Nicola Sturgeon won eight elections at both Holyrood and Westminster. Regrettably, at the UKGE of 2017 she campaigned on a slogan that a vote for the SNP was not a vote for independence. At that election her party lost 21 seats and over 500,000 independence supporters stayed at home. That was a huge red flag that so many of us missed!
It was so different from the promise of November 2014 when Alex Salmond handed her the golden keys to Scottish independence. He had presided over the best seven years of Scottish governance since 1707. She inherited from Alex the victory of 2015 and 56 out of 59 seats.
12,000 independence supporters crammed into the SECC in November 2014 for her ‘coronation,’ All that day believed they were welcoming the first FM of the soon to be independent Scotland. Now it seems she truly believed they came to see her in her own right. That day the cult of Sturgeon was born, and the decline of the independence movement began.
The party had grown from around 50,000 members to a massive 125,000 SNP members, with a very healthy balance sheet and huge donations dropping into their bank every day. Scotland and its people were ready, willing and able to take its independence. We waited, and we waited, and we waited, and she did nothing.
There is a great example of a similar failure to act that also caused a huge delay to an eventual outcome. It too was caused by appalling leadership.
During the Second World War the Allies landed an army on the beaches of Anzio. Operation Shingle was an Allied amphibious operation launched on January 22, 1944. It was conceived to break the Cassino stalemate by landing Allied forces behind enemy positions at the coastal sites of Anzio and Nettuno. The idea was that the landings would draw Wehrmacht units away from Monte Cassino, forcing a breakthrough to open the way to Rome.
The plan was simple: Churchill wanted a fast surprise attack behind enemy lines in Italy to capture Rome. He wanted the wildcat.
The mistake: US General Lucas landed on the beach, but he did not push inland right away. He stopped to build up safety walls.
The result: Lucas stayed still for too long. This gave the German army time to surround the beach and trap the Allied soldiers in a bloody stalemate. Churchill felt stuck with a helpless, flopping whale.
Churchill famously said, “I had hoped we were hurling a wildcat into the shore, but all we got was a stranded whale.”
A great analogy for Sturgeon becoming SNP leader and the de facto head of the independence movement. We all expected a swift and successful campaign to free our nation from our parasitical imperial coloniser, England. Instead, we got obfuscation, delay, deflections, denial, promises of next year, next time, next election. Just like General Lucas, Sturgeon proved herself to be a useless commander. Churchill was able to remove Lucas; sadly, the independence movement was stuck with Sturgeon for 9 years.
Now we in the independence movement are surrounded by unionists and at present we have a stalemate. At Anzio, General Lucas was replaced by Major General Lucian Truscott who was successful; he adopted a more aggressive strategy and successfully broke out of the German beachead liberating Rome, on June 4th, 1944.
Unfortunately, we replaced the incompetent Sturgeon, with the equally incompetent Yousaf and then replaced him with the equally incapable Swinney. We need a ‘Mac’Truscott to bring some aggression and leadership to our independence struggle! We are metaphorically stuck on the ‘independence beach.’
Saving England from Brexit. Promoting gender nonsense. Playing Chief Mammy at Covid. Trying to imprison her mentor. Banishing rivals, anything but do the one job she was supposed to do: get Scottish independence.
Many lifelong SNP members and supporters like myself became disenchanted with her failure to move the cause on from the 2014 referendum. I had first joined the party in 1968 while still at school. Even for me, by January 2020,and her infamous speech of capitulation on the day of Brexit was the final straw. I realised that day and during that speech she was a charlatan.
Worse was to come when she tried to falsely imprison the great man on trumped-up charges of sexual impropriety. She, along with other senior SNP members including her embezzling husband, ably supported by British civil servants, invented stories and lied their way to a humiliating defeat in the courts, not once but three times.
At a Court of Session hearing in Edinburgh, Judge Lord Pentland said the decisions were “unlawful in respect that they were procedurally unfair and that they were tainted with apparent bias”.
Helping her in all of this and since was the ever- loyal John Swinney. He and others colluded and connived not just continue to discredit Alex Salmond; their biggest moves were to protect Nicola Sturgeon from any criticism or blame. John’s famous redacting pen has hidden so many lies of Sturgeon and her cabal.
Fortunately, justice is coming and neither Swinney nor Sturgeon and many others, will evade their comeuppance.
Through all these intervening elections, hardcore independence supporters like myself became more and more frustrated and disillusioned by Sturgeon’s refusal to put a cogent independence plan in place. Everything was aligned from the moment we had 56 out of 59 MPs and England voted for Brexit. Yet, she would not, and did not advance our cause even under the most favourable conditions.
The infamous Isla Bryson was not the sole cause of Nicola Sturgeon’s resignation, but it created intense political pressure and added to a mounting series of controversies that contributed to her departure in February 2023.
Firstly Humza, then Swinney kept deflecting any blame or criticism of Sturgeon over the Salmond case, the lack of movement on independence, the disaster that is GRRB, or the decline of SNP memberships or votes. They even kept her pet project of gender nonsense front and centre.
Her husband also agreed to a guilty plea with the Crown, provided they dropped any mention of all the female products and goods purchased with embezzled money. Again, John Swinney always deflected any reference to her when questioned about the missing funds.
Yet this week how does Sturgeon repay that absolute loyalty from her ex-colleagues? She does what she has always done: she threw John and her former party under the bus to try and sell more copies of her book! She wrote a new foreword criticising the SNP and traducing them while boldly praising the Scottish Greens, calling their election performance a “triumph” and criticizing the SNP for lacking vision and environmental courage.
This is a woman who has betrayed everyone and everything she has ever encountered; her mentor, her colleagues, her party and, worst of all, her nation of birth and millions of ordinary Scots that trusted her to take us to independence.
She now lives in London and long may she remain there. She has destroyed the uniqueness of the SNP and our movement. She has done more damage to our cause than Thatcher or any other unionist has managed.
I just wonder how many of her cult-like followers will still worship her and think of her in positive terms. One day there will be statues throughout Scotland to those that have fought tirelessly for our freedom. There will be dozens of statues and streets named after Salmond and Margo and Winnie and many others. I doubt there will ever be a Sturgeon, Swinney or Yousaf statue or street.
This was the main topic of this week’s podcast for my panel of Eva Comrie, Terry Howson and, Phil Boswell.
It’s time to force Swinney to resign , that starts the ball rolling on An Independently run Plebiscite Election.
It’s that simple!
If the Alex Salmond scandal doesn’t get Swinney out , we’ll need to march on Bute House – then Holyrood. They are both Westminster constructs and as such they need dismantled.
This is the reality and Scotland needs to wake up to it pronto.
When ‘Devo- Max’ and ‘Federalism’ are being rolled out by corrupt BritNat MSM you know , and more to the point , they know , the game’s up!
FFS SCOTLAND GROW A PAIR OF BALLS!
Apart from the parasitical colonise comment, I couldn’t agree more. The 56/59 MP AND MSP majority admin should have woke people up to her treachery but sadly many still fell fir the lies and excuses. The wheesht for indy and Nicolla’s secret plan which turned out to be selling out Scotland, stitching up her mentor and husband and emigrating to England leaving behind a broken party and movement. The English establishment’s agent provocateur did her job with such ease due to a compliant movement and party that didn’t want to see what was blatantly right in front of their eyes. Their hope and desire was used against them.
Now, we have Swinney doing the exact same. England posing as UK government are enacting the English Act of Union 2016 Bill bit by bit. It is now at the point of installing the English written constitution which would unconstitutionally replace the Scottish constitution and popular sovereignty with English parliamentary sovereignty, English rule and a permanent English veto under the guise of UK.
It must be pointed out that in law substituting terminology is not mere parlance or administrative shorthand. It fundamentally changes the meaning and legality. How many recall the committee debate where England attempted to use MAY instead of ShALL on a legal document? The treaty of Union is Great Britain NOT United Kingdom. United Kingdom is an illigitimate, unconstitutional legal fiction which circumvent the treaty of Union to evade legal responsibility and accountability for the numerous treaty breaches. It is why England consistently says UK is a voluntary union. It is why Scottish government delegates, the FM and admin look to England as their superior and constantly seek permission. UK is ENGLAND’S creation. It is not the Treaty of Union which was a mere trade agreement with explicit terms and conditions. The treaty of GB retained both states sovereign legal personalities. The UK doesn’t. It uphold and imposes English constitutional law and parliamentary norms including English parliamentary sovereignty. In ToU there is no constitution, parliamentary sovereignty, Government of GB (only the delegation and lords), PM, party political system or simple majority rule. These are ENGLISH parliamentary norms. Not those of the treaty. Swinney, as FM is supposed to uphold Scots constitutional law and exercise the full force of Scots sovereign authority. The Scot gov MP delegates are supposed to do likewise at the state Parliament but they don’t. Instead of applying Scots constitutional law they abdicate their solemn duties and impose English constitutional law and parliamentary procedures over Scotland turning a sovereign legal equal peer into a subordinate region of England. They do not stand on the terms of the treaty nor Scots constitutional law but on the legal fiction created unilaterally by England for England’s benefit. This is not colonialism. It is a deliberate unconstitutional act by those imbued and entrusted with upholding Scots sovereign and constitutional laws. It is self inflicted constitutional abdication where upon they actively and voluntarily impose English constitutional law over Scotland and defer governance to England. Colonialism would be the kinder of the two as it would place the blame on England but this is worse. Far worse. Like Sturgeon, Swinney, the Scot gov MP delegates, the admin and representatives of Scotland use the ignorance of the Scots who view UK as mere parlance to impose English rule. No colonisation was ever needed when our very own voluntarily ceded to England.
📜 THE 1707 TREATY VS. ENGLISH LEGAL FICTIONS
Great Britain Is the Lawful Compact – The “UK” Is an Unconstitutional Subversion
A Complete Constitutional Analysis
🏛 1. THE FOUNDATIONAL CONTRACT: OMISSION EQUALS NON-EXISTENCE
The 1707 Treaty of Union was a bilateral international trade compact between sovereign peers. Under strict treaty law, any power, institution, or mechanism not explicitly written into the Treaty does not legally exist.
* ❌ NO “Constitution of GB” or “Government of GB”: The Treaty created no state constitution, executive government, Prime Minister, or party-political system.* ❌ NO Parliamentary Sovereignty: “Crown-in-Parliament” is strictly English Common Law—never a treaty term.
* ⚖ Time Does NOT Create Legitimacy: Unconstitutional acts and treaty violations produce zero legal custom or validity, regardless of duration.
* ⚠ Economic Coercion: The union was opposed by the Scottish populace and forced through English economic warfare, blockades, and sabotage (e.g., Darien).
* 🗳 Delegate Allocation: The higher count of English MPs reflects England’s internal setup, not a treaty grant of majority rule over Scotland.
* 🔒 NO Simple Majority Vote: Zero mechanisms exist to alter static treaty terms.Article XIX entrenched Scots Law in perpetuum.
⚖ LEGAL PRECEDENT
“The principle of the unlimited sovereignty of Parliament is a distinctively English principle which has no counterpart in Scottish constitutional law… I have difficulty inseeing why it should have been supposed that the new Parliament of Great Britain must inherit all the peculiar characteristics of the English Parliament…”
— Lord President Lord Cooper of Culross, MacCormick v Lord Advocate (1953 SC 396)
🔄 2. ENGLAND’S TWOFOLD REBRAND, STATUTORY LAW & LEGAL EFFECTS
⚠ CRITICAL LEGAL REALITY: In law, terminology substitution is not harmless administrative shorthand—it fundamentally alters legal identity and enforce ability. Replacing the bilateral treaty agreement between two distinct, continuing sovereign states with the fictional construct of a single “UK” state is a deliberate mechanism to subvert statutory obligations and bypass constitutional constraints.
* 🏷 1. Rebranding GB as UK (Circumventing the ToU):
* Tactical Illusion: Swapping “Great Britain” for “United Kingdom” to create thepretence of a single, unitary UK state.
* Legal Reality: This substitution is an underhand tactic designed to circumvent the1707 Treaty of Union, evade legal responsibility, and escape accountability for systemic treaty breaches. In 1707 terms, “Great Britain” was established strictly as a trade pact utilising a shared parliament, not an absorbed, unitary nation state. Both Scotland and England fully retained their distinct sovereign legal personalities. By deliberately conflating England, the UK, and Great Britain, England seeks to erase this bilateral compact and fabricate an unconstitutional parliamentary sovereignty. TheTreaty uses “united kingdom” purely as a descriptive adjective; Great Britain is the sole lawful designation of the trade pact. The “UK” and “UK Government” are unconstitutional fictions possessing zero legal standing or jurisdiction in Scotland.
* 🚫 2. Systematic Erasure of “GB”:
* Tactical Illusion: Gradually phasing out “Great Britain” from public, international, and commercial life.
* Legal Reality: England actively replaces “GB” with “UK” across administrative and civic markers—from international drop-down menus to official state documentation—to normalize an unconstitutional fiction and obscure Scots’ treaty rights.
* 3. Rebranding England Politically as “UK”:
* Tactical Illusion: Framing English parliamentary rule as “UK-wide” sovereign authority.
* Legal Reality: England conflates itself politically with the “UK” to unlawfully projectEnglish Parliamentary Supremacy into Scotland. There is strictly Scots law and English law—there is no “UK law.” Because the “UK Government” is an unconstitutional body created unilaterally by an equal peer, it holds zero standing in Scotland; delegate sign-offs cannot validate ultra vires acts.
* 🎭 4. Dormant Sovereignty & Fictional Agency:
* Tactical Illusion: Positioning Scottish statehood as absorbed, subordinate, orextinct.
* Legal Reality: Scotland was never legally absorbed into England or the fictional “UK.” Sovereign authority remains fully intact—dormant only until formally exercised by the Scottish people. An illegitimate entity created by an equal peer cannot extinguish Scottish rights, regardless of delegate compliance.
* 🏛 5. Structural Mechanisms of Control (Unlawful Courts):
* Tactical Illusion: Using “UK” judicial bodies to rule on constitutional disputes.
* Legal Reality: Institutions like the “UK Supreme Court” are completely unknown to the 1707 Treaty and hold zero constitutional authority to grant, restrict, or deny Scottish rights.
🛡 3. SCOTLAND IS NOT A COLONY OR ANNEXED TERRITORY
⚠ CRITICAL LEGAL REALITY: Colonial framing falsely implies that Scotland was conquered, subjugated, or absorbed into a dominant foreign power. Under international treaty law, Scotland entered as a sovereign equal, retaining its distinct legal identity,unextinguished rights, and inherent sovereignty.
* 🤝 1. Co-Equal Peer Status:
* Tactical Illusion: Treating Scotland as a subordinate region subject to English parliamentary mechanisms or oversight.
* Legal Reality: Scotland entered the 1707 bilateral compact as a Co-equal sovereign state. Its statehood and legal personality were never surrendered or extinguished by treaty.
* 🏰 2. Unabsorbed Sovereign Authority:
* Tactical Illusion: Claiming that “UK” institutions unilaterally created by England possess inherent authority over Scotland.
* Legal Reality: Rebranded or illegitimate institutions created unilaterally by one equal peer cannot extinguish the constitutional rights of the other. Consent by delegates to an unconstitutional framework cannot legitimise ultra vires acts.
* ⚔ 3. The “Conquest / Military Ban” Myth:
* Tactical Illusion: Interpreting post-1745 military presence and cultural restrictions as proof of colonial conquest.
* Legal Reality: Post-1745 actions were internal civil enforcement requested by factions of the era, not international conquest. Colonial status requires total legal extinction, which never occurred under Scots law or the Treaty.
🚫 4. ZERO Legitimacy & SYSTEMIC TREATY BREACHES
⚠ CRITICAL LEGAL REALITY: When an administrative body exceeds its treaty-defined mandate, its actions are legally null and void (ultra vires). Systemic breaches do not create custom, validity, or lawful jurisdiction over time.
* 🚧 1. Border Limits & Jurisdiction:
* Tactical Illusion: Operating as though English Common Law and parliamentary writs run across the entire island.
* Legal Reality: English authority strictly terminates at the border. There is no overarching “UK” legal system—only Scots law and English law.
* 📜 2. Void Acts & Inverse Application of Section 1:
* Tactical Illusion: Assuming Scottish MPs (delegates) and MSPs at Holyrood (devolved administrators) validate “UK” governance and centralized asset control through participation.
* Legal Reality: Scottish delegates (MPs) fail to apply Section 1. Instead, they allow the inverse: England, operating under the fictional “UK” label, applies everything that was omitted from the Treaty. Delegates possess zero legal authority to abdicate their constitutional duties, and devolved administrators (MSPs) operate within a subordinate framework that cannot override Treaty terms; their sign-offs cannot validate an unconstitutional body or make an ultra vires act legal.
* ⚡ 3. Illegitimate Asset Seizure & Energy Grid Exploitation:
* Tactical Illusion: Framing the centralised national grid framework and regional energy pricing as equitable, shared infrastructure management.
* Legal Reality: Since 1707, England has unlawfully assumed sole custody of the shared GB treasury and falsely applied its constitutional framework to claim Scottish assets—including oil, gas fields, fisheries, and territorial waters. In energy, while Scotland generates abundant power, it is denied its own sovereign grid; control of the grid system is retained strictly in and by England under the “UK” label to Scotland’s direct detriment. Scottish power is transmitted south while Scottish generators are penalised with the highest Transmission Charges (TNUoS) in Europe, whereas English generators receive network credits. Scots are subsequently forced to pay disproportionately high domestic charges for their own electricity—a direct breach of Article VI of the 1707 Treaty, which guarantees uniform trade regulations and equal economic terms across both nations.
⚖ 5. THE CORE LEGAL REALITY: ZERO Authority & CONSTITUTIONAL ABDICATION
Great Britain is a bilateral trade compact. Most state institutions—including the “UK Government,” “UK Parliament,” and “UK Supreme Court”—are operating strictly under England under the fictional “UK” label, making them unconstitutional legal fictions created under false pretences.
The term “united kingdom” appears in the Treaty strictly as a descriptive adjective, whereas Great Britain is the sole legal designation of the trade pact. Deliberate attempts to erase “GB” across public and international domains do not alter the underlying contract.English rule continues only because delegates actively abdicate their constitutional duties—bowing to a fictional framework controlled in and by England instead of standing on the unalterable 1707 Treaty of Great Britain.
I must admit when ATLS was formed I was excited and hopeful , so much so I flooded X and other blogs with comments to vote for ATLS for independence , honesty , integrity and direct democracy , but unfortunately after watching Prism from the start I feel as if nothing has changed , it is just repetitive moaning and groaning about sturgeon , swinney and how many snp apologists are still voting for the scum snp
I note Eva continuously cites Alex Neil’s policies , how great Joanna Cherry , Philippa Whitford , Angus Brendan McNeil and others are for the independence movement , is Eva unaware that Alex Neil and the others sat back on their fat arses and salaries for 10 years whilst the scum sturgeon and her accomplices set about DESTROYING the independence movement AND the governance of Scotland
Neil , Cherry , Whitford , McNeil allowed the deviant perverted policies to be FORCED on the people of Scotland without exposing the ongoing corruption of her governance
Cherry won the PROROGATION case then sat back and did nothing , a case which ONLY benefited the ENGERLISH voters , she later spoke out about the deviant GRRA but with the emphasis on how it affected lesbains NOT ordinary women and girls , Whitford a surgeon said NOTHING about the devastating impact the GRRA would have on the health and safety of our womenfolk , Eva continuously credits Angus Brendan McNeil with the proposal to dissolve the SG and go for a plebiscite election when it was Stuart Campbell of WOS who proposed that route years before
The panel continuously highlights the egregious involvement of Israeli influence in our politics which I wholeheartedly agree with but goes to great lengths to avoid any mention of the effect Islamic policies and Islamists have on our politics
You and the others were part of the CULT of snp which was more focused on winning governance of Scotland , hence Sturgeon’s ability to ANNOUNCE in 2017 that a vote for the snp was NOT a vote for independence , the LOSS of 500,000 votes for the snp should have wakened the CULT up , instead the CULT kept voting for the DEMISE of independence
You hit the crux of the problem. When party politics takes the main role what is blatantly obvious ends up being ignored. For example, while various MPs applaud themselves for moaning about various things the English government under its pseudonym of UK are doing not one of them stands up and points out that the state Parliament is NOT an English parliament with English parliamentary structures. It is the parliament of Great Britain and Scotland is an equal peer not their subject or a region for England to control. Not one of them has the mettle to walk to the table at the front and take Scotland’s rightful place directly opposite the English government. Frankly, Scotland’s FM should be the one directly opposite England’s PM. We are equals so why are our government delegates, admin and representatives deferring governance to England? Why has Angus, Cherry, Swinney never once called out the English government for acting beyond their competence, for violating both the treaty and Scots constitutional law? Why do they insist on giving credence to a legal fiction to the very detriment of Scotland? Not one of them stannds for Scotland by upholding Scottish constitutional law and fundamental rights. They impose English constitutional law and apply English parliamentary sovereignty over us. With English government PM Burnham now stating they are writing up a “UK” constitution which violates the treaty of Union, Scots constitutional law and REMOVES Scots SOVEREIGN AUTHORITY what are they doing? Just like with the EU – nothing. They are bitching about whether an exit clause will be written in to it NOT that it actually overrides Scots constitution and sovereignty. They are legitimising ultra vire acts just as they do by treating the English government as having authority over Scotland. When party before country is the norm people switch off, they disengage and they allow the endless list of breaches to go unanswered. But this is part of the system those in office rely on. Scotland needs to urgently address the constitutional question not simply whether Scotland can hold a referendum but why Scotland is giving England any say in the matter let alone a veto over it. It needs to address why Scots delegates REFUSE to uphold Scots constitutional law and enforce Scots sovereign authority. It needs to address why our government delegates to the state Parliament refuse to take their rightful place as an equal peer when nothing in the treaty grants England whether under England, GB or England’s pseudonym UK, dominion. The commissioners when drawing up the treaty ensured both states were forever equal with no over reach permitted by either state. But our delegates ignore the terms of the treaty itself and instead defer to England. SNP, Alba and others should have being calling this out and refusing to go along with the charade but they were and are as entrenched as those before them. When new Scots MPs go to WM their English counterparts show teach them the English parliamentary rules and customs. Scots delegates should be stating right from the very start that it isn’t an English parliament. That their is no parliamentary sovereignty, constitution, government, PM, party political system, simple majority rule within the treaty. That they will not recognise these English conventions and that they will be treated as the equal peer that they are and the times of England acting as sole custodian of GB are over. Sadly, party politics blinds them to what actually needs done and the debates always end up discusding the same things that get regurgitated year in year out.
Everyone lauds Alex Salmond as the greatest modern politician in Scotland , BUT Alex Salmond not only went along with a Flawed franchise that ensured an independence defeat , he also stated that if we had another referendum he would use the same franchise again , WHY are our politicians and pseudo politicians more interested and focused on incomers than they are on indigenous Scots , Why do they feel the need to endow and proclaim that everyone turning up on our shores is a NEW SCOT , as we are witnessing on a daily basis some of these NEW SCOTS are anything but proud to be associated with a welcoming nation with many of them INSISTING that their cultures and beliefs should take precedence over our culture and beliefs
What other nation would give away their nationhood so eagerly to VISITORS who don’t share our values or beliefs , I wonder if given half a chance would the Aborigines , Maories ,Inuits , or first nation Americans eagerly proclaim that everyone coming to THEIR country should be termed NEW whatever, those indigenous peoples , the REAL owners of their lands are ignored and demonised by the NEW OWNERS , if anyone thinks this will not happen in Scotland take a look at the midlands in England , where the indigenous English are becoming overwhelmed by the NEW ENGLISH and their NEW customs
There are plenty of people willing to throw the race card about when debate about immigration raises its ugly head those same ones like to demonise and ridicule people who believe in blood and soil nationalism , but those same woke progressives never extend the same ridicule or denigration to blood and soil nationalists in Pakistan , India , Afghanistan or anywhere else where patriots know their ancestors fought and died for their country
This is your plan? I am confused.
The problem with Salmond and many of the long term politicians is that they fully endorsed the English parliamentary system and over reach which violated not just the treaty of Union but Scots constitutional law and fundamental rights. The structures in place today are systemic, generational, breaches that Scots have grown up with and do not question.
I am finishing the draft legal complaint that will be lodged with the UN Special Rappateurs for systemic and generational treaty breaches and also demanding a full independent financial audit for the years 1708-2026 which is when England took full unilateral control of the shared state treasury. Will be officially lodged either tonight or tomorrow.
One can understand the sentiments that you express but unity of party, at least for external appearance, is something that is very important. If a party is allowed to become a basket case of disagreement then little is achieved. Yes, as a movement was something that came together very well.
So it is not difficult to understand how people in a party in a disagreement can continue to work, albeit in disagreement to further the cause. Eventually however, the disagreement on policy and direction becomes to large to accommodate and people depart, form their own party or parties, and the movement fractures. I for one after 37 years an SNP member hung on longer than I should have until I realised the absolute treachery that was underway. Many others will be the same.
All part of a brit decapitation strategy. Straight out of their playbook. So how do you counteract it. Destroy the SNP, hope for change within the SNP, a new party like ALBA which started well but fell into the abyss because of bad actors within who were no doubt more of the Brit emasculation strategy or the forming of new parties plural.
So yes we are where we are because of deliberate actions by bad actors. The SNP was full of good people committed to independence and they worked at it. Say what you like but against all the odds 2014 was a success. A success for the SNP as a party and a success for Yes as the wider movement. It could not be allowed to happen again – hence the very high profile disposal of one Alexander Salmond who could never be allowed to come back.
And so Twathater, we know the challenge and its how we all meet it that is the big issue now that what was our independence party the SNP is no longer that.
Willie thanks for your response , as you say yourself you were a member of the snp for 37 years , I have never been a member of any political party but I always believed in independence for Scotland , unfortunately most snp members believed that independence BELONGED to the snp and anyone who had an opinion had no right to say anything because they were not snp members , that attitude was very evident throughout the run up to 2014 and still continues to this day as is evidenced on social media at the downfall of ALBA and any suggestion that the snp are traitors
ATLS made great pronouncements that the party had ONE policy and that policy was only independence for Scotland , but on the Prism Roddy and all the candidates talked endlessly about Gaza , Ukraine , Russia , Israel , USA , Trump and other political matters impacting on Scotland , obviously these were the opinions of the candidates for ATLS , I commented about the franchise for the 2014 referendum and the massive amounts of immigrants coming to Scotland and the grooming gangs , I was immediately called a racist by Roddy and Alan Petrie who was a founding member of ATLS and was told that I should go and join Reform because their racist policies more aligned with mine
So in other words ATLS wasn’t about one thing , independence for Scotland , it was about independence for Scotland as long as your policies and beliefs aligned with Roddy’s , Eva , and Phils , in other words it’s my ba and your no getting a game
I have been totally and vehemently opposed to the GRRA , the HCB , uncontrolled immigration , GROOMING GANGS and the corruption and lies of the snp in government , I will never wheesht for indy , because we have all experienced the evil that comes with SILENCE
It seems that one policy, Independence nothing else, was too much for you to understand.
I am still waiting to hear your nasterplan to take us to independence.
Tumbleweed?
Do you have a plan?
Forget all this stuff about the “fictional” 1707 union – it’s largely wrong and wholly irrelevant.
We will not get independence until a sizeable majority of people in Scotland want it and they will only want it if they think they’ll be better off under it. We do not need “permission” from Westminster (and it was of course one of Sturgeon’s greatest errors to go running off to the Supreme Court with a hopeless case that managed to establish the concept of needing permission) but it would be helpful at least to have some sort of deal with Westminster and of course recognition from the worldwide commiunity. That isn’t going to happen while support for independence hovers round the 50% mark and it is difficult to see how that’s going to increase while the SNP portrays itself as the party of independence but does nothing to advance the cause – quite the opposite in fact. I can’t see the SNP changing – those members who feel like I do have left and have no say in the running of the the party that effectively remains in the hands of the Old Guard. And of course the SNP will do everything it can to prevent the formation and success of any other party that might genuinely want to go for independence.
A plan? Well, Craig Murray’s has a lot going for it but would only work if support for independence in Scotland is at least 60% and ideally more. So how do you achieve that when the mainstream media and the so-called Party of Independence is dead set against it? No wonder I’m gloomy.
The 1707 treaty of Great Britain wasn’t fictional. It just wasn’t what it is claimed to be. It was a trade agreement between sovereign states which enshrined their sovereign legal personities and ensured equal status.
UK is the fiction and it is this that our own government endorses by subjugating Scotland to England under the guise of UK governance, parliamentary sovereignty and it’s institutions. It is why they consistently ask England for permission for what we have always had the authority to do.You can’t simply ignore that which is acting counter to the very principles of the treaty, the Scottish constitution and Scots sovereign authority.
If Scots are serious about their independence and reinstating their full statehood then they need to address the elephant in the room not pretend it doesn’t exist.
As much as I loathe the English government and it’s establishment, the one thing that will always trump Scotland is they put their country, it’s constitution and it’s sovereign authority first. Any political differences they have are secondary to it. That is why they will always mount a united front.
Meanwhile, Scots can’t agree on diddlysquat and the gatekeepers to Scots independence go out their way to undermine the movement and any perceived political opposition.
People are disillusioned not because they have lost interest or desire for it but because so long as we are fighting among ourselves and letting England do whatever the hell it wants nothing will ever change.
As you say Gayle every other country and nation has no problem with blood and soil nationalism in fact they are PROUD to INSIST That ONLY their rules regulations and constitution have AUTHORITY in THEIR country
NOT our politicians and pseudo politicians like Roddy, Eva, Alan Petrie, Craig Murray and others, they are willing and happy to cite WM as our enemy whilst ignoring and welcoming every Tom dick and maninavan to set our rules and regulations.
Roddy’s answer is to engage in childish retorts, no wonder sturgeon and her Perverts got away with so much whilst the cult members idolised her, but still Roddy and the cult encourage the invasion of our enemies
Personal attacks are unbecoming.
I have asked you a simple question instead you resort to name calling.
You wrote a long diatribe attacking everyone and their efforts for our nations freedom.
Then when you are politely asked for your solution— abuse.
I am sick and fed up with all the experts that are condemning everyonev else and their efforts and actually they themselves practically do nothing but hammer the keyboard with their genius!
I have campaigned for over half a century doing every task imaginable handed over copious amounts of my hard earned cash, knocked doors, delivered leaflets, canvassed literally thousands of doors, stood at street stalls in sun and rain,marched god knows how many times, stood for election, been an agent and campaign manager, and finally when I had left the country I began a blog and a podcast, helped form a new party committed to a single policy Independence nothing else.
What have you done apart from attack everybody else’s efforts?
Unlike you, I know I don’t have all the answers I disagree with a lot of the initiatives of others however I don’t attack them for it! If you are so much smarter than the rest of us why aren’t you leading us to freedom?
The 1707 Act wasn’t a trade agreement, although it did cover some aspects of trade. It in fact explicitly extinguished both the former kingdoms of England and Scotland and united them in the new Kingdom of Great Britain (Article I – “That the Two Kingdoms of Scotland and England shall upon the first day of May next ensuing the date hereof, and for ever after, be united into One Kingdom by the Name of Great-Britain”. It did not enshrine their pre-union sovereign status, but if you suggest it did perhaps you could refer me to the clause where that is stated. And of course the Treaty also created a parliament that governed the new state (Article III – “”That the United Kingdom of Great Britain be represented by one and the same Parliament, to be styled the Parliament of Great Britain.”)
It is also fanciful to suggest that it was ever intended that Scotland and England entered the union as equals – clearly they didn’t and it was never stated that they did. Why should it? By 1707 Scotland was in a state of severe financial ruin and near-bankruptcy. This economic crisis was driven by the catastrophic failure of the Darien Scheme, compounded by the “Seven Ill Years” of widespread famine and harvest failures. England on the other hand had roughly 36 times the total wealth and five times the population of Scotland. It possessed a vastly superior, globally active professional military backed by the powerful Royal Navy, whereas Scotland maintained a tiny, financially strained Scots Army and a nominal three-ship naval force. Certainly England had a very substantial national debt but it was able to service it by a sophisticated (for the time) system where long-term public borrowing was backed by permanent parliamentary taxation and managed by institutional monopolies. By contrast the centralized Scottish state had not established a permanent national funding system or public debt apparatus and it lacked the institutional banking depth, stable tax-base infrastructure, and London-style credit markets required to float massive sovereign loans.
And of course if the Treaty was meant to enshirine equality it would not have provided that England had so many MPs and Scotland so few. Meanwhile, can I suggest that there’s no point going on about the “English Government”? England doesn’t have a government. It does however dominate the UK Government as one might expect as England has 10 time the population of Scotland. We happen to be part of the UK and thus subject to the UK Government which does contain representatives from Scotland though sadly they invariably seem to be more concerned about the interests of their respective parties than their nation. The only was to end that situation is to obtain our independence, but I’m sure we all know that (unless you happen to be in the upper echelons of the SNP).
In any event, if the 1707 Act is as flawed as you suggest, what do you propose should be done about it? For a start, for the last 319 years Scotland has “acquiesced” to virtually every part of the Union and has in fact been an active participant in maintaining it. Acquiescence in Scots law is a legal principle where if a person or property owner quietly accepts or fails to object to an action, breach, or infringement of their rights over a period of time, they lose the right to a remedy. Are you suggesting that a Court with appropriate jurisdiction would seriously void the Act of Union?
If we want to achieve our independence the first thing we have to do is convince more people living in Scotland that Independence would demonstrably benefit them and their families. It’s reckoned that there are 10% soft “No”s – convince them and we’re above 60% in favour. I hope that Robin McAlpine won’t mind my quoting part of the conclusion from his latest excellent blog posting:
“Use the most effective tools based on the best possible data and use your creativity to make great, compelling messages that really speak to our target audience based on solid product development (independence is our ‘product’ and the current available specifications of our product are rubbish, filled with vague promises and requests to just take our word for it…). Get that core work done, learn about your audience, create a strong messaging strategy with constant effective feedback, get support over a ‘settled will’ threshold and then press your advantage politically”.
Suggestions that there may be substantial flaws in the Act of Union, on the other had, are going to change very few minds indeed and might actually be counter productive.
Actually it was and it is even recorded as such on Hansard. The treaty was breached from the get go firstly by England continuing to use the new state parliament as though it was still the English Parliament causing Scot gov delegates to sit at the back of the chamber which may have been expedient given the revolt and then by imposing simple majority vote mechanism that was completely omitted from the treaty in order to retain full English dominance in clear violation of treaty terms and conditions. They then set about dismantling the Scottish legal personality to where we now face England writing up a UK constitution which will illegally and unconstitutionally extinguish Scottish constitutional law and sovereign authority replacing it formally with English parliamentary sovereignty and giving retrospective credence to a legal fiction -UK – which was illegally overlaid onto the ToU unilaterally by England in 1800.
The full systemic and generational list of treaty breaches and over reach by England and the constitutional abdication by Scots delegates at both WM and Holyrood is being formally lodged with UN.
Where are we with the lodging at the UN?
I believe we need a sponsor nation to do this, has anyone stepped forward?
BRB,
I have submitted a formal petition with an attached 15 page dossier of breaches to the UN. Now I just wait.
Let me know if you need anything
I may not think that what you’re doing will do any good, Gayle, but I could be wrong and at the very least you’re making a considerable effort and doing something, so my hat’s off to you for that.
Thanks Davey.
We as a nation have become so accustomed to viewing the treaty through a English lens that we forget that an independent Scottish state would not have used English parliamentary sovereignty to draw up the treaty. When viewing what was specifically enshrined and omitted it is a very different picture to that painted by the establishment. The English government now has 60 days to respond so will see what the response is. In meantime lots needs to be done should they conclude that my petition and argument is verifiable proven.
BRB,
I sent you the pdf I attached to the petition which was sent by both email and through the portal and accepted by both.
I would welcome your input on various matters I highlighted in the email to yourself.
After watching Scottish Prism for the last time, I came away thinking when will Terry, Roddy, Phil and Eva be joining the SNP again.
Criticizing Sturgeon and then praising John Swinney and claiming he’s a nice man!! I wonder what Salmond thinks of this when Swinney was hiding everything that had happened over the last 12yrs.
Roddy you and your buddy’s have lost the plot completely. I take it ATLS is dead and buried as a party.
When does a political party ATLS praise another,.
I think you need to listen again,this time get an adult to exsin what is being said to you.
You accuse me of personal attacks and name calling , and then respond to a commenter
“I think you need to listen again,this time get an adult to exsin what is being said to you.”
I was going to write a response to your childish retorts and comprehension ability but TBQH it would be a waste of my time that I would never get back , you are a self opinionated hypocrite who believes that he is always right , unfortunately you and your cult snp members who idolised sturgeon the BETRAYER for so long has rendered independence practically unachievable
As I suspected you do not have any plan or idea and just like telling everyone else they are wrong, So many like you sadly, it us no surprise we cannot get unitybor independence too many charlatans around. You trying to play the victim is laughable.
I tried to find this video of Alex Neil that Eva mentionedbut no luck.
Does anyone have link to share?
Ta.