Too Tight To Mention
So this snuck out quietly at the bottom of page 2 of today’s Daily Record.
And like, we suspect, most of Scotland, our response was “WHAT?”
Peter Murrell has been very well paid for most of the last 20 years – somewhere in the ballpark of £100,000 a year – and there’s very little evidence of him spending any of it on anything. He shared a modest house in Uddingston, had a couple of pricey but not wildly extravagant cars, no public social life and he’s too fat to have a heroin habit.
Quite recently he had so much spare cash floating around that he was able to loan the SNP £108,000 of it (and of course he stands accused of embezzling more from the party). So why in the world are WE suddenly all on the hook for paying what would undoubtedly be a fortune – embezzlement cases are notoriously complex and usually drawn-out affairs – for his legal costs? Where’s it all gone, Peter?
The rules for legal aid in Scotland – set, delightfully, by the Scottish Parliament – are very vague, but we know they’re relatively generous if it’s for a criminal matter (it’s a lot harder to get any help for a civil case). Your main residence doesn’t count as an asset, for example, so whether he’s staying at the Uddingston house, his villa in Portugal or somewhere else, those will be off the books.
His £95,000 Jaguar was part of the police investigation into his alleged embezzlement, so presumably that doesn’t get counted as an asset either, and of course the iconic campervan belongs to the SNP, not Murrell personally. And as he and Sturgeon are now conveniently separated – although they weren’t at the time of the alleged crimes – none of her considerable personal riches – including a £300,000 book advance – can be taken into account either.
Also conveniently, Sturgeon was very careful to emphasise in 2023, before Murrell had been arrested or their separation announced, that the loan money belonged solely to Murrell, though the couple have always refused to either confirm or deny whether they had a joint bank account.
A third convenience (in terms of getting legal aid, at least) is that because the crime is one of embezzlement, ie a financial one, the Lord Advocate, who answers to the First Minister and still attends SNP cabinet meetings, has frozen Murrell’s property assets under the Proceeds Of Crime Act 2002.
(The piece refers very specifically to an inhibition being ordered on his property, and primarily his houses – there’s no mention in it of his cash assets also being frozen, although that is possible under POCA2022.)
And as far as we know Murrell has been unemployed since standing down as SNP CEO in 2023, so his current income is presumably minimal. But with legal aid in a huge financial crisis in Scotland, it still defies belief that a lavishly-remunerated hermit like Murrell doesn’t have enough salted away in the bank to pay for his own lawyers like Alex Salmond had to when Murrell tried to stitch him up over false allegations.
(What perhaps IS believable is that despite professing that “we still care deeply for each other, and always will”, Sturgeon’s profound and undying fondness for her loyal still-husband doesn’t extend to lending him a few quid for his defence if she can get the people of Scotland to pick up the tab for it instead.)
We know for sure, for example, that the SNP still owes him £60,000 of that 2021 loan (exclusively revealed by Wings, just like most of the entire affair was). As of today, the Electoral Commission’s register entry for the loan shows that less than £48,000 of it has been paid back.
But the fact is that Peter Murrell has trousered somewhere close to £2 million over his time as SNP CEO, and nobody knows where it’s gone. Everything about the matter, frankly, stinks to the heavens. But Scotland is controlled by such a comically corrupt and crooked cabal of cosy cronyism, with everyone covering everyone else’s back, that the chances of any of it ever seeing the light of day are microscopic.
Indeed, it remains very distinctly possible that Murrell will ultimately cop a plea deal, accepting a reduced sentence in exchange for avoiding a trial, so that neither the public nor the SNP members whose party was allegedly defrauded will ever get to hear what actually happened.
(Though interestingly, if Murrell is so broke that he needs the taxpayer to pay for his defence, that would seem to preclude any possibility of him getting away with a fine.)
If and when that happens, the whereabouts of the “ring-fenced” £600,000 for a second indyref campaign that vanished into the ether will never be explained, we’ll never know what the infamous campervan was really for or who authorised its purchase, or why a control-freak First Minister who lived in the same house as her party-CEO husband, and who angrily ordered her quivering minions not to question the party finances, never suspected a thing about what he was up to.
Nothing will be resolved, and the rotten stench will linger over the SNP and Scotland forever. It’ll be, to all intents and purposes, as though none of it ever happened at all.
The collaborators cabal are simply a bunch of financial scamsters and racketeers.
I used to feel that I was living through “1984”, now it seems we’ve moved on to “The Way We Live Now”.
What the actual fuck.
I was charged with a criminal offence. (Which was thrown out of court on the day of the supposed trial)
I’m disabled but because my mrs works i was refused legal aid.
I had to borrow £1500 for legal fees and despite being declared innocent i can’t get any of that money back.
I know of two similar unrelated situations. Both were working, but not in highly paid jobs. Both incurred legal fees of circa £2000.
One has had to go into debt to pay solicitors. The other received help from friends & family. Neither has, or can get any recompense. Like yourself one was dropped on day of trial, the other was told shortly before that the case would not proceed. Sometimes I wonder if we’re in a tinpot dictatorship.
It makes you wonder how many people have had to wrongly plead guilty, as they cannot afford the cost of legal help, & pay a fine as it’s cheaper for them.
Ach, if it’s any consolation, 1500 and 2 grand is jist a light screw over.
Plus as a taxpayer, you get continually shafted in the scam/shams of the “Scottish” legal and “justice” system.
The likely damages of tens of millions for malicious prosecution of the Rangers directors will undoubtably not be coming from the pockets of those that carried out the debacle.
When you have time, it’s worth taking a scroll through the pages of articles on this linked to site.
link to petercherbi.blogspot.com
I know of two similar unrelated situations. Both were working, but not in highly paid jobs. Both incurred legal fees of circa £2000.
One has had to go into debt to pay solicitors. The other received help from friends & family. Neither has, or can get any recompense. Like yourself one was dropped on day of trial, the other was told shortly before that the case would not proceed. Sometimes I wonder if we’re in a tinpot dictatorship.
It makes you wonder how many people have had to wrongly plead guilty, as they cannot afford the cost of legal help, & pay a fine as it’s cheaper for them.
Maybe Murral has expensive tastes, lots of friends etc.
But surely only one of those properties can be his main residence, the other (or at least half of it) should be up for grabs by Legal Aid. The whole thing stinks.
1707, claim of right, bastard English, UN, salvo wave a flag bla bla bla bla…
Total crap I agree. But I just wanted to get ahead of the ‘yoons’
If the truth does not emerge about the £600k, there is a civil court action called ‘count, reckoning & payment’ which can be brought against the holders of a fund by any or all of the contributors. I would contribute to the cost of obtaining Counsel’s Opinion if you’re up for it, Rev?
You’re spelling the ‘c’ word wrong.
“C*nt, reckoning and payment” sounds spot on.
This post is so good I’m having a second go!
“C*nt”, “Reckoning” and “Payment”. The three volumes of Sturgeon’s autobiographical trilogy. Available separately or as a single, omnibus edition.
‘Comically corrupt’ absolutely nails it.
Well they took Nicola’s Cocks in Frocks away. They forced her to resign. They laughed at her prodigies. The stopped paying their membership fees. How fucking dare they!
It’s only fair they bastard Scots pay for fat boys trial.
The bit that jumps out for me is why is it being relegated to the bottom of page 2 where it’d barely be noticed? Normally a good potential “let’s bash the indy movement” story would run on the front page for at least a few days, especially in that bogroll. Something’s a wee bit off here.
Perhaps the former CEO, also former Director of Communications and prior to that Editor of the Daily Record (M.Foote) has something to do with that.
Mrs Murrell was the brains behind the corruption. Just look at the book deal given to Leaky Liz – who should also be in jail. She’s that much of a black widow spider – she’s eaten her fake husband Mr Murrell alive. She’s devoured him. Divorced him. Taken all his stolen money.
Can she now testify against him now she’s divorced him?
Or will Lady Dorian and Dorothy Bain cover it all up? I suspect they will do their best to!
Even if they arrange a plea deal, surely the complainants still have a right to know where the money went? And will it still require to be repaid/recovered?
I reckon Murrell has 5M in bitcoin on a USB stick, up his arse.
Scot Squad need an aggressive bulldike with a lot of lube and a latex glove to … get to the -bottom- of this …
But I reckon he is the type who pays for that kind of action anyway. Pushing at an open door.
The non credibility of the Murrells domestic life astounds me, the authorities being incurious to the point of ridicule …
Peter has it “all on his laptop” but he REFUSES to let Nikki use it and she “obedient and bullied” and again, tactically “incurious”, doesn’t even try to find out.
“that’s nothing for you to worry about – I’m just looking at gay boyz websites, nothing dubious or financial”
“yes, dear … ”
or
Look Nikki I am doing something very dodgy here, so by letting you even touch the thing you become an “accessory after the fact”
– but I just want to check my emails.
Listen luv, if this all goes to shit, then I want to be able to protect you, so you can fly free and have that life of unrestricted muff diving I could never give you …
– peter, you are my rock … have you seen my diary, I can’t seem to remember what I am doing moment to moment
SNP operating procedures, a room scanned for bugs, all mobile phones in a metallic foil bag, no notes, nothing written down, and all policy meetings one on one, inside a car, in the underground parking garage, with the engine running and hands placed over mouths. New burners distributed once a week.
Maybe the Wee Ginger Doggers will do a crowdfund for him.
It’s hard not to think that this, along with what else has happened since 2014 wasn’t inevitable. The referendum was likely always going to be lost given the resources and dodgy tactics that the UK had to throw at it. They were initially cocky but got enough of a scare to make sure another would never happen. I’m not even sure that had the vote been yes, that it wouldn’t have suddenly become an advisory referendum.
It seems now that the SNP went into the referendum as a seriously divided party of those that truly wanted independence and those that sought their fortunes within the UK (while of course loudly proclaiming their desire for an independent Scotland (eg Blahford)). Once you saw and heard the 56 MP’s who went to WM in 2015, it was clear who had taken over the SNP. Their use of TINA has served them well and now they are firmly part of the Scottish establishment. Maybe if the pre-2014 SNP had been more careful/ruthless in getting the party ready for independence it might all have been so different. That would have meant ready not just to win a vote on independence but actually manage the transition to and early years of an independent Scotland. Looking at any number of the post 2014 and current SNP politicians highlights just how far removed from that the SNP has become.
As for now, the push for independence would make a cracking Nordic Noir type series, with the good guys being well and truly gutted.
Spot on, Ian.
Very well said Ian!
From apparently halcyon days they are now an incompetent “progressive” (in its worst sense) boil that needs lanced..
They just can’t see it though, what a disgrace.
This a clear example of the Colonized state favouring it’s lackeys. The colonial masters have a clear objective. In 1707 the people would have been outraged.
Everybody is being very careful. There’s a paddock I pass most days, and half a dozen of the horses are missing heads.
Still though, isn’t it absolutely delightful that Murrell is giving us a reminder of the Scot’s stereotypical, miserly grippiness. I’m almost proud of the boy for keeping his wallet welded solidly shut!
And it’s only taxpayer’s dosh. The fact that most people really do struggle to understand is that it really does grow on trees.
Online Gambling?
Another twist in an extraordinary tale. One does wonder what past-time a middle aged man has that requires a mobile home, burns through his fortune, and of which his wife apparently has no inkling.
Hmmm.
Holyrood is the operational HQ of the gangster syndicate euphemistically known as the Scottish Government.
The Scottish Government is a subliminal criminal enterprise sponsored and overseen by its parent outfit ‘The English Money Laundering, Weapons and Warmongering Company’.
The EMWC has a sister company called ‘What’s Yours is Mine PLC’ that deals in illegally acquired real estate (called overseas territories or colonies in WYIM parlance) which is rarely put on the market for sale (or decolonisation as the United Nations describes it).
The Scottish Government’s primary criminal activity is to facilitate the illegal extraction of Scotland’s natural resources and wealth and to keep its criminal operation concealed – using a variety of psychological tricks and the illusion of free and fair access to democratic processes – from the local indigenous population.
Once the true nature of the Scottish Government is known it can hardly come as a surprise that Holyrood’s senior capos and functionaries – operating under the protection of an acquired local law enforcement and a bought and paid for judiciary – are immune from any and all consequences relating to any possible criminal activities in which they might have participated.
The usual format for these ‘slightly embarrassing’ situations that arise on occasion is to draw the whole affair out for several years and then wrap the whole thing up in a show trial where the capo, or functionary, in question is publicly slapped on the wrists but is secretly rewarded and compensated for their trouble… and for their loyalty to the ‘organisation’.
For the ethically flexible, conscience-free and spiritually abandoned there can be rewarding careers to be had in one of the many many departments (known as tentacles) of the EMWC – see http://www.gov.scot or ww.gov.uk or http://www.whatsyoursismine.uk for details on how to apply.
Nationalism and gangsterism go hand in hand.
The VIP lane for contracts to cronies during Covid was even worse. That’s English nationalists for you.
Actually I never thought like this but your right. The SNP are the biggest criminal syndicate in Scotland.
There is an acronym that I’ve always wanted to use, and it seems apt in relation to this post….= WTF !
“When Mr Murrell appeared at a private petition hearing at Edinburgh Sheriff Court, he made no plea or declaration and was committed for further examination and bailed.
The Crown Office said there are no dates for a future hearing.”
————————————————-
What is the delay in setting the hearing?
But there are prunes.
I’d like to think that this is a scandal too far. However it seems that nothing is too corrupt for the Scottish establishment [much like England’s].
I pray that Liberate Scotland’s umbrella grouping will start to get the publicity and support it deserves so that the 2026 election makes a real difference. Today’s Through a Scottish Prism has 3 Liberate Scotland candidates – one each from Independents for Independence, ISP, and Sovereignty party. A welcome change from “say anything and answer nothing” politicians.
Dark days in MacGotham city (Embra) with trials (ahem) and the many tribulations of Marvels latest supervillain trio; Redactoman in a black and white costume looking like a barcode, The Swindler in a black rubber gimp suit with lavender colour pound signs, and, leader of the gang; Franklystein – a midget with a big Mekonesque head- sitting on a large empty memoir while facing the wall for seven hour stretches whenever asked questions and generally creating an oppressively sinister atmosphere.
Is there a superhero to take on these troublemakers?
As I have said many many times thanks goes to the original complainer, if it had not been for him the whole debacle would be buried by now
TBH I cannot understand why genuine contributors have just accepted their money back and let these arsewipes carry on as if nothing has happened I personally would have tried to form some sort of joint enterprise on a no win no fee basis for a civil action to expose these arseholes and who REALLY stole the money
OK the fat bastard has been charged but does anyone honestly believe that the main scum deviant bastard did not direct operations, a narcissistic control freak who THREATENED anyone who even thought to go against her wishes
For the assorted yoonionists who ridicule posters when they blame wm for anything untoward that the moronic Scum Nonce Party introduces or fucks up, I ask you WHERE is the endless stream of ridicule and derision, WHY is it buried on page 2 of the daily rectum,WHY are all the broadcasters NOT all over this, especially the Bastard Broadcasting Cunts, THIS news would create anger and outrage against the snp from ordinary voters that this wee fat arsehole who has been paid millions by the snp is now getting LEGAL AID while his HAHAHA wife is swanning about receiving hundreds of thousands of pounds for writing a JOKE book or COMIC as it is universally known
The Holyrood summer recess is upon us, time to bury bad news…
What bad news is being buried?
The Romanians certainly had the right idea where their corrupt and incompetent leadership were concerned. Just saying…
Surely the loan money cannot be Murrell’s alone if he is still married.
If they were to go for divorce and split their assets this money would be taken into consideration.
Sturgeon should have filed for divorce and he can claim half of her £300K book deal but don’t tell me that is all the money she has that can be split.
Release the Jaguar from investigation and he can pay his own way in court.
His bank transactions must sing like a canary.
You have the right to remain silent. So shut the f*** up. You have the right to an attorney. If you can’t afford an attorney, we will provide you with the dumbest f***ing lawyer on earth.
PEOPLE OF MY GENERATION have near zero interest in politics and wouldn’t actually care if democracy, demo what?, disappeared altogether, and with A.I. writing essays and dissertations, phew, bring on the bots guys.
In part this is the legacy of the self-serving, intellectually challenged political classes whose ancient «parties» crumble around them with few caring to clear away the debris.
On the periphery something awful lurks, biding its time, sharpening its tallons awaiting its moment to be raptor atop the slaughter house, and all that without much effort.
Just heard a Reform spokesperson describe Local Council Finances as being, effectively, “Self rewarding Ponzi schemes” … somehow made me think of the SNP “special fund for independence”, can’t really imagine why.
Something like this, perhaps?
link to thebureauinvestigates.com
But why are the Legal Aid Board being so abnormally generous to Peter Murrell?
Is this hush money? and if so, what or whom has he threatened to expose?
On the other hand, shouldn’t the SNP be made to repay the remainder of the £60,000 that Murrell lent them, to help pay his legal bills.
WORLD WAR Z, SUPERHEROES, AND SCOTLAND’S DELUSION
Run! The Zombies are coming!
Buchanan Street quakes with the din!
Not slow and foot-dragging either,
But in rage engaged in their plan.
They see though they’re blind!
Nothing benign on their mind!
From sewers they spew —
to chew every spine their design.
But wait! What’s up there?
Spiderman leaps from the Tron!
Batman and Ironman and Superman care!
In a blink American illusions are gone.
No more to our thought than flicker on wall?
Just sat, Plato says, chained in our cave?
Our backs to the door, preferring our movie,
Painful lights from on high at end of the show?
(With reminder that of course ‘World War Z’ with Brad Pitt was filmed around Glasgow’s George Square.)
Just pondering:
As both effectively had their reports acted upon by Westminster- well who fiscally speaking p1shes higher up the wall?
Messrs Barnett or McCrone?
McCrone by a country mile or many more!
At least Dick Turpin had the decency to wear a mask while robbing people blind..
I heard that Murrell spent £100,000 on ‘penile masculisation’ surgery and now has a todger the size of a black pudding.
The sight – and implications – of such an organ so alarmed the former First Minister that she moved out before nightfall.
PS…this is what Stu is hinting at in the title of this article…’too tight to mention’
This is The Lavender Hill Mob in realtime. Oh these paragons of virtue…
I’ve just been enjoying the irony of this news coming out in lavender season, this being the late June to early August period during which said plant blooms. Coincidence? Hah, I don’t believe in ’em… 🙂
SSSHHHHH, don’t mention this.. just ¡SHOUT IT!
link to archive.is
Whatever your views on the specifics of the regional politics.
Scotland, ¡WAKE UP!
TURABDIN.
Aside from the obvious hidden traciblity of ownership.
The interesting part of that information that may go unnoticed is that the governing body is England and Wales,
That it is under English Law,
Indeed, «hiding»in plain sight and all perfectly normal in Yookay..
It seems the British state functions on the accommodating body of the Law of England.
Scots Law = purely domestic, English law = national & international.
i understand the anglo establishment was rather peeved when the Lockerbie incident was processed according to Scots Law.
I suspect all those BritGov facilities and Crown properties are possibly subject to English Law too.
While Scotland sleeps…
I was rather peeved when the Lockerbie trial, run by the Scottish legal establishment, put the wrong man behind bars.
Scratch that. I was furiously angry and ashamed for Scotland and I still am.
Looking back, that was our first pointer to the rotten state of the Scottish legal system. The reminders have come thick and fast since, with this latest farce (the subject of this article) just another chapter in a vast compendium of failures.
God yes, the Lockerbie case was shocking.
Great journalism by Craig Murray, Liberation Scotland’s ambassador to the UN.
Meanwhile faux independence ‘leader’ Swinney has signed Scotland up with the City of London Corporation and hence Westminster’s ‘values’.
Ah yes, CM.
He was a friend to Scotland once. Not any more.
If he’s on your side, Alf, give up now.
So the devolved parliament sent to Scotland.
Is it under the governing body of english law?
The governing body of England and Wales?
From the same Westminster governace?
Westminster governance of Great Britain is under the governance of Englands law. To all intents and purposes.
This can be attested to in the Trade treaty with America, and the Anglo- Ireland treaty.
Separate English law was supposed to decease and be dissolved with the treaty of union.
I know I know your fed up of hearing about the faux treaty of union,
But seriously, when are all we Scots in Scotland seeking independence going to wake up to the fact that Scots are not in the treaty of union
And that Great- Britain parliament is still the parliament of England, governing as the parliament of England, and that of England and Wales. Under English law.
Salvo need to include such information in their presentations should the requirement arise as evidence that the Scots are a colonised people,
Along with the parliament of Englands- Great-Britain admittance that they rigged the 1707 treaty of union by avoiding asking the Scots to join the treaty of union,
Separately the information jigsaw has little weight, but the combination of accumulated collected evidence under one presentation has the ability to carry a great deal of weight that not onlyhave the Scots been colonised, but also the faux treaty of union itself has been used as a tool to colonise the people of Scotland.
Englands kingdom and the parliament of England and the laws of England still exist today as the governing body of Great Britain,
Not dissolved.
SNP have been infiltrated by the british security services for years. Bribery and blackmail are their weapons. discrediting the snp was their aim. removing Alex as a threat their priority. they have achieved that. the snp members are shameless!.
All true. But what are we going to do about it?
These grifters have closed nearly every avenue to move forward.
We’re going to have to break some rules to discard this vile, poisoning trough that Sturgeon has created. And she still slurps the pish they feed her.
Where are our legal teams? Where are our detectives? Why does Scottish law seem to be frightened to deal with her? She should be behind bars with a few others.
Posted on scotgoespop today on his joy at krap alba polling article at 12:”4 030725:
“Wishing the demise of a REAL YES alternative is not the action of a real independence supporter. Green and SNP in recent years have not acted like real yes parties. The list why is endless:
1. dorothy bain – asking for permission for a referendum (knowing it would be defeated instead of legislating for it through holyrood and challenging them to intervene)
2. Failure to appoint key nationalists in charge of key security and legal positions.
3. Opposition to using elections as referendums when it’s clear that’s the only sane choice.
4. hostility to a yes alliance – a necessary vehicle to bring out the disenfranchised who don’t vote but are the target group for a yes victory.
5. 2 votes SNP resulting in a million wasted list votes.
6. A distraction obsession about girls being boys being girls being boys instead of the real independence urgency.
7. Promotion of targeting immigration from rUK (knowing these are the most unionist of voters) in the devo national strategy for economic transformation.
8.The bias in which the SG involving the SNP leadership behaved around the Salmond case.
There are numerous examples of political parties colluding with a foreign controlled government to run devolved/colonial functions. The Irish Parliamentary Party is close to home who talked a game but did nothing. the SNP doesn’t even talk a good game.
You may have your beef with Alba but celebrating their demise and pretending SNP Green is a real pro-indy alternative shows you for the bitter not-real indy charlatan that you are.
Posted on wings as I know you’re too scared to do it here.”
For Sale
Time machine. Si 2000xL Mark II
One careful owner. Six months tax and MOTed. 100,000 light years on the clock. Non smoker. A few genuine bullet holes from The Battle of Culloden.
No time wasters.
Call mobile: 01707 999 1745
The initial complaint was about the missing £600,000 yet no information regarding its whereabouts has been forthcoming. Why? It’s either there or it’s not. Everything is shady, from the Murrells to the investigation.
@cheyne
Your contributions adds what to the debate as to the devious Murrell getting taxpayers money to fight his case?????
I think it’s about time we looked seriously at these Trade Union representatives.
1. They don’t understand the Law.
2. They have a real problem understanding what the difference between a boy and a girl is.
The big question is, how is the SNP still alive and kicking. I do not believe for a minute the SNP has 60,000 membership and even if it did how is the party able to pay its bills?
Andrew Scott,
Its simply a matter of scrolling on by if you are not interested in realising that Westminsters governance is acting as a parliament of England,
Camerons suggestion of Evel laws must have been said tongue in cheek, whilst knowing full well that this was already happening as a past tense scenario.
But then in my opinion , you are not here for Scots and Scotland to be independent as a a legal possible short exit,
Perhaps you prefer the mental long haul thrashing around, carrot dangling, blustering and hang wringing approach that the SNP do.
At the end of the day wings over Scotland has always been a Site that would seek independence,
And some of my comments on Scotland situation are from previous comments that Stu posted years ago,
To Scroll on by is your decision to make. I will not be offended in the least.
The EVEL procedure was an answer to the West Lothian Question, first identified by Scottish MP Tam Dalziell in 1977.
EVEL ceased to exist in 2021 following a decision by the House of Commons.
Now let’s be honest here “Factchecker”; Tam Dalziel was the doyen of the then Labour awkward squad who delighted (from the comfort of his stately home and back bench) in raising problematic questions regardless of the resultant backlash.
Good ol’ BritGnat Tam had no such qualms over English MPs as need arose weighing in on Scottish matters, rather, he was taking a pop at Labours approach that Scotland was a vote earner to influence matters in WM..
The damned cheek of the lower class Jockonese!!
Who do they think they are !
EVEL and a bill to hold a Brexit referendum was announced the very day the dodgy Indy referendum result was shouted from Merry Old Englands rooftops with absolute zero parliamentary input- not least pesky Jockonese parliamentarians.
Honestly, you really do need to put down your parties biased printed political take on history and learn real some historical “facts”..
Better if posts are RELEVANT TO THE ISSUE THE REV PUTS UP
Where’s the FUN in THAT?
Young Lochinvar says:
EVEL and a bill to hold a Brexit referendum was announced the very day the dodgy Indy referendum result was shouted from Merry Old Englands rooftops with absolute zero parliamentary input- not least pesky Jockonese parliamentarians.
Honestly, you really do need to put down your parties biased printed political take on history and learn real some historical “facts”..
So here’s the fact.
English Votes for English Laws (EVEL) was introduced in the House of Commons on October 22, 2015. Seems to me that’s long after the referendum result was announced. It was in fact a reaction to the devolvement of further powers to the Scottish parliament. It was revoked in 2021 by a vote in the House of Commons.
Young Lochinvar should check his historical facts.
“check his historical facts”
Ah, c’moan now. You would deny these boys the pleasure of making it up as they go along.
Plus you forget that if you remove the eternal rehashing of imaginary historical grievances from the debate, most of them would struggle to number the advantages of Indy on the fingers of three fingers.
Some low IQ example will be along in a minute to once again accuse me of being opposed to Indy. In reality, I’m opposed to the low IQ low lifes that are as much use to Indy and Scotland as are the barnacles and weeds clinging to the hull of a ship.
The ship of Indy and the country of Scotland will go much further and faster when the barnacles and weed are scraped off.
Wrong, wrong and just plain wrong again.
Factchecker, you aren’t living up to your nom de guerre and really shouldn’t take comfort from P3nisbreath McP3nisbreathface’s rambling support; serious reality failure there!
I direct you to David Cameron’s speech to the press the day after the Indy referendum.
It’ll be out there somewhere in the ether and I recall it exactly having watched it here live at the time.
3 things were mentioned; the lie of the Smith Commission being set up and what it would deliver, the proposal/ introduction of EVEL, and the promise of a Brexit referendum.
C’mon Factchecker, you can do better than quoting actual policy introduction dates, I quoted when it was first publically announced.
I think you’ve just described yersel!
Cheery bye-barnacle/ bottom feeder..
Indy Scotland should metaphorically sheath the hull in copper to dissuade infestations of Unionists..
.
“Some low IQ example will be along in a minute”
Whoops! My bad, I called it wrong.
Not a minute – over 12 hours later.
Oh!
How very very Vicious (and wrong)..
Which one are you P3nisbreath?
McEllan or Jacobi?
Or a bit of both..
.
Ah blame CONFUSED.
He summoned up the spirit of ROOBY, the Wings BTL troll who’s very name was banned after its unclean cadaver was burnt, then ground to dust, before being cast into the deepest pit.
And now it stalks the corridors of Wings, weeping and screeching, its foul breath tarnishing and poisoning everything it touches.
Cursed to forever take its sick love to town. All night long.
Holy water and crucifixes on high, folks! We’ll get through this.
I some how remember a crowd funding for peter murrell was setup or do I have that wrong?
That WAS the £600,000.
The post I made is related to what Stu posts.
The Snp sit in the devolved parliament, the devolved parliament, of which the legislation for the Scotland Act was passed,
Westminster parliament, that passes English laws as a self claimed Sovereign parliament for and on behalf of England,
Westminster parliaments concept of parliamentary Sovereignty is one and the same old Englands parliament concept.
If the Scots and therefore their territory( Scotland) are in a political parliamentary union since 1707 with England then Westminster parliament cannot claim Sovereignty of Westminster parliament , nor can it pass English Laws for England no matter if it is for one day, one month or multiple times.but as we in Scotland are just recently learning. Westminster has been passing laws , legislation and statues and treaties as the Sovereign parliament of England,
Circle back to Stu’s post yesterday,
What legal right do the Snp or any political party have to sit ruling over Scotland from the position of a (devolved government) from a Branch of the parliament of England claimed Sovereign parliament of Westminster,
It has become obvious that Englands political and wealthy elites have gone Rogue resting in the Great- Britain parliament and long since thought that the treaty of union could be England tool to colonise Scotland,
whilst behind closed doors retaining old English parliamentary Sovereignty over Scotland, Ireland, Wales, and even the people of England are under that (self claim)
of parliamentary Sovereignty by them over the treaty of union.
That the devolved government ‘Scotland Act’ derives from old English parliamentary Sovereignty of Westminster parliament lets you know why those that sit in that branch office to colonial manage Scotland are determined not to give Scots a vote on independence even when given multiple mandates to do so.
Perhaps when the Queen of England by declaration and the parliament of England dissolved the Scottish parliament they thought they had the perfect disguise and tool to do so ,
However under the Scottish Constitution the Scots Sovereignty is incompatible with the English Constitution,
The two Sovereignties would not work, That being realised by England, they realised that the treaty as a treaty of union would not work,
To circumnavigate this problem after debate and discussion, they made the decision to avoid asking the Sovereign Scots to vote join the 1707 treaty of union altogether.as they would probably vote No.
And the result is that The Sovereign Scots are not in the treaty of union.
I just cannot understand how independence voters have split about 20:1 remaining with the SNP while still controlled by Surgeon cabal henchmen.
At a pinch I can accept Humza Useless getting in after they rigged the arrests to wait a weekend after the voting was finished, but why members stood by and let it stand, then went on to crown Swinney uncontested is utterly baffling.
And they look good for another catastrophic term in government as Labour’s clown car collapses.
The avoidance of asking the Scots Sovereignty to join equally with the English Sovereignty in a treaty would have created untold complications for England, which wished to be able to hold or maintain complete control.
Without the Scots Sovereignty in the treaty, Sovereignty of the parliament of England could secured,
By dissolving the parliament in Scotland, (which was not Sovereign) Englands parliamentary Sovereignty could be further secured from any future complications of interference from the Scots.
They are aware even today that their present monarch of England is not a secure monarch of Scots,
As that is for the Sovereignty of the Scots to decide.
The parties that sit in the devolved parliament sent to Scotland hold a percarious seat, and the SNP have been doing everything in their power to make the devolved parliament hold Sovereignty over the people of Scotland.
And this is how what Stu posts is tied into my Comments regards the Sovereign Scots are not in the Treaty of union
The SNP wishes it were different and the Scots were.
The SNPs aim is to replicate that of Englands parliament. Whereby the peoples Sovereignty is Under and is second to parliamentary Sovereignty.
The opposite version of what the Scots want.
The carry ons and the unelected, the unaccountable finances, and ultimate control, from a sovereign parliament status. And the sad thing is this has been their goal for a long time,
A ex labour party member that moved over into the SNP argued with my spouse and I over whom should hold Sovereignty in Scotland in 2015 and 2017.
So labour in the Snp say that the devolved government in Scotland should be Sovereign. Not the people,
A replica of the English concept of where power and Sovereignty is held.
And it goes without saying that when the people are under the unelected sovereignty they, the parliaments can do as they please over the people.
Retaining Sovereignty of the Scots in Scotland is important if we do not want to be run by dispotic powers,
And the Sovereignty of the Scots has been inadvertantly aided by Englands elitist politicians not wanting to lose control of their parliament in England by not letting the Scots Sovereignty into the 1707 treaty of union.
Reason behind Peter Murrell’s legal aid success revealed – as bereaved family blast decision
link to scottishdailyexpress.co.uk
one leading defence lawyer has pinpointed just why Murrell was accepted despite it being difficult to access for mosts. Thomas Ross KC said: “It doesn’t matter who you are – if your liquid assets have been frozen by the court until your case is concluded – your only heritable asset is the house you live in – and imprisonment is an option in the event of conviction – you’ll qualify for criminal legal aid in Scotland.”
————————————————-
Does that mean he is now living on benefits if all of his assets are frozen?
It says a lot about Mrs Nicola Murrell’s humanity that she isn’t helping poor old Pete with his legal costs…
I’m reading more of Albert Memmi’s The Colonizer and the Colonized.
It’s interesting stuff:
For the layman and non-intellectual, and I’m both, it’s sometimes difficult to understand what Memmi is getting at when he describes the complex and convoluted ‘dance of death’ between the colonised and their coloniser – such is the tortuously complex psychology that underpins the relationship between the two.
In the case of the Scots I believe that relationship is complicated further by their close geographical location to their oppressor and the centuries long history of animosity that has existed between Scotland and England even before 1707.
According to Memmi we Scots, being a colonised people, have some work to do on ourselves if we are to escape our condition – materially, psychologically and spiritually.
For if Memmi is correct – and I believe he is from what I understand of his writings – the first most important and most difficult step in delivering Scotland’s liberty from oppression is for the individual Scot to stop defining themself based on the characteristics given them by their oppressor… or anybody else.
The Scots must recover their identity based on their own history, traditions, culture and, crucially, language; they must eschew entirely those alien categorisations forced upon them by their oppressor.
Memmi ends his book with this:
”Having reconquered all his dimensions, the former colonized will have become a man like any other. There will be the ups and downs of all men to be sure, but at least he will be a whole and free man.”
Loving it, NC.
But have you any advice for the lassies of Scotland as we loons reconquer our dimensions, decolonise and finally become men?
Do they have to become men too? Was ScotGov ahead of the curve with the gender woowoo all along and we were too ill-informed to see it?
Do you realise what you have said about yourself.
So everything that Stu posts on the antics of the devolved scottish parliament from Englands parliamentary Sovereignty claim concept is a reality in that those messing, stalling, ignoring mandates from the Scots, the missing money, the hand out of our taxes is placed in Scotland and is there for a purpose and has very little to do with gaining independence of Scots or Scotland.
Once Sovereignty of a devolved parliament is established over the sovereign Scots then the Scots will be quickly reminded of the treaty of union parliamentary union with England parliament, which would then claim Sovereignty of parliament above Scots Sovereignty of a devolved parliament.
It is fast becoming apparent that the Snp and other parties in the devolved Scottish parliament have a target agenda and strategy to bring the Sovereign Scots all under the one unberella of the devolved government Sovereignty.
Hence ignoring mandates given and removing themselves from the Scottish independence grass roots movement.
Have you been locked in a cupboard or something. Have you just realized. Even the mad flag wavers have called it a day.
Northcode,
To conquer any of the above mentioned in your post,
As Alf Baird has pointed out,
First ones mind has to except that it is they that have been conquered by colonisation, it is not someone else unattached and disconnected as if from a surreal conversation overheard,
Aye, James. And this is what for many, if not most, colonised is the first and most difficult stage in the decolonisation process.
As the ever sparkling wit of Memmi writes in The Colonizer and the Colonized:
“The liquidation of colonization is nothing but a prelude to complete liberation, to self-recovery…”
Northy @ 12.34.
“Ever sparkling wit of Memmi”, oh Northy, you wee rascal you … I saw what you did there.
We’ve been lacking your gentle good humour.
Yer twistit weasel-worded anti-Scots bollocks wis spotted a long long time ago., Sveny.
An noo awbody else sees it tae.
Northcode @ 11.29.
How nice to have you back, Northy. Though I cannot help noticing in his later book, Decolonisation and the Decolonised the ever dreary Mr Memmi appears to suggest that it would be pointless to use concepts applicable to previous years of anti colonial struggle.
In a Scotland where many of the electorate can’t even bring themselves to register on the electoral role let alone even stumble down to the postbox or polling station I fear that gaining much public involvement in ‘post colonial theory’ and the learning of a new Scots dialect, or mayhap Gaelic, could prove a bit of a challenge.
Maybe starting off with some genuine independent candidates for our devolved assembly in the 2026 elections could prove a more successful strategy.
Either way, please don’t forsake the BTL comments for too long again.
I reckon we should crowdfund NC to translate and publish Memmi’s (and maybe Fanon’s) seminal works into Scots.
Are you in, Sven?
The Scottish independence movement is much like the Scottish football team. They can’t get by the first leg. They need someone else to win or loose to advance. And it all ends up in tears.
The ‘If onlys!’ and ‘What ifs!’ spend the rest of their life annoying the shit out of everybody.
O/T Just talking to people will do a lot to improve the prospects at the 2026 election. If they don’t know about the SNP’s lack of a plan, or the arithmetic of the Holyrood voting system, or the existence of Liberate Scotland, they will continue to vote SNP 1 and 2.
So raise the subject with friends and family. Try to keep it positive e.g. “the SNP needs help in the struggle to get independence”.
sarah says:
So raise the subject with friends and family. Try to keep it positive e.g. “the SNP needs help in the struggle to get independence”
——————————————————-
I thought you supported Liberate Scotland?
I do support Liberate and would like it if every independence party/grouping came under its umbrella. However I doubt that will happen.
I recognise that there will be a substantial number of voters who won’t get the message that the SNP are a liability and they will continue to vote SNP. It will be progress if those people can be converted to using their list vote for another party, preferably a Liberate Scotland candidate. So if you are talking to such people it is more helpful not to slag off the SNP.
Scotland has created it’s very own Frankenstein. A Government created from all the dregs of it’s own community. All the bits sown together in a haphazard way. Ignited and united by the spark of Independence.
The monster moves from one disaster to another resulting in the angry locals destroying the abomination.
“Ignited and united by the greed, deceit, and interference from Westminster”.
There,fixed that for Mark.
Do keep up.
What part of Scottish politics is fucked do you not understand. Yes Westminster will step in and on the stupid as it has always done since 1707.
“A Government created from all the dregs of it’s own community.”
We cannae expect much from a colonial administration run by whoever Whitehall decides to send up here and tasked with protecting the colonizer’s interest.
This is why postcolonial theory tells us a colonized people inevitably end up with a ‘mediocre meritocracy’ (Memmi). A crisis in every policy area is the end result.
Meantime the economic plunder and cultural obliteration continues.
Mark. We don’t want you or your ilk. What’s so hard to understand?
Gee I’m all cut and sore. Why dya go an say that. Made me cry
“Whitehall has created it’s very own Frankenstein government for Scotland…”
There. Fixed that for you.
Shine on Harvey Moon.
-they should unfreeze enough of his assets to let him fund his own defence.
Is he being charged with unlimited financial irregularities?
Or or the folks who write these rules too useless to ensure true fair play.
A question for Wings supporters-is there any one who actually reads the repetitive mince that Cheyne posts umpteen times everyday?
Chas says:
4 July, 2025 at 4:38 pm
A question for Wings supporters-is there any one who actually reads the repetitive mince that Cheyne posts umpteen times everyday?
————————————————————-
I speed read them and point out the obvious errors as shown below.
If someone can’t get the basics of a simple matter right I disregard what they say.
————————————————————
agent x says:
1 July, 2025 at 6:14 pm
James Cheyne says:
1 July, 2025 at 10:57 am
The Con merchants of the the treaty of union,
The 2014 referendum vote has no legal validity and is not binding on the Scots, due to the contradictory nature of the Question posed.
Do you want to remain.
————————————-
Agent x says:
The referendum question was “Should Scotland be an independent country?”, which voters answered with “Yes” or “No”.
————————————————————
For those who dwell in the Scottish past would do well to remember who won and why.
For he who dwells in the past has no future.
#mark
Agree he is as boring as fcuk with all his historical dribblings
Usually NOTHING TO DO WITH THE REVS ARTICLE
“Those who do not understand their past have no future”; meaning they are destined to keep making the same mistakes..
Lies, deceit, yes, we know.
The SNP acknowledged the «authority» of the British state when its mps took their seats in London. That was an error with consequences. The gesture proclaimed « Scotland IS British».
Hardly the stuff of constitutional change never mind «revolution».
OT. I’m fucking sick of eating strawberries. About a pound in weight a day for weeks has really torn the arse out of the delight of munching such sweet succulent healthy fruit. Frankly, it’s become a chore.
But what I want to know is if an idiot like me can chuck 36 strawberry plants in the ground and leave them to produce more fruit than I can eat, how much of an idiot would you have to be to use castoreum sourced from the glands near a beaver’s arse as a strawberry flavour essence.
Would it not be a lot easier to just grow some strawberry plants instead of trapping beavers and squeezing their arse glands to collect strawberry flavouring substance. And who the fuck sucked a beaver’s arse in the first place to find out this substance tasted of strawberries.
Dan, I think the Rev has shown us over the last few years through his coverage of “Pride” events, that a beaver’s arse would be on the must-do list of a lot of a certain kind of person!
As for your strawberries, can I swap my raspberry glut? I never thought that I would get a touch fed up with them – mind you it is damp and midgy here today so picking raspberries is not the delight it usually is.
Dan and Sarah , spare a thought for those of us who pick both fruits 2 at a time every 2 days.
Donate your excess to the local foodbank?
Castoreum comes from Beavers’ Butts, eh. If it’s used in Nutella then perhaps an association of ideas led to Mr Swiney’s idea of using that product along with a banana for our Primary Childrens’ sex education classes.
@ diabloandco: benign neglect has resulted in me now having 2 raspberry beds instead of one and many outliers! You know how they spread if one is not alert. I never got round to planting strawberries but wish I had – though no doubt my world-leading colony of snails and slugs would ravage them and that would be extremely annoying.
Yet P3nisbreath, even though I point you in the direction of actual facts, you don’t even read it and carry on with yer tendentious fake “facts” and non stop trolling..
You sad c**t!
Away wi ye ya complete waste of fresh air and give real people, real people here in Scotland some peace from your fifth columnist bilge.
Dial 999. Paramedic needed. Suspected overdose of castoreum 🙂
Wow!
Did the paramedics get to you in time and are you alright?
Would have sent you a posse of stinking Willie if I knew where you were laid up convalescing..
.
I came across an article concerning Cape Verde celebrating 50 years of independence. Listening to the infestation here of unionist mince pedlars on independence you’d be forgiven for thinking that after fifty years it would be a complete shit pit of despair horror and death.
It seems that that is not the case though, Cape Verde has succeeded in massive improvements in many sectors but still battles against some effects of colonialism.
I’ve no doubt Scotland would follow a similar successful trajectory if a break with our current overlords ever comes about.
link to dw.com
“In towns with electricity, television is available on three channels”
link to en.m.wikipedia.org
Well Dave perhaps you can let us know which towns in Scotland will have the electricity turned on when we are like Cape Verde…
Hopefully in time for River City to keep my missus happy.
I an energy rich country like Scotland,that is surely the most preposterous thing to say..
To look at it another way, you do realise Green and Pleasant Land England is a Jekyll and Hyde country; one minute in drought and syphoning off Welsh reservoirs, the next flooding at each borderline immoderate spell of rain as it’s the sump of the British landmass!
Just saying an’ that..
Get yer water wings on!
I don’t see the message “Vote for Indy and in 50 years time, you’ll see some improvements” generating much enthusiasm on the doorsteps.
Naw, that’s not true. It will generate lots of enthusiasm. Just not the kind of enthusiasm you would want.
We’re not tropical coconut farmers clinging to some barren rocks in the middle of nowhere. We need to know that Indy will deliver all the promised benefits to our current first-world society. And damn quickly too.
You must be middle class, Hatey. You may personally consider Scotland a “first-world society” but the fact is under London rule we are in perpetual socio-economic crisis, with half the population living in or close to poverty, starved of our own resources and a GDP-per-capita less than half that of our near neighbours.
The truth is no former colony ever asked to return to London rule and only the more privileged assimilated native elites help keep the colonial racket going, as postcolonial theory confirms.
link to yoursforscotlandcom.wordpress.com
It’s been spelt out to you many times. You choose not to listen.
I’ve grown so tired of Alf’s misapplication of post colonial theory to Scotland’s case, and his pedalling of the snake oil that somehow the UN are going to see the light and declare us a non-self governing territory, that I thought I’d ask Grok what it thought of what passes for his analysis:
Question: Grok – Please present an analysis of why we cannot apply the post colonial analysis of Fannon and Memmi to the case of Scottish independence.
Applying the postcolonial theories of Frantz Fanon and Albert Memmi to the case of Scottish independence is problematic due to several contextual and theoretical mismatches. Below is an analysis of why their frameworks, developed primarily to address the dynamics of colonial oppression in non-Western contexts, do not neatly align with the Scottish independence movement:
1. Historical and Structural Differences in Colonialism
* Fanon and Memmi’s Context: Fanon (e.g., The Wretched of the Earth) and Memmi (e.g., The Colonizer and the Colonized) focus on colonialism as a system of racial, cultural, and economic domination, typically involving a foreign power subjugating an indigenous population (e.g., French colonialism in Algeria or the Caribbean). Their analyses emphasize the violent imposition of alien rule, exploitation of resources, and systemic dehumanization of colonized peoples, often along racial lines.
* Scottish Context: Scotland’s relationship with England, formalized through the 1707 Acts of Union, does not fit the classic colonial model. The union was a negotiated political and economic merger between two sovereign kingdoms, not a conquest involving a racially or culturally distinct “other.” Scotland retained significant cultural, legal, and institutional autonomy (e.g., its legal system and Kirk), unlike colonized territories under French or British imperial rule.
While some argue Scotland was economically subordinated, the partnership allowed Scots to participate actively in the British Empire, often as colonizers themselves (e.g., in India, Africa, and the Americas). This complicates the narrative of Scotland as a straightforward “colonized” entity.
2. Absence of Racial and Cultural Alienation
* Fanon’s Framework: Fanon emphasizes the psychological and cultural alienation of colonized peoples, whose identities are erased or suppressed by a racially distinct colonizer. Violence, for Fanon, becomes a means of reclaiming identity and agency.
* Memmi’s Framework: Memmi describes a rigid binary between colonizer and colonized, where the colonized are dehumanized and stripped of agency, often through racial or ethnic hierarchies.
* Scottish Case: The Scottish independence movement does not hinge on racial or ethnic oppression. Scots and English share a broadly similar cultural and ethnic background, and Scotland’s cultural identity (e.g., language, literature, and traditions) has persisted, even flourished, within the UK. The grievances driving Scottish nationalism—such as economic disparities or political marginalization—are not rooted in the same existential alienation described by Fanon or Memmi. Instead, they reflect debates over governance, resource allocation (e.g., North Sea oil), and national sovereignty within a democratic framework.
3. Nature of Power Dynamics
* Fanon and Memmi’s Power Dynamics: Both theorists describe a stark power imbalance where the colonizer maintains dominance through violence, economic exploitation, and cultural suppression. Decolonization, for Fanon, often requires revolutionary violence to dismantle this structure.
* Scottish Case: The power dynamics between Scotland and the UK are mediated through democratic institutions, not colonial violence. The 2014 Scottish independence referendum, conducted peacefully with a 55% vote to remain in the UK, exemplifies a process of negotiation and democratic choice, not a struggle against an oppressive colonial regime. The devolved Scottish Parliament, established in 1999, further undermines the notion of Scotland as a colonized entity, as it exercises significant legislative power. Fanon and Memmi’s models, which assume a lack of agency for the colonized, do not account for Scotland’s political agency within the UK.
4. Economic and Social Integration
* Fanon and Memmi’s Economic Exploitation: Both theorists highlight how colonial powers extract resources and labor from colonized regions, leaving them impoverished and dependent. The colonized are excluded from the benefits of their own wealth.
* Scottish Case: Scotland’s economic relationship with the UK is complex. While critics of the union argue that Scotland’s resources (e.g., oil) have been mismanaged by Westminster, Scotland has also benefited from UK-wide economic structures, including access to global markets and infrastructure investment. Scots have held prominent roles in British politics, business, and society (e.g., Prime Ministers like Tony Blair or Gordon Brown), unlike the systemic exclusion of colonized peoples in Fanon and Memmi’s frameworks. The economic debate in Scotland centers on fiscal autonomy and policy differences, not the extractive exploitation typical of colonial systems.
5. Decolonization and Violence
* Fanon’s Decolonization: Fanon argues that decolonization is inherently violent, as it requires the colonized to overthrow the colonizer’s oppressive structures. This violence is both physical and psychological, aimed at reclaiming identity and sovereignty.
* Memmi’s Binary: Memmi sees decolonization as a rupture, where the colonized reject the colonizer’s dominance entirely, often through radical means.
* Scottish Independence: The Scottish independence movement operates within a legal and democratic framework, seeking separation through referenda and parliamentary processes, not violence. The 2014 referendum and ongoing debates about a second referendum (“IndyRef2”) reflect a non-violent, institutional approach to self-determination. This contrasts sharply with the revolutionary struggles Fanon and Memmi describe, where colonized peoples face existential threats and lack democratic recourse.
6. Cultural and National Identity
* Fanon and Memmi’s Cultural Erasure: Both theorists emphasize the colonizer’s attempt to erase the colonized’s culture, language?0language, and impose a foreign identity.
* Scottish Identity: Scottish cultural identity—encompassing language (Gaelic, Scots), traditions, and symbols—has been preserved and even celebrated within the UK. The independence movement seeks greater political autonomy, not the reclamation of a suppressed cultural identity. The cultural dynamics Fanon and Memmi describe, involving the annihilation of indigenous culture, do not apply to Scotland’s experience.
7. Global Context and Imperial Participation
* Fanon and Memmi’s Global South Focus: Their theories address the experiences of non-European colonized peoples subjected to European imperialism, often in distant territories.
* Scotland’s Imperial Role: Scotland was not merely a victim of empire but an active participant in British imperialism. Scots played significant roles in colonial administration, trade, and military campaigns across the British Empire. This historical complicity in colonialism undermines the applicability of a postcolonial lens that casts Scotland as a colonized subject.
Conclusion
While some parallels might be drawn—such as perceptions of economic or political marginalization—Fanon and Memmi’s postcolonial frameworks are ill-suited to the Scottish independence case. Scotland’s integration into the UK, its democratic agency, shared cultural and ethnic ties with England, and participation in empire distinguish it from the colonial contexts analyzed by Fanon and Memmi. The Scottish independence movement is better understood through lenses of nationalism, sovereignty, and political economy than through postcolonial theories of oppression and decolonization.
So…there you have it. Five will get you ten that the UN will in the end agree with the analysis above.
What will all the snake oil salespeople and adherents of “cunning plans for indy” to then?
@ Andy
In the interests of balance, what would the answer be to this question.
Question: Grok – Please present an analysis of why we can
notapply the post colonial analysis of Fannon and Memmi to the case of Scottish independence.@Dan
Doubtless even someone of your limited intellectual capacity is capable of working the internet.
Doubtless changing the question from “cannot” to “can” will produce a different result, as that’s presumably how Grok’s algorithms work.
In the end however, like any such complex issue, there will be one side of the argument which most of the people find more convincing, most of the time. There will also be one side which is more generally accepted by academics and subject matter experts in the field. That doesn’t stop folk supporting minority (or even obviously flawed) takes on any given subject, whether on the applicability of post-colonial theory, climate change, the conflict in the middle east or eastern Europe or anything else.
Go do! Google dnd Grok are your friends, which in your case is just as well.
AI may be the fashionable go-to tool but is hardly an acceptable refereed academic publication, unlike like this one which finds that:
link to bpb-us-w2.wpmucdn.com
“Here, in-depth research and analysis based on development of a theoretical framework and application of relevant theoretical perspectives reveals a disturbing picture amidst the rapid need for improved understanding and explanation behind the motivation for Scottish independence as being a consequence of colonialism in all its well-practised, albeit often disguised features: notably, the political and economic subjugation and exploitation of a distinct people – the Scots – which is enabled through their ongoing cultural and linguistic oppression. The theoretical framework as developed by the author on the subject of Scotland’s independence provides for new insights into Scotland’s oppressive colonial reality as the underlying rationale and motivation for independence, which is also about decolonisation.”
“the fact is under London rule we are in perpetual socio-economic crisis”
The fact is we are fighting the new colonists off with shitty sticks and we still can’t stop them.
If what you claim was true, Alf, you could get a job for Reform, helping to stop the boats by speechifying on the French beaches.
And seeing as how you ask, Alf, I’m working class. I work for my daily crust of bread.
Starship Troopers (1997) – unbelievable that 28 years have passed since I first saw that movie on the big screen.
Anyway, Robert Heinlein was the author of the 1959 novel of the same title the movie is based on and although it’s slightly different from the movie both are very good in their separate ways.
Another of Heinlein’s novels is, Stranger in a Strange Land (a title directly taken from the King James Version of Exodus 2:22, “And she bore him a son, and he called his name Gershom: for he said, I have been a stranger in a strange land”).
Personally I don’t like the use of the term ‘grok’ used outwith Heinlein’s ‘Stranger in a Strange Land’ novel; especially so as the name of Elon Musk’s wee chatty chatbot AI thingy (it’s a tad cringeworthy – I’ve actually heard techies use the term in conversation with each other as in “I don’t grok what you mean” – fucking idiots.)
It also smacks of lazy thinking on the part of those who thought it was a super smart idea to name their wee bit o’ software bot AI thing after Heinlein’s neologism.
AI chatteringbots are programmed by humans and often contain many of those humans’ biases.
I suppose they have a limited use here and there for those too lazy to do their own research into subjects of interest to them.
But I would be very very wary of accepting any analysis based on the output from a chattering byte churning bit bot owned by a super rich multi-billionaire driven by who-knows-what crazy internal agendas might be rattling aboot in his heid.
AI technologies cannot be trusted – just take a look at who owns them and you’ll quickly reach an understanding as to why putting any trust in their ‘analyses’ is a bad idea.
Is it possible that Grok is “living in fear”?
Somebody should ask.
@Alf – is that a review of your own work?
@Andy
Jeezo, anything to have a go ya fud. The point wasn’t that I couldn’t search and provide the result, it was that you only provided one side…
Question Grok: Please present an analysis of why we can apply the post colonial analysis of Fannon and Memmi to the case of Scottish independence.
Applying Frantz Fanon’s and Albert Memmi’s postcolonial theories to the case of Scottish independence involves examining Scotland’s historical and ongoing relationship with England (and later the United Kingdom) through the lens of colonial dynamics, power structures, and identity formation. While Scotland is not a typical colony in the sense of overseas territories exploited by European powers, Fanon’s and Memmi’s frameworks—centered on the psychological, cultural, and political effects of colonialism—can be adapted to analyze Scotland’s quest for independence as a response to internalized domination and cultural subordination within the UK. Below, I outline how their theories illuminate this case.
1. Fanon’s Framework: The Psychology of Colonial Oppression and Liberation
Frantz Fanon, in works like The Wretched of the Earth and Black Skin, White Masks, explores the psychological and social impacts of colonialism, emphasizing the dehumanization of the colonized, the internalization of inferiority, and the necessity of resistance (sometimes violent) to reclaim agency and identity.
Colonial Subordination and Cultural Erasure: Fanon argues that colonialism imposes a cultural hierarchy where the colonizer’s culture is valorized, and the colonized’s is degraded. Scotland’s incorporation into the UK through the 1707 Acts of Union can be seen as a moment of political and cultural subordination. While not a classic colony, Scotland’s distinct cultural identity—its language (Gaelic and Scots), legal system, and traditions—was marginalized in favor of a British (often English-dominated) identity. The suppression of Gaelic after the Jacobite rebellions (e.g., post-1745 Highland Clearances) and the imposition of English as the language of power mirror Fanon’s description of cultural erasure under colonial rule. The Scottish independence movement, particularly since the 20th century, can be interpreted as a Fanonian struggle to reclaim a suppressed national identity.
Internalized Inferiority and Psychological Liberation: Fanon’s concept of the colonized internalizing the colonizer’s view of their inferiority applies to Scotland’s historical self-perception within the UK. The narrative of Scotland as a “junior partner” in the Union—economically dependent or culturally “backward” (e.g., stereotypes of Highlanders as uncivilized)—has parallels with Fanon’s analysis of colonized peoples adopting the colonizer’s gaze. The push for independence, especially post-2014 referendum, reflects a desire to reject this internalized subordination and assert a distinct Scottish identity, akin to Fanon’s call for psychological decolonization through collective action.
Resistance and National Consciousness: Fanon emphasizes that liberation requires a national consciousness forged through resistance. The Scottish National Party (SNP) and the broader independence movement have cultivated a narrative of Scottish nationhood, drawing on historical grievances (e.g., Thatcher-era policies like the poll tax, seen as imposed by a distant Westminster) and cultural revival (e.g., devolution and the re-establishment of a Scottish Parliament in 1999). This aligns with Fanon’s view that national consciousness emerges as a response to colonial oppression, though Scotland’s resistance has been largely non-violent, unlike Fanon’s focus on revolutionary violence.
2. Memmi’s Framework: The Colonizer and the Colonized
Albert Memmi’s The Colonizer and the Colonized analyzes the interdependent relationship between the colonizer and colonized, highlighting how both are trapped in a system of domination that dehumanizes each. Memmi’s framework is particularly useful for understanding the structural and relational dynamics between Scotland and the UK.
The Colonizer’s Role and Privilege: Memmi describes the colonizer as benefiting from a system that privileges their culture and power. In the UK context, England (or the Westminster establishment) can be seen as occupying the colonizer’s role, with political and economic power concentrated in London. The UK’s centralized governance has historically marginalized Scottish interests, from industrial decline in the 20th century to decisions like Brexit, opposed by 62% of Scottish voters in 2016. Memmi’s idea that the colonizer justifies their dominance through myths of superiority applies to the narrative of British unity, where Scottish distinctiveness is often subsumed under a homogenous “Britishness” that prioritizes English norms.
The Colonized’s Ambivalence: Memmi argues that the colonized are caught between assimilation and rebellion. Scots have historically navigated this tension: many embraced Britishness (e.g., through participation in the British Empire, where Scots played significant roles as administrators and soldiers), while others resisted through cultural nationalism or political movements. The 2014 referendum, with 45% voting for independence, reflects this ambivalence—some Scots see the Union as a partnership, while others view it as a constraint on self-determination. Memmi’s concept of the colonized rejecting assimilation for self-assertion is evident in the SNP’s push for independence as a means to reclaim political and cultural sovereignty.
Mutual Dehumanization and Liberation: Memmi posits that colonialism dehumanizes both the colonizer and colonized, locking them in a cycle of dependency. For Scotland, the Union can be seen as a structure that limits both Scottish agency and the UK’s ability to fully embrace a pluralistic identity. Independence, in this view, is not just about Scottish liberation but about dismantling a system that perpetuates unequal power dynamics. The post-2014 surge in pro-independence sentiment, fueled by perceptions of Westminster’s disconnect (e.g., austerity policies or Brexit), aligns with Memmi’s idea that the colonized must reject the colonizer’s framework to achieve true freedom.
3. Applying the Frameworks to Scottish Independence
Historical Context as Colonial Legacy: While Scotland willingly entered the Union in 1707, the economic pressures (e.g., Darien Scheme failure) and elite coercion suggest an uneven power dynamic, akin to colonial arrangements. The subsequent marginalization of Scottish institutions and culture (e.g., the decline of Gaelic, centralization of power in Westminster) mirrors postcolonial patterns of control. Fanon’s and Memmi’s emphasis on historical dispossession applies to events like the Highland Clearances, which displaced communities and weakened cultural cohesion, creating a sense of grievance that fuels modern independence movements.
Cultural Nationalism as Decolonization: The revival of Scottish identity—through devolution, cultural festivals, and the promotion of Gaelic and Scots languages—parallels Fanon’s call for cultural reclamation. Memmi’s focus on the colonized reclaiming their narrative is evident in Scotland’s efforts to redefine itself as a modern, progressive nation (e.g., the SNP’s vision of an independent Scotland in the EU), distinct from the UK’s more conservative trajectory.
Power Dynamics and Resistance: Both theorists highlight the need to challenge structural power. Scotland’s lack of full sovereignty within the UK—evident in Westminster’s control over key policies like foreign affairs or energy—resembles Memmi’s description of the colonized’s limited agency. The independence movement, particularly post-Brexit, seeks to disrupt this by demanding self-governance, aligning with Fanon’s view of resistance as a path to national liberation.
4. Limitations of the Postcolonial Lens
Not a Classic Colony: Scotland’s historical role as a partner in the Union and its active participation in British imperialism (e.g., Scots as colonial administrators) complicates the colonial analogy. Unlike Fanon’s and Memmi’s focus on racially oppressed colonies, Scotland’s experience involves cultural and political, rather than racial, domination.
Economic Interdependence: Memmi’s binary of colonizer/colonized oversimplifies the UK’s economic structure, where Scotland benefits from shared resources (e.g., North Sea oil revenues) but also faces centralization.
Non-Violent Resistance: Fanon’s emphasis on violence as a liberating force does not apply to Scotland’s largely democratic and civic nationalism, though his broader point about collective action resonates.
5. Conclusion
Fanon’s and Memmi’s postcolonial theories provide a robust framework for analyzing Scottish independence as a response to historical and ongoing cultural, political, and psychological subordination within the UK. Fanon’s focus on reclaiming national consciousness and Memmi’s exploration of the colonizer-colonized dynamic illuminate Scotland’s struggle to assert its identity and sovereignty. While not a perfect fit due to Scotland’s unique historical context, their ideas highlight the power imbalances and cultural erasure that drive the independence movement. The push for independence can be seen as a decolonizing act, seeking to break free from a Westminster-centric system and forge a self-determined future, aligning with both theorists’ visions of liberation.
@Dan
GRTF with your “anything to have a go” pish. If you’re capable of doing it, why expect others to do your homework ya utter roaster?
Of COURSE it only provided one side, because it was a binary question. And OF COURSE the opposite question will provide a different response. Big whoop. The $64,000 question is of course which of the two people generally and the academic consensus finds most convincing.
Naturally, it’s only a Grok AI generated response, but if folk are that invested, they can – if nothing else – use the responses as a basis for parsing Alf’s analysis and the opposing POV if they so desire.
For interest, let’s look at another one:
Question: Grok – Is Professor Alf Baird’s post colonial analysis of the Scottish independence movement widely supported by academic subject matter experts?
Professor Alf Baird’s postcolonial analysis of the Scottish independence movement, primarily articulated in his book Doun-Hauden: The Socio-Political Determinants of Scottish Independence and related articles, frames Scotland’s relationship with the United Kingdom as a colonial one, drawing heavily on postcolonial theorists like Frantz Fanon and Albert Memmi. His work emphasizes cultural suppression, linguistic marginalization, economic exploitation, and demographic shifts as evidence of Scotland’s colonial status within the UK. However, the question of whether his analysis is widely supported by academic subject matter experts requires a nuanced examination of the academic discourse, the reception of his work, and the broader context of postcolonial studies applied to Scotland. Below is an analysis of the extent of academic support for Baird’s framework, based on available sources and critical evaluation.
1. Overview of Baird’s Postcolonial Analysis
* Core Argument: Baird argues that Scotland exhibits characteristics of a colonized nation, including political subordination, cultural and linguistic suppression (e.g., of Scots and Gaelic), economic exploitation (e.g., control over resources like North Sea oil), and demographic changes driven by historical emigration and Anglophone immigration. He applies postcolonial theory, particularly Fanon’s ideas of cultural alienation and Memmi’s colonizer-colonized dynamic, to argue that Scottish independence is a decolonization process aimed at restoring national sovereignty and cultural identity.
* Key Texts: His book Doun-Hauden (2020) and a series of articles published on platforms like Yours for Scotland (2021–2023) outline determinants of independence, such as language, ethnicity, demographics, and institutions, framing them as colonial issues.
* Influence: Baird’s work has gained traction within pro-independence circles, particularly through grassroots platforms like Yours for Scotland and organizations like Salvo, which he supports for its focus on national liberation and Scotland’s constitutional rights.
2. Evidence of Academic Support
* Positive Reception in Pro-Independence Circles: Baird’s work has been praised by some independence activists and commentators, who view it as a groundbreaking application of postcolonial theory to Scotland. For instance, reviews by independence campaigners Maggie Chetty and Ian Grant commend Doun-Hauden for its “enlightening” explanation of colonial structures and its role in energizing the independence movement. Additionally, the Towson University Journal of International Affairs published an article by Baird in 2022, suggesting some academic recognition of his framework.
* Engagement with Postcolonial Concepts: Baird’s use of established postcolonial theorists like Fanon, Memmi, and Edward Said aligns his work with a recognized academic field. His references to Ireland’s colonial history and its parallels with Scotland draw on precedents acknowledged in postcolonial studies, as seen in Said’s work on Ireland’s anti-imperialist struggles. This situates Baird’s analysis within a broader academic discourse, potentially appealing to scholars familiar with postcolonial frameworks.
* Support from Specific Scholars: While direct endorsements from named academic subject matter experts are scarce in the provided sources, comments on platforms like Yours for Scotland suggest that some individuals with academic or intellectual backgrounds (e.g., bloggers like Iain Lawson or contributors to iScot magazine) view Baird’s work as a significant contribution. For example, one commenter notes the “superlative level of argumentation” in Doun-Hauden, arguing it should be adopted by the Alba Party, indicating intellectual support within nationalist circles.
3. Evidence of Limited or Mixed Academic Support
* Lack of Mainstream Academic Endorsement: There is little evidence in the provided sources or broader academic literature that Baird’s specific framework is widely adopted or endorsed by mainstream academic experts in Scottish studies, postcolonialism, or political science. His work appears primarily in pro-independence blogs (Yours for Scotland, ScotlandSpeaks) and self-published formats (e.g., Amazon), rather than in peer-reviewed journals beyond the Towson University Journal. The absence of citations in major academic databases or references by prominent scholars in Scottish or postcolonial studies suggests limited mainstream traction.
* Controversial Claims: Some of Baird’s arguments, particularly around demographics and “settler influence” (e.g., Anglophone immigration diluting Scottish identity), are contentious and have been criticized for oversimplifying complex social dynamics or veering into ethno-nationalist rhetoric. For example, a 2016 study by Graeme Macdonald in New Formations acknowledges the postcolonial lens in Scottish studies but focuses on broader literary and cultural analyses, without referencing Baird or endorsing his specific claims. Similarly, Alasdair Gray’s comments on “settler” influence, which Baird echoes, were criticized as xenophobic, indicating potential resistance to such arguments in academic circles.
* Institutional Resistance: Baird himself notes that his work is unlikely to be published by Scottish universities, suggesting a lack of institutional support due to its “dangerous originality” or perceived radicalism. This may reflect a broader academic skepticism toward applying postcolonial theory to Scotland, a developed nation within the UK, given its historical role as a co-participant in British imperialism. Scholars like Macdonald highlight Scotland’s ambivalence as both a colonized and colonizing entity, complicating Baird’s binary framework.
* Criticism of Methodology: Some responses to Baird’s work, as seen in comments on Yours for Scotland, express disagreement with specific claims, such as the necessity of a single Scots language for independence. One commenter argues that Scotland’s linguistic diversity (Scots, Gaelic, English) does not necessitate a singular language focus, challenging Baird’s emphasis on linguistic suppression as a colonial determinant. This suggests that even within sympathetic audiences, his framework is not universally accepted.
4. Broader Academic Context of Postcolonialism in Scottish Studies
* Postcolonialism in Scottish Studies: The application of postcolonial theory to Scotland is not new but remains a niche area. Scholars like Graeme Macdonald have explored Scotland’s “postcolonial” status in literary studies, focusing on cultural marginalization and national identity in novels. However, these studies often avoid explicit colonial terminology for Scotland, preferring terms like “internal colonialism” or “marginalization” to account for Scotland’s complex role within the UK and the British Empire. This contrasts with Baird’s explicit framing of Scotland as a colony, which may be seen as overly reductive by some academics.
* Comparison to Ireland: Baird’s parallels with Ireland’s colonial history resonate with some scholars, as Ireland’s status as a former colony is widely accepted in postcolonial studies. However, Scotland’s distinct historical trajectory—its voluntary union in 1707, its active participation in empire, and its relative economic development—makes direct comparisons contentious, potentially limiting academic support for Baird’s framework.
* Current Academic Trends: Recent studies (e.g., Macdonald’s 2016 work) indicate a growing interest in postcolonial readings of Scottish literature and culture, particularly post-2014 referendum. However, these tend to focus on cultural and literary dimensions rather than the overt political and economic colonialism Baird emphasizes. The lack of direct engagement with Baird’s work in these studies suggests his framework has not yet penetrated mainstream academic discourse.
5. Sentiment on X and Public Reception
* Posts on X reflect strong support for Baird’s analysis among pro-independence activists. For example, users like @J4m35c4mpb3ll? and @Peter__A__Bell? praise Baird’s work for articulating Scotland’s colonial status and cultural oppression, with quotes emphasizing the “Scottish cultural cringe” and economic exploitation. These sentiments, while not academic endorsements, indicate that Baird’s ideas resonate with a segment of the independence movement, potentially influencing public discourse more than academic circles.
* However, X posts are inconclusive as evidence of academic support, as they primarily reflect activist enthusiasm rather than scholarly consensus. The lack of references to Baird in academic X profiles or institutional accounts further suggests limited academic traction.
6. Conclusion
Professor Alf Baird’s postcolonial analysis of the Scottish independence movement is not widely supported by academic subject matter experts in a mainstream sense, based on the available evidence. While his work has garnered significant praise within pro-independence circles and from some commentators (e.g., Maggie Chetty, Ian Grant), it lacks widespread endorsement in peer-reviewed academic literature or by prominent scholars in Scottish or postcolonial studies. The niche application of postcolonial theory to Scotland, as seen in works like Graeme Macdonald’s, supports some of Baird’s themes (e.g., cultural marginalization), but his explicit framing of Scotland as a colony and his focus on contentious issues like “settler influence” may limit broader academic acceptance due to Scotland’s complex historical role within the UK and empire. Baird’s work appears to have a stronger influence in activist and grassroots contexts, as evidenced by X posts and pro-independence platforms, but this does not translate to widespread academic consensus.
Seems like pretty thin gruel to me. Alf’s analysis unsurprisingly appeals mostly to the converted, chip on the shoulder, “true-believer” outliers of the movement, just as within the broader academic sphere.
There’s a reason why he constantly cross references his own work. Alert readers don’t find it hard to figure out why.
@Northcode 11.40am
Starship Troopers (1997) – unbelievable that 28 years have passed since I first saw that movie on the big screen.
That long huh? Makes me feel a tad old. The scene with the brain eating space bug would certainly account for the condition of more than a few of the usual suspects in here right enough. 🙂
But I would be very very wary of accepting any analysis based on the output from a chattering byte churning bit bot owned by a super rich multi-billionaire driven by who-knows-what crazy internal agendas might be rattling aboot in his heid.
Of course, I doubt many folk will take Grok’s word as gospel, but you can’t expect the average layman always to have the time or indeed inclination to “do their own research”.
I suspect it’s never been any different in as much as most folk when presented with a detailed argument about any particular topic, be it post colonial theory, climate change, any of the current major global politico-military crises will analyse them through the lens of their pre-existing knowledge and prejudices and (hopefully?) perhaps do some additional research.
Whether that’s listening to the news, reading newspapers or journal articles and books, reading blogs and/or watching vblogs. There’s always been a place for “condensed” versions, whether it’s “Politics for Dummies” type books, or the various study aids produced over centuries.
It’s too glib to just write of any analysis that isn’t based on years of detailed study, or poring over learned articles and books. That’s not what most ordinary folk do, except perhaps in relation to one or a few issues they feel particularly strongly about and motivated to put the work in.
Even then, we all know there are plenty of examples of people who can spend inordinate time and effort chasing fanciful ideas, whether the earth being flat, or the Royal Family being space lizards.
If nine engineers tell you a bridge is unsafe and one says it’s fine, most folk will err on the side of caution rather than side with the outlier because one of the nine has other views we find disagreeable.
Your follow up comments are pathetic and childish, and precisely what readers here expect from you.
But don’t stop there, go for gold.
If only his still wife was still a lawyer and he’d used her to complete his legal aid application. It would be lying unsent on an office floor somewhere!
I am always happy when others help to get the message across by pointing out my name and therefore Englands treaty of union that is missing Scots.
I am indeed grateful, for you trumpet similar to Labours constant attacks on nigel Farage’s Reform party down south,
The attention refocuses on those attacking as everyone is wondering what is worrying and upsetting those that doth protest the loudest..
Mixed views on this. My own view is that Murrel is a scum bag,that he has been well remunerated these last years. But like everyone no matter the charge, there is a promotion of innocent until proven guilty.
Everyone is entitled to a defence especially since the state has very considerable resources to pursue prosecution.
Indeed just look at sources deployed against Alex Salmond to just that. An attempted political stitch up by the state would not be an unreasonable observation
And of course the multiplicity of ” lawfare ” cases pursued against Donald Trump.
So irrespective of what wethink of Murrel we should not lose sight of why people should be entitled to legal aid.
But yes, for me and no doubt for very many Murrel’s legal aide sticks in one’s craw.
Willie @ 08.37.
I’ve no problem with the presumption of “innocent until proven guilty”, Willie.
However I believe that Mr Salmond was in fact required to fund his own defence and it was retrospectively that he was awarded some £512,000 in costs.
I believe it’s more this perception of one rule for some and a different rule for others which, as you correctly express it, “sticks in the craw”.
For many of us two tier justice isn’t confined to England.
Here’s part of a speech I gave to a packed Gaiety Theatre in Ayr some time ago when I was on the public speaking circuit carving out a crumb or two.
I needed some extra cash for that month’s child support payments owing to the fines I’d incurred over a public nuisance conviction I’d acquired.
For those uninterested… scroll on by.
Otherwise, here it is:
Ten shillings I made with that speech. Whoever said there’s no money in rhetoric – and I’m not sure anyone ever has – is a fool.
But I confess that speech wasn’t mine and you probably won’t be surprised to hear that I didn’t deliver it to a packed Gaiety Theatre in Ayr.
No. That speech was delivered by the brilliant Robert Donat in a scene from the 1939 black and white movie The 39 Steps directed by Alfred Hitchcock and based on the novel of the same title by John Buchan.
Charles Bennet was the scriptwriter and a fine job he made of it too.
In 1999, the British Film Institute ranked it the fourth-best British film of the 20th century.
Coincidently, Buchan was the 15th Governor General of Canada from 1935 to 1940 and John Swinney is the 3rd Governor General of Scotland (2024 – present. Incumbent).
Sorry, NC, not buying it.
Burns wrote of the “honest men” of Ayr. They would never have let you in.
You’re no “bonnie lassie” either.
@Hatey – I’m guessing there’s some truth in this part of the story though;
“I needed some extra cash for that month’s child support payments owing to the fines I’d incurred over a public nuisance conviction I’d acquired”
What is ten Shillings?
It’s 50 pence too much for a 179 word “speech”!
“Deprive the people of their National Consciousness, treat them as a tribe and not a Nation, dilute their National pride, do not teach their history, propagate their language as inferior, imply they have a cultural void, emphasise their customs are primitive and dismiss independence as a barbaric anomaly”
On the Germanisation of Czechoslovakia, but feels awfy familiar for some reason…
Northcode –
I think I know why main is getting so wound up about myths and legends
– it is because he is shiting it in case we discover that it is the Scots, not the Ashkenazi that are the true Lost Tribe of ISrahel, and they are just interlopers, larpers and land thieves.
It would make sense, if you were God looking for a candidate to be your “special little guys” why would you chose these ugly, murderous, liars?
Yes, it’s all bollocks, but bollocks with bite for we have the – propaganda operation essentially, of “British Israhellism”, of the 19th century, which had the jews who had migrated to England convince anglo elites that the Anglo Saxons were this “Lost Tribe of Iz”. Yup, 4real, as the kids like to say. And to this day, how many misguided prods think it is their “christian” duty to slavishly support zionism?
The english, narcissists all, were flattered and it allowed the jews to penetrate the class system; they had money and they wanted to marry into it, but the system was rigid and they were not well liked.
Then we have the british empire get right behind zionism, despite their allegedly pro arab sympathies (they liked their aristocratic manners, love of horses). This kind of really deep bullshit pays off well down the line and people with long timescales can play games like this.
Supposedly the males of the royal family get their jimmies sliced. And them C of E. For shame.
There is a mad book by a mad jewish woman titled “when Scotland was jewish”, but it seems too mad for even my wildest flights of fancy, Dan Brown level.
– but you never know.
Then we had those mad prods, the covenanters, who signed a second covenant! (- as if one lot was not bad enough, and totally failing to get it with regard to the whole reason why Jesus turned up …) – thinking yourself the new master race (the elect) and trying to convert England to presbyterianism, alas, did not go well for them.
All this ancient guff is totally mad and totally relevant and totally fascinating, might write a long one which helps to connect the dots; in short, the madness never ends, and we never get to get off the rollercoaster because of it and the whole of history turns on the most random of events – a schizo old man tries to murder his son and concocts a wild story to explain it (“god told me to do it … and if we all slice our willies …”)- or Henry 8 and his dodgy todger, woman trouble – it was not meant to be like this; he was bezzies with the Pope and had a public “flame war” with Luther … then it all goes crazy.
Have you taken your medication?
Powerful combo yon Benilyn and Buckie….or so I hear….
The farce of the creation of the Church of England is that Henry Tudor 8 reaffirmed his Catholic beliefs on his death bed..
All that hassle in order to get a divorce and steal the established church wealth shown exactly for what it was as old stinky coppernose lay worrying about looming retribution on his black soul.
If there is a heaven and hell then I think he deserves to be roasting in the lowest pit of the latter.
You might be on to something there, Confused.
At Dan’s 12.02pm comment in response to the grok question
It is strange for someone who insists on being an independence supporter to go to the bother of seeking out only the NEGATIVES of the colonial arguement from the AI grok , as you rightfully pointed out the common sense thing to do would be to publish the positive beside the negative to allow a comparison but for someone just to publish the NEGATIVE imo indicates their duplicity and bias
It would also be a bonus if a range of the academic points concerning Scotlands colonisation were put in layman’s terms with concrete examples given.
The ‘ten things’ format that’s everywhere these days could be a start to getting the true status of Scotland understood and talked about by the general population.
…leaflets handouts posters, it’d be a big effort but could be done and what a headache it would give the yoons.
Hmm. As a practical person and an absolute demon on the hand tools that fixes and builds all manner of stuff from basic lawnmower repairs to million quid machines in the oil industry, but in a non-academic non-intellectual capacity, I’ll attempt to interpret for the neds / plebs.
Colony: A country or area controlled politically by a more powerful country.
All major powers such as broadcasting, immigration, energy,
defenceoffence & national security, economic policy, are reserved to London Rule… London is in England… and the Kingdom of England has a 10 to 1 democratic advantage over the Kingdom of Scotland, meaning Scotland just gets whatever England chooses.Over the decades, 55 million folk in the KoE have continued to vote in a bunch of arseholes that sold out the UK and make a complete arse of things, and the 5 million folk in Scotland just have to put up with it because reasons…
It’s a shite state of affairs all-round, as people in general appear to have melted brains and lost the abilities of critical thought and attention spans required to even begin to understand how things work and how to fix things.
Sorry, Dan, nothing personal, but I can’t let that one go unanswered.
“Over the decades, 5.5 million folk in the KoS have continued to vote in a bunch of arseholes that sold out Scotland and make a complete arse of things”
Do you see what I did there?
No sane, rational Scot is going to disagree with that statement.
And so, the path to Indy isn’t too complex:
1 Find some Scots who aren’t arseholes.
2 Persuade them to stand for elected office.
3 Persuade Scots voters to unlearn their congenital arsehole traits, and vote for those Scots identified at 1.
Simples. Don’t let anybody tell you it’s any more complicated than that.
Remember I wrote “complicated”. “Difficult” is a different discussion, with 3 being the most difficult of the lot. Because until we Scots unlearn our congenital arseholery, nae savvy Scot is going to bother with 1 and 2.
Surely the onus is on those who agree with something to make their case, and those who disagree to make theirs?
I know it’s not a popular view for some BTL in here, but I don’t think that most Scots really buy in to the “Scotland as colony” concept. Those who do are free to go on about it of course. Absolutely nobody is stopping them. They’re apparently making their case to the UN, so let’s see how that goes shall we?
Whatever the carping about the Grok responses referred to above, since we now have the pro and anti versions, people who aren’t that invested and/or don’t have the inclination to do their own detailed academic research, can at least use those alternatives as a jumping off point, yes?
I make absolutely no apologies for only presenting the side of the argument I agree with.
I’d no more try to “talk up” the pros of the “Scotland as colony” argument than I would try to talk up the pros of the unionist argument, or the Jockistinian argument because I ting both of them are utterly without merit.
Folk who want to “both sides” the idea, or who are persuadable or not sure can have at it.
Far from indicating duplicity an bias, it simply indicates that not all of us are easily led by charlatans and snake oil salesmen.
Doubtless even if (when?) the UN comes back and refuses to recognise Scotland as a colony or non self governing territory, Alf and his mates will continue to tilt at their post colonial windmills. Same old, same old.
Andy Ellis says: at 4:57 pm
“Surely the onus is on those who agree with something to make their case, and those who disagree to make theirs?”
Not always the case really if you actually want to build support for returning to self-governance.
If you are completely unable or unwilling to let anything slide that may resonate with others but doesn’t align exactly with what you want, and as a result of that you end up badgering everyone with an ever so slightly different take on things, then you are a hindrance to building support for the cause you purport to want.
I don’t know if you are on the spectrum or whatever, but for years you’ve clearly shown a complete inability to get along, agree, be supportive of pretty much anybody that posts btl, except yer yoon chums…
Ever considered kerbing the relentless hostility and just shutting the fuck up once in a while.
Support needs to be built which means more folk with views that undoubtably won’t align exactly with yours need to be welcomed to the pro-indy pool, but you can’t help but find issue with folk.
Do you get so hostile with yer lass seeing as she is stupid enough to use pronouns and give credence to the insanity of the genderwoowoo, or does she get the “moonhowling idiot, can’t educate pork” treatment lobbed at her.
“Far from indicating duplicity an bias, it simply indicates that not all of us are easily led by charlatans and snake oil salesmen”
You are, clearly!
@Andy – you might have missed that the Salvo petition has gone to the UN decolonisation committee, back in June. In a turn of events that nobody expected (everyone) they were sent packing
@aidan 7.16pm
Yes, I’m aware. Not unexpected. I never had any expectations the UN would accept that those making the submission would have any standing. Even in the unlikely event the committee decided to look at it, there’s no chance it’ll go any further. Far too many UN members have their own issues with secessionist movements of their own to support it.
@anthem 7.06pm
I’m not the one on the losing side of the reference to the UN colonisation committee bud, so there is that. 🙂
Nobody said independence is easy, but it helps if you know what the word means. It means decolonization, according to the UN.
@Andy – all valid points, but the thing that chopped it off at the knees is that the UNCDC has no authority to add new countries to the list of NSGT’s. West Papua tried a similar tactic in 2017 with the same result.
@Alf
So if (when?) the UN refuses to recognise cases like Scotland, Quebec and Catalonia as de-colonisation…..what then?
Seems like a huge hostage to fortune. All that time and effort, setting back the cause by years to achieve SFA?
@Aidan
So is it the definitively the case that Baird’s petition to the UN has officially been rebuffed/rejected?
If so, no wonder why Xaracen refused to say what success in 12 months look like – if it’s already been binned off at the time of writing lol. I mean, who could’ve seen that come, eh readers…………….
@Captain Caveman – yes, I would say “officially” is probably putting it too strongly, it’s likely one of the admin staff that has dismissed it out of hand.
The only route to get Scotland added to the list of NSGT’s now is for the General Assembly to agree to add Scotland to the list. Obviously that isn’t going to happen.
O/T Flags for Liberate Scotland can be bought from Eva Comrie or message on the Liberate Scotland facebook page. £7 for a 5 foot flag or £10 for 8 foot. [Looking at the one flying in the photo on the LS page, the flag is fitted to go on a proper flagstaff i.e. a hem to pass a rope through, so with a piece of rope/cord through the hem it can be tied to a mobile pole.]
Salvo.scot also does flags and other merchandise via Salvo hubs.
Come back AyeMail! You’re needed. 🙂
You must have missed Alf’s comment that in Scotland “half the population living in or close to poverty”.
You expect them to buy flags to fly on their flagstaffs?
Prick.
You can never hae too mony flags, x.
You can use them tae keep warrum in the winter. Wrap one aroond each bairn, or the wee-er anes can coorie up in one big flag. So can frisky adults, but nae if they’re shirt lifters. That wouldna be respectful tae oor nation’s banners. Carpet munchers get a wee bye 🙂
In a real cauld snap, pawn them tae get the bawbees tae buy soup, or just burn them in the grate.
Every flagstaff I hae ever seen is wid. Burns grand.
On a serious note – it was insufficiently vigorous flag waving that lost it in 2014. Let’s not repeat that rookie error next time.
O/T Since it’s the weekend and raining, here are some petitions to sign.
http://www.manifestoforindependence.scot
link to petition.parliament.uk Transparency and Review of the free zones and ports impacts These zones are an abuse on the people and businesses within those areas in particular – compulsory purchase of your house/farm etc – and of the whole country due to the profits from our assets being sent back home to the overseas investors. Thank you Kate Forbes and Westminster.
Signatures 638
Goal 100,000
Any day now!
I thought that Wings readers will want to support this practical, explicit, way to leave the “Union”.
If people don’t know about a subject it is because there is no publicity. The MSM aren’t going to help inform people, obviously.
ERSKINE CHILDERS, A GREAT irish Nationalist who died in the gun sights of an Irish firing squad.
Just like your fellow unionists, TOO stupid to realise that you are in the same lunatic asylum as the rest of us, the difference between us is that we can see how ALL the political parties are incompetent and corrupt and we are fighting to get away from the scum whilst you are languishing in your stupidity and ignorance by supporting the status quo, agent x more like fuckwit x
Sarah, you’ve been banging on about the petition for months now. This – as we’re often reminded – the most popular and well read Scottish politics blog on the internet, but so far the grand total of signatures hasn’t even reached four figures. So either the messaging is wrong, or people just aren’t that interested. You can’t keep blaming the lack of publicity or the hostile MSM.
So far the movers and shakers behind the competition haven’t even managed to persuade Rev Stu or other high profile figures to endorse it. It’s hardly likely they aren’t aware of it’s existence, so presumably they just don’t think it’s that great an idea.
Nobody is trying to stop you advertising, or shut you down, but doesn’t there come a point where the minimal level of support is just embarrassing and may actually have the opposite effect to that desired, by making it look like the movement as a whole just doesn’t interest folk?
It’s not exactly a Catlan “La Diada” style turnout is it? Or even a few million signatures like the 1950’s Scottish Covenant calling for Home Rule, which got precisely nowhere either….
“same lunatic asylum as the rest of us”
No way TH. There’s “lunatic asylums”, and then there’s lunatic asylums.
Most readers can see there’s infinitesimal to zero chance they will end their days in the same place as the sick losers that have settled in here.
Isn’t it the law that those deemed too mentally stunted to adequately function in normal society are denied a vote?
The Indy movement needs to organise itself so that those who are too mentally challenged to function in normal society are denied a voice. No sane, rational Scot can believe that their deranged ravings on here or anywhere else are improving the cause of Indy or converting the undecided to its support.
Sarah. This is the type of thing that should leafleted through every door in in Scotland!
The SNP should be shamed into doing it!
The SNP should be adopting the Manifesto for Independence and then we wouldn’t need to be signing it!
The SNP should also be joining the Liberate Scotland umbrella.
There’s a whole list of things that the SNP should be doing. Sadly they aren’t doing any of them. Sigh.
Sara thanks for that link to the parliamentary petition, unfortunately it is coming back as server not found
And Sarah don’t let any of these yoonionist fuckwits put you off posting your thoughts or your links, they are only here to disrupt and Stu seems to be alright with their attendance
You seem to have a real bee in your bonnet about Stu’s lack of support for “cunning plans for indy”. Calling everyone who disagrees with you, including fellow independence supporters, “yoonionist fuckwits” because they disagree with your half baked ideas isn’t necessarily going to ingratiate you with the good Rev.
To his credit (and indeed the exasperation of many) the Rev has a pretty light touch when it comes to moderation of comments. If he didn’t it’s hardly likely he’d tolerate the screeds of repetitive and barely literate nonsense churned out by James Che, or Alf Baird’s fixation with post colonial theory and posting self aggrandising links to his own vanity published snake oil titles.
Why is it that midwidts like you, Dan and some of the other usual suspects always mischaracterise people questioning issues or ideas (whether Sarah’s or anyone else’s) as attempts to put them off, or as they also often complain, to have them removed?
The opposite is in fact usually the case: what people are asking for is evidence, or a reasoned debate about why Sarah, or other people’s opinions, should be listened to. Instead, all we get from most of them is abuse and accusations that they’re playing for the other team.
It’s as predictable as it is intellectually dishonest, and of course mirrors the old unionist delegitimisation tactics from #indyref1, where any disagreement – however polite or reasoned – was characterised as vile cybernat abuse.
Lolz at waking up to another groundhog day with Andy accusing and complaining of others mischaracterising folk when for years he’s relentlessly spewed out his derogatory pish and misattribution towards anybody (other than the yoons) who posts on here.
link to wingsoverscotland.com
And looky here. The very next day after I suggested some exposure and promotion of new candidates wouldn’t go a miss, Barrheadboy’s site posted this.
link to barrheadboy.com
It’s odd that “midwits” (is that a step up or down from moonhowler?) strive for some positive actions to begin to improve Scotland’s lot, yet the “high intelligentsia” individuals you like to think you belong to just spend pretty much all your time ranting and raving at supposedly lesser individuals instead of leading the way to salvation.
link to wingsoverscotland.com
“Groundhog day”
Clear case of cultural colonisation there, Dan.
Anyway. Didn’t some famous boy once say that most people sincerely wish that today will be much like yesterday?
For people “living on the edge of survival” (and that’s always been most people, everywhere, everywhen) they know that they survived yesterday. And so for them, that’s today’s aspiration too.
Obviously we’re far more advanced than that here and now, even in Scotland, but we too are becoming used to and accepting of the idea that “managed decline” is our lot. So every day that the decline from yesterday is imperceptible is a bonus.
And so we Scots are very happy for every day to be Groundhog Day. We’re smack bang in the middle of our comfort zone. Plus (don’t tell Alf) we’re very comfortable indeed with all the American cultural colonialism we can get. Super sized and with a side of fries.
@Dan – it’s a fine article by Barrhead boy. I particularly liked the description of the “vicious” attacks by independence supporters (read legitimate questions about the approach) which he dismisses as an “lack of ability to see reality”. I wonder if a slate of candidates probably polling at less than 1% might approach with a little less hubris.
@Dan
Yet more of your disingenuous misdirection on your part. Same old, same old.
I’ve frequently taken issue with the yoons and (purportedly) unpersuaded types who post here, particularly given their mostly brexity views and tendency to come from right or centre or far right positions on most issues that I could never disagree with. Of course, when I agree with them on certain points, I’ll say so.
The fact that (horror of horrors!) I might actually agree with them on some issues and not on others is part of being a grown up, something most of the charmers in here wouldn’t really understand let alone try to emulate. Instead we have charmers like James repetitively calling people pricks, much like the late unlamented Rooby whose cheif contribution was c-bombing all and sundry like a tourette’s addled schemie coming doen from a bad trip.
Barrhead boy’s piece has something to recommend it, but even he can’t resist having a go at folk within the movment who have the audacity not to agree with him. It’s the same MO yoons used during #indyref1.
It’s also a bit rich for you to use the platform provided by Rev Stu to castigate him for not being on message.
Presumptious much?
Why is Rev Stu, or anyone else for that matter obliged to commit to any particular strategy, still less the ones being promoted by some folk in here which he clearly doesn’t think will work or are worth anything. I happen to agree with him. You and others might not like it, but from everything we can see, we’re the ones that are in the majority, NOT them.
I don’t “purport” to support plebiscitary elections. I was one of the early adopters and publicisers for the policy as was Rev Stu. I clearly recall getting pelters for it at the time, generally from know-nothing slavish SNP loyalists on the one side, and “cunning plans for indy” fantasists on the other. A plague on both their houses.
They’re the ones who are collectively a clear and present danger to the prospects of achieving independence in the short to medium term, particularly using 2026 elections for that purpose.
Indeed, such is the disarray within the movement that it’s probably already too late for that, because the SNP either needs to be fully signed up to the use of plebiscitary elections or it needs to be removed from the equation. Neither of those now appears at all likely by 2026.
Part of the responsibility for that DOES rest with the midwits proposing novel, extra parliamentary short cuts to indy.
I’ve no interest in “leading people to salvation” as you so pompously put it. The path ahead is clear to anyone clear sighted enough to see it. But in the end you can’t make horses drink after leading them to water.
I’m all for anyone standing for office if they want to, whether they’re ISP, Alba, I4I, Liberate Scotland or anyone else. As long as they’re signed up to the principle of plebiscitary elections, all that matter is ensuring they collectively get 50% +1 of the vote. They don’t need to agree on detailed policy, or what a post independence Scotland will look like or what orientation it will have, they don’t even have to like each other as long as they’re committed to the plebiscitary principle.
Given that the much vaunted (at least by Sarah) petition hasn’t managed to breach four figures yet, I won’t be holding my breath that such measures are going to be of much help.
I am sorry that the Free zones and ports petition “can’t be found”. It’s almost as if someone doesn’t want it found!
I’ve had a similar problem with accessing the legal documents on the Liberation.scot website. Now I do know that their site was massively interfered with last year so that only about 30% of signatures were getting through to the right place.
As a member of the 77th brigade I can confirm that it is the UK’s security services that are obstructing the website. It is seen as a critically important threat to the British state. The Prime Minister receives a briefing on it every day, and he discussed it for over two hours with Trump on the phone this week. We have a whole team of 45 analysts and 60 field agents working on it from a secret bunker in Hertfordshire. We’ve pulled resources from monitoring Russian nuclear submarines to focus on this, and the CIA are being asked to provide additional capacity.
I can’t tell you how concerned we are, that “twathater” might find out the “truth” about the Freeport’s programme. Most cabinet ministers are already sheltering their families in secure locations, the prime minister has a helicopter running outside at all times which he normally sleeps in at night just in case.
Published on scotgoespop 18:33 050725
“I’ll bet you £20 James that SNP get zero list seats.
Your sooky return to fake yes SNP and voting for them on the list is due to spitting the dummy out. “
Stuff going on in Scotland… With a familiar name popping up again…
link to isp.scot
Thanks for that link Dan, apparently there are things happening in Scotland that may be relevant to independence supporters or even normal everyday Scots
Liz Lloyd appointment, FFS what can you say. The SNP are the biggest threat to Scotland and our people, they don’t even try to hide it.
The leadership is running the party into the ground but the people in the party are so deaf, dump and blind and money grabbers are so worried they come under the radar of the leadership that they all turn a blind eye.
Sturgeon is still in charge of the SNP Swinney is only the monkey swinging from trees to trees making a fool of himself, the question is how long will this last and a lot can happen in a few months look at Boris Johnston.
100%Yes @ 09.33.
OldJapanese saying, “Even monkeys fall out of trees”. Let’s just hope it’s a very long drop onto an amazingly firm surface for Mr Swiney.
Look at Starmer.
Look at Farage.
Haud oan though, that’s England.
And this is Scotland. Nothing happens here in years and decades.
You’re confusing Swinney with the previous boy. He was the one swinging through the trees.
Swinney is more of a Gollum.
I believe L.L.also works as a policy advisor for the Labour government.All her past efforts are bringing home the gravy.Will she have any time for shenanigans?
@Anne
Unless there’s been a change in the last 6 months, that’s a different Liz Lloyd.
link to thenational.scot
@Northcode
Kizlode
MEANWHILE elsewhere in the British Banana kingdom.
link to archive.is
Tax Payer facing the bill to fund Peter Murrell’s legal defence against fraud charges screams the headlines very much typifies the suspicion of the largesse of public funds being granted by hidden hands of influence.
As the Salmond case showed there was no end of public money, tens of millions at that spent investigating and pursuing Alex Salmond on charges all rejected by a court.
The state, the devolved state and its dark masters have no holds on them when they pursue their objectives, helping their friends and hurting their enemies. Scotland in the clutches of the establishment is a rotten hole. And this week, a continuing example of that rotten collusiveness emerged in relation to Flamingo Land.
For readers not aware Flamingo Land is a commercial real estate proposal, utterly out of keeping with the Loch Lomond National Park and the local area. Hugely unpopular with the Scottish public to the extent of being the most objected to planning proposal ever in Scotland, this Las Vegas on the Loch proposal has been doggedly pursued by developers these last ten years.
However, what is now emerging is the suspicion of hidden hands and secret deals. Exclusivity agreements in fact with a sole preferred developer where details of that agreement are secret, confidential and not for public knowledge.
The sale of iconic loch side land a secret as to what money, if any is being paid for tens of acres of land being but one example. But the hand of the disgraced ex Finance Minister Derek Mackay being employed as a consultant to the developer has only just emerged. Its not a good look and of course with the Flamingo Land great giveaway as it has been anecdotally decribed having many many more questions being asked about it and its relationships with the National Park Authority and Scottish Enterprise there are now questions being asked about the Reporter in planning matters.
The Reporter as readers may be aware was the individual who reviewed the planning authority’s rejection of granting planning and reversed the decision in favour of the appealing developer.
However, with last week the government facing a defeat in the Scottish Parliament the minister Ivan McKee the evening before the parliamentary meeting announced that he was calling in the Reporter’s decision to over -rule the planning authority’s decision.
And so with parliamentary vote defeat averted it now emerges that the Reporter who will review the Reporter’s decision and and advise the government is no other than the Reporter who made the decision.
Now I don’t know what other folks think but this does seem utterly perverse and utterly typical of our so called Scottish Government.
As to what the public purse is paying for all of this murk is a big question. How many millions, multi millions of public money has been spent by government promoting this controversial scheme these last ten years. How much has the developer spent those same ten years. What does the secret agreement between the government make provision for. What public monies could be being paid to support the development. What public monies could be due in the event the deal does not materialise. The developer has recently intimated that it is taking legal advise. Legal advise about what. There’s big money rolling around here – and maybe that is why it has just recently been reported that the ex finance minister Derek Mackay is now advising the developer.
Big questions folks, big big questions, but maybe our Scottish Government is purer than the driven snow. Lets trust we find out.
In the meantime, for those not awake, sleep comfortably in the knowledge that your Scottish Government always spends your tax pounds wisely.
DUCK.AI ON
AN OVERVIEW of MONEY LAUNDERING in London
London is often referred to as a major hub for money laundering, with nearly 40% of the world’s dirty money flowing through the city and its crown dependencies. This situation is largely attributed to the city’s historical role as a global financial center and the presence of overseas territories that facilitate financial secrecy.
Key Factors Contributing to Money Laundering
Historical Context
Colonial Legacy: London’s rise as a financial center began in the 16th century, with wealth flowing from colonial exploits, including the slave trade.
Post-Soviet Influence: The collapse of the USSR in the 199s led to an influx of capital from kleptocratic regimes, further embedding money laundering practices in the financial system.
Regulatory Challenges
Weak Oversight: The Financial Conduct Authority (FCA) has reported that professional bodies overseeing legal and accounting sectors are not effectively preventing money laundering. Some organizations spend as little as £73 annually on anti-money laundering supervision.
Loopholes and Deregulation: UK regulations, while strong on paper, have been exploited due to enforcement failures and loopholes, allowing illicit funds to enter the economy.
Current Efforts and Recommendations
Public Registers: There are ongoing demands for public registers of beneficial ownership to increase transparency in financial transactions.
Government Action: Calls for the UK government to reform anti-money laundering supervision are growing, as current measures are deemed insufficient to combat the flow of illicit funds.
London’s reputation as a money laundering capital is a complex issue rooted in its historical, economic, and regulatory landscape. Addressing this problem requires significant reforms and a commitment to transparency.
Scotland wake up!
And Edinburgh is the branch office.
It turns out Cináed mac Ailpín was described by the Irish annalists as rex Pictorum ‘King of the Picts’.
In the documentary sources – the chronicles and annals – the territory inhabited by the Picts is often called Pictavia, which means simply ‘Pictland’.
This being so, and me being descended from a long line of Picts, I am reclaiming my ancestral heritage as a Pict and hereby renounce the title of Scot (a title my ancestors were tricked into adopting).
From henceforth the terms Scotland, Scottish and Scot are to be alien to me and in my mind I am to become Pictavian – a Pict and an indigenous inhabitant of Pictavia.
From Fife to the Isle of Skye, and from Shetland to the Tay, the native inhabitants of those places were almost certainly part of the Pictish nation.
The characteristics of what is known of the Pictish language (from place names and such) show that it was part of a group known to linguists as P-Celtic.
This P-Celtic group includes Gaulish and Brittonic – respectively the ancient languages of Gaul and Britain – but excludes the Goidelic or ‘Q-Celtic’ languages, of which the Gaelic of Ireland, Scotland and the Isle of Man are modern representatives.
Despite having bequeathed no literature of their own, the Picts were not backward or primitive in any aspect of their society or culture. On the contrary, they were a vigorous and powerful people who played an important role in the shaping of medieval Britain.
Far from peering out of a mystical twilight on the fringe of the Celtic world they were major players in the social, political and cultural developments of their time.
They didn’t simply vanish into the Highland mists: they merged with another Celtic nation and eventually relinquished their identity (the fools).
The modern descendants of the Picts (of which I am one) provide a reminder of the significant Pictish component in the population of Scotland, even if this genetic heritage is invisible and rarely acknowledged.
In their continuing blood-lines, and in a majestic Highland landscape adorned with sculptured stones, my people, the Picts, have indeed bequeathed a lasting legacy.
Hey you’ve been Colonized twice.
….even if this genetic heritage is invisible and rarely acknowledged.
Surely given recent scientific advances in DNA sampling and technology Pictish DNA heritage wouldn’t be invisible?
According to some studies from 2023 there is a DNA marker (S530) which is more prevalent in Scottish men than English or Northern Irish men: 10% of Scots males carry it, but only 0.8% of English men and 3% of Northern Irish men.
Confusingly however the highest concentration of Pictish DNA is found in Western Scotland rather than eastern Scotland which was the Pictish heartland.
Alf’s going to be gutted when he finds out the Picts ended up speaking a Germanic language imposed on them by their anglo-saxon overlords. 🙂
link to journals.plos.org
“We aimed to determine the genetic relationships between the Picts and neighbouring modern-day and ancient populations. Using DNA analysis, we have been able to fill a gap in an understudied area of Scotland’s past. Our results show that individuals from western Scotland, Wales, Northern Ireland, and Northumbria display a higher degree of Identity-By-Descent (IBD) sharing with the Pictish genomes, meaning they are genetically most similar among modern populations.”
link to su.se
Great stuff, NC.
Looking forwards already to your first post in Brittonic.
Be sure to make it a belter. This could be just the revolutionary breakthrough Indy needs.
” Northcode says:
2 July, 2025 at 12:24 pm
I am descended of the Danaans.
When we first arrived here on your Earth-city we parked our vessels, our space-going craft, in what you call Ireland… but we are not Irish for we are not of this earth – we just shacked up there for a bit while we sorted out our bearings and stuff.
After a time some of us Danaans moved to what is now called Scotland – taking some local Irish with us – and set about merging the few peoples who lived there, the first and oldest of which were the Picts, into a single people now known as the Scots.”
—————————————————–
I always thought the usual suspects were a bunch of space cadets.
From the mouths of babes….
Interesting post NC.
In line with what you have said, St Columba (originally from Ireland) could not communicate with the Picts and required the assistance of a translator from (I believe) Brythonic speaking Strat Clut (Strathclyde).
“St Columba (originally from Ireland) could not communicate with the Picts”
I didn’t know that, Young Lochinvar, but it makes sense now that you mention it.
“I am descended of the Danaans.”
I hadn’t noticed my misspelling of ‘Danann’ so the opportunity to rectify my error is welcome.
The full and proper name for the mythical supernatural race of gods I was referring to in my original post is ‘Tuatha Dé Danann’
I’m not really descended from a supernatural race of gods – I don’t think I am anyway – and I was quite obviously just having a bit of fun.
I am, however, descended from the Picts and that being so am a Pict – I even have the S530 DNA marker to prove it.
Northcode says:
“I even have the S530 DNA marker to prove it.”
————————————————–
Did the Police take your DNA for you?
That I believe would be the Celtic mythical Tuatha de Danann, the Celtic equivalent of the Gods of Mount Olympus.
It would interesting to read bathometry reports off the west cost of Ireland regarding High Brasil legends.
Fascinating stuff that inspired our distant ancestors.
Anyway, happy anniversary of the birth of Robert the Bruce today 🙂 🙂
Gosh, woe (& confuddlement) is me.
First broad Scots.
Then Brythonic.
Now P-Celtic trace language.
How on earth is a baffled old codger ever to know what new, old, language must be mastered in order to achieve Scottish indepedence.
Brain hurts.
O/T Could someone please post an archived link to the Sunday Herald interview with Kenny MacAskill “I will not forgive the behaviour of Nicola Sturgeon towards Alex Salmond. And indeed, the lies told by others.”
It sounds suitably critical! What’s the Sunday H’s readership? Huge, I hope.
Here you go. Plus the call for a public enquiry.
link to web.archive.org
link to web.archive.org
Thank you, auld highlander!
I hope that spines are shivering in SNP leadership’s clique today. May Kenny Macaskill win a seat in 2026 so he can glare at the evildoers and make their lives hell. And the prospect of them needing his support on a confidence and supply basis is delicious. 🙂
He would of course stand a much better chance of election if Alba came under the Liberate Scotland umbrella. But Alex never joined Action for Independence so it seems unlikely that Kenny will change direction on this, sadly.
Or alternatively if more people in the movement who were disgusted with the milquetoast devolutionists in the SNP had gotten behind Alba party (as the only realistic
prospect and with the only leader people would have actually have followed) and not started fighting like ferrets in a sack because their People’s Front versus Popular Front obsessions are more important to them, we might be a lot closer to independence than we are now.
Yes Sarah, the Liberate Scotland strategy offering a single unity candidate per constituency and a single policy (i.e. an independence declaration based on securing a majority of seats) is the only serious independence offer for Holyrood26.
Alba should be supporting and joining with the Liberate Scotland initiative which also complements the ongoing Liberation Scotland UN decolonization initiative.
The good people behind Liberate Scotland can be found here weekly:
link to barrheadboy.com
It is getting the word out that is so daunting. All independence voters need to know about Liberate Scotland and Liberation but so many don’t have any idea.
The Yes Registry is a way that both organisations could get the word to the groups on the registry. Do you know if Salvo have thought of this, Alf?
Iain MacKinnon’s work explores the concept of domestic colonization in Scotland, particularly focusing on the Highland Clearances and the cultural appropriation of Highland culture by English and lowland elites. His research highlights how these actions were part of a broader strategy to impose English culture and diminish Scottish identity.
Overview of Domestic Colonisation in Scotland
Domestic colonisation refers to the cultural and political domination of one group over another within the same nation. In Scotland, this concept is particularly relevant in the context of English influence over Scottish culture and identity.
Historical Context
The Jacobite Rebellion and Aftermath
The Battle of Culloden in 1746 marked a significant defeat for the Jacobites, leading to the suppression of Highland culture.
Following this battle, the British government implemented laws aimed at dismantling the clan system and eradicating symbols of Highland identity, such as tartan and the kilt.
Legislative Measures
The Disarming Act of 1746 banned the use of tartan and Highland dress, associating them with rebellion.
The Heritable Jurisdiction’s Act of 1747 transferred control of Jacobite lands to the government, disrupting traditional clan leadership.
Cultural Impact
Education and Language
Efforts were made to replace the Scottish Gaelic language with English in schools, promoting English culture over Highland traditions.
The Scottish Society for Propagating Christian Knowledge played a key role in this cultural indoctrination.
Appropriation of Culture
Wealthy English and Lowland elites began to appropriate Highland culture for their own benefit, transforming symbols of resistance into fashionable items.
This appropriation often stripped the original cultural significance from these symbols.
Contemporary Perspectives
Iain MacKinnon explores the ongoing effects of this domestic colonisation, examining how traditional knowledge systems and cultural practices of Scottish Gaels continue to face challenges. His research also connects historical events, such as the Highland Clearances, to broader themes of resistance and identity in modern Scotland.
Interesting post.
Incidentally the “Lowland” clearances took place over 100 years earlier, those on the border even earlier.
Just didn’t get the same PR.
Just saying..
Yep, thanks for reminding me.
From Tom Devine.
““One of my main arguments is that the scale of land loss was greater in lowland Scotland and that the scale of landlessness at the end of clearance was also greater,” explains Sir Tom.
“We all know about urbanisation but in terms of Scottish culture, the sheer scale of the revolution is not recognised. In early 18th century Scotland most people living outside the towns and cities of the lowlands and Borders had access to some land because to be without it in that subsistence society was to court survival itself.
“By about 1820 in the lowlands and Borders, the landholding society that had existed since time immemorial, including the quarter to a third of old rural population who were cottars, had vanished.”
As Sir Tom points out, while the wounds around clearance, dispossession and forced emigration remain painful in the Highlands, recognised and revered around the world, kept alive and passed on through families and communities, there has been no such process of grief or remembrance for the lowlands.
“I’ve always been interested in puzzles,” he says. “One of the big questions is this: why in many parts of Scotland did the dog not bark in the night? With the exception of a levellers’ revolt in the 1720s the process in the rest of the country was silent. There is no folk memory of dispossession and that led many people to think nothing had happened, that the whole thing was concentrated on Gaeldom and the Highlands, where it is still a live issue.”
“Sufficient self-government refers to a level of autonomy where a territory can effectively manage its own affairs without external control, while insufficient self-government indicates a lack of adequate political independence and decision-making power, often leading to continued colonial influence. In cases of colonialism, the distinction is crucial for determining the rights of peoples to self-determination and independence.”
We can’t prevent poverty being imposed upon us.
We don’t control our economy or welfare systems.
Energy.
We can’t prevent poverty being imposed upon us.
Actually, we could if “we” as a people chose to do so either by achieving independence, or in the event the people prove too feart to go that far, they could push for full fiscal autonomy à la Hungary post 1867 and insist we wanted control of everything other than defence and foreign policy. But if we lack the balls to go for “full fat” independence, the chances of that seem pretty remote.
Don’t overlook the influence of almost all of the media which attributes the poor health and poverty of Scots to the Scottish government.
“We can’t prevent poverty being imposed upon us.”
Yes sam, the ‘objective of colonialism is to widen inequality’; which is why oppressed peoples ‘need to break with colonialism, not a compromise’ (Memmi).
The Southern Scots were a part of the oppression of the Northern Scots, the destruction of the northern culture, language, and the theft of the land. The Southern Scots traded slaves, tobacco, sugar with the plantations of the Empire, making Glasgow a major centre, and Edinburgh a wealthy city, leaving the North in poverty.
But now the Southern Scots want to appropriate the oppression for themselves, even though they were the oppressors, along with the rest of Britain. Reparation would be more in order. Especially as the oil and green energy is in the North.
Sorry Andrew
Meant to address your last point.
As a resident of unfashionable former industrial Lanarkshire with family links over to Clydebank, I have to say I have never seen so many wind turbines, solar panel and battery storage farms here than I’ve ever seen in the Highlands.
That’s not of course to say that then there, just, it kinda irks from a mining/ steel and shipbuilding background to hear (sorry no insult intended) parochial, insular, gentrified money supporting and retaining its beauty Highlands historically financially bolstered by the Lowlands, particularly the unfashionable bits of the Central belt where the hard work was done- and – the majority of troops incidentally were raised.
Don’t get me wrong, love the Highlands and the people; let’s just maintain some perspective though eh?
Cheers.
You are doing the colonizer’s work, Andrew with your divide and rule rant.
You are conflating what colonial powers do – divide and rule – which happened and happens in real life, with contesting the partial and dodgy historical view in which the south appropriates its oppression of the north and presents itself as the victim. But see Young Lochinvar, this is also bullshit if you go back another cycle.
“The Southern Scots were a part of the oppression of the Northern Scots, the destruction of the northern culture, language, and the theft of the land.”
Given the earlier role of Dalriada Scots in the takeover of the Pictish Kingdom this perspective perhaps needs revised, if not reversed in pre-Scotland Pictavia terms.
“Given the earlier role of Dalriada Scots in the takeover of the Pictish Kingdom…this perspective perhaps needs revised”
It definitely needs revising, Alf. The real history of Scotland has either been omitted from the formal education of Scots or been fabricated to meet their coloniser’s imperial objectives.
I’d say that Young Lochinvar’s counter-argument is better, the Treaty of Ardtonish, as being nearer in history – but it also points up the division of north and south. So, complicated, no simple narrative.
I think the “Scotland is a colony” argument renames the class divide. The supremely wealthy, from Empire, the very wealthy middle class of lawyers and agents, the poor who are despised. Big new cities and development. The same in Liverpool as in Glasgow, but in the latter it’s being renamed as colonisation, when Glasgow is an active part of colonial exploitation of the colonies. To me, denying it is wrong – historically? morally? As an uncomfortable reworking of history?
Andrew R @ 12.53
Bit partial in your reading of history there Andrew, somewhat post ‘45 influenced..
Prior to that the “split” is generally/ sort of noted at 1411 when Donald of the Isles came a burning across the North to claim the earldom of Ross prior to Reid Harlaw.
Heiland “shiftiness” if I may be so crude to use the phrase was highlighted by the Treaty of Ardtonish/ Westminster, and a reign of Cateran terror on the settled Lowlands through the 15th and 16th centuries.
The Heiland bloodbaths of the 17th centuries predates and is widely reckoned to have influenced some of the equally savage acts of the end of the 17th century up to mid 18th century.
And who can forget Johnny Heilandman forsaking the battlefield en-masse against the old enemy (whom they but rarely actually encountered on home turf) at Flodden and Pinkie?
If only they’d stood, but that’s what-iffery..
If I recall some chiefs in the Hebrides did equally well in the British Imperial project- just as the money grubbing tobacco barons in Glasgow did.
Just the times they lived through.
History is a bit more complex than your post suggests Andrew.
Young Lochinvar – you are completely right to say I was being simplistic and parochial. Your extension back in history adds another dimension, more to think about. Mine was the Hollywood version, but the Scotland is a colony business – 300 years of oppression – it’s tiring, and I cracked.
The way it mangles history and everything is wrapped up tidily with bows. (But that’s just what the oppressors would say.) You have to not-see so much for it to work, as in trade, shipping, industry, finance markets, cities, ports. Glasgow port and town, doesn’t exist, make it disappear. Culture, the enlightenment, science, education, none of it happened. Huge wealth going to the merchant/owner class, a Scottish class taking advantage of Empire and actual colonies. And Scottish poor. (Cue some sort of “this always happens in colonial relationships” reply.)
Instead, shifting positions between a partial, dodgy, version of the past and the present, the waste of the oil. Yes this is a rant, and bullshit too, major league bullshit, but nothing is that simple. Good, breathes deeply.
Was the loan to the SNP in order to prevent him having to pay out on legal cost, for me I want to know if the Legal aid is aware of this loan because if they aren’t, then why not, its a asset.
The SNP should be forced to pay back this loan in order for Murrell to his legal cost.
I’m reading ‘Decolonising the Mind – the politics of language in African literature’ (1986) by Ngugi wa Thiong’o (Jan 1938 – May 2025); a Kenyan author and academic.
Thiong’o embraced Fanon’s ideas on postcolonial theory and spearheaded the establishment of The Kamiriithu Community Education and Cultural Centre – an arts and education facility built in Kamiriithu, Kenya in 1976.
Wiki has this to say about ‘Decolonising the Mind’:
In everything I’ve read so far on postcolonial theory language is a standout crucially important question.
A particularly difficult aspect of the language question in postcolonial theory is whether the complete abandonment of the English language, for instance – at least in the sense of a consciously arrived at preference for indigenous languages as a literary medium – is the best approach in assisting the colonised in their progress toward the decolonisation of their minds.
Thiong’o believed the complete abandonment of the coloniser’s imposed language is the best approach. Others take a more pragmatic view and see the ‘complete abandonment’ approach as problematic.
Thiong’o considered English in Africa a “cultural bomb”. A ‘bomb’ that continues a process of destroying pre-colonial histories and identities.
He says this about it:
In Decolonising the Mind, Thiong’o views “colonial alienation” as the alienation of the colonised from their identity and cultural heritage. He considered linguistic oppression to be imperialism’s greatest threat to the nations of Africa.
There can be no doubt that the linguistic oppression of the Scots leid, or tongue, is one of the greatest threats to the nation of Scotland.
“There can be no doubt that the linguistic oppression of the Scots leid, or tongue, is one of the greatest threats to the nation of Scotland.”
Precisely so, Northcode. This explains why our colonizer and their ‘colonial watchdogs’ occupying Holyrood aye refuise tae lairn Scotland’s bairns thay’re ain mither tung. Oor langage is wha we are.
Deprivation of native language and teaching only ‘English Studies’ was as we know a standard colonial procedure in all English colonies. All registered teachers in Scotland must have Higher English but they need no knowledge of oor ain mither tung an mony dinna ken ony Scots wirds at aw.
As Thiong’o wrote of colonial education in Kenyan schools: ‘the language of my education is not the language of my culture’.
“As Thiong’o wrote of colonial education in Kenyan schools: ‘the language of my education is not the language of my culture’.”
Indeed, Alf. A sentiment expressed by Thiong’o I’m sure many Scots can agree with.
On the education of African children Thiong’o says this:
I wonder if those African children were also beaten, as many Scots children were, by their school teachers if caught speaking in their mother tongue.
Meanwhile Alf, in the real world, there are approximately 1.5 BILLION people currently learning english (often at great personal expense).
Why ?
Because english is now THE world language !
People all over the world want to speak it to get ahead and be successful in life !
But naw ! According to your distortion of “post-colonial theory” that’s too good for us scottish peasants !
We should be kept in our place, gibbering away in your hilarious version of old scots.
Ridiculous !
“People all over the world want to speak it to get ahead and be successful in life !”
Aye, it sure has helped us Scots with our long-term zero economic growth, poverty, housing crisis, widening inequality, and an alien culture helping themselves to our resources.
And as Northcode reminds us the worst effect of all is our colonial mindset:
link to yoursforscotlandcom.wordpress.com
For me of course Scotland essentially lost its most deep-rooted vocal medium when it forsook Gaelic (the historic language of the founding Scots). Political independence would be welcome of course, but it is always going to be a salvage operation in terms of any Scottish “republic of the mind”.
We are all English now in a way which is probably irreversible. As far as national community consciousness is concerned, Scotland thinks (if that’s not too flattering a term) overwhelmingly with the words the English and Americans have given it. Some of us have scarcely any other words to think with. We have been deprived of, or have just lazily spurned, our own linguistic continuity long since.
Language is a fundamental index of personal and communal identity. Imperialist regimes have long appreciated that. Few Scots are bothered. English will do — who need’s anything else? All I want to do is get by in Ibiza. No work for me thanks — let foreigners put in the graft and let them risk coming across as monosyllabic strugglers.
But ignorance of the richness of existence embodied in different languages is throughly depressing. Enlightenment eclipsed. Apart from the continuity of literature and the very modulation of sound (noise) tracking and echoing our national historical journey, every language is a unique window on reality, even carving up time in its own way. Every language is another escape route from the looming monolingual Planet Alcatraz.
The late Brian Friel’s play ‘Translations’ is a brilliant critique of the remapping of Ireland by the conquering English Ordnance Survey:
“I am a barbarian in this place because I am not understood by anyone.”
The Irish were dispossessed of both external and internal landscapes (as of course were Scottish Gaelic-speakers).
John Montague, in his 1972 poem ‘The Rough Field’ [> Garvaghy > Garbh Achadh] speaks of:
“The whole landscape a manuscript
We had lost the skill to read.”
Padraic Pearse referred to the educational system imposed on Ireland by the English as the “Murder Machine”. Language substitution (and thus worldview, ie consciousness, substitution) was a central aim.
John Montague again:
“And who ever heard
Such a sight unsung
As a severed head
With a grafted tongue?”
North American academic researcher and Gaelic-speaker Michael Newton has a specific interest in the Gaelic heritage of the Lennox area (roughly Loch Lomond to the Clyde). In his essay ‘“Woe to him who has lost his voice”: re-discovering the Gaelic literature of the Lennox and Menteith’, he writes –
« To be in control of one’s own narrative embodies self-determination and self-realisation. The contrary condition – that of having no voice – represents a lack of power. The Gaelic language has only become moribund in the Lennox and Menteith since the 1950s or later [1970s?], and yet there is surprisingly little consciousness of it today.
« […] These ideas are re?ected in a Classical Gaelic poem preserved in the early 16th century manuscript ‘The Book of the Dean of Lismore’. This poem is there attributed to Donnchadh Mór ó Leamhnacht, Great Duncan of the Lennox, which Dr Steve Boardman has suggested to me could be the eighth earl of the Lennox, who was beheaded in 1425. The ?rst quatrain states:
Mairg duine do chaill a ghuth
Agus ’gá bhfuil sruth do dhán
Agus nach fhéad gabháil leó
Agus nach eól bheith na thámh.
[Woe to him who has lost his voice
Who has a stream of song
And who cannot sing it
And does not know how to be silent.] »
(Michael Newton, ‘Bho Chluaidh Gu Calasraid – from the Clyde to Callander’, The Grimsay Press, 2010)
I just looked him up. Ngugi started writing his novels in his mother tongue during a year of imprisonment for criticising the Kenyan government – previously he’d written them in English. And he wrote about the importance of African writers establishing their own languages as valid after colonial rule: “Language carries culture, and culture carries, particularly through orature and literature, the entire body of values by which we come to perceive ourselves and our place in the world.”
There’s a bit of difference between this and teaching children a new language as a way of establishing an independent culture. Welsh, for instance? (Obviously, native speakers use whatever they feel best.) That outside Britain it’s usual to have several languages and use them for different purposes. I couldn’t find figures for Scotland, but Britain as a whole is very monolingual – although I’m not sure they counted Scots as an independent language! But Ngugi could write in the language he felt most expressive/uncompromised, and be translated into English for a wider audience (with the loss/compromises of translation).
His book was written and released in English to achieve a wider audience.
Yes, he had several languages that he could use for different functions. He also taught in English, but wrote novels in his mother tongue.
Post Colonial Theory.
Is this what the independence movement is reduced to. Is this all you can come up with.
Everybody is brain washed except me and my chums!
Everybody is stupid except me and my chums.
Look how clever the chummies are with their Paragraph generators. Spouting self inflated pish.
Yes indeed it is all over.
“Everybody is brain washed”
How did you think the colonial hoax worked so well and so easily taking millions of native peoples in throughout the world and making them all think they are ‘British’ (or French etc)?
It is of course because there is a pathology associated with the condition and that ‘colonialism is based on psychology’ (Cesaire).
link to yoursforscotlandcom.wordpress.com
And they were very successfull don’t you think.
So now that you’ve identified your problem. What is it that you are actually going to do with this history, that no one gives a care about
Let me think. Nothing, absolute nothing. You can’t turn time back.
Is this a cunning plan to get compensation? Or is it what I have always thought.
Wokes crying in the night.
Get over it. The rest of the world did.
They who dwell in the past have no future.
Creeping closer to the big 1000 Alfie Boy. Do you really think that any sane individual pays any attention to your repetitive, boring mince? Mind you are not alone in the drivel stakes. Confused, Mia, Cheyne and others, this applies to you as well.
The site needs more contributions from the likes of Billy Carlin but the psychiatric nurses keep locking the computer room. At least his posts are funny.
«LORD GIVE ME CHASTITY and continence, but not yet» This infamous prayer of the young Augustine of Hippo (354-430) reflects the inner conflict of any soul who recognises the virtuous thing to do, yet fears or shies away from the demanding struggle.
One might see in this an analogy with the SNP’s mindset regarding independence.
Except that Saint Augustine was honest about his situation and eventually attained the objective, as for the matter of the «virtuous thing to do» the SNP leadership might have cause to examine the collective conscience.
Given how you are attempting to bore everyone to death with post colonial theory Professor Baird, isn’t it time you saw a Psychologist?
You must be a riot at parties.
As you have an unhealthy obsession with trotting out your favourite one trick pony, at any (and every) opportunity.
I wouldn’t mind if you actually had something original to contribute, but as Mr Beggan points out it’s the same old cr*p served up time after time, and shoehorned into every subject, to browbeat people to death with.
I realise that the plebs might not get it, but then again post colonial theory won’t be winning any votes when people go out chapping on doors.
As your average voter would probably consider anyone banging on about it to the extent you do, as being some kind of weirdo…
“Given how you are attempting to bore everyone to death with post colonial theory Professor Baird, isn’t it time you saw a Psychologist?”
Postcolonial theorists such as Fanon were psychologists. It is those still in denial of colonial oppression who may need to see somebody. Tho the only remedy for colonialism is ‘liberation and self-recovery of national culture’ (Memmi)
Your like a death at a birthday party.
Oh look. Another new ‘name’.
That you, SP?
Psychology terms;
Rumination, Repetition compulsion, historical nostalgia.
Stuck on the past.
On the topic of helping Scotland to cease being subservient, to restore its constitutional and international status.
Surely no Scot, and no-one who knows there are 200 plus nations in the world, likes Scotland being subservient to another country. It is an unnatural and demeaning position to be in.
All such Scots and Scotland-resident people could declare their support for Scotland’s wish to be out of the Union by simply signing the Edinburgh Proclamation on the http://www.liberation.scot site. Nothing more is required from them.
The Liberation Scotland approach to the United Nations has begun. The necessary introductory process comes first – that began in March, followed in May with a letter to the De-colonization Committee chair, and in June by appearing at the UN in New York on behalf of other candidates for de-colonisation. This enabled conversations with other nations introducing Scotland’s own case on an informal basis.
Scotland’s Petition to the Decolonization Committee has not yet been submitted, I believe. The process to gain UN recognition of Scotland’s status as a non-self-governing territory may take 2-3 years – or it may be quicker. Fingers crossed that we get some news before the 2026 Holyrood election – it would certainly stimulate the voters!
Obviously it would encourage support for Scotland within the UN if we showed them that over a million of us support Scotland’s liberation. Spread the word and get the Edinburgh Proclamation on http://www.liberation.scot signed by every Yes voter you know. And do it now!!
There’s a very interesting set of posts over at the “People’s Assembly” over on Facebook about Salvo/Liberate Scotland, and why your strategy is doomed to fail.
link to m.facebook.com
The “People’s Assembly” also makes some interesting assertions re Salvo and Liberation Scotland.
Perhaps someone might care to enlighten us as to if there’s any substance to them?
I will however declare that I am not a member of either the “People’s Assembly”, or “Salvo/Liberate Scotland”, however in the interests of clarity, it would be useful to know if there’s any substance to these claims.
@Stuart – I’ve written extensively previously about why the Salvo approach isn’t going to work, but it’s worth noting that subsequent to the post you linked to from February, the Salvo approach to the UN has now failed. The Committee on Decolonisation has said conclusively that the case of Scotland won’t even be considered in any session as they have no power to consider territories beyond those the General Assembly has designated.
“The Committee on Decolonisation has said conclusively that the case of Scotland won’t even be considered in any session as they have no power to consider territories beyond those the General Assembly has designated.”
Has it, Aidan?
What was the text of this conclusive statement, and when exactly was it made?
@Xaracen – it’s on the JPTI website. If you want the actual wording you’ll need to email JPTI or persuade Alf or Sarah to post it. It was made just before the June session of the UNCDC.
Only one page on JPTI appears relevant, Aidan, and it doesn’t say what you asserted.
JPTI states on its site on Scotland’s case;
“it’s important to note the strict protocols involved. Only regions on the UN’s list of “Non-Self-Governing Territories” can be discussed. Currently, Scotland is not on this list, restricting any dialogue on its situation.
For Scotland to be added, the United Nations General Assembly (UNGA) must first adopt a resolution recognizing Scotland as a territory for decolonization. This resolution must go through the UN’s Fourth Committee, which deals with political and decolonization matters. The good news is that, unlike referendums that require consent from the UK Government (Westminster), the UN process does not. Instead, a single UN member state must sponsor and introduce the resolution, initiating the formal process.
-Craig’s Essential Work-
Craig Murray’s efforts are critical at this juncture. He is actively seeking countries willing to sponsor Scotland’s resolution. He is also collaborating closely with the peoples of New Caledonia and French Polynesia, who are already on the UN’s list and working towards exercising their right to self-determination. Their experiences serve as the most relevant examples for Scotland.”
Interestingly, Craig Murray stated in an interview recently that a sponsor is very willing to act on Scotland’s behalf and is awaiting approval from his government to do so, and is reasonably confident of getting it. If that doesn’t happen, Craig said that others have suggested that they may do so.
The fact that Craig has said this strongly suggests that Scotland’s case has not ‘failed’, and is still very much in play. He also said that even if our case is eventually won, it would likely take around three years, or even longer.
You appear to be overegging your claims again, Aidan. I’ve got quite a list of these, now.
Unless you can provide a more ‘explicit’ source to back up it up, I’m inclined not to take your word for it.
Let’s rewind back a bit, go back to any WoS post from May or earlier and the plan was very clear: the petition goes to the UNCDC at the session this June. The UNCDC will then engage the decolonisation process which will lead to a new referendum under UN supervision. As the text that you have posted confirms, that plan has failed.
Yes it is technically true that the UN General Assembly could add further territories to the list of NSGT’s. But is the General Assembly going to vote disregard the fundamental principle of the territorial integrity of states at the behest of whatever rogue state Craig Murray has been speaking to. Absolutely not. Let’s be clear, what he’s asking for isn’t some minor administrative procedure, it’s to rewrite the UN Charter. So that won’t be happening.
So let’s be clear, the Salvo plan has failed, rather than admit that failure and come clean with the independence movement, it’s now onto cunning plan #2.
No, Aidan, that was not the plan. I had misunderstood part of it because I was unaware at the time of the details of all the processes involved, but that doesn’t mean that Salvo and JPTI had. As JPTI explained at the time, which I hadn’t noticed until you pointed it out to me, the UNGA and Fourth Committee plays an important part, and that part hasn’t been completed or rejected yet.
The Salvo plan hasn’t failed; the Petition was indeed lodged with the C-24 for its June session, and no-one involved was expecting a decision beyond accepting it for future consideration once the other preliminaries were completed if they ever were. Thus, the next phase of having Scotland recognised as a candidate territory in the UNGA for the purposes of evaluating its NSGT credentials is under way, and the signs to date are encouraging, as I pointed out.
As for your fundamental principle of the territorial integrity of states, that rather presupposes the authenticity of some states’ territorial claims. And anyway, that principle isn’t under threat, it just means that when Scotland’s sovereign people decide to end the Union, the UK state will cease to exist as such even if it chooses to retain the name. There will be a readjustment of its territorial claims, without the principle itself being touched.
Scotland’s territory was never owned by its monarch or parliament, but by its sovereign people. And ‘England as Britain’ didn’t legitimately own that territory after 1707, and England’s establishment and its monarch and its MPs had no formal rights to treat it as their own, with no regard as to the rights of the sovereign Scots who constitutionally owned it, and still do today.
Granted, the UK is entitled to defend the territory of the UK from external threats, but it cannot legitimately deny the sovereign Scots the reclamation of their own territory should they end the Union. That’s an internal matter, and if the Scots end the Union as is their right, neither England nor the UK can claim that its territorial integrity has been breached.
Again, there is no point in trying to rewrite history here. Go back and read the posts prior to May and you can see what the plan is: petition the UNCDC at their general session in June to add Scotland to the list of NSGT’s. That plan has unambiguously failed. So now there is a new plan, but that plan involves getting a majority of members at the UN General Assembly to vote in favour of it. That just isn’t going to happen.
You’re right that Scottish independence is an internal matter, but it is an internal matter for the U.K. to be determined in accordance with the U.K.’s domestic law. Neither Scotland or England are recognised as states in International law, the relevant state is therefore the U.K. and the U.K. is entitled to respect for its territorial integrity, which in turn means the UN cannot interfere with any question of independence in any part of that territory as per Article 2(7) of the Charter: link to legal.un.org
I think Xaracen’s inability and/or refusal to set out even in basic terms what a “good outcome” looks like in 12 months from now speaks volumes.
Project “Hee Haw”.
No, Aidan, you are mischaracterising the plan. You may be thinking of my mischaracterisation, which I admitted was incomplete, but JPTI and Salvo were never under any illusion that the plan revolved solely around the C-24, and even I knew that, just not the details.
As for the UK’s territorial integrity, it was never entitled to that from legal internal threats from one of its two still extant sovereign territories’ owners, and sod the UK’s domestic law on the matter, Aidan, that is a crock of shit, and we both know it, and so do many others. That will eventually include the UN if the plan works out, and I accept that it may never fully do, but it’s failure is not at all guaranteed.
@CC, a good outcome in 12 months is that Scotland’s case is being evaluated by the C-24. No-one is expecting a rapid conclusion except Aidan.
@Xaracen
“@CC, a good outcome in 12 months is that Scotland’s case is being evaluated by the C-24. No-one is expecting a rapid conclusion except Aidan”
So best case outcome is for P.H.H. not to be summarily thrown out in a year from now. You’ll forgive me if I’m not exactly blown away by neither your optimism nor confidence. Still, at least you’re realistic, which is something I guess. Thanks for the response. 🙂
@Xaracen – The plan as described on this blog many many times was to approach C-24. We were all encouraged to sign and donate money. We were further told that there were two possible outcomes; a) Scotland is a colony, or b) Scotland is in a treaty which it can withdraw from. The idea of a 3rd option (neither of these, C-24 has no remit, go away) was of course dismissed and ignored, and of course the 3rd option is what happened.
Secondly, yes you are right, Article 2(7) does not provide the UK with protection for its integrity against its own internal legal procedures. What it DOES do is to provide the U.K. protection for the integrity of its state against interference by other states AND the UN. The “plan” will not therefore involve the UN unless the UN agrees to change its charter to remove 2(7). That isn’t going to happen at the behest of a tiny campaign group.
Your own “success criteria” is a failure today right now. C-24 have already said that they are not going to look at it.
@Aidan, the C-24 does have a remit to look at petitions for NSGT listing, but that remit cannot come directly from the petitioner, it has to come via the UNGA and the Fourth Committee.
So yes, the C-24 is perfectly correct to say that it will not look at Scotland’s case, for now, because those other stages have not yet been successfully completed, and possibly one of those may fail. But it has accepted the Petition, and will look at it and a whole lot more if and when it is provided that remit from the UNGA.
So, Aidan, has the C-24 explicitly ruled out ever looking Scotland’s petition, even if it gets that remit from the UNGA?
I suspect it hasn’t.
Right, but as I keep saying to you again and again, one of those “steps” as you put it, is persuading the UN General Assembly to amend significant parts of the UN charter. It’s not like there’s just a few forms to fill out.
“Right”
Thank you, so, the C-24 hasn’t actually thrown out the Salvo Petition, it’s just shelved it until it becomes relevant to the C-24.
As for the UK’s territorial integrity, that must presume the authenticity of the UK’s ‘transmission’ to the UN C-24 regarding the constitutional nature of the UK, but that authenticity is bogus, isn’t it, Aidan?
The UK has two distinct territories, each owned by a different sovereign entity, neither of which is the UK. One is the territory of the kingdom of England, which includes England itself, Wales, and Northern Ireland. These are constitutionally owned by the English monarch and/or English MPs. It does not include the territory of Scotland, because that belongs to the other sovereign entity, the Scots. It always did, and still does today.
Their territory was never ceded to the new Union because the Treaty didn’t specify that it should, and no-one involved in the Treaty had the authority to take their territory from the sovereign Scots any more than it had to take their sovereignty from them. Therefore both these things still legally and constitutionally belong to the sovereign Scots today.
So, the Union’s parliament at Westminster does not legitimately own the Scots’ territory, neither does the UK government, and neither does the UK monarch, as none of his predecessors owned territorial rights over the Scots territory. Only the English monarch had such territorial rights, but only over the territory of the English kingdom. The Scots’ monarch had no such rights.
So that means that the neither the UK government nor the UK parliament, nor the UK monarch legally owns Scotland’s territory.
So, exactly which territory does the UK’s territorial integrity actually cover, Aidan? What it told the UN, or the truth? That is, what it actually is, taking into full account the two sovereignties, constitutions and territories of the Union, as I’ve just outlined?
Is Scotland’s NSGT status to be set aside to maintain the fraudulent territorial integrity of the UK?
A UK that has never been entitled to own Scotland’s territory in the first place?
A UK that intentionally misled the UN C-24 regarding its ‘transmission’ explaining the constitutional nature and territories of the UK?
I don’t think that’s going to fly, Aidan. It’s going to come out if the C-24’s evaluation is thorough enough.
I suspect and hope that the UK might have the authenticity of its territorial integrity challenged by the UN as well as the authenticity of its fraudulent ‘transmission’, especially as it isn’t as popular in the UN as it might like to think.
@Xaracen – no, its thrown it out.
Secondly, again you miss the point. The UN recognises the U.K. as a state, and therefore the UN is prevented by its own charter from hearing or acting on any of the arguments you have set out. Even if they weren’t totally nonsensical (which they are, for reasons I’ve explained many times) the UN has no right to intervene in the domestic affairs of the U.K. The arguments you’ve set out would need to be made ultimately to the Supreme Court. Given what the Supreme Court has decided previously about the U.K. constitution, it’s exceptionally unlikely that such arguments would even be entertained, let alone accepted.
Again, whether it is the domestic courts or intentional organisations, nobody is interested in redefining the U.K. constitution based on relitigating arguments from 1707.
This morning I asked three different AIs the following question;
Has the JPTI/Salvo Petition to the UN been rejected?
None of them even hinted that it had; they all agreed that there has been no official rejection, and that the process is still in play.
It appears that the sole source of the ‘story’ that JPTI/Salvo’s Petition is officially dead, is you, Aidan.
Amusingly, one AI actually mentioned Wings, and included a quote from one of my responses to you from last month, Aidan.
It didn’t mention anything from you, though.
If the petition had actually been officially rejected, Aidan, it certainly wouldn’t be left to one blog commenter to break the news. JPTI, Salvo, and Craig Murray obviously would have addressed it — and it beggars belief that the UK media would pass up a headline like that!
@Xaracen – you beautifully highlight the major challenge with AI. Because people like yourself are filling the internet with nonsensical garbage on this subject, it’s then feeding into the answers that AI generates. It does not have the human capability to assess the accuracy or legitimacy of differences sources of information, so unless and until the UN explicitly uploads a statement on its own website confirming that the whole thing is nonsense, then it’s the classic modelling case of shit in=shit out.
You are ignoring the fact that JPTi have put on their website that no discussion of Scotland could take place at the UNCDC. It sort of has been addressed, not in a way that talks to the fanatical lying that’s been going to for months, but by pretending the plan was to go to the General Assembly all along. The minutes of the 2025 sessions of C-24 should be available soon. They’ll be no mention of Scotland, unless to say that Scotland cannot be discussed. But of course that wont persuade you. Even if I could get every member of C-24 to sit in a room right in front of you and tell you this and spend days answering any and all questions, you still wouldn’t believe it because you’re determined to believe this stuff regardless of anything anyone does or says. Ultimately, you can’t reason someone out of a position they haven’t reasoned themselves into. One day hopefully you’ll just wake up and believe that the only person you are really lying to is yourself.
As to why the media aren’t covering this. Nobody cares about it aside from a tiny number of people on Wings and a few other blogs. Nobody seriously thinks this is going anywhere or is going to achieve anything. If Craig Murray persuades the representative of a rogue pariah state to bring up Scotland in the UN General Assembly – you can bet your last dollar that the unionist media will all be covering that. I would if I were them!
@Aidan;
“@Xaracen – you beautifully highlight the major challenge with AI. Because people like yourself are filling the internet with nonsensical garbage on this subject, it’s then feeding into the answers that AI generates. It does not have the human capability to assess the accuracy or legitimacy of differences sources of information, so unless and until the UN explicitly uploads a statement on its own website confirming that the whole thing is nonsense, then it’s the classic modelling case of shit in=shit out.”
You beautifully highlight the major challenge in debating with dishonest adversaries. And your assertions above don’t address my post. You are deflecting again.
I just treated the AIs as search engines, Aidan. Either there’s confirmation of your story or there isn’t. All three AIs were crystal clear; there is none. The sources and all of the confirmations of your story came directly from you and you alone.
And those don’t address my post. You are deflecting again.
“You are ignoring the fact that JPTI have put on their website that no discussion of Scotland could take place at the UNCDC. It sort of has been addressed, not in a way that talks to the fanatical lying that’s been going to for months, but by pretending the plan was to go to the General Assembly all along.”
These don’t address my post. You are deflecting again.
“The minutes of the 2025 sessions of C-24 should be available soon. They’ll be no mention of Scotland, unless to say that Scotland cannot be discussed. But of course that wont persuade you. Even if I could get every member of C-24 to sit in a room right in front of you and tell you this and spend days answering any and all questions, you still wouldn’t believe it because you’re determined to believe this stuff regardless of anything anyone does or says. Ultimately, you can’t reason someone out of a position they haven’t reasoned themselves into. One day hopefully you’ll just wake up and believe that the only person you are really lying to is yourself.”
All of that is mere speculation and bloviating, Aidan. They don’t address my post. You are deflecting again.
“As to why the media aren’t covering this. Nobody cares about it aside from a tiny number of people on Wings and a few other blogs. Nobody seriously thinks this is going anywhere or is going to achieve anything. If Craig Murray persuades the representative of a rogue pariah state to bring up Scotland in the UN General Assembly – you can bet your last dollar that the unionist media will all be covering that. I would if I were them!”
This is obvious and insulting nonsense, Aidan. It doesn’t address my post. You are deflecting again.
I’ve just run a couple of searches on ChatGPT for for similar search criteria. Which is helpful and revealing because it reveals its key sources. So on the question of whether C-24 can accept petitions from countries not on the list of NSGT’s with respect to Scotland:
– the liberate Scotland webpage says that C-24 can; and
– the chair of C-24 is quoted in a Guardian article explicitly saying that C-24 cannot.
As a human, it’s obvious that the chair of C-24 has more standing and so it’s their view that should be taken, but since the Liberate Scotland webpage is more directly targeted to Scotland and more recent, that’s what ChatGPT uses. So essentially you are others are flooding the web with rubbish and then acting as if ChatGPT summarising that false information somehow confers some legitimacy on it. That’s aside from the clear contradictions, for example in two subsequent answers ChatGPT described Gibraltar as both being and not being a NSGT. In short, using an LLM to contradict actual authoritative evidence is about as convincing as saying the magic crystals told me it was true.
If I’m wrong, provide some evidence that C-24 is considering the petition. A statement from C-24 would do nicely.
“–the chair of C-24 is quoted in a Guardian article explicitly saying that C-24 cannot.”
Irrelevant, Aidan, because it doesn’t state the relevant context.
That context is that the C-24 bloody well can look at Scotland’s situation once it is added to the list as a candidate NSGT following a resolution in the UNGA/Fourth Committee, via an existing UN member acting as a sponsor for Scotland.
That is the process that JPTI/Salvo and Craig Murray are currently pursuing, precisely because the C-24 has not ‘thrown out’ Scotland’s Petition, as your bogus framing is trying to imply.
Neither Salvo nor JPTI were ever under impression that the C-24 would look into Scotland’s case solely from the submission of the Petition to it; it was always going to involve the UNGA. It may well still fail in the end, but it has NOT failed yet.
None of this excuses your thoroughly dishonest attempts to convince readers here that the Scottish Petition is already dead. The only dead thing here is not the Petition, but the pantomime horse you have been flogging mercilessly on these pages for weeks.
“If I’m wrong, provide some evidence that C-24 is considering the petition. A statement from C-24 would do nicely.”
That’s yet another dishonest framing from you, Aidan; it isn’t considering yet, as you very well know, because other processes need completion before that can happen, and they are in train.
This is how you operate all the time, Aidan.
“Northcode says:
7 July, 2025 at 1:20 pm
I’m reading ‘Decolonising the Mind – the politics of language in African literature’ (1986) by Ngugi wa Thiong’o (Jan 1938 – May 2025); a Kenyan author and academic.
” In Decolonising the Mind, Thiong’o views “colonial alienation” as the alienation of the colonised from their identity and cultural heritage. He considered linguistic oppression to be imperialism’s greatest threat to the nations of Africa.
There can be no doubt that the linguistic oppression of the Scots leid, or tongue, is one of the greatest threats to the nation of Scotland.”
————————————————–
————————————————–
What North fails to point out and in fact fails to refer to in his extracts from Wiki is that Kenya achieved independence from British colonial rule on December 12, 1963.
From Wiki – the following happened YEARS after Independence….
“In December 1977, following the production of the controversial play Ngaahika Ndeenda (I Will Marry When I Want), which he co-wrote with Ngugi wa Mirii, and the publication of his highly politicized novel Petals of Blood (1977), Ng?g? was imprisoned without trial or charges in Maximum Security Prison by the authoritarian Kenyan regime.
Due to his writing about the injustices of the dictatorial government, Ng?g? and his family received threats of violence and death, and were forced to live in exile. Ng?g? lived out his exile in the United Kingdom (1982–1989) and in the United States (1989–2002). While he was in exile, the Kenyan regime continued to harass him, and attempted to get him expelled from England. The regime also continued to repress his literature in Kenya: from 1986 to 1996, Matigari could not be sold in Kenya, and the regime removed all of Ng?g?’s work from all educational institutions. Only after Arap Moi was voted out of office, 22 years later, was it safe for Ng?g? and his family to return.”
————————————-
Yes – Ng?g? fled Kenya to seek refuge in the United Kingdom (the Colonial oppressor) 20 years AFTER Independence.
To reply again, yes, it was the post-independence Kenyan government that put him in prison. That it was a big thing when he started writing in his mother tongue – English was the cultural norm as the residue of colonial times. But it’s common now for writers, not controversial.
He fled to England for safety 20 years after Kenya achieved Independence.
Since everyone here is now talking about the imminent resurgence of the Scots leid – initially in the Scottish literature, arts and culture scene but eventually throughout the whole of Scottish society – I thought I’d get ahead of the curve and re-publish one of my braw and exceptionally well-received poems (taken from a series of critically acclaimed poems written entirely in Scots and which explore various Scottish themes ).
Nuckelavee Rysing
Awaik, ye doverrit sowels, awaik
Purge aw doolie dreyms an ryse
Untreuthfull visioune beluvit weype
Fae dounwart glaumered een
Hae mind o richts forleetit clayme
Lang-lippent fredome aye cried doun
Nou strive wi unfeart fettle keen
Invok the Mither o the Sea
Throu sommer’s shorebretsh brimskud crye
Bawl oot a pouerfu gramarie
Beseik fayr mistris blintrin lycht
Tae loose demonic Nuckelavee
Deep mirk-daurk fadom lang hit rysis
Creests watters wyld a skyn tyned naig
Throu bindin oath troo Scots tae keep
An shaik thaim fae fairce malsoun
Fae banie skult ill-scance’t ey accurse’t
Leukt fearsum oot tae sloak hits drouth
Abandoun’t skaims tae haud Scots doun
Ther makkirs fearfu rin deleerit grue…
Hurrit hame tae safer grund
I’m not sure if I’ve said this before (of course I’ve said it before)… but what a braw language the Scots leid is.
Did you get 10 shillings (50 pence) for that one too?
For those interested I only got a half crown for that poem.
My half crown is a sum of money equivalent to 30pence.
To avoid any confusion King Charles the Third’s half crown is what he got when he became King of England.
A half a crown is equal to 12.5 pence.
“My half crown is a sum of money equivalent to 30 pence.”
For clarification that’s 30 pre-decimal pence, of course.
It’s the same as two shillings and sixpence – equivalent to twelve and a half decimal pence.
Something else you’ve said before, NC, is that your ancestral language is Brittonic (apologies if I spelled that incorrectly).
It’s clear to me that you’ve allowed yourself to “adopt the mind set of the coloniser”.
Shame on you, NC.
Building a nation: Papua New Guinea’s 50 years of independence
link to theguardian.com
Interesting read.
The historian, tom Devine says England sought the Union with Scotland for security reasons, not economic reasons.
Colonialism begins with coercion. That is what England did to Scotland to bring about the Union.
Scotland could and did benefit from the Union,at least initially because at first it was England’s security that mattered. Slavers, like the Duke of Buccleuch still benefit from their slavery.
Most of England’s colonies had the same template. Self government which ultimately could be controlled by the UK government. For colonies like Ireland and Canada such control lasted for centuries.
The legal language that reserves power to the UK in Scotland is the same language used in reserving the powers of Canada and Ireland.
When vast amounts of oil was found in Scottish seas, the Labour government went to grat lengths to hide the letter from the civil servant McCrone who wrote that the economy of an independent Scotland with its oil and gas would have a “chronic surplus to a quite embarrassing degree and its currency would become the hardest in Europe”.
The letter only came to light after a FoI caught it.
Thatcher knew her government would need the money the oil would bring to support the planned unemployment de-industrialisation would bring.
There are elements of colonialism at work in the past and now in the UK. Coercion, erosion and appropriation of culture including language. Resort to violence to keep control. Reservation of powers using the same language as in other colonies. Exploitation of Scottish oil
“There are elements of colonialism at work in the past and now in the UK. Coercion, erosion and appropriation of culture including language. Resort to violence to keep control. Reservation of powers using the same language as in other colonies. Exploitation of Scottish oil”
——————————————————-
“Council of Europe Charter
The European Charter for Regional or Minority Languages was adopted in 1992 to help protect Europe’s regional or minority languages, and encourage their use. The UK Government ratified the Charter in 2001 in respect of Welsh in Wales, Scots and Gaelic in Scotland, and Ulster-Scots and Irish in Northern Ireland.”
“Resort to violence to keep control.”
Can you give me a recent example of when The Uk Gov has done that?
The riots in George Square 1919.
These were protests about working conditions that so alarmed the UK gov that they deployed troops and tanks as well as polis which the sheriff ordered.
The gang violence of the 1930s was rooted in the working class of Glasgow and such as the Beehive boys were both admired and feared within their community.
Rural agrarian violence was also present in Ireland with the livestock of landlords being maimed and crops burned.
In Scotland and Ireland it was the conditions of the most deprived that prompted violence and government response.
Violent gangs in Glasgow continued well into the 1960s and 70s. The violence was again related to the economic conditions, deprivation, unemployment.
These conditions arise from UK government policies.
David Walsh and his colleagues have analysed the “Glasgow Effect”, exploring why Glasgow has more health inequalities than Manchester and Liverpool, cities with similar levels of deprivation.
Whyte and Cooper have written a book: The Violence of Austerity.
““Resort to violence to keep control.” Can you give me a recent example of when The Uk Gov has done that?”
Northern Ireland comes to mind. Colonialism is also defined as ‘geographic violence’ (Memmi). In Scotland’s case the country was annexed and occupied militarily, particularly after 1746. Resultant trauma continues in the psyche of colonized descendants, according to Mac Síomóin.
However, violence, which is costly and problematic, is no longer essential once the psyche of the colonized is controlled and influenced through linguistic imperialism and associated colonial procedures. This is what also helps obscure the colonial reality, which is helped along by assimilated native elites.
As Turabdin says below: “Scotland does indeed have cultural issues which pretending to be English has not and will not resolve.” Get the picture yet?
Yes Alf you and Northy are really annoying the yoonies, so much so that they feel they need to try and unite to better belittle your exposures, they talk about our history and culture as being ancient guff but not one of them has ever presented anything positive about being in this rancid corrupt union, it is all about the negativity of Scotland and Scots
The franchise fanny who idolises Stu, and his wee bum boy Bastard TAX moan complain about everything and everyone doing nothing BUT all THEY ever do is demean every effort that others do
I’m surprised that the franchise fanny doesn’t start up his failed website again because the amount of Scotland haters on here nowadays would give him a decent audience, and then he can claim to be one of the first to raise plebiscitery elections without people calling him a liar, and Bastard TAX moan could push his anti semitic accusations widely
Aye, this pointing out the truth is spooking them big time.
lol
The avatar that James uses belie his youthful sporting background. I know that he represented Scotland at both football and swimming however injuries prevented his sporting career to come to full fruition.
Not a lot of people will know that James is an expert fisherman.His main area of expertise is carp fishing. The main reason for his success is the formulae he uses in preparing the ‘swim’. A secret recipe known only to himself which proves irresistible to the carp. You could easily say that James is a Master Baiter.
I forgot about the TWAT in my previous post. Apologies.
Your post above is a masterpiece, Chas.
Or should that be “masturb piece”? 🙂
As for the TWAT, he’s fearfully hoping the assisted dying lot have forgotten about him too.
Prick
(I believe that is an acceptable response on here)
One ponders how you managed to see and respond to a post within 1 minute, when it takes up to 15 mins for the site to update for me…
I quite agree, “Chas” is indeed a unionist prick.
Well said.
Sure, x, but it’s kinda lost its ability to hit home.
Put it another way. Nae steaming schemie at an Auld Firm derby, roaring insults at the “enemy” on the opposite terracing bothers with that one.
Naw. It’s got to involve accusations of shirtlifting and bum sex.
“they talk about our history and culture as being ancient guff but not one of them has ever presented anything positive about being in this rancid corrupt union, it is all about the negativity of Scotland and Scots”
indeed so, twathater.
The ideology of colonialism is largely dependent on ‘debasing the colonized’ (Fanon), so much so that it seeks to make a people ‘crave dependence’ (Cesaire).
Hence their endless attempts at debasing our people, culture and language whilst making any attempt at liberation seem impossible are sure signs of a pro-colonial (i.e. ‘Unionist’) narrative.
@Alf – I constantly praise Scotland and talk up its strengths both here and in person. Can the same be said for you or for most of the other usual suspects who inhabit this place?
Gaun yersel Aidan, tell us aw aboot oor zero-growth unner-developed and plunnerred colonial economy aye rin bi a bunch o gangsters wha hates oor cultur an langage an aw.
@Alf – does Edinburgh not have one of the highest rates of GDP per capita anywhere in the world, higher than Tokyo or Singapore, around the same as Oslo, and not too far off major US cities like New York? Is it also not home to the worlds biggest comedy festival, about to start next month.
Does Scotland also not have one of the most developed high-end tourist industries across the Highlands and Islands for a country of its size, attracting wealthy people from around the world?
Does it also not have strengths in high-quality exports like whisky and seafood, recognises the world over?
Now it’s true, the U.K. poorly managed its oil and gas reserves from the North Sea compared to other countries, and Scotland has suffered disproportionately (particularly compared to its neighbours) from deindustrialisation in the post-war period. But the term “plundered” is absurd based on any rationale analysis of the economy of Scotland and only is used by those determined to live out some 17th century pirate based fantasy. The question for all of us is whether an independent Scotland would perform better or worse economically than Scotland inside the Union. The U.K. has not performed well economically in the last 15 years, but then neither has Europe. Given all of Scotland’s strengths I think that answer definitely could be yes, but it’s by no means guaranteed. It’s certainly not the case that if enough people sing out the declaration of Arbroath then that will unlock untold riches from a secret vault in Edinburgh castle as some on here seem to believe.
@Aidan at 8:58am
Yer being awfy selective bigging up Auld Reekie’s GDP, and it having a shit comedy show where ye’ll get cancelled for telling jokes that may offend some precious soul.
But whit about much larger areas of Scotland. Eg, grouse shooting. Something like over 50% of the land accounts for 0.03% of our economy.
And mind and mention current renewable energy management being as useless as the oil and gas was / is, with it being of more benefit to big foreign owned corporates than folk that live in the UK.
@Dan – and yet I’m apparently the one talking Scotland down! Why don’t you get yourself to the comedy festival, it sounds like it would do you a world of good!
I don’t know what point you are trying to make re larger areas of a very sparsely populated country. So what if deserted parts of Caithness aren’t producing the same economic activity as Edinburgh?
Lastly, renewable energy generation is a high-risk, highly subsidised activity. Everyone has got to get away from the idea that it’s this hugely lucrative activity that foreign investors are making their billions out of.
@Aidan
There’s no need to travel and pay exorbitant Edinburgh prices for a moderated laugh when there’s a continual stream of grade A comedy from the likes of yersel on here 24/7.
You’re like the Swiss Tony salesman of Unionism with your whataboutery and patter.
Away tae fuck with yer “deserted parts of Caithness” as if that is all there is.
There are absolutely huge expanses of empty uninhabited land all across Scotland from the borders to John o’ Groats. Those huge areas of uninhabited land are owned by a very small amount of people. But a totty wee plot to build a hoose costs many tens of thousands of quid.
And don’t even think of saying the land isn’t viable to live on as the land can be transformed as mentioned in comments about Revive event in Perth last autumn.
link to wingsoverscotland.com
Sure Dan.
We could do like the Bolsheviks did in Siberia. Force people into the cattle cars at gunpoint. Stop the trains at selected places along the line. Throw the people out with their portable possessions and the clothes on their backs. Issue them a spade each, and tell them to start digging the foundations for their abodes, the mud they will need to make the bricks, and the furrows to plant their subsistence crops in.
Huge expanses of Scotland are wet deserts, where one day’s exposure to the weather and the biting insects suits many of us for the rest of our lives.
As per usual Dan, your post doesn’t make any overarching discernible point or appear to raise any argument relevant to the discussion. I know that there are many parts of Scotland where many more people could live.
So what? Do you think Scotland should have a much higher population, if so, what do you think it should be? I very much doubt there is much support in the Highlands and Islands for creating a busy crowded area like Surrey, maybe I’m wrong.
“has ever presented anything positive”
Ah, c’moan noo Alf. Why not ask one of the many perennial gurners about oor lost EU membership to present the positives of being in the EU.
Those positives that ScotGov, with its (as far as I know) still extant insistence that iScotland will automatically be in the EU, fully shares.
Just substitute UK for EU and there are all the answers you seek.
You can’t have it both ways, Alf. As May might have said, either “Indy means Indy”, or it doesn’t.
“does Edinburgh not have one of the highest rates of GDP per capita anywhere in the world, higher than Tokyo or Singapore, around the same as Oslo”
Aidan, last time I looked Scotland’s GDP-per-capita was less than half that of Norway, Ireland or Singapore and colonial rule was costing us between £150-200 billion a year:
link to yoursforscotlandcom.wordpress.com
Right, because whilst Scotland’s capital is more productive than Norway’s or Singapore, Scotland also has pockets of severe deprivation left out from deindustrialisation. With respect Alf, the day after independence all those people, many of whom have developed serious drug and alcohol problems, aren’t going to go out and get highly paid jobs. It’s a serious structural challenge which will take decades to address and which the SNP have done so little about.
@Aidan at 9:39pm
But hud oan, your “Better Together” unionist London Rule chums have for as long as I have been alive held all the major reserved powers to steer industry, the economy, energy, population, yet they have facilitated the loss of so many of our industries, mismanagement of other matters, and the resultant damage that causes to society.
But somehow you suggest the NuSNP (who are also sellout devolutionist twats like yer unionist buddies) to have sorted this from the poundshop devolved parliament in Edinburgh that doesn’t have control of all major powers.
Of course, things won’t be perfect on day one of Scotland returning to self-governance. But it will mean Scotland will have control of all major powers to begin to serve our nation better and start to repair the damage caused by previous London Rule.
@Hatey at 4:44pm
Fuck off with yer drivel spoken like a true toony.
Where the fuck do you think a lot of our society’s food comes from. It’s from out here in the rural areas like where I live. Natch, you can sit on yer arse posting on t’internet for what seems like an awful lot of time, but others lead more productive lives.
The local farmers I know who work long hard hours in all seasons operating multi-million pound concerns to provide sustenance to the population would not give arseholes time-wasters like you the time of day.
I’m fairly sure if folk could gain land to build on for nothing, quite a lot would jump at the chance of not having to pay 100 grand for a plot and help free themselves from the burden of paying high costs for a bit of land and being indebted to parasite bankers for a large part of their lives.
You suggest mud bricks in a derogatory way, but actually cob and clay construction is a grand way to build and thermally efficient, and less harmful to the environment than importing building materials and using cement.
Of course we could just use the local stone, slate, and timber like they did back in the day. My house is over 250 years old and still looks as good as the day it was built. Not sure modern shitbox house design will be able to say the same.
But land being given away like you suggest just isn’t going to happen under the current political setup.
And if the land is so fucking useless as you try to infer, then why do so few extremely rich folk own quite so much of it.
Why aren’t they trying to give it away if it is a burden, and are instead selling small bits off for hundreds of thousands so some foreign millionaire golfers can jet in and have a huge holiday home here, while the indigenous young locals have no chance of owning a property in the area.
I heard a rumour that the guy that bought the first plot at Taymouth Castle golf course development dropped extra coin and bought a second adjacent plot so he could block off anyone else building and wouldn’t have neighbours close by.
@Dan
It seems to me you like to portray yourself as some “hard-headed pragmatic” type of guy here, yet your somewhat absurd posts belie a rather different truth.
So yeah, let’s all build houses from traditional stone… except, you are obviously clueless about the increased build times as compared to modern build methods, vast material cost increases, the need for highly (expensive) specialised labour etc. (Not to mention thermal, fire, ventilation, building regs compliance et al).
Mud and straw you say! See above mate.
Build anywhere, the land’s for free! Yeah, brilliant. Who’s going to put in all the required services infrastructure – mains water, electricity, sewerage, telecoms, gas? Or maybe they’ll collect rainwater, burn candles and shit in a bucket, right? Lol.
What about building control? People putting up shoddy houses left, right and centre that may, or may not still be standing in 10 or 20 years (hopefully not caving in on the hapless occupants during the next storm, landslip/subsidence, gales or whatever) and/or burning to the ground? Even if none of this happens, what value a home-bodged, non-compliant house? Bulldozers required.
Imagine (if you’re capable) the most beautiful parts of Scotland – frequently important wildlife areas – littered with impromptu “Dan houses” all over the place, DIY hovels and a blot on the fucking landscape. I mean, it’s almost as though you don’t think this shite through…
You reckon your big farmer “mates” wouldn’t give Hatey the time of day, but my money’s on them taking him over zoomers like you any day of the week. Maybe stick to beavers and randomly digging holes in the ground, eh.
@Dan – I assume because I criticise the insane and deluded rantings of our most eccentric posters that makes me chums with better together right?
Secondly, what you say is fundamentally not true. Whilst the U.K. Government controls the macro fiscal levers, sub-national governments around the world from Germany to India to China, with the same powers and funding levels as the Scottish government, have designed and implemented very effective regional growth strategies. The problem is that has never been the focus of either the SNP government or the previous Labour government in Scotland. The current SNP administration could chose tomorrow to do away with freebies like the baby boxes or luvvie perks like free university education and use that money to support and incentive new industries in Scotland. It is a political choice not to do that, and it’s the consequences of that political choice that we all apparently keep voting for.
You say “Scotland” will have these powers, but the powers won’t be exercised collectively by the Scottish people will they, they will be exercised by politicians and civil servants. Which means at the moment, those additional powers will be exercised by those who promote the current anti-growth and anti-economic development policies. Now maybe post-independence, suddenly everyone will start voting for growth instead, but if that’s the case then why wait until independence to do a 180 degree turn? Why can’t we have pro growth politics now?
Finally, from our previous discussions I think you probably have this idea that Scotland will make itself wealthy by selling wood and potatoes. It won’t. The average salary in industries like law and financial services is 3x that in the farming and timber sectors, and probably 4/5x the GVA of those jobs. Those are the types of industries Scotland needs if it wants well paid jobs for younger people and to sustain good quality public services. This idea that it’s not a real job unless it involves using a hammer and a saw is a delusion in the first world.
“The current SNP administration could chose tomorrow to do away with freebies like the baby boxes or luvvie perks like free university education and use that money to support and incentive new industries in Scotland. It is a political choice not to do that, and it’s the consequences of that political choice that we all apparently keep voting for.”
Precisely. If Scots dislike living in a perpetual state of economic decline, they should stop voting in moribund left wing parties like Labour and the SNP for unbroken decades at a time. Unfortunately, though, there’s just too much generational indoctrination and political baggage for that to realistically occur – and thereby break the doom-loop.
By way of example, NS enjoyed unparalleled popularity in Scotland – for years – despite achieving very little, especially in terms of economic outlook and progress. One has to ask: what experience do these politicians have out “in the real world”, have they ever had to make it “out there”? No is the answer. Is Swinney or Yousaf any better? Hardly.
Start voting for intelligent people with demonstrable, proven track records (preferably non-lefties) who know how to run real businesses (i.e. not banks) and make money. Fill your parliament with them.
@Captain Caveman
The subject was the high cost of land. Nothing I wrote infers knocking together buildings that don’t meet current structural and safety criteria.
If the land price wasn’t such a ridiculously large factor in overall building costs, then it would free up some capital to put towards using better materials and construction techniques.
Things have moved on and machinery can be used to quarry stone and slate instead of the more basic way it was extracted in years gone by.
The quarry where the stone most properties and other structural engineering such as bridges and retaining walls in my area were built from is still there, with thousands of tonnes of untapped stone reserves.
It could be a revenue generator and create jobs.
Quality does cost and I note you’ve completely swerved the topic of the low quality and longevity of modern shitbox house construction versus older more traditional built buildings.
I know plenty about building work having renovated several older buildings. And I also comprehend the service connections required for properties.
I went through the involved process of installing a large water main pipe with fire hydrant to supply clean water under decent pressure to properties in an area of my village because the existing private supply regularly fails chemical and biological testing, and pressure is low with modern lifestyle demands which means properties could run a system designed for mains pressure.
I also had the foresight and technical nous to spend slightly more when putting in the new water pipe to ensure it was sized appropriately to connect more properties in the future.
I’ve dealt with sewerage systems too, as some will recall last year when the local pumping station had issues. This also highlighted the ridiculous situation where we still pump untreated effluent into the river, so don’t think the way things are is great and try to imply that I don’t have a clue about how things could be improved.
Having worked in the oil and gas industry as a hydraulic engineer assisting developing deep water extraction techniques does give one a bit of insight and understanding on pipework and control systems…
@Dan
Well, your OP talked about people being “given free land” so they could “help themselves”, which to me seemed to suggest you were talking about self-builds (using natural stone lying about and/or mud and straw). The inference seemed reasonably clear to me, but if not, fair enough.
Notwithstanding, it’s still naïve to think that the construction methods you mention are economically viable for large scale construction of affordable homes. Even you tacitly acknowledge this with your “quality costs” remark – indeed it does.
Btw, I am not an advocate for modern construction methods per se, with all the dry walls etc that come with it (we live in a 500-year old cottage) – but I am a realist. If we need to build at scale, and if we need the houses to be thermally efficient, BR compliant then that’s realistically the only practicable route. For one thing, labour costs and awful lot more than it did even 20-30 years ago, let alone 200 years ago.
THE SCOTS DID MUCH TO PROMOTE ENGLISH starting with John Knox (opposed in his anglicizing endeavours by Ninian Winzet), James Murray and his work on the OED, Thomas Babbington Macaulay, English born, but of Scots lineage who believed India’s indigenous languages handicaps to British plans for the country.
When it comes to shooting yourself in the head, foot or tender bits in the promotion of others interests the Scots are not to be outdone.
However…circa 1587, Second edition of the Chronicles by Englishman Holinshed. In his description of contemporary languages he said The Scottish english hath beene much broader and less pleasant in vtternace than ours, because that nation hath not till of late indeuored to bring the same to any perfect order…Howbeit in our time the Scottish language endeuoreth to come neere, if not altogether to match our toong in finenesse of phrase. Holinshed also said that the wild Scots, otherwise called the Redshanks lived in the north and speake good Irish which they call sic Gachtlet while in Orkney and Shetland the Gottish or Danish speech is altogether in vse.
Scotland does indeed have cultural issues which pretending to be English has not and will not resolve.
Twathater says:
7 July, 2025 at 6:15 pm
“Yes Alf you and Northy are really annoying the yoonies, so much so that they feel they need to try and unite to better belittle your exposures….”
Amazing how anyone who points out that what they post is mind numbing, repetitive, pretentious drivel, is now a “yoonie”…
Aye right Son…
i find it very strange that how things have developed on here.
“I am a proud Scot that demands Independence”.
Has been replaced with:
“I am a subservient Scot that wants freedom from Colonial rule.”
It’s worse than that, x.
“I am a gormless, gumption-free Scot that wants others to gift us freedom from colonial rule” more accurately captures the situation.
Because that’s what this “appeal” to the UN is all about.
I reckon with the current thread toing and froing on the subject of colonies and colonialism and the Act of Union, that a serious expose is required on the whole Darien affair.
It’s a subject long fraught with an embedded Unionist triumphalism mantra but it really is the root to how the TOU was pushed through by the exponents of “Britain”.
Also, interesting that it was set up (I believe) as a trading post and not a colony as such.
It, and fallout thereafter needs better understood to see how we ended up where we now are.
Why?
The past has passed.
Chas
Well first because it’s interesting, second because it’s pertinent to much of the discussion going on here and lastly because as the saying goes; those who don’t know their history are doomed to make the same (or similar) mistake again.
No-one would be forcing you to read it Chas if it’s not your thing.
Leah Gunn Barrett has this to say about the Darien Scheme.
I came across the Google site I’ve provided a link to below by chance when searching the web for a paper written by a different author.
I discovered that Leah Gunn Barrett, among others, has posted some interesting articles there:
Mythbusters – Scottish independence myth busters
From other sources I have read concerning the sabotage of the Darien Scheme I agree with Leah Gunn Barrett’s view. But, As ever, folk should do their own research and judge for themselves.
I will happily admit to being unable to point out the location of “Darien” on a large scale map of the area.
Just as I will happily bet a large sum of cold, hard cash on the certainty that neither can you.
But you do you, YL Sah! Why not call, campaign and agitate for an official inquiry into the “whole Darien affair”.
I will happily nominate you to run it, on a generous funding basis, hopefully to take 5 years.
Think of it as state funded therapy for whatever it is that ails you.
Easy Penisbreath.
Stick your finger on the Atlantic side of the Panama Canal and you’re 9/10ths there.
Zat so, YL Sah!
Then I was right. You couldn’t find Darien on a map without help.
I recommend you take up my offer of 5 year’s study. Even for you, some kind of a breakthrough should be possible by then.
And hey, you might be cured too.
Penisbreath
It’s the Panama Canal, not the Suez Canal ya mong.
Try asking for help from some of your Langley pals in Latin American Stations- y’all/ Oi vey.
W..kstain..
.
It’s a hot night, and a sad, insomniac old man’s thoughts turn to self pleasuring. Keep the noise doon, YL Sah! and mind and clean up after.
Mind too, that for all your boasting about your time expired military prowess, the boys in the Eastern Med wouldn’t notice the likes of you in their way.
Not even when you were in what passed for your prime.
They have superior training, superior tactics, superior leadership, superior morale, superior intel and superior motivation. And how that sticks in your sorry craw.
Suck it up, YL Sah!
In reply to P3nisbreath @ 3.11 am (yes 3.11am!!!!)
And your point is caller, “whanging oan” yet again about the Hebes and the camel jockeys again when the question had been (as raised by you) the location of Darién on a map?
YL try not to take much notice of Chas his comments usually consist of his sexual fixation with Prof Baird, Chas’s conversation is only ever stimulated by what is happening at his golf club, it appears he is highly thought of by his fellow Scotland hating chums here and at his clubhouse
Chas even tried to promote himself as some special entrepreneur but it appears he only owns a wee shoap
Great stuff. At least I am not a twat.
Liberation’s case to the UN continues.
Looking forward to hearing about it Sarah.
No it doesn’t
Yes, it does. It is simply pending the completion of the next phase which is still in play, and may be for some time, and there are further phases after that.
I know you know this, Aidan, you pointed me to it.
Understanding the UN Decolonization Process
Pity the Jacobites didn’t win. Young English nationalists would be talking of the slaughter of London, the burning of Winchester. The forced migration to Australia. The ancestors of the Scottish refugees would lament The rape of Glasgow. The extermination of the Church of Scotland.
The Colonial trade would continue under ‘New management’. Business as usual except you all pay the Pope.
I suspect not MB.
The problem I have with the Jacobite rebellions is the whole “using” thing the exiled Stuart’s indulged in.
The sad fact is that come Mary Queen of Scots time, inheritance of the English throne WAS the Stuarts priority. The mid 16th century; the original “battle for Britain” is when we were set onto the path towards being sent down the river.
I really don’t think BPC if successful would have kept his tartan duds on long, and like James 6 and Chuck 2 would have settled into louche depraved London with ease.
Those patriots who had “Scotland and no Union” engraved on their blades fought and died in vain, BPC was never going to repeal the TOU.
The whole sordid thing was set down in James 4 time; Henry “Blodwyn” Tudor 7, sneaky bar steward knew this when marrying his daughter off to James 4 said “the larger swallows the smaller”.
Englands routemap for us;
King (in the family tree with his nation as dowry) TICK
Religion (stoke the reformation) TICK
The Nobility (bankrupt them then buy them: Darien) TICK
THE Three Estates (close it and swallow it up by Westminster) TICK
The ordinary people (sod em, clear them to colonial plantations or use as canon fodder) TICK
“The foundational function of the State is the monopolistic organization of the power of the sword over a territorial cultural area.” (Herman Dooyeweerd).
In 1707 the Scots ceded that power to the English…
SCOTTISH ANTHEM
1.
the English above us
the English above us
their all-powerful fighter-jets
saving us from ourselves
Chorus:
saving us from ourselves
saving us from ourselves
just in case we hurt ourselves
saving us from ourselves
2.
the English above us
the English above us
their all-powerful parliament
saving us from ourselves
[Chorus]
3.
the English above us
the English above us
their all-powerful language
saving us from ourselves
(Chorus)
LAOIDH ALBA
1.
na Sasannaich os ar cionn
na Sasannaich os ar cionn
na diètichean uile-neartmhor ac’
gar dìonadh bhuainn fhìn
Sèist:
gar dìonadh bhuainn fhìn
gar dìonadh bhuainn fhìn
gun fhios nach dèan sinn cron oirnn fhìn
gar dìonadh bhuainn fhìn
2.
na Sasannaich os ar cionn
na Sasannaich os ar cionn
a’ phàrlamaid uile-neartmhor ac’
gar dìonadh bhuainn fhìn
(Sèist)
3.
na Sasannaich os ar cionn
na Sasannaich os ar cionn
a’ chànan uile-neartmhor ac’
gar dìonadh bhuainn fhìn
(Sèist)
I don’t understand hardly a word of Gaelic, Fearghas MacFhionnlaigh, but I always enjoy your contributions (in as far as I can) in Scotland’s true original language.
I can’t help noticing how few other regulars ever seem to even notice your posts.
Your point about “all powerful fighter jets” is well made. That’s reality, as we can determine simply by turning on the news.
As is your point about the “all powerful” English language. That’s another reality we can see by observing just how many of the regulars on here seem to lack so much as a single word of any alternative to English.
Does your Scottish Anthem have a tune?
See following Wings over Scotland article ‘Death from above’ (March 13, 2012).
Stu writes:
« We have a paid subscription to the Herald, but it’s not working at the moment, locking us out from access. In case it’s a widespread problem, we feel compelled to reprint this amazing story – which curiously didn’t make the website front page today and was buried in the politics section – just to make absolutely sure that nobody misses it.
_____________________
Herald item:
ENGLISH ‘WOULD BOMB OUR AIRPORTS’
Glasgow and Edinburgh airports, in an independent Scotland, could be bombed by an English government if it was threatened by an unfriendly country, a former deputy leader of the UK Conservative Party has warned.
Lord Fraser of Carmyllie also warned that SNP policies removing nuclear forces from Scottish bases and reducing Scotland’s navy “essentially” to fishery protection vessels could make Scotland a war zone. He said a country with a few fishery protection vessels was “asking to be invaded”.
The former Lord Advocate and Solicitor General said he did not see who might have “evil intentions” against England but he had missed “the import of the Balkan crisis and the ramifications of 9/11” and would hesitate “to predict the crises even in the rest of the century”.
He foresaw the possibility of an enemy commander ordering the runways at Scottish airports to be cleared because his planes would be landing and “if that were to happen what alternative would England have but to come and bomb the hell out of Glasgow airport and Edinburgh airport”.
He suggested one solution would be to base the nuclear fleet, currently based on the Clyde, to Scapa Flow in the Orkney Islands.
(End of Herald item)
_______________________
Ponder for a moment, readers, the media coverage if a significant SNP figure had suggested the reverse scenario. Wouldn’t that be fun? »
I like to think of it this way : an analogy
Scotland is like Auschwitz (rich industrial area, but not so good transport infrastructure, our railways are shit), the nazis are like the english (people who think they are the master race), the Scots are like the jews (who are the master race)
– then our political and middle class strewn across media, academia, the law are then like the
SONDERKOMMANDO
– these were the jews who did the nazis dirty work, offing the other jews. Nikki Sturgeon can be our Ilse Koch.
I think that’s a good one, but maybe not since no one cares about the holocaust anymore, it being “ancient guff” and even the jews saying “fuggedaboutit”.
“let bygones be bygones, its all past” – says the Holocaust Education Trust and saying we should knock down the 10000 holocaust memorials worldwide; “what are we like, we just rattle on and on about it” said the Chief Rabbi – “I am bored with it and I have a vast pornography empire to run”
As Netanyahoo said the other day : let’s just forget about the PAST and move on, eh? We’re all Yitzhak McGershteinberg’s bairns, so let’s just sit down, talk it out and make a lasting and just peace, for this land is big enough for many peoples and diversity is our greatest strength … these 3000 year old property deals are just a larp, I mean, we’re not even from round here … lets move on
(EXTERMINATE THE BRUTES)
I too, for one, look forward to the cancellation of next years remembrance ceremonies at the cenotaph for being “ancient guff”.
To be replaced by a new festival “victims of empire” day – something for almost everyone on earth and remembering history’s “real nazis” and what they did.
Lord Chief Justice Sir Robert Pederast of the Supreme Court has laid down a ruling (between using his penis pump) :
Magna Carta, the Bill of Rights, is “ipso facto, prima facie, dulce et decorum est, parri passu … a LOAD OF SHITE”
– to be replaced by MANGA carta, which is a cartoon book full of preteen big boobed chicks, so while examining the rights and freedoms of all freeborn englishmen, BY GOD, you can have a crafty one as well – a wank for all the greatest wankers on earth
LOLz
🙂
Brilliant!
Good wank was it? That’s so nice to know.
Absolutely nae need tae gang intae the detail o this.
Oan environmental grounds alane, yer ability tae post should be withdrawn.
Ah’m truly sorry aboot the KB ye goat frae the big nosed English lassie, Confused, but TBQFH, from the state of you, we can all see why she had tae dae it.
Not My King
Liberation’s case has to be approved by the General Assembly of the UN. That is well known. The route to the General Assembly can begin at different points.
For those who want to understand the process, listen to Craig Murray talking to Barrhead Boy on 25th June.
Would that be the same UN General Assembly where the UK Government can wield a veto?
Why yes it is!
link to moderndiplomacy.eu
In any event as the “People’s Assembly” over on Facebook point out, Scotland is *not* a colony under international law.
“The key legal criteria for decolonisation cases involve territories that were subject to colonial rule without any democratic structures or internal governance. Scotland on the other hand has its own parliament, legal system, and governmental institutions. It voluntarily entered into a political union with England in 1707 and while the terms of that union can be debated, the modern reality is that Scotland has a level of self government that disqualifies it from the UN’s decolonisation framework.”
“The UN has rejected similar arguments before”.
link to m.facebook.com
“The People’s Assembly” also state that Salvo/Liberate Scotland’s claims are misleading and unrealistic.
So with all due respect to those involved, appealing to the UN is looks like being another dead end.
However it does provide an excuse for some on the BTL comments on here, to bang on about decolonisation ad nauseum…
The UK has a veto in the UN Security Council, not the General Assembly . The GA is a talking shop and any resolutions made by it have no legal standing.
Dangerous stuff.
The more boxes that are ticked that say “ye just Cannae dae it” and that we are in perpetual tied/ chained up outside the corner shop while England goes inside spending ALL our money, then well you know, people are left with a diminishing list of alternatives.
Does WM really want that?
Or is it just that (McCrone style) they daren’t let us leave?
Sounds awfully like a controlling marriage doesn’t it?
Only the (way not to go) alternative is a whole lot more unpleasant than just cutting up someone’s ties..
There comes a time..
Stuart you CLAIM to be an independence supporter yet you EAGERLY join with the yoonionists to try to demean and dismiss any and all attempts at forcing through independence using all and any available avenues , I would say that puts you in the suspicious category as your actions belay your claims
So when deriding and rubbishing any attempts to gain independence through SALVO, Liberation.Scot, Liberate Scotland, SSRG, enlighten us with your obvious big brain being a claimed supporter of independence how YOU would get us independence
If Stu has any sense he won’t respond to your drivel. I suspect he has more sense than you. In reality that would not be too difficult!I find it strange that anyone who does not side with the cranks, fantasists and outright nutters on this site is automatically deemed a Unionist, by the cranks, fantasists and nutters.
OT. But, why are we using American corporates as consultants for road infrastructure around fort William? Aren’t there any Scottish consultants?
How about Scotland First eh.
It wouldn’t have happened under Alex, I’m sure. Every single b…y decision by the authorities in Scotland is rubbish.
Hence the need to use every single route and support every single effort by decent, principled people, to get government back under our control and out of the Union, and out of our own self-serving politicians’ hands.
Probs the same reason they use American politics in Scotland.
It’s not my day. Several btl commenters attempting to sting but only irritating but I have just kindly helped a bumblebee out of the dog’s water bowl and it stung me! An extraordinarily painful experience considering that it didn’t leave the sting in my finger.
Having studied the online advice, I think I shall live so long as I don’t get anaphylactic shock.
Turning back to the Liberation case at the UN, I repeat that the best place to understand the process is Barrhead Boy on 25th June talking to Craig Murray. Enjoy.
I hope the Bee was ok.
Despite the pain I was in, I placed the bee in the centre of a rose so it could recover its strength!
I didn’t think bumble bees stung. Honey bees will.
A bumble bee pelt makes an excellent pea cosy. So it’s ideal to have a few dozen pelts in stock in case someone phones just as you’ve served dinner with a portion of peas. Quickly slip the peas into the bumble bee pelts so they retain their heat for the duration of the phonecall. Remember to remove before tucking back into nosh though…
Thanks for the giggle, Dan. Bumble bee pelts indeed! I didn’t think bumble bees stung either but this one was definitely not a honey bee – much bigger, fluffy and a white rear.
“much bigger, fluffy and a white rear”
A white sizzler bee.
There’s more and more of them every year, surging north across the border.
“JPTi and Liberation Scotland’s decolonisation petition to the UN
marks a new dawn for the campaign for Scottish Independence
Liberation Scotland’s 20,000 members are deeply embedded in Scotland’s grassroots independence movement and are mostly long-serving members of that movement.”
—————————————-
If Liberation Scotland has 20,000 members why are there only 655 signature on its petition?
agent x “If Liberation Scotland has 20,000 members why are there only 655 signature on its petition?”
Because the 655 is on Peter A Bell’s Manifesto for Independence! The M4I is an entirely 2026 Holyrood election campaign device. See http://www.manifestoforindependence.
🙂 🙂
@ sarah
Thankyou for that clarification. I find it strange that you support Liberation Scotland and you keep asking people to sign the petition but the majority of Liberation Scotland have not signed it.
Different “petition.” But “Liberation” doesn’t have anywhere near 20,000 members. They’re as secretive about their membership as the SNP, and probably for the same reason (they don’t want it known how few members they actually have).
On Craig Murray’s return from his ambassadorial mission to the United Nations in New York where he presented the case for Scottish independence on behalf of Liberation/Salvo he participated in an interview with BarrheadBoy on the 25th June 2025.
In the interview Craig tells of his informal meetings, some in the context of social gatherings, with the diplomatic and political representatives of other nations from around the world while in New York.
Right at the end of the interview he offers up this message of hope for those Scots who support Scottish independence.
Craig says this:
Of Craigs mission to the UN and on his presentation of Scotland’s case to the C-24 committee BarrheadBoy writes:
“This involves convincing the UN C-24 committee that Scotland ticks all the boxes that the UN recognises as factors when pronouncing a nation a colony.
First and foremost, Scotland needs a UN member nation to champion our cause.
Listen to the interview to hear if Craig was successful in finding a nation to champion Scotland’s cause.
The entire interview can be watched here:
BarrheadBoy Craig Murray interview – 25th June 2025
Well Northcode that’s 52 minutes of my life I’m not going to get back…
The upshot of it being no Craig Murray can’t name a single nation who is going to back this, apart from maybe the likes of Cuba or Venezuela!
To cap it off he wants to bring ISIS bride and Jihadist Shemima Begum to Scotland and give her a passport!
*Facepalm*
This whole thing is going to be an absolute gift to the unionists, as they’ll say that supporters of Independence, are having to resort to trying to get independence via the back door, via dodgy third world regimes.
However it still does not address the fundamental flaw in this whole farrago, that Scotland has never been a colony.
The whole thing falls at the first hurdle, and even if by some minor miracle it gets as far as the floor of the General Assembly, Craig Murray had to admit there was no precedent for this.
Now why would that be?
Is it possible that lots of nations have independence movements of their own that they don’t want to give encouragement to?
So all Craig Murray got was a lot of warm words, as he was quietly sent packing.
I rather suspect that Salvo/Liberation Scotland’s cunning plan will as a result be quietly strangled in a UN committee room.
The games a bogie….
“This whole thing is going to be an absolute gift to the unionists”
Actually our colonial rulers understandably don’t want to talk about the Liberation Scotland UN initiative for fear of raising awareness and appear to have issued a D notice stopping the msm from publicising it and the wider public gaining knowledge of it.
“Appear to have issued a D notice”
????
You really are off the reservation today aren’t you. Do you think the editor of the national is on their way to Belmarsh after they published it a few months back?
The treatment of Shemima Begum was outrageous and broke all international law. She was 15, a minor when she left, she was made stateless by Britain (an illegal act, against Britain’s signature) with the newspapers baying for her blood, on the grounds that she had a grandparent born in Bangladesh, so she could “apply” there for citizenship. Bangladesh had already said they wouldn’t take her, so this was a fraudulent argument and there is now a two-class system where anyone with a grandparent anywhere outside Britain can have their citizenship removed by the edict of a government minister. And the courts refused her appeal on sneaky grounds.
Now, of course, the illegal terrorist ISIS group in Syria is our best friend, meetings with politicians all round the world, all nice and cosy. Not evil at all. (Supporting a terrorist organisation is the fourteen-year imprisonment crime, unless you are a politician who sends them arms and gets them trained up.) So she should definitely be allowed home. She thought, at 15, that she was doing the right thing, so she deserves better. Fuckers.
More – if she committed any real crime she should have been prosecuted in an English court. It’s pure racism that she wasn’t. And weedy politicians who’d rather ruin someone’s life than risk a bad headline. So that’s pretty much every politician.
Don’t you think it will come to the independence movement? False flags, banning groups, they are not going to let go lightly. That a government minister can make this decision.
Awa and not shite, Andrew R.
Shout from the rooftops that you, and by extension Indy, support the kinds of people who have brought burning alive back from where Scots thought it had been left – the medieval period.
And CM. The enthusiastic cheerleader for dragging innocent people into holes in the ground, to leave them to rot.
Shout that one from the rooftops too.
Best that sane, rational, decent Scots know what we’re getting into if these people are ever allowed anywhere near the levers of power in iScotland.
“Appear to have issued a D notice”
????
You really are off the reservation today aren’t you. Do you think the editor of the national is on their way to Belmarsh after they published it a few months back?
Hatey, have a heart. (Heartey!) Did you never do anything stupid, aged 15? Maybe not as stupid as going to Syria to marry a terrorist, that would take some doing, but there must have been something. She didn’t (as far as I know) do any actual terrorism, but if she did she should be prosecuted. In a British court, as a British citizen.
Her crime was to “support” the terrorist organisation, ISIS. She thought it was the right thing to do; the Caliphate. Later she changed her mind. But right now, the head of Syrian ISIS is in London, meeting British politicians. We are allies. This is actual, real life, support for a terrorist organisation; arming them, training them, recognising them as the government of Syria. Just like the Taliban, back when.
The politicians will not be prosecuted for their support of terrorists, or have their citizenship taken away, or be expelled from the country of their birth. It’s the way of the world. But, Hatey, why get all hot and bothered about the girl and not the politicians? (It was late, to be fair.)
And you don’t mind that the Secretary of State took away her British citizenship by edict? Made her stateless despite international law, and the courts allowed it? It’s up there with Locherbie.
@AndrewR
Sorry, but when it come to that kind of people, being heartless is the only language they understand.
We’ve spent much of the period since WW2 playing nice and by the rules and the people who don’t have simply exploited what they see as our spinelessness. The pendulum is now swinging the other way, largely through the efforts of a great half-Scot, President Trump and I, for one, am happy about that.
As is often the case, you expect me to feel sorry for the people who slaughter and abuse my country’s and my religion’s innocent kids, here in my country.
I don’t.
Why are you accusing me of getting all “hot and bothered”? You brought the subject up. If I never hear her name again it will be too soon. Like many Scots and indeed English too, I am sick to the back teeth of endlessly having to hear about and think about the followers of the “religion of peace” – that cancer that is eating the heart out of Europe. That cancer that was foisted on us all without even one single democratic mandate.
You could say I’m “heartily” sick to the back teeth of it. Would that do you?
Hatey – “… you expect me to feel sorry for the people who slaughter and abuse my country’s and my religion’s innocent kids, here in my country.”
But she didn’t do any of that, did she? You must know that. Still, she’s had her life destroyed for some short-term political gain. While our politicians support actual terrorists, really support them. You complain about her but not them. I don’t get it.
@Andrew – I suggest she had her life destroyed by the decision she took to join a murderous death cult and participate in acts of terrorism and treason against a country which had welcomed her parents with open arms. I’ve very little sympathy.
Aidan
She didn’t participate in acts of terrorism, and certainly not of treason (this was in Syria).
This same murderous death cult is now a staunch ally of Britain, with its leader getting the full political show, hand-shakes and photo-ops. Smiles all round. I’ll say it again: if she broke the law she should be prosecuted in a court, not expelled by an arbitrary ruling. Especially after a press pile-on. Is that how the law should be?
Craig says this… again just for good measure:
The world loves Scotland and the Scots – it’s only natural for those folk who hate the Scots to be aw twistit oot o’ shape wi envy – puir sowels.
No wonder Murray is so upbeat and optimistic and reckons independence can be achieved within 3-4 years – we Scots hae a lot o’ freends oot ther.
As ever, tho, folk should judge things for themselves.
And tae help folk judge things fir thersels I’ll add a link to the interview again just in case folk missed it the first time.
BarrheadBoy Craig Murray interview – 25th June 2025
Thanks for the link, NC. I enjoyed reading the article.
“Our friends in Orcland”. The boys who wrote that are serious too!
It really is fundamentally important that everybody in Scotland knows that the likes of CM is swanning around the world telling anybody that will listen that Scotland wants to be in the same political blocs as the Orcs and the humous medievalists.
So our future lies with the tyranny of NK and the female abusers of Ir@n? Ah really do hae ma doots.
Maybe we should start enriching uranium in preparation for Indy. Wha’s wi me on that?
Exactly Hatey – these “friends” aren’t going to be the ambassadors of Denmark or Singapore. It’s going to be rogue pariah states with appalling human rights records who the cause of Scottish independence will be seriously damaged by association with.
Something inspired me to write a wee poem. A hiv nae idea whit.
Another braw poem tae add tae ma wee collection o’ braw poems.
Here, I might get a thrupenny bit fir this yin if a’m lucky
“Something inspired me”
Ah, c’moan noo NC.
It’s mean of you to deny Buckfast an honourable mention.
“Actually our colonial rulers understandably don’t want to talk about the Liberation Scotland UN initiative…”
Indeed, Alf. And for obvious reasons tae… they’re terrified the UN will, like most nations around the world, side with the Scots.
The ‘UK’ for England has very few ‘pals’ left kickin aboot on planet Earth.
Ach, hits anely a maiter o’ time noo, onyway.
The scribblin’ is oan the wa fir thon dirten blaflum geggery cawed unioun.
(translation: The writing is on the wall for that excrement-covered illusional deception called the Treaty of Union)
Sae true, NC, the scribblin is oan the wa.
In fact, it’s only going to be (checks notes) 4-5 years before Chairman Murray returns from the UN with Scotland’s Independence on a scrap of paper in his haun.
Now, if I truly believed that, I’d have far better things to do than post mince on here. That 4-5 years will pass in a flash. And there’s one heck of a lot of planning and preparation to make for what will be the most momentous event of all of our lives.
Diversifying savings for example. Identifying quick profit opportunities and making the necessary investments. Maybe even just laying down a stock of potable water and several week’s worth of canned goods.
And if you actually believed the mince you post on here, you wouldn’t be posting on here either.
So I’m calling you out, NC. You’re a lying fantasist. Keep it up. The day you stop will be the day that Indy has a real chance of happening.
“This whole thing is going to be an absolute gift to the unionists”
Says the unionist….
Absolutely James he jist canny wait tae rubbish and decry genuine efforts for freedom, yet when asked how his big brain would achieve indy just like the other disruptors and fake Scots silence is the response
I am like Northcode I would accept independence any way we could get it, I particularly like the idea of I4I (Independents4Independence) where we can get rid of the party system where scum tr@ tors and betrayers like the deviants and perverts party snp become unemployed
Re Craig Murray at the UN C24:
If nothing else, it’s important for the rest of the world to know and understand Scotland’s real status in relation to England and the UK. Lesley Riddoch has just been to a conference of Nordic nations (including Greenland), which was held in Stornoway, spreading the same information. The poverty and deprivation here in a land full of energy and opportunity, which is sustaining England, needs to be known as widely as possible.
Lesley vote snp 1 and 2.
Wrong. Stopped listening to her at that point.
Nae eulogies fer Starovoit yet?
How insensitive of me. The usual suspects will need time to process their grief.
Oligarchs fall oot.
Must have run oot of tea and windaes.
Given the current occupants of the comfy seats in Holyrood manage to make The Donald and his gang appear intelligent and competent, they probably didn’t notice; but, yesterday’s announcement of a hose pipe ban by Yorkshire Water is clear indication.
The next thing England will be coming for is our water, we’ve got plenty, they have a lack – it’s quite clear, Scottish Water will be the next of our resources sacrificed to the benefit of Greater England.
Water, wind power and whisky revenue nicked by the neighbours!
I know! Those bastard English stealing the wind. I was up in Mallaig a few weeks ago and it was completely still. Last time I was up that way there was a lovely fresh sea breeze. Driving the M74 later there was just truck after truck heading south. I bet a few of them were filled up with that breeze, ready to be polluted in the cities of the south. It’s heatbreaking and makes you want to cry.
Midgies tae.
When oor junkies and jakies start being stealed an a’, we’ll ken we’re in the end game.
Ah, jist noticed this post by Aidan trying to diminish understanding of how much energy is exported from Scotland’s geographic are down to England.
It’s not windy in Scotland where I am and yet Scotland is still exporting 1.7GW to England. That’s about 50% of what Scotland’s current demand is.
link to terravolt.co.uk
That’s jist leccy exportation though. England is still generating nearly 40% of it’s leccy demand (13.5GW) by burning gas in CCGT power stations.
link to gridwatch.templar.co.uk
I wonder where they are getting the gas. 65% of the UK’s domestic gas production is in Scotland’s geographic area…
link to data.nationalgas.com
I also wonder why an acquaintance is designing HVDC leccy transmission lines to take the large amount of energy generated from Scotland’s windfarms down to England…
Of course, all of this is little benefit to anybody that lives in the UK because the twats in Westminster allowed foreign interests to make profits rather than the UK having a sensible energy policy that allows homeowners and businesses to access reasonably price leccy.
Close to a billion quid paid to windfarms owners in curtailment charges last year to switch off their wind generation because the GB grid can’t handle the power.
Yup, it’s been on the cards for a few years now.
Water.
Currents.
Sellafield.
ENGLAND AND FRANCE PLAY FOOTSIE and Kate’s got a new frock and hairdo….
Meanwhile in the adult big world.
link to bbc.co.uk
Rare earth elements extraction is extra dirty and it’s being projected for Scotland.
From “The National” quoting MSP Allan Dorans
“In 2017, the same researchers again, looking at nuclear reprocessing-related radiocarbons in Apex predators such as harbour porpoises and seals, with sampling sites in Girvan, in my constituency, and Troon in Central Ayrshire, found contamination in Harbour Porpoises at 238 Bq/kg and in harbour seals at 284 Bq/Kg, and noted that distance from Sellafield, Girvan and Troon was a key factor.”
The treaty of union was a political parliamentary union between Scotland and England only,
Then England dissolved that union.
In did not include the Scots as a people or a Sovereign nation.
The colonisation is indirect upon the Scots, but nevertheless real.
For the old parliament of England never ceased as it was as was agreed, and the actual colonisation by England in the treaty of envolves over Scotland can be was
, England assumption was and always has involved an attempt to capture the Sovereignty of the Scots through the one sided use of that political parliamentary union,
We can see this in the Continuation laws of England Acts passed over the years in Westminster parliament.
While Scots laws were considered obsolete, or expired and repealed systematically over continuously decades.
We also see this with Anglo- treaties made through Westminster parliament,(The old and continuous Westminster parliament)
For in regards of treaties made by England prior to 1707 have been retained and continued to this day.
However any of the Scottish Treaties made prior to 1707 have been territorial consumed into the to be treaties of the continuous parliament of Englands Westminster parliament.
Logically if the Colonisation topic was to be challenged at all anywhere, the subject on colonisation should be over the the treaty of union itself.
For nowhere in the treaty of union articles, terms and conditions does it permit England to take over Scotland. Its territory its realm, or its people.
That is is left unsaid, and not written down and of the out the The treaty of union altogether.
The factual Statement by the UK parliament site in 2022, 2023 and 2024 that states it was decided after debate not to put the vote to the Scots to join as in all probability the Scots would vote No to joining.
Should be an enlightening moment on how the continuous old English parliament resting within Westminster parliament of Great- Britain which ended in 1800/ 1801.
Has colonised and consumed the actual treaty of union.
It is notable that the Westminster parliament with its, acts on continuing The Laws of England while in a faux treaty of union with the Scots people…. refuses to let the Scots have self determination.
Acting as if Scotland was not in a political parliamentary union under a treaty,
By then as we can observe all of Scotlands treaties were made obsolete, expired or repealed. And the old Scottish parliament dissolved from its side of the 1707 parliamentary treaty,
Where does that leave Scotland. Or the Scots.
Out with any treaty
For the 1707 (political) parliamentary union between Scotland and England to exist there has to be two parliaments resting within the now obsolete Great Britain parliament,
The parliament of Scotland and the parliament of England.
Only the old parliament of Scotland was deleted as dissolved.
The old parliament of England members officially entered the parliament of Great Britain with out election taken place.
They or the old parliament of England were not deleted or dissolved.
That is where the cheat on a faux parliamentary union but colonisation of the 1707 treaty of union by the old parliament of England happened.
Stu,
It is true in what you point out, a fact that a colonised people will have no voice, will not be taken seriously, will have no official outlet, no remedy to the right to self determination and that their land and resources will be abused.
And that the Coloniser will always hold the power and control, even over the Scots that were never invited to to join the 1707 treaty of union.
That is purely the result of Colonisation of the Scots that started with The old parliament of Englands continuation and its constitution into the old parliament of Great Britain (1707-1800.)
And that said parliament ensuring that the old parliament of Scotland was immediately dissolved and unable to hold any official sway in the Westminster parliament of Englands Great- Britain,
“It is true in what you point out, a fact that a colonised people will have no voice”
Gngh. GNGH! For pity’s sake, enough of this absurd crap! It is insulting to people who actually are living under the boot of a hostile power, of whom there are still to this day numerous examples! I seriously cannot imagine a more nauseating, bourgeoisie statement to make, than to claim that Scots in 2025 are “a colonised people with no voice”, probably whilst watching Bargain Hunt on the bloody sofa with remote control in hand.
Guess what, “James”, you’re fortunate enough to live in a free democracy; you get to vote your politicians in or out every few years – you even got to CHOOSE whether you wanted to stay in the UK or not a few short years back. Within living memory, people fought and died for YOUR right to be able to freely spout bollocks like this about the country you live in on the internet, with no fear of retribution or any sanction whatsoever!
Be bloody thankful and count your blessings.
Aw, thank you – we are indeed blessed by the munificence of the unionists!
Thank you for inclusion in the magnificent union where we have no control over our own resources and have the revenues from these taken from us, while 50% of our citizens live in poverty.
Thank you for allowing those revenues to be used to enable Scotland to subsidise England; to pay for Thatcher’s industry-wrecking unemployment policies, the renewal of the London sewer system, HS2, new trains for the London underground (and extensions of the Jubilee and Northern lines), the Thames crossing, “Crossrail”, the north of England “powerhouse” scheme, Wembley stadium rebuild and much, much more to come.
Thank you to our imperial masters for ‘granting’ us a rigged referendum over ten years ago in which the Scots voted to leave the UK – but we’re still here. And allowing us to vote in UK general ‘elections’ where we get the governments that England votes for. Thank you for imposing Brexit on our country – after we rejected it by a 60%+ majority.
Thank you for the free unionist democracy where to protest now often means arrest, and Scottish Independence supporters are named on a list of extremists drawn up by a sitting English prime minister.
Thank you for involving us in all your illegal wars, and for graciously allowing us to house -at our expense- your illegal stockpile of nuclear warheads 30 miles from our largest city.
Thank you for making us into a country that has to ask the country next door for permission to hold a vote on our own future.
Thank you, thank you! THANK YOU!!
@CC – well exactly, does anyone think a website like this would be tolerated in the PRC?
Whoosh.
Way to miss the point, pal, with your straw man boilerplate pish. I didn’t say “James” had to be grateful to unionists, including for any of the stuff you mention. Merely, she/he was being absurd to suggest that 2025 Scotland comprises of a colonised people under the boot of the oppressor and with “no voice”, despite all the blindingly obvious contra-indicators (free democratic elections, free referendums, freedom of speech including dissenting against the UK as per “James’s” post and all the rest.
First and foremost, therefore, your post – such as it is – is entirely unwarranted, misdirected and irrelevant. Probably best to stick to posting “Prick” randomly, that’s about your level.
Notwithstanding the irrelevance of your wide-ranging assertions:
“No control over our own resources”
Utter bullshit. The Scottish Parliament retains significant powers (including tax-raising powers) and is specifically responsible for the allocation of oil, wind, gas and renewable contracts etc. (as well as planning). So if they’re made a fist of it – which they undoubtedly have – stop blaming other people mate, vote ’em out (finally) and get people in who have a bloody clue (start by checking if they’ve ever had a job).
“Scotland subsidises England”
Oh yeah? Big assertion to make. Show me (and the rest of us) objective proof that England is a net financial benefactor year on year in terms of the flow of public money north v. south. (Note “objective proof”, not some dissident or other’s OPINION off some obscure, dusty little corner of the internet, TIA).
“Thatcher’s industry-wrecking policies”
Again, BS – those industries were already well and truly wrecked prior to her being elected PM in 1979 – they were already smashed by absurdly powerful, quasi-political unions (the Militant Left). I know, because I was there, like my father before me. E.g. I saw FIRST HAND people openly sleeping on the job en masse in Swindon’s rail yard (now long since closed, natch), and countless other examples. I worked on the shop floor mate, in manufacturing (sheet metal fabrication), whereas most of your cappuccino commies wouldn’t know one end of flypress from the other, any more than a building site or mine, come to that.
Thatcher was dealt a very, very bad hand and whilst she made some big mistakes and things could’ve been a lot better, they could’ve been a lot worse as well (and would’ve been if we’d had that fool Michael Foot and his bunch of cronies in charge, perish the bloody thought). Thatcher HAD worked in industry and she believed in a balanced economy, attracting much-needed foreign investment (unlike Blair/Brown who thought banking was the answer to everything, and we’re still paying a huge price now). Mark my words, another “Thatcher moment” is upon us very shortly, we cannot carry on like this, so let’s hope there’s someone who is up to snuff eh?
“Rigged referendum”
Again, bollocks mate. I remember plenty of Indy observers and monitors being in place and all agreed it had been a fair contest – you just don’t like the (reasonably emphatic) end result. Tough.
Let’s see your objective proof, please. Otherwise it just looks like yet more tinfoil hat crap.
“Imposing Brexit”
That’s what democracy means, mate. Hell, I don’t like being handed another useless left wing government, but I have to suck it up because that’s what (stupid) people voted for. I blame our useless education system and the indoctrination of the youth – they’ll learn.
“Illegal wars”
Tell me about it, us net contributors have to pay for this stuff. That’s Blair and Labour for you.
“@CC – well exactly, does anyone think a website like this would be tolerated in the PRC?”
Yes, exactly Aidan, these berks need calling out.
James says:
“Brexit”
Aw, we need to crowdfund the boy a dictionary.
Turn doon the page corner on the letter ‘I’, ‘I’ for Independence to be precise.
Teach the innocent, sheltered neophyte whit the word actually means.
Halsbury Laws of England and Wales.
Statues and legislation in Westminster based on the Halsbury laws for England and Wales makes the parliament of Westminster the parliamentary laws of England,to cover Scotland
Thus we see that the UK ? Westminster parliament with continued English members of the old parliament of England running Westminster parliament under the laws, Statues and legislation of England and Wales, making Anglo treaties and long ago dissolving the Old Scottish parliament and its treaties and repealing Scots laws as expired or obsolete to England and Wales.
For heaven’s sake…
SHUT UP, you crazy old bat !
For heaven’s sake james PUT A SOCK IN IT
total word salad -same words just in a different order
Sad sad sad
intolerance.
“…we discuss the psychology of three understandings of intolerance that are concealed within the literature: (a) prejudicial intolerance based on rigidity, closedmindedness, and antipathy toward a group of people; (b) intuitive intolerance involving disapproval of out-group beliefs or practices based on unreflective responding; and (c) deliberative intolerance, which involves interfering with specific beliefs or practices that are considered to violate moral principles and values…”
“An Intolerant Personality Type is someone who displays a very limited tolerance for differences in opinions or beliefs.
They tend to base their evaluations about people and the world on their own experience, which can hamper them from hearing the perspectives of others.
Intolerant people also do not like accepting criticism, or having to modify their current viewpoints as new information becomes available.
Rather than adapt and adjust, they often become defensive.
Such an attitude can be damaging to relationships, especially when it crosses over into refusal to accept differing opinions or beliefs in social or political contexts.
An intolerant personality can often be recognized by their unwillingness to take into account different points of view.
They have a determination to hold fast to whatever position they have taken on any given issue.
What Are Intolerant Personality Characteristics & Traits?
Here are some of the most common characteristics and traits of someone who has an Intolerant personality type:
Intolerant people are often quick to judge others and make assumptions about them
They have a strong need for control and like to be in charge of everything
Intolerant people can be very opinionated and inflexible when it comes to their beliefs
They can be quite defensive and react aggressively when they feel threatened or challenged
They can be difficult to work with or interact with, as they are not very good at compromising or accepting different viewpoints
Intolerance is often associated with anger, hostility, and resentment towards others
Intolerant Personality Examples
Many world-renowned people have an Intolerant personality type.
As someone with an Intolerant personality, they tend to be aggressive and take risks without considering the consequences.”
Great stuff sam.
Now do the type of “personality” that posts interminably about pricks, penises, wanking, shirt lifting, glory holes and bum sex.
Make sure you link that “personality” type to the Scottish Indy movement, its efforts to increase support with Scotland’s politically uncommitted, and make sure to discuss how these obsessions play out with sane, rational, decent Scots reading on Wings BTL for perhaps the first time.
And perhaps the last.
Well that would be you P3nisbreath;
posting about “sucking blokes off” (your post), shafting blokes between “spread bum cheeks” (your post), accusing crumblies of “wanking through the night” (your post)!
Just why do you think you’ve attracted the name P3nisbreath then?
Then there’s you’re repeated penchant for “whanging oan aboot” denying 3thnic cl3ansing “east end of the Med” as you put it to bypass moderation.
Then there’s you’re ENDLESS unfunny trolling posts where every accusation turns out to be a guilty pleasure confession of your own.
You’re a sad wee tw8t of a keyboard warrior with your small but active coterie of Unionist keyboard worriers/ spoilers/ trolls here.
I repeat;
You w**kstain..
.
“here’s what you could have won … ”
link to archive.is
“- they are doing well enough, but imagine how great these countries could have been if they too had been part of the most successful political union in history?”
SAID NO_ONE, EVER
And what do these countries have in common?
– EFTA mainly. Not the EU. And not FGS, the UK.
Scotland would be better off, have more power and autonomy as a state of the US than an “equal partner in the UK” – and that would be insane. But what does it say if “the insane thing” would be better than what you have now??
Are we “double insane”?
Norway’s wealth fund made a profit of over 200B USD last year (this is Scotland’s official GDP)
– and without hard Scots resources the UK would fall to “shithole” status. Once we leave we kick out the pegs holding that hellhole together – they want to build nukes and do AI, but they are heading for “helter skelter”. Which will be a joy to watch, as long as we are outside of it, behind the razor wire and the autoguns, aliens style.
Without the hidden boost of being a de-facto oil backed currency, the pound would fall to 80 cents on the dollar and chaos ensues for a country that makes nothing no more, is a nett importer, even for 44% of its food.
EFTA means you don’t get soaked by being in the EU; Norway keeps its dosh, Luxembourg can keep its secrecy and the Icelanders get to keep all their fish. Not being in the EU also allows you to avoid the insane electricity market rules described by Varoufakis. Ireland, though rich, has a political class which has gone full EU globalist, with its penchance for woke sex and mass immigration. This, we could do without.
The question of Scotlands GDP being 200B – is that a real, true number or not? It is absurdly bad given our EFTA peers are in the 600-800B USD range. But either way its bad, Scotland’s real GDP is either much higher and the wealth is being stolen/hidden, accredited falsely to London, in order to make Scotland look “poor”, or, it really is as bad as it is reported, in which case it shows chronic incompetence and mismanagement (London controls the economy). Either way, you are mad to stay.
The excellent dystopian thriller “children of men” was on a few days ago; this is where England is at, right now, the future is here. A lot of little englanders will be looking to literally “head for the hills”, i.e. our hills, to Scotland, while the rest of it falls apart and the political elite resorts to police state tactics to force the diversity, wokeness, neoliberalism and foreign war mongering down everyones throats. (Did you see how fast the justice system moves when white working class people get out of line?)
Scotland will be “on the hook” to fix the problems the english created for themselves; fuck them, let them burn. They deserve it.
Aren’t we gonna be keeping the Pound, Confused?
How does that fact fit into your fevered fantasies?
Scott-Samuel et al
“The aggressive promotion of free market policies under Thatcher was accompanied by the growing influence of business interests, a commitment to reducing the size of the welfare state, the acceptance of widespread, unequally distributed unemployment and the implementation of a range of authoritarian social policies. All of this suggests Thatcherism contributed to ensuring Britain became a less healthy and more unequal place than it might otherwise have been. Thatcher’s neoliberal project was subsequently strengthened and more firmly embedded by her successors in Conservative (Major) and Labour (Blair and Brown) governments. Itslegacy is especially visible in the policies currently being pursued by the post-2010 Conservative / Liberal Democrat UK coalition government (26).”
Your quoted post fails to consider the alternative under Michael Foot’s Labour. I think we can safely assume it would’ve been an unmitigated disaster – far worse than anything doled out by Thatcher – not least because of Labour’s lamentable economic record. (Not forgetting, either, that Foot & Co. were especially bad, even by Labour’s dismal standards – a more moribund bunch of dinosaur ideologues is impossible to imagine, seems almost surreal now, though perhaps not so much in Scotland, given you’ve had the SNP).
As for the usual lefty trope of blaming those of us on the Right for Blair and Brown, surely you jest. It’s true that Brown adhered to the Tories’ spending plans in their first term as a manifesto pledge (because even then, the British public – in England at least – knew that Labour couldn’t be trusted on the economy), but they went nuts after that, bloating the size of the public sector and its price tag, making an absolute arse of public finances and then culminating in their abject failure to regulate the banks and the City, together with a few illegal (hugely expensive and disastrous) wars.
The unarguable fact of the matter is this: the UK was in a VASTLY better place in 1997 at the end of the Thatcher years (including Major’s continuation) than ever it was in 1979. Because self-evident reasons. No amount of revisionist leftist crap or airbrushing history is ever going to change this fundament fact, which unquestionably shows the folly of your argument (or rather someone else’s argument that you’ve nicked off the internet).
If you know, you know.
Yet more bollocks. Give it up, pal.
No-one is listening.
Not many people agree with you.
link to derby.ac.uk
Survey results
In January and February 2019, researchers at the University of Derby commissioned BMG Research to run a survey to answer these questions, asking 5,781 people living in Britain how much they agreed with the following statements:
Margaret Thatcher made Britain Great again – 26% of respondents agreed, 37% disagreed
Margaret Thatcher was right to sell council houses to tenants – 37% agreed, 31% disagreed
Today’s housing crisis was a result of selling off so many council homes in the 1980s – against the more positive assessment of the right to buy legislation demonstrated above, 48% of respondents agreed while 22% disagreed
Social and economic changes since the 1980s have ensured a brighter future for all – 22% agreed, 34% disagreed
Margaret Thatcher’s governments decreased the quality of life for many ordinary people – 45% agreed, 22% disagreed
Margaret Thatcher’s governments did a lot of damage to communities around here – 42% agreed, 24% disagreed
Margaret Thatcher only looked after the interests of the rich – 44% agreed, 21% disagreed
Despite these figures, which tend to suggest a rather downbeat assessment of her legacy, there was still a high degree of support for her general approach. When asked if they agreed that “although there were some losers, overall the changes Margaret Thatcher’s governments made were necessary”, 35% of respondents agreed while only 26% disagreed. When asked if “[she] was right to take on the trade unions”, 38% agreed, while only 25% disagreed. When asked if they agreed that “right now, the country needs a leader like Margaret Thatcher”, 38% agreed, while a much smaller 24% disagreed.
When Thatcher left office in November 1990, MORI asked respondents if they thought “on balance, her period as Prime Minister had been good or bad for the country”. We repeated this question:
Margaret Thatcher: good or bad? MORI November 1990 BMG/University of Derby Jan-Feb 2019 Difference
Good 52% 32% -20%
Bad 40% 38% -2%
No opinion 8% 30% +22%
Although Britons leaned slightly in favour of Thatcher’s period in government (52%) at the point when she left office, this has since subsided, with only 32% now seeing her time in office as good. The proportion of people who think her time in office was bad has stayed broadly the same (40-38%). As one might imagine, the proportion with no opinion has increased. There are now more people who believe her time in office was bad than think it was good. Nevertheless, around a third of our respondents had a positive assessment of her time in office.
When you don’t know what you think you know.
Cambridge Journal of Economics Cover Image for Volume 44, Issue 2
Volume 44Issue 2
March 2020
Volume 44, Issue 2, March 2020, Pages 319–342, link to doi.org
Published: 17 August 2019 Article history
Abstract
Economics are the method: The object is to change the soul (Thatcher, 1981)
There is a growing disaffection with mainstream politics in the world’s liberal democracies. In particular, the UK has become an increasingly divided nation; as evidenced by, for example, increasing inequality, an emphasis on individualism, the so-called North/South divide and the polarised debate about the UK’s leaving the European Union. Many leading UK politicians claim their inheritance of the “Thatcher legacy” to legitimate their proposed policies, yet it is not clear what is that legacy. Thatcher’s policies, instituted in the 1980s and broadly pursued by subsequent governments, changed the economic and social outlook of the UK. Criticism of her record is taken to indicate one is a left-wing ideologue. Our contribution in the following is that we judge Thatcher’s policies by no standards other than her own. Utilising a holistic approach, we consider whether neo-liberal policies facilitated or undermined the UK’s achieving Thatcher’s stated moral outcomes: the growth of democratic capitalism and the strengthening of the moral economy. We demonstrate, in contrast to contemporary narratives of her “saving the country”, the neo-liberal economic experiment has failed to deliver, even on Thatcher’s own terms. This analysis has contemporary domestic and global implications as generally Thatcherite policies continue to be applied in the UK and in other nations around the world.
JEL B31 – IndividualsE60 – GeneralH11 – Structure, Scope, and Performance of Government
Issue Section: Articles
1. Introduction
There is no such thing as society. There is [a] living tapestry of men and women and people and the beauty of that tapestry and the quality of our lives will depend upon how much each of us is prepared to take responsibility for ourselves and each of us prepared to turn round and help by our own efforts those who are unfortunate. (Thatcher, 1987)
The legitimacy of democratic government depends, according to Abraham Lincoln (1854), on its ability to do for a community that which they would have done but cannot do for themselves as individuals. If this is so, it seems recent UK governments have not been delivering on voters’ aspirations. Every decade-cohort of young people born in the UK since the 1960s has been less enamoured with the democratic process than their elders (Foa and Mounk, 2017). These are the young people who became eligible to vote during the governments of Margaret Thatcher and her successors. We examine below the particular impact of her policies on this generation.
Under Thatcher, leader of the Conservative Party from 1975 to 1990, and Prime Minister from 4 May 1979 to 22 November 1990, data indicate that the economic and social prospects of the typical British household underwent a sea-change. Saluted as a class-warrior (The Herald, 2013; The Telegraph, 2013), whether one saw her policies and her successor’s, John Major (Prime Minister from November 1990 to May 1997) as necessary and/or successful depends upon one’s point of view (Financial Times, 2013), or so it is said.
She has been voted both the greatest (YouGov, 2013) and the worst recent UK Prime Minister (The Guardian, 2016). During her first term, many predicted the crisis her policies would produce (Courts et al., 1981) yet, by the time of her resignation, the majority (52%) of the British people were of the opinion that her government had been good for the country (IpsosMORI, 2013), even though she was personally disliked by the majority (60%) (IpsosMORI, 2013). At the least, perhaps, most would agree with one-time Liberal Democrat leader Paddy Ashdown (quoted in The Guardian, 2016), ‘she laid out her stall and she achieved it’. However, it is precisely here where the record is weak.
In the following, we consider the efficacy of these policies from the point of view of Thatcher’s and her government’s stated aspirations. It is often assumed that Thatcher’s goals were purely economic, the re-establishing of the principles of free-market fundamentalism (neo-liberalism as she—and many others—called it, Thatcher, 2003, p. 337). However, that is to underestimate the scale of her ambition. Thatcher (1981) sought to ‘change the soul’ of the British people: and believed ‘Economics is the method’ by which this might be achieved.
Although we necessarily focus primarily on her economic policies (assessing the extent to which they delivered, or failed to deliver, the results for which she had hoped) following Thatcher, these are only the method. We cannot judge her legacy in purely economic terms (Stepney, 2014) but rather by whether she wove or unravelled the ‘living tapestry’ of the UK.
In Section 2, we consider the impact of neo-liberal policies on economic growth and incomes growth. In Section 3, we consider the changing employment and welfare prospects of the British people. In Sections 4 and 5, we assess Thatcher’s success in promoting home ownership and shares ownership, respectively. In Section 6, we consider her success in promoting the moral society she sought. In Section 7, we consider explanations for her supposed popularity. Conclusions are drawn in Section 8.
2. Economic growth
everyone in the nation has benefited from increased prosperity – everyone. (Thatcher, 1988)
In the first instance, we consider the impact of Thatcher’s policies on the UK’s economic growth in three aspects: national income, household income and poverty. We will consider, in each case, the inheritance of the 1980s and whether it is reasonable to suppose the UK economy was revitalised by the policies of the 1980s.
2.1 National income
If it is the case that the adoption of free-market ideology improved the UK’s economic prospects (Thatcher, 2003), it is reasonable to suppose the rate of economic growth was greater after this adoption than before. However, the data (Table 1, Figure 1) undermine this supposition.
Table 1.Open in new tabAnnualised increase in real GDP per capita of post-war governmentsa
Government Years Annualised growth rate
Conservative 1951–64 2.82%
Labour 1964–70 2.22%
Conservative 1970–74 2.59%
Labour 1974–79 2.31%
Conservative 1979–97 2.09%
New Labour 1997–2010 1.37%
Coalition (Cons./Lib.Dem) 2010–15 1.32%
Conservative 2015– 1.13%
Does any left of centre politician care about the young people born in the UK, sam?
Much of the evidence I see tells me that they care far more about the people born overseas who are now flooding here in an unstoppable invasion.
I’ll change my view when the facts change. For example, lifting the 2-child benefit cap will be a policy aimed squarely at the immigrants. Indigenous inhabitants largely stopped having more than 2 kids a generation ago.
Sam – did the university poll a wide range from the UK?
Scotland only would probably throw up different results?
As you may know, the Scots hate the Tories almost as much as the Tories hate Scotland, and haven’t voted for them, by a majority, in a general ‘election’ since 1955…..
And yet Scotland has had decades of Tory governments that they didn’t vote for. democracy, Huh?
It never ceases to amaze me how many fuckwits actually think they are in the same rich league as these parasitical scum and continue to hold them up as someone you should look up to
Thatcher and her ilk were just a shower of rich tax avoiding and tax evading arsewipes whose sole existence was in making as much money as possible irrespective of what damage and misery it brought to normal people
Anyone who believes these scum did anything worthwhile is just a greedy amoral piece of excrement just like them
Corporal Batshit extols the virtue of thatcher destroying the power of the unions and cites his experience of “I worked on the shop floor mate, in manufacturing (sheet metal fabrication) ,where have we heard that pish before, My father was a toolmaker says kid starver AYE right
IF corporal batshit actually did WORK on the shop floor his experience would tell him that these greedy bastard bosses wouldn’t invest in new tooling or machinery that would make them more productive and more competitive NAW it was because batshit saw a worker sleeping on the job
The english have a propensity to admire and hold these scum up as people who should be revered even when they are destroying their nest eggs and undermining the economy, they actually applaud and worship the fact that corruption and incompetence is at an all time high, it is only when the scum start to target inheritance tax or demand that you sell your house to pay for your care that they get a wee bit upset
Stammer moans about the deficit and screws the disabled and poor, corporal batshit and his fellow greedy bastards celebrate, stammer gives charlie a £25 million pound rise and corporal batshit and his fellow greedy bastards celebrate, stammer does away with the winter fuel allowance for rich pensioners and there is a mutiny
That’s some amount of shite CC.
Heh. So you couldn’t back up any of your earlier bullshit claims then.
Imagine my surprise.
Whatever, dick.
TL;DR
What, that was your rebuttal? Lol.
You surely don’t think I’m wasting any of my time on any of that half baked shite you posted?.
The only rebuttal you’re capable of is repeatedly shoving your head up your arse.
prick.
I literally asked you to provide evidence for any single one of your dumbass, unsubstantiated assertions. That’s not a “rebuttal” you fat moron. It’s putting you to proof – which unsurprisingly you dismally failed on every count because you’ve been found out. Again.
Stick to low grade abuse and trolling. Anything else is above your pay grade.
How’s the carp fishing going James?
Piss off troll.
Captain caveman,
12:04 pm.
Actually the programme I am watching is
How to Save England, -.
The word England being used in conjunction as the territory of Britain,
Filmed by the Spectator, posted 2 days ago,
“Police preparing for Donald Trump to visit Scotland
The Scottish government said it was working with the UK government to support police, and that the first minister was briefed on policing preparations on Tuesday night.”
link to bbc.co.uk
Get yer blimps out.
Treaties are worthless, not unlike cease fires. How many treaties did the imperialist British sign before annexing the other signatories homelands.
The indigenous peoples of North America signed loads of such papers and look where that got them.
The anglo-saxon characteristic, fair play, but not for the other guy.
The shadow nats in the ruling party must be party to the old confidence trick.
Yes, worthless treaties simply used ‘to legalize colonialism’, at least in the eyes of an Imperial justice system. A hoax the co-opted native elites are party to, as we see in Scotland’s colonial administrations.
The British and Anglo-Saxon are not synonymous. I am sure you know this. But you often use the term Anglo-Saxon to mean that and always pejoratively.
The fair play, but not for the other guy (a crass, bigoted caricature but perfect for this place of course) is much more associated with the Norman French who if you remember, invaded England and murdered or displaced 75% of the Anglo-Saxon and other peoples such as the ‘Celts’ (many of whom were very much still there as they lived and mixed with the Angles), of the north of England. The Harrowing of the North in the late 11th century has been called a genocide.
I know you do not care about such important distinctions when it does not suit you – this is what prejudice is, but you certainly love them when it does.
Reply to Chas @ 8.26
Oi Chas
Leave James alone!
It’s me that goes fishing and frankly, it’s no-one here’s business.
That said, enjoy the site Chas, and James, carry on, you’re doing a splendid job.
Undemocratic elections, Rigged elections for Scots.
They knew they should give the Scots a vote ‘they” had discussed it in depth between them, but decided not to because the Scot would vote NO. date 1706/ 1707.
They knew the should re- run the referendum vote for (Scots to stay in a union that they were not in ) due to publicly acknowledging that ruskies had interfered in the referendum votes, 2014- 2020.
England democracy for Scots or Colonialism for Scots.
Cheers, YL.
They don’t like it up ’em. LOL
Worthless Treaties. Un-democratic voting for Scots.
The other half of the treaty of union down south after much discussion decided not to give the Scots a vote to join the treaty of union 1707 due to the being aware the Scots would probably vote NO to Joining,
Democracy ignored, No treaty with the Scots.
The 2014 referendum vote should have been re- run, for Scot to remain in the treaty of union that the Scots Were not asked to join, due to acknowledged interference in 2014 from the ruskies in that vote,
Worthless political parliamentary treaties between the Scotland and England, as Westminster parliament and (monarch of England) immediately dissolved the old Scottish parliament from the treaty,
Overriding un-democratic and rigged voting systems for Scots.
Obvious Colonialism over the Scots and their territorial realm as the Scots deliberately never got the vote to join the 1707 treaty of union.
Its difficult to stay or remain in a 1707 treaty you never asked to join, and its difficult to acknowledge that the Crown of England by succession and descent had any status of succession over a now vacant republic country Scottish crown.
The crown of Scotland was offered to England, not the Sovereign territorial realm/ kingdom or Country, but England Chose to keep the the new great Britain parliament under the Crown of England,
Due to not wanting to share the power of monarchy Sovereignty with Scotland in the new English parliament.
And not wishing to share parliamentary power with the Scottish parliament, the Scottish parliament was dismissed, deleted and dissolved from the 1707 treaty,
Meanwhile Scots were never given the vote to join the treaty of union.
What remained of the treaty, left England in the treaty on its own,
Then the Westminster parliament of England decided under continuous laws of England and expired or obsolete laws to repeal Scottish laws.
And introduced Halsbury laws of England and Wales statues to run the Westminster parliament over the colonised Scots. Whom had no monarch , no parliament and no Scots in the 1707 treaty of union of England with England.
Twists and turns.
The devolved Scottish parliament can only be referred to as a subsidiary parliament of England and Wales under the introduced English Halsbury statue laws for England and Wales in the Westminster parliament down south.
Almost all of Englands constitution codified or un-codified, are based on Halsbury Statue of England and Wales, and the succession to the crown of England, a monarch of England.
It has been argued that the old members of the old Scottish parliament joined the new parliament of Great Britain, and that is why we have a political parliamentary union.
However it can equally be argued that is not a correct summarisation.
1)
Because the old English parliament members simply transferred themselves without election into the new branded named parliament of Great Britain.
2)
The new parliament of Great Britain was and had the Monarch of England by succession and descent resting in that parliament.
The old Scottish parliament members entered the Westminster parliament of England as new members of the Westminster parliament of Englands Great Britain.
This was officially completed when the parliament of Scotland was dissolved from the treaty of union,
This being approved by the monarch of England and the old English parliament of Westminster now residing in the rebranded parliament of England to the parliament of Great Britain.
Thus with the old Scottish parliament dissolved and the parliament of England continuing into the Great britain parliament there is no union of parliaments.
Rather it is the case that the old Scottish parliament members became english parliamentarians.
As soon as the Scottish parliament was officially completely dissolved.
“The old Scottish parliament members entered the Westminster parliament of England”
Aye James, lest they had no shame, I suspect the Scots contingent on that fateful day may have immediately regretted their decision, when first faced by their procurer, who would take no pity on or liking for a disgraced class of people who were and still are prepared to sell their ain nation and enslave aw its fowk.
An naethin haes sin shiftit ower the lest 300+ years, for thon is aye the wey oor doun-hauder an procurer deeks at deceitfu Scots wha doup doun in thair Englis pairlament, an desertly sae.
We have a lot of formorian sea devils on this forum. Have you guys not worked it out yet?
– its the Scots who are the master chosen race, not the anglo saxons, the aryans, the ashkenazi … but the difference is, with us, we just accept it, with an inward glow
let’s remind ourselves of WHO WE ARE :
Oxford Uni did a big genetic study not that long ago. They even drew some nice, clear pictures.
And yet, these studies, scientifically rigorous and well-researched, are mostly ignored in the media; it becomes uncomfortable from many angles, for many reasons. If you are a proponent of multiculturalism, as most liberals and right-thinking people are, it raises dangerous questions about “belonging”.
link to peopleofthebritishisles.web.ox.ac.uk
“The most striking observation is the EXTRAORDINARY CORRESPONDENCE between the genetic clusters and geographical location.”
It simply shows on a map who the peoples are and some things jump out at you.
– the Scots are a people, with a land, and we are not English
the modern Scots are 3 distinct groups, roughly gaels, picts and nordics. The “vanishing” of the picts has been found to be a fiction as their DNA still exists within us at the 10% level; they had no written culture and so they “disappeared”.
the English are primarily anglo-saxon (the big red cluster centred on the south east), with a periphery of smaller clusters which reflect the brythonic (“celtic”) tribes. Yorkshire is a place on its own, due to “viking” heritage. Notably, the anglo saxons do not cover northumbria or cumbria. Northumbria was mainly a danish kingdom which resisted the anglo saxons, and it is likely the romans imported germanic mercenaries to fight the caledonians on a like for like basis.
ergo – lowland Scotland is not “anglo saxon”, it was always celt/gaelic; it would be more accurate to regard much of cumbria/northumbria as really “scottish”, and indeed, in the past, our borders extended further south.
Certainly the pernicious fiction that Scots are just anglo saxons with funny accents pretending to be aboriginal picts, is quite wrong. Typical LYING ENGLISH BASTARDS – you get it a lot.
Invasions are “problematic” for many researchers in the field; they like to talk of migrations and cultural interchange, like ancient history was “diverse and multicultural”, but then the ancient DNA guys turn up and find, e.g. the male DNA of one group disappears after a period, entirely – some new tribe turns up, wipes out the men of the old tribe and grabs the women. Cultural interchange, but with spear and cock. That the mixing of different peoples usually leads to violence is an uncomfortable fact.
The “english” are a mixture down to all the invasions they experienced (for a people who never shall be slaves, they sure get conquered a lot, mainly because they are shit at fighting) – romans, angles, saxons, vikings, normans; the ancient “scots” were relatively left alone by e.g. the romans and the vikings, and the northumbrians got put back in their box when they tried to expand. The fiction of the lowlands being “english” is due to northumbria extending to edinburgh for an insignificant period.
You can go back further of course, then the groups talked of are the beaker people, corded ware culture, neolithic farmers and the yamnaya, who invaded from the steppes. This is becoming a bit mythic, a bit conan the barbarian “Between the time when the oceans drank Atlantis and the rise of the sons of Aryas, there was an age undreamed of.” – you can throw in the Tuatha de Danaan into this (the tribe of Dan? – a lost tribe?!) – then there is our own mythic origin, the egyptian princess, and warriors from “scythia”.
– beyond a point, while it remains interesting, it just gets silly and impractical. We are not dealing in absolutes, certainly not genetic determinism. No DNA test before you hit the voting booth.
Point is though, telling a people “they do not exist” is a vicious form of colnial, psychological warfare and should be resisted; the perversions of language used to fool you, called out for the bullshit it is – “new scots”. Please, fuck off, and once fully fucked off, fuck off again, just to be sure.
The UN is very big on the right of self determination, which is an absolute, not to be controlled, mitigated, moderated or dished out as charity by some “superior” group.
The Scots just want their rights, and their country back. To make their own decisions and in their interests. Just what everyone else is allowed, no more, no less.
The Scots just want shot of the likes of you.
We wouldn’t have the shits that are running us at HR if the likes of you hadn’t voted them into power.
Over and over again.
The shits at HR are you, only with more money, better clothes and the power to make real the kind of sick fantasies you post online. And that’s precisely why you vote for them and will continue to do so.
the anglos always were pirates, it’s in their DNA
“wherever wood floats, you will find an englishman, stealing all he can”
nice one bobby, nice one son, nice one bobby, let’s ‘ave anuvver wun …
link to grousebeater.wordpress.com
I hope he got a full english in the cells.
Noice.
In reply to Penisbreath @ 4.48pm
Hmmmm..
At what point then, if not already, do you want Brown people to deferentially refer to you as “Memsahib” and black people to refer to you as “Bwana”?
I reckon they should just be a bit more forthright in what they call you..
I reply to P3nisbreath @5.05pm
“We” the “Scots”..
Yer having a laugh..
There’s no-one on this site that has put down Scots, their hopes and dreams, lifestyles and influence in yer great old “Mother of all Parliaments” keich more than you.
Anyone interested; well feel free to trawl back through P3nisbreath’s wearisome catalogue of nasty little monologues putting Scots and Scots independence down..
Well in line with SOP of you UniTrolls on here; Rev Stu..help! Some Scotchman is being beastly and answering back!! Shouldn’t they all be sozzled on Buckie by now?
Rev, help..
You’re fooling no-one w**kstain, just away and gie us all peace ya fifth columnist propaganda sH1te spouter..
Amen to that, brother.
OH no someone else has unveiled Bastard Tax MOAN’s real agenda,undermine and deride everything about Scotland and Scots and beg for Is rahel to come and save us
Alf Baird.
” Thus the old Scottish parliament members became [English parliamentarians]when they entered the continued English Westminster parliament resting openly in the Westminster parliament of Great Britain”
That the commissioners from both England and Scotland, the old Scottish parliament members and the all English Parliamentarians and the Monarch of England decided after debate, not to ask the Sovereign Scots to join the 1707 treaty of union due to the high resulting probability that the Scots would vote NO,
And that was a feared chance they were not willing to take,
Is was where Scots have been propagandered into believing they were in the Faux English parliament of Great Britain and 1707 treaty of union.
Whereas the political parliamentary union never occurred because the Scottish members transferred themselves by election to become English parliamentarians into the continued parliament of Englands new Great Britain.
The Scots and the kingdom of and community Realm of the Scots has threadbare history connections to the 1707 treaty of union,
And only the modern freedom of information that has now been digitally down loaded has enabled The Scots to learn that the (early propaganda ) machine over the said treaty has not reached there ears and eyes until centuries later.
Today the English Great britain Westminster parliament has continued English laws and run on Halsbury’s Statue laws of England and Wales,
Anglo- treaties have continuation as prior to 1707.
And the monarch of England continues to be as the monarch of England.
With no historical legal connection to the Scots other than Colonisation and a faux propaganda overtreaty of union supposedly with the Scots.
With no Shared monarch,
One wonders why we beg the parliament of Englands Great Britain from 1706 to 1800 for permission to leave a treaty we are not in,
Other than our brains now believe the colonial Propaganda that was perpuetated on Scots since 1707 when news was not so forth coming.
It no longer requires a deep thinker to question the validity of, the extended from England parliament subsidiary Scottish parliament under The Scotland Act, Or Why the parliament of Englands Great Britain and the monarch of England refuse the right to self determination fo the Scots,
Colonialism also continues, along with English Treaties, English laws, English monarchs, English Territories, English assets and resources. English currency.etc.
Without Scots involvement, without a Scottish monarch, without the dissolved Scots parliament.
Alf Baird.
I apologise for late reply as busy thinking about re- locating.
Hopefully somewhere where they do not have an internet connection.