Kenmure Street stood outside UK law yesterday, as Westminster legislation on immigration, opposed by the people of Scotland, could not physically be enforced by agents of the state. What the people did was gloriously, joyfully illegal. Its illegality must be embraced, not skated over by politicians worried at the precedent of people power.
Scottish cities have a history of social solidarity, and in my lifetime I remember similar scenes over warrant sales and poll tax, and of course roots of popular resistance in Glasgow can be traced back through Tommy Sheridan, Jimmy Reid and John MacLean. But there is, undeniably, an added element of nationalism here. The handmade banners decrying “Team UK” in Kenmure St and the active presence of the SNP’s Roza Salih in a community leadership role, will both be seen as significant in an event which future historians will rightly view as a socially important step on the road to Independence.
There is a strong understanding that this is English oriented immigration law and English racist attitudes towards immigrants, being imposed on a Scotland which feels very differently. Indeed, the contrast between Kenmure Street, and the Labour electoral collapse in Northern England as their voters turn to more open panderers of anti-immigrant snake oil, could not be stronger. It is a part of why Labour in Scotland is doomed until it embraces Independence.
But Kenmure Street is an example in a much wider way. I have repeatedly explained, in detail, that Scotland has the right to self-determination in international law. which specifically states that right cannot be constrained by the domestic legislation of the state from which you are seceding. Otherwise Latvia would still be Soviet and Slovenia would still be Yugoslav. Westminster legislation and its Supreme Court cannot override Scotland’s right to self-determination. It is an inalienable right.
The UK state will never accept the great loss to its resources that would result from Scottish Independence. Scottish territory, seas, military bases, renewable energy, water, minerals, food products, financial institutions, education, and above all “human capital” to exploit, are all viewed as essential to London.
Keeping Scotland is the most vital of all UK national interests. As I have explained till I am blue in the face, David Cameron only agreed the last referendum because at the time Independence stood around 28% in the polls and the UK state apparatus believed the referendum would destroy and humiliate the very idea of Independence. Instead of which, the astonishing Alex Salmond brought it to the brink of achievement.
Where it has hovered ever since.
That is why there will never be another referendum agreed by Whitehall. Even if Johnson wanted to agree (which he doesn’t), the security services, military and other power structures of the UK Establishment would prevent him.
Nor can Scotland, “legally” in terms of UK law, hold a referendum without agreement. The UK Supreme Court has already explicitly held that Westminster is sovereign, in its ruling that the Sewell Convention has no force in law. If, as she suggests, Nicola Sturgeon leaves it to the courts to decide if a referendum without a S30 is legal, I have no doubt whatsoever – not even 0.000001% uncertainty – that one of two things will happen.
(1) Either the Supreme Court will rule that, under the current Scotland Act, an advisory referendum on a reserved matter is illegal without Westminster agreement;
[I think that would very probably be the ruling; ultra vires expenditure]
(2) Or the Tories will simply amend the Scotland Act to specifically outlaw the referendum, which the UK Supreme Court will certainly uphold because of their established doctrine that sovereignty resides in Westminster.
Either way, one thing is absolutely clear. There will never be a “legal” referendum as legality is defined by London. It is just not going to happen. Independence is going to have to be achieved illegally in terms of UK law, but legally in terms of international law.
How do you do that? I am constantly told this is impossible, that the UK state will act to prevent it happening. Well, we saw the answer in Pollokshields yesterday, and very plainly. The British government cannot enforce its law on the streets of Scotland if the people of Scotland reject that UK law and its enforcers. Yesterday there were riot shields, helmets, long batons, horses, and all the panoply of repression on display, and all of that could not take two men out of the community, against the will of the people.
Pollokshields showed how the people of Scotland will eventually take their own Independence. The “illegal” way in British law. The Gandhi way. The Mandela way. The people’s way. You cannot impose UK law on the people of Scotland.
I can’t tell you exactly how it will happen. Kenmure St crowds may be protecting polling stations, may be protecting the parliament. But happen it will. The people of Scotland will take Independence sooner than people realise. We will not just wait on Boris Johnson or the UK Supreme Court for permission. Come it will for a’that.
———————————————
Forgive me for pointing out that my ability to provide this coverage is entirely dependent on your kind voluntary subscriptions which keep this blog going. This post is free for anybody to reproduce or republish, including in translation. You are still very welcome to read without subscribing.
Unlike our adversaries including the Integrity Initiative, the 77th Brigade, Bellingcat, the Atlantic Council and hundreds of other warmongering propaganda operations, this blog has no source of state, corporate or institutional finance whatsoever. It runs entirely on voluntary subscriptions from its readers – many of whom do not necessarily agree with the every article, but welcome the alternative voice, insider information and debate.
Subscriptions to keep this blog going are gratefully received.
Choose subscription amount from dropdown box:
Paypal address for one-off donations: [email protected]
Alternatively by bank transfer or standing order:
Account name
MURRAY CJ
Account number 3 2 1 5 0 9 6 2
Sort code 6 0 – 4 0 – 0 5
IBAN GB98NWBK60400532150962
BIC NWBKGB2L
Bank address Natwest, PO Box 414, 38 Strand, London, WC2H 5JB
Bitcoin: bc1q3sdm60rshynxtvfnkhhqjn83vk3e3nyw78cjx9
Ethereum/ERC-20: 0x764a6054783e86C321Cb8208442477d24834861a
Subscriptions are still preferred to donations as I can’t run the blog without some certainty of future income, but I understand why some people prefer not to commit to that.
I feel it must be time for a spot of islamic terrorism to refocus our attention, don’t you?
So Israeli bombardments targeted the international media building in Gaza, in a cynical attempt to stop reports coming out of Gaza, and the West Bank, and hide any Israeli atrocities. So folk are saying that Israel is committing a war crime by doing this. I say the occupying apartheid, oppressive, military regime known as Israel, is murdering and suppressing the people of Palestine, and has been committing war crimes for decades.
That couldn’t have been the plan, but if it was, just shows how 20th century thinking from old ideas and old men basically is dyeing ruthlessly, foolishly, stupidly, and ignorantly. I mean everybody has a phone nowadays to take pictures and make movies about what is happening on the ground. The evidence is overwhelming, so all that is left to sense is whether or not the bully will get its due.
~
My bet is that will be the case. I relish it.
~
BK
What is always depressing about this is the absence of cries for Israeli leaders to face trial for war crimes. Throughout the fictional Syrian gas attacked on civilians, the western leaders and the awful BBC and other MSM were chuntering on, incessantly, about war crimes and that Syrian leader should face war crimes trials. Now absolutely fucking nothing from these hypocrites!
I am sorry to bring up the topic, but the Holocaust industry is largely responsible for the “teflon” property of Israel – no crime ever sticks to it. Why? Because the Holocaust religion insists that Jewish people are victims – and thus that they can never be anything other than victims.
Any experienced psychologist, social worker or police officer could testify that people who have been treated cruelly – victims, in other words – are more, not less, likely to treat others cruelly.
And Israel today looks unpleasantly like that other regime that flourished briefly 80-90 years ago.
To put it even more simply, a lot of people cannot imagine the Syrian leaders doing anything good, or the Israelis doing anything bad. As Caitlin Johnstone so cogently pointed out, for the great majority a good narrative trumps any and all facts and figures. The narrative is “Jews GOOD, Israel GOOD, Arabs BAD, Iranians BAD”.
“In recent years . . . the UN Security Council resolutions have not been earnestly implemented and, in particular, the Palestinian right to build an independent state has been continuously violated”
— Wang Yi, China’s foreign minister
China, with more moral authority than the US on this?
All the UK political class have latched onto that social media footage of one random, nameless idiot shouting offensive rubbish from a car, in London. An attempt by politicians(Starmer, Gove , Nandy et al) to draw some false equivalence to the vicious state violence being waged against Gazans, perpetrated by their mates in Israel? Talk about ‘Look – a squirrel!’. Anything to avoid admitting the people they’ve been courting are war criminals. General Sir Nick Carter was in Israel not long since promoting closeer cooperation. Wonder what he thinks of the IDF tactic of firing M109 howitzers into densely populated areas. Would we do it?
Reportedly the footage was faked and has been taken down by Facebook – some are suggesting a ‘voice overlay’ was added to the footage.
If so, that’d be embarrassing for all the politicians who pounced on it, including, but not limited to : Johnson, Gove and Starmer. Although, regardless of whether it’s real or not, latching onto to it while remaining relatively silent about the atrocities occurring in Gaza, shows how desperate they all are to deflect.
But this apparently did happen.
Video: pro-Palestinian protester ‘mown down’ in London hit-and-run – to ‘silence’ from ‘mainstream’ media.
https://skwawkbox.org/2021/05/16/video-pro-palestinian-protester-mown-down-in-london-hit-and-run-to-silence-from-mainstream-media/
“Anything to avoid admitting the people they’ve been courting are war criminals”.
Exactly the syndrome that led to Mr Murray leaving the Diplomatic Service and taking up his present work. Everyone in London, from Jack Straw down, knew perfectly well that the Uzbek government boiled people alive and that the information London prized so much was obtained by torture.
That’s why they got so extraordinarily angry when Mr Murray told the world about it.
We knowingly supported the US in its carpet bombing of Iraq, Libya and all the shenanigans in Syria, didn’t we?
So to say we would have ‘scruples about firing M109 howitzers into densely poopulated areas’ sounds like superfluous semantics to me.
So, to summarise: the behaviour of the Scottish political and legal establishment towards you has been blatantly unlawful and therefore should be overturned.
Whereas the behaviour of the mob was blatantly unlawful and therefore should be celebrated.
You can keep trying, but your false equivalences will never make sense.
Exactly. Well said.
So what happens when an ‘unlawful’ establishment deems an action ‘unlawful’?
SNAFU
It’s called ‘cognitive dissonance’ – holding two opposing views at the same time.
I think to answer you in simple terms:
As ever a much more understanding and ‘nuanced’ approach yesterday from Police Scotland when it comes to mass anti-Irish racism and anti-Catholic bigotry. Five long hours of it in the very centre of Glasgow and nothing witnessed that could be considered within remit of the hypersensitive Hate Bill.
Some demons are best exorcised by exposure to the full light of day, rather than festering away in mental rankness.
I don’t know a single Scot that wants immigrants, legal or illegal, in this country. When are the people going to be listened to rather than the champagne socialists who never have to suffer lower wages or any of the numerous other problems that immigrants from cultures that share virtually nothing with Scotland bring? Do we really have to go down the Swedish route to learn just how bad immigration can be for a country? I hear the SNP have signed up to bring 3 million immigrants to Scotland when we already have issues with a failing education system, a failing NHS, not enough homes for the people we already have etc but I wonder how many people voting for them know they have signed up to be replaced?
I don’t think there are many against legal immigration anywhere.
“I don’t think there are many against legal immigration anywhere.”
Since the UK union, Scotland has lost over half its people through ‘legal immigration’, partly due to incentives and resettlement laws implemented by the British state, as well as effects of mass unemployment, poverty, deprivation, inadequate housing etc due to colonial exploitation and oppression. Historic census records also tell us that, whilst millions of Scots were given incentives or forced to leave Scotland, the largest ethnic migrant group of people to come to Scotland has been people from rest-UK, primarily England; the latter in-migration to Scotland has also been oriented towards the professional and managerial classes. Scotland’s change in population since the UK union therefore reflects a rather colonial legacy, and this ongoing uncontrolled population ‘shift’ also helps explain why such a large number of people in Scotland today oppose independence; support/opposition for indy is dependent on our ‘national consciousness’ and hence identity, which is determined by our culture and language.
National independence is primarily about a defined ‘people’ holding control over their national borders and hence their protection from the adverse effects of loss of sovereignty (e.g. through population displacement).
“Champagne socialists’ – simple-minded cliche alert! Add that to the tabloid stirring and utterly false claims, just for your titillation.
To those protesters taking sides in an endless conflict far away:
Wouldn’t you do better going to your local MP and asking why they are affiliated with the “friends of Israel / Palestine.”
Ask them if they are receiving remuneration and if they are, how they intend to spend it and what they are expected to do in return.
Quid Pro Quo?.
Shouldn’t they concentrate on their own constituents / country instead of helping to interfere in the affairs of other nations?
South Africa would still have Apartheid if nobody was willing to ‘interfere in the affairs of other nations?’ Its because the Israelis are allowed to do what they do without sanction their even worse version goes on and on…
“Joyfully illegal”.
I love this phrase, it so aptly describes people power which can achieve great changes. We need to see much more of it. To hell with establishment pomp, rules, decrees, tradition, etc., all designed to stifle progress.
There’s a lot of interference:
Ukraine, Syria, Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya, Georgia, Yugoslavia etc.
How did it improve here? How did improve there?
Shouldn’t we sort our problems out first?
Dear ambassador. I have great respect and also gratitude for your work in general. Here I was taken a bit aback by you swinging the racism truncheon. I don’t think, the British, or english, are particularly racist. The peaceful migration of masses from all corners of the world to the UK seems to be indicating the opposite. In line with your yearning for democracy, I suggest the people are given the means to express themselves on this issue in a plebiscite or in an advisory referendum. On other matters, I wish you all the best in your current ordeal with the legal system. Best regards.OA.
The US “Rules based Order” includes vetoing calls by Russia for the convening of the UN Security Council to demand immediate ceasefire in Palestine. Gideon Levy of Haretz newspaper, said well over 95% of Israelies agree with what their Government and Military do to the Palestinians. Its not just Netanyahu stiring things to avoid prison. The policy of stealing land will continue in and and resistance by Palestinians will be classed as Terrorism and met with continued airstrikes. Our media will continue to portray the conflict as an equal fight between two parties. The Arab worlds leaders will blame Hamas for resistance. The Palestinian Authority will cancel elections to stay in power and police their own people on behalf of the occupying power in the West Bank, otherwise known as Palestine. The EU and UK will never condem or sanction Israel. The US will always continue to supply weapons and billions to Israel. Its called the “Rules based Order”. Amen !
The rule on which this is based is called “Rule by American Fist”.
Cheers for sharing the news, Murray, good to see the dêmos (δῆμος) krátos (κράτος) alive and well in Glesga, standing in solidarity against the inhumanity of the polis (πόλις) – felt like dēmokratia (δημοκρατία) :-))))
No, I don’t speak Greek, just lots of goggling and cut’n’pasting :-))
Worth noting that Pollockshields’ stand is built on decades of community activism & support, little of which shows up in the main stream world, virtual or real. So nice (& perhaps a bit curious) to see this instance getting a much wider & more positive mention.
In the early to mid Noughties, whilst supporting folk down South during the earlier & uglier days (believe it or not!), when migrants & ‘fugees were fast becoming the ‘tribe’ to hate according to our ruling minority & their media partners in crime, Glasgow was already ‘on the map’ for showing a steadfast commitment to civility, building community cohesion & challenging the hateful narrative.
Acts of solidarity, compassion, dissent & disobedience, plus an enduring dialogue deconstructing the unending stream of media lies & obfuscation have been simmering along for decades. From Cambridge & Campsfield to Bristol & Glasgow, all across the Isles, folk have been mobbing police stations, yelling in the face of detention centres, locking the carpark gates of Immigration & Nationality Directorate snatch squads or simply adding their voices to the chorus & making the sarnies. All the while, helping alongside the migrant communities themselves to provide legal & social assistance to those facing hardship in our “hostile environment” (ffs?! when did that become an acceptable policy term to champion?!?)….basically just being friendly to fellow human beings.
Great to see Glasgow ‘representing’ the greater Good, once again.
You obviously weren’t there on Saturday.
Very little tolerance on display, except from the police …
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-glasgow-west-57133503
You can only be friendly to your fellow human beings up until the point that the boot is firmly on the other foot. It is when your fellow human beings have usurped you, and only then, that you will find out how friendly your fellow human being really are. Human nature is human nature, there is no getting away from it.
It was not democratic. If put to a vote of whether migrants who have broken laws to overstay in the country should be allowed to stay, you would quite possibly get a different result.
It was mob rule, which just as often results in pogroms and genocides as it does in progressive advancement.
Colin,
Maybe democratic for that particular local community?
& I guess one person’s “mob” is another person’s Flint MI sit down strike or Selma freedom march.
Quite easy to tell the difference with an open mind & an open heart ?
“The UK state will never accept the great loss to its resources that would result from Scottish Independence.”
Not sure how different Britain is compared to the US in this regard, but would be funny to think that there was a practical objection to the idea of Scottish independence because the Kingdom had already hocked all of Scotland’s resources & assets, public lands & coastline, to its international creditors 🙂
Then there’s all the opaque land ownership that probably dates back to the Enclosures, held by Her Maj & her various courtiers. Would there be rates payable to a sovereign Scotland for Balmoral?
Ahhhh, fun to imagine all those noses that would be put out of joint
(Mods: sorry – I posted this in the discussion forum first, thinking it would be off-topic in this thread, but since there’s already discussion underway here about Gaza etc. it should go here…)
Perhaps a soundtrack containing the words against “the Jews” was added to the video of the London “convoy”.
This is war. Don’t take anything at face value.
Audio and video together make a powerful medium.
The image that is being presented in the media of middle class and bourgeois Jews in “North London” or “Finchley” cowering under their duvets – just as their great-great-greatgrandparents barricaded themselves in peasant shacks in Russia when the Black Hundreds arrived on horseback – because a small number of unarmed men have driven along the road waving Palestinian flags from their cars is rubbish. It’s propaganda.
Incidentally the cars and jeeps driven by those who collect money in the area for “the State of Israel” often carry Israeli flags. And many young people who carry British passports go and do military service for the said terror state, happily swanning back to Britain afterwards without getting jailed for terrorist offences, without even getting question by the British authorities, let alone having their British citizenship removed. Talk about fighting war on other people’s territory!
Which is rather the point. The Zionists consider that area of London to be “theirs”. It’s an open secret that it is protected by “community defence” units who pack as many guns as any other criminal gang in London, but who have much stronger intelligence support and better contacts in the “legitimate” British state than the Adams family elsewhere in London, the Noonan family in Manchester, the Hong Kong 14K Triads (most middle class Chinese families in Britain are “protected”), the Yardies, what remains of the IRA in various British cities, etc. Those “defence units” aren’t the Shomrim. As far as I’m aware the uniformed Shomrim don’t even carry truncheons. The “defence units” may be voluntary but that doesn’t stop them being a state agency – and I’m not talking about the British state.
A media campaign in Britain saying “Jews are under attack” when forces of the Jewish state are massacring civilians in Gaza, the world’s largest concentration camp, is normal. But its scale this time may be bigger than normal…
The question is whether this means a bigger attack than usual is underway, or whether it’s just a function of British prime minister Boris Johnson having a stepmother (Jenny Sieff) in the family that controls Marks and Spencer.
Information about how to make a charitable donation to help give medical assistance (including surgery) to Palestinian victims in the current conflict is here. (Every little donation really does count.) For each death there are at least 3-4 wounded, often severely wounded – including children.
“There is a strong understanding that this is English oriented immigration law and English racist attitudes towards immigrants, being imposed on a Scotland which feels very differently.”
Hmmmmm…..?
nah,
more like twats in England colluding with twats in Scotland who share a common fascistic (with a small ‘f’) ideology. Twats who’ll happily schmooze with other twats from Modi’s mob, US neo cons, Chinese authoritarians, Saudi head choppers, Israeli settlers, Uzbek tycoons or whoever. As long as their net worth is high & their sense of exceptionalism & self aggrandisement wrt us Plebs is sacrosanct.
Much of our narrative is constrained within these imaginary Westphalian lines, framed in terms of “England this” or “Iran that”, “China such’n’such” & “don’t get me started on Belgium!”, which is, quite frankly, a bit ‘analogue’ (20th Century).
The conversations & decisions that most truly shape our reality, at Davos, the WEF, CFR, Chatham House, WHO, IMF, BIS & goodness knows where else (just follow the champagne & lobster orders) are made in the context of a tribal affinity that is more ideological than ‘nationalist’ and failing to recognise that leaves us splashing round in our own little ponds, not quite grasping how we can effectively challenge ‘our Masters’ voices’.
Yes – national identities are just brands and they are managed as such. They are managed with just the same greed and cynicism as “Manchester United” or “Google”. Some people have a problem understanding this because
a) they have bought into them, i.e. made an emotional investment, and
b) to the (often very shaky) extent that they apply their intellects, they reason that national identities existed before brands and therefore they can’t be brands now – but that is false reasoning.
But -1 for saying “analogue” as though it’s bad! 🙂
:-)))
“….”analogue” as though it’s bad”
picked up that use of the term in East Africa, means “old fashioned” rather than “bad”
🙂
“When I was young, it seemed that life was so analogue,
A dialogue, not an angry mob, polemic fog” (il)Logical Song
……. keeping the day job!
“national identities are just brands”
Would you say the same about the diversity of nature as you do about the diversity of peoples? Do you really argue to eradicate the diversity of peoples, a diversity dependent on the the natural development of cultures and languages and place, and which in turn gives people their national identities and ethnicity and sense of belonging?
Have you never heard of the oppression’s and conflicts brought about through cultural and linguistic imperialism and the socio-linguistic prejudice and inequalities that result from an ethnic/cultural division of labour? Have you never heard of colonialism, or the right of a defined ‘people’ to self-determination to escape from ‘the scourge’ of colonialism?
Imagine a modest-populated nation of c.5 million people which has an open uncontrolled border with a larger populated nation of 60 million people, and inflows of around 1 million from the larger to the smaller nation every 20 years. The larger dominant nation also imposes its culture and language on the smaller-populated nation and exploits and plunders its resources. After a century or two of this you might care to think about the outcome for the smaller or oppressed nation, and the reason for its people to seek self-determination and liberation.
Frantz Fanon described the process thus:
“The poverty of the people, national oppression and the inhibition of culture are one and the same thing. After a century (or more) of colonial domination we find a culture which is rigid in the extreme, or rather what we find are the dregs of culture, its mineral strata. The withering away of the reality of the nation and the death-pangs of the national culture are linked to each other in mutual dependence.”
I do agree with the posters who feel that there is a strong anti-English racist element here. The Glaswegians from Pollokshields in particular and the Scots in general show a shining example of racial tolerance and understanding, unlike the English headbangers from Hartlepool who are so degenerate that they elected a Rotten Tory as their MP.
Ummm …. has Craig Murray ever been in central Glasgow on the afternoon of a Rangers versus Celtic football match? Sectarianism is pretty much unheard of in the East of Scotland – it is something you only hear about on TV or radio when they are discussing news from Glasgow. If one travels west to Glasgow, the sense of sectarianism and sectarian tension is palpable.
And if/when you do gain ‘independence’, what will you have won? On the current trajectory you’ll be a one-party state ruled by the SNP. It won’t be Scotland, it will be the Peoples Democratic Republic of Sturgeonia. That’s even before you consider that you will still be ruled indirectly by the EU, NATO and the US – as you yourself have previously acknowledged.
Dear oh dear. And people wonder why the so-called united kingdom is falling apart.
@ josh your comment seems to have gone AWOL but I am pretty sure – feel free to correct me if I am wrong – that if a member of your family was raped by anyone, never mind an asylum seeker, Somali… you wouldn’t be saying, oh well, they got a ‘guilty’ verdict but they are still a human being and that is my starting point; you wouldn’t be giving two hoots about past childhood trauma or what ever they had went through. No, you would be demanding that they be strung. And what would you say to the parents of the victims of the Manchester bomber whose teenage daughters were blown to smithereens by some human being as your starting point. I venture – again, please feel free to correct me if I am wrong – you wouldn’t be so forgiving!
Alfie,
“you wouldn’t be saying, oh well, they got a ‘guilty’ verdict but they are still a human being and that is my starting point.”
I would & I wouldn’t :-))
It’s something I’ve thought about over the years & I find it as startling as it is ‘normal’ that more people don’t just lose their sh!t & murder the fk out of people who have committed atrocities against them.
If someone brutalised my nearest and dearest, I can’t imagine I wouldn’t want to retaliate in the most forceful way, commit my own bit of murder or terror.
I really find it hard to imagine anyone wouldn’t feel like that, who wouldn’t want to fetch “an eye for an eye” in those horrific events we hear of, a bombed out music concert or a bombed out wedding party.
But most of the time we don’t, do we?
It’s part of being civilised, I guess (or at least of being ‘on the road’ to being civilised).
It also makes sense.
Tutu put it succinctly when he said “when you cut someone else, you cut yourself”, or something like that.
Aside from the barbarism that ensues from the “eye for an eye’ lunacy, to become barbarous in the face of barbarity is simply to be defeated once more by whomever has committed an offence against you.
When I lived, for a very short time, in the OPT & saw what the Palestinians were putting up with, it made me laugh to think of all the foreigners bleeting on with their “Arab terrorists” bullsh!t. I just looked around at all these communities of folk, quietly trying to get on with their day to day survival, & wondered “how the fk don’t you all just walk out your door right now & kill the fk out of the nearest occupier?!?”, ‘cos that’s what I thought I’d have to do if I were in their shoes.
I felt humbled to think that they had a strength of character that I’d yet to need or to discover in myself.
Maybe the loss & grieving kills off the vengeful lust, or simply threats of further violence and/or hardship. I don’t know & hopefully I never have to find out.
How do those families & individuals, whose stories come to light from time to time, offer ‘forgiveness’ to perpetrators of obscene crimes?
The whole “Truth & Reconciliation” thing? htf?!?
But I do know that I don’t believe in the death penalty – The Abrahamic hat trick & their “Thou shalt not kill” line appeals to my humanity (although bacon sandwiches prevent me demonstrating a conviction to this principle across species). Plus, institutional execution invariably wipes out a few innocents from time to time & I wouldn’t wish that on myself or anyone else.
I do know that people commit monstrous acts and yet they are not necessarily monsters, this being real life & not an episode of “24hrs” or some such binary sh!t.
I do know that someone who commits a crime can “mend their ways”, believe it or not.
“..you wouldn’t be giving two hoots about past childhood trauma..”
As a victim, maybe I wouldn’t, at least not initially.
As a human being, I do want to know this because I want to know how such things can be prevented from happening in the first place, wherever possible. Maybe even a ‘victim’ wants to have those answers too, eventually.
“…demanding that they be strung…”
There’s always folk who take this line. Perhaps it’s a line the most folk advocate, entertain or mutter at one time or another during their life, with varying degrees of conviction or seriousness.
But being “civilised” precludes our adopting this sentiment in any possible rational argument.
An ‘eye for an eye, tooth for a tooth’ has got nothing to do with retribution. Correctly interpreted it means that if you falsely accuse someone of a crime that you should receive the same punishment they would have received if they had been convicted on your false word. A principle, I suspect, that many on this blog would whole-heartedly agree with 😉
Mandy,
I remember hearing a similarly eye-opening alternative interpretation of “an eye for an eye” , something along the lines of ‘if you take an eye from someone, you must then become their eye’, although it was explained a lot better than that.
Kind of like if you take or maim, then you must compensate in some way. Much nicer concept than the generally accepted interpretation of the saying being about revenge.
What a relief to read something well written by a well read person. Living in England is like living in a lunatic asylum when it comes to truth, politics and common sense. Only the one called the lunatic is the same person.
Correct above should be same person at end. Door bell went
British nationalists hate nationalism. I know, I know. So laughable. They just can’t see themselves as others see them.
Doug. Craig and his cronies have popularised the label ‘Britnat’ and, like playground bullies, scatter it around like confetti. I jaloose it means anyyone who isn’t a Scotnat. But all Scotnats are actually Scotnat Brits, if truth mattered on this blog site. Which would make me a Britnat Scot to Craig.
I doubt he’d categorise you as anything other than a nitwit.
Ouch.
Craig, your delusion, prejudice and paranoia are so strong I can smell them. Unless you admit your guilt, you won’t get parole.