Wings Over Scotland

But it was one in the eye for the SNP so thats allright then

Ban the fixture, distribute the points evenly and only reinstate the fixture once the fans have shown that they can behave themselves.

I know the majority of fans are not involved but this can’t be allowed to continue.
Civil upheaval due to a sporting fixture just because it’s the Old Firm has to stop.

My daughter works in a shop and there was fighting outside the shop, the shoppers inside were terrified and scared to go outside.
What other society in the world just shrugs of stuff like this?

I am on record many times during the cynical campaign to have the OBFA legislation scrapped as stating that I would hold James Kelly, Professor Two Jobs WATP Tomkins, and Murdo 7 Times Failure The Queen’s Eleven Fraser, and Patrick Harvie and his very own Green Brigade as culpable should any poor soul lose his or her life now that tens of thousands of thugs have had their behaviour ‘decriminalised’ just so that the Brit Natsis could get one over on the hated EssEnnPee, and Harvie could indulge his James Cagney neurosis and flex his power broking muscles at Holyrood.
You are an absolute disgrace, all of you.
People are dying, the festering animal mob has been unleashed on our streets, and our Dead Tree Scrolls and broadcasters, in the pay of their Unionist Masters and Colonists celebrate the SNP getting a ‘bloody nose’, but hide the violence, death, and psychopaths that now thrive unchecked in our midst.
Fuck Rangers; fuck Celtic.
Fuck the tens of thousands of idiots who follow them to satiate their violent hate-filled death wish.

The sooner we get rid of d’Honte, and return to sanity and Self Determination the better.
I note that the Dead Tree Scrolls and the telly are blaming Scott Brown for it all.
What fucking evil people we have writing this evil bile for Anglo Brit Nat loot.
It is time for the peole of Scotland to rise and drive them all from our country.
We deserve better that psycho racist bigoted thugs ruling by violence and threats.
Kelly, Tomkins, Harvie, Fraser, the Boards of Rangers and Celtic, you stand condemned.

It’s the Kelly consequentials, Labour not too keen on FOM but right on with FOB.

I hold the Labour/Tory/LibDem/Green politicians directly responsible for Sunday’s events, they gave the green light to the bigots. They literally now have blood on their hands.

Relieved I resisted the temptation to give a second vote to the Greens, having a few more Pro-Indy MSP’s at Holyrood is not worth it if the result is the Green’s grandstanding with the unionists.

To James Kelly MSP.
You stated the OBFA was not fit for purpose and that Labour would bring forward a paper on a better way of dealing with crowd trouble at football matches.
All Scotland is watching and waiting for this magic paper to be produced. Is there any intention of producing such a document or was it all just fine words on the day, we are waiting Mr Kelly, waiting and watching, this will not go away.
Produce the paper.

I commented about the previous post – that Ian Murray’s approach reflected the first past the post system at Westminster, which I believe is outdated. Placing Party over Population.

On the other hand, the OBFA repeal shows that even with improved representation the Holyrood system isn’t perfect either cf. the opposition to the minimal alcohol pricing.

These are not football fans. These are scum bigots who use football as an arena to vent their hatred. You only need to look on the Internet at their fan forums to know this.

They are a millstone on Scotland move to the future. They are aided and abetted by newspapers and media commentators who are also fans of these clubs,though mainly at Ibrox.

Strict liability at all grounds.
Stricter sentences for football related crime and especially sectarianism.

Strict liability for incendiary media articles.

I am sick of this all over Scotland not just in the West. It is going back to the behaviour when I was young, over religion that not too many of them believe in.

They are the lowest of the low,with many politicians playing the sectarian card for votes right beside them.

Most of us knew there’d be a reckoning after the repeal but I did think(crazy I ken) that Labour would have realised that it would have been in their best interests to come up with a better plan.

Of course it was a forlorn hope as Kelly really does not care but I bet you anything he’ll be fucking all ‘concern’ for the victims and the tv studios…

“kwallity polis”- burnistoun style – from the beeb

It is understood that one line of inquiry is that the incident was connected to the earlier match at Celtic Park.

– do you think?
– but “correlation is not causation”, so nothing to see, move along; lots of “incidents”, maybe not all football related, but let’s not kid ourselves, most will be – the massive uptick in street violence after a rangers defeat is no coincidence

– the shooting is being framed as an attempted robbery
– a guy got slashed waiting for a taxi
– a guy in bathgate got bashed
– some guy got his door kicked in and was slashed – not being connected to any “football” cause – but … it was in LARKHALL … if this guy is the only catholic in the street, you might have your reason

wonder if any of these “incidents” will get classified under “hate crime” – it is certainly hateful and its certainly sectarianism – but the proponents wont like it

– hate crime typically offers special rights and protections to special classes of people, judged by the commissars to be better than the rest of us – these people are few in number, but upsetting them is seen as being heinous – thus if you annoy them, the law can throw the book at you

– so, we get a lot of mostly trivial stuff – name calling, “bullying”, being classified as “hate”, while ordinary, serious, violence, done to the undeserving normal is swept under the carpet; offence now trumps injury

– having the sectarian thrown in with the hate is disliked – because it offers protections to a class of people who don’t count, are not special, according to the id politics victimisation olympics – and because there is genuinely a lot of it, it makes the numbers look bad

if someone plugs you with a kitchen knife, severing your large intestine, attacking you on the basis of – you were the nearest celtic fan to the door – is this not a hatecrime?
– even if you live, you needed a bowel resection and now live with a colostomy bag

– the celtic fans were stabbed in the back, by surprise – this shows premeditation, and also a lack of any justification by provocation, self defence, banter that went too far – it was deliberate and murderous, planned

but the crime of last night will be investigated as if it was an isolated “some guy attacks another guy in a pub” – and yet it is so much more

– a gang entered that pub, armed and with common purpose – this is a criminal conspiracy and as such, this -racket- should be investigated as such – networks, associates, affiliations, soldiers and bosses, funding attacked – if the law worked in this country and was not applied selectively – the whole fucking lot – sevco, fans clubs, the orange lodge, the apprentice boys, the black lodges – they would not be marching anymore, because they would be shut down

– scotland needs a RICO act

– to add further insult to the serious injuries – I would expect a number of celtic fans to be charged with assault for refusing to be stabbed, when requested
– that way it looks even-steven – 6 rangers fans for assault and say, 4 celtic fans, with a couple for breach of the peace (“screaming while stabbed, in a public area, causing general alarm”)

according to the Evening Times, the cops are investigating SCOTT BROWN for his “goading” behaviour – this shows entirely the outlook and priorities of the police, which leads onto …

NB celtic fans objections to the OBFA were based on this – the law in this country is APPLIED SELECTIVELY – so giving the cops another stick to beat you with is a bad idea; celtic fans know there will never be mass arrests at ibrox or anywhere else of rangers fans – but they will be.

– still, the OBFA was better than nothing and it made the “civilians” feel a lot safer; there is the argument that by stamping down on minor behaviour you prevent more serious behaviour – but I am not sold on this, just because I cannot shout “fenian bastards” in the ground, doesn’t stop me plugging some poor bastard 3 hours later.

– if anyone still thinks celtic fans are bad people, or at least partially to blame (this is how the media plays it) – go back to the george sq attack – that shocked many out of their complacency, and also think of Arkan, the notorious serb hooligan and his “tigers” – in the balkan war they formed a paramilitary unit, known mostly for attacks against civilians
– this whole unionist structure, rangers/sevco club, the fans, the affiliates – this is not simply about football, a problem for their rivals esp. celtic – its a problem to our entire nationalist project

This sad event is being used by BritNats to try to prove Scotland is just like England in regard to knife crime. Disgusting.

We know that the only reason Labour MSP’s are sitting in Holyrood, other than to lift their fat pay cheque, is to carp from the sidelines and attempt to destroy everything half decent that the SNP politicians try to do: no doubt following orders from their big boss in London. Try searching for anything constructive that they’ve done for Scotland over the years. You won’t find it.

James Kelly, number one culprit in repealing the OBFA, promised to deliver an alternative plan. So where is it? We should all be contacting the Scottish Parliament to put pressure on him to reveal his anti-sectarian ”works to date.” He in fact should have been forced to work on and produce an alternative plan before he scuppered the OBFA. Then again just scroll back and take a gander at his glaikit looking face. Listen to him. The man’s not capable of stringing a coherent sentence together far less formulating any kind of a plan. A total embarrassment for Scotland, in fact.

The Greens played a part in this too; could have put a stop to it but didn’t. Suffice to say that they won’t be getting my vote again either.

……………………………………..

O/T

We haven’t heard from Robert Peffers recently (or maybe I’ve missed something?). Last time he posted he seemed to be recovering from another illness / condition. Anybody know if he’s ok? Just taking a well-earned rest?

You can image my horror when I saw the reports of this dreadful act of violence and insanity.
I, like many others, had gone into Glasgow on Sunday for an afternoon out, and had no idea that an old firm match was on…
I have no interest in football and prior to the OBFA, had hated to be in Glasgow when any match was scheduled to be on, often avoided the city on those days, but when the OBFA came into force I was happy to be in Glasgow as it had become a much safe place to venture into especially when an old firm match was on… even to the point where I was happy to venture into the Merchant City on those days.
But when James Kelly and his cohorts, for no other reason than to score a political point against the SNP, got the ball rolling to have the law removed many ordinary people, and many fans too for that matter, new that the bad old days of football violence would return… little did we think it would return is such a violent and devastating way.
I had no idea that there was a match to be played on Sunday when I ventured into Glasgow, to simply to wonder around with my camera to while away that lovely day, and a lovely day it was too with dry weather and sunshine.
Not thinking that anything unto-wards would happen, based on previous experiences of going into a good establishment in Blackfriars Street after the OBFA’s introduction, I decided to have a pint and a relaxing read but when I looked into the pub, it was full to the gunwales… so rather than squeeze in, I decided to head up to the north west end of town instead… not long before this insanity began.
I count myself lucky that I made that decision as it took me away long before it all unfolded… and shocked that because of political point scoring, someone is now fighting for their life because of that.
Those that fought to have the OBFA removed should hold their heads in shame… shame on them.

Both clubs charge entry into their gardens of remembrance, if they were a disco the police would remove their licences, so maybe the repealers shot themselves in both feet with their anti SNP garbage because now they’ve left it wide open for the Scottish government to take much stronger action and what political party is going to argue the toss with them in the full knowledge that whatever the SG do now a massive percentage of the population is going to agree with them

Except the decent supporters of both teams that is, although the decent supporters should have shown the clubs their displeasure at this behaviour and voted with their feet a long time ago and there are more of them than the numpties so maybe too late to moan now

Just when crime is at a record all time low and the police are getting on top of other kinds of crime these Baams want to use our taxpaying money to pay more police to run around after them because they’re a bunch of nut jobs

It was quietish for a few years because Rangers were out of things but everybody and their dug knew perfectly well they’d be back and the my Irish christianity is better than your Irish christianity would get itself going again, time to up the SKY payment for more controversy, pay up Sky they can do this every week for the right money

C’mon it’s tradition!

It’s difficult to be dispassionate when commenting on these events.
It’s probably easier to look at the motivation of James Kelly.
What drives this man?
Where do you start in putting together a pen portrait of James Kelly?
He is most definitely unpleasant in character.
He’s also a coward.
He has, through his actions, mobilised a small army of nasty people to fight his battles.
Because he does not have the skills to frame a rational argument in support of British Labour, he uses other people to enact his fantasy.
He is like the school bully who manipulates others to do his dirty work.
It’s easy to pigeon hole James Kelly as thick and of low intelligence but he does fully understand what he is doing.
It’s a thoroughly unpleasant form of cleverness that James displays. Unpalatable to reasonable people, yet effective.
So why is he doing this?
Well, James self identifies as British and this is important to him.
So important, in fact that in his mind he sees British and Brutishness as supremely important to his world view and personal standing.
Brutishness is his point of reference and one of the things that he sees is that this Brutishness, his British way of life, is under threat.
James is acting out like a cult member, because being British is a cult. James is a cultish obsessive. It’s irrational to us but completely rational to James.
His little British world is under threat.
It doesn’t matter that the threat consists of solutions to social ills, that the threat will see people gaining access to employment, health care, education, housing.
No.
Britishness in all its London Bus red, blood soaked, xenophobic, unfair, empire worshipping, ghoulish glory is going down the khazi.
So what’s a Loyal Brit to do.
Well, James has several hundred years of Brutish, British behaviour to draw upon. Hell, it worked in India and Africa, so what’s wrong with a little blood spilled on the streets of Scotland? Got to keep that Union Jack flying, after all and if that means a little more blood red in the dye, then that’s ok.
GSTQ, eh James? Hopefully a knighthood is on its way from Buck Palace.

@Jamie,

I wish I could agree, but what you cannot dismiss is that the very day after OBFA was rescinded, football hooligans disguised as fans felt they had a license to pursue the same old hatred.

I am a Celtic fan of many years standing. My son in law and others are Rangers fans. We can watch the game together.No hassle.

I read the fan sites and boy oh boy, it has been a little while since I’ve read such hatred. It’s primal.

What lies behind it? History and the affiliation with Ireland North and South. Affiliation to religion, to organisations of the troubles, and to a myth of being better than them.

It is living for the past,in the present. The stabbings happen because the bitterness becomes overwhelming, or the superiority becomes intoxicating.

Football is not the root of these evils but it is the symbol many wear as a justification to carry out these acts. Football must cleanse itself of these associations or have someone do it for them.
Lip service is not enough. People die because a team won or lost. That is important.

It’s good to see that you are still with us Mr P.

The greens can go fuck themselves too over this…they aided and abetted if memory serves…but even if I’m incorrect, they can still fuck off 🙂

Following this incident on Sunday past close all licensed premises on the day of the next match between Celtic and Rangers and don’t allow televised coverage or highlights that day.
And hold the game behind closed doors no fans allowed to watch either in the ground or on tv or radio anywhere.
The general public will be affected but that is a good way to ensure that Celtic and Rangers fans change their ways.

Time for some reflections on theology and stuff?

THE SECTARIAN TEMPTATION: REFLECTIONS ON THEOLOGY, THE CHURCH AND THE UNIVERSITY

I shall state in summary form the thesis of this lecture. It is very tempting in our cultural era to isolate Christian theology and ethics from critical external points of view in order to maintain the uniqueness or historic identity of Christianity. I call this a sectarian temptation, not because it is always associated with classic Anabaptist ecclesiologies, though in part it is, but because the separation of theology from other ways of construing the world in the culture is somewhat similar to the sharp separation of the Christian community from the world that has always characterized sectarianism.

In contemporary theology we have very sophisticated defenses of such a separation. I shall note and explain some of them all too briefly. The effect is that theology becomes a descriptive rather than normative discipline, and ethics becomes fidelity to the ethos of a particular historic community rather than participation in the patterns and processes of interdependence of life.

I shall then compare my account of contemporary proposals with what, to me, are better defended forms of ‘confessional’ theology in the recent past to show where I think a critical difference lies in contemporary proposals. Next I shall argue that assumptions underlying new sectarianism in theology are untenable sociologically, philosophically, and theologically. Finally I shall briefly state what readers of my recent work already know, namely what I believe is necessary in theology and ethics, and the risks that are involved.

With this summary of the lecture in mind, I shall now proceed to develop my analysis and argument more fully, regretting that within the time constraints of one lecture it cannot be done with full adequacy.

link to ejournals.bc.edu

The Search for Peace: How Toleration Defeated Sectarianism
link to thephilosopher.blog

Moral Conflict and Legal Reasoning
link to bloomsburyprofessional.com

Sectarianism Without Perfection? Quong’s Political Liberalism
fqp.luiss.it/files/2012/12/PPI-1-2012-02gaus.pdf

I have a suspicion that the BritNat parties rather secretly wanted this kind of disturbance to happen. For them, the mayhem “proves” that we are ungovernable all by ourselves, and we need a nice calm overseer to keep the Queen’s peace.

Except that the OBFA repeal has sent a signal to those fractious dullards who have been impatiently straining at the leash for some time, with all-too-predictable results. Kelly & Co have blood on their hands.

We could wait until hell freezes over for Idiot Kelly to do anything about it as promised. If the SFA and the clubs do nothing appropriately radical now, the SG should, as a matter of urgency, step up to the mark and get the job done. And properly this time.

@galamcennalath

‘This sad event is being used by BritNats to try to prove Scotland is just like England in regard to knife crime. Disgusting.’

Well, it might not be as bad in terms of the number of murders directly attributable to ‘knife crime’, but when you stay not 5 minutes walk from a set of shops which are the haunt of the local troupe of ‘stabby wee cunts’ and you know two people who’ve been stabbed there for no reason other than one had the temerity to actually want to buy something from the main shop, the other was just walking by on his way to his aunts house, you do have to wonder.

Unlike the majority of the reported knife-crime down South, this isn’t knuckledragger-on-knuckledragger (for different values of knuckledragger) crime we’re talking about here (though i will admit that there is an element of it ) this is knuckledragger-on-everyone. It’s very obvious that people locally are worried about it, as soon as the streetlights come on, the streets empty.

polis

@Jamie

That’s not Jamie Kelly by any chance is it?

It was a green light to bigots by politicians. And as been mentioned before, Mr Kelly was going to bring something forward that was better than the OBFA. But to quote Nick Robinson, when queried where these proposal are, there comes no answer.

It was merely a bit of politics to reverse a SNP piece of legislation, they had no concern about any outcomes, defeating the SNP was their only objective.

The unionist shits at Holyrood want to keep us divided so we don’t vote for independence.

Initially, James Kelly and his fellow members of the Socialist Political wing of the Celtic Family were all for OBFA – as they thought it would only affect “the other lot.”

They would Surrender, Derry’s Walls would collapse, wearing your father’s sash – or at leat singing about it – would be verbotten, and wading up to your knees in Fenian blood would also be banned, as would reminding the “Plastic Paddies” at the other end of Celtic Park, Hampden or Ibrox that the Famine was over, and they could now safely return to Ireland.

What Kelly and his ilk didn’t reckon on, was that some of their Party Songs and some of their unacceptable behaviour would also be cracked down on. And when that happened, suddenly, OBFA wasn’t such a good idea and would have to be got rid off.

The Old Firm are twa cheeks o’ the yae erse and Scottish football would be well rid of both – except, nobody else will have them.

Jack Collatin

Says “The sooner we get rid of d’Honte”

What system would you prefer, Jack. IMHO the problem with D’Hondt is not the system but the standard of candidates put up by Labour and Tories.

Clachangowk @ 16:47,

A fair point. And it’s not “D’Hondt” anyway. Sounds suspiciously foreign, so must be bad. But it’s just a method of calculation – a piece of maths – and a perfectly sensible one for what it is designed to do.

The actual system is called AMS – Additional Member System. It grafts (guess what?) some additional members onto FPTP to attempt to undo the worst of the latter. A typical British bodge on a long-outmoded system designed for illiterates.

And even worse, the system bequeathed to us by those daring radicals in the Labour party adds an extra degree of confusion – the list vote to choose the parties who will choose these additional members. A bodge on top of a bodge on top of a bodge.

So replacing it with something reasonably rational and understandable should be one of the first priorities of an independent Scotland. On that, I think, we can all agree.

Agree with many of the above sentiments, the OBFA should not have been repealed without a suitable replacement. Perhaps, as the football season is about to close, pressure should be put on James Kelly and his cohorts to draw up a suitable replacement plan for implementation for the new season. If not, then the SG steps in to set the agenda – surely that would help concentrate a few minds (though JK’s would probably explode!!!).

@James Kelly
Pin your ears back lad, time you got edumicated.

The Concept of Public Policy in Law: Revisiting the Role of the Public Policy Doctrine in the Enforcement of Private Legal Arrangements

I. INTRODUCTION

There is a peculiar thread that links vast and incongruent cases: the man who restricted his own freedom to trade, a fellow who bet on Napoleon’s life,1 a parent who fettered his estate for perpetuity, a married man who proposed to another woman while he was still in the process of divorce,2 a company that appointed an employee as trustee in an insolvency proceeding to make the company a creditor of itself,3 and an arbitral award delivered in favor of a country with strained political relation with the country of the court’s proceedings.4

In most instances mentioned here, contracts or awards were found to be unenforceable. Yet, these cases—and many more similar ones—hardly shed any light on this peculiar thread called public policy. It is only through redefining and revisiting the concept of public policy that we can finally begin to make sense of this historically convoluted and often-neglected doctrine.

link to digitalcommons.unl.edu

Overview Of Public Policy: The Public And Its Policies
link to oxfordhandbooks.com

Rhetoric and The Rule of Law: A Theory of Legal Reasoning
link to oxfordscholarship.com

Rules and Principles: A Theory of Legal Certainty
classic.austlii.edu.au/au/journals/AUJlLegPhil/2011/7.pdf

P.S. Westminster obviously doesn’t give a stuff about Scoland’s public policy, nor the rule of law.

The Scottish parliament should have ensured there was alternative to the OBFA before voting to abolish it. This is now an emergency. All the parties must put their political differences aside and come up with a solution to protect the public.

Like Liz G and others on here and elsewhere I have to ask , are footballers in general outwith the law , do they not face the same criminal charges and penalties that we do

As others have reffered to , when you or I are out socialising and for some reason you feel like punching or kicking someone do you really expect to walk away and not be charged with assault or affray , or do you expect the polis to stand idly by and not intervene when the place erupts

Is there something sacrosanct or untouchable about the 4 walls of a football stadium that allows these prima donnas to act with impunity , I have watched many incidences of blatant assault on televised games , as evidenced this weekend yet nothing is done about it , these games are televised and recorded yet the AUTHORITIES maintain ( we seen nothing guv ) these cretins incite and encourage the bampots to act even more recklessly and inflame tensions

If the police directed by the CCTV commander stopped the game and arrested and charged these idiots for blatant assault a few times that would send a message to the clubs , players and fans that they are NOT above the law

It is a mindset not only in Scotland but throughout the UK that footballers , their clubs and supporters are above the law , that the so called beautiful game should not have to be constrained by laws for mere mortals

I also agree that the unionist gstq political parasites are deliberately inflaming religious fervour and should be exposed and demonised for their blatant encouragement to divide Scotland’s people

If a Hopeful stands in the Constituency ballot, and fails, he or she should not be on a Magic Party List to get in at the back door, as Fraser has done, SEVEN TIMES, Professor Two Jobs Tomkins and James Kelly the Boy From Killane have.
They are ‘unelected’ placemats there on the Jobs for the Boys Gravy Train.
The electorate rejected them at the ballot box.
Tomkins stood in my constituency and he came in an inglorious 4th.
The choice should be stark. Stand for a constituency Seat or get on your Party’s Golden Ticket unelected list.
We wouldn’t have had to put up with Kezia in The Jungle and at the dock if Constituency Failures got the Big E.
It’s called d,Hondt after the Furriner who devised it, btw.
The system should not allow failures and millionaire farmers and businessmen to beat democracy.
I favour armed rebellion now.
That’ll get me in trouble.

PS I’m looking out my old tennis racquet now.
Allons, enfants.

Question to presiding officer. When is Kelly MSP submitting new proposals for voting on? Postcards at the ready.

Or at least there should be some ‘time limit’ that bars a candidate from repeatedly being placed on the List year after year and getting into Holyrood on that basis, having failed to get through on the constituency vote time and time again.

Surely being rejected by the electorate repeatedly only to fallback into a job because you are on the fallback list is utterly corrupt practice?

Also, anyone who has succeeded in doing so, there should be a change every 2 years for those that have entered the parliament in this way, go to the electorate again for the List vote every 2 years?

According to Gordon Ross in Indycar, 2.4.2019, an Independent Scotland’s retirement pension could be set to double under new EU directives.

Just watch the BritNat propaganda machine hush that up.

Which blindfolded cretin came up with the oxymoronic term ‘The Beautiful Game’?

It would be good if the previous scrapped Bill could be replaced sometime soon.

O/T

Theresa May gave the usual underwhelming speech to the ‘nations’. I think should she have given that to the H o C first or is she scared that Ian Blackford would give the right response to it?

Theresa May is inviting Jeremy Corbyn to talks, this is to try and con him to agreeing to her WA, she stated he must agree to the WA. If he doesn’t agree she will then clam it is Labour’s fault, Corbyn would be a fool to take part on May’s terms.

Claims it is for national unity but ignores the largest party in Scotland, looks like an England only invite then.

Jfngw The SNP may still be involved, May did not specifically exclude them and of course plenty of Scottish Tory and Labour MPs and MSPs

@HYUFD

Very amusing, are you applying for a spin doctor role or just practising.

There are flats in Merchant City, people actually live there, including Albion Street.

In the absence of a real war, wasn’t sport devised to keep the armies of the ancients battle ready and loyal to their tribe?

We may have developed different skills and the immediate threat of war is hopefully far away but some seem stuck in that war mentality with a historical enemy, reliving the battle every weekend.

Then again it’s just a game to the rest of us.

I’ve never liked football anyway (I don’t like sports) but the behaviour of the fans is disgusting. Just makes me dislike the game even more.

gus1940: Pele, I believe.

manandboy says:
2 April, 2019 at 6:20 pm
According to Gordon Ross in Indycar, 2.4.2019, an Independent Scotland’s retirement pension could be set to double under new EU directives.

Manandboy, this was known about, along with the tax evasion laws that the EU planned to bring in, around the time of the EU Referendum. It was suitably hushed up by the British State Broadcaster then, and has been ever since. It’s no wonder that it nobody knows about it.

Anywas, back to topic, perhaps the first thing that needs to be done is to prosecute players and managers for offences that if committed in the street, would be arrested and charged.

Once a fud always a FUD.

All opposition parties voted it down .
And it would not have mattered anyway on Sunday given the idiotic behaviour of both sets of players And their comments after the game and again Tuesday night .
The day is coming sooner than we think when the cops will start hauling in players to help them with their inquiries
And PMS statement to tv what happened to making statements in Parliament

This isn’t OT. Still don’t think the nation of Scotland faces an existential threat? Not from tubes like Kelly, but from institutional British nationalism. Time for a bit more Legal Theory?

Legal Certainty, Proportionality and Pragmatism:
Overriding Mandatory Laws in International Arbitration

C. Overriding mandatory laws as public law

The unpopular effects of overriding mandatory laws on party autonomy, however, must be placed in the context of their public law nature of market regulation. As illustrated by the Ingmar case, they are exceptional key vehicles for implementing (only) the market’s most important policies, that is, those deemed so fundamental that a materially diverging outcome cannot be tolerated, irrespective of the international implications.

If one wishes to conceptualize party autonomy as the outflow of fundamental or even human rights of the individual against the State,20 then it is equally necessary to recognize that overriding mandatory provisions are the constitutionally allowed – and, indeed, warranted – legal limitations to those underlying fundamental rights, enacted in the public interest. The State has a duty to regulate to ensure that all stakeholders in the market, and affected by it, can equally enjoy and develop (at least the core of) their fundamental rights.

The law regulating private relations in particular hinges on the State ensuring a level playing field that is ‘so regulated that it reflects the objective order incorporated in the fundamental rights.’21 The arbitrages that become necessary in the policymaking process, the balancing of interests, and the drawing of lines between them, through the (re-)definition of rights, is primarily entrusted to the political legislative process.22

eprints.lse.ac.uk/88377/1/Kleinheisterkamp_Legal%20Certainty_Accepted.pdf

It was often said, not least by lawyers and legal experts, that OBFA was bad law. Mostly on the grounds that, theoretically, it was difficult to implement. That may well be true, in terms of both legal theory and legal practice.

But what it indisputably did do was this: it gave the right message. And equally indisputably, that message was effective. The offensive behaviour associated with football matches did very much decline. Because those who had become accustomed to behaving in such ways, and who would have liked to continue to do so, were afraid of the possible consequences.

True enough, how far they could go without being arrested was not clearly defined. Or – for the law professors and other theorists – insufficiently defined. It was difficult to say (and maybe too much a matter of subjective opinion on the part of the police) what exactly could, or could not be adjudged ‘offensive behaviour’.

If that made the legislation bad law, it also made the potential perpetrators wary – and less likely to offend. In other words, the effect of the legislation, and maybe even of its very ambiguity or its not fully defined nature, was socially positive. Very positive, in fact. Not only in regard to what actually went on during football matches but also in regard to the spill-over from them before and after they were played.

The legislation therefore served the common good, not just for those who enjoy watching football matches but, more widely, for the general public as well. It should have been praised by all concerned, including all politicians who are in the service of the common good, and – granted that it could be improved upon – it should have been taken as a starting-point or foundation which, in the light of experience, could be further built upon.

Which is very much needed, since the issue being addressed does not simply affect football. I once heard of an African country which introduced legislation, soon after independence, to the effect that citizens were entitled to promote their own religion but not to attack that of other people. They could disagree with religions other than their own, of course, and obviously would do. They could politely point out where they thought them wrong, but they were not entitled to attack them directly or vitriolically, especially in public places.

I don’t know how the legislation worked in practice, or if it was ever or often implemented in the African country concerned (I think it was Tanzania, but I may be wrong). But whatever the actual outcome of the legislation, there are some principles there that are worth considering. Even more broadly, for the question for the Scotland of today and tomorrow, even after independence, will be this: how do you create a tolerant society when members of the population often hold clearly different fundamental beliefs?

This is not a question which is confined only to religion. As we know, the problem which the ‘Offensive Behaviour’ Act was addressing is not solely, and some would say not primarily or fundamentally religious in any case. At the very least, it has all kinds of other ramifications, social, political, historical and so on. Most of the people who indulge in offensive behaviour are not generally the most religious or church-going that you ever encountered.

How do we create a genuinely tolerant and pluralistic – and therefore genuinely free and equally respectful – society in Scotland? People have a right to their fundamental beliefs, whether they be philosophical or religious or socio-political or whatever. No one should get his throat slit or his ribs knifed for sincerely holding these, whatever they are. And we all have a duty to respect and actively tolerate those others whose beliefs are different from our own.

You may promote what you believe in a sane and positive and basically polite manner. You may not attack vitriolically those beliefs you disagree with, especially in public places – far less may you threaten or act violently towards those who hold them. We want an independent Scotland where everyone living here can feel genuinely at home, and be confident that he or she is safe. Our nationalism is not only civic, but civil.

This commitment to civility must be written into our future constitution, and steadfastly upheld. What the OBFA legislation only touched upon ultimately concerns constitutional issues of a wider and deeper nature. We should take heed, and take note … if only so as to be ready for the challenges ahead.

Scotlands shame. Step up J. Kelly, its champion.
For a few votes more.

@ Robert Peffers says at 3:03 pm … ”No, Petra, I’ve decided to now just be a lurker and am washing my hair. The problem is I’m having a real hard job finding that hair.”

Glad to see that you’re OK Robert and forget about searching for hair to wash, LOL. Just stick on your Yes badge bedecked bunnet (or a See You Jimmy Hat) and get back on here. Then again maybe you’re due a wee break. Come back to us when you’re ready. More than anything, I hope you’re keeping well X

Interesting dilemma for the DUP now, if Corbyn backs Mays WA do they withdraw their supply & demand agreement and vote to bring down the gov if Labour bring no confidence motion. Either way they are screwed, their only hope now is with Corbyn rejecting offer. DUP now relying on Labour, every cloud has a silver lining.

That’s from the 19th March Robert…we’re not quite there yet wrt current shitstorm 🙂

Are we about to ‘witness’ a ‘unity government’ scenario, Corbyn’s playing his ‘big boy pants’ card wrt to meeting hashtag Mayunhinged.

@James Kelly
You still got your ears pinned back lad?

Revisiting the Regulatory State: A Multidisciplinary Review Establishing a New Research Agenda

Abstract

This paper provides a comprehensive literature review of the ‘Regulatory State’ through the lens of utility regulation. The review is multidisciplinary with it bringing together the insights available from the political science, economics, legal and management science literatures. It is clear that while the term ‘Regulatory State’ is essentially missing from the economics literature a vast array of economics papers provide valuable insights for debates about the Regulatory State within political science.

In addition to reviewing the existing literature, the paper identifies opportunities for future research. The literature is grouped into five topics: (i) Consumers, (ii) Courts, (iii) Ideas, Experts and Expertise, (iv) Governance and (v) Assessing Regulator Performance. Apart from (iv), we believe all of these areas have been under-researched in relative terms. In particular, a key finding is that compared to the information available on Public Utility Commissioners in US States, very little information has been collated on the background, characteristics and careers of individual utility regulators working within Europe.

competitionpolicy.ac.uk/documents/8158338/8235397/CCP+Working+Paper+14-9.pdf/49db203a-9326-4b94-b46e-dedcf12bd751

THE PUBLIC/PRIVATE DICHOTOMY: POLITICAL DISAGREEMENT AND ACADEMIC REPUDIATION
link to scholarship.law.upenn.edu

“Down the rabbit-hole”: The projection of the public/private distinction beyond the state
link to academic.oup.com

Sovereignty in the 21st Century
link to leidenlawblog.nl

@K1 says:2 April, 2019 at 7:39 pm:

” … That’s from the 19th March Robert…we’re not quite there yet wrt current

Try this then:-

link to telegraph.co.uk

O/T Looks like Maybot is now prepared to rope-in closet-Leaver Corbyn to save her from her maddest opponents in her own party.

So goodbye PV, goodbye revocation of Art50, and goodbye an early UKGE. Hello yet again to her “deal”, this time with Labour connivance.

The majoritarian BritNat Cartel at its most crudely visible.

What the SNP wanted will be stitched up as Corbyn and May gather round the table each trying to remember what Joanna Cherry said.

The pellet with the poison’s in the vessel with the pestle; while the chalice from the palace has the brew that is true! 🙂

What a farce!

PS: A read if you like.

link to scotgoespop.blogspot.com

This’ll be Corbyns SNP plan that Labour voted against (Bain principle) and the media will help them out by keeping their mouths shut about that because if Mrs May rejects it Brexit will be the total fault of the SNP because the FM’s been planning it since she was eight years old

gus1940 says:
2 April, 2019 at 6:33 pm

Which blindfolded cretin came up with the oxymoronic term ‘The Beautiful Game’?

Um, i think that was the one and only Pele!

ALL THOSE WITH BLOOD ON THEIR HANDS

Proposal for a Bill to repeal the Offensive Behaviour at Football and Threatening Communications (Scotland) Act 2012.

Lodged on Tuesday 29 November 2016

Total Supporters: 61

30 Scottish Conservative and Unionist Party
22 Scottish Labour
5 Scottish Liberal Democrats
4 Scottish Green Party

For Supporters’ names see:

link to parliament.scot

Paywalled on the Tele Robert, can’t read it to archive and re post. But got the drift in the first couple of para’s.

Still not working.

Cut & Paste it into your browser and you’ll get the Pdf with all the rouges listed.

Mad Unionist@8:10pm
Your head is full of mince and you appear disinterested in securing reasoned compromise. That might be why you support the Yoonyawn, in spite of the impending threat it poses to your biological security. Here’s some Educational Theory and stuff to get your head around.

The historical and contemporary debate about the relation of Catholic schools in Scotland and the social problem of sectarianism

Abstract

There have been claims that contemporary Catholic schools in Scotland are related to sectarianism by the Church of Scotland, academics, the secular lobby, the press and media and public figures, at various points in the twentieth and twenty-first centuries. These individuals and groups have all highlighted the anomaly of state funded educational institutions being allegedly related to a serious social problem – sectarianism. This article presents a close examination of these claims and argues that there is very little empirical evidence to substantiate the alleged relation between contemporary Catholic schools and sectarianism.

Keywords: faith schools, Catholic schools, Scotland, sectarianism, social problems

link to eprints.gla.ac.uk

Report confirms Catholic schools are not the root of sectarianism
Government advisory group says issue has had its day in Scotland in report welcomed by the Church
link to sconews.co.uk

Sectarianism and state funded schooling in Scotland. A critical response to the final report of the Advisory Group on Tackling Sectarianism in Scotland.
eprints.gla.ac.uk/114642/1/114642.pdf

Catholic Schools and Sectarianism in Scotland: Educational Places and the Production and Negotiation of Urban Space
link to journals.sagepub.com

Wull @1926 well said.

Indeed it would Robert…I’m hoping as ever that 2+2 is still equaling 4, but wi this shower and their shenanigans we can never be sure of anything, especially right now.

I have no doubt that our SG and FM have indeed factored in…all the scenarios.

Sectarianism/The Old Firm are something I see as ‘Our Great Shame’

But Labour actually promoted themselves as the ones resurrecting it as they battled with the Conservative & Unionist Party for the ‘Orange Vote’

THIS is what it’s all been about.

They’ve been trying to grab a few extra votes, those votes come at a price. Every hundred votes they got represents someone affected by Sectarian violence. Perhaps a football fan stabbed to death, a fan attacked and injured, a wife of a fan who comes home and attacks her because his team lost, or the child who can’t go to school on Monday because (this time) the bruises are visible after daddy’s team lost. With no one to challenge their behaviour, and in fact they’re telling them it’s perfectly fine, these ‘fans’ take it to the level beyond verbal abuse and become violent. Usually it’s where no one can see it, at home, behind closed doors.

They don’t care about the human consequences of trying to scrape up votes from human trash by becoming their enablers in violence. They aren’t fit to hold office.

Hopefully soon, someone will wake Scottish Labour up and they might find their conscience again…

I have just emailed Mr. Harvie to tell him I was very unhappy, being generous, with this situation. To think I stood outside polling stations telling voters they should give their list vote to the greens.
And now there is a guy from my neck of the woods could be on his road out. Knifed in the neck, you don’t do that if you don’t mean to kill.
And I contributed to Weightman’s fund-raiser

@Sarah says: 2 April, 2019 at 9:25 pm:-

” … @Robert Peffers: here’s hoping!!”

Well, Sarah, it has been obvious for some time that the Westminster contingent of the SNP have been ramping up the, “Scotland will not be dragged out of the EU”. In fact they have been quite bold in that respect. Not only that but the FM has told the members that her announcement about indyref2 is getting closer.

Thing is I’ve had the feeling that perhaps there may be no need for another indyref. People like Alyn Smyth and Joanne Cherry have been using legal terms and involving the courts and the courts seem to be upholding The Scottish Claim of right.

What’s more the Westminster propaganda that people of Scotland are legally sovereign is, “Popular Sovereignty” is mince. It has been an integral part of Scots law since at least 1320 and the Declaration of Arbroath. Popular Sovereignty it is not – it is Scottish Law.

So it is Scots law and has been upheld by the international courts then Westminster are on a hiding to nothing and if the Scots Government invoke The Claim of Right and the EU go along with it there is no good reason why the EU should not simply say:-

As the United Kingdom is obviously a united kingdom just as the title, “The United Kingdom”, indicates it is then the Kingdom of England can have what it voted for and the Kingdom of Scotland can have what it voted for and the Kingdom of Scotland is now the legacy member state. We wish you well The Kingdom of England and goodbye. Hello The Kingdom of Scotland – we kept the light on for your return.

Posted same before.
What do Labour want?
Some sniff of government.
How can they achieve that?
Not by a GE.
How else could they achieve it?
A state of emergency and a National Unity Government.
How could that be brought about?
I have no idea…

O/T

A few tweets spotted this evening

According to ministers, defining issue was that if there was a no-deal Brexit “we’d have to go to direct rule in Northern Ireland” says one. “Disaster. Huge risk. Of all legacies, the break-up of the Union [of the UK], the worst for a PM. She’ll never do no deal now”. And…
link to twitter.com

Ministers in absolute ANARCHY tonight. Some want Mrs May gone within 24 hours. Meanwhile backbench strike talk is back. And also a huge amount of anger from leavers in government at the ERG.
link to twitter.com

Sources in EU institutions v clear tonight that Brexit extension to May 22 (which was first offered at the last EU summit & is back in play if TM can convince EU that her new plan can deliver the deal) is ONLY an option if the UK commits to European Elections. /1
link to twitter.com

@Thepnr says: 2 April, 2019 at 9:54 pm:

” … O/T Maybe no deal really is off the table for good?
link to archive.fo
It matters little now I’d think, the damage is done.”

Never ever forget, Thepnr, that the unionists are, and always have been, “The Westminster Establishment”. What’s more it was always thus. The UK goes to war and the very first thing that happens is that, “Her Majesty”, The Queen of England, summons her choice of leader to her presence and commands that person to form Her Majesty’s , cross-party, Wartime Cabinet.

Of course we know that it isn’t really Her Majesty’s choice but that of Her Majesty’s Privy Council. The point is that all unionist parties are one and the same. The party system is just to fool the public. his goes right back to when the Parliament of England, then the aristocracy, rebelled against their real monarchy in 1688 and upon inviting William & Mary to become their monarchy they forced then to legally delegate their Divine Right, (a.k.a. sovereignty), to the English parliament.

Which is why, today, Westminster illegally claims sovereignty over Scotland. There is no legal rule that the Scots ever gave up their legal sovereignty. Furthermore there is no Parliament of England but Westminster, on 1 May 1707 just carried on as if there were.

Thepnr@9:54pm
I just hope folk in Scotland realise just how vulnerable their human rights are under the British constitution. Somehow, I don’t think the corporate media will help in reaching this understanding, nor an understanding of its’ significance. The BBC in particular.

Going global, turning back national: Towards a cosmopolitan administrative law?

Ten years ago, the global administrative law project represented a new promised land for administrative lawyers, escaping the crisis that was affecting the fundamental pillars of administrative law at national level. In these ten years, the global administrative law scholarship did a very good and hard job. It discovered new lands, challenging cognate disciplines and refreshing the mind of a scientific community traditionally enclosed in the national boundaries.

From this point of view, global administrative law pushed for a significant renewal of national administrative law: sometimes you have to go to the moon to have a better and more comprehensive view of the Earth. Another important contribution of the global administrative scholarship was the rebirth of comparative studies, beyond the traditional cross-country approach.

That is why going to the global level and turning back to the national one with a stronger comparative approach can open up a new frontier of cosmopolitan administrative law, which is everywhere concerned with the double task of empowering public authorities and controlling the bureaucratic
behavior and dominated by functional needs and the logic of collective action.

link to academic.oup.com

International Administrative Law and National Sovereignty
link to cambridge.org

Global Administrative Law: The Quest for Principles and Values
link to ejil.org

Global administrative law: The state of the art
link to academic.oup.com

OT

Black 47 is now available on Netflix.

Hi Robert Peffers at 9:52 pm.

You (again) mentioned the phrase “Popular Sovereignty” and, again, misconstrued it, as I pointed out a week or so ago.

The use of “popular” in that phrase denotes (from Apple’s dictionaries),
“3 [ attrib. ] (of political activity) carried on by the people as a whole rather than restricted to politicians or political parties.”

That is the meaning that I believe is being intended in discussion btl here. What is NOT being implied are the other definitions in Apple’s dictionary:-

1 liked or admired by many people or by a particular person or group: she was one of the most popular girls in the school | these cheeses are very popular in Europe.
2 [ attrib. ] (of cultural activities or products) intended for or suited to the taste, understanding, or means of the general public rather than specialists or intellectuals: editorials accusing the government of wanting to gag the popular press.
• (of a belief or attitude) held by the majority of the general public: many adult cats, contrary to popular opinion, dislike milk.

“Popular Sovereignty”, ie carried on by the people as a whole, is what we Scots have.

I must say that I agree with Prof. Doonthetoon. 😉

History of the Theory of Sovereignty since Rousseau
link to core.ac.uk

THE PARADOX OF SOVEREIGNTY: AUTHORITY, CONSTITUTION,
AND POLITICAL BOUNDARIES
link to etd.library.vanderbilt.edu

Hegemonic sovereignty: Carl Schmitt, Antonio Gramsci and the constituent prince
link to tandfonline.com

The Theory of Popular Sovereignty
link to jstor.org

More on the administrative state and popular sovereignty.

The Very Idea of Popular Sovereignty: “We the People” Reconsidered

Extract

The sovereignty of the people, it is widely said, is the foundation of modern democracy. The truth of this claim depends on the plausibility of attributing sovereignty to “the people” in the first place, and I shall express skepticism about this possibility.

I shall suggest as well that the notion of popular sovereignty is complex, and that appeals to the notion may be best understood as expressing several different ideas and ideals. This essay distinguishes many of these and suggests that greater clarity at least would be obtained by focusing directly on these notions and ideals and eschewing that of sovereignty. My claim, however, will not merely be that the notion is multifaceted and complex.

I shall argue as well that the doctrine that the people are, or ought to be, sovereign is misleading in potentially dangerous ways, and is conducive to a misunderstanding of the nature of politics, governance, and social order. It would be well to do without the doctrine, but it may be equally important to understand its errors. Our understandings and justifications of democracy, certainly, should dispense with popular sovereignty.

link to cambridge.org

The Concept of Sovereignty Revisited
link to ejil.org

The incoherence of strong popular sovereignty
link to academic.oup.com

Reclaiming Sovereignty: Constituted and Constituent Power in Political Theory
link to e-ir.info

Breeks says:

Black 47 is now available on Netflix.

Excellent. A cracking action movie, but also a harrowing tale of England’s inhumanity to Ireland.

I saw it in the cinema, but that was difficult. Very few places showed it. I’m suspicious when an anti UK Establishment themed movie isn’t on wide release.

@me
@Breeks

Peterloo is in a similar vane. Not shown widely. Wonder why? Touch a raw nerve, even today? Especially today!?

The movie is perhaps too long, too much of a build up. But I still enjoyed it. Highlighted the horrendous attitudes among the regional ruling class.