We’re a bit bemused by a story reported in the Herald this morning, which makes a fairly dramatic headline claim:
“Scottish voters are turning strongly against independence, according to the latest opinion poll, which shows the cross-party No camp charging ahead with a record 20-point lead.
The snapshot by TNS BMRB – taken after both campaign launches – puts those against independence on 50% and those in favour on 30%; the latter figure being the lowest received for independence in five years of surveys by the Edinburgh-based pollster.”
We were even more bemused when we went to the TNS BMRB site to examine the details and found no mention of it. Now, we’re sure the Herald hasn’t just made it up and that it’ll appear shortly, but the odd thing was that we DID find mention of some other polling by the same company on the subject, conducted just two weeks ago.
We should be grateful for the ongoing Rangers circus. With both the Scottish and UK Parliaments now off on their summer recesses, we’re entering what newspapers traditionally call the “silly season”, where there’s little for political reporters to cover and they’re reduced to fabricating copy out of nothing to fill their sections.
Even so, the Herald’s front-page splash today is a bit desperate. Watch in amazement as the dramatic headline (“Cameron under pressure to stage vote on independence“) crumbles to pieces before your very eyes in the space of a few short sentences:
“David Cameron faces a “crunch point” in the next few months, senior Coalition sources have indicated, when he may have to take the most difficult constitutional decision of his premiership – that Westminster and not Holyrood will stage a referendum on Scottish independence.
Frustration is growing in Whitehall that Alex Salmond is “dragging his feet” on sorting out key issues surrounding the 2014 poll, most notably on whether there should be one or two questions.
To be able to deliver the SNP Government’s preferred time-table, it is thought there is just a matter of months to pin down the technical details of the referendum. By next spring, if agreement has not been reached, then the Prime Minister faces a major political dilemma.
Asked if he might have to decide Westminster will legislate to hold an independence referendum in Scotland, a senior Coalition source told The Herald: “Potentially, this is a scenario he may have to face.””
So let’s break that down. “A few months” in fact means “almost a year”, while “Cameron under pressure” actually translates into “POTENTIALLY, Cameron MAY come under pressure, at some point in the fairly distant future, IF the Scottish Government’s consultation process hasn’t resolved itself in a manner everyone can live with, and IF Cameron then decides to commit electoral suicide by imposing a London-run referendum on Scotland”. Well, hold the front page.
We’re reminded of a popular Scottish phrase regarding the addition of certain physical appendages to the person of one’s grandmother in order that she might be denoted one’s grandfather. We commend the Herald on their powers of invention in a lean news period, and will now get back to our piece on what the constitutional implications will be if Michael Moore is unexpectedly revealed to be a Nazi from the moon.
It’s becoming impossible to keep track of all the lies, disinformation, smoke and mirrors surrounding the Rangers fiasco at the moment. We’ll try to update this page with at least the more egregious ones as they arise. Let’s get started.
An alert reader recently pointed us to a story we’d missed in last week’s Sun. Headed “SICK TAUNTS FOR ‘NO’ GIRL CEILIDH WATSON”, it describes the “vile internet abuse” suffered by the 2010 Miss Inverness after she appeared at the “Better Together” campaign launch. Oddly, the worst (in fact the only) example of these attacks the paper felt able to provide was one alleged “cybernat” saying “It’s amazing how low some will stoop for 15 minutes of fame”, which is a bit unfriendly but we’re not sure it quite reaches the level of “vile abuse”, particularly when directed at someone who’s voluntarily and actively involved themselves in a heated political campaign.
The piece also referred (we presume, being unaware of any other incident that fits the description) to this blog’s own brush with infamy last week, noting that we’d “posted sick images of a funeral cortege of dead squaddies passing through Royal Wooton [sic] Bassett”, apparently in response to Ms Watson speaking of her soldier boyfriend.
We still haven’t seen the launch event – there appears to be no footage of it available on the campaign’s website – so we had, and have, no idea what Ms Watson’s boyfriend does for a living. The image in question had absolutely nothing to do with him or her or anything she may or may not have said at the No campaign launch.
As for “sick images”, though, the picture we used in our mockup poster wasn’t edited in any way (except for blurring out the numberplates of the hearses in an attempt to protect the identities of the dead men, which were then spread across the internet anyway by Labour activists), so if it constitutes a “sick image” then pretty much every newspaper in Britain – including the Sun – is guilty of the same crime.
You can see the full story below, without having to visit the Sun’s website.
We were struck by a thought this morning. Between them, measured by average attendances, Rangers and Celtic between them command more support than the other 40 clubs in senior Scottish football put together. They pull in somewhere over 100,000 paying customers at a time to their home games, (and could probably attract considerably more had they the stadium capacity to accommodate them), while the other 10 SPL clubs struggle to get half that many combined.
It’s a massive dominance, and obviously is particularly the case in Glasgow, where the vast bulk of Scotland’s media is located. So it’s weird that offhand we can’t think of a single print or broadcast journalist anywhere in the entire Scottish media that admits* to supporting either one of them. If every writer in the country who claimed to support Queen Of The South or Albion Rovers actually turned up to either of those sides’ games at once, they’d pack their stadia to the rafters rather than having crowds you can count on fingers and toes.
The question arose in our minds when pondering a couple of pieces in today’s papers.
On the few occasions we’ve bothered reading Better Nation in recent times, it’s usually been as a result of something posted by Kirsty Connell. She’s penned several thoughtful, interesting blogs since joining the editorial team, and we’ve even tweeted a few of them before now. Today’s piece, in which she explains why she’s finally lapsing her membership of the Labour Party, is unmissable.
We won’t keep you from it, but there’s one enormously telling phrase in particular in the post. Connell dates many of her doubts about Labour back to a traumatic experience when campaigning in the famous Westminster by-election in Glasgow East, a deprived area whose troubles she attributes to “a Thatcherite government [which] strangled funds to a Labour-led council”. Perhaps it’s some last remnant of tribal loyalty which prevents Kirsty from coming out and saying it: the “Thatcherite” government strangling those funds went under the banner of the Labour Party.
The Glasgow East by-election took place in 2008. By then, the “Labour” government of Tony Blair and Gordon Brown had already been in power at Westminster for 11 years. Even as the party’s support reaches all-time lows in Scotland, a dogged hardcore of wilfully-blind loyalists continues to desperately gloss over the fact that Labour long ago abandoned most of the honourable socialist values and principles on which it was founded and surrendered to Thatcherite ideology in order to grab power. We rejoice that one more member, in a long and continuing line, has seen through the deception, and hope that the others will one day choose to open their eyes too.
The piece, penned by Tom Gordon, is headlined accordingly – “Alexander claims: yes to independence could mean mortgage rise”. What’s interesting, though, is a little piece of text that seems to have been left in by accident at the bottom of the page.
It appears to be a discarded alternative headline for the same article, given that the fourth paragraph cites “the SNP Government” dismissing Alexander’s claims as scare stories. (We did check by Googling to see if the headline had appeared on a completely different Herald piece, but turned up nothing.)
It’s quite instructive to see the paper’s thought processes laid bare. “Scottish Government Slam Scare Tactics” is a positive message from the SNP’s point of view, as it would portray them standing up against Unionist fearmongering.
The headline used instead is the complete opposite – it actually IS Unionist fearmongering, designed to produce an instinctively frightened reaction in the reader, by planting in his/her mind the image of a crippling rise in the cost of living and associating it with a Yes vote (no matter what the feature then goes on to say).
The current issue of Private Eye (which also features a fascinating full-page piece on Craig Whyte) relates news of another Labour dividend for the people of Glasgow – the decades-long neglect and imminent destruction of a much-loved green space. We’ve attached the story below for your convenience.
On the upside, though, we’re pretty sure we know where another large green space, which already comes with goalposts, is about to become available.
After all, we can’t blame a Unionist conspiracy for the borderline-criminal trousers that Alex Salmond inexplicably chose to wear to the world premiere of Brave, and also on the Late Late Show with Craig Ferguson the same evening.
But we couldn’t help noticing an odd quote in The Scotsman’s report of the event, which the paper happily let end its story, forgetting to close the quotation marks as it did so. According to Kelly MacDonald, voice of the central character:
“She [Merida] is an adventurous tomboy and very happy young woman. The spell is broken when her mother says she has to get married and take on adult responsibilities. That’s when she takes things into her own hands and makes a mess of everything.“
We think our brains may have been completely fused by a story in today’s Daily Record, which is based around comments by Rutherglen Labour MSP James Kelly, pictured below in a scene from the particularly bad acid headache he’s just given us.
Here’s the bit that’s been making our minds spin round and round and round in circles this morning until we’re dizzy trying to make sense of it:
“ALEX Salmond was accused of “double standards” yesterday over his efforts to woo Rupert Murdoch. Labour raised further questions about the First Minister’s links with Murdoch following claims the media mogul lobbied Tony Blair to wage war in Iraq.
Former spin doctor Alastair Campbell said in the latest volume of his memoirs that Blair “took a call from Murdoch who was pressing on timings, saying how News International would support us, etc”.
Salmond won plaudits across Scotland for his outspoken opposition to the war which he described as “the most disastrous foreign policy decision of recent times”. But it did not stop him from trying to get closer to Murdoch to win The Sun newspaper’s backing for the SNP.
Labour MSP and chief whip James Kelly said: “This could make the conversation a little uncomfortable the next time Alex Salmond has Rupert Murdoch round to Bute House for tea and biscuits. Alex Salmond was against the Iraq war but that didn’t stop him cosying up to Rupert Murdoch. This is classic double standards from Alex Salmond who is prepared to put his party’s interests ahead of any issue.””
Let’s try to talk our way through this slowly: LABOUR is attacking the SNP for not being sufficiently critical of RUPERT MURDOCH when he backed LABOUR Prime Minister TONY BLAIR over going to war in IRAQ in 2003? What, seriously?
That can’t really be it, can it? Labour, who instigated the illegal war that left hundreds of thousands dead, attacking an opposition party who voted against that war (and which actually tried to impeach Blair for it) for not being critical enough of a newspaper proprietor whose papers enthusiastically backed Labour at the time and who made Tony Blair godfather to one of his children, because when subsequently in government it had a couple of meetings with that newspaper proprietor (also one of Scotland’s largest private-sector employers) the best part of a decade later?
Are we dreaming this stuff? Please tell us we’re dreaming it.
We’ve been getting very confused today by the (New) Sunday Herald. Last night the paper’s “Investigations Editor” Paul Hutcheon tweeted that this morning’s edition would carry an “exclusive” on how a psychologist was telling the SNP to avoid using the word “independence”. Mr Hutcheon was clearly pretty excited about this breaking story, as he plugged it again a few hours later, and has gone on to tweet about it no fewer than 31 more times (figure correct at time of writing) during the course of the day.
But weirdly, this great “exclusive”, rather than being splashed all over the front page as you might expect, didn’t manage to make the online edition of the newspaper at all.
David Blake on The Promise: “I think you are doing a great job exposing a huge scandal o am therefore reluctant to pick fault. But…” Jun 27, 06:54
Aidan on The Guilty Party: “Whilst that’s true Alf you aren’t entirely comparing like with like. The MV Finlaggan is a higher capacity vessel than…” Jun 27, 06:15
Young Lochinvar on The Guilty Party: “HMcH Whoa! Easy there tiger!! While I have a scintilla of sympathy with the thrust of what you are saying…” Jun 27, 04:17
Angus on The Promise: ““It’s time for action.” Those even more condemnable than the criminals are those who have deliberately failed to bring the…” Jun 27, 03:13
robertkknight on The Promise: “If it walks like a duck…” Jun 27, 00:48
Confounder on The Promise: “Yeah, but ‘No true Scotsman…yada, yada, yada.’” Jun 27, 00:34
Confounder on The Promise: “False logic in spades, there, I think.” Jun 27, 00:31
100%Yes on The Promise: “Thank you to you both, I never knew that.” Jun 27, 00:23
Spartan 117 on The Promise: “Quite possible, but I think Occam’s Razor would dictate its more likely they are just a bunch of corrupt degenerate…” Jun 26, 23:52
Effijy on The Promise: “https://www.facebook.com/share/p/1E6r5H6ZbK/?mibextid=wwXIfr Wee truthless the Baroness requiring her neck re-brassed.” Jun 26, 23:21
willie on The Promise: “Standard computer generated email response I suspect issued to anyone making a donation, with in this case, Mr Henderson being…” Jun 26, 23:16
sarah on The Promise: “When you’re sending the same email to a whole raft of people who don’t know each other and therefore don’t…” Jun 26, 22:38
robertkknight on The Promise: “What’s that stock response employed by other contributors to BTL in similar circumstances? Ah yes, I remember now… “Prick”” Jun 26, 22:09
Hatey McHateface on The Promise: “And if Police Scotland and the Crown Office charge various Scottish SNP names, and levy fines and other punishments on…” Jun 26, 20:31
Fearghas MacFhionnlaigh on The Promise: “Stuart Campbell’s Scottish Sun interview from 2 weeks ago is freely online here: www.youtube.com/watch?v=Or1V9HuR2qU” Jun 26, 20:18
100%Yes on The Promise: “Why would Jim Henderson be sending a email from himself to himself?” Jun 26, 19:57
Alf Baird on The Guilty Party: ““The Pentalina and Alfred were a snippet of the cost of the Loch Seaforth, Glen Sannox or the Glen Rosa”…” Jun 26, 19:51
robertkknight on The Promise: “If Police Scotland and Crown Office decline to take any action with regard to the (missing) Indyref2 funds then that…” Jun 26, 19:26
Lorncal on The Promise: “There are certainly rules governed by statute for the disposal of ring-fenced funds in the charity sector and local government,…” Jun 26, 19:16
Young Lochinvar on The Guilty Party: “CC @ 11.09 I read your post, sometimes nodding in agreement, other times shaking it in disagreement. What I’d like…” Jun 26, 18:20
Jim Anderson on The Promise: “Whilst there is a clear case of maladministration by the SNP leadership they also have a fiduciary relationship in respect…” Jun 26, 17:57
Spartan 117 on The Promise: “Typically used when an eMail recipient list is kept secret, usually for GDPR or security.” Jun 26, 17:56
Anthem on The Promise: “Agents, I clocked that as well. Any explanation anyone?” Jun 26, 17:49
Paul Eden on The Promise: “It’s damming. And conclusive. I suspect they’ll get away with it but they shouldn’t.” Jun 26, 17:42
agentx on The Promise: “Just a minor point – the first email seems to be from Jim Henderson to Jim Henderson?” Jun 26, 17:18
robertkknight on The Promise: “Bang to rights!” Jun 26, 16:52
David Ferguson on The Promise: “It appears to me that the 9 March 2020 email is more legally damning. The others say that the money…” Jun 26, 16:37
Alf Baird on The Guilty Party: ““Stu is very much better at the forensic stuff than I am” You are too modest, Peter; few have reached…” Jun 26, 16:25
Brotyboy on The Promise: “Agreed. It’s almost the opposite of a tautology. This statement is false by virtue of the meanings of the words…” Jun 26, 16:24