On This Day, 1305

On this day in 1305, Sir William Wallace was tried in Westminster Hall on the charge of High Treason, during which a garland of oak was placed upon his head mockingly, to signify him as the King of outlaws. His grisly sentence, of course, was read out immediately following the verdict, and included the full details of the punishment, known as “hanging, drawing and quartering”.

He was then beaten and dragged outside to a pair of waiting horses, and subsequently chained prostrate onto a hurdle (just a piece of fencing, not the wheeled construction shown in the film) before being dragged through the filthy streets of London for the public to mock, throw rubbish at, and stone.

He was drawn first to the Tower, about two and a half miles from the site of his trial, and then on to Smithfield via Aldgate, another mile or thereabouts so that all could look upon his mighty person and safely jeer. When his would be humiliation was finally complete and he had arrived at the spot of his execution, without ceremony, a noose was swiftly tightened about his neck, after which he was hanged all the way up and to the point of unconsciousness, being cut down just before passing out, or strangling to death. He was not racked as shown in the film however, nor was he allowed a chance to submit to Edward’s peace or even take a breath, and thereby cut short his suffering; rather, whilst being held upright by the hangman’s rope, like a carcass in a butchers yard, his private parts were swiftly cut away (all of them, and hence emasculation, not castration) of which were then summarily burned in the brazier in front of him. Then, while still upright, and very much alive and conscious, his stomach was slit open so that he could be ritually disemboweled for a baying crowd of filthy, cowardly peasants. His entrails were burnt on the brazier likewise.

Not content with the excruciating torture already dished out to the bound prisoner, the cruelty of the English rarely sated when given the chance at psychopathy, and so the final act was to be decapitation, and then quartering. You will note that in effect, these are three symbolic deaths: first, hanging, second, evisceration, and finally, decapitation. But before that small mercy, his arms and legs were first hacked off of his body, and for at least some of that, or perhaps even all of it, Wallace might very well have been conscious enough to know what was happening to him. I only pray shock had fully set in then, and all was but a detached numbness as his body wracked and spasmed from the blows of the axe slowly, but steadily detaching the broken limbs from his body.

But why did such a cruel injustice befall Wallace, one might ask, and for what reason would such a horrific punishment be devised? Look no further than Edward I then, who is said to have decreed that treason was a triple crime: against God, against man, and against the King. Hence the triple death sentence. The grisly, grotesque nature of the killing was explained in the severe language of the law with the intention that it should terrify the listeners and enhance the misery of the man whose body would soon illustrate the reality of the horror it entailed.

Needless to say, afterwards, Wallace’s head, dipped in tar, was then fixed to a pike, and subsequently displayed atop London Bridge, to be joined alongside by those of his brothers later on.

“I could not be a traitor to Edward, for I was never his subject.”- Wallace at his trial.

This barbaric murdering, in fact, was employed by the English for the execution of Scotsmen even as late as the 18th century, and as given by Lord Chief Justice Ellenborough (1750-1818) the wording was as follows:

“You are to be drawn on a hurdle to the place of execution, where you are to be hanged, but not till you are dead; for while still living, your body is to be taken down, your bowels torn out and burnt before your face; your head is then cut off, and your body divided into four quarters.”

P.S Tonight, I’ll be raising a glass of Bourbon in the name of Scotland’s Immortal Guardian.

“A Wallace, a Wallace!”- The War-cry of the men who had the fortune to follow him.

Cinead.

Advertisements

To back up, or not to back up…

Britain should disown the US if it launched a “preventative” attack against North Korea to stop it developing nuclear weapons, according to a leading military think tank.

Is the foreword on the Sky news websites article: ‘Scenes of carnage’ if North Korea crisis escalates into war, British report warns

Sky: The unusually blunt advice from the Royal United Services Institute (RUSI), which is the intellectual powerhouse behind the UK’s military establishment, comes amid growing concerns that such an attack is being seriously contemplated by Donald Trump’s administration. They write.

Me: Oh, what is this? The “special relationship” doesn’t seem all that special now, does it? England preparing to abandon its “closest ally” when things start to look dicey; when a real sense of danger wafts through the air, England suddenly finds its resolve wanting; like a dog barking at the gate, only to high-tail it for the front door when the gate swings open. And this just shows you how much of a shit-show the Westminster government truly is; they make grand promises and assurances, and then buckle under any real pressure; they scramble from their hill of strength the moment a threat approaches.

And here was me thinking that America was our greatest ally; and so since when do allies abandon one another? Isn’t the whole point of fostering alliances solely to provide back-up for either party in the eventuality of war? Sure, trade agreements that mutually benefit either country are by-products of such partnerships, as is continuing peace; but what good is peace and trade, if one half of the deal is armed to the teeth and sailing the waves of the Yellow Sea? Is this the sort of alliance America needs; an England already planning to abandon it in what could become a major world conflict? Now of course, America really doesn’t need England, or the rest of Britain as a whole; America is a powerhouse, a giant and a god of war. So who cares, right? So what; let England scurry away like a cowardly dog, eh?

bulldog
Britain (England FYI)

But then what does that truly say about any such special relationship? Of course America doesn’t need us, but does that mean that we shouldn’t stand shoulder to shoulder with them? Does that mean that we shouldn’t live and die in our convictions as a country that stands by its principles and its word? If we say we have your back, should we not then have your back, regardless even if our friend is big enough and strong enough to handle himself without us?

Sky: A RUSI report says the UK “should refuse to rush into unconditional support for US action” if the US was to attack North Korea in an attempt to prevent it from further developing the ultimate weapon of mass destruction.

Me: Now listen, anyone who is familiar with my blog will know that I’m fairly isolationist, and also don’t agree with Scotland sticking its nose into places it doesn’t belong; but Scotland is in Britain, and Britain seems to cling to the teat of America, and so much so that it peddles this notion of Britain and America as brothers-in-arms, and as the best of friends of which the English controlled media that plagues Britain as a whole often likes to force-feed us on a daily basis; so as a Scotsmen, I feel compelled to point out that if America does go to war, then so should we. It’s as simple as that, and that’s my two cents worth on the matter; we should fight alongside them come what may, and not because of some ridiculous idea of brotherhood, but simply for the sake of self-respect and honor! Otherwise what are we but cowards and back-biters on an international scale not to be taken seriously? Isn’t it funny just how hollow the English government now seems as it rolls over and offers its undulating and pendulous belly to the world? And think, what if America was to win this theoretical war, would it not then shun Britain for ever more; leaving us friendless and at the back of the cue for any resulting reconstruction contracts and positions of governance and influence on the post-war world stage? Way to think ahead, British cowards; in your rancid fear, you would potentially throw away whatever shred of credibility you have left to skulk under the desk whilst humming with your fingers stuck in your ears as you assume the fettle position.

Sky: In the report, author Professor Malcolm Chalmers writes: “(The UK) should make it clear that it had not been asked for its views in advance and that it would not have supported military action even if it had been asked.”

Me: So what? If America goes to war with North Korea, then Britain automatically becomes a target regardless of whether or not we declare a side, what with it having up until then proclaimed itself America’s chief parasite. Is North Korea, or even China, or Russia really going to care if Britain distances itself from America, when eventually it’s probably going to join the war at some point anyway? So would it not make sense then for the east to make a preventative strike of their own to thwart that eventuality? Yet, if Britain was in the fight from the very beginning, then we would at least have our guard up from the get-go, and perhaps be better equipped to deal with any such attack in the first place for having a firm grasp on who our enemy is and where the strikes are likely to manifest. War doesn’t care about gestures, it only cares about threats; Britain is a threat, whether or not it cowardly shrinks from the fray meantime, Britain would still be a threat by proxy.

Sky: “Casualties in such a conflict would likely reach the hundreds of thousands, even if no nuclear weapons were used. There could be far-reaching consequences for the global economy, involving sustained disruption of vital supply chains and markets.” 

Me: I’ll let Joseph Dunford, chairman of the US joint chiefs of staff respond to that one: “We can’t let a madman with nuclear weapons let on the loose like that. We have a lot of firepower, more than he has times 20, but we don’t want to use it… I hope China solves the problem. But if China doesn’t do it, we’ll do it”

Yeehaw!

But, at the end of the day, would America really be all that surprised by England’s lack of a spine in such tense, trying times? Of course they wouldn’t; why would they? America is well aware that all Britain is good for is bending at the waist to accommodate their’ slippered feet upon its back. America doesn’t need Britain. Britain needs America, because without them, the empire 2.0 would be steam rolled into oblivion the moment the ships left Portsmouth. So, in understanding that, you would think that the sniveling cowards down at Westminster would be prostrating their feeble bodies in an effort to clamber around America’s feet and swear allegiance to their boot-straps only to fool themselves into, and continue on, with the belief that America will make them great again.

no brainer
One is powerful, and the other thinks its powerful

Man up, or shut up; for if it was to come to blows, and then maybe even escalates into some sort of an actual major world conflict; sides will have to be taken. And I don’t know about you, but I prefer fighting fresh, than already bloody. And sure, people would die, but then, people will die whether or not they are holding a gun or not. I come from a military family, I feel I should point out; with every man all the way back and to the Jacobite risings having been a soldier, or in some branch of the military, and so would no doubt have immediate family fighting in any such conflict, yet I’m perfectly fine with that; soldiers are soldiers, and they are trained to kill and die, that’s their entire job description; and so I don’t care about projected casualties, both military, and civilian, because again, people die en masse when wars are fought between powerful entities, and that’s no reason not to fight, and it’s no reason to go back on one’s word, and its certainly no reason to abandon ones ally.

And look, I’m not a warmonger, nor do I have a Michael Bayesque hard-on for guns and explosions, but sometimes wars solve problems, or at the very least, they solve problems for future generations in hindsight. Again, I wouldn’t relish war for the sake of war alone, but from a pragmatic standpoint, North Korea is threatening world stability, it is a menace to peace and is arming itself for conflict, and so needs to be put in its place by a firm hand, and if that means war, then what other recourse is there to counter such a flagrant and openly hostile threat. Diplomacy? Please; ever heard of the catastrophic diplomatic effort known as The Age of Appeasement?

age of appeasement

 

Cinead MacAlpin.

 

 

 

 

 

 

McCrone report: page 1-11 uploaded

Mccrone 1

As the title suggests, I’ve begun uploading the full McCrone report to the pages section. The report essentially outlines the blatant plan by the British government to steal the North sea oil from Scotland and funnel it down into England. It’s an interesting read, and sheds a definitive light on the inherent deception and disgusting thievery of a selfish Westminster. What they did was truly underhanded, deceitful and abhorrent. This isn’t, nor was it, a conspiracy theory. It happened, and considering the Tories, it should come as no surprise to anyone familiar with them or their scheming as to how low they would be willing to sink. I’ll be adding the full report soon, and If your interested in Scottish independence, or just politics in general, then I’d recommend giving it a read.

oil

You can find a PDF of the full report here in the meantime:

http://www.siol-nan-gaidheal.org/download/mccronereport.pdf

Cinead.

 

Knock, knock…Whos there? Dead Scot’s on a slave ship

Below, was what was said by conservative MP Lucy Frazer, during the queen’s speech debate in the House of Commons:

It is the home of Oliver Cromwell, who defeated the Scots at Dunbar; incorporated Scotland into his Protectorate and transported the Scots as slaves, to the colonies

lucy frazer1

She remained standing there with a barely stifled, smug-laden grin, as the chortling, sycophantic sneering, and venomous contempt had petered off long enough for her to add “Now there, is an answer to the West Lothian question; but not one that of course I would recommend

lucy frazer2

lucy frazer3

What a disgusting wretch of a woman; hundreds of dead Scots being heaped into mass graves after succumbing to the conditions onboard those ‘Slave‘ ships; is that really something in which you find a perverse sort of joy; a conceited smirk playing on your thin English lips as you so flippantly disregard the agonizing suffering of women and children having starved to death within the cramped, suffocating squalor of those ‘Slave‘ ships?

lucy frazer4

How vastly would the tables be turned, say, if I were to make such an inflammatory and derogatory remark in regards to the recent Westminster terrorist attack? After all, what are the English to me; nothing; foreigners; so why wouldn’t I be able to mock and scoff at the loss of life in that attack, when its fine and dandy for a Goddamn fucking English MP to not only make light off, but seem almost pleased about, the horrendous deaths of hundreds, perhaps even thousands, of Scots? And all done with that repugnant contortion of the English snout that passes for the self-congratulatory smirk of a whimsical quip delivered.

Here is a better look at that horse-faced English scarecrow witch:

lucy frazer

But what sickens me the most, is that there will be many people in Scotland who will still vote for these horrible little rats; old people clinging to life seemingly just to make it harder for the rest of us through their selfish and bad choices; those old bastards who scuppered the first Independence referendum complaining about their pensions; fuck you! You’ll be dead in the ground long before now, so why not leave a better future for your grandchildren than a Scotland yet chained to its abuser! These Vile, contemptuous British puppets, grovelers, sniveling and prostrating, servile and subservient Brit nats; quisling Scots who don’t deserve the blood in their veins, pedaling the lies and misinformation drip feed to them by their English Tory overlords; too meek and blind to see through the bars of their own cage, and out into the world changing around it.

We’re part of some harmonious union? Dear god; we are nothing but a device, our presence assuring the hollow Englishman of his ‘British identity’ when in reality, no such identity exists out with the delusions of grandeur so many of their ilk possess. We are not simply a region of England, we are not north Britain; our country is older than England; we were Christian first, whilst they continued to wallow in mud and wattle dwellings like the Germanic savages they were! They are the scum in this pond; they are the beasts needing leashed; they are the broken leg needing amputated! We are better than them in every way, socially, medically, and educationally; remember they send their patients up to Scotland for a reason. And our universities consistently outperform theirs. We are smarter, more creative, more musical and more pleasant than they could ever hope to be; they are the parasite, not us!

It is time we removed ourselves from the English and their toxic presence, and just got on with our own self’s. Leave England to suck America’s teat; those two countries can jerk each other of all they want; they can rebuild the empire 2.0, with England acting as uncle Sam’s footstool; whatever! Both are as meaningless to me, as the apple is to the wolf. Let them fight Russia in Syria, and let England fight Spain; but let them do it alone, and without the scottish soldier; the only reason as to why England ever got itself an empire in the first place; let Englishmen die, and let English families weep and wonder why.

Scotland deserves to be free. If you can’t see that, then for you, what hope is their left? Surely it isn’t from fear of being cast adrift cultureless and without identity, without a sense of self and belonging; for that is the wheel of the hollow Englishman. What then? Scotland is too small to stand on its own? Whereas Ireland and Iceland do just fine; when tourism and Whisky, and yes; OIL; are as plentiful for our country as insecurity is for England! Is it the thought of unchecked mass immigration that plagues your mind? Well, vote for independence and then never vote for the SNP ever again; simple! Why vote Tory or Labour just to spite your own nose? What does that really achieve in the present, or the long run; more punishment and less freedom; English law in place of Scots? What dog is so whipped that it can’t even realize when it’s being beaten? What sorry excuse for a human being would rather accept the rule of one country, over the self determination of one’s own soil?

Cinead MacAlpin