The world's most-read Scottish politics website

Wings Over Scotland

The vote of confidence

Posted on February 15, 2020 by

Print Friendly

    1 Trackbacks/Pingbacks

    1. 15 02 20 07:57

      The vote of confidence | speymouth

    790 to “The vote of confidence”

    1. CageyBee says:

      Ain’t that the truth

    2. Al-Stuart says:

      Thanks Chris.

      Though I am beginning to get some hope back.

      BoJo will decline very fast

      His Achilles Heal is Dominic Cummings. That lunatic wants to destroy the British Establishment…

      As for Alister Jackass?

      A no-mark skid mark.

      Excellent cartoon. Thank you chief.

    3. Robert Louis says:

      The English Tories’ colonial governor general of Scotland.

      A Scot dancing to London’s colonial jig, happy to betray and sell out his own country, Scotland for personal reward.

      The history of Scotland, since 1707, is littered with Alistair jacks.

    4. Josef Ó Luain says:

      Dominic Cummings is Johnson’s “mud-guard”, bolted-on for the sole purpose of deflecting shit from his boss.

      That the media have bought into the ploy merely illustrates what a cunning fucker Johnson is.

    5. Tony Hay says:

      Give the fucker enough rope ………

    6. Morgatron says:

      Every time I think of the British media, I hear Neil Innes sing “How sweet to be an Idiot” I dont think we have ever seen or heard politics and politicians so out their depth solely acting for self interest than this Tory party and getting no scrutiny from the so called free press. Great toon as always Mr C.

    7. Rob Outram says:

      Alister Jack, not so much scraping the bottom as licking it?

    8. Colin Alexander says:

      Scotland’s MPs and MSPs bend the knee in complete colonial subservience to these people, accepting them as our Imperial Masters.

    9. Ottomanboi says:

      Re Otto von Bismarck and Sun Tzu admirer Dominic Cummings:
      All the keys to character, influences and motivation are there.
      And this:
      Cummings is a man on a mission and has found his ‘punter’.
      Let your plans be dark and impenetrable as night, and when you move, fall like a thunderbolt.”
      ? Sun Tzu, The Art of War
      Remember OUR MISSION?

    10. Kangaroo says:

      Nope. The bottom has not been scraped yet. A long way to go, there’s even a rabbit hole underneath and it goes a long way down.

    11. Muscleguy says:

      Now Cummings has a cabinet of doormats his bicycle wheels will glow red hot as he flies around Whitehall supervising the minions.

      The Civil service will post lookouts for him and the jungle telegraph will clcik as the Mandarins figure out how much time they have to get stuff through their compliant, doormat minister before Cummings gets to them.

      Cummings hasn’t thought about this aspect of having doormat ministers. The Mandarins will, I suspect be too clever for him.

    12. Ottomanboi says:

      Cummings….techno-populist, cherry picking faux-scientist, fantasist, David Icke on a hyperdrive skateboard, techno-fascist?
      We need to take this whacky guy, more than Johnson, very seriously.
      Cyborgs are taking over BritState.
      Graphic comic coming to a retailer near you!
      Scotland get your act together.

    13. kapelmeister says:

      “The SNP is an evangelical faith-based cult” says the new Scottish branch leader of the evangelical faith-based Brexit cult.

    14. Gordon Keane says:

      I was quite appalled at the replacement of a half decent Northern Ireland Secretary, with a clueless person like Brandon Lewis.
      We wonder how long it will be, before he has to go, or before those in Belfast find they can’t have anything do with him.
      If this is what they are getting over there, we can only wonder at the level of tory politician these days.
      As for the new billionaire Chancellor, well, I guess the less said of the thing the better!
      Somehow, I am left to wonder how long Boris Johnson will be Prime Minister. I would be surprised if he lasted 4 years. But for however long he is there, he is going to be very destructive.
      And yet, and yet, both Labour and Libs in Scotland are more than happy to be ruled by him!

    15. Stoker says:

      “Remember OUR MISSION?”

      Says a twat always helping the Brits to promote their propaganda platforms. Find some bloody respect for those of us who at least make an effort to avoid posting direct links. Selfish BritNat facilitator. We don’t constantly try to bring people to this blog for you to entice them into supporting our No1 enemy. You know the score and you know *exactly* what you’re doing.

    16. Stoker says:

      Quality cartoon as usual Chris. Thank you!

    17. Scott says:

      Nice one again Chris.
      who would have thought.

    18. Breeks says:

      I see ominous parallels between Trump, Steve Bannon and the far right News syndicate Breitbart, and their British counterparts, “Britain Trump” Johnson, Dominic Cummings, and the far right BritNat media, which is more or less all the media.

      What’s perhaps more ominous, is that Trump has an American media and political opposition which might admittedly be finding it hard to gain traction over Trump, despite trying. They got him impeached, and any normal, self respecting President would have resigned at the ignominy of being impeached.

      Set aside the voting public moment, and accept for the moment the sweeping statement that the electorate has had it’s head turned by populist rhetoric, and focus on far right ‘organisation’.

      Trump, to a large extent, is a ‘ringer’ who markets himself as anti-establishment and friend to the working man, (whom he subsequently strips of workers rights and healthcare), but maybe gives a job. Bannon and Breitbart were too much of a right wing liability, literally fascist and white supremacists, and were dumped.

      But over here, Boris Johnson might very well be Mini-Me to Trump’s Dr Evil, but in terms of his status, Etonian Boris Johnson is very much a product of the Establishment where Trump is marketed as an alternative to the “Establishment”, and Trump’s in a never ending battle with the US News Media, whereas the UK Establishment media is more or less a megaphone for far right values.

      There are two things which occur to me. I don’t quite follow the spat between Boris Johnson and the media. Something stinks. Why is Johnson finding it necessary to pick a fight with an Establishment Media which is more right wing and fascist than he is? Tories get an easy ride in the Media. The cynic in me suspects the UK is indeed styling itself of the US President’s precedent, and the US formula dictates that the President must undermine criticism as fake news. Boris / Cummings are orchestrating this fallout with the media because the US formula stipulates that it’s necessary.

      The second concern, is that Johnson’s regime isn’t anti-Establishment like Trump’s rednecks, but “of-the-Establishment”, and consequently, it is difficult to see where opposition to the UK far right Government will coalesce. Labour? Do me a favour.

      I think the UK is in much greater peril from a Government with far right tendencies than the US. Trump has provoked a few trade wars with large economies, yet despite being reckless and foolhardy, it can still be contained under the heading of poor / idiotic policy. It’s not brought the USA to its knees.

      In the UK however, this flirtatious affair with far right populism has already seen the UK population sold the massive pup that Europe was the enemy, and was holding back the economic prowess of the British Empire! BritNat / English exceptionalism has been whipped into a frenzy, which right now, is all dressed up with nowhere to go.

      The UK is in for a bumpy ride economically, and will in due witness the truth about Brexit unfolding, but will see it being stage managed and distorted into anti European hate-speak, with Europe blamed for every misfortune that becomes manifest in the U.K.

      How will it play in Scotland? I don’t know. I still can’t quite bring myself to believe we are still in this mess, however, here we are, and Scotland might soon be vilified as a friend of Europe, and Scottish institutions attacked as unpatriotic and anti-British. That might raise cheers in London, but here in Scotland, that narrative might backfire, and actually entrench and embolden sympathy for Independence.

      Boris Johnson must now find a way to dilute Scottish Nationalism and Scotland’s empathy for Europe. I don’t think that will be easy, because even if Johnson had the means to damage or discredit the credibility of the SNP, which I don’t think he does, I don’t actually think the SNP is the focus of Scottish Independence any more. I think Brexit Day was D-Day for many of us, and Nicola badly misread the signs.

      Perhaps Boris Johnson’s plans are to string along the Scottish Government by dangling Referendums like a carrot, while Scottish Institutions are surreptitiously weakened and deregulated, while standards and methods begin to deviate from EU best practice so that rejoining Europe becomes a pipe dream. Don’t forget, he doesn’t need electoral popularity here. Make Scotland suffer and let the SNP’s impotence breed resentment and frustration. To coin the phrase, “who else they gonna vote for?”

      It’s Constitution or bust Scotland. We grasp our Sovereignty and put it to good use getting out of this shite, or we sit back and watch the Tories dismantle Scotland as our Scottish “Assembly” wrings it’s hands in impotence, and complains that Scotland must be given the right to choose, and decide if it wants the responsibility for deciding whether it can choose something which we should always have the right to decide…

      It’s Constitution or Bust Scotland. Are you with us Joanna Cherry? Let’s use the 700th anniversary of the Declaration of Arbroath as the occasion where we tear up the Scotland Act and renew our acquaintance and vows with Scotland’s Constitutional Sovereignty…

    19. Daisy Walker says:

      A great cartoon Chris, as always, not that it will penetrate thick skins.

      In other news, and isn’t this interesting…. for the first time in 100 years the UK has ‘exported’ a substantial amount of gold, to the US. £12 billion pounds worth in fact, and it looks as if its been a private seller.

      Now what extremely wealthy family do we all know that has that kind of ill gotten gains, accumulated over centuries of colonial asset stripping, that might not want those kind of assets lying around – if no arrangement can be made with the EU over their tax laws, and who just might want/need to curry favour with the US establishment, to prevent uncomfortable investigations taking place/going public, re favoured son’s behaviour?

      Any ideas.

      Nana, if your out there, best wishes, and what are your thoughts/info re this transaction.

    20. Republicofscotland says:

      Nice one Chris, and very true.

      Meanwhile a guest commentor in the National newspaper today, might just have given us an insight into Johnsons/Cummings plans for the UK.

      David Mungall, writing in the paper said of “The path”

      “In 2012, a week after the Olympics ended a group of five Tory MP’s, four now in Johnsons cabinet, puublished Britannia Unchained. A Darwininan manifesto of fewer employment rights, and a smaller state. Mungall goes on to add more, of what could happen.

    21. Dan says:

      Nana’s post with links from previous thread. Well worth reading.

    22. jfngw says:

      Jackson Carlaw & Annie Wells
      Rightwit Lielow & Vacant
      Willie Rennie & Alistair Carmichael

      British Nationalists, the gift that keeps on giving. Although to be fair, Vacant hasn’t made an arse of him/herself yet. And for an encore you can throw in AC-H, always good for a laugh, but the choice seems to be never ending with the British Nationalists.

      Anyway I need to spend a bit more time with my family (of to London soon though, you know opportunities and all that).

    23. Colin Alexander says:

      Stoker said:”… helping the Brits to promote their propaganda platforms.”

      Why don’t you lecture the SNP, who provide a link in their latest SNP mail shot, so we preview the Evil Empire’s latest pro-Empire propaganda.

    24. Ottomanboi says:

      OMG! You have plainly a prob with the concept of ‘freedom’.
      Set up a blog of your own if you wish to make prescriptive rules’.
      No wonder there’s something rotten in the current state of Scotland.
      Intolerance, and do I smell the reik of racism too, is not a pretty sight.
      Btw. The Guardian does print articles sympathetic to Scottish nationalism unlike the rest of the Unionist media. Don’t knock it!
      Did you bother to read the link, or were you too high on self-righteous dudgeon?
      Have a great day!

    25. Terry says:

      @breeks. 11.17
      Spot on
      “ Boris Johnson must now find a way to dilute Scottish Nationalism and Scotland’s empathy for Europe. I don’t think that will be easy, because even if Johnson had the means to damage or discredit the credibility of the SNP, which I don’t think he does, I don’t actually think the SNP is the focus of Scottish Independence any more. I think Brexit Day was D-Day for many of us, and Nicola badly misread the signs.”

    26. winifred mccartney says:

      Just been watching the labour hustings in Glasgow, what a bore – when labour in Wales can’t do something it’s austerity when snp can’t do something its there fault.

      So many things said which were factually untrue -labour cant win without Scotland, if every constituency in Scotland had voted labour at the last election they would still have lost.

      RLB talks of democracy for everyone except Scotland 52% for indy is not enough, Federalism the only game in town, should be reminded of Smith Commission – the tories offered more to Scotland than they did. That ship has not only sailed it has sunk.

      WM cuts funding by 1% but snp cuts by 7% what tosh, free prescriptions, free tuition fees, new child support, free transport, free child care etc etc

      Unfortunately labour only talks to labour and by doing so they will continue in the wilderness and deserve to be there.

    27. Nana says:

      @Daisy Walker

      Can’t say I’ve thought much of the gold transfers, some folk seem to believe it could be other countries repatriating their gold from the BOE.

      Those with the most to lose will hide or transfer their ill gotten gains wherever they believe to be a safe haven.

      The following tweet includes links to articles along with a youtube video from 2017
      Brexit Forensics: The gold export illusion

      Best wishes to you too 🙂

    28. Robin McHugh says:

      Folks here are really needing to look at the links from Nana towards the end of the previous thread as mentioned by Dan at 11.44am, and particularly the Twitter stuff about the far right.
      If this proves to be the case, a grave situation is developing!

    29. Sinky says:

      Tories in Scotland have now matched Labour for the lack of talent at the top. Gov General Jack is really poor at Scottish Questions plus dodgy twice failed second hand car salesman now in charge of North Britain.

      Surprised that there has not been more publicity for this report on UK treatment of oil companies compared to other countries

      Should be read and quoted when anyone extols the benefits of the Union and relishing on the largest deficit in Europe.

    30. Dr Jim says:

      Kate Forbes SNP MSP Finance Minister giving evidence to the Budget Scrutiny committee said “There is no communication between the Scottish government and the Exchequer as to the UK budget, they just keep referring us to the Tory party manifesto”

    31. Rm says:

      If RBS is finished could Scotland not start another independent bank, if every independent minded Scot or non Scot put their money in it would fairly get a decent start, it could start investing in opening up Scotland in the 21st century people all round the world who are sympathetic in a different future for Scotland might start investing.

    32. admiral says:

      Sinky says:
      15 February, 2020 at 12:59 pm
      Tories in Scotland have now matched Labour for the lack of talent at the top. Gov General Jack is really poor at Scottish Questions plus dodgy twice failed second hand car salesman now in charge of North Britain.

      Echoing Kennedy’s successful campaign against Nixon, perhaps the SNP could use a picture of Jack the Carlot with the slogan “Would you buy a used car from this man?”. 🙂

    33. meg merrilees says:


      Independence Movements have always been and always will be bigger than one party, in this case the SNP.
      The SNP was the ‘coat hook’ that helped independence stay alive through the dark days and get it to where we are now but, for independence to be a success it has to be cross-party, it has to be a majority desire, not just an SNP majority desire, it has to be the singular aim of most of the people. Once we achieve it, the SNP will have to reorder itself.

      Nicola has a lot on her plate because she is not just leading the SNP, she is First Minister and I’ve often thought that the job is too big for one person, any person, though the benefit is that policies can be formed with a view to the long term and helping to establish an independent state.

      The SNP is the means to the end, they are our political representation in all the talking shops and legislative forums (? don’t know the plural, sorry) but the ‘people power’ will be the vessel that will take us across the line.

    34. Golfnut says:

      @ RM.
      Lots of comments on FB regarding RBS, many along the lines of good riddance, etc.
      Independence gives us the opportunity to reset the banking world in Scotland and I would like to see a new TSB type bank on the high street. Owned by us and savings, pensions and investment linked to the oil fund.

    35. Hate to say it,

      Scotland/SNP/New Indy Party could do with a political strategist like Cummings,

      we seem to have the weapons but do not know where to point them or when to shoot or who to shoot,(metaphorically)

      Cummings is an acolyte of John Boyd (US military strategist)
      who`s teachings of the `OODA Loop` have been taken by most world militaries,economics,law,business and politics,

      OOPD Loop,

      the collection of data by means of the senses
      the analysis and synthesis of data to form one’s current mental perspective
      the determination of a course of action based on one’s current mental perspective
      the physical playing-out of decisions,

      the Loop part means everything is fluid so Observation,Orientation and Decision can be revisited before Action,

      he was one of the main strategists for Desert Storm,

      Cummings sees the UK GOV/Civil Service as still living in paper and pen age and force it into the fast changing cyber age.

    36. kapelmeister says:

      Boris Johnson didn’t even tweet congratulations to Carlaw on his election. No mention. That’s how important Scotland is to Johnson.

    37. Golfnut says:

      @ Meg Merrilees.
      The Yes movement has in essence outgrown the SNP, they still hold the political reigns but their feet appear to have slipped out of the stirrups. I don’t think they realise just how ready and willing many of there members, I’m one, to confront Westminster politically and constitutionally head on.

    38. Republicofscotland says:

      On RBS attempting to drop its toxic name, NatWest took a £900 million charge for mis-sold PPI. Of course as some have already stated RBS, started to aid the tranfer of English bribes to Scottish lords who sold out Scotland via the Act of Union.

      In reality its those who might lose their jobs that are the big losers,in all of this if RBS does exit an independent Scotland that I feel for.

      This move is not a new phenomena, Lloyds Banking Group acquired the Bank of Scotland in 2009, and retains the banks name North of the border.

      RBS destroyed the lives of many folk who ran small business, a division of RBS, also issued the infamous “Rope” memo to staff, in the context, that you sometimes just have to let customers hang themselves.

    39. Golfnut says:

      I see the UK Advocate General has responded to the team going to court on the refusal of an S30. First point that springs to mind is that there is no such thing as a ‘ Advocate General of the UK ‘. The Advocate General of Scotland was formerly Lord Reed, now president of the SP. So why was the Advcate General of England responding for the UK government. Could Johnson and Cummings be trolling Scotland. I wonder if Cummings is related to the Red Comyn, seeking revenge belatedly for his treacherous ancestor.

    40. MaggieC says:

      Chris , Great cartoon I hope there’s a hole in the bottom of that barrel and we could just put
      the “ Union “ Jack and Boris in the barrel and toss it in the sea .

    41. Colin Alexander says:

      Remember this article:


      Why has the Scottish Govt or SNP never made ANY attempt to settle the question of whether the Scottish Parliament currently has the power to legislate for an indyref?

      Answer: They don’t want the answer. In case a court rules it is within the powers of the Scottish Parliament.

      How’s that? Blame the Tories for no indyref2. It was obvious to the dogs in the street no s30 would be forthcoming.

      The SNP are playing the indy movement for the trusting mugs that they are.

      The SNP leadership don’t want an indyref any time within the lifetime of the current Scottish Parliament. They are looking to 2021 and seeking another mandate to scratch on the walls at woke cult HQ, five-bar gate style to keep to try and keep tally as the excuse to get them another five years of colonial woke rule.

    42. Joe says:

      Whining liberal remainer fannies, SNP cultists and the pan sexual multireligious, open borders, multicultural champagne socialist, white priviledge fighting Labour tribe will soon be joined in their crying by people who voted for a liar and expected honesty. Is it any wonder i come across as an arrogant cnt?

    43. Ottomanboi says:

      Carlaw, SNP evangelical faith cult…at least nationalists have a faith and principles.
      Tory Unionism will bare its fat fundament to all comers.
      The catamite of Brit politics.
      Principles? What’s them?

    44. Lochside says:

      ‘Those who do not remember the past are condemned to repeat it’..George Santayana, the Spanish Philosopher.

      Scotland is a country isolated from its past by Imperial design imposed by England and its Caledonian collaborators since 1707.
      The illegal ‘Union’ aided and abetted by English spies such as Daniel Defoe bribed the bankrupt Aristocratic cartel running Scotland. Trading England’s debt for these despicable tra*tors’ own losses and leaving the Scottish people with a burden lasting 300 years right up to the present.

      Meanwhile, the Stuart carpetbagger Jamie the Saxt.or as he preferred 1st of ‘Britain’, placed his new English forces on the border to enforce this arranged marriage. The Border where he was finally able to subjugate the Border clans and ‘encourage ‘ them to ‘plant’ Ulster and seed the Irish troubles.

      The Presbyterian inspired uprisings in Scotland at the time of Union; the same people who attacked the weak Church of Scotland which bowed to implementing the English Bibles and the forcing of Bishops. The war of 1638 when our army forced James to crawl to the English Parliament for money and arms. The spark that lit the ‘English’ Civil War. A war in which Scotland participated and which yet again demonstrated its divided self: the Presbyterian armies switched sides against Cromwell ( Johnson) when he executed the Monarch, and by doing so he broke the Scottish people’s Sovereign covenant with the monarch who embodied said sovereignty. Cromwell turned on his erstwhile allies and crushed the Scots at Dunbar and massacred more people in Dundee than the butchery of Drogheda.

      The 1820 rebellion ‘Scotland free or a desert’..Thomas Muir, the martyrs Baird, Hardie and Wilson, crushed again by treachery. The disproportionate losses of Scottish war dead in WW1 (140,000 OUT OF 700,000 uk); the sacrifice of the Highland Division at St Valery in June 1940 at the same time of the ‘glorious rescue of Dunkirk’. Right up to the present with the grand theft of our seas and our oil and the continuing depopulation of our young, talented and deportation of europeans replaced by RUK no voting colonial minded retirees.

      Most Scots are unaware of most of this history. There is a major football team in Glasgow whose fans are totally unaware of their religious identification with a monarch who is a usurper of their own identity….once the Williamite succession took root the Alien Act reduced their forebears to second class ‘Britons’ and one third of the Irish who were starved to death by Mother England were ‘Prods’. Less than a hundred years it took to drive nearly a quarter of a million Presbyterian ‘Ulster Scots’ out to the US where they fought as an identifiable hegemonic group against the hated ‘Crown’…such irony..yet how many know here or in Norn Iron?

      Because our ‘Leaders’ the SNP, have ignored this history, as ‘nationalist’ and focused on virtue signalling, and more importantly completely missing the point of our political ideology rooted in Presbyterian sovereignty of the people, itself originating back through pre Reformation to clan chiefs being trustees of power not owners and the Declaration of Arbroath…We are left scrabbling about ‘begging’ for recognition from a modern Cromwellian State. One that will prove as implacable as the original one was.

      We must cast aside all cowardly defeatist attitudes towards the ancient oppressor, England. The sociopathic state that never quits in its relentless history of conquest militarily or economically over other nations. Their bogus institutions of Westminster, Supreme Court must be ignored by our ‘Leaders’ who must come from Civil Scotland, as the SNP have proven themselves liars and weak deceivers of our people. The AUOB,’YES’ movement and those radical elements, if any, in our remaining ‘institutions’ of law, church and civil society must crowd fund our claim of Right to Europe and the UN. Doing nothing until 2021 is abject surrender

    45. Dr Jim says:

      Jackboot Capstan is an honourable man and every business he’s been a part of that’s gone into liquidation can testify to that

      He used to parrot David Camerons words then he parroted Theresa May’s words now he parrots Boris Johnsons words and inbetween those words he parroted Ruth Davidson’s words

      He’s a typical used Ford Fiesta salesman using the language of many careless owners

    46. manandboy says:

      As the recently elected PM, Alexander Boris De Pfeffel Johnson is now charged with continuing the same neo-liberal legacy which has been carefully protected by every Prime Minister since Margaret Thatcher.
      That legacy is simply to continue to transfer taxpayer’s cash to the Wealthy Elites, beginning with the Queen and all the members of both the immediate and the extended Royal family. Then, to the aristocracy and so on.
      This is the purpose behind the insane Irish Sea Bridge. Like the failed Garden Bridge across the Thames, the Bridge over a million tons of high explosives will ‘require’ an extensive feasibility investigation by Tory donors in the consultancy world and costing many tens of millions of pounds in eye-watering fees and charges.
      The project will then be abandoned for one ‘reason’ or another, with yet another large transfer of public money to the private pockets of the Establishment and the Ruling Class.
      You can bet your house on it.

      In the next few weeks we will be told of yet another similar project in the same vein. We can but wonder what it will be, but it will simply be the next of many ‘money transfers’ which will continue over the next five years of the Johnson Premiership. Then, the neo-liberal legacy will pass to whoever follows, and on it goes.

      And the gap between the rich and the poor will expand, in both directions. The Empire lives on.

    47. Ottomanboi says:

      A word to the SNP and its ‘leadership’. Hello! Are you still there?
      In organizational behavior and industrial/organizational psychology, proactivity or proactive behavior by individuals refers to anticipatory, change-oriented and self-initiated behavior in situations. Proactive behavior involves acting in advance of a future situation, rather than just reacting. It means taking control and making things happen rather than just adjusting to a situation or waiting for something to happen.

    48. Republicofscotland says:

      Jackson Carlaw CBE, and how he must relish his obedience gong title, has had his old 2014 deleted blog resurrected, and what he though of the players in the 2014 referendum is there for all to see.

      You might be surprised at what Jackson thought of Sturgeon back then.

    49. Republicofscotland says:

      Re my above comment, I’d imagine that even Carlaw himself, must be taken aback that we haven’t really made any significant progress on the independence front since 2014.

      Sure the polls have moved slightly in our favour, but one would’ve thought that Sturgeon would’ve, other than being cute enough to continually get her party re-elected again and again moved us much closer to the independence finishing line.

      Sadly, polls aside we don’t seem to be moving that way under her leadership, during one of the most uncertain and turbulent times in English politics, and even though we have countless mandates, commissions and a currrency plan, independence is as far away as it ever was.

    50. cirsium says:

      @Lochside, 6.10
      A call to arms. I like it. As Meg Merrilees said at 2.02, we have to have a national movement

    51. Clapper57 says:

      @ Lochside @ 6.10pm

      Interesting and very good comment .

    52. Ian Brotherhood says:

      @Lochside –

      Hear hear.

      Perhaps one of the most frequent Catch-22 arguments running through the history of this place has been ‘SNP is the only vehicle’ versus ‘SNP doesn’t really want indy’.

      It’s all come into sharper relief since the GE and ‘brexit’, but the basic argument remains the same. Those of us who have become deeply suspicious of SNP hierarchy motives and methods have to also acknowledge that it remains our best hope, but it’s clear that we’ll have to make more of an effort ourselves to get the party in reasonable shape for the final move(s). Right now, it’s all over the fuckin place.

      There *is* stuff we can do. Perhaps it was in the previous thread, but I did suggest that folk consider helping those opposing the GRA reforms. As general knowledge of the issue increases, so does opposition. But someone here pointed out that the SNP can’t and won’t change tack on this because the NEC members are elected internally (at conference) and the TRA representation is powerful. So, the only way to change policy is to change the members on the NEC, and that can only be done by SNP members pushing potential candidates who are prepared – like Joan McAlpine and Joanna Cherry – to stick their necks out and take the kind of intimidation we’ve become so used to seeing.

      Many of those most involved with the TRA clique has been meeting in Perth. Rev’s twitter has several images of the gathering of SYI, and it looks like less than 50 people. It’s quite incredible that this bunch has managed to cause such havoc. They simply have to be dealt with before the SNP can regain the trust it’s been bleeding for so long.

    53. Tinto Chiel says:

      I smiled when I read Lochside’s description of England @6.10:

      “The sociopathic state that never quits in its relentless history of conquest militarily or economically over other nations.”

      Coincidentally, I had been thinking recently about why our neighbours have produced rulers of such rapacity, ruthlessness and endless entitlement (e.g. William The Bastard, Edward I, Elizabeth, Henry VIII, Cromwell, etc.). I came to no definite conclusion, other than it is a sad fact, affecting the three other nations of Britain and Ireland quite catastrophically.

      Even a large and powerful country like France had to struggle for over a hundred years to get free from its constant expansionism, which eventually achieved its apotheosis in the greed, brutality and exploitation of the British Empire.

      The SNP leadership doesn’t seem to understand that playing nice and observing WM rules will get them nowhere with such people: all it does is sap the morale of independence supporters who may feel we have been led up a dead end by the FM’s “Save England from Itself” Brexit strategy, (which I believe she had no mandate from us to do) and who may well not turn out in sufficient numbers in 2021 because they feel totally disillusioned by the direction of the independence party. Remember 2017, when the I-Word was hardly mentioned in the manifesto?

      I hate to go all Breeksy on you all (‘cos he can do it a lot better than me) but when we have the Excalibur of sovereignty in our scabbard and someone like Joanna Cherry QC thinks it’s a winner, I’m at a loss as to why this question hasn’t been put to the test during the last three and a half wasted years.

      Sovereignty should be asserted, not sought cap in hand for permission to exercise.

      Bojo, his would-be wee Caligula pal Cummings and the real power behind the throne whom Nana mentioned earlier today will never respond to such feeble behaviour.

      Good to see you posting again, Lochside.

    54. Ian Brotherhood says:

      FFS, this place used to be buzzing on Saturday nights.

      Where is abody!?!

      *stamps feet and drinks scrumpy simultaneously*


    55. TheBuchanLoony says:

      Why go to the courts if we don’t need to…the EU will get us our s30…and before the end of this year.

    56. Colin Alexander says:

      The Bishops War c.1639 happened during the reign of Charles 1.

      The political union of 1707 happened under the reign of Queen Anne.

      The monarchs were (all Scottish titles):
      James VI,
      Charles I (son of James VI),
      Charles II (son of Charles I),
      James VII ( younger brother of Charles II),
      William II (Scotland) and Mary II (joint monarchs),( Mary II was elder daughter of James VII)
      Queen Anne ( younger daughter of James VII)

      James Francis Edward Stewart was Anne’s Catholic half-brother (aka The Old Pretender), He never became king, as the throne then went to George 1 of Hanover (as he was a Protestant).

      The current monarch, Elizabeth, is of the house of Saxe-Coburg and Gotha, but the family changed the name to Windsor during WW1 to sound English, when London was attacked by German Gotha bomber warplanes.

    57. kapelmeister says:

      Angela Rayner’s going to “live in Scotland……if I have to” in order to help Labour win the Holyrood elections.

      Scot Labour’s got so many problems that Clare Rayner couldn’t help, never mind Angela Rayner.

    58. Dr Jim says:

      @kapelmeister 9:42pm

      At least we’ll know where they got the one vote from

    59. Rm says:

      The Scottish Government is no different to any other Government around the world, they’re all pushing the globalisation philosophy which the top leaders are taught at University, they have their agenda bit by bit it’s been forced on the world by all the Governments, everything just seems to happen the majority of the population don’t even know it’s happening, whose behind it all, it’s been created from somewhere, it maybe has to be because the worlds population is getting to big, the people of Scotland who vote SNP don’t know what their party leaders are thinking, one thing for sure they don’t seem to do much about pushing for Independence.

    60. Dr Jim says:

      Because Elizabeth 1 had manly features an adams apple and refused to marry and have an heir to the throne it was rumoured for many years she was a man especially as she left strict instructions her clothing was never to be removed from her body after her death nor an autopsy carried out

      These rumours abounded at the time because she could outride and outdo most men in most things regarding anything requiring the physical

      Historians say it’s *probably* not true

    61. Colin Alexander says:

      This is one the best essays on the formation of the Union that I have read:

      I recommend you bookmark it.

    62. Simon Curran says:

      Just caught the latest British army advert on the tele. Guess what features a drunk Scotsman! Nice to keep peddling the stereotypes.

    63. Ian Brotherhood says:

      @Dr Jim –

      I remember reading an account written by a French diplomat who had been given an audience with Liz The First. His description was terrifying – apparently she had the white make-up but was also bare-chested.

    64. Colin Alexander says:

      Law Society of Scotland “The Journal” article about the legal status of the Union.

      An “international treaty” in law.

      This was authored by David M Walker a former regius professor in law at Glasgow University, who, very unfortunately, died in January 2014.

      It’s another one worth bookmarking, in my opinion:

    65. kapelmeister says:

      Dawn Butler decked out in a tartan jacket and tartan skirt at the Labour hustings in Glasgow.

      Because yeah, donning tartan in Scotland worked so well for Corbyn in the 2019 GE.

    66. Dr Jim says:

      But but, we all wear tartan don’t we, I wear mine in my tin bath so it can get a good cleaning what with the mud and cowpat and all, plus it dampens down the smell of the drink in the morning before I go out slaughtering the badgers for my dinner

    67. John from Fife says:

      Just came across on BBC parliament channel Nicola Sturgeon answering questions during her recent trip to the EU and I was disappointed to hear her say again that while not ruling out a non UK approved section 30 referendum she definitely wanted Westminster’s approval before she would go ahead with one. What is she frightened of.

    68. Dorothy Devine says:

      Ian Brotherhood , I congratulate you on being a man who can multi task!

    69. Kangaroo says:

      Colin A. Thanks for referencing that legal reference.

      Perhaps Forward as One should have asked for an opinion on

      “Does the EU Withdrawal Agreement breach the essential Articles contained in the Treaty of Union ?”

      My opinion is that it does, but the question remains when does it “effectively” cause the breach? Is it
      a) 1st Feb 2020 when the UK left the EU, or
      b) 1st Jan 2021 when the effect of the Withdrawal Agreement is absolute.

      If it is a breach, as I contend, then perhaps it is not effective until 1st Jan 2021 at which point Independence happens automatically and can only be overturned by the Scottish people voting to reinstate the Union.

    70. HYUFD says:

      Kangaroo One of the most ridiculous arguments I have ever read, the Act of Union was signed over 250 years before the EU was even created

    71. Kangaroo says:

      Kangaroo @10:47pm

      I should have added that, if I am correct, then the best course of action is to effectively sit on our hands for 11 months, whilst simultaneously increasing the Yes vote.

    72. Kangaroo says:


      Come back to me with rational arguments when you have read the Treaty of Union and the Northern Ireland protocol.

      Your point that theTreaty was written a while ago is relevant how exactly?

    73. robertknight says:

      Johnfromfife@ 10:32

      “What is she frightened of”

      Newspaper headlines.

    74. Golfnut says:

      @ Hyufd.

      The Acts of Union, because there are two are the internal mechanisms used to bring the Treaty of Union into law, both the Kingdom of England’s constitutional law and the Kingdom of Scotland’s constitutional law. The ‘Treaty’ was signed by two Independent Sovereign
      England is bound by the Treaty under the same Articles Union as Scotland. To breach any part of the Treaty by either side can trigger withdrawal if the aggrieved chooses to do so.

    75. Golfnut says:

      @ Colin Alexander.

      It’s a must read for anyone interested in the Treaty.
      One of the main points I have taken from this is that just because Westminster does something doesn’t mean it has the legal authority to do it.
      The Withdrawal Bill falls right in there.

    76. Colin Alexander says:


      I think one of the big issues of the years has been that England as the UK has tried to treat the Treaty of Union as English domestic legislation, when it isn’t.

      The comparison given in the essay, (which it turns out is very topical, since today’s news reports are saying the UK Govt wants to abolish the Human Rights Act 1998), is that…

      Hold on, I’ll explain this first of all. The UK signed up to the Council of Europe, which has 47 members. It is a human rights organisation. It is the source of the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR). The ECHR is an international convention.

      The UK signed up to the ECHR and so has given the right of direct legal reliance in court on the ECHR via the Human Rights Act 1998 which has much of the same Human Rights Articles as the ECHR, such as Article 8, a right to a private and family life.

      The UK can repeal or amend the Human Rights Act 1998. They could even withdraw from the Council of Europe but, they can’t repeal the ECHR, as it is an international agreement which other countries are signed up to, so not under the control of UK Parliament.

      Similarly, the legal essay discusses that UK Parliament CANNOT amend the Treaty of Union ( except where the Treaty gives it explicit permission to do so), as it is an international treaty that was negotiated between TWO sovereign states: Scotland and England. Yet, the UK state’s UK Parliament HAS amended the Treaty in areas which are not supposed to open to amendment. Thus, has unlawfully changed the terms of the Treaty when it has no legal power to do so, in international law.

      So, that’s like the UK Govt not only repealing or amending the Human Rights Act 1998 ( UK legislation) but also legislating to repeal the ECHR which is an international convention / treaty which UK Parliament has no legal power to repeal or amend.

    77. Kangaroo says:

      Golfnut @11:12

      Your correct IMHO. However its not the Withdrawal Bill that is defeated. The twist is that the UK Parliament has “legally” instituted a customs regime for Northern Ireland which is different from Great Britain and therefore breaches the 1707 Treaty rendering the 1707 Treaty null and void. This becomes an absolute breach on 1st Jan 2021 and if necessary any Sovereign Scot can make the case, it does not have to be the SG but that woukd be the best forum.

    78. Kangaroo says:

      Colin A

      Your de facto correct when you say that the UK Parliament has tried to treat the Treaty as UK Domestic legislation when it isn’t.

      It has always been the English position that they have control over the whole of the UK and, de facto(in fact), they have through weight of numbers. However de jure(in law) the Treaty persists and it is the only document that binds the two Kingdoms.
      So IMHO on 1st Jan 2021 the two Kingdoms of Scotland and England once again become separate entities and the United Kingdom dissolves.
      The split of assets will be interesting, particularly in regard to foreign places that are still under British jurisdiction but were acquired after 1 May 1707. Gibraltar, Cyprus, Diego Garcia to name but three examples.

    79. Famous15 says:

      The Treaty of Union is the answer.

      BS by unionists for years that Scotland was extinguished is just that.

      Lord Cooper,Prof Walker,Sir John McCormick et al too numerous to mention
      have emphasised that a Treaty is a Treaty and no amount of Unionist politicking can override it.

      These are legal authorities whether in obiter dicta,learned writings or case law they all unite to provide an overwhelming legal case ,if one were needed,to affirm that a Treaty if breached only requires the party of the first part to declare the breach and require the ending of the Treaty. I would expect the Scottish Parliament to be the voice of that wish,whom failing a referendum of the Scottish peoples would also affirm such a wish. That referendum ,if required,would only require to be conducted fairly and would not require the “permission” of the UK Government. All legal all good in international law.

    80. Colin Alexander says:

      As regards the EU,

      The UK signed up to the Treaty of Lisbon (which I believe) turned the EC into the EU. Article 50 of the Lisbon Treaty says that notice to exit from the EU must be approved in accordance with the constitution of the member state.

      UK State said the constitution of the UK State is that parliament is sovereign, so parliament decided on that.

      However, as we know, there was an advisory referendum ( not binding on a sovereign parliament) and Scotland voted Remain.

      But, I argue, there is no UK constitution: there are Scottish and English constitutions. In the English constitution UK Parliament is sovereign (Crown / Lords / Commons). In the Scottish constitution the people themselves have common or popular sovereignty (not the Crown, Lords or Commons).

      The UK State and EU have accepted UK Parliament’s votes to leave the EU as Article 50 having been triggered in accordance with the UK constitution.

      However, I’ve always argued, as the people of Scotland remain sovereign, a referendum decision, especially on a constitutional matter is not an expression of opinion, it is a binding decision by a sovereign people.

      So, with regard to the EU referendum, Scotland decided to Remain in the EU. The UK state (and the FM and Scottish Government) breached the constitution law of Scotland by overruling the sovereign people. In my view of Scots Law, there is no sovereignty of parliament: the people are sovereign.

      So, the Article 50 vote to leave was not in accordance with the constitutionS of the UK. It was only in accordance with the constitution of ENGLAND.

      And, the SNP, our champions of asserting “the people of Scotland are sovereign” to my knowledge, has NEVER raised any constitutional challenge based on sovereignty. They did go to court but, chose only to make a challenge on devolution Sewel Convention despite having previously asserting in the 2014 White Paper that the convention is only a convention, so strongly implying they already knew it was not legally enforceable despite the Smith Commission.

      That is part of the reason I repeatedly criticise the colonial administrator SNP.

    81. Ian Brotherhood says:

      @Dorothy Devine (10.40) –

      Thank you kindly for your compliment, but I am duty-bound to report you to the site moderator for blatant sexism.

    82. HYUFD says:

      Kangaroo The 1707 Act of Union united the Parliaments of England and Scotland, was written a century before Ireland joined the Union, let alone Northern Ireland and over 250 years before the UK joined the EEC.

      So Brexit and the arrangements for Northern Ireland are irrelevant to the 1707 Act of Union

    83. Kangaroo says:

      Colin A

      UK Parliamentary Sovereingty was only ever a convention. Under English Law the Monarch delegated their Sovereignty to the English Parliament, however that parliament was dissolved in 1707 and hence the Monarch regained that Sovereignty.

      The people of Scotland have been Sovereign since the Declaration of Arbroath of 1320 and the then Popes agreement confirmed by later letter.

      The EU Withdrawal Agreement Act S38(i) asserts that “the Parliament of the UK is Sovereign”, however you can’t obtain something legally that is not yours in the first place, eg a stolen car does not belong to the thief just because he says it’s his. So the only Sovereignty that was legally granted to the UK Parliament by S38(i) was the English Monarchs and she did this by providing Royal Assent to the Bill.

      For “legal” clarity
      a) The UK Constituition is the 1707 Treaty of Union.
      b) both the English and Scottish legal traditions remain extant and have not been annulled by the UK Constituition, hence the reason why Scottish Law declared the proroguing of Parliament to be unlawful, whilst English Law did not.

      Agreed that referendums in Scotland are binding decisions as the people are Sovereign. That being the case a consultative referendum is an absurdity.

      EU Withdrawal stuff. This only had to be legal according to the conventions of the UK. The UK being the member state a majority vote in UK Parliament was, I believe, what was required. I assume the majority of Scots MPs voted Nay to the Bill, no matter it was driven through.

    84. HYUFD says:

      Golfnut Westminster is the supreme sovereign body for England and Scotland and voted for the Withdrawal Agreement, Scottish and English courts still function separately

    85. Kangaroo says:


      The 1707 Treaty united the Kingdom of England and the Kingdom of Scotland as the United Kingdom. The KoE included Wales and Ireland at that time.

    86. Papko says:

      @John from Fife
      “What is she frightened of.”

      Losing a referendum perhaps? or worse still winning one.

    87. HYUFD says:

      Kangaroo Scotland, England, Wales and Ireland all shared a monarch by 1707 but only England and Wales were formally united before then

    88. HYUFD says:

      The people of Scotland also voted 55% to stay in the UK in the ‘once in a generation’ (in Salmond’s words) 2014 referendum.

      Scottish voters also voted 54% for Unionist parties at the 2019 general election well after the Brexit vote

    89. manandboy says:

      HYUFD – pissing in Wings tea.

      Pissing on Scotland.

      Over and over again.

      Time to put a stop to it.

      And don’t give me the free speech bit.

      Free speech here goes with responsibilities towards Scotland.

      All I hear is brainwashed BritNat hostility.

      Keep the piss out the tea.

    90. Famous15 says:

      HYFUD if the saying of it by you had any weight as aTory Councillor in Essex then what you painfully spout would be worrysome but the world is not listening to your anglocentric imperialism. International Law considers the law pertaining to the countries in alliance.

      Scotland is legally equal to your country of England in reference to the Treaty of Union.

      The only issue is how Scotland expresses its will. Most would accept the majority in the Scottish Parliament but if not a referendum conducted fairly under the auspices of the Scottish Parliament would be more than enough.

      Your repetition of once in a generation is as old as Boris Jonson being dead in a ditch and as much-use.

    91. Kangaroo says:

      HYFUD @1:09am

      Your man Henry numero 8 would disagree as he was King of Ireland following the Crown in Ireland Act of 1542, but Ireland was part of the English Kings Dominion long before that.

      HYFUD @1:12am

      Scottish people can vote for whom they like, it does not mean we can’t change our minds. They can reassess the situation as and when the facts change or even if they don’t, that’s democracy.

    92. twathater says:

      @ Lochside 6.10pm A great read also Colin A and Kangaroo and others apart from the FUD thanks for your posts and links

      I am grateful that Martin Keatings and FORWARD AS ONE are taking the legal challenge forward to clarify that Scots have the right to conduct a referendum on independence BUT I believe it would be better in the longer term clarifying the SOVEREIGNTY OF SCOTS through the international courts , we already have it ratified and registered in the records of Hansard in wastemonster , so their WM arguments are considerably weakened as would be their opposition , thereafter there could be no argument that Scots can hold any number of referendums for any subjects they choose

    93. Breeks says:


      I’m curious about Geoffrey Cox being sacked as Attorney General to be replaced by Suella Braverman. I don’t know the first thing about her, but Cox seemed an ardent Brexiteer who was muttering in a pro-Boris way about re-examining how Supreme Court judges were appointed.

      I wonder if Downing Street couldn’t find a room big enough to contain the two planet sized egos of Johnson and Cox simultaneously, or whether Cox got the heave-ho after Joanna Cherry did to Cox over Prorogation, what Karen Gillan did to Ryan Reynolds over trash talking. 🙂

    94. Kangaroo says:

      Breeks @7:15am

      I think Geoffrey Cox would be too strong a personality for Bojo and Cummings and they need a more compliant stooge. According to media sources Cox may be going to head up a review of the “Judges” as they are apparently straying into political areas.

      This is yet another songbook straight out of the 1930s.

    95. Sinky says:

      Arch Unionist Neil Oliver venting his spleen at this bunch in Scottsh government in Sunday Times.

    96. Margaret E says:

      Suella Braverman was Suella Fernandes before her marriage, worked for Matthew Elliott law firm in New York, was very high up in the Brexit campaign (Brexitcentral). She seems remarkably ill-equipped professionally for the job of Attorney General, in fact one would be hard put to it to find someone less qualified even in the current set.

    97. Joe says:

      Seeing a lot of history being talked about here. This is an extremely relevant documentary that anyone here should find interesting. Its a bit old and from mainly US perspective but the subject matter is as relevant now as ever. Strongly recommend watching in full

    98. HYUFD says:

      Twathater Of course there would,given international courts did sod all when the Spanish Civil Guard were clubbing and arresting Catalans for voting in an independence referendum the Spanish government ruled illegal, the idea they would do anything about Westminster ruling out indyref2 is absurd

    99. HYUFD says:

      Kangaroo Ireland was not formally part of the UK until the 1801 Act of Union, before then Ireland had its own Parliament. Scotland shared a monarch with England, Ireland and Wales from the early 1600s but again kept its own Parliament and did not formally create the UK until 1707.

    100. HYUFD says:

      Famous15 A majority of Scots oppose indyref2 this year and if the SNP fail to win a majority at next year’s Holyrood elections.
      Even if the SNP win a majority next year a plurality of Scots do not want indyref2 straight away.

    101. Ottomanboi says:

      RBS group is rebranding as NatWest group.
      That Scottish bit’s a no no. NatWest aka National Westminster pukka English moniker.
      Next step moving the hq to guess where?
      Scottish national powerlessness strikes again.
      Being chewed up and spat out by the English is becoming the national quirk.
      This really has got to stop.
      Anybody got a spine?
      Could we borrow it?
      Some people still rabbiting on about that ancient Treaty of Union. I can well imagine what Boris & Dom would do with that.
      There we agree. Appeals to international community did not stop the illegal US invasion of Iraq either. Rather naïve this belief that the ‘rule of law’ will put Scotland aright. It won’t, only the Scots with much more effect than employed so far, can do that.

    102. HYUFD says:

      Ottomanboi RBS branch offices will retain the RBS name it is only the group name that will become Natwest

    103. PacMan says:

      John from Fife says:15 February, 2020 at 10:32 pm

      Just came across on BBC parliament channel Nicola Sturgeon answering questions during her recent trip to the EU and I was disappointed to hear her say again that while not ruling out a non UK approved section 30 referendum she definitely wanted Westminster’s approval before she would go ahead with one. What is she frightened of.

      The strategy of the SNP over the last 30 odd years has been independence in Europe. It is obvious that if we become independent we would get back into Europe as long as independence is gained by legal and constitutional means, as much as that can be in a state that has no written constitution.

      It might be worth considering with her dealings with European officials and politicians have left her a tad too cautious to ensure that independence is achieved in a way there isn’t even a hint of illegality to it that can be exploited by opponents of independence to try and derail entry back into Europe?

    104. Rm says:

      Jackass Carlaw what an A- – – – – – e , people like him that have put Scotland where it is just now, there must be conservatives who want to stay conservatives but are proud to be Scots and would like Independence, if only one or two high profile Scottish Conservative Buisness People who can see the great future Scotland will have being Independent, for Buisness and working people throughout Scotland. Jackass Carlaw a Scotsman? What a laugh ha ha ha ha ha ha

    105. Effijy says:

      Is this the lull before the storm?

      Posts have become fewer and further between.
      This cartoon by Chris has only added 100 posts in 26 hours.

      We seem to know the destination we require but don’t seem
      To know exactly where we are or which way we are facing.

      I have rejected the latest SNP letter requesting more money,
      Unlike previous requests as I can’t see where and what the money
      Is going to do for my immediate desire for independence.

      All the stars are aligned for me with every part of the Indy Ref vow broken,
      Being dragged out of the EU against our will, yet another Tory government
      That Scotland didn’t vote for, a bugling prime minister who had made it clear
      He hates the Scots and who would always invest in England before Scotland
      And N Ireland who voted Remain like Scotland gets a special deal but we don’t
      Come in for consideration.

      A Serial Liar and Adulterer, a man who used physical restraint on his girl friend to an extent
      Where the Police were summoned, a man accused of groping women while he worked and a
      Man who obviously had relations with an American blond woman as long as he provided her
      With UK business opportunities she had no right to access.

      What more could we be hoping for to justify leaving the corrupt and fascist country next door after 300 years of abuse, insults and complete disregard?

    106. Craig Murray says:


      It is important always to remember that opponents of Independence from a country which is not an EU member state, will have no traction at all in Brussels. Whereas Scotland as an accession state will.

    107. jfngw says:

      Andrew Tickell giving comprehensive review of Jackson Carlaw’s history in Sunday National, I wouldn’t say it was complimentary.

      I see the cut and paste wanker from Essex is back.

    108. Colin Alexander says:

      @ Craig Murray

      The point you make is a very valid one.

      Yet, Nicola Sturgeon prioritised keeping the UK as part of the EU, thus giving the UK in the EU the power of veto over an indy Scotland’s application for EU membership. This seemed very strange for a party that asserts a policy of indy Scotland in the EU.

      Of course, we now know Nicola and the SNP leadership had no intention of independence for Scotland. So, they wanted to keep Scotland as part of the UK in the EU.

      So, the issue of a UK veto over Scotland’s EU application would never have arisen.

    109. Republicofscotland says:

      “It might be worth considering with her dealings with European officials and politicians have left her a tad too cautious to ensure that independence is achieved in a way there isn’t even a hint of illegality to it that can be exploited by opponents of independence to try and derail entry back into Europe?”

      Illegality, Johnson will never sanction another S30 order, the last indyref was too close to call for them. Scottish independence will need to be taken not given, Christ how many times do the likes of the Rev and Craig Murray need to tell folk this.

      Westminster won’t willingly give up a third of its land mass and all the assets that go with it. Its international recognition that we need not Westminster recognition, for as I say that’s a non starter.

      How many years are you prepared to sit back and wait for Johnson to say okay have your indyref, five years? Or if he gets a second tenure ten year? Or if the Tories extend their reign to fifteen years? Then what?

      And what about the damage the Tories will do to Scotland between now and then, would we even be in a position to hold a indyref by then.

      Scottish independence MUST be taken, for it will never willingly be given.

    110. Ottomanboi says:

      For fiduciary reasons the RBS style will be retained in Scotland but the bank’s old Scottish identity is being sloughed in favour of a City one.

    111. jfngw says:

      I will pick one point from Mr Tickell I have an issue with, he makes the comment about middle class chino wearers. I wear chinos and I assure him you will find few more common man than me, you don’t find many middle class people who grew up in Niddrie, Edinburgh, many still give the impression that a unpleasant odour is around if I mention it.

    112. jfngw says:

      I suspect the Tories are not going to scrap the licence fee, they are merey ensuring the BBC stays in line. Expect the BBC to get even wrse in its bid for survival. It would be better to close itself down that become even more despised.

      The above does not relate to Scotland of course, that ship has sailed. You can tell by the number of BT people that have been commissioned by the BBC in Scotland which side of the bed you should be on if you want to work for the BBC.

    113. Ottomanboi says:

      @Effijy 10:27
      It is high time we rose to this challenge, however with an official leadership which appears to be functioning in a different universe and according to a conventional set of rules the challenge may need to be taken up by others with more imagination.
      Scots, collectively, have been treated like minions for three hundred years yet many are in denial.
      Just how far are people prepared to take this cause.
      Logically it ought to be ‘no limits’ but that is a step too far for some and that ‘some’ is a significant element in the yes camp.
      Effectively, it is only the native failure of confidence that hinders.

    114. Willie says:


      Not surprised that any coverage of Jackson Carlaw would be less than complimentary.

      He is a used car salesmen who presided over the failure of two car dealers companies. Wylies and First Ford. Not exactly a mark of distinction.running a business. But there are plenty of private school educated dummies in the Tory party.

      One cannot therefore help think that as the time goes with Carlaw as Tory leader he will be increasingly exposed as a buffoon totally out of his depth.

    115. gus1940 says:

      Carcrash seems to have overdosed on the Verbal Diaorrhea Pills before going on to Brewer this am.

    116. PacMan says:

      Craig Murray says:16 February, 2020 at 10:28 am


      It is important always to remember that opponents of Independence from a country which is not an EU member state, will have no traction at all in Brussels. Whereas Scotland as an accession state will.

      True but the lies and misinformation about our unique sovereign rights in an unitary state could be exploited by elements in EU members states, the most obvious being Spain, for their own ends. While, it is doubtful that in any circumstances Spain would veto an independent Scotland gaining entry to the EU, they might use it to gain leverage which would give the EU complications that they don’t want or need. If the SNP meticulously ensured all the i’s were dotted and the t’s crossed, there will not be fear of that.

      However, that is just an opinion. We just don’t know what has been discussed by SG officials and politicians with their EU counterparts. I respect the EU and believe they are honourable and trust their word but we have to remember that they have other considerations in regards to us both within the EU and towards it’s relationships with the UK as well.

      Saying that though, the EU might just give an independent Scotland fast-tracked entry to weaken the UK if the Tories go ahead with their rhetoric by playing hard-ball and being a ruthless competitor with them or the Tories allow the UK to be used as a proxy of the US in their rivalry with the EU.

    117. PacMan says:

      Ottomanboi says: 16 February, 2020 at 11:11 am

      For fiduciary reasons the RBS style will be retained in Scotland but the bank’s old Scottish identity is being sloughed in favour of a City one.

      The British press had never liked the RBS, an upstart from ‘up north’ coming down and being one of the big boys. This really ramped up by the 2008 bailout and has got to the point where the brand is so toxic that a name change was inevitable. I’m surprised that it has taken so long.

      I’m constantly surprised given the brand recognition Scotland has throughout the world that the business community seems to focus on growth south of the border but of course, those who advocate that in the business community aren’t representative of it.

    118. Ottomanboi says:

      @Craig Murray
      Admire your faith in the EU but given the existential problems the organization is currently facing and failing to fix, Scotland is way down the list of ‘must do’.
      The EU lost its way when it was seduced by the bling of the anglo-saxon economic model, effectively it ceased to be European and became just another player in the globalization game. In that it is not alone, India, China, Japan also sold their souls to this whores’ bazaar and are at leisure reaping the bitter societal and cultural harvest.
      I believe in the European concept but have little faith that those currently in charge can rescue the idea. It will require the paradigm shift of a totally new generation who re-pose the question “What does it mean to be European?”
      A philosophical question. Où sont les intellectuels d’antan? Transfixed by the latest pap from NetFlix?

    119. HYUFD says:

      Ottomanboi Natwest used to be a building society, it never had an investment bank unlike RBS

    120. HYUFD says:

      Ignore my previous comment, was thinking of Abbey National

    121. HYUFD says:

      Pacman In any case the EU is hardly going to invade the UK to try and force Westminster to grant indyref2

    122. Ottomanboi says:

      I commend this history of the National Westminster Bank plc to you.
      Have a good day!

    123. Ottomanboi says:

      BritState with its dream of BritEmpire#2 will be even more a haven for dodgy money, buccaneering and privateering and casino style capitalism.
      On an individual level this seduces the mega rich and the gullible. Collectively, it signals the worst of private wealth, public squalor, societal fracture and cultural decline.
      Scotland can and must do better for its citizens.

    124. HYUFD says:

      Ottomanboi Will have a look

    125. HYUFD says:

      In the Republic of Ireland, Fianna Fail, Fine Gael and the Greens set to form a grand coalition government to exclude Sinn Fein

    126. kapelmeister says:

      Hi, Jackson Carlaw here. The only way Scots can prevent indyref2 is for a majority to vote for parties opposed to it. But even if a majority vote for indyref2, Uncle Boris will just say no. Quite right too.

      I’m Jackson Carlaw. I don’t do logic. I don’t do consistency. I don’t do democracy. I don’t need to. I’ve got some here in a bottle from 2014. A good year for democracy, that was.

      I’m an unashamed idiot. I’ve just been elected.
      I’m Jackson Carlaw!

    127. Effijy says:

      Laughing at HI FUD’s comment above:

      “Ignore my previous comments”

      We do! Trust me we do.

      Your homeland, Essex is quite an incredible place.
      The many have these fake teeth in stupendous white
      At £12,000 a go.
      Fake tans, tattooed eyebrows, and a mandatory dolphin
      Manicured and painted nails on hands and feet,
      Designer hand bag costing thousands and this is just the men.

      All supported on
      A £50k wage no matter how dumb your I.Q level is but as you have
      An easy London commute and they have Scotland’s revenue
      The world down there is just Lovely!


    128. Bill McLean says:

      Effijy – I live “down there” and can tell you it’s far from lovely for ordinary people. I ignore HYUFD too as i’m disappointed that he hasn’t told us why staying in this corrupt, racist, sectarian, war-mongering, class-ridden, debt-ridden, bull-shitting union is good for us.

    129. sassenach says:

      Wonder what it was that awakened FUD, again?
      He’s all over this site like a rather nasty rash.
      Is his intention to argue that Scotland should be imprisoned by him and his Essex Tories, for ever?

      Something tells me they are getting VERY worried about Indy!!

    130. jfngw says:


      You are right in the ‘if he can’t run a small car company why does he think he can run a £30bn economy’. I’ll wait for HYUFD to answer that one.

      The piece in the National goes much deeper than that, his history is of toadying to whatever leader is in place, his high admiration for Michael Howard and IDS. It would lead you to think he is a despicable character. He even picks a deputy of the same ilk, admittedly it’s a canny move, no threat there from an intellectual superior, although it’s a close call I think.

      He is a political van Klomp.

    131. jfngw says:


      You have to excuse him, he sees himself as Thomas Fairfax to Johnson’s Oliver Cromwell. the great protectors of the union. Although I think Johnson sees himself more as Churchill and may be displeased with HYUFD, forever now exiled to fight in an unwinnable council constituency (well unwinnable for him anyway).

    132. HandandShrimp says:

      Jackson Carlaw is a boon and a blessing to the independence cause. The SNP haven’t always been as sharp as they should be but they have been very fortunate in their opposition (or lack of it).

      As I recall Jackson was dead against people voting for the golden eagle as Scotland’s national bird. I think he wanted a one legged pigeon from Central Station with the motto “got any spare change”. Carlaw is terrified of anything that makes Scotland look in anyway good, interesting or self confident.

      He may muse over the word generation. If he understood politics he would do better to muse over the word opportunity.

    133. Dr Jim says:

      Show of hands from all the posters on WOS who go on to English websites to troll that country? Now would be the perfect time to be trolling England as they’re having terrible difficulty with floods and the ruining of their homes, so what an opportunity that would be for us, do we do it?

      I bet there’s none here, yet the troll from Epping in England floods this website daily because he thinks he has a right to Why does he think that? what kind of person or people do this?

      We Scots are apparently the bad guys yet I’m betting nobody here does that in the hope and purpose of upsetting people

      Anybody with any doubts over why this happens isn’t looking hard enough

    134. Colin Alexander says:

      Here is the infamous Annex A:

      This was written over SEVEN years ago.

      It says, among many other controversial assertions that: “2. First of all, the status of Scotland before the union of 1707 would be of little or no relevance. In particular, the Treaty of Union, considered with or without the Acts of Union, does not currently sound as a treaty in international law”.

      There is no case law or legal source quoted to support such an assertion.Contrast this with the legal opinion I referenced last night which said the Treaty of Union is a treaty in international law.

      Sturgeon says everything must be done legally. (She seems to think the Scotland Act is the only applicable law). Yet, when it comes to establishing what the law is, the tune changes to: best to settle things politically.

      Those who favour political settlement of issues without going to court, ignores the glaringly obvious reality that the UK State is openly hostile to Scotland’s independence. In effect it means, independence must be on the UK’s terms. eg Never.

      The Annex A also says: “Reversion to a previous independent state such as the pre-1707 Scottish state may not be excluded. But it normally depends on conditions that are absent here, such as the unwilling subjugation of the former state”.

      Was the subjugation of Scotland something the people of Scotland willingly agreed to?

      The union was created by a mixture of threats and bribes, including the threat of invasion if Scotland did not agree to the union.

      The SNP continue to insist everything can and will be sorted by political cooperation. I suppose that’s true to an extent: England as UK says No and Sturgeon’s SNP cooperates in colonial servitude.

    135. McDuff says:

      PacMan 10.10
      Of course when Sturgeon talks of getting UK approval it is in fact English approval as they completely dominate and rule parliament. And that really angers me.

    136. Colin Alexander says:

      Talking of Cromwell. The Richard Harris Cromwell film was on the TV other week.

      In the film, some of the Commons MPs were pro-Royalist and trying to make secret deals that favoured the monarchy.

      Then, in the film, to discourage those MPs who were sympathetic to the parliamentarians,they said: “We must think very carefully”.

      I wonder if that’s where Cameron and Queen got the line from that the Queen then used just days before the indyref vote?

    137. Dr Jim says:

      Why is England so afraid to stand on its own feet without Scotland
      Why did England relinquish control of Northern Ireland so easily
      Why does England keep talking about *their Union* when they’re happy to let one part of it go (Norn Ireland) but are terrified of allowing the other part (Scotland) the same freedom

      England is saying two different things to two different parts of *their Union* They’ve clearly told Norn Ireland (you have no money so if the EU and Ireland wants you you can leave)

      England is saying to Scotland (you can’t go because you do have money even if every last one of you wants to leave because England needs your money)

      Now they can’t continue to say they love us Boris Johnson has made that clear when he called us Vermin, plus the Internet is clogged up with people from England trolling Scotland with hate messages tyrannical rants and misinformation about England’s superiority over all things

      Some of todays regular trolls from England over on the FMs twitter keep punting the line that the SNP control the oil and the Scottish media and that’s how they stay in power
      Is that what England believes? and who told them that utter garbage and lies if they do believe it, and if they do it means they’re trolling Scotland without any knowledge of why they’re doing it except they’re outraged at people like us demanding a say on what they believe is something they own

      The thing is it doesn’t matter because the reason they troll us is because they think they have that right as part of *their* country

      Ownership is the delusion of England brainwashed into them by their own government

    138. velofello says:

      Carlaw and Wells; Leonard and {?);Rennie and Cole-Hamilton,jings. We seriously need a group to keep the SNP on it’s toes.. be it a List MSP only Indy party, or a formally organised Yes movement. We are drifting.

      Maybe the SNP should just concentrate on “running the store”. I read recently that Peter Morrell has been in his post for 21years! Hardly signs of a dynamic executive. I’ve been in the SNP for 30 years, I’m not at all content with events, meaning the absence of such.

      The AUOB provide excellent visibility, and will face up to authority intransigence, the SNP whimpers to Westminster for – an unnecessary S30 permit.

    139. jfngw says:

      @Dr Jim

      He’s not here to debate but to, as you say troll, he wants to bait people to pass the time. He has that traditional BritNat superiority that has won them so many friends around the globe. Best to ignore or just reply with nonsense.

      I only post on here, and very rarely on WGD, James Kelly & Peter A Bell site (although Mr Bell can be a bit acerbic at times).

      Pre 2014 I used to comment on the Guardian site, in fact if the handles are the same people then some still post here. Couldn’t put up with their Scotland coverage eventually (esp Severin Carroll) so dump it completely in 2016.

    140. HandandShrimp says:

      Dr Jim

      Personally I don’t see it as any of my business what goes on in an English site, or US, Dutch etc., It wouldn’t cross my mind to go and pass comment.

      I have commented on UK forums, mainly the Groaniad or international forums like the James Randi one (sceptics forum). I’m assuming there are English sites like Wings. I haven’t looked.

    141. jfngw says:

      When Johnson says he loves Scotland, I believe him, its just the people who live here he thinks are vermin. The land and resources, well that’s a different matter.

      Although they have always had a special place for your offspring when cannon fodder is needed for their interminable wars, you are once again a beloved asset. The way to leverage that asset is to keep them impoverished so, for some, fighting is basically your only means of income.

    142. jfngw says:


      One of the reasons I believe we may need a second (list) independence party is the SNP as the ScotGov are compromised in they have to represent all voters. Another party does not have the weight of government around its neck and can be more radical in its parliamentary motions.

      Not the Greens, I have no desire to go back to sackcloth and bringing out your dead.

    143. iain mhor says:

      I don’t mind those who believe in the UK as perhaps some Unitary ‘British’ State, if not ‘Unionist state’ – that’s entirely up to them to believe in whatever they wish. However, I do like to establish which it is (what happened to England & Scotland, were both those Kingdoms extinguished, just one, or neither) before proceeding with any related discussion.

      As an example: the position for a Unitary British State, created from two prior Independent States, which extinguished both – Logically, this means there remains no party to which any Act or Treaty applies, such Acts/ Treaties were rendered void at the point of ratification.

      Establishing a position, I believe, leads to a more logical discussion – for a framework has been set upon which either may build: Unitary/ Union/ Other.
      So it pains me and I struggle to read, continual responses to some Unionist/ Unitard commentators, where I have no idea what either side’s position is and neither apparently do the antagonists.
      Perhaps this is a reflection of the political state in which we live and/or, I am hard of understanding.

      Wikipedia, professes that the UK (like the majority of the worlds States) is a Unitary State. The internal legislations of this professed ‘Unitary State, makes specific references to, and rely upon the existence of (apparently) non-existant Kingdoms. This Unitary State has a monarchy which also references, relies opon and derives its position on (logically) non-existant Kingdoms.
      A Unitary State is one State – One Kingdom – One Nation, One Parliament, One Government, One Law (occasionally One Monarchy) whose constitution may be dispensed, amended, repealed, abrogated, or otherwise devolved, as the State sees fit. Logically, this cannot apply to the United Kingdom as currently instituted; however much it is stated, or described elsewhere.

      I have asked the likes of HYUFD his position on a couple of occasions but received no reply – so I cannot engage – it would be a pointless and illogical exercise for me. Nor do I like to make bald assumptions if I can avoid it. Certainly ‘H’ appears to argue from the position of a Unitary State, but then makes errors in internal logic by referring to Unionism and vice-versa.

      This type of inconsistency is not the sole preserve of Unionists/Unitards I might add; nor is this boring moan of mine directed solely at particular commentators – I have asked the same question of politicians and appeared to cause some malfunction of reason.

      I’m happy to concede, for any debate’s sake, that the ‘UK’ is indeed a Unitary State, but that requires some genuinely interesting explanations – as do any other permutations relating to Unions and Kingdoms (extinguished or otherwise) But I cannot concede some amalgamation of several standpoints and then be expected to proceed with any logical consistency.

      So I don’t and I remain perplexed by those who do.

    144. The truth is Scotland has been bankrolling the rest of the U.K. ., for years if England lost all of Scotland’s input she would struggle to survive now that is a fact so they will never let you go without a fight,and that’s a fact you can state all manner of facts on sites like this but it won’t change a thing they just ignore you because the truth has them beat that is why they hid and never mention the Macrone report

    145. HYUFD says:

      Dr Jim Northern Ireland has a border with another EU country, the Republic of Ireland, unlike Scotland and a hard border with the Republic of Ireland would breach the Good Friday Agreement. Northern Ireland is thus a different case

    146. Graeme says:

      HYUFD says:
      16 February, 2020 at 12:39 pm

      “Ignore my previous comment, was thinking of Abbey National”

      I ignore all your comments, why? because you’re a fucking prick

    147. Dr Jim says:

      If you live in a semi-detached your next door neighbour doesn’t get to be in charge of your house because he’s got the biggest family even if you have a shared driveway, and he doesn’t get to take whatever vegetables that grow in your garden and eat or sell them to somebody else, nor does he get to invent new joint neighbour rules that affect you without asking for any agreement from you, if he did he wouldn’t be a next door neighbour anymore he would be a thief and a thug you would report to the council and police

      We live next door to the neighbour from hell who says he owns the police and the council, so we could move house, but he owns the bank so we’re stuck there

      Unless our other neighbours nearby offer us their help in resolving this difficulty our intransigent neighbour is leaving us with only one choice, our neighbour in the past has lived in many houses and behaved in the same way to those neighbours, so what did they do to get rid of this troublemaking thief of a neighbour

    148. Mist001 says:

      @ Graeme


    149. Dan says:

      Hey, cut the Germinator some slack today as he’s probably bored oot his napper with being stuck indoors because his country is at a standstill due to the QE2 bridge closure.
      I learnt from his unionist compatriots last week that a bridge closure can do that sort of thing…

      So Holyrood will now have performances by The Stereochronics aka Carlaw & Wells as the lead singers for the unionists’ hymn sheet, with The Moronic Keich Preachers of Rennie & Leonard as their supporting act.

      Turns to camera and mutters ironic Jazzclub “Nice”…

    150. jfngw says:

      BBC staff now tweeting what great value the BBC is, and I can see if you are a BritNat it is. You have all independence supporters that want to watch any live TV subsidising your propaganda channel.

      If it is such great value then going subscription would be a no brainer, it would stop all licence evasion and they could scrap all the enforcement officers around the country harassing people who don’t want their product. Surely it would save them a fortune, after all they already have a direct debit system in place.

      Or could it be they are happy with the current situation, the voice of Westminster, the government courtiers with their special relationships. Money rolling no matter what the quality of the product.

    151. Dr Jim says:

      You have to laugh at the English the way they talk about respecting some things but refusing to respect others because it doesn’t suit them to

      The facts are England is a gutless country afraid to stand on its own feet without Scotlands assets, because it can’t afford to and that’s why Norn Ireland was let go, they have no money and the EU ordered Johnson to release them or no documents of any deal would ever have been signed to allow Johnson to claim his hollow victory over nothing

      The next round is beginning shortly and Johnson already knows he’s on to a kicking from the EU so is faking his no deal confidence line in the simple knowledge that the EU are in charge and not him as he feigns outrage at what he knows is going to be a major part of the deal or no deal and pretends to England everything’s OK because he planned for it

      Yeah sure he did

    152. Robert Louis says:

      Graeme at 457pm,

      Easily wins prize for best comment of the decade.

    153. Dan says:

      @jfngw says at 5:31 pm

      BBC staff now tweeting what great value the BBC is…

      One wonders if that value was increased or decreased after Donalda leaving.

    154. jfngw says:

      The BBC are always keen to poll whether the nations want their parliaments/assemblies scrapped but never ask whether these same people would want Westminster scrapped. I wonder why?

    155. Dan says:

      Correction to post at 5.38pm, she is actually still in place.
      For some reason I thought she had moved on, presumably because I hadn’t noticed any particular improvement in the perceived bias in BBC Scotland she was going to address…

    156. Robert Louis says:

      Iain Mhor at 352pm,

      This is the important question, if the treaty of union, according to some of these pig-ignorant unionists extinguished Scotland, then surely it extinguished England too. But, of course, due to rampant English exceptionalism (to whom rules and reality do not ever apply), the English think it was just Scotland that was extinguished.

      The simple explanation is that English unionists believe that England exists and that Scotland was extinguished. I believe they actually paid two legal stooges to argue that during the previous indyref.

      As for Scottish unionists, they are perfectly happy with the notion that Scotland was extinguished – hence the running around in Engerland football shirts by the knuckle draggers at Ibrox.

      The reality of course is that neither was extinguished. The treaty formed a single administration by respective acts of union, the formation of a treaty under intenrational law, between two equally sovereign states. A treaty, incidentally, which either Scotland or England can end, as it so chooses. No ‘permission’ from De pfeffle, the English clown prime minister is required.

      The only thing holding the union together is that treaty. It is truly astonishing the number of unionists and other Scots who have mo idea that is how it works. The 1707 treaty is NOT irrelevant, it is an active document – why else would England have allowed us to keep Scots law some three hundred years later?

    157. twathater says:

      Watched Broadcasting Scotland earlier with 2 guests 1 from AUOB the other from SIF , the AUOB chap was saying that they were preparing and organising the marches for the rest of 2019 with special emphasis on the Arboath March and claim of right 100th anniversary , he also spoke about a gathering the AUOB organised yesterday which was well attended and many ideas were spoken about

      The lady from SIF was encouraging groups and organisations to approach them for funding projects that may help the indy cause

      During the broadcast there was no mention of forming another independence supporting party to challenge the list seats or to discuss whether people would be supportive of a move in that direction
      The AUOB chap also said that there was some discussion about naming targets for individual marches eg naming a March about our EU removal he also said it was highlighted that we need MORE music at the marches to make it even more enjoyable

      TBH I have been on quite a few marches which I found enjoyable and uplifting but I don’t want more marches or endless discussion forums I WANT INDEPENDENCE , I WANT THE SNP GOVERNMENT WE ELECTED TO STOP F***ING ABOUT WITH THE GRA PISH AND FIGHT WM ( DORIS ) WITH EVERY TOOL THEY HAVE TO GET US THERE , before Stu and ALL the other patriotic bloggers die of boredom

    158. Robert Louis says:

      I truly look forward to the day, the TV license (Tax), is scrapped. Just watch as every single self-respecting Scot, bins it on day one.

      Who in their right mind would pay for such blatant pro-London rule, anti-scottish propaganda.

      If De pfeffle the English clown prime minister abolsihes the TV license, he will have done all of us a great favour. Hopefully it would lead to the closure of pathetic quay. It’d be good to see the likes of Glenn Campbell on the dole, unable to punt his unionist views to Scotland, anymore.

      Bye, bye, BBC. You really will not be missed up here.

    159. Robert Louis says:

      twathater at 551pm,

      Totally with you on your last paragraph.

      Every week, I just ask myself the same question, what have the Scottish Government done this week to push independence and stop Scotland being dragged out of the EU (they have multiple democratic mandates for both). Sadly, this week, as with most weeks, the answer is nothing.

    160. Robert Louis says:

      McDuff at 213pm,

      Yip, me too. the FM constantly begging ‘permission’ from England to hold a freaking referendum, is not just stupid and unecessary, it is actually embarrassing now.

      Get off your knees for heavens sake, Nicola, and have a bit of self respect.

    161. meg merrilees says:

      So that’s it then – the COP 26 summit will have to be moved away from Glasgow now.

      According to the Mail on Sunday – the only paper to run the story – all the information anyone could ever need to mount a terrorist attack has been published accidentally by the Government.

      Doesn’t say which Government so I presume it is Westminster, because they would definitely have blamed the SNP if they could.

      Amazingly, all the maps of underground tunnels, electricity supplies, gates, exits etc – places where you could mount a terrorist attack on the large gathering of assembled world leaders – this security material is now available online.

      How could someone accidentally put this stuff online – all me a cynic but I smell a smell.

      oh, dear, oh dear, oh dear, what a dreadful mistake, how could that have happened, what can we do now…. looks like we’ll have to move the summit away from Glasgow for security reasons now, sorry Nicola, don;’know how that could have happened….

      Why only the Mail on Sunday? No prizes for guessing.

      Perfidious Albion once more…..

    162. Grouse Beater says:

      Chris, when are we going to see a full-length animated story in the cinemas of your cartoons? Askin’ fir a few thousand pals.

      Your essential weekend reading:

      ‘Ireland United’:

    163. sassenach says:

      Well said Graeme, it’s a perfect description of the FUD.

    164. jfngw says:

      If you voted the last time the Tories won in Scotland you would now be at least 85 years old (voting age in 1955 was 21 I believe).

    165. Lochside says:

      While the SNP are sleepwalking into another year of inaction and pleading for a’gold standard’ Referendum which even the dugs in the street know aint happening, something far more imminent is on the horizon, which is definitely going to occur.

      I refer to the new Constitution of the ‘Union’. The Johnson/Cummings axis of Evil(evel) is pushing this attempt to bind Scotland into a vice from which all the ‘gold standard’ anythings will mean precisely zilch.

      I referred to Cromwell earlier because I see a rerun of how, historically,Scotland fatally sided with revolutionary forces in England which turned and crushed our remaining freedom and incarcerated us into a ‘Protectorate’ or dictatorship of ‘Great Britain’. I foresee a New Constitution of the ‘Union’, with this time prohibition of ‘separatist’ movements and referenda for any such parties.

      We know the ground has been laid with the bogus claims of Scotland’s ‘extinguishing’ by the 1707 Union. We know this is a lie, but one that has never been challenged. The Johnson/Cummings elective dictatorship will easily utilise this fiction to validate a ‘healing of division’ etc. The important facet of this Constitution is that it will enable the Britnat State to defacto and de jure characterise any Referenda or moved to assert Scottish self determination as ‘secession’ as per Catalonia, something which at the moment they are unable to do in the court of International opinion.

    166. jfngw says:

      Outside a totalitarian state how many countries have had to endure a government it didn’t vote for 63% of the time since it last did win (counting from 1959 – 2024).

      On the other side the party that Scotland voted for has only governed for 37% of this period. Talk about a democratic deficit. Imagine the uproar if this was the case in England.

      Technically the Conservatives have never won an election in Scotland. In 1955 it was 30 Unionists and 6 Nat Lib & Con (I assume these were Nationalist Liberals). Labour actually won most seats as an individual party.

    167. Republicofscotland says:

      “This is the important question, if the treaty of union, according to some of these pig-ignorant unionists extinguished Scotland, then surely it extinguished England too.”

      The very fact that we had an indyref in 2014 shows clearly that Scotland hasn’t been subsumed by England, nor can it be permanently binded to this union.

      Our biggest threat to gaining independence isn’t from Westminster, though if we hesitate for too long it will be, no its the inactivity of the Scottish government to take steps to facilitate a referendum as soon as possible.

    168. Dr Jim says:

      Jimson Carplant in his interview today did admit one thing, that he was now speaking for the minority

    169. jfngw says:

      ‘It’s time to bring this era of democracy to an end… for good’, well Jackson Carlaw wrote nationalism but in effect he means democracy as the only way he can halt the drive to end the union is to outlaw parties he doesn’t agree with.

      Would he support the take over of Holyrood by Westminster, the FM deposed and himself being installed as vichy FM, something tells me it is the only Yes he would agree to, with Annie Wells as Deputy FM (let that sink in).

    170. Dr Jim says:

      Let’s all fervently hope that Jimson Carplant gets a sore throat in time for FMQs, I’ll get sweeties and ginger and popcorn in to watch Annie Whelp

    171. HYUFD says:

      jfngw Most Scottish domestic policy is now determined at Holyrood anyway.

      Plus to take another example, in the US the state of California (with a population and area several times the size of Scotland) has since 2000 not had the President it has voted for 60% of the time either nor the Congress it has voted for most of that time either. Yet like Scotland it also has its own legislature

    172. Dr Jim says:

      There goes the Troll again comparing sizes and amounts of people in other places to disguise his Nazi agenda

      One rule for you and no rules for me, he’ll be calling Herr Johnson D’artanion next

    173. HYUFD says:

      Republic of Scotland 56% of Scots oppose an independence referendum this year

    174. Effijy says:

      Exactly HI FUD.

      Scotland is a country with its own language, culture and traditions.

      California is a state. Stolen from Mexico where it belonged.

      Ah, now there is a comparison.


      You are wasting your time on this site.
      You could be at Morris Dancing Classes,
      Persecuting the Windrush Children, the Jewish
      Community or Muslims perhaps.

      Go Tugging your forelock for Boris and his chums
      and get ready for your Zero Hours Contract.

    175. jfngw says:

      Oh God

      Blah..blah.. blah..blah..mince. Guess who?

    176. Republicofscotland says:

      “Republic of Scotland 56% of Scots oppose an independence referendum this year”

      The last three polls have shown a 50% plus in favour of independence. If we look back at 2014, we can see once a date was set for the indyref support for independence jumped, even though the full weight of the British wheel of lies and deception took centre stage.

      No I’m confident once a date is set, support for independence will rise even higher than the mid fifties.

      Of course the real stumbling block to naming a date isn’t Johnson, no he’s insignificant, a bit part player that can be bypassed.

      The real problem is Sturgeons reluctance to pursue a route to independence, that in reality is the only way out of this unfit for purpose union.

    177. Effijy says:

      With the next Westminster election in 2025, that will be a full 70 years
      Since Scotland last voted Conservative and even then it was a mix of parties
      Who aligned with them that gave a majority.

      So SNP officials can you please beat the Tories to death with the fact that for
      Generation after generation after generation the Scots have refused the Tory
      Doctrine emphatically.

      Even in 1955, they did nothing for Scotland and it’s fair to say the Tories have done
      Nothing for Scotland at any time in the last 300 yesrs.

      What is it they don’t get about we don’t want them and they have no future here?

    178. jfngw says:


      HYUFD likes to quote that flawed yougov poll as the question is nebulous. It’s unclear how the data was constructed as they produced a percentage for each option which indicates to me they allowed you to vote in every option. So all those that never want a referendum vote no every time but those that do are split across the categories, except the last one which effectively includes all the others, hence you give the impression that no wins most categories.

      In my case in this poll I would have voted Yes to this year and within the next 5 years as this includes this year, the others I would vote no. It’s how you germander a poll to produce the result you want in my opinion.

    179. dakk says:

      @ hyfud

      Isn’t there a flooded parish within a couple hours drive from you which you could help slopping out after all the rain.

      If you had any sense of community you would be doing something useful for your fellow countryman rather than waste your time trolling Scottish people.

      Little wonder the people of England won’t elect you.

    180. HYUFD says:

      Effiji Scotland may have its own language but only about 1% of Scots speak Gaelic and only 30% speak Scots.

      Most English counties have their own culture and traditions too

    181. Pete Barton says:

      Unless I’ve missed something

      Scotland is a country.

      I wouldn’t mind discussing our constitution,from the constituent parts of the UK poin the of view, but..

      I will not contemplate responding to baited comments from a contributor who seems to be ignorant of matters involved, from a learned point of view.

      FUD, I bet you liked poking wasps’ nests as a kid.

    182. jfngw says:


      That’s colonialism for you, the first thing they do is to try and wipe out language and culture, as you infer the English have been successful colonists.

    183. Joe says:

      @ Lochside

      Good points made there. I will say though that the bigger enemy is corporate globalism disguised as ‘progress’. Nationalists of every stripe are up against it together one way or another. My guess is that Johnston, like his hero Churchill secretly serves that hidden hand

    184. Rm says:

      The Scottish people will take the route to Independence into their own hands, and once we get Independence every party can fight it out in an election or we can do things differently work together so everybody has a say no matter how much they have.

    185. Republicofscotland says:

      “HYUFD likes to quote that flawed yougov poll as the question is nebulous. ”

      I take his comments with a pich of salt, Petes as well, their modus operandi is clear.

      However we shouldn’t get hung up on polls in the first place. I think the last election showed that if Sturgeon calls we will answer, and I translate that into a indy majority, if she gets round to holding a referendum.

    186. Pete Barton says:

      Interesting to see Unison,GMB and Labour for independence coming into the light..

      Even a reference to Scottish senior Tories mulling over Scots’right to choose their future.

      Is this an olive branch, or a fig leaf to fool us into Federalism fairy territory?

    187. Bill McLean says:

      HYUFD – Wow!

    188. meg merrilees says:

      Republic of Scotland at 7.07

      Our biggest threat to gaining independence isn’t from Westminster, though if we hesitate for too long it will be, no its the inactivity of the Scottish government to take steps to facilitate a referendum as soon as possible.

      Do you not think that the people of Scotland have a role to play in this as well. We can’t just sit back and blame the Scottish Government – we have to show everyone – the Scottish Government, the UK Government and the rest of the world that we want Independence.
      (I don’t mean by violent means in any shape or form).

      We have to rise up like the Catalonians, 1 million people on the streets demanding our right.

    189. Pete Barton says:

      Or perhaps the tide has turned already?

      Some don’t want to be left beached?

    190. meg merrilees says:

      Did anyone listening to QT from Dundee last week here the bit where Joanna Cherry was talking about the Union and said the UK was a Union of two countries, Scotland and England. About two seconds later a great muttering was arising in the audience as people were trying to correct her and say it was a Union of 4 countries etc…

      Joanna cut them off straight away and said that the Treaty of Union has only two signatures on it – the signature of the country of Scotland and the signature of the country of England.
      Because it came from her I think that will have sunk home and no-one questioned her statement.

    191. Liz g says:

      Twathater @ 5.51
      I was at yesterday’s AUOB meeting and the new party for the list seats was certainly discussed.
      The wheels for it are definitely in motion and the response to it there was generally positive.

    192. jfngw says:

      @meg merrilees

      You are 100% correct, if the people of Scotland are willing to be dormats then it’s hardly surprising that Westminster will wipe their feet on them. The problem is many like the idea of change but don’t want to take the personal risk. To say there is no risk is deceiving people, there is always a risk with upheaval, the Irish embrace it, disappointingly I’m not sure the Scots have the bottle.

    193. Pete Barton says:

      Henry, Gordon, Alex..come on guys, Slab has no future denying our people a choice.

      Even 40% of Slab voters are now favourable to independence.

      Work it out!

      There comes a time when even the most ardent British unionist feels distinctly uncomfortable denying reality.

      A vote on having our say is one thing, a vote to decide independence is another.

      If we are indeed better all together,

      what’s to fear a properly informed choice?

      I’m told I need to ‘shop around’ by all my utility companies I choose.

      Fair play.

      But this debate and choice is denied to us at those rarified upper levels that we can’t hope to understand?

      Jackson Carlaw is a prick.

      Sorry, I just needed to say that.

    194. Republicofscotland says:

      “Do you not think that the people of Scotland have a role to play in this as well. We can’t just sit back and blame the Scottish Government – we have to show everyone – the Scottish Government, the UK Government and the rest of the world that we want Independence.”

      The problem here is that only a certain amount of folk who will vote yes take to the streets, AUOB marches canvassing, street corner stalls etc. However I believe there’s a silent majority that will only become active on voting day, once a date has been set.

      Without a date the incentive for some who will vote yes is dormant, we saw that in the 2014 indyref. I expect the last three years to have incentivised even more folk to vote yes on the day, once a date is set.

      More recently you only have to look at the GE, Sturgeon asked us to vote for her, and we didn’t disappoint. Yes a indyref isnt a GE, however in both its about protecting Scotland from Westminster.

      I’m fairly confident that once a date is named indy activities will increase in the grassroot area. But we can’t wait too long the longer Sturgeon waits the more likely it is that Westminster will find a way to thwart independence, especially with Johnson and Cummings in office.

    195. Fireproofjim says:

      You are right. When the date of the referendum is announced there will be a surge in interest and a boost to the Yes vote.
      Right now, unless you are a political nerd (like most of us on Wings), you don’t see any excitement and you are rather treading water.
      We need that date. Then the buzz will start.

    196. jfngw says:

      @Pete Barton

      Maybe some see an opportunity here, the end of the union would be a cataclysmic blow to the Tories. They may not particularly like the Scots but it would be the final dagger in their empirical delusions. Whether it’s Scotland that goes first or NI it will have a domino effect on the other, Wales then needs to make a choice.

    197. Scott says:

      Jack Carcrash reply to me on cult.

      I’m afraid all the hallmarks of a cult are present. A willingness to ignore the comprehensive failure of delivery on the devolved responsibilities and to sacrifice that responsibility and excuse that failure in the name of an unyielding quest for an objective soundly rejected by the majority in our largest ever plebiscite.

      That is all he has SNP BAD.

    198. Dan says:

      @meg merrilees at 8:41 pm

      2 Countries? Surely 2 Kingdoms is a far better and more accurate response to give whenever the Union is being described.
      It covers the 4 nations so also acknowledges both Wales and Northern Ireland, and importantly also highlights the matter of the Queen with her two crowns and the resultant differences the monarch has in relation to the people of both kingdoms.

      I also noted a failure to rebuke the “Only 45% voted SNP line” which our own HYUFD has given us endless practice in correcting, as one simply needs to point out that a GE does not allow 16 & 17 year olds, plus most EU Nationals a vote. Plus a significant number of Labour voters are also pro-Indy.

      This failure to simply and quickly rebuke endless Yoon lines of attack boils my piss.
      I’m a fuckin idiot yet I know this stuff. It’s fuckin ridiculous that our politicians are not able to get a handle on this.

    199. Pete Barton says:


      Did he really write that?


    200. Pete Barton says:

      Jings, that’s some wind ..

      Hope you’re all safe..

    201. jfngw says:


      The largest ever plebiscite was the EU referendum in Scotland, 600K difference compared to 400K in the Indyref. That is all that can be compared as the voting criteria was not the same (EU vote had a lower eligibility but a higher difference in the outcome).

      His other comment is no more than you are a cult if you don’t agree with me, just basically pish.

    202. KOF says:

      @Meg Merrilees 20:41

      The first line of the Treaty of Union with England,1707, “That the Two Kingdoms of Scotland and England shall upon the first day of May …”.

      Ms Cherry is wrong.

    203. Robert Louis says:

      Meg merrilees at 837pm,

      I totally agree, but here’s the point, it is the elected MSP’s MP’s and Scotgov who are literally PAID to enact their electoral mandate.

      It is all very well, saying people need to rise uo, but leadership is needed and right now NS is not showing any at all.

      It is thoase in positions of power and being very highly paid as poiliticians who need to start setting the agenda. Blaming ‘the people’, for not rising up in the streets, is pointless, and is more akin to an excuse for politicans to sit back and do nothing. They might say ‘oh, we’ll do something once we see a swelling of support for indy , or the polls rise above 60%’. That is lazy excuse making, of the very highest order. An excuse to do nothing.

      Take a look through history at campaigns, and all of them had leadership. Right now, the supposed ‘leadership’ of Scottish independence, the FM, is happy to sit back, twiddle their thumbs and whine that ‘Boris winnae let them’. So they do nothing, and the clock keeps on ticking. Where is THEIR fight? Where is THEIR ‘uprising’? Where is THEIR anger?

      The Scotgov and SNP leadership should be proactive, not reactive. They are sitting waiting for things to change, instead of actually making change happen.

      It is lazy, it is disingenuous, and it is, wuite frankly, a disgrace.

      And do you think Scotland might see the number marching in Scotland as is seen in Catalunya, if we had so-called ‘leaders’ here, who were as dedicated and determined as those in Catalunya?? I think so.

      It is piss-poor leadership. It stinks.

    204. jfngw says:

      @Pete Barton

      Yeh, I think I’ll pass on the turnip next time, but I’m OK. Thanks for asking.

    205. Pete Barton says:


      The tipping point that seems to be coming is dependent on how much cash is being delivered in the UK OK budget.

      How many souls will betray themselves for promises by a bankrupt UK govt?

      2 trillion and rising;mind that figure..that is the UK national debt.

      Ah but Empire 2 will save us all, just believe us, it’s all gonna be OK.

    206. James says:

      Re: HYFUD …People, people, please don’t rise to it! He is obviously on a wind-up mission. Or auditioning for the Edinburgh Comedy Festival? FUD.

    207. Brian Doonthetoon says:

      RE: country/kingdom.

      I’m sure the vast majority of people in the British Isles use country as a term, as opposed to kingdom – specially dan sarf.

      Perhaps Ms Cherry was keeping it simple for those who don’t understand the concept of two kingdoms.

      I feel that whenever a pro-indy MP or MSP or councillor is involved in a TV/radio discussion and someone uses the term “country”, they should be asked to clarify which country they are talking about.

      Similarly, in the HOC, if a speaker mentions “the country”, a point of order should be raised, asking for clarification of which country they mean. After all, there are three countries and a province contained in the UK. Are they speaking about an individual country, or THE UNITED KINGDOM?

    208. cirsium says:

      @republicofscotland, 8.52

      Agree – we need a date. This would give focus to a campaign and the announcement would be the starting-gun for that campaign.

    209. Famous15 says:

      I get frustrated on Twitter as I rarely know what they are talking about. Yes I can guess but why do they not give a summary.

      Secondly “WTF” is not a reasoned reply to anything other than what happened to my coitus.

      I think that Ms.Cherry is aware ,the clue my learned friend is in her being learned!

    210. dakk says:

      Where is he?

      Wheelspinning away in his Rangerover wae his waders on heading for the river Ouze or some such with a bit of luck.

    211. Famous15 says:

      I watched a very interesting discussion on trans issues on Sky News.One huge problem is say anythin outside the agenda of some mysterious trans supporting group purporting to speak for all gender challenged or even gender uncomfortable and you are classed as transphobic. Even professional psychiatrists and psychologists are silenced by fear. Not good.

      I am reminded of the police in the 1970’s employing vicious race relations “experts” in training colleges who silenced any reasonable discussion. Many of these “experts” were later discovered to be groomers for terrorists.

      We must not repeat that. All discussion must be open and argument allowed.

    212. Effijy says:

      It looks like Scotland faired better than England or Wales with these floods.
      It doesn’t look like many Scottish homes were badly affected and according
      To residents this was the first time that they were flooded.

      I suggest the First Minister announces budget this year to install flood protection
      For these homes so that it cannot happen again.

      Then we need to ask Boris why so many English Homes have been flooded 3 times
      During the Tories 10 year term and although they say they have invested in flood defence
      It is obviously not enough nor quickly above.

      Their failure has destroyed families and communities across England.
      They will never be able to sell nor insure these homes and now they wait
      for it all to happen again next week or next year.

      PS I’m sure the EU were handing out mass funding to help those in flood areas.
      Just as well the ones that voted to rid themselves of Johnny Foreigner have invested
      In rubber wellies and a synthetic Prime Minister.

    213. North chiel says:

      cirisium @1032 & republic of Scotland 0852 entirely agree that setting a referendum date will see an upsurge in interest and support from the electorate. Also , if SNP / Yes campaign funding is an issue then with a future date set I would suggest that a similar upsurge in funds would be forthcoming. Certainly if some of these funds helped to counteract the wave of increased unionist propaganda from the Britnat propaganda outlets it would be necessary & well spent .

    214. Dr Jim says:

      Everybody should be heard, but the trouble is 0.02% of the population demand to be heard telling everybody else to shut up or they’re bad

      The Internet can make the world amplified into a dangerously less equal place just the same as TV can

    215. Kangaroo says:

      Meg merrilees @8:41 and others

      I think J Cherry just made an unfortunate slip of the tongue. She meant Kingdoms but inadvertently said Countries.

      This is nit the first time that Ms Cherry gas referenced the Treaty, I have seen her do it in the HoC too. It is the “key” to unlocking the handcuffs of Union.

      The Treaty has only two Kingdoms, Scotland and England, the latter containing both Wales and Ireland at that time.

    216. Sandy says:

      Re polls questions.

      Many are phrased in a manner to receive an opinion as to what might happen, not to be interpreted as what YOU might like to happen.

    217. K1 says:

      Once again I’m obliged to inform those not aware of Simon’s (fuddick) intent on Wings, no need to speculate or exhaust the tiny bit of no interest in what the little diddy is on about, just read this and rest yer weary mind that you need no longer concern yersel wi his…

      Rinse and repeat:

      ’16 September, 2018 at 12:24 am
      For all those who haven’t had the absolute pleasure of ‘debating’ with HYFUD or whatever, he’s already declared ‘why’ he’s here:

      ‘HYUFD says:
      2 September, 2018 at 5:18 pm
      The Tories got a higher voteshare in 2017 across the UK than the SNP got in Scotland at the general election which really says it all.
      I will of course never apologise for having pressing the Unionist case hard, if you do not like that as a diehard Nationalist, tough.

      HYUFD says:
      2 September, 2018 at 5:24 pm
      I could of course not care less what anybody on this forum thinks, I came here to press the Unionist case hard and take on the Nationalists (and any party which puts National identity first is by definition Nationalist). Notice the brilliant Ruth Davidson by taking a tough hard approach to nationalists has seen her party’s vote surge, she is undoubtedly as tough a Unionist leader as Salmond was for Nationalists

      HYUFD says:
      2 September, 2018 at 5:29 pm
      You will no doubt whinge as ever about Scotland’s woes despite the fact it now has its own Parliament which decides most Scotgish domestic issues and representatives at Westminster too. The Tories have of course halved unemployment from 2010 and reduced the deficit too but that is a different matter however no doubt you will whinge about that too’

      He’s here to ‘destroy’ us ‘Nats’ and if you want a real insight into why it’s a complete waste of time even responding to him…it starts about here on the 19th of August, on ‘The Cereal Offenders’, thread. There is nothing you can say to him as his mind is made up and if you continue to read to the end of that thread…you’ll understand exactly who you are dealing with, it’s nothing but ‘rinse and repeat’, he’s no here to debate:

    218. HYUFD says:

      Jfngw The Tories won a majority of 158 in England at the general election but only 80 across the UK so it would actually benefit them for Scotland to go independent but they still back the UK as we are better together.

      Of course if Scotland did get independence the SNP would swiftly become redundant having achieved its main goal much like the Brexit Party, with a new revived Scottish right

    219. K1 says:

      ‘…with a new revived Scottish right…’

      Now you’re just trolling.

    220. Kangaroo says:

      K1 @12:53

      Yep and that quote is the bait.

    221. Still Positive says:

      Great to have the Wee Ginger Dug back from the USA.

    222. Dr Jim says:

      Herr Boris Johnson Fuhrer and self appointed King of England has told the EU he has no intention of keeping the same rules on trade or workers rights and has demanded the same deal as Canada has or he will “rip the EU to shreds”

      See the Mail the Express and the Sun for the full details of Herr Johnson’s empty threats and bluffs

      Apparently President Macron of France said *Oh ho hoa then Eengland can joost pees off then oh ho hoa* well slightly but not much more French words to that effect

    223. Breeks says:

      I’m sure the Papal 1328 recognition of the Declaration of Arbroath and the lifting of King Robert’s excommunication by Pope John XXII must surely survive as a record in the Vatican archives, but does anyone know where the text can be seen or read?

      It seems like the missing point in the triangle between the Declaration of Arbroath, the 1328 Treaty of Northampton and Edinburgh, and the Pope’s recognition, which to the best of my knowledge has never been disputed, but which I have never seen in literal translation.

    224. HYUFD says:

      Dr Jim What Boris has actually said is that he wants the same trade deal as Canada and South Korea have with the EU with the same rules and obligations on trade and workers rights and no more

    225. Mike d says:

      Jfngw 9.33pm. Sadly too late for wales to make a choice. 650.000 english residents 21% of the pop. They swung the brexit vote in wales 52% to 48%. Welsh people voted remain said professor dorling of oxford university.

    226. Dan says:

      Ooh, good find from one of Rev’s retweets.
      This site shows transfers of leccy power.
      Scotland exporting just under 5GW to England at the moment.

      Here’s the UK grid one again which has more info and the Euro connections if folk want to save them for future reference and checking.

    227. Ottomanboi says:

      Scotland is country few outsiders understand or indeed care about. It has a complex history, more so than its neighbour, and a culture drawing on a variety of ethnic sources which have been used to divide, conquer and subordinate. It has been a petrie dish for testing colonialist strategies employed in the wider imperial project.
      As a guy of MidEast origin I recognize the exploitative, appropriative, mercenary pattern and the cultural hubris of the perpetrators.
      Scotland is important to the Union as territory, its people are not, it was ever so in imperial games of acquisition. Should that territory, however, regain a mind of its own then take care.
      Be that as it may, there are still plenty of opportunities for Britannia to attempt to subvert the liberation project, but at what ultimate cost I wonder, and to whom?

    228. Graeme says:

      HYUFD says:
      17 February, 2020 at 12:43 am

      “Jfngw The Tories won a majority of 158 in England at the general election but only 80 across the UK so it would actually benefit them for Scotland to go independent but they still back the UK as we are better together.”


      No we are not better together so why don’t you enlighten us and tell us what it is about English independence that scares you so much ?

    229. callmedave says:


      Good catch there on the transmission data. 🙂

      Ian Blackford’s argument there on shortbread radio for a parliament committee to look at Boris’ reshuffle and the part that Cummings has played looked a bit weak.

      BBC licence on a shoogly peg sooner than we thought.

    230. Republicofscotland says:

      This might be the catalyst that we need to force Sturgeons hand on holding a indyref.

      The Independent Scotland Party, look set to field list candidates next year.

    231. robertknight says:

      callmedave @ 9:09

      “Ian Blackford’s argument there on shortbread radio for a parliament committee to look at Boris’ reshuffle and the part that Cummings has played looked a bit weak.”

      “Weak” is the default position for Ian “Cowardly Lion” Blackford.

      After his “we will not allow Scotland to be dragged…etc.” he could claim today was Monday and I wouldn’t believe him.

      But so long as coming out with the guff he spouts every week at PMQs keeps him in his three-piece tailored suits then all’s well I guess. Trougher!

    232. Breeks says:

      Scottish Government
      15 Feb
      The Scottish Government Resilience Room has been activated to monitor the impacts of flooding in the Borders.

      Monitor the impact of corruption, collusion and nepotism and you’ll maybe do more good for the local community.

    233. Colin Alexander says:

      Every cloud has a silver lining.

      The Imperial lie repeated by SNiPers is that:

      Indy = the SNP


      The SNP = indy

      The SNP have spent the last five years avoiding talking or doing anything about indy.

      When the indyref can couldnae be kicked doon the road any longer, Sturgeon was forced to admit, she bends the knee to Boris the Bold, her Imperial Master. Any indyref will be on the Empire’s terms, not for the people who gave the mandate. If Boris says No, it won’t happen. If it ever does happen it will be an Imperial referendum. eg As rigged as it’s possible to be.

      The separation between the indy movement and the “pro-indy” devolution SNP has become obvious. So, it’s up to the indy movement to push for indy, to persuade and encourage our friends, colleagues and acquaintances, and push the SNP, despite the SNP’s colonial brakes being on.

      Sturgeon has lost her credibility as the leader of the indy movement. She’s the pro-indy First Minister of the colonial government.

      Who will lead the indy movement now?

    234. mike cassidy says:

      The shape of UK healthcare to come.

      Drug prices in USA are so high

      One private health-insurance company in Utah financially encourages customers with repeat prescriptions to travel to Canada or Mexico to buy the drugs much more cheaply.

      John Oliver in fine form on the American healthcare dilemna.

      From about 6 minutes in

    235. mike cassidy says:

      Breeks 8.21

      The Pope’s Reply to the Declaration Of Arbroath

    236. Ottomanboi says:

      The British state establishment has been given a shot in the arm. It is now rampant, prowling looking for prey. Blackford, easy prey, needs to watch it.

    237. mike cassidy says:

      Occasional reminder that the Trans issue is not going away.

      Just read SNP where it says Labour.

    238. Breeks says:

      mike cassidy says:
      17 February, 2020 at 11:01 am
      Breeks 8.21

      The Pope’s Reply to the Declaration Of Arbroath…

      Thanks Mike. I appreciate that.

    239. Willie says:

      Colin Alexander @10.18.

      It’s not just independence that the SNP has let down. It’s the day job too.

      Under Salmond’s leadership, and with an initial minority government, the SNP did great stuff. Abolished prescription charges, hospital parking, bridge toll, no tuition fees, embarked on a major infrastructure building programme of schools and roads to stimulate employment for tens of thousands, brought privatised hospital services back into the public sector and of course took us to a referendum that we nearly won.

      And now, pray tell of the policies being implemented by the SNP star chamber.. Independence’s? Most certainly not. The Named Person Act? Gender Recognitions? Or what about doing something about the utter corruption and inefficiency that bedevils our local authority sucking the very lifeblood out of it. They’ve done nothing about that as service crumbles. Taken over where Labour let off our SNP is now like New Labour on steroids. Comfortable as Labour once were in their exalted place with the electorate it could all, and indeed will, unless something is done turn to tears.

      I for one a member of more years than I care to remember is heart and soul sick. This is not now a party with vigour, with drive, with vision. It’s a party full of jobsworths getting paid a better than average wage and a view on the next election of seats to a Hollyrood.

      Well if the SNP high command will not change then its time we got rid of them. Sturgeon is an able First Minister but she is no driver for independence. She is surrounded by a small coterie of folks to the exclusion of all the rest. It is not good, it is not healthy and only the members iron discipline has stopped there being a bloodbath.

      Well maybe it’s time others came forward. And there are others. Let the FM go off and get a job in Europe or some of her acolytes a job in business. And let people get on with the drive for independence.

    240. meg merrilees says:

      Re ‘the Treaty of Union’ between two countries/two Kingdoms

      I’m not criticising Ms. Cherry for using country instead of Kingdom. I’m highlighting the fact that most people think it is a Union of 4 Countries as Cameron and May would repeatedly tell us.

      I’ll bet most folk outside this discussion forum don’t think of Scotland or England as being kingdoms any longer – maybe because we don’t have a king just now – but they certainly don’t understand the concept of there only being two signatures on the Treaty and that was the point she was putting across. Many people down south do not understand why Scotland has to be treated as ‘special’ ( ha ha) because they don’t know or have forgotten ( if they were ever told) that the Treaty only had two signatures, therefore one or other signatory party can withdraw/cancel without the permission of the other.

      Agree it would have been better if she had said a ‘Union of two Kingdoms’ but facts are chiels etc and I think the message was got across.

      It’s a point we have to make time and again, louder and louder, especially this year with the Arbroath Declaration so relevant.

    241. iain mhor says:

      @ K1 12:30am

      His mind isn’t made up, which is the principle problem.
      He’s not the only one, there are questions and it’s the avoidance of answering them, or putting them to the proof which defines every narrative.
      In good company though, as both Westminster and the erstwhile Scottish Parliament have sought to avoid them too.
      Anything else is just hurling bees and accepting false narratives – there is no first principle to proceed from. Which is why England, the UK, Scotland (and arguments here) are in a sucking mire.

      First principles are at least principles, HYUFD (and his ilk) evidently have none (or withholds them) As a counter example: Mr Peffers (late contributer to this forum) did have principles and however much one might disagree with his views (or their accuracy) one had to address his first principles before proceeding.

      Call it pseudo-Socratic reasoning perhaps; but if a first principle is the ever topical : ‘people are sovereign’, then we may choose to accept that for debate – we may then enquire ‘In what relevant form does this manifest’? If the response is ‘in the creation of a collective state – we may proceed with ‘who then is the ultimate arbiter of this collective sovereignty, the state or the people’?
      From here we may address whether the current attempt to establish the first principle of ‘sovereignty of people’, is to effect the creation of a collective state (Scotland?) or to affirm that such a state already exists and the people are, or are not, its arbiters.

      The question which follows any affirmation of pre-existence is: ‘What is the form of this existing state’? There’s the rub – the affirmation of pre-existence is taken for granted, There is no dearth of opinions contradicting that position, or we would not have suggestions any vote for independence would be ‘Sevco Scotland’

      I see the wrong questions being asked, a principle foothold has not been established and has been skipped over to land in the morass .
      I speak not for England, but the UK has established a principle that its state was created, not via the sovereignty of a peoples, but in and of itself and of itself it holds all sovereignty. A political and monarchical creation – if not of its asserted divine provenance, certainly of political power.

      If the principle is; that Scotland exists as a collective state, under the sovereignty of its peoples and its form is perhaps of union (or subjugation) with another – we may proceed on that basis. Or perhaps, that it does not exist and its peoples are seeking to create such a nation. ‘Should Scotland be Independent’ is not the correct question of first principle ‘Does Scotland exist’ is.

      It is inconsequential to argue opinion here, individually, whether we believe we have a collective nation and that it does have a representative senate of the peoples sovereignty; for what is that senate’s collective position of first principle – not our individual opinion? I would posit it has none, certainly I feel that it has not been clearly stated or codified.

      The closest was the spoken assertion, that the prorogued Scots Parliament was reconvened and is currently in session. If that is uncontested, or accepted at least as a point of debate – then that is indeed a first principle and we may proceed the argument.
      The Scots Parliament as a continuation, encompasses within it, all the codification to answer the questions ‘Does Scotland exist, who is its sovereign arbiter and what form does Scotland take’ – not least of which, is its competence to refer itself to its people with impunity.

      Yet, how was that assertion of parliamentary reconvention codified? May we look to a document which confirms Scotland’s Parliament was indeed reconvened that day, a collective document of affirmation – surely an historical article on par with any – the correct questions must be asked, as ever.

      That Scotland’s Parliament was not reconvened, that Scotland (and England) do not exist; that the UK is a self created Unitary State and not a Union (albeit with inherently illigical and self-denying legislation) that the peoples of the UK are not sovereign, that Scotland’s Parliament is a devolved executive of the UK State, that a cadre of peoples within it are seeking a seccession and creation of a new Independent state – is indeed a prevailing view.
      A view however seldom directly affirmed or articulated and never to be defended – for its inherent inconsistencies preclude it.

      The churning of the ground between what people may believe, what parliaments may believe and what is actuality, creates the sucking glaur we are all fast in. Ask the correct question, establish the principles – then we may all perhaps, proceed to extricate ourselves and wash clean the filth of centuries – for one outcome, or another.

    242. Dr Jim says:

      @meg merrilees 11:46am

      I’d bet most people don’t know they don’t have a Queen either especially the folk in England, because how is it possible to call a country a democracy and a Monarchy at the same time when everybody really knows that the Queen has no powers over anything, otherwise Oliver Cromwell was a figment of everybody’s imagination

      The Queen is a tourist attraction, a picture postcard of illusion to keep the forelock tuggers comfortable in their minds of a stability of being ruled over by a benevolent deity who’s really nice instead of the truth which is all power rests with the English parliament and by voting a majority political party who between themselves elect a leader, that leader becomes de facto King of England giving that leader total power and control in exactly the same way as would have been the case for a Monarchial system of inherited power

      People think they’re voting for a political party to form a government, but in fact they’re voting for a King acting under the false pretence that the people voted for them when technically they didn’t they voted for representatives who then nominate one of themselves to be the Monarch

      It’s why neither of the big two political parties in England are happy if they don’t have a majority so they invented the myth to the people that they can’t govern effectively if they don’t have that majority to elect themselves a King

      A wonderful deception to have kept up this long on a people

    243. cirsium says:

      @Willie, 11.28

      Good comment. The other big issue not being dealt with in the day job is land reform.

    244. Pete says:

      Dont agree with much you say but you’re bang on the money with this.
      I’ve always wondered about where we are benefitting from the recent tax increases in Scotland for the above around £25k folks.
      Well, I read yesterday that the extra revenue generated is reduced from the Barnett block grant by about 80% thus leaving us barely better off.
      If this is true, it is quite shocking and therefore, what’s the point?
      Can anyone enlighten me further?
      I want facts not propaganda.

    245. Republicofscotland says:

      “And now, pray tell of the policies being implemented by the SNP star chamber.. ”

      Although Sturgeon has let us down on the independence front I can’t quite agree that in other areas there hasn’t been any progressive policies.

      Just of the top of my head I can think of three one is the Baby Box scheme and the another is the twice yearly bonus given to carers, and also the Best Start Grant.

      There are more if you care to look, is it any wonder Corbyn touted them during the GE.

      Lets not get mixed up here, there’s no other party at Holyrood that would implement as many good policies as the SNP, yes they’ve dropped the ball on independence, that aside they’ve been progressive in my opinion.

    246. Effijy says:

      I see Grovelling Gove is acknowledging that food prices in the UK
      will face very significant increases as a result of Brexit.

      The hope Is that the EU is dumb enough to hand out a no tariff deal
      Without any membership fees.

      Yes why don’t you do that Europe or England will hate you lousy foreigners even more.

      It seems that 80% of food stuffs we eat comes from Europe.
      How about a 20% tariff increase and delays leading to shortages due to red tape.

      Gove promised trading would be simpler with Brexit.
      Maybe that one was on the other side of the £350 million per week to the NHS bus?

    247. Breeks says:

      meg merrilees says:
      17 February, 2020 at 11:46 am

      Agree it would have been better if she had said a ‘Union of two Kingdoms’ but facts are chiels etc and I think the message was got across…

      I agree Meg. But what gives me most encouragement is that it shows us where Joanna Cherry’s head is, and that is focussed upon a bilateral treaty between Constitutional Equals.

      I am also encouraged that Joanna Cherry twice used the Scottish Courts and Court of Session to circumvent the Supreme Court, and squarely nail legally binding victories.

      I don’t know if people registered what I was talking about when saying Scottish Sovereignty was red because it comes from the people, while Westminster Sovereignty is white, because it’s origin is Devine. I then speculated on whether Holyrood administered red Sovereignty, white Sovereignty, pink Sovereignty, or raspberry ripple Sovereignty.

      It seems more and more clear that Holyrood is neither red, nor pink, nor even very raspberry ripple. When Westminster’s white Sovereignty says jump, Holyrood dutifully obliges.

      But Joanna Cherry, both in her Court Actions, and her reference to the bilateral Treaty of Union has her feet firmly planted in Scotland’s red Sovereignty, Scots Law, and Scottish Constitutional muscle in all she does. The U.K. government tried to add some white pigment through the Supreme Court, but it had no jurisdiction over Scotland’s red Sovereignty. When Boris Johnson was forced to unprorogue Westminster, his white Westminster Convention of Sovereignty was being overruled by the red Sovereignty of Scotland.

      I also spoke a couple of weeks back about there being three Constitutions at play here; the sub-sovereign constitution of a devolved assembly codified in the Scotland Act and Sewel Convention, the unwritten constitution of the UK Parliament and it’s unwritten “convention” of sovereignty, and the explicit and unambiguously sovereign Constitution of the Scottish Nation.

      Maybe Holyrood is conflicted, because if Holyrood becomes to obstreperous for Westminster, then Westminster can legitimately turn off the taps and deny Holyrood the White Sovereignty and money it operates with, and valued protections and mitigations which Holyrood has put in place might fail. I say Holyrood is ‘maybe’ conflicted, but in truth I see no evidence that it is. It actually seems remarkably sanguine and docile about it’s limited capacities under it’s Scotland Act constitution, and certainly makes very little of Scotland’s National Constitution and Popular Sovereignty of the people. It rare enough occasion, and pretty much lip service when it does occur.

      I think Holyrood currently has an existential dilemma. For as long as Holyrood and the SNP pursues the issue of a referendum with a Section 30 Agreement, then it is acting as a devolved legislature that is a lower house beneath Westminster. That lowly position is simply not compatible with Scotland’s National Constitution, where the Scottish people are Sovereign.

      I am utterly perplexed and demoralised that we are contesting Scotland’s right to self determination using the restricted levers of colonial legislation designed to empower Westminster, when Scotland has much better levers to pull under the Nation’s Constitutional Sovereignty which Westminster repeatedly acknowledges as valid, since time and time again, it cannot overrule the Claim of Right.

      Westminster’s assertion of Parliamentary Sovereignty is a bluff, a subterfuge, a brass neck confidence trick. It cannot actually say it is Sovereign over Scotland, because that isn’t true. Instead it claims to be Sovereign by a mysterious and unwritten “Sovereign Convention” which is a consensual agreement between equals. Westminster is only ‘sovereign’ for as long as we Scots agree to it.

      That is why Brexit was so important, because it exposed the mysterious and unwritten “Sovereign Convention” which was meant to be a consensual agreement between equals as a total lie, and Brexit as an unconstitutional act of Colonial subjugation.

      The United Kingdom Government only survives by bluster and established Convention, but in Brexit, it even broke the rules of its own “Convention” of Sovereignty. It claimed to be sovereign without Scotland’s consensus, and that was a step too far. The UK’s Parliamentary Sovereignty by Convention has been smashed to pieces by Westminster’s colonial misadventure. IF Scotland’s weak and supine “Government” had had an ounce of backbone and Constitutional acumen, the Union would now be dead and buried, and Scotland would be a sovereign independent nation in Europe.

      I have no time for the SNP’s endless drivel about democracy. They have played Brexit and Scottish Independence like 3rd rate amateurs. The only live wire the SNP has in it’s arsenal is Joanna Cherry, with both feet planted in Scottish Sovereignty and twice now having put Westminster in its place. Ms Cherry has done more to reign in Westminster than the the rest of the SNP combined, and she’s under attack for deselection from within??? SNP, just go and have a lie down in a darkened room. Don’t come out until we tell you to.

      We NEED Joanna Cherry taking Scotland’s Red Constitutional Sovereignty to an International Constitutional Court at the UN and Council of Europe, where Scotland denounces the colonial aggression of Westminster, not just breaching its own mythical convention and thereby flouting the Treaty of Union, but subjugating the will of a sovereign Nation, contrary to International Law.

      If Joanna Cherry won’t step up, then we need somebody else who will, but I have faith in Joanna. The time for talking is short. We need action.

    248. Ian Brotherhood says:

      @Breeks –

      Joanna Cherry is being mentioned more and more frequently, not only because of her approach to the constitutional ‘difficulties’ you talk about, but for not backing down to the woke brigade.

      The wokesters seem to have reached a threshold of sorts with the ‘red circle’ targetting of Joan mcAlpine – some still have the symbols in their Twitter headers, others never adopted it (e.g. Mhairi Hunter) and others displayed it only for a few days (e.g. Cameron Arhibald).

      Joanna may be well positioned to draw support from all across the Yes movement, for very different reasons.

    249. kapelmeister says:

      Johnson and Cummings are playing one of the old, old tricks. Hire someone so demonstrably obnoxious – this Sabisky fellow – and then you can dismiss him and appear moderate.

    250. bookie from hell says:

      neil oliver piece in the sunday times goes on about the bridge AGAIN

      says the buck stops with voters – why do they still vote SNP

      it’s like he’s having a nervous breakdown

    251. jfngw says:

      If we had an annual Great Scottish Arseholes award I could confidently predict Neil Oliver would always be one of the nominees. I also suspect the fire risk would also be prominent, the gallus besom.

    252. kapelmeister says:

      Neil Oliver hasn’t realised that the Scottish cringe is history.

    253. Republicofscotland says:

      As Katie Forbes becomes Finance secretary, Derek Mackay, her disgraced predecessor might have left a parting shot at Westminster.

      The Scottish government are to continue with Mackays strategy of debunking the outrageous unionist GERS figures touted annually and lauded by the media and opponents of Scottish independence.

      Granted its not the move on the indy front that we desperately need, but at least its a positive step.

    254. Dr Jim says:

      Bank of Scotland notice inside my branch in Bishopbriggs reads *we only dispense English notes at this position*
      So I checked the outside auoteller and got Clydesdale Banknotes, weird?

      I didn’t ask why in case the place was full of Yoons who might want to kill me for treason sedition my inferior eugenics or just mental Yoonery

    255. Dan says:

      That was the safe play Dr Jim.
      We don’t want to you being rounded up and taken on a “holiday”.

    256. Almond Chutney says:

      At the end of the day it’s the same currency (GBP), which you can spend north or south of berwick-upon-tweed.

      The real question is post-indy currency, you won’t be needing to worry about what type of GBP you make sure you only have copies of for transactions. Then again, Ireland managed to secure their own and eventually join the Euro, so, not impossible.

    257. jfngw says:

      What’s the difference between 1930’s facists and modern day BritNats. Taste, I don’t ever remember seeing even the most ardent Nazi dressed in a Swastica suite.

      People seem surprised the PM seems to be a eugenics supporter, not sure how, have you ever seen his father interviewed. They see themselves as the master race, believing their own intellect is justification for their ardent xenophobia, racism and cruelty. They want to see those with less intelligence than B.Johnson wiped from the earth, that of course would result in human extinction (possibly only survivors Carlaw & Wells, the new Adam & Eve left to rebuild mankind).

    258. jfngw says:

      Suit obviously, unless it’s a three piece.

    259. ben madigan says:

      @Effijy who mentioned flooding in Scotland and England.

      With regards to the UK applying for EU funding to mitigate 2016 winter flood damage, AFAIK it did not apply, as it was in negotiations to determine its position on the Brexit Referendum (Stay or leave the EU) later that year. Now of course as a former member, it can’t apply.

      Here’s some general info about protecting your property from flooding. It was written for winter floods in Ireland 2016 but the same principles apply to Scotland.I hope people find them useful and bear them in mind when they are re-doing/rennovating their houses, after floods or not.

    260. Dan says:

      Re. Eugenics. I can’t get my heid around the idea that the Fat Gammon is really considered to be the pinnacle of the human form at this point in the evolution of our species.

      If ze Fat Gammon race prevail the current sporting world records held by “mongrels” will never be beaten.
      The future new world of fat gammon records:

      100m SprintWaddle – 47 seconds
      LongShortjump – 3ft 3inches (imperial measurements obzs)
      The Marathon event is now won by the FG that can eat the most Snickers, as running 1 mile, nevermind 26, is a physical impossibility.

    261. Dan says:

      From The Skotia twitter feed.

      Our footage of yesterday’s @JoannacCherry QC MP lecture: Scotland’s Future – an independent nation in Europe?

    262. twathater says:

      @ Liz g sorry for my late reply , I am extremely happy that a indy list supporting party was discussed at the AUOB gathering , I feel that NOW would be a time to expose this GREAT news and to start the explanations and breakdowns to convince indy voters of the ENORMOUS benefits that can be accrued by having a very valid opporchancity to rid our SP of the very many arse warming parasites and to increase indy supporting parties

      I agree with most of the praise towards Joanna Cherry but unfortunately she like many of the SNP reps still fail to DESTROY the currency myth , it INFURIATES me and many others that this LIE is allowed to be dragged out time and time again to defeat and confuse them

      When this issue is raised they should go on the ATTACK and say ( how dare you threaten to attempt to block a shareholder of the bank of england from utilising the services we contribute to ) , the bank that was set up in 1694 by Scotsman William Patterson and is the bank for the the whole uk and when we do leave we will be utilising our share of the banks assets

    263. Golfnut says:

      @ Almond Chutney.
      We already have our own currency, the only question that needs answering is just how far Westminster is willing to crawl up Scotland’s arse to secure even a temporary pegging to prevent sterling’s collapse.

    264. gus1940 says:

      WANTED FOR MURDER – The CPS and the Tabloid Press.

    265. mike cassidy says:

      Re Bank Of England

      Very easy to produce the gammon effect

      Just tell the English the Bank has never belonged to England.

      A private company until it was nationalised in 1946

    266. Golfnut says:

      @ Dan.

      You probably already know this.
      Churchill is Johnson’s hero, Churchill was an advocate of the Eugenics principal as were many of America’s most prestigious institutions. These same institutions complained bitterly that funding a located for research went to Germany and not them, the rest his history. After WW11 many of its champions quietly dropped their support, even going so far as to erase any records that were potentially embarrassing.

    267. meg merrilees says:


      I agree – England’s vote taking Scotland out of the EU against her will is a total breach of the Treaty. ( despite the agreement for customs barriers between N.Ireland and the rest of the UK also being a breach of the Union – clause 4 – I think) and they justify it by using the result of the 2014 Independence ref as an expression of our wish to remain part of the UK.

      BUT it is a wish to remain part of the UK as agreed under the terms of the 1707 Treaty. This has not been suspended or nullified so it is still applicable. That means, as has been proven, that the Court of Session is allowed to pass judgement under Scots Law which is not inferior
      to anything in England as Scots Law is protected by the Treaty.

      Surely, if Scots Law reckons the Treaty has been breached then that is that – game’s a bogey, UK ceases to exist.

      Otherwise we are just a colony of England – and I believe that Ms. Cherry said as much on QT at another point in the broadcast.

      The sad fact is that hundreds of thousands of our fellow Scots haven’t clocked that yet!!!

    268. kapelmeister says:


      Yes, among the 1920s/1930s eugenics enthusiasts were Sidney & Beatrice Webb. The husband and wife team who were leading lights of the Labour Party and owners of the New Statesman.

    269. mike cassidy says:

      Churchill and Eugenics

      Horatio Donkin sounds like one of the good guys.

    270. Dorothy Devine says:

      re Mr Oliver , I wonder what effect his latest outburst will have on NTS membership this time.

    271. Liz g says:

      Twathater @ 5.28
      No worries Twathater 🙂
      There’s an article in the National about it today!
      As I understand it the “Scottish Independence Party” are waiting for confirmation from the Electoral Commission that they have been approved as an official political party.
      Once that is in the bag then they can go on to making any announcement and launch.
      Fingers crossed it work’s,I think we’re at the stage where doing nothing is no longer an option …..
      I’m so looking forward to getting Murdo and his fellow British Nationalist seat warmers out of Holyrood and people from the Yes movement in… 🙂

    272. Dr Jim says:

      I’m surprised that nobody seems to have noticed that Dominic Cummings has the power to hire or fire anybody he likes or dislikes, and Herr Cummings dislikes quite a lot of folk and they all tend to be folk who dislike him whether they’re good at their jobs or not

      I can’t imagine why the media in the so called UK don’t make a bigger deal out of reporting that kind of power to the public who didn’t elect this man into any position whatsoever yet he’s running the entire UK

      So much for the Brexit fascists complaining about unelected folk in the EU, seems it’s one rule for them and all the rest of the rules as well

      Dominic Cummings has exceedingly more power than any unelected private individual and even more than actual elected MPs, I’m trying to recall anybody in history with zero responsibility for a government who’s running the government

    273. Rm says:

      The Scottish Government have to start targeting European Politicians to speak up for Scotland to end the Union between the Countries Scotland and England, it’s the 21st century times have changed the English want to go right while Scotland wants to go left, end of relationship, divorce, fineto, end of, araberderchi, good byee, good riddance.

    274. Dorothy Devine says:

      I have just been reminded of Mr Oliver’s description of the Highland Clearances ’emigration’ – offensive or what?

    275. Joe says:


      The trouble is if Scotland goes left and England goes right is that it will create an overwhelming draw of capital and skills south of the border. Then we start looking like an Eastern bloc shithole except we’ll have to cover our women up so as not to offend the ‘new scots’ that will pile in:)

    276. Joe says:

      Sorry folks but left wing politics will end a newly independent Scotland very quickly. Id say the left wing has already fkd our near term chances of indy with what powers they do have with the (predictable) bullshit cycle of increasingly radical (and unhinged) ideas. Practicality wins. Defunct and dangerous ideology doesnt.

    277. Bill Hume. says:

      Dear Joe, you are an idiot….that is all.

    278. Smallaxe says:

      ‘we’ll have to cover our women up’

      I don’t own any women, Joe!

      Do you?

    279. Breeks says:

      meg merrilees says:
      17 February, 2020 at 6:04 pm

      ….Surely, if Scots Law reckons the Treaty has been breached then that is that – game’s a bogey, UK ceases to exist.

      That’s the way I see it Meg, but there are three stages to it; if the Treaty is breached, it ceases to exist, but that isn’t the end of it. There would have to be International Recognition for the new Constitutional arrangements, and thirdly, there is the possibility of pro Union Scots refusing to accept Scottish Independence and working to overthrow it.

      That is why I get irate about the squandered opportunity of Brexit, because Scotland didn’t have to terminate the Union, just cite Constitutional Sovereignty and Scotland’s remain majority as a Scottish Backstop and effective veto on Brexit, and compelling the Westminster Government to make a choice between going a head with Brexit, or keeping the Union together.

      Whether Westminster acquiesced to respecting Scottish Sovereignty and abandoning Brexit, or whether it opted to abandon the UK to complete an English Brexit, I do not believe the 1707 Union could have survived, and it’s demise would be attributed to Westminster’s gross misadventure, which in turn would have ameliorated any Scottish resentment about the demise of the Union.

      Nevermind the contrived rhetoric about 2014 being a once in a generation opportunity, Brexit was a one off golden ticket for Scotland to get out of the Union with the prospect of unionist resentment largely diffused. It was right there for the taking, and we blew it.

    280. Pete says:

      Totally agree.
      Most of the posters on here are of the Corbynite tendency and have no idea as to how free market economies work.
      Tax the aspirational till the pips squeak.
      They don’t seem to realise that you can’t get benefits without wealth being created and those that do produce wealth need to be encouraged, not penalised.
      Can’t be sure but I understand that a fair chunk of the extra tax levied here in Scotland is clawed back under the Barnett rules. So why do it?

    281. Dorothy Devine says:

      Smallaxe , a wave to you and Sybil!

    282. Brian Doonthetoon says:

      “Most of the posters on here are of the Corbynite tendency and have no idea as to how free market economies work”

      That’s the biggest flask o’ hough I’ve read on WOS in a long time!

      You obviously have no inkling, knowledge or understanding of the diversity of our YES movement.

      Try again…

    283. Smallaxe says:

      Hi, Dorothy.

      Sybil sends her love, as do I.

    284. Brian Doonthetoon says:

      Hi Smallaxe!

      Good to see you active!

    285. meg merrilees says:

      Brexit still is a one off Golden Ticket because by an ever-narrowing margin, we haven’t completely left yet and there is the old chestnut of an argument from the don’t knows that – ‘until we know what the deal will be how can we vote against it’.

      You know, and I know that the deal will not favour Scotland but they haven’t admitted that yet and haven’t accepted that they might have been wrong all along.

      The tide is slowly changing in our favour but the escape window is closing.

      Nicola is playing a dangerous game of the highest possible stakes if she waits till next year but likewise if she goes too soon and Boris decides to extend negotiations, then she could be stymied. However, after December 31st Boris ( sorry Cummings) will be unstoppable and they could try to overthrow Holyrood.

      We need to have the true Parliament of Scotland waiting in the wings to take over at midnight on December 31st to protest and uphold the choice of the people of Scotland who voted to Remain.
      The Court of Session may well take the view, as it did with the Prorogation of WM, that it cannot legislate as and until the ‘crime is committed’ i.e. until 00.01am on January 1st 2021 at which point it can declare the Treaty null and void and Scotland will resume its rightful place as an independent, Sovereign nation. ( that would be some Hogmanay announcement)
      Whether we want to rejoin the EU can be our first decision – that’s if the EU survives the next year…

      I’m minded of Montrose’s maxim:
      ‘He either fears his fates too much or his desserts are small,
      who will not put it to the touch to win or lose it all’

      I think that is where we are heading.

    286. Smallaxe says:

      Hi, Brian.

      Some peoples comments have a tendency to make me active!

      Keep fighting the good fight, my friend.


    287. manandboy says:

      Spot the change of language in the BBC’s monthly weather outlook.

      England’s propaganda war becoming all encompassing.

      “There will be the risk of snow on high ground in the north of the UK, …”

      “The rest of next week looks changeable. Atlantic weather systems are likely to affect the country, but there are some indications that the south of the UK might be a little drier and calmer than it has been.”

      However, it should be less wet and less windy for the UK as a whole.

      “There will still be some rain, this mainly over the north of the country where it may become windy at times. The south of the country should become drier and calmer, ..”

      “Just the north of the UK, mainly Scotland but perhaps Northern Ireland …”

    288. twathater says:

      @ Liz g 6.58pm Yes Liz and the sooner the betterer

      I watched in d car Gordon Ross earlier and he said that there has been an application submitted to SEPA by the MOD for permission to set up a waste dump to dispose of NUCLEAR waste from Faslane and ALL the nuclear subs , the proposed site is apparently around Coulport at Loch Long , but it disnae really matter it’s only SCOTLAND
      Also apparently the SG know nothing about the application and have not been consulted Scotland the dumping ground for the UK (england ) imperial forces

    289. Liz g says:

      Well said Smallaxe….And…
      Hi great to see you post,hope are keeping well.
      Much love to you and Mrs Smallaxe.
      Tell her I was asking fur her XXX

    290. callmedave says:

      Andrew Sabisky: No 10 adviser resigns over alleged race comments

    291. Smallaxe says:

      Hi, Liz.

      I woke up this morning (that’s always a bonus)

      Peace and Love to you and yours from Mrs S and I.

    292. Golfnut says:

      @ BDTT.

      I think Joe and Pete are the same idiot.

    293. meg merrilees says:

      Good to see you back online Smallaxe – here’s to you and yours.

      Lang may yir lum reek!

    294. Pete Barton says:

      Laugh of my day goes to Golf nut for his last comment pmsl

    295. Graf Midgehunter says:

      For me the make or break moment was the 31 Jan, 23.00 hrs.

      That was the moment WM knowingly broke the ToU. and a demonstration of what Scottish sovereignty means to them. They dared NS/SNP/SG to react and the Scots mouse hardly squealed.

      I don’t particularly want a ref. because the chance of manipulation by WM is much too big, anyone who puts any faith in postal votes etc. is more than slightly loony.

      The question is quite simple, “Are we sovereign or not”.

      We say we are, but we don’t do anything to demonstrate it.

      If we are, then we don’t take any shit from the clowns in WM.

      700 years Dec.oAbr.coming up soon, the SNP ought to be screaming this out to the population. Education, what is it and why does it matter now.

      The sound of silence”

    296. Smallaxe says:

      Hi, Meg.

      Thank’s, I usually stick to lurking these days but I just couldn’t let that one lie.

      Hopefully, we’ll get out of the doldrums (and the union) soon.

      Peace and love to you and yours.

    297. terence callachan says:


      You are absolutely correct
      But you know what ?
      So many Scottish independence supporters aid them by always saying british
      when they should actually be saying English
      Weegingerdug is classic
      Never says it’s england that is responsible for brexit or
      It’s england responsible for voting in a pm like Boris J

      He always says british this British that

      It’s about time Scottish independence started calling it what it is
      It’s an English problem
      The number of britnats in Scotland or wales or NI is tiny compared to England

      Scotland refused S30
      Treated badly by Westminster
      Ignored about brexit
      Etc etc etc

      It’s england doing it
      Not wales or NI or Scottish people we already know a majority of Scottish people support Scottish independence

      What’s so frightening about them saying ENGLAND or ENGLISH it’s as if these are forbidden words so they hide behind Britain or British

    298. Pete Barton says:

      Jackson Carlost has been instructed by his UK string pullers
      to change direction;prior to that change of attack it was SNP get on with the day job, stop obsessing about IR2.

      Now, as figures obviously suggest Yes is over 50%, let’s convince them that the SNP, and by association the Yes movement are in fact a bunch of deviants.


      Morally ..what was it..?


      Sent to him by his state handlers.

      Of that I have no doubts.

      So, watch this space, the new narrative is ‘Invasion of the body snatchers’- go to sleep, you’ll wake up mindless.

      I smell Cummings…

    299. Pete Barton says:

      And did the sun hold back their story till the finance secretary was due a speech?

      Remember the game ‘Kerplonk’?

      Did it not have loads of sticks, which, if you timed it right the whole thing fell through?

    300. Old Pete says:

      Agree 100% with you Terence Scotland and all the folk who live her are effectively under the yoke of a right wing English Tory government. It was voted in by the English and for the benefit of the English.
      Sadly 25% of our electorate in Scotland are desperate to be part of the Tory English governed “country” and in the shires nearest to England its probably nearer 40%.
      Wales as a conquered nation is more or less considered part of England by the English. Scotland is more or less considered an English possession by large numbers of English people and if we don’t get free from them soon then they will achieve it.

    301. Dr Jim says:

      Scotland is a country the English think they own like the Falklands or the Chagos Islands, places they’ve never been and likely most will never go but if reminded they’ll jump into immediate Imperial mode and claim ownership of

      27 countries of the EU believe England and the English to be thick or why would they have voted for something they don’t understand, so why is it if Scotland says the same we’re called anti English when it’s England who’s anti everybody else

      Even the BBC showed a clip of the Bexit day celebrations in England doing a vox pop with two women who claimed “well laws and that* the interviewer asked which laws and they hadn’t a scooby what they were talking about

      I’ll just be content to be one of the eugenically inferior Scottish vermin infesting the North of England’s territory that the English can’t live without to stand on their own feet, what’s up with that anyway, why are the English so afraid to be an Independent country

    302. mike cassidy says:

      You would think that an 80+ majority would keep them happy.

      Tories bow to the irresistible march of woke

    303. North chiel says:

      “Meg Merrilles @0604 pm “ As you highlight ( along with other consistent posters) the most recent breaches of The Treaty of Union 1707, it is becoming clearer now by the day that “ The sovereignty of The People of Scotland “ issue is coming centre stage in our quest for Independence. The “ devolved” Holyrood Parliament ( set by Westminster as subservient under recent Westminster legislation) cannot surely be tolerated under the 1707 Treaty UNLESS an EQUIVALENT English Parliament was simoultaneously established. (Albeit it is crystal clear now to “ every man and his Scottie dog” that Westminster is now the Defacto English Parliament). Notwithstanding EVEL etc. and the “ defacto” nature of Westminster, how can there be A “ devolved “ Scottish Parliament under the Union treaty, WITHOUT an equivalent “devolved” English Parliament ?? . Hence this glaring lack of equivalence must surely be a CLEAR breach of the 1707 treaty.
      As others have mentioned recently , Joanne Cherry Q. C. Would appear to be beginning to “ Champion” the Scottish Sovereignty issue and I feel that this issue will take centre stage over the coming months . However, I hope that my points above highlights the subservient and lack of equivalence issue in relation to Holyrood/ Westminster to better understand the constraints ?on our FM & Holyrood Government, and consequently it is probably our Westminster Scottish leadership who now have to “ take the lead “ as regards our Scottish Sovereignty in relation to Clear Breaches of The treaty of Union 1707. Over to JC & IB??.

    304. Sandy says:

      Graf Midgehunter @ 10.48pm.

      Treaty of Arbroath 6th April 1320.
      The everlasting problem is the media. 99.9% of the press are anti-Scottish. Forget about the BBBC & ITV. In respect of the ToA, no doubt there will be a somewhat passing reference to it. Activists must, at every opportunity, raise this issue at every conversation.
      Here’s hoping the Party has the intention of a flier to every home, even business failure, Carlaw.

    305. iain mhor says:

      @Breeks 8:59pm

      There is of course the question of what constitutes a breach of ‘the Treaty’ in toto – as articles of the ‘Treaty’ have been breached previously. Death by a thousand cuts?
      Whether the failure to contest such ‘breaches’ at the time, is to be considered acquiescence, or whether these historical breaches may be revisited – in the manner of plod ‘throwing the book’.

      I must assume (though hate to project) that your first principle here is that the ‘Treaty’ is a live article, then may we consider: Whither the Crown?
      For if we take also, the principles that the ‘Crown in Parliament’ as a representation of the Union of Crowns; that the Crown in Queen Anne brokered the Treaty personally (at least her advisors did on her instruction – not the Parliaments of the respective Kingdoms, who merely ratified the Treaty) then either the Commons of the Parliament of GB etc. breached the Treaty of the Crown – or The Crown as the ‘Crown in Parliament’ breached – or at least failed to uphold – the articles of her own Treaty (The Union of Crowns currently resides with Elizabeth)

      I am making a poor fist of making my point (it’s very late) Perhaps I should just partially quote Queen Anne at the first sitting of the Parliament of GB etc :

      ‘There are several matters expressly made liable by the Articles of the Union, to the consideration of the Parliament of Great Britain, which, together with such others, as may reasonably produce those advantages, that, with due care, must certainly arise from that Treaty, I earnestly recommend to your serious Consideration…

      On my Part nothing shall be wanting to procure to my People all the blessings which can follow from this happy circumstance of my Reign, and to extinguish by all proper means the least occasions of jealousy, that either the civil or religious rights of any part of this my United Kingdom can suffer by the consequences of this Union.…”

      Well, join the dots I suppose, or I’ll be into screeds of boring constitutional arguments… again.

    306. manandboy says:


      They refuse to be a team player with Europe, while forcefully insisting that Scotland will play in Team England.

      “In short, we only want what other independent countries have. ” – Except for Scotland, which must remain under our colonial-style control and be subject to the Authority of the English Executive.

      We won’t budge on escaping EU rules, says UK’s Brexit negotiator
      David Frost says democratic consent would snap if UK agreed to EU alignment

    307. manandboy says:

      David Frost goes on to say:

      ““So if it is true, as we hear from our friends in the commission and the 27, that the EU wants a durable and sustainable relationship in this highly sensitive area, the only way forward is to build on this approach of a relationship of equals.”


    308. manandboy says:

      PS. As in ” Britain to evacuate passengers from quarantined ship”, the term ‘UK’ has seemingly fallen from favour at No.10 Downing Street, to be replaced by ‘Britain’. ie. The Country of Britain.

      Don’t you just love the English, with their addiction to treachery.

    309. Mike d says:

      Terence callachan 10.55pm.people are frightened in Scotland to use The word england or english in case they are deemed anti english.hence constant use of the word british. Their propaganda is working

    310. mumsyhugs says:

      Excellent news – Angus Robertson is running for Edinburgh Central next year 🙂

    311. Rm says:

      Worked for an English couple who retired to Scotland, fine folk to speak to, I asked how long they’d lived up in Scotland Ten years yes it’s a great country, fresh air, good scenery and the people are nice, I said do you think you’d ever go back south to stay again ? He said in a Lancaster accent the only way we’d go back down south is if Scotland got its independence, I laughed and said I want Independence he couldn’t believe it they stopped speaking, I passed their house not long ago and noticed an English flag flying from a pole in their garden, they obviously have a pride in their country, but they didn’t think I should have pride in my country. It’s not the English people’s fault that they seem to think they’re superior, I think any people not born in Scotland will have to have stayed here for twenty years or until they become Scottish Nationals.

    312. Joe says:

      @ Pete

      I dont know much about the tax situation. I do know school level economics, which is something well beyond the average commentor on this site and possibly the Yes movement at large. They are pathetically ignorant and deluded and wonder why they cant maintain 50% support for long even at the most extreme times

    313. Breeks says:

      iain mhor says:
      18 February, 2020 at 1:19 am

      @Breeks 8:59pm

      There is of course the question of what constitutes a breach of ‘the Treaty’ in toto – as articles of the ‘Treaty’ have been breached previously. Death by a thousand cuts?

      Absolutely correct Iain, and if I`m correct, one or other parties in the contract must declare the contract breached, and thereafter the contract is ended and cannot be resurrected. If the breach was an error or unintended, it doesnt matter, the contract cannot be resurrected, and even if the breach actions can be reversed and made good, the original contract remains dead a new contract would need to be agreed.

      That’s how it works with building contracts, and even purchases. Some people with a problem are too hasty in declaring a contract breached without reading it, and thereby end the contract which might very well have codified arbitration procedures and conflict resolution protocols which actually protected the customer.. you’re right to a refund, compensation etc. READ THE CONTRACT is sound advice.

      Ordinarily, declaring the contract breached is last resort territory, and more useful as a threat than an actuality, if you want an amicable resolution or something salvaged from the contract.

      But the Treaty of Union might be different, but I think the basic principles will be similar.

      If Scotland was to get grim and serious about declaring the Union Treaty formally breached, was resolute and determined, and not bluffing about it, (looking at you Mr Blackford), I think we’d very quickly see a change in tone from Westminster.

      A change of tone maybe, but little common ground. Westminster knows very well it has been playing fast and loose with the Treaty for a very long time. Frankly, I think it has been greatly emboldened lately because it has witnessed Holyrood and the Scottish Government adopting the Colonial legislation of the Scotland Act as sacrosanct above the the Nation’s constitution.

      Scotland’s government is meekly, but stubbornly, observing the conventions of a devolved assembly which was designed to be a lower house beneath Westminster, and totally ignoring the Nation’s constitution which enshrines sovereignty upon the Scottish people.

      It is currently the Scottish Government’s weakness, and apparent constitutional naivity which is giving Boris Johnson a green light to force through all manner of colonial impositions on Scotland because Scotland, which absolutely ISN’T toothless, is currently acting precisely like it is. The Scottish Government is acting like the proverbial rabbit in the headlights and the whole BritNat Establishment is pinching itself because can’t believe it’s luck.

      The SNP is trying to make Holyrood a sovereign parliament it isn’t, by clever and cunning reinterpretation of the Scotland Act which constitutes Holyrood as a lower house legislature beneath Westminster. They are looking for a loophole. That may or may not be successful, and ‘may’ authorise a referendum that is contrary to the will of Westminster, but in all seriousness, what poverty of ambition. That is still Scotland roaring like a mouse.

      Scotland needs to put away the micky mouse colonial fealties of the Scotland Act, and fetch in the big guns instead, the heavyweight constitution of the Scottish Nation and the popular sovereignty enshrined with the people. Don’t roar like a mouse, roar like a fucking lion rampant and defend the sovereign constitution of Scotland.

    314. Joe says:

      Ive spoken economics but the social effects of leftist ideology is starting to be felt. GRA, mass immigration from conservative and supremacist religion (not Scotland yet). If i say im right wing I throw in a caveat – not the G Bush kind. If someone says they are on the left and doesnt add some sort of caveat to seperate themselves then they are without shame or any awareness

    315. Mike d says:

      RM. 7.46 am.I dont think that english flag would be flying in a garden in Ireland.

    316. Golfnut says:

      @ iain mhor.1:19

      I think you made an excellent fist of it.

      The most important part of the ruling by the Court of Session, and though not relevant in Scottish Constitutional law the confirmation by the SP, was that neither the Crown nor Parliament are above the law. The Crown is the weakest link in Westminsters assumption by convention of absolute Parliamentary Sovereignty. The Crown is answerable through Scots Constitutional law to the people of Scotland and therefore so are her Ministers and her government, Parliament and Ministries.
      That the Treaty between Scotland and England is extant is irrefutable, simply by virtue of the supremacy of Scots law in Scotland, past breaches of the Treaty are irrelevant, because it is always the prerogative of the aggrieved in any contract whether and when to take action.
      Until and unless the people of Scotland start to assert there right and act as sovereign people, Westminster will continue to ride roughshod over our country.

    317. Effijy says:

      You know all those lovely adverts where the corrupt casino bankers
      assure you that they are your best friend and it’s all about you
      Well the latest update from HSBC is that 35,000 of their loyal workers
      Are about to become unemployed.

      So fewer staff means even greater profits for the already rich share holders
      And of course the public find branch closures, long trips to a branch, longer
      Phone calls and bigger phone bills when you need to talk to them.

      They give no interest in your money, they charge plenty for borrowing, the repossess
      and close down business at the drop of a hat if they can make money from it.

      They say the root of all evil is money
      Well the bankers are the Mother of all evil
      And a natural haven for corrupt politicians like
      Flipper Darling and Klunker Brown in their retirement.

    318. sassenach says:

      Joe @ 7-52am

      Joe and Pete, the Britnat tag (team??) starting early today!

      Give us a break, lad(s)!!

    319. sassenach says:

      terence callachan says: @10-55pm

      “So many Scottish independence supporters aid them by always saying british
      when they should actually be saying English
      Weegingerdug is classic”.

      I see WGD has replied to that criticism on his blog – time for an apology, Terence??

    320. Rm says:

      Scotland need the right people in charge of Dissolving the Union, separate from the governing side of our parliament, more radical thinking willing to try any tactics, given a free hand when people see things happening we’ll get more and more labour voters thinking in a different way and more towards ending the Union between two sovereign countries.

    321. HYUFD says:

      Only 29% of Northern Irish voters want a United Ireland according to a new poll, compared to 52% who want to stay in the UK.
      99% of DUP and UUP voters want to stay in the UK as do crucially 70% of Alliance voters.
      92% of Sinn Fein voters and 81% of SDLP voters still want a United Ireland though

    322. Reluctant Nationalist says:

      The Right is responsible for mass immigration, Joe B. And not the G Bush kind. How’s yer slav?

    323. Dr Jim says:

      Amazing how these Britnats insist on informing us how intelligent they are and that all the rest of us struggle to understand the basics that they feel compelled to teach us, except their spelling and grammar subverts their attempts and demonstrates the opposite

    324. Colin Alexander says:

      The article quoted below discusses the Vienna Convention On The Law Of Treaties.. so it discusses current international standards regarding treaties. However, it must be noted that the UK Union pre-dates the Vienna Convention so the Vienna Convention is not legally binding on the Treaty of Union.

      Article 56(1), entitled “Denunciation of or withdrawal from a treaty containing no provision regarding termination, denunciation or withdrawal,” likewise explains that withdrawal from a treaty is generally not possible unless the treaty contains a provision for its termination.

      It states that there are circumstances under which a revocation provision that is not expressly stated in the treaty may nonetheless be implied:

      A treaty which contains no provision regarding its termination and which does not provide for denunciation or withdrawal is not subject to denunciation or withdrawal unless:

      (a) it is established that the parties intended to admit the possibility of denunciation or withdrawal; or

      (b) a right of denunciation or withdrawal may be implied by the nature of the treaty.
      By stating that the basic rule is that, except in certain limited and specified circumstances, “[a] treaty which contains no provision regarding its termination and which does not provide for denunciation or withdrawal is not subject to denunciation or withdrawal,” Article 56 places the burden on the party seeking to withdraw.

      Article 42(2) of the Convention recognizes that there are situations where a right to withdraw is imposed by operation of law—in other words, according to some legal rule and regardless of the other party’s consent.

      These situations are detailed in Articles 46 through 62…the detailed and specific nature of these exceptions underscores that no general right of unilateral withdrawal exists. Such detailed and specific provisions would not be necessary if a general unilateral right of withdrawal existed.

      Article 46 deals with inconsistency between state internal law and the treaty; such inconsistency does not suffice to invalidate the treaty unless the violation was “manifest and concerned a rule of its internal law of fundamental importance.”

      Article 48 concerns the possibility of error in the treaty;

      Article 49 concerns fraud in the inducement;

      Article 50 raises the issue of corruption of a state’s representative;

      Articles 51 and 52 concern coercion of a state’s representative;

      and Article 53 deals with inconsistency between the treaty in question and jus cogens.

      Article 60 sets out the consequences of a breach by one of the parties; under limited circumstances, a breach by one gives the other party the right to withdraw.

      Articles 61 and 62 deal with impossibility of performance and fundamental change of circumstances.

    325. Colin Alexander says:

      Regarding the The UN’s International Court of Justice as a legal forum regarding the Union and Scottish independence:

      “Only States (States Members of the United Nations and other States which have become parties to the Statute of the Court or which have accepted its jurisdiction under certain conditions) may be parties to contentious cases”.

      “Advisory proceedings before the Court are only open to five organs of the United Nations and 16 specialized agencies of the United Nations family or affiliated organizations”.

    326. Old Pete says:

      Belfast Telegraph ? No bias there then (ho,ho)

    327. Jockanese Wind Talker says:

      What about the Scots?

      “Londoners who are unhappy about Brexit should be allowed to have an ‘associate citizenship’ for the EU, insists Sadiq Khan.”

    328. Colin Alexander says:

      “The International Court of Justice (ICJ) is the principal judicial organ of the United Nations (UN). It was established in June 1945 by the Charter of the United Nations and began work in April 1946”.

      “The Court’s role is to settle, in accordance with international law, legal disputes submitted to it by States and to give advisory opinions on legal questions referred to it by authorized United Nations organs and specialized agencies”.

    329. Macart says:

      @ Smallaxe 10.50pm

      Good to see you and hope you’re keeping better. 🙂

    330. Dr Jim says:

      Well it didn’t take the unnamed LGBTKXYZ sources long to attack Kate Forbes, apparently she’s a Christian and if that’s not bad enough it seems she might be the wrong sort of Christian

      It used to be the Muslims they attacked but they’re not allowed to do that anymore so let’s do a white Christian woman now because her way of doing sums might impinge on something they can invent for her to impinge upon, whoever these unnamed source people are

      The SNP are reviewing whether to replace themselves with a computer as real peoples views on anything are unacceptable to the great unnamed 0.02% of bampots who say everybody else is wrong but them, and they will exercise their right to dominate the internet and complain to the newspapers who print their crap in order to shout it at everybody until we all get the message that our lifestyle and opinions are worthless compared to theirs

      I’m an old white atheist male, kill me now I’m ready to face their unnamed judgement

    331. Ottomanboi says:

      The English, lovely individuals but menacing collectively, assume they are some species of ‘the chosen’. Their history is separatist and fused with ‘racial’ exceptionalism. The notion of an ‘island people’ as in the writings of W. Churchill, underpins ethnic consciousness and folk myth. European, in the existential sense, they are not. Cosmopolitan, by the standard definition, they are not. As understood by the term ‘establishment’, theirs is an ëlite driven monoculture grounded in and buttressed by a handful of historic institutions, Eton/Harrow, OxBridge, Anglicanism, English Law, Parliamentary Sovereignty and Monarchy.
      Imperialism gave the English and Englishness wings. The current régime of romantics and oddballs wants those wings back.
      The English are friends only to themselves.
      They are but faux amis to the rest of the world. Double dealing comes naturally as does the power of the iron fist.
      Scots, of all people, ought to realise that, those engaged in Scotland’s liberation struggle in particular.
      Sadly, many are like Mr Neil Oliver purblind to the essential nature of Britannia.
      Mr Oliver is of course a ‘speculative’ archaeologist not a fact based historian, which suits the myth bound system nicely.

    332. Republicofscotland says:

      So a major report is to be published today by EU expert Anthony Salamone, on how Scotland can get back into the EU within four years, after independence.

      Mr Salamone refers to Scotland as a republic in the report. So if we believe that nothing on the indy front will happen this year and that’s the most likely scenario, then next year its the Scottish elections so that rules that out, unless Sturgeon put a consultative indyref in the SNP manifesto, which I hope she does. That automatically triggers one if indy parties get a majority at Holyrood.

      If not then 2022, would be the next opportunity for a indyref, unless of course Sturgeon still sits on her hands. The report state that its regrettable that there would be a border between Scotland and England, but it would be managable, just like any other EU border.

    333. jfngw says:

      You’ve got to laugh at David Leask with his tweets:

      ‘Maybe it’s time Twitter partisans stopped expressing opinions on stuff, such as media, on which they have no knowledge?’

      I’m pretty sure that the PM has the same opinion of journalists and the public about politics. He does make an arse of himself frequently.

    334. Giving Goose says:


      Re the flagpole in the garden.
      That sounds like a siege mentality to me.

    335. Ottomanboi says:

      @DrJim 09:41
      Identitarianism is a secular religion. Let us pray it never becomes the state cult.

    336. Rm says:

      I’m hoping Scotland doesn’t end up like Venezuela, a country with vast resources but can’t do nothing with it, as the years go on if the Scottish government just sit and do nothing what future has Scotland, we can’t borrow even with our vast resources and even bigger massive potential regarding the renewables future of Europe and the worlds survival, with all our great potential Europe or EFTA would welcome Scotland with open arms, why are the SNP government not trying harder, has the leadership been compromised?

    337. Golfnut says:

      @ Colin Alexander.

      I think you have ably demonstrated, if that was your intention, just how Scotland could withdraw from the Treaty of Union. The ICJ already identifies that Scots law has immutable legal jurisdiction over its borders and boundaries, and as a joint signatory of the Treaty which enshrined the Sovereign right of the people of Scotland has a number of options for legal withdrawal from the Treaty.

    338. Almond Chutney says:


      I work on the English border with Wales so deal with a lot of English people on a day to day basis, I even know some of them well enough to say that I don’t think it’s down to it’s people. The people are blameless within the grand scheme of things in terms of a WM establishment.

      The term you said here –

      ‘The notion of an ‘island people’ as in the writings of W. Churchill, underpins ethnic consciousness and folk myth. European, in the existential sense, they are not.’

      Maybe it’s true, but you already said was the writings of one man, not a reflection of an entire population of 40+ million.

      As for the Europeans, I think people forget that the entire continent of Europe has ties to colonialism in the past, where it was our greatest mistake as a race of Europeans. Britain is probably the most notorious of such, but the atrocities of Spain, France, Portugal, The Netherlands, Denmark and Germany are just a couple of examples of colonial ties, without referencing 1930 Germany either..

      Was it not true before the Act of Union that Scotland had attempted many colonial endeavors during the Darien Scheme in 1695, like such as in Panama or New Caledonia in nowadays North Carolina.

      Anyway, my main point before I get accused as a BritNat (I’m ready to respond) is that I just think it’s highly unfair to term ‘English’ people, especially in the modern age as colonial, imperial masters. This is all isolated in Westminster alone, and exactly what Westminster wants is willing to deflect the blame of its actions to it’s regional populace. My own family detest the English, but the whole ‘blood and soil’ argument is getting a bit boring now, because those generations of people are dying out.

    339. RobertTheTruth says:

      @ sassenach aka ‘Cubby’

      You were told to piss from here and migrated to WGD where you continued your obsessive beef with various posters and this site owner.

      Here you are again in one of your various guises continuing your ‘Coco’ jibes and issues with Terence C.

      If, as you claim, you want this site to return to its supposed halcyon days where everyone was happy and singing from the same hymn sheet then why do you continue to foment discord at every opportunity? This is not your site and you do not decide who apologises to whom or what is allowed to be said here.

      Your barely contained rage on WGD is quite funny as you struggle to comply with WGD’s reminders that you should not bring your personal grievances to his site.

      You have some serious issues going on that Independence alone won’t sort out.

    340. Breeks says:

      Colin Alexander says:
      18 February, 2020 at 9:15 am

      Regarding the The UN’s International Court of Justice as a legal forum regarding the Union and Scottish independence:

      “Only States (States Members of the United Nations and other States which have become parties to the Statute of the Court or which have accepted its jurisdiction under certain conditions) may be parties to contentious cases”.

      “Advisory proceedings before the Court are only open to five organs of the United Nations and 16 specialized agencies of the United Nations family or affiliated organizations”.
      Colin Alexander says:
      18 February, 2020 at 9:15 am

      Regarding the The UN’s International Court of Justice as a legal forum regarding the Union and Scottish independence:

      “Only States (States Members of the United Nations and other States which have become parties to the Statute of the Court or which have accepted its jurisdiction under certain conditions) may be parties to contentious cases”.

      “Advisory proceedings before the Court are only open to five organs of the United Nations and 16 specialized agencies of the United Nations family or affiliated organizations”.

      Aye, but the Chagos Islanders got there…

      And yes, while the Treaty of Union predates the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties, and the Treaty of Union has no written protocols for it’s dissolution, to a certain extent, determining what may or may not be done must surely default to being the prerogative of one or both of the signatories of the Treaty. Thus, if Scotland can document sovereign legitimacy, as Scotland can, then Scotland will have a sovereign proprogative to do what it likes, and arbitrarily terminate the Union without even a need to explain why. Such action would be a sovereign prerogative with authenticated sovereignty.

      However, the issue of soveregnty is incomplete without International Recognition, so a much wiser strategy than arbitrary sovereign prerogative would be to submit a claim for recognition which properly cites legitimate sovereign prerogative, but which is also padded out to make the case for sovereign recognition which marries medieval origin, centuries of documented provenance and precedence, and lawful legitimacy all together with modern constitutional criteria.

      As ever too, don’t forget there are parallel issues here; the legitimacy of Scottish Sovereignty versus the legitimacy of UK’s convention on Sovereignty. Essentially, you cannot put one on trial without simultaneously doing likewise to the other.

    341. Republicofscotland says:

      Re my 9.51am comment.

      To conclude, the report states four years after independence as a target to return to the EU.

      So if 2022, is the most likely year that the SNP government hold a indyref (Indy fighting funds accumulated by then hopefully). The coffers will be emptied to fight next years election. So it looks very unlikely that a indyref will happen next year, a four year window from that is 2026.

      The problem must surely be can we afford to wait two years to exit this union, and what damage to Scotland will Cummings and Johnson have done by then.

      The EU time scale will mean nothing, not a jot if we don’t hold an indyref sooner than two years time.

    342. iain mhor says:

      @Breeks @Golfnut
      May I reply with yet another lengthy piece over well trodden ground – and apologies to all the Wingers who would much prefer I didn’t!

      It’s certainly my understanding that the ‘Treaty’ and consequent ‘Acts’ are extant and yes indeed any ‘breaches’ may be addressed at any time. The nature of the beast is one of the prime questions to be addressed IMO.
      Another which follows is the ‘State of the Union’ – Unitary or Union? The UK govt & Crawford/Boyle position was never put to the proof -for pretty good reason (search waaay back to Wings “The Clean Slate” for a precis)
      A third is the ability of the GB etc Gov’t to amend the ratifying Acts – which a loose reading of the Treaty/Acts would suggest it is enabled so to do.

      A fourth, is the nature of the Crown in Parliament? As a thought exercise : Assume Anne and the Union of Crowns brokered the Treaty (her advisors etc) The two Parliaments of the respective Kingdoms ratified the Treaty and assume again, these Parliaments were by those Acts both prorogued and not extinguished and that the new Parliament of Union (GB etc) was convened.
      The continuing of the machinery of the English Parliament and folding some elements from the Scottish Parliament is not required here, to be viewed other than that of the logic of any business merger – So far, so funky.

      Now, there is a prevailing view of the Crown in Parliament, Divine right, Sovereignty (blah de blah) The question is from which Crown this derives?
      For if, we also assume the Crown in Parliament is invoked only under the aegis of the English Crown (For Divine right etc is anathema to the Scots Crown as Jamie Saxt found out) then so too, sit the Commons of the Parliament of GB etc.
      If the Commons, or Crown in Parliament, is in any breach or failure to ‘Uphold’ the Treaty, then its breach is under the aegis of the English Crown.

      Yes it’s just a fun thought exercise, but such exercises are the gymnastics of Law.
      If, as you aver @Golfnut, Scotland must better lever at least its last standing independence – its Law; (For the Kirk, once the keeper of the Scottish Act of Union, is, like its Patron, a ghost in these matters) then such exercises are a good limber up before lifting our Monarch to answer for our Crown.
      Usually we are used to ‘The Crown vs X’ in court – meaning the Crown Gov’t vs X – however the consequence of such exercise, ulitimately requires our actual Crown to answer.

      As to the question of whether the Scottish Crown was absorbed by the English Crown (a corollary of the extinguishing of Scotland/continuation argument) then the statement: “Although a new Scottish Parliament now determines much of Scotland’s legislation, the two Crowns remain united under a single Sovereign, the present Queen” – appears to refute this.
      Though we may not necessarily take this as an official position (the above appears on the Royal’s website under ‘Scottish monarchs’ if you search there deeply enough!) perhaps we should actually ask the question directly.

      That ultimately leads to ‘Who may do the asking of these questions, especially in matters pertaining to the ‘Crown?’ Is it to be the Scottish Parliament, or Scottish representation via the ‘GB etc’ Parliament?
      What exactly is the status of the Scottish Parliament (or at least, what is the Scottish Pariament’s averred status) Was our Parliament indeed reconvened and operates under the suzerainty of the GB etc. Parliament, or is it directly a mere devolved arm of said Parliament? So many questions!

      As ever it’s finding principles on which to stand, finding the right questions to ask and putting them to the proof – anything else is just winging it.
      To take an analogy from business and bureaucracy; In my experience, the ‘rules and legislations’ one receives tend to be dictated. One is told what the ‘rules are and how they are to be interpreted – inevitably chinese whispers passed from one line manager to the other. A perfunctory examination of the actual regulations inevitably refutes the bollox.
      Quite often one must struggle to actually receive a copy of “Where this is written?” far less a reply. (T&C’s are a great playground for me, especially with banks! If you find ‘penalties may not be levied, if there were sufficient funds in another account to cover payments..’ – well, it’s a grinning kind of day lol!)
      As I’m sure you’ll appreciate, the most fundamental question of all, in business and law is “Where is this written?” A maxim, I have always stood by – Pander not to the ‘AA’ men (as my auld man called them) “Ayy Ayy – you can’t do that!”

      I think the Scottish Parliament (by extension the SNP) had initially no such core principles, identified no key questions and were therefore unable to put them to the proof and were winging it – in thrall to the ‘AA’ men.
      Perhaps not universally, but the factions who were asking the questions were a cheep. As you say @Golfnut – that cheep should be a roar.

    343. Kangaroo says:

      Breeks, Meg Merrilees

      IMHO you are both correct. To borrow a phrase from a recent Court case. The gun fired on 31st Jan2020 and the bullet hits its target on 31st Dec 2020 unless there is an extention. At that point a statement that the Treaty Art 4 & 6 have been breached would be immutable.

      Why bother with an indyref that may be lost, by fair means or foul, when there is a simpler solution?

    344. sassenach says:

      aka “oxymoron”?

      Poor soul that you are, grasping at straws.
      I read WGD every day, but have yet to post anything on that site.
      But I desperately want Independence – do you???

    345. jfngw says:

      The madness of the BritNats, they are actually boasting about the superiority of have a manufacturing trade deficit with the EU and how it gives them the upper hand.

    346. robertknight says:

      Kangaroo @ 11:35

      “Why bother with an indyref that may be lost, by fair means or foul, when there is a simpler solution?”

      But who will champion that “simpler solution”?

      Please don’t say the SNP. I’ve just had a minor surgical procedure and I’d hate to burst my stitches due to excessive laughter.

    347. Ottomanboi says:

      Depends on personal encounters and experiences but I take issue that the blood&soil nationalism is on the wane. The attendees at ultra right manifestations in England and in Europe are not old colonel blimps. The simplicities of ‘fascism’, a catchall term, are rather attractive to the immature, of all ages and origins.
      It has been pointed out that interest in the British Empire is growing, the glamour bits that is, yet the mechanics of the imperial process is little touched upon. The operations of the East India company highlight the manner in which corporations subvert even the strongest of systems. William Dalrymple made the link in his book The Anarchy with modern American based equivalents, anglo-saxon predation in a tech guise. Shashi Tharoor in Inglorious Empire provides a racy polemic on the imperialist methodology and its consequences.
      Like Scotland’s hamfisted attempts at colonialism we are very small beer in this global great game.
      All the more reason to be on our guard and trust no one, especially gift bringers.
      Scotland is still rather wet behind the ears in certain important strategic respects.
      There is much yet to be learned and intellectually digested..

    348. John H. says:

      Ottomanboi 9.49am.

      The French I believe, have a saying about the English (State). Not the English people, who are abused just as much as we are. It goes something like this.

      “Better to have the English as an enemy than a friend. If you are their enemy, they will try to buy you. If you are their friend, they will try to sell you.”

      The British (English) State must love Scotland very much indeed.

    349. Kangaroo says:

      Iain Mohr @11:15

      I agree that its useful to undertake the legal gymnastics as it helps to root out any thought provoking positions. Indeed you do that in your various pieces. So let me add to your collection, but from a different perspective
      a) is there a dispute that the Declaration of Arbroath and its agreement by Pope John xx11 at the time made Scots people Sovereign?? I can find no evidence of that. On the contrary, indeed the rejection of Mary Queen of Scots and the similar ejection of James V11 in 1689 Claim of Right endorses that position. Further our right to roam is further proof of that as a Sovereign cannot trespass on his/her own land.

      b) the Scottish parliament was prorogued in 1707 and Queen Anne announced it dissolved later on that year. However she did not have authority over the Scottish Parliament so her statement was unlawful.
      c) Winnie Ewing opened the Parliament stating that having been prorogued it was now reconvened. This is a difficult one. The case could be made that the new Parliament is a subsidiary of the UK Parliament, and indeed the UK Parliament seems to be able to change the SP powers whenever it wishes, even “abnormally”. So it would be easy to make the case that the Scottish MPs at Westminster were delegated the Sovereign will for matters that come up in that chamber and MEPs the Sovereign will for matters in Holyrood. This makes it very messy to unpick, indeed a Gordian knot.

      IMHO in order to have no legal dispute of any substance, see my post of 11:35am.

    350. Kangaroo says:

      Robert knight @ 11:49

      We the people is the answer. It only takes one of us Sovereign Scots to make the case. I’m sure J Cherry is aware, a breach is a breach and nullifies the Treaty and Humpty Dumpty won’t be put back together again.

    351. Kangaroo says:

      jfngw @11:40

      Quite so. Wait till they find out that they need to provide goods in exchange and their worthless paper notes need to be replaced with a Hard asset such as pharmaceuticals or gold.

      And the oil and whisky etc belong to hmmmm and we have left. They will be a trice upset.

    352. HYUFD says:

      Jfngw Over 50% of UK goods and services are now exported outside the EU, the largest amount to the USA.

      The UK is the largest destination for EU exports

    353. Ottomanboi says:

      @John H 11:56
      Les Anglais just love property. It’s in the DNA. Shopkeepers! A nation of estate agents.

    354. jfngw says:

      And here is HYUFD here to prove my point, The Madness of King Boris?

    355. James says:

      U-oh. The FUD’s farted again….

    356. MaggieC says:

      Just announced that Donalda MacKinnon is leaving as head of Bbc Scotland in the autumn –

      Good riddance!

    357. jfngw says:

      BritNats hanker for the glory days, when the children of the underclass deaths certificates regularly recorded marasmus as the cause of death. Long live the Empire, hurray!

    358. @HYUFD,

      US and EU have a quid pro quo trade deal, the two biggest consumer blocks ever,

      UK does not yet have a trade deal with either US or EU,

      you think either US or EU will give UK a special deal ?

    359. jfngw says:

      @Scot Finlayson

      It’s amusing reading these BritNats as they imagine once the UK is desperate for a major trade deal then Donald Trump’s egalitarianism will suddenly come riding through to their rescue.

    360. jfngw says:

      Donalda McKinnon promoted by the BBC in Scotland and declares that she will restore trust. After her analysis she obviously decides the problems is the output is not quite BritNat enough. Finds trust has sunk even more but is at a loss to understand why, resigns, no doubt in hope of some sort of recognition for her tireless work. A honour or at least a head role in a think tank must be coming her way surely.

    361. jfngw says:

      What I find strange is those independence supporters who believe ‘it’s just not cricket’ to game the Holyrood voting system. The BritNats have no problem doing this exact thing themselves, how many times in a council by-election STV system have you seen the SNP win first preference votes but not win the seat. Plus the now strangely large postal vote returns that seem to favour BritNat options.

    362. Liz g says:

      Kangaroo @ 12.00 & Iain Mohr @ 11.15
      I’d say there isn’t much doubt that Holyrood is an instrument of Westminster.
      Because that was the offer on table in 1997 and that’s what the people of Scotland voted Yes to.
      It may not have been framed that way but the offer was for an elected Executive branch of the Westminster Government to exercise the powers of the unelected Scottish Office.
      Nothing about that arrangement altered the power of Westminster to make or unmake any law for Scotland ( which is always written down)
      AND Scotland said yes we agree that’s what we want
      So far there has not been a vote to change that arrangement from the people of Scotland.
      So the sovereignty of the Scottish People is invested by us in the Westminster MPs unless and until we vote to change that…Holyrood works at Westminister’s command just like the Scottish Office before it.

    363. terence callachan says:

      jfngw….I agree

      The britnats regularly persuade Lib Dem or Labour or Tory candidates to stand as independents usually on a single platform that the SNP also have in their manifesto the idea is that they hope they can steal SNP votes
      They often do the same when the Lid Dem Labour or Tory candidate standing had committed some misdemeanour or put people off voting for them
      Again the idea is to pretend they are not really Lib Dem Labour or Tory and they do it to try and divert votes away from SNP

      Anything Scottish independence can do to win is justifiably acceptable given the downright dirty tricks often illegal tricks the britnats get up to

    364. Dan says:

      MaggieC says: at 1:04 pm

      Just announced that Donalda MacKinnon is leaving as head of Bbc Scotland in the autumn –

      Good riddance!

      I’d like to take credit for that!
      I’m more powerful than you can possibly imagine. lol

    365. terence callachan says:

      One of the biggest imports from USA to U.K. now that U.K. has left EU and lost the safety regulation of food will be corn fed beef

      It’s much cheaper than grass fed beef

      Genetically modified food will be flooding the U.K. too
      Watch out for U.K. farmers taking the opportunity to grow genetically modified food too

      Genetically modified organisms put living things into your body that are created by the modification they are things that don’t exist on this planet in natural form

      I won’t put my life at risk by eating it that’s for sure

      Most U.K. farms are owned by people who are not the the actual farmer and do not work on the farm they probably don’t even eat what they produce and probably don’t even live in U.K.

      It a mess

    366. manandboy says:


      “The last four years were merely establishing the foundations of dishonesty, and now they have been completed, the work can begin to ensure people forget the truth altogether.”

      I might add, that ‘ensuring people forget the truth altogether’ can be achieved by keeping the electorate in a constant state of being bamboozled, of being unable to figure out just how you’ve been fooled and cheated by the Government of the 1%, but just knowing that you have.

      This PMJohnson-led Government of All the Lies, clearly has a plan to camouflage everything it is actually trying to achieve in its service of the 1%, by covering it with multiple layers of lies, half-truths, contradictions, and denials of many different hues.

      Using a constant stream of slogans like ‘levelling up’, and other soundbites, repeated constantly on TV and radio, in the Press and online, by a small army of speakers, journalists and media presenters, designed to overwhelm the truth – and leaving the population confused, puzzled, mixed-up, and generally not knowing what to think. In short, bamboozled.

      But in addition to all the other lies, one other crucial deception, is to cover the public with the perception that this Government is FOR THEM. A government for the people, respecting ‘the will of the people’ in everything PMJohnson does.

      This strategy will go on and on – because it is so effective and so successful.

      But one more. Which is to create a new Britain which we can all be proud of. One Britain. One Country. Our Country. With our Queen. Our Union Flag. Doing things our way. Building a wonderful, fairer and more equal future for all our citizens.

      It has begun.

      Watch out Scotland. You are in great danger.

    367. Almond Chutney says:


      I agree with that, although if the interest in the British Empire is indeed growing, then I find that a rather sad fact indeed.

      I think collectively, as you said earlier the representation of the English people is of course down to media intervention and a lot less understanding of the facts, rather being fed a fantasy of global power and glory, which no longer exists. I mean, I see a lot of Scots say that England is practically trying to hold onto Scotland as a colonial hostage, but I see a lot of English come to Wales and actually still think they’re in England and is their right to not attempt to attune to local custom. I mean, I work and travel around the border a lot, so it would be probably be likely but sometimes the ignorance is just too much.

      The way I see it, is that if the Scots, Welsh and NI have their own devolved assemblies, all ‘a level’ under WM and the English is directly governed by WM, they see themselves as outcasts of the system directly, and already treated differently, whether it is a benefit or a hindrance.

      I always said they should have devolved England it’s own parliament (away from London) in the late 90s as an attempt to equalize the union of 4 states, because why wouldn’t anybody else, and either keep WM solely for UK whole matters or abolish it all together. Just a theory of general common sense, they should of done this differently I think.

    368. Graf Midgehunter says:

      Kangaroo says: 11:35 am

      Breeks, Meg Merrilees

      “IMHO you are both correct. To borrow a phrase from a recent Court case. The gun fired on 31st Jan2020 and the bullet hits its target on 31st Dec 2020 unless there is an extention. At that point a statement that the Treaty Art 4 & 6 have been breached would be immutable.

      Why bother with an indyref that may be lost, by fair means or foul, when there is a simpler solution?”

      That’s exactly the point I made earlier.

      It’s not Indyref that’s at the centre of the target as it was in 2014, but the question of sovereignty and why we allow(ed) the 50% equal partner in the ToU to decide over our Right as a sovereign partner and Nation.

      We voted no but WM nevertheless dictated the process and decision to leave. They dragged us out without our expressed permission as an equal partner.

      The ToU has been blatently breached by one of the partners and that must have legal consequences to follow.

      I think Joanna Cherry understands this and methinks AS, however as long as NS rules the roost ……??

    369. Almond Chutney says:

      terence callachan says:

      Genetically modified organisms put living things into your body that are created by the modification they are things that don’t exist on this planet in natural form

      Most of your post was bullshit but my favorite part is the above.

      I have never seen any such science state otherwise, so I advise you stop misleading other’s

      >GMO do not put anything living in your body, it’s not parasitic
      >GMO has been used by humans for the past 15,000 years
      >GMO especially in crops is mainly to implement resistance to certain herbicides.
      >GMO in animals is probably the worst ideology of all, but it doesn’t do what you claim.

      Conclusion, become a veggie or vegan, have no worries

    370. terence callachan says:

      Sassennach 8.27am…

      You must be joking , what I said is true

      his response refers to a statement he made about English people and their views of Scottish people of course he would use that statement .

      He could hardly get his point over about English people making racist comments about Scottish people
      by referring to English people as British people making racist comments about Scottish people could he ?

      But whenever he is talking about England’s Westminster refusing Scotland a S30
      Or England’s Westminster MPs walking out when Scottish MPs talking
      Or England’s Westminster ignoring NS or insulting other Scottish govt reps
      Or anything at all from England insulting Scotland
      He never says England or English
      He always says british or Britain

      He’s not the only one

      I sometimes wonder if it’s fear or perhaps keeping the foot in the door in case Indy fails because journos will still need jobs

    371. Robert J. Sutherland says:

      Liz g @ 14:14:

      I’d say there isn’t much doubt that Holyrood is an instrument of Westminster.

      On the face of it, that’s unarguable. But… =grin=

      There are two qualifications. Firstly there is the fact that in politics, Things Change. Tony Blair may have (in)famously regarded Holyrood as a mere parish council, but some of the ultra-Unionists like Tam Dalyell saw the danger (as they perceived it) right from the start. Power, once conceded, may become irretrievable. (That’s what, incidentally, gave Canada its break.) And we’ve seen as an observable fact that in the decades of its existence Holyrood has achieved far more in the public mind than the status of a puny parish council. Not least thanks to competent SNP administrations through recent years and their pushing of the autonomy envelope.

      Secondly – and this is the wild card – when you mix the reconvening of a Scottish Parliament (whatever LOndon may have intended of it) with the constitutional position of Scotland within a clearly non-unitary UK (however abused over the centuries that position has been), you create a potentially powder-keg situation that no-one – whatever their bluster – can easily predict. London Governments from 1707 until now always been very careful not to push things too far, in case any had serious legal and, importantly, political ramifications.

      Some of us, myself included, believe that this constitutional position (which ought to have the fundamental backing of senior Scottish jurists, after all, since it is the only thing which protects their own rights) could still be the key. Whatever the outcome of a challenge, since it has the potential to affect the public mind in the same pro-indy direction, whether we are proven distinct in law as we assert or whether the Treaty of Union is shown to be a dastardly tissue of lies from start to finish.

    372. jfngw says:

      Herald grab the win-win scenario. Nicola Sturgeon attacked for talking to Alex Salmond, Nicola sturgeon attacked for not talking to Derek Mackay. No matter what the outcome was the attack line had already been decided.

    373. Dr Jim says:

      Todays topical questions at Holyrood contained all the usual references to the freak weather conditions that led to the closure of the Queensferry crossing and from the opposition benches the demand for *guarantees* that those weather conditions won’t occur and lead to such an event again

      The government gave as much information as it could under the circumstances restraining themselves and resisting the the temptation to answer a stupid question with a stupid answer, however I do know that Tony Stark was contacted and if this happens again he has agreed that he or members of his team will assemble and fly to Scotland to take immediate action

      And this is why I could never be a politician

    374. jfngw says:

      I suppose the question we are posing to the court is does the Claim of Right have any legal standing and should we be able to ask the Scots what they want whenever we want.

      If the judiciary rule the Claim of Right meaningless then I would then move that the deciding factor is if the number of independence supporting MP’s at Westminster is more than 50% of the Scottish contingent then we have the mandate for independence. After all that was how we entered this ‘union’ and if they deny the Claim of Right and the Holyrood parliament then we must fall back on precedent.

    375. terence callachan says:

      The poll hyufd refers to 8.32am was conducted by a think tank in London made up of people who are nearly all English people and it was done in Belfast but thee thing is they didn’t publish all the results in the Belfast telegraph they cherry picked results to make out a minority will vote for Irish reunification

      Where have we seen this before

      It’s exactly what Westminster and its allies in the newspapers BBC ITV and English think tanks have been trying on with Scotland for years

      The Irish are wise to it too

    376. terence callachan says:

      Almond chutney 1057 ….English think themselves colonial masters

      What you say is that
      It’s all concentrated in Westminster
      It’s not the actual people of England

      You are wrong what you say is silly

      It’s the English people that vote for Westminster’s contents and it’s actions and it’s continuance

      That old trick that all England’s nasty work is nothing to do with English people is just lame

    377. Dr Jim says:

      @terence callahan 2:43pm

      The selective usage of the words British or English depending on the argument is a classic attempt at diversion when they include the word Scottish as a separate entity
      Now you could argue it’s unconscious, but how when and why did it begin to be that

      If you use the word English you’re automatically anti, but if the word British is used the person deems themselves to be all encompassing until they use the words British and Scottish in the same sentence as comparisons

      England thinks of itself as British and English but don’t think of Scotland or Scots or Scottish as British, Scotland has always been excluded from that inclusion thus creating the bias that exists in England against Scotland

      How many times do we see the weather forecast talk about events across the whole of the UK then in the same sentence we hear *and in Scotland* or *in a survey right across the UK* when it’s only carried out in England

      To be fair poor old Wales never gets a look in

    378. Almond Chutney says:

      terence callachan says:

      That old trick that all England’s nasty work is nothing to do with English people is just lame

      It’s not a trick, you’re just trying to sugar coat xenophobia to be honest, it’s disgusting that you would classify an entire race as such with no justification for means, which is a centralized Westminster government.

      All the English people have is numbers, WHY DO YOU THINK Westminster would directly govern the largest populaled state on Great Britain if they did not think the amount of people they can brainwash with propaganda would make the difference in UK wide matters, add that to their failing services and lack of a general right to free higher education, prescriptions or whatever, it’s a pretty shitty time to be English it seems, but I don’t blame them on their voting intentions, it’s just the way it has been set up for them by the establishment.

      If you

    379. Golfnut says:

      @ iain Mohr.

      All good points and if you don’t mind I will do my best to give a personal view based on what I consider historical fact.
      Does Scotland have International legal recognition, the answer is Yes. A country’s borders are defined by legal jurisdiction, the ICJ ruled, against stiff opposition from both the United Kingdom and the United states, that legal Jurisdiction lay with Scots law. To my mind that verdict killed stone dead Crawford and Boyles other assertion that Scotland had been extinguished by the Treaty of Union, when in actual fact it was the Treaty which enshrined the supremacy of Scots law in Scotland which ensured its very continuance. Their referral to the 1953 McCormack v The Lord Advocate judgement was weak at best since the Lord Presidents summary was completely at odds with their position.
      Because the court found that the Crown could choose any name or number it wished to be known by as proof that Scotland was extinguished was weak, since the judgement was spurious since it was based only on the Royal Prerogative from both Scotland and England.

    380. Robert J. Sutherland says:

      Golfnut @ 15:29,

      Good points there. Personally, I’m all in favour of a legal constitutional challenge in the Scottish courts because it will surely expose the Wizard of Boz behind the curtain in No.10.

      For far too long we have been cringingly willing to accept bluster from London that is nothing more than exceptionalist hot air.

      Pop the balloon.

    381. sassenach says:

      terence callachan @ 2-43pm

      WGD is a ‘real’ person who tours all Scotland speaking about independence, and you have the temerity to suggest he may be keeping ‘a foot in both camps’ to protect his journalistic career. You are pathetic!

      He is far more likely to be respected by thousands of Scots that have attended his meetings, than an unknown poster such as yourself, spouting (almost racist?) anti-English rhetoric almost every time you post your drivel on here.

    382. iain mhor says:

      @ Kangaroo
      Indeed your point a) I do not believe was contested
      B) Unclear, the Parliament was prorogued prior to the Proclamation dissolving said Parliament – usual procedure prior to the election of a new Parliament.
      The first GB etc. Parliament was not elected. Elections were not held, though they certainly historically followed.
      That the Crown did not have the ‘power’ to dissolve the Scots Parliament unilaterally, I could concede, but suggest it was not an unilateral decision per se. For the Scotland Acts being ratified by the Scots Parliament, was the precursor and validation; enabling the Crown to issue – if not precisely ‘Letters patent’ – certainly the ‘Proclamation’

      So I’m unclear there, except to engage in some hypothetical judo (and why not, legal careers are made if it)
      If the Scots Parliament was prorogued, then dissolved, yet no subsequent election was made of representatives to the new Parliament – then the Scots Parliament remained prorogued. Was it in some prorogued limbo until the first elections to the (devolved) Scottish Parliament? Or, did subsequent elections to the new formed Parliament of GB etc. fulfill the completion of the dissolution and validate it?
      Stretching credulity here with that one, but I’ve read worse!

      C) Well, there’s the rub indeed and I should not add to that further today!

    383. jockmcx says:

      Fuck’s sake my hair’s as bad as teddy taylor’s now!
      I want Hugh MacDiarmid’s

      Only Yesterday (Official Video)

      Scottish Devolution | Hugh MacDiarmid | Margo MacDonald | People and Politics | 1977

    384. Golfnut says:

      @ iain Mohr.


      Absolutely correct, its quite specific that some of the acts can be ammended but it is also explicit that they can’t impinge on our right. I have always read that as our right under Scots Constitutional law, open to question undoubtedly, which is why recognition of the sovereignty of the Scottish people should have been sought before know or alternatively the people of Scotland should have asserted their Sovereign right at some point over the last 2/3 years.

      Parliamentary Sovereignty is an English principal, so opined Lord Cooper, or as Carwen Jones recently asserted nothing more than convention. Whatever legal standing it had died with the Treaty of Union. I’m not going anywhere near the divine right of Kings, let’s just say that English Sovereignty differs from Scots Constitutional law which doesn’t recognise Parliamentary Sovereignty. Westminster assumes that because the Queen of England lends her authority to parliament, which in English law is all she is able legally to do, that it covers all of the UK. It doesn’t, the argument the Scottish Crown was absorbed by the English falls at the first hurdle. Both the English and Scottish Parliaments rejected such a union in 1603. As late as 1704 the Scottish Parliament passed the Securities Bill which if enacted would have removed the Scottish Crown from Ann’s head. The Queen in this union wears two crowns, one crown requires the wearer to protect the Sovereignty of the Scottish people, they have no authority to lend it to westminster.

    385. Dan says:

      If Scotland was “extinguished” then one ponders why Westminster tweaked the sea borders between Scotland and England.
      This was done in 1999, is it purely coincidental that’s the time the Scottish Parliament reconvened.

    386. Socrates MacSporran says:

      At the moment, although he has been charged with the various offences for which he is due to stand trial, ALEX SALMOND IS AN INNOCENT MAN.

      So, is it just me, or, does anyone else think: by repeatedly making him appear before the court in so-many preliminary hearings, such as today’s, The Establishment is somehow trying to put the idea about that: “He must be guilty of something.”

      I honestly do not see how they can ever assemble a jury of 15 Scottish residents who have never heard of the case, or who Alex Salmond is.

      I honestly feel, in their efforts to throw enough mud at Wee Eck that some of it will stick, perhaps The Establishment is over-playing its hand.

      I see more problems ahead before this case is settled.

    387. Golfnut says:

      @ Iain Mohr.

      To my mind the Scottish Parliament exists because the Scottish people voted it back into existence. Had we voted no, devolution as we know it would never have come into being. Devolution is a Westminster construct, but the Parliament is ours. The Scottish Gov may be constrained by the Scotland Act, but we are not, and we need to find the will and a way to our Parliament heed our voice rather than Westminster.

    388. Socrates MacSporran says:

      Proof you’re really thick – when the likes of Murdo WATP Fraser, Annie Wells, Adam Tomkins and Jamie Green can get onto Jackass Carlot’s Shadow Cabinet team before you.

    389. Robert J. Sutherland says:

      sassenach @ 15:43,

      Amen to that. I can’t think of anyone in the indy movement who has been a more consistent proponent of independence, and moreover one that is unfailingly positive and inspiring, while also being genuinely funny, than Paul Kavanagh.

      It’s this kind of totally unjustified personal backbiting from “Holy Willie” mental pygmies that is the current bane of the movement. Some of this toxic environment is clearly engineered as a desperate last-ditch divide-and-conquer tactic, and explicitly created for useful idiots to promote (having nothing better to do).

    390. Liz g says:

      Robert J Sutherland @ 2.52
      Tis a puzzle right enough 🙂
      It I believe has to,and has always had to be.
      That Treaty was always so demonstrably loaded in England’s favour the Union has never been settled for Scotland.
      Only for a brief time around the two world was the Union not in question here in Scotland!
      Westminster has always tried to shy away from it ( the Treaty ) even being discussed. It’s kept like an embarrassing relative in the background an not mentioned.
      It’s existence is what prevents a genuine written constitution being put in place because it would need dusted down examined and ended.
      To do that they cannot risk that Scotland wouldn’t be on board with its replacement Constitution.
      To keep the Treaty they create a fudge and pretend to us this is how it’s intended to work
      This is why we are not entirely clear of the route to Indy as well.
      To ask a Court to make a judgement on Holyrood
      Westminster would likely argue that …..
      When a law is unclear a judge should look for the intention behind it.
      Westminster never intended for Holyrood to have the power to break the Union,and the evidence for this is that they reserved the Constitution.
      Now that’s true Robert J… They probably even have a record of this in the 1997 debates.
      On the other Hand
      Holyrood would argue that Westminster has already acknowledged that the voting results in Scotland void that stance and their evidence is the Edinburgh Agreement and the Good Friday Agreement which are more recent than the 1997 devolution settlement,and the Smith commission declaring that it was within the gift of the Scottish People to seek independence.
      So it’s still very much ( pardon the pun ) a judgement call.
      But let’s say we won and Holyrood could hold a referendum!
      there’s still a Rocky Road after the Yes vote is in.

      In 2014 when the polls showed Yes in the lead,the HOL started to question if Cameron and his Government had the right to end the Union at all.
      One argued “as it would bind future parliaments no House had the right to do it, and it could not be done” (I know )
      So even with a section 30 they were still looking for a way out and even now they are working on a document which will be portrayed as a written constitution.

      They hold us by fudge and bluster and before we get into any court…. I’d like to know exactly what right’s and powers the Scottish Westminster MPs actually have down in Westminster?…..
      Thatcher seemed to think they had some teeth and if they are under Scots law why are things getting written into it they object to?
      And mainly why they don’t highlight every breech of the Treaty.
      Surely if they took the government to the Supreme Court that Court would find the government had to act in accordance with the Treaty it’s signed up to?
      It did it with the EU Treaty so much so Westminster withdrew from it! 🙂
      Firstly they should go for the N.Ireland special trade advantage…. That’s a breech of Scotland’s Treaty with England,what Westminster does about it is their problem Scotland hasn’t signed The Good Friday Agreement ( no harm to N.Ireland )but we should be acting in the interests of the Treaty we did sign and are being held to.
      The Scottish MPs should force Westminster to choose which Treaty they want to keep to …
      But Naw.. Westminster are getting to keep both!
      And their pet media are promoting which hoops N.Ireland and Scotland need to jump through to end their respective arrangements with Westminster
      Nicola has gone about as far as Holyrood can without overwhelming public support..
      It’s time the MPs stepped up and gave Westminster a few hills to climb!!

    391. jfngw says:

      If only we could do a poll. What do you put Boris Johnson’s condition down to?

      1. Rampant racism

      2. STD

      3. Etonianism

      4. Greed

      5. All the above

    392. Effijy says:

      Yes he is an idiot with zero common sense or social
      Skills but he IS my son.
      I just hope he never goes into politics.
      He would be a disaster.

      Quote from Mary Anne Trump

      Donald Trumps Mother.

      I can see her Scottish roots coming through now!

    393. Famous15 says:

      So the Labour Party are the first to step into the elephant trap that is Gender Recognition

      Will the Greens ,SNP or Lib Dems follow. I include the Lib Dems because they temporarily escaped with the defeat of Jo Swinton.

      The Tories with eugenics just do not know their woohoo from their elbow.

      Many comment that the Labour leadership debate on this subject is all the Yorkshire ex miners talk about. Given that 0.01 of them may be personally involved it may be.

    394. jfngw says:

      Did I just spot the BBC News have a Jocky/Jackie Wilson moment. Preview of the Brits and Lewis Capaldi with video of Peter Capaldi, they’re both Scottish so close enough I suppose.

    395. jfngw says:

      Feeling sorry for the mother of the poor child who died at the Southern General. She is being used as a SNP attack proxy by Labour, BBC and much of the MSM. When no prosecutions occur she will be dropped like a stone when they can milk the story no further. Only then will she realise what has happened, and probably feel even worse.

    396. Republicofscotland says:

      More lies and decption from the English government.

    397. Dr Jim says:

      STV news reports that while England has many of the ISIS type variety of terrorist prisoner inmates Scotland only has five inmates jailed on terrorism activities and all five are right wing Loyalists

      MSP John Finnie of the Greens accused SNP MSP and Minister for Justice Humza Yousaf today of pandering to a racist Boris Johnson then immediately apologised to Mr Yousaf for his clumsy use of words

    398. callmedave says:

      Rebecca Pow, currently serving as Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State at the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, at last a government official on the job.

      She’s drawn the short straw and has been sent out in the rain to take the flack for Boris there on the News as the continued flooding darn South turns much of the country (England) into a swamp.

      Boris not out in his wellies glad handing the residents surprise!

      “Big government must do something about it and spend some money and we can’t get insurance” says a man. 🙁

      I feel sorry for the folk but we’ll see how much help they get.

    399. twathater says:

      As R Peffers used to say ALL peoples are sovereign if they have the force to be behind them , our situation is no different the only difference is that we are attempting to do it in a civilised legal manner , the problem is that we have a neighbouring nation who we have consented ( I know ) to be involved with in a mutual agreement is REFUSING to agree to the decision or accept the decision of the people of THIS country whether we want to remain within this mutual agreement or withdraw from it

      But and I will say it is a bigger problem , that our head representative refuses to allow the people of OUR country to signify their wishes or wants in regards to this situation , we are CONSTANTLY told that the way to independence is from the MAJORITY of Scots calling for it , yet the ONLY way to ascertain the majority of Scots feelings or wishes is to hold a referendum to determine those wishes , YET we have our senior representative REFUSING to call that referendum

      A veritable catch 22 situation
      So in essence it is not the leader of our neighbouring country refusing agreement to the outcome it is OUR senior representative refusing us the opportunity to have one

    400. Colin Alexander says:


      I think it was Mauritius who brought the Chagos Islanders’ complaint to the UN’s ICJ. As Mauritius claimed the islands.

    401. Reluctant Nationalist says:

      Otto: “The simplicities of ‘fascism’, a catchall term, are rather attractive to the immature…”

      Like repeatedly advocating political violence as a curative for the plodding niceties of queensberry rules stateship? That sort of thing?

    402. jfngw says:

      I see Pete Wishart is still on his tantric referendum podium. It’s like listening to Ian Paisley ‘never, neVER, NEVER!’.

    403. iain mhor says:

      @ Kangaroo

      re: your points
      A) I do not believe was contested
      B) Unclear, the Parliament was prorogued prior to the Proclamation dissolving said Parliament – usual procedure prior to the election of a new Parliament.
      The first GB etc. Parliament was not elected. Elections were not held, though they certainly historically followed.
      That the Crown did not have the ‘power’ to dissolve the Scots Parliament unilaterally, I could concede, but suggest it was not an unilateral decision per se. For Scotlands Act (or Articles) of Union being ratified by the Scottish Parliament, was the precursor and validation; enabling the Crown to issue – if not precisely ‘Letters patent’ – certainly the ‘Proclamation’

      So I’m unclear there, except to engage in some hypothetical judo (and why not, legal careers are made if it)
      If the Scots Parliament was prorogued, then dissolved, yet no subsequent election was made of representatives to the new Parliament – then the Scots Parliament remained prorogued. Was it in some prorogued limbo until the first elections to the (devolved) Scottish Parliament? Or, did subsequent elections to the new formed Parliament of GB etc. fulfill the completion of the dissolution and validate it?
      Stretching credulity here with that one, but I’ve read worse!

      C) Well, there’s the rub indeed and I should not add to that further today!

    404. Dan says:

      @jfngw at 7.20pm

      I went for a wee looksy…but I should have just gone for a wee…

      It appears there’s quite a lack of awareness in the reasons why folk vote SNP.
      There seems to be a strong belief that the SNP can do no wrong as some claim the slow rise in Indy support since 2014 is wholly due to them, rather than considering that belief may potentially be misplaced, and there’s the possibility the 5% swing is actually down to the catastrophic shitshow the other political Parties have managed to perform with the EU situation, and the resultant carnage and uncertainty that causes to our society.

    405. jockmcx says:

      Scotland’s national bird = golden eagle

      Britain = robin

      england = mmm,does’nt seem to have one

      can we send them a tweet, albatross?,cuckoo?,dodo?

    406. robertknight says:

      Utterly predictable from Wishart.

      SNP failing to deliver the goods but Scotland must tolerate them and only them, simply because…

      Sorry Wishart, but if the organisation you repeatedly entrust with your cash, votes, time and effort stops delivering the goods you don’t simply take a telling that it’s them or nothing and continue to give that organisation your cash, votes, time and effort.

      It’s time that Scotland AND the SNP woke up to the fact that Independence doesn’t = the SNP and that the SNP doesn’t = Independence.

      Good morning SNP… it’s time for your wake-up call!

    407. meg merrilees says:


      If Scotland was ‘extinguished’ how come –
      The Queen has to come up to Scotland every year to swear in front of the Moderator at the General Assembly of The Church of Scotland that she will defend the religion of Scotland –
      how come we have Scots Law and the Court of Sessions –
      how come we have our own education system
      how come Boris Johnson had to reassemble the House of Westminster Parliament of the UK after he illegally prorogued it…

      Naw, Scotland has never been ‘extinguished’ possibly sidelined and ignored but definitely NOT’extinguished’ for so long as one hundred of us remain ………

    408. jfngw

      The Scottish Claim of Right was was a late night discussion in the House of Commons, brought by Ian Blackford in the weeks immediately after the SNP marched out en masse about 18 months ago. It was not opposed and Hansard records it as being recognised by the Parliament of the UK.

    409. Pete Barton says:

      Bye, Donalda.

      Thanks for trying.

      Now Mcquarrie can spend more monies.

      Is there another Nation on earth who would quietly put up with it?

      BBC may be feeling the pinch now.

      My family think I’m a loony not paying their propaganda tax.

      Fair play folks.

      But I’ve got what they don’t, that’s commitment to fairness.

      Even if it takes me the rest of my life, I will not succumb to blackmail.

      BBC: if you’d engaged with the people of Scotland instead of enraging us

      We might be better together.

      You’ve blown it.

    410. manandboy says:

      PM Johnson is currently the best friend of the Independence Movement. Sadly, the friendship won’t last too long at the rate he’s going, while he certainly won’t last 5 years in No.10 Downing Street.

      Michel Barnier did some straight talking today as the European patience with the world’s worst political figurehead is clearly wearing thin over his ridiculous statements on the future relationship with the EU.
      The half decent part of England is sure to follow suit. It’s only a matter of time.

    411. Pete Barton says:

      @Meg Merrilees:

      Please tell me more..

      Does ER actually do this every year,ie come here and confirm this?


    412. Pete Barton says:

      I’ve looked around, I know the AUOB have a bus to Arbroath but does anyone know if there’s one from Edinburgh shire?

    413. Pete Barton says:

      Sorry I meant glesga have a bus going..

    414. Graf Midgehunter

      I think one of the fallacies in recent years concerning any challenge using the ToU as an argument was the worry that it may have ‘passed its sell by date’ and that surely a law created in 1707 is not applicable now.
      Could the Sewel Convention or Scotalnd Act surpass it?

      Of course T May herself exploded that myth when she tried to use Royal Prerogative and Henry Vlll powers when she was triggering Article 50 and for some of her more silly ideas that she wanted to push through without scrutiny.

      Then there was the N. Irish challenge to Westminster ‘not normally’ legislating for devolved legislatures and the possible clash with the Good Friday Agreement at which point the Irish judge in summing up basically said that ‘ the winds of change are blowing but from which direction and how strong’ and we have waited to see the direction etc.

      The ToU has never been repealed, annulled or modified ( if treaties can be repealed, annulled or modified).
      There is certainly a current proposal for a new Treaty of Union as well we know.

      I think the ToU will be broken by Westminster and the Unicorn will be freed but it has to willing to leave those chains behind and walk away from captivity.

    415. Peter – being ‘The Queen’ she can wangle out of the gig by sending a Deputy. Technically, Her presence is represented and by so doing, the oath is maintained – see below:

      Each year, The Queen appoints a Lord High Commissioner to represent the Sovereign at the General Assembly of the Church of Scotland.

      Monarchs have sworn to maintain the Church of Scotland since the sixteenth century. The duty to “preserve the settlement of the true Protestant religion as established by the laws made in Scotland” was affirmed in the 1707 Act of Union between England and Scotland.

      The Queen made this pledge at the first Privy Council meeting of her reign in February 1952.

    416. KOF says:

      @Meg Merrilees

      The Queen usually sends a representative, Lord High Commisioner, to the General Asembly of the Church of Scotland instead to attending herself. This year her representative is the Earl of Strathearn, her grandson William, heir to the throne. He’ll be there all week.

      It’d be terrible if he was booed and told his mother was a “tractor” to the Scots by ignoring their sovereign choice to remain in the EU.(Among many other things) With the 700th anniversary of the Declaration of Arbroath just a few weeks previously, there will be a lot of focus on Scotland, on kings and sovereignty. I’m sure it’d make all the newspapers, all round the world. 🙂

    417. kapelmeister says:

      Scotland faces a battle for existence as a nation while the SNP leadership wishes to continue with polite parliamentary pleading as the answer. Sturgeon seems to view with distaste the idea that the masses require robust leadership and direction in an emergency.

      While Wishart sees a new list party as “impatience, frustration and fragmentation” others see determination, justified anger and strength through diversity.

    418. Breeks @ 7.58

      Ruth Davidson was, and Arlene Foster is against a border in the Irish Sea precisely because it breaches the ToU.

      Westminster knows exactly what it is doing and at some point we are going to have to stand up to them and tell them that they have gone too far now.

    419. Pete Barton says:


      Thank you for your that!

    420. kapelmeister says:

      Hitler had an eerie birthday party in his Berlin bunker in 1945 as the Soviet tanks closed in on the city centre.

      Now Prince Andrew is to have an eerie 60th birthday party at Buckingham Palace as the FBI close in.

    421. Bill Hume. says:

      Dear Stu.
      We want you, we need you,
      But there ain’t no way we’re ever gonna love you.

      But as a matter of fact…… 2 out of three ain’t bad.

      Get yer erse back in gear.

    422. jfngw says:

      @meg merrilees

      I know about the WM vote, but that was merely a debate and a vote, there was no legal consequence to that vote. The claim of right has never been tested in court, does it have any legal standing is what I want determined. If the court rules it does not then what do we do?

    423. Fireproofjim says:

      Don’t you think that attending the deliberations of the Church of Scotland General Assembly for a whole week is sufficient punishment for the poor devil’s sins for life.
      I certainly sympathise.

    424. KOF says:

      @Meg Merrilees 22:05

      I try my best! 🙂

    425. stewartb says:

      Pete Barton @ 9:35 pm

      Re- bus to Arbroath from Edinburgh

      This might help:

    426. Kangaroo says:

      Iain mohr

      B) Winnie Ewing was a lawyer and she stated on the opening of Parliament that the Scottish Parliament having been adjourned was now reconvened. Watch it on youtube 2mins.

      Wikipedia (I Know)suggests that the Scottish Parliament was prorogued sine die…
      In either case, it was not dissolved.

      On the other hand there’s this

      but as I alluded to before, the Queen does not have power to prorogue a Scottish Parliament, far less dissolve it.
      NB. King Charles 1 tried to prorogue the parliament and they ignored him. This was the prelude to the Bishops Wars. It is also the precedent that meant that Bojo could not unlawfully prorogue the UK Parliament.

      I suggest that Oor Winnie being a lawyer and having had ample time to research the “legals” would have got the correct wording.

    427. Kangaroo says:

      Jfngw & othrs

      When the monarch dies an Accession Council is convened and the new Monarch has to swear an oath, which includes the Claim of Right. See under ‘Oaths’ in this article

      A more detailed explanation can be found on UK Gov websites.

      The Claim of Right does NOT need a Court to uphold it. It is woven through the very fabric of the UK and a Court would not countenance denouncing it, unless the UK became a Republic.

    428. I’m no legs;l expert but I very strongly suspect that If the Court of Session ruled that the Scottish Claim of Right was non-existent then I suspect the Judiciary at one sweep of the pen would cease to have any authority as judges within the auspices of Scots Law and Scots Law itself would cease to exist.

    429. Colin Alexander says:


      Winnie Ewing was not in a court of law; she was wearing the politician’s hat at the time when she declared the Parliament of Scotland reconvened.

      But, I agree, that the Cherry proroguing case seems to support the legal principle that only the Parliament of Scotland could dissolve itself, not by Royal Proclamation.

      Various websites argue they did in reality vote to dissolve themselves by agreeing to the Articles of Union with England that would create one GB Parliament and their selection of candidates for the GB Parliament.

      Which begs the question: then how come they set a date for reconvening the parliament instead of declaring it dissolved, if the intention was it’s to be dissolved?

      Arguably if the parliamentarians only prorogued it and set a date for reconvening, then the intention was to reconvene it and its dissolution by Royal Proclamation was not according to law (so void, a nullity, of no legal effect).

    430. manandboy says:

      PMJohnson turns against Immigrants and asylum seekers

      “UK to close door to non-English speakers and unskilled workers
      Government plans to take ‘full control’ of borders a disaster for economy and jobs, say industry leaders and Labour”

      Lisa O’Carroll, Peter Walker and Libby Brooks. Tue 18 Feb 2020 22.30

      “Industry leaders warned that the government’s plans could have serious implications for many sectors of the economy including restaurants.

      Britain is to close its borders to unskilled workers and those who can’t speak English as part of a fundamental overhaul of immigration laws that will end the era of cheap EU labour in factories, warehouses, hotels and restaurants.

      Unveiling its Australian-style points system on Wednesday, the government will say it is grasping a unique opportunity to take “full control” of British borders “for the first time in decades” and eliminate the “distortion” caused by EU freedom of movement.

      But industry leaders immediately accused the government of an assault on the economy warning of “disastrous” consequences with job losses and closures in factories and the high street.”

    431. Kangaroo says:

      meg merrilees @11:19

      Scots Law does not owe its existence to the Claim of Right, rather it is vice versa. The Claim of Right is just a small, but very important, part of Scots Law. If it wasn’t for the Declaration of Arbroath then when James V1 became James 1 of Engerland then the whole British Isles would have become the Kingdom of Scotland and the Parliaments would have been merged at that time, in 1603. In short we would have been completely stuffed and independence would be a no go.

    432. That’s worth knowing – thank you Kangaroo. Though it has to be said that perhaps the United Kingdom of Scotland might have turned out hugely differently from the current situation.

      My understanding is that James Vl chose to move his Court to England because they still adhered to the Divine Right of Kings and the English were subjects of the Sovereign but in Scotland, the people were Sovereign and if they didn’t like the current Monarch they could ‘evict’ them from the Throne because of the ancient system of Tanistry which was abolished during the reign of James Vl.

      A fascinating period.

    433. jfngw says:


      I had a quick look through the claim of right, I do admit I find the way these old documents are written or transcribed difficult to decipher sometimes. It seems more geared towards getting rid of the monarch rather than indicating we could have a referendum at our choice (although one would make the other seem irreconcilable).

      The Declaration of Arbroath makes more bold statements on this matter, in my opinion.

    434. Graf Midgehunter says:

      Meg Merrilees

      Sorry for the late answer but as usual it’s catchy uppy time again.. 🙂

      “I think the ToU will be broken by Westminster and the Unicorn will be freed but it has to willing to leave those chains behind and walk away from captivity.”

      We’re both on the same wavelength here but I think the ToU has already been broken and must have a legal consequence for the people that broke it.

      I’m right behind Breeks here in saying we must stop this dithering, bending the knee and kissing WM bums. We’re just making fools of ourselves.

      We have the Dec o Arb, the Claim of Rights, Scottish judicary, a Sovereignty of the people. Even the ToU was a Union of two equal Kingdoms.

      What we don’t have is a leadership with a steel backbone and the iron will to just stand up for Scotland.

      We’re at 50/51% because of the dammed hard work put in day after day by the YES movement and dare I say it AS who got us to within spitting distance of our dreams.

    435. manandboy says:

      With each new week, No.10 Downing Street provides copious reasons as to why England, and in particular the England of Brexit is quite incompatible with Scotland.

      But such is the depth of evil in the current English Ruling Class, that the blatant incompatibility will be set aside in favour of England’s ruthless exploitation of Scotland’s Norway-scale wealth. Let’s not underestimate therefore the English Establishment’s determination to retain power over Scotland.

      Which brings us to the big question, viz, How do we get our Independence under such circumstances, particularly when our own political SNP leadership is found to lack any real drive to achieve it.

      We are going to need help. Perhaps from Europe, maybe the UN, but I can’t think of another single possible source of assistance. The Courts may be of some use of course, but this Westminster Government is easily capable of choosing to ignore any Court decision in Scotland’s favour.

      We may even need Divine assistance. Now wouldn’t that be something.

    436. jfngw says:


      The Articles of Union is an even more difficult read, obviously paragraphs had still to be invented in 1707. It has that legalese way of having interminably long sentences so you have forgotten what it said at the beginning by the time you reach the end of it.

    437. schrodingers cat says:

      Greece has just said they will veto any deal between the EU and the UK unless the UK returns the Elgin marbles to Greece.


      beware of greeks bearing gifts

      i wonder if the french might be willing to include a s30 indyref2 be part of any…..ahem…. trade deal 🙂

    438. Colin Alexander says:

      It’s clear from the recent rulings that the Inner House of the Court of Session did take the Claim of Right (CoR) seriously as a valid statute to a point.

      However, it was pointed out the lack of precision or specification of that statute does not meet modern standards of law. eg Cherry argued the CoR said parliament should be allowed to sit and BJ had prevented that, so it breached the CoR.

      From memory, the court pointed out that parliament had been allowed to sit and would be again; but it would be five weeks and it can’t be said that breaches the CoR as it’s not specific enough about when and for how long parliament must sit.

      Cherry was not using the CoR to try and prove the sovereignty of the people: she was using it to try and prove the prorogation was unlawful. But, to some extent it showed the Crown is subject to the law and subject to parliamentary scrutiny.

      The Cherry case came down to for what purpose was the prorogation? To stymie parliamentary scrutiny and in common law that was an abuse of power so unlawful.

      From the Wiki page:

      “Scots law recognises four sources of law: legislation, legal precedent, specific academic writings, and custom”.
      The Cherry case quoted from the essays on the nature of the limited legal monarchy in Scotland.

    439. Kangaroo says:

      Graf midgehunter

      I agree we’re all on the same wavelength, at least we are trying to be.

      The thing is that the polls are still at 50/50 even after all the abuse hurled our way. We simply have to get the polls moving much more favourably in our direction. We have already got the low hanging fruit and I fear that some will not change their minds until the deed is done and only after a year or so of being independent will they shift their position, and even then it will be reluctant. People are fickle and some stubborn and even the most blatant evidence won’t convince, there are still some flat earthers! I think this is the SGs problem with moving now, only yet more Bojo abuse will do it for some.

      Just look at Question Time with Murray saying we still dont have answers on currency, borders and the deficit. He’s either a total muppet who doesn’t understand anything or he’s a total lickspittle pushing his masters position. Is it any wonder then that people are still saying we don’t have an “economic case”. The fact that the economic case for keeping the UK is a disaster, see Operation Yellowhammer, doesn’t seem to have penetrated.

    440. mike cassidy says:

      You’ve got to watch those Greeks.

      Its the high heels, you know.

      Beware of Greeks wearing lifts!

      And if anybody can remember from which film I stole that joke.

      Well done! Cos I can’t.

    441. Kangaroo says:


      You’re right legalese at its finest. Long winded, lacking punctuation etc, but in my experience a missing comma csn make all the difference to the interpretation. This just makes it harder. Very rough translation – Articles 4 and 6 make it clear that no hinderance can be placed on commerce within the United Kingdom and no favours granted which would prevent fair trade between the merchants of the UK either in GB or His majesties Dominions. Customs and duties must be the same throughout.

    442. Graf Midgehunter says:


      G’day mate. 🙂

      You’re right in many ways which is why we desperately need a much better leadership to find a way through the media fog.

    443. Colin Alexander says:


      From what I’ve read, there are serious differences in opinion regarding the Treaty of Union binding the GB Parliament and the courts are very unwilling to get involved (which is interesting in itself).

      Courts not wanting to rule on a legal document? (That’s politics???). Well, the courts did rule on the Lisbon Treaty and unilateral cancellation of A50 and prorogation etc.

      So, why when it comes to the Treaty of Union that becomes “politics” not law?

      Is there something they are afraid of?

    444. Kangaroo says:

      Graf Midgehunter

      We need only do two things
      1) boost the polls,
      2) wait till 1 Jan2021

      The media fog requires short sharp rebuttals of Bullshit from the MSM. Their arguments are still the same as before, except they are now adding -it would be better to wait till the dust of Brexit settles before we do Scexit. Suggesting that Brexit might be a resounding success. Chances of that are next to zero, the Yellowhammer report put paid to that.

      Currency a Scottish pound would rapidly increase in value and the English Pound would be forced to peg to the Scottish. Not the other way as was mooted.
      Borders. WM are intent on putting Borders up anyway so there would be one more, what exactly is the problem. What makes the Scotland England border unique? Only 4 or 5 more customs posts, no big deal.
      Deficit – we dont have a deficit. One example is

      there are many more.

    445. Kangaroo says:

      Colin A

      The Treaty is a mixture of both politics and law. Usually in international treaties your dealing at a distance and so retain your own parliaments. We combined ours with Engerland thus mixing law and politics. To end the Treaty we must do it legally for the international community to recognise it. So that is what the SG is doing. Slowly but surely. We must also convince our fellow Scots that it is the best option otherwise they may vote in a Government that takes us straight back in to the same mess.

    446. twathater says:

      Liz g as I said in my last comment I am delighted that a 2nd indy party to fight for list seats has movement re their meeting with the EC

      I have been reading many comments over on twatter and the National and quite a few comments are raising concerns in regard to the name the people’s alliance Party , to many it is too similar to solidarity or rise and are concerned that it has the socialist left wing connotations , many are suggesting that it should be something akin to the INDEPENDENCE PARTY or THE SCOTTISH INDEPENDENCE PARTY to ensure that people are TOTALLY aware of what they stand for as the saying goes IT DOES WHAT IT SAYS ON THE TIN what’s your opinion

    447. Robert Louis says:

      Kangaroo at 1215am,

      The polls are still at 50/50 because the curretn Scotgov are not showing leadership on the matter of independence. Time and again i have watched NS with a golden opportunity to get the message across, and she doesn’t even mention independence.

      And this to my mind, is the root of the problem. Most folk in Scotland have no idea the degree of abuse and money wasting going on by Westminster in relation to Scotland. They just don’t know about it. Why? a terribly biased media, both in Scotland, AND England, the blatantly biased and anti-Scottish BBC, AND a Scottish government and SNP leadership that seems feart to do anything.

      Chance after cchance after chance for the SNP to kick up an almighty fuss and get Scots on their side, but they do nothing.

      The SNP sitiing waiting for the polls to change, will achieve nothing. NS has been handed mandate after mandate after mandate. She has been given electoral success, other parties could only ever dream about, yet has done not one thing to advance independence. She had every MP in Scotland, except one, and did not have the political guile to even secure Smith, post indyref, never mind independence.

      No, the ONLY thing the SNP have done since 2014, is creat new innovative reasons as to why they cannot talk about independence (remember NS regularly bragging about how she didn’t mention independence??). The to top it all, NS openly tells Westminster, inadvance of requesting a section 30, that she will not hold indyref without it. I mean seriously?? How politically naive can you get. No wonder Theresa and Boris have both refused a section 30. They don’t even need to discuss independence, just a ‘yechnical’ agreement, FFS. I mean seriously, that has to trop the list of crass political indeptitude.

      So, no, it is not that the Scots need a bit more Boris to suffer, we just need political leadership, whose sole aim is independence. What we don’t need are the likes of Pete Wishart, who seems to have gotten way, way, way too confortable down in Westminster.

      The polls will change, once indyref is called. Sitting waiting for them to change by magic, is stupidity of the very highest order.

    448. Golfnut says:

      Way to many people getting hung up on the ‘ Claim of Right ‘, including I might add the SNP.
      Sovereignty, who and where it sits is the key.
      We know that Westminsters claim of absolute sovereignty is bollocks, its no more than a convention, nothing in law makes Westminster sovereign, and if they passed law making Westminster sovereign it would require explicit reference to the monarchs approval, it could only be loaned therefore temporary(English law) and it could only apply to England. The Scots currently lend their sovereignty via their MP’s, that is also by convention, their is no law covering this, there is no law that states that by lending our Sovereignty to our MP’s that by default we lend it to westminster. Nothing, nada, ziltch.

    449. Rm says:

      Is there something that we the Scots born people are not seeing or not being told, is there something happening behind the scenes, the curtains are drawn and that’s the problem too much red tape and bureaucracy not getting communicated back to the people who Politicians are working for, the Scottish Government do a great job of running the country with a very limited hand out but I still think they can be a bit more open and get behind the people who are pushing their way towards dissolving the out of date union.

    450. jockmcx says:

      Mike Russell under Scots’ Law & The Act of Union & the Scottish Parliament REVOKE CONSENT for brexit

      Auld Bob
      Auld Bob
      1 month ago
      Let’s get something very clear – the claim so often made by Westminster Establishment unionists that, “Britain doesn’t have a writtin constitution is wishful thinking and downright lying on their part on more than one level.

      First of all, “Britain is not a political state and Britain does not have a government, armed forces or even an overall monarchy. The United Kingdom is British but not all of Britain so terms like, “The British Navy, army or air force”, are downright lies.

      With that one out of the way – What is, “The United Kingdom”, and how did it come into being? Yet even that is misleading and I ask it to make just that point. From what point of view are we considering the Term, “United Kingdom”? If that point of view is Her Majesty the Queen of England and Queen of Scots it differs from the point of view of anyone else. Her Majesty’s United Kingdom is the two kingdoms she represents but also includes the crown of the Kingdom of Ireland, (not including the bit that is a republic”, and the crown of the Principality of Wales. It also includes the three, Non-UK government, Crown Dependencies.

      For everyone else the United Kingdom is just that – The bipartite United Kingdom of equally sovereign kingdoms of Scotland & England that was constituted – – – , “Haw! Hing oan there Jimmy”, whit is yon ye jist said? “It was constituted”??

      Yes it was constituted by a Treaty of Union that contains 25 “Articles of Union”, and each, “Article of Union”, is a legally agreed condition of the Treaty of Union in its own right. Now correct me – if you can, but does that not constitute the conditions of the Treaty of Union? Are not the two Kingdoms that signed “The Treaty of Union” equally sovereign? They had to be equally Sovereign to enable them to agree and sign an international treaty of any kind otherwise it would not be a legal treaty and Scotland can just walk away from Westminster.

      So there it is after all the years of being lied to that The United Kingdom doesn’t have a written constitution we realise it had to be constituted to exist and the Treaty of Union is a written constitution. Thing is now we must ask – has that written constitution been broken – and by which equally sovereign partner kingdom?

    451. jockmcx says:

      The Act of Union, with Brian Cox…

      The Act of Union: Johann Lamont Gets an ‘F’ in Scottish History

    452. jockmcx says:

      oldie but goodie
      Johann Lamont ‘Telt!’ by @BBCJamesCook

      27 Aug 2014

    453. Ottomanboi says:

      Sovereignty: an idea with a army.

    454. Rm says:

      The real people never had a say in the act of union, isn’t that illegal, people have the power now to change or reverse a miscarriage of common law, would be good if Brian Cox could start speaking for the common people.

    455. Breeks says:

      Colin Alexander says:
      19 February, 2020 at 12:14 am
      It’s clear from the recent rulings that the Inner House of the Court of Session did take the Claim of Right (CoR) seriously as a valid statute to a point.

      … meh, … yeah kind of… but the way I see it, the Claim of Right is being misinterpreted too.

      It isn’t the Claim of Right which endows the people of Scotland with Sovereignty, be in no doubt, that is the 1320 Declaration of Arbroath, a state of Scottish Sovereign Independence recognised by the English, and Pope John XXII in 1328.

      The essence of Scotland’s Popular Sovereignty stems from the Declaration’s claimed, acknowledged and recognised capacity to depose it’s own monarch and choose another… thus royal lineage was determined by the will of the people, NOT the will of God as with “normal” monarchs. Scotland’s 14th Century Constitution thus broke the mould of the conventional nature of what sovereignty actually meant.

      Was it deliberate? Well that’s arguable. Did the Scottish Lords and King, and indeed the Pope, fully appreciate Scotland was being given a sovereign authority that could not even be overruled by God? Was recognition perhaps “casual”, and didn’t really think through the ramifications?… Maybe. But that’s idle conjecture. The International and Ecclesiastical Recognition was given, and thus, a thing was done which cannot be undone, even by God. Scottish Sovereignty was enshrined upon the people.

      Has that principle of popular sovereignty ever been used? Yes. Yes it has. To cut a long story short, King James VII (or II of England) was the King deposed for his Roman Catholicism, to be deposed by the English “Glorious Revolution” replaced by William and Mary in 1688. But England’s Glorious Revolution was nothing to do with Scotland, but the Protestants wanted rid of James, and the “Convention of Scottish Estates” compiled a charge sheet of alleged failures of James VII, and in 1689, invoked the Popular Sovereignty of the Scottish Constitution to depose Scotland’s King, which became the 1689 Claim of Right which removed James VII from the Scottish throne.

      The Claim of Right by itself is not a piece of binding legislation as much as a recognition that Scottish Sovereignty is a Popular Sovereignty enshrined with the people, as codified in Scotland’s Internationally recognised Constitution, the 1320 Declaration of Arbroath.

      If He-Man was a Scot, he wouldn’t invoke the power of Greyskull, he’d invoke the Claim of Right, and access the power of Scottish Popular Sovereignty.

      So why is the Claim of Right so “weightless” in Westminster? That’s debatable. But the Claim of Right cannot reign in Westminster, that is, we Scots have no jurisdiction under the Claim of Right to overrule the sovereignty of England nor depose an English monarch from an English throne. The Claim of Right can only remove an errant King (or Government) which is not properly serving the interests of Scotland.

      So the Claim of Right itself, is just a register of principle. The 1989 Claim of Right made sure the principle of Scottish Popular Sovereignty was dually recognised by the Devolved Assembly of Holyrood, and in 2018, Westminster debated the Claim of Right and past a motion that the Claim of Right was respected.

      But be clear, every Claim of Right is the “Claim”… it’s just an affirmation. The meat in the sandwich, the “Right” is the binding component of the claim, and that is the Constitutional Sovereignty that was enshrined upon the Scottish people by the Declaration of Arbroath.

      Every time Scotland enacts it’s Sovereignty, could legitimately be called a new “Claim of Right”. If Scotland had invoked popular Sovereignty to demand recognition in Brexit negotiations, or even to defeat Brexit on Sovereign Constitutional grounds, those actions could legitimately be described as individual “Claims of Right”.

      The Claim of Right is a “shooting star” of the moment. It is fleeting. The Right however is permanent, inalienable, and there to be “claimed” whenever appropriate. It SHOULD have been claimed before Scotland was subjugated and Brexited. It is lamentable and scandalous that it wasn’t by a Scottish Government which seems pitifully inarticulate about Scotland’s Constitutional Rights and Sovereignty.

      Scottish Independence was right there, for the taking, a “2016 Claim of Right” to defeat Brexit by Sovereign veto, but we did absolutely nothing about it.

      So be it. If Holyrood has forsaken Scotland’s Claim of Right and stand’s complicit with Scotland’s subjugation, then Holyrood should become a victim of Scotland’s Claim of Right, and face impeachment as a “2020 Claim of Right”, …“Yet if he should give up what he has begun, and agree to make us or our kingdom subject to the King of England or the English, we should exert ourselves at once to drive him out as our enemy and a subverter of his own rights and ours, and make some other man who was well able to defend us our King”

      A timid and supine “Government” which grovels before Westminster is no use to Scotland. Scotland should exercise a claim of Right to depose them as quite literally “subverters of our rights and theirs”, because that is precisely what they have done.

    456. iain mhor says:


      Appears I double posted – apologies.
      How, and so far apart, I have no idea! Pocket dial?

    457. callmedave says:

      The Australian points system is going down well then!?

      No UK Government minister, Scottish Tory MP or MSP is available for comment squeaks shortbread radio this morning.


    458. jockmcx says:

      Glasgow belongs to jacob

      Rees-Mogg’s Comments On Boer War Concentration Camps

      Gaudd 1888
      10 months ago
      What an advert for the Union. “Look, the union caused the same death rate in Glasgow as concentration camps in South Africa”. Well that’s me sold. I love though the typical British Nationalist justification for the camps “it was to protect the people”.. “Oh, who from?” “”.

    459. Ottomanboi says:

      Why do so many Scots get bogged down in nit picking legalism? Treaties of this that and the other and their claims. BritState doesn’t give a damn. Recourse to legalism suggests a state of powerlessness. The current régime needs more than that.
      A party built like a bulldozer perhaps? . Smashing its way through the conceit, arrogance and smugness of the system?
      Where can we get one of those?

    460. Breeks says:

      Breeks says:
      19 February, 2020 at 8:54 am

      Was it deliberate? Well that’s arguable. Did the Scottish Lords and King, and indeed the Pope, fully appreciate Scotland was being given a sovereign authority that could not even be overruled by God?….

      Hmmm… Just reading back what I wrote, a light bulb in my head flicked on that I’ve been corrected about that before… Scotland had no history of “divine” dynasties of Monarch. The Declaration of Arbroath didn’t “invent” the principle. Scotland had a tradition of choosing rulers suited to the roll rather than putting up with weak and useless ones, safe in their office by the will of God. If you weren’t any good you got the heave-ho. It was a rather prosaic principle…

    461. Effijy says:

      The Elgin Marbles were made in Greece by Greeks.
      They are an integral part of Greek history and belong in Greece.

      Yes they lay in ruins as Elgin, yet another English Colonialist sought
      Treasures he could steal, but Greece was in no position to have rescued them.

      They must be returned to their homeland and perhaps as a justice Greece could
      Pay for copies to be made for the London museums and perpetuate the myth of
      The English being superior and entitled to rob anyone they like wherever they may be.

    462. Colin Alexander says:


      It’s already established case law that the Scottish Parliament and Scot Govt are subject to legal challenge and can be legally overruled.

      So, any takers for bringing the court case against the Scottish ministers for failure to respect, defend and uphold the sovereign will of the people of Scotland by allowing them to be Brexited?

      Or has the Scot Govt and Scot Parl done what in law they are legislated to do: act as a powerless puppet Govt of the UK State?

      eg Colonial administrators.

      Clearly it’s no a real parliament exercising the will of the people when it was overruled by the unelected Lords in the Continuity Bill. That in itself should have been a red line.


      UN ICJ Kosovo Advisory opinion introduction: “…The fact that a question has political aspects does not deprive it of its character as a legal question — The Court is not concerned with
      the political motives behind a request or the political implications which its
      opinion may have”.

      Save that quote for any legal case.

      It appears it was the UN General Assembly who brought that case to the ICJ.

      “the Secretary-General of the United Nations officially communicated
      to the Court the decision taken by the General Assembly to submit the question for an advisory opinion”.”

      It might be helpful that the UK has already snubbed it’s nose at the UN re the Chago Islands. Maybe they would be willing to bring Scotland’s case to the ICJ as payback to the UK?

      Will Sturgeon make diplomatic overtures for this purpose: I very much doubt it. She’s the UK Parliamentary sovereignty person: let’s do everything by English Law and England’s permission to make it legal type of person.

    463. Dan says:

      Ian Murray has said that “nobody understands Scotland” in Labour’s deputy leadership race.

      “Nobody understands Scotland and they still don’t. When you mention Scotland, everyone runs as far as they possibly can,” Mr Murray told PA at his Westminster office.

      Hmm, guess that’s the rub when you belong to the wee branch office of a larger Party based in another country, but it does make one wonder why Labour were waving “When Labour Wins Scotland Wins” boards about a few months back when nobody in the Party understands Scotland…

      C’mon Labour minded folk in Scotland… Are you YES yet?

    464. dandydons1903 says:

      Sturgeon needs removed and replaced with someone of steel, you fight fire with fire against the perfidy.

    465. Bill McLean says:

      Effijy – the Elgin as in the “Elgin marbles” is to my shame a Scot – currently the “Earl of Elgin and Kincardine”. Direct descendant of King Robert Bruce. The current Earl lives near Limekilns in Fife.

    466. jfngw says:

      You can understand why the Tories pick an second hand car salesman as their leader. He’s is trying to sell you the old banger that is the union under the guise that it is a sleek well oiled running machine that you would be proud to be seen with. But we know the truth and unfortunately (or fortunately for us) he was a failed second hand car salesman.

      Even now he is punting his team of electoral rejects as the future, a bunch of Austin Allegro’s given a lick of paint but don’t look under the bonnet. His idea that what Scotland can achieve is at best Annie Wells.

    467. iain mhor says:

      @ Golfnut

      Many interesting points and as you (and some others) have touched on the concept of Royal Prerogative, I’d like to comment – I’ll try and make this my last looong post if I can, as I know such things annoy very many.

      If the Scots Crown enjoyed Royal Prerogative to broker the Treaty of Union 1706, then the same prorogative may be invoked to repeal it. rendering the Articles of 1707 null & void. Or can it?

      The Royal prerogative was invoked to trigger the recent Article 50 Withdrawal and consequently led to the Miller case. No-one in the “UK” Government was very happy about that at all; not least as Royal Prerogative has been used to enact Treaties far less repeal them. The Governments of Cameron & May, both thought the Prerogative rightly applied.
      Parliament is never too keen on Royal Prerogative if it feels its use by the Government is to frustrate it (though not that averse where it chimes with Pariament’s will of course! Then it becomes “a cherished cornerstone of the “British Constitution”) The Judiciary’s view of it has been “the clanking of medieval chains of the ghosts of the past” (ha) However that may be; the same Royal Prerogative could have been levered by Scotland, if the UK Governments argument had been successful and for the same arguments used there.

      The Scots Crown is bound by the same ‘advice’ from the Scottish Government. Any ‘advice’ from the Scottish Government, invoking Royal Prerogative to revoke the the Treaty of 1706. obliges her Crown to do so (Or Act if the Scottush Paiament instructing the Government to so ‘advise’) Westminster is thus frustrated – Royal Prerogative is not a matter reserved to Westminster.
      Schedule 5: of the current Scotland Act is clear on that:
      2(1) Paragraph 1 does not reserve —
      (a) Her Majesty’s prerogative and other executive functions.

      That is one of many scenarios. The Articles of Union 1707 was a domestic Act. The Treaty of 1707 an international Treaty, brokered under Royal Prerogative. Or, if counter arguments are upheld, was not an international Treaty.
      Much of the Miller case hinged on International vs Domestic law. But, ultimately (if I infer correctly) Royal Prerogative for International treatises good, altering, or otherwise affecting Parliamentary Acts bad.
      The difficulty in the Article50 case I believe; was the dual nature of levering RP against the Treaty of European Union – whose Acts had become incorporated as Domestic Acts of the Parliament of the UK, etc.

      Generally, successive UK Governments, historically choose to bend the ‘constitution’ to suit themselves and are quite brazen about it. The judiciary is frequently reluctant to become embroiled in what they perceive as a political, not judicial issue.
      One only has to recall the witch- hunting against the judges of the Supreme Court, following the Miller case. They were all the Tractors of the day and should be hanging from a gibbet. A view many of the UK Government were sympathetic to.
      The dust has not settled on that issue.

      What’s your point caller? That levering Royal Prerogative upon The Treaty is either against an International Treaty or domestic agreement. The Scottish (& English) Parliamentary Articles of Union are either Acts of the respective Parliaments or are incorporated Acts of the Parliament of GB etc.
      The Crown in its duality must accept advice from a Scottish Government as much as from an UK etc Government. Westminster is a continuator of the English Parliament, or it is not. The Scottish Parliament and its Government is subject to UK Parliamentary Divine Sovereignty, or it is not, etcetera, etcetera…

      I will not labour further examples; suffice to say, that any particular principle above, can be taken and levered by “UK” Governments in isolation to suit their ends . If it is contested, they pick another Principle and lever that as reality instead.
      Scotlands situation is, that whichever lever it chooses is invalid, because Westminster argues the alternative as reality.

      This is perpetual Check with no threefold, or 50 move rule to resolve it (or ‘1’ is all that you can score, if you prefer that analogy) Hence the current standoff about holding a referendum. Both sides know this, the law knows this. It is political and not judicial, for the endless principles above are so intwined, that one case law decision impinges another concept, which must then be tested ad-infinitum.
      The Miller – Article.50 is a case in point – if anyone thought that setted any “UK” constitutional matter, go have a look at what its ramifications have been.

      What is my solution or suggestion? I don’t have one, I’m an interested onlooker, neither lawyer nor politician. But as ever, politics abhors a vacuum, man is a political animal and eventally the fickle will of ‘the people’ will always be materialised – by gibbet or ballot.

    468. Liz g says:

      Twathater @ 3.34am
      The people on social media are correct….
      The Peoples Alliance being floated on Twitter are a proposed amalgamation of groups into what seems to be a re- branding of a socialist movement…… They have no current constitution and have not applied to be registered as a Party with the Electoral Commission.
      At the moment they are mostly noise,but are introducing the concept of going after the list seats!
      This is Not the NEW party I’m referencing Twathater,they’ve not yet even former a party.
      The National was being a bit cheeky in it’s reporting of three current contenders for a new party….. It would have been more accurate to say ” one current contender,and two potential contenders “.

      The new party have an application pending with the Electoral Commission and won’t launch till they are confirmed as an official party. That’s when,if successful, you will see them with an online presence and also see that they are not a vehicle for the Scottish Socialists you are seeing online just now.

    469. Golfnut says:

      @ iain Mohr.

      A good reminder, and it was needed, that Scotland is no where near as powerless within the current set up as Westminster would have us believe. We have no idea of course what advice was given by the FM or the Advocate General to the Queen regarding Article 50, or the EU Withdrawl bill. What we do know is that both those actions were taken against the will of the people of Scotland, Holyrood and by a majority of our MP’s, those MP’s are by convention empowered by the Sovereign will of the people of Scotland.
      That the Queen of Scots made us subject to the will of the English, against the expressed will of the people of Scotland and political representatives should have been challenged and still should be.

    470. Republicofscotland says:

      Now that the UK is out of the EU, the EU has put the British overseas territory the Cayman Islands on its tax haven blacklist.

      This could not be done prior to Brexit, along with the Cayman Islands, the Seychelles,Panama and Palau are also on the list.

      EU Finance ministers warned that if the UK thinks it will become a tax haven as well, then it too will find itself on the blacklist.

    471. Republicofscotland says:

      Petty Lib/Dem MSP Alex Cole-Hamilton, will need to find something else to get off on, now that the Transport Secretary Michael Matheson has announced that ice sensors will be fitted to the on time, and under budget, Queensferry Crossing bridge.

    472. jfngw says:

      Overpaid news presenter Emily Maitless demonstrating why the BBC is so untrusted in Scotland. After effectively referring to care workers as low skilled (this from a person whose job is basically to talk under the direction of someone else). She then goes on to say that Scotland should get back in its box, it is being treated as part of the UK, which is just tantamount to telling Scots to just do what England decides.

      This is the organisation that is now begging for support to maintain their inflated salaries, now apparently being sold by Frankie Boyle too. that English gold is so attractive.

    473. jfngw says:


      I don’t think that will put AC-H off, he will be demanding a system that never allows ice to develop, a system that doesn’t actually exist in any affordable form.

    474. I think to many on here are concerned with the past and the wrongs that were done to Scotland back then better to concentrate on the present and get on with trying to win our freedom now . I fear the SNP are going to destruct itselfe by not carrying out the mandates it has been given by the people doing and saying nothing is not the answer ., there is no fire left in them just a wait and see attitude well they better not wait to long ???

    475. Republicofscotland says:

      ” . I fear the SNP are going to destruct itselfe by not carrying out the mandates it has been given by the people doing and saying nothing is not the answer ., there is no fire left in them just a wait and see attitude well they better not wait to long ???”

      The SNP needs to show its serious about independence by including a indyref in their next manifesto, and a indy majority at Holyrood next year must be acted upon.

      No more mandates nonsense.

    476. Famous15 says:

      “I could pick a berry or two

      I could gut a little fishy

      I could make a bed

      I could wait on table

      I could wash the dishes

      I could pull carrots

      If only my arthritis and

      If only my carer allowed.”

      If only I could invent a machine

      If only.”

    477. Famous15 says:

      Get that 8 million inactive to work instead of immigrants says Priti Patel who admits her own parents would not now get a visa.

      Stu,I will say it this time,if only!

    478. Ottomanboi says:

      @jfngw 11:53
      Although many do not like the theme, Scotland, as viewed from the English/London perspective, is of little consequence. England will hold onto its 1707 territorial acquisition whether Scots like it or not. Ultimately, the only way BritState will get the message that we do not, is by “force”.
      It is actually the only thing these arrogant people understand.
      We need the equivalent of the classic baseball bat to drive the message home.
      Do we have the party, let alone the mettle, to do that? Not yet it seems.
      The international community will not pay any attention until we do.

    479. Famous15 says:


      Getting your claymore from the thatch are you?

      Your a MI5 plant.

    480. manandboy says:

      “EU Says Johnson Will Be Blamed If Brexit Wrecks Trade with U.K.

      ” Phil Hogan urges Britain to accept alignment with EU rules
      Regulatory divergence a ‘big worry’ for U.K. industry”

      European Union Trade Commissioner Phil Hogan said the U.K. will have “full responsibility” for any damage to the British economy after the post-Brexit transition expires, countering a stinging attack by Boris Johnson’s government on the conditions set by Brussels for a follow-up deal.

      Hogan told a conference on Tuesday that the EU wants economic integration with the U.K. to remain deep, repeating that any free-trade agreement between both sides should align competition, environmental and other standards. The insistence that Britain stick to EU rules “simply fails to see the point of what we are doing,” the U.K.’s chief Brexit negotiator, David Frost, warned hours before Hogan’s comments.

      The sharply contrasting views about the framework for Britain’s ties with the EU as of 2021 set the stage for fraught negotiations and highlight the risk of a car-crash separation when a transitional arrangement that maintains the economic status quo expires on Dec. 31.”

      So, having left the EU Golf Club in a temper, driven by xenophobia, racism and the centuries old belief that England is superior to all others in all things, and is entitled to special treatment as a result, The English Ruling Class now wants to rejoin the Club, but under its own terms, which basically are:-
      1. To play without adhering to the Rules of Golf

      2. To be free to start a round at any of the eighteen holes
      they choose, even when it means interrupting those who
      started at the first hole, and causing hold-ups and
      general chaos in the process.

      But this is not the main problem. No, the underlying difficulty is that the English Establishment knows only too well that the EU Golf Club is run in the best way possible to satisfy all its members, but in London they are nevertheless determined to force the EU to pay tribute to English Superiority and Entitlement.

      Lunatics & asylum come to mind.

    481. mike cassidy says:



      Wanna see some footage of Bernie Sanders on his honeymoon?

      In Russia!

      While it was still communist!

    482. Republicofscotland says:

      “England will hold onto its 1707 territorial acquisition whether Scots like it or not. Ultimately, the only way BritState will get the message that we do not, is by “force”.
      It is actually the only thing these arrogant people understand.
      We need the equivalent of the classic baseball bat to drive the message home.”

      What a load of old bollocks, by the very fact that we had an independence referendum in 2014, shows clearly that Scotland is in a union, and nothing more.

      Yes Westminster might consider violence, and to be frank I wouldn’t put it past them, theyre flouting international law on the Chagos Islands and holding Julian Assange illegally, he’s served his sentence.

      The world already looks upon England, and it is England that’s the driving force in the above matters, and illegal wars and funding proxy fighters in Libya, Iraq, Afghanistan, Yemen and Syria in a not so democratic light.

      Scotland is not the Chagos islands, Westminster cannot expect to hold fivee and half million people hostage through violence, and not become a pariah to the international community.

    483. Sinky says:

      BBC lunchtime TV news coverage of uk immigration proposals makes no mention of Scotland or Scots Gov visa system.

      The proposals will hurt Scotland more than other parts of UK.

      And will Northern Ireland get huge advantage in recruiting EU labour?

    484. ben madigan says:

      the Constitution Unit at University College London adds to the discussion on Scotland’s Claim of Right. The CU says it is the UK’s leading research body on constitutional change.

    485. Dr Jim says:

      This new immigration system is great isn’t it!
      What an opportunity to get our kids healthy by getting them out into the fields fruit picking, and our pensioners will benefit from the fresh air and exercise thus keeping them out of hospitals with niggly old age complaints and it’s time the elderly put something back for all the free pensions and benefits they get, our current unemployment rate will plummet by getting all the lazy University leavers and computer programmers into the workforce doing the carer jobs in our new camps until they are employed in the careers they trained for

      We can set up our new camps for them to live in where the old can look after the young and where work is it’s own reward
      We can have free dentistry, and everybody doesn’t need more than one pair of shoes or one overall to work and live in and it’ll cut pollution in our towns by not having to supply free bus travel to those wth no reason to be there

      More solutions will be announced in the coming months

      Much can be done within our new order, it’s a new dawn

    486. Almond Chutney says:


      If you’re going to chastise somebody, at least use the proper grammar.

    487. Colin Alexander says:

      The Claim of Right was turned into a right to choose the form of govt best suited, which undermines the true power of the CoR.

      The original Claim of Right 1689 is more than the right to choose a form of government. It is a statutory affirmation of the sovereignty of the people of Scotland (not the creation of it), which not only gives the people the right to choose their form of govt: it gives them supreme power OVER the monarchy, parliamentarians, government and state.

      (IF it can be effectively exercised).

    488. robertknight says:

      Hey, SNP accolites out there…

      Anything going on in terms of our constitutional situation?

      Has the SNP become the ‘paper tiger’ that Westminster always claimed that it was?

      Can the SNP leadership appreciate that it is they who are responsible for the “impatience, frustration and fragmentation” within ‘Yes’ as described by Pete Wishart?

      “There are risks and costs to action. But they are far less than the long range risks of comfortable inaction.” JFK.

    489. terence callachan says:

      Genetically modified organisms
      Plant or Animal
      Is a risk to human health
      It’s been known for many years

      Brexit will lead to imports of GMO from USA beef cattle that never see the light of day and are fed GMO corn to fatten them
      People in USA always look for beef labelled grass fed if they can afford it and they check that it’s always been grass fed because farmers feed them on grass til the last six months before slaughter then they go indoors to fatten up on GMO corn

      We don’t have the EU to protect us from these kind of tricks anymore

    490. Sinky says:

      Scotland Politics this afternoon discussion between four MSPs guess which one Gordon Brewer interupted the most

    491. Rm says:

      Could we call the new party in Scotland, THE SCOTTISH PARTY we don’t need the independence part in it because we’ve always been independent, Real Scots are not british we’re SCOTTISH and we’re definitely not english, although the labour, Lib Dem’s and conservative MSPS must be wishing they were the way they keep taking Scotland down all the time, it doesn’t matter how hard the Scottish government try the English contingent can’t see anything good, time to dissolve the union and get into this modern time.

    492. Dr Jim says:

      Scotland, one of the most migrated peoples on the planet, and in the 1920s England positively encouraged Scots to leave by promising them the world in other countries, as the years went by they offered assisted passage to Scots to leave Scotland

      Successive governments in England have been trying for a century to empty Scotland of it’s people now they’ve come up with yet another plan to depopulate Scotland by stopping folk coming in who don’t already earn more wages elswhere than they could earn here anyway, they say it’ll boost wages, it’ll make employers pay more, that’ll be a £1 per strawberry missus or we kidnap yer wean to pick them, what’ll it be?

      The next deal offered to the poorer folk of England will be to come to Scotland, I seem to remember them doing that one to Norn Ireland too

      England’s different, they don’t like anybody anyway and the only way to keep the white supremists happy down there is to make them think and hope they’re getting rid of all the ones they don’t want, and they’re wrong because right at this moment the UK government has adverts in African countries for people to come to the great UK of E to work on their paved with gold streets and in a year or two England will be full of African workers doing the same jobs EU folk were doing and the English will go berserk because that’s what they don’t want

      But it’ll be OK because Herr Johnson will be gone by then and won’t give a jot

      Scotland will have been badly damaged by then so job done

    493. Effijy says:

      Pretti Patel should be tackled by the trades description act.
      The woman is the ugly face of fascism in England.

      Her own family would have been allowed in here under the new rules but she’ll right Union Jack.

      She claims 8 million are inactive here?
      So if you count 2 million at study, a couple of million sick and infirm
      Not capable of berry picking, another couple of million under state retirement age
      Not working but happy to live off their own saving until the N. I payments kick in
      And of course a million or so full time Mothers or caters.

      So there you go that lot will need to stop and run around Amazon Warehouses in the Winter
      And berry pick in the Summer.

      Good old oven ready working very hard serial liar worked from behind by Cummings and many Goings.

    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