GetMeOutOfHere

Pro Scottish Independence Cybernat

[Wings Over Scotland @WingsScotland]

The moment has come to mobilise, folks. If you donated to the SNP's 2017 or 2019 fundraisers and you haven't had your money back, please contact Wings either by DM or via the Wings contact form. Fraud must be answered for. https://t.co/3v5tS9sswD

[Sara Salyers @SSalyers2]

Here's how you can answer that question with certainty. As you've pointed out the Claim of Right was made a precondition (condition precedent) of the union and the treaty, because it was specifically named in the overall condition precedent - the 1706 Act for the Preservation of the Presbyterian Church. This was ratified word for word, ('by the tenor thereof') along with the Articles of Union as a condition in all time coming. Before the British began reframing the CoR as a sectarian act purely concerned with the religious matters suggested by the title of the 1706 Act, neither the Scots nor the English failed to recognise the significance of the inclusion of the CoR Act, the only named Act, in the overall condition. Nor did anyone imagine for a moment that it was just a religious statute. It was then and still is the first and only statutory summary of the Scottish constitution.
"The Laws of Government, (in Scotland), continue as the Government continues establish'd in the Claim of Right, I mean as to the Limitations of Government and Obedience", Daniel Defoe, chronicler, Propagandist and English spy. Note: the Limitations of Government and Obedience is how a constitution is often described both then and now.
Now, the Claim of Right remains a constitutional statute because otherwise the union is void. But, of course, it is given lip service only and the latest British trick is pretending its all about religion so people stop noticing or caring.
But adopting it at the time, in the full knowledge of what it meant, proves there was never any inention to create a single kingdom (single crown) or a new state. Why? Because the CoR requires a lawful monarch - enabling a lawfully assembled legislative parliament, as summoned by a lawful monarch - to take the Scottish Coronation Oath. But the Scottish Crown is the Community of the Realm and not the monarch and so the Scottish Oath of Accession includes a promise by the would-be monarch to defend the Scottish Crown and never to transfer or undermine its rights rents and privileges. The Treaty of Union, however, calls for a (new) single crown/kingdom which would necessitate transferring the sovereignty of the Scottish Crown to a new, merged British Crown.
So a condition precedent/sine qua non of the union made that union impossible!
No pea brain involved in pushing through the Treaty and Acts could have failed to see that the only way their terms could all have been implemented would have been to impose the Scottish Crown, (with its identity as the people, its monarch just the first among equals with no immunity from legal process and its treason laws protecting the Common Weal and not merely the king or queen), on the new 'Great Britain' in place of the English. And that was never going to happen.
The treaty was impossible to implement. The condition without which it was and is rendered void, the continuation of the CoR, prevents the creation of the 'single kingdom (crown) which is its whole purpose. And because the monarch summons the legislative parliament that makes the joint parliament just as impossible.
Either no one had the brains to realise that or the English pushed the treaty through, by threat of invasion, bribery and coercion and contrary to Scots law, without the slightest intention of implementing. Once it was ratified, they could dismantle the Scottish state in preparation for the new one - and then simply fail to dismantle the English state and instead add Scotland to its control and its crown. That is what they always intended and that is exactly what happened. Cheaper and easier than the alternative - invasion.
"Foreigners say publicly, I mean our own allies, that we [England] are a perfidious nation; and since we have violated our treaty with Scotland and laugh at the notion of fundamental and inviolable articles [of Union], there is no great wonder if we treat other nations as we do."
Harley, Robert, "Letter by Lord Harley Earl of Oxford to William Carstares, 1709.
Now the Brits want the world to believe there really is a British Crown and the treaty really was given effect and they hope no one digs up proof of the continuation of the Scottish Crown or realises what that means about Scotland's legal status in the so-called union. Can you say colony?!

[UselessOldGit @GitUseless]

Demanding an inquiry into SNP governance is a sideshow. It distracts from the real scandal: the Crown protecting, rather than prosecuting, those involved in fraudulent referendum fundraising just to shield Sturgeon.

[UselessOldGit @GitUseless]

https://t.co/ykbY1SubwR

[Sara Salyers @SSalyers2]

I’m sure those Scots who hate the English will get over it when the truth about the so-called treaty (of union) is universally known; when the truth about the risings against the annexation of Scotland - for which the never implemented treaty provided cover - risings supported by 90% of Scots, is told; when the horrific genocide that followed the third attempt of the Scots to get out from under English annexation is finally acknowledged - “slaughter and famine” prescribed by Cumberland and backed by the ‘union’ (ha!) parliament so as to quell the “rebellion” described and acknowledged in Westminster as “*not* a civil war” but an “insurrection”which only a handful of Scots in that “vile spot” did not support; the real start of the clearances in 1706; the occupation that saw every town and hamlet in Scotland occupied by English troops and depredations they committed are acknowledged and when the utter deserts (those ‘wild highlands’) where once were busy prosperous communities are seen and commemorated for what they are.
If you want a first hand account of the slaughter and famine and the delight of the English troops in the burning of whole towns the smoke for miles around “higher than the hills” while all foodstuffs animal or grain were brought to the camps of the English who could eat no more and had to let it go to waste (while the scots starved and died) all this is to be found at the Culloden memorial. (It’s mostly hugely misleading in favour of the false civil/religious war narrative deployed to conceal the horror and the shame of this genocidal slaughter and occupation) But that vivid description is provided from the journal of just one English Captain Ashe-Leigh.

And if that seems like ancient history to you and something we ought to forget, know it blighted my grandparents lives and all their grandparents before them in more ways than I can tell you while its modern form is stealing our resources and seeing our people dying of poverty related diseases and conditions. So maybe you can see why some Scots - not this one! - hate the English and what will be needed to change that.

When the lie of a voluntary and mutually beneficial union is replaced by the horror story that is our real history, when all that I have described comes to pass then the animosity and the hate can change.

You see, reconciliation begins with truth, with the validation of a peoples’ particular suffering - not the burial of a crime and its effects.

[Sara Salyers @SSalyers2]

You cannot love what you do not know. If you knew Scotland, her true history, her unique constitution and her centuries of common good statutes and provisions, including an education system that ensured every Scot could read and write by the 1500s while boys got grammar school education in the burghs, if you knew the horrors of the so-called union (a forced treaty whose single kingdom was replaced by subjection of Scotland to a renamed English crown), if you knew what deserts were made where thriving communities were burnt out by an occupation that covered every inch of this land, if you saw the terrible graveyards they are and not your lovely treeless and sheep filled ‘wilderness’, if you loved the real Scotland and not your wee Brigadoon fantasy, you’d want to see her free and restored to her true identity. But you do not love Scotland. You can’t love something imaginary. Actually you are afraid of it and so clearly hostile to those who really do love her. But you keep your ‘love’ of your made up communal version of this nation. And we will go about freeing the real thing.

[Sara Salyers @SSalyers2]

actually this is fully established by the fact that James VI, Charles I, Charles II, William and Mary and Anne (all prior to annexation of 2797) took two separate Coronation Oaths, one for England the other for the Scots Crown. Also that James VII was deposed for two crimes against the Scottish nation; violating the fundamental constitution of Scotland by claiming the right, (to quote Dicey on English parliamentary sovereignty), ‘to make or unmake any law whatever’ and for failing to take the Scottish Coronation Oath as required by law. Furthermore, both Crowns remain today as does the statute providing the required format for the Scottish Coronation Oath. The requirement for the Scottish Oath is contained in the Claim of Right, a co fiction precedent and continua of the Treaty and Union (never put into effect). That’s why the oath remains a statute. Guess if any English monarch has raged the required Oath since Anne? And yet two crowns perdue and somehow the English Crown is called the British Crown and that name change is the same as a treaty for a single crown/kingdom.
Two crowns there were in 1603. Two crowns there were in 1707. Two crowns there are today. Fact. The implications are going to free this nation.

[Liberation Scotland Committee @LiberationScot]

For over a year our website has been being consistently intercepted and redirected so that sign-ups though they may appear to function do not register. You can imagine who is behind this.

If you see our appeal for membership below and have any doubt about your membership, please sign-up again. We will sort any duplication our end. It's free!

Reposting the sign-up page as widely as possible and as quickly as possible will be a great help. Many thanks!
- The LSC Committee

[Grouse Beater @Grouse_Beater]

FROM 'SABOTAGING SCOTLAND'

"Gareth, successive UK governments and their civil servants running Scotland have blocked a whole series of international port and shipping developments that would have placed Scotland firmly on the global map, doubling our trade and current ‘colonial level GDP’ too.

They include: Ardersier port, Scapa Flow container port, Hunterston container port, European Gateway Port for ferries and cruise ships at Cockenzie, building of 50+ proven design catamaran ferries under license on the Clyde, plus starting extensive multi-vessel riverbus operations on Forth, Clyde and elsewhere.

All these initiatives and more were blocked one way or another by our colonizer and their ‘little helpers’." Prof Alfred Baird

[Sara Salyers @SSalyers2]

Bravo. In fact the Scotland Act voids its own authority by assuming superior authority over the treaty and ratifying acts that purportedly created it. If it has that authority over the acts then the parliament that passed the Scotland Acts is not authorised by treaty and acts and has no legitimate authority. Thus the act voids itself.

[GetMeOutOfHere @SinkingUK]

@mgshanks A working refinery in Scotland that you campaigned on the promise of keeping open would have helped

[GetMeOutOfHere @SinkingUK]

@ScrdiScot Well done

[Kirralie Smith @KirralieS]

This time next week (Monday 25th May), I will be sitting in a court room in the NSW Supreme Court because I identified two males in female sport.

As a result of three years of lawfare I was found guilty of vilification and ordered to pay $95,000 in damages as well as make contradictory social media posts.

I am appealing that decision.

Nothing in this world can make me believe they are women.

Nothing in this world can make me believe they deserve a place in women's sport.

Nothing in this world will give me confidence in the courts after @salltweets lost her federal court appeal.

Men are not women. Gaslighting us, penalizing us, threatening us will not change that fact!

[Sara Salyers @SSalyers2]

@peeps160 @Hendehibby Their chief weapon for the past century has been to keep Scots ignorant, befuddled and misled. Our chief weapon is the truth, spread as far and as wide as possible.

[Sall Grover @salltweets]

It is the day after #GigglevTickle and I haven’t woken up believing that men can be women. You can try & punish me for not believing it, but you can never make me believe it.

Men cannot be women.

[Sara Salyers @SSalyers2]

I can’t believe I used to buy into this - the story now crumbling into nothing as logic and true history start to take hold.
Fact: England had an empire before the fake union. (An empire that was already termed the ‘British Empire’ by John Dee, adviser to Elizabeth I.) Then England supposedly turned into Great Britain by absorbing Scotland in 1707.
No more Scottish state. England continued with its empire, its proxy the East India Co holding all title and authority by agreement of the English Crown and ‘senate’ (parliament) until it ceased to exist. Scots provided military fodder (just like all the other colonies, and often by force); Scots provided administrators because they were the most educated population in Europe. Scots with an eye to profit - like individuals in every other colony - profited from the misery of England’s empire hell. But ‘Scotland’? The state that no longer existed? The nation depopulated by genocide, ethnic cleansing, displacement, engineered famines d where for the first time the majority of its people were barely surviving? Go tell the story that ‘Scotland’ was an accomplice in England’s empire to the people who still either don’t use either reason or fact to construct a narrative or who still cling to that stupid lie because they need to. Maybe you can also convince them that the fact that *300,000* Indian troops ‘conquered’ East Africa for the English Empire means India helped to build the British Empire too…

[Angry Pict @SymbolStones]

Three: Reconstitute legitimate sovereign authority:

Holyrood is a devolved legislature created by Westminster statute. It cannot dissolve the union because Westminster can dissolve it first.

The legitimate sovereign body implied by Scotland's own constitutional tradition isn't Holyrood. It's a reconstituted Convention of the Estates - a body that draws its authority not from Westminster's permission but from the continuous, unbroken constitutional principle that sovereignty in Scotland resides with the people.

That body has never been formally extinguished. It has only been ignored.

The Simple Version:

Stop asking. Start asserting.

Stop framing this as exit from a legitimate union. Start framing it as the correction of an illegitimate annexation.

Stop treating Westminster as the court of appeal. Start treating international legal frameworks as the arena.

Stop waiting for Holyrood to deliver what Holyrood was never designed to deliver.

Start building the constitutional structures that draw their legitimacy from Scotland's own legal tradition.

None of this is simple in execution. But the direction is simple.

The union was imposed by force, fraud, and coercion. The evidence for that is substantial, documented, and growing. The legal and international frameworks for addressing it exist.

We DO NOT need Westminster's permission. We never did.

Cnoc na Fìrinn- the Hill of Truth. The evidence is the strategy.

[Sara Salyers @SSalyers2]

Actually, it isn't modern. England applied it to itself centuries in an attempt to make itself appear to be part of the indigenous, Celtic tradition, harking back to Rome and 'Britania'. Then Elizabeth I's adviser, a Welshman by the name of John Dee suggest the term 'British Empire' to mean England and her colonies. And as we now know, the 'British Empire' established and maintained through the East India Company with its delegated sovereignty from the English Crown (yep, post union!) contracted entirely and only with ... you guessed it, ENGLAND!
Britain = England
Great Britain = England enlarged
British EMpire = England and her colonies.
That is the real backstory to 'Britain'. As an identity for its colonies its a con trick.

[Grouse Beater @Grouse_Beater]

ELECTION DAY

Three colonials who have taken £millions out of Scotland's purse for a salary to belittle us, telling us daily we will never be the equal of England. Shut off their income!

[A.M.MacJ @ammacj]

BBC Scotland daily promotion of unionist press.👇

In 41 days of Scottish Election campaign:

Papers highlighted:
19 Scotsman
15 Herald
11 Sun
10 Daily Record
1 National

81 from pro-unionist papers
1 from pro-independence paper

32 negative stories about Scotland, 0 positive