Scottish independence, plus jokes.

Wings Over Scotland


Binoculars on backwards

Posted on April 11, 2013 by

This is “Better Together” campaign director Blair McDougall looking comfortable and confident on last night’s edition of Scotland Tonight as the recently-controversial subject of campaign donations was discussed.

blairmcdougall12

Not for the first time, his comments seemed a little at odds with the truth.

Later in the show Mr McDougall came out with some extraordinary unsupported allegations about co-ordinated and sustained harassment of the No campaign, but for the moment we’re going to focus purely on his claims of fact.

“I think what we’ve seen today is that almost every bit of money that the Yes campaign has got has come from the SNP. By contrast we’ve had nearly 10,000 donations, 10,000 small donations from Scots, many of them who will have never donated to any cause before, and we’re really proud of that, because it’s reflective of the fact that it’s our side of the argument that commands the majority of support from ordinary Scots.”

That last line’s interesting. How might one measure “the majority of support” in the context of financial donations from “ordinary Scots”? How about a handy graph?

donationsgraph

Hmm. The two pie-charts (which are correctly proportioned relative to each other), would rather seem to suggest that the “majority” of support is firmly with the Yes camp. Not only that, but contributions to the Yes campaign from within Scotland are almost four times as high as to the No side, at £1.63m to £0.46m.

We’d also be intrigued to hear the justification for the rather woolly claim that “many” of the No donors “will have never donated to any cause before“, and to have clarification of whether “the SNP” includes anyone who is a member or supporter of the party, in which case Mr McDougall’s previous assertion that the No camp have not received a penny from political parties would ring a little hollow.

(Because if donations from SNP supporters like the Weirs are counted as coming from “the SNP”, then presumably contributions from Labour and Tory supporters must by Mr McDougall’s logic be regarded as coming from Labour and the Tories themselves.)

That the “Better Together” campaign is mostly funded by English Tory money isn’t exactly news, of course. But it’s a bit odd for the campaign’s director to be so brazenly trying to pretend that the cash has actually come from “ordinary Scots” when a minimum of 60% of it is from residents of England, and that a figure representing just 39% of the combined total raised by both campaigns is a “majority of support”.

Readers might want to bear such claims in mind in future when assessing the truth or otherwise of anything else Blair McDougall asserts, is all we’re saying.

Print Friendly

155 to “Binoculars on backwards”

  1. Alex Grant says:

    Yes but did Blair Jenkins make this point on Newsnicht last night??? I think not!

  2. Juteman says:

    Good screen capture. That says it all.

  3. beachthistle says:

    While I think that all of that is bang-on, and that we should be a bit miffed that the mainstream media don’t seem to be able or willing to challenge his parallel universe soundbites, I also think we should be going a bit easy on Blair McD. As an out-of-his-depth Labour ex-SpAd with no real world experience and the political judgement of a suburban saloon-bar Tory, it would be hard to imagine a better person in the job for the Yes campaign.
    Even with ALL UK and Scottish print and broadcast media on his/their side, plus the whole of the UK corporate/capitalist and political establishments behind him/them, the fact that Blair McD has still managed to get the No campaign into such a pickle so soon is frankly astonishing – and very encouraging. We should be doing all that we can to make sure he stays there…

  4. Silverytay says:

    Rev  I was hoping to go home for my tea soon ‘ but that picture has given me the boaks .

  5. Famous15 says:

    I thought Blair Jenkins answered as much as he could and still retain some dignity. The moderating journalist should have pressed this bruiser for more accuracy. As usual i checked to see what my wife thought given her calmer and more intuitive listening skills and she laughed and said she wondered why the NO campaign saw the need to distort the obvious truth.”are they now losing?”

  6. Yesitis says:

    Once you pop, you can`t stop!
     
    McDougall`s crackers.
    U KOK

  7. Linda's Back says:

    It is OK for NO campaign, its supporters and unionist press to smear SNP / Alex Salmond at every turn but rush to lawyers to silence opposition when questions are raised about the probity of their donations 

  8. steven luby says:

     But it’s a bit odd for the campaign’s director to be so brazenly trying to pretend that the cash has actually come from “ordinary Scots” when a minimum of 60% of it is from residents of England, and that a figure representing just 39% of the combined total raised by both campaigns is a “majority of support”.
    He and others can say what they like on MSM,who’s going to question them?
    The fact that outright lies go unchallanged at the time they dribble out of their mouths reminds me of a lawyer in front of the jury. Just get the words out in the open,with conviction,and let the jury’s imagination do the rest.

  9. The Man in the Jar says:

    @Alex Grant
    I agree with your above comment. I think that he missed an opportunity. When McDougal was going on about attacks from cybernats and the graffiti at the Scotsman Blair Jenkins could have brought up the SoS swastika / saltire issue. Perhaps he deliberately bypassed it not wanting to come over as over adversarial.
    I have said before that I am not very comfortable with the Yes campaigns laid back attitude. It seems to be working so I will give them the benefit of the doubt for now.
    Credit however to the SNP Angus Robertson’s letter to A. Darling regarding Taylor’s donation is a cracker. (Links elsewhere on this site)
    The point is of course that Bitter Together are funded by Tory money and dirty Tory money at that. And the more that BT complain the worse it becomes for them. Regarding Taylor’s donation the BT mob have forgotten Rule No.1 = When you find yourself in a hole stop fecking digging! I for one will happily donate to BT – a spade!

  10. Seasick Dave says:

    Technically, he is a lummox but, as Beachthistle correctly points out, he is doing a grand job and we should be grateful that he fitted the bill for BT.

  11. Willie Zwigerland says:

    Last time I checked, the referendum is one man, one vote, and the number of votes ar not determined by the size of your bank account. Therefore it seems that it could be valid to judge support by the number of donations rather than value of donations.

  12. ecossenkosi says:

    I could be wrong but I get the impression if he was an actor, he would get roles as the thug in a dark alley

  13. Morag says:

    RevStu, WordPress has buggered up at least one of your links again.

    Actually, just the last one – the one to the Herald article. “isn’t exactly news”

  14. Rev. Stuart Campbell says:

    Fixed, cheers.

  15. muttley79 says:

    That was a very odd ‘contribution’ from Blair McDougall last night.  You could anticipate from the moment he opened his mouth that all he wanted to do was to attack the SNP.  That is all the No campaign are going to do.  They, and their activists, such as Ian Smart, Duncan Hothersall, Grahamski etc, and their MSM buddies, are going to attack the SNP at every opportunity.  They simply do not know any other way.  This has been evident in Scottish politics for decades.  The SNP will be painted as extremists, there will be terrorist and fascist/Nazi smears.  There will just be fear and denigration of independence.  I think I understand what the Yes campaign are doing now.  They will remain as positive as possible.  They will give the No campaign as much rope as possible, and let them destroy their own credibility.

  16. themadmurph says:

    @Willie Zwigerland 
    While you are not wrong, I would imagine that many people have been so screwed over by successive UK governments, they don’t have the money to donate to a campaign.  Fortunately voting is still free!  We’ll find out on the day who has the bigger support!

  17. Rev. Stuart Campbell says:

    “I could be wrong but I get the impression if he was an actor, he would get roles as the thug in a dark alley”

    Nah, he’s basically Nick Frost – the big dopey sidekick in Simon Pegg movies.

  18. scottish_skier says:

    Therefore it seems that it could be valid to judge support by the number of donations rather than value of donations.
    I doubt you’d convince e.g. ICM or MORI etc of that. Maybe could give you a possible, rough idea if the total number of donations to one side was tiny and the other was absolutely massive as you got very close to the day.

  19. Maybe I’m being picky (but I think not) but those two pie charts do not look in proportion to me. Surely its the AREA that should be in proportion and it looks to me like its the diameter which is in proportion.  I agree whole heartedly with the post but you don’t want to be accused misrepresenting the data.

  20. Rev. Stuart Campbell says:

    “Last time I checked, the referendum is one man, one vote, and the number of votes ar not determined by the size of your bank account. Therefore it seems that it could be valid to judge support by the number of donations rather than value of donations.”

    Then it might not be wise for “Better Together” to count donations from outside Scotland, as they’ll have 0 votes.

  21. EdinScot says:

    For a man that has the whole of the msm on his side and allegedly having the majority of the public on his side too…he sure doesnt look a happy bunny.  This picture captures the mood of the NO camp well.  Morally bankrupt and nothing to offer just like their clapped out so called union.   Heave awa’ lads and lasses on Unionists they’re cracking big time.  Their delusion tells me so!
     
    Off topic – will be interesting to read about the site traffic in the past few days on Wings and NC and NNS in due course.

  22. Vambomarbeleye says:

    Off topic but:-
    Would like to see a statue of Margaret Snatcher in the Scottish Parliment with the words on the Plinth Not Forgotten.

  23. dmw42 says:

    @muttley – I completely agree.
     
    Let’s face it, there’s in-fighting in the Labour ranks, there’s in-fighting in the Tory ranks, there’s hissing, spitting and scratching eyes out in the Liberal ranks.
     
    Put all that lot into a pot together; there’s bound to be a split within BT. Only a matter of time before they self implode mate, only a matter of time.
     
    Light blue/red touch paper and stand well back.

  24. YesYesYes says:

    Something else that has been lost in all of this is the No Campaign’s refusal to respond to the Yes Campaign’s invitation to it to agree to both campaigns releasing donations figures simultaneously. As yet, there has been no official response from the No Campaign as to why they didn’t agree to this.
     
    Could it be that the No Campaign released its donations figures early because it believed that this would earn it some cheap political capital? Surely not. The MSM dutifully obliged of course and then, after the No campaign had released its figures, demanded, like petulant teenagers, that the Yes Campaign release its figures immediately, a strategy that has hopelessly backfired on the No Campaign in light of Vitolgate.
     
    I nominate Blair McDougall for the Eddie the Eagle award in the referendum campaign. He valiantly waves his little union jack, trying his little heart out but, no matter how hard he tries, and no matter how shrill his protestations that he’s going to win, you just know that he’s going to fall flat on his arse and finish last. 

  25. I hate to say this, but the size of the two pie charts on the graphic is misleading. You have confused linear scale with area scale, and area scale is what matters.
    The Yes Scotland pie has a diameter of 590 pixels and the Better Together pie has a diameter of 375 pixels. To be accurate, the Better Together pie should have a diameter of about 475 pixels.

  26. Jeannie says:

     “I could be wrong but I get the impression if he was an actor, he would get roles as the thug in a dark alley”
     
    I know what you mean, but he really reminds me of a younger version of the guy who does the bowel cancer screening advert.  Don’t you think?

  27. cynicalHighlander says:

    I hear that the YES pot has a boost of another million from the Weirs, can’t thank them enough.

  28. Barontorc says:

    Correct me if I’m wrong to think that the Electoral Commission are mandated by both YES and NO to observe its own guidelines and regulations for donations?
     
    Weren’t these procedural rules quite specific regarding the source and amounts that could be donated?
     
    If I’m right to think as I do, what’s the Electoral Commissions trigger point to sanction against donations arriving to either camp which fall foul of their regulations?
     
    In other words – when the bloody hell is the Electoral Commission going to do as it says on the tin?!!

  29. muttley79 says:

    The No campaign are going to try an put the electorate off the referendum.  The Yes campaign is better just letting them be negative.  The No campaign are essentially trolls, and are constantly looking for a reaction from the Yes campaign and independence supporters.  Blair Jenkins was correct to just stay as calm as possible.  He did the same to Sarwar ages ago when he personally attacked him.  If the Yes campaign reacts too much it will only put the electorate off.   

  30. Rev. Stuart Campbell says:

    “Off topic – will be interesting to read about the site traffic in the past few days on Wings and NC and NNS in due course.”

    As I noted on Twitter last night, yesterday smashed our all-time one-day pageviews record into lots of little pieces, stopping just short of 60,000. (Previous best was about 47,000.)

  31. muttley79 says:

    I see National Collective are almost at £8,000 for their fund raiser. 

  32. Bob Howie says:

    If you keep telling porkies they come back to bite you and that is BTs biggest problem they continuous lie if they actually told the truth they might as well join the Yes campaign.

  33. Rev. Stuart Campbell says:

    “I hate to say this, but the size of the two pie charts on the graphic is misleading.”

    That’ll teach me to use some dodgy online tool to calculate it. Fixed now, ta.

  34. velofello says:

    Donation sources could be a tipping point with the electorate: Certainly instigate a libel action when you have been wronged,but when you have been found out? Doesn’t seem astute to me. But if you are wealthy and well connected possibly you feel you can crush your opponent. Go get em Hamish!
    Whaur is oor wee lion these days? Are thon Pandas been gieing him ideas?
     

  35. Les Wilson says:

    I remember there was something in the press a while ago about Ruth Davidson holding talks or parties for well heeled Tories in the South of England, to help raise money against Scottish independence. How much did she pull in from down there?

  36. No problem, Stuart.  I’m only glad I spotted it before someone in the No camp did.  I wouldn’t want it to detract from the figures themselves.
     
    And well done for fixing it so quickly, I’m impressed.

  37. Macart says:

    Would you buy a car from this man? :D

  38. EdinScot says:

    As I noted on Twitter last night, yesterday smashed our all-time one-day pageviews record into lots of little pieces, stopping just short of 60,000. (Previous best was about 47,000.)
     
    Wow and its well deserved Stu.  Nice one. Now thats a real winner…

  39. Arbroath1320 says:

    Nice to see Mr McDougall is flying a wee union flag in honour of his “hero” Lord Nelson. This is the only reason I can think of for him adopting the “I see no ships!” approach to “discussions.”
    I really do wonder about the “leaders” of the NO camp. They are 100% on attacking the SNP 24/7, no one else just the SNP. This is a tactic that can NEVER be a good choice. Constantly attacking ONE element of a HUGE army can only end in ONE result, a result that will NOT be good for the NO camp. Still as long as they continue with this ridiculous tactic they are giving the rest of the YES camp an easy ride and showing themselves up to complete MUPPETS!
    The constant attack attacks by the NO camp on the SNP is doing a great deal to turn people OFF, not turn them off voting in the referendum but turning them off voting NO! Thank you Better Together you are building OUR numbers of YES voters on a daily basis!

  40. Marcia says:

     
     
    One of my friends who is not that political today said  to me, ‘What is in it for this guy who donated so much to the No campaign and doesn’t live in Scotland?’  I said I couldn’t comment . On the other hand she said that the Weirs had given monies to various charities and the only thing they could get is Independence. A good sign that people are starting to take an interest in the referendum campaign.

  41. Aplinal says:

    The continual frustration, is that such obvious “economy with the truth” is allowed to stand without comment by the BBC.  The impression WILL have been gained by viewers who still trust the BBC in Scotland, that the NO campaign is more popular that YES in Scotland.  It serves to give ‘comfort’ to those beginning to doubt and waiver from a possible NO towards “Don’t know” that they are “not alone”.  It’s a powerful subliminal aspect of propaganda.
     
    When, OH WHEN, can we have the media monitored by an external party?  Someone in past articles suggested that OECD or someone had been contacted in this regard.  What happened?

  42. muttley79 says:

    @Arb
     
    The thing with the No campaign is that they are focusing all their bile on the SNP.  What does not seem to have penetrated their brains is the thought that this tactic has been done to death by Scottish Labour over the last 40 years.  They seem to be clueless and uncomprehending that this constant Nat-bashing has resulted in the ending of their hegemony in Scotland, and that there is going to be a referendum on independence.  In other words this tactic has been proven to have been a total failure.  Faced with this glaring reality of their strategic and tactical failings, what are they about to do?  Yes, they are going to intensify their Nat bashing to another dimension…
     
    I have been getting the sense that a certain section of Unionists view the SNP in some bizarre light.  I wonder if they view the SNP (and by extension independence supporters because they don’t want to admit others support it) not as constitutional, democratic, civic nationalists, but almost a cross between Neo-Nazis, Al-Qaeda, and the old Provisional South Armagh Brigade?  That is the only way I can now view some Unionists’ hateful attitude towards the SNP.  It is like they see something completely different to what everyone else sees.     

  43. Another London Dividend says:

    Don’t you just love our media?  Take this afternoon for example
    BBC TV Reporting Scotland allowed some Tory sounding absentee crofter to claim that new crofting legislation which is to encourage full use of crofting  to say to the effect   Is this what it would be like with  independence? Would anyone be allowed to criticise the Union in the same way?

    Scotsman online runs headline to give impression that Alex Salmond had invited and would join Martin McGuinnnes in a ceremony in Iona  when in fact it was the organisers who invited a representative of the Northern Ireland Parliament to attend given the St Colmuba connection.

  44. Dcanmore says:

    … and don’t forget in ’79 we still voted YES!

  45. muttley79 says:

    @Another London Dividend
     
    Yes, there is a lot of subliminal, ongoing misinformation, and propaganda going on from the MSM, particularly BBC Scotland, at the moment. 

  46. Morag says:

    To the absentee crofter, I wanted to say, “Who knows?  This is what it’s like under the union, though.”

  47. martyn says:

    re the outside observation of the media surrounding the referendum.
     
    i wrote to Nicola Sturgeon last week asking if they had considered the OICD etc coming in and the reply i got was a resounding NO.
    The email did say however that they are constantly complaining to the BBC. Not that it will do much good.
     
    It did make me wonder why the yes campaign were not fighting it more vigerously.
     
    Martyn

  48. Brian says:

    Blair MacDougall does jump almost straightaway into non-evidential hype, showing he has no real ammunition. Blair Jenkins did look quite relaxed.
    The more interviews like that the better. MacDougall will run out of credibility pretty quickly of all he does is attack the SNP, with no backup.
    The advantage in this interview it was one and one, though the interviewer did once put MacDougall’s point, which gave him two chances.
    The BBC technique is a well known anti-whatever ploy. Always have two Anti -speakers to one Pro-speaker. Though in the case of the BBC the interviewer is often a third Anti-speaker, by allowing extra questions, or hurrying the focus to an Anti-speaker.

  49. Doug Daniel says:

    If Blair McDougall is Nick Frost, who’s Simon Pegg? Not Alistair Darling, surely?
     
    Interesting article on BetterNation, incidentally. Basically a case of “everyone stop arguing on the internet”. Good luck with that one – presumably once we’ve suitably diluted the independence debate, we can crack on with policing how debate is conducted elsewhere on the internet? Although it’s interesting how several of the praising statements come from someone who not so long ago was throwing about the term “rape apologist” so liberally that they accidentally insulted an actual rape victim…

  50. muttley79 says:

    @Morag
     

    To the absentee crofter, I wanted to say, “Who knows?  This is what it’s like under the union, though.”
     
    That obvious point seems to get lost on many Unionists…. 

     

  51. DMW42 says:

    And the ‘plot’ thickens.

    “Top oil trading house Vitol plans to offer C$192 million ($192 million) for Canada-listed oil and gas group Sterling Resources, to gain a foothold in the North Sea oil and gas sector. The planned deal, worth C$0.85 per Sterling share – a 79% premium to Tuesday’s close at C$0.475, is the latest in a series of moves by Swiss firm Vitol to acquire physical energy assets.” (Reuters 13 Feb)
    http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/02/13/sterlingresources-vitol-idUSL4N0BD4MF20130213

    “Vitol Group sold a cargo of North Sea Forties crude, its eighth since March 28, as the price dropped to the lowest in more than a week.” (Bloomberg 10 April)
    http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-04-10/vitol-sells-north-sea-forties-hpcl-buys-nigerian-crude.html

    But I’m sure it’s merely coincidental that the CEO and President would want to give £½ million to a group that wants to keep North Sea revenues, licences and contracts under the control of Westminster. Isn’t it?

    Only sayin, like

  52. Robert louis says:

    martyn,
     
    I’m really not sure if the YES campaign truly understand the depth to which the British establishment will stoop in order to make sure they keep Scotland as ‘theirs’.  I know there are rules in the final run up regarding impartiality, but I genuinely think they will not be honoured by the likes of the BBC.  You see, this is not like an election, it won’t happen in another 4 years, so really it is a case of the British establishment have a choice; play by the rules and likely lose OR ignore the rules, and accept the flak the day after a NO result.
     
    You see, the day after a NO result should it happen, where the BBC and its ilk have blatantly tried to influence matters with biased output and coverage, then even if the YES campaign complain and even if it is very blatant and obvious bias, it won’t matter, nobody will take them seriously, they will be portrayed by that very same biased media as just poor losers.
     
    This is why we NEED EU observers.
     
    I think the SNP complaining to the BBC is akin to pissing in the wind – I mean look how successful that strategy has been so far – their party conference isn’t even covered properly, and they are the Government of Scotland FFS.  
    I think they need to wake up.

  53. Yesitis says:

    It`s a strange one, that old BBC.
    If the Scottish government has contacted the BBC regards it`s slanted and pro-union biased news stories (I say stories rather than news reporting), and the BBC are essentially ignoring any requests for impartial broadcasting, and in fact, turning up the bias, and becoming more bold in it`s anti-Scottish government stories.
    Well, it could be said that the BBC is cutting off it`s nose to spite it`s face.
     
    If BBC Labour think it is getting away with it`s pro-unionist propaganda, and being seen as to be baiting and playing games with the Scottish government, the one thing the BBC is underestimating is the Scottish people who witness this day in day out.
    You only have to witness one piece of unionist propaganda in a BBC Labour news story, and the walls fall down. You start seeing it on a daily basis at the BBC. The trust is gone. Game over.
     

  54. Heather McLean says:

    “cynicalHighlander says:
    11 April, 2013 at 5:45 pm

    I hear that the YES pot has a boost of another million from the Weirs, can’t thank them enough ”
    Yes! Thats what I thought when i read a link to a story about it on Facebook,
    http://www.heraldscotland.com/politics/referendum-news/weirs-double-to-2m-cash-support-for-independence.20763264
    but I was informed by Morag

    “Morag says:
    11 April, 2013 at 5:14 pm

    Heather, that’s the same million we heard about several days ago.  It’s in addition to the million to the SNP last year, not another million to Yes Scotland.”
    Anyone know whether they did or did not contribute another million to the campaign??

  55. Aplinal says:

    @martyn
     
    Thanks for that.  Does a complaint to OICD have to come from the SG or can an individual request that they at least consider the situation based on examples of “apparent” bias in reporting and presenting the Independence referendum?
     
    Are they the most appropriate organisation?  Aren’t the “rules” for referenda clearly stated on the site of OECD and others, that the UK is a signatory to?  Does this only apply in the final 16 week period when, apparently, the media should be ‘objective’?  By then considerable damage could have been done in the minds of, shall we say, less politically active voters who depend on the MSM, particularly the BBC in Scotland, for their information?
     
    I understand the desire to remain “above it all” by the YES campaign.  But I do get nervous every so often! This is FAR TOO IMPORTANT

  56. Marcia says:

    Heather
    They gave the SNP £1m last year and gave Yes Scotland £1m recently. Total £2m.

  57. DMW42 says:

    @Aplinal @Martyn
     
    I posted a response I received from ODIHR the other day (can’t remember which topic though).
     
    Basically they stated that it would have to be the UK govt that would have to make any request for ODIHR / OECD before they could monitor msm / state broadcaster bias.
     
    It’s therefore down to us to expose the lies and biased commentary, at least in the short term.

  58. Taranaich says:

    Is the graphic’s use of the saltire for “Yes” Scottish backers and the lion rampant for “No” Scottish bankers intentional, or am I reading too much into it?

  59. Aplinal says:

    @DMW42
     
    Thanks for the update.  So, even more reason for the BT mob to try and shut down the internet blogs etc.  If I recall correctly, during the 16 week period the media HAS TO BE monitored, doesn’t it?  Are YES really waiting for that period before they become more assertive?  
     
    To paraphrase Jack Nicholson in “few good men”.  The BT rationale is obviously, “TRUTH, Scots, you can’t handle the truth!”

  60. martyn says:

    DMW42
     
    not being able to ask for help against a blatently biased state broadcaster……another union dividend.
    2 comments made by other people keep springing to mind
     
    1) by someone on NNS “the BBC are going to lose us this referendum
    2) an old favourite by my dad “its like farting against gale force winds”

  61. Rev. Stuart Campbell says:

    “Is the graphic’s use of the saltire for “Yes” Scottish backers and the lion rampant for “No” Scottish bankers intentional, or am I reading too much into it?”

    NOBODY CAN SAY FOR SURE.

  62. BillyBigbaws says:

    Barontorc said: “If I’m right to think as I do, what’s the Electoral Commissions trigger point to sanction against donations arriving to either camp which fall foul of their regulations?
     
    In other words – when the bloody hell is the Electoral Commission going to do as it says on the tin?!!”
    Probably never, just like they never got round to thoroughly investigating Peter Cruddas and Sarah Southern over their pretty clear breaches of party funding laws during the cash-for-access scandal.  And like they never got round to investigating several very dodgy constituency election results related to postal voting.
    Don’t worry though, if the Yes campaign do anything wrong they’ll be right on it.
     

  63. muttley79 says:

    My concern is if there is a narrow No vote and the MSM, particularly Pravada on the Clyde, has been seen to be demonstrably biased by a large number of Scots.  If this occurs, and there is a fair chance it might, then what kind of a situation do we find ourselves in?  The obvious answer is that it would be a nightmare scenario.  The Unionists and the MSM will be on full triumphalist mode.  There will be a huge GIRUY to the SNP in particular.  Independence supporters will be livid with the MSM, particularly Pravada, and bridges will have been burned permanently.  The political process will be filled with acrimony.  The bitterness will be intense.  In addition, it will have been too late to turn back the clock. 
     
    In short, the SG should be seriously thinking about requesting international media monitors.   

  64. BillyBigbaws says:

    Gah, why can’t i edit me posts after posting to make ‘em more shapely?

  65. DMW42 says:

    Martyn / Aplinal
    As things stand and I see the blatant lies, propaganda and bias, I am so bloody angry and frustrated. But, I genuinely believe that the truth will out, and when it does, man, will it really hit the fan. 
     
    We’ll then have the I opportunity to say “thank you and be on your way”.

  66. Macart says:

    The thing is, and I may be absolutely wrong on this, but is it not the case we are getting the message out there? Is it not the case that despite their near unchallenged dominance of the msm they’ve turned their cannon on bloggers and independence minded sites and posters for a reason? You folks, all of you are a serious problem for the no campaign. You underestimate your influence guys.
     
    All of you make a difference. For every lie that’s told by the opposition, for every fact omitted or position misrepresented by a politically biased media each and every one of you are willing to jump online and put the opposing view out there for others to judge its merit. They are worried and you’ve put that doubt in their minds. Whatever happens next year, they’ll know they’ve been in a fight and that ordinary members of the public put Westminster’s troughing careerists on notice.
     
    Rant over. :)

  67. scottish_skier says:

    NOBODY CAN SAY FOR SURE.

    Using the union flag kinda muddies the waters too Rev. Scotland is still in the union mind.

    :-)
     
     

  68. Marcia says:

    Good to see that Peter Bell’s twitter account is no longer suspended. He wasn’t given a reason for it.

  69. Marcia says:

    SS
    The Lion rampant is of course the Monarch’s flag and should not be used without the permission of the Lord Lyon.
     
    Its use by other, non-authorised persons is an offence under the Act of Parliament 1672 cap. 47 and 30 & 31 Vict. cap. 17.

  70. pmcrek says:

    Thanks to the Weir’s generosity, official campaign money is not so much the battle, as always it is mainstream media in Scotland, we need to fund sites and bloggers like Newsnet Scotland, Bella Caledonia, Wings of course, National Collective, Lallands Peat Worrier etc.. the list is endless and I apologise for missing folks. This is the only way to negate the massive advantage Better Together have in the media.
     
    Oh I’m not saying you shouldnt bung Yes Scotland what you can though :)

  71. Rev. Stuart Campbell says:

    “Gah, why can’t i edit me posts after posting to make ‘em more shapely?”

    You can, for 10 minutes, but not once someone’s made another comment.

  72. Rev. Stuart Campbell says:

    “The thing is, and I may be absolutely wrong on this, but is it not the case we are getting the message out there? Is it not the case that despite their near unchallenged dominance of the msm they’ve turned their cannon on bloggers and independence minded sites and posters for a reason?”

    Absolutely. It’s no coincidence that the heat’s started turning up on sites like this and NC as we’ve started to get more popular. Smears, innuendo, DoS attacks, all standard tactics. It’s a sign we’re doing something right.

  73. cynicalHighlander says:

    @Heather McLean 
     
    Thanks for the correction.

  74. pmcrek says:

    Sorry quick off topic but I just remembered something, didnt Better Together spam text 300,000 people weeks ago now, anybody heard anything about the results? Or lack therein?

  75. muttley79 says:

    Is anyone from here (I know it is a virtual place!!) going to the anti-Trident rally in Glasgow on Saturday?

  76. john king says:

    I wrote this to reporters without borders on the 9th of march and so far have not received a reply , anyone else want to give them a try?
    http://en.rsf.org/?_kk=9d0faf14-7e7c-4fe9-b64d-6737c4d20c79&_kt=24776116434&gclid=CMm74sG3w7YCFaLHtAodbjQAng edit the contact was heather [dot] blake [at] rsf [dot] org

     
     
    Can reporters without border help us, the freedom movement in Scotland is being shackled by a MSM  which is completely biased in favour of the status quo and will not give a balanced view of events this has led to a democratic deficit in Scotland which sees us being asked to pay a licence fee to the BBC who have absolutely no shame in twisting news reports in favour of the UK at the expense of the YES  campaign meanwhile preventing a right of reply on their websites, the disgraceful abrogation of the BBC to honour its own commitment to balanced and fair reporting is to this countries everlasting shame, please help us to bring balance to the public and allow them to make an informed choice in 2014
    john king 

  77. john king says:

    DMW42 says:
    11 April, 2013 at 8:27 pm

    Martyn / AplinalAs things stand and I see the blatant lies, propaganda and bias, I am so bloody angry and frustrated. But, I genuinely believe that the truth will out, and when it does, man, will it really hit the fan.  We’ll then have the I opportunity to say “thank you and be on your way”.
     
    trouble with that is the truth will only out if WE OUT IT,
    help me in my attempts at getting “reporters without borders” on board and we may well see the truth getting out.

  78. rabb says:

    pmcrek says:
    11 April, 2013 at 9:09 pm

    Sorry quick off topic but I just remembered something, didnt Better Together spam text 300,000 people weeks ago now, anybody heard anything about the results? Or lack therein?
     
    I think we can safely assume that had it shown a majority in favour of a No vote it would have been plastered all over their site and on the BBC / papers etc.
     
    The results would have been pretty instant so it’s not like they are still counting them by hand or anything.

  79. Gordon Bain says:

    @DMW42
     
    So let me get this right. Only the oppressor is allowed to request outside monitoring? What kind of a stupid rule is that? What’s the point of them then?

  80. DMW42 says:

    Gordon
     
    I’ve responded in similar vein to ODIHR, and provided links to blatant examples of bias, including examples produced by RevStu, NNS and screen dumps from the state broadcaster’s website.
     
    I’ll post any subsequent response on WoS but, even though I received a negative response, it would do no harm if other like minded individuals made the same request. Try emailing Thomas [dot] Rymer [at] odihr [dot] pl or Steven [dot] Martin [at] odihr [dot] pl

    I’ll also be following up on JK’s post and contact reporters without borders.

  81. mato21 says:

    Power in the Community were at the French Embassy in Edinburgh on Tuesday to try and get their support for monitoring the media
     
    http://powerincommunity.blogspot.co.uk/

  82. Green Bean says:

    Re: John King, http://wingsoverscotland.com/binoculars-on-backwards/#comment-373834.
    Another organization to be aware of is the Electronic Frontier Foundation, which helps fight for freedom of speech, online privacy etc. etc: https://www.eff.org/work. In October 2004, just a few days before the European Social Forum took place in London, the FBI walked into a building in Canary Wharf and nicked the servers of UK Indymedia. Allegedly the head of the Met was furious, as they had no legal right to do this. Legal action was taken on behalf of Indymedia by the EFF. You can read about the whole murky business here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indymedia#Seizure_of_servers_by_the_FBI.
     

  83. Cath says:

    “I’m really not sure if the YES campaign truly understand the depth to which the British establishment will stoop in order to make sure they keep Scotland as ‘theirs’”
     
    Oh I’m sure they absolutely do. In fact, I suspect one of the major advantages the Yes campaign, the SNP and the independence movement generally have is that they know absolutely how the media and their opponents will behave. They’ve been through it in 1979, in 1997 and over the past few years with the SNP. I’m fairly certain the SNP in particular are using the media against itself and have been for a long time. For example, the NATO debate looked like manipulation, dangling an “SNP split, hated Salmond could be defeated!” story in front of them that meant they spent months and acres of newsprint helping “normalise” independence by talking about something that wouldn’t be relevant until afterwards.
     
    Now, they are doing a very good job of backing themselves into a corner with all their lies, negativity and smears. Don’t underestimate people – many, if not most of us, here have come to the SNP and independence in spite of such media, or even because of it. The truth is seeping out through blogs like this. But equally as important, if not more so, the grassroots campaign is shaping up and beginning to take off. I was out tonight knocking doors and handing out leaflets, and people’s reaction is interesting. They desperately want information – real information. And I think most are only too aware something is not right. So far people hit out at the Yes campaign and SNP for “not having answers”. But they do have those answers – it’s simply the media are not allowing them to be heard.
     
    Now that might seem like a huge problem right now. But when that information starts to percolate through grassroots campaigns, through doors, discussions with neighbours, friends, colleagues etc, and at local events, the difference between media reporting and reality will start to become more apparent to more people. That’s when folk will start to become angry. So while the Yes camp have that advantage of the politicians and media behaving fairly predictably, Better Together don’t, because they’re dealing with grassroots organisations, individuals, small blogs etc. They’re playing dirty politics as normal with a campaign that, SNP aside, isn’t that at all.

  84. the rough bounds says:

    Davidson, Lamont, and Rennie. Those three remind me of the three dopey characters in The Wizard of Oz.
    No heart, No courage and No brain.
    And the three of them have plugged themselves into their own nightmare.

  85. Cath says:

    “Is anyone from here (I know it is a virtual place!!) going to the anti-Trident rally in Glasgow on Saturday?”
     
    I’ll be there, assuming I manage to get up in time. Nightclubbing to Brit Pop the night before :-)

  86. DMW42 says:

    Cath, I totally agree.
     
    I remember one of my first posts on WoS when I highlighted how Obama won both terms. Simple stuff really, social media and community organisation.
     
    Sure, Obama now has msm in his hip pocket but, we’re really making far, far better use of social media and community organisation than BT, and we will continue to improve in our use of these mediums over the next 17 months.
     

  87. Tamson says:

    There’s a potential for an “attack ad” in the US style from all this:

    Opening shot – Big graphic of the words “Better Together?”

    Then a close up of Darling with the words “Labour front”, fading out into pictures of the likes of Taylor, Sansom, and Baxter, and the words “Tory backers”.

    Close on the graphic “Better Together? Aye, Right.”

  88. Brian says:

    This is when it becomes apparent there is a democratic deficit by only having two terrestrial mainstream TV stations. Sky is Murdoch and it would not allow Independence cover.
    We went into this believing BBC would give reasonable coverage. It would only need the interviewer ask, “What do you mean?” when opinions or made up facts are given.
    As when MacDougall said the No campaign was being smeared the STV interviewer didn’t ask what he meant, it was allowed to stand unexamined.
    Unfortunate there aren’t community television stations or community radio.
    Is there a way of getting an internet radio station?

  89. Dave McEwan Hill says:

    Cath
     
    First class post and I agree entirely. Intelligent people are walking towards us as the mince from Better Together gets ever more desperate and risible
     
    O/T
    I think on the day of Thatcher’s funeral we should gather for public services in attempted expiation of the was crime of the UK sinking a vessel that had surrendered and was steaming away from conflict. We should offer apology to Argentine and the families of the murdered sailors and make clear to Argentine that this evil act was not done in Scotland’s name 

  90. Gordon Bain says:

    @DMW42
     
    thanks for that, I feel your frustration. I’ll send an email at the weekend. Is it alright to link to threads such as this as evidence or does it need the specific instances ( there are soooooo many)?

  91. YesYesYes says:

    @Doug Daniel,
     
    Well said and excellent comment on Better Nation.
     
    One of the disturbing features of the self-appointed cyber-police in the independence debate is that, in their sanctimonious reproaches to anyone who doesn’t tow their line, they seem to lack any awareness of just how patronising they are to the very people that they claim to be speaking for (the ‘undecided voter’, the ‘general public’).
     
    Their assumption seems to be that ‘undecided voters’, the ‘general public’ are such shrinking violets, with such delicate sensibilities, that they don’t have the stomach for some of the more robust exchanges that occur between the participants on both sides in the debate. Maybe it’s just my circle of friends and family, but the complaints that I hear most often about ‘politics’ from the people I know is that there are few discernible differences between the main political parties, that ideology is dead, that most politicians and journalists have lost any principles that they ever had, that people have less fire in their bellies today than in previous decades and, the most common complaint of all, where is the anger and radical dissent in Scottish politics?
     
    Your point (on Better Nation) about encouraging diversity and different voices in the online independence debate (and elsewhere) is so important and well made. If we lose that, this debate is going to be reduced to the kind of anodyne exchanges that are regularly aired on the BBCs Question Time and we’ll risk killing this debate with conformity.
     
    I can’t explain the pathological hatred that the people on Better Nation seem to have for Stuart, even allowing for the fact that, nowadays, accusations of ‘homophobia’, ‘misogyny’ and ‘bullying’ seem to roll off some people’s tongues easier than spit. But if you’re reduced to arguing that if there’s a No vote in 2014, it will all be Stuart’s fault then it seems to me that you’ve lost your sense of perspective and maybe need a break for a wee while.

  92. Cath says:

    “we’re really making far, far better use of social media and community organisation than BT,”
     
    Aye. BT seem to be stuck in a mindset that “social media” is about technology and paying for things like spam text messages and sponspored Facebook links. That is not only wrong but gobsmackingly wrong.
     
    Social media, networking and a grassroots campaign is about people. That is it. It helps hugely to have technology to bring people together, spread information among networks and collate information. But all the social media technology in the world is useless if you don’t have people behind it driving it. If anything, there is more change of actively pissing people off if you’re appearing unsolicited in their social media.
     

  93. Braco says:

    Cath,
    that was a real pleasure to read. Thanks. It’s so easy when concentrating on the MSM output on the Indy debate to become despondent. Especially as it’s this excellent blog’s raison d’etre to expose the worst of it and so is without a doubt an essential part of the fight. But it’s all too easy to forget the bigger and much longer term strategy being played out here. So thanks again for the reminder. It came at just the right time (for my sanity anyway. Smiley)

  94. YesYesYes says:

    Oops, “toe” not “tow the line”.

  95. Cath says:

    “Your point (on Better Nation) about encouraging diversity and different voices in the online independence debate (and elsewhere) is so important and well made”
     
    Totally agree with you both. Before I found Wings I used to read Better Nation at times but just found it generally dull. It seemed to be the same few tedious political types talking amongst themselves in a very narrow kind of spectrum – one that didn’t really match the debate. To be fair, I haven’t read it for ages so perhaps I would have felt the same about Wings at the time, and maybe that one’s better now.
     
    Wings is far more about really challenging media lies, and getting vital information out there. I like a bit of fire in the belly and anger – now and again, at least. I’m sure there are others out there who prefer to believe they’re entirely unbiased and seeing all sides. But the fact is, when you’re dealing with a highly biased media setting the agenda, you will frequently find yourself a useful idiot taking that approach.
     
     

  96. scottish_skier says:

    Aye. BT seem to be stuck in a mindset that “social media” is about technology
    Agreed Cath. Good post.
    Yes, I’d been noticing this/wondering about it a bit too. Sudden blitz, enough to spike a brief flurry of activity, then dies just as quick as no substance?
    In contrast, YesScotland slow, steady, calm and informative. Certainly not in yer face either.

  97. Doug Daniel says:

    Cath – well, Better Nation used to be the top of my blog list. But the days of sprawling debates going on for over a hundred comments are long gone, and while I still visit occasionally, generally it’s not what it was. To be fair, that’s just what happens in blogging – people’s circumstances change, and their blogging becomes less frequent, until eventually they stop (unless you pay them to make it their full-time job, of course!) I’ve got more blogs in my “Latent Feeds” list on Google Reader than I do in my “Scottish Politics” list.
     
    But I think the main problem was the decision to start closing comments after about two days or whatever it is. I mean, let’s face it, arguments on comment threads are basically about trying to “beat” your opponent. Who wants to start a big argument with someone on a comments section, only to find their opponent got the last word in before the comments were closed?
     
    There’s a reason why the most popular blogs tend to be the ones that let people say pretty much what they want (within reason) in the comments section…
     
    “I’m sure there are others out there who prefer to believe they’re entirely unbiased and seeing all sides. But the fact is, when you’re dealing with a highly biased media setting the agenda, you will frequently find yourself a useful idiot taking that approach.” – Absolutely spot on. 

  98. Doug Daniel says:

    Incidentally, someone mentioned the spam text campaign. The reason there’s been no results of the poll for that is that it wasn’t really a poll – the poll was just the hook to get people to fill in details in their website and give them permission to put their number in their database for future spam texts.

  99. rabb says:

    And look out for some inovative Yes campaigning later on in the year.

    True grass roots campaigning that gains maximum exposure to our cause in communities!

    I won’t say anymore than the model has been tested and works extremely well :)

    BTW It’s not an official Yes thing. It’s a local yes group idea (for now).

  100. Indion says:

     
    So how are the other BT doing in getting broadband out and about throughout Scotland?
     
    And how are the Scottish government helping?
     

  101. Handandshrimp says:

    McDougall thinks it is nationalists that are supporting independence?
     
    Did he get his coconut at the end of the show? 
     
     

  102. David McCann says:

    Max Keiser on how North Sea oil saved Thatcher

  103. Rev. Stuart Campbell says:

    “I can’t explain the pathological hatred that the people on Better Nation seem to have for Stuart, even allowing for the fact that, nowadays, accusations of ‘homophobia’, ‘misogyny’ and ‘bullying’ seem to roll off some people’s tongues easier than spit. But if you’re reduced to arguing that if there’s a No vote in 2014, it will all be Stuart’s fault then it seems to me that you’ve lost your sense of perspective and maybe need a break for a wee while.”

    Mysteriously, they still haven’t approved my comment of four hours ago on that thread.

  104. Macart says:

    “Absolutely. It’s no coincidence that the heat’s started turning up on sites like this and NC as we’ve started to get more popular. Smears, innuendo, DoS attacks, all standard tactics. It’s a sign we’re doing something right.”
     
    Sometimes feel we’re a bit hard on ourselves when it comes to the old media v people power subject. The fact that the opposition misrepresents and let’s face it lies so blatantly about independence minded sites and posters means we don’t just have them worried, we’ve got them seriously rattled. All that media influence, money, political clout and talented chaps like yourself and members of the public like ourselves have them rattled.
     
    Gives you a warm fuzzy glow. :D

  105. bunter says:

    Looks like The Herald doesnt take kindly to receiving lawyers letters. It now seems to be a dog with a bone regards Taylors donation and isnt going to let go anytime soon. Its a good article and credit where its due this time.
    It really is a better paper when you know who is away….is it for good?

  106. bunter says:

    Oh BBC Scotland breakfast time news going big on Trump and his lawsuit over the windfarm which will ”destroy” Scotland. but is still quiet on the Taylor stushie, despite being over all the papers that they usually get their news stories from.
    If anyone needs evidence of bias and suppressing negative stories affecting the Unionists, this would be a good one to run with.

  107. john king says:

    Awee update for you all 
    in my inbox this morning is this

    To: john king
     

     

     
     
     

    I personally am not in a position to deal with your issue but I’ll forward your querry to my colleague in Paris at the European desk.

    Best wishes

    Hélène Sackstein

    RSF – UNOG

    sackstein [at] rsf-ch [dot] ch

     

    just so as you know eh?

  108. Indion says:

     
    Here’s the link to the Herald article that bunter @ 7:18am wrote about: http://www.heraldscotland.com/politics/referendum-news/silence-over-no-donation.20640745 
     
     

  109. john king says:

    just sent this to odihr

    To: info [at] osce [dot] org
     

     

     
     
     

    I am aware other Scots have approached the ODIHR  for help in combatting a completely biased main stream media in Scotland in favour of the country of Scotland remaining within the United Kingdom,
     the main culprit being the British Broadcasting Company, 
    this has led to a scenario where although people are obliged under law to pay a license fee to the BBC, they quite outrageously prevent people having a response to biased articles,
     this coupled with vested interests paying for the no campaign but resisting media interest raises the question of a fair and open debate,
     however to reach my point, the other contactors appear (correct me if I’m wrong) have had responses which imply only the sovereign state can approach which suggests your mandate is to only support the oppressor and not the oppressed ,please I would be most grateful if could  enlighten me to the facts, 
    yours very sincerely 

    john king 

  110. Another London Dividend says:

    Good article by Robbie Dinwoodie in The Herald this morning which has stood against Taylor’s lawyer’s bullying.  
    But still a wall of silence from BBC.  They had Douglas Alexander on this morning and failed to ask him about his previous comments on Vitol?
    Utterly disgraceful by our State Broadcaster.

  111. Boorach says:

    @ John King
     
    Thanks for the info and all that you have done. Can you tell me exactly who ‘reporters without borders’ are? I assume they are much like ‘doctors without borders’ operating wherever they believe their particular expertise is required as an independent, neutral organisation without any government associations/links.
     
    However, where DSF  canpractise their expertise anywhere/anytime RSF require a platform to publicise their findings. Are they not likely to run up against the same wall we are battering our heads against in trying to get the facts into the Scottish MSM?
     
    On a tangent…. I note that ‘all media Scotland’ are being conspicuously quiet on the vitol donation!

  112. Patrick Roden says:

    I was intending asking where Alistair Darling had disapeared to, but the Herald has done a far better job today.
    Anyone would think Alistair had something to hide?
    Maybe Duncan Hothersal or Grahamski can enlighten us ?

  113. john king says:

    dont know a great deal about them boorach but their mission statement goes like this
    “Reporters Without Borders was founded in Montpellier (France) in 1985 by four journalists: Robert Ménard, Rémy Loury, Jacques Molénat and Émilien Jubineau. This association, registered as a non-profit organisation in France since 1995, soon took on an international dimension.
    Under the direction of Christophe Deloire, Reporters Without Borders organised its team of researchers by geographical area. The organization also gradually developed two essential and highly specialised spheres of activity: one focused on Internet Censorship and the New Media, and the other devoted to providing material, financial and psychological assistance to journalists assigned to dangerous areas.”
    Reporters Without Borders is registered in France as a non-profit organisa- tion and has consultant status at the United Nations and UNESCO.

    Reporters Without Borders’ Awards

  114. Patrick Roden says:

    FAO all you fantastic artists out these,
    You will have saw the picture of Arkan with a tiger cub in his hand in front of a tank, with a big mob of his thugs all clad in face masks?
    How about an image based on this but with Alistair Darling, Blair Mc Dougal, Johan, Willie Rennie, Ruthy, etc also hiding thier identity (but not enough for the veiwer to see who it is)

  115. Doug Daniel says:

    Another London Dividend – “They had Douglas Alexander on this morning and failed to ask him about his previous comments on Vitol?
    Utterly disgraceful by our State Broadcaster.”
     
    That’s outrageous. I don’t care what anyone says, if a high-ranking SNP person was being interviewed in similar circumstances, the whole interview would be geared towards putting them on the spot over their hypocritical comments.

  116. Boorach says:

    Thanks John, certainly worth a punt. Consider my email on it’s way.

  117. bunter says:

    At last, on GMS the BBC mentions Taylors donation to Ken McIntosh who gibbers that he knows nothing about it. The whole interview is a masterclass….not, and everyone should get to hear it lol.
    I have to say that I think the pro indy bloggs and websites seem, slowly, to be  forcing  the unionists and their pals in  the MSM onto their back foot. They are losing control, and they dont like it! 

  118. john king says:

    “However, where DSF  canpractise their expertise anywhere/anytime RSF require a platform to publicise their findings. Are they not likely to run up against the same wall we are battering our heads against in trying to get the facts into the Scottish MSM?”
     
    without knowing their modus operandi I would guess they use the blogosphere to supplement the very well respected rev with professional reporting and investigative journalism that can prove expensive and difficult for citizen reporters (no offence rev) 

  119. scottish_skier says:

    Sun’s thoughts on the ‘delicate flowers’ of the pro-union campaign. Their words, not mine.

    http://www.thescottishsun.co.uk/scotsol/homepage/news/sun_says/1460642/The-Scottish-Sun-Says.html

    Bin naughty

    AS a political dirty trick, ordering your rivals’ campaign literature and then dumping it in the bin is just a bit on the mild side.

    It’s not exactly up there with poisoned tipped umbrellas or exploding cigars.

    So is the Better Together campaign really full of such delicate flowers that they need to make a big fuss about it?….

    ….or if you really want to get into conspiracy theory territory, you could even start to wonder if the whole thing is a fiendish plot by Better Together to smear their opponents.

  120. Dan Simmie says:

    Heard the interview on GMS.He got off very lightly. I don’t think the defence  of “I know nothing,I saw nothing”(anyone remember Shultz) will really wash.
    Maybe the pressure is getting to the BBC but really a proper journalist would have taken McIntosh apart over how he was behaving.
    And I know ,I know I shouldn’t look at The SUN online however there is a very funny story about a handwritten note that was sent to the no campaign.This note obviously proves beyond all doubt that we are all foaming at the mouth rabid English haters.Or maybe it just shows the complete lack of imagination from the no campaign when they are pushed into a corner.

  121. john king says:

    the rough bounds says:
    11 April, 2013 at 10:20 pm

    Davidson, Lamont, and Rennie. Those three remind me of the three dopey characters in The Wizard of Oz.No heart, No courage and No brain.And the three of them have plugged themselves into their own nightmare.”
    ha ha ha ha ha ha  love it 
    who could be Dorothy and Toto ?
    Jackie Bailey and Anus Sarwar maybe?
    and of course who could forget the inimitable A Darling as the wizard behind his curtain?

    and dont even get me started on the oompaloopa’s
    theres a project for someone?
    and the wicked witch of the west well? anyone?

  122. Linda's Back says:

    Asking “I know nothing” Ken MacIntosh about Vitol is just a fig leaf for the BBC as it was Douglas Alexander they should have asked.
    However I am sure they will ask Alistair Darling the next time he is on what due diligence did he do on Vitol’s activities after his meeting with Ian Taylor?  NOT

  123. dmw42 says:

    Memo to all MSM
     
    Your pages were absolutely covered in Ian Taylor’s donation to the Tories last March, with page after page of Taylor’s visit to Chequers, with Peter Cruddas being accused of accepting money for access and Millipeed’s abhorance that such should be allowed.
    Cover the story now Scotsman, Mail, Sun, Express, Record, Telegraph, Gaurdian, Times et al!!!
     
    And as for you BBC, really, really cute to remove the said pages from your website. But we remember.

  124. ianbrotherhood says:

    @Bunter, Dan Simmie, Linda’s Back –
     
    Aye, and he sounded as if he was physically withdrawing from the microphone, possibly getting up to leave as he ‘answered’, voice lowering, muttering…dodgy in the extreme.
     
    You never do know – perhaps the question was flung in at the last moment a la Columbo. Even if it wasn’t intended to trip him up at the last minute, the impression lingers (after all his psychobabble about straw-men arguments etc) that MacIntosh was an unreliable and shifty contributor. 

  125. Boorach says:

    @ Linda Black
     
    Oh, come on now! I’m sure Alasdair did all the due dilligence he considered necessary. Paid ‘due’ reverence and ‘dilligently collected what he thought was ‘due’! :-)

  126. Elizabeth says:

    Here’s the waffling Ken Macintosh being filleted by Garry Robertson on GMS. KM sounded vague, and unsure of himself throughout. His response to the question about the dodgy BT donar comes at the end. 
    Tune in at approx 2:50 here.  http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b01rmghm  

  127. Morag says:

    And as for you BBC, really, really cute to remove the said pages from your website. But we remember.
     
    They’ve done WHAT?????

    If that’s true, and provably so, we’ve gone beyond “outrageous” into territory I do not have a word for.

    RevStu on the case here?

  128. The Man in the Jar says:

    @Morag
    My sentiments as well.
    I hope this is the case. A blatant cover-up by BBC if so lets use this to our advantage.

  129. Linda's Back says:

    Always take hard copies of links you refer to as when they are withdrawn you still have evidence,

  130. Taranaich says:

    … I just realised I called the Better Together backers “Scottish bankers.” I seem to be stuck on Freudian Slip mode on this site.

  131. The Man in the Jar says:

    @Linda’s Back
    Apparently there is no need for hard copy. If you know what you are doing with the Internet (and I most certainly don’t!) there are ways of viewing “cached”?? items. That the originator has no control over. I think.

  132. Morag says:

    So, if they really have done this (and I fear I am still in sceptic mode), we need evidence, we need screen-grabs, and we need a Wings article.

    Sorry, in a funny mood today.  I think I actually solved Lockerbie last night, about half past nine.  That is, I found the lost luggage list that solves the puzzle of the transfer luggage, which destroys the Crown case that the bomb started in Frankfurt.  I don’t claim to know who actually did bomb that plane except that someone who was in Malta that morning and in Tripoli in the afternoon could not physically have done it, no way.

    So of course I couldn’t sleep a wink.  And I need to get on with a pile of work here, coffee break is at an end.  But if the BBC are pulling online articles to deflect attention from the dodgy donation to Bitter Together, that’s dynamite.

  133. Dave McEwan Hill says:

    Morag
    Well done .

  134. Rev. Stuart Campbell says:

    Any more info on what might have gone missing?

  135. muttley79 says:

    @Morag
     
    Interesting, I hope you put it in your book!
     
    On Pravada (BBC Scotland): they kind of gave the game away with their comment that they do not have to be balanced until the official last campaigning weeks!  I to hope Rev Stu is on the case (providing he is not to busy).

  136. Adrian B says:

    @ Morag,
     
    That is fantastic news, well done, I am aware that you have put a great deal of work into the subject over a number of years.
     
    I noticed this news last night : 
    http://www.firmmagazine.com/news/3163/Merged_Scottish_police_investigating_allegations_of_criminality_of_Crown_Office_and_police_in_Pan_Am_103_case_.html
     
    I hope that things start moving in the right direction, its been a long slow process. I realise that the end might be still very much in the far distance, but if you are right on this latest part of the puzzle, then it is surely a landmark moment.
     
     

  137. Aplinal says:

    @Morag
     
    Well done, please let us know when the book is due to be published.  I have no doubt in my mind that al Megrahi did not and could not have planted the bomb.  This travesty of Scottish justice must be finally put to bed.

  138. dmw42 says:

    Albalha, the links you’ve provided are all I was able to find as well, and these merely mention his name in the passing.  I could be imagining it but, I can picture the narrative castigating Mr Taylor and his connections with Alan Duncan. Maybe it’s just old age but, given that the BBC invariably included the same commentary as that in the Gauardian, and the Gaurdian of 26 March 2012 stated:
    “Cameron held a “social dinner for strong and long-term supporters of the party, with whom the PM has a strong relationship”, including banker and Tory donor Henry Angest, and farmer and oil company boss Ian Taylor.
    Taylor’s company, Vitol, was helped last year by his friend, the minister Alan Duncan, to ensure vital supplies got through to the insurgents in Libya and were prevented from reaching Colonel Gaddafi. Duncan spearheaded the government’s secret “Libya Oil Cell”, which helped Vitol to take petrol and gas into Benghazi and bring crude oil out.”
    http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2012/mar/26/tory-donors-three-billion-david-cameron
     
    Maybe my hamster has just fallen asleep at the wheel and I’m seeing conspiracies everywhere but, I honestly and genuinely believed I had read similar on the BBC as I don’t buy the Gaurdian.
     
    If I am incorrect, I hold my hand up and apologise.

  139. dmw42 says:

    Following my last post, maybe I’m thinking of commentary involving Peter Cruddas and donations?

  140. Morag says:

    Adrian, don’t believe everything you read in the papers.

    I was sent that link by email last night with an exhortation “don’t go off on one, please!”

    Of course, I was going off on something else entirely by then.

  141. Adrian B says:

    @ Morag,
     
    Keep up the good work and in Particular – Keep going off on one, as long as it doesn’t hinder health and mind at any rate.
     
    Looking forward to the book. I like the way you keep going to get at what really happened. The fact that you have a political stance that we all view here helps to of course as it keeps Lockerbie more visible.

  142. Morag says:

    Well, I’ll probably have to self-publish, I don’t imagine a publisher will be interested. It’s not hard these days though, and I imagine quite quick.  I’d like to get it out for the 25th anniversary at the end of this year.

    Actually, what I discovered last night will shorten an unwieldy chapter, I hope.  Much neater to be able to say, look, it’s that, rather than delve down every alley and say, look we have no clue what it was but the idea you can say it was the bomb is ludicrous.

    But it’s dry stuff, and thin on human interest.  It doesn’t even offer any insight into who actually bombed the plane, other than the usual “why don’t you go back and look again at your original suspects” riff that everyone has been spinning for years.  All it does is demolish the far-fetched conspiracy theory that was the Crown case.  I think actually it’s obliterated and the ground sown with salt.  I just wish I’d been able to do this before poor Megrahi died.

    It’s the gross incompetence of what happened that bugs me.  I mean, dumb as a bag of hammers that failed hammer school.  You don’t need massive international conspiracies when you’ve got people working for you of the calibre of certain German police officers, not to mention more than a few people this side of the pond.

  143. Silverytay says:

    dmw42  If you go onto the S.N.P’s media page and click on the story Labour distances themselves from no camp donation ‘ you will find a link to a daily mail story headlined 
    Duncan faces questions over Libya deal .  You might find more information there .
    Sorry I cant give you any more information ‘ I am on a computer at work and as soon as I try to click on anything to do with the daily mail I get blocked .

  144. Adrian B says:

    @ Morag,
     
    I read your Lockerbie blog links that you posted. I found very quickly just how much information you were sifting through, the dead ends, dead ends constantly revisited, cross examination of witness’ and evidence.
     
    The book may be dry stuff, short on human interest, but if it pieces together likely events in the way your blog did, then I will probably well enjoy reading it.

  145. dmw42 says:

    @Silverytay
    as soon as I try to click on anything to do with the daily mail I get blocked
     
    Quick, go and buy a lottery ticket, yer luck’s in.
     
    I’ll have a good browse over the weekend and see what I can come up with.
     

  146. Morag from Indion says:

     
    Morag @ 2:19pm
     
    In case you missed it amid your breakthrough news, here to catch-up is http://variety.com/2013/film/news/amber-forecast-setting-up-lockerbie-movie-exclusive-1200343523/
     
    RE your book and publishing, if you have not done so already, suggest you check-out Unbound books – at http://unbound.co.uk/ – to see if pledged public funding would suit your publishing needs.

    Unbound was unknown to me, until a Pat Kane tweet about Paul Kingsnorth’s book on the struggles of Hereward the Wake and the fen men that he had recommended and I went on to be one of the many more who donated successfully to help fund it. 
     

  147. Indion says:

     
    Morag @ 2:19pm
     
    In case you missed it amid your breakthrough news, here to catch-up is http://variety.com/2013/film/news/amber-forecast-setting-up-lockerbie-movie-exclusive-1200343523/
     
    RE your book and publishing, if you have not done so already, suggest you check-out Unbound books – at http://unbound.co.uk/ – to see if pledged public funding would suit your publishing needs.
     
    Unbound was unknown to me until a Pat Kane tweet about Paul Kingsnorth’s book on the struggles of Hereward the Wake and the fen men that he recommended. I went on to join the many more who donated successfully to help fund it.
     
     

  148. Morag says:

    Mmmmm, yes, we’ll see what happens.

    http://lockerbiecase.blogspot.co.uk/2013/04/lockerbie-campaigners-efforts-to-find.html

    There are quite a lot of ways of publishing stuff these days.  I have to write it first!

  149. TYRAN says:

    Rev, how about a new top link or BT graphic displayed on right side of this site? This stuff is hot and of interest. Quick easy access for people visiting this site. It links to a page with this story, the embassy dots, the inflated poll, the graphs, lots of other stuff you have covered. 

  150. Handandshrimp says:

    I think we can safely conclude that Taylor has provided a gift…just not to whom he intended.

  151. DMW42 says:

    Going back to earlier concerns I had about BBC postings – Duncan, Cruddas, Trigafura, Libya, Vitol…a Newsnight article about 3 years ago I think

  152. Dave McEwan Hill says:

    O/T
    As a matter of considerable interest a gent whom I have always presumed to a unionist or an orange lodger due to his wearing an obvious large Union Jack badge on his lapel came into our YES Centre today waving a sheaf of papers and asking loudly “why aren’t you  telling people about this?”
    It was Mr Jappy’s most recently distributed piece on the McCrone Report and he left us with the intentions of telling everybody he knew about how we had been tricked and sending the report to the Daily Record.
    I think the McCrone report could be very important 

  153. Adrian B says:

    I think the McCrone report could be very important 
     
    The McCrone report is certainly very important. John Jappy did a good piece in Newsnet Scotland, over a year ago now from memory. The BBC will not mention it by name – they don’t like commentators even alluding to it as ‘better together’ cannot come back with an answer against it – so much for a public service broadcaster. They like to keep things as a he said / she said debate – that’s not the way the facts stand however.

  154. Morag says:

    I just popped back to this thread to record the fact that my Lockerbie euphoria above was a wee bit premature.  Closer examination of a small stack of lost luggage claims from 1988 (damn, these things are impenetrable!) suggests my thesis wasn’t as bankable as I thought.

    Oh well, back to square 98 (if you get my drift).



Comment - new users please read this page first for commenting rules. HTML tags like <i> and <b> are permitted. Use the live preview box.




↑ Top