IN an astonishing turn of events, The National can reveal today the greatest intelligence coup since Odysseus conned the Trojans into taking home a wooden horse.
We can report that brave, highly trained espionage agents from the Yes movement have secretly infiltrated the Scotland in Union (SiU) organisation and are wrecking it from the inside.
READ MORE: Former BNP member pictured working with Scotland in Union
As our source put it: “They have done a great job because SiU is now like someone breaking wind in a lift – wrong on every level.”
These double agents have brilliantly hoodwinked SiU’s hapless leadership and its secret dark money donors into funding a whole series of fruitcake foibles that have undermined the whole Unionist case.
READ MORE: An indyref2 campaign guide for our Scotland in Union pals
For surely such an infiltration can be the only explanation for a litany of failure and downright embarrassment on the part of SiU who are to smart political campaigning what Donald Trump is to humility. The latest boo-boo from the boys and girls in the Unionists’ not-so-favourite clown show was to pay a fair wad of cash to Survation to try to hoodwink the public by changing the usual question on independence to ‘remain in’ or ‘leave’ the UK. Yet they and Survation had to admit – give SiU some credit for honesty – that the poll showed that only 36% were against a second referendum and the voting preferences would see the SNP increase its share of the vote and number of seats in Westminster. Oops!
SiU’s “own goal” poll was another example of the sheer wretchedness of a grouping that has as much legitimacy as Alan B’stard.
Remember how they leaked their own “top secret” donor list late last year? Only legal rules stopped us from printing every name, but social media has seen plenty leaks of them and it will be a very long time, if ever, before certain donors we know will cough up to SiU.
Last month we reported how one volunteer left SiU because one of their employees – who has since departed – shared in what another SiU worker called the group’s “culture of extremism”.
Earlier there was SiU director Alistair Cameron liking on social media a picture of a man holding a blunderbuss in case he met a nationalist. Shoot the SNP? Nice ...
Best of all was the revelation that SiU was funding a “secret” cabal of letter writers to pen anti-independence diatribes in newspapers and on websites. Yup, that was some secret ... The whole SiU farrago of nonsense would be totally laughable were it not for the very sinister way in which SiU is funded. Oh, sure they comply with the Electoral Commission rules, but is it right that anonymous donors who won’t state their beliefs in public are able to throw large sums of money at an organisation which, lest we forget, is out to stop a second independence referendum.
When indyref2 comes - listen up SiU, it’s going to happen so save your pennies - some organisation will have to become the principal opponent of Scottish independence as Better Together was in 2014.
SiU will angle to get the job so please, please, please will the Electoral Commission appoint SiU as the No side’s lead campaigners. For they are already totally damaged goods, and will only get worse at promoting a cause whose end is thoroughly nigh.
Why are you making commenting on The National only available to subscribers?
We know there are thousands of National readers who want to debate, argue and go back and forth in the comments section of our stories. We’ve got the most informed readers in Scotland, asking each other the big questions about the future of our country.
Unfortunately, though, these important debates are being spoiled by a vocal minority of trolls who aren’t really interested in the issues, try to derail the conversations, register under fake names, and post vile abuse.
So that’s why we’ve decided to make the ability to comment only available to our paying subscribers. That way, all the trolls who post abuse on our website will have to pay if they want to join the debate – and risk a permanent ban from the account that they subscribe with.
The conversation will go back to what it should be about – people who care passionately about the issues, but disagree constructively on what we should do about them. Let’s get that debate started!
Callum Baird, Editor of The National
Comments: Our rules
We want our comments to be a lively and valuable part of our community - a place where readers can debate and engage with the most important local issues. The ability to comment on our stories is a privilege, not a right, however, and that privilege may be withdrawn if it is abused or misused.
Please report any comments that break our rules.
Read the rules hereLast Updated:
Report this comment Cancel