The world's most-read Scottish politics website

Wings Over Scotland


Conspiracy theory and conspiracy practice 102

Posted on January 24, 2013 by

We should get one thing straight from the start: the only thing on Earth more tedious than a conspiracy theorist is a conspiracy denier. For every swivel-eyed nutter you find shouting hysterically that the government and royal family are 12-foot-tall shape-shifting lizards from space, there’ll be an equally (but differently) dim-witted Pollyanna at the other end glibly sniggering about “tinfoil hats” and rubbishing the mad notion that a group of people might ever get together and covertly seek to achieve an aim.

Because the history of humanity is the history of conspiracies. From Guy Fawkes to various military coups, revolutions and civil wars to the burning of the Reichstag and right up to the present day, mankind’s records are littered with events which, had anyone actually warned of them before they happened, would have been dismissed by smug idiots as the deranged fantasies of the comically paranoid.

As recently as last year we saw one right here in our very own country, when the South Yorkshire police were found to have perpetrated a co-ordinated, decades-long cover-up over the Hillsborough tragedy. Yet like moths which keep flying into lightbulbs over and over again in the irrational hope that THIS time they’ll turn into the moon, we stubbornly refuse to entertain – indeed, openly mock – even the abstract possibility that anyone in a position of power might ever be up to no good.

So, then, to the Scottish media.

Read the rest of this entry →

The conversation killers 67

Posted on January 23, 2013 by

There are some questions that are guaranteed to bring a sudden end to any internet discussion. (In real life it’s harder for people to just vanish into thin air.) One always effective on Labour supporters, for example, is the classic “Would you rather live in an independent Scotland governed by Labour or one in the UK governed by the Tories?”

Of course, more strictly speaking that’s actually a near-certain way to ask someone to choose between Option A and Option B and every time get the answer “Non-existent Option C”. Other questions, though, are sure to solicit no response at all.

Last year, when occasionally debating with Rangers supporters about whether The Rangers International PLC (or whatever it’s called today) was a new club or not, I must have asked this one at least 60 or 70 times of 60 or 70 different people: “If they’re the same club they always were, why are they in SFL 3? They were neither relegated on the field nor demoted as a punishment, so why aren’t they still in the SPL?”

I’ve as yet never had a single response – even a bad one – to that, just instant and complete radio silence or, at the best, an abrupt change of subject. And recently I’ve discovered there’s a holy water for the Tory type of vampire too.

Read the rest of this entry →

Bull Bridge 83

Posted on January 23, 2013 by

We’re unimaginably thrilled to bring you our very first ever official Wings Over Scotland cartoon, composed and drawn by regular reader and commenter Chris Cairns.

We feel like a proper grown-up newspaper now.

Better Together in the EU 159

Posted on January 23, 2013 by

We’ve got a bit of a dodgy Freeview picture this morning thanks to the weather, but we THINK this is what we just heard on the news from all the Tories (and others) who want the UK to leave the EU, but Scotland to stay in the UK.

Thanks to many alert viewers for sending in some we didn’t quite catch.

Read the rest of this entry →

Fish in a barrel 74

Posted on January 23, 2013 by

It’s almost too easy to take all the cheap shots that David Cameron’s much-trailed, long-awaited speech about UK membership of the EU left open.

From a Scottish perspective it was difficult to suppress a hollow laugh, for example, when the Prime Minister said of some prominent non-EU nations: “I admire those countries and they are friends of ours – but they are very different from us. Norway sits on the biggest energy reserves in Europe, and has a sovereign wealth fund of over €500bn“

It’s also tempting to simply marvel (again) at the mind-boggling witlessness of the “Better Together” campaign, who spent the final weeks of last year hollering from the rooftops about how Scottish independence might bring about the terrifying prospect of Scotland finding itself out of Europe, when they MUST have known that Cameron was about to make that same thing a far more real possibility within the UK than outside it.

(The No camp’s willingness to keep on energetically hurling hefty boomerangs at the independence movement, no matter how many come flying back and hit them in the teeth, is truly one of the wonders of the modern age.)

Read the rest of this entry →

Oh great, that’s all we need 60

Posted on January 22, 2013 by

Cue six months of Jim Murphy droning on about the “Arc Of Inflammability”.

Bunnet-doff to alert reader Ray McRobbie.

What’s the magic word? 131

Posted on January 22, 2013 by

We’ve raised this subject before, but it was brought to mind again by a conversation we had on Twitter last night and this morning, and it never gets any less relevant. Opinion polls are tricky things. Let’s just remind ourselves of a few:

Who do you trust to act in Scotland’s best interests?
Scottish Government: 71%
UK Government: 18%

(Source: here. Also reported in Scotsman subsidiary Fife Today, but mysteriously now completely vanished from the internet.)

Which decisions about Scotland should be made by Holyrood?
All of them: 43%
The same ones as now: 21%

(Source: here, table A1. A “devo-max” option scored 29%.)

Should Scotland be an independent country?
Yes: 28%
No: 48%

(Source: here, although see here.)

Alert readers will of course have noticed (again) that these three questions are in fact all the same as each other. They all describe independence. Yet the answers are radically different. Scottish voters trust the Scottish Parliament to act in their best interests vastly more than they trust the UK Parliament. They think it should make all decisions about the governance of Scotland. Yet ask them if they want to vote to make that exact thing happen, and they change their minds completely.

There’s clearly a serious democratic disconnect here. What to do?

Read the rest of this entry →

FOUND: The positive case for the Union 78

Posted on January 22, 2013 by

For four days, anyway.

Don’t be mean about the swede. They’re trying, bless ’em.

Read the rest of this entry →

They think you’re stupid 64

Posted on January 21, 2013 by

(We suspect this might become a regular series.) We try not to take any notice of the often-ludicrous propaganda churned out by the official “Better Together” campaign, but today’s was too utterly ridiculous to ignore. We’re not going to deface our nice pages with the image, though you can see it here if you want to without giving them any hits.

The graphic claimed, mind-bogglingly, that the award of £2.3bn in grants to good causes in Scotland by the National Lottery since its advent in 1993 was “another reason we are better together”, as if the figure represented some great largesse towards Scotland on the part of the UK. This, as any reader with an IQ higher than the number on a lottery ball will immediately realise, is such a monumental and obvious misrepresentation of how the lottery works that we can only concur with the Twitter user who enquired “When will the glue-sniffing stop at BT strategy HQ?”

Read the rest of this entry →

Raspberry or rhubarb? 45

Posted on January 21, 2013 by

There was an interesting article in today’s Herald entitled “SNP snub plan for more tax powers at Holyrood”. It centred around the latest report from the Institute of Public Policy Research, advocating a new form of further devolution settlement (dubbed “Devo More”) as a solution to Scotland’s problems rather than for independence.

The article itself was devoid of any analysis of the report’s findings, though in fairness to the Herald it did note that the IPPR “has close ties to Labour”, thereby alerting suspicious readers to potential bias within the document.

As far as many independence supporters are concerned, any offer of further devolution at this point is merely an empty promise of “jam tomorrow”. Had any Westminster party seriously intended to increase the level of devolution to Scotland, runs their argument, then they could have done so during the Calman Commission, the Scotland Act or more recently by including an offer of further devolution on the ballot paper for the 2014 independence referendum. They did none of these things.

Read the rest of this entry →

The grass roots of independence 89

Posted on January 21, 2013 by

One of the most unfortunate things about the Scottish media’s coverage of the independence debate is the persistent portrayal of the Yes campaign as nothing more than a figleaf concealing the SNP. Recently we’ve pointed out the unwillingness of the press to acknowledge information that’s already in clear public view with regard to the demographic make-up of the pro-independence movement, even while making great play of the alleged comparative broadness of the No side.

So we decided to conduct our own poll, just out of curiosity, on a dozen random topics. With just shy of 1000 respondents it’s a respectable sample size, and while of course it isn’t scientific (being self-selecting) it wasn’t aiming to be. The large majority of this site’s readership is of the nationalist persuasion – for want of a better term, at least – so we weren’t trying to take a snapshot of all Scotland, but rather one specifically of the Yes movement. The results were pretty interesting.

Read the rest of this entry →

Probably a coincidence 49

Posted on January 20, 2013 by

Alert readers might have noticed that this morning we tweeted a link to a post on the Facebook page of Labour For Independence. It was a retort to a sneering claim from Anas Sarwar that the group had “one or a maximum of two Labour members” and was in fact a front for the SNP, and it responded by printing a list of 13 named Labour Party members who were active in the group. One of them stood out a little.

Now, we have absolutely no idea if that Alex Foulkes is the same Alex Foulkes who’s the son of arch-Unionist peer and Nat-basher Lord George Foulkes. We’re sure there are lots of people called Alex Foulkes in the Scottish Labour Party. But given that Lady Judy Steel (the excellent wife of Sir David, another prominent No voice) came out for independence a while ago – prompting a slightly misjudged joke from Murdo Fraser last week – it’d be a moderately amusing development if it was.

After all, if the leading lights of the No campaign can’t even convince the closest members of their own family to back the UK, how the heavens are they going to be able to sell the ailing Union to the rest of Scotland?

  • About

    Wings Over Scotland is a thing that exists.

    Stats: 6,983 Posts, 1,252,021 Comments

  • Recent Posts

  • Archives

  • Categories

  • Tags

  • Recent Comments

    • BLMac on Whatever Can Have Happened?: “No doubt the result of any enquiry (it may just be another carrot for the remaining gullible SNP members) will…” Sep 30, 23:16
    • charlie on Whatever Can Have Happened?: “Time to start kicking the can down the road, slowly and judicially with only the public paying.” Sep 30, 22:38
    • Hatey McHateface on Whatever Can Have Happened?: “@ am firinn says:30 September, 2026 at 8:58 pm “Exactly what legislature do you think passed the Scotland Act 1998?”…” Sep 30, 21:32
    • am firinn on Whatever Can Have Happened?: “Exactly what legislature do you think passed the Scotland Act 1998?” Sep 30, 20:58
    • am firinn on Whatever Can Have Happened?: “Remind me what institutions “Scotland” had to raise against these sections in 1998?” Sep 30, 20:57
    • Fearghas MacFhionnlaigh on Whatever Can Have Happened?: “Apologies to Mark Beggan. I was 2 minutes later than you.” Sep 30, 20:05
    • agentx on Whatever Can Have Happened?: “Adopting Alternative International Frameworks The review is explicitly tasked with examining alternative Law Officer models used in other jurisdictions. The…” Sep 30, 19:57
    • Hatey McHateface on Whatever Can Have Happened?: “And he’s back. And he’s put the cracked record on again. Readers new to this saga might not know that…” Sep 30, 19:37
    • Ross on Whatever Can Have Happened?: “Playing devil’s advocate… Who will the Lord Advocate be accountable to if not the Govt? The Parliament?” Sep 30, 19:34
    • Hatey McHateface on Whatever Can Have Happened?: “When required to register for the daily attendance allowance. Just like in the HoL.” Sep 30, 19:07
    • Hatey McHateface on Whatever Can Have Happened?: ““This really is a “made in England” problem” Of course it is. How many times must we be told? Scotland…” Sep 30, 19:05
    • Alf Baird on Whatever Can Have Happened?: ““which is what puts the Lord Advocate above the law” Indeed, which also tells us that it is not the…” Sep 30, 19:04
    • agentx on Whatever Can Have Happened?: “No major institutional or governmental objection was raised by Scotland against section 44(1)(c) of the Scotland Act 1998, which makes…” Sep 30, 18:36
    • am firinn on Whatever Can Have Happened?: “It’s all very well the Scottish Government consulting on this. However, s44(1)(c) of the Scotland Act 1998, which establishes that…” Sep 30, 18:01
    • Fearghas MacFhionnlaigh on Whatever Can Have Happened?: “« They will attend meetings of the Scottish Government cabinet only when required. »” Sep 30, 17:39
    • Mark Beggan on Whatever Can Have Happened?: ““…only when required..” Required for what? Not that we don’t trust a word they say.” Sep 30, 17:37
    • Spartan 117 on Whatever Can Have Happened?: “Hmm. To quote Mr. Spock, “Fascinating”. Entirely disconnected to certain recent going on, I’m sure.” Sep 30, 17:18
    • agentx on Whatever Can Have Happened?: “Coincides with Murrell having legal aid withdrawn.” Sep 30, 16:40
    • robertkknight on Whatever Can Have Happened?: “Must be an election in a couple of days and our rancid SNP Government needs to appear, I stress appear,…” Sep 30, 16:18
    • Hatey McHateface on Whatever Can Have Happened?: “As a matter of fact, Andy, Memmi predicted exactly this in one of his publications. But I’m not telling you…” Sep 30, 15:45
    • Hatey McHateface on Whatever Can Have Happened?: ““the former judge leading the review is himself a former Lord Advocate” I see. Everybody else must have been already…” Sep 30, 15:37
    • Sean Duffy on Whatever Can Have Happened?: “There will be no meaningful change. The politicians have the police and the judiciary firmly within their grasp. They won’t…” Sep 30, 15:34
    • Willie on Whatever Can Have Happened?: “Interesting nugget Colin Dawson about arrangemnts not so long ago being considered as ” appropriate “. Well according to Big…” Sep 30, 15:28
    • Stuart MacKay on Whatever Can Have Happened?: “Sadly no. You forgot a pithy quote from a prominent intellectual who was working with the CIA.” Sep 30, 15:16
    • Andy Wiltshire on Whatever Can Have Happened?: “It’s colonialism! Am I the winner?” Sep 30, 14:50
    • Colin Dawson on Whatever Can Have Happened?: “In March 2026, just two months ahead of the last Holyrood election, the Scottish Government published an initial internal report…” Sep 30, 14:30
    • Willie on Whatever Can Have Happened?: “Cannot for the life of me guess why this has arisen Rev. Maybe Big John of the Independent minds she’s…” Sep 30, 14:15
    • Hatey McHateface on The Turning Point: “@Aidan You can see why it’s so important to sell the “colony” lie. Real former colonies don’t have to shoulder…” Sep 30, 13:52
    • Hatey Mchateface on The Turning Point: “Farage comes out swinging: “The state pension is not a handout, nor an act of government charity. It is a…” Sep 30, 13:34
    • Aidan on The Turning Point: “Yes and you could always take the view that since Scotland would be a new state, it cannot have any…” Sep 30, 13:26
  • A tall tale



↑ Top