I live in the capital of my country. I had to travel hundreds of miles to the capital of a foreign country to hear a bunch of unionist judges, the majority from a foreign country, declare that my country has no right to existence, indeed my country only exists at all in so far as it was incorporated by a foreign parliament in the Scotland Act of 1998.
It was cold and wet, walking to the Supremes Court his morning from Albert Embankment. Londoners were hurrying to their jobs with heads bowed, collars up and gloved hands clutching umbrellas against a driving rain. It was mundane. There was no sense of excitement and no indication anything in particular was happening at the Supreme Court. Arriving at 9am there was no queue, and I was the third person into the courtroom.
The former Middlesex Crown Court is one of the heaviest and most plodding examples of Victorian Gothic architecture in existence. It looks like a set from a 1930s Errol Flynn film of Robin Hood. Courtroom Number One of what is now the Supreme Court has a mock medieval vaulted ceiling, designed to echo that of the ancient Westminster Hall across the square (which is one of the architectural marvels of the world). But the Victorian version fails to soar like the medieval one. It is massive and clumpy and the bosses are like vast excretions of pointless wood. Rather than marvel at its lightness, we fear it will fall on our head.
In Westminster Hall, a pain-racked William Wallace stood his trial before a foreign authority he did not acknowledge, but which insisted it ruled him and had the right to condemn him to death. That same foreign authority was about to come down on our heads again. 700 years later not much has changed; the venue had just shifted three hundred metres.
Inherent in the judgment of the Supreme Court is the proposition, incredibly advanced by Scotland’s Lord Advocate, that Scotland effectively ceased to exist as a nation in 1707 and the Scottish legal principle of the sovereignty of the people was completely replaced by the English legal principle of the sovereignty of the Crown in parliament. Thus Scotland has no authority, power or recourse, in any situation, beyond what is handed down to it by Westminster.
That is in no sense an exaggeration. It is what the ruling is.
It is fair to say – and I published this at the time, long before the judgment – that Scotland’s unionist Lord Advocate got precisely the result her entire presentation of the case was designed to achieve. She did not turn up in court, doubtless having been sent the judgment in advance and perhaps not wishing to be seen to smirk in public.
The Court itself was extraordinarily subdued on an occasion that will be written into every history of the Scottish nation. The public gallery was not crowded, and mostly filled by law students with zero interest in the outcome wither way, turning up as part of some assignment. There were a few gloating members of the state and corporate media. I was there with an old friend from Sinn Fein.
A few of the very best of Scotland’s MPs turned up – Angus Brendan McNeill, Douglas Chapman, Tommy Sheppard, Neale Hanvey, John McNally and Anne McLaughlin (apologies to any I missed). There was a remarkably high correlation between MPs who bothered to turn up to the case, and MP’s willing to be seen to be friends of Craig Murray in public, which I think is not coincidental. Or to put in another way, there was no sign of the troughers who don’t care about Independence beyond the effectiveness of the slogan in getting them elected.
I shall do a proper analysis of the judgment later. It was notable that Reed – whose Scottish accent had once again become almost entirely imperceptible – addressed the international law aspects of the case which had been wrongly and totally omitted by Lord Advocate Bain, but submitted separately on behalf of the SNP. Reed relied heavily on the completely outdated Quebec judgment of the Federal Court in Canada – which is of course apposite because it is a parallel instance of the colonial authority denying democracy. He also very selectively misrepresented the Kosovo Opinion of the ICJ.
So Reed ended up in a situation where this was quite literally the argument of the court.
Scotland is not a colony, Scotland has meaningful access to the political process. No, Scotland certainly does not have the right to hold a referendum.
That he cannot see the glaring contradiction in this is a sign of the effectiveness of Unionist blinkers.
This outcome is precisely what Nicola Sturgeon and her Lord Advocate aimed for. She can now claim she tried to hold an Independence referendum and was blocked, when she plainly never had the slightest intention of holding the referendum in the first place.
We now come to what is known in Scottish politics as “Plan B” – a plebiscite election, which she announced would follow if a referendum is blocked.
A plebiscite election on Independence can only mean an election which, if won by the SNP, will be a mandate to declare Independence. Plebiscite is virtually a synonym of referendum. A “plebiscite election” cannot be an election which will lead simply to a renewed request for permission from Westminster to hold a referendum. A “plebiscite election” is the referendum.
I am pretty confident we will see Surgeon again squirm towards the off ramp and simply try to turn the “plebiscite election” into a demand that we re-elect the do-nothing troughers for a further five years with a new “mandate”. I do believe this ploy is now wearing thin.
We now know Westminster will not grant Independence; we have to take it. We have to take it whatever UK law or the London Supreme Court says. We have to assert the Sovereignty of the Scottish People as an authority that stands, in Scotland, ineffably higher than any parliament in a foreign land.
Independence must be declared in Scotland by Scotland’s people, preferably through Scotland’s government.
Any politician who still argues we must be constrained by Westminster law and bow our heads to London diktats is a unionist. Please see that.
(Correction – I typed Tommy Sheridan for Tommy Sheppard. Both excellent men. Now corrected).
————————————————-
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.
On the 29th June 2022 Mhairi Hunter said this about the proposed plebiscitary election:
‘A successful outcome will not lead to a declaration of independence. There is no route to independence that does not involve the agreement of the UK govt. But it would be politically impossible to continue to deny a mandate for a second referendum in the face of a ‘Yes’ win’
So this is the SNP’s position. A cynic would say that she thinks a successful income would be a ‘No’ result.
As for the second sentence, Blah Blah Blackford would be proud of it. How many times has this sort of rubbish been disproved by Westminster’s actions?
Sturgeon has her back to the wall and feels she must do something., but to bet everything on the prize which is just another chance to ask for another referendum defies belief. If the result was ‘No’ where would independence be then?
I imagine the special SNP conference next year will spend a lot of time considering how to back pedal from what was promised.
Syriza anyone?
We could break out of our prison, that’s portrayed as a union as soon as next year, if Sturgeon and Harvie cared about Scotland, however they don’t care about Scotland, and I doubt they’ll do the right thing.
Courtesy of Wings Over Scotland.
“Sturgeon reiterated in general terms (while refusing to be drawn on any specifics) that the new plan was to conduct a plebiscitary general election, but offered no explanation for why we had to wait two years for it.
It is wholly within her power to stand down as First Minister, have the SNP and Greens block the election of a replacement and thereby force a new Holyrood election which could serve as the plebiscite, and would have the considerable benefit of including two demographics (EU citizens and 16/17-year-olds) who statistically favour independence and would be able to vote in a Scottish election but not a UK one.”
Stu doesn’t want to leave Somerset.
No Briton in Britain is in “a foreign country”.
We’re in Britain geographically – but we are in the ‘United Kingdom’ politically – an artificial state cobbled together by a melange of grasping ‘upper’ class English and Scottish chinless wonders. ‘Britain’ is a geographical, not a political, name.
Forget the “Great” in the moniker “Britain”. That’s an old French thing to differentiate Britain from Bretagne (Brittany).
The United Kingdom of Great Britain was created by Scotsmen, within Britain, for the benefit of Scotsmen both within Britain and overseas.
It’s mostly doing rather well, except the Northern bit over the last decade and a half.
Ok, so the Northern bit is suffering from lowering education standards and piss-poor roads and rotten health and a lousy ferry system and a horrendous drug and alcohol problem, but we’ve got the rest of the UK to subsidise us, so that’s OK.
No Briton is a foreigner within Britain. Nor should they be. Nor should they thinkingly be made to feel so.
It was just the Kingdom of Great Britain. It only became the United Kingdom when it included Ireland. The name “Great Britain” for the island dates from the C15th.
“The United Kingdom of Great Britain was created by Scotsmen”
Dinnae be daft, Scotlan wis – an aye still is – bocht an selt by its ain mankit elite, juist lyke maist ither colonies. Colonialism is always a co-operative venture with native elites who assume the culture, language and values of the colonizer and with considerable effort seek to place as much cultural distance as possible between them and the native population.
As Albert Memmi wrote: “The first ambition of the colonized is to become equal to that splendid model and to resemble him to the point of disappearing in him. By this step, which actually presupposes admiration for the colonizer, one can infer approval of colonization.”
Unfortunately, Scotland’s colonial masters have colonial masters of their own.
So, next steps – for us punters, and bloggers.
ONE). Keep going with articles and comments, activity
TWO). Attend marches and rallies. This needs to increase, a lot. I roughly counted out 50 people last night in a block and then eye-shaded similar blocks. At its peak when it was nearly down to the road, (Bath Street), there were about 12 block including on the steps, so about 600 people. Not bad for a Wednesday, but really should be 10 times that.
The usual Socialist Workers presence, well, they do make the effort and help to make it more supported. Yes of course, they kidnap the chants from “What do we want …”, to “Tory Tory Tory out out out”. Like many I don’t shout to that, who cares what the government of a foreign country is? I’d prefer “Westminster Westminster Westminster out out out” but it is a bit long.
A few SNP roundels, a couple of Alba banners on Dewar, and after one speaker said something, an Alba person shouted “You should ask the SNP that”, but nobody tore down their banners – so it seems we CAN have different views without fighting, The 3 x 2 polis along the side had nothing to do, neither did the 2 big polis vans.
Personally before this I wouldn’t have gone to an anti-SNP rally, but if all marches and rallies can be made multi-purpose, then it seems we can all go together under one roof – the open sky!
so – THREE). We really do need to talk about existing “All Under One Banner”, and find ways the anti-SNP mob can stand alongside the SNP cultists, and the rest of us who just want Independence for our country, to continually have public displays get larger and larger and larger.
Part 1 of 2
So, as well as continually converting NOes to YES, I think what is perhaps far more important for a time at least, is to get far more people involved and active, out and about. Because that in its turn will help convert people to YES.
Well done to all of us who turned out yesterday but to be blunt, the total attendance was truly pathetic, and I think the Unionists were actually too embarrassed for us to make any rude comments.
You will have to take it all right, like the (slightly-less-far-right-than-the-usual-Liarbour-shower) Corbyn regime, ignobly didn’t.
Well, the ( s . l . f . etc) were actively prevented by a fomented propaganda campaign, including the use of scurrilous fake antisemitism lies, rather than as you imply, not bothering
Corbyn could have sued at the first slander but apologised instead. Media propaganda didn’t excise his backbone, he never had one.
Right with this section below by the Rev in mind.
“It is wholly within her power to stand down as First Minister, have the SNP and Greens block the election of a replacement and thereby force a new Holyrood election which could serve as the plebiscite, and would have the considerable benefit of including two demographics (EU citizens and 16/17-year-olds) who statistically favour independence and would be able to vote in a Scottish election but not a UK one.”
Get E-mailing your SNP MSP or Green MSP if you have one and explain in the E-Mail why we need Nicola Sturgeon to resign for the good of Scotland and how important it is that she does so. So that a Holyrood election will be used as a plebiscite next year and not in two years’ time.
Find your SNP/Green MSP here just enter your postcode
Good Luck.
https://www.parliament.scot/msps/current-and-previous-msps
Your SNP MSP has already got your vote.
(S)he couldnae gie a fock aboot ye, or whit ye think.
It’s a tribal thing. Not rational, just tribal.
Scotland awaits Alba …or rather it disnae !
Buggah!
“Your SNP MSP has already got your vote. (S)he couldnae gie a fock aboot ye, or whit ye think.”
They might be a bit more interested if you told them they could no longer count on your vote, especially if enough people gave them the same message.
I dare say you are right, that a majority of Scots don’t want independence, but if that is the case, why the hell do they vote for the SNP, then?
Have you seen the alternatives ?
Voting is not compulsory…..yet.
I have long believed that the UK government would only grant independence if support was ’embarrassingly high’ ie over 75% We have hovered at 50% without any campaigning so why isn’t anyone campaigning? This SHOULD be part of the remit of any independence seeking government.
But on another point, precisely HOW should a government TAKE independence. We’ve seen what happened in Spain and I don’t doubt for a minute that any self declaration would be quashed – although perhaps in a more camera-friendly way. What can we actually DO when the issue is glossed over by the media??
There are now 44 SNP MPs legitimising a Westminster parliament which does not recognise their democratic right to establish independence. How can the Scottish electorate or the EU be expected to acknowledge the case for Scottish independence if the SNP continues to recognise the legitimacy of the Westminster parliament, one which denies the right of the Scottish people to decide their own destiny?
Before/during the referendum, support for nihilism “hovered” around 48%, rarely touching 50% and once or twice spiking at 52%, in the opinion polls.
The outcome of the Referendum was that less than 38% of the electorate of Scotland voted for self-amputation.
What are the chances, Wee Nippy undoubtedly wonders, of more than 50% of the people of Scotland voting for her if there were to be a phantom ‘referendum’ tomorrow or next year or the year after?
She’s seen the books. She knows how fucked we’d have been by now if we’d cast ourselves adrift into the icy North Atlantic, like some kind of coldwater Cuba, without recourse to the hind tit of the munificence of the solvent part of the UK.
She also remembers the tear-streaked face of Attila the Hen stepping into the limo for the last time in Downing Street.
She also remembers the shrunken ashen face of Wee Eck slumped in the back of the limo departing Bute House the morning after the Truth of Scottish opinion was announced in THE Referendum.
She also remembers the sobs of that equally silly bitch, Theresa, saying g’bye on the steps of Downing Street.
She knows what’s coming if she tries to front up a re-rerun of the referendum.
She’s got her escape route to a sinecure in Brussels or New York for a lifetime of infinite scissoring with her French bestfriend and the occasional weekend of bliss in Portugal.
She’s got everything to lose in a referendum and no chance of personal gain.
This is the best sense I’ve read so far.
I resigned my SNP membership a couple of months ago and am glad I did, because they look laughably amateurish and incompetent now.
I suggest the way to remove Nicola Sturgeon is for every serious independence supporter to resign their SNP membership too. Falling membership cannot be ignored and she won’t be able to ride it out.
Other than that, I can’t see any way to remove her and she’s very unlikely to go of her own accord but she has to go if independence is to move forward.
Seems that the Scottish electorate like her, but what the hell would they know ?
‘I am pretty confident we will see Surgeon’
Should be Sturgeon. Predictive text?
I can see why the court might argue they can’t hold a binding referendum. As I recall the Kosovo Judgement, the ICJ held that the Kosovo was welcome to make as many declarations as they like, it didn’t mean they carried any weight.
I don’t see why Scotland can’t hold an advisory referendum if they so wish. In Australia, due to internal party politics, the Government was unable to pass a bill to authorize a referendum on same-sex marriage, so instead they used executive powers to hold a mail-in ballot.
You’ve had your referendum the results were clear GET OVER IT !!
Should your remarks not be addressed to the SNP – a party that has, by your reckoning, lost its raison d’être and thus should disband itself?
Doesn’t work like that David. Too many Scots now want out and once they’re gone they won’t be coming back, anymore than any of the others have. Wales will very quickly follow I predict. They are developments you will find it hard to process and accept but history just rolls over us.
If Scotland had seceded from the UK then Shetland and Orkney would quite certainly have subsequently seceded from Scotland, taking their oil revenue with them back to the rUK.
Fortunately for all of us, the majority of Scots in Scotland decided not to make the mistake of seceding from the UK which was created by Scotsmen for the benefit of Scotsmen. As the majority of oil landed directly ashore goes through Sullom Voe and Flotta, that would be an enormous loss to Scotland which benefits hugely from the revenue which flows through those terminals.
We dodged a bullet when we decided not to cut ourselves off from the munificence of the UK which was created by our forebears for our benefit.
You appear to be advocating ‘partition’, which is a common theme wherever British colonial rule was imperilled, as in India, Ireland, Mid-East, Cyprus, Palestine, etc, and always results in ongoing conflict.
Shetland & Orkney could only legally secede from an independent Scotland if the latter allowed it, Ebenezer. If they made a UDI, it would be a maximum of 16,000 men with few guns (and no comms after mobile phone masts have been switched off) versus the Scottish armed forces (maybe 3,000-4,000 armed troops), plus armed police.
The way Shetland and Orkney will secede is quite simple. They’ll do business with the UK government and simply ignore the numpties in Edinburgh and Leith.
Shetland Islands Council is seriously considering doing exactly that. Orkney Council has said that they will secede if Scotland goes rogue and separates from the UK.
Yes, Wee Nippy is crazy enough to send armed troops to suppress the people of Shetland and of Orkney. She’d have no moral scruples to use the power of the State against its people and her dissenters. She and her ghastly cabal have shown that in the cases of Salmond and of Murray.
Ebenezer
This one comes up occasionally. and is an interesting one, but one very much over-hyped by Unionists, who think to score a point over Scottish Independence. Not so, however. From Shetland Islands Council – 9 September 2020:
“10 Notice of Motion: Self-Determination
The Council RESOLVED to adopt the motion, that the Council formally begins exploring options for achieving financial and political self-determination.”
Note carefully the words “exploring options”. They then sent a letter to the ScotGov:
https://www.gov.scot/binaries/content/documents/govscot/publications/foi-eir-release/2021/04/foi-202100142624/documents/foi202100142624—information-released/foi202100142624—information-released/govscot%3Adocument/FOI202100142624%2B-%2BInformation%2Breleased.pdf
a snippet: “However, we need recognition that additional fiscal and political powers at a Shetland level are essential to maximising these opportunities and achieving the thriving island community we aspire to.”
and in response, as well as saying about Covid but asking to arrange a meeting, the reply said this:
“The vote in favour of the motion to pursue options for self-determination is undoubtedly a significant event, and has understandably generated a high level of interest in the ambition of Shetland.
Whilst the Islands (Scotland) Act 2018 introduces a number of measures to support and enhance local decision making such as the Additional Powers Request (Scotland) Regulations 2019, we understand that you wish to conduct extensive research into the most attractive future model of autonomy for Shetland and would welcome an update in due course.”
Back in 2012 several of us discussed this on CiF on the Grun, and most were of the opinion that of course Shetland is entitled to Self-determination, and as an enclave would be entitled to an (up to) 12 nm territorial waters, but not an EEZ. But that they (and Orkney) should absolutely use the Indy Ref to play Scot Gov against UK Gov for the betterment of their Peoples. And so they have – as can be seen by the 2018 Act, and other stuff previously. Well, with the possibility of Indy Ref 2 they did this again and they’d indeed be daft if they didn’t. They should continue to do so.
But it’s not Independence they’re looking for, it’s more Autonomy, which personally thinking I think ALL the islands are entitled to, and when you consider the reliability on at least some off-island facilities, medical, higher education, comms. etc. Inverness / Aberdeen, Edinburgh and indeed, Thurso, are a far sight nearer and cheaper to get to, than Newcastle, Leeds or London. So it’s highly likely they’d be better off with a co-operative and interested Scottish Government, than a UK one – though they often say that BOTH Governmentd are far away from them.
No idea what the current status is – it’s only this year that we are recovering from Covid.
Sorry it’s long, I’ve kept it as short as possible, but it is a very interesting subject, and if they ever did want to go for full Independence, I’d expect and demand the ScotGov co-operated fully. I looked this up back in 2012, and it would need support to get going from either Government, similar to that in the UN decolonization (sic) program, which I checked out at the time (e.g. Falkland).
If you think about it carefully and compare it to Scotland gaining Independence from the UK, you’ll realise it’s very much a double-edged weapon for Unionists to try to use.
YesIndyRef2 has got Shetland completely and totally WRONG!
Nobody in Shetland is looking for “independence”.
What they want to do is to decouple from the numptiness of the SNumPties of the pygmy parliament and from the Leith Numptorium and to reconnect with the much more rational and stable drag strip which abuts Scotland Yard.
I suspect that many/most of those islanders would be delighted if the King of Norway were to redeem the value of that dowry money from the pawnbroker and take back Orkney and Shetland into the competent care of the Norwegian government, but we all know that’s not going to happen.
Thanks for your reply Ebenezer. I doubt whether, having allowed Scotland another referendum, the residual UK would then want to go to war with it over the Shetland Islands, much less the Orkneys. In any event, most countries around the world will be supporting Scotland because they don’t want a precendent set whereby small, resource-rich regions can just elect to secede unilaterally, taking their resources with them.
If Orkney and/or Shetland did unilaterally declare independence from Scotland or to become part of the residual UK, the Scottish government would have to take action to retain them, otherwise where does it stop? Tory-voting Aberdeenshire, Dumfries & Galloway, and Borders would be next, then Highland etc..
Good post, YIR2, but if Shetland could somehow gain independence, I don’t see why it wouldn’t be entitled to its EEZ, giving it the most oil reserves per capita of any country in the world by far.
As I said, Ebenezer:
“But it’s not Independence they’re looking for, it’s more Autonomy,”
That’s whether with Scotland, the UK – or Norway.
The Scotsman – not exactly a friend of the “SNumPties of the pygmy parliament” [1] – had this to say, somewhat similar to my posting:
https://www.scotsman.com/news/politics/talk-shetland-independence-wide-mark-2968657
“The language is important. This is not about independence, but greater powers. Steven Coutts, the council leader, has indicated a preference for tax-raising levers and a legislative assembly in Lerwick.”
[1] translation from Daily Express to English – “SNP Government at the Scottish Parliament”
and from way back in 2012, check out Unionist LibDems Scott and McArthur:
https://www.shetlandtimes.co.uk/2012/03/19/the-isles-and-the-referendum-some-observations
““Orkney and Shetland should establish their objectives as island communities in this period of constitutional upheaval and use their inherent advantages as leverage with both the UK and Scottish governments.”
I totally agreed with Scott and McArthur – and still do.
Lapsed Agnostic
Sorry, I didn’t write it clearly. As a fully Independent entity, Shetland and Orkney would be entitled to an EEZ, which they’d negotiate with Scotland (or take to a tribunal).
But if they remained part of the UK they’d be part of the rUK, but off the coast of Scotland, which would be the coastal state having the EEZ (and continental shelf). Again it could be subject to negotiation, with the rUK negotiating on their behalf. but with a weaker case.
I was cutting my own arguments back in 2012 short – both Shetland and Orkney would probably be better voting YES to Independence from the UK, THEN voting for Independence from Scotland, and very carefully in that order.
Lapsed Agnostic
Jings me again, I found the old link, perhaps THE definitive argument:
http://www.ejil.org/pdfs/12/1/505.pdf
and it does discuss Shetland. The great advantage is that the UK EEZ was agreed back in whenever, the 70s, though of course there is a temporary “theft” of 6,000 miles though that was more for admin purposes for existing gas and oilfield blocks to be fair, which are mostly exhausted.
So unless Norway wants a renegotiation which is unlikely unless the ScotGov treat Shetland unfairly and undemocratically and try to bully their way, in the same way as the UK is treating Scotland, it should be a reasonably peaceful agreement over the EEZ.
O/T
Craig, I note that your historically very important interview with Michael Buerk, including key information about USA rendition (UK-compliant via Prestwick) for torture in Uzbekistan, seems no longer available on the BBC Radio 4 webpage here:
THE CHOICE: 18/09/2007
Michael Buerk interviews people who have made life-altering decisions. 6/8: He talks to Craig Murray, former UK ambassador to Uzbekistan.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b007yvl7
I was wanting to share it with some folk today, so was relieved to eventually find it archived on your own site here:
THE CHOICE (May 17 2020)
https://www.craigmurray.org.uk/archives/2020/05/the-choice/
I mention this to alert others to its present whereabouts, and also to express hopes that it is in no danger of being lost altogether.
Thankyou for that link.
I hope that Craig will also preserve and replicate the BBC Radio dramatisation of his book Murder in Samarkand.
I think that the book ought to be compulsory reading for all Sixth Formers and the radio play ought to be made recommended listening for all Fifth Formers.
It shows the ruthlessness and dishonesty of oppressive governments who have no compunction about using bogus allegations of sexual impropriety as a weapon of oppression against dissenters such as Assange, Salmond and Murray.
https://soundcloud.com/craig-murray/murder-in-samarkand
Thanks for that Fearghas
Craig, when you say “outdated Quebec judgment of the Federal Court in Canada” do you mean the judgment of the Supreme Court of Canada ? There is a separate and distinct Federal Court here.
“I live in the capital of my country. I had to travel hundreds of miles to the capital of a foreign country to hear a bunch of unionist judges, the majority from a foreign country, declare that my country has no right to existence, indeed my country only exists at all in so far as it was incorporated by a foreign parliament in the Scotland Act of 1998.
It was cold and wet, walking to the Supremes Court his morning from Albert Embankment. Londoners were hurrying to their jobs with heads bowed, collars up and gloved hands clutching umbrellas against a driving rain. It was mundane. There was no sense of excitement and no indication anything in particular was happening at the Supreme Court. Arriving at 9am there was no queue, and I was the third person into the courtroom (…)
A few of the very best of Scotland’s MPs turned up – Angus Brendan McNeill, Douglas Chapman, Tommy Sheppard, Neale Hanvey, John McNally and Anne McLaughlin (apologies to any I missed). There was a remarkably high correlation between MPs who bothered to turn up to the case, and MP’s willing to be seen to be friends of Craig Murray in public, which I think is not coincidental.”
You’ve completely lost it, @Craig.
This really deserves to go in Pseuds Corner. It’s barking. On a serious note, if you go on like this you should seek help. Frankly you are not the centre of the world and you seem as if you’re hurtling headlong, kilt flapping in the wind, towards the funny farm.
LOL. you did make me laugh.
Having done stats, you can get an apparent correlation between two things, but the real cause is that they are actually both correlate to a third thing. In this case all of the people mentioned are rebels to an extent, and don’t neccessarily obey the “rules”. So they take demonstrative action about the UKSC, AND it seems, are friends of Craig Murray. While others don’t have the courage to express their own opinions, or do their own thing. So no, sorry, I don’t think Craig will be joining you in either place.
On the contrary, Craig is one of very few honest commentators out there. I shudder to imagine where you find your truths.
Unionism is a Trojan Horse empowering English influence in Scotland. In exactly the same way that the US runs Britain through its Atlantacists, like BoJo .
The gravy train poodles of the US in London would like to have their own poodles in Scotland. For me, the issue of how Britain un-couples from the US is more important than Scottish Independence from England. But the mentality of poodling to money and power is disgusting , whoever the willing poodle is and whoever the gravy train providers.
Colonial.power is naked political corruption anywhere.
Perhaps a Labour government will uncouple the UK from US control. ?
https://declassifieduk.org/the-secretive-us-embassy-backed-group-cultivating-the-british-left/
Reza,
” Perhaps a Labour government will uncouple the UK from US control.”
Under Starmer?
No way.
“Under Starmer? No way.”
No Labour opposition that showed the slightest inclination to decolonise the UK from the USA would get within sniffing distance of being elected, unless by chance or subterfuge, in which case they wouldn’t last long. One thing would be for certain, LIz Truss would no longer be the shortest-serving Prime Minister.
Totally agree. Britain needs to stand on its own feet free of external interference – and since WW2 that interference has come primarily from the USA. Although, lately Israel, another USA lapdog, has been very active in UK politics.
Maybe a truly independent UK that was concerned with its own people’s welfare rather than dancing to the war drums of the North Atlantic hegemon might diminish the ‘need’ for Scottish independence, just saying …
The zionist antisemites are a US imperial goon squad that the owners of the British state have availed themselves of in the same away for the same reasons.
Read Michael Sims, November 26 2022 at 1:14 pm comment on https://www.taxresearch.org.uk/Blog/2022/11/25/sometime-the-whole-corrupt-edifice-of-the-two-party-political-hierarchy-in-westminster-is-going-to-collapse/
“2. The Treaty did not grant ‘unlimited sovereignty’ to the new UK Parliament because one of the obligations was to uphold Scotland’s own constitution permanently. Scotland’s national sovereignty is embodied in its people, not in its monarch, nor its parliament, and both have been subject to judgement and punishment in the past for breaching the constitutional rights of the Scots. Scotland’s constitution derives its authority from its people’s sovereignty. Breaching Scotland’s constitution or the sovereignty of its people is itself a breach of the Treaty. Brexit certainly smashed that sovereignty by setting aside the overwhelming decision of the sovereign Scots to Remain in the EU.”
Scotland does not have a separate ‘constitution’ from the constitution of the United Kingdom which was created by Scots for the benefit of Scots.
Constitutional matters of the UK are reserved to the UK Parliament.
I’m sure you will provide a link to our mythical constitution so I can read it
There’s nothing “mythical” to our constitution.
Being an evolutionary, not a revolutionary, constitution, it’s not scribbled on a single rag.
The same is true of Common Law.
Scottish Constitution, in Scots: https://salvo.scot/the-scottis-constitutional-covin/
There’s also an English language version: https://salvo.scot/the-scottish-constitution/
Sooner or later some teenager was going to scribble a fantasy “constitution” on a rag for the imagined State of Scotland.
The wankstain on a rag referred to by Alf Baird is an example.
Excellent piece, enjoyed the historical/architectural analogies. Won’t all those MPs you mentioned be blackballed? I think it’s incredible that the Lord Advocate did not turn up. I guess Smith and McDonald were meeting with their handlers to celebrate.
Both the Lord Advocate and her boss knew that constitutional matters are not devolved to the pygmy parliament or to the Numptorium down the road.
No point in either of them pitching up to be humiliated by appearing on the doorstep of the Court to hear the rather obvious answer to their pathetic pleading.
Looks like the UK Supreme Court by asserting that the UK Parliament is Sovereign confirmed that they are part of the criminal syndicate that is intent on stripping Scotland of its resources and impoverishing its people.
Won’t be long now Scrotum.
This must be read by all, it gives a clear picture on the great theft of Scottish assets, and how we’ve been lied to, also ignorance has played it part as well.
“It sets out the evidence that Scotland while in a political and economic Union was never in a territorial Union.”
https://yoursforscotlandcom.wordpress.com/2022/11/26/reclaiming-the-rights-of-scotlands-people/
Time they woke up to the reality of their situation !
Wonder if the English will ever wake up to the fact that the Westminster establishment is also asset stripping and destroying England in the name of privatisation and virtue signalling to WEF policies.
We’ll all have nothing and be jolly thankful to our ‘betters’ for that.
“Wonder if the English will ever wake up to the fact that the Westminster establishment is also asset stripping and destroying England in the name of privatisation and virtue signalling to WEF policies.”
Not until the looting is over, I very much doubt, when it will be too late.
Last time I looked, Norfolk was in England. Or is there one in Scotland? You’re as English as I am.
Can’t help thinking that constitutional negotiations would be on a more even footing if Scotland had its own armed forces. I have no love for the Israelis, but it’s about time we had a long look at their playbook.
Hopefully a SDF will not be necessary but certain a “Law of Return”, as Israel offers, could be an interesting way to attract a more supportive, compatable inward migration.