The troubles caused by Partition have cost £Billions. Ireland wanted Home Rule/Independence. After years of oppressive Westminster British Rule.They got Partition. Lloyd George a Liberal. The Balfour Agreement catastrophe. Years of bloodshed. Illegal wars and oppression of people. Still ongoing. Westminster imbeciles.

  443. Ken500 says:

    The Tories will not be there very longer. The imbeciles are on there way out especially in Scotland. They will not be doing anything to Scotland or taking powers. Just vote SNP/SNP. Vote for Independence. Get one other to vote as well. Vote them out.

    Tory majority 3 ? 30 of them oppose (a no deal) Brexit. The shambles cannot go on much longer the Tories will collapse.

  444. Ken500 says:

    ‘Now is not the time May is gone’. A total disaster like the rest of the Tories. Into oblivion they go.

  445. Footsoldier says:

    Abulhaq 08:55 is correct in saying SNP should not have meddled in NI vote – it will do nothing to help independence and may in fact create difficulties which were quite unnecessary.

    According to the The Herald the UK Government must adopt a permanent campaign mode, with a war chest to match. When are we getting into permanent campaign mode as we have wasted years since 2014? In this I agree with Angus MacNeil MP.

    Everything the SNP does, especially in the current climate should be preceded by the first question “will this help independence and if not do not do it”. It should be followed up by the second question “could this cost votes for independence and if yes do not do it.

    The SNP Government have ably proved their competence in government now their entire focus should be on independence – in other words do what the Unionists accuse them of doing anyway.

  446. call me dave says:

    Heard Lesley Laird Lab there on shortbread radio defiant in her effort to get out her ‘on script’ message in the face of mild criticism from ‘Gary’.

    Flogging a dead horse in Scotland.

  447. Dr Jim says:

    The meddling SNP did what they were asked to do by Northern Ireland politicians apparently

    Sky news reports opposition parties in Northern Ireland delighted at the vote, although resulting legislation cannot be implemented until October and will not be implemented should the NI parties return to Stormont because of the DUPs *petition of concern* ploy which was the tool they used to block the decision of all the other parties

    So in the best interests of NI the opposition to the DUP would not return by that date thereby seeing the new legislation passed and the majority of the people of NI would get what they’ve been trying to pass for years

    So it appears the politicians were picking up the phone to one another to achieve the outcome that NI wanted, everybody’s happy except the DUP, but then they were in the minority on this anyway and just bullying pretty much like the extreme loonies they are

  448. Iain mhor says:

    @Confused 11:38pm

    I spat my tea! Just catching up and had passed over that link earlier. Still laughing. +1 Internet for you! 😀

  449. Effijy says:

    NHS England Minister on ITV breakfast a complete car crash when asked
    6 times if Washington Diplomat Sir Kim should be pulled out of Washington.

    He muttered, he mumbled until he was speechless.
    What a plonker of a man. God help NHS England.

    The whole thing disturbs me but the Tories seem confident
    That the public can no longer join the dots together or read between
    The lines.

    If May says she has full confidence in Sir Kim then she is happy
    With his assessment that Trump is dysfunctional.

    When the damning report was sent out to all government bodies
    They surely must react if they find his report to be damaging and

    No one at Westminster did this so obviously they fully agree with his statements.

    Next problem is why are tax payers expected to fund this guy in a very expensive job
    When he is actually barred from having any form of relationship with the Trump administration?

    Get him out, get May out, Bojo out , the Tories our, and Westminster out of Scotland.

    Now it makes sense.

    (This Probably lowered the price of US companies buying NHS England)

  450. Terry callachan says:

    Change of subject

    The UK oil and gas authority

    Based in London as you would expect even though most of the oil and gas comes from Scotland’s waters.

    On 24th may 2019 the Westminster government laid before the EU parliament details of the
    32nd round of offshore oil and gas licenses so that countries in the EU can see details of where companies can explore for oil and gas.
    An invitation to apply.

    Yes that’s right the 32nd round of licenses to explore for gas and oil !!

    Huge amounts of gas and oil are clearly still there but England of course just love to tell Scotland that it’s running out they’ve been saying that since the 1960,s
    Meanwhile they sell quadrants of our seas to the highest bidder many of the companies that bid and explore and extract oil and gas from our waters have people in Westminster and the House of Lords who have shares in or are on the board of directors with these companies.

    England controls it all

  451. Terry callachan says:

    Radio 4 this morning J Hunt discussing the NHS amongst other things
    Plans to introduce amazons Alexa into the NHS !!
    Yes that’s right Alexa .
    Happily saying that people will be able to ask Alexa about their illness and healthcare !!

    They discussed how Alexa stores everything you ask it but recently I read an article that says that even when you are not actually using Alexa if it is switched on it is listening to and recording what is going on around it.

    Hunt happy to say that privacy laws are robust , eh , no they are not
    Cambridge Analytica , need we say more ?

  452. Capella says:

    These electronic devices, including cameras and microphones on your PC or laptop, do not need to be switched on to record. They can switch them on remotely. Keep Alexa in the fridge.

    See “Snowden” or “The Fifth Estate” on Netflix.

  453. Terry callachan says:

    I’m baffled why anyone would be against same sex marriage or against women having an abortion
    I’m pretty sure that women don’t have an abortion just for the sake of it
    And surely it’s a women’s right to decide if she should have a baby or not…in all circumstances..Given that it takes nine months a long time and can seriously affect you health and many other things in your life.

    If I were a pregnant woman I would say to anyone and everyone how dare you tell me what to do .

    England with a huge unbeatable majority of MPs in Westminster and House of Lords too ,are comfortable using that majority to control Scotland wales and Northern Ireland affairs when it suits them but when they introduced EVEL English votes for English laws they were saying to Scotland wales Northern Ireland we will have a say and decide what happens in your countries but you will have no say in what happens in England.

    Considering this point it’s clear that Westminster politics is not fair it’s not reasonable so I cannot accept the argument that Scotland MPs in Westminster should not have voted for justice in allowing people in Northern Ireland to have same sex marriage and abortion I say this because in Scotland England and Wales people already have the right to Same sex marriage and abortion.

  454. Terry callachan says:

    Capella your post 1018..

    So are you saying that if Alexa is not plugged in it still records ?

  455. Terry callachan says:

    So much oil and gas they have to auction off more quadrants

  456. Capella says:

    Does it have an internal battery? If so then yes.

  457. SilverDarling says:

    I can see sort of see why the SNP felt they should vote, on a matter of conscience, in the absence of a devolved admin. However, remember Yvette Cooper and Stella Creasy wanted to take abortion legislation back from the SP into Westminster and there was rightful anger at that.

    With the caveats that the decision can be over ruled if the people of NI get a parliament to reflect their say, then fair enough but it is a decision that will be used against the SNP for sure by the DUP ( as if they they ever vote in the same way on anything though!)

    Sinn Fein do not take up their seats, the DUP whether you agree with them or not make up the majority of elected representatives of NI in Westminster. Do they speak for NI or not?

    Are we happy that Scottish Tory politicians have the ear of the Westminster Government even though they are not elected to Westminster? By saying the SNP were listening to politicians outwith Westminster, is that just the same as Rooth and co influencing the Tory government with no mandate?

  458. Dr Jim says:

    Big brother really is watching you:

    Have you ever used remote assistance to fix a problem with your computer by a guy called Barry from New Dehli, or Gavin from Mumbai

    They’re staring at you now, watching you, looking at everything you’re doing, everything you’re reading,everything you’re writing,every site you visit, everything you look up on Google, they can switch your camera on and off at will and you won’t even notice they did it unless you have cast iron security software to stop them, and even then they can switch that off too

    If they can do it everybody can do it, especially GCHQ because that’s what they’re there to do, to prevent you, to thwart you, to report on you, to label you

    Give companies your mobile number? you might as well just leave your front door open when you go out because those companies sell your number to others who sell your number to others until it arrives in the inbox of a Nigerian Prince called George who’ll take a special interest in your bank account and relieve you of all that extra money you bad rich people have

    Keep accepting those cookies for a better Internet experience because they *promise* they only use them to make your life better

    The UK government admitted to tapping MPs MSPs phones years ago but promised to stop except for the SNP, they wouldn’t promise to stop tapping those

    I have two mobile phones 1 for family and 1 for other people and never give out my family phone number to anyone ever and I don’t use Internet banking

    Paranoid? who says I am?

  459. Cubby says:

    Terry callachan@10.22am

    Excellent post. Agree with contents. One point you missed out. I’ll add it for you.

    I’m baffled why anyone would be a racist.

  460. Terry callachan says:

    One thing you should know is england is not a race it’s a country

  461. Terry callachan says:

    I think Alexa has to be plugged in

  462. Madir Mabbott says:

    Keep focused, Stu!

    I believe an appeal would be a distraction from the fundamental mission of the site, and I suspect you would “lose” again. Although I would contribute to an appeal fund, I would rather see the money spent on Wee Blue Books etc., directly forwarding the goal of Scottish Independence.

  463. Terry callachan says:

    Oil and gas authority

    Here we see that there is so much oil and gas still in the North Sea that they are selling off exploration rights in huge areas

  464. geeo says:


    Oh look, here he is, Mr “ESSENPEE USELESS” himself, rushing to defend anyone critical of the bad “ESSENPEE”

    Nobody has ‘interfered’ in devolution in N.I.

    There is no devolution currently being administrated in N.I.

    N.I. is being run from WM.

    WM is the parliament of ALL THE UK.

    SNP are part of the Uk parliament, and are therefore perfectly entitled to get involved.

    If N.I. parties do not like WM getting involved in what it sees as its business, they only have to get back to work in Stormont.

    And of course, you seem to ignore the fact that THE TORIES Labour, lib dems, brexit party, change uk and Green MP’s are all getting involved in devolved policy areas of N.I.

    But somehow its ONLY the SNP who are to be criticised for doing so ?

    This has ZERO comparability to any potential WM interference in Scottish Devolution, as Holyrood is NOT SUSPENDED and there is no prospect any time soon of being suspended.

    If you learned to read (it was the post right before your slavering response, you couldn’t miss it) you would have already noted that I explained already why the SNP getting involved was not an issue.


    ” Devolution is suspended in N.I. so if WM are voting on an issue concerning N.I. in their absence of an assembly, Scottish MP’s work at WM parliament, so are perfectly entitled to get involved in a WM issue.

    If N.I. politicians want to keep Scotland out of their affairs, then they should get their arses back into Stormont.

    We already have English Votes for English Laws, so are we to have N.Irish Votes for everyone bar Scottish MP’s ?

    What next, ban Scots MP’s on everything ” ?


    Look at the folk trying to pile onto this and attack the SNP, it is quite telling



    Robert Louis


    A veritable list of “essenpee bad” merchants of doom.

    Even Callachan is right on this issue, although he will probably hate me saying that (lol).

  465. Iain mhor says:

    @Terry Callachan 10:26am

    All devices require power, but there is a difference between ‘switched off’ and ‘powered down’ and the question of backup power.
    With ‘Alexa’ type devices, the most common ones require constant mains power to operate fully. Some have backup battery and some have ‘add-on’ battery bases available, for wire free or backup operation. In the case of laptops etc. It’s complicated by the many power states they have. Suspend, hibernate etc. How to tell if anything is truly ‘powered down’ is the big question.

    The majority of electronic devices operate a small, internal battery, to hold ‘states’ when powered off/unplugged – a simple example would just be an internal clock.
    Although something like an ‘Echo Dot” (Alexa) device may state in the specifications that it requires mains power to function, it will have an internal, small ‘CMOS’ battery. Though that is very unlikely to have enough power to actually fully operate the device, its not impossible
    Devices are power hungry, which is why wireless, battery powered versions of smart home devices, usually require you to press a button before asking what the weather is like in Kuala Lumpur.

    A complex example of remote control, would be ‘Wake-on-Lan’ Where a device has a residual power source to listen for ‘magic packet’ transmissions across a network. Such a transmission signal can then bring a device to an ‘awake’ state and more – if it has enough power internally (eg laptop battery) or is plugged in to source of power.

    How much power is available to a device, its hibernation state, whether it can be ‘remotely activated’ and what it is then capable of, is for the user to ascertain wearing a suitable tin-foil hat. But, assume all devices are capable of autonomy and monitoring, until one establishes otherwise.
    So @Capella is technically correct – which is the best kind of correct 🙂

  466. Terry callachan says:

    Geeo geeo gee..

    I don’t hate you geeo , in fact I hope you get better soon, keep taking your medicine and
    lay off the hard stuff , remember the two don’t mix well together at the same time.

    I’m glad the SNP voted in favour of those rights for people in Northern Ireland for two reasons
    First it’s their human rights
    Secondly everyone in Scotland England wales and Southern Ireland too already have these rights
    so why should anyone say people in Northern Ireland should be excluded from these rights.

    I do wonder if it is bible thumping religious zealots that are against it.

    Sorry geeo I know you were hoping I would be against people in Northern Ireland having these rights but I’m in favour
    Still, you ignored that point and criticised anyway , check your blood pressure and lay off the sauce it does get you very mixed up sometimes.

  467. Cubby says:

    Terry callachan@11.10am

    I am well aware of that fact.

  468. Cubby says:

    Terry Callachan proving that even racists can be decent people on so many other issues. Pity he has to resort to pathetic personal insults.

  469. Mo Workman says:

    Just heard a man from Aberdeen on LBC saying he voted No in 2014 and remain in 2016 expects there to be another independence referendum which he thinks will be successful this time, and he will vote yes to stay in the EU. Tide is defo turning.

  470. geeo says:

    Actually, Callachan, i was PRAISING YOU but you go straight to personal insults.

    Looking to be banned again ?

  471. call me dave says:


    I’m not the only one to have seen ‘The conversation’ or ‘Three days of the condor’then. 🙂

    I see that the prime minister who wore his underpants on the outside will step in and take Boris to court… maybe.

    ‘Left in the dark’ front page news in Scotland 🙁

  472. Terry callachan says:

    Iain mhor

    A good article
    A family had to unplug their Alexa because it was storing conversations and passing them on to other people without their knowledge
    They their house appliances linked up to Alexa

  473. Terry callachan says:

    To cubby

    You are now

  474. Joe says:

    Tyranny can enter into democracy at the level most decent people find acceptable. Once that door is opened the powers expand and expand on one bogus justification after another.

    Afterwards people say ‘When did it all go wrong’?

    Answer: the minute you righteously let someone whose politics you completely disagree with be deliberately and unfairly treated by the law/state.

    The British (and Scottish) authorities have in the last few years shown a very troubling authoritarian turn.

    When judges start acting on the behalf of political parties/persons/ideologies, when your elected representatives start following rules from ‘international best practice’ to the detriment of many, when people are smeared wholesale by state media, when the police start acting on posts on social media and deciding what is offensive without any relevant public complaint made its time to look out your pitchfork.

    Left and right politics doesn’t mean a thing in that environment until the state is put back in its box.

    Its the most important thing the founders of the U.S got right – the group of most potential danger to the people of any country are their own government. The 20th century says it all.

  475. Terry callachan says:

    Geeo…you’re so unhappy

    I hope you feel better soon

  476. geeo says:


    Keep it up, but know this, your targetted personal abuse has been reported.

    People doing what you are doing, rarely last long on here.

    So batter in champ, i fucking dare you.

  477. Terry callachan says:

    Cubby and geeo two busy bees for the british nationalist cause

    Always calling people British nationalists or anti SNP or racist or bigots whenever people disagrees with their point of view

    Still… I forgive them , they know not what they do ,lights don’t shine bright everywhere
    They support Scottish independence and that’s priority for me here

  478. Terry callachan says:


    Get well soon

  479. Heart of Galloway says:

    I trust you are devoting equal energy to winning people over to YES as you are to self-flagellating over the SNP leadership”s perceived inaction.

    This is not to say that on occasion some of your points do not have merit. Quite the contrary, in fact.

    But as I stated on here some time ago, morale and a shared belief in a YES victory are priceless assets which our UK nationalist opponents will seek to undermine at every opportunity.

    So why should anyone give succour to them? That may not be the intention, but rest assured our adversaries will seek to exploit any issue to sow doubt and dissention in the ranks.

    That brings me to another point. As I stated previously, the Second War of Independence is already underway. At the moment there are only skirmishes because the main front of battle has yet to be drawn.

    Will the field be defined by General Election (Possible). A so-called People’s Vote? (Highly unlikely). Brexit with deal? (Hard to see with BoJo the Clown). A no-deal Brexit on October 31? (Very possible).

    Incredibly, after over three years, nothing is settled because, in the FM’s words, “I underestimated the incompetence of the UK Government”.

    The SNP’s entire constitutional position is founded on Scotland’s continued membership of the EU because that was the instruction from the people.

    Time and again the SNP leader at Westminster has vowed that Scotland will not be dragged out of the EU against our will.

    There is no going back from that pledge but timing and by which means it will be fulfilled has yet to be determined.

    Meanwhile, get out and persuade all the persuadeables that independence is our only hope of building a country of which our children and grandchildren can be proud.

  480. Terry callachan says:

    Joe…What’s wrong with international best practice ?

  481. Terry callachan says:

    Tour de France live on tv for the next few hours , fantastic

    Hope,there isn’t an outbreak of trouble in Northern Ireland this coming weekend as the unionists celebrate King Billy
    Bonfires as high as a house and as wide , usually displaying pictures of people they hate such as politicians , leaders , the Pope and oh yes flags they hate too , Palestine flag last year ?


    With the vote in Westminster about same sex marriage and abortion happening in the week that the unionists celebrate killing catholic Irish neighbours there could be trouble

    I hope not , but

  482. call me dave says:

    Two leaks in the news.

    Darroch resigns.

    HMS Queen Elizabeth: Leak forces aircraft carrier to abandon sea trials.

  483. Terry callachan says:

    Englands Westminster practicing being an empire again had a navy ship stop and board and then take control of an oil tanker from Iran this week as it was travelling on its way to South America

    The reason given. . .?

    USA tariffs

    That’s right Westminster acting like pirates in charge of the Mediterranean taking over a ship from Iran as it passes through international waters the Gibraltar straits going about its business

    England and USA think they are the police force of the world telling countries around the world what they can sell to other countries and what they can’t sell and then calling it tariffs .

    England doing USA,s dirty work

  484. Dr Jim says:

    Sky news cuts away from PMQs as SNP MP Ian Blackford begins to speak

    England doesn’t want to hear what Scotland has to say on *anything* they just want to take from Scotland *everything*

    It doesn’t matter if English people are anti Scottish or not
    but their leaders and their media are

  485. Tam Fae Somewhere says:

    Oil and gas authority

    Here we see that there is so much oil and gas still in the North Sea that they are selling off exploration rights in huge areas
    If I have read that correctly then roughly 2/3 of the area is in Scottish waters.

    A lot of area west of the Shetlands so expanding well beyond the North Sea as well. Highlighting the vast potential down the west coast with Hurricane Energy already striking a big field there.

    More money for Westminster unless we get independence!

    C’mon Scotland – wake up!

  486. Dr Jim says:

    Is Mundell hiding in the same place Ruth Davidson is

  487. Jack Murphy says:

    First they came for the…

    Then they came for the …

    Then they came for the…

    Then they came for me—and there was no one left to speak for me.

  488. Sharny Dubs says:

    Having a rethink.
    What about…

    We have an appeal fundraiser, then put all the money into the next WBB with an added addendum siting the facts of the case, nothing remotely controversial just the facts with a “this could happen to any of us” at the end.

    Into every house in Scotland? Way better than winning it losing an appeal don’t you think?

    The dream will never die

  489. call me dave says:

    You can turn an ear to this later if you fancy.

    ‘The National’ podcast. 3pm every Wednesdaay

  490. Cubby says:

    Terry callachan@11.54pm

    “Always calling people ……racist or bigots….”

    Wrong again Terry old boy. Just YOU that I call a racist bigot and it is an accurate description based on what you have posted in the past.

    Didn’t ask for and don’t need any of your phoney forgiveness. I know what your priority is and it’s hating the English.

  491. Ahundredthidiot says:

    I once watched a macaphee video where he had 3 or four of the worlds top i.t. security guys in a forum.

    He asked how many did internet banking and they all burst out laughing.

  492. Cubby says:


    Kirsten Hair Tory MP for Angus in an anti Scotgov/SNP rant asks the Maybot to “join with me to condemn this illegal referendum approach”

    She does not of course explain what actual law would be broken to make it illegal. The truth is it is the Britnat made up law that Scotland should always do what it is told to do by Westminster. You know the old colonial laws – do what your masters tell you.

    The Maybot replies with the old lie ” the SNP PROMISED people in Scotland ……….a once in a generation vote”. Of course they did no such thing. It was more a warning that the Britnats having got close to defeat will do all they can to ever prevent another referendum taking place. It now seems today a very accurate warning.

    These Britnats cannot open their mouths without lying.

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