The world's most-read Scottish politics website

Wings Over Scotland

The lady’s often for turning

Posted on April 15, 2016 by

While we’re on the subject of Ruth “line in the sand” Davidson of the Ruth Davidson No Surrender To The SNP Anti-Referendum Party making U-turns, we thought we might remind you of another one, this time from rather more recent history than 2011.


Just nine months ago, apparently Ms Davidson’s view was that “it would be wrong for the Tories to stand in the way” of another referendum “if the SNP gets a democratic mandate from the public”.

Sounds like a firm, resolute commitment to democracy and the incontrovertible right of the people of Scotland to determine their own destiny. Stirring stuff. We approve.

The full Mail On Sunday article can be read below.


Of course, in fairness that was a second-hand report. Got anything in her own words?


Don’t trust Magnus Gardham? Understandable. So how about this?

That’s unequivocal, then: Ruth Davidson wouldn’t block a second referendum.







Oh. Well, we imagine that there must have been a significant material change in circumstances since last August. We all know you’re allowed to change your mind about stuff if there are significant material changes in circumstances.

We’re sure Ruth Davidson agrees. In fact, she’s just proved that she does. It’s good to get these things cleared up, don’t you think, readers?

Print Friendly, PDF & Email

1 Trackbacks/Pingbacks

  1. 15 04 16 16:57

    The lady’s often for turning | speymouth

227 to “The lady’s often for turning”

  1. gerald connelly says:

    If brains were bucks, She’d be skint !

  2. heedtracker says:

    I’d say the blue tories are reaching out to the stick your independence up your arse voter. But I am no Professor Poultice.

  3. JPJ2 says:

    Ruth has obviously had her chain pulled by her unionist master, Cameron-yes, it’s, ironically, the same chap who erased her line in the sand.

  4. Robert Kerr says:

    Begs the question.

    Why oppose a second referendum?

    Does she think the Tories might lose?


  5. Macart says:

    Probably the single most dishonest political leader in Scotland bar none and the boisterous smiley face approach fools no one with two neurones to rub together. Disagree with or question La Davidson and both the smile and the pally demeanour disappear in a heartbeat to be replaced with loud, overbearing and downright rude.

    That lady is dangerous and nasty and represents a party which stands for worse. I suppose if you truly felt the need to vote for someone who would abuse your trust, your community and smile whilst doing it, that one would be Ruth Davidson.

    Take one look at her superiors actions, the misery they have visited upon the poor and the powerless and tell me Ruth is any different.

  6. stonefree says:

    Wonder the odds on her having a complete wobbly before the election?
    On the other hand it might just be,she might have turned so often She’s dizzy

  7. Artyhetty says:

    Well we all know who she takes her orders from. It’s that saying, by Upton Sinclair, ‘it is difficult to get a man to understand something, when his salary depends on him not understanding it’. Sort of fits with this tanktop U-turn.

    Well a woman in this case, but taking an educated guess, the establishment have had a, very loud and clear, word in her ear!

    How far can people go when taking orders is essential to their big fat pay check! Quite far actually, scarily.

  8. handclapping says:

    I blame the Coalition with the LibDems. Even the Tories are now in the game of saying or promising anything to get elected, ‘Political Lies old boy, Political Lies don’t count. They’re not like telling the wife you’re not seeing the other woman, you know.’ and then reneging on anything they feel like once elected.

    Though I must commend the Ruth Davidson No Surrender Party on taking this LibDem principle to a new low in using it to reach the giddy hights of the official opposition. Has she applied to the Joseph Rowntree for a grant for this new initiative?

  9. Michael McCabe says:

    Ruth is so far past her line in the Sand she is Drowning. And I would happily Volunteer to stand on her head. Never trust a tory should be taught in Schools. And Deputy Dug should be taking up a Bricklaying course to clean up the mess her party has made of the Building of new Schools.

  10. Alison Rollo says:

    Basically in panic mode!!
    They know they’ll lose the next one and then what will she do?
    No worries Ruthie — head off down to Westminster! Lady Davidson?

  11. msean says:

    Does this mean that the Tories will not stand in the way of a second referendum,but actually stand up for those who want to stand up on their own without Westminster who seems to want folk to stand up,just not stand up to them?

  12. Ali says:

    Hasn’t she said she wouldn’t oppose a referendum if there was a mandate for it? There won’t be if it’s not in the manifesto. There’s no inconsistency in having two different positions under two different sets of circumstances. I don’t want one because we’re not ready for it. Give it another term of Tories and successful SNP government in Holyrood then we might be about ready next time around.

  13. Jack Murphy says:

    Sounds as if Ruth Davidson’s just turning into the Toxic Tory’s Branch Manager in Scotland—-just like the Labour Branch.

    “Captain Manwairing, it’s HQ on the telephone”.

    Some things never change.

    SNPx2—–no ifs or buts. 🙂

  14. Illy says:

    Sorry, but those two stances are perfectaly reconcilable…

    Objects to, and will campaign against a second referendum, but will not stand against one happening if the democratic mandate is there for one.

    ie. “I think it’s a bad idea, and I’m going to try to convince you it’s a bad idea, but if you really want one, I won’t stop you”

  15. blackhack says:

    Ruthie will say and do anything to clutch onto power……Just remind anyone who might vote for these scum, that they are intending to charge sick people money for prescriptions…..Approximately £8.00 a time…..I know loads of people who earn less than that an hour.

  16. Inverclyder says:

    Abbot Self Propelled Gun Commander Ruth, leader of the Ruth Davidson No Surrender To The SNP Anti-Referendum and Unionist Party is nothing more that a Westminster puppet with the strings being pulled directly from London.

    They would replace her in a minute if they thought anyone else could do any better.

    At least she may split the Former Socialist Labour Branch Office and Unionist, We hate the SNP, Voice of the People Party vote and reduce the amount of MSP’s they have.

    Fighting for second place is not a party I want to be voting for and screams of defeat even before a vote is cast.

  17. muttley79 says:

    This must be Davidson’s next line in the sand.

  18. NeoconNat says:

    I must be thick because I don’t see any contradiction in saying you won’t “block” a referendum but at the same time pledging to argue against having one.

    Maybe someone can enlighten me.

    I won’t stand in the way of Rev. Stuart getting into Cliff Richard and wearing frilly pink frocks, but can I pledge to you all right now that I would vehemently argue against it.

    You get the idea.

    While we are here, I won’t stand in the way of K1 or Grouse getting into Cliff either.

  19. Big Jock says:


  20. Dunks says:

    Don’t know so much about “Line in the sand” but her heid certainly is!

  21. DerekM says:

    She is not the leader just a branch manager who just had her spud murphy moment.

    Nothing she says about policy is true if you want to see conservative policy take a good hard look at westminser that is where conservative policy is made not by her,she has no say in policy only does what she is told from head office.

    They are no different to the red tories mascarading as a Scottish party with its own policies total liars.

  22. Dr Jim says:


    I think you’ve missed a bit, read again and compare to what she’s saying now, and even if you still interpret what she’s saying as reasonable then you would have to agree that even opposing a referendum on her logic is ridiculous

    Ruths logic is that simply she won we lost, it’s over done stop it
    Then why is she standing for election at all given that the Tories lose every election by a huge amount but they keep trying,

    Why is she ignoring the wishes of the people of Scotland she’s disrespecting all previous elections where she and her party were told quite clearly they’re not wanted

    I don’t hear the FM or anybody else opposing the Tories standing, she should consider herself lucky to be allowed by her own logic

  23. The Rough Bounds. says:

    Davidson: a wee fat frumpy woman that would only look good in a bell tent. It’s extraordinary who people will vote for.

    Dugdale:l a yattering budgie. It’s amazing who people will vote for.

    Rennie: a boy scout who boasts that he knows the composition of the Union Flag, and the right way to fly it.
    It’s scarey who people will vote for.

    Patrick Harvie: why?

    SNP X 2

  24. Ruby says:

    It’s a stupid question to ask Ruth Davidson.
    She doesn’t have the power to block a referendum. David Cameron has said he would block a referendum and the TankGirl will just have to do what she is told.

    Sure she can vote against a referendum in Holyrood but I doubt if the entire ‘Better Together Coalition’ will have enough votes to block anything.

    Sure she wants David Cameron to say he wouldn’t block a referendum because then what could she say to gain votes?

  25. Kevin Evans says:

    The thing that really makes all this ridiculous is they are acting like independence is a new idea thought up by the SNP 7 years ago.

    It’s the first line in the SNP ideology.

    I guess it just shows how scared they are.

  26. heedtracker says:

    Future Lord Tomkins of the Scotch region of norf Britannia is a tad cool on Ruthie babes too. Cant think why. Although, Ruth got the tory leader job after a whopping six months of getting non elected on 1700 votes. So carpet baggers like Prof Tomkins must getting a funny feeling in that UKOK special place.

    Adam Tomkins ?@ProfTomkins Apr 13
    After 5 May, something will change in Scotland: we’ll actually have an Opposition to the SNP #TeamRuth

    The carpet bagger has a handy list of twitter unionist toryboy chums

    You may also like ·

    Ruth DavidsonVerified account

    Kevin Hague

    Mark Elliott


    David Torrance

    Adolf Hitler

    Kevin Hague has certainly hit the far right UKOK big time.

  27. Ruby says:

    Who in their right mind would think that the Tory Party who fought with every fibre of their being to keep Scotland in their Union would think that their branch office would vote for a 2nd referendum?

    The question that was never answered is why the Tory party fought with every fibre of their being & every dirty trick know to man to keep economic basket case Scotland in their Union!

  28. sturzstrom says:

    How would she go about blocking it anyway, if the Snp have a majority in the Scottish Parliament? Someone needs to tell those people thinking of supporting her that there is no official opposition in the Scottish Parliament.

  29. Looks like dodgy dave has a hand in this

  30. Liz Rannoch says:

    She’s a chip off the old block right enough. Do not expect anything but lies from the tories.

    … and don’t get me started on pensions!

  31. G4jeepers says:

    Tory tour bus pulled in to Thainstone market today, thought it was mabye a container load of auld Aiberdeen Angus heifers for a minute til I heard the bleat, bleat of whiny old Tankie mumping on about the farming subsidies her party forgot to pass on to the farmers.


  32. heedtracker says:

    Christ toryboy’s are the whole hour. That’s US for boring as feck

    David Torrance ?@davidtorrance 22h22 hours ago
    I feature at the end of this @NewStatesman podcast talking about Holyrood prospects on 5 May (at 44.09):

  33. Thepnr says:

    Very happy to see Wings put the Blue Tory party leader under some scrutiny for a change. Let’s face it she won’t face any at all from Scottish media.

    When she puts things into the public domain does she research them or make them up?

    Probably a little bit of both. She needs to be asked this question.

  34. NeoconNat says:

    Earlier today, amidst the usual & expected outbreaks of cynicism, I posted not one but several links to news articles which reported on the growing dependence in Scotland and elsewhere on Food Banks. In the last year there’s been a staggering 14% rise in Foodbank dependency in Scotland. Now just hang on to that number for a wee while.

    Sometimes it seems like we are all to focused on the big stuff to notice and appreciate that it’s often the small stories that are the important ones. Maybe misery is so widespread and commonplace these days that it almost goes without saying and we’d prefer to be left to focus on the big picture. Maybe I’m too thick to see the logic of that.

    This big journey of ours is important, there’s no denying it. Independence is undoubtedly a prerequisite, not for solving all our problems, but for giving us the power and the chance to solve them. This I think we all agree on.

    But important as that journey is, how we get there is also important. In the backdrop we have this growing reliance on food banks and nobody of any political persuasion can reasonably ignore or dismiss that, regardless of where we are going.

    It has been brought to my attention that Maryhill Food Bank is basically being elbowed out of existence. Despite a 14% rise in the need for that and other Food Banks, it’s being closed down. That can only mean people will literally starve.

    Nobody appreciates the fine words found on here daily more than I do. But it’s time for fine action. Let’s support these folks in any way we can.

  35. Nana says:


    Peter A Bell on both votes snp

  36. Clootie says:

    In dealing with Tories remember this simple guide – ” Judge them by what they DO and not by what they say”.

    It doesn’t matter which colour of Tory you are dealing with because Westminster is the master driving their promises.

    Scotland can do better than this!

  37. heedtracker says:

    Murdoch’s hired goon in his Scotland region. Even his “Iron Ruth” is hopeless but it makes sense that Murdoch’s crew fall back on the classics.

    None of them work, Iron Ruth Milk Snatcher? no that’s hopeless.

    Iron Ruth Prescription Snatcher’s getting there. Thatcher’s toryboy’s used to bash on about how much they fancied old Thatch, Mitterrand said she looked like Caligula with Marilyn Monroe’s lips, could Iron Ruth and Red Tory Kez ever hook up, red tory meets the blue tory and Scotland was never the same again, like what future Lord Tomkins promises.

  38. Ruby says:

    “it would be wrong for the Tories to stand in the way” of another referendum “if the SNP gets a democratic mandate from the public”.

    My understanding of ‘stand in the way’ is vote against.

    Does this mean it would be wrong for the Tories to vote against everything in the SNP manifesto if the SNP get a democratic mandate from the public?

    ‘The Scissor Sisters’ K & R remind me of the Julie Roberts character in Pretty Woman.

    The Richard Gere character asks her what her name is and she replies ‘What do you want it to be’

  39. NeconNat says:

    Nana, thanks for that. I mean it, it was a very worthwhile read and I would highly recommend it.

    Peter Bell must also be thanked for clarifying aspects of voting and the Scottish elections that I wanted to know about but didn’t know where to turn. In particular;

    “You can draw male genitalia on both your ballot papers without fear of punishment or penalty.”

    ===o x 2

  40. Ruby says:


    What about Ruth Scissorhands?

    Cuts! Cuts! Cuts!

  41. Dr Jim says:

    Ruths tactic is to shout and fist pump the air in indignation about how bad the SNP is because it’s a lot easier than having to point to her own party’s record and appalling behaviour in government

    Don’t want anybody thinking about that do we, so shout louder Ruth it’s definitely working, the people love it

    We haven’t noticed at all have we folks

  42. ronnie anderson says:


    Stephen Lyall aka Harry Sahm of the Tessie camper van was convicted of stalking & semtenced to 130 hrs of Community Service olso he has to keep away from the Lady for 18 mths any breach will see him doing jail time, he has outstanding charges in west Dumbarton to answer.

    Mitch Kilbride has reported on Scot2scot on all appearances to date.

    Please dont purchase anything from Yes2 aka Harry Sahm the CONMAN.

  43. Greannach says:

    Tanktop doesn’t have the power to do anything. Even with her impressively “strong team”. Apart from Murdo (1950s Gents Outfitter) Fraser, I can’t name a single Tory MSP.

  44. Ruby says:

    What happens if a flamebaiter is just ignored?

    I’m assuming everyone knows what a flamebaiter is. If not here is the Urban dictionary definition

    A scumbag who practices the art of the Flamebait. Someone who posts in a message board or forum for the sole purpose of starting asinine pointless arguements. Is generally hated by most.’

    I wonder how many posters will be hooked by The Flamebaiter?

  45. Thepnr says:

    Just nine months ago, apparently Ms Davidson’s view was that “it would be wrong for the Tories to stand in the way” of another referendum “if the SNP gets a democratic mandate from the public”.

    We will oppose any attempt by the SNP to hold a 2nd referendum during this parliament – no matter the result of the EU referendum this June.

    Those two stances are NOT perfectly reconcilable, in fact are complete opposites. She “won’t stand in the way” of a second referendum but “will oppose any attempt to hold a 2nd referendum”

    Which is it Ruth?

  46. Grouse Beater says:

    NeocotNat shows a glimmer of self-perception, but then throws it away by not seeing how one Tory stance supports the will of the electorate, and the other says the Tories are the best people to decide the will of the electorate.

    I must be thick because I don’t see any contradiction in saying you won’t “block” a referendum but at the same time pledging to argue against having one.”

    Maybe if Tories stop obsessing over a second Referendum and concentrate on composing progressive policies we might gain a reasonable opposition party.

  47. mealer says:

    So what do we know,at the moment,of Ruth’s stated position? She has stated that she will vote against a second referendum whatever the situation.Thats perfectly reasonable.I’d expect the SNP to vote against Trident renewal even if the Tory government had a clear manifesto commitment and mandate to renew it.

    She has stated that the PM should not obstruct a second referendum if the SNP win a majority and decide to hold another referendum.Again,that’s perfectly reasonable.So from her statements so far,her position is that she will do all she can to stop a referendum,but if the Scottish Parliament democratically votes to hold one the PM shouldn’t stand in the way.Perfectly reasonable.

    We need to ask Ruth to confirm that this is her position.

  48. Ruby says:

    Grouse Beater:

    There used to be a Flamebaiter on this site who called you ‘Grousey’ and called ‘heedtracker’ ‘heedy’. What was his name?

  49. NeoconNat says:

    Theprn: “Those two stances are NOT perfectly reconcilable, in fact are complete opposites. She “won’t stand in the way” of a second referendum but “will oppose any attempt to hold a 2nd referendum””

    The voice of reason replies:

    Well, I think she is saying it would be wrong for the Tories in Westminster to stand in the way. As I understand it they could, it’s a reserved matter of sorts.

    She’s also saying she will oppose it in the Scottish Parliament. She’s entitled to do that, entitled to pledge she will do it, and nobody could dispute those entitlements.

    I don’t think the Tories in Westminster would stand in the way. But all of this is premised on the SNP pressing for a referendum and that’s hypothetical enough right now without complicating matters by guessing how others might respond.

  50. Marcia says:

    I am a bit perplexed with the Tories literature that seems to be against a referendum that has not been called and seems to be about the SNP and not them. The SNP literature I have seen doesn’t mention a referendum. The Tories hope that the those who voted No will be attracted to the Tories if they bleat on and on about a referendum. I get the feeling they will be rather disappointed on the 6th May.

  51. Gary45% says:

    I wouldn’t say Gun Turrets had a line in the sand, more like her head in the sand.
    I am SNP x2 always will be, but if I was drunk enough I would give my second vote to one of the other parties, just to wipe that pig ignorant, fu**ing cheesy fu**ing bast*rd grin of her coupon.
    Apologies for using the word cheesy.

  52. Ruby says:

    Grouse Beater says:
    15 April, 2016 at 5:29 pm

    “I must be thick because I don’t see any contradiction in saying you won’t “block” a referendum but at the same time pledging to argue against having one.

    Ruby replies

    I suppose there must be a lot of thick Labour & Tory voters who don’t see the contradiction in their parties arguing against Tory cuts, tax credits, named person act etc and then either abstaining or voting for these acts.

  53. NeoconNat says:

    Marcia, for us it’s good. I don’t know anyone who would jump from the SNP to the Tories because they feared a second referendum.

    That means the Tories are likely only going to take votes from Labour with this approach, give or take a few bewildered neutrals.

  54. NeoconNat says:

    Gary: “I wouldn’t say Gun Turrets had a line in the sand, more like her head in the sand.”

    More like a line in her nose, like Georgey.

  55. Joemcg says:

    Maybe I’m “thick” but the two examples ARE polar opposites. Stu is right.

  56. HandandShrimp says:

    They wibble and wobble like a wibbly wobbly thing.

  57. schrodingerscat says:

    no mention of ref on snp literature

    no need, if the eu is a leave, the snp will make the 2017 local elections a vote on whether we have indyref2

    btw, the snp will walk the council elections but it will be difficult to win outright control of all 32 councils, a requirement if we want to run another referendum in scotland

  58. Effijy says:

    I have a reliable source that assures me that Dim Jim, Labour, and Wee Ruthie Tank Commander, are being lined up
    to replace the Krankies in Glasgow’s Pantomime Season.

    Wee Jimmy, Janette Tough approaches her 70th year, and is looking to retire.

    With the experience these two characters have of Panto,
    they are sure to be winners after failed political careers.

    When asked to comment, Wee Ruthie said ” Fan-dabi-dozi”.
    Did Jim would only say “Fundimundilly”.

    Oh Yes they Did! Oh Yes they did!

  59. NeoconNat says:

    Joemcg says: “Maybe I’m “thick” but the two examples ARE polar opposites.”

    I won’t stand in the way of you saying they are “polar opposites” but I will oppose the idea.

  60. Capella says:

    @ heedtracker 4.24
    I see Adolf Hitler’s got a twitter account. But how many followers?

    Somebody phoned me yesterday to ask if I would vote for the Conservatives. I was so taken aback I didn’t have the wit to make something up. Must be a miserable job though.

  61. schrodingers cat says:

    neotroll, you are becoming tiresome,
    now piss off and dont come back, there’s a good chap

  62. Ruby says:

    How does it work re blocking a referendum?

    Does the prime minister just dictate that there will be no referendum and that’s that?

    Or is there a vote in Westminster like they did with the Scotland Bill when every English politician & the three Scottish Unionist politicians voted against the Scotland Bill?

    Living in Scotland is like living in a Fascist state!

  63. Ruby says:

    I wish there were reply boxes on this forum.

    I would have posted a big smiley face & a lol below ‘Effijy’ panto post. Oh yes I would!

    🙂 LOL

  64. Kenny says:

    Regarding Tories in Scotland, I find that there are two groups. The largest are “bitter unionists” who will never vote for an independent decent country, they are too beholden to the “Rule Britannia” vision they have of what is (not even) the UKOK.

    But I find there are some Tories who vote SNP in Holyrood, because they like the good government provided by the SNP in the form of free prescriptions (yet are too selfish to think about ending child poverty by voting SNP in a general election or YES in an indyref).

    Yet the Tories are led by numpties like Osborne, Dodgy Dave, Boris…. while on the SNP side we have Swinney, Sturgeon, Angela Constance, loads of great ministers. Especially on the financial side, I wish someone could produce specific “SNP – Tory” literature that could be designed to work on the “softer” Tories…

    If we could just get 1-2% of the 15% who vote Tories onside, it would be very valuable in terms of pushing the general numbers for indy above 50%. I agree that it is best working first on Don’t Knows and Labour voters, but I still think it is possible to make a good case for the SNP (and Scots in general) to some Tories as being good government, cost-effective, efficient… especially if you do a comparison between Dodgy Dave and Nicola, Osborne and Swinney…

  65. heedtracker says:

    Ruby says:
    15 April, 2016 at 5:09 pm

    What about Ruth Scissorhands?

    Cuts! Cuts! Cuts!

    Rubber Ruth?

  66. heedtracker says:

    Capella says:
    15 April, 2016 at 6:21 pm
    @ heedtracker 4.24

    Be polite always, is the way forward. You can be cheeky online though. But not too much. I used to be very rude back no voting RFC emblemed facebook tough guys but out of the blue got a facebook message from the SNP saying cut it out, play nice. So I do now, mostly:D

  67. Macbeda says:

    Ruthie the Assault Gun Commander, Kez the Dug and Wee Wullie are all aiming to be second.

    You have to ask yourself why would I vote for second best.

    “Nil satis nisi optimum”

  68. heedtracker says:

    Huge Wullie Rennie boost from rancid the Graun tonight, from toryboys that wont shut up about the next referendum

    Insisting that renewed debate on Scottish independence had to be sidelined to allow for a clear focus on improving public services, Rennie said the party’s manifesto was “our plan to make Scotland great again”.

    Good old Severin, UKOK bullshitter for anyone that might stop Scottish democracy evolving into and away from gits like Wullie.

  69. Ruby says:

    DerekM says:
    15 April, 2016 at 4:09 pm

    She is not the leader just a branch manager who just had her spud murphy moment.

    Ruby replies

    Spud Murphy is a woman with a big potato gun.

    I know this because I have read the Eoin Colfer book ‘The Legend of Spud Murphy’.

  70. Bob Mack says:

    Ruthie is after the vote of the dyed in the wool bigots. Simple as that. This lady with the big smile will court anyone for a vote.

    By standing for the Union rather than policy issues as the main headliner,she is issuing an open invitation for the hard liners to desert traditional voting for her Union Jack defence league. Might work as a lot of them are dim enough to take this on board.

  71. Thepnr says:

    Just read Ruthies manifesto, just a couple of snippets:

    “Ruth Davidson and her strong Scottish Conservative team have one over-riding priority in this election: to speak up for everyone who wants Scotland to remain part of the United Kingdom, and say NO to a second referendum.”

    “But to those who want to ensure that strong opposition they know our country needs, I make this promise: If you vote for me and my team, then I will do a specific job for you.

    – I will hold the SNP to account.

    – I will fight against any attempts to drag our country back to a second independence referendum.

    – And I will make the Scottish Government focus on the issues that matter to you”

    At least she has spelt out her parties priorities. Make me leader of the opposition and I promise you SNPBAD ad infinitum.

    Foodbanks, now what are those? Bedroom tax? Don’t know what you mean. Austerity? never heard of it.

    Of course I support George Osborne scrapping tax credits and disability payments, of course we should all have to wait longer before getting a state pension. I mean how else do you expect us to pay for tax cuts to the highest earners or increase Inheritance tax allowances?

    That is after all exactly what you elect a Tory party for stupid.

  72. DerekM says:

    Cant remember if i have read that one Ruby in case you were wondering it was a reference to jim murphy making up policy only to get slapped down by the PLP,the only difference is the blue tories arnt stupid enough to air it to the public.

  73. HandandShrimp says:

    Ruth is a Tory. She may be trying to disguise herself as an old fashioned Scottish Unionist Party leader but she isn’t. She is a Tory. She would do Tory things if she ever got near power and we can see how that plays in England.

  74. heedtracker says:

    If hard core tory politics don’t pan out, she could dye her blonde and be a great Boris Johnson impersonator, and vice versa. PM Bojo, FM Davidson, the tory dream to rein over their country. Just watching Bojo on C4 teatime news with ageing George Galloway. They really like carpet baggers on telly, although we get Prof Tomkins for sending them George Galloway.

    I still think ProF Tomkins will be next tory leader. And like Thatcher, he also has Marilyn Monroe lips.

  75. * David Smith* says:

    We have be wary of complacency. She’s probably looking for the hard-core yoon vote, who out of fear of a new indyref may turn out in formidable numbers (Remember the first indyref silent majority). Combine that with the greens chomping at the SNP supporters for votes then we might have a big problem on our hands.

  76. heedtracker says:

    You have to ask why Ruth doesn’t command respect like what Fluffie Mundell does do.

    “David Mundell: in a country famously hostile to Tories, he commands respect
    Scotland secretary, who has come out as gay, has won admiration in difficult role as isolated figurehead for Tory government”

    Like fcuk he has.

  77. Iain says:

    I’m sure I’m not alone in scrolling past all the fud yoon posts unread, why do they bother we are not interested in them and their outdated empire. They need to move on to indy Scotland.

  78. Iain says:

    The so called journalists at the rancid guardian must be smoking some of the towel folders stuff if they think mundel is popular in Scotland.

  79. Robert J. Sutherland says:

    heedtracker said:

    Huge Wullie Rennie boost from rancid the Graun tonight

    Huh, the irrepressibly-grinning fellow and his party get 10/10 for optimism anyway. But more likely to end up with a sad reprise of Paddy Ashdown in complete “eat his hat” denial as happened at the UKGE. The current FibDems must surely be anomalous break-throughs from a parallel universe. One that they will hopefully be disappearing back to in three weeks’ time.

  80. Croompenstein says:

    Here she is in all her flip flopping glory, she is a rancid piece of shit who would sell Scotland and the Scottish people out..

  81. One_Scot says:

    The woman is an out and out headcase. Can you imagine the gloating, goading and abuse we will take from the likes of her and her fellow Yoons if the SNP don’t get a majority.

    For the love of God, let’s make sure we don’t F this up on May the 5th.

  82. Rock says:

    Davidson is the most disgusting and dishonest politician in Scotland in my view.

  83. Robert Louis says:

    Ruth Davidson is a fraud. She pretends that ‘her’ scottish conservatives, are somehow nice and cuddly, and not really like those nasty London ones, like Hunt (who is currently in hiding), Johnson, Gove and IDS. They are of course all the same, and have the same selfish attitudes to other people, less fortunate than themselves.

    What we see above, are just clear examples of her duplicity.

    This pretence, this fake behaviour, makes me dislike Ruth Davidson. If she behaves like this out of Government, how on earth can anybody trust her, if she were in (god forbid) government.

  84. Robert J. Sutherland says:

    Has Ponsonby done his interview with Ruthie yet for STV? With the info graciously provided here, he should easily be able to do as good a job on her as he did on Coburn. Should.

  85. heedtracker says:

    Robert J. Sutherland says:
    15 April, 2016 at 8:14 pm
    heedtracker said:

    Wullie also got a massive boost from BBC Scotland teatime news, on a kids slide, very exciting, from the crew that brought us disgraced Carmicheal. They’ve more from than Selfridges that whole BBC pack.

  86. Glamaig says:

    @One Scot at 8:20pm

    Well said. It cannot be emphasised enough, THIS IS A PR ELECTION. Talk of ‘wipe-outs’ is dangerous nonsense. Even with current polling levels, its hard enough to get 70 seats, which is only a majority of 5.

    Every vote counts, on both constituency and regional ballots.

    Any reduction in majority is going to result in endless shite in the media about ‘peak SNP’, ‘the tide has turned’, ‘fightback for the Union has started’ etc etc. Makes me want to throw up just thinking about it.

  87. Effijy says:

    Vote Tory and Vote for the Bedroom Tax, Retirement in your 70’s, Welfare cuts from those who need it and who have earned it, pay for your prescriptions when you are ill,
    pay for your kids education if you want them to mix with the rich kids at University, pay to keep the UK rich topping up their tax free Havens, for paedophile cover ups, for ever increasing austerity, for privatised NHS,
    for 3% Tax Bands for multi £Billion pound corporations.

    How could you resists wee Ruthie Krankie’s bag of promises
    when you have an opportunity to pay the Bankers gambling?

  88. Robert J. Sutherland says:


    Wullie also got a massive boost from BBC Scotland teatime news, on a kids slide

    Actually, I thought that was a rather unfortunate visual metaphor: “Wullie’s campaign on the slide”! =laugh=

    (What with one thing and another, he’s having quite a comedic outing, is he not? ScotGE’s very own Mr. Bean…)

  89. Dandy Dons 1903 says:

    A nasty piece of work is Davidson, just like the outdated anti-Scottish party she represents. Empire loyalists like herself and her unionist chums have to realise they are not wanted in Scotland.

    Got to be SNPx2!

  90. NeoconNat says:

    If Rev. Stuart is Pavlov, we’re the dogs eh? Well, some of are.

    “In his initial experiments, Pavlov presented a stimulus and then gave the dog food; after a few repetitions, the dogs started to salivate in response to the stimulus. Pavlov called the stimulus the conditioned (or conditional) stimulus (CS) because its effects depend on its association with food.”

    It’s funny, I can remember clearly how Murphy was hated, Lamont too, then there was Wendy. I don’t see anyone foaming at the mouth over any of those people now.

    If you were to be adult about it, you’d acknowledge that you dislike them because they are political opponents. It isn’t personal and descending into barbaric attacks on their characters isn’t helpful and doesn’t give a good impression.

  91. Ruth has all the hallmarks of a sociopath,

    Glibness and Superficial Charm ,

    Grandiose Sense of Self,

    Pathological Lying,

    Lack of Remorse, Shame or Guilt,

    Shallow Emotions,

    Incapacity for Love,

    Need for Stimulation,

    Callousness/Lack of Empathy,

    but does that not sum up all Unionist`s.

  92. David Anderson says:

    @ schrodingers cat

    You got ownership issues? Think you may need to have a wee word with yourself. Telling someone to piss off from a public site. You miss the point entirely. There be a good phrase for you and it goes something like WTFDYTYA.

  93. Robert J. Sutherland says:

    There is an upside to all of this. If Armoured Fighting Vehicle Ruthie does succeed in scooping up every working-class RFC diehard, the Labour Party will be toast thereafter. (Which is her hope, no doubt, but she won’t get the non-zealots as well, methinks. And who she really represents will be glaringly obvious to all.)

  94. Dunks says:

    HandandShrimp says:
    15 April, 2016 at 5:58 pm
    They wibble and wobble like a wibbly wobbly thing.

    “Weebles wobble but they don’t fall down”

    Showing my age now!!

  95. Dandy Dons 1903 says:

    PS I must add I would trust a Brit-Scotch Tory the same way you would trust Gary Glitter round a kids playground. They truly are wicked scum who would sell Scotland down the river in the blink of an eye given half the chance.

  96. Ian Brotherhood says:

    @Robert J. Sutherland –

    Willie Rennie appears to be regressing to his childhood – the inevitable destination for all true narcissists.

  97. Joemcg says:

    Watching Rennie speaking on the news it’s like he’s talking to a child or someone with learning difficulties. Couldn’t even listen to him never mind vote for him. Embarrassing. Cringetastic.

  98. HandandShrimp says:

    If you were to be adult about it, you’d acknowledge that you dislike them because they are political opponents. It isn’t personal and descending into barbaric attacks on their characters isn’t helpful and doesn’t give a good impression.

    Someone was talking about this on the radio this morning. Two Democrats that stood against each other where the rivalry became vitriolic but subsequently worked well together (referencing Bernie and Hillary).

    Politics is primarily opposition of ideas rather than people. The debate can get heated as it should if you are passionate about something but I think most of us would wish no ill on individuals (other than that they lose their seats 🙂 ). Couldn’t abide Portillo as an MP and was very happy when he lost in 97 but I have enjoyed his train travelogues on TV.

    There are a number of Labour, Liberal and even a Tory politician or two that I could happily have a beer with. Then again, there are a few that I probably wouldn’t care to spend time with. I am sure the feeling is mutual too.

  99. ronnie anderson says:

    @ David Anderson (schrodingers cat) is expressing how most of us feel on a daily basis Neoconnat is a Troll ive said plenty myself on the subject & im slow to rile.

  100. NeoconNat says:

    David Anderson, thanks for the consideration. The general idea is I shouldn’t be here because I don’t believe Karl Marx had all the answers to Scotland’s 21st century problems.

    You’d think a fresh perspective would be appreciated or at least tolerated, but no.

    Of course, there are particular reasons for despising me. There are always particular reasons when it comes to prejudice, never the obvious ones like colour, race, religion, political views.

    That said its been illuminating. They attack, I respond, and that proves I’m a troll to be hated. They attack, I ignore, it proves I’m a troll who won’t answer, again to be hated.

    In amongst all that they wonder why I’m contemptuous.

  101. Thepnr says:

    I do so hope you have been keeping up with all the comments from NeoconNat. These solely directed at me from that last couple of days articles are among the tamest of his/her views.

    “Moreover, since Graeme was familiar to your wife, as appears to be the case, might we assume that she was also familiar to him and that the familiarity wasn’t just one way?”

    “Any man that has the guts at his age to declare he wants to be considered a woman and go through all the pain of that procedure etc. has my respect.

    No big deal, water off a ducks back ect, I just suggested that he/she fuck off. It’s his/her attitude to the “poor and lazy” that get my goat. If there is anyone guilty of labeling people it’s not Schrodingers Cat.

    You might want to read all the posts WTFDYTYA.

  102. Rob James says:

    Received campaign leaflets through the letterbox this morning. Claire Baker(Slab), some Green person and none other than the mastermind of the libdum revival, Wullie whotsisname. I naturally ripped the first two into several pieces, but took great care with the last one, gouging out the eyes before I decapitated the little prick.

    Is this normal behaviour or should I see a shrink?

    They were all delivered by a postie, conveniently hidden inside some other guff from Iceland (The frozen food variety)

    I wonder if Ruthie, self propelled 105mm light artillery vehicle, no surrender to the SNP, commander, will be delivering her offering personally. or will it be concealed
    among the usual crap which goes straight in the bucket?

    Does anyone else think that the ‘no surrender’ pish may be an attempt to attract a certain neanderthal section of society?

  103. Dr Jim says:

    Cameron won’t have to make the decision to allow or with hold permission for any referendum and he knows it and even if he says yes, that’ll be left to the next guy in to lose so Camerons legacy will be intact

    The precedent’s been set and it would be a fool of a next prime minister who tried to refuse especially if it were to be Boris or Osborne

    My feeling is an accommodation between the SNP and Westminster has probably been agreed though that a referendum will proceed and will be won by Scotland with only token opposition from the rest of the UK

    It’s after that is when England, (and I say England because when Scotland leaves there can not be a UK given that there are two Kingdoms and we’re the other one so they’ll have to remove that title) will seek it’s revenge, because they will, it’s in their nature not to lose, they’re a vindictive lot the Brits

    In some ways it makes you wonder why any other political parties in Scotland oppose Independence it might do them the world of good, instead of a country being for or against something everybody would have to be for and in that respect might get a hearing (that’s of course if they have anything worth saying)

    What a nice change that would be eh all the politicians having to do their best for Scotland or they’re out, without a UK party to fall back on for a knighthood or a gong of some sort

    I’ll put £100,000 on Kezia having a complete change of heart and deciding to do a Johann Lamont by telling us all that the Labour party misled her and please can I have a wee joab at the SNP which of course by then we’ll need the Creche facilities manned at Holyrood (or womaned) so she’ll be alright

    Ruth will go on to lead her own new party “Lesbian farm girls machinery and equality party” with great success

    Willie Rennie will achieve his life long ambition to play Stan Laurel in a DC comics production of “The life of Stan
    Run Willie Run”

    Patrick Harvie will emigrate to China and become a spokesperson for the Communist party but may face a short career in that job

    Jackie Baillie will land a part in the next Star Wars movie
    Dae ah need tae say

    That’s my wee evenings amusement done I’m off to the pub to see Murphy the spy, he keeps me up to date on the training procedures and so on of the SDF….. Wheesht!! they’re a secret

  104. Thepnr says:

    FFS We’ve got a tag team. Who are “they” NeoconNat? Readers of Wings I guess.

    Nobody wonders why you are contemptuous, we know why, it’s because you are a troll. That’s your job, shame your so bad at it eh?

  105. asklair says:

    “If you were to be adult about it, you’d acknowledge that you dislike them because they are political opponents.”
    See Thatcher, see Blair and all their side kicks, war criminals all of them, dislike is no were near what I think of them, they are not political opponents they are war criminals. The “palace of westminster” is a cesspool full of scum feathering their own nest.

  106. schrodingers cat says:

    Robert J. Sutherland
    you are probably right, i usually ignore neo troll but he was beginning to get on my nerves. I have my moments so apologies

    pnr, yep saw that, i was amazed stu didnt ban him, but as Robert J. Sutherland says, its not my job to suggest such things 🙂

  107. heedtracker says:

    Politics is primarily opposition of ideas rather than people. The debate can get heated as it should if you are passionate about something but I think most of us would wish no ill on individuals

    We are living through an era of wealth transfer, from you know to you know who else. We are living in era of wealth transfer from Scotland to the south of England. We are living in era of red and blue tory socio economic domination of the whole of the yew kay. Although its slipped a bit in Scotland, you can bet toryboy world’s going to make it temporary.

    Above all else, we let them do it. Sure we were lied to and lied about and we are bullshited on massive BBC levels. after 2007, Labour turned out to be the greatest liars probably in history but even so, we let them do it.

    Poor little us:-(

  108. Vambomarbeleye says:

    Rubber Ruth
    The image that came to mind was of one of those long bendy double ended dildos. Ether way your fucked.

  109. Robert J. Sutherland says:

    schrodingers cat, no, no, not me gov. A misattribution there, I fear. Having suffered as well, I’m with you and Thepnr on this one. I’m all for a free exchange of ideas, but sometimes the outpourings of NeoNat can get a bit wearing.

  110. Bob Mack says:

    @Neocon Nat,

    “They attack ,I respond”,,

    Well well,you are human after all.

    In spite of your superior air,you are really just like everybody else..Allowed to judge ,but not be judged.

  111. call me dave says:

    Worth a peek!

    I catch up on the last three threads later.

  112. Big Jock says:

    The day after the referendum. I felt lonely, a foreigner in my own country. I still feel like that but without the loneliness.

    When people talk about Scotland,I think that there is a real Scotland and a make believe country. I inhabit a different Scotland to the Brit Scots who live in the phoney country. Indeed we have little in common. They will swap their nationality for the Olympics or when it matters.

    They are the 90 minute patriots. Scotland only exists as an idea to them. They are not the same as me. I am proud and delighted not to be like them. I want something better than they aspire to. While there are enough of us the dream will never die.

  113. NeoconNat says:

    Apology accepted, schrodinger.

    If I ever realise I was wrong about something I’ll do likewise.

  114. Gary45% says:

    Wullie “Pupils Premium, Punching above Our Weight” Rennie

  115. Tinto Chiel says:

    “There used to be a Flamebaiter on this site who called you ‘Grousey’ and called ‘heedtracker’ ‘heedy’. What was his name?”

    Where is Sensible Dave now, Ruby? And, come to that, Aldo? I fear Mr Peffers may have been right about 77 Brigade. NCN: a transmutation devoutly not to be wished, as Old Shakey never said.

  116. Does anyone know which way the 500,000 English settlers/refugees living in Scotland will vote,

    how many are here because of the work Nicola has done and will vote for SNP?

  117. Capella says:

    I thought I was wrong once. But I was mistaken.

  118. Nana says:


    Prof Robertson latest on bbc bias.

  119. Ian Brotherhood says:

    @Big Jock –

    Well said.

  120. Tam Jardine says:

    schrodingers cat

    Whatever happened to Angra? He went quiet and this other one started up… same day- same post at the start of the month. Banned maybe?

  121. NeoconNat says:

    Dr Jim, you think that England “will seek it’s revenge” after we achieve independence “because they will, it’s in their nature not to lose, they’re a vindictive lot the Brits…”

    History suggests otherwise. Above all else the English have been pragmatic rather than vindictive or ideological in relations with “other” countries.

    They didn’t seek revenge with India, Ireland, or all the others. The one exception, funnily enough, is possibly the United States. I believe They attacked in 1812 so many years after the U.S. had broken away. That war is often forgotten in accounts of the period but it was a nasty one, the British fleet bombed Washington DC extensively.

    The typical response though was to send a plane load of diplomats to try and iron out agreements after a country had bolted.

  122. Capella says:

    @ Tam Jardine

  123. Ian Brotherhood says:

    @NeoconNat –

    Please clear this up, eh?

    Did you used to post here as ‘Angramainyu’?

  124. Tinto Chiel says:

    NCN: “They didn’t seek revenge with India, Ireland, or all the others.”

    The eventual composition of these countries after they managed to achieve independence WAS England’s revenge.

    Your Butcher’s Apron underpants are showing.

  125. Thepnr says:

    @Ian Brotherhood

    Nah, not the same person, but a self opinionated prick with his head up his own arse all the same.

    As yesindyref2 told him, if he wants to find a tool then he should look in the mirror.

  126. Iain says:

    I was born in England and from I was fifteen years old I was a member of the Snp. We will be independent soon. An accident of birth does not stop you being Scottish. We shortly will become independent and there is nothing the yoons can do.

  127. yesindyref2 says:

    So that’s quite equivocal.

    @Ian B
    Yes,that’s what I thought too.

  128. Ian Brotherhood says:

    @Thepnr –


    All the same, it’ll be interesting to hear it from the horse’s mouth, or t’other end, whichever sounds-off first…

  129. Tam Jardine says:


    You sure mate? There is no crossover from what I can tell.

  130. yesindyref2 says:

    I got the idea from some other poster a few days ago who said something about angry or angry man, can’t remember.

    It’s a definite maybe!

  131. Simon Curran says:

    I read Lesley Riddochs article in The National about guy from Dundee and the impact of Universal Credit and DWP sanctions. Gut wrenching and depressing – that’s the reality of life under the Tories and which people need to be reminded of. You vote for cuddly wee Ruthie but underneath there’s something very different!

  132. Robert J. Sutherland says:

    Thepnr @ 23.08
    You may say that, but I couldn’t possibly comment! =grin=

    But back to more serious things.

    Thanks Nana for the ref to the latest media review by The Redoutable Robertson. His findings are alas all too recognisable; simultaneously both sad and funny.

  133. Tam Jardine says:


    I reckon that was the last of angra and we’ve had this other one since. No that I give a monkeys… this place has one moderator and it ain’t me.

  134. Cherry says:

    It’s my opinion that NCN is two people. One like the above is very adversarial and quite obnoxious. Whereas the other one has a cheeky, comical, almost bearable sense of humour which, when yesterday he/she mentioned scented pink candles I actually laughed right out loud. I didn’t agree with yesterday’s postings nor today’s efforts which have been antagonistic.

    But that is the nature of the beast. However not being consistent with his/her persona reminds me of Heedtrackers nemesis Sensible Dave. Just saying! 😉

    Oh and I won’t respond to you whoever you are, as your whole reason for being on WOS is to disrupt the flow of debate and make it all about you. From now I will as Ruby says SRP! Have a nice life! 😉

  135. Ian Brotherhood says:

    @Tinto Chiel, Ruby et al –

    Went back to the archives, selected a date at random, looking for the BTUKOKer who used to frequent this place pre-referendum. Can’t remember his name, but he was well-liked and kept promising to give us his case for the Union…

    Anyway, couldn’t find him, but stumbled across this old thread which is remarkable for two reasons:

    1. Duncan Hothersall is a regular WOS commenter.
    2. Rev Stu DEFENDS Hothersall against vicious Cybernat attacks (at 12.36 p.m.)


    Ahhh…the old days…

    (Go on Rev…admit it, you’re looking this up already…)

  136. Thepnr says:

    @Tam Jardine

    Can never be sure of course, though Angramainyu was way more subtle and never attacked others directly.

    I not even sure that NeoconNat is a paid for troll, just an idiot and more to be pitied…

    Mental health problems. If you need to understand my reasoning then read this, my flabber was truly gasted.

    NeoconNat says:
    11 April, 2016 at 6:37 pm

    Thepnr, hi, hope you are well.

    I was hoping you could clarify something that you said.

    Here you say “a second from the SNP handed to my wife as she came home from walking the dog”.

    Then you go on to say; “The SNP leaflet was delivered by MSP for Angus South, Graeme Dey who was by himself. As I live in a bit of an off the beaten track location it was a pleasant surprise”.

    When you say it was a “pleasant surprise”, do you mean for you? I can only assume that if he handed it to your wife, you must mean it was a pleasant surprise for her?

    It’s interesting that you also say you live in a remote “off the beaten track location”. Most women I know in a situation like that wouldn’t be pleasantly surprised, they’d be somewhere between alarmed and worried that a man was lurking about like that.

    Furthermore, it sounds like you have some familiarity with Graeme Dey since you know his name. Or do you? Again, since it was your wife who intercepted him, we must assume that she told you it was Graeme Dey who delivered the leaflet which means she has familiarity with him.

    So, to sum up, your wife was at home by herself in a remote location — we haven’t any suggestion of where you were at this time or what you were doing — when a man familiar to her by the name of Graeme Dey visited. The facts as we know them indicate that he left a leaflet.

    So far so straight forward. A couple of question though;

    1) How long did Graeme Dey spend with your wife? Did they have tea or chat? Any info would be appreciated.

    2) Assuming you were sincere when you said you hoped his “efforts pay off”, don’t you think it was a a bit of a wasted journey? The time he spent visiting your wife at a remote location could surely have been invested more fruitfully elsewhere, perhaps helping to convert wavers, for example.

    Moreover, since Graeme was familiar to your wife, as appears to be the case, might we assume that she was also familiar to him and that the familiarity wasn’t just one way?

    This isn’t 100% certain and I don’t wish to jump to conclusions, but if it was in fact the case that familiarity was in both directions, might we further assume that he probably knew that you and your wife were quite staunch SNP supporters and, therefore, this visit to a remote area was even more questionable and of the variety that you might call an indulgence of sorts?

    Thanks in advance.

  137. Capella says:

    O/T Mary Ann Kennedy is particularly good tonight on R3 -but soon will be finished. Special 1916 anniversary edition.

  138. Iain says:

    Wether it’s in three months or in twenty years the empire is finished we are going to win. The whole yoon empire is collapsing the bbc viewing figures are on a downward trend and the dead tree newspapers sales figures are in a death spiral. Yoondom is at an end and there is nothing that they can do. We can vote SNP,SNP and remain and democracy will do the rest. The Scottish people can no longer be ignored. We refuse to be put back in our boxes again.

  139. Tam Jardine says:


    “Can never be sure of course”- click on the gravatar.

    Pretty crazy- I have known of guys like that who will take a wind up and turn it into something extreme. There is loneliness there… and anger. Sadness too. I liked him more when he was Angra- seemed to have more of a sense of humour.

  140. Tinto Chiel says:

    Threpnr: at the time I thought NCN’s comment was just about the weirdest and creepiest comment I had seen on Wings, and a few days grace has only confirmed this. We all have fall outs on here occasionally but this was just too far.

    Probably complete disengagement is the answer.

    Life’s too short to stuff a mushroom.

  141. heedtracker says:

    A Scottish athlete’s got an incredible match tomorrow, BBC vote Anyone But SNP, no mention

  142. Ian Brotherhood says:

    @NeoconNat –

    Now, come on mister, play the game, eh?

    You’ve been quite fastidious about responding to comments since you turned up, but that’s a kick-in-the-arse off an hour and you still haven’t sorted this out…

    Did you, in a previous incarnation, post here using the name ‘Angramainyu’?

  143. Robert J. Sutherland says:

    Oh please, Thepnr, we all have our war wounds, but it’s not polite to expose them to unsuspecting bystanders in such gory detail!

  144. yesindyref2 says:

    Angra did attack or try to discredit other posters who got on his case, here’s an example thread:

    Similarities of style and arrogance, different message this time.

    Twisted is the word I’d used. Twisting the night away!

  145. Valerie says:

    If you want sport, get over to Bella. Another RISE candidate gets his piece begging for votes, and Rev gets slagged by a wee nyaff btl.

  146. bugsbunny says:


    He was an Englishman called Sensible Dave.


  147. defo says:

    Not for turning? Or spit roasting either. Apparently.

  148. Tinto Chiel says:

    See what you mean, Valerie.

    I’ve just about given up on this “too cool to be nationalist” site.

    Even my ethically-sourced organic twayblade espadrilles have had enough.

    And is Paul WGD?

  149. Robert J. Sutherland says:

    Oh, Valerie, this argy-bargy between pro-indy groups all jockeying for some ScotGE action is getting quite depressing. It’s probably unavoidable in the current circumstances, I suppose, but it’s very unhelpful in the greater scheme of things.

    I’ll be glad when the election is over, frankly. Maybe then, as another poster has already said, we’ll see a much-needed resurgence of Yes2.

    (Oh, and an appreciation, BTW, of your recent posting in another thread giving the inside track on PFI as you witnessed it. We need more like that. There has been far too much naive (or faux-naive) wittering in the MSM and in forums about “building control”. But the can of worms is truly open now.)

  150. bugsbunny says:

    270 years ago to this very day since the Battle of Culloden. Culloden was lost mainly due to the successful divide & rule policy that was already working in Ireland. Clan against clan, religion against religion, history of bitterness against your neighbour exploited.

    270 years later and has anything really changed? Like most Independence supporting and Independent minded Scot’s, the absolute drivel that comes out from certain aspects of Scottish Football appals me. Certain Rangers supporters even pride themselves in wearing English Strips. Robert Carlisle was left out to be hung and dried by the Unionist Press when he remarked, after he had completed filming the series Adolf Hitler, The Rise of Evil, where he played the part of Adolf, that he would rather wear an SS uniform, than an English Strip.

    But wasn’t it the Unionists who goose stepped down to George Square that fateful Friday Night, picking fights, flying the Butcher’s Apron and heiling Hitler Salutes? The Unionists can sacrifice to Satan, and all is good with the world. An SNP member sneezes and “Union Jakey” Bird is screeching down the television at us, along with a plethora of well paid Quisling’s.

    We must leave this bitter Union. Old Mother Englands teat has shrivelled up long ago. It’s time we weaned ourselves off it. The milks gone sour, and our teeth have came through.

    It’s time we fought back. It’s biting time.


  151. Graeme Doig says:


    You seem to be suggesting that someone’s character is somehow separate from the kind of social and economic policies that they would Impose on their fellow human beings.

    I would postulate that it becomes very difficult for the influence of politicians not to become personal.

    There is, of course, healthy and legal was of expressing your dissatisfaction with the actions of our public figures and that, in no way, takes away from the opposing arguments being put forward.

    I would say, on the whole, Wings contributors do a very respectful job of dismantling unionist bullshitters.

    Oh by the way, I think you’re at it.

  152. Fran says:

    The Lady is not for turning, at least a few times anyway!

    Unionists do not want a 2nd ref for the real fear of losing it, no 40 point lead cushion now.

    Even London understands that now, very clearly!

    Under no circumstances will Scotland be allowed to leave!

    No holds barred!

    Let none of us forget this, this is a fight to the death for British Imperialists.

    SNP 1&2

  153. Valerie says:


    Thanks for listening!

    @Robert J
    Yes, the jockeying is getting tiring, but some of these vote beggars are being economical with the truth, and slagging WoS and the SNP, all on one page was annoying, so had to contribute.

    More and more, over at Bella, I’m getting called names. During the week, the Editor called a few of us loons, and tonight a rude poster called me a devotee of the Rev.

    I’ve been called a lot worse, but sometimes it’s cumulative and I react!

  154. Sandy says:

    To all readers of WOS, whether pro or anti independence, take heed.
    England, under the current WM government, is literally up shit creek without a paddle, right up to its CHIN.
    Hard as it is, here in Scotland, even under severe WM austerity, we are keeping our HEADS above that water line.
    With our extreme limited financial resources but with people who understand what life is all about, we are making a better go of things.
    England is sinking deeper into the mire & holding onto anything that will keep it afloat. Don’t let them drag us down with them. As an independent country, we could guide the ordinary working people of England away from their arrogant ruling classes.
    History shows that your Nelsons, your Wellingtons, your Woolfes, your Churchills all relied on Scots, yes, even your Americans in their war of independence.
    Yet we are deemed today to be utterly incompetent to run our own Country.
    I leave you to consider the above. We have Adam Smiths in Scotland waiting in the wings, not Camerons or Osbournes or Mays or Johnsones or other such-like incompetents with only themselves & their co-horts in mind.

  155. Ian Brotherhood says:

    @NeoconNat –


    Do you know what time it is?!

    FFS, it’s nearly one o’clock in the morning!

    You haven’t posted a comment since 10.52 last night!


    Anyway, I can’t stay up much longer so, I really am sorry for bothering you, honestly, but could you please please just confirm that you are not the same person who used to post here as ‘Angramainyu’?

    Can you do that, please?

  156. bugsbunny says:

    Defo, good one,

    I believe David Coburn has participated in a few split roasts in his time? What part he played is anyones guess.

    I think “Babe” Ruth’s a Pescatarian. Apparently she can’t bring herself to get a bit of meat inside her, but is quite partial to the taste of fish.


  157. yesindyref2 says:

    Glad to help!

    @Robert J. Sutherland
    It seems to me there are a few to whom personal political ambitions totally outweigh Independence. But by far the most of YES would put YES first, that’s how many came to politics, or shook off the stranglehold of Labour.

    After the election the self-interested voices of politics won’t have a platform and YES will happily get together again. Hopefully those out for self won’t have caused Scotland to have an ineffectual Government that has to pander to all views and none to hesitantly ask for Indy Ref 2 with the agreement of al the other minority pro-indy parties, to be told by Cameron / Osborne / Boris to s@d off.

  158. Robert J. Sutherland says:

    Valerie said:

    During the week, the Editor called a few of us loons, and tonight a rude poster called me a devotee of the Rev.

    devotee…, Rev… OMG, I’m involved with a cult!

    Ach, WoS is a very broad church, so I don’t see what their problem might be. Sad. Have you asked them (as daughter #2 would say): “Is the air thin up there on the moral high ground?”! =grin=

  159. Shane Fraser says:


    Turn off the 99.9% unionist propaganda media in Scotland by getting on with your life; in as a positive manner that becomes a Scottish realist wishing the best for his kinsmen and those that we care for from war trodden countries torn apart by WESTMONSTER GOVERNMENTS PUPPETEERED BY THE MONEY ELITE !

    Come may the 5th .. Scotland will do the Honorable thing by not forgetting the unionist’s sick stab in the back, and in our face we Scott’s are FKG Useless, we have not forgotten.

    SNP X 2 .. SNP X 2 .. SNP X 2 .. SNP X 2 .. SNP X 2 .. SNP X 2 .. SNP X 2 .. SNP X 2 ..

  160. schrodingers cat says:

    “The lady’s often for turning”

    never struck me as the sort of lady who would enjoy being spit roasted…call me dave on the other hand…………

  161. Almannysbunnet says:

    More like Ruth “lie in the sand” Davidson. If we are not careful she’ll be in a coalition with Wil lie for a penny Rennie.

    Your choice? Them two or SNP x 2.

  162. Ken500 says:

    Many prisoners are on the spectrum and do not get the support they need in the community. Davidson wants to keep them in prison longer. Davidson is ignorant and coarse. The Police should be trained in how too approach vulnerable people, 40% of ‘charges’ never go to Court. Many ‘offences’ are committed under the influence of drugs and alcohol. Many prisoners should be in proper, total abstinence rehab. It would be more affective.

    The Tories are sanctioning and starving vulnerable people. They are a disgrace.

    The Westminster criminals should be in jail. Child abusers, fraudsters, tax evaders, killers.

    Vote SNP. Vote for FFA/Independence.

  163. mealer says:

    Good morning folks.Just a few weeks until the election and there’s lots of work to be done.Many readers here won’t participate in campaigning,but why not give it a try? You don’t have to chap on doors.Theres lots of other ways you can help.It gives you a wonderful feeling to be taking part in the struggle for our countries independence.

  164. mealer says:

    Oh,I meant to add….even if you just drop in to an SNP shop or hub and give the people there a thumbs up,it gives everyone a wee lift.

  165. Breeks says:

    Kinda funny, I was about to say Ruthie had all the morals of a BBC journalist, but thought I’d check whether Wikipedia had a record of her time employed there.
    Ruthie’s path to parliament, and leadership of the Tories is somewhat less than inspiring. It seems at a quick glance that beating Murdo Fraser in the leadership election is about the only election where she didn’t come fourth, and everybody grumbles about Westminster interference to help her win that.

    What is it about this PR and List seats which permits duffers, also rans, and under achievers to present themselves as leadership material and rise to prominence far above their legitimate entitlement outside a PR system?

    Could ask the same question, what is it about the Conservative party which permits duffers, also rans, and under achievers to present themselves as potential leaders?

    There is something fundamentally grubby about politics. Maybe there always has been, but more and more of our political control is being revealed as artificial and contrived, and joined at the hip with our thoroughly corrupt media. The SNP has an outright majority, but the “State” will give every one and anyone a leg up to contest that hard won mandate. If it was a boxing match, the crowd would be on its feet booing at the rigged fight and walking out in disgust.

    I have serious concerns about postal ballots, the electoral commission, the rancid media, and our timid SNP. The one source of brightness on the horizon is the Scottish electorate revealing itself as a canny and rational bunch which finds all the media hype and propaganda increasingly tiresome and ineffective. It raises a curious mix of emotions; pride that we rise above all this, but fear that we are fickle and won’t.

    Nevertheless, it is difficult to feel confident or self assured entering an election process which doesn’t feel like a sanctified act of democracy, but a mere exercise in counting votes already compromised by rigged ballots, a rabid media, and strings being pulled from down south.

    Maybe we should ask Ruthie what the result is going to be.

  166. NeoconNat says:

    Bugsbunny, that was a great speech about Culloden. Well, it was about division really and how we need to unite, like uniting the clans. I feel you.

    The thing is, I’m looking back through the comments and I didn’t see anyone specifically request a rousing speech from the heart.

    Is it considered normal to just walk up to groups of people and make speeches like that? Can you do it at bus stops and in cafes or just online?

  167. Almannysbunnet says:


  168. NeoconNat says:

    Graeme: “You seem to be suggesting that someone’s character is somehow separate from the kind of social and economic policies that they would Impose on their fellow human beings.”

    Really? I thought I was saying we should refrain from personal attacks and focus on the politics people espouse. There’s a dangerous acceptance in here of playing the man rather than the ball.

    Your integrated approach seems to allow us to make value judgements about political viewpoints, deem certain views acceptable and unacceptable, and attack accordingly. But who are you to decide that the politics you support are morally superior to the politics I subscribe to?

  169. david anderson says:

    I couldn’t give a flying erse if Neocon is what people term ‘a troll’. If he is on the windup or not is for others to decide and either respond to him in a polite manner or ignore him. I took exception to him being told to piss off as that puts me and perhaps ohters off from posting. A plurality of opinion is desired. As for Thepnr and his tagteam comment. Well, let’s just say it rather proves a point.You bring down the tone of a usually enlightening and often irreverent below-line comment section.

    You wrote this “but a self opinionated prick with his head up his own arse all the same”. You are aware of the irony I imagine.

  170. Grouse Beater says:

    Ruby: “There used to be a Flamebaiter on this site who called you ‘Grousey’ and called ‘heedtracker’ ‘heedy’. What was his name?

    You’re right. Same self-promotion as NeoconNattercherjack, same narcissism, same pervasive, arrogant attitude that all here are wrong in ideals except him. He’s here to teach us better manners and how to think neo-liberal. He used familiar condescending terms such as “I’ll explain this in simple terms so you can understand it.”

    In time they all merge into one … and probably that’s exactly the case!

    “You’re playing the man not the politics” is a hackneyed slogan.

    Well, I have news for NeoconNat – the bloody layers of the onion ARE the onion!

  171. I wonder when Kezia will realise that the political establishment that calls all the shots through their control of the media has abandoned her and is promoting Ruthie and the Tories.

    The door’s open, Kezia. Step through it and bring what is left of Scotland’s once proud Labour Party with you.

  172. Graeme Doig says:


    “Your integrated approach seems to allow us to make value judgements about political viewpoints, deem certain views acceptable and unacceptable, and attack accordingly. But who are you to decide that the politics you support are morally superior to the politics I subscribe to?”

    These are judgements we make every day Neo. It is part of the human condition and certainly a big part of politics. In fact, you could be describing the point of politics there.

  173. Ghillie says:

    OT Valerie

    Just come off commenting on Bellacaledonia. What a toxic article and comments.

    Challenged the ed. Don’t really expect a fair answer.

    What on earth has happened to that site? Taken over by unmentionables?

  174. Ruby says:

    david anderson says:
    16 April, 2016 at 8:46 am

    I couldn’t give a flying erse if Neocon is what people term ‘a troll’.

    Ruby replies

    Well if you care about Wings then I think you should care!
    You just have to ask yourself what a troll/flamebaiter is trying to achieve by posting here.

  175. Ruby says:

    This post is about PFI

    Great article by Mhairi Black in the National.

    ‘In Scotland, the focus on PFI as the only option for investment was quickly pushed ahead by then-Finance Minister Jack McConnell. This resulted in Scotland having a far higher proportion of the UK’s PFI-funded projects. Despite being about 8.5 per cent of the UK’s population, Scotland accounts for 40 per cent of all PFI deals.

    What makes this worse is that during the period of Labour and the LibDems running the Scottish Executive, they managed to underspend the Scottish block grant by about £1.5 billion’

  176. Ruby says:

    ‘Labour kingpin Jim McCabe warns of “electoral irregularities” as he attacks his own party’

    This article is not open for comments however an article about Lady Mone is and it turns out that is the most commented article.

    At the moment it has 42 comments so perhaps people have decided that commenting on The Herald is a waste of time.

  177. Grouse Beater says:

    Ghillie: “What on earth has happened to that site? Taken over by unmentionables?”

    Interesting. I proposed joining in as a contributor many months ago but realised it was the equivalent of throwing plates of spaghetti at a wall and seeing what sticks. You need a precisely honed jet for best effect. Wings provides that service.

    Sun’s out, clear and sharp, but man, it’s cold.

  178. Grouse Beater says:

    Ruby: “an article about Lady Mone turns out is the most commented article.”

    Not surprising.

    This one attracted over 5,000 hits in a single day. Actually, I was disappointed. We’re still obsessed by shallow celebrity:

  179. Ruby says:

    Grouse Beater says:
    16 April, 2016 at 9:55 am

    Ruby: “an article about Lady Mone turns out is the most commented article.”

    Not surprising.

    This one attracted over 5,000 hits in a single day. Actually, I was disappointed. We’re still obsessed by shallow celebrity:

    Ruby replies

    That is an excellent article. I particularly like the captions on the pictures.

    ‘Businesswoman’ Michelle demonstrating her intense dislike of nationalism in all its forms

    Nicola Sturgeon Scotland’s First Minister outdoing Ms Mone when it comes to balcony panoramas

  180. Ghillie says:

    And re Bella. As i expected did not get a fair reply from the ed.

    Whatever they are up to it is weird.

    Your right Grouse Beater. Wings it is!

    Though i do wonder what folk reading there make of it. Very strange.

  181. Ruby says:

    Has Bella Caledonia turned into a flamebaiter/troll?

    Personally I think flamebaiters/trolls should be ignored although I can understand why that might be hard!

  182. David Anderson says:

    @ Ruby

    I firmly beleive all ideas should be present in public forums. Normally ideas that don’t fit are seen as such eventually without the need for abuse. I for one don’t need to tell this individual anything other than i don’t agree with him. I believe engaging in protracted and personalised dialogue serves only to encourage them. By all means refute any ‘facts’ they profer if they don’t appear as facts to you as that informs others. Abuse, well there really is no need for it. Really no need for it.

    What are they doing on this website? Well, either offering up their opinion or attempting to bait people. I can quite easily skim past a post if I remember the name to be one that posts nothing interesting. It takes more than the odd anamoly to evoke feelings of anger and I don’t think the site has suffered as a result of the few who wish to play their games.

    I frequent this site as it is a welcome counterbalanance to the other media offered up. The other reason is that a number of participants willingly share great information and really interesting links that can add to my knowledge base. Worth its and their weight on gold.

  183. Legerwood says:

    Ruby @9.46 am

    At the moment the Lady Mine article has around 68 comments but the article in today’s Herald about the China deal has over 90.

    Yesterday a similar article on the China deal had almost 370 comments. The whole China deal series of articles must have attracted almost 2000 comments in all.

    So perhaps celebrity is not all it is cracked up to be.

  184. Fred says:

    Bella has lost the plot completely, Rise sceptics are invited to fuck-off back to Wings & The Man From Bath, WOS is apparently just a mouthpiece for the SNP.

    Andy Wightman has taken the opportunity to attack the First Minister over “Land Registration”, all this in the middle of a campaign where we need every vote we can get and from folk, by the way, who want your second vote!

    @ Jig Jock, good post, woke up in a foreign land indeed!

  185. Almannysbunnet says:

    Someone said this on another thread “the smiling gregarious ruthie very quickly changes into the arrogant, rude, aggressive, interrupting ruthie when she is on tv on debates- really dangerous person.”

    Remind you of anyone here? She wouldn’t would she? 🙂

  186. Ruby says:

    David Anderson says:
    16 April, 2016 at 10:46 am

    What are they doing on this website? Well, either offering up their opinion or attempting to bait people.

    I can quite easily skim past a post if I remember the name to be one that posts nothing interesting.

    Ruby replies

    A flamebaiter/troll is offering up their opinion in order to bait people.

    You can easily skim past a post but not everyone can and the flamebiater/troll knows that.

    What is your definition of abuse?

    I would say flamebaiting/trolling on a website is the ultimate in abuse.

    I don’t have a problem with posters telling a ‘flamebaiter/troll’ to piss off.

    I think we are going to have to agree to disagree on this one. 🙂

  187. Ruby says:

    Legerwood says:
    16 April, 2016 at 11:39 am

    Ruby @9.46 am

    At the moment the Lady Mine article has around 68 comments but the article in today’s Herald about the China deal has over 90.

    Yesterday a similar article on the China deal had almost 370 comments. The whole China deal series of articles must have attracted almost 2000 comments in all.

    So perhaps celebrity is not all it is cracked up to be.

    Ruby replies

    Any SNP bad article always attracts thousands of comments.
    The more comments these SNP bad articles get the more The Herald will print them.

    So perhaps commenting on The Herald encourages them to print more SNP Bad articles 🙂

    If ‘The Mone’ was a member of the SNP/Independence supporter the comments would be in the thousands and the story would be run three days in a row.

  188. NeoconNat says:

    Ruby: “You can easily skim past a post but not everyone can and the flamebiater/troll knows that.”

    Interesting that you feel confident enough to appoint yourself some sort of political cadre in here. I’m sure the flock find it comforting that you are here to guide them and protect them from bad men like me. Maybe you’re right, maybe they’re too dumb to work things out for themselves. I don’t think so though.

    I can probably find ten accounts of people in here in the last week saying that they find at least some of what I say stimulating and challenging, or words to that effect.

    Ruby, can you find one person saying that about any of your posts, ever? One single example, ever? One? Ever?

  189. ronnie anderson says:

    @ David Anderson Interesting choise of wording Odd Anomaly when reffering to a persistant Troll, wee have had many of those in the past & no doupt plenty in the future, & we see them off in various ways ,very few dare personal attacks on Wingers . You with your comment only gives the Troll the impression of support,that might not be your intention, but thats the way they view it.

    As Tam Jardine says there is only one Moderator on this site, & as we know he,s got a long memory & short fuse when required.

    Am still on the hunt for PianoWire. Haw Maw put the kettle oan.

  190. John Edgar says:

    Anyone who gets photographed on a tank aping Thatcher, the toxic tory must surely be suspect. Of all symbols to recreate that must be the worst.
    It is also in itself negative. But I suppose she you are a minor entity with a North British mentality and toryfied, anything goes.

  191. David Anderson says:

    Hi again Ruby. Yes, abuse is a many faceted thing. I was referring to direct and literal abuse. We can definately agree to disagree. I wish you well.

    @Ronnie. I was referring to the anomaly of those on the wind up or those wishing to spread falsities intentionally. I reckon they are very few and far between. That is in some part down to the response they recieve. I don’t think they are put off with being told to piss off. They are usually shown to be what they are through rational arguement delivered by very well-informed posters. People see through their merde as it were. I think that it is valuable sometimes to have that opportunity.

    Re the whole ‘wingers’ thing.That is for those who like that sort of thing. However, whoever the self-addressed wingers are makes no difference to me. I am a visitor to this site as I am to others and that is it. If some wingers believe they ‘police’ the site or serve as some form of Praetorian guard then all power to them. That is entirely their own business however, it will have very little to no impact on my usage of this site unless it becomes a ‘thing’. Hence the reason for my initial comment. My response is not intended to support Neonat or anyone in particular, it is intended to promote respectful dialogue and free speech and if read properly it will be seen as such by any fair-minded individual.

    O/T I met you in Arbroath. We had a quick and pleasant chat, though I declined the wings badges 😉

  192. Ruby says:

    It’s tempting but I’m going to resist!

    Don’t feed the troll!

  193. Robert J. Sutherland says:

    I’ve been sleeping on the “Bella Caledonia” issue, and I think I have a glimmer of what’s happening. It’s a consequence, I believe, of this peculiar AMS voting system we have, and the different attitudes of different pro-indy supporters to maximising a return from it.

    There are many posters here (of different political viewpoints) who are advocating SNPx2 as an insurance policy to retain an SNP majority in the coming parliament. And we all know very well without spelling it out what the loss of an absolute majority would entail. The so-called “wipeout” of the Unionists at the UKGE was largely an artifact of its crooked electoral system, and under AMS it is very difficult indeed to achieve an absolute majority. So they have a very valid case. The weakness in the argument is that it gives the SNP little incentive to be as radical as they perhaps ought to be (and claim to be) without at least some other pro-indy voices in Holyrood to challenge them.

    On the other side of the fence, there seems to be a feeling that the SNP are “taking over” the whole indy movement and stifling alternative voices, so they feel under threat and possibly a little jealous as well. Maybe they thought that more support would come their way in the wake of the indyref and are feeling somewhat bruised with the growing realisation that maybe it ain’t (and not necessarily because of the SNP, incidentally).

    The quandary facing all of us is how best to handle pro-indy diversity, especially given the unreliability of seat predictors, as the Rev. Stu has shown. There are some hopeful signs, though, so maybe we’re getting just a little too nervous. It was the decline of the party that effectively once had the role of “moderator”, the Lib Dems, which gave the SNP its majority in 2011. They walked away from a coalition with the SNP in 2007 (funny that, since they were happy to shack up with the Tories thereafter) and cast themselves out into the wilderness. They are likely to decline even further this time. Despite furious attempts by the MSM to prop up Labour (because they also know what’s exactly at stake), Labour is also likely to suffer some decline, or at the very least a reduced turnout.

    So what best to do? Prof Curtice indicated on careful reading that there are at least a few parts of the country where a non-SNP pro-indy list vote could help, if done intelligently. Surely it would be a good thing to have alternative pro-indy voices in the new parliament? Provided, that is, they couldn’t hold the (presumed) Scottish Government to ransom, as some unfortunately seem to be attempting. The most positive contribution that the Greens and RISE could surely make would be to confront Labour and take votes from them, if they can, rather than moan about the SNP.

    We all need a little more confidence, and challenge the real opposition.

  194. DerekM says:

    lol give em a break guys they just got a new contract well there is an election coming up i bet it doesnt pay as well as the last one those tories are a right bunch of misers.

  195. Breeks says:

    @Fred at 11.48 am…

    RISE sceptics invited to fk off back to Wings…

    I seem to remember Wings taking a pretty hostile line towards Newsnet once upon a time. I thought it was unfair, ill informed, and said as much at the time. Put me right off Wings for a very long time, and to this day I have no idea why it was felt necessary. If the heart is in the right place, live and let live, and “vive le difference”.

    We should all slow down, count to ten, and consider the effect of a broadside before we fire it. Look at what gets said about RISE, and how its constituency or list vote threatens the SNP’s majority and the chances of another referendum. What is that if not the SNP’s open declaration of war against RISE? I’m curious, exactly how would you expect RISE supporters to react?

    Personally, I believe the SNP’s current majority borrows a lot of goodwill from hardcore YES supporters who are lukewarm about the SNP. The SNP should alienate these people at its peril. I count myself as one of those who’ll be holding their nose when they vote SNP, and that’s a situation for which the SNP is fully responsible for creating.

    Again, in my humble personal opinion, the SNP should better embrace the differences in our pro- Independence movement. Maybe not the best place or occasion to quote Winston Churchill, but “the only thing worse than fighting a war with allies, if fighting a war without them”.

    Reel your SNP necks in. Be prepared to give up a wee bit of the stage to RISE or the Common Weal… Declare them the enemy, and the ill feeling you engender will endure well beyond May and could come back to hurt you when it really matters.

    How many times have I been asked to set aside my principles and grievances for the greater good, lest my dissatisfaction with the SNP threaten the likelihood of Indyref 2? Funny that. Maybe the SNP could stand a dose of the same medicine.

  196. JLT says:

    It has to be said, that both Ruth and Kezia are painting themselves into a corner. As today’s article highlights; Ruth states last year that a 2nd Referendum shouldn’t be blocked, however, with a nice change of heart, she decides that a 2nd Referendum is now not a good thing.

    However …while Ruth hotfoots, it’s probably not half as bad as Kezia’s demented statement at the tail end of one of the Leaders’ Debates last month when she stated that she would deny the Scottish people a 2nd Referendum even if the majority of Scottish people demanded a mandate for it. Yep…Go Democracy! Go SLAB! Go Kezia!

    Ruth has so far avoided making the idiotic point that she would deny the will of the Scottish people …well …at least for the moment!

  197. NeoconNat says:

    Breeks, you make some interesting and challenging points there.

    I’m not a natural SNP supporter myself but decided that I’d give up certain ideals for the sake of realising one paramount ideal, independence.

    I agree that it would be heartening to see more sensitivity and tolerance in here and the Indy movement generally when it comes to political perspectives. Otherwise it feels a bit too much like “vote for us and shut up”.

    My problem with RISE is that they are Marxists. Extremists. I have no idea what Sillars is doing amongst them, playing a part in dividing the Indy vote. Cat Boyd is the classic example of a middle class person trying to make a career out of pretending she is a socialist and would be much more at home sitting next to Kezia. Give it a few years eh.

  198. Ruby says:

    Breeks says:

    Reel your SNP necks in. Be prepared to give up a wee bit of the stage to RISE or the Common Weal… Declare them the enemy, and the ill feeling you engender will endure well beyond May and could come back to hurt you when it really matters.

    Ruby replies

    Are you seriously suggestion that Rise voters would vote NO in IndyRef2 just out of spite?

    This is an election campaign every man for themselves. Every single political party has declared war on one another. Do you think the NO voting parties should be considering the Winston Chrurchill quote during their election campaigns. Do you think SLAB members will vote YES in IndyRef2 to spite the Tories should they beat Labour in May?

    NB Typo/faux pas in the first paragraph of your post.

  199. Robert J. Sutherland says:

    Breeks, there’s much sense in what you are saying, especially that the SNP are borrowing a lot of goodwill. But I don’t agree that the SNP are actively trying to undermine anyone else. It’s just a natural consequence of the position they are in. They have to strive their utmost to retain a majority, as we need them to do, and I don’t observe them trying to do anyone else down to achieve that. Which is not quite true of the other pro-indy people, I would say, who seem to be repeating Labour’s mistake and merely sniping at the SNP. A strategic and tactical error. They should be making their own positive case and seeking to persuade voters of that, ideally eating into Labour’s position by winning over people who are reluctant to vote SNP.

    And for those able to attend, Prof. Curtice is giving a talk on the background to this very topic this coming Tuesday:

    ‘Are the SNP heading for another triumph? Prospects for the May 5th Election’

    Tuesday 19.Apr @ 18:00, Boyd Orr Building, University of Glasgow

    Could be interesting…

  200. Ruby says:

    Anyone remember ‘IndependenceNow’ aka ‘Norse Warrior”
    from various online forums?

    I was reminded of him when reading one of the previous posts.

  201. heedtracker says:

    Personally, I believe the SNP’s current majority borrows a lot of goodwill from hardcore YES supporters who are lukewarm about the SNP. The SNP should alienate these people at its peril. I count myself as one of those who’ll be holding their nose when they vote SNP, and that’s a situation for which the SNP is fully responsible for creating”

    Only one answer Breeks.

    You either want Scotland to be a self governing nation state or you can whine away about how hurt your feelings are.

  202. Robert J. Sutherland says:

    Ruby said

    This is an election campaign, every man for themselves.

    You’re right, of course, in the strict sense that we only have two votes each, but I don’t agree completely, since I don’t believe this election is entirely a zero sum game. Sniping between pro-indy groups could damage them all, and conversely, challenging Unionist propaganda can benefit them all.

  203. WellKeith says:

    This article is a lot of rubbish. Don’t get me wrong, I know that the Tories have lied and gone back on promises in the past, and I know they will do so again on the future. However this simply is not the case here. There are two separate scenarios here.

    In the first, the SNP have – with a mandate from the Scottish people – proposed and passed legislation for a second independence referendum. In this situation, Ms Davidson is saying she would not advocate the Tory Government at Westminster blocking the holding of that referendum. In the second, the SNP have only proposed the holding of a second referendum. In this case, she is saying she would vote against the legislation when it was put before the Scottish parliament.

    Ms Davidson has not said anything here which suggests she has changed her position on either of these scenarios. I know you would love it she had, but you can’t just make stuff up and hope it sticks. If you do, you’re no better than the unionist media you are trying to discredit.

  204. Robert J. Sutherland says:

    WellKeith, you may have a point, but it’s sophistry really. Ruthie is obviously trying to have her cake and eat it. She’s freely admitting that she’s not going to be the next First Minister of Scotland, yet theatrically posturing about a referendum that no-one else is mentioning. It’s a cynical play for Labour’s Unionist diehards, and nothing more.

    Oh, and I notice you made no comment about the article recalling her other apparent volte-face over Police Scotland.

  205. Proud Cybernat says:

    There are no “so-called indyref triggers that justify another referendum” – Ruth Davidson

    So, Ruthie–come SE2021 and the polls show 60% to 40% of Scots in favour of a second referendum, you will go against the wishes of the majority of the people of Scotland and refuse to put an indyref in your next manifesto?

    Fine. Welcome to oblivion.

    It’s easy Ruthie to tell people what you WON’T do (especially when you know fine well that you won’t have the power to deliver what you won’t do anyway). The hard thing, Ruthie, is to tell people what you WILL do.

    Learn the difference, lassie.

  206. Ruby says:

    I need some info please re Westminster blocking/allowing an IndyRef.

    How does this work? Does it go to the vote in Westminster & HOL or does the party in power/the Prime Minister just decide yes or no?

    Ruthie is confusing voters instead of saying it was a question for Nicola surely she should have said if was a question for David Cameron that all her little branch office party could do would be to vote against a 2nd IndyRef at Holyrood. Did anyone think they they would do otherwise?

    According to this article

    David Cameron: No second independence referendum

    David Cameron said

    ‘Cameron insisted there would be no repeat of 2014’s vote within the next five years’

    That seems pretty clear so whether or not Ruthie’s little branch office party vote for or against IndyRef2 in the next parliament it wont make a blind bit of difference.

  207. Ealasaid says:


    Bob Peffers is the expert on this, but worryingly he does not seem to have posted for a while. Hope he is OK

    I cannot remember his precise terms, but it is to do with the rights that are given by the United Nations both for a ‘People’s’ self determination itself and for the right to call a vote on it at any time of their choosing. Thus it is not up to David Cameron but the people of Scotland.

    Hope this helps.

  208. Breeks says:

    No, I don’t think for a moment that RISE would vote No out of spite, (so Indyref 2 has nothing to fear on that score), and personally, I don’t reckon RISE will get many seats anyway, but when Indyref 2 is called, I do not want us all to be preoccupied and divided with the petty tribalism along the lines of Wings is an SNP website, Bella is RISE, etc. To prevail, Indyref 2 will need to engender the same common purpose that YES achieved, and unless we cut each other a little slack, that is all put at risk and we will just make a rod for our own backs while gaining precisely nothing.
    The SNP recognised the wisdom behind NOT dominating the YES campaign, and that was a good call. As far as I can see, the logic of it still applies. The SNP was the benign overlord, and dissent was well managed.

    Going back to the Bella article, as I read it, that’s all it’s saying. It doesn’t advocate NOT voting SNP, it basically states the obvious, that you catch more flies with honey than vinegar. The SNP can and should jockey for the maximum majority they can, but being belligerent towards lesser pro-Indy organisations is inviting a backlash and hostile division.

    And Heedtracker, the issue of my “hurt feelings” has cost me tens of thousands of pounds, put people and apprentices out of work, and given some rotten and corrupt individuals in my locality the green light to carry on like before with the tacit endorsement of the SNP. Don’t go expecting me to forget about that anytime soon, and nor do I find there is any conflict between Independence and standing firm on matters of principle. You really have no idea how hard it is to bite my tongue on the matter as it is.

  209. Ruby says:



    The more Tory Ruthie & Cameron talk about blocking/voting against a 2nd referendum the better it is for the YES campaign.

    Sure there will be some NO voters that like the idea of being dictated to by the Westminster Fascists United but I can’t imagine all NO voters like the idea of living in a dictatorship.

    If Tory Ruthie had any sense she would have a IndyRef2 in her little Branch Office party’s manifesto sure she is against Independence but then her boss is against Brexit but still he is having a EU Referendum.

    OMG It’s snowing in Edinburgh!

  210. Tinto Chiel says:

    Ruby says:
    16 April, 2016 at 3:14 pm
    Anyone remember ‘IndependenceNow’ aka ‘Norse Warrior”
    from various online forums?

    I also remember “Kingfisher”, Alcedo Atthis, who was at best a contrarian, and who seems to have taken a holiday from this site.

    But perhaps I’m just being too suspicious, but I enjoy The Bogus Man by Roxy Music.

    Hope Robert Peffers is ok too. He was a poster who was convinced about 77 Brigade.

  211. defo says:

    WellKeith say

    “This article is a lot of rubbish. Don’t get me wrong, I know that the Tories have lied and gone back on promises in the past, and I know they will do so again on the future.”

    Inside information, or form ?
    BTW Do you like tanks ?

  212. Ruby says:

    Tinto Chiel says:
    16 April, 2016 at 8:14 pm

    Ruby says:
    16 April, 2016 at 3:14 pm
    Anyone remember ‘IndependenceNow’ aka ‘Norse Warrior”
    from various online forums?

    I also remember “Kingfisher”, Alcedo Atthis, who was at best a contrarian, and who seems to have taken a holiday from this site.
    Ruby replies

    I never came across those two. Did they spend their entire time posting about how awful the SNP were at the same time claiming they were Independence supporters?

    I had quick look at the Bella Caledonia article that everyone is talking about and I got the impression the ‘IndependenceNow’ types might have found a home there.

    I also enjoy Bogus Man by Roxy Music.

  213. Tinto Chiel says:

    Och, Ruby, I’ve given up on BC, but their attack on the Rev and WGD (and DB) is an indicator of what we are up against: an opportunist bunch who continually attack the SG for being too right wing when all it is trying to do is govern for all of us in Scotland on the equivalent of pocket money.

    We can fragment as much as we want once we have achieved independence.

    Sorry for the confusion: Kingfisher WAS Alcedo Atthis. He was quite a subtle and clever poster: never too sure if he was just a contrarian or outright troll. If you’re out there AA, tell me I’m wrong.

    I would have posted a non-imbedded YouTube link to Bogus Man for the non-converted but all available versions are crap.

  214. Breeks says:

    If the Bogus Man quips are aimed at me, rest assured I have only ever posted as Breeks, and I would wager my commitment to Independence would rival any one of yours. I do however think for myself, and respect matters of principle, and I will stand my ground no matter what. Can’t help it. That is how I was raised and it runs right through me like Brighton rock. If that means I stand apart from the flock, then so be it. The flock is free to stand wherever it likes.

    If you don’t like my attitude towards the SNP, then I’m sorry, but it’s kinda tough, because the SNP’s attitude towards me was, and remains, downright shabby and unprofessional. But hey, it’s election time, and nobody wants to hear that, so let’s all pretend that I’m some mad deluded fool to be ridiculed, and everything is absolutely fine.

    I know exactly why I want independence for Scotland, but you know, I’m suddenly curious as fuck why you do.

  215. Tinto Chiel says:

    Breeks: no. Ruby and I were discussing some strange characters from the past. I have read your posts and your genuine misgivings, so have to respect them, prima facie.

    I don’t see why you thought these remarks were directed at you.

    Vote as you wish.

  216. Thepnr says:


    Can’t talk for the original posters but I totally doubt anything was directed at you.

    Can I just say this, I love your posts! They are excellent and you only have to be a supporter of Independence to appreciate them. I’m sure the Unionists don’t 🙂

    You know as well as I that not all posters on Wings are SNP, that doesn’t matter to you nor me but there is no doubt that SNP are the main vehicle in the drive for Independence.

    Too be honest I think the original Bogus Man quip was aimed at NeoconNat. If the likes of you didn’t post then I believe Wings would be the poorer for it.

  217. yesindyref2 says:

    Breeks, what you’re saying is fair enough. But think how it would be if the boot was on the other foot. So say RISE were the party with a majority, and the party who looked like getting a majority, but would that be an overall majority?

    So would us SNP members / supporters want to vote for RISE, because we need an overall majority, and we don’t want the Unionist press to jump on any decline in the RISE overall majority because it could harm Independence?

    I’d vote RISE of course, both votes, no idea if I’d be hacked off at all. But any smug attitude from RISE supporters probably would annoy me.

    Same would be true of it were Greens the main chance, or even Tommy Sheridan. It’s Indy.

  218. Tinto Chiel says:

    “Too be honest I think the original Bogus Man quip was aimed at NeoconNat. If the likes of you didn’t post then I believe Wings would be the poorer for it.”

    Quite so, both points.

    Pax vobiscum, and so to bed.

  219. Ruby says:

    Breeks says:
    16 April, 2016 at 11:06 pm

    If the Bogus Man quips are aimed at me,

    Ruby replies

    No they were NOT!

    Paranoid man quip heading your way! 🙂

    How much are you willing to bet that my commitment to Independence is equal or even greater than yours? 🙂

    Have you got a YES tattoo?

  220. John Edgar says:

    Will the Tory party be “ruthless” ( pardon the pun) after the Holyrood election? Murphy went from Slab after 2015. When Ruth falls of her tank, will she fall on her sword or be pushed? The unionists cannot keep failure to the fore or are they so insignificant now that it does mot matter?
    Same for Kez and Will? Who takes over? How much lack of talent do they have left in the branches? It must be galling to have these ongoing photographs of former leaders at party headquarters.
    I suppose it is only a matter of time before the party faithful “revolt” and reject the links with Westminster head office. There is a limit to pledging undying loyalty to a lost cause. They cannot use the old mutual arguments, ” We’re keeping you from the Tories, from Labour! Wr in Scotland can now do without them and finish it with Independence.
    The English Tories, Scots don’t count, are arguing whether Cameron should stay or go if there is a Brexit. Ironically, some Tory Remainers say he should go and some Tory Brexiters say he should stay but not conduct exit negotiations with the EU. Notice the Scots Tories at the moment ate silent on Brexit, even Mundell has been conspicuous by his absence from the scene.
    Roll on May 5 or to be precise May, 6 and watch the bloodletting. Will we be Ruth- Kez- and Will- less ? Then the yoonies will have to start all over again.

  221. Keith fraser says:

    Must have been a line in the quicksand!

  222. msean says:

    One day,independence will be supported by the dear leader.It’s about the only avenue she hasn’t tried.

Comment - please read this page for comment rules. HTML tags like <i> and <b> are permitted. Use paragraph breaks in long comments. DO NOT SIGN YOUR COMMENTS, either with a name or a slogan. If your comment does not appear immediately, DO NOT REPOST IT. Ignore these rules and I WILL KILL YOU WITH HAMMERS.

↑ Top