Saturday 24 June 2023

ex-PM and his party using the court change

A few days late with this, as I have had to carefully nudge my signs back in to Google, which it kept blocking on a main browser until updated, and even then, it had to be in a mobile site setting not desktop, and in a new window not retaining any code memories of the blocked sign-ins. Too much naff we get from Google's security. Hence, why had I ever signed out? knowing it has inconvenient results. Because, I had to reset all my identity indicators to do a survey from new again, that was programmed to pick up where you had got to and not allow you to start it from new again in the same browser! but one of the survey's option choices had been unclear and only after choosing, turned out to be a wrongly limiting choice, so that I needed to start it from new again.

Thus is an era snapshot of the fight to do your own simple things instead of confirm to what arrogant programs want you to do.

Okay. The real post. -

The Alba Party is loudly announcing and publishing an opinion by an international law lawyer, against the British Supreme Court decision that Scotland has no power to hold an independence vote unilaterally. It accuses the court of "significant errors" in the decision.

This is the new party set up in 2021 by former Prime Minister (okay officially they have the silly title "First Minister" to make them sound less like a national govt) Alex Salmond, after his falling out with the older SNP who he used to lead, but which conspired to get him jailed on word alone for accusations under the witch-hunting of men. The luck that an ethically conscientious jury did not go along with that, leads to the Alba Party's existence.

This opinion on the Supreme Court is a faulting of a court decision. Alike whether you agree with its content, or disagree with it and counter-fault it, it is an important democratic move to arrive at inability to accept as final what you perceive you can demontrate error in. Hence, is a use of the COURT CHANGE!

Nobody has ever offered any refutation of the reasons why the court change is real, but its ignorement by all the political elite includes by all the nat parties. There is the irony in now needing and exercising something whose existence they have ignored for a generation.

Monday 6 February 2023

grave for community councils

Community councils - they are defined by law as to represent communities, yet they consist of self-appointed volunteers. Any time they choose to ignore or not engage with an item that protects some local businesses, they misrepresent the community, and liably harming those local businesses by it. Also breaching their constituted function by it.
Such is now the position in South Queensferry, whose community council is choosing not to record or address, in its picture of the local economy, an ethical protection of local funeral businesses. It has been created by an apology obtained for a very nasty anti-social action towards all bereaved people, in a community event at a venue used for funerals. This passed to a funeral director and further minuted in an affected church's AGM. Hence the community council system is proved deficient towards wellbeing of businesses in communities, and owing to businesses to repair this.
A councillor on the real council wrote "there are council officers within the governance department who are responsible for the oversight of community councils". But that office itself, "Under the Standing Orders, it is up to the Chairperson of the Community Council to determine what additional items of business will be included in the agenda of the Community meeting," one person's fief to do that completely unaccountably yet get taken as speaking for a community. This when "3.7: Community councils should be able to demonstrate how they are fulfilling their responsibilities as representative bodies by provision of an annual report and other forms of engagement such as newsletters, surveys, websites and use of social media."
The bureaucratic inaction line contradicts this, and interorets the Standing Orders such as makes them contradictory. Meanwhile, businesses are left without the benefit community committed upholding of an ethical protection for them.

Wednesday 4 January 2023

lying about rape definitively provenly exists

The Eleanor Williams case in Cumbria is the most definitive proof that you or Nicola Sturgeon could ever need, that lying about rape exists. Hence that radical feminist dogma that it does not exist has always been a crime against human rights, conspiring to defeat justice. www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2023/jan/03/eleanor-williams-lied-grooming-gang-guilty-perverting-justice Convicted of the most publicly prominent, and on a group scale, with a made up story about a grooming gang, of serial crimes of false rape accusation, where there were clear alibis and evidences against the accusation. Whence is Rape Crisis's answer? Conviction on words against other words, whether it is 1 or even 2 persons' words, is never safe, never objective evidence. To allow it is always a most basic violation of human rights, the oldest human right of all. Usually Tory blogger Effie Deans, completely right about this, warned on Nov 14 of Sturgeon brewing a plan to abolish juries in rape cases, on grounds that they find innocent at a rate not fitting the witch-hunters' dogma. Including, any thinking observer instantly points out, in Alex Salmond's case, where Sturgeon herself had appeared to anticipate conviction and it was going to suit her in party. Remember too that Sturgeon was stopped, including by defence lawyers' opposition, from an attempt to suspend jury trials more generally at start of the Covid state of emergency in 2020. 20-20 vision on this will alert to and make the same law objections to every move against juries or for convictability on word, and will ever cite Eleanor Williams's case.

Thursday 20 October 2022

yes George, show us what the democratic means is


Because as we are now, devolved, eveyone living in Englandandwales is at liberty to escape this shocking pre-fascist virtual banning of protests and demonstrations there, by moving to Scotland. Compare that to how a Scottish state under racist "civic nationalism" would want to reject even some Scots from making that move. To make citizenship by descent tefusable is to hand over our economic emigrants' families, on a plate, to what George Monbiot has described in the Guardian.

Paragraph from a Guardian article by George Monbiot, 19 Oct 2022, on public apathy towards environmental protest:

Writing for the Mail on Sunday, the home secretary, Suella Braverman, claimed: “There is widespread agreement that we need to protect our environment, but democracies reach decisions in a civilised manner.” Oh yes? So what are the democratic means of contesting the government’s decision to award more than 100 new licences to drill for oil and gas in the North Sea? Who gave the energy secretary, Jacob Rees-Mogg, a democratic mandate to break the government’s legal commitments under the Climate Change Act by instructing his officials to extract “every cubic inch of gas”?

But George Monbiot himself ignored the court change, after he spoke at a Globalise Resistance conference in Glasgow 2001.

The court change benefits fightability of everything he urgently cares about. Since he has experienced arrest on an environmental protest, intentionally indeed, George Monbiot arrested for defying Extinction Rebellion protest ban - 2019,  he surely has every personal motive to care against the largely media-ignored violation of the human right to presumption of innocence, by the US and Canadian border systems giving innocent arrested people a worse status for entry. The court change helps fightability of that too.

So WHEN MONBIOT URGES YOU TO LISTEN, ON THE ECO EMERGENCY, MAKE IT CONDITIONAL. ONLY LISTEN ON CONDITION THAT HE EXPRESSES SOME LISTENING TO THE COURT CHANGE.

Wednesday 19 October 2022

Wee Alba Book citizens

There is now the Wee Alba Book, newly published by the Alba Party, given out at demos. p55

《 " The plans for how to manage Scottish citizenship were set out at the last referendum and still apply. Anyone born in Scotland or born to Scottish parents or grandparents will have an automatic right to citizenship, as will people resident at the time of independence." 》

Claiming this was the position in the last ref is of course spin lies. Salmond himself would not say this position to me as a caller on his last ref phone-in. The White Paper and Yes policy last time, which the SNP has still never budged from, was a racist shocker appealing to the same type of nasty anti-outsider voters as Brexit. It made citizenship by descent refusable, it made citizenships by birth or residence conditional on preexisting British citizenship

Faced with this, during the indyref I lodged EU petition 1448/2014 which is a human rights law resource always there for anyone's use. ECHR human rights are part of EU law. So I cited that article 8, family life, wil oblige the EU to disown shun and sanction Scotland as an international pariah racist state and make no dealings with us, unless citizenship by parental descent is unrefusable.

But that history only matters to defending that I + we were right to vote No because of it. Even if Salmond was not saying the right position then, his party is now.

This new book corrects the citizenship policy + states the perfect line on it. But it states it just for the Alba Party - does the Yes movement agree with it? Do the other indy parties agree with it?

Sunday 23 January 2022

Remember it was Ukraine who gave up the Bomb

CND's drooling fantasy that Scottish separation would force British nuclear disarmament has always been recognised as nonsense by every CND-supporting unionist, like George Galloway. Defence of the whole island will always by definition be England's or rump Britain's defence interest: so in practice we would still be under the British nuclear umbrella. So the problem that the nat cult includes a delirious cult faith against nuclear weapons is not a real objection for voters who are not of the peer pressured left's faithful mob and who value keeping nuclear weapons.

That means, by our location we are luckier and not placed the same as Ukraine. But if the CND argument caught in and advanced and changed European defence the way it wants, that would change. So arguing with them about Ukraine is important.

CND aint worked for Ukraine, has it ?!! Had the bomb when it became indy. Bowed to fashionability to give it up in 1994. Now look where it's at. Now we interestedly await to see the invasion defeated by NVDA civil resistance, hope the CND faithful are holding your breaths for it, confidently. The NVDA civil resistance I was always infuriated to hear described with dedicatedly faithful confidence by an 80s schoolmate.

This is the big one for them, this is the Russian-threatened country that unilaterally disarmed ! The European-Ukrainian Nuclear Mistake -Obviously so.

Thursday 18 November 2021

Article 8 really is used

A link to a Europhile site on citizenship legalities with a global citizenship ideal. globalcit.eu/tying-up-historical-loose-ends-the-nationality-and-borders-bill-uk/ This link discusses changes and impacts from Britain's present Nationality and Borders Bill,

whose main purpose is to be nastier and less fair to refugees, but it actually also tidies up some fairness anomalies around the old British Overseas or Dependent Territory citizenships dating from the Imperial era. These anomalies included some racist anomalies around parents' marriages affecting getting those citizenships by descent, and through which parent.

The page mentions a case won using article 8, the European Convention on Human Rights article on family life. The same article as I have cited ever since the White Paper, in the long conflict with the indy movement and SNP for Scottish citizenship by parental descent to be unrefusable. I cited article 8 in my EU petition 1448/2014 during the indyref, to recordedly cite to the EU that article 8 obliges it to disown shun and sanction Scotland as an international pariah racist state and have no dealings with us, until our citizenship by parental descent is unrefusable.

How totally vindicated I am now, in an action and a campaign basis that mindless cybernats have often rubbished. Article 8 already is used in court cases over citizenship and to overturn discriminatory citizenship rules. It was the right article to cite and it already used for this purpose. It is well founded.