Six grand, some mostly leading questions, a perception of momentum and a whiff of being in there at the beginning of ‘something special’. Is that all it takes for a prominent Nationalist feminist to surrender her alleged principles? Looks like it does. AhDinnaeKen investigates Natalie McGarry’s decision to post poltical rants on Nationalist Front website Wings Over Scotland:
By Longshanker aka @ergasiophobe
I have quite the conundrum. I wonder if you could help me with it.
My pro-Indy best friend now lives in Maine, USA. He once spent some time trying to convince me that my view of Stuart Campbell, editor of Wings Over Scotland was wrong. You see, I think Campbell is a political fanatic with some worrying views on both independence and the world in general.
I originally referred my friend to the page on the Wings Over Scotland site where Campbell refers to the electorate as “morons“. Not only that, Campbell sub-headlined his opinion in the piece with the view that “The Scottish are cringing pitiful scum“. He also referred to a section of Northern Irish voters as “spectacularly retarded” and “potato brained half-wits” for the crime of exercising their democratic right to vote for a candidate of their choice.
My friend reckoned the piece entitled “Everyone in Britain is a moron“ was tongue in cheek. We agreed to disagree. Later, Campbell himself referred to the piece as “robust polemic“. Hardly tongue in cheek, Natalie, I’m sure you’ll agree. My friend chose to keep schtoom on that description.
This type of contempt for Scottish citizens – the people living in the country he chooses not to – can only be described as hateful. For example, when Croatian football fans recently displayed a ‘positive’ banner apparently supporting Scottish independence, Campbell wrote: “How will we explain to these people that our own land is full of snivelling cowards?”
Do you think the same of your fellow countrymen Natalie? I think we* should be told.
What surprises me about you though, Natalie, is that you would actively embrace such an extremist given your alleged feminist values. You see, Mr Campbell holds the type of views which I imagined would be anathema to you.
He doesn’t appear to like feminists, or women, much. He referred to feminism as follows: “feminism is the most intolerant ideology currently operating in the UK, leaving ultra-radical Islam trailing a distant second and looking on angrily.”
Considering the object of his ire was a Women for Independence supporter I thought you might like to know. I’m cutting you some slack and assuming you had no prior knowledge. I’m curious, as are a few other people, why you think it’s acceptable to promote his site by actively contributing to it.
To finish, and to mark the reason for this post, I’ll tell you a bit more about my friend. I referred him to the Wings website for his value judgement. I thought he would agree with my views. He didn’t. Whenever I pointed out things which I believed were the mark of an extremist, he pooh poohed me and overused the phrase, “That’s just a wee bit over the top. His other stuff is good.”
But, and this is a big but, my friend now agrees with me. Part of the reason for his Damascene conversion hinges on something Campbell wrote within the Wings site. Campbell said the enemies of Independence should be treated with “merciless contempt”. My friend now knows the form Campbell’s “merciless contempt” takes.
This site, AhDinnaeKen, has witnessed first hand the vicious and vindictive side of that contempt. It’s the contempt of the extremist smear merchant. Mr Campbell has claimed that the editor of this site was previously arrested for “threatening to rape and murder” him.
If it wasn’t such an extreme and vile accusation it would be laughable. It also affects the individual, if he exists, named in a piece of black extremist propaganda entitled The Personal Touch. Take a look. You don’t need to read between the lines to realise it’s puff and bluster with no real evidence – pretty much in line with the majority of Campbell’s other “trenchant insights“.
My friend and I have been solid friends for approx 35 years and we know each other inside out. He knows that the only run ins with the police I have ever had have been a couple of speeding fines with approximately 15 years between each one. Unlike Mr Campbell, I have never been arrested in my life.
The seriousness of Campbell’s accusation is such that, seeing as you now condone/promote/champion his cause, perhaps you could find out some of the answers to the questions raised in this AhDinnaeKen feature. Campbell cannot and will not answer them. He knows something like the truth might just find the light of day if he produces anything of substance. And it’s worth reinforcing that an alleged victim of an alleged crime has the right to receive an explanation from the Procurator Fiscal for not pursuing his/her alleged grievance.
I suspect Campbell’s reason for making the unfounded and evidenceless accusation is to divert from the perfectly valid – though not always temperate – questions I have raised over the months on Campbell’s political credibility. Like many people, Unionist and Pro-Indy alike, I view him as a disgrace and a discredit to the Indy cause.
I buy into the belief, Natalie, that the Independence campaign is a noble cause. Campbell, however, is the polar opposite of noble.
You might, if you really have integrity, like to find out what the money raised by Wings Over Scotland’s crowd funding success is actually being spent on – aside from Panelbase questions, poker games and crisps that is. You see Campbell has/had some huge debts to pay off.
IDIOCY AND TRANSPARENCY
One debt concerns court case costs after he pursued, without a lawyer, a multi-million pound publishing company. When the case finally reached court, he lost within minutes – bitch slapped by a due legal process which he had not one iota of a clue about. He may have been in the right – though the judge clearly didn’t think so – but you have to question the type of ego, greed and lack of intelligence which motivated him to pursue such an obviously doomed to fail action in the first place. That particular brand of idiocy left him with an undisclosed legacy of tens of thousands of pounds in legal fees to pay.
Another possible debt concerns a hearsay allegation, from a credible source, to do with jobseeker allowance, housing benefits, Bath job centre and the declaration of freelance work. I’ll leave it at that.
I’m not implying that Campbell got his benefits stopped by the DWP. And I’m definitely not saying that he had to pay monies back to them which may or may not have run into thousands. I am saying, however, that the average rent in Bath for a one bedroom flat is £750 per calendar month and, at one point, Campbell’s only seeming source of legitimate revenue appeared to be freelance work with Imagine Publishing’s Retro Gamer magazine. Revenue which, at most, would have covered his rent.
Don’t you think his donaters, like the DWP, deserve to know where the money’s going to or coming from? Or is it enough for you and them to trust someone because they strike a pro-Indy pose and their views resonate with the frustrated ignorance of the gullible, the bigoted and the romantic?
Pat Kane recently distanced himself from Campbell due to his extreme views, despite having previously been a tub thumping supporter.
And that’s the rub of this piece Natalie. What’s your excuse for the full on embrace of such a repellent individual? Not only do you undermine your own credibility, you bring the credibility of the Women for Independence campaign into question. You are a prominent member after all.
Here’s another piece highlighting a case where Campbell chose to denigrate the victim of a sexual assault. Do let us* know why you would excuse such an abhorrent individual.
You can choose to ignore this piece. You can opt to write it off as the ramblings of a “deranged stalker“. Or you can take a look at the point it’s raising. Someone has to watch the watchmen watching the watchmen after all.
What’s worth remembering Natalie is that your action, in choosing to write for the Wings Over Scotland site, not only condones Campbell, it actively promotes him. In effect, you are acting as a bona fide apologist for him.
What kind of message does that send to Women for Independence campaigners?
What kind of message does it send about you?
I think we* should be told.
[ * In this case the we* is not the pretentious pluralis maiestatis we*. It really does mean everyone – at least, those with an interest in the independence campaign.]