The world's most-read Scottish politics website

Wings Over Scotland


The talent puddle

Posted on October 14, 2015 by

Today’s Herald reveals that the new Labour leader of Glasgow City Council, Frank McAveety (who was last seen in the headlines leering at a 15-year-old girl visiting the Scottish Parliament), has hired Bob Wylie as a special adviser.

Wylie was communications director of the scandal-riddled Strathclyde Partnership for Transport (SPT), which readers may recall from last year’s banning of an advertising campaign for this site on the city’s Underground after receiving one complaint about it.

But he’s somewhat more famous for his part in an expenses junket which saw several of the quango’s senior management bill taxpayers for a 2008 “fact-finding” mission to Manchester whose timing just happened to coincide with the UEFA Cup final between Rangers and Zenit St Petersburg being played in the same city.

fcpuddle

Wylie’s appointment follows the controversy which arose when Labour gave convicted drunken arsonist Mike Watson a job as education spokesman in Jeremy Corbyn’s shadow cabinet. And the two hirings threw some light on a thought we’d been thinking since reading a Kevin McKenna column in last weekend’s Observer.

McKenna and fellow columnist Iain Macwhirter of the Herald have been taking some flak on social media in recent days for a few articles which have been less than glowing about the SNP (mainly with regard to the Michelle Thomson saga and the T In The Park story, which seems to have dribbled away).

To most reasonable observers the attacks on the pair have been over the top and counterproductive – any movement always needs critical friends more than it needs unquestioning sycophants. But more to the point, that kneejerk reaction obscures the flaws in the articles concerned, and in particular something that a political opposition and commentariat desperate for the Nats to fall on their faces keeps overlooking.

Earlier this month we took some snarky social-media glee in pointing out some of a series of somewhat premature “the Scottish Labour fightback starts here!” columns on the Progress website, dating all the way back to January 2008. We also embarked on a Twitter search for the first “the SNP honeymoon is over” articles in the press, of which the earliest/most clear-cut example was a Severin Carrell one for the Guardian in November of the same year.

carrellhoneymoon

For seven years now the media has been announcing the imminent bursting of the SNP bubble, over which period the Nats’ support in Scotland has instead grown and grown, currently standing – astonishingly – at around 25 points HIGHER than the vote share which won them the 2007 Holyrood election.

The “honeymoon is over” article has resurfaced regularly throughout that period, as countless pundits let the wish be the father of the thought, and has seen a particular resurgence recently on the right of the political spectrum, where it’s often paired with charmingly optimistic predictions of a Conservative revival.

(Often from writers who sneer at the SNP as a cultish, “faith-based” movement, yet have no problem evangelically imagining a second coming for the Tories in Scotland without the slightest glimmer of evidence in support of their belief, Ruth Davidson’s party having just won its lowest Scottish general-election vote share for a century.)

McKenna’s piece in the Observer last Sunday was a sighting of the marginally less common left-wing version, in which he espoused the theory that “the [SNP’s] spell on the electorate won’t last for much longer if there isn’t soon some clear evidence of progress in three key sectors of government: health, education and justice” and professed to detect “a discernible optimism abroad in the room” at Scottish Labour’s annual fundraiser despite another series of dreadful opinion polls.

But there are two problems with that view, both of which have underpinned the SNP’s long rise and which show no signs of going away any time soon.

One is the fact that the public is actually pretty happy with the Scottish Government’s handling of those issues – just 21% of Scots are dissatisfied with the current state of education, 23% with health and 37% with policing. The chances are also that most of those people already don’t vote SNP, so there’s not much prospect of a collapse in the party’s vote on those grounds.

But the point McKenna misses, along with the rest of the punditariat, is that even were dissatisfaction to rise significantly, that isn’t enough in itself to bring about a change in government. As the recent UK general election showed with striking clarity, even an electorate that doesn’t think much of an incumbent administration will still vote it back in if the opposition looks worse. Better the devil they know.

And that’s a difficult problem to fix, because changing policies alone won’t do it. Partly that’s because Labour in particular has changed its policies so often in recent years that nobody really has any idea what it stands for any more, and no confidence that any given position won’t be reversed by next week.

(As with the party’s new-found opposition to George Osborne’s fiscal charter, and the rapid dumping of most of Jeremy Corbyn’s radical positions after he became leader.)

But more to the point, it’s because people vote for human beings, not manifestos. Polling for the general election consistently showed that the electorate liked Labour’s policies, but weren’t prepared to put Ed Miliband into Downing Street because of how they perceived him personally.

No matter how drastically Scottish Labour swings from Johann “something for nothing” Lamont to “Red” Jim Murphy and back again, no matter how often poor Ian Murray is forced to U-turn, re-U-turn and abstain until he doesn’t know whether he’s coming or going, no matter how frantically Kezia Dugdale rows back with the prevailing wind for Corbyn, voters aren’t idiots. They can see that it’s still the same people every time.

newteam

For so long as Scottish Labour’s ranks are still staffed by serial liars like Jackie Baillie, serial laughing-stocks like Iain Gray and serial numpties like James Kelly, nobody will pay any heed to the endless proclamations that the party has listened and changed (which go back almost as far as “SNP honeymoon is over” articles).

While the Labour candidate list is the same old Diddy Squad, the SNP could walk around disembowelling kittens on live TV for all the difference any amount of scandal or incompetence, real or media-manufactured, would make.

The “new” Glasgow council leader is a man booted in disgrace years ago, the “new” Scottish Labour leader is the deputy who oversaw the loss of 40 of 41 Westminster seats, and the only talent they can find to employ is dodgy expenses scammers and booze-addled fire-raisers disinterred from the dustier corners of the House Of Lords.

Under those circumstances, readers might feel that anyone holding their breath for the Great Labour Comeback would be better off waiting for Elvis’s.

Print Friendly

    3 Trackbacks/Pingbacks

    1. 14 10 15 17:43

      The talent puddle | Speymouth

    2. 14 10 15 18:16

      The talent puddle | Politics Scotland | Scoop.it

    3. 10 05 16 10:02

      Taking Stock, Part Two: Responsibility | A Wilderness of Peace

    209 to “The talent puddle”

    1. wee sandy says:

      Oh no! Don’t tell me Elvis ISN’T coming back??!

    2. Bob Mack says:

      Brilliant article Rev. Labour top officials steeped in corruption and criminality. That is why Glasgow is sick of them.
      As a previous Labour voter of over 35 years,I can confirm definitely that I will not return to Labour until this band of miscreants is swept from the scene ,as you would clean a dirty stable. Even then it is doubtful.
      There is no going back for me and many like me.Roll on the elections.

    3. Disco Dave says:

      And bearing in mind McAveety was council leader before in the late 90’s he is very much the “old/new” head honcho at the local authority.

    4. annie says:

      Telling it like it is, but Labour only listen to each other so nothing changes. Kezia’s Facebook guru is Duncan Hothersoll who’s main past-time is arguing with and insulting the people Labour hope will vote for them. Blair McDougall who spends his time on twitter doing much the same is also part of her team, same old, same old.

    5. heedtracker says:

      Should be interesting to see when the next, next, next “SNP honeymoon over” headlines from likes of Libby Carrell get farted out, tomorrow?

      Daily Heil report on McAveety,

      “The married former Scottish culture minister was seen ogling the dark-haired girl in the viewing gallery while speaking to his
      committee clerk.

      He was then heard to say: ‘There’s a very attractive girl in the second row. Dark and dusky.
      ‘We’ll maybe put a wee word out for her. She’s very attractive, very nice, very slim.

      ‘The heat’s getting to me. She’s got that Filipino look – the kind you’d see in a Gauguin painting.’

      Christ knows what his wife made of “We’ll maybe out a wee word out for her” and it is actually extremely disturbing.

    6. Exactly right Stu the Labour party change policies at a whim. The Tories are not flavour of the month at any time..
      The SNP have a leader in Nicola Sturgeon who appeals to the majority of voters. Since the referendum last year even NO voters that I know would vote for her at the next election.
      Compared to what,s on offer in the other parties it seems to me to be a foregone conclusion. Being an SNP activist and speaking to the public the impression I get is that she has more personality than Corbyn and Cameron put together.

    7. Taranaich says:

      To most reasonable observers the attacks on the pair have been over the top and counterproductive – any movement needs critical friends more than it needs unquestioning sycophants.

      Unfortunately most of our critics aren’t friends and most of our sycophants aren’t unquestioning.

    8. Bob Mack says:

      The Labour I see today are dull, without talent, and prone to falling headlong into traps set by Cameron and the Tory Party.
      They lack creativity, guile and intellect.

      Why on earth would you back them?

      I would be willing to bet that no-one could recall the last time a speech from anyone in Labour inspired them to do more than go back to bed.
      You can’t say that about the SNP.

    9. Finlay says:

      Labour’s biggest problem is that they believe their own lies.

      The only policy they could possibly hope of adhering to is a promise to remain the party of mass delusion and cognitive dissonance.

      Hell mend their broken minds.

    10. frankieboy says:

      Frank & Bob represent the Glasgow Old Guard. The cronies, the champagne socialists and are living embodiment of everything that went wrong with Labour in Scotland.

    11. Socrates MacSporran says:

      For the avoidance of doubt: Elvis is quite happy running his wee business in Dalmellington, alongside Lord Lucan.

      Neither is in the first flush of youth, that much they accept, and they don’t get out much these days, since Shergar had to be put to sleep and they could no longer go for hacks around Kyle Forest on the old horse.

      But, they have no complaints about the help they get from the Scottish Government and are not planning a comeback any time soon. Those of us locals who know who they are, and where they live, are also unlikely to “out” them any time soon.

      But, I can confirm, Elvis is well – he has not left the building.

    12. BLMac says:

      “the [SNP’s] spell on the electorate won’t last for much longer if there isn’t soon some clear evidence of progress in three key sectors of government: health, education and justice”

      I would vote for the SNP even without progress in those areas.

      I would vote for the SNP even if the FM indulged in porcine activities like the PM.

      And I vote for the SNP for one reason, and one reason only. INDEPENDENCE.

      Everything else can be sorted out afterwards.

    13. Bugger (the Panda) says:

      Labour GCC is just a corrupt drinking club, nothing more, nothing less.

    14. Dr Jim says:

      Booze-addled fire-raisers

      It’s the way you tell them, that’s a cracker

    15. Chitterinlicht says:

      Talent puddle -good one Reverend

      I think labour are finished up here as serious party for some time.

      They are not necessary, redundant even.

      Youth is against them.

      People don’t believe them.

      Satisfaction with government is against them

      They have ‘this much talent’ (collectively.)

      They are a one mantra party – SNP bad -Kezia Dugdales FMQ performances are a disgrace, an affront to Scottish politics.

      I know a few No voters who voted SNP at GE 15 because they can’t vote for labour even if they used to because they are so bad.

      etc

      Now they could slowly build confidence back in the party but they are so blinded by their history and hatred they can’t see it. Or maybe they know the end is nigh and they are going down ‘bleating’

      baaaaahhhhhd baaaaaaahd SNP baaaaaahd

    16. mealer says:

      Are Labour really so bereft of talent that they have to rely on McAveety? Pathetic.Where does McKenna get the idea that folk are going to go back to voting for that kind of dross?

    17. K1 says:

      The sociopathic Labour wannabes just can’t see what they are doing wrong, they believe everyone is wrong but them.

      10 signs for spotting a sociopath

      1) Sociopaths are charming. Sociopaths have high charisma and tend to attract a following just because people want to be around them. They have a “glow” about them that attracts people who typically seek guidance or direction. They often appear to be sexy or have a strong sexual attraction. Not all sexy people are sociopaths, obviously, but watch out for over-the-top sexual appetites and weird fetishes.

      2) Sociopaths are more spontaneous and intense than other people. They tend to do bizarre, sometimes erratic things that most regular people wouldn’t do. They are unbound by normal social contracts. Their behavior often seems irrational or extremely risky.

      3) Sociopaths are incapable of feeling shame, guilt or remorse. Their brains simply lack the circuitry to process such emotions. This allows them to betray people, threaten people or harm people without giving it a second thought. They pursue any action that serves their own self interest even if it seriously harms others. This is why you will find many very “successful” sociopaths in high levels of government, in any nation.

      4) Sociopaths invent outrageous lies about their experiences. They wildly exaggerate things to the point of absurdity, but when they describe it to you in a storytelling format, for some reason it sounds believable at the time.

      5) Sociopaths seek to dominate others and “win” at all costs. They hate to lose any argument or fight and will viciously defend their web of lies, even to the point of logical absurdity.

      6) Sociopaths tend to be highly intelligent, but they use their brainpower to deceive others rather than empower them. Their high IQs often makes them dangerous. This is why many of the best-known serial killers who successfully evaded law enforcement were sociopaths.

      7) Sociopaths are incapable of love and are entirely self-serving. They may feign love or compassion in order to get what they want, but they don’t actually FEEL love in the way that you or I do.

      8) Sociopaths speak poetically. They are master wordsmiths, able to deliver a running “stream of consciousness” monologue that is both intriguing and hypnotic. They are expert storytellers and even poets. As a great example of this in action, watch this interview of Charles Manson on YouTube.

      9) Sociopaths never apologize. They are never wrong. They never feel guilt. They can never apologize. Even if shown proof that they were wrong, they will refuse to apologize and instead go on the attack.

      10) Sociopaths are delusional and literally believe that what they say becomes truth merely because they say it! Charles Manson, the sociopathic murderer, is famous for saying, “I’ve never killed anyone! I don’t need to kill anyone! I THINK it! I have it HERE! (Pointing to his temple.) I don’t need to live in this physical realm…”

      Quoted from :https://archive.is/j3d6b

    18. Effijy says:

      What and you think expenses fraudsters, lechers, and drunken fire raiser are worse than a duly elected member of parliament sitting in parliament while spurious smears
      against her are being disproved daily?

      What is the world coming to?

      How is a corrupt Labour Party official supposed to earn a crooked living with people like the Rev turning them in?

    19. green_pedant says:

      “Arsonist”?! Who is the unionist hireling now? Fire Raiser please. Even if he committed the crime in England it should still be referred to as fire raising as that is what we call it in Scotland.

    20. Surely no “honeymoon is over” piece can exist without reference to Duncan’s famous “busted flush” tweet..lol.

    21. jimnarlene says:

      Roll on, the big clear oot, come May. Red Tories oot.

      SNP/SNP

    22. boris says:

      A devastating expose of all that is wrong in Glasgow Council

    23. David McDowell says:

      The media turncoats’ spell on the electorate won’t last for much longer.

    24. dakk says:

      Now why aren’t those custodians of morality (the MSM, sensibledave and Colin Rippey) all over Macaveety’s immoral case.

      Ye you got it in one,cos they don’t care cos he’s not SNP.

    25. mike cassidy says:

      There’s a guy works down the chip shop swears he’s Jim Murphy.

    26. donald anderson says:

      Labour Pie-oneer, McAveety, lost his seat along with other Labour MSP numpties and then decided to unseat sitting Glasgow Cooncillor numpties, so as they could improve the breeding stock. In fact numpties replaced numpties. Think of the back stabbing scramble to come after the 2016 elections.

      The pie-oneer’s qualifications? He is an Old Firm bam.

      I attended an ‘Irish Post’ debate on Ireland, in Malone’s Bar, Glasgow,where he stood in for fellow Sellick bam and sectarian loser, Mick McManus, MSP, along with a paid perjurer of an academic, whose name and instantly forgettable speech, escapes me, taking the Jelly Bean’s shilling in some English university. It was just their bad luck real. Irishmen from the Celtic League were over for the Yes campaign and many more to see the Dublin vs Donegal Gaelic footie on the telly, plus members of the “Irish For Yes” campaign. An exasperated McAveety wanted to know, when he was howled down, “Why am I a gombeen and ("Quizmaster" - Ed)”? He really pretended that he did not know and took the petted lip. They were used to talking, sectarian clichés and Labour propaganda to foul mouthed Labour voting Green Brits that they were clearly out of their depths, with their “witty” sectarian” low level cliques.

      “It’s over. It’s over”.

    27. Onwards says:

      At this point the SNP are the natural party of government here.
      They are simply seen as the pro-Scottish party.

      The Tories are generally seen as the anti-Scottish party.
      Right now they are proving that by making a joke of the referendum promises. Willing to devolve spending powers, but insufficient economic powers to grow the economy.

      And Labour are all over the place, but people will remember their part in the referendum for a long time. Miliband and Cameron together.. proclaiming that Scotland would be forbidden to use the pound, while their useless MPs in Scotland stood silent.

    28. Juteman says:

      The only way British Labour can recover in Scotland, is if they can manage to split the ‘Indy’ vote that presently votes SNP.

      A glance at certain so called Indy websites will show that the undermining attempt is in full flow. Whether these folk are useful fools, or employed by the British State is hard to deduce. Or not.

    29. DerekM says:

      What the hacks get wrong about the SNP is they seem to think the electorate are following them ,just like what used to happen with Labour.

      But since the referendum politics in Scotland has changed ,we now have an electorate that is more engaged than at any point in the history of UK politics.

      And as long as the SNP dont come out with no more independence they will have our support,the bonus is they are actually pretty good at running a government.

    30. Bugger (the Panda) says:

      @ Juteman 5:47 pm

      I have noticed that too and a load of new Twitter Accounts arriving with load or very few Followers all Following me.

      I am not that good.

    31. Awizgonny says:

      Superb.

    32. Truth says:

      @Bob Mack 4:41pm

      Let’s face it Bob, the only way to truly clean a stable is to burn it to the ground and build a new one.

    33. ArtyHetty says:

      Ha ha brilliantly put!

      Maybe Stu you could put some of the most popular posts, I know they are all good, into a big blue book like Wee Ginger Dug did with his. Xmas presis anyone, or, in the lead up to the Scottish election?

    34. Grouse Beater says:

      “Got your back, Bob”.
      “Got your back, Frank”.

      Said it before, will say it again.

      It’s almost impossible for a pro-Labour journalist, sucked into that society over decades, to throw off the ideology and lose some old friends in the process.

      Though they may compliment the SNP for some achievements, as soon as the electorate look jaundiced with them those same hacks will revert back to type.

    35. Proud Cybernat says:

      Problem is, many a Labour voter in Scotland (we allowed to say ‘Scotland’ yet??) look at this lot and try and imagine them in power in an Indy Scotland, think to themselves, “F@#k that! There’s no way I’m voting for indy if that is the kind of SLabour Government we’ll end up with after indy.”

      There’s method in the SLABour madness.

    36. Bob Mack says:

      @truth,
      Well they have the right man for that job in Mike Watson.

    37. Ruby says:

      This article is spot on.

      However I can’t believe any of this is a surprise to anyone.

      Perhaps when Jezerna claims that Jockistan is a one party state what he means is that there is only one party worth voting for

      ‘a contest in which one candidate or competitor is clearly superior to all the others and seems certain to win.’

      I believe that is what’s called a One Horse Race.

    38. Legerwood says:

      “…Labour in particular has changed its policies so often…”

      Indeed they have changed them so often that they no longer have policies just ‘tactics’.

      Unfortunately no one is any clearer about the tactics than they were about the policies.

      But they do a nice line in U-turns which may get them a place on Strictly.

    39. Colin Rippey says:

      @dakk
      Oh I have absolutely no problem with Labour councils being taken to task, in fact it will be a day to behold in 2017 when all these councillors are swept away by an SNP tsunami in similar fashion to the GE this year.

      Because ultimately it is local councils who really do run most things in the bigger cities, and getting in a bunch of new councillors (even if they are from the SNP) won’t do Glasgow any harm at all.

    40. dakk says:

      Well said Colin. 😉

    41. Ruby says:

      dakk says:
      14 October, 2015 at 5:38 pm

      Now why aren’t those custodians of morality (the MSM, sensibledave and Colin Rippey) all over Macaveety’s immoral case.

      Ruby replies:

      Good point! What I have been thinking about and something I did bring up on another thread is the morality of stealing/hacking/leaking emails.

      Kezia seems to be involved in a lot of incidents involving the theft of emails. I don’t know if it is illegal but it must be immoral. Is there a difference between ordinary letters (snail mail) and email? Would Kezia be OK with someones letters being steamed opened and then released to the press.

      I do remember the Frank MacAveety ‘nice very nice’ incident and also the Iain Davidson ‘doing’ scandal and I was very surprised that the women in Scottish Labour who claim to be feminists had nothing to say about these incidents.

    42. David McDowell says:

      dakk @ 5:38pm
      I suspect Colin Rippey can’t work up the courage to comment after Rev Stu ripped him a new arse on Monday.

    43. Ruby says:

      ‘McKenna and fellow columnist Iain Macwhirter of the Herald have been taking some flak on social media in recent days’

      Nothing wrong with that but I suppose the difference between McKenna & MacWhirter and the rest of the pack is that McKenna & MacWhirter seem to care about the flak.

    44. Ruby says:

      Legerwood perhaps that’s what ‘The Killers’ were singing about when they asked

      ‘Are they human or are they dancers?’

    45. john king says:

      K1 says
      “1) Sociopaths are charming. Sociopaths have high charisma and tend to attract a following just because people want to be around them. They have a “glow” about them ”

      What?
      you are kidding aren’t you?
      http://tinyurl.com/pquelwl

    46. Bugger (the Panda) says:

      Ruby @ 6:42

      I think it may be because they are puting their heads above the parapet and feel that they need support and not abuse.

      They have to make a living as Freelancers and there are few outlets for their output, if they support our side.

    47. Colin Rippey says:

      @Dave McDowell
      Nope.

    48. Harry McAye says:

      STV’s Colin Mackay tonight outside the Aberdeen conference centre, trying to paint the news of high unemployment in Scotland while it’s dropping in the rest of the UK, as bad news for the SNP on the eve of the conference. I’m sorry, but aren’t we supposed to be better together?

      This increase, along with the Scottish economy apparently stalling, is happening under the union. Is it not conceivable that things might improve if we were independent and have all the relevant levers to shape our own destiny? If it was the other way round guaranteed that would also be spun as a negative for the SNP.

    49. gus1940 says:

      Who can forget the glass half-empty monotone excreted over us nearly every night by Bob Wylie when he was one of the star reporters at that hotbed of Labour Activists – BBC Scotland.

    50. HandandShrimp says:

      Iain McWhirter has written some excellent pieces over the years and overall, in my opinion, is one of Scotland’s best journalists. Not every article is sympathetic to everything that the SBP do but that is OK because he isn’t afraid to say he agrees when agrees.

      Severin is remarkable in his “Salmond/SNP/Sturgeon accused blow” consistency – it is like he has John McTernan as a flatmate.

      Kevin is an above the line troll and I think he gets paid by the click. Sometimes his pieces are funny, sometimes they are like an aardvark ice skating sometimes they appear to the ramblings of a man venting a spleen over a bottle of wine. Next week he could be drawing the ire of Labour supporters for having a go at the ones that back austerity tonight (assuming some will – they might surprise and all fall in line with Jeremy).

    51. gordoz says:

      What Kev McKenna & Iain MacWhirter suffer from is that they keep returning to the media bubble and TV Blurb for their stories (its obvious), sad but true.

      For clearly educated guys they seem to fall into the same trap as others in the public domain and end up back in the fold blurting out establishment claptrap that sells in unionist papers.
      (Supposed they need to earn a living some way).

      ***********************

      REV – please have a look at 6 O’clock STV news tonight and their piece on SNP conference.

      Its an absolute howler from Colin McKay re SNP conference Bad
      (even the wife spoke up)

      Spoke for about 2 & 1/2 minutes about SNP crisis on eve of Aberdeen conf.

      Has to be seen to be believed !

      Oil production BAD
      NHS BAD
      Jobs BAAAD
      MT BAAAAAAD
      Honeymoon over for Sturgeon
      Pressure of 100,000 members Critical
      Splits, Breaks , rebellions the lot

      Everything and their Granny is BAAAAD
      Labour ready to pounce blah, blah, blah

      Im sure there’s something worth posting or keeping for later

      COMPLETE HOWLER FROM STV NEWS to dampen SNP conf

      Def worth keeping to see how it plays against the other lot.

      Anyone else see that mince at 6pm ???

    52. Davy says:

      I have been thinking that it might be a good idea to vote for the SNP next year for in Scotland but then vote for either labour or UKIP in the next big country election. That way the SNP can look after Scotland and leave all the big stuff for like UKIP say. I mean not the Torys. and not the greens nutters. Everyone wins then.

    53. HandandShrimp says:

      Gordoz

      I never watch TV news – it is shite and rots the brain. 🙂

    54. Robert Graham says:

      Well ,a fair appraisal of Labour in Scotland ,a sad case beyond redemption , in saying that I am a little puzzled and surprised that these masters of the universe are capable of the coordinated attacks that have been launched since Jesus Christ was anointed , someone must be pulling the strings, are they so afraid of a small political party whose only following is based in the northern part of these islands called Britain , that they will come together ,in the background ,in the shadows ,to try and crush any hint of another vote, just a thought. Better Together Didn’t Go Away it’s just that most people are not aware of this, but I bet the MSM are right on message.

    55. Legerwood says:

      Gordoz @ 7.22 pm

      I did not see the mince on STV but I did see the mince on BBC at 6 o’clock and at 6.30 pm on Reporting Scotland.

    56. john king says:

      @Davy 7.27
      Eh?

    57. Big Jock says:

      I think people were justifiably and angry at Mckenna and Mcwhirter. Not because the SNP is above criticism.

      It was for presuming Thomsons guilt and towing the MSM line. What they wrote was sniping, innuendo and completely baseless. If they continue with playground journalism and pseudo independence support. Then they will continue to get angry retorts from the electorate. The ball is in their court not ours.

    58. Macart says:

      Cracking dissection Rev.

      Kez’s new team.

      A collection of tribal brainfarts looking for a brain to escape from.

      People who care more about damaging their opposition than giving a shit about their electorate. If there was ever any doubt of that, the past few weeks FMQs should remove any lingering doubt.

      They are so rapped up in anti SNP tactics and strategy I wonder if they are even aware they have an electorate? Or are we just the currency which gives them the opportunity to act like pooh hurling chimps on crack?

      It doesn’t matter anymore. The job at hand is protecting people as best possible and then at the first opportunity running our own show.

    59. Alastair Ewen says:

      ..or waiting for Godot.

    60. Bob Mack says:

      I think there is a betting pool among the journalists to see who can get something to stick on the SNP. Winner scoops the pot.

      With interest added, I think the pot will be quite sizeable before they manage it.

    61. galamcennalath says:

      A brilliant appraisal of the state Labour have got themselves into.

      You won’t see this quality of journalism from the dead tree brigade!

      Come to think of it, this would make a nice full page spread in The National.

    62. ahundredthidiot says:

      I have never supported Labour, who stood back and did nothing for my home town.

      Their last big bigshot could be argued to be Donald Dewar, so back in the day when The Herald sort of reported the truth, I recall an article outlining what was left in his will.

      250 grand worth of Railtrack shares.

      Labour. For the working man.

      My arse.

      These people are feebleminded, insecure, intellectually challenged bottomfeeders.

    63. Bob Mack says:

      The whole scenario is like a love triangle.
      Labour want to be loved by the electorate ,but have a serious rival.(SNP)
      The SNP want to make the people happy,but face constant abuse from the rival.(Labour)
      The people pick the one who seems more reliable (SNP).which infuriates the other(Labour)

      Labour react with even more fury towards their rival (SNP), and occasionally towards the people who spurned them..

      Friends ,colleagues (media), join in and reinforce this sense of Labour injustice, propelling them towards another cycle of the same behaviour..

      Barbara Cartland could probably have done more justice to this tale.

    64. Dave McEwan Hill says:

      Which government produces the employment figures?

    65. Tackety Beets says:

      Aye , STV tonight was the worst yet.

      I totally sympathise with those who have lost their jobs , but come on MSM it is under your BT Union with our masters@WM.

      How many , like me , warned that a NO vote would be followed by an almighty thrashing For Scotland. O fear not it will be done sneakily , a wee word in the ear in boardrooms etc to Scotland’s disadvantage, where it can be justified.

      I have seen it constantly during my lifetime , supported SNP since 60s . I just fear the worst.
      Now I admit it is so refreshing to realise that 50% of the population are watching and seeing what is really happening.

      DKK , nae sign o Wullie Podmore lately ?

    66. heedtracker says:

      Severin and Kevin are routine special guests wheeled out whenever BBC etc require a talking head and they are always presented as neutral and intelligent, which is just one more of how completely mad with bias these newsrooms really are.

      They are merely hacks and Carrell is a particularly henchman for rancid The Graun, appearing on the telly gives them a totally absurd gravitas that you can only get by sitting in Pacific Quay and putting the boot in to Scotland’s democracy.

      One way of getting kicked off rancid Graun’s CiF is telling him he’s the soon to be Guardian foreign correspondent in Scotland. He loves that.

      STV have that Slab berk Pia, often half cut too.

      The three horsemen of the UKOK apocalypse, one may well slide off his horse pished.

    67. Dr Jim says:

      @Davy 7.27pm

      I thin joo got sun splainin to do Lucy

    68. Paul Wilson says:

      I will never ever vote for Labour again if the SNP were to do wrong then I would just not vote rather than vote for the lying two faced ("Tractor" - Ed)ous Labour party.

    69. De Valera says:

      I wouldn’t compare Labour to Elvis, he is missed by millions. Labour are the Gary Glitter of politics.

    70. heedtracker says:

      And right on their not actual progressive liberal rule Britannia from Landsend to Carlisle cue-

      http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2015/oct/14/guardian-view-on-snp-lords-of-all-they-survey-nicola-sturgeon

      “There is little sign in the polls that Labour is winning back support from the SNP. But Scottish politics is still about who is the true opposition to the Conservatives. In the last few years this is a battleground on which the nationalists have regularly triumphed. The priority for the SNP is to triumph once again in May. Until then, the independence issue will be firmly hidden away.”

      Ghastly photo of Sturgeon, sneaky shit ending. Red tory SLab, true opposition to blue tory? They’re having a larf. JC’s clearly just one more norf Landan bullshitter and the Blair/Brown glory years have also been airbrushed out of teamGB history.

      Wouldn’t put anything past these staggering liars and hypocrites.

    71. Ruby says:

      heedtracker says:
      14 October, 2015 at 8:23 pm

      Severin and Kevin are routine special guests wheeled out whenever BBC etc require a talking head

      Ruby replies: I expect they get pretty well paid for these appearances. I suppose all these pro journalists have to give the client what they want. They are not free to write & say what they want.

    72. Sinky says:

      When voters come to choose between Nicola Stugeon a UK nationally known leader and Kezia Dugdale who has never won an public electoral contest in her life or a choice between John Swinney who has balanced Scotland’s books for each of eight difficult years or Iain Gray who won his safe Labour seat by 150 votes and predicted that the £750 million Edinburgh Tram scheme would only cost £375m from the Scottish Executive’s integrated transport fund to build tram lines to serve the north and west, the first to be running by 2009. Mr Gray says the money would pay for “at least” the North Edinburgh Loop as well as out to the Airport..

      .. then it is game over for Labour.

    73. Michael McCabe says:

      48 red Tories vote with the nasty party to pass the Austerity Bill. Heartless B DS

    74. Alun says:

      Brilliant. Just brilliant.

    75. heedtracker says:

      They are not free to write & say what they want.

      What they want Ruby is for the SNP to disappear asap. Kev’s pot belly’s a bit distracting but Severin makes a good side show bob for future Sir Gordon Brewer, two smarmy middle class suits, sneering at Scottish democracy in a £400 million glass box of great British grot on the Clyde, is always worth not paying your licence fee for.

      Lets not forget the vote NO or else silly tash brigade

      http://wingsoverscotland.com/walking-the-dinosaur/

      Good old Mike call me Shahib White.

    76. Rock says:

      “and no confidence that any given position won’t be reversed by next week.”

      They have one position we can be fully confident they will never reverse and are unanimous about: “SNP bad”

      Apart from that, they don’t have a position on anything else.

      They abstain and then lie about it.

      I hope they lose every single constituency seat in 2016.

      Vote SNP+SNP in 2016.

      Don’t take any risks by giving the list vote to the Greens or to anyone else.

      Beware of Green sympathisers, now in the SNP:

      Paula Rose says:

      “The Brechin branch of the SNP had a fab discussion with the SGP candidate at the GE – a really good discussion – plenty of agreement xx”

      The same Greens who stood against the SNP in the Westminster election and helped the Tory viceroy of Scotland get re-elected.

    77. KenC says:

      The SNP’s approval ratings are astonishing, given the hammering they receive week after week.

      I/we are accused of being brainwashed by them, but with the media being almost 100% unionist, where and when is this brainwashing taking place?

      Are pods being left in our sheds or attics?

      I can see Gordon Brown now, charging down the M8, shouting, “You’re in danger!” “You fools,they’re after us, they’re after all of us!” “They’re here already!” “You’re next!”

      Come to think of it, he already has; almost. 😉

    78. Dr Jim says:

      I read these daft papers and then move on the daft comments that follow predicting the end is nigh for the SNP and I have to say it all just sounds like the same half dozen folk moaning to each other about when it’s going to happen

      One day it might, but here’s the thing, by the time it does it’s highly likely these same folk and the “journalists” who punt this nonsense won’t be here and neither will the daft papers they’re reading this stuff in

      We get people from our side as well saying stuff like “I’ll leave the party if it doesn’t do so and so” or I won’t vote for them, well of course you wouldn’t if there’s something you don’t like that’s democracy

      But then you’ll have to think, who will I vote for
      Kezia will be about 70 years old by then living in a home for the bewildered, and Ruthless will be living in France in one of those barn things still trying to make all the French speak the Queens English
      Willie Rennie will be an old Creel Fisherman on a craggy beach somewhere telling stories of how it was really his idea to make Scotland Independent

      So all that’ll be left will be Dame Mhairi Black of Paisley Chippie Lady Protector of Scotland

      See I can make stuff up as well as any stupid journalist

    79. Hoss Mackintosh says:

      Rev Stu,
      A great piece of analysis which highlights the problems of the Unionist Parties and Labour in particular.

      I would like to add a couple of points if I may.

      Firstly, the “talent puddle” is sitting in the middle of a desert and there is no sign of rain coming for a very long time.

      As you have highlighted in several articles about the party conferences of the three Unionist parties, they all have a declining and ageing membership. There is no new young talent moving to these parties and this becomes a very difficult situation to reverse and rectify.

      For Labour, it is not helped by the pack of dinosaur ex-MPs and ex-MSPs still trying to cling onto any seats as this also acts a as block to any new talent, if it could to be found.

      If you contrast this with the SNP and Greens who have lots of “bright young things” some even MPs and MSPs then the size of the gulf is wide and is rapidly widening all the time.

      My other point, is about the lack of Labour, Tory and Lib-Dems politicians coming through from Oxford and Cambridge Universities.

      Someone highlighted this on Peat Worrier a while back and it is due to the effect of the student fees required to go there as compared to staying in Scotland.

      This stream of talent was very important for the Union as it gave the Labour, Tory and Lib-Dem parties a steady stream of young Scots who were moulded by these universities into the UK establishment. Many Scots Labour, Tory and Liberal MPs took this route to power but no more.

      The last of these was Danny Alexander, a Highlander, who had gone completely native to the South-East of England and looked more at home with the Eton Tories than with his own party or the country of his birth.

      So the Oxbridge stream has also finally dried up too and cannot be turned on again unless the Tories give free fees to Scots to their privileged two universities which is not likely to happen.

      So just where are the new generation of Unionist leaders coming from to save the Union? No wonder the MSM, BBC and Unioinist are getting worried and more hysterical by the day.

      The tiny talent puddle in a desert soon to be swept away by another SNP tsunami.

    80. Angra Mainyu says:

      As ever, good article, Rev.

      Actually, though, I think the prognosis for Scottish Labour is even worse than you suggest. I’ve noticed that many of those who jump from SLAB to SNP do so with a real deep sense of anger and resentment — kicking themselves for ever having been so stupid as to vote Labour in the first place.

      I’ve never seen anything like it. You’d probably need to look at the regret Germans felt after the Second World War to find anything comparable to that.

      Looking at all the people I know who have jumped from Labour to SNP over the last decade, I am assured not only that none of them will ever go back “home” to them but that their hatred of them, like mine, will continue to deepen and grow.

      Some will no doubt say it’s quite sad, but I’m probably motivated more by my hatred of Scottish Labour and the way they ripped us all off over decades than I am by the appeal of the SNP.

    81. tartanfever says:

      I see MacWhirter, Riddoch, Stephen Paton, Michael Gray of Common Weal (certainly not Sense) and the RISE mob have all jumped the shark with their ‘Scottish water is being privatised’ schtick over the last few days.

      Going tabloid and trying to infer the entirety of Scottish Water is being sold off is certainly one of the low points for this mob and for which the deserve a ticking off.

      Possibly MacWhirter and Riddoch have reverted to their original positions of being ‘Devo-maxers’, which they only dropped when they realised that a second question wouldn’t be on the referendum ballot.

    82. handclapping says:

      It really is a problem, especially as they need a new “leader” every few years so they can use ‘It wisnae me. We’ve moved on now and we’ll do better next time.’ as an excuse.

      Including stand-ins just how many “leaders” has Slab had from the saintly Donald to the snarling Dug?

      Oh dear, never mind, lovely Slab. May you reach parity with the Tories in 2016.

    83. punklin says:

      Message to Messrs McWhirter and McKenna (don’t suppose this will reach them but you never know…)

      As a v active SNP member, I like your writing, I respect it and more to the point I read it in order to learn, but I just think you’re misreading/overplaying the SNP losing it and proving all too fallible line…

      It’s a journalistic rut that it may be hard to avoid but it ain’t reality. Sure, it is worrying that the SNP is susceptible to centralisation and lobbyists/corporate voices – it would be naive to think they won’t need scrutiny and correction by the more radical membership but that is not the same as the easy “honeymoon is over” line you’ve been adopting of late.

      Please raise your hitherto strong game!

    84. tartanarse says:

      There’s a man works down the chip shop swears he’s shouty Matheson..

    85. HandandShrimp says:

      I see the Graun Opinion piece is that the SNP are probably bad but the chances are that they will win in May because they are still popular….the baistarts.

      🙂

    86. K1 says:

      Aye John, yer right, that picture does however fit this sociopathic descriptor:

      ‘They tend to do bizarre, sometimes erratic things that most regular people wouldn’t do. They are unbound by normal social contracts. Their behavior often seems irrational or extremely risky.’

    87. galamcennalath says:

      tartanfever says:

      …. positions of being ‘Devo-maxers’, which they only dropped when they realised that a second question wouldn’t be on the referendum ballot.

      As long as DevoMax lurks in the background, independence probably won’t happen.

      In IndyRef1 it was the elephant in the room. Popular, yet ignored initially. Then used as a weapon by WM in the final stages.

      A phrase I used in a previous post/article is that it is a ‘demon which needs to be exorcised’.

      When the present Scotland Bill has run its course, it should be crystal clear to everyone that WM will never actually give us DevoMax.

      DevoMax must be seen to by all to be dead, gone, buried.

      Then the DevoMaxers must make their minds up – DevoNotMuch or Independence.

    88. dakk says:

      ‘The Talent Puddle’

      And the small,rapidly evaporating puddle reeks increasingly of ammonia.

    89. Capella says:

      @Hoss MacIntosh
      So just where are the new generation of Unionist leaders coming from to save the Union? 

      China?

    90. Tam Jardine says:

      The success in council elections by the SNP has been boiling away, largely unreported and to many, unknown.

      I think the establishment have withstood the referendum, have suffered humiliation in May and are now facing not only a returned SNP majority but also the mother of all earthquakes at council level.

      We are watching the dismantling of the unionist stranglehold on Scotland and the council election is hopefully one of the final acts.

      It is remarkable. To contemplate a change in the order of Glasgow City Council is wonderful.

      The press are so out of step with the dynamic of the people. Most folk seem to be on a scale from ‘terrified of losing pension’ up to ‘actively campaigning for others to retain state support’ whilst the press range from ‘SNP critical independence supporters’ up to full blown xenophobia.

      This disconnect between the debate the people are having/need to have and the debate and agenda of the press can’t go on. It is unsustainable, extremely boring and actually does nothing in itself to improve anything.

      Either the Yes side triumph and we become independent or Scotland withers. Either the SNP keep winning or we are ruled by tories forever. Either the press wins, the press changes, or the press dies in Scotland.

      I agree with comments above about the state labour are in. I have no doubt there are enthusiastic slab supporters out there who will never turn to the SNP but the heart of the movement as it was is dead. I am sure any one SNP member would confirm- the choice of candidates in all levels of election is staggering. How do you choose form 16, 18, 20 candidates when there are so many SNP members with strong credentials on the list?

      How does that compare with slab? lib dem? tory? I would really love to know!

    91. heedtracker says:

      What must it be like for the 70+ years of SLabour crew and their charming right to reign over their UK Scotland region, in BBC Scotland particularly.

      70+ years of SNP Scots.gov? Lest face it, this is what the whole Britnat media and SLabour are having to contend with, if only because they assumed they’d own Scotland for another 70 years too.

      Its why they’re going big with their one party state monstering. They devoutly believe Scotland belongs to them and under them, one SLabour party for ever and ever. And the blue tories were more than happy with it all, for obvious rule Britannia reasons. Is it nationalism or good Edinburgh government, trying to fix 70+ years of SLabour.

    92. caz-m says:

      Where was the Shadow Secretary of State for Scotland OR the Leader of Her Majesties Opposition (Scottish Branch)tonight?

      Not a sign of Murray or Dugdale on Labour friendly, Scotland Tonight or Scotland 2015.

      PS.

      McWhirter and McKenna are getting noticed less and less, so occasionally they have to come out with a shock horror story to get them back up the ratings.

      They are nothing more than a couple of drag chains round the ankles of all forward thinking Scots.

    93. yesindyref2 says:

      @Ruby
      “but I suppose the difference between McKenna & MacWhirter and the rest of the pack is that McKenna & MacWhirter seem to care about the flak.”

      Yes they do, and perhaps more to the point, they care full stop. Which means they will be variable, and reactive.

      From McWhirter’s pieces in the Herald he certainly reads Wings, and other sites, and I’d say he also reads comments in the Herald, not just his own threads but others, and may well skim through comments btl in Wings.

      I like both McKenna and McWhirters pieces even when I disagree. I quite often do. But I think they believe what they write – at the time.

      As for Labour it was sad watching Katy Clarke last night, McTernan I care not about.

    94. Ruby says:

      KenC says:
      14 October, 2015 at 9:54 pm

      I/we are accused of being brainwashed by them, but with the media being almost 100% unionist, where and when is this brainwashing taking place?

      Ruby replies:

      That’s a very good question!

      Have you seen the film ‘Flesh Gordon’

      ‘Emperor Wang (the Perverted) is leader of the planet Porno and sends his mighty “Sex Ray” towards Earth, turning everyone into sex-mad fiends.

      Planet SNP are sending out Rays and turning everyone into SNP-mad fiends.

    95. yesindyref2 says:

      @dakk “And the small,rapidly evaporating puddle reeks increasingly of ammonia.”

      I was thinking formaldehyde.

    96. Dave McEwan Hill says:

      Rock at 9.47

      I agree with Rock here. As I wrote yesterday there is a fundamental misunderstanding among some following our happy relationship with Greens at the Referendum. The Greens are not on our side in this coming election. They are opponents.

      They have a good case to make to try to persuade folk to vote for them and they are perfectly entitled to do so but the case is not that a Green vote progresses the independence cause.
      At this election if it takes votes from the SNP on the lists it impedes it.

      It has to be SNP 1 and 2.

      In my mind it is unfortunate that some accommodation could not have been considered for a pan independence alliance to fight the election. Then again I think it unfortunate that we are not fighting the election ourselves with independence as the main focus.
      The longer we fanny about with such as the Smith Commission the more credibility we give to a variety of anti independence impediments. We have to get the balance right.

    97. Hoss Mackintosh says:

      @Capella,

      Unionist Leaders from China?
      Not sure about that – No leaders more like!

      Onwards to a majority in 2106 and to wipe out the Labour councils in 2017.

    98. Paula Rose says:

      Wow Hoss – that’s forward thinking!

    99. dakk says:

      Yesindyref2

      ‘I was thinking of formaldehyde’

      Is there formaldehyde in pish too ? 🙂

    100. Ian Brotherhood says:

      If ‘Labour’ is having trouble finding itself, it might do well to remember why it exists at all:

      102 years have now passed since the Senghenydd Colliery disaster – 440 dead, on Oct 14th 1913.

      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Senghenydd_Colliery_Disaster

    101. Cherry says:

      O/T

      I hope I’m not repeating something which has been covered but there is an indiegogo link which I think would really be worth contributing to..plus it’s got perks! It was posted in the last blog from Stu. It’s from a guy called Alan Knight and he is making a documentary from G.A. London’s book London Calling worth a punt.

      http://www.wingsoverscotland.com/the-accusing-fingers/comment-page-1/#comment-2069342

    102. Cherry says:

      Sorry,blasted auto correction. Should be Ponsonby not London!

    103. Grouse Beater says:

      Poor character judgement if the SNP thought they could rely on Labour to defeat the Tory government on anything.

    104. yesindyref2 says:

      OT
      Missed most of it, but BBC with “30% of world’s shipping will be using North-West passage (Arctic) by 2030″, with some guy from Iceland.”

      That’s North-West, which is practically untalked about, there’s more talk about the North-East round Russia. Well, slap bang in the middle of that is the old highly strategic “GIUK gap”, (Greenland Iceland UK Gap), or to be more precise, the new GIS – Greenland Iceland SCOTLAND Gap. Not much regarded by the UK Defence establishment it seems, who forget their history.

      So:
      1) NATO will put iScotland at the back of the queue, yeah right.
      2) Time to dust off the covers, blow off the cobwebs, of the Hunterston hub business plans, and get some investment into it. We’re talking 19,224 TEU (Twenty-foot Equivalent Unit – standard size) container ships currently, and probably bigger by then.

      Probably worth more than all the oil in UKCS even at pre-2014 prices, in terms of economy and revenue.

      “The direct and indirect added value jointly are about €22 billion. The Port also provides jobs to some 145,000 people in direct and indirect employment. “ (Rotterdam)

      plus “So the strategic value of the Port of Rotterdam is currently already 30% bigger than its economic importance and may well increase further.”

      http://www.rsm.nl/about-rsm/news/detail/1470-port-of-rotterdam-is-of-pivotal-importance-to-the-netherlands-international-competitive-strength/

      I want some of that for iScotland.

    105. yesindyref2 says:

      OT again
      “The direct and indirect added value jointly are about €22 billion.”

      We see talk about “worth £10 milion / £100 million to the economy”, in that case perhaps £18 billion to the economy.

      Fine and dandy, but what is that in revenue for the Gov, iScotGov? What we need is some sort of approximate generalised factor, so we can roughly say 50%, 20%, 80%, by the time profits get taxed, wages get taxed and nett wages get recirculated in spending and VAT and the circle of wages and profits goes on and on in decreasing spirals for revenue.

      Any “big picture” economists in the house …

    106. john king says:

      Now heres a thing

      http://blogs.lse.ac.uk/politicsandpolicy/there-was-no-rise-in-scottish-nationalism-understanding-the-snp-victory/

      Whats your take on that rev?
      we know what Peter Bell thinks of it! 🙂

    107. yesindyref2 says:

      @John King
      Interesting article. Ironically I agree with Duncan Hothersall, that early summer 2014 data is far too early to judge “nationalism”.

      More to the point, however, is that the author doesn’t consider that nationalism can be dual for more than one reason, and perhaps for instance some Independence supporters have decided to take ownership of both Scottish and British nationality, one of the arguing points of the Ref. The figures show a growth in “both” and very little growth in British only or More British. From the beginning of the Ref in 2012 I firmly asserted my right to both, after Independence.

    108. john king says:

      “More to the point, however, is that the author doesn’t consider that nationalism can be dual for more than one reason, and perhaps for instance some Independence supporters have decided to take ownership of both Scottish and British nationality”

      Yup
      I couldn’t agree more
      the author seems to equate “feeling Scottish ” with nationalism and a innate support for independence and
      “feeling British” as an automatic support for the union which is utter rubbish,

      There are people in the no camp who are rabidly anti English and people who follow the Robert Peffers line of thinking (of which I am one) is that you can be no less British if you vote yes,
      no matter what YOU or I think we’re still British

    109. Angra Mainyu says:

      “From the beginning of the Ref in 2012 I firmly asserted my right to both, after Independence.”

      A strange thing to say. And since Britain would cease to exist after Scottish independence, its also a silly thing to say. You can apparently claim to be British and Scottish now though.

    110. yesindyref2 says:

      @angra Mainyu “And since Britain would cease to exist after Scottish independence, its also a silly thing to say. You can apparently claim to be British and Scottish now though.”

      No, it’s not Britain ceases to exist, it’s the UK.

    111. jacksg says:

      O/T

      From our friends at the P&J.

      OMG what would we do without strictly come dancing aaagh 😕

      https://www.pressandjournal.co.uk/fp/news/politics/holyrood/723510/primetime-tv-shows-could-be-lost-under-snp-bbc-plans/

    112. john king says:

      Maybe the Scots who feel “Scottish” should follow the eastern trend of getting plastic surgery to make them look more western.

      http://tinyurl.com/nqc5r57

      Is there an op that can give you ginger hair and slightly blue complexion?
      or maybe the ones who feel “British” in the unionist sense
      can get an op that gives them pot bellies and pork chop whiskers?
      http://tinyurl.com/nk6ftok
      then we can tell each other apart. 😉

    113. john king says:

      “And since Britain would cease to exist after Scottish independence, i”

      Dear oh dear oh dear
      not been paying attention have we?
      Britain does NOT cease to exist as an entity after a yes vote in continues as it is not the same thing as the UK

      Seriously I really cant understand why this is difficult to get?

    114. john king says:

      beat me to it indyref. 🙂

    115. Brian Doonthetoon says:

      The UK would cease to exist after independence, Angra Mainyu.

      Great Britain would still exist – it’s the largest island of the archipelago that is the British Isles.

    116. Angra Mainyu says:

      “No, it’s not Britain ceases to exist, it’s the UK.”

      Great Britian as I understand it was the name given to the alliance of Scotland and England in 1707. As i understand it, Ireland and Wales did not take part in the creation of that Union per se because they were de facto colonies of England.

      Regardless, it is abundantly clear that Scottish independence will most likely result in us all having no claim or right to a British passport. Just as you can’t have half of a dog, you will not be able to have a Scottish passport and a British one at the same time.

      Most of these terms, Nationalist, British, Scottish, UK, etc., have multiple meanings and don’t help.

      I take the view that Scotland’s relationship with England was of a vassal-colonial nature — disguised where it suited them as a partnership of sorts — and I have absolutely no wish to ever be considered British. I also take issue with any assumption that hinges on a desire on my part to continue to consider myself British and anyone claiming to fight for my right to do so.

      In short, I want nothing to do with Britishness and Britian. I never did. When you consider what Britain stands for in the world (imperialism, slavery, aggression, etc.), it puzzles me that any sensible person would want anything to do with it.

    117. ronnie anderson says:

      @ BrianDTT am gonna tak ah stap tae yer erse ,there is no Great in Britain , only Britain, ah hope yer suitability chastened n dont let it happen again, or you,ll be bereft of a Alert Reader Badge lol.

      Ah never brought enough wee Scotland Flags wie me & no many Saltire/Catalunian Badges left.

    118. Angra Mainyu says:

      John King, I wish it was true that I wasn’t paying attention. I don’t buy into your narrow definition of Britishness that equates it with being from this particular island or whatever you are saying.

      As I said before, all these definitions and terms have multiple meanings. I reject any idea that I am British. And I reject anyone who defines me as British. You can stick that.

    119. john king says:

      “As I said before, all these definitions and terms have multiple meanings. I reject any idea that I am British”

      Whatever definition the Establishment have chosen to usurp from the meaning makes it no less true that British Isles were the British Isles long before England and Scotland were even countries

    120. heedtracker says:

      Professor Smirky of Slovenia is displeased with, well everyone that disagrees with toryboy world

      http://new.spectator.co.uk/2015/10/centralising-illiberal-catastrophic-the-snps-one-party-state/

      “Imagine that the ruling party controlled 95 per cent of MPs, and policed the political culture through a voluntary army of internet fanatics who seek out and shout down dissent.

      Welcome to Nicola Sturgeon’s Scotland in 2015.”

      Oh god what next from this nutcase.

    121. manandboy says:

      SHOULD THE PRINCIPLE THAT RESIDENCY IS THE PRIMARY QUALIFICATION TO VOTE IN A REFERENDUM ON INDEPENDENCE
      BE RETAINED FOR INDY2?

      Prof. Ailsa Henderson’s study of March this year found that:
      52.7% of people born in Scotland voted Yes while 47.3% voted No.
      27.9% of people living in Scotland but from the rest of the UK voted Yes
      while 72.1% voted No.
      42.9% of people living in Scotland originally from outside of the UK voted Yes
      while 57.1% voted No.

      blogs.lse.ac.uk/politicsandpolicy/there-was-no-rise-in-scottish-nationalism-understanding-the-snp-victory/

    122. Angra Mainyu says:

      John King, you just won’t listen, will you? I met a drunk guy/Hunnish lunatic at a bus stop one night who insisted I was British because “we aw like fish n chips…” Was that you?

      Throughout the ages the country we now call Scotland has had many names attributed to it. From Pictland, to Alba, and Caledonia, right through to Northern Britian; take your pick. Rumour has it there’s a map out there that defines Scotland as Northern England — i have actually looked at German maps that more or less did so.

      Of all the words we could use to describe this place, you seem hell bent on using the one that is most demeaning and troubling (Britian). Why?

      I think you are confusing geographical definitions with political ones. A silly error. If you are ever unlucky enough to bump into a couple of ISIS chaps, I’m sure they’ll do a better job of explaining the distinction and why it matters than I will…

    123. Onwards says:

      @Angra Mainyu

      “I reject any idea that I am British. And I reject anyone who defines me as British. You can stick that.”
      ———

      That’s fine, but that sort of attitude is hardly going to attract those with a part-British identity to vote for independence. And that’s what needs to happen.

      Practically, we also have to bear in mind that we will NEVER be able to stop having Britishness forced upon us in the TV and shops, so we might as well take ownership of it, and redefine it – making it clear that a British identity doesn’t have to include London rule.

      The idea of ‘Britishness’ will be a lot simpler after independence, as it will be solely about a part-shared identity, culture and geography, not politics.

      Maybe campaigning for a better Scotland and a better Britain would help to get us over the line.
      And we can’t so easily be slammed as ‘separatists’.

    124. Marcia says:

      Latest Yougov Scottish Poll – SNP lead by 30%

      https://twitter.com/theSNP/status/654573051896549376

    125. heedtracker says:

      Its a Horatio Nelson, Prof T double toryboy whammy this week

      http://blogs.new.spectator.co.uk/2015/10/yes-tories-can-be-progressive-if-theyre-doing-conservatism-right/

      Horation Nelson says

      “But to me, the more important point is that conservatism – done properly – is also progressive. That is to say: it narrows the opportunity gap between the rich and the poor. ”

      In a red and blue tory teamGB, inequality highest ever etc.

      Next up from the toryboy rule Britannia madhouse, Napoleon Bonaparte says, Margaret Thatcher was essentially a commie, here’s why.

    126. manandboy says:

      Prof. Adam Tomkins:- Teaches Law at Glasgow University but is afaiaa unqualified to speak about politics or economics.

      Expertise in one field is no guarantee of even basic competence in any other.

    127. galamcennalath says:

      Britain and British. They do have multiple meanings.

      Yes, strictly Britain is an island and those who live there are British.

      However to an awful lot of people it goes beyond the strict formal definition. Colloquially, Brit or British means political identity, and there’s no getting away from that.

      A good parallel is … tell a Canadian they are American. They will correct you, they are not American, you will be told in no uncertain terms. So you point out they must be because the come from the continent of America. They will not go along with this strict geographical definition.

      A great many Scots now feel the same. The geographical based meaning is generally not the common one.

      It’s probably simplest to avoid words which have acquired connotations through common usage. Personally I just avoid using the British or Britain … UK conveys the political meaning and avoids geographical ambiguity.

      I also usually avoid nationalist and nationalism because of its double meaning. Yes, you can have whiter than white civic nationalism. You can also have black nasty nationalism and it is this second form which has blighted so many European countries in the last century. And, it is this second form which comes first to many people’s minds.

      Saying, I am a nationalist, but not one of those nasty kind, is just too complicated.

    128. galamcennalath says:

      Marcia says:
      “Latest Yougov”

      YYYEEESSS! Carried out between the 9th and 13th Oct. How much effect has the Corp Media and Unionist smearing onslaught had? Apparently NONE !

    129. manandboy says:

      Dear Scotland – we have to talk about Ineos.

      At first it was just a tiny little baby python, so cute, but unnoticed, it has grown somewhat and is now 30 feet long.

    130. john king says:

      Dont be fooled Angra Mainyu
      these people lay claim to anything that isn’t nailed down
      being British is not their gift to give or remove,
      By acceeding the identity of “British2 to people who have no more right to it than you or I is allowing them to steal our
      history, same as the “pound” they seem to think as their property.

      Dont give them an inch Angra .

    131. Tam Jardine says:

      Nationality and nationalism seem to be open to a fair amount of interpretation. The survey quoted in the LSE article is strange as has been highlighted above. What is my legal nationality? UK-ish I suppose. What is my actual, my real nationality? Scottish of course.

      I think surveys like this are all well and good but it all depends on the phrasing of the questions and how deep they dig. It is presumably asking ‘what ethnic identity do I identify with’ and suggests either Scottish or British as alternatives rather than Scottish or UKish.

      Legal nationality is a somewhat transient thing nowadays. I never thought I would apply for an Irish passport for my kids but I did. I never thought I would fail to renew their UK passport but that is now the intention.

      So legal nationality is easy to quantify, ethnic nationality is fairly easy to identify and ‘British’ although a constant in such surveys is now a completely redundant term. Can we really still be talking about something completely redundant and unfit for purpose as Britain and Britishness? Ask how British those in ROI feel?

      What we seem to be trying to find out is what legal nationality we would choose for ourselves had we the ability to create our own passport; what state we would choose to be part of if we had the choice.

      If I feel like I identify with a future nation state of Scotland then that is a nationalism I feel comfortable with- where although I am happy to enjoy my ethnic status as Scottish this is not the project we are involved in. There we have the fundamental misunderstanding. I want to live in an independant Scotland, not some kind of Scottish ethnic enclave.

      Every time the two ‘nationalisms’ or two desires for a future legal nationality ‘Scottish’ as endorsed by 45% of the electorate who voted in the referendum is conflated with a desire for a distinctive purely ethnic Scottish state (which almost no-one wants nor has campaigned for) the waters are being deliberately muddied.

      It is perhaps not surprising that the SNP are constantly described as nationalists and the movement for an independent Scotland is constantly conflated with ethnic nationalism. That this is a naked tactic by those who want Scotland to remain controlled by Westminster is as clear as clear can be.

      There are some unionists in Scotland who believe in the union- what I see in the rest of the UK are not unionists with a strong belief in the union otherwise all of the anti-Scottish propaganda in the run up to the referendum and general election would have been met with rioting in the streets down South.

      Is David Cameron a unionist in any real sense? Or George Osborne? Surely unionists would be as comfortable in all parts of the UK? Surely no unionist could threaten to destroy the economy of one part of the union? Surely no unionist could lobby leaders of other countries and international businesses to threaten part of said union?

      Surely no unionist could attempt to pass laws to disenfranchise MPs from one component of said union?

      The terms of the debate are pish. Britishness? Scottish Nationalism? Unionists? None of these terms are helpful, relevant or accurately defined.

    132. heedtracker says:

      There is some real coffee time high toryboy comedy out there. This is ofcourse NOT Professor Tomkins of Slovenia on Graun CiF, raging at evil and cruel UK on Monday

      “Here is a post from the comments section of SLOVENIA’s national broadcaster a few days ago (9 October 2015) under article entitled Did Russian missiles land in Iran or is this only ‘psychological warfare’? (my rough translation of the posts from Slovene to English):”

      Not Prof T from Slovenia, with his perfect academic uni thesis level written English, can only rough translate a Slovene tv article.

      It may not be so funny, when Prof Tomkins does rise to power in his Scotland region.

    133. Angra Mainyu says:

      Onwards, thanks. I suspected that some desire not to offend English/British sensibilities would be at the root of this wordsmithery.

      Out of interest, has anyone ever tried the more abrasive ‘call a spade a spade’ approach? Seems to have worked for others in the world dealing with very similar problems, why not Caledonians?

    134. manandboy says:

      Scotland is a country. The Scots are a nation.

      Scotland is my country. The Scots are my nation.

      You won’t see those words in the CorpMedia, nor hear them on the BBC.

    135. Midgehunter says:

      Is there a live broadcast of the conference from anyone?

      Indy live? Nicola’s speech?

      I can’t seem to find anything, am I looking in the wrong places?

    136. galamcennalath says:

      Tam Jardine says:

      I agree with what you are saying.

      “Is David Cameron a unionist in any real sense? ”

      In particular, the word Unionist can’t really be applied to mean ‘supporter of the Union’ because those inside the London centric Establishment aren’t really motivated to maintain a partnership. They want to retain the last vestiges of Empire. Imperialist better suits Cameron.

      Unionist, IMO, only makes sense describing a Scottish (or N Irish) person who wishes the remain in union with rUK. As I say, there is little evidence that those down south have equal partnership in mind.

    137. heedtracker says:

      And finally, hopefully not:D

      World outside toryboy madhouse

      http://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2015/oct/15/crime-rate-rise-cyber-offences

      World inside Prof Tomkins’ vote NO vote Torboy world, where the monster that is Nic Sturgeon has turned Scotland into a Judge Dredd police state hell on earth,

      http://new.spectator.co.uk/2015/10/centralising-illiberal-catastrophic-the-snps-one-party-state/

      “Recorded crime is falling the world over — and Scotland, happily, is no exception. Despite having fewer offences to investigate, however, Police Scotland manages to clear up 50,000 fewer crimes each year than the eight old constabularies did a decade ago. Basic policing mistakes that just were not made in the old days now fill the newspapers: in July a woman was left lying next to her dead boyfriend in a car in Bannockburn for three days after the crash was reported to police; she later died. A few weeks ago an elderly disabled woman died when police waited 20 hours after a call from a concerned family member before forcing entry to her home, where she lay collapsed next to her dead husband. A recent survey found that a third of Police Scotland’s staff planned to leave the force within three years: the merger, as Theresa May put it, is a case study in what not to do.

      This is why it suits the SNP to talk about independence: any other conversation would be about how they have betrayed the country they purport to champion.”

      There are no depths that Prof T won’t plumb. Glasgow uni must be so proud of Prof T and his staggering dishonesty, lectures law too.

    138. Kishorn Commando says:

      @Midgehunter

      Type in livestream snp conference 2015 to youtube

    139. Bob Mack says:

      @heedtracker.

      Thanks for posting that article. Have you read the comments below?

      They think they are actually a superior species,who have had the right upbringing which allows them to confidently hold the reins of power,whilst those who have made their way in the world could never be as good.
      One comment sums it up.

      “Those from a background of low IQ parents could never hope to be different”

      I abhor these vermin.

    140. manandboy says:

      Does Adam Tomkins know there are vacancies over in NI on the recently formed Loyalist Community Council, comprising the UDA, the UVF and the Red Hand Commanders.
      Seemingly, they are looking for funding from – well, actually, from anywhere. Maybe Adam could advise them. Possibly a couple of bucket collections down Ibrox way would get them going.

      BTW, the British Establishment got lots of practice in ‘dirty tricks’ and ‘covert operations’ during 30 years of ‘The Troubles’, including the ‘elimination’ of hundreds of British Citizens.

      And some people still think the Establishment-run IndyRef was clean.

    141. caz-m says:

      John King

      I understand your argument John, but the elephant in the room is the Union Jack.

      As soon as the word “British” is mentioned, people immediately think of the Union Jack flag.

      I think that is the biggest drawback you will have when you try to tell us we are British, because in most peoples eyes British means, Union Jacks, Rule Britannia, London Bobbies, Buckingham Palace and so on.

      There is never a Scottish link made when the word “British” is used.

      I think you have a hard sell on your hands John.

      By the way, I still love you to bits. Smiley thing.

    142. manandboy says:

      Livestream from Aberdeen starts at 10.30am

      Paste- livestream snp conference 2015 – into YouTube

    143. Big Jock says:

      Manandboy says:Prof. Ailsa Henderson’s study of March this year found that:
      52.7% of people born in Scotland voted Yes while 47.3% voted No.
      27.9% of people living in Scotland but from the rest of the UK voted Yes
      while 72.1% voted No.
      42.9% of people living in Scotland originally from outside of the UK voted Yes
      while 57.1% voted

      So the facts are the majority of Scots voted yes. 43% of immigrants from outside the UK voted yes but only 28% of those from the rest of the UK voted yes. This is our problem going forward we need to try and change this group in order to be successful. I am not saying we can’t convince more native born Scots either. But when percentages are so slim we need to get another 20% of the rest of the UK residents in Scotland to come with us.

      My thoughts are that the MSM are to blame for creating this anomoly.

    144. Marcia says:

      Midgehunter

      It will be on the Parliament Channel. For those outwith the UK use this;

      https://www.filmon.com/group/uk-live-tv

    145. Midgehunter says:

      @ Kishorn Commando

      Many thanks for the tip 🙂

    146. Socrates MacSporran says:

      Can I flag-up Lallands Peat Worrier’s wonderful demolition of the “Scotland is a one-party state” argument, which he postd yesterday.

      Required reading, if only to remind us, how far we still have to go before we can put Scotland back on its feet – there are an awful lot of Unionists still out there, making decisions.

    147. john king says:

      Angra Mainyu asys
      “I suspected that some desire not to offend English/British sensibilities would be at the root of this wordsmithery.”

      WORDSMITHERY?
      I dont think that anyone who knows me on here would describe me as a “wordsmith”
      but what I am is a realist, and the Use of the word “British” has been hijacked by the Establishment to such a degree that people who actually see the point Bob I and others have been making, cant bring themselves to describe themselves a British

      Early variants of the term date back to Ancient Greek times!
      The word Britain to describe the entire archipelago was used by ancient Greeks for Christ sake, how far back do we need to go to stop allowing these people ownership?
      maybe the land that is now the north sea? possibly the pre historic creatures present before the last ice age maybe?

      or more recently maybe we should relinquish Golf as “an English invention” as recently stated on the beeb?

      And I wonder what little Englanders would say if they were aware of this?
      http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/europe/7919429.stm

    148. One_Scot says:

      ‘My thoughts are that the MSM are to blame for creating this anomoly.’

      Agreed, and that is why I strongly believe we need control over Broadcasting.

    149. Lollysmum says:

      I’m in England & strangely enough (aye right) BBC Parliament has chosen to launch a new series of programmes on that channel from today. It doesn’t include the conference-right now it’s Anna Soubry spouting rubbish as per.

      I watched the whole conference on BBC Parliament last time 🙂 so it looks as if BBC England is still busy spiking SNP guns. Another nail in the unionist coffin!

    150. heedtracker says:

      Bob Mack says:
      15 October, 2015 at 10:16 am
      @heedtracker.

      Thanks for posting that article. Have you read the comments below?

      No, later. Its the extraordinary deceit from Tomkins that’s sticks out like a boil on the arse of toryboy world. He lectures Glasgow uni, law not ethics but what can you do.

      Clearly he doesn’t like it when the sweaties talk back but I would love to ask him how he justifies lying so hard at Scotland, how his bare faced lies reflect on his professional conduct as a law lecturer.

      Its not hard to see how endemic corruption gets going in any ruling establishment but Prof T could at least add that in Scotland its our PR electoral system giving him a toryboy chance of a Holyrood seat. But then toryboys like Tomkins only mean harm, to Scottish democracy and the Scottish economy.

      He needs a far wider audience in his Scotland region though. This is what they created from their The Vow fraud on Scotland and how they’ve designed it to seriously damage the Scottish economy, get the SNP kicked out, end Scottish independence etc.

      So in his notes from North Britain blog-SNP are doomed

      “. And what will bring the SNP down is their record in government. By the time of the next-but-one Holyrood election (assuming it takes place in 2021) the SNP will have been in power, continuously, for 14 years. If Scotland’s schools haven’t improved by then it will be no-one but the SNP’s fault (and, so far, Scottish education has got worse, not better, under the SNP).

      If the Scottish health service is still in the mess in 2021 that it is in now, it will be no-one but the SNP’s fault.

      Moreover, well before 2021 the new tax and welfare powers agreed by the Smith Commission and currently being legislated for in the Scotland Bill will be fully in force.

      Mr Swinney made a complete hash of the first tax devolved to him (stamp duty) and, when he takes charge of income tax in Scotland, which he soon will, his job will get a whole lot harder. Especially when he has a Cabinet Secretary for Welfare urging him radically to increase spending on social security provision in Scotland.”

      Interesting that his The Vow. Smith Commission fraud has nothing for actual economic growth in Scotland, only damage.

    151. tartanarse says:

      The UK wont cease to exist until we have had a referendum in an independent Scotland on the monarchy.

      Britain doesn’t exist politically as we are told that we are in a political union.

      Britain is the name given to the island that these unions of politics and monarchy are contained within.

      All that will change in the event of Scottish independence is that Scotland will become a normal country.

    152. ClanDonald says:

      When Prof Torykins has a go at the SNP’s single Police Force is he even aware that the Tory manifesto for the 2011 Scottish election also pledged to create a centralised police force? Page 20.

      What an idiot he is making of himself, lol.

    153. caz-m says:

      Can someone explain why a THIRD Referendum is out of the question?

      It has been shown that the more facts that are put out there, the more support for Independence has grown. So, even if we lost a second Referendum, it would surely show that we had increased our support for Independence.

      So again I have to ask, why would we rule out a THIRD Referendum, sometime soon after a second referendum?

      The SNP have grown in numbers after every election. You don’t stop have elections, so why should we stop have Referendums?

      Try, try and try again.

    154. Midgehunter says:

      @ Marcia

      Thanks for the link. 😉

      I live near Frankfurt and Filmon is the software I use for watching UK TV, (very selectively of course!)

      The Beeb has no coverage of the Conf. anywhere and Indy. Live/Youtube SNP is a no go because of copyright problems.

      I’m chewing through 2″ oak planks with frustration so I hope someone is recording the Conf. – Nicola’s speech etc.

      Anyway I’m off to get the winter tyres put on the car, the first snow has arrived. 🙂

    155. galamcennalath says:

      Big Jock says:

      So the facts are the majority of Scots voted yes. 43% of immigrants from outside the UK voted yes but only 28% of those from the rest of the UK voted yes

      We definitely need to court these groups! We need to make them believe Indy is in their personal interest and for society around them.

      I would have thought the smaller outside UK group would have been easiest because, after all, they all come from countries which and not the UK ie. Independent.

      Many from within the UK probably wish to keep their existing identity. Perhaps making it crystal clear that they can retain rUK status after Indy and remain as full privileges residents of Scotland would help. They should know that they won’t be forced to take Scottish citizenship, nor will the be treated as second class citizens.

      Sell the idea to non born-here Scots that they can actually have the best of both worlds! Retain rUK status (if that’s what they want) and reap the benefits of independence too.

      These groups need focused campaigns to win more of them over.

    156. caz-m says:

      Frank Field, English Labour MP, has just told us on the BBC News Channel that,

      “The Scottish Labour Party tail is wagging the English Labour Party dog. And that is unacceptable!”

      I wonder what Kezia has to say about that?

      Is this the start of a split?

    157. Helena Brown says:

      yesindyref2, very interested in your bit about Rotterdam as we were there late August and the Guide who took our Tour said that Rotterdam’s position in the league table for Ports had slipped a bit and wasn’t quite as busy as it had been, ports in Germany having taken it’s place.
      I thought for a Port it was extremely attractive and boy wish we had their roads.
      Time for Scotland to get our Ports working, stop sending stuff south, can it be done?

    158. Proud Cybernat says:

      I really don’t want to sound like a broken record but…

      The comments above show about 6 posters using the term ‘MSM’ and only 2 posters using the term ‘CorpMedia’.

      Of course, I do not want to tell people what to write or what terms to use–people are totally free to write as they please.

      However, as I have repeatedly posted, we really need to stop using the term ‘MSM’ (Mainstream Media). The word ‘Mainstream’ imbues these newspapers and broadcasters with a sense of legitimacy and authority that is wholly undeserving–they are nothing more than propagandists. By using the word ‘Mainstream’ we are effectively legitimising this media source and, inadvertently, undermining all other media sources as being ‘fringe’ (i.e. if the print media and broadcast media are regarded as ‘mainstream’ then, it logically follows, that any other media types, including Social Media, are ‘fringe’ and somehow less worthy or credible).

      By using the terms ‘Mainstream Media (MSM)’ we are effectvely promoting the print and broadcast media to the detriment of Social Media. We really have to stop doing that.

      The newspapers and broadcasters in this country are no friends to the people of Scotland. They are, without exception, owned outwith Scotland by Corporate Media barons who act on behalf of the British Establishment to undermine the democratically elected government of Scotland. The term ‘MSM’ is benign and neutral and fails to get across to people (mainly open-minded indy NO voters) just who these people are and, more importantly, that they care more for corporate big business than they do the people of this country. The weapon of choice for big business against the people of Scotland is its CorpMedia.

      We need to get that ‘message’ out there and into the indy debate lexicon.

      ‘CorpMedia NOT ‘MSM’.

      It is all about perception and we need to change the people’s perception in Scotland about the print and broadcast media that it presently accesses. If we can win that battle then we will start to change those minds that need changing.

      You are, of course, entirely free to think I am talking utter pish.

    159. Macart says:

      Oh, we’re back to definitions.

      John King is bang on the money. The state have usurped the definition of a geography and they use it to define, well whatever they want. I’ve always been comfortable with both geographic definitions, but I absolutely refuse the states definition of what any of that should mean. Its bollocks with nobs on and means precisely nothing to me personally.

      I’m a Scot by strict geography and accident of birth. Scotland is my country and currently it is being mismanaged and its people short changed by a historically corrupt and catastrophically badly run unitary state construct in the palace of Westminster. The construct of the UK state and the inhabitants of Westminster love to be the arbiter definitions, pigeonholes. They get off on telling you who you are and what that should mean.

      Its control Jim, but not as we know it. I don’t know about anyone else, but I don’t like to be told by the state who I’m supposed to be and what that should mean to me. Geography and government do not define a nation. Geography merely tells you where are on a map, its the people who define the government and the nation.

      So like any soul of independent mind, I don’t hold to that idea of state control and I aim to misbehave at the ballot box until we define who and what constitutes the nation of Scotland and put some meaning back into the term ‘public servant’.

      We’ll do the defining of who we are.

    160. sensibledave says:

      galamcennalath 10:10 am

      “Unionist, IMO, only makes sense describing a Scottish (or N Irish) person who wishes the remain in union with rUK. As I say, there is little evidence that those down south have equal partnership in mind.”

      I have commented on this subject a number of times – to no avail previously. But I think some are on the way to understanding.

      Some on Wings, use the catch all phrase “Unionist” to describe a) those that voted No in the referendum and, b) everyone else in the UK. The latter point is where some go wrong.

      I am English, I live in England, I am proud of being English and if someone asks me my nationality, then I say “English”. However, and without any difficulty, I am happy to be “British” (or from the UK) when circumstances require, or are appropriate (passport control, the Olympics, online when I have to enter my nationality and UK is the only relevant option, etc).

      I have grown up in the UK with the relationships between the Home Nations being as they are. That is my “norm”. I know, financially (and I really not trying to make a political point here), that the economy in England supports supports the economies of some of the Home Nations via the Barnett formula. I have no problem with that. ’twas ever thus (in living memory) and that is just the way it is.

      However, together with all my friends and acquaintances with whom I have ever discussed the subject – there is no evidence whatsoever of “Unionism” in the sense that the word is often used here. I am not “for” Unionism – the Union just “is” – as a consequence of how we arrived here.

      No one I know in England, had any particular axe to grind in the Scottish Referendum. We were interested, we watched and listened but we didn’t intervene and there was no “popular movement” in England, that I am aware of, that took any sort of position.

      I am not aware of any “pro Union” movement in England amongst its populace. Put simply, we are happy to accept the status quo – and equally happy for any of the Home Nations to leave the Union if that is what they want.

      This is a very important point that some here seem totally incapable of grasping. I am not a “Unionist” in the sense that I desire to promote it, keep it and make it stay the same. I am a “Unionist” only in exactly the same way as Headtracker, Grousey and the Rev are. I happen to live in the UK which currently includes Scotland.

      Headtracker is an extreme example of someone who hasn’t got the slightest understanding of this point. He writes everything on the basis that if you are not a Yes Voter – then you must be UKOK, Britnat, etc.

      Just for a minute, think about what you heard from the average Englishman/woman in the run up to the referendum. Virtually nothing! The typical attitude was that the Scots should have whatever they vote for.

      I don’t really think that attitude represents “Unionism” in the sense the word if often used here on Wings.

    161. Helena Brown says:

      For everyone saying that they are Scottish and British I think you may have a hard time discussing that with anyone in England who thinks he is British, i.e. English. I suggest that you try it and with some they will tell you exactly what you are, In fact do not say you are Scots, just try having a conversation and wait for comments, seems they just need to hear the accent.
      Time may come many years after Independence when that may be possible but not now.

    162. Hoss Mackintosh says:

      @ClanDonald,

      I think that is because Prof Tompkins was probably still a left wing socialist, republican back in 2011 who supported Indy. I kid ye not!

      How on earth did he get on the Smith Commission – unelected by nobody – as they had no one else?

      What was Rev Stu saying about the Talent Puddle more like a talent blob for the conservatives in Scotland.

      @Kishorn Commando – yeah Gaberlunzie – I loved that song. Are they still going?

    163. Will Podmore says:

      Wings is becoming less and less about politics and more and more about personalities. It’s more like a gossip column than a serious venue for debate.
      We are on the brink of another British intervention in the Middle East, of rising tension in the South China Sea, of another financial crash – and what does Wings focus on? Some local councillor appointing some dodgy geezer as a special adviser.
      Parochial? Never!

    164. heedtracker says:

      Once again, gees a break sensible

      eg

      “Headtracker is an extreme example of someone who hasn’t got the slightest understanding of this point. He writes everything on the basis that if you are not a Yes Voter – then you must be UKOK, Britnat, etc.”

      to

      “No one I know in England, had any particular axe to grind in the Scottish Referendum. We were interested, we watched and listened but we didn’t intervene and there was no “popular movement” in England, that I am aware of, that took any sort of position.”

      gives us

      http://wingsoverscotland.com/the-master-of-disaster/

      This bloke;s from Kent sensibledave. So at the very least, now you do actually know an English britnat unionist with a very big UKOK axe to grind, don’t you sensible.

      Why are you cyberbritnats all such liars sensibledave?

      Also several hundred billion quids worth of not Scots oil and gas revenue’s been pumped into England’s transport infrastructure alone sensible, so even your happiness to subsidise your Scotland region isn’t based on any real world socio economics.

      But why would it, rule britannia wise?

      And its heed sensible.

    165. tartanarse says:

      Helena at 11.14.

      You have it correct. Of course I can only go on my own experience of having travelled England extensively and having lived in the country for over 20 years(and still do).

      Most automatically assume that I’m for independence. I’ve been asked why I don’t fuck off back to Scotland if it’s so great/you don’t like us etc..

      I always reply that I’ve a British passport and ask them if they instruct their Pakistani friends to do the same.

      It’s rare that they just assume I’m happy with union.

      To be fair they’ve never heard of Wings, Bella, WGD etc and why would they. They’re simply not interested in the alkie, junkie subsidy skirt wearers unless they’re taking the piss out of the footy team(but not the rugby obviously).

      They’re simply misinformed and ignorant of Scotland as they are of many countries.

      Trouble is so are many in Scotland. I’d be loathe to say it was 55% of Scots who are like this as of course we know of the scared pensioners, the dim and the “non fiddling” record breaking postal votes.

      We need to find a way of educating these folk. The only way for many is by talking to them. Some wont do technology. Some simply wont understand.

      If we want an independent Scotland we need to start to talking to each other.

      Easy for me to say sitting in England but I do try.

    166. Onwards says:

      Onwards, thanks. I suspected that some desire not to offend English/British sensibilities would be at the root of this wordsmithery.

      @Angra Mainyu, Even if that were true, would it change the logic of it?

      There are plenty of people who voted No because they felt like they didn’t want to offend English friends or relatives, or they would be rejecting any concept of shared Britishness or a common connection.

      What we need to get over is that we are not breaking up Britain, but IMPROVING Britain. We could have a new Britain with a politic relationship of equals.

      The flag wouldn’t even have to change, as the blue would represent the union of the crowns.

      Lets face it, those with a 100% Scottish identity are going to vote YES regardless. It’s the others we need to bring along and make them feel comfortable, not excluded.

    167. Kishorn Commando says:

      @Hoss MacKintosh

      Yes they are still going. Check their website for tour dates, next show on Saturday in Newtonmore.

      For closer to home the gellions bar Inverness on the 29th October.

    168. Finlay says:

      @manandboy

      Regarding study into independence choice of Scots born voters.

      Though it seems to be factually correct that the ‘Scots Born’ demographic voted Yes and an overwhelming number of non-Scots born residents voted No – leading to a No result; it’s not a point I like to bring up if I can help it as, unfortunately, too many people get the impression of Scottish nationalism being some sort of xenophobic anti-English crusade. If I do bring it up then I feel I have to tread very carefully.

      David Cameron is trying to gerrymander the EU referendum by disallowing EU citizens originating from outside the UK from voting. Pretty safe to say that most of them would probably vote Yes to remaining in the EU as otherwise they are voting to potentially deport themselves… Cameron’s agenda is clear.

      I fully accept the independence referendum result, I think that all residents being able to vote on independence was/is the fairest way to do it and I would like the EU referendum vote to encompass the same electorate. My point is that, by comparing differences between the chosen electorate of these two referendum, Scottish nationalism can be shown to be an inclusive civic nationalism whereas British nationalism is an exclusive imperialistic nationalism.

      As we have exemplified many times; the anti-independence campaign’s incessant nationalism-bashing fits far better as a criticism of their own British nationalism than it does of the independence movement of Scotland.

    169. Luigi says:

      caz-m says:

      15 October, 2015 at 10:53 am

      Can someone explain why a THIRD Referendum is out of the question?

      It’s not, but if we lose IndyRef 2, another referendum would be very difficult to justify in the short term. After all, we would have had two goes and two fails. It would be off the table for many, many years – a generation, possibly a lifetime away. If IndyRef 2 is lost, then WM would move fast to legislate to prevent Holyrood having another referendum within a “reasonable” time frame, 15-30 years IMO. As a strong supporter of independence, I concede that you cannot keep having referenda every 2-3 years if the people cannot make up their bloody minds. I don’t think it will come to that, however. There will be no IndyRef 2 until the people start screaming for independence (which may be sooner than we expect!). The establishment (fools that they are) left the door half-open for IndyRef 2 with their VOW and vague promises never kept. They won’t be so careless next time round.

    170. Alan Mackintosh says:

      There you go big brur, http://www.gaberlunzie.com/
      Didnt see any dates in DunEdin, but they’re up north soon, in The Gellions and Beauly at end of the month

    171. tartanarse says:

      Onwards at 11.40

      You are right. When I am quizzed about independence by my English work/football pals I tell them that in my opinion relations between the two countries will actually improve.

      When they realise that they’ve been had and that Scotland can actually support itself they’ll get to see just how frustrating it’s been for the 45%.

      Scots have had a shite deal and had no voice until recently.

      As far as relations go, I would point to Ireland for examples.

      St Patricks day is widely celebrated in England, in fact more so than St Georges day, in my experience.

      The Irish are treated well. It’s illegal to tell Irish jokes and carry on in the manner of Kelvin Mackenzie and his “jockistan” comment.

      No one tells them to piss off back to Paddyland. Many English have Irish family, as they do Scots.

      It wasn’t long ago Irish were blowing up English shopping centres but they’re still treated ok.

      No one is going to hold the media, well CORPMEDIA (yes I do read all the threads) to account. We’ve already pretended to do that.

      Internet is where it’s at but more important is talking to folk.

    172. Lochside says:

      Will Podmore…you’re correct…for once…Wings is becoming a talking shop for cliques.

      Ffs…we are ‘British’??…are you all nuts?…Mr Peffers may be well informed on some aspects of Scottish history and constitution…but he also talks a load of keech about ‘BRITAIN’.

      ‘British’ is a toxic brand and has become synonymous with ‘ENGLISH’…if you don’t believe me..try getting out of Fife sometime into the big world…Nobody regards the ‘British’ as anything other than ‘ENglish’ whether government or place.

      Do the Irish ever get mistaken or described as anything other than ‘IRISH’?…Well they live in the British Isles don’t they?…but everybody calls the place they live ‘Ireland’…and it irks their Proddy Orange compadres in the ‘British’ (partitioned off bit) as a result does it not?

      I don’t mind being described as ‘European’ but it hardly covers nationality…in the same way a ‘scandanavian’ is a broad brush for a Dane, Swede or Norwegian.

      If and when we become independent, I want to be able to describe myself as Scottish, living in Scotland in the Greater British Isles off the European continent. That will not entitle anyone to call me ‘British’.My passport will clearly state ‘Scottish citizen’.
      There will be no bolted on Germanic parasitic royal family connected either, to confuse matters, as I will be living in a republic.

      If RUK want to continue to call themselves ‘British’ which I doubt, as most English now identify as ‘English’ first…well let them get on with it. If I was a Republic of Ireland citizen now…would I give two flying f*cks that my grandparents used to be British subjects up until 80 years ago?

    173. sensibledave says:

      OK Heedy, I know this will be a complete waste of time because you are unable to read and understand what anyone else has to say – but nevertheless, I will try!

      I wrote:

      “No one I know in England, had any particular axe to grind in the Scottish Referendum. We were interested, we watched and listened but we didn’t intervene and there was no “popular movement” in England, that I am aware of, that took any sort of position.”

      You wrote “ “http://wingsoverscotland.com/the-master-of-disaster/ This bloke;s from Kent sensibledave. So at the very least, now you do actually know an English britnat unionist with a very big UKOK axe to grind, don’t you sensible.”

      No Heedy, I don’t know him.

      Heedy, do you really not see the difference between some bloke on the telly – and a “popular movement” or the views of the majority – in the context of my overall comment”? I’ve seen people on the TV rant against Islam and I have also seen radical Islamists rant about western values – neither represent the views of the majority, they not part of any popular movement, they are just some extremists that are put on the telly so we can “watch the loony”.

      … and Heedy, based upon your rantings, you certainly deserve a spot on the “watch the loony” show.

    174. Alan Mackintosh says:

      Man and Boy, thanks for the stats re voting patterns. Although they are useful, the proportions of each subset needs to be known so that a change of x % of one group is equivalent to y% of another. Last time this topic was discussed a few people got upset and stormed off. But without understanding which parts of the population voted whichever way, it is difficult to target the no voting elements. Although it is obvious that the majority of those from other parts of the UK voted no, it is also true that a slim majority of Scots voted Yes. A movement of a few percent in that subset will equate to a much larger part of the other smaller subsets. We need more born Scots to move to Yes and the others will be less of an issue.

      Hoss, they’re in Balerno on the 24th. No idea where that is but its an 0131 no. so must be in your neck of the woods

    175. sensibledave says:

      Just heard Ms Sturgeon speaking on the radio. She appeared to rule out the concept of a 2nd Indy ref in the next Scottish Parliament.

    176. orri says:

      How believable the (very ?) post referendum survey is to the actual way people voted is up for debate. On the face of it there’s no way that comes close to reflecting the result.

      There’s several reasons why that might be including a kind of buyers remorse where people give “mis-remember” how they voted. Another reason is that, as I recall, the survey was held within Scotland whilst the referendum was UK wide to some extent due to qualification for postal votes. How many of the huge number were from people with no honest intent of returning to Scotland is anyones guess. But remember that the “estimate” given at the time was roughly 80% No in the postal vote.

    177. Rev. Stuart Campbell says:

      “Regardless, it is abundantly clear that Scottish independence will most likely result in us all having no claim or right to a British passport. Just as you can’t have half of a dog, you will not be able to have a Scottish passport and a British one at the same time.”

      That’s incorrect. Both sides have acknowledged that Scots will be entitled to both passports if they want them.

    178. caz-m says:

      Luigi

      I personally don’t think we will need INDYREF3, I am confident we will win INDYREF2.

      But I still think if we needed to go for a third Referendum, I don’t think the timeline would be a generation.

      As I said above, I am confident that we will get the required %50+1vote in INDYREF2.

    179. Proud Cybernat says:

      “Just heard Ms Sturgeon speaking on the radio. She appeared to rule out the concept of a 2nd Indy ref in the next Scottish Parliament.”

      Sturgeon said nothing of the sort. She said there cannot be another Indy Ref until there is a significant change of mind by No voters from IndyRef#1. In other words, if there is a signficant change of mind of those No voters in the next parliament (i.e. there is a significant demand and majority for indy during the life of that parliament) then the Scottish Government will call another referendum.

      Of course, we must make sure that when such circumstances come around, the SNP Scottish Government will be able to get IndyRef#2 Bill through the Scottish Parliament. To do that we need to make sure we vote SNP/SNP in SE2016.

    180. heedtracker says:

      … and Heedy, based upon your rantings, you certainly deserve a spot on the “watch the loony” show.

      So poor old Prof Tomkins doesn’t count as English sensible.

      Figures. I work in England and like you say, there was hardly any interest in Scotland 18 Sept, until the last week of campaign.

      Overall people were still not that interested, but some got very exasperated and/or furious in that last week, and the closer you got to where Im from Aberdeen, the angrier English people got. But that’s all just pretty empty anecdote sensible and I am happy to concede that, unlike you ofcourse.

      As you keep being told sensible, there are a lot of arguments for this union, so why not make them on here. You’re only making a fool of yourself by lying and insulting and sneering at people who disagree with you or, very much like Professor Smirky of Slovenia here

      http://new.spectator.co.uk/2015/10/centralising-illiberal-catastrophic-the-snps-one-party-state/

      To be fair to you sensible, this English UKOK bettertogether lunatic is so mad, he may well be a cybernat plant. We are everywhere sensible and we are taking country back.

    181. My surprise is that only 37 Labour MPs either abstained or stayed away from parliament rather than vote against George Osborne’s Fiscal Charter.

      But then is only the first of the skirmishes of the internecine war in the Labour party against Jeremy Corbyn and his shadow chancellor John McDonnell.

      Unfortunately it is the ordinary people who are the ones that are collateral damage as they continue to suffer as a result of these austerity measures.

    182. Brian says:

      Brilliantly perceptive article.
      NB MacWhirter’s comments are measured, thoughtful. Mckenna seems to wheel from one extreme to another, week to week, like a schizophrenic.

    183. shug says:

      When commenting in the herald always mention wings

    184. Angra Mainyu says:

      Rev: “Both sides have acknowledged that Scots will be entitled to both passports if they want them.”

      My understanding is that you will be able to choose one passport or another, not both as you seem to suggest.

    185. Angra Mainyu says:

      Onwards: “Even if that were true, would it change the logic of it?”

      Well, I happen to like the battered wife analogy which, as you will recall, depicts Scotland as a battered wife in an abusive relationship. Those who aren’t comfortable with that should consider leaving the room.

      Anyway, the thrust of your argument seems to put more emphasis on placating the batterer than the wife.

      At some point Scotland will collectively need to nail its colours to the mast. You know, it’s worth remembering that they nailed the flags to the mast like that to stop people striking (pulling them down) in the heat of battle when their bottles were inclined to crash.

      This idea that you can be Scottish and British is just dumb. It’s dumb now as part of the Union and it’ll be even dumberer after independence. And I don’t see why I should act dumb just to placate English wife-beaters.

    186. Davy says:

      I have a strait question. If we all go and vote SNP and the SNP win independence. will my forces pension be taxed by uk or by scotland. I ask this because will tax not go to about the same as all other wee countries. In case it does go up, I would be better staying with UK.

    187. Marcia says:

      Some poster on here hears but doesn’t listen.

    188. heedtracker says:

      http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-scotland-politics-34533955

      I have no sound here but why does the camera man suddenly wobble about as he ultrafast zooms in on Sturgeon like this at the first question from super torygirl Keunsberger? Drunk probably.

      Actually there may not be any sound anyway, Pacific Quay creepshow loves to fiddle about with their gear when a non Britnat has simply got to be interviewed.

    189. Will Podmore says:

      The good news is that Scottish voters are still opposed to independence, 52% are opposed, and 48% are in favour, the same figures as in September. (YouGov poll, 9-13 October 2015.) So there is no “strong and consistent evidence that people have changed their minds and that independence has become the choice of a clear majority in this country”. (Nicola Sturgeon).

    190. Will Podmore says:

      The good news is that Scottish voters are still opposed to independence, 52% are opposed, and 48% are in favour., the same figures as in September. (YouGov poll, 9-13 October 2015) So there is no “strong and consistent evidence that people have changed their minds and that independence has become the choice of a clear majority in this country”. Sturgeon.

    191. Proud Cybernat says:

      “The good news is that Scottish voters are still opposed to independence, 52% are opposed, and 48% are in favour… the same figures as in September.”

      And certainly higher than September 2014 (55%-45%). Not looking good for you if that trend continues over the next few years which, imo, will most likely be the case. This is far from “good news” for your ilk. Always look at the trend, laddie – the TREND.

      Now away and chase yersel.

    192. yesindyref2 says:

      @Angra Mainyu
      https://www.gov.uk/dual-citizenship

      “You can’t have dual citizenship if you’re a British subject or a British protected person unless you’re a British subject from the Republic of Ireland.”

      It was stated that Scotland would be the same as the Rebublic of Ireland, so dual citizenship, which equals two passports.

    193. Angra Mainyu says:

      “It was stated that Scotland would be the same as the Rebublic of Ireland, so dual citizenship, which equals two passports.”

      yesindyref2, you have a strange debating style. See, most people make arguments and provide sources that support their stance but you seem to be making arguments and providing sources that support those who you seemingly want to oppose (in this case me).

      If you look at your link, it states clearly that “You can’t have dual citizenship if you’re a British subject or a British protected person unless you’re a British subject from the Republic of Ireland…”

      Further to that, it suggests; “to get dual citizenship in the UK, apply for citizenship in the normal way.”

      Now I’m pretty sure Scottish people aren’t Irish people. You say “it was stated that Scotland would be the same as the Republic of Ireland” but don’t say where or by whom it was stated.

      As your source makes clear, it’s something you can apply for, if that’s what you really want to do, just as any visitor to Britain can apply for citizenship.

      I don’t need to bother with all that guff because I am clear on the issue and don’t want anything to do with Britain, British citizenship, Britishness, The UK, bombing Syria or any other country, the renewal of trident, The BBC, The Westminster Paedophile ring, etc.

      Also, I think Oasis were crap.

      Now if you in a post-Independent Scotland still want to feel like you’re part of any or all of that, knock yourself out and apply for British Citizenship.

    194. Iain More says:

      I am Elvis!

    195. Proud Cybernat says:

      Angra Mainyu

      “SCOTS can expect to remain ­British citizens if they vote for independence, the UK Government has conceded.” (The Herald 24-1-2014)

      These islands were known as Britain long before either England or Scotland ever existed. The ‘British Isles’ are a region of the world just as Scandanavia is a region of the world. Denmark, Sweden and Norway are part of that Scandanavian area of the world just as Scotland, Ireland, NI, Wales & England are part of the British area of the world.

      I have no problem in being from Scotland (my nation) which is within a wider geographic region of the British Isles that is within a larger region known as Europe that is itself upon planet Earth.

    196. Paula Rose says:

      On twitter the supporters of the UK start fuming when reminded that the term “British” is geographic and start raging when I ask them whether they want to be called Ukist, Ukish or Ukanian.

      Reason enough to not allow them to have exclusive use of Britain and British as political concepts.

    197. Republicofscotland says:

      Nice one Rev, I suppose the appointment of Wylie is an be an old pals act. Hopefully the SNP will take GCC next year.

    198. Angra Mainyu says:

      Paul: “Reason enough to not allow them to have exclusive use of Britain and British as political concepts.”

      Well if it pisses them off, I might be persuaded. Confused but persuaded.

      Anyway, enough of all this. It looks like we aren’t getting another referendum for about 5 years and, since I’m a Glaswegian in my mid-40s, that more or less rules it out in my life time.

    199. yesindyref2 says:

      @Angra Mainyu
      Strange reading style you have, the source I quoted was the UK Government website, THE authoritative source, it shows that people can have TWO passports, and totally disproves your previous assertion “you will not be able to have a Scottish passport and a British one at the same time.”. Yes, you can have two passports at the same time, it’s called dual citizenship.

      As for “would Scotland be eligible”, clearly you’re not going to get that on the gov.uk website as Scotland is not independent yet. And Proud Cybernat has give you a source for our rightful claim to that dual citizenship, there were others at the time.

      As for “knock yourself out and apply for British Citizenship” no need, we already have British Citizenship and we’d keep it after Independence – like it or not. Whether we could relinquish British Citizenship I don’t know, but probably.

    200. yesindyref2 says:

      @Angra Mainyu “Well if it pisses them off, I might be persuaded. Confused but persuaded”

      Indeed. I know from Unionist postings it does piss them off. Mind you, the hardline Unionists usually are pissed off by facts of any sort.

      For unionists, and the undecided:

      *You don’t have to stay part of the Union to stay British, it is your right*

    201. Fireproofjim says:

      Yesinderef2

      You are right. Youcan certainly have two passports
      The recent Scottish winner of the Nobel prize for economics has joint US and British Nationality, and two passports.

    202. KenC says:

      @ Ruby, 11.53. As plausible an explanation as mine, Ruby, especially considering the fascination with Nicola’s legs in some quarters. 🙂

    203. Angra Mainyu says:

      Certainly didn’t expect to come on to Wings today and be persuaded that I was British and likely to remain British after independence….

      Oh well.

      Can someone remind me what we are all here for?

    204. Paula Rose says:

      @Angra Mainyu – Hi, the main point we are making is that the term “British” is geographic not political. Those who want to remain part of the UK want to own the word – we will not let them, they can call themselves Ukish (pronounced yukkish) or any other such variation.

      Many folk who may well be persuaded that Scotland should run its own affairs, as any country would if its union with another is no longer fit for purpose may have a fondness for being British – we say no problem.

      I was born in England – moved here 30 years ago, English-Scot probably describes me, but I have no problem with British as there is no political entity called Britain.

      As for the love of the Ukists for Great Britain – that is the name of the largest island in the British Isles in terms of land mass and is most definitely not a description of the UK.

    205. Christian Schmidt says:

      If there were more commentators like McWhirter or McKenna then there surely would be more pressure on the SNP and the party’s future would not look as rosy as it does. But with people like Wylie around I cannot see how the honeymoon can ever end….

    206. Will Podmore says:

      Paula claims, “there is no political entity called Britain.”
      When the Communist Party of Britain Marxist-Leninist talks of Britain we mean the British Isles excluding Ireland. We mean England, Scotland and Wales, united, our one nation, created by the British working class. We British workers always cast our borders in this manner. This is the only land in the world that we as a working class lay claim to. We are for Britain, against Empire.



    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