The world's most-read Scottish politics website

Wings Over Scotland

When Scotland Voted Leave

Posted on July 28, 2017 by

Last month saw the first meeting between the UK Brexit delegation and the EU’s, and by many accounts it fell far short of the UK’s expectations. David Davis spent months drumming up the “strong and stable” approach which would see both the divorce deal and the subsequent post-Brexit trade deal negotiated simultaneously. He was told by everyone that this wouldn’t happen, but simply brushed off the warnings. When push came to shove, he finally accepted that he’d have to negotiate the divorce deal first.

This is just the latest in a long string of failures and ineptitudes over the course of the UK’s handling of the whole farcical process and it got me thinking. If Scotland had voted Yes in 2014, what would it have looked like if the Scottish Government had handled that vote the way the UK has managed Brexit?


Today, in another Scotland:



The SNP have been ascendant. Under the leadership of First Minister Alex Salmond, the party is now in the second year of its majority government.

Salmond, who had always been known as a gradualist, had been reluctant to offer something as drastic as an independence referendum. He was far more interested in focusing on domestic policy such as his infamous Tunnocks Tax but after a couple of defections of MSPs to the fringe party Siol na h-Alba in 2010 it was inevitable that independence would have to be an option on the table.

Salmond tried to soften the blow by concocting a plan by which he would take a package of offers to the UK Government and ask for a series of additional powers. Only then would he present the case to Scotland to either accept his deal or to demand independence. The date of the referendum was set: 18 September 2014.



The talks with the UK Government have not gone as well as hoped. The general impression in Westminster is, at best, one of “this again?” and whilst they eventually agreed to hand over a few concessions – Scotland would gain the ability to adjust income tax by a couple of pence in the pound and some obscure regulatory powers that no-one could really describe well would be shifted – but the overall impact was clearly going to be negligible.

Salmond, of course, plays the whole thing as a glorious success. The Scottish Conservatives are no friends of independence but welcome the successful deal with Westminster and pledge to endorse and support it.



The independence campaign starts to take shape. Salmond will head up the Scottish Government’s “official” Remain campaign under the banner “Not Yet”. He’ll play up the economic benefits of the close ties with the rest of the UK whilst emphasising the autonomy that Scotland had and would get in the future.

In Salmond’s vision Scotland would take the path of Australia. A slow, decades long decoupling from the rest of the UK by which independence would eventually be achieved but… “not yet”.

This, of course, wasn’t going to be soon enough for some. In a shocking move, senior Scottish Government cabinet members Nicola Sturgeon and John Swinney break with the “official” position and declare themselves for Leave.

They take with them a substantial enough bloc of the SNP to form a rival campaign under the banner “Scotland Now”. Most activists from opposition parties such as the Greens and Scottish Socialists, as well as a minority of members from Labour and the Lib Dems, flock to their call for an independent Scotland within Europe.

Meanwhile, Siol na h-Alba launches their Leave campaign from their constituencies of Brigadoon and Dunroamin, pledging “Scotland for the Scots” and complete severing of all ties with the rest of the UK as soon as possible. Harking back to Scotland’s past as a trading nation and playing up sentiments of traditional “warrior spirit” they are determined to court the most fringe elements of Scottish society to their cause.

Though careful to avoid any direct accusations of racism, SnA leaders busily work with their pliant media contacts to insert dog-whistle phrases into their puff pieces. Media attention on the group has never been higher despite them still only having two MSPs (neither of whom were elected under the Siol na h-Alba ticket).

Both Leave campaigns declare themselves to be the “official” voice of independence and register their interest as such to the Electoral Commission. There’s a lot at stake as the official campaign will gain an increased campaign spending limit as well as direct government funding and representation on political broadcasts.

After weeks of debate, the EC eventually rules in favour of Sturgeon and Swinney’s Scotland Now.



The campaigning is now fierce but cracks are beginning to show. Much of the debate has centred around things like the economy and immigration but the arguments are beginning to sound increasingly vacuous. Few debaters are willing to lay down solid plans or proposals of their own, preferring instead to attack the opposition whenever they mention something, anything. The same soundbites are repeated on the evening pundit shows. Programmes like Question Time become dominated by debates about domestic policy but rarely do any clear answers emerge.

Scotland Now comes under increased scrutiny as it emerges that they have little idea about what, precisely, they wish to do with independence. Calls for an Independence White Paper begin to gain traction and the few media interviewers with the nuance to do so begin to ask about procedural questions such as how the Scottish Government would begin negotiations to disengage from the UK.

The UK’s constitution, being an “unwritten” document is particularly vague on the subject and the previous examples of disengagement – Ireland and decolonisation – are not altogether helpful in the modern age. Questions, too, about the border, currency and other issues are answered only with platitudes and soundbites.

Not that the other Leave campaign is any better. Asked on what currency Scotland would use, Siol na h-Alba’s leader Niall McFergus simply said “No the Inglis yin!” and refused further questions.

With the date of the referendum fast approaching, public opinion begins to crystalise into two camps. Those leaning towards Remain tend to say that they’re concerned about the economy and are either supportive of more immigration to Scotland or, at least, not bothered either way about it. People leaning towards Leave tend to say that they are worried about the levels of immigration to Scotland but are either less concerned about the economy or are convinced that it will thrive once the “shackles of Westminster regulation” are cut.

The solid majority for Remain has begun to ebb slightly in the polls but little momentum is gained in either direction.



Scotland Now finally releases its Independence White Paper. A dismally short piece containing no real information whatsoever, it is ignored entirely by the now rabidly pro-Leave media and is noticed at all only by a few bloggers on social media.

The Not Yet campaign still appears to be on track for a solid victory, albeit not quite as large as once they hoped. Salmond remains as confident as ever behind the podium but, privately, whispers have emerged of apathy within his campaign. Activists are thin on the ground even in potentially target areas. There is little enthusiasm even among political wonks for his message of “the same but a little better”.

Siol na h-Alba releases an extremely divisive billboard campaign showing caricatures of Sturgeon and Salmond personally welcoming crowds of stereotypical “English” people (Morris dancers, bowler-hatted City types, tattooed football hooligans) coming across the border at Gretna.

Police Scotland warns of increased tension in communities but McFergus denies any racial connotations in the advert saying that no particular group was represented. They withdraw the ad later that day under intense negative pressure but the message is sent and lands home with its intended target.


Siol na h-Alba kick the referendum off with a week of political stunts by organising a “Fête of Scottish Naval Might” by inviting “all patriotic trading vessels” to journey up the Clyde. The response is rather less than anticipated.

McFergus blames media bias for only running photos of “empty stretches of river between gaps in the flotilla”. No photos of more crowded sections are forthcoming officially or otherwise.

Salmond is near invisible on the political scene although his press corps still doggedly assures a solid victory for Remain. The polls have been a statistical tie for weeks and Leave is still nudging upwards…

Sturgeon and Swinney are seemingly never off the television at this point but a disastrous interview by Swinney on the final Sunday before the polls in which he struggles to outline any solid numbers about immigration figures is widely ridiculed although he does promise that in the event of a victory for Leave, his team will be ready to start negotiations “the following Monday”.



With a 65% turnout and margin of 51.89% for Leave versus 48.11% for Remain, Scotland votes to Leave the UK. It is a result which sends shockwaves throughout the islands. Early in the morning of 19 September Alex Salmond resigns with immediate effect saying the Scottish people have voted and their will must be respected.

It is widely expected that the victorious Scotland Now team will take control of the Scottish Government and begin to implement their (still unpublished) plan to remove Scotland from the United Kingdom. However, the press conference which follows the First Minister’s shows the downcast figures of Sturgeon and Swinney apologising, equivocating and, ultimately, also both resigning their positions in the cabinet.

The Scottish Government is now in turmoil, with fragmented factions of Not Yet and Scotland Now both accusing each other of failing to come up with a proper plan for leaving. The SNP hastily organise a leadership contest to replace Salmond.

To cap an already historic day, Niall McFergus also resigns as leader of Siol na h-Alba saying “The job’s done. I’m away tae Nova Scotia”.

Obviously, the Scottish Government is in no condition to start talks on Monday 22nd September. The UK Government says that it will wait till everyone is ready…but that its patience is not unlimited.



The SNP leadership contest is marked more by who rules themselves out than by who rules themselves in. All of the prominent pro-Leave faces either beat a hasty retreat for the back door out spend their time outright poisoning the attempts of their colleagues to push themselves forward.

In the end, the only person left standing is former Justice minister Kenny MacAskill, who had been a prominent activist for Not Yet.  Immediately, his tenure is under question both for his role in the former campaign, the fact that he was not elected as FM and also due to questions raised during his time as minister.

Nonetheless, a government is formed and the SNP’s majority sees it pass its first vote of confidence. The new government vows to take charge of the “mandate given to us by the people” to leave the UK but says that time will be required to formulate a plan.

A deal is struck with the UK Government. Once the Scottish Government is ready to begin negotiations it will notify Westminster via the Scotland Office which will then trigger a process by which Scotland will leave the Union two years later.


MARCH 2015

There is still no plan. Patience is wearing thin on all sides. The economy is starting to feel the strain of the uncertainty and many are starting to wonder if independence will happen at all.

PM MacAskill announces that he has put together his negotiating team but is immediately criticised for it consisting solely of SNP members from the Central Belt. Parties which supported Leave feel betrayed and locked out, while parties which voted Remain demand that the negotiations take into account the whole of the country and not just the SNP’s fiefdoms. Places like Orkney and Shetland, which voted strongly Remain, demand a distinct place at the table to ensure their specific interests.

They even produce a detailed and extensive White Paper (at least in comparison to the still non-existent one from the Scottish Government) detailing their concerns and offering various compromise solutions. The demand for a place at the table is denied and the White Paper is simply dismissed by MacAskill and the Scottish Government. A bill demanding such representation, passed jointly by the councils of the islands, goes without formal response.

By the middle of the month there is, at last, some movement. MacAskill announces the publication of a Leave White Paper and announces that the leaving process will be triggered by the end of the month. Scotland will leave the UK by 29 March 2017.


APRIL 2015

MacAskill sends further shockwaves through an already the Scottish political world by announcing a snap election. Claiming that he had an epiphany whilst hillwalking, he claims that it would increase the Government’s mandate and, he hopes, would neutralise the still lingering claims about the means by which he became First Minister.

The election is widely regarded as a rubber-stamp exercise given the still-vast lead the SNP enjoy in the polls. The date is set for June 8th.


JUNE 2015

The results of the general election come in and it is not to the Scottish Government’s liking. An unexpectedly blistering campaign by Labour’s Jim Murphy – who had been widely derided as “completely unelectable” even by members of his own party – utterly smashed through all that was placed before it. From the day of the announcement of the snap election to the day of the poll there was a rapid rise in support for Labour right across the country.

From hopes of a crushing majority, the SNP fell to one seat short of being able to form a government at all. Scotland was, by now, the laughing stock of the British Isles but MacAskill vows to cling on and see independence through.

He turns to Siol na h-Alba – who lost their new leader Tam McGlashan in Dunroamin but scraped a victory in Brigadoon – to prop up his administration. Soon, the media is full of tales of the worst of Siol na h-Alba’s misdeeds. McGlashan resigns and a new leadership contest is run but by this point, no-one particularly cares about the party which started the whole sorry story.

MacAskill remains determined to progress talks with the UK Government and sets the date of 19th June to hold the first talk. However, coalition talks with Siol na h-Alba are not going well, and the first vote of confidence on the new government is delayed amid bizarre excuses such as the ink needs time to dry on the paper.

A new date for the vote of confidence is set for June 21st – two days after the first of those discussions with Westminster. The Scottish Government seems as if it will progress without a mandate and without even having a secure and stable government.



Team Scotland arrives in London to meet the UK delegation. The six-man team (the lack of other genders is noted) consists solely of SNP members with all other parties locked out completely. It will be the test by which the rest of the negotiations are measured. MacAskill steps into the room full of bluster, but empty of any actual documents. Across the table, David Cameron is waiting…


A version of this post previously appeared at The Common Green.

Print Friendly

    78 to “When Scotland Voted Leave”

    1. Cuilean says:

      What a fantastic political allegory. Very, very clever.

      And they say we can’t look after ourselves.

      Yes, we can.

    2. Johnny says:

      Very well put-together parallel narrative!

      Of course, were Scotland to vote Yes in any second ref, what we’d actually have to watch for is timewasting and obfuscation from the WM Govt (they’d approach it the same away, and with probably even less respect, than they are currently showing in the EU negotiations).

    3. Stan Wilson says:

      Absolutely brilliant, what more can be said……

    4. Petra says:

      Brilliant Stu. What on earth are you going to do when we get shot of Westminster? You can’t let your amazing talents go to waste Mr. So what next one wonders?

    5. galamcennalath says:

      Puts the whole Brexit fiasco into a framework we can better associate with. Nicely done!

      As things turned out in 2014 it was the NO campaign which mirrored Leave, ie lots of unlikely to be deliverable promises and no clear plan.

      In both Leave and NO majorities were won because enough people actually believed the woolly offers being made.

      The outcomes from the two referendum wins, however, were markedly different.

      After the IndyRef most winning promises were swept aside and never delivered. There was, of course, no intention to ever do so.

      After the BrexitRef the winners actually seem keen to attempt deliver most of their promises!

    6. Giesabrek says:

      Maybe stretching the comparison a bit at times but what sums up the ombishambles that Brexit is is highlighted above – had the Yes campaign won, sat on its backside for months claiming secrecy over its negotiating position, then the SNP held an election, lost its majority, and then entered negotiations with unrealistic expectations, it would be seen by all as utter nonsense.

      Yet somehow I can’t see the SNP ever being so imbecilic.

    7. Johnny says:

      Petra, this was Dr Craig Dalzell’s work, I think 🙂

    8. Sublime, Dr Dal.
      20 months to go and not a blow struck, but hey, it’s the summer holidays in England.
      It will all come out right in the end. Where’s your Dunkirk spirit?
      England’s Waco.

    9. Foonurt says:

      Soons fameellyurr.

    10. Rev. Stuart Campbell says:

      “Brilliant Stu. What on earth are you going to do when we get shot of Westminster? You can’t let your amazing talents go to waste Mr.”

      Much as all of that’s true, Craig Dalzell wrote this particular piece 😀

    11. Petra says:

      @ Johnny says at 2:33 pm …. ”Petra, this was Dr Craig Dalzell’s work, I think ?”

      Ha, ha, ha! How observant am I? However my prior comments remain unchanged taking into account the amazing work that Stu is doing.

      Better say that anyway or I might get ‘hammered’, LOL.

    12. Ken500 says:

      Why the analogy? The reality is just as bad. Another IndyRef coming soon.

    13. Neil Cook says:

      Brilliant article ?

    14. heedtracker says:

      Planet toryboy really is insane, look at their bastard offspring Nigel Farage. Its all completely exposed the dreary old UK double whammy, endemically corrupt and hopelessly inept tories and the whole of the UK media. Just don’t boo their anthem at the football or it will cost four grand.

    15. Conan the Librarian says:

      Everyone and his wee ginger dug kens what is happening with Kezia Dugdale; what’s happening with Siobhan McFadyen?

    16. heedtracker says:

      How come tory beeb gimps are not telling us what’s actually going on, on planet torboy?

    17. heedtracker says:

      BBC Scotland go mental at SNP Holyrood, in that another universe. In this one, same gimps go mute, tory mute.

    18. Toby Lerone says:

      I believe EU citizens were denied a vote on Brexit.
      I’m thinking another parallel could be drawn in this story
      regarding rUK residents in Scotland ?

    19. Richard MacKinnon says:

      I stopped reading this article when I got to the bit “…..and it got me thinking. If Scotland had voted Yes in 2014,…”. Although as I say I never read any further the interesting thing about that statement is what it says about Dr Craig Dalziel.
      He will know, being a doctor, about The Kübler-Ross model and the 5 stages of grief,


      And there is no argument about it the Doctor must have arrived at stage 5 to allow him to begin his fantasies of, what might have been.
      May I take this opportunity to congratulate him on the completion of what must have been an arduous journey. There are many, especially it seems, on this site that are still trapped at stage 1 and many more completely lost at stage 2. Doctor Dalziel has done well but may I caution him on too much reflection. It is a complete waste of time and if it continues could be a sign that he is regressing back to stage 4.

    20. Proud Cybernat says:

      Are you feeling it yet, soft NOs? The shit-storm of Brexit in the air. You should, by now, be catching a whiff of the stench it will bring. Gets stronger by the day, doesn’t it.

      Scotland doesn’t have to be part of it. We don’t have to go down this serious self-harming route.

      IndyRef2 / ScotRef you know what to do.

    21. Walter Scott says:

      We really need more of this kind of thing. Rapier satire is more affective than just repeating that Kezia or Ruth and all the Britnatz are a bunch of lying cunts. Though we need reminding of this from time to time we would surely gain more support by being clever & entertaining

    22. Dan Huil says:

      Nice one, Doc.

      Billy-no-mates Westminster has an unerring ability to make enemies. Thankfully today’s Scotland has friends in Europe.

      BTW: good to see Ireland sticking it to Westminster about future border lines.

    23. Foxy Lindy says:

      Absolutely superb Stu!

    24. Rock says:

      It is my prediction that there will be a “snap” Brexit and the SNP will be caught napping and unable to hold a second independence referendum.

      Truth Always.

    25. Proud Cybernat says:

      “It is my prediction that there will be a “snap” Brexit and the SNP will be caught napping and unable to hold a second independence referendum.”

      Brexit, however the negotiations go (Deal / No Deal), still has to be ratified by the EU27 within the 2 year A50 timeframe. The UK can do nothing about that timeframe. Sure, they can walk out. But they still have to abide by the rules of the Club they are leaving until those rules expire (after 2 years).

      As such, I rather doubt the SNP can be “caught napping”. But even if there were some way the UK could get round the rules, I suspect the SNP will be keeping a close eye on the UK gameplan, anticipating their every move.

    26. Liz g says:

      Richard McKinnon @ 3.55
      Apart from makin an assumption about what kind of Dr (there are many of them)Dr Craig Dalziel is.
      Ah goat that bit…

      Whit are ye talking aboot…… your post makes no sense.

      How did you get from a bit of fictional writing…
      To Dr Craig bing bonging around the later stages of grief?
      And them a very general statement about what stage others are at…?

      You dae know this is Wing’s Over Scotland and we discuss the upcoming referendum…aye?
      Mibbi you want the Daily Express heath/horoscope page ?

    27. Rock says:

      Proud Cybernat,

      “As such, I rather doubt the SNP can be “caught napping”.”

      The SNP has already been caught napping.

      While Nicola was busy flogging a dead horse – a separate deal for Scotland which was never going to happen, the unionists got their act together.

      The result was the fall in SNP vote from 50% to 37%.

      Nicola was left dithering for two weeks after the result, before postponing legislation for a second independence referendum.

      If you think the British Mafia State will respect its EU obligations, you are extremely naive.

      For the avoidance of any doubt, my mantra has long been and remains:

      “Always vote, and always vote SNP only until after independence.”

      Truth Always.

    28. heedtracker says:

      “Always vote, and always vote SNP only until after independence.”

      Truth Always.

      Why does that just not ring true at all, as endorsement, numbnuts?

    29. manandboy says:

      Rock says:
      “It is my prediction that there will be a “snap” Brexit and the SNP will be caught napping and unable to hold a second independence referendum.”

      That would be a good bet, Rock, but for the fact that the Westminster Establishment is likely to be more devious and more treacherous than that, a) because it’s in their nature, and b) because life without Scotland’s wealth is something they cannot contemplate.

      With the Establishment backed into a corner, naivety is a luxury Scotland can’t afford.

    30. geeo says:

      If you do not understand what Article 50 ACTUALLY says, and anyone who thinks the SNP can be “caught napping” by a legally impossible “snap brexit”, has not been paying attention, why on earth would anyone give 2 fucks about your clearly inadequate opinion ?

      As for the other goon, “i didn’t read your article but will make assumptions about it anyway”….away ya donkey.

    31. Hamish100 says:

      rock won’t read of a snap brexit in the pro “indy” paper at least cause he doesn’t read pro indy papers. Strange.. but truth always or is it peace?

      The fact is if Scotland had voted for independence the right wing tory alliance would have been put in its box.
      Of course some career politicians would have jumped ship claiming they were always pro indy. Henry McLeish would still be an aye or a maybes naw. Rock would still be casting doubts but this Scotland would have moved forwards in planning the removal of nuclear weapons. Setting up our conventional forces on the Clyde and start the restructure of our industries to suit this country and not London. Oil companies would be welcomed but would not rip us off, our EU market would expand and our depopulation would be reversed as most people would see the benefit of living and working in a forward looking country.

      We have been given another chance because of the right wing loonies of the tories and UKIP.

    32. Juan P says:


      Submissions on the proposed repeal of thd offensive behaviour at football act starting to be published:

      Overwhelming support to keep the act so far. Hopefully the greens see sense and oppose repeal.

    33. Macart says:

      That’s a keeper.

      Neatly done Dr Dalzell.

    34. colin Alexander says:

      A couple of web pages I can recommend. Apologies, if they have already been posted.

      Try reading this one in the context of GE 2017:

      where Scottish Labour campaigned for, and celebrated their success in, helping to get 13 Tory MPs elected in Scotland.

    35. Artyhetty says:

      Great piece by Dr.Craig and it highlights the utterly farcical, incompetent, couldn’t give a stuff about anything, troughers which make up the current calibre of britnats in WM.

      I had to laugh, and could see this as a spoof film. We have to laugh, otherwise we would cry, Ken500@3pm, but yes it is a very serious and dangerous situation in which we find ourselves in this torrid UKOK.

      Have a great weekend all, keep sharing, keep caring and we will get there. 🙂

    36. Az says:

      @ Richard Mackinnon

      Well, that comment was a load of pompous old wank.

    37. Glamaig says:

      What strikes me about this is how it sounds more farcical and shocking when applied to Scotland than it does to the UK, and of course if it was Scotland’s situation the media would be quite rightly ripping the SNP to shreds even more than they normally do.

      Shows how much residual brainwashing I still have that the UK establishment is competent, clever, trustworthy etc, and how lightly the media is letting off the Tories for allowing what was their internal party dispute to escalate into threatening economic disaster, the break up of the UK, and making the UK an international laughing stock. The party should really be forced to disband and half of them sent to jail.

    38. Ian Brotherhood says:

      Does anyone know what ‘snap Brexit’ means, or is even supposed to mean?

      Are we at the stage where anyone can just stick a random word before ‘Brexit’ and then adopt a pensive expression?

      Okay then.

      I predict a…


      …a ‘proportional’ Brexit.



    39. ronnie anderson says:

      @ Ian Brotherhood The snap comes before the cackle n pop but ah hiv porridge fur ma brexit, so whit dey ah know.

      Might be ah few oracles oan here kin advise you .

    40. Ian Brotherhood says:

      @ronnie anderson –

      I used to listen to the Rice Crispies. It was magical…

      Tried listening tae a bowl of porridge once and just got an earful of steam.

      (There’s a metaphor in there somewhere…)

    41. Fred says:

      That would be a “Feckless Brexit!” Pours large Laphroaig, but no ceegar!

    42. Proud Cybernat says:

      “Truth always.”

      Aye, whitever. Noo where did ah leave ma vaseline?

    43. Glamaig says:

      From the BBC website

      ‘Sir Jeffrey claimed that 64% of goods exported by the Republic of Ireland go to the UK.
      But that figure is incorrect – exports to the UK amounted to 12.8% of trade in 2016, according to the Irish government.’

      Refers to a DUP MP lying on the radio this morning. Even the BBC point out he is lying (although they didnt at the time of the broadcast)

    44. ronnie anderson says:

      Ian Brotherhood enjoy the Brandy Mr .

      Fred same tae you enjoy yer Laphroaig

      Proud Cybernat Dont you slip up noo.

    45. K1 says:

      I’m opting for ‘ready brexit’…central government fur wankers.

    46. sinky says:

      O/T Radio Scotland tea time news that 80 buildings in ‘Britain’ failed fire cladding tests. There were none in Scotland so far as I know so why do Radio Scotland news editors give a false impression.

    47. Ian Brotherhood says:

      @ronnie anderson & Fred –

      So many lies have been bandied about, why don’t we just call it ‘Bare-arsed Brexit’?

    48. mogabee says:

      Well Dr D, fair enjoyed that and “most” of the comments! ;D

    49. Connor McEwen says:

      Bloody brilliant on Dug’s BREXIT, AND AS SO MANY READ POSTS HAVE TO RECOMMEND IF YOU CO NOT MIND ” indycargordonross ” on facebook for additional info on Indy matters.

    50. heedtracker says:

      Brexshit. Brexshit, SO toryboy fascist, not even Snatcher Thatcher wishes that on us all, in her pyramid.

    51. Valerie says:

      Just what the Doctor ordered, you funny, clever man. I was asking throughout, and starting to see it as a kind of prolonged skit.

      I honestly think the makers of ‘Saviour of the Union’ would do this proud.

      @Richard McKinnon
      Way to try bring down a clever piece of writing, by just vomiting bile.

      Jog on, and get some kind of life.

    52. Az says:

      I’m sure there is something wrong wih the commenting system. Surely we’d expect to see three or four times as many?!

      So I wonder, is this site under cyberattack? We all knoow Stu’s smart enough to stop them taking the site down… but maybe the comments..?

      I made four comments on the article “Having to make a choice”, not one of them appeared, even after several hours.

      Be vigilant, folks. There is a “war” taking place and as such, all of us are the enemy.

      Just make sure your anti-virus software is up-to-date, make sure you have a good quality anti-malware installed (I’d recommend ‘malwarebytes’, because you get a free 30 day trial [no details reqd] which is like the primo paid version PLUS after the 30 days you get a basic package. Most importantly, your definitions are kept up-to-date and yu can always do a full scan – wait til you run scan 1… might be a shock)

      Pay attention to deviations in your service, eg suddenly slow or repeated failures to load. While there can always be other explanations for such incidents, I urge all Wingers to be super cautious from here on.

      Make no mistake, the British state is truly reeling – in a corner and therefore at its most dangerous. Very suddenly, the unthinkable can become very thinkable, very quickly.

      God speed and love to all as per. We’re oan wur wye 😀
      love you guys

    53. Az says:

      Special Hi to Cactus if he or she is aboot 🙂

    54. Cactus says:

      Aye ahm aboot, we be a he, come meet us all at the next social.

      All the best tae yerself too Az bro / sis?

      Thought provoking article Craig.

      Would make a good movie…

      I see a picture forming..

      Saturday again.

    55. davidbsbs says:

      Ach that was quite good tae the bit about Jim Murphy. Jezza is regarded as unelectable only because the establishment decided he was ( and I am not a fan I stress ). But Murphy is unelectable because he is a c..t.

    56. bjsalba says:

      O/T well sort of – it is about the next chapter in this saga.

      The Tory Brexiteers are currently touting their Transition Period and are spending lots of time fighting out the details in public – Any Questions on R4 last night being a case in point.

      I know that the idea of a Transition Period was discussed in the European Parliament but it is NOT part of the “Divorce” negotiations. Barnier has no authority to even discuss it and all this public wrangling over the terms is in my estimation purely a diversionary tactic to keep the public from looking closely what is currently being negotiated and to use up time.

      I suspect that their main strategy is Brinkmanship. From what I have read they genuinely believe that the EU27, Commission and European Parliament will crumble in the end, and give them pretty well everything they demand – they actually believe they can “have their cake and eat it”.

      I wonder if Craig could do a little crystal ball gazing and write the next chapter in his saga based on the scenario that the EU27, Commission and European Parliament stand firm.

    57. Ghillie says:

      That could do well as a play on The Fringe = )

    58. Ken500 says:

      Bad photo

    59. Richard MacKinnon says:

      If you want a good example of why you should never text or post comments when your pissed, read Az says: 29 July, 2017 at 3:00 am. Wonderful.

    60. Nana says:

      Last from me

      No Dunkirk Spirit Can Save Britain From Brexit Defeat

      Robert Somynne is no longer with commonspace.
      “much happier out of that organisation”

    61. Macart says:

      Good selection Nana.

      Mr Smith’s link was a stand out. How the EU states see the UK and basically it’s exactly as most suspect.

      If ever there was a QED moment, this is it. Our media and journos, with very few rare exceptions, has done the UK public a great disservice in their political coverage of recent years.

    62. Hamish100 says:


      Dunkirk, Royal family including Diana, labour ex MP talking about game of thrones.

      I’m off for a wee greet and a wee fawn.

    63. gus1940 says:

      Our wonderful media playing down last night’s London riots as ‘People throwing some fireworks at the police’.

    64. Robert Kerr says:

      Just to finish this sequence on brexit my contribution is.


    65. Ghillie says:

      Richard MacKinnon That was a gratuitous, unnecessary, unfounded and unkind remark. Not impressed again.

    66. Richard MacKinnon says:

      I am reassured that you find may comment gratuitous, unnecessary, unfounded and unkind. Go back and read Az’s reply (28 July, 2017 at 7:58 pm) to my original comment,
      You are a sanctimonious hypocrite.

    67. K1 says:

      I think ‘that comment was a load of pompous old wank’ describes how Az feels about your initial comment, aptly. Az proffers their opionion on your comment about Az’s previous comment. He describes what you’ve written as ‘pompous old wank’, he doesn’t describe you Richard, he doesn’t insult you?

      You on the other hand just insulted Ghillie ‘personally’. For no other reason than you didn’t like Ghillie’s comment ‘about’ yours to Az.

      That’s a ‘gratuitous, unnecessary, unfounded and unkind remark.’

      So was your first to Az. Keep it up Richard, it’s fun watching a load of old wank being thrown aboot the place, in a pompous manner.

    68. Ghillie says:

      K1 Thank you = )

      It is painful to be personaly attacked. So on that score, RM scores a wee victory.

      Mr MacKinnon. You may think I am sanctimonious but I find it difficult to watch a fellow Yesser having their reputation dragged down like that with a completely unsubstaniated statement and not defend them.

      I do regret that there are times a friend here is attacked in such a way and I have not been here to call out the rancid remark.

      I caught you in the act of a gratutious, unnecessary, unfounded and unkind remark aimed at Az.

      And called you out for it.

      Still not impressed.

    69. Richard MacKinnon says:

      You guys are far too sensitive of a bit of criticism. Far too touchy when one of yours is made fun of. I’ve seen that kind of behaviour before, when someone starts to be over defensive its usually a sign that they are beginning to doubt themselves.
      I’m going to test this theory over the next few months.

    70. K1 says:

      But it’s not making ‘fun of’, is it Richard? No one is laughing, your comment was scornful toward Az, your comment toward Ghillie was not funny either, it was an insult directly aimed at the commenter, on the back of them expressing an opinion.

      Why are you now lying about your intent with those two comments? It’s as clear as day what your comments were about.

      Pop psychology doesn’t get you a free pass either Richard, sometimes when people insult/make ‘fun of’ others, the other can feel the blade of intent, which is to wound, when wounded, yes the reactive defence may well kick in?

      So your psychological assessment of ‘defensiveness’ is not analytically sound. Because you’re attempting to remove the ‘causative’ aspect of the whole movement of the defence mechanism?

      You’re attempting to absolve yourself as the instigator of the ‘offense’.

      You had no ‘reason’ to be offensive/make ‘fun off’ to either commenter. There was no debating point, no enquiring, it was point blank ‘judgement’ of the commenters themselves. You’re more or less admitting to attacking others for the sake of it to undermine them. You’re making ‘fun of’ them Richard.

      You were in the wrong on this, on both counts, with Az and Ghillie. You are clearly a man incapable of admitting this in the first instance, you then cover this up and avoid your own part in causing any potential distress to others by claiming their taking offence at you insulting ‘them’, making ‘fun of’ them is some sort of measure of ‘their’ self doubt?

      It’s not Richard. It merely indicates they are indeed sensitive enough still, to recognise when someone is actually insulting them/others, and have the capacity and confidence to challenge such a person on their conduct. Hardly a signifier of any doubt whatsoever. People know when others mean to harm, and you’ve merely confirmed that this is indeed what your ‘intent’ is/was, and now you ‘scold’ them for daring to ‘defend’ themselves against offensive comments aimed ‘at them’ by you?

      Yeah…keep on throwing that old wank around Richard…we’re all waiting for your next rationalisation when you decide to pull another one off…

    71. Ghillie says:

      Thank you K1 = ) Very well said.

      This is covered rather fittingly in Petra’s post about tactics of abuse.

      Yes. I did feel the blade of intent.

      And I won’t be mocked out of calling it out. That fell on stoney ground.

    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