We don’t really need to write anything today. If you want to know why you have to vote Yes in 2014, just turn on your TV.
Labour MP John Mann has now given his account of yesterday’s goings-on around a misattributed quote in the Sunday Times and Herald. You can read it on his website, or look at this conveniently-located screenshot (click to supersize) instead:
Speaking as writers we’re especially impressed by the fifth paragraph’s use of no fewer than SIX exclamation marks after a single word. But it’s the next bit, and in particular the section we’ve highlighted in the image above, that’s rather more concerning.
We were dismayed to hear this morning that the Scottish Parliament had wussed out on holding a debate on Margaret Thatcher’s legacy which had been scheduled for the day of her funeral (though not during it). But we were immediately cheered up again by this indirectly-related reader comment:
“By the way did I hear correctly that the funeral is supposed to have a Falklands theme? Would it therefore be bad taste to suggest putting Thatcher into a General Belgrano-shaped coffin and have it sunk into the grave by a hearse disguised as HMS Conqueror?”
Now THAT we’d pay money for.
It’s gone midnight and we don’t normally do speculation, but as it’s already showing up in our incoming searches we’ve spent the last little while trying to work out what’s gone on between SNP MP Angus Robertson, Labour MP John Mann and the Herald in the last 24 hours. So first let’s establish the known facts, then have the attempted deduction, and hopefully by the morning read the official clarifications.
So here’s a funny thing.
And here it is again, equally categorically:
And again for good measure:
(Our emphases.) That’s pretty clear, then – the No campaign will not accept money from “foreign donors”, but will take “up to £500” from people resident in the UK.
We’ve received another letter from Ian Taylor’s lawyers. You can read it below.
We recently received the same letter from the Radio Times as many other people did, in response to our complaint about the magazine’s misrepresentation of respected Scottish historian Dr Fiona Watson last month. The problem related to an article about the film “Braveheart”, which made some deeply unpleasant implications easily read as saying the SNP were xenophobic racists encouraging anti-English violence.
The reply didn’t address the very specific issues we’d raised about what Dr Watson did or didn’t say, so we wrote back to the mag’s editor Ben Preston seeking clarification on a couple of important points. His reply is below.
It’s Monday morning, so rather than have an “And finally…” tonight we thought we’d cheer you up ahead of the grimmest day of the week with a couple of completely genuine unPhotoshopped images from this morning’s BBC Breakfast.
We’d love to imagine this was a satirical “accident”.
Scotland on Sunday, 14th April 2013 (our emphasis):
“[A Labour] MP pointed out that any further devolution would need support from the Labour Party in England: ‘Johann can’t just say to Ed [Miliband, the Labour leader] this is what I want. These decisions and policies have consequences for the whole of the UK. There are Labour MPs in England now who are getting fed up with it, not just Tories.'”
We hate to harp on. But it may be that there are still some people stuck in a cave somewhere in the Hebrides who think Johann Lamont is the “leader” of a political party called “Scottish Labour” rather than a regional branch manager of one based in London, and who imagine that the findings of her commission on devolution – should there actually be any before the referendum – will become official Labour policy.
And for those people, we have four words.
Readers! Scotland on Sunday’s Euan McColm – who is a proper, mature, grown-up journalist, unlike we scurrilous, anonymous blogger types – has a message for you with regard to modern developments in the financing of alternative media sources.
(As we’re aware that some people are uncomfortable with robust language, we’ve blurred out part of the text for sensitive viewers. Click the image if you have the sturdy constitution necessary to read the uncensored version, along with some more pithy wit from this cuddly, avuncular figure of the “quality” press.)
We’ve been documenting of late how the No campaign has grown increasingly negative and smear-based since the turn of the year, as opinion polls show a trend of small but consistent movement towards independence. One of the core characteristics of negative political campaigning is to accuse your opponents of doing the thing you’re actually doing, and the last couple of days have thrown up some striking examples.
That’s our old pal Euan McColm of the Scotsman, of course. And he’s not alone.
The Labour Party’s clinging to the pretence of a commitment to multilateral nuclear disarmament is perhaps the most cynical of all the lies it still tells the electorate, on either side of the border. This weekend, as thousands of protesters congregate in Glasgow, Labour activists are mounting a frantic rearguard action pretending that independence and Trident are unconnected issues.
But the feeble smokescreen with which the party attempts to conceal the truth could be blown away by an asthmatic bee. It shouldn’t take too long to run through the logic.
Wings Over Scotland is a thing that exists.
