MIA COMES UP WITH THE ANSWERS!

Photo by Pixabay on Pexels.com

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 do 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.

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

No, it isn’t, actually. The only thing it proves is that people get information at different paces and the majority of those voting for Sturgeon still think she is a pro-independence leader who is going to deliver independence. But wait for the moment they realise they have been fooled for 8 years. 

The majority of those who voted SNP during the GE2015 thought they were voting for independence. Sturgeon only removed the wheels of the SNP and claimed a vote for the SNP was not a vote for independence (in my view in contravention of the constitution of the party) AFTER it had been announced since October 2014 that the SNP would win by a landslide. 

And when you say “anybody who believes in the democratic process” clearly you do not include Sturgeon herself. Because no democrat would ever accumulate democratic mandates only to let them expire without lifting a finger to deliver them. Also, no democrat would ever hand free vetoes to the British state to stop Scotland exercising its right to self-determination. No democrat would ever undermine Scotland’s popular sovereignty by capitulating to the demands of a foreign government which has only the mandate from England to govern. No democrat would have ever legitimised England MPs self-awarding themselves the right to veto Scotland’s vote in the EU referendum, as Sturgeon did by keeping our 56 anti-union MPs sitting in Westminster when that vote went through Westminster in 2015 and then surrendering to the ruling of an English court basing its ruling in a parliamentary sovereignty that has no place in Scotland’s constitution. No democrat would have ever allowed an equal partner in a union to subjugate Scotland against its expressed democratic will, like Sturgeon did. No democrat would ever impose an impossible threshold to exit this union by forcing on the people of Scotland the same conditions you would impose on a fair and democratic referendum, but when you have none of the advantages of a referendum, when the franchise has been designed to override the yes vote of natives, when the oppressor controls the rules and when, at will, it can arrange for hundreds of thousands of people living in elsewhere in the UK to cast a vote from Scotland. No democrat, with a majority of anti-union MPs and the power to terminate the union, would have ever consented on the crown and executive forcing absolute rule over Scotland by forcing on us policies and bills rejected by the majority of our MPs in Westminster.

“A road has been laid to Independence
Mr Salmond and the yes supporters laid that road to independence. Sturgeon has used most of her energy for the last 8 years to dig potholes and fabricate obstacles to put on that road.

“It might work; it might not”
With Sturgeon at the helm, or one can predicts with Robertson too, it will never work. It will only work with a leader that is serious about independence and not just pretending to be.

“I have always said that our parliamentarians should seek to undermine the U.K. every day”
The SNP has had absolute majorities of MPs since May 2015. You expect Nationalist MPs to undermine the UK when they are in a minority, like the SNP under Mr Salmond did. When you have sent a majority of anti-union MPs, what you expect is them not to undermine the UK, but to terminate it.

“Some don’t like it”
If they don’t like it, then they do no belong in a party whose main raison d’etre is independence. And that includes the present FM herself.

“Maybe if you concentrated your talents on persuading folk to vote YES”
And there we go. The same soundbite over and over and over again. EIGHT years has been this woman in power and how many people have her antics moved to Yes? How that does compare with the number of staunch no voters who have emigrated to Scotland during the EIGHT YEARS she has been in power with her hand firmly on the hand brake of Scotland’s independence? How many times since 14 November 2014 have the polls showed yes over 50%? Wasn’t they indicating yes at 56% at one time? And what did this “leader” do? To let it pass.

“and undermine the U.K”
We have been undermining the UK since 8 May 2015 by sending a majority of anti-union MPs to Westminter. What is the effing point in us “undermining” the UK when the anti-union MPs choose to get comfortable in the green seats instead of doing what they were voted to do and end the union?

“But maybe that’s your comfortable place ”
You mean the comfortable place Sturgeon has placed herself in by wasting 8 years of Scotland’s time and resources, using our yes votes to preserve the union instead. And yeah, that indeed speaks volumes.

MY COMMENTS

MIA is not the type of columnist who pens an article then walks away. She is happy to defend her position with reasoned argument as she does above. At least regular readers know where Mia stands and that is more than can be said about the vast majority of Scotland’s elected pro Indy politicians. Does anyone know where they stand on the key issues? Have they ever attempted to explain and expound? Are they gagged? Are they members of a single voice Party?. Whatever..it is not working, increasingly people want to know a lot more about what they do every week to earn the big salary. We are all ears!

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.

51 thoughts on “MIA COMES UP WITH THE ANSWERS!

  1. Good article.

    However the Nicophants have written Alex out of History. We imagined those milestones. Those great steps forward were as nothing compared with the Nicola baby box bonanza.( a stolen idea and only a partial implementation of the original concept)
    The GRA will transform the lives of…..dozens. Why do the hard work for millions when an easier headline awaits. The mutilation of a few hundred young girls is a price worth paying to keep the Selfie Queen in command.
    The COVID stage show and now the Monarchy Band wagon all keep the Nicola theatre in the job recruiters mind.
    We will be in the Union while she tours America as a Clinton warm up act.

    …and still the elected politicians, SNP members and voters pretend a secret plan is unfurling.

    The 2023 Referendum will slide into the night as the next carrot emerges.

    Liked by 23 people

  2. “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” I’m incredulous that this is an actual quote from Nicola Sturgeon. Why is she still here? I’m beelin’! Mia lays it all out, again. When are the real nationalists (I’m sure there are still some there) in the SNP going to call her out? When are the rest of her supporters going to see her for what she really is? I’m stopping here before I write any more in anger.

    Liked by 26 people

    1. Why is she still there Morna? See this bit by Mia:
      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.

      The last few days have made crystal clear just how much of a royal groupie we have in this FM. She is DEVOTED to the Crown. How the SNP can be so stupid they keep this incompetent betrayer in her position is beyond me.

      Liked by 17 people

      1. Vidkun Abraham Lauritz Jonsson Quisling sold out his country and thats why anybody now who is a traitor is called a Quisling. We in Scotland should be looking to do the same and call anyone who sells out thier country a sturgeon and that should be the official word from now on for traitors and recorded in Scottish history for evermore.

        Liked by 9 people

    2. If I’m correct Morna and Marion (that sounds like a double act) Mia’s quote (now it sounds like a trio) is not from sturgeon but one of her (unfortunately) sycophants who has been asked numerous times by myself to produce ANY educational information that sturgeon or her morons has created or formulated to convince no voters and undecided voters to see the benefits and necessity of independence

      Again unfortunately he hasn’t produced ANYTHING to support his sycophancy , but that is only because there isn’t anything that sturgeon has done to BOLSTER independence

      Liked by 5 people

  3. Bang! Batter! Thump! Clatter!

    I love the sound of another dead pro-gradualist and FM/SNP apologist argument being nailed into its coffin first thing in the morning.

    Liked by 21 people

  4. Mia,

    Scotland, England, Wales & Northern Ireland are in the early days of a brand new constitution as affirmed by Orders in Council at Accession Council, as the King & PC exercised exclusive right WRT administration of the ‘union of crowns’.

    He has forfeited his inheritable kingdom of Scotland *only* to the Scottish Government for the benefit of the people, quid pro quo.

    Similarly Wales, to its Government.

    Northern Ireland & England will have their own new Seals to confirm legislation too. Belfast Agreement still upheld.

    S/W/E/NI also in the final days of the Elizabethan era as was, once the mourning period is over those railing against what isn’t ‘Charles Rex’ via MSM & Twitter as they focus on a funeral with one eye, ignorant of the ‘new form’ might regret the focus of any ire. Shills like Farage will dance for a foosty cheese baguette, so he’s favourite for the job of keeping at least one raven alive forever. A man of his talons should be able to keep some ravens alive, je m’apple Sylvie Platewee? All the black birds.

    Further Orders in Council are expected in due course, to clarify what happens next in the kingdom of Scotland and elsewhere.

    Penny Mordaunt looked like she had a stone in her shoe and a crack in her periscope as she directed proceedings of AC live in front of the world, such was the lack of any sense of warmth or *celebration of a new dawn*. The King had very much spoken, on his terms. PC assented. Lawful, peaceful, logical.

    Tuesday will be an interesting event insofar as all MSM outlets & elected politicos will be judged by their analysis of the dawn of a new convention, and the period between the death of QE and ‘now’.

    I’ll have £20 on ‘Egg on face moments aplenty as the “peoples” merrily and peacefully eat popcorn, jelly and ice-cream.’

    Liked by 2 people

  5. Mia, if Sturgeon was reading this, she wouldn’t be interested in a single you have to say. She’s got the backing of the King and Westminster fully behind her. She’ll love the idea that she has to report to Westminster. What leader would hirer a lord advocate for Scotland who doesn’t believe Scotland has a right to be Independent and then ask her to take it to the British supreme court. Like Dunlop QC said, what do your lordship have to listen to, the Lord Advocate and UKG are in total agreement. So the SNP are allowed into Court case but they are only allowed to submit 20 pages and are not allowed oral arguments.
    I don’t believe the UKG has sturgeon under their thumb, she doing it willingly and without any persuasion at all. You don’t have to look far to find the truth, look at Pete Wishart and Ian Blackford and their subtle comments like “let’s make Westminster work” or “I want to be speaker of the house” and “I love working at Westminster” tell me a nationalist in the last 90 years who stated their British she isn’t even bothered at pretending. The betrayal hasn’t even started yet, I can see it coming with this Supreme court case, just wait it’s going to be so clear its going to be hard to miss.
    I keep telling people do not waste their money buying the Rag. Here is why, do you remember when THE SNP’s former policy chief called for three options – including “devo-max” – to be put to voters in a second independence referendum. This is where we are all heading not towards a referendum on independence but to further unification with a new constitution written by UKG and backed entirely by the SNP and its leadership with devo-Max or should I say UKG little version of devo-max.
    Mia is wrong to say that the SNP and its leader hasn’t done anything in the last 8yrs, oh but they have, they have issued a law that prevents freedom of speech (and who are the most vocally active people in Scotland the nationalist), she’s stopped any protest outside the parliament (again who happen to be the nationalist), she’s now doing away with not proven, if you think about it this whole transgender affair is deliberate because she knows that the Nationalist would never accept a law that denies woman their right to be a woman and she’s now bringing out a new law to stop anyone who’s vocal about any issue related to transgender being part of a future referendum once again affecting the nationalist. People say she has no agenda oh but she has and she known about it for a long time, this is why she tried to be leader long before she was. She has tried to get rid of Joanna Cherry, Salmond two huge figures in Scottish politics who also happen to be nationalist, and these people were also huge figures during the 2014 Referendum. If you’ve taken away the right to protest or speak out then who’s voice is the only one that can be heard Nicola Sturgeon and her drive for devo-max. Remember Craig Murray told us before the article in the Rag about devo-max and that Sturgeon had gone to London (her most favourite place on the planet, were she’d tried to become an MP) and she’d had talks with the Tories about devo-max.
    The hairs on my back of my neck went up when I heard Charlie swore an oath to the Claim of Right, this is the clearest indication yet that Scotland is a country and the Scottish people are sovereign, so whatever the British Supreme court rules can be over turned by the Scottish people. I stand ready, who’ll stand with me, because we can’t allow the SNP and or its leader to silence us or deny us the right to speak out, now is the time for our voices to be heard and heard loud and clear both south and north of the border.

    Could I ask if Yestival has been cancelled, I suppose this was done by the SNP run council.

    Liked by 12 people

  6. The silence from the supposedly pro-independence majorities of MPs and MSPs is deafening. They have nothing to say because their hypocrisy is no longer defensible. They are now openly pro-British and pro-Crown, having proved themselves as loyal (and incompetent) colonial administrators. This is what has created the rupture in the independence movement. The SNP has opted for collaboration rather than liberation, which is unfortunately a common theme in postcolonial studies, as Frantz Fanon noted:

    “inside the nationalist parties the will to break colonialism is linked with another quite different will: that of coming to a friendly agreement with it.”

    Liked by 27 people

      1. I note the lack of mention of the Order in Council that clearly hands Scotland to the Scottish Government, in return for the Sovereign Grant.

        The King is mourning until after the funeral of the late Queen.

        Scotland is no longer in mourning, because her body has left the kingdom for the final time. Politicians are silent on the matter of next Privy Council, awaiting further Orders in Council as announced at AC.

        Constitutional politics change whenever the monarch change, because the incumbent can lawfully declare a new arrangement for administering the ‘union of crowns’ – the most important written constitution of all for the monarch.

        His decisions are lawful, logical, in line with principles of natural justice, a common good, and the common law. No legislature loses power to govern its territory.

        4 countries & “peoples” with their own legislatures, maintaining peace on these islands in the process by command of King Charles III – where exactly is the beef here?

        My eyesight isn’t that great but I clearly heard the very short Orders in Council as they were affirmed one by one. And something about which door to leave by, after the main party had left anyway doon the carpeted corridor of certainty.

        Is Indy by proclamation of the monarch not enough?

        Liked by 1 person

  7. An editorial in the Daily Heil sees fit to praise the failed solicitor turned MI5 asset; “Even the SNP has acknowledged over these sad few days that Scotland is ‘absolutely central’ to the UK’s constitution – a far cry from its usual grumbling that it is a downtrodden nation with no influence.”
    Last week MI5 asset Kezia Dugdale used her column in the Courier to praise Sturgeon’s “radical” performance on poverty.
    Hmm, I’m beginning to see a pattern.

    Liked by 22 people

  8. A massive red flag, which few appeared to have seen. Why oh why did Alex believe she was a worthy successor?

    “The majority of those who voted SNP during the GE2015 thought they were voting for independence. Sturgeon only removed the wheels of the SNP and claimed a vote for the SNP was not a vote for independence (in my view in contravention of the constitution of the party) AFTER it had been announced since October 2014 that the SNP would win by a landslide.”

    Liked by 15 people

    1. Alex also made Stephen Gethins his SPAD despite Gethins obvious (covert) US State Department employment. I don’t attribute any nefarious intent on the part of Alex, only to say that Sturgeon wisnae the first MI5 asset recruited within the SNP.
      Eh, Angus?

      Liked by 11 people

  9. I know how to achieve independence for Scotland, apart from what the new King did at AC.

    You get a tennis ball, cut it in half, and then put it over the lock, and then smash it with the palm of your hand and the air pressure forces the lock up. There’s a sports shop round the corner.

    Liked by 1 person

  10. Off Topic but important.

    Please spread the word!

    “Under cover of the Queen’s death, Liz Truss lifted the fracking ban two days ago. A swathe of fracking licences across the country is the result.”

    Energy is reserved to WM, will they override Holyrood as feared with the United Kingdom Internal Market Act 2020.

    Liked by 10 people

    1. The Scottish Daily Express has already got the article out in regards to the Scottish government and fracking. Vivienne Westwood and the Nanas went to David Cameron’s door step on a tank years ago when he approved fracking but didn’t where he lived.

      Liked by 4 people

  11. Penny was at a Scottish University with Bill Gates a few years ago to do with a project. Then Dundee university the funds for male contraceptive pills studies. As for Nicola well like all politicians if you have been voted for and you lied to get the votes then they should stand down and receive karma for the effects that this has had upon the people.

    Liked by 4 people

  12. (@Iain – again I am using my post from elsewhere on social media which I trust is ok with you – it has relevance.)

    “Exercising my Claim Of Right as a Sovereign Scot, I declare:” … Turning words into actions!

    It is no coincidence that when I chose those words as the opening sentence to the The Declaration of a Sovereign Scot that you very recently heard the words “Claim of Right” during what is known as the Accession Council. Those words – the claim of right – have been uttered at every Accession Council since 1714.

    But they are only words. Unless and until they are acted upon, they will remain only words.

    So too are these words “the people are sovereign. Unless and until they are acted upon, they will remain only words.

    On 4 July 2018, the House of Commons officially endorsed the principles of the Claim of Right, agreeing that the people of Scotland are sovereign and that they have the right to determine the best form of government for Scotland’s needs.

    Again, no matter the importance that those principles are recorded in Hansard as unalterable fact, they remain only words. Unless and until they are acted upon, they will remain only words.

    The Declaration of a Sovereign Scot is an open invitation to every Sovereign Scot – not to simply see, read or hear those words but to act upon them – by signing their individual Declaration!

    I will take blank forms to the two remaining events/rallies – Yestival in Glasgow and AUOB in Edinburgh, and supplies of forms are (but only just) beginning to be available at Yes Groups/Yes Stalls.

    (PS: For those who are unaware of this initiative, and the growing support and participation it is receiving from all across Scotland, a full record since it started in April 2021 can be found here: http://www.facebook.com/X2-113742180011217 Amongst the explanations given on that page is why for instance it involves the United Nations and international law as opposed to domestic law.)

    Liked by 11 people

      1. Hi … Simple answer yes, but I hesitate to reply in simple terms when the word “different” is central to your question

        At a more profound level – both initiatives derive their inherent validity and potential for the independence of Scotland from the legacies left to us by our Scottish forebears, the claim of right being the most obvious of shared – not differentiated – perspectives.

        Liked by 5 people

    1. Another plant. Nicholson’s agenda is the same as nicoliar’s agenda and it ain’t independence. Sick to the back teeth of this sh*te. Really I am. It’s not take the wheels off the bus…it’s blow up the fecking bus 🥺😤

      Liked by 6 people

  13. If people are confident in the documents that have been retrieved then there’s nothing to worry about. The folk in Scotland are perhaps now seeing that with trusting the government without question mainly due to the fact there was a second that is significantly more horrendous has allowed for a parcel of rogues to govern. It’s been awfully upsetting for the ordinary Scot and of course we have had nae justice. Anyone who deviates from the theatre is getting highlighted in the script as being the scary people. It’s like Shakespeare working for James except the audience is wider noo. The folk who want sovereignty are noo the ‘witches’ 😁

    Liked by 7 people

  14. There’s a link I tried post about Lady Macbeth and it’s titled the dangerous women project and once you read it it fits with the things happening to women now.

    Liked by 1 person

      1. It was only one link but it’s relevant in the sense of how the theatre was used along with James in order to reinforce his claim but in the process they managed to demonise Gruoch have her as a childless manipulator that used her sexuality to have someone murdered when in fact it was her that was the reason that Macbeth was the king alongside his wife due to her heritage. It’s written that she was generous and donated land to the culdees and they brought peace to Scotland for 17 years. It also touches upon James and his obsession with witches and him even going to see the women being tortured.

        Liked by 2 people

  15. As this site didn’t let me share it, ladies and gentlemen who are not into the gender reforms basically it’s how Shakespeare did a hatchet job on Scotland’s first recorded Gaelic Queen and her husband Macbeth. It goes on about her being evil and asking to be unsexed and when you read it you realise that it’s just like today’s events.

    Liked by 1 person

  16. O wad some Pow’r the giftie gie us …

    In relation to many of the posts on this page of the blog, related to the First Minister, perhaps be tempted to head to the Spectator and the article – “What should Liz Truss do about Scotland” – by Alex Massie.

    Whit – him? Yep!

    To see oursels as ithers see us!

    Liked by 4 people

  17. Mia runs true to form. She reminds me of a participant in an ESU debate. Trying to bring some legal meaning to words like “ the Vow” and “once in a generation”. On second thoughts , the judges would mark her down for her gratuitous hatred of another individual.

    Her declaration that the Scotland Act 2016 “ extended by an inch the powers of the Scottish Parliament “ is just daft.

    Here is a wee list of them:

    “The Scotland Act 2016 devolves the following powers to the Scottish Parliament:

    Powers to set rates and thresholds of Income Tax, and devolution of Air Passenger Duty.
    Some social security powers including disability and carers’ benefits, Winter Fuel Allowance.
    The power to create new benefits in devolved areas and to top-up reserved benefits.
    The power to adjust aspects of Universal Credit in Scotland including the housing element.
    Devolution of some employment services.
    Devolution of the Crown Estate in Scotland.
    The arrangements for elections to the Scottish Parliament.
    Devolution of Tribunals in reserved areas – such as the Employment Tribunals – in Scotland.
    Devolution of additional powers over equal opportunities, including to legislate for gender balance on public boards.
    Devolution of British Transport Police.”

    Of course they don’t include all the powers of an independent state as I campaign for , but to suggest they are inconsequential just doesn’t bear independent scrutiny

    She fails to contribute anything meaningful to the debate as a mature reflection of these powers should have awakened in her their possibilities to advance not just the cause of independence but also the well-being of our population both under Devolution and Independence.

    While recognising the steps the SG has taken to use some of these powers to mitigate the worst effects of Westminster rule I take issue with the SG in not taking control of and expanding Scottish public expenditure through raising the funds from our land which they can do under Devolution.

    Using my model Devolution could increase the after tax income of the average tax paying Scot by about £10,000 per annum. With Independence that increases by another £5,000.

    The 2016 Act created the opportunity to offer these significant increases because it allowed the SP to set the rates of income tax on earned income. While the 2012 Act introduced devolved taxes on land their transformational benefit is only possible now that the SP has the ability to set a zero rate for income tax. On earned income

    I suspect that is something the negotiators for the Union and Independence haven’t realised yet. Maybe they too are constrained by their ESU experiences. In layman’s terms that’s code for not seeing the wood for the trees!

    Liked by 2 people

    1. Graeme all you get out of you repeatedly is denial ,denial and whatabootery , IF anything your excellent proposals re AGR are extremely positive and would be fairer if implemented

      BUT that is the RUB , sturgeon will never implement them because they are FAIR they put the FINANCIAL RESPONSIBILITY where it should be and THAT cannot happen because the rich ancestral landowners will not LET it happen
      Social Security payments and benefits , universal credits , is that why Shirley Anne Stupid BEGGED wm to keep them until 2025 because the SG weren’t ready for them , which the unionists take GREAT PLEASURE in reminding supporters about

      Liked by 9 people

    2. Graeme I am going to be honest. Your comments are painful to read. They are not painful because they are difficult to rebut. They are painful because they are far too easy to rebut and at this point, I have no clue if you are actually writing your onw mind or you are following a party script to polish the image of a failed leader who has let down at every possible point. Failed at delivering democracy, failed at respecting the articles of the UN regarding right to self determination, failed to protect Scotland’s assets and rights, including here women’s rights, and failed to deliver the raison d’etre of the party she claims to lead when she was given every majority other pro-independence leaders could only dream of to deliver independence. Sturgeon’s tenure has been a massive and dissappointing failure and there is really no much you can say to erase that from clear view: 8 years of evidence are there in the open for everybody to see.

      I see that you dive in and out of ad hominem as a way to discredit my arguments. I assume this is because you cannot tackle them head on. It shows, and believe me it does not give your argument any strength.

      You claim I ” bring legal meaning to the vow”. Yes, of course I do. This was promised to us during the purdah period of indyref by every single radio and broadcaster and by Gordon Brown himself. It was signed by the three main representatives of the executive: the PM, the deputy PM and the leader of HM opposition. Because if I do not accept it had some legal meaning, then the alternative I have to accept is that the British estate aka the executive, broadcasting, the crown, with the help of newspapers moguls and minions like Brown, have committed fraud. If I believe the vow has legal meaning, then I can just criticise Sturgeon for being completely useless at forcing them to deliver it. But if I believe they committed fraud, then what I would have to criticise her is for much, much worse, for starters, for allowing them to get away with fraud for 8 years despite Scotland giving her enough majorities to repeal the Treaty of Union 8 times over.

      “Her declaration that the Scotland Act 2016 “ extended by an inch the powers of the Scottish Parliament “ is just daft”

      True. It was daft from me to say that. I said it extended the powers of the Scottish Parliament by “an inch”. I retract that. It did not extend the powers of the Scottish Parliament at all. Why? Because power devolved is power retained. At all effects, what that act has extended is the illusion of power and the administration of those powers, but not the ownership of them.

      And that is what I cannot possibly accept. Those powers are Scotland’s powers, not England’s. Yet devolution somewhat transfers Scotland’s powers into England’s ownership. The proof is how the power of controlling the fishing waters, which was devolved to Holyrood and should come back straight to Holyrood after we exited the EU, went to England MPs instead on their own decision. That is in my view theft, nothing less. But that is the meaning of devolution, so the inch that was extended to Holyrood with that power, was very quickly taken away. And by the way, that theft happened under Sturgeon’s watch and she didn’t even bother lifting a finger to stop it, despite having an absolute majority of MPs. If they are Scotland’s powers, legitimately they must lie on Scotland’s MPs, not England’s ones. Therefore there is nothing stopping Scotland’s MPs renouncing to those powers and sending them to Holyrood in perpetuity. So why hasn’t that happened? Because Nicola Sturgeon and her version of the SNP have no interest in Holyrood gaining powers. They appear to prefer England MPs to exercise Scotland’s powers.

      But let’s return to the main point of the discussion:
      Who achieved those devolved powers? You claimed it was Sturgeon. I say those devolved powers might have been delivered during her tenure, but were achieved by the actions of her predecesor. There is not a single extra devolved power delivered to Holryood that can be attributed to Sturgeon’s good management of the SNP majorities she was entrusted with.

      “Here is a wee list of them”
      You can list a thousand powers. It will not change anything:
      a) those powers are devolved, ergo not “owned” by Holryood
      b) it was not Sturgeon’s good management of the SNP and strategic ability who achieved them. It was Salmond’s . An example of Sturgeon’s mismanagement of the majorities and atrocious strategic ability is the loss of the power about the fishing waters and every other major power she lost us.
      c) There has been a consideration of devolving the broadcasting powers to Scotland’s parliament since the 70’s. 8 years of majorities and Sturgeon has not even managed to get that power.

      By the way, what does “devolving the crown state in Scotland”?

      The crown, through its COPFS arm continues to control the government of Scotland, both by sitting in the cabinet, despite the lord advocate having not been elected by the people of Scotland to represent us in government, and by interacting directly with the UK civil service operating within the “Sgov”. In fact, it was the combination of the COPFS and the UK civil service who actively worked together to frustrate a parliamentary inquiry with the aim to suppress information of fundamental public importance, from the eyes of the public. So, via the COPFS and the UK civil service, the crown appears to control not only the Sgov but also Scotland’s parliament. A case in point is how STurgeon has surrendering our right to bring bills to Holyrood by handing to the crown, in the form of the head of the COPFS, the lady Advocate, the power to decide if the bill for the referendum should be brought to Holyrood or not. We all know this strategy is a delaying tactic. The question is what are they waiting for to happen. Would it be that new constitution Scot mentions below?

      When exactly did the people of Scotland nominated COPFS to walk over our democratic rights and hand over to England judges the decision if our bills should be passed in OUR parliament or not?

      What is most fascinating is that England and the UK have “separation of powers”. This is from a document that can be accessed from the supreme court website (title of the document: “Separation of powers worksheet for teachers”):

      “What is the separation of powers?
      The doctrine of the separation of powers requires that the principal institutions of state—
      executive, legislature and judiciary—should be clearly divided in order to safeguard citizens’
      liberties and guard against tyranny.”

      “According to a strict interpretation of the separation of powers, none of the three branches may
      exercise the power of the other, nor should any person be a member of any two of the branches.1 By creating separate institutions it is possible to have a system of checks
      and balances between them”

      Clearly, when Westminster designed Holyood’s parliament it deliberately left those powers united, perhaps because “safeguarding citizen’s liberties and guarding against its own tyranny” was never the objective. By putting the Lord Advocate right in the cabinet and by allowing this continuous connection between the COPFS and the civil service of her government, it seems STurgeon’s main aim is not safeguarding our liberties and protecting us from tyranny either.

      “For each of the three branches, name the main organisations or bodies considered
      part of that branch

      In the UK, the executive comprises the Crown and the Government, including the Prime
      Minister and Cabinet ministers.
      The legislature; Parliament, comprises the Crown, the House of Commons and the House of
      Lords.
      The judiciary comprises the judges in the courts of law, those who hold judicial office in
      tribunals and the lay magistrates who staff the magistrates’ courts”

      So, from the above, it seems that the Crown is stuck in both the executive power and the legislative power. But because the judges are appointed by the crown as well, it seems the crown is stuck in everything. That does not look much like a monarchy with very limited powers, does it? So let me ask you again, what exactly has the crown devolved to Scotland?

      You also talk about devolution of police. Well, how does that work when you have one the crown’s arms the COPFS, dictating Scotland’s police who to investigate so they can prosecute afterwards, when the procedure should be the other way round? Wasn’t that what happened with Mr Salmond?

      “Of course they don’t include all the powers of an independent state as I campaign for”
      Graeme, those Acts do not include ANY of the powers of an independent state. Those acts “lend” Holryood “the use” of a power, not the ownership. An independent state OWNS its powers, does not lend them from somebody else.

      “they are inconsequential just doesn’t bear independent scrutiny”
      It may not bear YOUR scrutiny because you seem to have a strange fondness for devolution. I loath devolution because it is both, a way to deny us the powers that belong to us and a way for England MPs to self-award themselves ownership of Scotland’s own powers. For as long as those powers are retained in Westminster, they are inconsequential because the only thing our representatives are doing here is to “administer” them, not exercising them.

      “While recognising the steps the SG has taken to use some of these powers to mitigate the worst effects of Westminster rule”
      Can you not see the problem with this?
      Why should Sturgeon and the SNP waste 8 years of our time and assets by “mitigating” the damage inflicted by a foreign government when they could have STOPPED that damage by repealing the treaty of union?

      You are trying to justify the unjustifiable, Graeme. You are trying to justify Sturgeon’s appalling waste of majorities, time and resources preserving Westminter’s perceived supremacy over Scotland for 8 years instead of terminating it.

      “Using my model Devolution”
      ?????
      Your model of “devolution”, Graeme? We have sent continuous majorities of anti-union MPs for 8 years and all what you aspire is “a model of devolution”? Forgive me but I have to ask: are you really seeking independence as a goal, Graeme or just the feel you can be seen as pursuing Scotland’s independence forever?

      “The 2016 Act created the opportunity to offer these significant increases”
      The majority of SNP MPs in 2015 created the opportunity to terminate the treaty of union and rid for once and for all of the toxic rule from Westminster.

      “I suspect that is something the negotiators for the Union and Independence haven’t realised yet”
      Do we have any “negotiators” for independence at present? It is hard to believe after watching the SNP and Sturgeon wasting us 8 years of possibilities to repeal the treaty of union, don’t you think?

      Liked by 8 people

  18. The comment that –

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

    is a supremely accurate comment.

    That is exactly where we are, and just in case, and amongst other things, that is without doubt why, powers are being stripped from the Scottish Parliament through legislation like the Internal Market Bill and the misuse of Sewell Motions.

    The secondary, subsidiary Hollyrood Parliament, aside of the utter inertia of Sturgeon to do anything to progress independence and indeed much to derail independence, is why devolution is now a trap.

    It also exposes why all the big powers are retained by Westminster.

    So yes, to restate a very wise observation – ” the U.K. won’t tolerate a position where Scotland drives a huge wedge between the transforming standard of living in Scotland and rUK.”

    Salmond ran the establishment close in 2014, closer than we maybe know, he gave them a fright, they know it and that is why, with the acquiescence of Sturgeon, there is now a full on attempt to destroy the independence movement.

    Liked by 10 people

  19. As usual, Mia pulls no punches and rightly so! How many of us in the days following the 2014 referendum and the next year with 56 of 59 MPs being sent to Westminster to exact extreme pressure on that institution to enable Scotland to achieve the wishes of its electorate and finally gain self-determination thought that independence surely must follow?

    Mia has outlined the inaction and incompetence of the FM in so many ways and on so many issues as far as promoting and advancing towards independence is concerned.

    However, missing from that long list is the time that the FM spent in consolidating her own position by ensuring that she was surrounded by incompetent sycophants that would be unwilling, or more likely unable, to challenge her position no matter how far she deviated from the road to independence.

    By these actions. the FM destroyed the heart of a political party that was once an exemplar of how to establish and run a democratic entity and has completely divided, sorry fragmented, the Yes Movement.

    The SNP membership is fast dwindling and is losing the best and brightest among them first because they see what has been happening in their name – or should that be not happening in their name?

    All of that sounds pretty dismal and negative, and it is because the stalwarts of the SNP and the predecessors of those who hold today’s positions of high office within the party would be horrified to understand that so many opportunities have been wasted with mandates that they only ever saw in their wildest of dreams.

    The Yes Movement is much bigger than the SNP or any single political party and if it ends in the demise of the SNP, then so be it! However, the flame that was lit so long ago will never be fully extinguished and will burn brightly again, finally to incinerate the Act of Union!

    Liked by 11 people

    1. I don’t like the colours of the SNP it’s the same colour as wasps and as we know they don’t really care who they sting to get to the sweet stuff. I absolutely dngaf about them, that ship sailed for me a few mandates back. It’s people power that’s required and if there’s a few politicians joining us then great the mair decent ones all the better. We can try and look at the positive in all of this, least we know what needs fixed.

      Liked by 1 person

  20. A.S. was crucified in 2018 by the woman who described him as ‘the least sexist man’ she knew in 2015.
    One guess? Nah..don’t bother, only one hypocritical, power mad narcissist fits that bill.
    But…Alex Salmond is no plaster saint. He was responsible for the change in direction from winning seats for Independence to following the Devolved disaster and Referendum rout. In 1979 we were robbed. The 40% base to win was a gerrymandered attempt. Salmond did not learn from that experience. No coincidence that it has recently been getting ‘floated again’ by Truss etc.

    Salmond anointed Sturgeon. He had Angus Robertson and John Swinney as close confederates. He stood up in the ‘Commons ‘ and sang ‘ode for Joy’ like some public-school twerp. He also backed the 2017 ‘no Independence’ disastrous G.E. and paid the price. Many bad decisions, made by a very clever man, a patriot yes, but who quit at the moment of truth: the bent Referendum. Purdah breached, rioting unionist mobs, BBC and media lying, and Gordon Brown striding like the colossal fraud that he is frightening the pensioners and desperate critical tranplantees alike. Yet Alex resigned, with 45% and rising to lead us back into the fray. Yet unlike Martin Luther King he looked over the mountain, but instead decided to hand the baton over to…guess who and why?

    That question has rankled with me ever since. In the aftermath of the Ref I attended a Nationalist /Yes meeting and Salmond was a guest speaker. Some man shouted at him, when he came on to universal applause. ‘you did it, you did it’. It was not an affirmation of well done, but an accusation, of betrayal.
    I have pondered what that man guessed or knew. I have believed that as the scales have fallen from my eyes that there is virtually nobody with an SNP label who has been elected who can be trusted. I have also no or little faith in the mini-me Alba, despite voting for them. A radical people based movement must begin to coalesce soon around new, determined resolute working class leaders who are time barred in office by first achieving Independence then stepping down. Middle class talking shops dominated by refugees from political parties must be eschewed if we have any chance of a genuine dissolution of this hated union of unequals.

    Liked by 8 people

    1. ” A radical people based movement must begin to coalesce soon around new, determined resolute working class leaders ……” . I’ve been thinking exactly that for some time . It’s what the country and the cause of Independence are crying-out for – and receiving nothing but simpering Neolib/Con acquiescence – sickeningly now abetted by obsequious monarchical fawning – in return .

      Have Sturgeon or any of her jelly-spined court jesters referred even once to the real cause of this manufactured Energy * Crisis * …ie the obscene , in-yr-face greed and callous disregard of the Energy gangsters . No , of course not . They are all fully behind this colossal lie . ( A ) Because that’s just how they * roll * ( over ) now – having abandoned any pretence of radicalism . ( B ) Because nothing can be allowed to contradict the ” it’s all Mad Vlad’s fault ” narrative .

      Perfectly summing-up the ” Lib ” and the ” Con ” of Nu SNP .

      Independence ? Under this mob ? Hahahahahaha . NEVER . Not a chance .

      Liked by 9 people

  21. Scott seems somewhat confused by the Seals. The Orders in Council on Saturday changed nothing, only authorising the continued use of the existing Seals until new ones are created and authorised for use. The holders of the existing seals also did not change. i.e. it simply preserved the status-quo as if Betty had not pegged it.

    The so called ‘Great Seal’ of Scotland is not the historical Great Seal, but the a different one authorised under Art 24 of the ToU, and handed to the FM as part of the SA 1998. It is simply colloquially referred to as the ‘Great Seal of Scotland’.

    ToU from the RPS site: “and that a seal in Scotland, after the union, be always kept and made use of in all things relating to private rights or grants, which have usually passed the great seal of Scotland, and which only concern offices, grants, commissions and private rights within that kingdom”

    See page 12 of the ‘Twelve Orders in Council’ PDF, under Part II, available from here:

    https://privycouncil.independent.gov.uk/orders-in-council/the-accession-council/

    Like

    1. Whenever a new monarch ‘takes over’ they declare the new constitution of the union of their crowns, as allowed for in law.

      The constitution of the legislatures, while an internal matter in situ, still rely on the monarch’s own definitions of which territories they hold power to legislate for.

      King Charles III explicitly authorised new Seals – gifting Scotland’s to its First Minister. Existing provisions in Scotland Acts weren’t due to proclamation of the King, but the will of WM Parliament with the former monarch’s approval, a massive difference in meaning and effect. Existing provisions in legislation will now cease to have effect and be repealed….

      Similarly with the declaration that he had forfeited Scotland to the Scottish Government in return for the Sovereign Grant – previously Scotland’s ‘Crown Estate rights’ were given by legislation at WM, not proclamation.

      I stand to be corrected, but I don’t recall mention of Great Britain, Britain or ‘one single governing legislature’ at Accession Council. I did hear mention of the kingdom of Scotland and reference to the peoples, governments and parliaments of the nations.

      The Accession Council is the only time the monarch has the power to impose their will, because it only deals with affairs related to administration of the union of the crowns and did not in any way remove power from the London Parliament in favour of the monarchy.

      We’re in a new era, with the written constitution that really matters evolving by Royal Command – all lawful. The legislatures will legislate, their form is also subject to change moving forward.

      Interesting times that can’t really be commented on by politicians etc until more Orders in Council are agreed for clarity wrt union of the crowns.

      Like

  22. King Charles makes his staff redundant and according to the Guardian does not have to pay inheritance tax – a great start to the new reign. He will of course be taking from the public purse while the public struggle to heat or eat.

    Liked by 5 people

  23. 1st WITCH.
    When shall we three meet again?
    In thunder, lightning, or in rain?

    2nd WITCH.
    When the hurly-burly’s done,
    When the battle’s lost and won.

    3rd WITCH.
    That will be ere the set of sun.

    1st WITCH.
    Where the place?

    2nd WITCH.
    Upon the heath.

    3rd WITCH.
    There to meet with Macbeth.

    For Mac Beth read «destiny».
    Scotland should have leaders who believe nations and peoples have a destiny and one of their own making. Likewise, an imagination to visualize beyond the given and the mundane and the courage and skill to manage the hurly-burly.
    The prosaic just does not match the task.

    Liked by 2 people

  24. @Lochside

    Now that’s a very interesting development: no dissent or death-threats as a result of your comments regarding AS. Jist sayin.

    Liked by 1 person

    1. Lochside has always said it as it is , and alongside many other indy supporters who have long posted on WOS and other TRUTH TELLING blogs his dissections are well worth THINKING ABOUT and acting on
      The ONLY way we will move forward positively to independence is to have someone in the old Tommy Sheridan , Jimmy Reid mindset where they openly despise , harangue and EXPOSE the FAKE POLITICIANS within ALL the parties in the Scottish parliament
      Let’s be honest does anyone who reads this blog or other honest blogs actually believe that all these self serving , self aggrandising wage thieves are interested or even CAPABLE of governing Scotland for the benefit of her people instead of themselves
      NOT only is independence fcucked with the clownshow of sturgeon and her morons , but the WHOLE of Scotland is fcucked with the parasitical goons who INFEST (I was going to write OUR parliament but honestly it is NOT MY PARLIAMENT the same as big lugs Charlie is NOT MY KING ) the colonial UGLY heap of Holyrood

      Liked by 5 people

Comments are closed.

%d bloggers like this: