Scotland is enduring the most devastating drug epidemic in Europe. Since 2015, more than one thousand people have died every year from drug-related causes. In 2023, drug deaths climbed to 1,197. Police Scotland reported 1,065 suspected deaths in 2024. The highest figure was recorded in 2020, when the number reached 1,339. Although recent figures suggest a modest decline, the scale remains catastrophic. Per capita, Scotland’s drug death rate is over three times higher than England and Wales and more than fifteen times that of many European countries. No comparable case exists among developed nations.
This is not simply a public health crisis. The devastation is concentrated in working-class areas that were once engines of industrial production. Glasgow, Dundee, Inverclyde, parts of Fife, and Ayrshire have become synonymous with grief and loss. The burden falls overwhelmingly on men aged thirty-five to fifty-four. Nearly all cases involve more than one substance. Heroin, methadone, street benzodiazepines such as etizolam, gabapentin, alcohol, and cocaine are often mixed. In 2023, benzodiazepine deaths more than doubled. Cocaine-related deaths rose to nearly five hundred. New synthetic opioids such as nitazenes and tranquilising agents like xylazine have begun to appear in coroners’ reports.
Since 2017, over fifteen hundred babies have been born in Scotland with neonatal abstinence syndrome. These infants are not born to a nation recovering. They are born into a condition of prolonged abandonment.
No explanation rooted in culture or individual behaviour can account for this. The causes are political and historical. Scotland’s current drug crisis is the result of decades of economic destruction, political disempowerment, and cultural erasure. The mechanism is modern. The logic is colonial.
To understand the depth of this emergency, one must turn to the historical record. In 1839, the Qing Empire banned opium imports from British-controlled India. Opium was destroying Chinese society. British merchants refused to stop. The British state responded by declaring war. Gunboats shelled Chinese ports. The First Opium War ended in 1842 with the Treaty of Nanking. China was forced to legalise opium, open ports to British control, surrender territory including Hong Kong, and pay large financial indemnities. The British Crown and merchant class made immense profits while Chinese communities disintegrated.
The Chinese experience of narcotic invasion provides a chilling precedent. Addiction was not an unfortunate consequence. It was the mechanism of subjugation. Sovereignty was broken not only through war but through chemical dependency. Entire generations were disabled while London’s wealth expanded.
In the late 20th century, Scotland followed a similar path. The discovery of North Sea oil in the 1970s should have created the foundations for prosperity. By the early 1980s, annual oil revenues flowing to the British state exceeded £7 billion in direct tax receipts. In 1984–85, North Sea oil and gas revenues peaked at approximately £12 billion in nominal terms, accounting for around 6% of total UK government revenue. Adjusted for inflation, that figure is equivalent to over £40 billion today. Including total production value and associated revenues, the cumulative wealth extracted from Scottish waters now exceeds USD 2 trillion.
I did not write this excellent analysis of the lengths successive Westminster governments went to, to retain Scotland as a colony. It is to be hoped that one day Scots will break away from English control and prosper from their own efforts.
High-ranking officials and close confidants of Nicola Sturgeon shared dozens of messages about the former first minister in a social media group chat, calling themselves the “Vietnam” group.
In one text message, two senior members of staff discussed the need to apply pressure on one of the alleged victims who was expressing reluctance about proceeding with her allegations.
Kenny MacAskill joined others in calling for Scotland’s Crown Office to release the unpublished text messages as written proof. He said: The “Vietnam” group included SNP staffers and members of government, and there has been a great deal of cross talk in SNP circles about the App and text messages and the Crown (office) is aware of it. He continued: the “Vietnam” moniker stemmed from “Operation Diem”, the name of the police investigation. Someone apparently misunderstood Diem to be a reference to a former president of Vietnam.
Peter Murrell, the SNP’s chief executive, husband of Ms Sturgeon and a member of the “chat group”, sent two messages to another member, Susan Ruddick, chief operating officer of the Scottish National Party on the day after Alex’s first criminal court appearance in January 2019.
Message 1: “Totally agree folk should be asking the police questions… report now with the PF on charges, which leaves police twiddling their thumbs. So good time to be pressuring them. Would be good to know Met is king at events in London.”
Message 2: “TBH the more fronts he is having to firefight on the better for all complainers. So CPS action would be a good thing.” (Refers to getting the CPS in London involved).
Murrell addressed the messages in a written submission to the harassment inquiry, stating: “The messages have been presented in a way that suggests a meaning that they do not in reality have. I intended to advise that there were questions that should be addressed to the Police and not the SNP”. Under oath, at the “Parliamentary Inquiry” he was asked if there were any more text messages to any other party official on the same subject. He replied: “No. Not that I’m aware of.”
On the Andrew Marr programme, Sturgon was asked if it was true there were no other text messages of “that nature”. She replied: “There are no messages that are relevant to this committee.”
Her reply implied the existence of other messages, but she had decided that none were relevant to the inquiry. Hardly reassuring.
Conclusion: Events since the foregoing reveal that habitual liar Murrell’s assertions that his motives for pressuring Ruddock were entirely honourable ring hollow. As do the utterances of Sturgeon
The American Constitution, for all its faults, is a good thing and governance arising from it should, if well administered, be a blessing to the people.
A corrupt administration that ignores the Constitution encourages people to mimic the leader’s behaviour.
Maladministration is unsustainable, and such a government inevitably fails, leaving a catalogue of disasters for the next government to put right.
A new government, led by someone strong, single-minded, and sworn to uphold the Constitution, might need to introduce a limited form of despotic rule for a period to eliminate corruption.
The American people have very short memories.
The Biden administration was corrupt beyond the pale.
President Trump introduced changes and saved the nation. His reward!!! A kick in the teeth!!!
Westminster controlled Scotland with an iron fist from 1707 through to the 1920s: The only things devolved were contempt, poverty, poor housing and starvation.
Hope of change for the better arose in the early 1920s as a direct consequence of Irish independence, which encouraged debate and activism within intellectual communities. Through this medium discussion evolved in differing ways, leading to an expansion of the Scottish Home Rule Association (SHRA), which embraced the concept of “home rule” and the recently formed and fast-growing Scottish National League (SNL) which was adamant that independence (as the Irish had achieved) was the only way forward. The political differences between the two groups were fundamental and discouraged any coordinated political activity.
The first sign of positive connection between the SHRA and SNL arose in 1930 when both groups marched together for the first time, in Stirling. The message the parade broadcast was that the SHRA, under the leadership of Roland Muirhead, a Westminster parliamentarian, had given up trying to grow the movement with support of other political parties.
Muirhead and Thomas Gibson, leader of the SNL, met soon after the march and agreed the best tactic to take both groups forward was to form a new political party. But the gap in the aspirations of their supporters was a difficult nut to crack. Would the way forward be contentment with devolved governance or would it be independence and only that? What would the Party’s mantra be?
Discussons between the two sides were protracted and seemingly impossible to resolve. They needed someone to hold their jackets and John McCormack, former member of the Glasgow University Scottish Nationalist Association ( GUSNA) and the Independent Labour Party (IDP) was available and willing to take the task on.
McCormack had been active in Scottish politics for some time and persuaded Muirhead and Gibson to his view that there would be no progress without compromise. They achieved this, agreeing the best thing to do was to unite their supporters under one flag (the saltire) other less pressing matters would be resolved at a later date. A majority of Party members backed the McCormick and Muirhead position that the election of MPs to Westminster provided the best opportunity with the assistance ot the Labour Party, to gain home rule within the Union. The NSP had decided its political future. The nationalist faction went along with the policy in the belief that independence would evolve from a devolved government.
But the new party failed to make an impact. It had no clear policies to offer Scots beyond home rule; campaigning was uncoordinated and mixed messages were promoted by candidates who reverted to advancing views at odds with Party policies.
McComack, a shrewd political operator, knew urgent changes were required to ensure a future for the Party after the Labour Party ended its political friendship with Muirhead, compromising his usefulness.
There was another nationalist cause, the Scottish Party (SP), with policies much in line with those of the NSP. The barrier to linking the two parties was the radical members of the NSP.
McCormack agreed and in 1933 he banished independence activists from the Party.
An election opportunity surfaced, providing an early test for the Parties, who agreed to campaign together. Their candidate did well, gaining seventeen per cent, exceeding anything previously achieved.
The two groups merged in 1934, forming the Scottish National Party (SNP). Barring independence activists from SNP membership had brought harmony to the movement. Home rule within the UK was adopted as Party policy and remained so until the emergence of Winnie Ewing.
In 1982, Robert Harris released an explosive BBC “Newsnight” report broadcasting previously unknown information about events in 1938-45.
The report centred on a former US intelligence officer, Tyler Kent, who, up to 1940 was employed as a diplomat (cyber decoding) in the US Embassy.
In 1940 he was arrested, tried and convicted of violating the British Official Secrets Act (which, as an American citizen, he was not bound to) by a secret court in London.
In an unprecedented act, again decided on, in secret, at the US Presidential level, Tyler Kent’s diplomatic immunity was n removed so that he could be arrested by MI5 and kept secure in a British prison until after the war.
There is no record of his trial, which was held in secret. He was sentenced to 7 years in prison, with no appeal.
The inquiry centred around the conduct of members of the juduciary and associates who allegedly conspired to pervert justice—e.g., by dropping or softening prosecutions against homosexual criminals or those with compromising information.
is arose amid cases like the embezzlement trial of solicitor Colin Tucker and Operation Planet (an investigation into underage male prostitution/”rent boys” linked to figures like Tam Paton).
Henderson, a defence lawyer involved in some of these cases, was accused of spreading and perpetuating the rumours. He claimed to possess a “list” (sometimes called a “lavender list”) of secretly gay senior legal figures, including judges, which could be used for leverage or blackmail. One confirmed name on a related statement was Lord Dervaird (who resigned after his homosexuality became public).
The Nimmo Smith Report (1993) was the outcome of an inquiry Led by William Nimmo Smith QC (later a judge) and Procurator Fiscal James Friel.
The inquiry examined the allegations and found no evidence of a conspiracy to pervert justice or a “Magic Circle.”
It cleared the legal establishment overall but strongly criticised Robert Henderson who was one of the “main instigators and perpetuators” of the belief in a broader list/document naming judges and others.
When certain aspects of Robert Henderson’s financial affairs first came under investigation, he took precautions. According to him, he expected that the police would arrive with a search warrant to search his house for documents.
He accordingly prepared a photocopy of certain documents and gave the principals in a manilla envelope, to Leeona Dorrian, Advocate, for safekeeping. She was a close friend for many years.
She took receipt of the documents on 18 August 1989, and retained them in in her possession continuously until, with the permission of Robert Henderson, she showed thems to the Nimmo inquiry who said there was no a “list” or anything relating to the alleged homosexual behaviour or any other aspect of the private life of any person. Their conclusion was that Robert Henderson chose to let it be believed that he was in possession of information.” The documents were never made public.
Afternote:
There is no public evidence that Robert Henderson QC and Leeona Dorrian worked out of the same office or “stable” (chambers). Dorrian had government-related roles (Standing Junior Counsel, Advocate Depute), which often involved separate arrangements.
If they had been in the same stable, contemporary reports or the inquiry would likely have noted it more explicitly, especially given the scrutiny on Henderson. Their connection was a longstanding friendship rather than shared chambers.
The report also criticised some police conduct (e.g., treating rumours as fact, possible homophobia). No criminal proceedings resulted from the inquiry.
Later investigations suggested Henderson may have amplified the Magic Circle rumours as a smokescreen to protect himself and associates from scrutiny over financial crimes (e.g., alleged property fraud) and child sexual abuse.
His daughter Susie Henderson publicly accused him of abusing her as a child and facilitating her abuse by friends/colleagues in the legal world (e.g., John Watt QC, later convicted of historic child sex offences).
The father of two children molested by John Watt QC told a court during the trial of Watt that he told the then Lord Advocate, Lord Hardie about the abuse while Hardie was Watt’s devilmaster. Lord Hardie did not go to the police and report the child abuse. Watt was convicted in 2022 of assaults/rape on four children. including Susie. The mother of one of the children said: “If anyone learns that a colleague has abused a child, they should go to the police, no question. Anyone who touches a child in a sexual manner is a danger to all children. If that is where their interests lie, they will do anything to be alone with children”. “It is hard to understand how someone responsible for the conduct of advocates, the lord advocate, responsible for prosecution, and a High Court judge could fail to do what needed to be done”
Henderson died in 2012 without facing charges. He had prior personal legal issues, including divorce proceedings and aliment (maintenance) disputes with former partners.
He was married three times.
First Marriage: Olga Henderson (née ?) Married: 1958.
They had at least three children, including daughter Susie Henderson (born ~1966).
Divorce: Bitter and acrimonious, with proceedings and custody battles in the 1970s (notably a 1976 Court of Session hearing).
Olga cited his excessive drinking, sexual promiscuity, involvement in pornography, immorality, and unsuitable associations. A specific 1975 adultery incident (when Henderson was 38) was used as evidence.
Custody was awarded to Olga, though Henderson had regular contact. Post-divorce disputes were prolonged: he allegedly failed to pay aliment (maintenance) reliably, emptied Susie’s child’s savings account, and there were housing issues (he kept the family New Town mansion while Olga and children faced instability).
Ben Borland) Daily Express later reported: “Scottish lawyer avoids investigation despite paedo allegations.”
The Article examined allegations by Susie Henderson (Robert Henderson QC’s daughter) that her father sexually abused her over many years and facilitated her abuse by others, including Sir Nicholas Fairbairn, QC and John Watt QC.
Susie first reported claims to police in 2000 and again around 2014;
At the time of the article, Police Scotland was investigating historic child abuse probes.
The piece highlighted that authorities had suspicions about Henderson decades earlier, based on court documents from his bitter 1970s divorce from first wife Olga. It presents this as the first contemporary evidence supporting Susie’s claims.
Key Details from the 1976 Court Report (for custody hearing before Lord Maxwell).
Olga alleged Robert was unsuitable as a custodian because he: Regularly drank to excess/ was extremely sexually promiscuous and involved in pornography distribution. He associated with unsuitable people (including a woman alleged to be a well-known Edinburgh prostitute who visited his house almost daily) He violently assaulted Olga in front of the children on at least one occasion. The claims were supported by Olga’s parents and two family friends. Henderson dismissed them as his ex-wife behaving “hysterically.”The evidence supported Olga’s divorce on grounds of adultery. Custody went to Olga, but Henderson retained regular contact with the children. The article detailed ongoing acrimony. Henderson often failed to pay court-ordered aliment (maintenance). He emptied Susie’s National Savings account to buy a Morris Mini. He retained the family New Town mansion. Olga and children faced unstable housing, including eviction from a dilapidated flat he owned. In 1979, he allegedly visited the flat unannounced, behaved threateningly, smashed furniture, and put the family in fear. A social worker-style report noted a decline in Susie’s school performance and personality after the split. Despite these red flags, Henderson took silk (became QC) in 1982, handled major cases, and later became central to the Magic Circle affair. The Sunday Express piece was significant because it unearthed archival divorce/custody documents (National Archives of Scotland) that provided independent, contemporaneous corroboration for Susie Henderson’s later public allegation whic he fed into wider discussions around the Magic Circle scandal and potential cover-ups.
The piece’s key contribution was unearthing contemporaneous 1970s court documents from Henderson’s bitter divorce and custody battle with his first wife, Olga. These provided independent, decades-old evidence supporting Susie’s claims — the first such public corroboration at the time. It alsos supported Olga’s adultery claim. Custody of the children (including Susie) was awarded to Olga, but Henderson retained regular contact. Post-divorce disputes were acrimonious: He allegedly failed to pay maintenance reliably, emptied Susie’s savings account, kept the family New Town mansion, and there were claims of threatening behaviour (e.g., smashing furniture in 1979). Susie declined direct comment due to the ongoing police investigation but was reportedly “relieved and delighted” that contemporary evidence had surfaced.
This Express piece appeared amid growing public interest in historic abuse claims linked to the Magic Circle affair, Operation Planet, and figures in Scotland’s legal and political establishment and highlighted how suspicions about Henderson existed in official records decades before Susie’s public allegations, yet no formal investigation into him occurred during his lifetime (he died in 2012). Suspicions about Henderson were reportedly noted by authorities around the time of the divorce.
Second Marriage: Carol Black 1982 -1989.
Third Marriage: Carolyn (or Carol) Gell. Married: 1995. She survived him; Henderson died suddenly in France in December 2012.
Henderson also had another relationship in the early 1990s resulting in a child, with a 1994 court order requiring him to pay aliment/maintenance, (~£29,000 at the time).
Lady Dorrian
The “Magic Circle” scandal and the allegations surrounding Henderson’s fanning of the flames occurred in the late 1980s and early 1990s.
Events linking Dorrian and her procurement of “bombshell documents” on behalf of Henderson.
There was no factual basis or formal misconduct inquiry brought against her regarding the matter.
Serial fraudster Abdul Rauf, resident of Govan was jailed in 1996 for four years for forging signatures on and cashing in 779 Department of Social Security payment orders to a value of £58,264 between June 1993 and July 1994.
He was charged with fraud for a second time in 2008, for claiming £80,000 income support from the Department of Work and Pensions while receiving up to £10,000 annual rent from the property in Edinburgh’s Dalkeith Road which he failed to declare. His court case was scheduled for February 2010.
11 Feb 2010: Nicola Sturgeon flexes her political muscle
The MSP for Govan and Scotland’s Deputy First Minister sent an unsolicited letter to Donald Finlay QC, advocate for the defence of Rauf, writing:
“Mr Rauf has accepted his wrong doing and has experienced the consequences of it through the effect on his health, the distress caused to his family and the impact on his standing in his community. He has already paid £27,000 of the outstanding balance to the DWP and will settle the remainder by selling property. He and his wife are anxious that a custodial sentence may be imposed by the court and of the effect this will have on Mr Rauf’s health and the impact on family life. I would appeal to the court to take the points raised here into account and consider alternatives to a custodial sentence.”
16 Feb 2010: Extraordinary developments
Rauf who was jailed for two years, said in a later statement to the press that he had never met Sturgeon and he had not asked for her intervention with a letter to the court on his behalf.
It was disclosed that Sturgeon’s unsolicited plea to the sheriff on behalf of Abdul Rauf was dated the day after businessman Khalid Javid paid £2,000 for a meal with the Deputy First minister in the MSPs’ restaurant at Holyrood.
May 2010: Sturgeon issues a “zero tolerance” warning to fraudsters
“Anyone contemplating fraud should be aware that they will be caught, and if they are caught, they will have to face the consequences of their fraudulent actions. Fraudsters in any walk of life are opportunistic, tend to be fairly entrepreneurial, and will take the opportunity to exploit any weakness in the organisation they target. Let me be clear today about what is a zero-tolerance approach to fraud and to fraudsters. Fraud in my view, is a fraud perpetrated against each and every one of us and that is why it is so important to combat it. So it does make sense for all of us, in our own ways and in our own roles, to act as counter-fraud champions.”
Her demeanour, dress sense and confrontational behaviour was evident in her student days and her aborted legal career and lifestyle before politics.
Sturgeon claimed she earned her nickname because she tried to emulate male politicians aggressive and adversarial practices at the start of her parliamentary career.
She claimed she was surrounded by “middle-aged white men” and behaved in a way about conforming and fitting in. That was also reflected in how she dressed.
Her belief was that fitting in with the behaviour of men required females to become adversarial and aggressive in pursuit of winning their arguments since assertive, aggressive, and adversarial male politicians are seen as strong leaders.
But her recurring failure to gain a seat as an MSP by popular vote was a worry for the Party leadership and she was persuaded to abandon her long held feminist principles and abandon her “nippy sweety” behaviour.
Sturgeon, the fashion icon and Scotland’s first lady in waiting was relaunched at the start of the Scottish Independence campaign in early 2014 after extensive and expensive coaching had been completed improving her delivery of policies to the public and parliament. Murrell ensured she had access to designer dresses and costumes and jewellery with a new expensive outfit being produced every day and many beguiled Scots believed the massively hyped transformation was real and would deliver change and were happy to climb on-board the “Sturgeon for Independence” bandwagon.
The period 2014-2023 exposed the disgusting scale of the Sturgeon “ponzie scheme” with Unionist media outlets participating in the continued cover-up of the abuse of the Scottish electorate.
