Slipping in the back door.

I noted the "law" in my last post on Wednesday regarding Peaches and the Queen, noting in the process the Commonwealth Games Opening ceremony due that night.

With regards to the latter I can only say that I, personally, found it difficult to watch - although it does seem I was not alone, given the weirdness of all the proceedings - dancing tea-cakes and all.

Two things jumped out though, the first being the man-on-man kiss delivered by purple suited, John  Barrowman, someone I had not heard of before. Apparently it was symbolic; intended to deliver a message to the 40  Commonwealth countries where homosexuality is still illegal. As I have noted before, I don't hold anything against homosexuals, but I do have slight suspicions of ulterior motives behind, let's say, glamorising the practice. However, the "legal" aspect tied in well, whilst it must be noted that it is extremely likely to have been the British Empire who created the "law" in the first place.

Note that the traditional, of old, weddings which took place at Gretna Green were conducted on the blacksmith's anvil. Shades of alchemy? Gretna was traditionally used for wedding purposes due to a difference between Scots and English law

The second was the ritual  (military) Red Arrows flypast where the media were briefed that the aircraft would release only plumes of blue and white smoke, rather than the standard red, white and blue. From the BBC :

There was "no question" the Red Arrows would change the colour of smoke trails to represent the Scottish flag at the Glasgow 2014 opening ceremony, Defence Secretary Michael Fallon says..
 
It follows reports the RAF aerobatic team was forced to change its smoke from blue and white to its usual red, white and blue at the last minute.

Also from the article, it appears that the question of "smoke colour" was discussed on the 20th February (20/2) and that the opening ceremony organisers were under the impression that it would be blue and white up until the very last moment.

Whilst most seem to be debating whether it was a "political" statement in terms of the forthcoming independence referendum, personally I see it as symbolic of who really wields the "power" and indeed who will continue to do so, whether or not we are "independent".

cheers