HAMISH MacPherson’s article in last Sunday’s edition claims that Scotland surrendered its independence in 1707 and asks whether the Henry VIII rules were legally applied (Bribery, corruption and riots ... the troubled passage of the Act of Union, January 13). It is worth noting what is NOT stated in the Agreements is as important as what IS in them.

There is NO Government of Great Britain, no mention of a country of Great Britain, no parliamentary sovereignty or clause for English parliamentary sovereignty to be transferred on to the Parliament of Great Britain, no parliamentary majority, no party political system of Great Britain, no military of Great Britain, no institutions of Great Britain bar House of Lords and Treasury which were to be represented equally by both Scotland and England, no English dominion, no ceding of independence of either country.

There IS the enshrining of all rights prior to and after the signing of both countries. These rights include the sovereignty, independence, constitution, rights of the people and in Scotland’s case the right to remove the monarch. In addition to these there are specific conditions which automatically void and dissolve the Agreements if they are violated. The institutions, law and legal system, religion and territorial integrity must be upheld and kept separate indefinitely. The territorial borders of Scotland have been repeatedly violated by the English Government, the institutions of Scotland removed, the religions (recently) united, the law and legal system encroached upon and Anglofied. The English Supreme Court acting as a state court in violation of the specific condition which states that no law passed in England can be imposed on Scotland and vice versa.

The reason for these conditions and omissions is because what was created in 1707 was not a country but the state of Great Britain which comprised of a binary parliament and a trade flag that was to be flown on ships. The majority of the Articles of the Agreements deal with trade and their related taxes, exemptions, the monarch’s entitlements, peerages, the binary parliament which is to house both the Scottish and English Governments with EQUAL authority, the number of MPs from each country and the alignment of laws relating to trade between Scotland and England that may conflict with the Agreements, and Scotland taking on England’s debt with the provision that Scotland would be compensated for doing so. (A compensation that was never given.)

But much like September 19, 2014, as soon as the Agreement was signed England changed the terms to suit itself and began the colonisation process which led to the Highland Clearances and the outlawing of all things Scottish. By 1801, Scotland was essentially governed by England. England then created the erroneously and colonialist named Agreement with Ireland called the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland. This Agreement ceased when Ireland re-established its statehood. Northern Ireland was partitioned and is considered by the English establishment a province of England. Thus the only Agreement which falsely claims to still be active is that of 1707 between Scotland and England.

It is a sad state of affairs which reflects the colonisation of Scotland that colonialist terminology is routinely used by Scots, the Scottish establishment and sadly even The National, which does not distinguish between the four countries within the state of Great Britain, their governments, institutions and nations and that of the state itself.

The only country within the state of Great Britain that does not refer to itself with regards to its government, parliament, political parties etc is England, which self-styles itself the United Kingdom. This is a deliberate act as by doing this people within the state of Great Britain and globally are led to believe that a country called the “United Kingdom” was created in 1707 and that Scotland ceased to exist, rather than the state of Great Britain. However, while the Scottish Parliament merely adjourned, the English parliament was officially abolished in order to establish the Parliament of Great Britain.

Had the English establishment honoured the Agreements instead of colonising Scotland the Scots would likely have (now) been content to remain in the state of Great Britain. As it is, the utter racist attitude and contempt shown on a daily basis along with the English dictatorship has inevitably led Scots and pro-Scotland campaigners to back a Scottish state. Where England asserts its sovereignty, democracy and independence on a daily basis, so too will Scotland in the only way left open to the sovereign peoples of Scotland – through the re-establishment of a Scottish state.

via email