Wings Over Scotland

Assent…

Everyone is getting their knickers in a twist over a pure formality carried out mindlessly by a dying old lady who sees her legacy disintegrating.

Calm down people Ffs – end of the Sovereign Nation of Scotland my arse. This – royal assent’ means nothing.

@Al-Stuart 8:13pm

As I suggested earlier Al, there can’t be a ‘UK wide’ ‘federal referendum’ until England has a devolved parliament – otherwise no-one is voting on federalism or voting federally.

If there had been no devolved parliaments at all, there certainly could have been a referendum on creating a federal union; which would then require the creation of federal parliaments – including an English one. That would also have nullified the Treaty and Acts of Union and specifically abolished the nations of Scotland and England – without argument – with the creation of a new federal state.

But today, whichever way it is sliced, there has to be an English Pariament created. Again not impossible to call for a federal UK today, but (and I’m not sure how else to explain this) it would be a vote to bring an English parliament into existence.
However, in what world do the existing devolved parliaments get to decide whether England gets a parliament? Aye right. It also has to specifically abolish both Scotland & England as nation states. All the very best convincing England with that. Scotland though (as we sadly know) has a large contingent who dream fondly of their own abolition.

So, my opinion is Federalism won’t fly – the other devolved parliaments would have equality of representation with an English Parliament and the Federal Government would have equal representation within it – this is not a world we inhabit.

There was no UK Vote on Brexit for example. a ‘UK wide’ one, yes, based on population size – So if they can’t even respect that partnership of equals, we can be certain perfidy will out with federalism. They may well be pushing for the new federal state of ‘Ukania’ as you fear – but we all know what its real name is.

How do you know when you have been annexed and not in a union. When your sovereignty can be usurped by another country and the royalty of that country agrees with this on the assumption they should be sovereign and not the people.

That’s two institutions that need obliterated from Scotlands future, WM and the royal family. My ambiguity regarding the royals has turn from disinterest to disdain.

What will the Colonial Stream Media make of this, nothing, they will spread the propaganda that is is just a normal occurrence, not even worth mentioning.

I saw English nationalism turning to outright fascism towards Scotland, almost thirty years ago when I was at university. Tories are barely human in a moral sense, so when you add neo-liberal theory and practice, these political knuckle-daggers tend towards full-fat-fascism. And they managed to obtain royal ascent, not that that’s a particular surprise.

Telt you fascism creeps up fast and appears as if from nowhere.

Natural Law Lecture 2005
THE POLITICAL ETHOS OF CONSTITUTIONAL DEMOCRACY AND THE PLACE OF NATURAL LAW IN PUBLIC REASON: RAWLS’S “POLITICAL LIBERALISM” REVISITED

I. CONSTITUTIONAL DEMOCRACY: THE HISTORICAL LEGITIMACY
OF ITS POLITICAL ETHOS

A. Constitutional Democracy and Liberalism: a Specific Political Expression of the Natural Law Tradition
The main concern of the following pages, and the principal aim of my argument which runs through all parts of this lecture, is to answer the question: “How in liberal constitutional democracy as it actually exists in most free and developed countries is natural law in the classical sense a legitimate and politically workable standard of reasonableness and objective moral value?” In order to answer this question, I will have to talk extensively about history (Part One).

Moreover, I will develop my argument in a partly sympathetic confrontation with what I consider to be the main and most valid contemporary philosophical theory of liberal constitutionalism: John Rawls’s Political Liberalism1 and its conception of public reason and liberal legitimacy (Part Two). In my view, this theory contains sufficient truth to be worthy of being continuously and fruitfully revisited, but also sufficient evident untruth as to be a useful contrast-background for a political-philosophical argument in favor of the relevance of natural law for public reason (Part Three).

The nearly unquestioned framework for normative thinking on political matters today seems to be constitutional democracy of some kind. The democratic constitutional state is the expression of a complex ethos, grown in the course of a long history. This ethos forms a specific conception of publicreason which is embedded in a framework of pre-political reasonableness that we refer to as “natural law.” Being “natural” and, thus, pre-political, it is not to be identified with public reason….

link to academic.oup.com

I was pretty sure we were heading for the twilight zone, which has been Scottish political irrealism since devolution unsettled constitutional practice. Anyway, we’re way past that now, IMHO, and are now in the scary zone, where “positive law” is all let off its’ leash. Careful now. 😉

The Twilight Zone of Positive and Natural Law
The conflict of “positivism” and “natural law” is not merely of doctrinal concern. Conceptually, this conflict develops in several stages: from a purely theoretical, jurisprudential stage, through an ethical-ideological stage, to a practical political stage, and each of these stages is marked by the evolution of certain ideas and ideals of democratic thought and action.

Concepts such as “inherent rights,” “reasonableness” and “equal protection” can be understood only in the light of this conflict and its potential resolution. The essential of democracy, “government of laws,” as government by positive law, is but a symbol of the final, political stage of positivism. The purpose of this article is to sketch both the meaning and the theoretical and practical import of the conflict of positive and natural law….

link to scholarship.law.berkeley.edu

Sorry….where legal positivism is all…..

Anyway, you don’t need to look very far for a constitutional democracy that appears to acknowledge a constitutional role of natural law. Though the law is a structure that is constantly evolving, so I’m not suggesting any particular constitutional structure for Scotland, other than one that does not stand under Westminster’s assumed legal supremacy.

Full text.

Judicial review in Ireland and the relationship
between the Irish Constitution and Natural Law
link to researchgate.net

I don’t mean to be a space hog but folk don’t click links, so here’s a passage from the link above. I think the head of state may have been poorly advised. Let’s give her the benefit of the doubt, or not. Just get this clear case of maladministration in front of an international law court, please

7 Positivism and the Sources of International Law
These were not the only obstacles, however, hindering legal positivism’s efforts to annex international law….

A Treaties
Treaties are the only objects of an apparently law-creating character at the international level to which states unambiguously consent. Treaties do not, however, formally create law at all:

Considered in themselves, and particularly in their inception,treaties are, formally a source of obligation rather than a source of law. In their contractual aspect, they are no more than ordinary private law contract: which simply creates roghts and obligations…The only ‘law’ the enters into these is derived not from the treaty creating them – or from any other treaty – but from the principle pacta sunt servanda – an antecedent general principle of law. The law is the the obligation must be carried out, but the obligation is not, in itself, law,63

The law compelling a treaty’s observance thus necessarily exists independently of, and prior to, the act of will by which state sovereigns agree a treaty terms.64 The principle pacta sunt servanda is a general principle of law.66 Indeed, it is quite possibly the first general principle ever to have been manifested in international relations.67 It is not the act of sovereign will in concluding a treaty which creates a legally binding obligation….

(you need to find out the rest for yourselves as I’m skipping quite a bit)

….Treaties are thus material sources of law, rather than formal sources: they tell us what legal obligation requires in the circumstances of a particular case, but not that a legally binding obligation exists….

From Tassie:

To Robert Peffers:

Just to say, if you are lurking Robert – best wishes to you and your family for 2020. Take care and hopefully Independence will come very soon!

Also best wishes to all other wingers working for Independence – may it be this year!

Scotsman in full anti SNP mode this morning with anonymous EU official saying Scotland won’t get back into EU anytime soon and former Labour spin doctor Gina Davidson who is apparently now a journalist attacking the SNP’s disastrous record even playing up the ridiculous report on teenage drinking levels based on a survey of 50 teenage drinkers.

Don’t worry about the lack of a “pin-up” @Brian Doonthetoon says 23 January, 2020 at 11:03 pm

The usual titts will be along soon!

😉

Common Weal rules out violence as unacceptable in the national struggle.
Why? And if it became the last ‘option’? Go back in our box?
Even Gandhi saw its value.
link to kurukshetra1.wordpress.com

SNP

Sovereignty
Now
Purloined

By Empress Elizabeth and the British Empire Establishment.

With the acquiescence of the Scottish National Party.

Scottish MPs continued attendance at WM means cowardly acceptance that the Sovereign of the Kingdom of England – Empress Elizabeth – is now sovereign over Scotland via UK Parliament.

That’s how Scotland’s sovereignty has been stolen from our nation by Empress Elizabeth and her beloved Conservative UK Govt.

We have Royal Sturgeon, colonial administrator on behalf of her Empress.
Administering her Majesty’s Scotland colony.

Bend the knee SNP.

The Cowards and charlatans who sold Scotland’s sovereignty for devolution power.

So will the European Commission and European Council simply sign-off the document on the UK Withdrawal Agreement, or will there be a spanner in the works.
Still wonder how the EU could enter trade deal talks with the UK whilst there is any question looming over the internal borders and ownership of resources within the leaving UK state.
I guess we’ll soon find out if there was any merit to the content of this post from Nov 2018.

link to wingsoverscotland.com

Did anyone hear the pillock on Radio Shortbread this morning, claiming 15000 cops could be sent North to subdue the unruly Scots in the event of a wildcat referendum? I think he also alluded to jailing leaders.

Hadn’t slept well so was only half-listening. Not sure whether it was serious or sarcasm…

Yeah, that would work out well in the long-term, might as well proscribe the SNP while they’re at it. Keep tabs on the ex-members STASI-style.

One week.

link to archive.ph

The EU Presidents sign the Withdrawal Agreement. Powerless Scotland is no longer a member of the European Union. Its a done deal.

I look forward to an independent Independence Movement making its response.

On Monday the Tories vote to make Scotland’s status equal to Somerset’s.
We are an English Shire who will abide by all rules laid down over the next
10 years by Bojo’s fascist party.

It matters not if what is good for England is adverse for Scotland.
They have full control over everything.
That what they want from us whenever they want it.

Cut the Barnett formula, sell our NHS, re-apply road and bridge tolls,
Charge extra margin on prescriptions, cancel free University education
Free care for the elderly, etc.

On Monday All Scots MPs who give a damn about Scotland verbally tear apart the Tories
For this and disrupt proceedings until forcibly ejected.
On 31st January SNP vote to close Holyrood for a new election where your choice is Scotland a powerless 3rd class English Shire or Scotland the country in charge of its own destiny and its rightful seat at the EU table!

Who is doing the crowdfunder? What for?

For the Court of Session legal action to exercise The Claim of Right 1689 and Articles of Grievances to remove Empress Elizabeth as the monarch of Scotland and to remove her UK and Scottish governments from power as a result of their illegal abuses of power against Scotland’s sovereign people.

Articles of Grievances:

Empress Elizabeth has never received coronation as Queen of Scots so has never been the rightful monarch of Scotland. She received coronation by the laws of England. She breached her vow to respect the laws and traditions of all the peoples of the United Kingdom, having failed to respect Scotland’s people’s sovereign power.

Empress Elizabeth has attempted to usurp and betray the constitution and laws of Scotland by giving Royal Assent to the EU Withdrawal Act which attempts to rob the people of Scotland of their sovereignty by its assertion at Clause 38 that UK Parliament is sovereign.

Empress Elizabeth has also failed to protect the democratic will of the sovereign people of Scotland by giving Royal Assent to the EU Withdrawal Act which will remove Scotland’s people from the EU against the democratic will of the sovereign people of Scotland.

Empress Elizabeth has enabled a UK Govt and Scottish Government to abuse and breach the constitution of Scotland. Both these governments of Empress Elizabeth have treated Scotland as a subjected colony of the Kingdom of England.

The FM of Scotland having failed to respect Scotland’s vote to Remain by offering to abandon any opposition to Scotland’s forced removal from the EU, despite having no lawful mandate from the people of Scotland to do so.

The Government of Scotland denying the people of Scotland democratic freedom of choice to end this iniquitous Union; the FM having insisted only her “gold standard” s30 indyref is the only legally acceptable way and a prerequisite of Scotland’s sovereign people having the right to dissolve the UK Union.

By this means and other wicked and deceitful procedures the Scottish Govt have sought to subjugate the sovereignty of the people of Scotland by placing them under the control of the MPs of England, Wales and Northern Ireland and unelected Lords and Empress Elizabeth, monarch and Sovereign of the Kingdom of England. By this means the Scottish Government have conspired with the Kingdom of England to rob Scotland’s people of their sovereign and ancient right to decide the constitution and laws of Scotland without outside interference or control.

I’ve just noticed that lots of bank notes still have our queen on them.
I understand during these austere times many folk may have missed this fact as they only have possession of a note for a brief time.
But seriously, she is on them so check it out next time you get a chance if you don’t believe me.

Brexit day protest, a week today outside the Scottish parliament. More than a dozen Edinburgh based Yes groups have organised it thousands expected to attend.

From 5pm to 7.30pm.

If you can’t make that there’s a later candlelit vigil outside our parliament from 10pm to 11.30pm.

If you can’t attend one, attend the other.

This is interesting

People leaving England and Northern Ireland
To live in Wales and Scotland

cid:0C70E023-63F7-420C-BD9E-E2C63698DEBC

Indyref?

Independence?

The law since 23/01/2020 is that only UK Parliament has the right to decide on indyref or Scottish independence.

UK Parliament has made that the law, rather than just convention.

SNP subservience under Sturgeon’s ahem, *cough* “leadership” has changed the rules of the contest completely.

The indyref battle is already lost before the SNP would get started. Can’t you see that? All that’s left is the SNP pathetically begging for the Evil Empire to do “the right thing”.
———————————————————————————————

Assertion of Scottish sovereignty via a reconvened Parliament of Scotland, repelling the sovereignty of UK Parliament, followed by Lawful denunciation of the Treaty of Union appears to be the only legal means left for self-determination and exercise of Scottish sovereignty.

That means defying the law of England and the Queen of England, Empress Elizabeth

Sadly, that is very unlikely to ever happen under Royal Sturgeon and the Queen of England’s privy counsellors of the SNP colonial administration.

Terence,
I don’t foresee an agreed deal between Scotland and England in any separation of belongings.
What I envisage is a deeply acrimonious divorce with the lawyers getting involved.

As long as we hope for the best and prepare for the worst then all should be well.

link to m.facebook.com

From 1846 to 2020, the attitude of the English Establishment remains the same. Only now it’s Scotland’s turn to feel the effects of England’s evil and inhumane decisions. They will treat us like diseased animals.

“Rotten potatoes and sea-weed, or even grass, properly mixed, afforded a very wholesome and nutritious food. All knew that Irishmen could live upon anything and there was plenty grass in the field though the potato crop should fail.” (The Duke Of Cambridge, January 1846)

Anyone going to the Scotland v France rugby at Murrayfield on the 8th March, and who cares about Scotland’s freedom. Don’t only sing Flower of Scotland, join in with La Marseillaise too. That anthem to freedom.

Westminster will hate it. The French will love it.

What I don’t get about the two unionists at the Scottish parliaments shouting at Nicola is that it is the Westminster government that is erecting a border up the Irish Sea and it is the British government charging British soldiers for carrying out their orders in N Ireland.

The orange unionist types really need to get to grips with what is happening

Breastplate…

“As long as we hope for the best and prepare for the worst then all should be well.”

What we hope for is decisive action, our own Boston Tea Party moment if you like, but what we’ll likely get are more regurgitated platitudes and empty rhetoric from our own Edinburgh Chocolate Teapot Party.

Blackford… “We’re not going to be dragged out against our will by the Prime Minister”.

“this UK government cannot drag Scotland out of the European Union before gaining the legislative consent of the Scottish Parliament”

The sand in the hourglass is running low, please tell me that you have something more, Mr Blackford. This country is being reduced to the status of an English county. Please tell us our party hasn’t pinned it’s hopes to a Tory Prime Minister changing his mind.

scunner says:
24 January, 2020 at 12:08 pm

Could England & Wales spare 15000 cops anyway and would we take a non-confrontational stance to a baton beating?

Now things get clearer Johnson did promise an extra 20,000 police officers at the GE! Just forgot to mention they were to come here and beat the shit out of Scots a la Catalonia. 🙂

My revised comment to Craig Murray’s latest blog article:

We don’t need to look far for a prime example of disregard for rule of law and national sovereignty.

On the 23rd of January 2020, Empress Elizabeth, Sovereign of the Kingdom of England gave Royal Assent to the EU Withdrawal Act.

Clause 38, in total disregard for the constitution and law of Scotland, asserts that UK Parliament is sovereign. A sovereignty it is said comes from the sovereignty of the Sovereign of the Kingdom of England. It is English convention made constitutional law for Scotland.

What the Kingdom of England failed to achieve over hundreds of years of attempted military conquest, has been achieved by Clause 38 of the EU Withdrawal Act. With the obedient acquiescence of the SNP and other politicians of Scotland, none of whom have been willing to sacrifice their respectability and comfort as British politicians to defend Scotland’s people’s ancient and rightful constitutional and legal rights.

“They may take our lives but they will never take our freedom” said Mel Gibson in the fictitious film, Braveheart.

The reality is the British Empire’s Empress Elizabeth, Sovereign of the Kingdom of England, has just taken Scotland’s freedom as a sovereign people, at the same time as dragging Scotland out of the EU against the democratic will of the people of Scotland.

As Craig has highlighted, the British way is to scorn morality and rightful conduct. For the British Empire has returned to the ethos of: “Might is Right”.

Yet, the SNP continue to play the role of colonial administrators, bending the knee to their Imperial Masters, with their talk of: “s30 to allow Scotland to exercise self-determination”, “the only legal way”, “the gold standard”; begging their Imperial Master to obey a “moral duty” and “do the right thing” etc.

This is the language and mindset of the SNP colonial administrators and their Imperial Holyrood colleagues who fulfil the role of passive, subservient administrators of Imperial devolution at that symbol of Empress Elizabeth’s Imperial power in Scotland, Holyrood, where Scottish democracy is limited and contained and Scotland is run as a colony of the Kingdom of England’s United Kingdom.

The withdrawal agreement is clearly in breach of the legal obligations defined under treaty law, so Westminster has just arbitrarily re-written history in order to usurp Scotland’s popular sovereignty. Yet our judiciary appears unconcerned. Do we have any judges in Scotland who aren’t BritNat fans of fascism?

Status of Treaties in Domestic Legal Systems: A Policy Analysis
link to cambridge.org

Seriously, do we have any judges in Scotland who aren’t fascists?

The Legal Effects of EU Agreements
The Legal Effects of Treaties in Domestic Legal Orders and the Role of Domestic Courts
link to oxfordscholarship.com

terence callachan
HMG apparently does not feel constrained by the moral and legal structure of the existing international legal order, so is now making the rules up as they go. Brexitania promises to be a spectacularly lawless state, IMHO.

The Relationship Between International Treaties and Domestic Law: A View from Albanian Constitutional Law and Practice
link to digitalcommons.pace.edu

I am breaking a long silence because I am tired of some people wittering about centuries-old irrelevant documents, when they clearly haven’t read or understood them.

The Declaration of Arbroath is a letter to the pope signed by 51 noblemen. It is a declaration of independence. It is not a constitution. It is doubtful whether it says anything about “popular sovereignty”, since it’s more likely that it’s just claiming the right of noblemen to replace a king. As was quite common in Europe at the time.

The 1689 Claim of Right similarly only claims the right of the Parliament of the time to replace a king. Not “the people”.

And here’s the best one:

There

is

no

“Treaty”

of

Union.

Oh, its terms were negotiated like a treaty. But it was signed into law as two Acts – a Scottish one and an English one. Not possible for Queen Anne to sign a treaty with herself, see?

So since no “treaty” exists, it has no standing in international law and it’s not possible for us to “dissolve” or “withdraw from” it. The two Acts need to be repealed by Westminster, because that’s the combination of the Parliaments which passed the Acts.

Don’t you think the SNP leadership hasn’t had advice and thought all this through?

People need to get their heads out of the musty scrolls, open their eyes to the 21st century and start thinking about practical ways to get the pressure on.

ian.dunt@politics.co.uk

Week in Review: No compromise as Johnson drives through brute Brexit

Ian Dunt offers a cold hard look at PMJohnson’s kid-glove offer of friendship to England’s Remainers, and reveals a fist of lethal steel.

If Johnson is set to treat fellow-English people this way, then we in Scotland can be in no doubt whatsoever that he will treat the natives in the Scottish colony even worse.

Johnson’s approach will be the same on every occasion. He will tousled his hair, say something he thinks is funny, make Scotland a generous promise, and then go back on it only to replace generosity with brutality.
Most recently we see this in the decision to not allow the children of EU citizens currently in the EU, to be re-united with their families WH are resident in the UK.

We all must scrutinise very closely indeed the forthcoming statements of the Scottish Government for any signs of being taken in by PMJohnson’s fake offers. If the SNP leadership show any inclination whatsoever towards believing PMJohnson then the Independence Movement must take steps to replace this Government as soon as possible.

Being fooled by empty promises into further frustrating delay, is no longer an option for Scotland. We’ve had a belly-full of that, going back to The VOW and the Smith Commission. We need to take a strong grip on our Independence and make sure it stays there.

This is the situation which Scotland has been dragged into as England morphs into a barely disguised brutal Fascist State for the protection and maintenance of the English Ruling Class. All under the puppet leadership of the jovial clown in blonde, PMJohnson, whose task is to disarm the UK population by amusing them with his incompetent and careless behaviour and privileged humour. Jokey-Johnson is always good for a laugh. Even, when your bleeding badly.

Seven more days. Then the Fascist Invasion begins.

If only the Indy14 No voters had listened to the truth instead of Establishment lies.

Nicola is making her plans known on Wednesday, so we will have a clearer picture then. I am willing to wait til then before passing judgement. I sincerely hope the gloves will be off.

Meanwhile Patricia Gibson has put forward the claim of right in the main chamber on Monday.

2.30 pm

Oral questions

Work and Pensions (including Topical Questions)

Legislation

NHS Funding Bill: Second Reading

Money Resolution

NHS Funding Bill – Jesse Norman

Adjournment

Claim of right for Scotland – Patricia Gibson

It’s the last item so no idea of timing. Can be watched live on parliament tv

link to parliamentlive.tv

Ok Breeks I read your points but how do we get the majority of the people of Scotland to do something for Independence.

Devolved Government is powerless as you say but in the last election the vote for Unionist parties was greater than that for the SNP.

We don’t have enough people on our side to justify all you write about in your posts about Scottish Sovereignty when the majority don’t back it in elections.

So not sure where we go from here. In contrast 90%++ voted for Independence in Norway away back in 1906 or whenever it was.

We don’t have anywhere near that number.

The only way I can see us getting our freedom is to declare udi Westminster is never going to allow you to leave people say it won’t work we,, nothing’s working just now and remember the old saying Only when you attempt the ridiculous will you achieve the impossible go for it

There are times when it is best to keep a low profile…unless you are a Tory…who all seem to have been given a licence to ride rough shod and just do the f**k what they like…

Newly elected Natalie Elphicke, wife of a suspended Ex Tory MP, that is THE ex MP who stands accused of sexual ‘assault’ allegations which has lead to a trial to be held on 29 June this year…..Charlie Elphicke…the Tory suspended..then unsuspended to vote on Theresa May’s Brexit deal then resuspended…yes THAT one.

This newly elected wife of the ex MP Charlie Elphicke who has now WON his old seat….constituents there obvs care not a jot and give not a damn….if it had not been her that they elected then a Monkey wearing a blue rosette would have sufficed…not sure…but based on her below suggestion I strongly suspect that there maybe a primate lurking within a human costume masquerading as Natalie the new Tory MP for Dover…her EX MP husband’s seat….

Well to raise her profile she has come up with a ripping spiffing idea of a banner on the White Cliffs of Dover stating ‘We love the UK’.

AND wait for it….fireworks too…so, she says, that they can see it in …France…that’s France BTW…NOT Brussels….are they going to take Dad’s Army out of retirement to do this…Lol

Sorry my understanding was that THEY, the Tory party Brexit cult, loved Europeans and it was just the ‘unelected’ bureaucrats in Brussels they disliked…who knew..(Us all really)…that it IS/WAS the foreigners that they dislike/disliked all along….

Seems as if where Brexit is concerned there is a bottomless pit of money waiting to be spaffed up a wall….to show Johnny foreigner what’s what….are they going to wheel out Vera Lynn too….

Mind you , I am sure many a European will celebrate the departure of the mega moaning,entitled and moronic elements of their Union is at last f***ing off…to join another Union…with Trump’s ‘America First’ USA…where they, the Brits, will be the junior partner….Lol

Expect happenings onn1.2.2020

Everything has gone quiet

For a reason

Preparations are being made

There will be trouble ahead

Doh!
The Relationship between EU Law and International Law

TheItalianJob

Popular Sovereignty of the people and an independent sovereign state are two different things.

The SNP follow a line that exercising of sovereignty comes from independence.

eg Scotland’s people can only exercise sovereignty AFTER an independent Scotland has been established.

Or they argue the Claim of Right 1989, that Scotland can exercise sovereignty to hold an indyref.

Indyref1 was generally accepted as an exercise in Scottish sovereignty WITHIN the UK state.
—————————————-
If Scotland’s people have the sovereign power to decide best form of government for the people of Scotland, they have the sovereign power to revoke WM rule over Scotland and reconvene the Parliament of Scotland.

I’ve argued for a while there is nothing to stop Scotland’s politicians from revoking the part of the Union Treaty which states one parliament for all of GB.

There is nothing to stop us having a reconvened Parliament of Scotland that represents and exercises Scotland’s sovereignty, instead of WM, without first establishing a separate state.

Sturgeon and the SNP deliberately make it the other way round, eg UK State approved indyref first, as they are colonial administrators and whom it appears, do not want to defy the UK State, as their careers and prestige are based on UK colonial administration of Scotland.

——————————

The usual arguments is that the UK State would never accept that, it would be unworkable.
But it may be a way of bringing more people on board, that for now, aren’t yet convinced by the arguments for full independence but who do regard Scotland as a sovereign nation in a voluntary union and who don’t want One Nation Conservative England Britain.

TheItalianJob @ 3.58 pm.

I understand your reasoning re the accumulated number of votes of the last GE.
However, bear in mind that this was a GE for the Westminster government for which, to many Scots, didn’t matter a hoot, knowing that the English vote would decide the outcome. I can’t remember what the % turnout was but I believe it was in the low 60s. In contrast, the 2014 Indyref had a turnout in the mid to upper 80s.
This was, of course, of great interest to Scots, &, despite all the lies & promises, we almost made it.
People are much wiser now &, coupled with more 16 to 18 year-olds eligible to vote, I, personally, am more optimistic for the future outcome.
Many proposals have been made on how the future campaign be carried out but might I add, INSTIL PRIDE.
No, before some troll comes up with “pride comes before a fall”, it is the unwary who make that mistake.
PRIDE & wariness has to be at the forefront.

.
Hi Iain Muir,

Thank you for the constructive post. It is very reassuring.

To clarify it is NOT myself advocating any sort of Federal UK to kill off IndyRef2 by the back door.

I am just bewildered at how a maverick Tory I used to work with and who now lives in Braintree, England was at one of his Essex Tory Branch meetings discussing ways to “solve the problem of uppity Scots and Independence talk”.

The people there may be detestable Tory carp-hounds, but quite a few of them actually have their hands on the levers of power in Downing Street and UK Government.

I simply don’t trust the scheming liar of an anti-Scottish PM. BoJo has scores to settle and he is quite open about sticking in the skean dhu.

Whilst the PM’s psychotic rent-a-villain, Dominic Cummings is barely house trained, but has one of those brilliant evil genius streaks. That flucker brazenly won Brexit with a game-player attitude and gerrymandered referendum.

DangerDom was behind the stitch up to get Boris elected, with help from BoZo campaign manager Sir Iain Dunked in Shlit.

The Tories brilliantly pulled out their ace card. The sleeper “asset” they had rigged years earlier by the Tory backed election of: Jeremy Corbyn. So the most unpopular Tory Government in a 100 years actually got elected with an 80 seat landslide because so many Tories joined Labour to vote to get Corbyn elected. Useful idiot of an opposition leader (sic).

Now, Bulldog Winston Boris, with his long term and public loathing of Scotland is planning something. Of that I have no doubt.

The trouble is we are so busy looking in the wrong direction on IndyRef2 and ASSUMING BoJo will say NO, NO, NO. When in a before May he is likely to say YES to IndyRef2. But with BoJo typical smoke-and-mirrors it will be HIS IndyRef2 we will get. A Federal IndyRef.

link to m.youtube.com

I smell a rat. The full story is far from public domain, but if the PM and Home Secretary plus Tory Party chairman ARE already planning to shut the SNP up for good, what if they have gone total Edward De Bono and gamed a lateral thought scenario?

Does any rational person here on Wings Over Scotland think Boris is just ignoring Scotland?

We will have a helluva job if BoJo actually offers Scotland IndyRef2 (but his flavor).

In England, the majority of the populous couldn’t give a stuff about Scotland. All they know is if BoJo stands up to the sweaties and gives the Jocks their IndyRef on being Federally Independent, then England will believe we have had our second referendum. If we win the poisoned chalice we will be indentured as subjects from Ewan MacGregor’s Trainspotting monologue…

[Rent-Boy]
It’s shite being Scottish!
We’re the lowest of the low!
The scum of the ffucking Earth!
The most wretched, miserable, servile, pathetic trash, that was sharp into civilisation!
Some people hate the English, I don’t! They’re just wankerss!
We, on the other hand, are colonised by wankerss!
Can’t even find a decent culture to be colonised by!
We’re ruled by effete arsseholess!
It’s a Shiite state of affairs to be in Tommy,
and all the fresh air in the world won’t make any fuckingg difference!

This is the legal protection Scotland loses at the end of the month, unless a spectacularly cunning plan unfolds.

Giving Effect to Customary International law
Through European Community Law
link to law.kuleuven.be

Ian Brotherhood@6.22
Nice one, I read some of the “tweets” although some could have said “How many UK+MSP Labour members does it take to change a light bulb?”
Answer =All of them because they are totally clueless on anything, you would probably get water coming out the light switch.
They would of course blame the ESEMPEE baaad.

RM & Terence “Honest I’m not a Xenophobe, but keeping lying about the number of English (sic) voters” Callaghan.

There was, if my memory serves me correctly, a public consultation from the SG on voter franchise for elections & referenda in Scotland in 2016. (Happy to be corrected)

There was healthy & heavy debate ongoing here BTL at the time, but as with everything in life, I wonder how many bothered to articulate their thoughts and reply to the consultation? You know, being proactive in our “democracy” I know that I did.

I’m personally feeling pretty scunnered with the perceived lack of action, but can report that 3 NI born friends who either didn’t vote, or voted no in 2014 are now actively campaigning for Yes if/when. Another couple of Tory acquaintances who are swithering (1 a councilor). So whilst the decided are getting impatient and bumping our gums, the undecideds or former soft No’s are coming round to see the light.

My tuppence-worth for the evening, back to lurking, as most of the time others hav expressed my thoughts before I get the chance to comment.

Website can be read at my work, but not commented on *Sigh*

RM said: It should be Scots born folk automatically allowed to vote even though they live in a foreign country any incoming residents will have to have stayed here full time for 15 years holiday homes don’t count and 16 year olds it’s their future.

Most expat Scots would vote NO, so good luck with that – a recipe for no Indy ever.

@Socrates MacSporran 7:15pm

Well said.

I would note you also did not complain when the Queen signed the Benn Act

link to holyrood.com
And so the chipping away at Holyrood begins………..

A year ago I would’ve agreed with the FUD, but actually, the Royal Family are pretty much a busted flush in the modern 21st century and Charlie will fuck it up proper when he finally takes over.

That, and the fact they are all a bunch of racist, bigoted cants. It will come out in the end about Harry/Meghan. and when it does, they’ll get desperate and admit oor Harry isnae really one of them anyway.

Although the SNP are right to smile and keep the party line over ‘we love the queen, honest’

HyFUD
Do you have any particular expertise that can help shed light, or are you simply here to wind up the natives, Toryboy?

——-

What I want to know is, what is the purpose of Scots law, if English law is, in fact, superior and immutable to all other law? Is it simply psychological decoration? Law that can be whatever is politically expedient, is no foundation for social justice or democracy.

If only Scotland’s judiciary supported the principle of universal human rights, or appreciated the extent of legal doctrine relating to the biological integrity of human-beings. Are they blind to the consequences of disregarding fundamental legal obligations defined through Treaty law?

Unity or Uniformity? Domestic Courts and Treaty Interpretation

Abstract

The role of domestic courts in the application of international law is one of the most vividly debated issues in contemporary international legal doctrine. However, the methodology of interpretation of international norms used by these courts remains underexplored. In particular, the application of the Vienna rules of treaty interpretation by domestic courts has not been sufficiently assessed so far.

Three case studies (from the US Supreme Court, the Mexican Supreme Court, and the European Court of Justice) show the diversity of approaches in this respect. In the light of these case studies, the article explores the inevitable tensions between two opposite, yet equally legitimate, normative expectations: the desirability of a common, predictable methodology versus the need for flexibility in adapting international norms to a plurality of domestic environments.

link to cambridge.org

@Breeks (8.02) –

I’m not going to pretend to fully understand your line of reasoning there but one line jumped out at me –

‘…a dead contract that cannot be lawfully resurrected.’

Wingers, perhaps more than the readers of other indy-supporting sites, are familiar with the Sevco story. Plenty of folk hate the subject being raised here but, unfortunately, it’s apt because it displays a particular attitude to ‘The Law’ which seems to have flourished under neo-liberal supervision i.e. “if it doesn’t suit us, change it, and if it can’t be changed, just ignore it.”

I admire your tenacity in exploring possibilities but the tragic truth is that most of us have given up. The hornets’ nest has been kicked to bits so I won’t even bother saying who I blame because, well, there’s no point now, is there?

Scotland lacks a domestic constitutional route to legal emancipation, as contemporary British constitutionalism appears to have lost sight of who the original contracting states were who brought the Treaty of union in to being. The equally sovereign states of Scotland and England, which though equal, locate their sovereignty differently.

Contemporary British constitutionalism refuses to acknowledge Scotland’s correct legal personality and equal legal status to England, because Westminster views the world through the eyes of English legal culture and practice. English law is assumed to be immutable and so supreme, As such, Westminster is unable to recogniee Scotland legally, without relinquishing the principle of parliamentary sovereignty.

Either Westminster and Holyrood start respecting the rule-of-international-law, or there will be blood on the streets, IMHO.

Treaties
link to opil.ouplaw.com

If I hadn’t got a bottle opener I’d want my money back.

ScotsRenewables

What’s Nicola Sturgeon gonnae announce on Wednesday?

Crystal ball time please.

Impress us or gies a laugh come Wednesday.

We aw need cheerin up.

I’m just filling in for Stu seeing as he’s went AWOL.

And don’t say I never warned you about Nicola Sturgeon and the SNP’s doomed to failure strategies!

I’ll even tell some of youse to F off and threaten to ban youse or put you on pre-moderation, to make it seem more authentic.

You’re gotta laugh at anybody who argues for *constitutional* Monarchies in a democracy, there’s no such thing
Oh and BTW the people of Spain do not love their Monarchy nor do they love their government and wonder of wonders nor do they even love the Pope, the people of Spain don’t much care for any authority of any kind because they believe all of it to be corrupt, and they’re mostly right

People say I slag the SNP.

I took a leaf out of Nicola’s book:

Come on Nicola, do the right thing. You have a moral duty.

You have the Remain mandate. You have the indyref mandate.
Exercise them. We know WM won’t let you.

So, take Scotland out of Westminster control.

Dissolve devolution. Declare Holyrood the reconvened Parliament of Scotland that exercises sovereignty of Scotland. Recall our MPs to sit with our MSPs and MEPs.

Declare the 1707 Treaty Union rescinded by Lawful denunciation from sovereign Scotland’s parliamentarians due to the flagrant breaches of the Union Treaty such as failure to respect Scotland’s sovereignty and enforced EU removal.

WM is the parliament of the Kingdom of England’s rule with English Crown in Parliament. Declare it so. No more pretence of democracy.

Do a Corbyn or a Cameron. Offer to negotiate a new treaty with England and put it to the vote: full indy or the re-negotiated treaty.

Scotland’s vote run by Scotland, for Scotland.

Thus, the unionists can have their chance to vote for a union. The indys for indy.

But Scotland decides for Scotland from now on. No more loaded UK parliament where Scotland has 59 votes and England 533.

There’s the argument again, the people of Scotland voted for ice cream and not chocolate and that proves for all time they don’t want the custard that wasn’t offered

Terrance Callaghan @ 9.17
You’re absolutely correct….
Shame it’s a different conversation.
I’ll try and explain!
We’re trying to get good government here.
The concept of nae taxation with out representation is inarguably a fixed staple of Democracy.
No one, absolutely no one, is claiming living here makes ye “magically” Scottish .
But what it does do is make ye a Scottish TAX pay’er.
In a Democracy that makes ye “Scottish” fur the purposes of the vote… AKA… A Scottish voter..
Why on earth after all these years dae ye still struggle wi this?… Ye don’t come across as particularly stupid?

@Liz g –

🙂

Not giving up on indy.

Never.

But NS pulling anything from the hat on Wednesday?

Keener minds than mine have applied themselves to this and produced nothing plausible so yes, I’m afraid I have given up on us ‘staying’ in the EU in any meaningful sense.

FUD @ 8:29

‘once in a generation’ has no more credibility than ‘rather be dead in a ditch’. Neither statement holds any currency, to repeat it as some sort of evidence is pathetic and it should stop on both sides.

Can we not be grown ups about the future of these Islands?

Clinging on to the Union is like constantly picking at a scab until it gets infected.

Ian Brotherhood @ 9.39
Glad to hear it…
Now I feel stupid for even thinking it!
I should have known better!! Sorry 🙂

Mist001

I have kept my mind open – despite cancelling my SNP membership before Christmas. So, if the SNP do more than you say, will you kindly shut the fuck up for at least a month?!

Maybe the Revs being quiet for a reason.

SWIM was out shopping today and cannae believe the bank notes they got back in change have been modified with the queen saying “Up the Jocks and your EU Citizenship” and “Fuck the Scottish plebs coz I’m pure minted from all your taxes”.
Amazing to think some folk would do such a thing after her only signing away their EU citizenship…
It’s almost like there is some kind of uncivil obedience being carried out.

Mist001 @ 9.49
Ah… There ye go… Your beginning tae doubt yerself…
Dinney fash .. we all have our moments !

Sarah

It’s simple – Labour is dead……and it started in Scotland.

England, without an SNP option, is lost in its Darkness.

You can thank Tony Blair and the Iraq War for starters. Darling et al and their champagne socialism…..fucking sell outs the lot of them. Torys are winning down South big time – we stand apart.

callmedave

Maybe that explains a famous newspaper headline during the Battle of Normandy at the Battle of the Falaise Pocket:

“Allies push bottles up Germans”.

Ouch.

@terence callachan 9:17 pm

To be a scot you have to have been born in Scotland or have a parent who was born in Scotland or have a parent who’s parent was Scottish…etc

Actually, youre only right insofar as, logically, a rat born in a barn doesnt make it a horse. Historically however, you couldn’t be further from the truth if you had tried. Its dated to at least the clan clan system, whereby if, for example, you came onto Callachan land, adopted the Callachan laws ans agreed to uphold and fight for the Callachan cause. You would be to all intents and purposes, a Callachan, with the same obligations and rights.

Scotland is therefore one of the few countries (perhaps the only one) where ethnicity or where you were physically born does not define being a Scot. Simply wanting to be a Scot makes it so.

O/T:

Boris Johnston’s lies coming home to roost!

link to web.archive.org

“ EU draws map for Boris Johnson of where customs checks he says won’t exist will go”

Re Ian Brotherhood @ 8.26

As Liz G said “You are not allowed to give up …” Hopefully you were expressing only momentary exasperation with the current situation as we really need your input. As an inveterate lurker who posts only occasionally I always appreciate your comments.

We need to remain positive and believe we will get there in the end. When that might be and who will lead us there are moot points. The SNP may yet grow a pair and finally do something positive in the next week or so but, if not, then there has to be a radical change in the SNP leadership or a new vehicle created to take us to our goal. Admittedly the latter in particular would create substantial delay but we cannot carry on in this limbo with all its false hopes. Our cause is supported by half at least of our population. That proportion increases daily due to demographics and also as the scales drop from peoples eyes despite the propaganda and lies of a corrupt establishment and their media. Our cause is just, backed by our own constitution and international law, and will ultimately prevail.

I suspect I am a bit older than you but I had always hoped, even expected, to see independence in my lifetime. I am beginning to suspect I may not live to see it but the fight has to go on for the sake of our children and grandchildren who do not deserve to live as second class citizens in a vampire state.

@ Ian Brotherhood

Took to long to compose my post and missed your intervening comments. Glad to hear you are still on the case!

I see a wee bit again about ‘expat and nom-dom’ furriners voting:
So I thought I’d drop in something I posted in 2017 (edited for brevity)
>>
It appears the Conservatives broke a manifesto promise to repeal the 15yr rule in 2015 (expats allowed to vote in UK elections for 15 years) and apparently it was also in the Queens Speech that year – So HM didn’t follow through on it either.
Here’s me thinking the number crunching would have favoured “Votes for life” or similar, yet the impression I’m getting is the Nom-Doms are too Euro or International in their outlook. I have a figure of around 3 million potential expat voters, but I haven’t a definitive link to data for that yet.

This research briefing re: ‘potential’ expat voters, appears to swing about from a quoted 5 milion, to 3 and under 2 million.

link to tinyurl.com (pdf)

The consensus appears to be that only around 23000+ voters exercised their right. That the government was/is attempting to increase that number to 100,000… (my surmise) of a significant, large voting bloc swinging UK election results is erroneous. Though that doesn’t preclude an impact of some description.

The ONS (Office of National Statistics) isn’t much clearer and appears to contradict the government research briefing (above) Figures are collated at 2011 with a note that they have not changed statistically at 2017?

link to tinyurl.com
>>

I can find very little updated since – effectively that ‘expats’ predominantly did not exercise their right to vote in UK elections and were more inclined to be pro-EU. Unfortunately, I have not collated enough data since to confirm, or refute, the notion that expats who vote are predominantly Unionist.
Other than to note: that expat voting appears negligible,pro-EU and observationally, that there appear disproprtionate pro-indy posters on Wings, who are ‘non-domiciled’ in Scotland.

Gfaetheblock, that’s not racism Terry is communicating – it’s nationalism. And he’s absolutely right to feel the way he does.

Currently on RT news banner at bottom of screen: EU warns that brexit trade deal will impact Scotland’s ability to rejoin the block.A subtle hint perhaps ?

Socrates MacSporran says:

“But, it all depends on the SNP growing a collective pair.”
—————–

They’ll need to grow steel balls and get a steel backbone, muchos rapido.

Rearing its head again I see ‘blood & soil’ nationalism. Though we understand the phrase negatively, as embodying the ‘Blut und Boden’ terrible agrarian and aryan nonsense (as espoused by the National Socialists in Germany) – we shouldn’t lose sight of the related phrases and very real application, when defining global citizenship and nationality.
Again, this is something I’ve posted before, so I will barely cover it:
Jus Soli & Jus Sanguinis

Jus Sanguinus : “right of blood” – is a principle of nationality law by which citizenship is determined or acquired by the nationality or ethnicity of one or both parents. Almost all states apply jus sanguinis in their nationality laws to varying degrees

Jus Soli : “right of soil” commonly referred to as birthright citizenship…is the right of anyone born in the territory of a state to nationality or citizenship and was once part of English common law.
Today it tends to operate, generally, on a restricted basis in Europe and unrestricted in the Americas.

Residency alone – outwith the two examples above, tends globally NOT to be a condition of citizenship. It is usually qualified and conditional via ‘Permanent residency’ status.

The ‘purest’ form of achieving citizenship, is to be found in the myriad ‘cash for passport’ schemes globally. The participating Nation gives not a damn who your parents were, where you were born, or where you reside – only the colour of your money – the rest of us have to rely on ‘blood or soil’ nationalism.

In Quebec of course most Francophones voted for independence from Canada in 1995 but No won overall thanks to English speaking Canadians