Scotland’s Sovereign Constitution Survives!

Written comment from Breeks in answer to those who prefer English lies and deception.

DaveyTee19 is no different from the Unionist doctrine of unwritten conventions taken as gospel without rudimentary scrutiny, and simply asserted as being superior to the formal Constitutional doctrines of Scotland. Scottish doctrines which ARE documented, ARE supported by evidence, ARE witnessed, and DO have provenance.

The Union only survives by brazen and baseless assertions, tireless misdirection, and orchestrated sophistry. You will notice that “defence” of the Union is invariably focussed upon disputing the minutia and arbitrary discrepancies in Scotland’s Constitutional integrity, but never ever dwells very long upon the dodgy “legitimacy” of Westminster’s Parliamentary Sovereignty. The “fight” is never on “their” patch, but invariably to discredit Scotland, it is never to prove the rights and legitimacy of the Union. Are we surprised? With it’s origins mired in seedy corruption, bribery, coercion and innumerable ultra vires improprieties, is it any wonder why they don’t like to talk about it?

There is a curious parallel with Better Together in 2014 being singularly unable to make positive case for the Union. The “fight” was Project Fear, and all about discrediting Scottish Independence. There wasn’t a single progressive or positive argument “for” the Union throughout.

There is yet another parallel, with Unionist voices asserting the Union is mightily secure, and swearing blind there’s no demand for Independence. But yet to a man, they all run in abject terror from holding any further referendum that would actually, “prove” it. The “fight” isn’t about winning a Referendum, but discrediting Scotland’s rightful access to democracy and making sure a referendum never happens. My, my, what confidence…

That is why “minor” issues, such as King Charles III swearing fealty to the Claim of Right matters, because every now and again, there’s a gap exposed in the myriad layers of Unionist horseshit, and the baseless waffle of Unionism comes unstuck because it runs headlong into the legitimacy of Scotland’s Constitutional Law.

Another “glimpse” of Scotland’s Constitutional potency in law was Joanna Cherry’s legal victory over Boris Johnson and his prorogation of Parliament. The details “almost” don’t matter, because what evidence exists of “a sovereign Westminster Parliament” when the Prime Minister of that Westminster Parliament can be compelled to abide by a ruling from Scotland’s Court of Session, which coincidentally drove a coach and horse through the jurisdiction of the UK Supreme Court?

Is Scotland’s Constitution watertight? Well, never say never, but as far as practicably possible, I think it probably is. Perfect? No, but show me a nation with better authenticity to it’s origins and constitution. 

There is confusion however, because as Brexit proves, Scotland’s “sovereign” will demonstrably CAN be overruled, so how can Scotland possibly be sovereign? Well, because there is a world of difference between being overruled and being “legitimately” overruled. Sturgeon HAD to dispute the legitimacy of Brexit, but she failed, she refused, she capitulated, and she should rightfully have been impeached there and then. (It isn’t too late).

The weakness in Scotland’s predicament is not in honing the Constitutional argument we can win, but overcoming the monstrous dead weight inertia of a truly massive three hundred year long fallacy. The fraud is mature, long since bedded in, and has layer upon layer of fictions masquerading as truth, many accepted AS truth, and all interwoven with arbitrary conventions designed to make access to the truth impenetrable. For a full three centuries, the will of Westminster has prevailed over this shameful dog’s breakfast and the Union has weathered every challenge…. Yet it still cannot, dare not, commit the UK “constitution” to written form because the odious “clarity” thus revealed would surely be it’s nemesis.

Yet for all that, even after these 300 years of obfuscation, the King of England, with wealth and power beyond measure, all the pomp, prestige, and privilege extended to the sovereign ruler of England, and no doubt with a veritable legion of slippery Constitutional advisors, can still be humbled into swearing fealty to the principle of Scotland’s Claim of Right as an obdurate precondition to becoming King of Scots. 

Aye. There it is. Do you see it yet? Scotland’s sovereign constitution survives


Scotland can be overruled by using UK “domestic” law. Therefore we need to take our case to the International courts. That is what Salvo and Liberation.Scot propose. We will never win expecting justice from Westminster. As long as they are allowed to move the goalposts at will our hopes are just a waste of energy. They created the “Supreme Court” for that purpose. It is too easy for them, pass some Domestic Legislation limiting or changing the powers of the Devolved Parliament. Then when challenged get the “Supreme Court” to support Westminster sovereignty. It is an entirely different situation making any of that stick in an International Court.

I am, as always


Beat the Censors

Regretfully there are some among us who seek to censor what others read. Sadly within the YES movement there are sites which claim to be pro Indy but exist to only promote one Party and will not publish articles which come from bloggers who don’t slavishly support that Party to the exclusion of the rest of the YES movement. I ask readers who support free speech to share articles from Yours for Scotland as often as possible as this defeats the effectiveness of the censors.


Free subscriptions are available on the Home and Blog pages of this site. This allows,for an email of each article to your Inbox and that is now how several thousands get my articles each day. This avoids problems that some have experienced gaining access from Twitter and Facebook. You will be very welcome to choose whatever route works best for you.


The work and important development of Salvo has been a beacon of hope in 2022 and as it develops Salvo is creating campaigning hubs throughout Scotland. Salvo will join  with Liberation.Scot and as the campaigning arm of Liberation we are looking at very effective campaigns kicking off very early this year and introducing some new campaigning methods as well as those that have worked well in the past. This requires money so all donations to this site, once the running costs are covered, will go to support the work of Salvo/ Liberation. I think you will see it well used and effective.


We are seeking to build Liberation.Scot to at least 100,000 members just as quickly as we can. This is part of our plan to win recognition as an official Liberation Movement via the United Nations. We intend to internationalise our battle to win Independence and through the setting up of our Scottish National Congress will prepare and develop our arguments to win progress in the International Courts. Please help by signing up at Liberation.Scot. It is from those who sign up to Liberation.Scot that the membership of the SNC will be created by ballot.


49 thoughts on “Scotland’s Sovereign Constitution Survives!

  1. well said, Breeks.
    It’s true I have never heard “the positive case for the UNion” – not in Northern Ireland, not n Scotland and not in Wales
    You mentioned FM Sturgeon “should rightfully have been impeached”. What’s the impeachment procedure?Where’s it set out?

    Liked by 8 people

  2. Scottish folk are still caught up in the media despite the fact that they know that they are not for us. They are kissing ass of those who actively worked against their sovereignty or encouraged them to part with it. Follow Charlie, if he done it, it’s as he knows. Now Joanna works for us and whilst we might complain about the length of time everything is taking she has displayed on the occasion mentioned here that she has been working on behalf of the folk. She also pointed out in Scots law about the penis situation in regards to rape etc and the flaws with the bill, she is keen for resolution to be done in Scotland where the problem was created for we here which indicates she doesn’t favour interference from the UK.

    Liked by 3 people

    1. I feel like there is one huge psyop taking place in our country in a last bid to interfere with our democracy. Some of our politicians have told us the problems that they have faced from within so this gives us a chance to gather under liberation so it can be resolved because otherwise it’s not going to happen unless we make it so. We can’t be fooled into believing that we don’t have any power when Charlie and Joanna already showed us that we do. So folk need to stop being pulled in directions that lead them aff a cliff.

      Liked by 6 people

      1. Stephen Flynn in the article that Grouse Beater did told the truth, basically if you stick with them you have to wait until 2030. Now thinking logically and with what Sara has said they can’t do it, they need us to and the way of doing it has been opened up to us via the Liberation movement. It doesn’t mean that they are all bad it’s just they are not sovereign it’s we who are. Every injustice that good politicians have faced can be resolved by having these documents to protect them from any of it happening again along with the people.

        Liked by 4 people

  3. Great article and arguments for our continued svereignty. Hard to keep up with the number of guest blogs you are posting Iain but so many good ones. How do we impeach Sturgeon ? She has taked a hit with GRR nonsense and the placing of a trans woman in an all female prison so it would be good to do this soon, if it is possible.
    That would send a message to Westminster and the International Community that we Scots are not happy with the way Holyrood is acting and the link to the Brexit shambles when she should have stood uo for Scottish Sovereignty three years ago is a good time to strike as we can all see the damage that has caused our country.
    Once folk learn that has been totally unnecessary, they will be very angry, i think.

    Liked by 8 people

    1. When you investigate there’s been trans in female prisons in England as well, more than in Scotland. Just five days ago the UK government have updated their policy and will be now doing case to case assessment.

      Liked by 2 people

  4. I really wish the likes of Breeks would pay more attention to what is actually done and said, rather than what they imagine.

    Let’s look at what the King actually did and said:

    “I, [INSERT TITLE] by the Grace of God of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland and of My other Realms and Territories King, Defender of the Faith, do faithfully promise and swear that I shall inviolably maintain and preserve the Settlement of the true Protestant Religion as established by the Laws made in Scotland in prosecution of the Claim of Right and particularly by an Act intituled “An Act for securing the Protestant Religion and Presbyterian Church Government” and by the Acts passed in the Parliament of both Kingdoms for Union of the two Kingdoms, together with the Government, Worship, Discipline, Rights and Privileges of the Church of Scotland. So help me God.”

    He swore to uphold the Protestant Settlement, not “fealty to the Claim of Right”.

    Aye, there it isn’t.

    Liked by 1 person

    1. Yes and this has been addressed via a video by Salvo. He reduced it to this however in doing so he could face consequences.

      Liked by 1 person

    2. No, you miss the point 5304IP.

      “ as established by the Laws made in Scotland in prosecution of the Claim of Right”.

      By his own admission, the King’s reign is conditional.

      By his own admission, King’s reign is not sovereign.

      Do you see it yet?

      It doesn’t matter whether the King’s reign is conditional upon religion, it’s conditional.

      Though, actually, it does matter if it’s conditional upon religion and religion alone, because the Laws made in Scotland in prosecution of the Claim of Right dictate that reducing the scope of what the Claim of Right means is actually an Act of High Treason.

      Liked by 6 people

      1. Excerpt only: … ” as established by the Laws made in Scotland in prosecution of the Claim of Right and particularly by an Act intituled …

        Were I not doing my own thing, what I would centre on is:

        … “as established by the Laws made in Scotland in prosecution of the Claim of Righ” – that is plural ie., not just one Law is conceded in those words.

        … “and particularly by an Act” … that is selective – one Act is chosen – why?

        Leave those thoughts with you.

        Liked by 4 people

      2. So are we just picking the bits we like from the act then?

        He mentioned the laws of the act ‘AND particularly’ (not in isolation) the sectarian bit. the key word is ‘and’ meaning including, but you knew that.

        I’m calling you DavyTee20.

        Liked by 1 person

    3. He chose to present it in that way but the key point is this. He had to do it. He had no choice if he wished to remain monarch. It was the clearest proof he was not sovereign and that the power remains with the Scottish people.

      Liked by 7 people

      1. We need to hammer home our red sovereignty – as long as Sturgeon continues to infest the position of FM we will see no progress on independence and a possible compromise of red sovereignty in her impossible “plan” to use the GE as a de facto referendum. The next UK government will be slippery Labour who will rewrite the constitutional settlement and our own wee traitor would lap it up if she is still in post. I am so grateful to you, to Salvo, to ALBA, to and to the other voices here for taking action now – the dangers just a short distance down the road are existential ones. So many open goals have been missed – can the SNP really miss so many open goals through their incompetence alone?

        Liked by 2 people

    4. Terminology in a oath is pretty important not only in the broader sense but also in the particular. Charles includes both, emphasising the particular ‘ An Act for securing the protestant Religion and Presbyyterian Church Government ‘ and in the broader sense ‘ Laws made in Scotland in prosecution of the Claim of Right. ‘ Prosection in this usage means in ‘ continuance to its end ‘ in other words, forever.
      The Claim of Right covers, like the Bill of Rights a broad spectrum of laws considered breached, so not just religion.
      The Claim of Right was heavily influenced by the kirk, probably more so than the Bill of Rights, and since the subject of breeks article makes heavy usage of the limited voting franchise to delegitimise both the COR and the Treaty of Union it’s worth noting that the church in Scotland was probably the most dictatorial and at the same time most democratic institution of the two kingdoms. Dictatorial because church attendance was compulsory and democratic because every parish elected their own minister. The kirk without doubt was more representative of the people than any other attending the Convenention of the Estates and indeed it’s ability to influence Parliament, make no mistake the kirk wielded that power like a sword.

      Liked by 2 people

  5. So clear, thank you for writing this. People may want to take a look at this entry about Moray House’s Summer House, where in 1707 the Treaty of Union was signed.
    Here’s what it says about that moment:

    Holyrood Road, Edinburgh EH8 8BA

    If you look through the gates of Moray House on the north side of Holyrood Road from this spot you can see the summer house where a historic event took place in 1707. In that year the threat of a riotous mob, enraged by the decision of the Scottish Parliament to sign the Treaty of Union with England, prevented the representatives of the two countries from signing the Treaty in the Scottish Parliament. For their own safety they retreated to this summer house in a private garden off Hollyrood Road, where they could sign away Scotland’s independence in peace. However, it proved one step too far for the Scottish representatives that Article 13 of the treaty imposed a malt tax on Scotland which had originally been established in England to pay for war with France. This tax on the brewing industry was too much for the Scottish parliamentarians and it was finally agreed that Scotland would be exempted from it. However, after the Union the tax was eventually imposed on Scotland anyway in 1725, leading to riots in both Edinburgh and Glasgow, where nine people died.

    Liked by 5 people

    1. Someone should do a film about this. There’s a whisky riot whisky. I had been reading this a wee while back and found some information on the subject. It made me laugh and think of the Airplane film when the plane was in trouble but when there was an announcement that they ran out of coffee all he’ll broke loose. 🤣

      Liked by 2 people

  6. If there is a positive for London running the remaking Nations of the UK….why didn’t they deploy it before all these Nations left?

    £45 Billion (BILLION) stolen from India alone.
    Perhaps it was the estimated death toll – one example

    Perhaps Nations such as Ireland in the middle of the 19th. Century remember that London denied assistance during the Famine

    The crop failures were caused by potato blight, a disease that destroys the leaves and the roots of the potato plant. The blight ravaged potato crops throughout Europe in the 1840s – but the situation in Ireland made it uniquely devastating.

    In Ireland, almost half of the population was entirely reliant on calorie-rich, hardy, nutritious potatoes, and the rest of the population also consumed the vegetable in large quantities. So when the crop failed, people starved.

    Irish Catholics had previously been prohibited by law from owning land. This changed earlier in the century, but land ownership was still concentrated in the hands of English and Anglo-Irish Protestant families (often absentee landlords) who had unchecked power over their tenants. By the 1840s, many tenant farmers existed at subsistence level on small allotments of land which barely provided enough food even in good years.

    London rapes Nations of their wealth and syphons it to the elite ( like Victoria)
    They destroy the cultures the engulf and kill lots of people in the process.

    The Empire where the Sun never set and the Blood never dried.

    Liked by 3 people

    1. Wasn’t she involved in the opium trade in China as well? I found some articles on how China wanted it stopped but she was adamant and so many Chinese people ended up addicts because of it.

      Liked by 1 person

      1. “The East India Company, formerly known as the ‘Company of Merchants of London trading into the East Indies’ was given ‘royal approval’ by a charter from Queen Elizabeth I on 31 December 1600. The Company was granted a monopoly on all English trade east of the Cape of Good Hope.” One of the greatest demands the East India Company endeavoured to supply was that for tea. Indeed it was the demand for the “cups that cheer but not inebriate” that led to British involvement in the opium trade.

        “By 1813 Britain was buying almost 32 million pounds (14.5 million kilograms) of tea. This presented the East India Company with problems as China demanded payment for tea in silver and Britain was left drawing on its own rather limited reserves of this precious metal. The East India Company resolved this problem by illegally smuggling Indian opium into China and demanding payment in silver. This could then be used to pay for the tea. It was China’s fierce resistance to this activity that led Britain to force China to buy the drug in the Opium War of 1840-1843”.

        Liked by 3 people

      2. Yes, as Clootie noted below, the British queen Alexandrina Victoria of the House of Hanover, through her subjects, ran a massive drug dealing operation into China. In 1836, the Chinese government debated whether to focus its prohibition efforts on the drug pushers or their victims. The decision was made that it would be best to close down the international drug dealers, who were primarily British. So Imperial Commissioner Lin Zexu sent an ever so polite letter to Alexandrina Victoria, appealing to her ‘Christianity’ and asking her to call off her drug dealers. He received no reply. Her warmongering Scottish drug dealers Jardine & Matheson, vociferously and persistently lobbied the government to go to war against China to perpetuate their drug dealing. Their lobbying was impeded by a minority of pacifist parliamentarians and civil servants who protested that Jardine & Matheson were engaged in an immoral trade which was criminal in China. So Jardine whipped up the great British public’s jingoistic fervour through the tabloid press. Lord Palmerston sent in the British gunboats as the Scottish drug dealer’s enforcers and the rest is history. After the Second Opium War, Chinese government records show that 25% of the male population of China was addicted to opium. This may accurately be described as “the greatest international crime ever committed”. “William Jardine: Architect of the First Opium War”

        Liked by 1 person

    2. Clootie, sorry to correct you again but the India estimate is 45 TRILLION Dollars, that’s 12 zeros. 45 thousand, thousand, thousand, thousand dollars stolen from India.

      Liked by 2 people

  7. Got to love the Interweb with access to all those experts on just about everything known to man and woman before I get in trouble. The trouble crops up when the same experts that were all knowing on vaccines and virology, the history of Ukraine and the constitution of our country turn out to be the same experts. This is not a dig at this blog or Breeks just a general observation and for the record I agree with just about all of Breeks writings. I hope Salvo are correct on our constitution as lets face it watching the SNP/Greens self harming over the gender mess it may be all we have left. Time for something refreshingly alcoholic and some soothing music as the world is going mad.

    Liked by 1 person

    1. Well what is an expert? Remember that everything is always subject to change. For instance there’s people now challenging Darwin and have evidence however they are being met with people who are loath to change and admit that what they were teaching has now been proven to be defunct. Problem is folk invest money in it and get funding from private firms and might have this withdrawn if they stray away from their narrative.


      1. I was watching a presentation about the computer models they use for making predictions in terms of carbon and climate change and the guy presents the evidence to show the model is flawed and he went to folk who had been taught by the flawed model which led people to destroy folks cars, artwork and such because they hadn’t seen the alternative science and evidence of the flawed model before.


      2. I don’t believe that anyone is an absolute expert I think we are all learning and everything is subject to change. These guys put forward their evidence that carbon net zero takes us back to a time where there was hardly any vegetation or green because plants and trees actually need carbon. When you listen to this and look at the links it makes you think right perhaps we have not seen enough evidence and are only being shown one side of something.


  8. Do you believe that Irish folk only planted potatoes. There’s another side to that story.


    1. Apparently the Turkish sultan of the time sent secret help after being told by Queen Vic that he would be showing her up by offering more help than she did so apparently he sent ships to another area so not to be detected.

      Liked by 1 person

      1. The real evil empire exposed and it isint the ottomans, recently I read a book about the last Celtic king of Scotland the real Macbeth .Under Macbeth Scotland prospered in relative peace. Macbeth was the only Scottish King ever to go to Rome for a papal visited. He was acknowledged abroad with high regard However he was smeared at a later date by our old nemesis Edward the First (The Murderer) in an attempt to discredit Scotlands ancient line of Celtic/Picttish Kings with intent of claiming Scotland as inferior vassal state. Shakespeare added to the bad press, durring King James reign, Gruoch Macbeths wife being painted as a sociopathic power hungry murderess. Shakespeare discredited Gruoch when apparently she was a kindly benevolent person. Macbeth did kill Duncan but it was on the battlefield and Duncan was not a old man but rival for the crown.
        What we are told about our history is tails and lies written by a Anglophones designed to devalue our celtic culture. Brainwashing gaslighting devaluation are all tools used by the evil empire to keep us in our place tethered together in their coercive Union.
        Many thanks for sharing the unknown history of Turkish humanity, I am quiet sure this picture will be backed in UK,Ok. Brexitland.

        Liked by 1 person

      2. Yeah and it was his wife who was the reason he was King as it was apparently through her that made him. Want me to ask Erdoğan baby to help us? Just kidding if you read the press he has been given loans fae UK, mistake of a past Sultan trusting them. See photo of him at Balmoral.😄 I spent 11 years with a Turk and believe me it’s better there than here.


      3. I made him wear a yes t-shirt my ex. Put is this way if he dared go against us well let’s just say I wouldn’t have been too fecking pleased. He first watched Brave heart and was like oh a lot of your traditions in this film are like ours. He witnessed Brits try talking me down and me not allowing it haha.

        Liked by 1 person

  9. Those who talk down the claim of right , the constitution, our sovereignty, (they are the enemy within.)
    Unfortunately like our current colonial administration their are those who are glad to cowtow to our colonial masters. Brigade 77 who cause their mischief everywhere , dont take anybody at face value. (Especially SNP politicians) who ask you for your address. However a pat on the head does some of these treacherous house jocks who would sell their grannies to the Arabs for their own gain. They betray us daily and reveal in our 2nd class citizenship they help allocate to us ,they steal our prosperity, language, culture and any hope of a better Scotland.
    If we leave it to the SNP to deliver our freedom we will die disappointed feeling like foolish mooncalfs for having trusted a the worst type of traitors.
    Desolve the Union.

    Liked by 2 people

    1. The claim of right should have people like I must not fuck my fellow Scots over as I must remember it’s not all about me and should I make it all about me there’s consequences, dramatic scene begins. Haha

      Liked by 1 person

      1. Collaborators are seldom welcome in a newly liberated land, which perhaps helps explain much of the UKs diverse population mix today.

        Liked by 5 people

  10. Good article, as you rightly point out the union only survives due to the amount of House Jock holding it together, starting in Bute House. Sadly today marks the anniversary that we left the EU, another year wasted by Sturgeon, and we’re not one step closer to ditching this prison of a union.

    Liked by 5 people

    1. Fae, how about a Portacabin on Gruinard. They can have rations and bags of seeds for next seasons food, good luck eating those :o)


      1. Sounds like a plan. We have to decide as a collective though. 😄 At least you are displaying kindness that we were not shown.

        Liked by 1 person

  11. Great piece of writing by Breeks.

    As Albert Memmi tells us, the role of the colonizer is ‘to make any possibility of liberation for the native seem remote’.

    Liked by 4 people

    1. Great point Alf – I personally think independence is there if a competent leader reaches out their hand! Never in over 300 years has that prize been within easier reach.

      Liked by 3 people

Comments are closed.

%d bloggers like this: