Photo by Pixabay on Pexels.com

The final part of the Mia response to the challenge. A pleasure to read. She would make a great Advocate.

“Scotland is subject to and dependent not on England, but on the United Kingdom”

I think this is incorrect. It is the United Kingdom of Great Britain the entity that is dependent on continuous consent from Scotland to remain as such. I do agree that currently it is the UK of Great Britain, what is a state, but because it is the product of an international treaty, the minute that treaty ends, the UK state ends. This is the same scenario with the EU. The EU is the legal entity that negotiated all the trade agreements for its constituent countries as part of the EU. This means that if tomorrow the constituent states of the EU end the treaty that gave birth to the EU, the EU as a legal entity ceases to exist and therefore all those trade deals negotiated with the EU as the legal entity will cease to have validity in the eyes of the law. The Uk is not a country. It is a political union, just like the EU is.

“The United Kingdom can do what it likes with Scotland”

I think this is incorrect for two reasons:
1. The UK is not independent from Scotland – it is Scotland. I think what you may mean is that England can do what it wants with Scotland, because what we have at present is not “The UK”. What we have is a rogue England acting as the UK.

2. As I said above, the “UK of Great Britain” derives its legitimacy to remain as a legitimate state from an international treaty and hence the continuous consent from its two signatory parties for that treaty to continue. So in reality, and because it is a bipartite political union, it is Scotland who can do what it likes with The UK, not the other way round. We will continued to be dictated for as long as we keep doing as we are told. Perhaps we should turn round and start saying “no”. We will decide what to do from now on, thank you.

“It can give it a parliament”

“IT” cannot give what it does not own. The UK parliament does not own Scotland’s powers. It has borrowed them. The parliament of Scotland was RECONVENED by demand of the people of Scotland, don’t forget. It was never a gift from England MPs. They had to because if they didn’t the alternative was the acceleration of Scotland’s independence. The “gifts” of our own powers are being very carefully managed by Westminter by managing our expectations to stop us demand them all back at once.

“it can decide what powers that parliament has”

If it has happened that way until now it is because the people of Scotland is not fully aware of their popular sovereignty. It has happened that way because the UK’s survival is entirely based on foundations of deception. EVen devolution is a deception. For instance, did you notice that the powers allocated to Scotland’s parliament in 1999 were decided AFTER the vote took place? Did you notice that the powers handed back to Scotland in 2014 were decided AFTER the vote took place? In what democratic world do you cast your vote before you know what you are getting? This is pure damage limitation. 

Why do you think the people of Scotland has never been asked what powers they want to have in their parliament?

Because the English ruling elite is scared the people of Scotland are going to turn round and demand all powers back. They have been for decades desperately trying to slam down the breaks on a process that started the day after the Treaty of Union was signed. 

“Scotland is not a sovereign state and has not been so since 1707”
We are going to have to agree to disagree on this one. You claim it is not a sovereign state. I claim it has put its sovereignty on hold and can restore its statehood whenever its people, where its sovereignty lies, reclaim that sovereignty back. The only thing they need to do is to ignore Sturgeon’s bleatings about her unicorn neverendum, find a suitable vehicle to bypass Sturgeon and her toothless SNP and declare the Treaty of Union 1707 void.

“You do have a bee in your bonnet about England”
Do I detect an attempt to send me on a guilty trip? Don’t bother as you would be wasting your time. I make no apologies whatsoever for expressing the truth as I see it. England has been exploiting and abusing Scotland for centuries. England by means of its representatives and monarch has imposed absolute rule on Scotland for its own benefit, in direct breach of Scotland’s constitution and by default the treaty of union. England has pocketed the bulk of the profits from Scotland’s vast oil resources and is now pocketing the profits of Scotland’s renewables. In England’s eyes, the assets of every nation of the Uk are hers and her debt is everybody else’s, yet England is the only one that has a huge, and I mean huge, deficit of trade of goods. We are talking about over 100 billion. England has used Scotland to pay a share of England’s debt, to pay for its vanity projects and the corruption of its political party’s negotiations, like the PPE and test kits recent scandals. England is using Scotland as its own nuclear waste back yard. England’s representatives are undermining and deceiving Scotland continuously for the sake of preserving what looks like an unlawful treaty that should have been declared void the day after it was signed.
There, I said it and I still no sign of the bee.

“The parliament you refer to is not England’s parliament, it is the parliament of the United Kingdom”

It may be called like that but it most certainly is not the UK of Great Britain Parliament. It is England acting as the UK parliament. Take a look at the EU parliament to see what a union parliament looks like. 705 members for the entire EU that has around 447 million people. England alone has 553 MPs for 55 million people. For the larger EU countries there is a cap in the number of members. Germany has 83 million people and only 96 seats (13%) England’s proportion of seats in the England as the UK parliament is 83%. That is not a “UK” parliament. That is England’s parliament. Proof of this is that we have effectively England MPs determining by themselves to increase England’s representation even more at the expense of decreasing the representation of Scotland, Wales and NI. As it is, with no cap, they could vote to take over all seats from NI, Wales and Scotland. Would you still call it then “the UK” parliament of by then you would start to consider it being England’s parliament?

” Technically, England is as subservient to it”

Please don’t make me laugh. England has been acting as “the uK” and keeping everybody else silent and subservient to its own needs for as long as I remember. There is nothing subservient about England.

” By agreeing to union with England, Scotland accepted that it would be governed by a parliament that was made up largely of English members”
Scotland did not accept anything. A handful of bribed aristocrats did.

“And Westminster has the right to decide over Scottish citizens because Scotland agreed to that”

When? Our 2014 contract which we accepted with our no vote is void. The minute England MPs unilaterally butchered the Act of Scotland which underpinned the status quo that gave legitimacy to that vote, they butchered the agreement.

On 8th May 2015 the people of Scotland sent an absolute majority of SNP MPs to Westminster. Democratically speaking, that removed that right from Westminster to act on behalf of Scotland. If it didn’t is only because Sturgeon removed the wheels of the SNP in preparation for that vote.

Furthermore, since 2016 there has been a mandate for an independence referendum on the table. A mandate for an independence referendum is not an agreement for Westmisnter to continue actiong on behalf of Scotland and business as usual. That mandate means Scotland has been questioning since 2015 that right and demands an opportunity to decide. Until the time that referendum or a plebiscitary election on independence in its place, Westminster does not longer have that right. The people of Scotland took that right away in 2015 and from 2016 the people of Scotland has said by means of that referendum mandate that until that vote takes place, that right is not restored.

“Unfortunately, however, the United Kingdom can and does”
I disagree. The only reason why we are doing what England as the UK tells us is because we have an elite, like Prof Baird says, that have reached an agreement with the colonialists. if we had real representatives instead of colonial administrators we would not be told by England what to do.

“Don’t blame the English for it. It was our parcel of rogues who sold us down the river for English gold”

Not quite. There are several parties to the betrayal:

1. those from England who engineered the gerrymandering of the Darrien scheme and the Alien Act to coerce the parliament of Scotland into conceding.
2. Those behind bribes and the dirty tactics to not call the members of parliament to ensure those who oppose the Treaty were in minority
3. The cowards and betrayers who pocketed the gold coins in exchange for selling their Kingdom
4. Those north and south of the Hadrian wall who have misinformed, obfuscated, deceived and abused power through history to keep an unlawful Treaty going against the interests of the people of Scotland and for the sake of England, the insatiable greed of its elite and its wars.
5. The current cowards that Scotland has as government who, watching breach after breach of the Treaty, they choose to sit on their hands like cowards and look the other way instead of ending the Treaty and its misery.

Besides the coercion mentioned above with regards to the Darrien scheme and the Alien Act, From the Vienna Convention on the law of treaties:

“Article 50 – Corruption of a representative of a State”
“If the expression of a State’s consent to be bound by a treaty has been procured through the corruption of its representative directly or indirectly by another negotiating State, the State may invoke such corruption as invalidating its consent to be bound by the treaty”

Buying the vote of sufficient MPs in 1706 with money, peerages or other sinecures falls very nicely within the concept of “corruption of a representative of a State”, don’t you agree?

This means the treaty was void even before the day it was signed. Scotland has remained trapped in this union not because of the Treaty in 1707 or because the bribes with English gold. Scotland has remained trapped in this union because successive governments and waves of MPs and MSPs did not find the guts neither to repeal the Act of Union in Scotland’s parliament nor to drag this treaty aberration into an international court of law and end its misery


Sadly some sites had given up on being pro Indy sites and have decided to become merely pro SNP sites where any criticism of the Party Leader or opposition to the latest policy extremes, results in censorship being applied. This, in the rather over optimistic belief that this will suppress public discussion on such topics. My regular readers have expertly worked out that by regularly sharing articles on this site defeats that censorship and makes it all rather pointless. I really do appreciate such support and free speech in Scotland is remaining unaffected by their juvenile censorship. Indeed it is has become a symptom of weakness and guilt. Quite encouraging really.


Are available easily by clicking on the links in the Home and Blog sections of this website. by doing so you will be joining thousands of other readers who enjoy being notified by email when new articles are published. You will be most welcome.


  1. “In what democratic world do you cast your vote before you know what you are getting? This is pure damage limitation.”

    It’s how you treat a colony, concede the minimum you can in order to forestall rebellion.

    “That is not a “UK” parliament. That is England’s parliament.”

    The thing is the England, its elite and a good number of its people (and unfortunately too many Scots!) believe in majoritarian rule. They think that because they have 85% of the population that means Scotland NI and Wales are subservient to them. This mean that the UK isn’t a union in any meaningful sense. It’s England and its colonies. Now if we wanted the same things that could be possibly be ignored but when we want different things and importantly different policies either you need to end the union or stop pretending it is one.

    “The only reason why we are doing what England as the UK tells us is because we have an elite, like Prof Baird says, that have reached an agreement with the colonialists.”

    THIS!!! With bells on. England treat us badly because we let it. Countries have become independent in droves since the end of WW2. Why aren’t we one of them? Why are people falling for the nuSNP. Electors stop listening to the words (carrots) and start reviewing their actions. Since 2014 the SNP’s domestic record has been poor. So if they aren’t delivering indy there is the square root of heehaw point in voting for them!

    Liked by 17 people

  2. Sorry to go o/t so quickly but I’m hearing that the SNP have suspended Tim Rideout for criticising Priti Patel based on what looks like a deliberate misreading of his calling out her hypocrisy on Ukrainian refugees given she is the daughter of economic migrants.

    I guess it’s entirely coincidental that he is one of the main figures calling for an independent currency after indy.

    Liked by 16 people

    1. Sadly they have been looking to discipline Tim Rideout for a while. He will face a Kangaroo court, staffed by the Thought Police, if he hangs about long enough to give them the opportunity. It was always going to happen the minute he convinced the SNP CONFERENCE to vote for our own currency on a faster timescale that Nicola’s “growth commission” wanted.

      Liked by 18 people

    2. A full year has elapsed since alleged sex pest, Patrick Grady was suspended as Westminster, Chief Whip. He still moves among the chosen, select few.
      How’s that investigation goin’. Tectonic plates move faster (when it suits them).

      Liked by 10 people

  3. A strong fight-back from Mia. And that’s what’s required. A much needed boost to our confidence after being treated as a colony for over 300 years. Good on you, Mia!

    Liked by 16 people

  4. What a wonderful post, Mia and thanks to Ian for posting. Let’s get this information out to the people. Can we not get Mia on to the cooncil telly so that folk who are not politically minded, or not online, can hear what she she has to say?
    I realise that so many of our citizens are fully concentrating on survival day to day (even more so with the rising energy costs and all the rest) so may be less interested in hearing this, but how else can we give folk hope and the knowledge that they do have the power to change our circumstances for the better?

    Liked by 11 people

      1. And as a woman I completely understand WHY Mia insists on this anonymity. However could someone else make her arguments to a wider audience? I love the OP’s naivety that council telly would allow such arguments EVER to be made though…

        Liked by 5 people

  5. Even with the best will in the world, having any relationship where one party is ten times the size of the other, then, over time, the dynamics of the relationship will always reach the same point. There can be no equality without root and branch reform and a break up of the larger party. That’s simply not going to happen. There are only two paths, complete assimilation or ending the relationship.

    Liked by 16 people

  6. Well done Mia, I can only hope that a few Nicophants will read your article and join the exodus from what was once the SNP.

    When you have seen what the SNP leadership have become you cannot unsee it! They roar to impress us and then curl up at the feet of their Master.

    I often wonder what path Scotland would have taken had the Act of Union not taken place….then I realise we would have been invaded anyway and the same treatment would have resulted. By bribery or bayonet they were going to take Scotland in 1707.

    Liked by 13 people

    1. “Every statue, whether of Faidherbe or of Lyautey, of Bugeaud or of Segeant Blandan – all these conquistadors perched on colonial soil do not cease from proclaiming one and the same thing: ‘We are here by the force of bayonets’.”

      (Frantz Fanon 1970, 66)

      Liked by 15 people

  7. This discussion has wider «resonances». How accountable ought legislators be to those who electic them through democratic ballot? The notion of peoples’ sovereignty passing to a small group of legislators and their unelected «advisors» as a consequence of a one off event in time and space appears to be endemic in the notion of democracy in many «first world» systems. Do we have have elected oligarchy, despotism, dictatorship as a result? Does the shade of absolutist crown and sceptre still roam the corridors of power? Presidential flummery, podiums, flags, decrees are suggestive.
    Covidism engendered and still promotes a climate of fear, governments predictably exploited the pavlovian response of the citizenry to the chilling climate. Media, backed by plutocrats $$$$ obligingly provided the agitprop backup. In effect DO your DUTY citizen, stay SAFE, DO as are you are TOLD, PERIOD! HATE the EVIL CONTRARY perspective.
    We need a new and intellectually RADICAL, «dispensation», clearly. In Scotland we might benefit from an Open Assembly of a Sovereign People, the lots recast.
    Hero of the moment, a comedian who played piano with his penis on TV….that and the pétomane president too.

    Liked by 10 people

    1. And the long tradition of the Convention of the Estates offers a template for a modern ‘Citizens’ Assembly’, just as important in our current, bankrupt, feudal system as independence itself!

      Liked by 16 people

  8. Just a note for the naysayers and objectors to the whole notion of popular sovereignty: Do you think any of this is about persuading the courts or the parties to ‘grant’ us the sovereignty that was always ours? The same courts that jailed Craig Murray for a crime that does not exist or have jailed and persecuted Julian Assange for acting as a real journalist? The same parties that have grabbed the kind of power that makes them despots and could not care less whether that is lawful in Scotland? Really?

    No, this is about exposing the truth so that the Scottish population learns what has been hidden from us for so long. We are a litigious lot, the Scots, and powerfully motivated by what is just or unjust, what is right and what is wrong. Have you noticed the overwhelming response to the rehearsal of the historic and legal facts? “Right, I’m getting my coat on and I’m out the door” That about sums up the effect that matters. Because when the people grasp what it means that we are sovereign, that there is no court or parliament that has the right to ‘grant’ us, or more importantly, deny us the rights we already have, the balance of power will shift dramatically.

    So what matters is the critical mass that *will* be reached when the people of Scotland finally understand that the power of government, to create or dissolve it, lies wholly with them. What court or government need they apply to for permission when it is they who grant or refuse permission to a government to govern?

    So watch this space. Once this truth has reached every man and woman in Scotland, the game is over. The forelock tugging, desperate pleading of a people whom must go cap in hand for what is theirs by right, while they sink ever further into poverty amidst untold riches, suffering injustice after injustice without access to redress and being systematically, stripped of their hard won human and civil rights … is over.

    Mia, I’m proud to stand shoulder to shoulder with you. And thank you for helping to build the ground to stand on so effectively!

    Liked by 20 people

    1. Brilliant Sara . As you say , and many of us have been saying for some time, some ideas are truly incendiary and once the fuse is lit can spread like the proverbial wildfire : though maybe the controlled burning of moorland is a more meaningful simile . Burning away the dross and deadwood of old assumptions and false consciousness . Allowing new growth to spring forth

      Liked by 11 people

    2. Great post Sara and I am delighted that you are teaming up with Mia. This is undoubtably the most formidable alliance imaginable and will lay low the Unionist opposition with mighty blows for freedom. Glad to have played a small part in bringing it about. Onwards and upwards!

      Liked by 11 people

  9. Thank you Mia for you excellent points and for your critical fighting spirit.

    May I suggest a perspective here:
    ” By agreeing to union with England, Scotland accepted that it would be governed by a parliament that was made up largely of English members”
    As I read the treaty it had one intent: trade. This was driven by English blockade and Darrien – in the scales of justice this was never a voluntary union. The brutal oppression of Scotland objecting to rogue England as Britain invalidate any argument that we ever agreed to England as Britain. To my mind, the case before the international community is a slam dunk. We just need to rid ourselves of the toxic nuSNP.

    Liked by 15 people

    1. You are absolutely right about the importance of trade to England (and Scotland) in the making of the Union. The Navigation Act had all but impoverished Scotland – deliberately – followed by the tragedy of Darien, for which agreement to the Union offered compensation in hard currency it seemed a matter of survival for many. (Not, we know, the majority!) But there were other potent factors. England had a huge national debt while Scotland had none. With Union, Scotland took on part responsibility for the English national debt. Then there was the problem of the Scottish tendency to allow their people to decide on their own loyalties. While the thirty years war saw around 50,000 troops sent to fight in support of Elizabeth of Bohemia and the Protestant cause another significant army of Scots fought for the Hapsburgs. (Count Walter Leslie’s is a story that is well worth reading!) So bringing the ‘unreliable’ and dangerous Scots to heel was as important as trade. What the history sites and books will not tell you is that Scotland was a far older and more successful trading nation than England and it was Scotland’s trading wealth that England had coveted. And got. The Union put the full stop on this sentence and made some tiny recompense to Scotland for what it had lost. In return for our obligation to service England’s national debt ever after.

      Liked by 13 people

      1. They also didn’t want the Scots muddying England’s plan for the succession, one Princess Sophia of Hanover, once Queen Anne’s mortal coil unwound itself.

        Liked by 3 people

  10. excellent articles and comments!

    naively putting this out there:

    we talk of spreading the word – is there any chance these articles AND comments/answers can be put in booklet form and printed for sale on line, through Independence groups or other avenues – especially for public consumption?

    we have been held back by our own and the State long enough, we need to move to enable the image our future to be realised.

    thank you.

    Liked by 12 people

    1. I’d expect (politely, demand) that the new edition of the Wee Blue Book at least gives a nod in this direction. I know Stuart Campbell, being a Liberal, is not wholly warmed up to the idea of our history as a guiding light, however, this would seem to be an intrinsic part of Scotland’s identity. As salyers57 states above, claim of right along with the Convention of the Estates would put our democracy on a fully modern footing – not just some warmed up feudalism where the masses are given the impression that they control how they’re governed.

      Liked by 16 people

    2. I think they’d need to be free. Folk aren’t going to pay to learn how they’ve been taken for mugs. Maybe a crowdfunder to cover costs of distribution?

      Liked by 9 people

      1. That’s a good idea with the crowdfunder Panda. I’m sure everyone on here realizes what a seismic change in thinking this could bring about. If there’s anything worthy of a crowdfunder, getting Sara’s work out to the masses must be it. I would be prepared to dig deep to get it out there and I’m sure there are many other like-minded folk.

        Liked by 4 people

      2. absolutely. – omitted that from my comment to first,y see if there might be some interest.

        even with limited means I am sure many patriots would be willing to help spread the word and to allow a greater input to the cause of an Independent Scotland

        Liked by 2 people

    3. The text of the articles is already taken from a booklet and just waiting for enough feedback and correction for publication. It would be a simple enough task to collect the objections (from Iain?) and Mia’s answers (with her permission) and maybe one or two of my own and add a kind of FAQ section on the end. It is pretty long already though so most people won’t read it as it is… It’s a dilemma. Anyway, whatever form it goes out in it isn’t a problem to make it available free.

      Liked by 12 people

      1. Sounds amazing – maybe a summary at the front with the “I just killed the biggest bear you ever saw” points and references to the pages with the follow up?

        Liked by 6 people

  11. * Mamma * Mia

    There you go again

    My my how can they resist you ? ( they can’t )

    There’s a fire within your soul alright .

    Liked by 10 people

  12. Brilliant, essential post, both today and Claim or Rights posts – look how many here are fired-up, rejuvenated and animated by the renewed confirmation of our chronicled power.
    Must say, these are exciting times. Coinciding with waning popularity and exposure of British Party Holyrood imposters, there’s once again light in Scotland’s long tunnel of darkness. Let’s not let-up, not for a second.

    Liked by 8 people

  13. Excellent post which points out the difference between a real union the EU and one which too many people have been brainwashed in to believing that how unions work is that the larger partner/partners have the largest say. In the real union the EU no matter how large or small a country is that each one has an equal say and just as important an equal veto on proposals.In the UK the larger partner has all the say and the 3 smaller partners just have to like it or lump it or so we are told. Classic behaviour of an abuser, the classic arguments of you couldent cope on your own, you couldent support your people, the usual too small,too poor etc,etc. The very reason for Brexit, Westminster is unable to accept any other country on an equal standing to them, their position regarding the UK union is no different. Posts and responses from Sara and Mia paint us a very different picture and after all the work that they have done to explain that there are other options to exit the toxic UK apart from the Section 30 Scam of the SNP leadership it is now up to the rest of us to get the message out to as many people as possible.There are many exit doors from the colonial UK, it is up to the rest of us to pick up the keys and unlock the doors to Independence and Self Determination.

    Liked by 8 people

  14. Who are you Mia? Your advocacy is needed on the public stage. You are a true patriot. You shine a spotlight on all the murky corners of the debate, the bits that other advocates either by ignorance or design, fail to clarify. Why are you not leading one of the Independence Parties? Scotland needs its best people in the vanguard of the fight against English colonialism. All power to you Mia. 🏴󠁧󠁢󠁳󠁣󠁴󠁿

    Liked by 1 person

Comments are closed.

%d bloggers like this: