Angry Pict

Recovering Scotland's suppressed history. Tracking the Line of Struggle.

[Angry Pict @SymbolStones]

New on Substack:

England borrowed the money to pay for the annexation of Scotland.

Then added it to the Anglo-British British national debt.

Which Scotland was then required to help service.

Scots subsidised their own takeover. There was no bailout.
https://t.co/z6qji5l2Ug

[Angry Pict @SymbolStones]

For 300 years we've been told:
Scotland failed at Darien.
Scotland went bankrupt.
England rescued it.

None of that is true.

Scotland had no national debt in 1707.
England had a vast one.

The 'Union' wasn't a bailout.

It was predatory incorporation - annexation disguised as English generosity.

New Substack article live very soon:
Scotland Wasn't Bankrupt: The Real Fiscal History of 1707

[Seannachaidh/Shenachie @SeannachaidhS]

For England's former colonies around the globe (which is most of it), Scotland being recognised as a colony at the UN and this leading to the final downfall and termination of the 'UK' itself is the ultimate justified revenge. If you don't think support for Scotland in this endeavour will be massive globally, including at the UN, then you haven't paid attention to history.

Think Luke approaching the exhaust port of the Death Star, about to shove a torpedo up its arse, to have it rupture from the inside out! I seem to recall that going down quite well throughout the galaxy! 😁

[Popular Sovereignty @Douglas_Haribo]

"Think Luke approaching the exhaust port of the Death Star, about to shove a torpedo up its arse"

[Popular Sovereignty @Douglas_Haribo]

Re-framing is required.
The UK is an illegitimate state. Scotland was annexed by England in 1707.
When Scotland is decolonised
that will be,
RESTORATION and not SEPARATION

[Sara Salyers @SSalyers2]

Two legal cases. One at the HRC and one at the ICJ (a lot of work to make those happen but lots already in place so fingers crossed) plus pushing for a C24 inquiry into Scotland’s situation plus a Salvo campaign to begin demanding the rights our own politicians forgot to try to get for us,

[Sara Salyers @SSalyers2]

James, there is no ‘the UN’; it’s an organisation made up of representatives from 193 states, six main committees and hundreds of sub committees. We just got back from the C24 seminar in Managua -podcast being put together now. We held the meetings we needed to hold - successfully - and our legal representative put forward proposals for adoption which will speed things up considerably. Also the changed climate meant that he could mention Scotland and others waiting for decolonisation by name without being removed for breaking the protocol. (Previously you could only mention too. the names of the territories already listed.) So the whole C24 heard that Scotland awaits decolonisation! (So much for the colonial secretariat burying our notifications!) Meanwhile we’re working behind the scenes on strategies which will directly affect both international recognition of our right to self determination and our situation right now. (Enforcing rights ignored by our political ‘champions’ until now.)
We have years of campaigning to catch up on and have been at this, working internationally, for just over a year! Think about that. And given the way we have already been faced with ‘grey zone diplomacy’ by the British state and its allies, I am sure you’ll forgive me if I only say we have powerful support from other states and do not say who that is!

[Sara Salyers @SSalyers2]

The best thing people can do to help is start saving Scotland here at home. We are going to go after the right of Scots to withhold permission for damaging land/sea use and establishing the location of legal ‘title’. That’s the Scottish Crown which still exists while the ‘British’ Crown is purely England’s. The Scottish Crown is the community of the realm - the people - and because the English decided to put their own crown over Scotland instead of creating a single crown and kingdom, legal title has never passed from the people. A deliberately buried but of constitutional reality but absolutely critical. (Btw that campaign at intnl. level will also reveal the true relationship between England and Scotland - annexation not partnership!) But there needs to be a big domestic campaign. That’s Salvo’s next undertaking. (You need a lot of people to drive the jobs of take back we’re looking for.) It only takes a handful to attend UN meetings and a committee to organise that. But if the handful are not the tip of the spear with the main part coming from the people it will not succeed. So join or set up a Salvo hub and take on a challenge that matters to you. Salvo is short for Salvo jure cujus libet- saving the rights of everyone. It will also be Salvo driving the case against the govt over the sisting of a judicial review of Starmers proscription of Palestine Action on the grounds that it breaches the law at in at least two fundamental respects under the Claim of Right Act. The CoR is condition precedent of treaty and union so bringing an international case on its force in law will also reveal the fact that if the UK was a genuine, unitary state, it would be based on a conditional agreement. So Scots already have the right to kick Westminster to the kerb and go their own way. It’s all about revealing the facts and then acting on them!

[Ron Wilson 🏴󠁧󠁢󠁳󠁣󠁴󠁿 🇺🇦 @TartanSeer]

Many have posted article after article on the illegitimacy of English rule over Scotland, rooted in the illegal Treaty of Union and Claim of Right of 1689. This is not some arcane historical curiosity but the key to stopping the rip off of our country. @SSalyers2 @SymbolStones 👇

[Angry Pict @SymbolStones]

@SSalyers2 The fundamental break then?

[Angry Pict @SymbolStones]

@SSalyers2 So the "condition precedent" was breached with the 1712 Patronage Act, or was there more to it than that?

[KT (#166) @phase_3_dream]

@indyscotnews @SSalyers2 @GreenBhoy1967 @SymbolStones Yes, but having said that, the exposure their hidden-away truths is receiving is off the scale.
Every time one of these boo-boos starts with their 'argument', so our champions educate thousands of Scots - by their superior knowledge - on a constitutional crime most foul

[Angry Pict @SymbolStones]

Of course.

You mentioned "barking mad" earlier.

You've just admitted the international picture is important by the way - not clever when your entire argument (troll) is based on arguing it's not.

And with that I'm calling a halt to this, you're now turning a repetitive troll into a series of incoherent rants across the multiple threads you've created.

[Angry Pict @SymbolStones]

You're now repeating exact sentences from your earlier posts.

The UN isn't going to persuade them, you clearly don't understand what's going on - or do but are deliberately misrepresenting it.

A majority of Scots voted for independence in 2014 (Glasgow University).

The only people quoting 1707 are the British (English) Government, that point has been repeatedly made to you, with evidence, and you've simply ignored.

This is getting repetitive, and is clearly little more than a troll.

[Angry Pict @SymbolStones]

@GreenBhoy1967 @SSalyers2 Those of us actually in Scotland are preparing, that's the point.

As has repeatedly been pointed out this has nothing to do with "ancient laws", nor does it rule out any of the "alternative" you've finally stated.

[Angry Pict @SymbolStones]

Not the argument, I repeat for the umpteenth time, state your alternative and answer the points:

But we're hitting 55% in some opinion polls, has that persuaded the UK (English) government to 'grant' another non-binding colonial plebiscite? No.

So how do we persuade them to 'grant' one, is there a clear path within the UK system? No.

Why do you feel it's important to accept their argument that their legitimacy is founded in 1707, and simply repeatedly beg them and be told NO?

Do we persuade them to change their mind by making their defeat certain?

[Angry Pict @SymbolStones]

@GreenBhoy1967 @SSalyers2 Certainly delegitimising the UK's position won't go down well in Langley Virginia, where according to your profile you're a resident.

[Angry Pict @SymbolStones]

Not the argument, I repeat for the umpteenth time, state your alternative and answer the points:

But we're hitting 55% in some opinion polls, has that persuaded the UK (English) government to 'grant' another non-binding colonial plebiscite? No.

So how do we persuade them to 'grant' one, is there a clear path within the UK system? No.

Why do you feel it's important to accept their argument that their legitimacy is founded in 1707, and simply repeatedly beg them and be told NO?

Do we persuade them to change their mind by making their defeat certain?

[Sara Salyers @SSalyers2]

Hiya Langley! Getting worried? Hoping to undermine us with clever displacement? For anyone else reading this: Fella knows, the US knows and the English state posing as U.K. knows, we don’t need anyone to ride to the rescue. We just need to expose the true constitutional framework of the ‘U.K.’ following which any democratic event to free ourselves from England cannot be contested internationally. End of.

[Angry Pict @SymbolStones]

@GreenBhoy1967 @SSalyers2 How does delegitimising English control of Scotland stop any of that happening?

It's not an either/or thing, except in your own head.

[Angry Pict @SymbolStones]

Not what's being argued. I repeat for the umpteenth time, state your alternative and answer the points:

But we're hitting 55% in some opinion polls, has that persuaded the UK (English) government to 'grant' another non-binding colonial plebiscite? No.

So how do we persuade them to 'grant' one, is there a clear path within the UK system? No.

Why do you feel it's important to accept their argument that their legitimacy is founded in 1707, and simply repeatedly beg them and be told NO?

Do we persuade them to change their mind by making their defeat certain?

[Angry Pict @SymbolStones]

That's not the argument, you're now relying on straw man distractions. Nobody is arguing for any of that.

Westminster bases it's modern legal legitimacy on that "300 year old treaty"+ blocks any democratic exercise in self-determination on that basis. If its not challenged, they hold a permanent veto.

Are you arguing for a permanent Westminster veto? It appears so to me.

For the umpteenth time state your alternative and answer the points:

But we're hitting 55% in some opinion polls, has that persuaded the UK (English) government to 'grant' another non-binding colonial plebiscite? No.

So how do we persuade them to 'grant' one, is there a clear path within the UK system? No.

Why do you feel it's important to accept their argument that their legitimacy is founded in 1707, and simply repeatedly beg them and be told NO?

Do we persuade them to change their mind by making their defeat certain?