OTS Readers, we're working hard to make this website a permanent fixture in the independence debate.  We're currently running a fundraiser to help cover costs. You can read our full breakdown on our GoFundMe page. If you can't donate, please share this link or contribute to the discussions. Thanks!
Help Keep OTS Going

Not Hitting The Wall #9

A selection of comments responding to the latest pro-independence blogs.

Friday, February 2, 2024
41 mins

Wings Over Scotland | As you mean to go on

Garavelli Princip

31 January, 2024 at 2:15 pm

So Nicola Sturgeon was making Covid decisions with “appropriate advice”.

Her closest advisers appear to have been Liz Lloyd and Devi Sridhar (naturally, two women) – on many occasions with Lloyd alone.

Liz Lloyd has an MA in American Studies and an MSc in European and Comparative Public Policy.

Devi Shridhar, despite holding a chair in Public Health at Edinburgh University, is NOT medically qualified. Rather, she is an anthropologist holding MSc and a PhD in Medical Anthropology.

She is however a qualified personal trainer – that must help.

Just the pair to offer sound advice in the areas of Virology and Immunology!

This may go some way to explain the debacle so brilliantly described by Robin McAlpine in his most recent blog.

But, very interestingly, Sridhar was a Rhodes Scholar at Oxford University.

The Rhodes Scholarship, as some here will know, is a mechanism for the US State Department and the Brit security services to ‘talent spot’ and insert useful future operatives into positions of influence.



31 January, 2024 at 3:35 pm

Could it be that she is being given, unofficially, some form of protection?

There might be an awful lot of very angry people once the information about the COVID inquiry and what their relatives might have gone through in the care homes is made public.

But of course, unapologetic cynics like me wonder if there is a possibility this political fraud might be under some form of supervision/protection because she is either a flying risk, a key witness of something/someone that cannot come to light without sending shock waves through the establishment, or a long term asset that needs frequent coaching.

I am still shocked about the burner phones to be frank. There is something there that does not quite add up.

I simply cannot believe this woman would have been so utterly stupid to order the phone herself and then kibosh the entire purpose of buying the phone by charging it to work expenses creating a trace for it.

I would find more credible that somebody else purchased the burner phone and then logged it on Sturgeon’s expenses as an insurance to secure Sturgeon’s fall at the right time (we have been hearing rumours of the burner phones for months). It might have even been herself to create an quick exit route for herself before the GE.

Are we to expect that it is the FM who complete her own expenses form and not her PA? I find that very hard to believe.

The thing about the phones is that to add it to the accounts it had to be approved by someone. They would have to approve two steps: the purchase of the phone first and the payment. So there must be a record. Due to the small amount, presumably they were paid from petty cash. To release the cash, they still would have needed to log in a receipt to justify the expense. If it was bought from Amazon, some card had to be used. Was the same card used to pay Sturgeon’s and Freeman’s burner phones? Did other members of the Sgov included burner phones in their expenses on the same month or the following? Were they logged in roughly at the same time in the expenses book, hence approved by the same person? Who approved the inclusion of this rather strange expense in the government books?

Were the phones to be used for SNP business, for SGov business, for both or for something else entirely?

Could it be possible that the phones were purchased to be used by a third party that had to remain anonymous and could not be linked to the phone/sim card? Who?

According to what has been published, Sturgeon included the phone in her expenses in March 2020. Mr Wings published in his article yesterday that the phone was purchased on the 19 March.

And what happened on the 18th March 2020? Wasn’t that the day when a witness declared that Woman H was not at the dinner she claimed she was, totally trashing her claims of rape?

What are the odds that by the 19 March 2020, they already knew the fabricated criminal case against Mr Salmond would not stick?

Was it a coincidence that On 18 March 2020, the Scottish Government also announced that, because of the Covid-19 crisis, they had paused on preparing for an independence referendum that year?

The first COVID case in Scotland was confirmed by SGov on 1 March 2020. By the 18 March 2020, in her daily report, Sturgeon confirmed another person had died of coronavirus bringing the total to 3. The numbers of deaths due to COVID were so low at that particular moment in time that it is hard to believe the burner phones were bought to talk about COVID.

I am of the opinion the phones had a very different purpose. If you fabricate a criminal case against someone and that someone is freed of all charges and therefore not sent to prison as you would have hoped, your main expectation will be to wonder “when”, rather than “if” your victim is going to retaliate against those who orchestrated the false case. Did any of the false accusers/ higher SNP echelons also buy burner phones at that time?

I am still puzzled about how (and what for) one of the burner phones ended up in Freeaman’s expenses.

Timings are always crucial. Having this inquiry that is going to trash the SNP here and the tories down south, right before the GE, is wonderfully convenient for Labour, isn’t it?

I wonder if snail-pace branchform is finally going to reach an outcome in their century-long investigation one or two weeks before the GE.

One cannot help but thinking that all chickens are carefully scheduled to come to roost at the appropriate time and in a particular order for maximum political effect: to get rid of the anti-union majority at Westminster at all costs.


31 January, 2024 at 6:00 pm

I can foresee the day Red Ned McLegohead will be too scared to go anywhere without a Police escort at least in Scotland. Maybe that is why she has one here…

Given the foulness and gargantuan betrayal of what she has done, on so many dimensions I have lost count, she will always be looking over her shoulder IMHO.

And if the whole truth (about everything) came out… I honestly think she’d have to get a gated community beach house in Florida next to Zelen$ky’s.


31 January, 2024 at 6:25 pm

“Because as we know, everything that goes wrong in Scotland is an English anti-Scottish action. Pathetic!”

Nope. Everything that goes wrong in Scotland, at present, is an action by brute force to stop the end of the union by suffocating democracy.

That has nothing to do with England. It has to do with the superior establishment powers that, for their own selfish interests, are forcing Scotland and England, whose people are pursuing diametrically opposite political directions as was made clear in 2016, glued at the hip and ruled by an undemocratic, dictatorial and warmongering uniparty style of politics where there is only one political side but a multitude of different brands which only look minimally different when you put them side by side and under a microscope. There is nothing pathetic about realising of that. And about time too.

Why is an unelected crown representative sitting in the middle of what should be a democratically elected government cabinet in Scotland?

Why is that unelected crown representative stealing control of the legislative power from the people of Scotland and transferring it to the crown so, in presence of an anti-union majority in Holyrood, and in a magnificent display of absolutism, England’s judges stop the referendum bill entering Holyrood to be debated by our democratically elected representatives?

In what kind of democracy it is the crown who decides what legislation is debated by a democratically parliament?

What exactly is the “crown office” and why is it attached like a remora to the jugular of Scotland’s prosecution service? Why isn’t there a remora crown office also attached to the jugular of England’s crown office?

Why was the previous crown agent changing protocol and instructing the police to deploy a hunting investigation against Mr Salmond when the procedure is usually the other way round? So is the crown now also controlling the police in Scotland?

What about the iterations between the UK civil service in Scotland and the crown office? The civil service in SGov represents part of the executive power. The prosecution service part of the judicial power. Those iterations between both powers should have never existed because both powers should have been independent in a democracy. Here, in Scotland, it seems the crown controls the three powers. That is not a democracy. That is absolute rule.

So hell, yeah. All what is wrong in Scotland at the moment is that Scotland is not a democracy and will never be allowed to be one for as long as Scotland remains in this union. This is a soft touch dictatorship where the crown appears to have a very tight grip in all governing structures and the three powers, and has been actively abusing them to stop Scotland’s independence.

Now, remind me, who/what was the main beneficiary of having a devolutionist political fraud like Sturgeon leading what should have been the main vehicle for Scotland’s independence?

Who/what was the main beneficiary of Sturgeon declaring before the GE2015 and AFTER it was known the SNP would win by a landslide, that a vote for the SNP was not a vote for independence?

Who/What was the main beneficiary of Sturgeon’s capitulation speech in January 2020?

Who/What would have been the main beneficiary if Mr Salmond ended up his days in prison and the yes movement was completely derailed?

Who/What was the main beneficiary of Yousless being parachuted to the driving seat of the SNP? What was the first thing he did?

He sent Scotland’s stone of destiny down south, so the English king could be coronated sitting on Scotland’s stone to symbolise subjugation of Scotland. And yet, the clown has the nerve to claim he is a republican.

Why wasn’t the evidence contained in the whatsapp messages released during the Salmond inquiry and criminal court case? What are those messages hiding, or rather who are they hiding? Who was included in those conversations that cannot be revealed?

Are we seriously expected to believe that Sturgeon is taxied in to the inquiry in a police car but then, she decided, on her own accord, to delete all the messages from 2020? Why was the evidence for the covid inquiry or the Holyrood parliamentary inquiry for the botched complaints procedure not secured by the remora crown office?

Why haven’t those messages being retrieved? This is the 21st century. Secret services have the power to follow the text messages of each one of the members of the public. Are we expected to believe they do not know what those messages contain?

Why is the british establishment protecting this woman and the perjurers in Mr Salmond’s case?


31 January, 2024 at 6:39 pm

(weeps into a lace handkerchief)
“I have al-ways re-lied ‘pon the kind-ness of strangers … ”

that lassie wiz jist daein her best for Scoatland
– it’s aw thay tories wut dun it
– and MI5 and their agents like Stuart Campbell, all part of a vast Salmond cabal

Lady Macbeth
Nurse Ratched
Imelda Marcos
Winnie Mandela
Little Nikki, she’s a devil
– the only control freak in history who never knew anything


31 January, 2024 at 6:56 pm

“According to the commenters here it is. Everything is a Unionist AKA English plot. Try reading some of the comments here directly before yours”

Nope. I have been reading the comments in this site for years now. It is not the people of England who they blame. It is the masters of the clowns sitting in England’s government. I am sure that the powers controlling England’s government clowns are the same pulling the political fraud Sturgeon’s and now Yousless’ strings.

Unionism is not “an English plot”. The people in this site knows that very well. If you read history you realise that in 1706 England had no interest whatsoever in joining Scotland in a union. It was orchestrated and pushed by the English crown, desperate to ensure that the same person continued to hold England’s and Scotland’s crown for fear that Scotland would join France’s side. When Scotland’s representatives approached the Queen in 1713 and asked to dissolve the union, it was not England who refused. It was the Queen.

Thatcher said quite clearly that if Scotland ever wanted to become independent, no political party would stop it. That was at a time when we still had political parties instead of this uniparty charade, where the leaders of the “parties” can only be distinguished by the colour of the oversized rossettes they wear.

The union was, has been, is and will continue to be a crown project.

Cameron stated very clearly years ago that the conservatives as a political party did not have particular interest in keeping Scotland in the union. In fact, not having Scotland would make it easier for them to remain in power thanks to the conservative vote in England.

It is disingenuous and actually quite dishonest to attempt to suggest that what is moving desire for independence in Scotland is hate against the English people. It is psychological blackmailing, just like the liking of Scottish nationalists to being racist, done by the Major of London years ago, is a form of emotional blackmailing.

The English people are subjected to as much crap and to this same clownfest of pretend democracy as we do. The best example was the brexit campaing, how the law was broken but yet, the British establishment pushed through with Brexit with complete disregard for democracy. And the cherry on the cake was the courts claiming that they could not force a re-run of the referendum because it was advisory, hence it was actually government choice to accept the result.


31 January, 2024 at 7:25 pm

“Just another Fabiani whitewash. 3.0”

You know, it has crossed my mind once or twice that this inquiry has worked wonderfully conveniently for Sturgeon, the alphabetties and their handler to delete all those messages from 2020 which most of us suspect could have been evidence for a potential case brought forward by Mr Salmond to denounce a political conspiracy.

what is intriguing, is that, for some reason, somebody sees as far less damning to link the deletion of all those messages to the pandemic rather than to Mr Salmond’s case. One wonders why. What/Who could those messages possibly hide that cannot be revealed to the public and cannot be used as evidence in a court of law?

Whoever this missing link might be, it seems obvious they have nothing to do with the pandemic, but this inquiry has given them a perfect back door to depart the scene with the deletion of all those messages claiming they were deleted under some made up X or Y policy.

Once it has been made official thanks to this inquiry that there are no messages, even if those still existed somewhere or could be retrieved, they would not longer have to provide them for any future criminal case. How convenient. For some.

This was not done to protect STurgeon, but somebody else. Sturgeon’s reputation is completely in tatters now. Her claim she deleted the messages presented her as a heartless and deceiving hard core liar. So who is it that is really benefiting from those messages not seeing the light of day?

It stands to the obvious the establishment is protecting the political fraud Sturgeon. So if the establishment has an interest in making those messages disappear from the public eye, and somehow the judge in Mr Salmond’s case, a representative of the crown, refused to allow the whatsapp messages to be presented as evidence, one, of curious disposition, would like to know why, and would like to know what/who were those messages hiding for the secret services, the crown prosecution services, the police, etc, etc all turning a blind eye to this deletion in industrial scale without making a real effort to retrieve them.

Who/What are they all protecting?


1 February, 2024 at 12:17 am

skimming the biz press : yankee bloomberg again –

IMF CAUTIONS UK AGAINST CUTTING TAXES IN UPCOMING BUDGET / Chancellor expected to cut taxes in bid for pre-election boost

– the IMF know what the tories are like and are coming out with “marxist shit”. The UK can’t afford this and needs to fund public services.

THE $2.6 BILLION EXPERIMENT TO COVER UP EUROPE’S DIRTY HABIT / A Norwegian project to bury carbon waste under the sea is getting backing from Germany.

– something we should be in on. Another missed opportunity.


– it’s not happening; the britain booming via free trade is just … nonsense; everyone is telling the UK to fuckoff, the UK has nothing to sell, except the stuff Scotland produces.


– yay, thank fuck we got out of the EU. Oh wait whut. But given we are so reliant, is there not some way we could “free the trade” to make it run a lot smoother. Answers on a postcard.

yesterday we find the POPULATION IS TO SOAR BY 10% IN THE NEXT 15 YEARS (legally). Good job we got out the EU – those euros let in all the p4kis, so they did. Warm beer, cricket on the village lawn and “le vice anglais” with a dear boy called Rupert in a punt at Oxford … england, the highest shining star, a beacon on God’s crown – it’s coming back … take me back to dear old blighty …

what can we make of all this? Well, brexit was a sham, a con trick and a waste of time. Whatever type of brexiteer you are – anti immigrant, a free marketeer, an EU hater, an english nationalist, working class northerner – you are all getting less of what you wanted. AH HA HA … EVER GET THE FEELING YOU’VE BEEN CHEATED?

Alas, this is too much a “high level analysis” for the average anglo. Cue Mail story about people on zodiacs.

online onetime, little englander empire loyalist brexiteer was rabbiting on about closer ties with the US, even the UK joining the US as a type of 51st “super state” – a yank corrected him; because of its population size, the UK would be broken up into several states, Scotland, Wales, Northern Ireland, and England itself would be split into north (54th) and south (55th); the anglo got very quiet. Ironically, Scotland as a US state would have total control over its own resources and far more autonomy than it does now, and with England having no claim on any of it. Scotland would have 2 senators, the same as Southern England, but the latter with more congressmen. Scotland’s state legislature would have -far- more power than holyrood. (Not that Scotland joining the US is a good idea – it’s fucking stupid, but even so, we would still be better off than in this current state; think about that)

I hate anglos more than anything else because they are stupid fucking cunts with delusional ideas about how wonderful they are; morons who think themselves “very high IQ”, and that the sun shines out their arses, and are universally admired by the world. And a simple -skim- of the US business press damns them all, this is not deep analysis. Imagine being chained to a moron for all eternity. This is your life, enjoy.


1 February, 2024 at 7:22 am

You ever stop to think just what fucked up country the ‘United Kingdom’ is?

The King of this Kingdom was best friends with Jimmy Saville.

His Prince brother was best friends with Jeffery Epstein.

Hie mentor Lord Mountbatten was a nonce.

His wife wrote a letter saying her husband was going to have her killed and if it happened it would be in a car crash.

She was subsequently killed in a car crash.

At the inquiry into her death her husband was not even called to give evidence.

What does that say about ‘our’ country?

Imagine what people from the outside must think?

All the mass grooming gangs being allowed to operate untouched to this day despite being totally exposed… it is from top to bottom.

Yet if you try to do something good for ordinary people… its immediate charges of ‘hair-pinging’, anti-semitism…

Broken Britain. Go fuck yourself.

Alf Baird

1 February, 2024 at 9:50 am

Geri @ 4:26 am

“What are we supposed to be healing? Scotland will only heal when it returns to independence.”

Yes, precisely. And on the ‘condition’ itself we are reminded that: “colonialism is like a cancer, it only seeks to grow” (Albert Memmi) .

The drama we witness each day, not least in the charade of a colonial administration and ‘colonial procedures’, is of a people who are “products and victims of colonization and who almost never succeed in corresponding with themselves”.

In this the people have yet to truly understand their ‘condition’, and they first need to understand it before they can find and administer the only remedy, which is independence/liberation.

According to Memmi:

“In order to witness the colonized’s complete cure, his alienation must completely cease. We must await the complete disappearance of colonization. For the colonial condition cannot be adjusted to; like an iron collar, it can only be broken.

Alf Baird

1 February, 2024 at 11:34 am

dasBlimp @ 10:19 am

“How can a country be arrogant? It’s only people that can be arrogant.”

Postcolonial theory tells us that, in a colonial society, two particular aspects of racism are evident:

1. That colonialism involves racism against ‘peoples’ the dominant colonial culture considers inferior (i.e. dependent), and;

2. that the colonially dominated people then ‘internalize’ this racism, resulting in psychological effects, e.g. colonial mindset, ‘cringe’ etc.

Scots arguably remain subject to both outcomes of colonial racism:



1 February, 2024 at 11:41 am

Indeed, what are we not being told? Being chauffeured in a police car, is she in police custody? I wish it were so. Was she expecting a clamorous multitude, ticker tape, the crown of laurel? Dream on Nicola, these days are long gone. No one believes you anymore. So dry your crocodile tears of self pity. You can whine for attention all you want. You have caused immense harm and suffering to the Scottish people.

Your blind desire for revenge against Alex Salmond, caring nothing about means or method, about what it left destroyed in its wake was and is reprehensible. Only vindication and suffering mattered to you and your co conspirators.

It may be that you were not always a narcissistic sociopath, though you always will be. Your secrets and lies and cover ups and redactions and Blinkety Blink and skeletons rattling around in your closet and manipulation and control were all meant to silence people, strike them dumb. I think the tables are turning now. It is your views and absurd beliefs which don’t matter now, you are not valued now, you do not exist.

Stuart is our modern day equivalent of the Scottish Enlightenment in bringing us the truth. You are the polar opposite, Endarkenment? Unlike you, I do not want revenge for your cruel, unjust and perverse policies you have tried to inflict on the Scottish people. Yes I want you to fuck off but I also want justice.

Alf Baird

1 February, 2024 at 12:03 pm

dasBlimp @ 11:19 am

“This is why we English won’t allow Scottish independence, we have to protect you from yourselves. It’s a given”

Postcolonial theory tells us that the colonial hoax only ‘works’ by debasing the colonized, much as you demonstrate.

However, it also tells us that a compromised national party elite ‘draws closer to colonialism’, it ‘takes the people up a blind alley’, and ‘becomes an instrument of coercion’.

Which is what we see as colonial administrators seek to impose ever more draconian laws on the people, holding back the movement.

Whilst “Scotland is lucky to be rid of her”, those of the same tyrannical (i.e. ‘legal’) tendency still remain ‘part of the colonial racket’ running a colonial administration which protects only the interests of the colonizer.

Fowk cannae ser twa maisters; thay aye luve ane an laith the ither.


1 February, 2024 at 2:04 pm

“come friendly bombs and fall on Slough” (and everywhere else in the South, come on Vlad, do it!)

the anglo thinks he’s a mogwai, but he’s really a gremlin

the anglo thinks he’s a hobbit, when he’s really an orc; tolkien was a plagiarist and an anglo propagandist – mordor is london, and his plots are twisted (read the nibelung)

the loss of the oil to this race of thieves is the greatest theft since the looting of India, or maybe even the looting of the monasteries during the reformation … or wait a minute, there is also the immense piracy they operated as well … the english steal a lot, you have to admit; still, the theft of the north sea oil is well up there.

they wrecked their own house, but chanced upon a banquet which belonged to us; they stuffed their mouths and sagged their drawers … then let some of us, lick the spoon – and DEMANDED WE WERE BLOODY GRATEFUL FOR IT …

Sometimes we need to remind ourselves what evil, hateful, shits our “equal partners in the union” really are; what is that thing people say nowadays – when people tell you who they are, believe them … try this –


Worsthorne, bizarrely, claimed to have lost his “virginity” (butthole version) after George Melly (!) done him over a chaise longue at “public” school; Melly, quite nonplussed by the notion.

“Melly, up the Welly (top) … ”
(to the tune of ferry cross the mersey)

Alf Baird

1 February, 2024 at 2:09 pm

Geri @ 1:32 pm

“does anyone have any idea what Alister Jackass is prattling on about?”

I suppose he longs for the return of ‘direct rule’ whan a haundfu o Tory place-folk ran Scotland. Jack would have fitted in well with the likes of Forsyth, Lang, Rifkind and Douglas-Hamilton; they all speak the same language, an it isnae Scots.

However, with a working class Scot thinking she is in charge (of ‘indirect rule’), even the Tories can see where that went wrong; power and a fancy lifestyle went right tae her heid, whilst courage tae deliver leeberation went oot the windae.

Our problem nevertheless remains ‘colonialism’ and no matter whether direct or indirect rule its still colonialism. Direct rule is perhaps less obscure, less confusing – we know who the oppressor is, not least in the wey thay speak, and vice versa. Indirect rule (aka ‘devolution’) is taking the people a while to figure out who is on their side and who is not.


1 February, 2024 at 2:32 pm

Like many anglos, who fancy themselves a bit of a wit, a master of the bantz, our resident nuisance gets all butthurt and thinskinned when anyone gives it back to him a little bit … poor blimp – cheer up lad, it’s only the interwebs, no one really cares –

– for a man who quotes poetry I am surprised you didnt get the reference, from a poet laureate no less.

by John Betjeman (1906 – 1984)

Come friendly bombs and fall on Slough!
It isn’t fit for humans now,
There isn’t grass to graze a cow.
Swarm over, Death!
Come, bombs and blow to smithereens
Those air -conditioned, bright canteens,
Tinned fruit, tinned meat, tinned milk, tinned beans,
Tinned minds, tinned breath.

Mess up the mess they call a town-
A house for ninety-seven down
And once a week a half a crown
For twenty years.

And get that man with double chin
Who’ll always cheat and always win,
Who washes his repulsive skin
In women’s tears:

And smash his desk of polished oak
And smash his hands so used to stroke
And stop his boring dirty joke
And make him yell.

But spare the bald young clerks who add
The profits of the stinking cad;
It’s not their fault that they are mad,
They’ve tasted Hell.

It’s not their fault they do not know
The birdsong from the radio,
It’s not their fault they often go
To Maidenhead

And talk of sport and makes of cars
In various bogus-Tudor bars
And daren’t look up and see the stars
But belch instead.

In labour-saving homes, with care
Their wives frizz out peroxide hair
And dry it in synthetic air
And paint their nails.

Come, friendly bombs and fall on Slough
To get it ready for the plough.
The cabbages are coming now;
The earth exhales.


1 February, 2024 at 4:13 pm

Megan Nolan, Irish journalist on living in England just before Brexit.

“I’ve lived in London for three years. I hadn’t spent much time in Britain before my arrival and had no particular feelings toward the English. I expected them to react to me with similar neutrality. What I didn’t expect was the toxic mix of dismissal and casual disdain. It would have been easier, perhaps, if it was all as overt as potato jokes. But what kills you is the ignorance; what grinds you down is how much they don’t know about the past and, if they do know, how little they care.

It’s a strange and maddening thing to discover about the people who shaped your country’s fate and who are poised to do so again. Why does it matter that an English man is English when he shouts at Irish protesters? Why did it matter where the men who threw the pigeon head were from? Because England keeps on making itself matter to Ireland, against our will.

Two weeks ago I visited Birmingham while the Conservative Party Conference was being held. All around me were examples of the worst elements of the English ruling class: their solipsism, their hatred of the poor, their amazing rudeness. A man in a boater hat and cravat, drinking Champagne and smoking a cigar, ignored a homeless woman asking for change and then chided me when I gave her some.

Fed up and demoralised, I wandered off to the cinema and saw Black 47, a thriller set during the Famine. In it, an Irish deserter from the English Army returns home to find his family dead and his homeland ravaged as a result of British rule. He hunts down those responsible – the landlords, the judges, the army, the lord in his manor – and metes out fitting punishments.

An older couple next to me in line, both wearing lanyards from the conference, were deciding what to see and asked me what Black 47 was about. “It’s a sort of revenge fantasy, I think,” I replied, “Set during the Famine, the Irish against the English.”

“Oh, really?” the woman asked.

And then, ponderously, more to herself than to me:

“Revenge for what?””


1 February, 2024 at 4:42 pm

“In the last 24 hours since you wrote that there has been a torrent of abuse against the English”

First of all, you appear to be desperate and completely determined to undermine our rightful desire to take control of our own country’s affairs by, somehow, liking it to racism.

That sets my alarm bells ringing because that is precisely what that Labour Major of London did in its day, what was his name, Sadiq Khan. The backlash the bumbling idiot received for his stupid strategy was spectacular and well deserved. This was also an strategy often deployed by Gordon Brown with his boring hyperbole.

It is, as we know, nothing more than psychological blackmailing because they exploit the negative connotations the word “racist” has and that people in Scotland (or anywhere for that matter) do not wish to be linked to it.

It is the exact same strategy the trans activists are using every time they call “transphobe” to someone for simply oppose gender ideology (whatever the hell that is) and exactly the same strategy zionists use every time they call “antisemite” to someone who does not tow the zionist line. Always the same strategy: emotional blackmailing.

I see you are desperately attempting to deploy it here. It will not work, we can see right through it so you are wasting your time.

I do not see here any torrent of abuse against “The English”. I see the opposite: Scotland and Scotland’s institutions are giving them ridiculous privilege.

Take a look at who is in control of most positions of power in our institutions in Scotland. What do you see? Now take a look at England’s institutions. How many people with an Scottish accent do you see there in control of the highest positions of power? When was the last time we had a PM of the UK who was an Scottish MP representing a Scottish constituency? How many ministers representing Scottish constituencies have you seen in the UK government in the last 10 years? How many people with a Scottish accent are in high positions of control in England’s NHS, police force, civil service, universities, etc?

It is no secret the majority of the English people come to Scotland to retire and see Scotland as the backyard of England, therefore they come determined to impose their political views despite those being diametrically opposed to those of the natives. Acknowledging that is not “racism” or “hate” or “abuse”. It is having your eyes open and see what is going on.

What I see here are posters highlighting classic stereotypes that expand beyond Scotland’s boundaries. That is not hate because, if it was, England would be the most hated country in the whole world.

For instance, ask any Spanish, Italian, French person and see what they have to say. By default, the exact same they do in Scotland, English people settling in those countries do not even attempt to properly adapt and absorb the culture of the host countries. The expect everybody else around them to change to adapt to them . What is the reason for the English people to act like that? I have no clue, but I can understand why some people would consider that kind of behaviour arrogance. I have always assumed this behaviour to stem from the English language being taught as a secondary language in most countries whose first language is not English, so in a way the English people have been spoiled.

There is also the thing that despite being migrants in other countries, they do not call themselves migrants. They call themselves ex-pats, as if not wanting to accept the fact they are migrants. Again, I have no clue what the psychology behind it is, but I can understand why some people would call that arrogance. I, however, consider it more the response of the English people to gaslighting and emotional blackmailing from their own ruling classes. Just like the Scottish nationalists do not like to be called racists for simply exposing the traits of England as a country, English people migrating to other countries do not want to be called migrants because migrants in England have been demonised by idiots like Farage.

Perceptions are subjective. What you perceive is not necessarily the same as what others perceive. Stereotypes are subjective. Perceiving arrogance is subjective. The traits of an English person do not mean the rest of the people of England has the same traits, in the same way that the traits of a Scottish person do not extend to the entirety of Scotland.

Now, a completely different thing is when arrogance is associated to England as a country. That is not an stereotype. That is not a perception. That is well evidenced and documented. If you cannot see it yourself, then you are blind.

Forcing brexit on Scotland, violating the Treaty of Union, violating Scotland’s rights under the treaty, forcing England’s parliamentary sovereignty unconstitutionally on Scotland, denying Scotland the opportunity to take part in the brexit negotiations, stealing our powers and assets etc, etc, etc, are continuous displays of abusive arrogance from England over Scotland.

Sending the three amigos in 2014 to convince the Scottish plebs with their con-vow was a display of England’s arrogance. Those three individuals were the leaders of England’s parties, elected by English constituencies and none of them represented a single vote from Scotland. Yet, somehow, they thought it was appropriate for England’s parties to stick their uninvited nose in Scotland’s business and thwart Scotland’s right to self-determination.

Another wonderful example of this was the intervention of the Treasury Civil Servants, who threw their code of conduct and alleged political impartiality out of the window “to save the union”. Then, they received prices for it.

The uninvited invasions of Libya, Iraq, Afghanistan and other countries in the middle east and the trail of destruction left behind are another magnificent display of pure arrogance.

Another magnificent example of the arrogance of England as a country is the new belief that their “parliamentary sovereignty” is above international law, so now, England as a country has given itself the right to violate international law as a matter of fact.

Agreed, the level of arrogance is not in the scale of that of USA or Israel, but it is arrogance just the same.

England as a country expects to have full autonomy and freedom to decide its own things and this is fine. What is not fine is that it feels it has the right to deny the same right to everybody else, unless the decisions are the ones England wants.

Some people will call that arrogance. I prefer to call it the vestigial colonial tendency that somehow makes those ruling England think they have the divine right to stick the country’s nose in other countries’ business, foreign policy and steal their assets, just because they are there.

If you want to understand what actual abuse is, go to Hansard and listen to the comments of some England MPs when the Scottish ones speak. Go no further than the mockery some uneducated ones make of Scottish MPs whose first language is Gaelic and therefore do not have the plum in the mouth accent that expensive private school boys like Ress MOgg have. Actually, considering that Scotland, Wales and NI have their own languages besides English, forcing everybody to speak English in Westminster seems another wonderful display of pure arrogance. This is the 21st Century after all and translators in other union parliaments around the world are not uncommon.

England MPs seem to conveniently forget that those Scottish Mps have been democratically elected to represent Scotland’s constituencies and are therefore the legitimate voice of those constituencies in Westminster. England MPs do not hold the mandate of a single vote from Scotland, therefore have no right whatsoever to claim they are speaking for Scotland. They are not. Their imposing their view on Scotland is seen as a display of arrogance by some. I see it as an expression of their colonial mind and the thought that Scotland is a lesser country than England and therefore ripe for abuse.

To deny the people of Scotland their legitimate right to make their own decisions and end the union if they so wish, is abuse, it is unconstitutional and it is a display of colonialism. The thing is the basis of colonialism is arrogance. You can only colonise another country if somehow you think you have the right to do so and the right to steal somebody else’s assets. In other words, you consider yourself more deserving of those assets than the legitimate owners. That is pure arrogance.

To call the Scottish people “benefit scroungers” to undermine them, gaslight them and break their will is a form of abuse. England is not subsidising Scotland, it is the other way round and more and more people is coming to realise of that.

Take a look at the way the McCrone was written. Not only the Scottish people are seeing as a group of people different from England, it was even discussed how would be the best way for England to steal Scotland’s oil. That is raw colonialism at its best and some form of racism too, because it is seeing the people of Scotland as undeserving of their own assets.

If I am not mistaken, this report was hidden by Labour for decades because they did not want the people of Scotland to know how wealthy their country was. This is what makes so ironic the attempts by labour likes such as Khan or Brown to take the (fake) moral high ground by insulting Scottish nationalists and calling them racists just because they wish to exercise their legitimate right to end the union. What is most ironic of the whole thing is that labourites are actually much closer to racism when they are purposely denying Scotland its right to self-determination and somehow suggesting that Scotland is a second rate nations because, in their minds, it is only England parties and England party leaders who have the self-awarded right to give consent for referendums in Scotland.

Linking the trait of arrogance to the English people is an sterotype like linking the trait of being stingy to the Scottish people is a stereotype or like being “siesta sleepers” and “flamenco dancers” is a stereotype linked to the Spanish people or being “pizza-eaters” is an stereotype linked to the Italian people.

Telling a few truths about the character of a person is not “abuse”. Somebody above mentioned arrogance as a trait of many English people. I might have experienced that arrogance in the context of Scotland wanting to end the union or when I tried to pay in England using Scottish notes. They think English banknotes should be accepted everywhere in the UK, but Scottish notes are not. The belief that only English notes are legitimate could be considered arrogance. I prefer to consider it ignorance.

In the context of Scotland wanting to end the union, I have heard and read all sort of nonsense: Scottish people are benefit scroungers, Scottish people live of the the generosity of England’s taxpayers, Scottish people are too stupid to rule their own country, Scotland is far too small and poor, Scottish people are lazy and prefer to live on benefits, Scottish people are drunks, Scottish people’s accent is tacky or “chavs” etc, etc, etc. I interpret that as abuse because those are not general stereotypes. If you go abroad, nobody considers Scottish people as being “chavs” for speaking English with an accent, nor “benefit scroungers”. In fact, in other countries they seem to like the Scottish accent better than the English one and they tend to see Scottish people as more cheerful, down to earth and approachable.

You claim that Scotland is not “English-friendly”. I invite you to take a look at the proportion of people living in Scotland of English ascent and then compare it with the proportion of people of Scottish ascent living in England.

What do you see?

When the proportion of people in England of Scottish ascent reach the figures of those of English ascent in Scotland and we see how England react to that, you can come back and we can discuss your “anti-English” assertion.

“Hardly accords with your tartan tinted view of an English-friendly Scotland does it?

You mention I have “tartan glasses”. Well, what kind of glasses are those? Are you using it pejoratively because I support Scotland’s independence? Should I become as sensitive as you are making up you are and interpret that insult as a “torrent of abuse” or should I follow Labour’s approach and like it to racism?

I think I prefer to interpret it as what it is: a very poor attempt at emotional blackmailing. You know the majority of the people in Scotland dislikes tories. In the same way Khan attempted emotional blackmail by linking racism to Scottish nationalism, or the trans activists blackmail emotionally gender critical people by calling them “transphobes”, or zionists emotionally blackmail Palestinian supporters by calling them “anti-semites”, you are subtly attempting to call me a tory.

Just with that you have convinced me you come here with an agenda and that agenda is far too close to Labour’s interests. This tells me you are here to disrupt rather than to contribute to the conversation. In other words, you appear to be a labour apparatchik. This explains your desperate attempts to establish this imaginary “English hate” as rife among nationalists to undermine Scottish desire for independence. I will therefore tick the “ignore” option in your posts from now on.

Have a nice evening.


1 February, 2024 at 6:51 pm

@John Main

“I absolutely lurve this stuff.”

It’s hard to know what’s on your mind (if that’s not an overstatement) when you write your junk.

Those opinions about partition were not written by me. They were written by someone with knowledge of history, unlike you.

Of course, Indian and Pakistani leaders have been culpable in not doing more to resolve the mess the English left. But you, Brit Nat, won’t acknowledge English exceptionalism, arrogance and hubris for what it is.


“In India, he [Mountbatten] proved to be monumentally unequal to the assignment.

Mountbatten arrived in India in February 1947 and was given until June 1948 – not 1947 – to complete his mission. Impatient to get back to Britain and advance his own naval career, he decided to bring forward the date by 10 months, to August 1947 (he eventually did become first sea lord, a position he coveted because it had been denied to his father).

How crucial were those 10 months?

I would argue, they could have meant the difference between a simply violent partition and a horrifically genocidal partition…

…To decide the fate of 400 million Indians and draw lines of division on poorly made maps, Mountbatten brought in Cyril Radcliffe, a barrister who had never set foot in India before then, and would never return afterwards. Despite his protestations, Mountbatten gave him just five weeks to complete the job…

..Working feverishly, Radcliffe completed the partition maps days before the actual partition. Mountbatten, however, decided to keep them secret. On Mountbatten’s orders, the partition maps were kept under lock and key in the viceregal palace in Delhi. They were not to be shared with Indian leaders and administrators until two days after partition.

Jaswant Singh, who later served as India’s minister of foreign affairs, defense and finance, writes that at their moment of birth neither India nor Pakistan “knew where their borders ran, where was that dividing line across which Hindus and Muslims must now separate?”

He adds that as feared and predicted, this had “disastrous consequences.” The uncertainty of exactly who would end up where fueled confusion, wild rumors, and terror as corpses kept piling up.

As historian Stanley Wolpert writes in “Shameful Flight,” Mountbatten kept the partition maps a closely guarded secret, as he did not want the festivities of British transfer of power to be marred or distracted.

“What a glorious charade of British Imperial largesse and power ‘peacefully’ transferred,” lamented Wolpert as he contemplated the possible implications of Mountbatten’s hubris.

70 years later
As the preeminent biographer of all the major political actors of British India’s last days, Wolpert acknowledges that many – and, most importantly, Indian political leaders themselves – contributed to the chaos that was 1947.

But there is no room for doubt in Wolpert’s mind that “none of them played as tragic or central a role as did Mountbatten.”

By botching the administration of partition in 1947 and leaving critical elements unfinished – including, most disastrously, the still unfinished resolution to Jammu and Kashmir – Mountbatten’s partition plan left the fate of Kashmir undecided.

Mountbatten, thus, bestowed a legacy of acrimony on India and Pakistan.

It was not just rivers and gold and silver that needed to be divided between the two dominions; it was books in libraries, and even paper pins in offices. As Saadat Hasan Manto’s fictional account conveys, the madness was such that even patients in mental hospitals had to be divided.

Yet, Mountbatten, the man who would fret incessantly about what to wear at official ceremonies, made little effort to devise arrangements for how resources would be divided, or shared.”

It’s important to remember – Peter A Bell

Robert McAllan

1ST FEB 2024 AT 15:05

John MacLean, a man of stature, of principle, who possessed a political conscience which is in stark contrast to the current generation of carpetbagging political pretenders who would and have baulked at the very thought of challenging the authority of the colonising state which chooses our oppression over compassion.

The role MacLean played in forming the ‘Tramp Trust’ and the subsequent campaigning, agitating and educating that derived, we can only but look back on with envy, and perhaps, shame. The passion, the belief, those men had in freeing the working class from their chains of oppression has not ( with possibly the exception of the UCS fight) been witnessed since.

Scotland has rarely been able to produce people of the calibre of MacLean, McShane, and Gallacher since. Times were hard when those men were in their prime. Does Scotland yet again have to experience that degree of hardship before we can again have BELIEF in our cause. Peter concludes ‘please give as generously as you can’. I would humbly urge others likewise.


1ST FEB 2024 AT 15:41

Great article Peter and a very very worthwhile cause McLean was one of the greats, he had a huge turn out at his funeral, the British state did all it could to break the man.

As for the fund raiser going slow, I wonder how many young folk, or indeed even older folk know of McLean, we don’t teach our own history in schools, our own culture and literature has been sidelined and replaced with that of England’s.

I always illustrate this with asking how many Scots know how many wives English King Henry VIII had, and most Scots usually know the answer. I follow this by asking how many Scots know how many Scottish King Malcolm’s there were, cue the head scratching etc.

Scotland has a varied and rich history of great men and women as well as great achievements in just about all fields, sadly until we embrace our ain folk and history many Scots won’t even know who McLean was or what the man stood for.

Off-Topic Newsletter
No spam. Just the latest releases and tips, interesting articles, and exclusive interviews in your inbox every week.
Read about our privacy policy.
Thank you! Your submission has been received!
Oops! Something went wrong while submitting the form.
Download Aesop's Fables!
Download Now!
Get The Off-Topic Scotland Newsletter

Get Off-Topic Scotland in Your Inbox

No spam or ads, just the latest posts and updates from Scotland's newest pro-independence blog.

Thank you! Your submission has been received!
Oops! Something went wrong while submitting the form.