Todays Sunday Times article by the BBC’s Neil Oliver is so stunning in it’s inaccuracy, it’s difficult to know where to begin. It oozes personal hate towards Salmond and Sturgeon, disdain towards the SNP and bitterness towards his fellow Scots who aspire towards a better vision for Scotland. Neil talks of ‘schoolboy logic’ but your average 12 year old could have written a more succinct article than this petulant whine.

The union in Neil’s world is not the reality of the one people actually live in and experience. He has also clearly chosen not to listen to the messaging from the SNP or read the manifesto or he would understand the sea change that is being proposed. If he sees independence as no different to the union I would go as far as to say this is a wholly fraudulent premise. Not renewing Trident and its huge expense alone is a sea change. Not paying your taxes to another country to be lied to from consecutive unionist governments about the great deal we get is a sea change. Not killing Syrian, Iraqi and Afghanistan children is a sea change.

The ‘centuries’ old union he refers to (in actual fact just 3 centuries) is portrayed here as a defacto wonderful thing without reference to the unions huge failings such as aggressive foreign policy, illegal wars, sickening debt, children in poverty, working people forced to food banks. I could go on. The irony of the article referring to a nationalist ‘hate fest’ (was this the George Square unionists?) and dead dog politics (sounds more like the union again) show a different side of the normally smug unionist. Perhaps this is because the union is teetering in the edge of a cliff like those featured in Neil’s ‘BBC ‘Coast’ programme.

Neil’s provocative language saying “He [Salmond] and his sort” and “Sturgeon and the rest… fail even to comprehend what it is they behold and despise” is a complete and total insult to half of the country. He says the SNP are “lacking in imagination” yet Scotland has never witnessed a party and leader so popular and it’s clear that it is Neil that is failing to behold this fact as it is something he personally despises.

The parochial view on the SNP being historically as insignificant as the monster raving loony party speaks volumes. There is no doubting the SNP are now at record strength but there has always been a reasonably significant post war support. That’s not to say the party have not been without their own previous factions and problems but the SNP are a party who have very much grown up and proven themselves capable of good governance and importantly are considered a party that genuinely want the best nation for all Scots.

Neil is stuck in the past and wants to denty Scotland a better futureWhat’s clear is that Neil is a ‘TV historian’ is stuck in the past. He is actually an archaeologist and chooses to dig up a unionist past that none of us recognise and the fact he is also an author, makes the quality of this polemic all the more surprising. Neil refuses to acknowledge or understand that people are striving for something far better than they have now and therefore offers no alternative or positive vision for change. As far as Neil is concerned the union is not broke and does not need fixed. He sounds exactly like the decades of red and blue Tories that have fed us similar debunked falsities.

The article carries no weight, does not give a single example of the benefits of union or disadvantages of independence. Instead of basing his argument around political facts, the hairy TV historian accuses SNP candidates of wearing hairy jackets. I have no idea what this is actually meant to signify. It reeks of a scared unionist trapped in a corner spouting a vitriolic rant. On the other hand, he may just be after the ermine, inspired by the Michelle Mone treatment, a free ride in the House of Lords for becoming a unionist lapdog.

“To my way of thinking, you can only have one referendum on any given topic — and we’ve already had it. The idea of keeping on — demanding one after another until eventually the planets align in your favour and you get what you want — is to utterly compromise the integrity of the very notion of the plebiscite. You cannot ignore a clear result just because it’s not the answer you wanted to hear.”

Neil does not support democratic changeWhat Neil says here is the opposite of democracy. By his ‘way of thinking’ we would not be having another in/out EU referendum (we had one in 1975), there would not be a Scottish Parliament (as we ‘lost’ that vote in 1979), the peace bringing referendum on the Good Friday agreement would never have happened in 1998 (as there was a 1973 constitutional referendum). Wales would not have the assembly that resulted from th 1997 referendum (as they lost a similar referendum in 1979). These things all happened because political change is an iterative and pervasive cycle.

Just think for one minute if the above democratic evolution had not been allowed to happen because of ‘Neil’s way of thinking’. The alternative to peaceful democratic change is one that we do not wish to contemplate; we will stick with our peaceful and democratic process thanks.

I don’t know if he has hit the bottle or having a mid-union crisis but I think he will regret this #SNPBad article. It is however now in the public domain and perhaps gives an insight to just how scared people like the BBC’s Neil Oliver are about Scotland’s place in the union.

Neil is a unionist. Neil is in a panic that independence is inevitable. Neil is part of the problem. He will however be just as welcome in our successful independent Scotland as those who had the vision to aspire to it and enjoy the benefits of Stirling, Scotland.

Thankfully people like Neil are becoming more of a minority in Scotland, so perhaps it is time for him to put on a hairy jacket and slacks and come and join the future before he finds himself on the wrong side of history.

Join the Conversation


  1. Oliver is scared. Fear makes people lash out with childish accusations. No one talks more about indy than the unionists. I feel sorry for them.

    1. Are joking? Sturgeon never stops talking about it, usually to deflect from the SNP’s
      miserable record in government.

      1. Nicola can talk about independence all she likes… is not against the law….YET…x

  2. I always get the feeling that the motive of Scotland’s Neil Oliver types when writing their puerile, insulting comments in the Unionist press is purely to prove their anti SNP/Scottish independence credentials to the Brit Nat establishment whose collective arse the likes of Oliver love to suck.

  3. I made this comment when I read the article earlier today:
    “Astounding, amazing, really coming across as quite angry and just a tad unhinged.What’s wrong Neil? Of course it was posted at 1am maybe after a few glasses of nice whisky?
    If an academic can write and publish this trite nonesense in a respectable newspaper it shows the depths to which both have sunk.”

  4. @Susan
    Spot on. Only this isn’t fear…it’s abject terror.
    A professionally written piece in retort to an extremely child-like and fact free load of venomous bile that Oliver considers, i assume, to be worthy of publishing.
    Nice one Craig.

  5. The irony is that Tony Pollard , his side kick in two men in a trench,and the guy with the English accent is a good guy.
    Oliver is a complete low life. He kneels at the feet of his English masters asking for another contract.

    1. like sturgeon traipsing around europe begging someone to be her friend, and let her play with the big boys ? – the woman is a power hungry deluded nasty racist non-entity, and the article by neil is bang on the money ! – a brilliant piece of work.

    1. I thought i recognised the face ,
      well one of them at least ,
      a poor demented soul seeking attention .

      1. He gets well payed to slander and insult his own nation and fellow Scots. But very few of his paymasters and ideological partners can be called ‘English’ in any meaningful sense of the title, imho..

  6. He is a disgrace to think he is Scottish makes me see RED & to say he is welcome in Scotland he is frightened of losing his cushie wee job go stay in England you nut job

  7. I used to like Neil Oliver, but these are the ramblings of a person that has certainly lost his soul, I dare say the “nobles” of the past eventually spoke in a similair fashion, being lost in their pursuit of more.

  8. well so much hate from one person, i gave up after a brief glance at his demented drivel .
    This neverendum that seems to be a favourite unionist chant , Easily averted if what was promised had been delivered , instead we had a long drawn out butchering , cutting , revising , altering of the Scotland bill , every single amendment proposed was rejected , in the most part by English MPs who had not listened to any of the debates , this was obvious by their absence right up to the vote , then we heard the customary the Nos have it the Nos have it , a self inflicted problem hidden from the folks who voted NO .
    I wonder whose blushes were being spared ,the ones who voted NO ,or the ones who did the butchering .

  9. For a scientist (he is isn´t he, sort of?) his logic is quite flawed.

    A referendum is not an attempt to measure a fixed quantity, like a physical constant, within an inevitable margin of error. First the quantity being measured, the desire amongst Scots for independence, is a variable that is constantly changing in response to circumstances and perceptions, as the opinion polls clearly demonstrate. Secondly, a referendum whose result is legally binding on government is not simply ¨testing the water¨, it actually hands the decision, at least in outline, over to the people.

    So it´s a bit like asking someone if they want to come out for a drink. And they say no, there´s something they want to watch on the telly, and then 10 min later they say, ¨Oh this is rubbish, are you still up for that drink …¨.

    Just wait while I find my hairy jacket 🙂

  10. In my opinion he wrote an excellent article. The only person I hear/read talking about a second referendum is Sturgeon/Salmond. It will never happen. Good luck to the delusional.

    1. only ones I hear are Unionists going on about 2nd referendum . Seem obsessed with it . Was the last one too close for comfort?

    2. If you think that vitriol and hate speech is excellent you need your head tested lady.

  11. It just shows sometimes you need a really good education to be truly stupid.

    Apparently if you are Scottish you are a nationalist. If you are British you are not a British nationalist. Britishness is above nationalism, it’s the one true nationality. The Scots are just racist,insular, bigoted morons. That will be me and 45% of Scotland Neil. Nice one mate! Scotland is so proud of an English boot licker.

    1. Very well said Jock. I think Neil is suffering from overactive bowels at the idea of standing up to his unionist masters in London.
      In reality Oliver and his kind are nothing but a pathetic and pitiful dwindling subspecies of moronic bigots and onanists.
      Scotland will be independent very soon.
      Saor Alba gu bràth deo.
      Beidh Westminster agus Sasana riail bàs gu bràth.

  12. Oliver’s agent should be worried , he’s showing classic symptoms of having lost the biscuit

  13. I didn’t know anything about Neil Oliver’s rant till I read it in the National today.
    But every time he speaks as a would-be historian I nearly puke before turning the channel.
    Now I know why. I must have an excellent instinct for turds. Why is anyone even paying attention to this moron?
    Cant wait to place both votes for SNP on Thursday despite the biased media’s desperation for independence to go away. It just wont.

  14. Great writing, Craig. Cogent and reasoned, so the complete opposite of Oliver’s vomitfest.
    I get that some want to stay the same, and deny young people the chance to move their country forward, because they are quite comfy with their lot.
    It’s hard to understand, though, that a person in the public eye, so lacking in perspective and awareness, pens a piece, that leaves the reader in no doubt, that you are having some type of breakdown at the prospect of people voting the way they want.

  15. Neil has a symbiotic relationship with the union and all it represents. He sees his grace and favour rigidly stuck to the union flagstaff and as such if the union goes so does he. Fear of losing something you hold dear often causes you to lash out at your perceived injustices.

  16. My 21 year old son, campaigning on Election Day in Glasgow, wearing a Scottish Green jacket walking his dog which has hair almost as long as Neil Oliver’s and which was also decorated with Green stickers (!) was slowly overtaken by this long haired guy on a bike who turned and glared at the two – a very, very angry glare! Of course it might not have been Neil Oliver, just some other poor soul who bore an uncanny resemblance to him. Perhaps Mr Oliver should investigate and call in all look-alikes who might be damaging his reputation as a personable TV presenter.

  17. This ludicrous Oliver (Hardy – like old black and white comedy from the past) article is written by a man having some sort of an existential and midlife crisis. He can’t handle the fact he is growing older, and the references to decay and death are very interesting. He is a man who has spent his life trading on history, so of course change and the future scare him, as an aging and outdated man – they mean nothing to him, and vice versa. This terrifies him and drives him to anger, despair, rage, venom, sarcasm, stupidity, invective, rubbish dead dog writing, endless bad hair days. This is a man who literally cannot handle life. His BBC time is at an end, as is his precious oppressive union. He writes, without irony: ‘When backed into a corner they imply that nothing anyone cares about will change. ‘ Hilariously accurate inadvertent self-assessment. What he cares about (and what makes a living for him) changing devastates him. He has buried himself in a myopic vision and version of a mythic past, and now that that is coming to an end he seems his own soon-coming obsolescence in front of him and it’s driving him to madness.

    Either that or he’s just a stupid hateful unionist (not capitalising that word, don’t hold the union in any high regard) c–t. Your choice. 🙂

  18. Look at that headline: ‘SNP vision of independence is same as Union, but dead.’ For a start, it makes no sense on a literal level. Junk language, confused communication. But think of the psychology behind it: if it’s him who wrote it, he is subconsciously acknowledging that the union is dead. He is saying that the SNP vision of independence would make the country the same as the union (which he loves), but dead. Nothing would change. But that way of life is…dead. I’m not being pedantic about this. You can tell a LOT by the way writers phrase things, and the words they use. This man is having a genuine mental breakdown, and the concepts of the union being dead, and the SNP’s post-union role in it, are driving him off the cliff of madness.

Leave a comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.