Like Responsible Citizens Do
Given the refusal of Police Scotland to meaningfully answer our questions, we’ve been left with no alternative but to report Nicola Sturgeon for the crime of reset.
We’re sure the matter will be handled with the exact same professional diligence and complete and fearless impartiality that it would be for any other accused person.
The full text of the report was as follows:
The common-law crime of reset is clearly established in Scots law. It is addressed in section 51 of the Criminal Law (Consolidation) (Scotland) Act 1995, which states:
“Criminal resetting of property shall not be limited to the receiving of property taken by theft or robbery, but shall extend to the receiving of property appropriated by breach of trust and embezzlement and by falsehood, fraud and wilful imposition.”
Section 7 of the Marriage and Civil Partnership (Scotland) Act 2014 notes:
“Any rule of law under which a wife who receives or conceals goods stolen by her husband does not commit the offence of reset ceases to apply.”
Nicola Sturgeon, the former First Minister, has for some years been in the possession of numerous high-value items paid for by her husband Peter Murrell with money embezzled from the Scottish National Party.
Ms Sturgeon has publicly stated her refusal to surrender these unlawfully-obtained items, in an interview broadcast on BBC1 on 31 May 2026.
“There will now be, I would imagine, a legal process to recover the money from Peter that he embezzled from the SNP […] I am not guilty of that embezzlement, so nothing that belongs to me should be part of that.”
I have for the past three months sought clarity from Police Scotland on whether the law of reset applies to Nicola Sturgeon. No response has yet been received, and absent one I must assume that it does.
Ms Sturgeon is therefore committing, and by her own admission, intends to continue to commit, the offence of reset, which under s.3 of the Criminal Procedure (Scotland) Act 1995 carries a maximum penalty of five years imprisonment if imposed by a sheriff court, or an unlimited term in the High Court.
That is a very serious matter and cannot properly be ignored by the police on the grounds of Ms Sturgeon’s status. The crime has undoubtedly, on the facts, been committed and ought to be pursued.
Because, readers, you simply can’t have a country where the rich and famous are allowed not only to break the law, but to flagrantly ANNOUNCE on national television that they’ve done it and are going to keep doing it, and where if you ask the police about it they say “What? Nicola who? Sorry, what even IS crime?”
Not only is that country not fit for independence, is isn’t fit for anything.
Well done.
I can’t help wondering what services you have to render, and to whom, in order to be exempt from criminal investigation and prosecution.
Correct, right on the money.
Can’t wait for the next none answer from those who cannot understand the law.
Hell slap it intay her as my auld granny would say….
Well done, Rev, for pursuing this matter. Our public “services” really must be brought back to their duty.
However, I don’t agree that Scotland is not fit for regaining its statehood.
As Alex Salmond pointed out, it is not the police/SNHS/legal system/politics etc etc that has failed – it is the “leadership”.
Get rid of those “leaders” and the failures in our systems will be easily remedied.
Exactly, Sarah. We can hardly be expected to clean up these Augean stables with a brush on loan from Westminster, with two thirds of the bristles missing!
Love your metaphor, am firinn!
Sure, sarah, always the leaders.
Never the saps who vote for the same leaders, decade after decade.
Sorry Sarah but I disagree,the rev is right Scotland is not fit for independence at this present time. Yes the leadership is rotten to the core but where are the SNP MSP/MPs who should be screaming at the leadership for dragging independence down the toilet. Apart from a handful they remain silent happy and take the money and don’t give a Donald Duck about Scotland. Would you really like this lot to handle the logistics of separation, we would be left with nothing.
I don’t think we need fear that the current lot of MSP/MPs will be organising the separation. They haven’t the will or the ability!
There are many others in the independence movement who are highly intelligent, capable, and principled. I feel that when it comes to the crunch, the politicians will be meekly following the instructions of the activists. I admit that I don’t see the mechanism just yet to bring this about but I certainly do not look to the politicians for the answer.
You would have to get rid of all the trough-munching, incompetent managerial classes, too. They keep it all going.
Sturgeon said, “nothing that belongs to me should be part of that”. Maybe she will say that the stuff Pete Murrell bought with stolen money is not ‘hers’ – if so, why did she not pile it into a heap and publicly hand it over to wash her hands of this episode the minute she could. As ever, control freakery, secrecy and dissembling rules the day. Here’s hoping that a comeuppance is on its way, but I’ll not hold my breath.
google for
“is there such a thing as a power of citizen’s arrest under Scots law”
– quite interesting.
Would be fun to ruin her next lesbo literary shindig.
And let’s not miss the above article’s last line link (“not fit for independence”) to KEVIN MCKENNA’s welcomely punchy piece: ‘SNP HAS TURNED SCOTLAND INTO A ROTTEN BOROUGH NOT FIT FOR INDEPENDENCE’.
Voted for Democracy and got Kleptocracy……
Make Scotland Normal Again.
Believe in your country.
Never trust a hippy.
Lets see what action the Police takes now and what her lawyer has to say.
Anonymous again. Maybe they’re starting to sweat.
RESPECT!
Might I just add that if this is stalled, the next step should be to organise a campaign in which every concerned Scot (or at least, everybody whose money was stolen) reports Sturgeon for reset.
Seek MSM coverage so that “major” news outlets are forced to report that thousands of crime reports have been received by PS.
Reach out to the newspaper columnists who are constantly hungry for click bait.
There are plenty of states in the UN who may be termed internally «unfit» nevertheless they are freer than Scotland.
Setting the independence hurdle at a level higher than that for other states is not wise.
It is possible to overwork the concept of fitness to the point of losing sight of the prize.
Politics of the hairshirt….no thanks.
“..paid for by her husband Peter Murrell WITH MONEY EMBEZZLED FROM THE SCOTTISH NATIONAL PARTY”
I presume that needs to be proved.
If Murrell paid from his bank account how to distinguish it as embezzled money from his salary? If paid using his SNP credit card and not reimbursed to the party then that’s simpler.
Is the reason why Nicola is not being charged with reset or anything else because Peter Murrell entered a plea bargain taking the fall on the agreement that his accomplices get off Scot free? Perhaps even the deal, agreed to be secret?
Get that flag to fuck.
It’s a flag recognised throughout the world as the flag of Palestine. Do you despise Palestinians because they are Arabs (a Semitic people) or because they are largely Muslim with a Christian minority. I think I know the answer.
If they’re largely Muslim with a Christian minority, they give us advance warning of what Scotland will likely be in 30 years time.
Even allowing for Global Warming, it’ll still be too wet and cold for us surviving indigenes to be huddling among the piles of rubble.
So yes, what Beggan said.
Chap/Surah 9 – quite tellingly entitled “The book of the Sword” – teaches all you need to know about them.
I also suggest you look up the meaning of the word: “Dhimmi”…
Or just keep abreast of current affairs. Observe which demographic benefits from the new concept of “Two Tier”.
Interesting, if only you were a flea on the wall eh.
Good one.
Guessing no Christmas cards with your name on them this year.
?
It is, I feel, approaching the moment when the high heid yins inside Thames House will convene and decide: “Agent Sturgeon is now becoming a huge embarrassment and a real and present danger to the service – the time has come to cast her adrift.”
When that happens, there will not be the popcorn supplies in Scotland to meet the demand of the general populace, watching her world collapse.
And, when her world does collapse, she will take a guid few down with her.
Sometimes “Wibble” really is the correct response.
But you’ll be so confident of your prediction, StaneHeid, you’ll have put a bet on. I expect you’re already planning a posh cruise with your winnings.
What odds did you get?
Good. Keep at it Stu.
The only thing that will defeat this blatant corruption will be diligent investigative journalism and holding the corrupt to account.
“The only thing that will defeat this blatant corruption will be diligent investigative journalism and holding the corrupt to account.”
Make your mind up, only the other day you were bemoaning people highlighting the blatant and open corruption of the Deform party and calling them communists , is it okay for your preferred yoonionist cabal of scum to engage in the blatant and open corruption of the electoral system
Every one of these bastards should be held to account for their misdeeds but clowns like you enable their corruption by avoiding the truth
Sturgeon and the Scum Nonce Party alongside Farage and the other yoonionist parties will continue to get away with blatant corruption and theft as long as there are greed driven clowns like you who think you are their equal
The whole of the uk political system is vile and rancid and while people like you celebrate deliberate corruption that will continue
Ahem. I was criticising the blatant hypocrisy, not supporting Reform. I also made the point that Nigel and his TechBros mates are equally as dodgy as the other lot of misanthropes lording it (or attempting to) over us. I make no “celebration” of corruption not do I “avoid the truth”. It’s a large party of why throughout my life I’ve found politics incredibly difficult to engage with and why I do not align myself with any political party or ideology.
And yes, if it quacks like a duck and walks like a duck, it’s a duck. So when I see social engineering, high tax, Big State, interventionist Internationalism mixed in with the oppression of civil libraries, it’s Communism.
Apart from your mistaken judgment on me, I agree with the rest of what you’ve said. They all need held to account.
Hoho, Spartan, twathater has you bang to rights.
You’ve been enabling and celebrating their corruption for far too long. High time you saw the error of your ways.
Indeed Hatey. Bad me.
Wings BTL gets all the more hysterical and surreal with every passing day.
In an ideal world, the Sturgeon would also be charged with possesion of a “Fray Bentos” hair-do, and possession of her dead grandmother’s clothing…
link to bbc.co.uk
2nd Indyref “By 2031” carrot being dangled by Honest John.
There’s no way that can happen if it hasn’t been foretold by the post colonial boys.
There’s more interest online about Sturgeon being reported to the police than there is about the devolved powers announcement. Just saying.
I think the graphic to the right of this page titled “A Tall Tale” composing a pastiche of laughable front pages from the Goebellsian “The National” agitprop circular (I resist calling it a “newspaper” as that implies journalism; it’s little more than an activist fanzine, like all “newspapers” and MSM media outlets) explains why today’s announcement has been roundly ignored.
The Boy Who Cried Wolf.
‘Goebellsian “The National” agitprop circular.
It’s readers are out of this world. I think some readers are wanting for the second coming and the other lot want a caliphate.
Their motif should be two crossed dead Fascists emblazoned on a mound of dead Fascists.
Let’s see
Well done Stuart for doing this. Though tbh I am a bit miffed nobody else had done this already after the embezzled amount Mr Murrell was charged with clearly left a considerable outstanding balance in “disappeared” monies and other procured goods.
It seemed rather obvious to me. But I presumed there were others far better placed and with far more knowledge of legal procedures when those running the country have been playing so fast and loose with justice.
link to wingsoverscotland.com
I admit to just a cursory reading of the Proceeds of Crimes Acts but it does appear Stu has taken the wrong train going to the wrong station – the responsibility for recovery of the dirty money lies with the COPFS, not the Police.
With regard to Mrs Murrell’s collection of the tokens of affection from sweet Pete, I would be surprised if a restraining order has not been slapped on the wife. Of course, Pete has promised to repay every penny from his own assets but best to be safe.
Again I note that the missive is unsigned. Somebody is clearly watching their back or has been instructed!
“Why the Rule Was Changed
Historically, the common law presumed that a wife was under the total coercion and control of her husband. As legal and social understandings of marriage evolved to recognise spouses as independent individuals before the law, this automatic immunity was removed to ensure equal legal accountability.”
———————————————–
I am sure that Sturgeon would entirely agree with the reasons for the change in the law. Especially as Section 7 of the Marriage and Civil Partnership (Scotland) Act 2014 was when she was First Minister at the time of the change.
Incorrect. Check again. There was about a six-month gap before she was sworn in as FM.
Ah – OK thanks – my apologies.
But I am sure that Sturgeon would entirely agree with the reasons for the change in the law.
In this case a Citizen’s arrest is not appropriate, not least because you have to establish that detention is necessary and also have to hand the person over to the police.
There may however be a route for a private prosecution even if Police Scotland and/or the Procurator Fiscal decline to prosecute. I expect Stuart is well aware of this.
That route falls off a bit cliff like Wile E. Coyote until you see the big ‘poof!’ as private prosecution route hits reality at 120mph…
> “is isn’t fit for anything.”
Your grammar checker ain’t isn’t is fit for anything, Stu.
Also the way you say “Sorry, what even IS crime?” reminds me of the Bottom Gas episode where Eddie is trying to explain where the hot water comes from.
“Is your country’s ex-premier a confessed criminal, then?”
“Yep! Er, NO! It ISN’T! Because we don’t use crime. Uh… because we don’t know what it is.”
I would imagine that Murrell had enough money of his own – from his salary etc. If she argues that the relevant goods were bought with his money, then she would be entitled to keep them. It needs proof that the goods were bought with SNP money ( credit card in their name etc.) before there would be proof that they were stolen goods.
This may be the reason the police refuse to take any action. Any thoughts on that argument, Rev?
She knows they weren’t. He pleaded guilty. She said on the interview she knew some of them were bought with embezzled money.
LIBERATION SCOTLAND 2026 CROWDFUNDER ANNOUNCEMENT
« Dear Liberation Scotland member / Independence supporter:
Liberation Scotland’s mission is to restore the sovereign, independent state of Scotland through the exercise of the right of self-determination and the restoration of the Scottish Constitution.
Our first, essential step is to secure international recognition of Scotland as a Non-Self-Governing Territory (NSGT, i.e. dependency, or colony) at the UN Special Committee on Decolonization (C-24) and so initiate the UN-mandated process of decolonisation of the Scottish nation and its sovereign people.
The critically important international campaign is the responsibility of the Liberation Scotland Committee. We are convinced that, with the support of Scots at home (through Salvo’s domestic campaign), and that of our global diaspora, we will establish a route – clear, deliverable and free from Westminster interference – to restoring Scotland as an independent and sovereign nation state. [ETC] »
link to liberation.scot
link to archive.ph
bravo
Liberation Scotland will be presenting a petition to the C-24 Decolonisation Committee of the UN next month!!! This is great news.
Now, Wingers, put some of your loose change into the fundraiser that Fearghas at 9.13 gave the link for. Now is the time for all good Yessers to come to the aid of Scotland’s cause.
Just a quick clarification, because accuracy matters here.
The text Liberation Scotland published – and which Fearghas provides a link to – doesn’t describe a petition being presented to the C-24 next month. It describes attendance at the session, participation in side events, and the delivery of oral statements — which any NGO can do.
A formal petition to the C-24 is a specific procedural act that only applies to territories already recognised as Non-Self-Governing Territories. Scotland isn’t on that list, and the UN can’t add new territories without the administering state’s nomination (in Scotland’s case the United Kingdom). So whatever LS are doing in New York, it isn’t a petition in the UN sense and doesn’t initiate any decolonisation process.
I’m not criticising anyone’s enthusiasm — just keeping the terminology accurate so expectations stay grounded in what the UN actually does.
Couldn’t you have had the simple decency to wait until the crowd founder hit its target?
The tipping culture in New York has gotten completely out of hand!
@ Northcode: click on the News tab on the Liberation Scotland website and the most recent article is the crowdfunder. Scroll down to the 12th paragraph – it says the crowdfunder will assist them to, inter alia, “attend and petition the annual C-24 Substantive Session on decolonisation at UN HQ in New York in October..”
Is Scotland on the agenda for the next session of C-24 or will, as Northcode points out, C-24 be limited to its remit of existing NSGTs?
“… “attend and petition the annual C-24 Substantive Session…”
Thanks, Sarah — yes, I saw that line.
In UN practice, “petition” in that context means delivering an oral statement or intervention during the session, which NGOs are allowed to do. It’s different from a formal petition under the C-24’s procedures, which only applies to territories already recognised as Non-Self-Governing Territories.
I’m not criticising LS at all — just keeping the terminology clear so folk know what the UN process actually involves.
Northcode, my understanding from last year was that before Scotland’s petition can be evaluated, Scotland must be sponsored by a current member state of the UN, but not necessarily the UK. The sponsorship must be backed by the UNGA, and if successful the C-4 can then ask the C-24 to evaluate Scotland’s petition.
If the C-24 finds that Scotland is an NSGT, and thus that it be listed as such, it will recommend that in its report to the C-4. If the C-4 agrees with the recommendation, it can put it to the UNGA.
But even if the UNGA agrees to have Scotland added to the list, the UK as Scotland’s administering state can require that Scotland NOT be added, and the C-24 will not normally refuse such a request, so in effect the UK can veto Scotland’s NSGT listing anyway, which rather defeats the entire point of the exercise.
But I’m not convinced that not being listed is the same as not being an NSGT. If the formal evaluation is that Scotland is an NSGT in all practicality bar the listing, is the UN going to just sit on its hands while Scotland continues to be abused by one of the worst colonisers the world has ever known?
I’m also not convinced that the UK is the ‘administering state’; surely that is the English state pretending to be the UK state? Since the English state isn’t a UN member, how can it have a veto?
Correction; I had said the UK can require Scotland NOT be added, but that isn’t correct. The UK has no formal right to ‘require’, only to request, but it can still make waves if it doesn’t get its way, so the C-24 will normally accede to the ‘request’.
The UN process is actually much simpler than that, and it doesn’t involve sponsorships or evaluations for non-listed territories.
Under UN practice, only the administering state can nominate a territory for Non-Self-Governing Territory status. That’s why the current list consists entirely of territories formally reported by their administering states.
The C-24 doesn’t evaluate or classify territories that aren’t on the list, and it can’t initiate an assessment of Scotland. Likewise, the General Assembly doesn’t add new territories by vote — it only receives reports from administering states.
So whatever one thinks politically, Scotland can’t be listed as an NSGT without the UK first declaring it as such, and the UN bodies don’t have a mechanism to bypass that.
On the “administering state” point: in UN terms the United Kingdom is the recognised sovereign state, and that’s the entity the UN deals with. There isn’t a separate “English state” as far as the UN is concerned.
This is just how the UN system is structured.
Well done Rev, but given how events have unfolded over the past few years one can only conclude that Agent Sturgeon has friends in high places, so I wouldn’t hold your breath.
No doubt some six months hence you’ll get a response saying that all evidence in relation to such an alleged offence has been “thoroughly examined” already, and as no new information has been provided there’s nothing to see here folks, so move along.
Wankers!
It’s good to see this being pushed if only to see some revers Karma for Scotland’s latest addition to the parcel of rogues.
In the meantime Stu, please don’t go driving on the A87.
There is very little doubt Nicola Sturgeon is protected and future-proofed by State promise. The Rev Stuart Campbell’s patiently incisive legal investigations will increasingly corroborate this. It is already apparent that entities within the Scottish establishment have been activated as frontline protection, patently subservient to levels beyond Scotland. But even should herself be eventually air-lifted out to some chosen distant sinecure, Stuart’s precision scalpel probes will have confirmed to the world the undeniably rancid nature of it all, indeed from the malign targeting of Salmond on. Who here cares about trinkets that were stolen. Our country was stolen.
I guess some “little doubt” must arise from her hubby currently doing time.
If some of the ongoing investigations/efforts bear fruit will that lead to the establishment of some more “little doubt”, or will you simply pick up a new conspiracy theory?
There’s no doubt that all of the relevant information about this story is in the public domain. There clearly is little doubt that the majority of Scots don’t give a scooby. Evidence such as the complete absence of street protests about it, through the SNP being voted back into power in May for 5 more years.
We don’t need to construct fanciful conspiracy theories when apathy, disinterest and tribalism provide a perfectly adequate explanation.
“Who here cares about trinkets that were stolen. Our country was stolen.”
Indeed so, Fearghas, as Burns wrote Scots and Scotland were bocht an selt, and still are bocht an selt by thon ‘parcel o rogues’ among us wha ‘crave dependence’. For it is through their eyes we meet our ‘procurer’ (Memmi) day and daily.
Like most colonized peoples it was our own ‘elites’ who sold us out and gave our sovereignty awa, and still do. Which makes us a subjugated and ‘enslaved’ people desperately in need of ‘reclaiming our sovereignty’ and ‘self-recovery of culture’ (Fanon).
So you’re enslaved now, Alf?
There’s numbers you can call. They’ll get you out, or get you treatment.
My money’s on the latter.
“They’ll get you out”
Its the colonized mind that refuses to come out, Hatey; Scots with decolonized minds are already out and will never go back.
Sure, Alf, claim you’re (we’re) enslaved, then when challenged about it, serve up another dollop of differently flavoured mince.
Alldiss wrote “Barefoot In The Head”. How about “Decolonised In The Head” for your next book?
You can plug it for free on here!
Well done Stu for your’e persistence in excellent journalism, chasing the laws where police fail to look at all the laws.
Perhaps one of the reasons for Sturgeons protection when applying the Scotland Act is that the Scotland Act itself is of corse set out, and passed by the legislation and Statues for parliament for Englands GB not the devolved parliament of Scotland,
The Scotland Act presented to Scotland itself determines wether criminals will be prosecuted or protected in Scotland.
The supposedly SNPs ring fenced finances could be found protected and found wanting under English laws applying to the Scotland Act.
Not by the people of England …. but by the parliament of Westminsters GBs Acts.as it merges Scots laws with those of Englands.
Politicians from Scotland always run down south for protection and peerages and ermine,
When it comes to policing and courts they always head to the supreme court of Labour an Tony Blairs making for decisions.
Which is illegal for it to cover laws of Scotland,
It is this double standard of TWO sets of LAWS covering TWO governances over Scotland that Westminster does not hold or have to contend with for the parliament of England and Wales, and makes for confusing when applying Scots laws that become English laws under the Scotland Acts.
Good points about the stranglehold the Fabians have over law and governance (all roads seem to lead back to The War Criminal Blair) plus the notable habit of those selling us out scarpering away within the M25 to collect their thirty pieces of silver.
MSM reporting that a Reform council has set up the first private migrant monitoring patrols in town centres. It’s an attempt to calm and de-escalate things in places where the indigenous law-abiding perceive their town centres being turned into high risk and even no go areas.
Women and girls are set to benefit most. According to MSM reports, incidents of following, overt filming, offensive sexual remarks, and being told to “cover up” have already been investigated by patrol members.
Imagine that, those in power actually looking after people.
I await the usual hysterical screeching from the Fabians about how this is somehow a ‘bad thing’.
HH, regarding immigration, the bottom line is money. Successive Westminster governments, no matter the colour, see immigration as cheap labour.
Immigration and controlling our borders was seen as a major issue in Brexit and promises were duly made by our politicians to curtail this.
Of course, it accelerated significantly.
Now we have people blaming these foreigners for all their ills and directing their anger at them instead of the very politicians that worked very hard to make it happen.
The very politicians who said they would curb it.
Again, it becomes tedious to point out time and time again, we have only ourselves to blame, including yourself, HH.
Yes, of course, it will all be fixed when Nigel Farage or Rupert Lowe becomes Prime Minister and we can all sleep safely in our beds…..and so the cycle begins once more.
I’ve never blamed migrants for all my ills.
But I have a lot of sympathy for the people stabbed or raped, and the surviving relatives of those who have been killed, when they blame a migrant for all their ills.
Every time I read about some innocent suffering life-changing trauma at the hands of some cant who has no legal right to be here, I get angry.
If that puts me in the tiniest minority of one, then so be it.
Under the Scotland act/s passed by Westminster parliament legislation and their Statues the Devolved government active at present in Scotland is Westminsters baby parliament. A branch of Westminster parliament, its reservations, it do’s and don’ts. And the supreme Court and Scottish parliament all come under Westminster parliament.
Not much to do with the people of Scotland or how it is run and controlling allowed laws to Scotland .it is difficult to say or pin point wether one is working and taking actions under Scots laws or restriction allowed in limiting Scots laws from Westminster parliament.
“Under the Scotland act/s passed by Westminster parliament legislation and their Statues the Devolved government active at present in Scotland is Westminsters baby parliament. A branch of Westminster parliament, its reservations, it do’s and don’ts. And the supreme Court and Scottish parliament all come under Westminster parliament.”
Yes James, if one looks close enough all one really sees is a colonial assembly in Scotland (and Wales and N. Ireland), a colonial administration, colonial ministries, colonial officials, colonial laws – hence colonial justice, a colonial economy, a colonial society, a colonial culture and, by implication, a colonized doun-hauden people.
Just a brief factual note:
Scotland isn’t classified as a colony under international law, and it isn’t listed as a Non-Self-Governing Territory. Scots law, Scots institutions and the Scottish Parliament operate within the UK’s constitutional framework, but none of that places Scotland in a colonial category.
That’s just a fact.
“Scotland isn’t classified as a colony under international law”
What international court told you this?
“isn’t listed as a Non-Self-Governing Territory”
That process has only just begun, but the fact remains that not all colonies are or were listed as a NSGT.
And does anyone really believe in the “UK’s constitutional framework”, which is a rather flexible concept adapted as situations dictate?
In any event, colonialism is a state of mind as much if not more than a matter of law. A colonised people know they are colonized – unless the effect of the colonial mindset and a dependency complex tells them to deny it.
I think if Prof. Baird limited his scope to include only plain, demonstrable objective facts and the truth, as opposed to his own “class of pseudo-facts”, we wouldn’t be having this discussion (daily).
Therein lies the problem: telling people what they want to hear, as opposed to what they need to hear, the latter based on actual reality, not fantasy.
I am surprised that it took a day for the nutters to arrive spreading their repetitive ‘wisdom’ yet again!
CC, indulging in a bit of projection, I see.
I believe it’s important to you to believe Scotland isn’t a colony.
Northcode may be right that Scotland doesn’t have the necessary paperwork to say it’s a colony but if it walks like a colony, quacks like a colony, it’s definitely a duck.
All the paperwork telling you that this particular duck’s pronouns are Partner and Co-owner, doesn’t make it so.
If you’re so sure that Scotland isn’t a colony, could you please state your definition of colony. I’m very interested.
While you’re here Chas, why don’t you give your definition of what a colony is. I’m sure your wisdom will be far superior.
Please don’t feel pressured into using bigger words than your brain can handle.
Or you can always, avoid the actual subject, jot down something inane and then scurry away.
“Therein lies the problem: telling people what they want to hear, as opposed to what they need to hear, the latter based on actual reality, not fantasy.”
Yes, anon colonial mouthpieces sic as yersel hiv aye been telling us that the UK ‘Union’ is not a fantasy; despite the increasingly obvious fact that the Westminster parliament is merely composed of ‘England rebranded as UK’ (Prof Black) and its subordinate ‘internal colonies in the Celtic periphery’ (Prof Hechter), the latter nations now seeking to break free, much as we see.
Reality, fantasy and the colonial hoax of ‘union’; wha tae believe, eh – these learned professors or Captain Caveman? Its a tough one.
@BP
“CC, indulging in a bit of projection, I see.
I believe it’s important to you to believe Scotland isn’t a colony.”
Yes, indeed it is “important to me”, BP. The objective truth matters, after all.
It is an indisputable fact that:
(a) In international law and established constitutional practice terms, Scotland is NOT classified as a colony;
(b) Further, Scotland IS NOT recognised by the United Nations as a Non-Self-Governing Territory.
Northcode is entirely, factually, demonstrably correct – and all the gnashing of teeth, howling at the Moon nor impotent, groundless protestations in the world won’t change these immutable facts one iota.
This whole “colony” label is invoked by fringe elements of the Independence Movement as a feeble rhetorical or political device to highlight (for more mainstream, “ordinary” political) frustrations over Westminster overriding Holyrood or the denial of a second independence referendum. However, from a structural, historical, and international legal standpoint, Scotland operates purely as a constituent nation within a multinational state.
As I have pointed out frequently, insisting on comparing Scotland to actual historical colonies—such as Memmi’s early 1950s Tunisia, where state-sponsored mass executions, rape, and house burnings routinely occurred within living memory – is a gross misappropriation. It is entirely unjustified and highly offensive.
@Alf Baird
Ah, the classic appeal to authority, eh Alf – ever the name dropper. But let’s be precise about what kind of authority we’re dealing with here.
Quoting Michael Hechter’s 1970s sociological theory of “internal colonialism” does not magically rewrite international law, nor does it alter constitutional reality, Chief. Sociological frameworks and political science models – whilst perhaps interesting academic exercises to some with nowt more gainful to do with their time – are not jurisprudence, something you’d do well to differentiate and take on board.
It is incredibly telling that in order to support your endless “Scotland is a colony” schtick, you must rely on ephemeral, subjective “sociological theory” – rather than pointing to a single United Nations resolution, international treaty, or legal ruling that actually classifies Scotland as such. Why? Because, as we both know, none exists, which must be highly inconvenient.
So, “wha tae believe”? Should we believe a 50-year-old (misappropriated) sociological model, or should we believe the established legal frameworks of the United Nations and international law? It’s not a tough one at all, mate.
You can throw around all the “colonial mouthpiece” insults you like. It merely highlights the glaring absence of legal and factual grounding in your position, and that continues to be so, despite your daily interventions here.
CC – this is where Alf’s argument falls apart.
Alf has made some good points over the years which I can see some truth in and find agreement with. As I’ve become more interested in Independence I’ve read quite a bit of material including Alf’s. There are some very compelling arguments there.
However, comparing present-day Scotland to some of the appalling historical examples which clearly do not match at all is not only ridiculously histrionic and inaccurate but offensive to the victims of such horrendous regimes. Additionally, I’d add that historically in Scotland some of the worst damage was done by being sold out by our very own (as is still the case).
I want Scotland to be independent because I want a fairer, more free, more democratic and more prosperous society for us all, freed from the litany of problems resulting from the utter omniclusterfuckpermashambles in ruling London and their obsession with being wedded to overseas interests. I’m not interested in philosophers or events that occurred centuries ago, nor am I interested in hatred of neighbours or grievances.
The independence movement needs to focus on winning the argument with cold, hard facts, not historical grievances, feelings or misguided philosophical ideas from long-deid academics who talk a lot yet say very little.
Totally fair comment Spartan.
It’s very interesting to spend a few minutes researching the UK’s remaining colonies.
There are 14 BTW, occupying bits of every continent apart from Australia.
It’s then interesting to inquire if they were in the EU when the UK was in the EU. The answer is No, with one exception, Gibraltar.
Does this mean that however you define a colony, the EU didn’t seem to believe that Scotland met that definition? After all, the EU declined membership to 13 of the pukka UK colonies out of 14.
Whilst it’s not categorical, it sure looks that way.
“comparing present-day Scotland to some of the appalling historical examples which clearly do not match at all is not only ridiculously histrionic and inaccurate but offensive to the victims of such horrendous regimes.”
Imagine yourself, Spartan, in Scotland in the 1700s, the brutal wars of independence and English military occupation. Imagine the Clearances, followed by millions of Scots being shipped out their own land facilitated by Westminster laws, men having no other option but to join colonial armies, just like the colonized Irish and Indians did. Imagine the abject poverty, hunger and deprivation in an under-developed exploited land leaving people no option but to join the colonizer’s army or leave. The same was played out in many colonies.
“..I’d add that historically in Scotland some of the worst damage was done by being sold out by our very own (as is still the case).”
If you read postcolonial theory you would understand that colonialism is always ‘a co-operative venture with native elites’ (Fanon), which remains a challenge facing Scots today.
Alf, you just proved my point. Stuff that happened in the 18th Century has no relevance whatsoever in 2026.
Interesting, yes, appalling, very but completely irrelevant to today.
I’m imagining, Alf, that you veer between the “no option” and the “co-operative venture” explanations, picking the appropriate one each time you need to construct evidence for your pre-conceived conclusions.
“Stuff that happened in the 18th Century has no relevance whatsoever in 2026”
Thon 1707 annexation and ‘union’ hoax haes plenty relevance theday, Spartan. Its also the main reason Scotland’s GDP (and population) is about half of what it should be in 2026.
You might also want to try that one on the Americans, and the French, tell them that “Stuff that happened in the 18th Century has no relevance whatsoever in 2026”!
And ‘the moon is made of cheese’ richt enough (Cesaire). Its nae wunner you and folk like you voted Naw in 2014!
“The Moon is made of cheese” is my all time favourite.
Odd that no progress has been made since. You’d expect somebody would have concluded which cheese by now.
A problem for a Professor to take up?
Dry your eyes Alf.
Guess what, people have different opinions and think and vote differently to you. I’d have thought a “Professor” would understand that but obviously not in your case; quite bizarre from a supposed academic.
Just gives to show that obsessive politicos are as blinkered and dogmatic as football supporters.
I tend to think critically and form my own opinions rather than endlessly quoting the idea of others, i.e. shite uttered by irrelevant “philosophers”.
Well if both Scotland’s population AND GDP were both double what they are today in your mythical scenario, then GDP per capita would be exactly the same as today – ergo the average Scot would just be as well of as they are now.
I suppose your supposition is that pre-1707 Scotland was an entirely peaceful place where nothing violent ever happened, and would have remained so were it not for the English, who of course are responsible for every and all problems faced by Scotland. Even when the Scottish people elect a bunch of useless (but ethnically Scottish MP’s) who stand on a ticket of Scottish independence – the resultant screw ups are all still the fault of the English (MI5 mate) aren’t they?
CC,
I’ve already conceded that Northcode is correct, unfortunately for Scotland.
We live in Schrödinger’s Scotland where we are a country and a colony at the same time.
Look one way, we are a country, look another we are a colony.
What do you think,
Are we treated like a country?
or are we treated like a colony?
Can a colony be on the theoretical hook for billions of pounds worth of reparations for slavery, theft, genocide, etc.?
After all, the Scottish place names littering the far corners of the world, and the millions of people in the Americas, Africa and the Antipodes with Scottish surnames, didn’t happen by magic.
Maybe some people want us to be Schrodinger’s colony – a put upon, oppressed, exploited victim when we’re getting out the begging bowl, but a rapacious, exploitative, militaristic force when we scent weakness in the nations we’re about to trample underfoot.
HH,
As long as Westminster calls the shots, Scotland can whinge and moan as much as they want, Scotland can play the victim as much as they want.
That can all change by again being responsible and accountable for our own decisions, it’s simple really.
What makes it difficult is the naysayers that absolutely insist we should be subservient and secondary to the whims of our neighbouring country, although they won’t couch it in those terms.
@BP
“I’ve already conceded that Northcode is correct”
Well in that case we’re agreed, and there isn’t really a discussion to be had – at least, not in terms of the stuff I’m talking about.
As per Northcode’s comments (and my own for that matter), facts are facts, and said facts take precedence over what people might “think”.
No CC,
You still don’t understand.
By your logic there are no colonies unless certified by the UN and these now certified colonies by the UN were not colonies before because they had no certification from the relevant organisation that had to certify them as colonies and only became a colony once the UN decided it was time to become a colony….or,
colonies that were already colonies sought help and representation from the UN, for example. To recieve help and representation from the UN they would have to meet certain criteria.
That criteria would, no doubt include, the applicant state being consistent with the definition of a colony.
Every name on the list of colonies that the UN hold would have been colonies before, not only after, the UN accepted them as such.
I’m sorry if this is confusing for you.
Breastplate @ 9:51
Give up son !
This has been clearly explained to you several times, but it’s obviously well above your level of understanding.
You’re just making a right tit of yourself now !
“I’m sorry if this is confusing for you”
Well, it was a bit over-complicated, BP.
I prefer Alf’s explanation (not the cheese one, the other one).
Some colonised persons prove they’re colonised by claiming to be colonised.
Other colonised persons prove they’re colonised by claiming not to be colonised.
The believers in our colonised condition, taken together with the colonised unbelievers in our colonised condition, add up to an irrefutable case for us being colonised. QED.
Are you questioning my logic? Then that’s clear and undeniable evidence that you’ve been colonised. Besides, it’s Alf’s logic, not mine, take it up with him.
Breastplate, I think you’re conflating two different things here, and that’s where the confusion comes from.
The UN list doesn’t decide whether a place was a colony historically. When the UN designates a territory as an NSGT, it’s not certifying or validating its past status. It’s simply applying a modern administrative category used for managing the decolonisation process that began after 1945.
Every territory on the UN list was indeed a colony before it was listed — you’re absolutely right about that. The listing didn’t make them colonies; it just placed them into a specific legal process for ending colonial rule.
Scotland’s situation is different. Whatever frustrations people feel about the political relationship with Westminster, Scotland isn’t part of that UN decolonisation framework, and it isn’t treated as a Non-Self-Governing Territory. I think that’s all CC is saying (he’ll correct me if I’m mistaken, I’m sure) — it’s just the legal category the UN uses today.
Political frustration and international legal status aren’t the same thing, and it’s okay to keep those concepts separate.
“Political frustration and international legal status aren’t the same thing, and it’s okay to keep those concepts separate”
I like the new Northy.
I guess the big question is what happened to the old Northy.
Is there a hideous painting under a blanket in the attic?
Or perhaps a deep, dank basement, where a hairy, shambling Pict-like figure is splintering its knuckles on the breeze block walls of its cell?
In film, these scenarios never end well. We had better enjoy the new Northy before the final reel brings the ghastly denouement.
Northcode,
No I’m not conflating two different things.
There’s nothing in your post I disagree with except the position of CC and like minded posters and their position that Scotland is not a colony and never was.
You acknowledge that before being on the UN’s NSGT list, you can be a colony, this is my position and the exact opposite of the position CC and some others take, that Scotland is simply not a colony because it is not formally recognised by the UN.
And because of this position CC et al take, they say Alf Baird and the rest of his team are wasting their time in getting Scotland’s case looked at.
This is the crux of the matter.
There’s no conflating.
@BP, You omit to mention that:
– the UN specifically considered Scotland around 1954 and made the positive decision that Scotland was not a colony; and
– the decolonisation legal framework was developed consciously and deliberately to exclude countries like Scotland.
The last time a new territory was added to the list of NSGT’s was 1963, and apart from this one instance no territory has been added to the list since 1946. Scotland also cannot be an NSGT, regardless of anything else, because it is geographically contiguous with rUK. So yes, Alf and team are wasting their time (but being retired he has much of that) and others money on this. There is no chance Scotland will be designated an NSGT.
Admit it, BP.
Arguing interminably over whether or not Scotland is a colony is way easier (and more fun) than putting in the hard graft of thinking about what Scotland would need to sort out prior to Indy.
Have you checked out Robin McAlpine? He’s looking to crowdfund the preparatory work his Common Weal believes is necessary before any Indy plan could ever adopt the mantle of grown up feasibility. I believe they’ve identified some 80 areas where policies would need to be in place.
You should take a look. I believe they ignore the question of whether Scotland is or is not a colony as completely irrelevant. Which of course it is.
But that does lead to a follow up question. Why are so many prepared to expend so much energy on something that advances the cause of Indy by nothing whatsoever?
Unless it’s because they remain as they were in 2014 – prepared to doom the efforts towards Indy through willed lack of preparedness and pointless focus on the irrelevant.
HH,
Yes, of course there is more than one way to advance the case for Scotland’s self determination, I agree with you.
Of course, some of them will be better than others, so it’s probably a good reason not to put all our eggs in the one basket.
I will be happy with any plan that culminates in reinstating Scotland’s status as a self governing territory.
When colonial mouthpieces tell you that the UN decolonization process and international law route for peoples in self-determination conflict is pointless, you instinctively know not to believe them.
Because they want you to depend 100% on the exceedingly good nature and endless ‘fairness’ of the plundering colonial power’s domestic political and legal processes, i.e. the ‘colonial straitjacket’ or ‘blind alley’.
Which no former colony now independent state has ever sensibly done.
@BP
Yes, you’re right – this clearly is “confusing for you”, so let’s draw a line under it. I note that as ever with you (and Alf), the goalposts have been dragged so far off the pitch that they’re now in a different postcode…
As others have also been telling you besides myself, you fundamentally misunderstand the causal link here. Scotland is not a non-colony because it lacks a UN certificate – it lacks UN recognition because structurally, legally and historically, it objectively does not meet the criteria of a colony.
To summarise this objective reality, which as I have been repeatedly saying operates entirely independently of your political frustrations:
1. Constitutional Reality
Scotland operates as a constituent nation within a multinational state, not a colonial outpost.
2. International Law
Scotland is not classified as a colony by any established legal framework.
3. The UN NSGT List
As Northcode, Aidan et al painstakingly explain, the UN decolonisation framework was consciously developed to exclude territories like Scotland (being geographically contiguous to the rUK). The UN simply cannot unilaterally list Scotland without the UK’s prior nomination.
We may reasonably conclude, then, that yes: spending time, energy and crowdfunded money trying to bypass a UN Committee that quite literally does not have the mechanism nor remit to classify Scotland as a colony, as under any conceivable circumstances, is the very definition of “a waste of time”.
As I keep saying, if independence is genuinely desired, there needs to be a focus on the grown up, pragmatic preparations required to run a modern state. Clinging to a subjective victimhood identity and crassly misappropriating the horrific experiences of actual historic colonies does nothing to advance the cause of independence. In fact it is an embarrassment, distraction, and actively detracts from it.
Well, I’ll it there, as the facts speak for themselves. Have a good afternoon.
Although I have payed attention to news, in the recent past of separating England into devolved Councils and mayorisms sections, which will also start applying double laws to England and Wales.
The Westminster parliament is busy behind the scenes applying doubles or triple laws capturing and controlling the people down south as well.
” One and the Same parliament”
Or is it?
Yes James, and even an English parish council can lawfully organise a referendum on independence – somebody should tell the SNP ‘leaders’!
link to youtube.com
Spartan 117.
It certainly appears insidious as to whom is running both Scotland and Englands parliaments and politicians, creating laws of Scotland, England, ireland and Wales, as they go,
Without doubt neither the people of Scotland, England, Wales and Ireland called for mass immigration influx boundary ignored borders of the Isles of Britain,
Just as the people never requested, gender self identification, just stop oil, BLM, free speech restrictions, reduction of actual british armed forces, navy, policing and DIversity agenda,
The Westminster parliament and those running it behind the scenes of Westminster parliament have a lot to answer for in restricting the people on the Isles of Britain with these new imposed laws, that are neither the laws of Scotland or England,
We all know that the Sovereignty of Scotland has been Colonial kidnapped, but how are the people of England, Wales and Ireland feeling right now with their Sovereignty been removed. I suspect the same as the people in Scotland,
The plans for these changes in Britain have been a long term project not so obvious at the beginning, however accelerated considerably in recent years removing democracy and accountability.
At this moment in time the people of England are so busy stopping Scottish independence that they are thwarting the independence of England,
This is a long standing problem of being taught to, look, “Scotland Squirrel” that takes their attention and diverts it away from what is happening to England and down south generally.
I have always recognised that when Justice is done for people of Scotland the same applies to England,
For when Scotlands Country is free and independent so is Englands country free and independent, the parliaments and laws of both Countries become freed and independent of foreign actors, that are pushing foreign policies of diversity, green agendas that increase fuel prices, Gender issues, free speech, the new religion of the monarch of England, and many more policies for controlling people,
They are all connected for as long as Englands people do not recognise the individual independent Status of both Scotland and England.
Alf,
Scotland is under Colonial status under the Scotland act, from Westminster parliament as there was no previous Scottish parliament in the parliament of Great Britain since it was dissolved by the Queen Anne of Englands declaration prior to the 1st of May 1707.
The Scotland act from Westminster parliament provides Scotland with a falsified parliament in Scotland, but also reties Scotland and Englands Countries together where it failed on the 1st of May 1707 after over three hundred years absence of a Scottish parliament,
this is not a treaty of union of parliaments as there is or was no Scottish parliament resting in Westminster parliament when the Scotland act was produced.
This is not recognised by Scotland or Englands people.
It personally occurs to myself that the other 50% needed to make Scotland and England free from Colonial rule of foreign policies.
Does not lie with the people of Scotland alone, but with the people of England, Ireland and Wales as they are also trapped and recaptured by the Scotland Acts,
Where as they had not been for over three hundred years previously to the Scotland Acts,
Maintaining the rhetoric that Scotland are bad for wanting independence, also maintains England as a captured nation of foreign policies.
And what would serve Scotlands nation if carried through would also serve the other three nations in the Isles of Britain at the same time
Colonial rule and lack of democracy does not effect or affect just Scotland anymore. The mantle covers all of the nations that make up The isles of Britain nowadays.
The end to these foreign policies is to regain our Sovereignties from foreign rules and agendas.
Does this garbage never end?
Chin up, Chas.
Astronomers believe that eventually the sun will expand to engulf the Earth.
(Nobody will be talking about “man made” global warming by then)
North code,
There has not been a Scottish parliament in the great Britain parliament for over three hundred years since the date the Scottish parliament was dissolved on the 28th April 1706 in England prior to the treaty of union starting in the 1st May 1707.
This brings us up to recent events in laws of the “Scotland Act” from the parliament for England and Wales Westminster parliament / parliament of GB passing a Colonial act over Scotland.
“…attend and petition the annual C-24 Substantive Session on decolonisation at UN HQ in New York in October…”
This is what the Liberation Scotland committee is doing. Next month we will see something major being done in the cause of regaining Scotland’s position as a normal country.
Wonderful!!!
The Liberation Scotland crowdfunder has raised over £8000 in the last 16 hours. Please spread the word, Wingers, so people know that a few quid donated from each independence supporter will really help the most significant step to independence since the 2014 poll.
“the most significant step to independence since the 2014 poll”
Odd.
The MSM is hoaching with accounts of how Swinney and his Welsh and Northern Irish counterparts have just agreed to work together for the breakup of the UK.
Assuming we get our referendum through these efforts as promised, then whatever the result, it will at least have legitimate, democratic authority.
Whatever goes on at the UN, that won’t.
I think that only somebody who doubts the actual existence of a sustained majority in support of Indy could describe a junket to the UN by a group of undemocratic chancers as “the most significant step to independence since the 2014 poll”.
But by all means, sarah, you dig deep.
£8k! Lucky Alf, that more than pays for a business class return and a weeks stay in the highest end hotels. Nice work if you can get it!
North code,
The Scotland Act Passed Englands and Wales and Irelands Westminster parliament is the Colonial the Act as there was no Scottish parliament that time and not since the 28th April 1706.
Chas,
Fancy you thinking Westminster parliament Acts laws and dates are Garbage that should not be repeated to the rest of world in general.
May be you do not stand in unionson with the rest of Westminster parliament.
Captain caveman,
Socialogical theory does not rewrite international laws nor does it alter Constitutional reality,
Couldn’t agree with you more,
Only the parliament for England and Wales did that when they altered their Calendar dates to the supposed international 1707;treaty of union in 1752. Making the parliament of England and Wales, loose 11 missing days to their side of the treaty of union.
Altering Constitutional reality.
Its always wise to look at what Westminster parliament is doing, has done in the past and is still altering that pre- conception of reality in the present.
international laws of treaties still have to apply if a reality.
James Che says:
“Its always wise to look at what Westminster parliament is doing, has done in the past and is still altering that pre- conception of reality in the present.”
Wow !
That’s pretty serious, “James” !
Ye cannae alter the pre-conception of reality in the present and hope to get away with it !
This is fun. Very NOT.
Still trying to figure if it is an AI joke. Somebody help me…
« THE WARGAME
What would you do in a state of emergency?
Coming to Sky and NOW from 21 September.
Who will appear in The Wargame?
The key cast of The Wargame, and their roles in the scenario, are as follows:
Leadership
? Prime Minister – The Rt Hon. the Lord Gove PC
? Deputy Prime Minister – The Rt Hon. NICOLA STURGEON PC
? Defence Secretary – The Rt Hon. Dame Penny Mordaunt DBE PC
? Home Secretary – The Rt Hon. the Baroness Harman KC PC
? Foreign Secretary – The Rt Hon. JIM MURPHY PC
? Attorney General – The Rt Hon. the Baroness Warsi PC
? Director of Communications – The Baroness Hazarika MBE
? Chief of Defence Staff – General Sir Richard Barrons KCB CBE
? National Security Adviser – The Rt Hon. the Lord Kim Darroch KCMG
? Intelligence Chief – Christopher Steele
International Roles
? Nato Secretary General – The Rt Hon. the LORD ROBERTSON KT GCMG PC
? US Secretary of State – Anthony Scaramucci
Russian experts, led by author Keir Giles, will be facing off against them.
When will The Wargame air?
The Wargame will air nightly from Monday 21 September, concluding on Thursday 24 September. The final episode will be followed immediately by The Wargame: Live (w/t).»
TRAILER:
link to youtube.com
Most question marks above are deceased bullet points which clearly didn’t survive their hyper-jump journey through cyberspace…
Enough to make a man smash up his ain hoose in blind rahe that shite Fearghas. The ‘Outer Party’ are sneering at us.
My neighbour died in April. He left no will, though he has cousins their whereabouts are unknown. I have just called 101 to report that people unrelated to him and who clearly have no right to his possessions have removed most of the valuable items from his house.
Apparently, that is not a police matter, I need to phone citizen’s advice ?
Good luck, Stew, but I’m not holding my breath.
There seems to be a lot of confusion about how the UN’s Non-Self-Governing Territories list actually works, so it might help to lay out the basics in plain language.
Scotland cannot be designated an NSGT (Non-Self-Governing Territory). The UN system can’t add Scotland to the NSGT list because…
First: the UN doesn’t go around deciding which places are colonies. A territory only goes on the NSGT list if the administering state reports it. The UK reports its overseas territories — Falklands, Gibraltar, Bermuda, and so on. It has never reported Scotland, and realistically never will. Without that step, the UN literally can’t do anything.
Second: Scotland was looked at in the 1950s and the UN decided it wasn’t a colony. That decision has never been revisited.
Third: Scotland is geographically contiguous with England. The UN’s decolonisation framework only applies to territories that are geographically separate from the administering state. Contiguous territories don’t qualify.
Fourth: the NSGT list is basically closed. No new territories have been added since 1963. The UN now manages the existing list rather than expanding it.
Put all of that together and the picture is pretty straightforward: Scotland can’t be added to the NSGT list under the UN’s current decolonisation system. It’s not a judgement about Scotland’s history or anyone’s political frustrations — it’s just how the system works.
I’m not saying Liberation Scotland shouldn’t make its case informally to the UN. I’m saying that even formal petitions asking the UN to put Scotland on the NSGT list can’t lead anywhere, because that specific route is closed off by the rules the UN actually uses, not the rules some people imagine it uses.
Thanks Northcode – a helpful and clear summary. I might also add that the political will amongst UN members to significantly expand the decolonisation framework (the only practical route through the issues you describe) is clearly not there. If anything, the UN and international law more generally have and are continuing to decline in importance.
It is my view that Liberation Scotland’s claim is structurally impossible.
They are asking supporters to believe that raising £200,000 and sending a delegation to New York could lead to Scotland being added to the NSGT list. But that route is closed off by:
– the reporting requirement
– the contiguity rule
– the 1950s determination
– the frozen list
– the lack of political will
– the declining relevance of UN decolonisation
This isn’t a matter of opinion. It’s a matter of fact and institutional architecture — it is how the UN actually works. It seems to me they are selling a route that cannot possibly lead to the outcome they claim.
Yes absolutely – within the current framework of international law there is no route to Scotland being designated as an NSGT. Liberate Scotland are wasting their time and other people’s money.
As you imply, these are largely your subjective viewpoints, which as one can see lack definitive sources. They also assume a rather static and unchanging geopolitical environment, which is no longer the case.
What is evident is that geopolitical events are leading to demands for a restructuring of the UN and its ‘institutional architecture’. It is also the case that major restructuring of the UN occurred following the global crises post WWII and again in the 1960s era, which coincided with global demands for imperial powers to exit their colonies, and which duly led to significant numbers of decolonizations.
We should remember that the UN even today acknowledges that ‘decolonization remains unfinished business’, and that, fundamentally, the UN was itself established to eradicate colonialism, and to end constant wars and conflicts due to imperial power domination.
As we now experience another global crisis, the imperial powers are again having trouble hanging on to their remaining colonies. Hence a major restructuring of the UN is expected and all colonial territories need to be ready to make their move at the opportune time. In this sense Liberation Scotland’s UN initiative is well timed and is receiving a positive response internationally.
“Hence a major restructuring of the UN is expected”
If so, nobody’s writing about it in the news feeds I follow.
Citation please, Professor Baird.
“As you imply, these are largely your subjective viewpoints.”
I think you may have misunderstood the nature of the points I’m making.
Nothing I’ve said is “subjective”. I’m describing the actual mechanisms the UN uses to maintain the NSGT list — mechanisms that have been stable for decades and that apply regardless of wider geopolitical turbulence.
The reporting requirement, the contiguity rule, the 1950s determination, and the frozen nature of the list are not opinions. They are the procedural constraints the UN itself uses. They don’t change because global politics feels unsettled, and they don’t change because people hope they will. They change only if UN member states collectively agree to reopen and redesign the decolonisation framework — something there is currently no sign of.
If the UN does undergo major restructuring in future, then of course Scotland can make whatever case it wishes. But that hypothetical future restructuring is not the same thing as Scotland being added to the NSGT list under the current system. Under the system that exists today, that route is closed.
My point is simply that Liberation Scotland is presenting a path that cannot lead to the outcome they claim within the framework that actually exists. If they wish to argue for a new framework, that’s a different conversation — but it isn’t the one they are asking supporters to fund.
Actually, what Northcode said is that these are facts, and not subjective viewpoints, and Northcode is right about that.
I would love to hear what your sources are or evidence is for this apparent restructure of the UN which is going to lead to a major expansion in the definition of what constitutes an NSGT, and the resulting decolonisation efforts. By any objective assessment, the UN is a far less significant body than it was 10 or 20 years ago, and international law plays a much less significant role in regulating the activities of and between states. That geopolitical situation is also heading further in that direction, and at an increasing rate.
There is no possibility that any of the major players at the UN are going to consider opening the door for their domestic independence movements, by providing for an internationally recognised right to independence. Why would they do that? The downside is very clear and obvious and the upside is what? You rightly identify that one of the key drivers behind deconlonisation was the recognition that richer countries owning overseas colonies was a serious threat to global peace. Conversely however, the UN charter also explicitly affirms the principle of the territorial integrity of states, recognising that independence movements and externally influence internal conflicts within states are also serious threats to peace and stability.
Both those points are as true now as they were in 1945, and I see no indication from anyone in authority anywhere that this fundamental basis for the post-war international order is going to change.
Why always so negative Hatey, anyone would think you were against Scottish independence/decolonization, such is your haste to dismiss even bespoke routes to liberation.
Anyway, who feeds you your ‘news feeds’, Duggie Alexander?
Best try some of these:
link to un.org
link to mofaic.gov.zm
link to archyde.com
“the framework that actually exists”, irrespective of UN reform:
General Assembly resolution 1514 (XV)
Declaration on the Granting of Independence to Colonial Countries and Peoples
link to ohchr.org
@ Alf Baird says: 16 September, 2026 at 7:34 pm
I responded to your post with a cut and paste section from your last link. That section contains a list of those countries for, neutral to, and against changes to the way the UN voting and veto system is structured.
Because the name of one or more of those countries against fell foul of the moderation policy here, my post didn’t appear.
Let’s just say that as the two major countries against are the most aggressive, imperialist colonisers active today, I wouldn’t hold high hopes for the UN becoming more relevant to world affairs. They’ll need their veto to stop the UN criticising them for seizing new colonies.
I expect the UN to go the way of the League Of Nations. After all, the US was the major bankroller and under Trump, that’s over.
“General Assembly resolution 1514 (XV)
Declaration on the Granting of Independence to Colonial Countries and Peoples”
General Assembly resolutions are not legally binding on member states Alf.
Multiple posters take the time and trouble to objectively, politely, patiently and provably show that Alf Baird is plain wrong in his endlessly repeated assertions. Anyone else would’ve piped down in embarrassment months/years ago, but not him it seems. He really is the “jobbie” that just won’t flush down, no matter how many judicious prods with the big brush.
He really is the most insufferable idiot.