Nationalist supremacist website Wings Over Scotland has been remarkably quiet recently over the headline dominating Bill Walker affair. AhDinnaeKen indulges in some shameless speculation over the possible reasons why.
Victims to blame for getting in way of Walker’s fists and inciting his temper.
By Longshanker aka @ergasiophobe
JUST WHY has Wings Over Scotland’s Rev Stu been so silent over the recent Bill Walker story?
He’s normally very quick with counter accusation styled soothers for his Nationalist Front cabal at Wings Over Scotland.
In this case, not a dicky bird.
AhDinnaeKen thinks we* may have the answer.
Consider the following technically correct, if somewhat repulsive, pre-conviction defense by Wings of the soon to be convicted wife beater:
“Bill Walker is innocent. Fact.
“If Bill Walker is guilty of either domestic abuse or rape, let him be brought to court, let him be convicted and let him be locked up and the key thrown away. Until then, he’s entitled to keep doing his job the same as anyone else, and anyone joining the lynch mob is who we ought to despise.”
Written on 12 April 2012 by the not very Reverend Campbell, the above quote casts yet more unpleasant dark shadows on the self appointed ‘media monitor’s’ victim blaming misogynistic tendencies.
The above was written four days after an exclusive follow up story had appeared in the Herald revealing some deeply unpleasant facts about Walker’s previous marriages:
Here’s what real professional journalists Paul Hutcheon and Tom Gordon reported on Bill Walker’s first marriage:
“In their divorce documents, Walker admitted striking the woman, but only after she had become “hysterical”…”
And on the second marriage: “Walker confirmed he had hit the girl with a saucepan”.
Now, you can call us* one of the despicable “lynch mob” if you like, but after reading the story entitled “SNP kick out ‘wife-beating’ MSP” we* were convinced that Bill Walker was a nasty violent piece of work fully deserving of the shameful label “wife beater”.
Yet, here’s how Reverend Campbell described Kenny Farquharson, deputy editor of Scotland on Sunday for calling Walker such:
“Kenny Farquharson of Scotland On Sunday waited until Walker no longer had the protection of a political party before indulging in cowardly “bully libel”, calling Walker a “wifebeater” in the knowledge that no individual can afford to sue for libel/defamation.”
So, although everyone who read the story knew the type of man Bill Walker clearly is – and it’s also worth remembering that the SNP allegedly knew all this information in 2008 – the Reverend Campbell persisted in a self righteous sanctimonious defense of the indefensible.
In fact, according to Campbell, it is Farquharson who is the “bully” not Walker.
Campbell further said: “Without a trial or admission of guilt, the demands for Walker’s resignation are inappropriate, unseemly, hypocritical and wrong, and all those making them – whether for party political or kneejerk ideological reasons – should be ashamed of themselves.”
Call us* shameful, but after reading the Herald story, we* were happy enough to refer to Bill Walker as a ‘wife beating MSP’ with or without a secured conviction.
Even if he hadn’t eventually been convicted of violent abuse on 23 separate counts, everyone would still have known he was a wife beater.
His son penned a heartfelt and deeply moving piece in the Sun newspaper cataloguing a shameful list of unsavoury violent incidents throughout his young impressionable life.
You don’t write that kind of story through shamelessness or hypocrisy or for “kneejerk ideological reasons”.
Guilt in the eyes of the law isn’t always concurrent with actual guilt. The law isn’t perfect and virtually everyone knows that.
Reverend Campbell knows that from first hand experience. Ask Future Publishing’s legal representatives over their short, dismissively easy and triumphant court dealings with him some time ago.
What piques AhDinnaeKen’s curiousity though is this. Given that Rev Campbell was prepared to take the sanctimonious high ground – and it’s worth remembering he was technically correct – in defense of a serial wife beater, why has he subsequently made such a shameless, hypocritical smear attack on Murray Brady, an individual whom he has called a “psychotic stalker” and accused of being a “would be gang rapist murderer”.
Surely he’s indulging in cowardly “bully libel”?
Brady, if he exists, has been routinely smeared and libelled by Campbell and subjected by him to a carefully orchestrated character assassination through a series of Tweets, emails and consistent references to the fluidly edited story “The Personal Touch”.
We*’re not going to rake over the coals of Campbell’s ludicrous allegations, but we* will, for the sake of clarity, reiterate the following paragraph written by Campbell in relation to Brady’s alleged arrest:
“It eventually resulted in an arrest, and a report by Glasgow police to the Procurator Fiscal recommending prosecution, which to everyone’s surprise was declined, after a very long delay and for unclear reasons.”
What we allegedly know from this statement is:
1) There was an alleged arrest intended to investigate an alleged crime – in this case rape/murder threats, harrassment, stalking etc.
2) The police allegedly submitted a report to the Procurator Fiscal recommending prosecution.
3) The Procurator Fiscal allegedly dropped the alleged report for alleged “unclear reasons”.
Call us* cynical or sceptical, but that’s a heck of a lot of allegations without any evidence, substance or facts to back them up.
As we* have stated before, complainers have the right to an explanation from the Procurator Fiscal if the Fiscal decides not to prosecute.
It’s strange, to say the least, that Campbell offers no explanation for the non-pursuit by the Fiscal of the alleged case. He’s not usually known for being shy or coy when it comes to shooting his mouth off using the vehicle of his mobnat funded website.
It leads to the following conclusion however:
Murray Brady, if he exists, is innocent. Fact.
Presuming he exists, if Murray Brady is guilty of either stalking or rape/murder threats, let him be brought to court, let him be convicted and let him be locked up and the key thrown away. Until then, he’s entitled to keep going about his business the same as anyone else, and anyone joining the lynch mob is who we* ought to despise.
Campbell was ‘called’ out by this site recently over his stalker/gang rape/murderer accusation. As it was aimed at this site, we* demanded he apologise for his vexatious “bully accusation”. He raised the stakes by naming a name, Murray Brady. This naming was a despicable “bully libel” for which he has no excuse.
Campbell is a disgrace to the term ‘professional journalism’ and a disgrace to the Indy cause. The sooner he is exposed for his unfounded “bully libel” the better. He is indeed acting like the bona fide Scottish heidbanger out of control – drunk on his own sense of self importance – he appears driven by the unquestioning support of his baying mobnat followers.
AhDinnaeKen invites Murray Brady, if he exists, to contact the police or the Scottish press with his side of this unsavoury and tawdry story.
If he doesn’t, Campbell will continue to vexatiously abuse his name in order to claim victimhood for his self. Nationalist types like Campbell thrive on grievance and common enemies and victimhood. It’s the lifeblood of his site. It’s the lifeblood of his type. You only need to read the orchestrated comments therein.
The “evil” mainstream media, if it can spare a half hour, should have a wee delve. Campbell has vexatiously accused an innocent party of a heinous crime. An alleged crime which didn’t even have the merit of substance or enough evidence to reach court. And that’s admitted by Campbell himself.
We* invite Campbell to come clean. He’s still playing with a busted flush, despite the artificially raised stakes, and it’s time he realised that. As can be seen from his defense of fragrant Bill Walker, he’s well aware of the basic technical issues surrounding guilt, innocence, allegations, libel and the law. Campbell’s accusation against Brady doesn’t even appear to have the luxury of hearsay.
We* invite readers to make up their own minds why Campbell still persists with the evidenceless “bully libel”.
[* apologies for the majestic we* throughout, sometimes we* just can’t help our*selves ]