AHDINNAEKEN presents a short, concise and succinct explanation of the repercussions of yesterday’s announcement by the governor of the Bank of England:
By Corrie Spondent
SALMOND’S PLAN f**ked!
AHDINNAEKEN presents a short, concise and succinct explanation of the repercussions of yesterday’s announcement by the governor of the Bank of England:
By Corrie Spondent
SALMOND’S PLAN f**ked!
NO NATIONALIST can resist building foundations on shifting sand.
Those were the words of Longshanker the great Scottish writer, author of AhDinnaeKen.
They were made up on the hoof to evoke a cheap laugh – just like the rest of the blog.
But ye couldnae really make up the pish being expostulated by Joan McArthyalpine in the Daily Ranger this morning.
Forty six per cent of voters intend voting Yes according to an ICM poll.
And that’s enough to get everybody’s pulses racing.
Particularly the Nationalists whose Yes campaign front has fallen apart in ignominy like the eponymous House of Cards.
Joanie’s putting it down to the effect of that great historic ‘game changer’ – the 670 Commandments of Nationalist Assertion. Or Scotland’s Future to give it its official name.
And, while she’s specific about the figure of 46 per cent, she’s a bit more vague when talking about the numbers who have actually signed the Yes Declaration and the stated aim of it gaining a million signatures.
She then uses the mention of the Yes Declaration to repeat the mostly meaningless Barnum statements contained within it e.g. “We are blessed with talent, resources and creativity.”
Bless! Wha’s like us, eh?
What she fails to mention is that, like many of the polls – internet and reality based – weighting/skewing of the polled figures has taken place to make up the numbers.
Consider the following statement from the ubiquitous indy commentator John Curtice: “ICM were only able to interview half as many 16-24 year olds as they wanted to.
“Although this deficit has been overcome by upweighting every 16-24 year old in the poll so that they count as two persons rather than one, it means the poll’s estimate of how this group will behave is based on a particularly small sample and thus can be very volatile – as appears to be true in this instance.”
In other words, like many of the Nationalist – and for balance, Better Together – assertions, it’s mostly meaningless.
As the Professor explained: “Indeed, we might note that if we compare the raw unweighted data in this poll with that in ICM’s previous poll we find that, at 34%, the proportion of Yes voters is exactly the same.”
But that would get in the way of the feel good factor the Yes camp so desperately needs. So Joanie conveniently ignores it.
With the Tories in the hated Westminster getting ever more vicious. With the prospect of nothing but more cuts and meaningless recovery statements reported by the media. And, with the prospect of a future Labouring government sounding like ‘more of the same, only worse’, by rights, the Yes campaign should be doing much much better.
That it plainly isn’t tells a story all its own.
Joanie says a Yes vote will break the distribution of the country’s resources to a rich elite concentrated in one part of the country.
Again, statements like this conveniently half ignore the latest jobs info which showed that London created the most jobs of any city in the UK.
But Edinburgh created the second most.
The conclusion is easy to reach.
Joanie wants to remove power over Scotland from a rich London elite to a rich Edinburgh elite.
Most Scots probably wouldn’t notice the difference, other than the accent, telling them how to take their unpalatable medicine.
There’s a lyric from a song which sums up exactly what would happen in the event of a Yes vote: “Meet the new boss, same as the old boss.”
Roll on September 18.
AhDinnaeKen is no fan of the Daily Mail. But first and foremost it is a newspaper driven by the agenda of its readers. It reports stories – like every newspaper does. Yesterday it told a story about abusive Cybernats. As with any tabloid styled story, it contained an element of hyperbole. It’s part of the modus operandi of popular newspapers. It’s what keeps readers interested and reading to the end. We* found the Mail feature entitled ‘Cybernats Unmasked’ to be temperate to the point of sanguinity. Which forces AhDinnaeKen to ask the question – just why are all those Cybernats highlighted by the story bleating so much? Will an indy Scotland be a Crybaby Nation full of grieving victims? AhDinnaeKen investigates the Daily Mail version of “social justice”:
By Ahmstill Laffin
THE DAILY Mail chose to expose some alleged Cybernats yesterday.
It was a double page feature introduced by a headline screamer.
Tagged as an “Exclusive”, it highlighted seven Cybernats famous/infamous for their varying independence invective on Twitter and the internet.
By the standards of some of the venom aimed at opponents or sceptics of Indy, the piece was balanced, fair, informative and temperate.
Not that you’d think so judging by the reaction to it.
One of the alleged Cybernats, Melissa Murray aka @meljomur is threatening to sue the Daily Mail for stalking and harrassment.
AhDinnaeKen says, good luck with that Mel, we could do with the laugh – in the public interest of course.
Another exposed Cybernat, ‘Reverend’ Jedi Wingsy Campbell wrote a whole blog about it. Entitled, “The Bully Pulpit“, the author allegedly used “trenchant insights” to “forensically” tear it to pieces.
From where we*’re standing, it read like a page out of the Wingnuts Over Scotland manual on how to write a hate preaching blog. Y’know, for Cybernats like himself and the others featured in the Daily Mail.
Consider the following two paragraphs from the whinging Bully Pulpit blog: [Italics for the Daily Mail, Bold Italics for Wingsy]
“But what marks out the cybernats is their modus operandi: from their disparate locations around the country, on smartphones, laptops and desktop computers in lonely bedrooms, they operate almost as one homogenous body.
There are central figures who spur on or co-ordinate this activity, binding them together and providing inspiration and moral support.”
To which Wingsy said:
Intriguing phrasing there. The “or” in the second sentence is a classic weasel word. It’s a bit like saying “All supporters of Partick Thistle enjoy football or abusing children” – it creates a negative impression while not actually being defamatory, because the “or” means that no one individual is actually being accused of paedophilia.
Which is “intriguing phrasing” itself. Consider this sentence written by ‘Reverend’ Jedi Wingsy Campbell aimed at AhDinnaeKen in a Wingnuts piece entitled “The Personal Touch“:
“…there is no doubt whatsoever the author of the blog responsible for the “dossier” is Murray Brady, or someone acting as a front for him.”
Hmm. AhDinnaeKen says, let’s take a look at that “intriguing phrasing” and consider again, what the use of “or” is for!
That’s right. According to Wingsy, it’s a “classic weasel word” – a bit like saying “All supporters of Partick Thistle enjoy football or abusing children” – it creates a negative impression while not actually being defamatory”.
But it’s only a “weasel word”, apparently, when used by the Dail Mail.
When it’s used by Wingsy it’s “robust polemic” or “trenchant insight” or “forensic analysis” or “professional journalism” or “tribune journalism”. But definitely not a “cowardly disclaimer” or “weasel word”. That accolade is exclusively reserved for the Daily Mail in Wingsy’s world.
To call it Cybernat poison or hate preaching doublespeak would interfere with Wingsy’s victim narrative. Which is always worth remembering when reading anything written by the self styled ‘Reverend’.
The Mail feature further highlighted another five Cybernats. It exposed their background and highlighted their typical modus operandi which, reading between the lines, is that they probably have too much time on their hands or they’re bored.
Andy Ellis who tweets as @ndls61 was one of the five named. It stated that he is a commercial manager for Hewlett Packard.
A recent BBC (biased against indy) report stated that Hewlett Packard was suffering from “falling sales”.
It begs the question, is it coincidence or magic that @ndls61 is a commerical manager there? Maybe he should be spending less time tweeting and more time on his day job.
In all, AhDinnaeKen found the Mail piece to be fair and balanced. It stated on at least a couple of occasions that there is abuse on both sides of the Indy debate.
It gave each of the named individuals the opportunity to defend themselves from the claim that they were poisonous cybernats.
And it printed their replies.
It also stated that the exposed individuals were, in general, more moderate in person than their online personas suggest – with the possible exception of ‘Reverend’ Jedi Wingsy Campbell whom it nailed with this excellent observation:
“On his website, he tells his acolytes: ‘they’ll [undecided voters] be hungry for more truth, and then you can send them our way.’
“The self-aggrandising ‘our’, of course, is slightly misleading, as Wings is more or less a one-man outfit, though he does sometimes commission and publish proindependence submissions.
“A self-publicist of the first order, Wings often boasts about his growing profile and Community Safety Minister Roseanna Cunningham is one of his Twitter correspondents.
Now that’s what we* call true professional journalism.
The Daily Mail, in general, isn’t AhDinnaeKen’s paper of choice. But there’s no denying that it put the cybernats to the sword with its weekend feature and did so fairly and squarely.
The feature was all the more damning because it was written in a textbook professional and balanced manner.
Anyone who thinks it wasn’t needs to go back to media studies classes.
Take heed ‘Reverend’. And your cultish coterie of Cybernats.
Graham Grant of the Daily Mail gave you an abject lesson in ‘professional journalism’.
It just seems a pity that Mr Grant’s efforts have fallen on cloth ears – from the Cybernat camp at least.
AhDinnaeKen’s still laughing.
A LACKLUSTRE limp biscuit campaign by the SNP in Coodenbeath will lead to miraculous victory in September says uninspiring SNP candidate. AhDinnaeKen asks, eh?
By Newspeak McGarry
THE EVIL Empire’s Red-Tory Labouring party trounced the forces of righteousness and sanctimony yesterday in a Coodenbeath by-election.
But Red-Tory party activists fear what the undercurrent of a huge 11 per cent electoral swing really means.
Some are whispering that it could be an omen of ill fortune for the great vote for ffrreeddoomm™ in September.
According to busted coopon faced Nationalist candidate Natalie McGarry, her humiliating lacklustre performance was only a ruse.
She reckons that it was all part of a cunning Nationalist plan to lull the Evil Empire’s forces into a false sense of security.
She said: “I was out on the doorsteps and a lot of people said to me:
“Listen hen, huv ye no got wan o’ they X-Box Wan’s in yer poket?
“Gies wan o’ thame the noo and ah’ll vote fur ye. If no, bugger off, Jeremy Kyle’s oan the telly.”
McGarry claims that messages such as that are Red-Tory code for voting Yes in the Neverendum.
Cringing, whinging, clandestine, forktongued, snake oil spokesperson for the SNP, Wee Naebudy, said: “Red-Tory Labour have fallen into oor trap. After this embarrassing rout, they’ll go back tae no takin’ us seriously. And then we’ll show them. There’s plenty of room for complacency.”
THE SCOTTISH social attitudes survey revealed yesterday what virtually everyone – apart from Scotland’s Braveheart Commandos – already knows: Most people in Scotland couldnae gie a toss about independence – and both campaigns are boring, turgid and don’t touch yer average Jock’s life in any meaningful way whatsoever. AhDinnaeKen investigates:
By Koodnae Geeyaphuck
SCOTS WOULD vote for independence for the price of an X-Box One and a copy of Grand Theft Auto Five it was revealed yesterday.
Sixty two per cent of the population think the Yes and No campaigns are of no relevance to their lives whatsoever.
And, if anything, core support for independence has fallen.
Professor John Poultice of Scratchcard University articulated the general attitude of Scotland:
He said: “Forget inclusiveness. Forget doing things better here. Forget social justice. And forget London Tory rule.
“What the Scot are really saying to the Nationalist is ‘Show me the money’.
“If Firstminster Salmond can find an inexpensive supply of X-Boxes and Grand Theft Auto V then independence could be in the bag.
“What a parcel of cheapskates in a nation.”
Joan examines work from List D academic Doctor Johnson Robertson and says it exonerates every chip on the shooder paranoid speculative belief held by the wilder eyed fringe of the Nationalist Grievance Brigade.
By Moan McVulpine – putting the pars into paranoia
DR JOHNSON Robertson is a respected academic, particularly in Nationalist circles, with a long history of saying what the Nats like to hear.
His work includes detecting bias in everything the media does.
Now the Reader in Media Bias and his researchers have turned their expertise to the Scottish emancipation campaign.
Dr Robertson’s undisclosed ‘team’ at the List D University of the West of Scotland spent a year, looking for instances of bias in the BBC and STV.
Guess what? They found them. Quelle surprise!
It’s a not so well known maxim that if you go looking for bias in a medium, you will find it.
You’ll even be able to make your grievance credible by supporting it with selected evidence.
Why do you think frothing right wingers refer to the BBC as the “Bolshevik Broadcasting Corporation?”
Why do you think frothing left-wingers refer to the BBC as the “Bourgeoise Broadcasting Corporation?”
And why do you think Nationalists – particularly Firstminster Salmond – refer to the BBC as the “British Brainwashing Corporation?”
They’ve all found ‘evidence’ to back their claims.
Nowhere in the ‘extensive’ 12 page report by Dr Johnson is there anything covering the inherent bias which affects all media outlets – including the BBC.
Nowhere in the ‘extensive’ 12 page report is there anything covering how these inherent biases are mostly ‘structural’ and part of the process of news reporting.
And, nowhere in the ‘extensive’ 12 page report is there anything relating to how these inherent biases affect ‘apparent’ political bias.
But there doesn’t need to be for the Nationalists to be convinced by the veracity of the report’s conclusions.
It fits in with their parochial world view of “they’re aw against us”.
The fact that the report says there is bias against independence is enough for the Nationalists to be convinced. No more questions asked.
In short, the report gives foundation to their fundamental grievance campaign. If it wasn’t so potentially dangerous, it would be raucously laughable.
What the whinging Nationalists don’t say. Or what they would prefer to cover up is that the sport of claiming bias against the media is fundamentally elitist.
It has it’s roots in a distrust of the people – it assumes they aren’t able to make up their own mind.
Effectively, they don’t think people are capable of detecting bias or thinking for themselves.
One other very important bias which hasn’t been declared, or touched upon, is the bias of the researcher himself.
Who the funders for the research were hasn’t been declared either. Nor has the political leanings of the academic and his team.
Moan’s prepared to give the Doctor and his invisible team the benefit of the doubt on this – despite the conclusions reached.
But it’s worth taking a closer look at some of the conclusions actually made.
On page 12 the report refers to the “objective evidence presented here“.
Sorry to tell you this Dr Johnson, but there’s no such thing as ‘objective evidence’ when it comes to reporting media bias – sorry for getting all ontological on your ass.
It all, ultimately, comes down to opinion and the bias of the individual/individuals making the claim.
And that conclusion is backed up by statements like this one on page 11: “Comparing Reporting Scotland with STV News, the former seems less balanced and fair to the Yes campaign“.
“Seems” is hardly objective or irrefutably conclusive is it?
It would be easy to go on. But I don’t need to.
The fact that the Murdoch Press haven’t picked up on this report and screamed it from page one of the Scum tells you all you need to know regarding its credibility.
TV bosses are probably pishing themselves laughing up their sleeves.
Politicians have a moral obligation not to knowingly dupe their electorate.
And that includes Joan McArthyalpine and her concerted grievance narrative bias in the Daily Ranger.
First there was an irate swivel eyed complaint. And then there was another one. And then there was another one after that. And then there was an ‘academic’ report from the List D University of the West of Skintland. And now it has been concluded that the BBC is in cahoots with the Bitter Together Project Feartie Anti-Scots, ‘Keep Skintland subjugated’ campaign. And now, AhDinnaeKen investigates the storm in a tartan List D cup, in-between the tears of incredulous laughter:
By Yoonionist Unda-Dabed
THE BBC have been found guilty of reporting the independence debate it was revealed recently.
According to ‘crackpot’ website Newsnat Skintland, the BBC have reported on the independence debate since it began.
And, they further claimed, the BBC continues to report on the indy debate.
The stooshie in a fur cup, concerns the BBC’s reporting of Irish European Leprechaun President Lucinda Righton.
The BBC’s Raymond Buchananstreet reported that she said: “If Skintland were to become independent, Skintland would have to apply for membership and that can be a lengthy process…”
Raymond Buchananstreet then used the word “but” and “and” to link her comments to comments made by Tefal Heid ex-Scottish Secretary Michael More.
This was seized upon by the Nationalist grievance merchants as proof of concerted and sustained bias against independence.
The hapless Buchananstreet was then offered up by the BBC Tristram Trust to be sacrificed on the altar of ‘inaccuracy’ – in order to appease the baying Newsnat loons.
One BBC insider said the BBC Tristram Trust’s action had demonstrated a textbook example of lily livered Neville Chamberlain bias (doing a Neville).
But, as expected, the Trust’s sacrificial lamb appeasement strategy was rejected by the Nationalist fundamentalists.
Nothing short of 24 hour self immolation, confession and begging for forgiveness on every media outlet throughout the land will satisfy the Nationalist Inquisition.
Frothing, spitting, dribbling, cackling, heidbanging Newsnat reporter, G A Ponceybody said: “This proves exactly what we have been ranting about all these years.
“The BBC reports news that we don’t like. And it’s not good enough.
“In an independent Skintland we will set up a board of Un-Scottish activities. BBC employees can look forward to appearing in front of it.”
Failed media studies dropout, Reverend Jedi Campbell, screamed: “They’re all against us! They want to destroy us! We must fight back! Give me money! Only with more of your money can I save Skintland single handedly.”
The DWP, or the Unionist led conspiracy, were unavailable for comment.