The bill states that it is permissible to criticize religion, but that will prove to be an empty provision if this bill is passed. Any opposition to jihad mass murder and Sharia oppression of women and others has for years been described at the highest levels as “stirring up hatred.” Thus this bill would certainly put an end to such opposition, and the jihad could advance unopposed and unimpeded.
“Scotland Swaps One Blasphemy Law for Another,” by Madeleine Kearns, National Review, April 29, 2020:
On Friday, reports emerged that the Scottish Parliament had introduced a bill decriminalizing blasphemy. No one has been prosecuted under the blasphemy law in question for 175 years, but still, the law “no longer reflects the kind of society in which we live,” the government said.
Fair enough, one might think. But look closer: The new bill does not simply repeal the dormant blasphemy law, as reports suggest. Instead, it replaces the law with a new one, designed for actual use in the 21st century. Reflecting “the kind of society in which we live,” the new bill is neither freer nor more liberal than the old one; it merely enshrines the policing of a different kind of speech.
The single sentence abolishing “the offence of blasphemy,” does not appear until part four of the Hate Crimes and Public Order (Scotland) Act. In part one, the drafters make the bill more palatable by creating enhanced penalties for existing crimes that are “aggravated by prejudice.” In explaining how this could be applied, Lord Bracadale, who conducted an independent review of the legislation, gave ministers two hypothetical scenarios:
A man who was annoyed at the noise his gay neighbor made putting out the bins in the early morning engaged in abusive shouting, in the course of which he made comments about the neighbor’s sexual orientation including hoping that “people like you die of AIDS. . . .”
A man shouts at a disabled person in a wheelchair on a street saying, “get out of my way you cripple” and proceeds to tip them out of their wheelchair . . .
In the examples Bracadale gives, the first man may have committed breach of peace and the second man has most certainly committed assault. But a judge would already be inclined to sentence those crimes more harshly if he thought them to be unprovoked or motivated by prejudice. Is it really in the statute book that moral judgments are to be arbitrated? Why is hurling abuse at someone because he is gay objectively worse than doing so because he is small or ugly? Why is tipping a man from his wheelchair because he is disabled objectively more egregious than tipping him from his wheelchair because he is poor or homeless?
Bracadale explains that the law is intended to ensure that crimes aggravated by prejudice against protected “identity” groups are “treated differently from ordinary crimes.” Presumably, if we accept this, then we will move more seamlessly from the “hate crimes” listed in part one of the bill to the prohibitions on “stirring up hatred” listed in part two.
Just as the 1837 blasphemy law prohibited “composing, printing or publishing any blasphemous or seditious libel,” the new bill outlaws “displaying, publishing or distributing” anything that “stirs up hatred,” as well possessing “inflammatory material” or performing a hateful play. The prosecution would not even need to prove “intent” on the part of the accused; it would only need to prove that from their actions, hatred would be “likely to be stirred up.” As for what constitutes “stirring up hatred,” unlike Bracadale, the law is short on specifics, leaving that judgment entirely to the subjective perception of a member of a victim group or some other third party. If a minority finds something to be “abusive, threatening, or insulting,” then it is, under the law. Two minor carve-outs are made for “freedom of expression,” which means it is permissible (within certain parameters) to criticize sexual behaviors, and “freedom of religion,” which means it is permissible to criticize religion. The fact that it was necessary to explicitly state that is okay to criticize religion in a law purporting to repeal the state’s prohibition of blasphemy is almost comical. Strikingly, there is no carve-out for criticizing transgenderism, which is currently the subject of fierce debate in Scotland….
Under the newly proposed bill, a person convicted of “stirring up hatred” could face up to seven years’ imprisonment. The Scottish government maintains that it has a mandate for such measures, because in 2015 the Scottish Social Attitudes Survey found that 69 percent of Scots felt “Scotland should do everything it can to get rid of all kinds of prejudice.” The justice minister has said that “by creating robust laws for the justice system, parliament will send a strong message to victims, perpetrators, communities and to wider society that offences motivated by prejudice will be treated seriously and will not be tolerated.” (Emphasis added.)…
jca reid says
Basically you can criticise ANY Religion bar Islam of course.
terry sullivan says
islam is a cancer and war is inevitable
Barbara says
If a non muslim rapes he can be charged and sentenced. If the rapist is a muslim I am a bigot for pressing rape charges. Then I am the who goes to jail. Did I get this right?
I never thought the Picts and Scots would have progeny who would be such pantie waste cowards.
All those stories of fighting the english to keep their freedom must have been fairy tales. Because the Scots of today not worth time of day.
mortimer says
The Scots are about to throw a big boomerang.
R Russell says
Barbara.
Your contempt for the Scots is no better or worse than the Muslim contempt for the Scots
gravenimage says
Barbara, I don’t think that lamenting how far Scotland has fallen with this appalling bill is showing contempt for the Scots. It is more wishing they would live up to their brave legacy.
Surely *you* are not sanguine about this appalling bill?
Rufolino says
“Get rid of all kinds of prejudice”. ALL kinds ?
I’m prejudiced against evil. Will this law therefore make me guilty ?
mortimer says
It will become illegal to criticize England or express hatred for the English … and then everyone in every pub in Scotland will have to be arrested.
R Russell says
Mortimer.
The SNP criticise the English all of the time. I’ll be very surprised if something like a law will stop them.
gravenimage says
I don’t think the Scots will be prevented from expressing hatred of the English–just of Islam.
Dude says
I might assume that all the sedition found in the desert scriptures will be deemed “hate speech”. Or are we just blowin’ smoke up the peasants’ botox, as the doublespeak politicians are want?
Solution: Only quote their monstrous texts word-for-word.
mortimer says
The Koran and hadiths and canonical commentaries of Islam should be taken into court and exhibited as evidence of genocidal hate speech.
Lilith Wept says
Wasn’t there someone who was arrested for merely reading those violent verses out loud in Britain? And in The Netherlands , I believe, a woman was sentenced to jail for speaking the truth about Islam, and told “the truth is no defense” …..Europeans are loosing what little rights they had!
All to protect the LGBT and Islam. So sick…..You know, the LGBT don’t make up that big a percentage of the population so why is it being pushed down our throats so much?
mortimer says
A British politician was publicly arrested for reading a passage about Islam written by Winston Churchill in front of the city hall.
revereridesagain says
Yeah, but Mortimer, if someone did that they’d be arrested for “stirring up hatred” because no one with a spine could refrain from “hating” such vicious, murderous, libelous and inciteful scribblings. Basically if these croc-feeding weasels were honest, they would have to arrest every Muslim in Scotland. But to be honest would be to be “hateful”.
rubiconcrest says
Yep! Anyone caught reading those ‘scriptures’ or paraphrasing them should be jailed for 7 years.
James Lincoln says
+10
Rufolino says
Absolutely, Mortimer.
David Kavanagh says
But the truth is no defence against hate-speech.
Ecosse1314 says
Didn’t work in Australia. I think the courts ruled there that to quote the korant would constitute hate speech….no me neither
mortimer says
This proposed law will make Islam vulnerable to lawsuits, because the Koran and hadiths are filled with appeals to hate the KUFAAR, the JEWS, the CHRISTIANS and the POLYTHEISTS.
Islam is not just filled with hateful declarations … it is overflowing with hatred directed against the ‘other’.
ISLAM WILL BE THE PRIMARY TARGET OF THIS LEGISLATION … but these MORALLY BLIND Scottish legislators don’t know Islam and can’t see what they are doing …
-Imam Abdul-Latif ibn Abdur-Rahman Rahimullah said, “It is not possible for someone to realize Tawheed (Islamic faith) and act upon it, and yet not be HOSTILE against the mushrikeen (i.e. wrong worshippers). So anyone who isn’t HOSTILE against the mushrikeen, then it cannot be said that he acts upon Tawheed nor that he realizes it.” [ad-Durar as-Saniyyah 8/167]
– “The Muslim should regard the Kuffaar as ENEMIES and HATE them because of their kufr (wrong belief), just as he hates their kufr (disbelief) itself.” – from Umar Sulayman ‘Abd-Allaah al-Ashqar, “Belief in Allah”
-“The doctrine of al Walaa wal Baraa is the REAL IMAGE for the actual practice of this faith.” – source “Al Walaa wal Baraa According to the Aqeedah of the Salaf”, by Sheikh Muhammad Saeed al Qatani, authoritative Saudi Sharia lawyer and imam at the Abu Bakr and Al Furqan Mosques in Mecca.
-Shaykh Ahmad ibn ‘Atiq said: “There isn’t in the Book of Allah the Exalted – after the issue concerning the obligation of tawheed and the forbiddance of its opposite (kufr=wrong belief)- any issue which has as so many proofs, nor so clearly explained, than the issue of al-walaa’ and al-baraa’.” (W-B is ‘Islamic apartheid’)
– Dr. Muhammad Saeed Al-Qahtaani said: “Thus, it is clear that Al-Wala’ Wal-Bara calls on Muslims to “love” their fellow Muslims and hate the non-Muslim (or Kafir).”
– from Sufi scholar Ahmad Sirhindi (1564-1624): “The honour of Islam lies in INSULTING kufr and kafirs. One who respects the kafirs dishonours the Muslims… The real purpose of levying jiziya on them is to HUMILIATE them to such an extent that they may not be able to dress well and to live in grandeur. They should constantly remain TERRIFIED and TREMBLING. It is intended to hold them under CONTEMPT and to uphold the honour and might of Islam.”
– from ibn Taymiyya, “Book of Emaan”: “… true believers show ANIMOSITY and HATRED towards disbelievers and NEVER support them.”
– K. 28:86 says: “Lend not thou support in any way to those who reject Allah’s Message.”
– In the matter of relations with kafirs, a Muslim should “…act like you are his friend. Then kill him.” – Sheikh Muburak Gilani
– “The Muslim should regard the Kuffaar as ENEMIES and HATE them because of their kufr (wrong belief), just as he hates their kufr (disbelief) itself.” – from Umar Sulayman ‘Abd-Allaah al-Ashqar, “Belief in Allah”
– “… to SHOW ENMITY to those who show enmity to Allaah and His Messenger”. – from [Chap.iv] “The Islaamic Concept of al-Walaa’ wal-Baraa’” by Khalid El-Gharib
– In 2019, Mufti Muhammad Ibn Muneer of New York said, “The general principle is to love and to hate for the sake of Allah. Which is simply summed up as, loving the Muslims and hating the non-Muslims”
mortimer says
Note: the above quotes are from normative, mainstream Islam.
Lilith Wept says
Yep, you are SO right. This isn’t from the lunatic fringe, but the core, mainstream Islamic ideology that is based on the same Koran, Hadith and Sira that every Moslem MUST profess to believe in and obey completely in order to be considered a Moslem.
And even the so called moderate moslems either support jihad by their silence, or through the payments Zakat (part of which which goes to support jihad) or by their support of imams and mosques that support jihad……..or by their support of Moslem politicians that refuse to condemn jihad ….or they will be pressured and threatened to conform and support jihad just as the kufir will be pressured and threatened.
And don’t forget that the Halal food industry uses the fees they charge for halal certification to support jihad. So everyone, Moslem or kufir, who buys halal is supporting jihad.
mortimer says
Ordinary Muslims try not to think about terrorism too much. When it is in their face in the news, they look the other way. Then, they complain that the media hates Islam for even reporting the terrorist attacks.
Ordinary Muslims want to pretend that no one gets hurt in jihad, so they do not feel responsible for it.
And Pontius Pilate (who had the ultimate power in Judea) washed his hands before the crowd, saying, “I am innocent of the blood of this righteous man.” That is what the ordinary Muslim is doing.
gravenimage says
I think it’s more that most Muslims don’t want the Infidel to know that Islam is violent against them. If more non-Muslims knew, they might defend themselves against Islam.
R Russell says
Mortimer, I apologise for going off at a tangent, but did you know that Pontius Pilate was Scottish? He was born in Forteviot.
Don’t believe the stories that the Romans never went beyond Hadrian’s wall. They also built Antonine wall and there are Roman artefacts all the way up the east coast (It’s flat) there was also w huge battle called Mons Graupius but very little if anything is known about it.
Ecosse1314 says
R Russell. That story about Pilate has been told for ages. I don’t know about the walls as they were built long after Pilates birth. The Romans were not in England never mind Scotland in roughly 20-10 BC
gravenimage says
There is no reliable source that claims that Pontius Pilate was Scottish. Note that this was not even suggested until 1899.
gravenimage says
Mortimer, I very much doubt that Islam will be in any danger from this bill.
Old Fat Bald Socially Inept Ron says
This new bill outlaws “displaying, publishing or distributing” anything that “stirs up hatred,” as well possessing “inflammatory material”
Does this legally binding measure imply that henceforth the publishing, and distribution, or verbal citation of the Quran will be treated as the hate filled, supremacist call to violence that it truly is?
?LL?H knows best
mortimer says
No comic will ever be able to tell a joke in Scotland.
Wellington says
Islam and Leftism are presently very much in the ascendancy in the UK—“more advanced” is such rot than in most (but not all) Western nations. Muslim rape gangs aplenty, the banning of Robert Spencer from even visiting the UK, and no massive civil disobedience protests against the effective shutdown of liberty in Britain all testify to this. Muslim rape gangs do not exist in the US and no person critical of Islam is banned from coming to the US—stark contrasts here among so many others and dispositive of just how pathetic the UK has become.
It is not enough that many Brits are privately disgusted that Islam and Leftism are taking over Britain. This alone is woeful and won’t cut it. It is merely indicative of the fact that most good people when confronted by evil will shake their heads and thereafter do nothing. The Tommy Robinsons in the UK are way, way too few.
Wake the hell up, Britain. You could start by holding Elizabeth and the entire Royal Family to account for doing NOTHING, saying NOTHING, as their nation continues to descend into an Islamic/Leftist hell-hole.
mortimer says
The rot is in the Home Office. The Home Office should be purged.
(And imho, esteemed Wellington, the problem is the reliance of UK on Arab oil.)
James Lincoln says
mortimer,
The United States could supply the UK with oil and natural gas LNG.
The UK could get rid of Arab oil and Russian natural gas LNG – and be a lot better off…
R Russell says
We could get our gas from Israel via the pipeline from Israel to Cyprus and Greece, and through Europe. The Oil we could get, from the Golan Heights Israel again.
But Russia will attack Israel in the very near future. They will most likely want the oil and gas. Russia cannot drill for oil in the summer. It needs the permafrost to be frozen and with temperatures rising it is thought that very soon drilling for oil in Siberia will be impossible.
gravenimage says
Lots of nations drill for oil when the ground is not frozen.
R Russell says
This article isn’t about Britain. This is a law for Scotland alone. The Home Office has nothing to do with it.
Reziac says
….yet.
Rob R (Brit stuck in Britainistan) says
“This article isn’t about Britain. This is a law for Scotland alone. The Home Office has nothing to do with it.”
Okay, but it’s not like Whitehall has a radically different policy, so why are you practically demanding your own hall of fame for pointing out this mild “error”, Captain Nitpick?
R Russell says
Rob R (Brit stuck in Britainistan)
Looks like I’ve hit a raw nerve!
mortimer says
For Wellington:
DAILY MAIL: “How wealthy Gulf Arabs are buying up huge swathes of the capital – and now make up a tenth of all buyers in exclusive Mayfair”
•Middle Eastern families have spent £4.4bn since 2006 and control nine of central London’s largest development sites
•The Abu Dhabi Royal family, the Al Nahyans, are now the largest landowner in Mayfair after the Duke of Westminster
•Estate agent Peter Wetherell said: ‘Every time there has been upheaval it has generated a new wave of investors’
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2727212/How-wealthy-Gulf-Arabs-buying-huge-swathes-capital-including-150m-Mayfair-property-year-alone.html
Save Europe says
The Royals have never been allowed to speak in the political ‘arena’, in ‘pure’ terms, so to speak.
I’d say the traitors are Blair, Cameron and May and EVERY Leftist in the U.K.
As I always say – you wouldn’t believe how many people who voted Brexit did so, due to the height of the 2015 Muslim invasion, invited by Merkel, into the EU.
It’s very very sizeable in percentage terms. I and the highest number of people I’ve met, have never had any problem with Poles, Hungarians etc – on the contrary – they are exceptional people. I don’t want more ‘Dutch/Swedish/Belgian/French’ Somalis etc in my country !!!!
This is from 2006 !!!!
http://www.bbc.co.uk/leicester/content/articles/2006/09/29/leicester_somali_community_feature.shtml
Rufolino says
If “the Queen and the Royal Family” did what you want them to do, the Monarchy would be sidelined, if not abolished, in six months.
Yes, they would have given voice to a valid cause, but in stepping outside their constitutional limits, Parliament would move to silence them completely by some means or other.
Parliament rules, not the Queen, and such a blatant challenge to Parliament’s authority would meet with a ruthless response. This isn’t the 17th Century and the Queen would not be beheaded, but her role would be extinguished.
Would it be worth it ?
James Lincoln says
Rufolino,
If “the Queen and the Royal Family” cannot speak out against the total islamic destruction of the UK – along with its imposition of sharia law, then they serve NO useful purpose.
If the Queen’s role is extinguished because of this, then so be it.
At least if she spoke the truth about islam / muslim invasion – people would at least listen…
gravenimage says
+1
Burner Jack says
Will Muslims also get 7 years for stirring up hatred by killing, maiming and robbing people? For raping their daughters?
Niemoller says
Who watches the watchmen? These politicasters prove daily that they are as worthy of arbitrating morality as Jim Jones serving up punch drink in Guyana.
mortimer says
No one is watching. The UK media are forbidden to report the hidden agendas, bribes and sell-outs.
The people on the passenger deck are telling the captain there is an iceberg ahead, but the captain is telling the officers to arrest the people who are warning the captain.
mortimer says
The Scots are about to impose discriminatory Sharia law by other means.
R Russell says
The Justice Minister in Scotland is Humza Yousaf. How much do you think he contributed to this law?
Look up his background in Breitbart and Gatestone.
He has family links to terrorism.
Sun says
That is shocking indeed. The progress of Islamic infiltration in the European governments is devastating.
R Russell says
I have a list of websites which might prove useful to me in the future. One of these was “searchlight”.
The article in searchlight stated that Yousaf considered himself Pakistani first and Scottish second.
This website has now disappeared. Am I just being a bit too suspicious to think it disappeared by design?
I’m wondering when the saltire will be removed as the flag of Scotland. The children aren’t taught the history of it so have no idea of its meaning.
Can’t expect a cross to be the national symbol of Scotland once the Muslims are in charge.
gravenimage says
Yes–terrifying point, R Russell.
andrew mckendrick says
Yes Was just thinking the same about Humza .Wonder if you will be allowed to make jokes about burqas or will that hate speech instead of islamophobic?
Sun says
R Russell, yep, informations on Google are well assorted nowadays…
I found following link on the other search engine:
https://barenakedislam.com/2014/09/21/humza-yousaf-the-terror-linked-muslim-radical-behind-the-scottish-independence-movement/
The photo of the “Clan Yousaf” on the day of the swearing in ceremony covers most questions about religious priorities and integration into our Western nations.
R Russell says
Yes, Sun,
You will have seen the terrorist links.
But please don’t forget that during WW2 the SNP wanted to establish a Nazi government in Scotland and we didn’t even have our own parliament then.
The info is readily available with a search engine.
You need to go back into the history of the SNP as there were several independence group which eventually amalgamated.
Merri-joy says
The Scottish Parliament will become guilty of gross prejudice if it passes a Bill that aims to protect certain “protected” groups!
It would be great to have a Law suit brought against the political ideology of hate!
R Russell says
Next year we vote. I sincerely hope the SNP will be voted out and their law with them.
Ecosse1314 says
Latest poll by a consevative peer has the SNP way out in front. So don’t expect too much from the next election.
Also to be blunt Labour tory libdums and greens are just as bad. Not one of our mainstream parties have done anything to stem the tide.
R Russell says
The only hope is for a Christian Revival to involve all who live in Scotland. A Christian Revival is happening in Iran, so it can happen here too.
RichardL says
George Orwell predicted all of this and everybody thought he was writing about the past…
Kepha says
I pray for the USA, my own ountry, that if ever a politician or judge proposes this kind of legislation, he would be impeahed, removed, and disbarred from the legal profession, holding public office (down to city dog catcher), or being in public employ for life. I hear criticisms of my religion every day of the week and twice on Sundays, but as long as I can criticize the other guy’s rank idolatry, I’m OK. Americans need to protect our First Amendment; and at this point, I see the ACLU as part of the problem rather than part of the solution.
gravenimage says
+1
ntesdorf says
Under the newly proposed bill, a person convicted of “stirring up hatred” could face up to seven years’ imprisonment…..Welcome to the new World of Scottish Islamic Dhimmitude.
gravenimage says
Scotland: New “hate speech” bill could give seven years’ imprisonment to those convicted of “stirring up hatred”
……………..
I’m sure that angering Muslims by daring to mention that Islam is violent will be considered “stirring up hatred”–preaching violent Jihad, likely not so much. Suicidal insanity.
R Russell says
Do you think the BDS marches will be banned, as well as the Orange Walk?
I gather the Pro-Palestinians regularly meet in Glasgow city centre to spout their hatred of anything Israeli. Will that be stopped too?
gravenimage says
I doubt it…
BLeigh says
Is this an example of Scottish abrogation
JoBo says
I weep for Scotland, country of my birth.
John de los Angeles says
OK. Then all Muslims should be tried for believing in the hate filled Qur’an, Hadith and other holy books!!
Owen.morgan3@btinternet.com says
The “Justice” Minister is named Humza Yousaf. He is very vocal about his religion, but the “National Review” never thought to mention that. This is a blatant attempt to get islam armour-plated protection under Scottish law. Yousaf couldn’t care less about all the other identity groups he names; after all, muslims usually either enslave such people, or chuck them off buildings.
UNCLE VLADDI says
This is what happens when chads tolerate beta-males acting like alpha females, and women can vote.
gravenimage says
Ah, yes–if only Muslims were in power, you wouldn’t have to worry about those ‘filthy females’ voting–or getting an education, or anything else…
No Muzzies Here says
Laws like that punish thoughts. Since it is impossible to know accurately what a person is thinking, these laws punish a person for being accused of illegal thoughts. There is obviously no defense against that, and so these laws are completely unreasonable.
Since these laws are used only against certain modes of thought, and not against others, the laws accomplish what the lawmakers intended: to punish and intimidate people of the wrong political orientation.
Ecosse1314 says
It already is worse than that in the UK ..if one person perceives something as rascist etc then thst is it….case proven.
OLD GUY says
Will they lock up all muslims for promoting their form of hate speech? Practically everything a muslim says pisses me off and I view as hate speech or do I not count? Is this law only for speaking out against Islam if you don’t agree with the muslim view, even if what you say about Muhammad and islam is a proven fact. Is it hate speech to tell the truth?
Hell if hate speech was all that muslim/islamics did and they quit beheading people, raping women & girls, along with a whole lot of other violent actions against mankind maybe we wouldn’t need hate speech laws at all.
Rob R (Brit stuck in Britainistan) says
Let me guess, it will apply to people who complain about the horrible things said and taught in radical mosques… but it wont apply to those “Imams”/whatever who actually said/taught it.
Jesus fuck, I know the psychotic mental illness that all pro-Islam people are riddled with. It’s scarier than any horror movie. There’s a particularly strong strain of it in Scotland, I know the political landscape of my own country. Wish I could get away from here.
Naildriver says
I would hope the Scottish would fight for their country against Islam even more so than they have against the British.
I’ll bet for many Scots they are like American blacks who think ‘the enemy of my enemy is my friend’– where American blacks entrench their racism against whites through Islam – do Scottish do the same, and welcome these Muslims because of this?
They should realize Islam is a whole new enemy.
R Russell says
The atheists were very clever. They attacked the Christian worldview in Scotland, making people believe there was science (another god) to prove the beginnings narrative of Christianity was a fairy tale. In fact science has progressed so far, it is verifiable that the atheist beginnings narrative cannot be verified and so it is a fairy tale.
Thus Christianity was shoehorned out Scottish life and those believing it seen as relics from the past. John Knox must be turning in his grave.
Just as nature abhors a vacuum, so Christianity had to be replaced with something else and the Science god, a changeable god, unlike YHWH God, took his place and the left’s agenda took over. A very sanitised version of Scottish history was taught.
an aside:
In the 1980s, my young daughter came home from school one day to tell me they had been taught about the Battle of Hastings. (An English battle) She was very excited to be able to tell me the date -1066.
When I asked her what the date was for the Battle of Stirling Bridge (Scottish) she replied that they hadn’t been taught that. It was the same for the Battle of Bannockburn. I gave up after that for she was only a young child and it wasn’t her fault.
This was before the internet and I spent the next day phoning round shops in Edinburgh to see which ones had history books suitable for a child. I was put in touch with the bookshop which supplied the school books to the private schools. I went there and bought these books for my children. I thought they were entitled to know their own history before learning about English history.
(Later on she also asked me if I had been alive at the same time as Mary Queen of Scots – 1542-1587. She was so disappointed when I explained that Mary had died before I was born. I chuckled for days after that one)
Anyway — The Scots have lost their identity. They get Islam pushed down their throats in the simplest of ways – On the BBC, Biased Broadcasting Company, almost every other doctor being interviewed about Covid 19 has a Muslim name.
The takeover of our country is insidious and relentless.
Don’t forget the queen is a descendent of Mohammed.
gravenimage says
All very sad.