MIA PROVIDES THE TOPIC OF CONVERSATION AT BALMORAL

Posted byiainlawson27Posted inUncategorizedTags:, ,

PHOTO: I know she was expecting protesters but this is surely overkill.


”This is obviously an attempt at gerrymandering”

I have a different interpretation of Truss’ (dead cat?) bill proposal.

Let’s remember about the reason for the 40% rule in 1979. It was to have an excuse to deny Scotland a parliament. 40% was an outrageously high threshold and they knew it. What they did not know is how the people of Scotland would react to this abuse of democracy. They paid dear for their mistake though: what they caused was a lot of people in Scotland to move from being happy with hoping for a devolved parliament to wanting independence. 

This new situation forced the powers that be to hold a second devolution referendum in 1997 and having to open a parliament in Scotland after all. A parliament which, under Mr Salmond’s expert hand, was often fed with more powers. Unfortunately, Sturgeon’s appalling housekeeping skills have seen that parliament put on a forced diet to quickly lose powers.

To stave off support for independence the powers that be were forced to hold the referendum in 1997. But by then irreparable damage to the union had already been done. Support for independence in Scotland had grown deep roots which can no longer be pulled up.

Truss now not only proposes to use the same failed strategy which led to such a risible pyrrhic victory in 1979. She is making the strategy look even more stupid, by moving the impossible threshold of 40% to an even more impossible 50%. An exaggerate overkill. Even a toddler can see through this.

In 1979 the powers that be might have not known what the rule of the 40% threshold would provoke in Scotland. But sure as hell they know what a 50% threshold will cause now: it will shoot up support for independence and will unleash even more contempt and disgust for the UK executive and parliament. So if what you are after is to protect the union in the long term, why making a complete fool of yourself by suggesting such a stupid thing to do?

Perhaps because they know the union is over and their idea is not to kill the referendum off, but rather to resurrect the idea of the referendum as a valid route just for a little bit longer.

Let’s not forget the Supreme Court have not given its verdict yet regarding Sturgeon’s referendum bill and we all know they are going to trash it. So what is the actual point of Truss’ bill? An overkill? A strategy to remove heat from Sturgeon after the eye rolling/laughter her sending the bill to the Supreme Court caused? Or a distraction from something else?

If I am not mistaken, this Truss’ proposal was after the display organised by SALVO in front of the colonial offices in Edinburgh. That is definitely something the powers that be might want to distract Scotland from.

SALVO seeks to reconvene the Convention of the Estates. The Convention of the Estates is what created the Claim of Right, which took the crown from a monarch accused of forcing absolute rule on Scotland and put it on another.

The crown controls the executive who brings abusive bills to Westminster parliament. The Crown has given royal assent to an awful lot of bills passed without the support of a majority of Scottish MPs and without the support of a majority of Scottish MSPs either. That is at all practical effects the crown imposing absolute rule over Scotland, in violation of Scotland’s constitution and the Claim of Right.

Once the Convention of the Estates is reconvened, what is stopping this convention serving notice to the crown itself for unlawfully imposing absolute rule on Scotland through its executive and parliament and in direct violation of Scotland’s constitution?

It is my opinion the powers that be might have seen the writing on the wall and are now desperately applying CPR to the corpse of Sturgeon’s bogus referendum so we still see it as a viable route to independence and they can continue to fool us for a bit longer.

Liz Truss’ stupid idea is, in my view, just a dead cat to generate a spontaneous, visceral wave of support for Sturgeon and her bogus referendum and to direct our anger towards Truss’ bill instead. Because for as long as our attention and energy are focussed on fighting the democratic injustice of this new, deliberately impossible 50% threshold, for as long as our anger is focussed on a transient tory gov and unionist MPs, they will be successfully removing our attention and energy from the fact that with a reconvened convention of estates, we can actually ditch the crown, the executive, the tories, labour, the Treaty of Union and its child, the parliament of Great Britain all in one go, so the sooner we get on with it the better. Truss’ bill is, I think, a huge squirrel. 

I think we should cut their bluff by totally ignoring the 50% rule and keep pushing instead for the route of the Convention of Estates

SALVO has fired a deadly blow (metaphorically speaking) to Sturgeon’s bogus referendum, but it has also sent a shot across the bows (also, metaphorically speaking) to the crown itself. The fundamental reason for the treaty of union 1707 was to ensure the same monarch would hold the crowns of Scotland and England. Therefore this treaty only makes sense if Scotland and England have the same monarch. 

If we cannot take the democratic route and hold a referendum because the crown’s executive and England MPs are unlawfully telling us we cannot or they are imposing on us impossible thresholds; if the self-serving crown is forcing us to remain in this union against our will by indirectly imposing absolute rule via COPFS, the executive and the latter’s control of parliament; if the union cannot be terminated in our own parliament or by our own MPs because our MPs and MSPs are now betraying us and batting for the other side; then we always have the nuclear option, which is bypassing them all and overriding the treaty by ditching the crown through the Convention of Estates

For as long as the crown was not seen to interfere in Scotland’s constitutional matters, I would have no problem with the current monarch/successor remaining as the head of state in Scotland until that time the people of Scotland voted otherwise. However, if it is proved the crown is abusing its position of power to deliberately violate Scotland’s constitution and force Scotland to remain in this union against its will and in contravention of the Claim of Right, then my position changes.

By the way, has it already been revealed what Brown and Prince William were discussing during their meeting at the palace of Holyrood in June 2021? Brown at that point was no MP or MSP who could claim to be talking on behalf of Scotland.

MY COMMENTS

I think Mia is right about the diversionary tactics. I also think she is right about the fledging Salvo organisation striking fear at Westminster…and Holyrood. Salvo is flushing out the truth and completely destroying the attempts to keep the Independence issue for the sole tactical use of the SNP, all designed to keep that Party in power indefinitely. An arrangement Westminster has been very happy about for the last eight years. When you look at the obstacles to Independence, the “Gold Standard”, the need for 60% support for an extended period, the SNP both votes strategy that elected dozens of Unionists to Holyrood and killed off any chance of a supermajority THAT ALL CAME FROM ONE SOURCE THE SNP LEADER HERSELF. Now we are being told that Liz Truss boasts she will just ignore the “attention seeking” First Minister of Scotland. Her response is to send her a congratulatory letter. Words fail me! I am coordinating the work on creating the Scottish National Congress which will be the modern equivalent of the Convention of the Estates. I and our team will not be diverted in the slightest so if that was the plan it has failed already.

I am, as always

Yours for Scotland

 BEAT THE CENSORS

The purpose of this blog is to advance Scottish Independence. That requires honesty and fair reporting of events and opinions. Some pro SNP Indy sites have difficulty with that and seek to ban any blogger who dares to criticise  the Party or its leader. As Yours for Scotland will not bend our principles and allow this attack on free speech to be successful we rely on our readership sharing and promoting our articles on a regular basis. This invalidates the attempts at censorship and ensures the truth gets out there. I thank you most sincerely for this important support.

FREE SUBSCRIPTIONS

Are available from the Home and Blog pages of this website. This ensures you are advised of every new article published on Yours for Scotland. Join the thousands already subscribed and be the first to get the news every day. You will be most welcome.

SALVO

This site has never sought donations, indeed we have a £3 limit alongside a message further explaining that donations are not required. That has now changed as the costs of running this blog for 2022 have already been raised in donation, therefore  for the remainder of this year  all donations made to this site will be forwarded to Salvo to help them educate Scots on the 1689 Claim of Right. This is vital work and we must all do what we can to support it.

YESTIVAL

It is time to fight back! Attend YESTIVAL in Freedom Square in Glasgow on the 18th September 12-5pm. Let’s get the show back on the ground!

JOIN THE SCOTTISH  LIBERATION MOVEMENT

Sign up at Liberation.Scot. Check spam folder if verification message does not arrive within a couple of minutes.


67 thoughts on “MIA PROVIDES THE TOPIC OF CONVERSATION AT BALMORAL”

  1. “I think we should cut their bluff by totally ignoring the 50% rule and keep pushing instead for the route of the Convention of Estates”.

    I completely agree, we should push ahead with this.

    Once we have sacked the government(s) and proposed restoring Scotland’s full statehood we will have to have a plebiscite to ensure that we carry the people with us – that’s democracy and this is Scotland. But that referendum, as I’ve mentioned before, must be ‘Made in Scotland’.

    The British rules based referendum route is bound to fail. It is designed to fail. The hurdle will always be too high. The barrier too strong. It’s called cheating. Let Sturgeon press ahead with it and when it fails, as it inevitable will do at one of the stages of her 3-pronged ‘plan’, we must make sure that the process is a) discredited and b) that the First Minister owns that humiliation.

    We press on regardless.

    Everything to do with May/Ress-Mogg/Gove/Johnson/Truss and their insults aimed this country’s people I believe are indeed a distraction, designed to sap our energy and divert our attention towards the personal rather than the constitutional. Look at all the time readers of rags like The National spend reacting to the latest outrageous comments from the Britz – what a waste of time and effort.

    First they divide us. Then they conquer us. Finally they rule us. It’s what they do – they’re BRITISH!

    We need to get the people angry. Then we need to harness that anger. Then we need to get even.

    Liked by 22 people

    2. So who has the plan of action incorporating all these good points and who now is the one to push the start button. Seems just now a lot of pundits saying the same thing . I’m not interested in baby cribs , rent freezes sanitary towels etc all out of proportion in the context of the big independence issue. SNP = sanitary nappy party and Alba means white in a lot of languages smacking of racialism . So let’s get on with it and stop this issue about peoples characters . Just get on with it

      Liked by 1 person

  2. If Mia wants to provide evidence for her many contentions she should get her facts right.

    The 2016 Scotland Act extended the powers of the Scottish Parliament . This happened under NS and not AS. The argument with NS is that while many of these powers have been used to benefit the Scottish people these powers have not been prosecuted as far as they should be.

    I don’t subscribe to the view that the current and ensuing hardship experienced by so many of our people should be the justification for Independence. Rather existing powers which enable the SG to control all of Scottish Funding should be used to put significant money in people’s pockets so that those Doubting Thomases will see that we do support ourselves and give them the confidence to vote yes! The U.K. won’t tolerate a position where Scotland drives a huge wedge between the transforming standard of living in Scotland and rUK. That will break the Union!

    Sent from my iPhone

    Liked by 2 people

      3. You cannot motivate the SNP leadership to adopt new ideas while the voters keep putting them back in power. She called for “both votes SNP” at the Scottish election NOT to gain seats but to ensure ALBA achieved little traction. The voters delivered a Million wasted votes and put Unionists in Holyrood.
        Sturgeon preferred Unionist MSPs to having competition from another Indy Party.

        We should have several alternative routes planned but Sturgeon is currently convinced she has a monopoly on Indy Votes and has no intention of doing anything other than carrot dangling.
        Hopefully 2023 passing with no progress on Independence people will start to wake up.
        We all know she is a charlatan but 2023 will be a tipping point for the SNP.
        I regret we have to wait but the carrot followers need time to see her for what she is.

        Sadly it is possible that Angus Robertson maybe the next carrot dangled with calls for “a fresh start” , “give the new leader time”…..more wasted time but the Westminster Short Money rolls in.

        The current polling tells her she is safe. Why would she listen…..she doesn’t do political history so the lesson of Labours rapid demise in Scotland escapes her.

        Nothing being done at the moment is wasted but please forget about a Damascene conversion for Sturgeon.

        Liked by 9 people

    2. Since the powers extended to the Scottish government did not include authority to lock the masses in their homes (ie in fear of the common cold), and was not a power of UK government to begin with, a precursor to SG adopting such measures (ie lest Barnet is trashed in consequence) would be to give itself some leverage by using the same legal principles used for the covid legislation to take (back) control of reserved broadcasting, telecommunications, data protection, defence and national security, employment and industrial relations, foreign affairs, transport and trade and industry, immigration and consumer protection policy, on the basis of the covid disinfo alone..

      .. and, as a precursor to that, take back control of energy, currency, betting and gambling, taxation and elections to UK parliament, on the basis of the carpet bagging behind the so called energy crisis.

      (login issues = many apologies if this being repeated several times, its a fundamental point however badly expressed but not worth ocd – plenty ways to skin a cat, etc*)

      *not to be confused with herding cats (/how or why..)

      Liked by 6 people

      1. “Since the powers extended to the Scottish government did not include authority to lock the masses in their homes (ie in fear of the common cold)”

        Yes they were (and are) – under public health measures, which is how Wales had the power to in effect “seal” its border with England. These same powers were once exercise by the councils, and were part of how they (in England) were organised as “sanitary districts”.

        So there was also always the power to effectively “seal” the Scotland / England border, or in effect cut off the Airports by not allowing arriving folk to travel far “landside” under the same health measures.

        Now as to if the exercise of the powers to the extent they did was an appropriate measure for CV19, that is a different question.

        Liked by 9 people

      2. @JB
        Suspect you might be conflating powers relating to public hygiene, ie sewage disposal, with public safety, ie incarceration of the insane – both of which can be contested if no law has been broken.

        Less sure about sealing the border which, depending on its timing, might have been consistent with the original dictat but you’d probably need to go back to Hadrian’s day for the legislation, if any, underpinning a self isolating understanding of powers associated with sanitary districts – in which case it could never have applied, or been subsequently devolved, to a Scotland where rights to roam take precedence in any event.

        Liked by 3 people

    3. Mia’s facts are where they should be. Where are yours?

      The 2016 Scotland Act extended by an inch the powers of the Scottish Parliament, sure, but those powers are not the achievement of Nicola Sturgeon. Those powers in the Scotland Act 2016 are the result of the “vow”. Do I need to remind you who was the FM of Scotland when the vow was promised? So, please do not give credit to NS for what her predecesor achieved. Those powers are credit to Mr Salmond, not NS.

      By the way, according to the Daily Record, the “vow” powers continued to be delivered until 2019 (Record View & David Clegg (2019) “IndyRef Vow delivered as Westminster completes final transfer of powers to Scotland” The Daily Record [online]).

      So 5 years into Sturgeon’s disastrous regime and she was still reaping the benefits achieved by her predecesor while she achieved absolutely nothing of her own.

      Let’s not forget that Mr Salmond achieved all that with a majority in Holryood, the child of Westminster, less than 10 SNP MPs in Westminster, and an official 55 no vs 45 yes.

      Since 8th May 2015 and until May 2016 NS commanded that same Holyrood majority Mr Salmond had plus a continuous absolute majority of SNP MPs in Westminster and over 50% of pro-indy vote in the GE2015. Yet with all that she has achieved absolutely nothing. Not one extra power.

      With 56 SNP MPs she should have delivered independence, or at the very least push the crown and England’s gov to the wall and demand the Devo Max we were promised in 2014 in full. But she didn’t. Instead, she let the crown and the UK executive water down the vow, she let them get away with throwing FFA in the bin and walk all over the Sewel convention to steal our powers.

      By the way, I say the crown because after all it is the crown who gives royal assent to each and every bill passed in Westminster against the opposition of an absolute majority of Scotland’s MPs, therefore forcing absolute rule over Scotland in violation of the Claim of Right. 8 years of majorities and NS has not denounced this even once. She just looks the other way and lets them ride roughshod over our Claim of Right, the Treaty of Union and Scotland’s sovereignty.

      “I don’t subscribe to the view that the current and ensuing hardship experienced by so many of our people should be the justification for Independence”

      Your personal view, your prerogative. My view is that the outrageous abuse towards Scotland which is the current fabricated hardship resulting from the outrageous increase in energy prices when Scotland produces more electricity, gas and oil than it uses, is not just another justification for independence. It is also a reason why such a disastrous leader like NS does not belong in the position of FM of Scotland. Not only she has been useless at progressing independence or bringing back powers home, she has also been an utter disaster at protecting our assets and preparing Scotland’s infrastructure for independence. It is a disgrace that England is getting our electricity for free while England MPs increase the caps in Scotland above those in England. So England takes our electricity and oil for free and on because England has always the hand on the UK purse, it profits further from making us paying more for the effing electricity we produce. But it is an even bigger disgrace that all this is happening while we have had an allegedly anti-union individual as FM who has been commanding majorities of anti union MPs in Westminster and Holyrood and who is doing SFA to stop it.

      “Rather existing powers which enable the SG to control all of Scottish Funding should be used to put significant money in people’s pockets”

      That is an incredibly devolutionist view which I do not share at all. The idea of having a majority of anti-union MSPs in Holyrood is not to use a meagre handful of powers and an insufficient budget to “correct” the criminal and chronical mismanagement of Scotland’s assets by the MPs elected by England.

      The idea of having anti-union majorities in Holyrood and Westminster is TO DITCH Westminster and for Scotland to start managing itself. Fact that has been somewhat lost to Sturgeon sometime before 2015 GE, and when it was already known the SNP would win by a landslide.

      “so that those Doubting Thomases will see that we do support ourselves and give them the confidence to vote yes”
      Sorry, this sounds ancient and very, very tired. The idea that good governance would bring the yes vote over the line might have sold well in November 2014. But after 8 years of terrible management by Sturgeon and after 8 years of continuous pro independence majorities both in Holyrood and Westminster which should have seen Scotland become independent a long time ago, such platitude no longer cuts it.

      “The U.K. won’t tolerate a position where Scotland drives a huge wedge between the transforming standard of living in Scotland and rUK.”

      What do you mean “the UK” won’t tolerate? What is “the UK”? the Kingdoms of Scotland and England are the UK. If “the UK” does not tolerate something is because NS, wasting the power of our majorities, has been continuously empowering England’s government and MPs to “not tolerate” things in Scotland. None of the England MPs sitting down south hold the mandate of a single vote from Scotland, therefore they do not speak or act on our behalf. Should NS be a real pro independence leader and she would be reminding them of that every week, every day, every hour, and in every intervention in either Westminster or Holyrood by an SNP MP or MSP.

      Please don’t tell me that you are one of those who equates the Kingdom of England with the term “the UK”.

      “Break” the Union?
      This is confusing. That is the unionists’ language. There is not such a thing as “breaking” the union. I think what you mean is “Ending” the union. Remember the foundation of this union is an international treaty. Repealing of the treaty does not lead to “break” anything. It leads to ending an international agreement. The union is just a product of an international agreement. The word “break” in that context has big psychological connotation. People does not like to break things. That is why the unionists use the word “break” instead of the correct terminology, which is “end”.

      There is no need to create any wedge to end the union. The only thing that is and has been needed since May 2015 is a real pro independence leader which is serious about pursuing independence and who manages the anti-union majorities of MPs to deliver independence, not to stall it. There is nothing more stupid a pro-independence leader could have ever done than removing the dentures of the anti-union majorities by claiming a vote for the party is not a vote for independence.

      Liked by 12 people

      2. That’s a new one on me! A so-called Independence campaigner giving credit to the Vow!

        Like

      3. Agreed Robert Hughes and Graeme responds to a MASTERFUL destruction of all his points by throwing in a wee childish WHATABOUTERY attempted diversion
        Graeme PLEASE read the TRUTH that Mia has responded with , please remove those nicla tinted glasses and realise that your and others sycophancy and adulation of the betrayer is severely DAMAGING our march to independence and freedom
        Iain Lawson praises your forward thinking ideas , just think if there were a REAL independence leader in charge how your ideas would be adopted to benefit your fellow countrymen , instead we have an imposter who is more focused on the SEX lives of our children and who is determined to destroy the very essence of WOMANHOOD

        Liked by 4 people

      4. If you wish to worship Mia go ahead . If you knew of my exchanges with Nicola I doubt the suggestion of sycophancy would hold water.

        The personal attacks on NS will just look more and more ridiculous as the Referendum beckons. You’ve missed the bus and your blaming the driver for bit stopping at your stop!

        Like

      5. No we accuse her of keeping the bus in the garage while stripping many of the most useful parts. If we do see a Referendum next year it will be a disaster based on an even worse franchise than the last time and with no preparatory work done whatsoever.

        Liked by 5 people

      6. Well Iain, you’re not as informed as you think you are!

        NS has popular support whatever her critics say. If u don’t have that you are just a debating society. That’s the harsh reality.

        If she fails to deliver Independence she will be off. But don’t think for a moment she will be replaced by AS.

        Stop the sniping; tell AS to stay in Colombey-les-Deux-Strichen; and concentrate to persuading those still to vote yes!

        Like

      7. I fear your optimism for NS is on pretty shaky ground. You don’t start a defence for someone you have faith in with the words “If she fails to deliver Independence she will be off” . With respect that is the equivalent of arguing the merits of a colander as a water retaining device!

        Liked by 3 people

      8. I’m not defending NS. It’s just a matter of fact!

        It’s also a matter of practice that if you fail to deliver your most important policy you go. Cameron and Salmond went!

        Unless a plan b to act as if we are already independent is devolved in case the Referendum delivers a No vote I suspect that a new changed movement will emerge.

        Like

      11. Graeme okay another chance to respond to my many requests for you to point out the many benefits and the super duper policies that sturgeon has introduced in her 8 years to better the lives of Scots , then when you are done with that you can point out or even link to the voluminous articles or documentation that has been produced by the Scottish Nonce Party to EDUCATE , INFORM AND ILLUSTRATE to those NO voters and UNDECIDEDS that you talk about that independence is not only desirable it is imperative if Scots are to survive
        You and sturgeon like to TELL people to go out and convince the NO voters and UNDECIDEDS why we need independence , here’s a thought , how about a FM (hahaha) and her politicians doing what they are bloody well paid to do , PROVIDE INFORMATION AND DOCUMENTATION to SHOW and PROVE that that is the case , EVERY piece of information OUT THERE has been provided by ORDINARY independence supporters at their own expense and by their own efforts
        YOUR LAZY party and FM have employed the VOW writer at great expense and a FAKE rebuttal unit and neither have EXPOSED or CRITICISED any lies or misinformation by the MSM

        Liked by 2 people

      12. Temper, temper! I could hear your blood pressure rising .

        The fact that people keep voting for the SNP under NS’s leadership is enough proof for anyone who believes in the democratic process.

        I’m sure no one supports any government’s policies all the time but they make their judgement in the round.

        That’s a bitter pill for folk who have personal animosity in their heart and tinge genuine criticism with bile.

        A road has been laid to Independence. It might work; it might not, but they’re many on board.
        We all have our frustrations, criticisms and we have,individually and collectively , the ability to persuade our fellow residents to vote YES.
        I have always said that our parliamentarians should seek to undermine the U.K. every day. Some don’t like it put that way , but that in effect is what they and we do who speak to people still to be persuaded.

        Maybe if you concentrated your talents on persuading folk to vote YES and undermine the U.K. than undermining the campaign for Independence…ah! But maybe that’s your comfortable place and that speaks volumes to me of where you are and what you support.

        Like

      13. Whoever you are Stand up and be counted then .As an interested observer all I see is a lot of wailing and gnashing of teeth. By various factions . So come to the forefront , bare your breast , brandish your sword yelling SCOTLAND and other will follow regardless of differences, the huff or general apathy Let the people see you in action Deeds not words

        Liked by 1 person

  3. We need a crowdfunding in order to buy a spot on TV, papers or a bill board to make Scots aware of liberation.scot/ and salvo.scot/, if people knew about these websites we could quickly increase our numbers towards going to the UN and removing us from this Union.

    Liked by 17 people

  4. Can/Would the Convention of Estates also ditch Holyrood?

    If the Convention would represent a complete cross-section of society then it would be entirely within its power and mandate to ditch a broken parliamentary system also.

    What a remarkable idea. As the world stands on the cusp of the destruction of the global agenda where nations start to reassert themselves in the interests of the many rather than the greed of a few, that Scotland has the tools necessary to clean the Augean stable and show the rest of the world how to do it.

    Liked by 17 people

      1. Well that would depend on how deep a clean you wanted to undertake. Certainly there are structural reforms needed across a wide range of government functions – the cosy relationship and revolving door between NGOs and government. for example. Similarly for advisors and business interests. Would the Convention have the mandate and authority to re-start everything from scratch?

        Liked by 4 people

      2. As regards an on-going basis in the independent state of Scotland I don’t know. Perhaps it would depend upon the remit assigned to the Convention of the Estates which would be hard coded into the updated and written down Scottish Constitution.

        However, at the outset of the restoration of Scotland’s full self-government I think everything should be up for grabs, not just the institutions but how they interact with one another. For example, SPADs should not be on the public payroll. These individuals should be privately financed and have no place at meetings of government cabinet meetings, parliamentary committees, company boards, trade union executives etc. Another example – there should be no immediate revolving door between government/parliamentary positions and outside agencies that might benefit from ‘insider information’ so a time interval must be observed between employment in government/parliament and (defined) third parties.

        For me, at the beginning, it should be revolution rather than reform.

        Liked by 9 people

      3. @ Duncan and Stuart , quite honestly I would like a TOTAL revolution of how things are done , IMO the convention of the estates which should be renamed as the Scottish People’s Assembly should be the ultimate decider on ANYTHING proposed by parliamentarians or political parties , we have SUFFERED interminably by the lies and corruption of these politicians and the political parties and we should ensure it STOPS

        Liked by 11 people

  7. You could well be right about all these threats to – effectively , make any future Ref impossible to win being nothing more than squirrel-spotting distraction Mia . I wouldn’t be TOO sure of that though .

    I clocked some Tory drongo being asked his opinion on what would be Truss’ main priorities as PM ; almost the first thing he replied was – in so many words ….” to counter the threat by the SNP to break-up the UK ” .

    Now , we may laugh at that notion , knowing how LITTLE a threat to the * sanctity * of Union the SNP , rather ….Nu SNP are , but it’s beyond question this is what we’ll be hearing , constantly , and how the UK/TORY/State will seek to gain support for winning the next UKGE .

    The existential threat of the * Separatist * Scots must be countered by EVERY means necessary .

    The whole thing is really an exercise in surrealist political pantomime

    The English State propagates the idea the SNP are a genuine threat to the UK , KNOWING the Sturgeon SNP will do nothing without the permission of the English State .

    The Sturgeon SNP propagate the idea of being a genuine threat to the UK , also KNOWING it won’t do anything without the permission of the English State

    And so the farce rolls on interminably .

    The only real interests being served are those of the duplicitous players in this game , while the actual , all-too-genuine interests of the Scottish people are relegated to walk-on parts whenever there are elections pending

    Liked by 18 people

    2. I think the word here is” dithering” Question is “who?” Interface problem
      Read all the arguments OK so where’s log jam. .All the muttering still goes on . We already have factions . No trusted leader
      UK will and are exploiting every weakness .
      High cost of energy , food banks etc also diverting us interest falls off so the army goes back home to feed the family . Lost cause ! depressing 😦

      Liked by 2 people

  8. nicola sturgeon and her so called missing husband have become the collaborators with the colonizers, all this delaying of action on independence is allowing westminster to change the rules towards devolution and independence, liz truss has said she will change the rules towards independence with a 50-% minimum vote that she knows is impossible to achieve, sturgeon has only herself to blame for her lack of action towards independence. THERE has been a change of mood amongst the independence groups that are working with the claim of right that hopefully will put scotland on the right path towards independence, the fact that nicola sturgeon and her snp party are trying to play down the claim of right makes our fight for independence all the harder, nicola sturgeon has been able to silence her mps and smps they are all frightened to put their head above the parapet in case they get blown away, we must find a way to get through to our mps and smps who at one time not so long ago all would have put their life on line for scotlands independence.

    Liked by 14 people

    1. The SNP grass roots – genuine patriots – need to hold Sturgeon to account at their AGM – or leave this corrupted party. That time has come.

      Liked by 16 people

    2. I’m sorry John I don’t share your opinion that they are either scared of her or that any of them would lay their lives down for Scotland , AFAIC they are a shower of CRAVEN COWARDS who are more concerned with their salary and pension just like Liebour were in Scotland , NOT one of them will stand up and EXPOSE the narcissistic pervert for what she is DOING to Scots and Scotland , our KIDS are suffering DAILY and these troughers do NOTHING

      Liked by 8 people

  9. Mia makes a very interesting point here:
    Once the Convention of the Estates is reconvened, what is stopping this convention serving notice to the crown itself for unlawfully imposing absolute rule on Scotland through its executive and parliament and in direct violation of Scotland’s constitution?

    By any measure Westminster imposes absolute rule over Scotland. Our representation in Westminster is risible. As soon as the Sewel convention was ignored Westminster established their absolute rule over devolved matters. The theft of Scottish sea was signed off by the Queen. Lets bite off one chunk of the UK state and chew it well – the role of the Royals is not highly regarded in Scotland (other than by no 1 fan Sturgeon …). The amending of laws to accommodate exceptions for the Queen does not play well. The old Queen is dying – lets make a good start by rejecting the new monarch.

    Liked by 17 people

      1. A lot of folk have time for the old Queen in spite of her being above her own laws and betraying Scottish interests – but not so much for the husband who saw his very young wife pilloried and then after her tragic death married the woman he had an affair with since the eve of his wedding to his child bride. The changing of the physical head is a point at which we can go with the rising tide and say:
        Not in our name.

        Liked by 6 people

  12. Excerpt from extensive online poem A’ Mheanbhchuileag / The Midge.
    English version first published in magazine ‘Cencrastus’ Autumn 1982:
    ___________________
    Near home there is an ancient standing stone
    with a boar carved on it by some talented Pict or other.

    The boar is almost invisible now.

    Do you think the boar is on the back of the stone
    or is the stone on the back of the boar?

    The authorities erected a secure high cage
    around the stone.

    Do you think the cage is to protect the boar from us
    or to protect us from the boar?

    Scotland, it seems to me this beast is a symbol of you.

    You chose captivity in the English zoo
    in order to avoid vulnerability.
    But you proved yourself so faithful
    that you were allowed to roam like a sheepdog
    (or was it rather like a doberman?)

    You loped around the globe
    barking and baring your teeth
    – but always listening for your keeper’s whistle.
    Many a beast you drove back to the Great Zoo,
    just like sheep to a fank for shearing.
    But weren’t you the fierce one!
    I don’t imagine there’s an animal on the earth
    without the scars of your sharp teeth on its rump.
    Aye, you were a “bonny fechter” right enough.

    It so happens the Zoo-keeper is growing old now,
    and the cages are falling apart through rust.
    Almost every exhibit has escaped but yourself.
    You were always so loyal.
    Though maybe you are still timid about freedom;
    about a world without an imperial whistle.

    Yes indeed, the Zoo has deteriorated a lot now.
    The cold of winter kisses you through your cage.
    Frost traces your spine. The ice of death
    embraces you with skin of gneiss.

    The one who refuses vulnerability becomes a stone!

    The only choice is between fire and ice.
    Our own planet is delicately poised between fire and ice.
    Scotland, there is nothing for you but fire or ice.
    Freedom is fire. Thralldom is ice.

    https://gobha-uisge.blogspot.com/2014/04/the-midge-2.html

    Liked by 7 people

  13. Re calling together the Three Estates. Since this hasn’t happened since Scotland was still an Independent nation – the question is: who gets invited?

    I reckon – we have 59 Westminster MPs; 129 MSPs and 32 Council Leaders, giving us a membership of the Three Estates of 220. Make that 221 if we include the Moderator of the General Asembly of the Church of Scotland, representing the national church.

    Given the pro-Independence parties: ALBA, Scottish Greens and SNP would between them be sending 119 members to any Convention – excluding the 32 Council Leaders, they already have a pro-Independence majority. Given also, the Unionist parties would almost certainly boycott any meeting of the convention – it shouldn’t be too-difficult to get a Let’s dissolve the Union motion through.

    Then we go to the UN and when England points out the boycott – they get told, you were invited, you chose not to attend. Let’s see them talk their way out of that one.

    Liked by 6 people

    1. I really wouldn’t include the Green. Green isn’t green anymore. Falsetto. It’s weird and disgraceful. Worse than that it’s disgusting perverted nonsense which scares the sh*t out of me! My sense is true. I’ll not be gaslighted.

      Liked by 7 people

    2. the UN won’t intervene as they consider this a “domestic” dispute and since there was a treaty of union agreed by both sides we are not a colony as we participate in the “national parliament.

      The SNP won’t participate the whole idea of SNP 1 and 2 was to exclude any independence party

      Liked by 4 people

      1. That was one of the incidents that should have shown YES voters the true colours of the nuSNP. They are a trans activist party. YES needs to ask what is it the nuSNP want kids to say YES to. It’s not independence.

        Liked by 8 people

      2. The Govt of the Republic of Ireland was refused a UN intervention that they requested at the start of the Troubles (early 1970s) because the UK argued they were a “domestic” i.e. internal affair, not an international issue. And yet there were 2 countries involved.

        Liked by 5 people

      3. That ‘participation’ is a demonstrable sham, as was the agreement of the Treaty, given the lengthy list of breaches of its terms, every one of which was to the benefit of England and the detriment of Scotland, and never the other way around. Any serious analysis of the UK would show that while Scotland may technically not be a colony by one definition because of the existence of that treaty, it is unquestionably treated as one by Westminter. Westminster’s behaviour provides the only meaningful definition of the colony status of Scotland.

        Liked by 6 people

  14. I really wouldn’t include the Green. Green isn’t green anymore. Falsetto. It’s weird and disgraceful. Worse than that it’s disgusting perverted nonsense which scares the sh*t out of me! My sense is true. I’ll not be gaslighted.

    Liked by 3 people

    1. hm. He has no democratic authority given to him by Scotland. I’m not sure that matters a great deal to the English prince who very certainly does does have power in this medieval mess we call our democracy.

      Liked by 5 people

    2. If their meeting was ‘inconsequential’, why did the ‘suit’ alight from Brown’s Range Rover cavalcade to stop Channel 4 from filming? And this on a Scottish public highway. Perhaps Gordon Brown owns a fleet of window-blackened Range Rovers.

      Nothing to see here, they’re only talking about Raith Rovers.

      Liked by 7 people

    3. “inconsequential as Brown has no power”

      Sure. Yet, this hasbeen, with, according to you, no power, had in 2014 more than enough clout to coordinate the redacting and release of “the vow” in a newspaper just two days before the referendum (a calculated time for maximum effect, no doubt). But it gets worse. He had by then the full backing of the entire UK executive, in the form of the PM and Deputy PM and also the leader of the opposition. Now that is three different political parties, one of them viscerally opposed to devolution, agreeing in less than a week quite significant concessions. That must be one of a kind.

      Brown was PM for a meagre 2 years and not a particularly good one. At the time he was not an MP or MSP so what the hell was he doing sticking his nose in the matter? He was not part of any of the two political parties in the executive. Did he just volunteer, on his own accord to step forward and lead this, and the numerous hyperbolic speeches before and after indyref? You could understand how Brown’s charms would get the backing of Miliband, but the other two, particularly when the tories oppose devolution with a passion? Yet we are expected to assume the parties in power were okay with a labour man, no longer in active politics, stepping in the toes of the executive, dictating to them what to offer and stealing their thunder in the campaign? Where did he get the authority to do this?

      Then look at the discussions post-referendum regarding what powers Scotland would get. Which was the party which opposed the most to returning powers to Scotland? Labour, Brown’s party. This despite Brown’s easy promises of devo max, or home rule as close to federalism as you can be with a neighbour country that has 10 times your population. It does not seem Labour, Brown’s party, was much on board with his Devo Max or quasi federalism he was parroting. So on behalf of whom was he speaking then? Does that make any sense to you unless somebody else, closer to Tories and Libdems than to labour was behind this move and backing Brown?

      So here is the one million pounds question: where was this hasbeen getting his clout from?

      Is Brown the Defoe of the 21st century?

      Liked by 7 people

  16. I completely agree with Mia. The Convention of the Estates (an assembly of the communities of Scotland) is the constitutional mechanism by which we enact the Claim of Right.

    “I am coordinating the work on creating the Scottish National Congress which will be the modern equivalent of the Convention of the Estates.”

    Amen to that, Iain!

    The English Crown is no friend of Scotland. As it is written in the Declaration of Arbroath, the English monarch “came with the appearance of a friend and ally to harass like an enemy”. A just monarch would rule over the two realms equitably and without prejudice, protecting the interests of one kingdom from the encroachments of the other. On the contrary, the present monarch is reigning solely as an English monarch, not as a joint monarch as per the Union of the Crowns, complicit in subjugating Scotland to England’s will and negligent in her duty to uphold Scotland’s constitutional rights as head of state. By failing to protect and defend the Kingdom of Scotland, she forfeits the right to the Scottish throne. Her passing should herald a new beginning for Scotland as a free and sovereign (i.e. people’s) republic.

    Liked by 8 people

  17. Noting comments about Nicola Sturgeon on here -when did Nicola Sturgeon last address a public meeting? Not an SNP members’ meeting, a public meeting?

    Liked by 6 people

Comments are closed.