The world's most-read Scottish politics website

Wings Over Scotland


Winning back Scotland

Posted on January 18, 2020 by

Print Friendly

    1179 to “Winning back Scotland”

    1. Breeks says:

      31st January 2020 Scotland removed from Europe.

      1st February 2020 Scotland impeaches it’s utterly useless Government.

      How do you like those final details of Brexit Nicola?

    2. ScotsRenewables says:

      1st February – Breeks feels really stupid, Mist001, Chutface and other Yoon trolls on Wings implode.

      Howja like those onions?

    3. Dan says:

      @Golfnut

      Aye, what with her being Queen of Scots, that is my understanding too.
      So with her giving Royal Accent to the EU Withdrawal Bill it is now the time to call this situation out.
      Not contesting this matter will effectively be taken as giving consent.
      For matters of such importance to one of her Kingdoms, especially the one with her only being the monarch by our consent, there must be a warranty of some kind on our Queen if she starts to malfunction and operate outside the agreed “normal” parameters.

      Would like to have read what Mr Peffers thinks on this subject. Hope he is keeping ok.

    4. Dan says:

      Assent…

    5. Brian Doonthetoon says:

      It’s been a while since a WOS topic made page 3.

      And no pin-up…

    6. ScotsRenewables says:

      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.

    7. iain mhor says:

      @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.

    8. Dan says:

      ScotsRenewables says: at 11:05 pm

      This – royal assent’ means nothing.

      Quoted for prosperity on the off chance Scots do actually lose their EU citizenship against their expressed will…

    9. jfngw says:

      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.

    10. ScotsRenewables says:

      Hyperbole, the last refuge of a scoundrel.

    11. CameronB Brodie says:

      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….

      https://academic.oup.com/ajj/article-pdf/50/1/1/6654330/ajj-50-1.pdf

    12. CameronB Brodie says:

      Are Scotland’s judges really so powerless or disinterested in social justice?

      The Jurisprudence of Constitutional Law: The Philosophical Origins and Differences Between the Western Liberal and Soviet Communist State Law
      https://elibrary.law.psu.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1116&context=psilr

    13. CameronB Brodie says:

      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….

      https://scholarship.law.berkeley.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=3325&context=californialawreview

    14. cynicalHighlander says:

      @ScotsRenewables says:
      23 January, 2020 at 11:57 pm
      Hyperbole, the last refuge of a scoundrel

      Oh the irony.

    15. CameronB Brodie says:

      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

      https://www.researchgate.net/publication/317097782_Judicial_review_in_Ireland_and_the_relationship_between_the_Irish_Constitution_and_Natural_Law

    16. CameronB Brodie says:

      As far as I’m concerned, there is now a definitive political devide in Scottish politics. Those who support open, liberal, society and those who remain loyal to the sectarian and xenophobic Torydum of British nationalism, And constitutional practice that would have embarrassed Mugabe.

      Get Betty up in front of the ICJ. 😉

      Natural Law, International Order and the Limits of Legal Positivism
      ejil.org/pdfs/12/2/1518.pdf

    17. CameronB Brodie says:

      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….

    18. Kangaroo says:

      Royal Assent

      What are the issues with this EU Withdrawal Bill, now an Act.
      a) they have ignored the Devolved Parliaments, this is just another power grab like the previous efforts, so nothing new here
      b) Clause 38 “The Parliament of the United Kingdom is Sovereign” . This is the REAL issue as Carwyn Jones pointed out. Previously the UK Parliament was sovereign by “Convention” as i) the English Monarch delegated their Sovereignty to the English Parliament in 1688, a Parliament w huich was subsequently dissolved. This Clause effectively means the Monarch of England has now delegated Sovereignty in England to the UK Parliament. ii) IMHO it does NOT impact Scots Sovereignty which still rests with the people.

      What is strange though is that it was NOT discussed at the Privy Council – very unusual. This is where Ian Blackford could have raised objections and possibly prevented the Bill becoming Law. That is no longer the case, so we are where we are and we just need the EU Parliament to pass their equivalent into EU law and then Brexit will automatically happen on 31st Jan.

    19. Mary Miles says:

      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!

    20. Robert Louis says:

      Cameron B brodie at 0242am,

      The portion which you cite, is MOST imp[ortant, and I just wish many more folk in Scotland would grasp it.

      As I keep saying, the treaty of union is just an agreement, like any treaty. The treaty of union is not special, it does not have magic powers.

      The text you cited contains this most important part;

      “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.”

      [my bolding]

      In other words, Scotland agreed to the treaty, and can also end it, without ANY reference to Westminster whatsoever. As many on here have been saying for years.

    21. Sinky says:

      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.

    22. Effijy says:

      Betty- German Queen of England and suppressor of the Scots
      With a dysfunctional family oven ready for the Jeremy Kyle show.

      She and her circus can now go and get to F*** out of my country.

    23. Jockanese Wind Talker says:

      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!

      😉

    24. Ottomanboi says:

      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.
      https://kurukshetra1.wordpress.com/2013/04/19/no-non-violence-didnt-free-india-from-the-british-empire/

    25. Mike d says:

      Those who make peaceful revolution impossible.
      Will make violent revolution inevitable.
      John F Kennedy.

    26. Colin Alexander says:

      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.

    27. Breeks says:

      Never hurts to refresh your familiarity with Scotland’s Constitution from 1320… a poetic classic that is timeless for eternity.

      “….Thus our nation under their protection did indeed live in freedom and peace up to the time when that mighty prince the King of the English, Edward, the father of the one who reigns today, when our kingdom had no head and our people harboured no malice or treachery and were then unused to wars or invasions, came in the guise of a friend and ally to harass them as an enemy….”

      Déja vu all over again eh? Harassed as an enemy pretty much sums it up.

      And we reminder too for the English Queen… (my emphasis)…

      “Yet if he should give up what he has begun, and agree to make us or our kingdom subject to the King of England or the English, we should exert ourselves at once to drive him out as our enemy and a subverter of his own rights and ours, and make some other man who was well able to defend us our King; for, as long as but a hundred of us remain alive, never will we on any conditions be brought under English rule.

      It is in truth not for glory, nor riches, nor honours that we are fighting, but for freedom – for that alone, which no honest man gives up but with life itself..”

      Does that mean Scotland is now a Republic and we can rid ourselves of this fraudulent Pretender to Scotland’s Throne?

      You want an act of Civil Disobedience? As our last act as a monarchy, Scotland dethrones this Monarch who spits on our Constitution and then holds a coronation for an actual living breathing pig with its snout in a trough. Queen Pinky the First of Scots, who’s first Royal Proclamation is that Scotland recognises animals as sentient beings and occasional monarchs.

    28. Dan says:

      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.

      https://wingsoverscotland.com/serving-the-nations/comment-page-1/#comment-2408098

    29. scunner says:

      @Sinky
      SNP’s disastrous record even playing up the ridiculous report on teenage drinking levels based on a survey of 50 teenage drinkers.

      Of course Common Sense dictates that the underage drinkers they referenced would be unaffected by price increases. Its illicit nature ensures that.

      Just usual SNPBadness, nothing to see here.
      Make sure your politically uninterested average Scot has their misconceptions reinforced on constant basis.
      Remember “It’s Shite being Scottish”

    30. scunner says:

      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.

    31. Ottomanboi says:

      @Mike d.09:40
      Frustration with the respectable ‘drawing room’ conventions and the blether of party politicians and their lawyers inevitably leads in the direction Common Weal dismisses out of hand.
      CW’s posture on the matter is ‘unacceptable’.
      There seem rather too many ‘appeasers’ in the current system.
      You cannot bargain with the British State, it must be hammered, bloodied and made to crawl away.
      Do the Common Wealers read history? Fancy not much.

    32. ScotsRenewables says:

      One week.

    33. callmedave says:

      @scunner

      I think you misheard that bit in the interview with Clara Ponsati’s lawyer Aamer Anwar who was talking about her situation with Catalonia.

      He was trying to get the shortbread interviewer to imagine a scenario where the WM Boris Gov sent troops into Scotland and locked up the ‘ringleaders’ with the FM being sent to jail!

      Outrageous Eh? Oh wait that’s not such a long shot is it?

      🙂

      PS:
      Ponsati’s about to made an MEP because when the UK leave EU, Spain gets to add another 5 MEPs to their total and she is likely to be one of them and so avoid extradition to Spain.

    34. manandboy says:

      http://archive.ph/wip/eiaE6

      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.

    35. Mist001 says:

      Common Weal and all the rest can witter on all they want but they’re missing the essential point which is that Sturgeon has to change her stance.

      She has stated numerous times that she won’t go ahead with a referendum without a section 30 order, the so called ‘Gold Standard’.

      The UK government has already refused once this year and and we’re not even past January. They don’t have to do anything except keep saying no and they certainly will.

      So we’re at an impasse and the only way to solve it is for Sturgeon to change her position on the section 30 order. She is the one standing in the way of a referendum. I think it’s important to note that the UK government hasn’t said no to a referendum. They’ve only said no to a section 30 order.

    36. Effijy says:

      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!

    37. Ottomanboi says:

      Returning Scotland to at the very least the status quo ante 1707 ought to be the decision of the Scottish parliament. The next Holyrood election ought to be the independence election, THE vote that counts. Stuff referenda and get on with pro independence propaganda.
      Arise from your ridiculous semi recumbent posture Scotland..to paraphrase Mr Wilde.

    38. Colin Alexander says:

      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.

    39. Republicofscotland says:

      The (NAO), National Audit Office has said its impossible to calculate just how much HS2 will cost.

      So what is 8% of a really, really, really big number that will be added to Scotland’s GERS defict, whilst we never reap any benefits of HS2.

    40. Dan says:

      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.

    41. terence callachan says:

      Mist 001…1057am

      Yes but …until Scotland is out of the EU no action by SNP and Scottish government will be taken
      The mandates for Scottish independence are all based on that one event

      I think there will be action taken on 1.2.2020

      People continually referring to Scottish government asking for a S30 always avoid the obvious which is
      Why are Scottish government so keen on. a S30 agreement ?
      The answer is

      A S30 agreement sets the scene for negotiations following a Declaration of Scottish Independence
      in the event of a majority voting in favour of Scottish independence in a Scottish independence referendum.
      Everyone knows a “NO DEAL” departure from a long-standing arrangement is disastrous
      Brexit has shown us the folly of that route

      A S30 agreement is the way forward and is worth waiting for so that we can have an orderly departure with arrangements made in advance every step of the way

      People who want to rush in to alternatives
      are playing right into Westminster’s hands
      They would love a “NO DEAL” separation
      It gives them the prime opportunity to keep all the things belonging to Scotland that they have in England right now plus a good deal of things they control elsewhere that actually belong to Scotland or are of shared ownership between Scotland and rest of U.K.

      If we have to go the alternative “ NO DEAL” route we will do it
      But there is no need to rush into such foolhardy action

    42. Republicofscotland says:

      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.

    43. Kangaroo says:

      mandboy @10:54

      Lets hope it doesnt take bojo very long to sign and return the Withdrawal Agreement. Hopefully over the weekend if couriers are any good.

    44. terence callachan says:

      This is interesting

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

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

    45. terence callachan says:

      . Untitled.pdf

    46. Colin Alexander says:

      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.

    47. scunner says:

      @Call Me Dave

      Thanks for that. Like I said I was barely awake having overslept (why is it with “extra” sleep you feel worse? :-))

      So just a scenario and not a “pillock” but a nominally “good guy”!

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

    48. Breastplate says:

      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.

    49. Breastplate says:

      That’s of course if we get that far.

    50. manandboy says:

      https://m.facebook.com/story.php?story_fbid=2543436479268089&id=1947778842167192

      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)

    51. manandboy says:

      https://m.facebook.com/story.php?story_fbid=2543438909267846&id=1947778842167192

      PMJohnson was born in to the English Ruling Class, the Establishment.
      As with the Irish around the 1840’s, the traditions of the brutal English Establishment will be maintained in Scotland in the 2020’s.

      “The children were like skeletons, their features sharpened with hunger and their limbs wasted, so that there was little left but bones, their hands and arms, in particular, being much emaciated, and the happy expression of infancy gone from their faces, leaving the anxious look of premature old age. “(William Forster, a Quaker, 1846)

    52. kapelmeister says:

      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.

    53. manandboy says:

      Brilliant idea, Kapelmeister.

      It’s just that the rugby fraternity are Unionist by majority, private schools and all that as well as a strong sprinkling of ‘English-Scots’.

    54. Shug says:

      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

    55. kapelmeister says:

      manandboy

      You’re right of course. Some of the most ardent unionists are in the rugby fraternity. Nevertheless, many thousands of Scottish rugby fans do not share the SRU’s attitude.

    56. robertknight says:

      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.

    57. katherine hamilton says:

      Bonjour mes amis
      Pour Us agin the French. Sing heartily!

      Allons enfants de la Patrie
      Le jour de gloire est arrive
      Contre nous de la tyrannie
      Letandard saglant est leve (repeat this line)
      Mugir ces feroces soldats
      Ils viennent jusque dans vos bras
      Egorger vos fils, vos compagnes
      Aux armes citoyens! Formez vos battallions!
      Marchons, marchons
      Qu’un sang impur
      Abreuve nos sillons.

    58. admiral says:

      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. 🙂

    59. Breastplate says:

      Robertknight,
      I’m sure you’re right.
      My point is that nothing that furthers the cause of independence will come easily or amicably, we should all prepare for that including the SNP.

    60. Colin Alexander says:

      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.

    61. Breeks says:

      Colin Alexander says:
      24 January, 2020 at 12:04 pm
      Indyref?

      Independence?

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

      But therein lies the sophistry of Westminster. It is ALL a con. There isn’t a word that has changed in the Declaration of Arbroath in 700 years. There is no Treaty which actually repeals it. There isn’t a word changed in the 1707 Act of Union since it was signed. It remains the statutory conditions of Union. The Claim of Right is ratified at every asking.

      The latest perfidious “trick” of Westminster is disingenuous manipulation of a Devolved Assembly, a puppet assembly by statute, and bound by Westminster Legislation and professed Westminster Sovereignty, and yet calling itself a Scottish Government which answered to the Scottish people, thereby muddying the waters of distinction so it “appears” like Scotland’s actual Government can be held in check by Westminster because Holyrood can. A “Sovereign” Constitution thus inadvertently adopts the mantle of a lowly Devolved Assembly, and Westminster rolls with laughter and orders it around like a serf.

      The Scottish Government is only held in check by Westminster because the Scottish Government abides the Holyrood Constitution of a Devolved Assembly, and kneels down before the Scotland Act and Sewel Convention, NOT the appropriate Scottish Constitution of Scottish Popular Sovereignty, NOR in fact does it even stand its ground on the Treaty of Union.

      Scotland’s people are being railroaded and swindled out of their European Citizenship and Popular Scottish Sovereignty, and our timid Government and emasculated ‘sub-sovereign’ Parliament which is making a material and decisive contribution to the swindle being successful.

      Scotland NEEDS our god forsaken Government to step outside and denounce the faux Constitutions of both Holyrood AND Westminster, and unprorogue the Scottish Parliament of 1707 which hasn’t sat in session for over 300 years and sit in Emergency session with all possible speed and urgency.

      To Hell with your Referendums and lame words of indolence. DENOUNCE ALL PRETENDERS WHO SEEK TO USURP SCOTLANDS RIGHTFUL AND LEGITIMATE CONSTITUTIONAL SOVEREIGNTY, and in God’s name do it before 31st January, or may you burn in Hell as agents and accomplices in Scotland’s unlawful colonial subjugation.

    62. CameronB Brodie says:

      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
      https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/american-journal-of-international-law/article/status-of-treaties-in-domestic-legal-systems-a-policy-analysis/E8D1E82011A3A5D9A8579D561FC13DDF

    63. Colin Alexander says:

      Breeks

      Well said.

    64. CameronB Brodie says:

      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

      https://www.oxfordscholarship.com/view/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199606610.001.0001/acprof-9780199606610-chapter-2

    65. terence callachan says:

      Breastplate 1246….

      Hi you might well be correct

      But the point I’m making is that the Scottish government cannot just assume that the separation will be acrimonious

      Not yet anyway

      Scottish government have to stick to agreed practices
      If Westminster break the rules , code of practice etc or just ignore them
      Then yes of course prepare on the basis of acrimony

    66. CameronB Brodie says:

      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 Caesar!nian Constitutional Law and Practice
      https://digitalcommons.pace.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1320&context=pilr

    67. CameronB Brodie says:

      Perhaps I’ve gotten this wrong, but placing politics above the law is a direct route to totalitarian dictatorship.

      Full text.

      The relationship between international law and national law in the case of Kosovo: A constitutional perspective
      https://academic.oup.com/icon/article/9/1/274/902275

    68. Ms. says:

      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.

    69. CameronB Brodie says:

      No, I wasn’t wrong.

      Treaty Enforcement in Domestic Courts: A Comparative Analysis
      International law today is not confined to regulating the relations between the states. Its scope continues to extend. Today matters of social concern, such as health, education, and economics apart from human rights fall within the ambit of international regulations. International law is more than ever aimed at individuals.1

      law.scu.edu/wp-content/uploads/Introduction20Jan_202009.pdf

    70. manandboy says:

      ian [dot] dunt [at] politics [dot] co [dot] 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.

    71. CameronB Brodie says:

      Please wake up Scotland, the nation is being (il)legally enslaved.

      From Joining to Leaving: Domestic Law’s Role in the
      International Legal Validity of Treaty Withdrawal

      https://academic.oup.com/ejil/article/30/1/73/5498083

    72. Boudicca says:

      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

      http://parliamentlive.tv/Commons

    73. Jack Murphy says:

      Off Topic.The BBC in Scotland.

      Two random quotes from one of today’s articles in Talking Up Scotland:
      “….The contrast with the approach taken by BBC Scotland is perhaps the strongest and clearest evidence of bias in their reporting on the SNP Government:…..”

      “…..BBC UK, England, N Ireland and Wales never politicise health issues while BBC Scotland nearly always does……”

      Full piece
      https://tinyurl.com/uvfklwp

    74. TheItalianJob says:

      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.

    75. CameronB Brodie says:

      I do hope Scotland does have some legal champions who are conversant with international human rights law. If Treaty obligations are no impedance to contemporary English nationalism, what future can Scotland hope for. Totalitarian authoritarianism is such an unseemly grubby end for such an ‘illustrious’ history.

      Treaty Obligations and National Law:
      Emerging Conflicts in International Arbitration

      ntroduction
      ….According to rules of international law, however, neither a Constitutional mandate nor the enactment of a statute provides an excuse for a treaty violation.9 Prevailing opinion holds that an act wrongful under the law of nations remains so even if a nation’s internal law deems otherwise.10

      Moreover, it remains settled law in the United States that courts should not construe a statute to violate international law if any other plausible construction presents itself.11 Thus, American judges remain under a duty to avoid, if at all possible, placing the United States in breach of its international obligations.12

      https://www.arbitration-icca.org/media/4/99181769719243/media012584292944710park_treaty_obligations.pdf

    76. 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

    77. CameronB Brodie says:

      Placing politics above the law, is the route to totalitarianism. Not respecting the legal order because the electorate are largely oblivious of their circumstances, is placing politics above the law. It won’t end well.

      EUROPEAN UNION LAW

      Part I
      Constitutional Foundations
      3. European Law: Nature – Direct Effect

      https://www.schutze.eu/chapter/european-law-nature-direct-effect/content/

    78. Clapper57 says:

      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

    79. terence callachan says:

      TheItlaianjob….3.58…

      There are over half a million English people in Scotland that get to vote in a Scottish independence referendum about whether or not
      Their country England
      Should continue to control Scotland’s affairs ( apart from those that England don’t want to control)
      Nearly all of them vote against Scottish independence
      What a joke

      There are a quarter of a million people living in Scotland who are from overseas countries other than EU
      They get to vote on whether or not Scotland should continue to be controlled by England
      they mostly see England as being U.K.
      and it’s U.K. that gave them leave to remain in the U.K.
      it’s U.K. that gave them british citizenship
      It’s U.K. that gave them a british passport for them and their kids
      And any old or sick relatives they bring here to look after
      They too will vote for England to continue to control Scotland because to them U.K. gave them so much

      There are a quarter of a million EU people living in Scotland
      Most voted against Scottish independence in 2014 because U.K. had a long term plan back then
      which was to pretend they intended to stay in EU
      Persuade EU people that voting against Scottish independence was the best way to stay in the EU
      Now that this lie has outed
      EU people will votes in favour of Scottish independence but many are leaving and going back to their country of origin

    80. terence callachan says:

      Expect happenings onn1.2.2020

      Everything has gone quiet

      For a reason

      Preparations are being made

      There will be trouble ahead

    81. CameronB Brodie says:

      Does Scotland have anyone in a position of influence, who is sufficiently conversant with international law? Remember, the Treaty of union was a voluntary, yet formal, commitment to legal obligations. Westminster has just proven that fact by reneging on those original commitments. In a rather informal fashion, frankly.

      Full text.

      Abstract
      How do EU law and international law interact? Is the relationship between EU law and international law different from the relationship between general international law and one of its specialised legal orders, for example the relationship between international law and the law of the sea? In other words, is the question of the relationship only one about the fragmentation of international law?

      Are the rules of interaction between the legal orders just ‘technical’ conflict rules in this context? Or are the rules of interaction between the international and the EU legal order which has been described as an autonomous legal order, akin to rules that govern the interaction between international law and national legal orders?

      Elements of both the international and the constitutional paradigms are reflected in most areas of EU law. But they are particularly prominent when analysing the relationship between international and EU law, a topic that has enjoyed increasing attention in recent years. In this paper, firstly, the more formal basis for the relationship is considered by looking at the international law framework of EU law before, secondly, looking at the relationship between the two legal orders and the realities of the relationship as expressed in the status of international law within the EU legal order.

      https://www.researchgate.net/publication/303786095_The_Relationship_between_EU_Law_and_International_Law

    82. CameronB Brodie says:

      Doh!
      The Relationship between EU Law and International Law

    83. Dr Jim says:

      The right to vote or decide on a proposition is what the England parliament is removing from Scotland and they’re deflecting from that argument by using polling data and projecting the results from one argument on to another, this is classic deflection by saying more folk voted for ice cream over chocolate pudding at the last election so that proves nobody wants rhubarb and custard

      This is a silly childish argument for folk who can’t maintain a thought in their head for longer than five minutes, but because it involves politics that most people’s heads can’t be bothered with in the first place, it works

      Tony Blair used these same diversionary tactics all the time and the Tories have refined them down to even simpler terms and tailored them to the hard of understanding

      They’re removing the right to the free will of choice by creating unacceptable choices people don’t want which forces people to begin choosing them because they have no choice than do otherwise

      It’s insidiously clever until you see it, then once you’ve seen it you can’t unsee it

    84. Colin Alexander says:

      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.

    85. Rm says:

      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.

    86. Sandy says:

      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.

    87. Mike d says:

      CameronB brodie.1.59pm. Do we have any judges in Scotland who are’nt in the pockets of the establishment.

    88. Al-Stuart says:

      .
      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.

      https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=OWGFdL4tNW0

      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?

      More fool the folk that underestimate that clown. Of course he is thinking about Scotland. Boris Johnson has an OVEN READY plan to cook Nicola’s goose and will be launching it this year.

      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!

    89. CameronB Brodie says:

      Mike d
      I doubt it, or else there would be a better defense of liberty and social justice for Scotland’s people. Why bother with Scots law? It appears a contented pet in the lap of English law.

      International Law as an Element of European Constitutional Law:
      International Supplementary Constitutions

      Max Planck Institute for Comparative Public Law and International Law

      Heidelberg, 24-27 February 2003
      https://jeanmonnetprogram.org/archive/papers/03/030901-02.rtf

    90. CameronB Brodie says:

      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

      https://www.law.kuleuven.be/iir/nl/onderzoek/working-papers/WP25e.pdf

    91. Ian Brotherhood says:

      If you’re in the mood for a proper belly laugh (at Ian Murray’s expense) have a swatch at this…

      https://twitter.com/Doogsta/status/1220059116154114054/photo/1

      🙂 🙂 🙂

    92. Gary45% says:

      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.

    93. Tinto Chiel says:

      @Ian Brotherhood 6.22: that’s a stoater. The Joy of One, indeed. How does he get all those Embra Tories and less-than-ecumenical Hearts fans to vote for the People’s Republic of Morningside?

      Is Madge still at Balmoral? If so, I suggest a huge march to the gates by independence supporters on February 1st. to hand over a short note saying, “As per the Declaration of Arbroath, since you have not defended Scottish interests in the face of English depredations, you are hereby deposed in favour of [insert name here].”

      There must surely be some obscure descendant of James VII living in Italy we could invite to wear the Scots Regalia and inaugurate the real Scottish Parliament next month.

      Think of all that superheated boiled gammon ablaw the dyke and all the international interest…

    94. Keith Fae Leith says:

      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*

    95. Socrates MacSporran says:

      Her Maj giving Royal Assent to the Brexit bill COULD be the game-breaker over Independence – provided the SNP can grow a pair between now and next Thursday.

      Getting the Queen involved is something which will give the Tories a large and embarrassing dose of the skitters, so, let’s do it.

      It will take coherent and simultaneous action by the Scottish Government in Holyrood and the SNP MPs in London, but, something along these lines might work.

      The SNP put-up a bill at Holyrood, and fast-trtack it through, removing the current occupant of the throne – on the grounds she has failed to protect the wishes of the Sovereign People of Scotland, who voted 62%-38% to remain within the EU.

      At the same time, the SNP convenes a meeting of the Scottish Grand Committee in WEstminster and passes a motion which also calls for the removal of the current ruler, for failing to protect the wishes of the Sovereign People of Scotland, to remain within the EU.

      The Tories would immediately use their majority to overrule the SGC decision – we have constitutional crisis and it goes to Law.

      If this doesn’t work, we find something else to upset them, and keep finding things until they become so pissed-off with us, they let us go.

      But, it all depends on the SNP growing a collective pair.

    96. ScotsRenewables says:

      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.

    97. ahundredthidiot says:

      Ian B @ 6:22

      I’ve just had one of those bitch of a days…….that turned my day around. There’s always someone worse off than yourself! – funny, funny.

    98. Doug says:

      @Socrates MacSporran 7:15pm

      Well said.

    99. HYUFD says:

      Socrates Scottish polling generally shows slightly more support for keeping the monarchy than keeping the Union so you do that and try and topple the Queen and it would just boost the Unionist cause even more

    100. HYUFD says:

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

    101. Breeks says:


      TheItalianJob says:
      24 January, 2020 at 3:58 pm
      Ok Breeks I read your points but how do we get the majority of the people of Scotland to do something for Independence….

      Don’t need a majority. It’s not heresy, it’s just a different mindset. Bear with me, but I really wouldn’t care unduly about an anti Indy Majority, even if there was to be one.

      I see Brexit as a National Emergency. An 8% shrinkage in GDP is four times worse than the 2008 Credit crunch. That’s serious shit, and I believe that imminent prospect gives Scotland more than due cause to use a legitimate Constitutional route to prevent our unlawful subjugation and diligently avoid economic catastrophe. It is my belief that through Brexit, Scotland’s Sovereign legitimacy, and Westminster’s colonial illegitimacy, is more than enough to plunge the UK into the Constitutional paralysis of disputed sovereignty.

      In such a state of paralysis, I then believe that Westminster Tories would not be able to steer their British Nationalists to accept an indefinite delay on Brexit, while Scotland should, and I think would, dig in, and stand firm behind an ultimatum that Westminster either respects Scotland’s Sovereign Constitutional right to abandon Brexit, or choose to ignore that Constitutional ultimatum, proceed with Brexit, and thus irreparably breach the Articles of Union. No more Union.

      In short, Scotland does NOT play its Union busting Indy card, but instead forces England to play its Union busting Brexit card. Brexit then represents the sovereign choice and unforced initiative of England to leave Europe, but they are forced to acknowledge while “getting Brexit done”, that it cannot subjugate Scotland into doing likewise.

      The Union is thus doomed. If Brexit happens, it’s an act of colonial subjugation and the Union is dead. If Brexit doesn’t happen, then Westminster and the BritNat Brexit Majority have been defeated by Scottish Constitutional Sovereignty, and the Union is untenable once Scotland has successfully secured a sovereign veto on all things British. England would not stand for the humiliation of it, and UK Sovereignty is an abstract and untenable construct.

      And, if there was to be a pro Union backlash in Scotland, it has an existential problem, because even if there was a massive pro Union swing to a big majority in Scotland, it is of no consequence whatsoever to England’s decision to leave Europe, and since England cannot be subjugated by Scotland anymore than Scotland subjugated by England. Vote all you like. They won’t listen.

      In those hypothetical circumstances, Scotland would then be the Nation wanting to keep the Union, but England not wanting to keep the Union if it means being subjugated by Scotland’s Remain Mandate and Sovereignty. Scotland’s pro Union views would thus be academic.

      Scottish Unionism would also have an uphill struggle to convert Scotland’s pro EU opinions into anti EU opinions, expressly to save the UK Union instead. Not impossible, but very difficult.

      But they also have an even bigger problem, because even if the UK ceases to exist just for an instant, even just technically, it becomes a dead contract that cannot be lawfully resurrected. A breached contract cannot be unbreached, so even a sudden and radical change of heart couldn’t hope to resurrect the 1707 Union, it would require a completely new 2020 Union to be negotiated, and that I would suggest would be an extraordinary difficult thing to do… and then you’d have to persuade England to sign up for it too.

      So to summarise, get the Union nullified by any means possible, ideally as a direct consequence of a reckless English venture, (Brexit), and any anger in Scotland about the Union’s collapse has to reconcile the death of the Union being caused by an English initiative not a Scottish one, and furthermore, any resurrection of a UK Union, even if it was possible, would never bear the slightest resemblance to the 1707 Union. They’d have to win a vote to create a new Union on a hypothetical Union that didn’t exist, had to be negotiated, and also required English consent to create. That’s Brexit in reverse.

      As a Scottish Unionist, you might be angry about the end of the Union, but the Union left you all of it’s own accord rather than you leaving the Union, so run along take your grievance up with the English electorate who left you behind. Meanwhile the rest of us will be heading off in the other direction and cementing the freedom of our resurrected Nationhood together with our European friends.

      (I’m technically wrong. At the start I said we don’t need a majority. To split hairs, we don’t need another majority. We have our democratic Remain Mandate from 2016. That is everything we need.)

    102. ahundredthidiot says:

      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’

    103. ahundredthidiot says:

      I genuinely believe that there are a lot of good people in the security/intelligence services and I think that if the UK Regime did rig the Postal Vote in 2014, (which many believe and would’ve been enough to swing it), then I think it will all come out in the end.

      I still believe the good guys win……eventually.

    104. CameronB Brodie says:

      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.

      https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/leiden-journal-of-international-law/article/unity-or-uniformity-domestic-courts-and-treaty-interpretation/94DDF0913E52AEC0127607B59BD6AF2C

    105. HYUFD says:

      Ahundredthidiot Not at all, constitutional monarchies in Sweden, Norway, Denmark, Japan the Netherlands, Spain etc are all still popular, as is our own royal family on the whole, especially given most of the Presidents currently in office

    106. Ian Brotherhood says:

      @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?

    107. HYUFD says:

      Breeks 54% of Scots voted for Unionist parties in December even after the Brexit vote and Withdrawal Agreement was agreed, virtually the same as the 55% who voted No to independence in 2014. Brexit has changed very little and thus Boris will not allow indyref2 as the 2014 referendum was ‘once in a generation’ in Salmond’s own words

    108. CameronB Brodie says:

      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
      https://opil.ouplaw.com/view/10.1093/law:epil/9780199231690/law-9780199231690-e1481

    109. Colin Alexander says:

      Ian Brotherhood said:

      “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?”

      Well, it seems Stu has given up this week.

      But, Aw come oan, that’s like no seeing the last episode of Taggart in the box set.

      I for one would like to know who you blame and how.

    110. ScotsRenewables says:

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

    111. Ian Brotherhood says:

      @CA –

      Interesting that your comment there was number 1111 in this thread.

      And I have nothing, apart from another 1, to add to it.

    112. Colin Alexander says:

      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.

    113. Liz g says:

      Ian Brotherhood @ 8.26
      How very dare you..
      You are not allowed to give up….
      By order!
      No matter what Indy is never off the table.
      And we’ll get there, The Union is over,it was over the day they made The Vow, when they were reduced to promising things that they were forbidden to deliver… Not just had no intention of, but actually forbidden the mirage of any Union ended.

      Stay The Course Man…
      I can’t say how or when but very soon we’ll get out from under that bloody Treaty.

      And can I just point out a couple of thing’s,we needed nae international recognition to get into the Treaty..Aye?

      And resource rich Scotland isn’t going to be ostracized ( if at all) for any length of time.. some may chance their luck!
      But we only need to Hang Fire
      There’s always someone willing to do business and the western democracies know that better than anyone…

      I suspect that the disaster capitalism that Westminster is keenly participating in, is what it really has to worry about when we leave….
      I don’t think for one minute that it will,as they’re prone to publicise…. Rebuild Hadrian’s ( I know ) wall…. Westminster is cunning and flash but no flexible!
      It’s a one hit wonder and it hasn’t held any territory of any real value yet… A few islands is about the size of it!
      That’s what let’s it strut… We’re half it’s land mass and half of us openly reject it’s Auld Treaty it’s got nae chance 🙂

    114. Colin Alexander says:

      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.

    115. terence callachan says:

      HYUFD….8.29pm

      You say 54% of Scots voted for unionist parties in December
      But that’s not true is it
      A third of those were English people living in Scotland who are certainly not Scots

      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

      An English person living in Scotland is not a scot

      Just like when I lived in England I was not English

      When I lived in Germany I was not German

      When I lived in Ireland I was not Irish

      I have lived in many countries but I didn’t become a national of those countries just because I lived in them

      But you know that already don’t you so I presume you are trying to be the fool

    116. Dr Jim says:

      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

    117. Dan says:

      @HYUFD at 8:29 pm

      Scratch OIAG scratch OIAG scratch OIAG scratch OIAG scratch OIAG scratch…

      Friday night on the turntables and all you can do is put on that broken record again.
      GTF you ignorant shite. Why don’t you ever mention your Tory government calling numerous General Elections ignoring the fixed term parliament act as they attempt to get themselves out of the shit their party created.

      And how about you factor in the lack of 16 & 17 year olds plus EU Nationals who pay tax here but were denied a vote in your Tory gerrymandered GE electoral process.

    118. Colin Alexander says:

      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.

    119. cynicalHighlander says:

      @ Colin Alexander says:
      24 January, 2020 at 9:02 pm

      ScotsRenewables

      What’s Nicola Sturgeon gonnae announce on Wednesday?

      It’s half day closing!

    120. Dr Jim says:

      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

    121. Golfnut says:

      @ Ian Brotherhood.

      I think everybody took a bit of a hit over the last few days, not at the S30 refusal( that was expected) but at the sheer arrogance on display at Westminster( nothing to be proud of Hyufd). Many I think found it difficult to accept that the Queen was really this stupid. I’m not one of those who believe that the Queen was lied to, the flurry of activity by the palace flunkies condemning Johnson was a sure sign of panic. This is Westminsters plan then, colonial subjugation, in an effort to stave off the inevitable with the hope of achieving just a few more years respite.
      Breeks outlined a pretty good scenario, whether anything like it is featured in Nicola’s strategy, I don’t know, but I have over the years learned to listen to all of her speech and not focus on what the media highlight. She chooses her words carefully, and the word that stuck out for me was ‘unchallengeable’. It seems to me that there is only one unchallengeable circumstance in which a pre revocation of the Act of Union could occur, and that is where Westminster demands we have it. The 29th is going to be very interesting.

    122. Liz g says:

      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?

    123. Colin Alexander says:

      Ian Brotherhood

      “We will fight them on the beaches….we will never surrender”.

      Oh wait. Mibbies arch-BritNat, army on the streets of Glesga, Mr Churchill wisnae the best choice to cheer you up.

      I know a story about a spider, is that a better yin?

      If at first you don’t succeed….

    124. Ian Brotherhood says:

      @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.

    125. Colin Alexander says:

      Dr Jim

      I hope you realise all this talk of chocolate and ice cream is no
      helping to tackle the obesity problem in Scotland.

    126. ahundredthidiot says:

      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.

    127. Mist001 says:

      If anything (and I’m not particularly hopeful) but if Sturgeon makes an announcement on Wednesday, it’ll be something to do with legal challenge or something along these lines and by which time the legal challenge has been resolved one way or the other, Scotland will have been long dragged out of the EU against it’s will.

      in short, there will be no revolutionary surprises or plan B. The can will be getting another hefty kick down the road.

    128. Liz g says:

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

    129. CameronB Brodie says:

      terence callachan
      Scotland will only gain self-determination through a respect for the inalienable rights of individuals to participate in cultural and political life. So you and me are gonna fall out if you keep pushing ethnic nationalism. That’s the shite that brought us Brexit, so just think before promoting an outlook that is incompatible with social democracy.

    130. ahundredthidiot says:

      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.

    131. Sarah says:

      O/T Can anyone explain what the hell the Dumfries Mid Galloway and Wigtown West voters were thinking of yesterday? 62% – SIXTY-TWO – first preference votes to Tories!!

      What world are they living in? Have they no hearts, souls, conscience?

      It’s enough to make one despair.

    132. Dan says:

      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.

    133. Dr Jim says:

      An attempt to make it more easily understandable for the *fat heads* who keep comparing one election number or percentage to another, or in another way, a man runs 100 metres in 9 seconds, in Unionist language he should never run a race again because that’s the best he can ever do

      No point ever arguing with Unionists, ignore them, move out of their way, or move them

      As far as I’m concerned anybody who tells me I can’t have a choice, a say or a vote, the discussing part is over

    134. Liz g says:

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

    135. callmedave says:

      Churchill’s last sentence not spoken to the nation but muttered at the end.

      “And we’ll fight them with the butt ends of broken beer bottles because that’s bloody well all we’ve got!

    136. ahundredthidiot says:

      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.

    137. Dan says:

      @Sarah at 9:58pm

      It’s probably just down to the early stages of ethnic cleansing.
      Give it another couple of electoral cycles and Tory vote will be at 123%.

      You also have to remember that Scots are the most politically gullible fuckers to ever roam the planet.
      At least we can take pride in ourselves for such monumental levels of underachievement.

    138. Colin Alexander says:

      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.

    139. Ian Brotherhood says:

      @Liz g –

      No apology needed for that one – my fault for clumsy comment.

      You sound as chirpy as ever so more power to ye!

      😉

    140. alba says:

      @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.

    141. Mist001 says:

      I don’t doubt anything. Sturgeon and the SNP have become monotonously predictable. Wednesdays announcement (if there is one) will just be more mumping of gums, saying something but without actually saying anything and more importantly, without having any action.

      On the plus side though, it’ll keep the blind Indy supporters and the party faithful onside, which will mean the money keeps rolling in and everyone can keep their cushy little numbers.

      To quote a character from a movie; ‘The more things change, the more they stay the same’.

    142. Jockanese Wind Talker says:

      O/T:

      Boris Johnston’s lies coming home to roost!

      https://web.archive.org/web/20200124221108/https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/brexit-boris-johnson-map-customs-check-ireland-border-eu-wto-trade-a9300031.html

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

    143. Elmac says:

      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.

    144. Colin Alexander says:

      alba

      The Duke of Wellington was born in Ireland but denied being Irish.

      “If one is born in a stable it does not make him a horse”

      But of course, he’s more famous for another reason…..

      Wearing a traffic cone oan his napper in Glesga City Centre.

    145. Elmac says:

      @ Ian Brotherhood

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

    146. Gfaetheblock says:

      Caesar! @ 10.21

      Obviously Terrance is spouting racist blood and soil filth, but your quote below is hyperbolic Scottish exceptionalist nonsense. Do you really believe that?

      “ Scotland is therefore one of the few countries (perhaps the only one) where ethnicity or where you were physically born does not define…”

      We are no better and no worse than anyone else, folk are just folk, you are both in you own ways stating some ethic superiority pish. Stop it.

    147. iain mhor says:

      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.

      http://tinyurl.com/y8puakqg (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?

      http://tinyurl.com/h2oxlbc
      >>

      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.

    148. Ian Brotherhood says:

      @Elmac –

      Much appreciated, thanks.

      Dunno how old you are (or how old you think I am?!) but this time of year is always difficult, remembering friends and family who wanted to see it happen but didn’t.

      Even right here, remembering the number of genuinely committed and passionate indy supporters who have ‘passed’ or (for whatever reason) dropped away from commenting is, at times, as moving as it is depressing.

      We’re not zealots. We’re not wreckers, terrorists or subversives.

      We’re just ordinary people asserting our desire to live and raise our families as citizens rather than subjects, and we know what nation we belong to.

      It’ll happen, aye, but it’s just a proper scunner that it’s taking so fucking long!

      😉

    149. Reluctant Nationalist says:

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

    150. Kangaroo says:

      We’re oot

      https://www.heraldscotland.com/news/18186231.boris-johnson-formally-signs-brexit-withdrawal-agreement-saying-fantastic-moment/

      OK Now we can answer the questions we could not answer before. NS will make a statement on Wednesday because that is when the EU Parliament will formally Ratify the Withdrawal Agreement.

      Remember for International recognition we MUST do things “Legally” and S30 was the Gold Standard. That has been denied by the Prime Minister of the UK.

      So lets looks Legally at what has happened
      a) indyref was lost in 2014,
      b) we voted Remain in 2016, this was a Sovereign mandate of the people of Scotland, Legally it was two votes, one for the Kingdom of Scotland and one for the Kingdom of England, so there was one Leave vote and one Remain vote in the two party United Kingdom so a Legal deadlock, however we have a UK Parliament dominated by one of the Treaty partners, Hmmm,
      c) the Withdrawal Agreement, now signed by the UK PM favours one part of the UK – Northern Ireland, in direct contravention of the Treaty Articles, this alone is enough to annul the Treaty, however it gets better,
      d) Clause 38 of the EU Withdrawal Act states that “The Parliament of the United Kingdom is Sovereign”, this can only be applied to the Kingdom of England as the Scottish people are Sovereign, so the Monarch has Legally consented to transferring the Monarchs English Sovereignty under the ‘Divine Right of Kings’ to the UK Parliament, so no wriggle room for the Unionists there.

      What does all this mean?
      a) The UK will no longer be an EU Member State on 31st Jan at 11pm when Big Ben Bongs,
      b) the United Kingdom Legally dissolves at the same time,
      c) the Sovereign Scottish peoples Remain vote may well be honoured by the EU to give us a seemless transition,
      d) As the UK no longer exists Northern Ireland can no longer be a part of the UK and Stormont will have to decide what to do,
      e) the Sovereignty transferred to the UK Parliament by the Monarch in S38 will simultaneously revert back to the Monarch

      I can hear the Unionists demanding indyref2, HaHa Happy Days.

      Happy Burns day and Happy Chinese New Year. The year of the Rat!

    151. John from Fife says:

      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 ?

    152. manandboy says:

      The Westminster Government, with its Unionist friends in the Labour and LibDem parties, are nervous – very nervous. Let’s keep it that way.

      PMJohnson can’t keep track of the children he has fathered.

      How on earth is he going to keep track of Scotland’s sovereignty, the Declaration of Arbroath, the Claim of Right, and the Act of Union. Not to mention the Independence Movement.

    153. Graf Midgehunter says:

      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.

    154. CameronB Brodie says:

      Kangaroo & Graf Midgehunter
      Pretty much how I see things. 🙂

    155. iain mhor says:

      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.

    156. HYUFD says:

      Terence Callachan Nationality does not depend solely on birthplace otherwise Arnold Schwarzanneger is still Austrian, Boris Johnson is American and Cliff Richard is Indian

    157. HYUFD says:

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

    158. CameronB Brodie says:

      HYUFD
      Your persistence is getting a bit more than tiresome, so I suggest you go and learn yourself some law. Perhaps you could then be in a position to guide Scotland’s judiciary. They appear uncommitted to protecting my legal rights from the legal violence of political authoritarianism, and may need a refresher course to remind them of the law’s purpose, i.e. to protect liberal society.

      Treaties, Direct Applicability

      Since Brexit, the EU law terms ‘direct effect’ and ‘direct applicability’ have at times been conflated. However, they have distinct meanings which should be clarified.

      Direct effect refers to the ability of EU Member State nationals to enforce rights derived from EU legislation directly in national courts. In other words, if a provision of an EU Treaty, Regulation, or Directive satisfies the requirements to be directly effective, national courts must enforce the rights that such a provision grants. Therefore, there is no need for nationals to go to the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) to plead their cases.

      Direct applicability, on the other hand, refers to whether a piece of EU legislation becomes part of a Member State’s national law without the need for any implementing legislation. EU Treaties and Regulations are directly applicable, as they come into force without any action on the part of Member States. Contrastingly, EU Directives are not directly applicable, as Member States must implement national legislation, before a prescribed deadline, in order to give effect to them.

      https://www.insidebrexitlaw.com/blog/direct-effect-and-direct-applicability-what-do-they-really-mean

    159. CameronB Brodie says:

      And this is why I think “direct applicability” could save Scotland from Brexit, if the international-rule-of-law were to be miraculously respected in Scotland, that is.

      THE DIRECT APPLICABILITY OF INTERNATIONAL
      INSTRUMENTS ON HUMAN RIGHTS
      (with special reference to Belgian and U.S. law)

      rbdi.bruylant.be/public/modele/rbdi/content/files/RBDI%201980/RBDI%201980-2/Etudes/RBDI%201980.2%20-%20pp.%20317%20%C3%A0%20344%20-%20Marc%20Bossuyt.pdf

    160. CameronB Brodie says:

      And a bit more on “direct applicability”. Full text.

      The Doctrine of Horizontal Direct Effect In EC Law and the Case of Angonese

      Abstract
      In the year of 2000, the ECJ delivered a well-known judgement among European lawyers, Angonese, which indeed recognised horizontal direct effect of community law among private parties in the field of free movement of workers. The ECJ thus held that a job applicant could sue a private bank before the national court on the basis of the prohibition of discrimination in Article 39 of the EC Treaty. Commentators argue that this is a landmark judgment and that “Mr. Angonese will now join the annals of community law pioneers”.

      The essential purpose of this thesis is to provide for an examination and critical analysis of the concept of horizontal direct effect in the field of free movement of workers, in particular to analyse in what manner the ECJ legally justified the recognition of this concept in relation to Article 39.

      https://www.researchgate.net/publication/228176489_The_Doctrine_of_Horizontal_Direct_Effect_In_EC_Law_and_the_Case_of_Angonese

    161. CameronB Brodie says:

      I hope the penny is beginning to drop for some of the more loyal subjects of the British crown. Your loyalty is all that separates you from a fuller enjoyment of your human rights, and legally empowered economic and social potential.

      The ECJ and Direct Effect. From the Treaty of Rome over Van Gend en Loos to Francovich

      Excerpt

      Firstly, this essay will provide some general information regarding the development of the EU and particularly why the above-stated questions arose. In this context the concept of supremacy will briefly be overviewed, as it is closely related to the doctrine of direct effect. Subsequently, a definition of both direct effect and direct applicability will be administered. Furthermore, the relationship between direct effect and the various Community measures will be examined, focusing then on Directives for reasons which will be explained afterwards.

      Afterwards, the issues concerning vertical and horizontal direct effect in respect of Directives will be investigated. Finally, the essay will illustrate why and in which cases the doctrines of indirect effect and state liability become applicable. The paper will then conclude by answering the question, referring to the previous remarks, why the European Court of Justice (henceforth, ECJ) introduced the concept of direct effect….

      https://www.grin.com/document/335302

    162. TJenny says:

      John from Fife – ‘EU warns that brexit trade deal will impact Scotland’s ability to rejoin the block.A subtle hint perhaps?’

      Aye, mibbe. I didn’t expect NS to be making any statement until 23.01 on Fri after we were effctively out of EU, however, it may be that Nicola feels she can make a statemant on Wed as the WAB, will have been signed off/ratified by both UK and EU by then, but we’ll still be in EU. A statement of intent to remain? Who knows, currently every day feels like Xmas eve without ever getting to Xmas day – maybe on Wednesday though, eh? Fingers, eyes and legs crossed for Santa Nicola.

      Or could be EU deflection. 😉

    163. Sandy says:

      Does the queen of England have a European/German passport? And her hangers-on. Just in case!!

    164. A. Bruce says:

      A question to Stu. Where is the Wee Blue Book? It’s surely time to get it out there.

    165. mr thms says:

      A great poolfree article from The National

      http://www.thenational.scot/news/18186244.fact-check-claim-scotland-slid-global-wellbeing-rankings/

      “FACT CHECK: Claim Scotland has slid down global well-being rankings

      WHAT’S THE CLAIM?

      “Alarm as Scotland slides down the global wellbeing rankings … Scotland posted one of the biggest falls among developed countries in the latest index of social and economic well-being” – The Scotsman, January 22, 2020”

    166. TJenny says:

      A. Bruce – ‘A question to Stu. Where is the Wee Blue Book?’

      Where’s the referendum campaign announcement?

    167. manandboy says:

      BREXIT:AN OBSESSIVE COMPULSIVE DISORDER – WITH A LONG HISTORY

      …. and with enormous and far reaching, destructive and disruptive consequences. Not for the first time, but now England has turned inwards as well as against the twenty seven nations of the European Union, and soon to vent its fury on Scotland with its upstart 62% Remain vote.

      In Brexit we see the denial of any scientific methodology including logical thinking and the rule of consequences. In their place, racism, xenophobia, and contempt. All this dressed in slogans such as ‘taking back control’.

      Unforseen by the majority in Scotland, the Brexit event is now imminent. Let’s call it for now, the ‘Rude Awakening’.
      For the truth is, that the much heralded benefits of ‘taking back control’ did not include Scotland. Quite the opposite.
      Brexit means that the English Ruling Class can now do to Scotland what it has been prevented from doing for the past 45 years.
      More oppression, greater exploitation and wall-to-wall Colonial Rule.

      Scotland – like a couple standing alone on a wide beach facing a tsunami wave 100 feet high, and nowhere to run.

      Oh dear! We should have voted YES. If only we’d known.

      Ach, never mind. Whit’s oan the telly.

    168. Breeks says:


      ahundredthidiot says:
      24 January, 2020 at 8:15 pm
      I genuinely believe that there are a lot of good people in the security/intelligence services and I think that if the UK Regime did rig the Postal Vote in 2014, (which many believe and would’ve been enough to swing it), then I think it will all come out in the end.

      I still believe the good guys win……eventually.

      I believe the same about Sovereignty.

      After the life or death Battle of Bannockburn, when the waves of colonial invasion ebbed after Scotland’s blood and courage and sensational victory in battle had brought Scotland a brief respite to compose itself and ready it’s defences for the next onslaught, in 1320, actually 1328 when it was recognised, the Declaration of Arbroath did a spectacular thing that cannot be undone. It made Scotland’s people sovereign.

      It cannot be undone by a colonial usurper like Westminster, it cannot be undone any Cromwellian invasion or military conquest, and it cannot be undone by any craven and wormtongue Scottish Government, whether that’s the perfidious Red Tories or the Woke quakers in the SNP.

      It cannot be undone, but for a time, it can be and is, caged behind bars made of lies, distortions and our indoctrination by falsehoods poisoning the minds of us and our children, and their children’s children. But a treasure buried remains a treasure until the day it is unearthed.

      We will only remain prisoners in this prison of fiction for as long as it takes us to wake up.

      I feel at one with Robert Burns. I would rather have been laid to rest, head in the clay, beside Wallace and Bruce and the heroes who died for Scotland in a genuinely free Scotland, than be alive in the gutless generation which acquiesced to it’s own subjugation and slavery, and allowed itself to be sold out by charlatan politicians well kent for their charlatanism.

      I hope Nicola Sturgeon proves me wrong on Wednesday. I hope she announces not just the prorogation of Holyrood, but the permanent abandonment of a Devolved Assembly ruled over by Westminster, and brings home Scotland’s MP’s from Westminster to form an interim and emergency sitting of an authentic Scottish Parliament which is true and loyal to the Constitutional Sovereignty of Scotland’s people, that alone, and that “thing” that was done that cannot be undone.

      Will she do it? I think not. I fear she believes in highfalutin Democracy more than she believes in stubborn Auld Scotland standing firm and grim in the rain. She speaks with the vocabulary I hear in the British indoctrination; we need more votes, more mandates, we need ephemeral popularity… Aye, funny how we always need a thing we haven’t got…

      She doesn’t use the vocabulary of absolutism, and the unalterable and indefatigable Constitutional principle of Scottish sovereignty. Democracy is a privilege of freedom, not it’s key. Without freedom and sovereignty, democracy is stuck in the same cage as the rest of us.

    169. Colin Alexander says:

      Scotland’s parliamentarians (MPs, MSPs and MEPs) reconvene the Parliament of Scotland ( POS) that exercised Scotland’s people’s common sovereignty.

      It announces: sovereignty over Scotland does not lie with the unelected Empress Elizabeth exercised through the unelected Lords and through the Commons where Scotland only elects 59 MPs.

      It sacks UK Parliament govt for Scotland as undemocratic and abusers of Scottish sovereignty using the Claim of Right 1689 sovereign powers.

      POS revokes A50 for the Scotland part of the UK. As we are still the UK but the UK now has two parliaments exercising sovereignty for different parts of the UK.

      The POS does NOT declare independence. It announces the amended Union continues for the interim while the POS will attempt to negotiate a new union treaty in which Scotland’s POS exercises sovereignty for Scotland (but sovereignty lies with the people).

      Scotland then holds a referendum on independence v whatever has been negotiated as the terms of a new union treaty (if a new union treaty can be negotiated).

      Scotland’s people are given an opportunity to choose (new) union v independence.

      rUK would also have to vote for the terms of the new union or reject this completely.

      So, the terms of any union are made clear v independence.

      What independence means for Scotland should mainly be decided by elections and party manifestos AFTER a vote for indy.

    170. Golfnut says:

      @ Colin Alexander.

      Sounds good to me. Although I suspect that Scotland’s removal from the EU will stand, no bad thing in my opinion since it allows a fresh look at membership conditions. The EU has to date completely ignored Scotland’s position within the UK despite the plethora of information available and of course International recognition of the right of people to decide on their legal status. That fact makes me believe that the EU is prepared to bargain with Westminster on Scotland’s assets, to Scotland’s detriment, and France and Spain’s benefit. The stipulation that Scotland was to be excluded from Brexit negotiations was too readily accepted by the EU. I’m not arguing against EU membership or even for EFTA, just that we need space and time for the people of Scotland to make an informed decision.
      I don’t believe that Nicola is unaware of the situation.

    171. manandboy says:

      ENGLAND – THE PARTNER FROM HELL.

      The bottom line is that while a great many individual English people are good, honest and decent, as a country, England is the neighbour from hell thanks to its Ruling Class and its predatorial and Colonial attitude to other countries.

      It’s a reminder that life contains good and evil, and that England qualifies on many counts for inclusion in the latter category.

      Scotland and Ireland can both testify to that.

      Scotland and England are of course not just neighbours, they are ‘married’ in the political sense, though it was strictly a shotgun-wedding. No prizes for guessing who held the gun.

      So, on to the divorce. Can’t wait.

    172. manandboy says:

      The 27 countries of the European Union have found the English government extremely difficult to deal with over the Brexit period so far, of three and a half years.

      A reminder to the Scottish government, if any were needed after more than three hundred years of often callous and brutal abuse of every kind.

      England of course has made an art-form out of casually ignoring its many colonial atrocities both here in the British Isles and throughout the Empire.
      The latest UK Prime Minister appears to have no idea of the seriousness of the crimes he has inherited from his many predecessors. Instead, he gives the impression that the horrors committed by the ‘British’ government over centuries, have all been a bit of a ‘wheeze’ and not something to take too seriously. After all, he might say, the ongoing desire of the privileged class is to continue to secure and increase their already enormous wealth and power, and that is far too important to be constantly reviewing England’s outstanding criminal record.

      On past form, The Scottish Government will find their English counterparts every bit as treacherous as they have ever been.

    173. CameronB Brodie says:

      Westminster stands above international law, or at least that is the cultural perspective it follows. So Scotland simply won’t gain proper legal recognition under British constitutional practice, which lacks coherence and compatibility with the legal doctrine of international human rights law.

      If Scotland had a government and judiciary who actually understood and respected the law, Westminster would not be about to strip Scots of their legal identity and human rights, through a legally sanctioned act of political violence and cultural subjugation.

      The European Court of Justice and Public International Law

      3. The status of international law in EU law

      According to settled case law, international agreements concluded by the EU become an integral part of the EU legal order.15 The conclusion of the agreement (usually by a Council decision) makes it directly applicable. In this sense, the EU may be said to adhere to a ‘monist’ approach.

      Direct applicability, however, should not be confounded with direct effect.16 If an agreement is deemed to have direct effect, it can be invoked directly by individuals before Union and EU national courts. There is an abundance of case law on the presence or absence of direct effect….

      https://rm.coe.int/statement-delivered-by-judge-allan-rosas-at-the-55th-cahdi-meeting-55t/16807b3b04

    174. Ian Brotherhood says:

      @Breeks (8.18) —

      Soo-perb.

      Hope you have copied onto the latest thread.

      😉

    175. Effijy says:

      Story about 600 Scots deaths due to air pollution I just
      Cannot believe.

      I look forward to finding out the body behind it are another bunch of
      Unionist fantasists looking to build today’s SNP Bad top up.

      I lived in the 60’s when smog was rampant and you could taste the air.
      People here have died with Asbestosis and Lung Disease often aggravated
      By chain smoking but I never ever heard of anyone in the modern era being
      Informed that cause of death was the outside air that they breath.

      At the end of the report it was suggested that more money is required by the Scottish government
      To tackle this problem.

      Now is that claim from a Lib or Tory who had been behind the £2 Billion cut to our budget
      Or from Labour Unionists who abstained when they could have voted against austerity?

      We need to contain these people in another country South of here very soon!



    Comment - please read this page for comment rules. HTML tags like <i> and <b> are permitted. Use paragraph breaks in long comments. DO NOT SIGN YOUR COMMENTS, either with a name or a slogan. If your comment does not appear immediately, DO NOT REPOST IT. Ignore these rules and I WILL KILL YOU WITH HAMMERS.




    ↑ Top