This was an important week in the Scottish independence struggle. The good folk at Liberation headed up by Craig Murray and Robert Black KC headed up a delegation to the UN in Geneva. They were presenting the case that Scotland is, in fact, a defacto colony of England.
In the words of Robert Black KC, “The events of 1707 certainly resulted in Scotland’s executive government and its legislature ceasing to exist. But was there any parallel in England? Were the governmental institutions of both nations replaced by the institutions of a new state?
The answer to these questions is no. England’s institutions of government continued in being completely unchanged save for their authority being now extended to encompass Scotland.”
Robert Black is quite convinced in his opinion; everything changed for Scotland, nothing changed for England except that they now had a few Scots sitting in their Parliament and England carried on with business as usual.
This action in Geneva is a long, long road. In a recent “Through A Scottish Prism” special Craig Murray made that very clear. (see below) However, this action with the UN can only enhance our struggle to regain our independence. No matter the outcome at the UN Scotland’s ultimate salvation will come from an electoral event. The ballot box will be the ultimate arbitrator of Scotland’s Constitutional wishes.
While the UN was deliberating this case our SNP devolved government was removing one of the cornerstones of our separate and unique legal system, the not proven verdict. This has until now stood the test of time and often been held up by our legal profession as a noble and worthwhile option in our legal system. Despite the pleading of our legal profession the Justice Minister a non lawyer decided to remove this option from juries and judges. Too many people get ‘let off’ is the argument of those who wanted this verdict removed. I suspect, in time as a nation we will come to regret this vandalism to our justice system.
Meanwhile, our SNP Scottish Government has in its infinite wisdom decided to challenge For Women Scotland (FWS) who filed a case in the Scottish Court of Session, seeking to overturn guidance that allows transgender pupils access to single-sex facilities based on gender identity rather than biological sex, arguing it breaches the Equality Act 2010.
The Scottish taxpayers have already spent vast sums on SNP Government failed law suits and employment tribunals as they try to defend the SNP raisons d’être, Gender ideology! Independence can wait apparently, the rights of 0,01% of the population cannot! Politics and life are all about choices and the SNP have made theirs, and it is not Independence, nothing else!
These two topics were foremost for our panel this week of Phil Boswell, Lloyd Quinan and Allan Petrie. Our dear colleague Eva Comrie was unable to join us due to illness. We wish her a speedy and full recovery.
Other matters discussed include the defection of Freddy Kruger’s brother Danny from the Real Tories to the new Tories known as the Reform Party. This is the party that is blaming low water levels in English reservoirs not on lack of investment by the privately owned water companies or even on climate change. No, this lack of water is apparently down to immigration as is every problem as far as Reform and the crazies in England are concerned!
We laugh at further hypocrisy this time by Chris Law the SNP castle owner who condemned everyone attending the banquet being held for President Trump at Buck Palace, until someone informed dozy Chris that his party leader John Swinney was also breaking bread with all the Brits and Yanks! Chris Law’s tweet quickly disappeared, however, nothing disappears completely on the internet! Gawn yirsel Chrissie boy!
We also discussed the apparent in-fighting already underway in the new Your Party of Jeremy Corbyn and Zarah Sultana. The left, is if nothing else, consistent in destroying itself with infighting. Tis always the way! The right never need to worry about the left they just need to wait for the inevitable civil war!
All this and more on your favourite Scottish Political Review Podcast.
A disgusting sight at the top of Glasgow’s Buchanan Street on Saturday afternoon as butcher’s apron bedecked fascists make their presence felt. But hold-on: many of the mob were otherwise well-behaved young men and women, not your normal collection of wild-eyed, hate consumed Nazi sympathisers, not by any stretch of the imagination. The Metropolitan-media has done a ‘fine’ propaganda job for Brit-nationalism here in the Northern, energy rich colony.
Carmen, can we really say that those who protest about immigration and other issues are Nazis? They are not even fascists. They are not. Any knowledge of the Nazi era would tell you, and everyone else, this. They may practise hyperbole and British nationalism, but they are not Nazis and we really need to stop this nonsense.
So, tell me, Lorn, if people choose to publicly practice “hyperbole” and “British nationalism” what differentiates them from Nazis? Is fascism not, above all, an expression of national-community or gemeinschaft, which is anti those who “don’t belong” within the abstract notion of national-identity. Isn’t it an utterly essential manifestation of fascism to hold such a view? The majority of Saturday’s protesters may not consider themselves to be fascists … but, if you choose to drape yourself in a union-flag and adhere to an imported and unmistakably racist ideology are you not flying-with-the-craws? When exactly were the first illegal immigrants onto Scottish beaches recorded? I must’ve missed that.
No, Carmen, that was British nationalism and fear, not fascism. Illegal immigrants do not arrive in boats on our shores, but they are allocated via the central British distribution system. As I recall, the SNP specifically asked for immigrants to be funnelled north, and, a short time later, Glasgow City Council had to beg Westminster to stop sending them because the city’s finances and infrastructure could not cope with the influx.
The UK, as a whole, is in chronic economic decline. That is one of those chiels that winnae ding, I’m afraid. Now, you may well be in a financial situation whereby you manage very well, but that is not the case for many people who are struggling today. Oh, I appreciate that our notion of poverty is relative, but that does not take anything away from the fact that many people are struggling.
I have the greatest sympathy for even those who are looking for a better life rather than fleeing oppression, and I certainly do not blame them for that, but, the fact remains that the country cannot, economically, house, feed, educate and treat under the NHS, everyone coming here – any more than you, as an individual could afford to open your door to unlimited numbers of guests forever.
It is also a fact that international law states that refugees and asylum seekers must stop in the first country that they are safe in, and that is not the UK, as they travel through several safe countries to get here. Most people are not opposed to immigration per se, but they feel that they have not been consulted on this issue at all and are called out as ‘far right’ and ‘fascists/Nazis’ for perfectly reasonable scepticism about the much-lauded benefits.
Legal immigration is very much higher, and I do believe that, sooner or later, it, too, will be phased out and automatic passport rights much reduced. After all, present generations are not responsible for the past. This suicidal empathy/virtue signalling practised by so many in the UK is illogical and nonsensical Should we hold the present generations of Germans responsible for WW II? Present-day Japanese people? The bible might say that the sins of the fathers are visited upon the children, but do we really believe that succeeding generations must pay forever?
The Danes, a very civilized nation took the bull by the horns and stopped immigration except for a trickle with which it can cope. Would-be immigrants are processed in their country of origin and anyone arriving illegally is sent back immediately. It was not so much financial worries that prompted this, but the fact that just over three million Danes began to realize that importing people with vastly different cultures (but with an overarching Islamic culture) would destroy, ultimately, Danish culture and heritage.
They recorded a sharp rise in sexual crimes, in drug crimes, and in violent, Moslem gangs, an extra layer on top of their own criminal fraternity. This is not to say that Moslem people are more prone to crime than anyone else, but few countries can afford to import any addition to the crime statistics. All of this is open to research, if you care to access it. There is another point, of course: taking people away from situations where they might progress in their own country and culture, as the Western nations have all done, enduring some very violent and bloody periods along the way, means that their countries and cultures are unlikely to evolve into ‘free’ and ‘prosperous’ nations in an organic way suited to them.
I feel conflicted frankly… But maybe not where you’d expect…
I agree, it’s ridiculous to have amateurish MSP’s meddling in legal affairs they don’t understand, (a bit like amateurish MSP’s meddling with bait-and-switch electoral mandates for Independence), but my ardour for leaping to the defence of Scots Law is greatly tempered by 300+ years of servile complicity with a Treaty of Union which should have been shredded long ago by its fundamental incompatability with Scotland’s sovereign Constitution.
I’m delighted that Robert Black KC has had is road to Damascus epiphany, but what about the other shrinking violets in Scotland’s Legal Fraternity? – Those still taking the money and keeping their traps shut. As Roddy says, they are THE experts in Scots Law, and they should know a dug cannae serve twa masters.
So the Legal Profession don’t want to lose their unique Not-Proven verdict? Ah bless! Funny that. The rest of us don’t get a say in the Anglicisation of Scottish culture and dismantling of Scottish Society, and largely because the Legal fraternity is nowhere to be seen whenever the duplicitous Treaty of Union is challenged. I wanted to keep my European Citizenship for a start, and Brexit should have torn the Union apart on constitutional grounds alone, but Scotland’s “leadership” rolled over to the last man. Michel Barnier even cried out to us “Are you sure this Brexit malarkey is all Constitutional?” and Sturgeon and the turncoats said nothing.
We KNOW there is potency to Scots Law; Joanna Cherry wiped the floor with Boris Johnson and his bellicose Attorney General Geoffrey Cox, both humbled by the Scottish principle that Parliament cannot remove itself from the scrutiny of the (sovereign) people. There is no such hierarchy of command under English Law where the English Monarch is sovereign and the English people are constitutional subjects. English power does not rest with the people. Was Cherry given due credit? No. We all know our Scottish Champion was treated disgracefully by the likes of Blah-blah Blackford and Sturgeon.
So thank you to Robert Black KC, a sincere welcome aboard, – but all hail to Sara Salyers and SALVO, showing Scots Law how it’s done.
I simply cannot agree that we are a colony. We are certainly treated as if we are, but that is a different thing. However, I do support every initiative to end the Union ASAP before it is too late. The biggest problem for Scotland is that our representatives acquiesced in the 1707 Union and accepted all the details. Legally and constitutionally, that should not bind us, but the Treaty and everything around it would suggest that we acquiesced in everything, in 1707.
The National might well have covered the issue of independence, but you try to state that there are two sexes and you will be banned. Now, to many, that might not be very important, but, when you look underneath to what the ‘woke’ agenda – a form of new, unworkable and overturning type of Marxism – and independence is in danger of being superseded by this horse manure.
The SNP government refusal to accept the UK Supreme Court ruling is beyond farce. We are still part of the UK until we regain our independence. After independence, we can make our own laws, but I would predict that, if they continue on this path, they will be inviting a revolution from half of the Scottish population, at least. Women should not have merely stood outside Holyrood, but entered it and occupied it. I can say from experience, that all the women I have come into contact with are sick to the back teeth of this discrimination against us and our long-established rights. That anger is going to overflow one of these fine days. This utter contempt for the female half of the population is becoming very dangerous now.
The SG agreed to the 2010 Equality Act when they put it into law. Have the SG been listening to their lawyers? If they have, why are they defying the UKSC ruling. It is unimaginable that any lawyer would question the fairness and depth of the legal argument of the UKSC? These people are completely delusional and are out of touch with reality. They need to be brought down pronto.
Not in agreement with UK (and Scottish) government recognition of a Palestinian state that does not yet exist. It will propel the Middle East into all-out conflict, forcing Israel to rethink its options. Exactly what happened in the former Yugoslavia when Slovenia was recognized prematurely. Not saying that all the former Yugoslav states should not have been recognized through diplomacy, or that a Palestinian state should not be instituted, but it is premature, too.
The removal of the ‘Not Proven’ verdict is pointless: the old Scottish verdicts of ‘Proven’ and ‘Not Proven’ make the most sense as ‘Not Guilty’ and ‘Guilty’ are too prescriptive and always were. However, the Scots have sabotaged, and will continue to sabotage themselves. No jury will convict where there is even the slightest doubt, so even where there is some evidence to suggest that the accused might have committed crime, but the evidence is not sufficient, a ‘Not Guilty’ verdict will be brought in and the alleged victim will have no leg to stand on in any subsequent civil case. The removal of ‘Double Jeopardy’ could make a difference, but it is used only very rarely.
The separate sexual offences courts are necessary, I believe, to signal the uniqueness of these crimes which are almost wholly carried out against women and children – i.e. against people who are uniquely lacking in physical strength against a predator of much greater physical strength. That fact has never before been highlighted. I also believe that women should be allowed to carry pepper sprays, powerful alarms and other defences against rape and sexual assault They are not like any other crime in that it is one sex that predates on the other (and children of both sexes).
Neither the removal of the ‘Not Proven’ verdict nor, indeed, the separate courts, will make any difference to the outcomes of trials for sexual offences because their intractability is rooted in their character, not their commission, because they are offences carried out under the cover of secrecy, with no direct witnesses to the crime. What the separate courts will do is show that one sex predates on the other and that this is a crime in every form it takes – in war and peace. Lloyd and Allan are right: the old Scottish verdicts are the ones that make most sense as they reflect the reality of a court trial. Only the accused and the alleged victim can possibly know whether the accused is actually guilty.
Lloyd: the same argument could be made against mass immigration. Women and girls are being threatened with rape and sexual assault on a mass scale, and it is utterly contemptible to suggest that they were always under threat from our own sexual predators. Of course they were, so why introduce another layer? Because we are always the sacrifice that is made to propitiate every political decision.
Why are the grooming gang members not pursued in court? I heard of one English judge say in court that he understood how difficult it is for men from certain cultures to comprehend that we do not treat women and girls as pieces of meat, and cattle to be bartered, in this country. Really? Every man and boy knows full well that rape and sexual assault are wrong, whatever their origins. This is rooted in culture and that kind of culture should not be welcome here; it has nothing to do with religion. Yet again, women and girls are sacrificed on the altar of ‘woke’ and virtue-signalling politics.
Jeremy Corbyn will do nothing for Scotland. Best ignored. Same for Nigel Farage. They are anti Scottish. Only acknowledge their existence if they start to make a dent in Scottish politics. Reform will make a killing in England, so sick are the English people of the three mainstream parties. I think, Allan, that many English now see themselves as English, not British. They are as entitled as we are to their own country. Up here, we have no idea of how many immigrants are coming into England every day. They are not asylum seekers or refugees because international law states unequivocally that such people must stay in the FIRST country that does not threaten them – they pass through Greece, Italy, Germany, France (mainly) Belgium, The Netherlands, to get here.
Roddy: is Liberate going to stand in the North-east?
Yes we will be standing in the north east.
A quick question for you if we are not a colony why do we need permission to hold a referendum to leave?
Why is there only Secy of States for Scotland, Wales and NI?
Why was she Elizabeth II not Elizabeth 1st?
I absolutely agree, but we signed that bloody Treaty and have acquiesced in our own treatment ever since 1707. As I said, we are treated as a colony, but, legally and constitutionally, I simply cannot agree that we are. The referendum nonsense is well past its sell-by date and needs to be scrapped. Personally, I agree with all the SALVO/LIberation have unearthed, and have been saying the same for years now.
However, I don’t agree with Professor Black’s stance on the aftermath of the Treaty. The ordinary people had no say at all and they did not welcome the Union (on either side of the border), but the fact remains that our representatives, hell mend them, did agree to the Union on our behalf. If we genuinely want independence, we are going to have to vote for it, show that we have the backbone to take our independence.
Nevertheless, that Treaty will haunt us, if we are not careful, because Westminster and Whitehall will try to use it against us in any post independence negotiations and, unless we are thoroughly prepared with knowledge and cunning strategy and tactics, and prepared to stand our ground on every issue, we could lose out badly.
Repudiating the Treaty will get us nowhere on its own. We have enough delusionists in our midst with the ‘woke’ lobby. Let’s not go down that route, too. Reality means that the Treaty exists. We need to understand its impact on both sides of the border.
Excellent post, Lorn. I entirely agree – Scotland is not a colony and will not be considered as such – the UN makes that quite clear: a territory cannot be regarded as a non self governing territory (i.e. a colony) if it is in free association with an independent State or is integrated with an independent state. The latter clearly applies to Scotland and I can’t see the UN changing its mind on that.
But even if Scotland was to be considered a colony, what then? Why would that bring us any nearer to independence? I’ve looked online for an explanation, but if there is a Liberate Scotland website I’ve been unable to find it. There is something on the ISP website but other than saying that all independence minded people should work together (provided that it’s under the Liberate Scotland umbrella) there’s nothing about how independence would actually be achieved. Perhaps a proper Liberate Scotland website could be set up?
As I see it, relying on historical documents and tenuous legal arguments is pointless. The only way to achieve independence is to convince the Scottish people that they and their families will be better off if Scotland is independent. Sadly, nobody currently appears to be doing much to achieve that.
(Provided that it’s under the Liberate Scotland umbrella) you are being somewhat disingenuous with that statement. Liberate Scotland is open to all parties and individuals, unity is the key. Liberate exclude nobody abd the door is open to all it is others namely SNP and Alba that choose to plough lone furrows.
I wouldn’t get hung up on whether Scotland actually is or isn’t a Colony. That isn’t really the point.
I look upon these proceedings as a test case. It’s purpose is to establish clarity where the Treaty of Union wilfully spawns confusions and ambiguity. The UK Government treats Scotland as a Nation when it suits them, and a subjugated colony when that suits the bill. They are not defeated or victorious by Yes or No to the question, but undone by simple clarity itself. They cannot have it both ways.
It’s purpose, as I interpret it anyway, is not to confine Scotland to a binary Constitutional definition of colony or not, but to expose, and stress to breaking point, the absurdities and irreconcible falacies which for 300+ years have permitted this bogus charade of a Union Treaty to exist, and allowed Westminster to selectively interpret the Treaty however it damn well likes.
The Union, even from it’s inglorious inception, has always been a rancid con, fully dependant upon bluster, disinformation, misrepresentation and impenetrable layers of corruption and chicanery. At the UN, it is to be hoped that clarity can at last be found.
Whatever we can achieve under UK Law is invariably compromised with Westminster holding both ends of the string, and free to set (fix) both the political narrative and agenda.
Clarity, of course, will always benefit Scotland which existed for centuries as a constitutionally robust and internationally recognised Nation which did not concede to subjugation, – whereas the Treaty of Union was always a grubby little device of unlawful subjugation masquerading as something else.
I look forward to seeing Westminster defend the indefensible, when the corruptions of this tragic Union are so well documented, unambiguous, explicit in fullest detail. Bring it on.
One of the best shows ever, serious subjects discussed with good humour included. I had company so missed the show, & have just caught up… One Question for Loyd, Please stand as a Liberate Scotland Candidate, you said yourself, the SNP need to be crushed, I agree, but people like you in the know & been there & done it, should be the once stepping forward so we do have a chance of crushing those that have done & are still doing more damage to this country than the tories ever did.
Hi Breeks, I agree with a lot of that. However, I find it very difficult to see the Treaty in the way that Professor Black sees it. A good number of years ago now, I did my own study into the Treaty and its workings, and approached that study from two different perspectives – the political and the legal/constitutional. In the end, it seemed to me that both the political and the legal/constitutional converged.
It is absolutely imperative that we confront Westminster and Whitehall with our independence, not as a begging nation but as one that is not prepared to accept ‘no’ as an answer, but we need to understand where they will come from, too. UDI would always be my first choice following a political vote. Our own perspective will not be enough: we have to understand and recognize their perspective so that we might all the better defeat it. I know I seem to be a contrarian, and, to be honest, I probably am just that.
Nonetheless, having studied the Treaty closely, and all the speeches and workings around it, I have had to accept that it was, and remains, a viable treaty, both politically and legally/constitutionally. From what I have gleaned, it does not seem to me to have been intended as a subsumption of Scotland, by the designers and draftsmen, nor by Queen Anne.
Where the treachery came in was in the form of the English MPs, several months down the line when they insisted on annexing the Scottish civil court of final appeal and who, having got all they wanted in the way of keeping most of their own parliamentary institutions, still wanted to humiliate Scotland. That is what I mean by “being treated as a colony” rather than actually being a colony by dint of the Treaty. Both politically and legally/constitutionally, Westminster and Whitehall have not a foot on which to stand. Even devolution and Holyrood are constitutionally ‘ultra vires’ according to the Treaty and their acceptance betrays a complete lack of understanding of the Treaty on both sides of the border. They see it as all theirs, and we see it as a mere bagatelle – when it is neither.
I do not mean that I think the Treaty and the Union are fine and dandy and should go on indefinitely: it is that the English have a very good case for fighting our interpretation of it, if it relies on an interpretation that itself relies on its being redundant from day one of its inception – which appears to be Professor Black’s interpretation – or, at least a one-sided entity. The very fact that we sent MPs to London would immediately negate that.
He is an eminent Professor of Law and I’m nobody, but we should take the Crawford and Boyle remit as a warning that we will not have it all our own way over the Treaty or the Union, and it will be, by no means, a one-way street when the negotiations for the distribution of assets and obligations come along, although much will, of course, depend on international law and on England’s stance, which might be to let us go and wipe the slate clean without laying claim to any of our maritime or terrestrial assets, but their renewables energy, to mention but one thing, is so tied into our assets that this would seem unlikely at this juncture.
Pass Laws folks whilst we witter about independence.
That’s what is apparently being announced today by Starmer when he will announce mandatory ID cards.
Mandatory ID required of everyone is the absolute basis of the hated apartheid South Africa pass laws.
It is the basis of control. The basis by which people can be restricted and controlled. Or should I say more effectively restricted and controlled than today
Access onto transport be it bus, train, plane or boat denied or allowed depending on status.
Access to services be it medical centres, a hospital, shopping mall, a schools, colleges, banks, or the purchase of certain goods., all controlled, granted or denied – and all tracked.
But it’s for our good we will be told. To stop the boat people. But who are the boat people – us?
That sadly is the reality of where we are headed. Unlike the South Africa of old, pass laws today, facilitated by all pervasive electronic IT surveillance will be more effective than folks can imagine.
Independence, aye right. I fear that boat has sailed for us. Rats in a trap for the most part. Or am I missing something?
Just another small thought following my comments about the introduction of mandatory ID cards.
If you turn your mind to what has been put into place these last few years you will understand how ID cards are part of a longer term plan of total surveillance and control. And was in in any of the various political party’s faux manifestos.
Was it in any manifesto that people over 65 years of age were from last week to be restricted in taking out their own money to £300 per day, with £1,200 a week maximum. And that if they want more they will have to book an appointment in a bricks and mortar bank to show not just their bank card, but also ID to get money – after of course they have explained what the money is for.
That’s only a small beer of what is coming down the line.
Or the right of government to use A! to trawl everyone’s bank account to profile and assess what monies have gone through their bank account and what the profile of the spending was on and where it went. Was that in any manifesto?
Or the profiling of people’s internet behaviours, what sites they have visited, and with the ubiquitous mobile phones, where they have been. The police regularly secure tower data dumps of everyone with a mobile phone on a demonstration.
or what of the record of every car and where it has been as it passes the many tens of thousands of ANPR camera so ubiquitous on our roads. These machines can track in real time and of course the records of all vehicle movements are retained for 7 years.
Or what of the facial recognition systems that can both record and track in real time. Many folks don’t kow this but Glasgow city centre has a facial recognition system in place. And of course mandatory ID cards, integrated into the system/s will ensure a digital ID picture of everyone.
And of course police are now going to be equipped with the facility to stop and identify everyone, and pull up their history – who they are, where they stay, a person marked as to being of interest etc etc. Well they do that at border just now, so why not on the streets of Glasgow, or Edinburgh or Portree.
Only a rotten and corrupt individual like an independence supporter or an anti war supporter or person with the wrong political sentiments would object to these controls. Its a grim reality of iron forming round us all but do we for the most part care. Would we walk into to the concentration camps of our free will, or more appropriately, are we in one already?
It’s maybe something folks should consider more widely or are we too late?
Willie: ID cards were necessary in wartime, and surveillance was also necessary. Now? Digital ID? Entirely open to abuse and cloning. This is the direct result of that suicidal empathy. We have trapped ourselves and been hoist by our own petard. The politicians, and those who pull their strings, know that the situation they have created is going to lead to revolution in the longer term because what is happening now cannot be sustained long-term. No country can afford to throw open its borders to everyone who wants to come, just as no household can support others indefinitely. Life is hard enough without the stupidity of certain people making life even harder for those who have the bear the heaviest brunt of policies that reward minorities and the terminally stupid at the expense of the majority.
John Stuart Mill, the utilitarian philosopher, advocated the happiness of the many even if that meant that the few had to be discontented with their lot. Common sense should tell us that this is the only way to run a country and keep a population on side and with you. The Bonhoeffer Stupidity of the few, for the past ten to fifteen years, has been turned on its head and has ruled the many and created a society in which we are all becoming strangers, dislocated from our own sense of ourselves. The Nazis, at least in the beginning, pretended that they cared about the German population. Our lot make it plain that the ordinary citizen is far from their thoughts. The politicians and their masters are beginning to panic and they know they need to be able to control us in order to keep us passive. They gambled and lost. Now, they do not know what to do except what authoritarians always do: suppress and repress the population.
Scotland is part of the UK, so it isn’t a colony. Liberate/Salvo/whoever are entertaining ejits who seem to place great faith in a discredited sociology book by a pseudo-Algerian, and ancient history. They seem to have plenty money.
So if it is not a colony why do we need permission to leave the union?
You need a Young Scot card to buy a beer or travel for free on a bus. The whole ID card thing happend in Scotland a while ago.
ID is here.. Facial recognition is here. Ditto voice prints. Ditto finger prints. Connected data bases are here connecting everything from bank accouts to pensions to health records to passports to the house you buy or sell. Your car is tracked by ANPR. Tracking by electronic means is here. All new cars now have telephone linked facilities built in. Passport control is here and for a long time passports have been marked to persons of interest, political criminal or whatever. Now it will through mandatory ID be linked to driving licences, and as the Covid experiment showed, the police trialled extensively mass lock down and the restriction of people being able to access adjacent area or whatever.
Pass laws south Africa back in the day are but stone age tools compared to what is available now. And don’t even mention internet tracking, internet profiling and the states abilities to restrict communication, or what you can access. They can even shut down your entire life – bank accounts, passports to travel, driving licences at the touch of a button.
But don’t worry folks. Government is good. The elites behind them are good. They are here to look after us. Providing good healthcare, affordable electricity and gas too. The fact that electricity in Scotland is the highest price in the world is neither here nor there. And poverty vs the elites. What poverty. And if you try to complain, express concern, you will be classed a terrorist and arrested and charged. Frankly, these elderly individuals that were arrested for peacefully displaying a poster card or a flag or a banner to express their revulsion at what was happening in Gaza are lucky the police did not give them a right good kicking. I mean they were terrorists and there will be many more like them.
Ah well enough from me. All this surveillance is for our own good, The good citizens of the Third Reich knew that. All of the surveillance then was for the bad citizens. And taking a leaf out of the history book it seems that internment camps are coming back here. Last used in Northern Ireland its a place to put the bad citizens and other undesirables. And of course the Irish new all about being sent to the colonies too a hundred plus years ago.
And Scottish Nationalists – in what category do you think they fit or are they just more of the poor animals in the trap that history shows us is repeatedly reset.
Aye Roddy MacLeod. Watch your step. Don’t think that no one is watching!