The laying on of hands

In the Middle Ages, and right up until 1714, it was believed that ills could be cured by a king or queen laying their hands on an afflicted individual. The ceremony of the laying on of hands was most commonly associated with the disease scrofula, a bacterial inflammation of the lymph glands which usually causes disfiguring but painless lesions on the neck. Noawadays it is easily treated with a course of antibiotics. The disease is rarely fatal and often goes into spontaneous remission, a miraculous seeming disappearance which was hailed by 17th century Nicolas Witchells as “Proofe that ye Monarche is indeede Marvellous.”

Today the Queen and assorted other members of her family, but not the one with the miraculously vanishing sweat glands, came on a visit to Scotland, stopping off in Edinburgh for a spot of sycophantic pseudo-mediaeval ritual before buggering off to Balmoral for a summer of massacring the local wildlife. Perhaps the British state is hoping that this spot of passing monarchical attention will miraculously cure what Westminster regards as the unsightly outbreak of independence support in Scotland. Given the other royal stories to hit the press today, that seems about as likely to happen as Prince Charles refusing to accept Fortnum and Mason’s bags and suitcases stuffed with banknotes, presented to him and his staff by some Middle Eastern potentate with a record of trashing human rights that would make even Priti Patel blush.

There has of course been no impropriety. Accepting suitcases stuffed with cash from authoritarian rulers is all part of the job for a [checks notes] working royal. It was all for *charidee* so that makes it all A-OK and totally above board.

Not that I have any affection or sympathy for Prince Charles, a cosseted and indulged man who reeks of hypocrisy, but it is interesting that just a few days after he criticised the British Government’s despicable, unlawful, and morally repugnant policy of sending asylum seekers on a one way trip to a Central African dictatorship with a record on human rights as poor as those of the regimes they’re fleeing, up pops the Daily Mail with some dirt on him dating from 2015, a story which they have known about for seven years but only now have chosen to publish.

Prince Charles has now called for an investigation into the “cash in bags” controversy, Which is a bit odd seeing as how he was the one who accepted the suitcases and shopping bags stuffed full of dosh. There’s no need for an investigation, he just needs to tell us all why he thought that behaving as though he was a drug baron in the middle of a dodgy cocaine deal was remotely appropriate behaviour for anyone never mind the next head of state. What does this sordid little episode tell us about his judgement, even if as he asserts, it was all legitimate? The Prince’s representatives say that “all correct procedures were followed”, which makes you wonder what the “correct procedures” are when it comes to accepting bags of cash from the leaders of oppressive regimes.

Meanwhile, as his maw arrived in Edinburgh on her summer hols, it came out that she and her minions have been intervening to get Scottish legislation altered even before it comes before Parliament meaning that MSPs don’t even know that the royal family has been meddling in the democratic process in order to protect the financial and other interests of the royal household. A Scottish government memo obtained by the Guardian newspaper has revealed that “it is almost certain” that draft legislation has been secretly changed in order to secure the Queen’s approval.

Under rules known in Scotland as Crown Consent, which are imposed upon Holyrood by the Westminster Parliament, the monarch and her advisors are routinely given advance sight of all legislation which could potentially have an impact on the Queen’s personal property or public powers. Effectively this gives the royal household a back door into legislation allowing it to make changes to any proposed laws that it dislikes or which it fears may affect the private wealth of the Windsor family. The fact that this intervention takes place before the proposed new laws are presented to Holyrood means that MSPs have no way of knowing if the royal household has intervened in order to protect its vast wealth.

Last year, lawyers for the royal household secretly lobbied Scottish ministers to change a draft law in order to exempt the queen’s private land from a major initiative to cut carbon emissions. The exemption they secured meant that the Queen is the only private landowner in Scotland who is not required to facilitate the construction of pipelines to heat buildings using renewable energy. Since the start of her reign in 1952, the Queen and Prince Charles have vetted more than 1,000 laws enacted by the Westminster parliament under the consent mechanism. And yet despite literally having a licence to exempt themselves from legislation that might cost them money, Members of this immensely entitled family still feel the need to accept bags of cash from Middle Eastern autocrats.

As long as Scotland remains a part of the United Kingdom this kind of scandal will continue, but what will also continue are all the other instances of royal grift that we never get to hear about. The biggest scandal here are all the scandals which are kept under wraps. You can be quite sure that for every marital infidelity, suitcase full of cash, or pauchled law that we hear about there are dozens more which are kept firmly under wraps and never come to public attention. The queen passing through Edinburgh on her way to her Highland estate isn’t going to change any of that. Westminster will never change it. The only thing that will change it is independence and a written constitution. Tomorrow Scotland has a far more important appointment than a passing visit from the queen, we will find out more about the steps towards this country’s date with destiny and the independence referendum to come, when the people of Scotland can lay their own hands on Scotland’s future and cure it of Westminster’s ills.

Many thanks to everyone who kindly supported the annual fundraiser. It’s always a nerve wracking time, I’m literally asking people to put their money where my mouth is. I’m delighted to say that the target of £5000 wasn’t just reached it was smashed. From all sources, the Gofundme page, PayPal donations, and direct donations by cheque or into my bank account, the grand total raised was an incredible £11,094. In my wildest dreams  Icould not have expected it to go so well and my deepest thanks to everyone who contributed.  It is heartening to know that so many people value my writing and that there is still an appreciative audience for a positive pro-independence message that concentrates on making the case for independence and debunking the arguments of the real enemies of Scottish independence, the Conservatives and their little helpers.  That’s what I will keep doing thanks to you.

albarevisedMy Gaelic maps of Scotland are still available, a perfect gift for any Gaelic learner or just for anyone who likes maps. The maps cost £15 each plus £7 P&P within the UK. You can order by sending a PayPal payment of £22 to (Please remember to include the postal address where you want the map sent to).

I am now writing the daily newsletter for The National, published every day from Monday to Friday in the late afternoon.  So if you’d like a daily dose of dug you can subscribe to The National, Scotland’s only pro-independence newspaper, here: Subscriptions from The National

This is your reminder that the purpose of this blog is to promote Scottish independence. If the comment you want to make will not assist with that goal then don’t post it. If you want to mouth off about how much you dislike the SNP leadership there are other forums where you can do that. You’re not welcome to do it here.

You can help to support this blog with a PayPal donation. Please log into and send a payment to the email address Or alternatively click the donate button below. If you don’t have a PayPal account, just select “donate with card” after clicking the button.

Donate Button

70 comments on “The laying on of hands

  1. deelsdugs says:

    Now that’s just given confirmation to the dodgy characters in their fat vehicles on the Glenshee route yesterday, along with the helicopters overhead today. Says I to my daughter, ‘reckon queenie’s on a wee journey, wonder if it’s the OU one yet’…it would seem to be, not yet. She’s still strutting her power hold over those who are lost on some realm of righteousness glory.

    On a slightly different note with bags of cash, just watched a Bill Nighy thing last night on the same level of ‘britishness’ underhand activity and a plastic bag of corruption in the form of queenie’s heid on loadsa notes. He even managed to walk through airport security with a bag of dosh…should just have had swag written on it.

  2. Billy Watt says:

    Nice article, although I would dispute that it is in any way possible to make make Priti Patel blush over human rights

  3. Capella says:

    Well it could have been worse. It could have been Primark bags.

    Congratulations on the fundraiser. Looking forward to tomorrow’s big announcement. DRoss will be incandescent.

  4. Hamish100 says:

    Surely Ross won’t be there or will say anything?

    After all he is not going to get involved or vote !! Lol

    • grizebard says:

      He’s never missed any opportunity before though to be the perennial rain cloud on a sunny day.

      (He must surely think it’s an official parliamentary role or something. Copied from that circus down south.)

      • Great piece, Paul.
        We ban huntin’ and shootin’ in I Scotland and take back these vast estates from the chinless wonders from week one.
        How did Dross and the Infamous Five vote on Truss’ Last Stand yesterday.
        Did the Blue Jockeys vote to break international law on a bill to trash the Protocol?
        Can some Dugger anorak let us know how the Silent Six voted?
        I take it Murray, Carmichael, and Jardine and the other LD Jocks whose names and faces escape me, abstained…

          • Thanks, Capella.
            I note thta Mundell. Lamont, Bowie,and Duguid For Nothing broke international law, Murray and the LD’s voted Naw,and Dross and Union Jack abstained. Money for Nothing yet again.

            Going by the number who didn’t vote on all sides, I come to the conclusion that nobody is taking this piece of legal ordure seriously.

            It will never happen in other words.

            Snap UK GE call by the King of the World in the autumn?

            • Capella says:

              It’s odd that it says “no vote recorded” which I suppose means they abstained although I thought you had to actively “abstain”.. Perhaps they just didn’t turn up.

              • The header below sets out the catchall reasons for those not voting.

                “The following Members did not have a vote recorded and were not tellers. This can be due to a number of reasons; The Speaker and deputies cannot vote because of the impartiality of the chair, and Sinn Féin Members have an absentionist policy. A Member may wish to abstain, or have a procedural reason for not voting. Members can be absent carrying out constituency or ministerial business, or be unable to attend for other reasons.”

                I have a sense that MPs were not whipped into line, because this piece of nonsense will get bogged down in The Lairds…and disappear entirely as they trundle on and on into Brexit oblivion.

                The DUP will of course will never enter Stormont, now that they are in a minority.

                The plan remains to smash the GFA, a hard border, and Loyalist Dominion status.

                Good luck with that one.

                I read somewhere that over 300 UK MPs have taken out Irish passports. Is this true or a wind up?

          • Not-My-Real-Name says:

            What has happened re Tory MP who was arrested by police on sexual assault charges….and who was then advised NOT to attend HOC by his party.

            I ask as noted the tally you added Capella with link did not show arch Brexiteer Andrew Rosindell as one of the ‘Ayes’ but instead he was on the list as one of the MP’s whose vote was NOT recorded…..hmm

            Also wonder what is happening re Michelle Mone via PPE scandal…. I assume she is suspended from HOL until police investigation completed ?….

  5. James Mills says:

    Bowie , Duguid and Mundell did their usual Quisling-like duty and voted for their English Masters !
    The others showed their” principles” by abstaining !

  6. barpe says:

    Out of sheer curiosity, I just had a look at the BBC site, and Lo and Behold, a “have your say” is open and the vitriol is just as we would imagine.
    Funny that !!!

  7. This just proves, yet again, that all those who claim that the monarchy is only ceremonial and that they have no real powers are talking nonsense.

  8. Dr Jim says:

    “Human rights are of the highest importance and we will be extending them throughout the whole of the United Kingdom” Boris Johnson said

    How can human *rights* be a right if an individual believes they have the right to control the distribution of them


    • Not-My-Real-Name says:

      * “extending them”…too many letters in that word used by Boris Johnson…remove some letters and get the TRUE word and thus the reality ….

      As in he meant ENDING them Dr Jim……E***NDING….

    • Hamish100 says:

      What if I say No?

      Will he impose his human rights based on his moral compass?

  9. yesindyref2 says:

    From the Herald:

    A. “Tom Gordon headlines decline again ahead of Nicola Sturgeon’s independence statement


    B. A. “A&E waits decline again ahead of Nicola Sturgeon’s independence statement


    C. “The Herald eagerly awaits Nicola Sturgeon’s independence statement


    D. “Tom Gordon: we will provde impartial professional opinion on Nicola Sturgeon’s independence statement

    only one of these is genuine – which one?

  10. Dr Jim says:

    The UN says Scotland has the legal right to choose it’s own future, the UK government is a signatory to that view, Nicola Sturgeon has requested legal co operation from the UK government to facilitate proceedings to choose on several occasions and they have refused without offering alternative routes thus denying the legality of the UN constitutional right to choose, again to which the UK government is a signatory to those legal rights

    By its actions the UK government is denying the existence of Scotland as a country of equal rights within a voluntary union and reducing it to a region within one unitary state controlled by the government of England that is no longer operating as the UK government representing four states of a voluntary union

    If I were a betting man this is where I would put my money on Nicola Sturgeons legal argument that UN law must ultimately *trump* *English* law as England is not a signatory to UN law and only the UK is so how is Scotland represented within a state (the UK) if that state is acting outwith its legal remit

    I’m also betting she has a big dod of a legal document saying so

    On the other hand if I’m wrong I’ll just cry and feel really daft

    • Alex Clark says:

      My guess is that we will learn the date and question of the referendum so that the Scotland Bill can be passed by Parliament the week that they return from recess (4th Sep), Westminster will have until then to put forward proposals for an agreement between both parliaments, in other words, a Section 30 order.

      No Section 30, then the bill passes and the ball is in their court, I don’t think the UN route can be taken until the right of the Scottish parliament to hold a referendum is challenged by Westminster in the courts. Only then are the Scottish people clearly being seen to be denied the right to self-determination. I guess we will find out very soon.

      I’d love the Scotland Bill to be passed this week but I don’t think that is possible but I hope I’m wrong.

    • Hamish100 says:

      As if you were wrong. Your the first I turn to for inside info!! 🏴󠁧󠁢󠁳󠁣󠁴󠁿

      FM was excellent.

  11. Hamish100 says:

    I see the FM statement is now on Bbc Scotland channel. 215pm

  12. andyfromdunning says:

    Yesterday Boris stated that the Falkland Islands will stay British until the people their choose otherwise. He said it is the right of self determination.
    He did not say this excludes Scotland

    • Dr Jim says:

      It’s like saying the Scottish population can all move to the Falklands and be refused the right to choose Independence there the minute they ask for it

      It’s very typically English of them to keep waving the flag of legalities while simultaneously denying access to the processes of achieving it by offering to *talk* about it sometime in the future of an unspecified and unrealistic timeframe

      “Now is not the time” isn’t a legal answer anybody is likely to find in any law book ever written in any country anywhere

      I believe they call this dictatorship, the only difference between the UK and Putin is the UK haven’t killed any of us ……..yet

  13. Capella says:

    For those of you who don’t pay the TV licence fee – here’s the live stream link. Session about to start and FM statement soon.

  14. Dr Jim says:

    I temporarily lost my connection to Wee Ginger Dug for a few moments and when I retyped to link was warned by Google that there was mature and dangerous content on this website did I still want to open it

    This is new

    • raineach says:

      None of my search engines locate this site any more. That’s also new. I have to log in via Munguin

  15. Alex Clark says:

    That’ll put the cat among the pigeons, a plebiscite election if the Supreme Court ruled that a referendum bill is outside the competence of Holyrood.

    • grizebard says:

      Yes, the gauntlet has been thrown down without a doubt. Are we in a voluntary Union or are we not?

  16. grizebard says:

    Automatically tacking “divisive” onto the word “referendum” is just another way of self-identifying as a fake democrat.

  17. grizebard says:

    Sarwar’s objection to a referendum is that we are in such a mess due to the Union that we can’t afford to take the time to ask people’s opinion on getting out of this Union. Mitigation Hell is the best we can ever expect from him and his party leadership. Another bunch of fake democrats.

  18. Hamish100 says:

    And if they say no we vote in the SNP in any U.K. general election on one issue. Independence.

    Ross looked out of his depth and small.

    Sarwar had a nodding dog response from Katy Clark, MSP. Who sat in the House of Lords when she couldnt get elected. Labour don’t do socialist policies or irony.

    • grizebard says:

      Labour haven’t done socialist policies since ~1946. That’s why they’re called the “Labour” Party, after all. In the WM system, major parties have to be large coalitions of many views that depend on garnering sufficient votes. Since the people of England have moved steadily rightwards, so has the Labour leadership. Scotland and England have been moving apart in attitude and opinion for a long time, it’s now increasingly showing, and there’s nothing that a bunch of whining Unionist posturers inside or outside of any parliament can do about it. That’s just the reality that we as a people need to get our collective heads around now. And high time too.

  19. yesindyref2 says:

    Click to access Draft%2BBill%2B-%2B27%2BJune%2B2022.pdf

    (4) The date on which the poll at the referendum is to be held is 19 October 2023, unless before then regulations are made under subsection (6).

    • yesindyref2 says:

      And of course:

      (2) The question is —
      “Should Scotland be an independent country?”.

      Anyways, she got BoJo by the short and curlies, if you’ll excuse the somewhat gross image it might conjure up, as she’s using S34 to pre-empt the UKGov’s S33 in the UKSC. GIRUY BoJo and your Bobbin’ Jack.

      • yesindyref2 says:

        What all the ignorant pigs [1] of the anti-indy media seem to miss while masticating publicly about this just being a GE tactic, is that:

        The UK Government would have to be RESPONDENTS

        That puts a whole different public face on this.

      • grizebard says:

        Smart cookie.

        She’s not only challenged BoJo, she’s in effect challenged Blair’s jumped-up little body if a) it’s fit for constitutional purpose and b) if it has the moral and constitutional heft to overcome centuries of self-asserted English hegemony and verify whether or not we really exist in a voluntary Union.

        BoJo has been well-and-truly trumped, so is it now in London’s interest – just as it was back in 2013 to conclude the Edinburgh Agreement, but now even more pressingly – to conclude a new referendum agreement and hope thereby to pre-empt the definitive constitutional showdown it has always wished to avoid…?

  20. Alex Clark says:

    The letter that has been sent to Boris Johnson.

    Click to access Letter%2Bto%2BPM%2B28-06-2022.pdf

    • yesindyref2 says:

      Thanks for that, it confirms this:

      The reference is being served on the Advocate General today.

      The AG could of course, just accede and decide not to defend.

  21. Clive Scott says:

    I am pretty sure there was money laundering legislation in force when Charlie accepted the suitcase stuffed with cash that required a money laundering report to be filed with the authorities for cash amounts received in excess of 10K with failure to report being a criminal offence subject to fine and/or prison. I look forward to reading about the prosecution….

  22. Skintybroko says:

    Nicola was awesome, the opposition were woeful and came across solely as deniers of democracy. No doubt the Media will take a different view. Hell mend them we are on course to becoming truly responsible for ourselves.

  23. Dr Jim says:

    Well, the FM chose the blackmail route so I can only give myself 7 out of 10 for some of what I thought might happen, although some of what I imagined is contained and included in the Lord Advocate’s legal presentation to the Supremecy court in Lundinium

    The gauntlet is down though, legally block Scotlands democratic rights or face the future consequences of the plebiscite general election which the unionists know for an absolute fact they will lose

    The UK regime will say they won’t or don’t give in to blackmail but we all know that’s always been a lie, in fact every UK government in my living memory has *negotiated compromises* at every opportunity in order to avoid trade difficulties or even so called terrorism by other countries

    The two biggest things England has always feared are loss of money and body bags, and that has on every occasion led them to the negotiating table whether publicly or privately

    Scotland awaits the bluster then the blurble then bawling grudging acceptance, we’ll have threats *but you legally can’t, you legally can’t* followed by *this is not what people want no no no* followed by *if it’s that important to you make it the last time* and the FM will of course refuse to agree to that

    So roll up roll up, even the hard line detractors can’t say she hasn’t covered as much as is humanly possible at this time

    Of course there will be even more to come, and that will not surprise me one teensy weensy bit

    • Golfnut says:

      I’m late to the party, only just watched the short clip of Nicola’s statement to Parliament and to be honest was completely underwhelmed. Glad WGD was my next stop. Obviously a lot more going on that I’ve missed and thanks to Yesinderef2 for posting links to the letter. Wow, gloves off.

      • grizebard says:

        Use the Scottish Parliament video link given by Capella upthread, which is what I customarily also do now, since you never get any sense of what has really happened from clips, not least those posted by the usual media suspects.

        The “live” video remains available, so you can always catch up whenever it suits. Here though is roughly the extent:

        • BBC ‘Scotland’ the supposed Scottish channel, cut the debate with 20 minutes left to run….
          Gary Robertson obviously had better things to do..after all, it was only a debate that affects every Scot..
          Robertson reminded us Third World Jocks that we could glue our ears to the steam radio at tea time for ‘reaction’ to NS’ announcement.
          I wonder what the citizens of Sweden Iceland and Ireland would have done if the broadcasters shut down their parliaments like this?
          I think that their citizens have TV, don’t they?
          Scotland the colony.

          BBC Scotland…£30 mill a year pissed up against a wall, a Unionist stonewall.
          Boy, were they beilin’.

          • grizebard says:

            It’s always interesting entertainment of sorts – if also considerably annoying – to see what slant will be put on matters this time by the broadcasting “caretakers of the Union” in their “reaction”. (For whom actually there is no more appropriate word.) No doubt we’ll get the ever-predictable objections from the three ever-faithful members of Bitter Together (reunited) whilst the Greens – who have a stronger right to public attention than that miserable wee rump of Illiberal Anti-democrats – will again fail to get any look-in.

      • Golfnut says:

        Apologies to Alex who should have received thanks for posting link to Nicola’s letter to Boris.

    • yesindyref2 says:

      Dear UK Government,

      We have asked you for permission to hold a referendum to see if a majority of us want to end our marriage with you.

      But you have said that you are the only partner who can end the marriage or agree for the Scottish People to give our opinions on whether we want to stay married or not.

      We are therefore asking the Supreme Court the following:

      “Do you agree that a husband can hold a wife in marriage potentially against her will? Is divorce legal in the UK? Is it legal to gag us and bind us and tie us to the iron bedframe demanding marital duties?”

      Not yours, but a believer in democracy and divorce

      Brave Caledonia, the chief of our line

    • grizebard says:

      The thing is, England has always preferred to keep the nature of the relationship between Scotland and itself ambiguous, in order to keep it’s own overweening assumptions about the absolute supremacy of Westminster unchallenged. Accompanied as always by a certain caution in all dealings with Scotland and much windbaggery such as the relatively-recently reasserted Claim of Right in WM.

      But the constitutional fabric has become increasingly threadbare of late, not least under the latest London regime of unashamed English Nationalists, who have increasingly tested their self-assumed hegemony well past the point of destruction. And are thereby bringing on the very calamity their predecessors were always very careful to avoid.

      • Bob Lamont says:

        “And are thereby bringing on the very calamity their predecessors were always very careful to avoid.”

  24. barpe says:

    I did find it so pleasing that Nicola ended her letter to The Fat Fuhrer, with “Best Wishes”.
    Wonder if she actually meant it???
    Well done that woman.

  25. Alex Clark says:

    We’re going to be hearing a lot more about these people in the coming weeks, the Lord Advocate works for the Scottish government and the Advocate General for Scotland works for Westminster.

    The current Lord Advocate is Rt Hon Dorothy Bain QC.

    Lord Advocate


    The Lord Advocate, also known as Her Majesty’s Advocate, is the senior Scottish Law Officer. The following are the Lord Advocate’s main functions:

    head of the systems for the investigation and prosecution of crime and investigation of deaths

    principal legal adviser to the Scottish Government

    representing the Scottish Government in civil proceedings

    representing the public interest in a range of statutory and common law contexts

    All prosecutions on indictment run in the name of the Lord Advocate.

    The current Advocate General for Scotland is Lord Stewart of Dirleton QC.

    HM Advocate General for Scotland

    The Advocate General for Scotland is one of the Law Officers of the Crown, who advise the government on Scots law.

    Responsibilities include:

    Oversight of Schedule 6 to the Scotland Act 1998 relating to ‘devolution issues’ raised before courts or tribunals in Scotland

    The Advocate General can choose to intervene, on behalf of the UK government, in proceedings in which devolution issues have been raised if he so decides

    The Office of the Advocate General considers all Scottish Parliament Bills as they progress, in consultation with interested UK government departments, to assess their legislative competency.

    Under section 33 of the Scotland Act, the Advocate General has the power to refer Scottish Parliament Bills to the Supreme Court for decisions on their legislative competence

  26. There is no way that the Brits will gamble on a FPTP electoral system in May ’24, in preference to a ‘consultative’ Referendum in Oct 19th 2023.
    They know that the SNP and Greens would win the majority of seats in Scotland, especially if the English proved beyond all doubt that they consider Scotland as their colony by refusing our Right To Choose in a referendum..
    Ergo, England’s Law Lords will be ‘advised’ by the King of the World to give the nod to the Oct ’23 plebiscite.
    Even, if expected, the Naws lose, the English Parliament will string out any divorce settlement over years, if we let them.
    The game’s afoot, Duggers.

    Dross, Sarwar, and the Tailor’s Dummy just ranted today.
    They have nothing.
    They have no answers…the people of Scotland are sovereign..not this bunch of third rate Brit bag carriers.
    NS was enjoying herself.

    • yesindyref2 says:

      It also ends the accusation that the SNP will string everyone along so as to get elected next GE on the basis “Please give us yet another mandate”.

      No, it’s “Please give us your vote for Independence”.

      There will be wailing and Pamela Nashing of teeth amongst the anti-Sturgeonites, the few remaining that is.

      • grizebard says:

        Well, quite a collection of past hints, murmurings and pernicious assertions from soi-disant supporters of independence just burned to ash this afternoon. One might expect then that all that remains to be seen from now on are the dedicated fakes.

        One might hope, anyway…

        • Tam the Bam says:

          The ‘usual suspects’ are all saying in chorus…”We called it or told you so and why did it take so long?” etc., etc.,

          They have egg all over their face and richly deserved too!

  27. Capella says:

    Well that was exhilarating. Nicola Sturgeon was very self assured and measured and also had a touch of steely determination.
    Douglas Ross said that the public walked out of the gallery when she started her speech. Really? I definitely saw members of the public in the gallery later on. Are the opposition incapable of telling the truth? He used the word “divisive” umpteen times. We will need a bingo card of cliches to amuse ourselves through the coming tedious blizzard of opposition.

    How many sex scandals, Russian spy scares or financial frauds will the British State be able to engineer between now and October? Will Her Majesty do her duty and shuffle off this mortal coil in time. Will the Tories call an early election to preempt the referendum?

    Exciting times ahead.

    • grizebard says:

      As I said upthread, “divisive” is a sure tell for a fake democrat. All elections are “divisive”. By definition! What he really means here is “one that exposes inconvenient truths and that consequently my side likely won’t win”.

    • Will the Tories call an early election to preempt the referendum?
      Not now, Capella.

      They’d lose Scotland even earlier than anticipated.

  28. grizebard says:

    Don’t overlook Jackie Baillie’s intervention at the very end, BTW. She seems to be the self-appointed spiritual successor to the late ultra-Unionist Tam Dalyell MP. Possibly clutching at straws and hoping to find some last-gasp way of throwing a spanner in the works by hauling the Lord Advocate in to Parliament and interrogating her.

    • Alex Clark says:

      I doubt they saw that coming, I’m sure that they expected the Nicola Sturgeon to first pass the Referendum Bill in Holyrood inviting a challenge from Westminster, one that they might never have done and instead left it up to some Tory stooge to do the dirty work for them

      At the end of the day though it’s not who challenges Scotland’s people’s right to self-determination it will now come down to what the Supreme Court judge the right of Scots to be under Westminster rule.

      It’s a question of who is sovereign in deciding the rights of the people of Scotland as to who and how they are governed, is it the people of Scotland or is it Westminster? No matter where this goes now there can only be one outcome at the end of the process and that is as stated in the “Claim of Right” and agreed by Westminster “the sovereign right of the Scottish people to determine the form of government best suited to their needs.”

      The democracy deniers are now in a bit of a quandary of their own making and things are about to get real.

  29. Hamish100 says:

    Torys are upset. We are no playing … it’s not the right time … polls say we don’t want we. We won’t take part in it. SNP need the Greens apparently. I wonder if labour MP’s will support the SNP all will they do a keir Starmer and sit on their apathetic bums.

    Beattie on radio asks a question of Glenn Campbell , BBC commentator re the Tory we will not play stance. He deliberately ignores the question who does not answer not wishing to engage in his own rant. Very deliberate, very unhappy are the britnats

  30. Dr Jim says:

    Until the the unionists show us the law book referencing the phrase *now is not the time* and cite the case precedents Scotland will proceed with our lawful referendum

    Remember folks, Labour are worse than the Tories and always have been, you can always trust a Tory to lie most of the time, in the past some folk slipped up and trusted Labour who lie all of the time

    Sarwar will be arranging his TV appearances as we speak, anything and everything he can get his mug on to repeat ad nauseam his lies that two thirds of Scotlands population don’t want a referendum will be greedily accepted by the usual culprits, and even if they do question him on his case for the union he’ll just keep right on repeating the same lie over and over till they run out of time

    DRoss has had it, no one will be that bothered about interviewing the lightweight Tory loser who can’t make his tiny mind up because he’s nearly as unpopular with the people as Johnson, so the unionists and their media will be hanging their whole campaign upon Sarwar & Baillie, the Labour team that counts ambulances but has never been in government to put any on the road

    • grizebard says:

      Funny-peculiar (but unsurprising) how none of the familiar Unionist lackeys ever recall the *later* Smith Commission conclusion, duly signed off by *all* participants, that “nothing … prevents Scotland becoming an independent country should the people of Scotland so choose”.

      The tactic now seems to rest solely in trying to prevent us from ever getting another opportunity to “so choose”.

Comments are closed.