AHDINNAEKEN presents a short, concise and succinct explanation of the repercussions of yesterday’s announcement by the governor of the Bank of England:
By Corrie Spondent
SALMOND’S PLAN f**ked!
AHDINNAEKEN presents a short, concise and succinct explanation of the repercussions of yesterday’s announcement by the governor of the Bank of England:
By Corrie Spondent
SALMOND’S PLAN f**ked!
NO NATIONALIST can resist building foundations on shifting sand.
Those were the words of Longshanker the great Scottish writer, author of AhDinnaeKen.
They were made up on the hoof to evoke a cheap laugh – just like the rest of the blog.
But ye couldnae really make up the pish being expostulated by Joan McArthyalpine in the Daily Ranger this morning.
Forty six per cent of voters intend voting Yes according to an ICM poll.
And that’s enough to get everybody’s pulses racing.
Particularly the Nationalists whose Yes campaign front has fallen apart in ignominy like the eponymous House of Cards.
Joanie’s putting it down to the effect of that great historic ‘game changer’ – the 670 Commandments of Nationalist Assertion. Or Scotland’s Future to give it its official name.
And, while she’s specific about the figure of 46 per cent, she’s a bit more vague when talking about the numbers who have actually signed the Yes Declaration and the stated aim of it gaining a million signatures.
She then uses the mention of the Yes Declaration to repeat the mostly meaningless Barnum statements contained within it e.g. “We are blessed with talent, resources and creativity.”
Bless! Wha’s like us, eh?
What she fails to mention is that, like many of the polls – internet and reality based – weighting/skewing of the polled figures has taken place to make up the numbers.
Consider the following statement from the ubiquitous indy commentator John Curtice: “ICM were only able to interview half as many 16-24 year olds as they wanted to.
“Although this deficit has been overcome by upweighting every 16-24 year old in the poll so that they count as two persons rather than one, it means the poll’s estimate of how this group will behave is based on a particularly small sample and thus can be very volatile – as appears to be true in this instance.”
In other words, like many of the Nationalist – and for balance, Better Together – assertions, it’s mostly meaningless.
As the Professor explained: “Indeed, we might note that if we compare the raw unweighted data in this poll with that in ICM’s previous poll we find that, at 34%, the proportion of Yes voters is exactly the same.”
But that would get in the way of the feel good factor the Yes camp so desperately needs. So Joanie conveniently ignores it.
With the Tories in the hated Westminster getting ever more vicious. With the prospect of nothing but more cuts and meaningless recovery statements reported by the media. And, with the prospect of a future Labouring government sounding like ‘more of the same, only worse’, by rights, the Yes campaign should be doing much much better.
That it plainly isn’t tells a story all its own.
Joanie says a Yes vote will break the distribution of the country’s resources to a rich elite concentrated in one part of the country.
Again, statements like this conveniently half ignore the latest jobs info which showed that London created the most jobs of any city in the UK.
But Edinburgh created the second most.
The conclusion is easy to reach.
Joanie wants to remove power over Scotland from a rich London elite to a rich Edinburgh elite.
Most Scots probably wouldn’t notice the difference, other than the accent, telling them how to take their unpalatable medicine.
There’s a lyric from a song which sums up exactly what would happen in the event of a Yes vote: “Meet the new boss, same as the old boss.”
Roll on September 18.
AhDinnaeKen is no fan of the Daily Mail. But first and foremost it is a newspaper driven by the agenda of its readers. It reports stories – like every newspaper does. Yesterday it told a story about abusive Cybernats. As with any tabloid styled story, it contained an element of hyperbole. It’s part of the modus operandi of popular newspapers. It’s what keeps readers interested and reading to the end. We* found the Mail feature entitled ‘Cybernats Unmasked’ to be temperate to the point of sanguinity. Which forces AhDinnaeKen to ask the question – just why are all those Cybernats highlighted by the story bleating so much? Will an indy Scotland be a Crybaby Nation full of grieving victims? AhDinnaeKen investigates the Daily Mail version of “social justice”:
By Ahmstill Laffin
THE DAILY Mail chose to expose some alleged Cybernats yesterday.
It was a double page feature introduced by a headline screamer.
Tagged as an “Exclusive”, it highlighted seven Cybernats famous/infamous for their varying independence invective on Twitter and the internet.
By the standards of some of the venom aimed at opponents or sceptics of Indy, the piece was balanced, fair, informative and temperate.
Not that you’d think so judging by the reaction to it.
One of the alleged Cybernats, Melissa Murray aka @meljomur is threatening to sue the Daily Mail for stalking and harrassment.
AhDinnaeKen says, good luck with that Mel, we could do with the laugh – in the public interest of course.
Another exposed Cybernat, ‘Reverend’ Jedi Wingsy Campbell wrote a whole blog about it. Entitled, “The Bully Pulpit“, the author allegedly used “trenchant insights” to “forensically” tear it to pieces.
From where we*’re standing, it read like a page out of the Wingnuts Over Scotland manual on how to write a hate preaching blog. Y’know, for Cybernats like himself and the others featured in the Daily Mail.
Consider the following two paragraphs from the whinging Bully Pulpit blog: [Italics for the Daily Mail, Bold Italics for Wingsy]
“But what marks out the cybernats is their modus operandi: from their disparate locations around the country, on smartphones, laptops and desktop computers in lonely bedrooms, they operate almost as one homogenous body.
There are central figures who spur on or co-ordinate this activity, binding them together and providing inspiration and moral support.”
To which Wingsy said:
Intriguing phrasing there. The “or” in the second sentence is a classic weasel word. It’s a bit like saying “All supporters of Partick Thistle enjoy football or abusing children” – it creates a negative impression while not actually being defamatory, because the “or” means that no one individual is actually being accused of paedophilia.
Which is “intriguing phrasing” itself. Consider this sentence written by ‘Reverend’ Jedi Wingsy Campbell aimed at AhDinnaeKen in a Wingnuts piece entitled “The Personal Touch“:
“…there is no doubt whatsoever the author of the blog responsible for the “dossier” is Murray Brady, or someone acting as a front for him.”
Hmm. AhDinnaeKen says, let’s take a look at that “intriguing phrasing” and consider again, what the use of “or” is for!
That’s right. According to Wingsy, it’s a “classic weasel word” – a bit like saying “All supporters of Partick Thistle enjoy football or abusing children” – it creates a negative impression while not actually being defamatory”.
But it’s only a “weasel word”, apparently, when used by the Dail Mail.
When it’s used by Wingsy it’s “robust polemic” or “trenchant insight” or “forensic analysis” or “professional journalism” or “tribune journalism”. But definitely not a “cowardly disclaimer” or “weasel word”. That accolade is exclusively reserved for the Daily Mail in Wingsy’s world.
To call it Cybernat poison or hate preaching doublespeak would interfere with Wingsy’s victim narrative. Which is always worth remembering when reading anything written by the self styled ‘Reverend’.
The Mail feature further highlighted another five Cybernats. It exposed their background and highlighted their typical modus operandi which, reading between the lines, is that they probably have too much time on their hands or they’re bored.
Andy Ellis who tweets as @ndls61 was one of the five named. It stated that he is a commercial manager for Hewlett Packard.
A recent BBC (biased against indy) report stated that Hewlett Packard was suffering from “falling sales”.
It begs the question, is it coincidence or magic that @ndls61 is a commerical manager there? Maybe he should be spending less time tweeting and more time on his day job.
In all, AhDinnaeKen found the Mail piece to be fair and balanced. It stated on at least a couple of occasions that there is abuse on both sides of the Indy debate.
It gave each of the named individuals the opportunity to defend themselves from the claim that they were poisonous cybernats.
And it printed their replies.
It also stated that the exposed individuals were, in general, more moderate in person than their online personas suggest – with the possible exception of ‘Reverend’ Jedi Wingsy Campbell whom it nailed with this excellent observation:
“On his website, he tells his acolytes: ‘they’ll [undecided voters] be hungry for more truth, and then you can send them our way.’
“The self-aggrandising ‘our’, of course, is slightly misleading, as Wings is more or less a one-man outfit, though he does sometimes commission and publish proindependence submissions.
“A self-publicist of the first order, Wings often boasts about his growing profile and Community Safety Minister Roseanna Cunningham is one of his Twitter correspondents.
Now that’s what we* call true professional journalism.
The Daily Mail, in general, isn’t AhDinnaeKen’s paper of choice. But there’s no denying that it put the cybernats to the sword with its weekend feature and did so fairly and squarely.
The feature was all the more damning because it was written in a textbook professional and balanced manner.
Anyone who thinks it wasn’t needs to go back to media studies classes.
Take heed ‘Reverend’. And your cultish coterie of Cybernats.
Graham Grant of the Daily Mail gave you an abject lesson in ‘professional journalism’.
It just seems a pity that Mr Grant’s efforts have fallen on cloth ears – from the Cybernat camp at least.
AhDinnaeKen’s still laughing.
A LACKLUSTRE limp biscuit campaign by the SNP in Coodenbeath will lead to miraculous victory in September says uninspiring SNP candidate. AhDinnaeKen asks, eh?
By Newspeak McGarry
THE EVIL Empire’s Red-Tory Labouring party trounced the forces of righteousness and sanctimony yesterday in a Coodenbeath by-election.
But Red-Tory party activists fear what the undercurrent of a huge 11 per cent electoral swing really means.
Some are whispering that it could be an omen of ill fortune for the great vote for ffrreeddoomm™ in September.
According to busted coopon faced Nationalist candidate Natalie McGarry, her humiliating lacklustre performance was only a ruse.
She reckons that it was all part of a cunning Nationalist plan to lull the Evil Empire’s forces into a false sense of security.
She said: “I was out on the doorsteps and a lot of people said to me:
“Listen hen, huv ye no got wan o’ they X-Box Wan’s in yer poket?
“Gies wan o’ thame the noo and ah’ll vote fur ye. If no, bugger off, Jeremy Kyle’s oan the telly.”
McGarry claims that messages such as that are Red-Tory code for voting Yes in the Neverendum.
Cringing, whinging, clandestine, forktongued, snake oil spokesperson for the SNP, Wee Naebudy, said: “Red-Tory Labour have fallen into oor trap. After this embarrassing rout, they’ll go back tae no takin’ us seriously. And then we’ll show them. There’s plenty of room for complacency.”
THE SCOTTISH social attitudes survey revealed yesterday what virtually everyone – apart from Scotland’s Braveheart Commandos – already knows: Most people in Scotland couldnae gie a toss about independence – and both campaigns are boring, turgid and don’t touch yer average Jock’s life in any meaningful way whatsoever. AhDinnaeKen investigates:
By Koodnae Geeyaphuck
SCOTS WOULD vote for independence for the price of an X-Box One and a copy of Grand Theft Auto Five it was revealed yesterday.
Sixty two per cent of the population think the Yes and No campaigns are of no relevance to their lives whatsoever.
And, if anything, core support for independence has fallen.
Professor John Poultice of Scratchcard University articulated the general attitude of Scotland:
He said: “Forget inclusiveness. Forget doing things better here. Forget social justice. And forget London Tory rule.
“What the Scot are really saying to the Nationalist is ‘Show me the money’.
“If Firstminster Salmond can find an inexpensive supply of X-Boxes and Grand Theft Auto V then independence could be in the bag.
“What a parcel of cheapskates in a nation.”
Joan examines work from List D academic Doctor Johnson Robertson and says it exonerates every chip on the shooder paranoid speculative belief held by the wilder eyed fringe of the Nationalist Grievance Brigade.
By Moan McVulpine – putting the pars into paranoia
DR JOHNSON Robertson is a respected academic, particularly in Nationalist circles, with a long history of saying what the Nats like to hear.
His work includes detecting bias in everything the media does.
Now the Reader in Media Bias and his researchers have turned their expertise to the Scottish emancipation campaign.
Dr Robertson’s undisclosed ‘team’ at the List D University of the West of Scotland spent a year, looking for instances of bias in the BBC and STV.
Guess what? They found them. Quelle surprise!
It’s a not so well known maxim that if you go looking for bias in a medium, you will find it.
You’ll even be able to make your grievance credible by supporting it with selected evidence.
Why do you think frothing right wingers refer to the BBC as the “Bolshevik Broadcasting Corporation?”
Why do you think frothing left-wingers refer to the BBC as the “Bourgeoise Broadcasting Corporation?”
And why do you think Nationalists – particularly Firstminster Salmond – refer to the BBC as the “British Brainwashing Corporation?”
They’ve all found ‘evidence’ to back their claims.
Nowhere in the ‘extensive’ 12 page report by Dr Johnson is there anything covering the inherent bias which affects all media outlets – including the BBC.
Nowhere in the ‘extensive’ 12 page report is there anything covering how these inherent biases are mostly ‘structural’ and part of the process of news reporting.
And, nowhere in the ‘extensive’ 12 page report is there anything relating to how these inherent biases affect ‘apparent’ political bias.
But there doesn’t need to be for the Nationalists to be convinced by the veracity of the report’s conclusions.
It fits in with their parochial world view of “they’re aw against us”.
The fact that the report says there is bias against independence is enough for the Nationalists to be convinced. No more questions asked.
In short, the report gives foundation to their fundamental grievance campaign. If it wasn’t so potentially dangerous, it would be raucously laughable.
What the whinging Nationalists don’t say. Or what they would prefer to cover up is that the sport of claiming bias against the media is fundamentally elitist.
It has it’s roots in a distrust of the people – it assumes they aren’t able to make up their own mind.
Effectively, they don’t think people are capable of detecting bias or thinking for themselves.
One other very important bias which hasn’t been declared, or touched upon, is the bias of the researcher himself.
Who the funders for the research were hasn’t been declared either. Nor has the political leanings of the academic and his team.
Moan’s prepared to give the Doctor and his invisible team the benefit of the doubt on this – despite the conclusions reached.
But it’s worth taking a closer look at some of the conclusions actually made.
On page 12 the report refers to the “objective evidence presented here“.
Sorry to tell you this Dr Johnson, but there’s no such thing as ‘objective evidence’ when it comes to reporting media bias – sorry for getting all ontological on your ass.
It all, ultimately, comes down to opinion and the bias of the individual/individuals making the claim.
And that conclusion is backed up by statements like this one on page 11: “Comparing Reporting Scotland with STV News, the former seems less balanced and fair to the Yes campaign“.
“Seems” is hardly objective or irrefutably conclusive is it?
It would be easy to go on. But I don’t need to.
The fact that the Murdoch Press haven’t picked up on this report and screamed it from page one of the Scum tells you all you need to know regarding its credibility.
TV bosses are probably pishing themselves laughing up their sleeves.
Politicians have a moral obligation not to knowingly dupe their electorate.
And that includes Joan McArthyalpine and her concerted grievance narrative bias in the Daily Ranger.
First there was an irate swivel eyed complaint. And then there was another one. And then there was another one after that. And then there was an ‘academic’ report from the List D University of the West of Skintland. And now it has been concluded that the BBC is in cahoots with the Bitter Together Project Feartie Anti-Scots, ‘Keep Skintland subjugated’ campaign. And now, AhDinnaeKen investigates the storm in a tartan List D cup, in-between the tears of incredulous laughter:
By Yoonionist Unda-Dabed
THE BBC have been found guilty of reporting the independence debate it was revealed recently.
According to ‘crackpot’ website Newsnat Skintland, the BBC have reported on the independence debate since it began.
And, they further claimed, the BBC continues to report on the indy debate.
The stooshie in a fur cup, concerns the BBC’s reporting of Irish European Leprechaun President Lucinda Righton.
The BBC’s Raymond Buchananstreet reported that she said: “If Skintland were to become independent, Skintland would have to apply for membership and that can be a lengthy process…”
Raymond Buchananstreet then used the word “but” and “and” to link her comments to comments made by Tefal Heid ex-Scottish Secretary Michael More.
This was seized upon by the Nationalist grievance merchants as proof of concerted and sustained bias against independence.
The hapless Buchananstreet was then offered up by the BBC Tristram Trust to be sacrificed on the altar of ‘inaccuracy’ – in order to appease the baying Newsnat loons.
One BBC insider said the BBC Tristram Trust’s action had demonstrated a textbook example of lily livered Neville Chamberlain bias (doing a Neville).
But, as expected, the Trust’s sacrificial lamb appeasement strategy was rejected by the Nationalist fundamentalists.
Nothing short of 24 hour self immolation, confession and begging for forgiveness on every media outlet throughout the land will satisfy the Nationalist Inquisition.
Frothing, spitting, dribbling, cackling, heidbanging Newsnat reporter, G A Ponceybody said: “This proves exactly what we have been ranting about all these years.
“The BBC reports news that we don’t like. And it’s not good enough.
“In an independent Skintland we will set up a board of Un-Scottish activities. BBC employees can look forward to appearing in front of it.”
Failed media studies dropout, Reverend Jedi Campbell, screamed: “They’re all against us! They want to destroy us! We must fight back! Give me money! Only with more of your money can I save Skintland single handedly.”
The DWP, or the Unionist led conspiracy, were unavailable for comment.
AN independent Scotland will be the land of milk and honey unless you’re a Ned or underage. AhDinnaeKen investigates the latest figures which show that Scottish Police stopped and searched four times more individuals than the ‘institutionally racist’ Metropolitan Police:
By Phuckem Oll
AN INDEPENDENT Scotland will not be like a police state – unless you’re young, poor or a fitba fan – claimed Injustice Minster Kenny MacNaeskill yesterday.
The street tramping law reformer is already well on his way to ensuring Scotland has the most draconian stop and search figures in Western Europe.
And the Injustice Minster says that the record figures of stopping and searching young poor people – four times higher than in basturt England – is only the beginning.
He said: “These record figures have been achieved under Devolution.
“With independence we will be able to stop, search and arrest anyone we see fit with impunity.”
MacNaeskill says that the move is all part of his ‘Four year plan‘ aimed at shaping the type of freedom loving society required by Nationalists.
Police are eagerly anticipating the scrapping of corroboration in order to increase the extra coercive power already gained through centralisation of the force.
After independence, Police Scotland expect to further their search criteria.
So far, under devolution, searches are restricted to young poor Neds – predominantly for knives, booze, fags and drugs.
With independence they expect to extend the categories.
Big Police Chief Commander, Stephen Inda-Hoose, said: “In future we will stop and search people suspected of possession of ginger hair, the wrong attitude, luggy bottles, soggy chips, Anti-Scots literature, fitba flags, song lyrics and looking at our officers the wrang way.
“We do things differently here and we’re looking forward to antagonising and locking up as many wee neddy basturts as differently as we can.
“They don’t vote anyway, so what do we or our political masters care?”
SKINTLAND’S civic government yesterday reinforced their commitment to the importance of childcare by voting against childcare in parliament. ‘Unionists are on the run’ through fear of our progressive and inclusive actions say the SNP. AhDinnaeKen investigates:
By Turnn Koat
CIVIC NATIONALISM received a boost yesterday by rejecting a key commitment to which it is committed.
The SNP voted against their own independence childcare manifesto pledge in order to prove how worthy it is.
Scottish minsters said they were committed to providing childcare by denying it to children who needed it.
Caring, committed, progressive, civic, inclusive spokesperson for the SNP, Wee Naebudy said: “It’s all there in the White Nationalist Paper on page 1513 – “Extensive provision of early learning and childcare for all families is a hallmark of some of the most advanced and successful countries today.“.
“And that’s why we’re not having it. Only in an independent country could we be that advanced.
“While we still labour under the yoke of Unionist oppression we have to demonstrate how backward we are and this vote against our own policy today certainly does that.”
Child eating, pitchfork bearing, Tory-lite, Labouring spokesperson, Imah Careerist said: “The 670 Nationalist Commandments made its position quite clear by stating that “the principal aim of providing this support is to give children the best start in life and the greatest chance to succeed“.
“Todays vote against vulnerable weans clearly demonstrates how committed to vulnerable weans ‘success’ the Nationalists really are.”
Firstminster Salmond was unavailable for comment due to previous golf, luncheon and ‘McArthyalpine’ commitments.
MOAN spoke to a family in Fife about the Scottish Government’s plans for independence and reckons that the door being slammed in her face was a positive indicator of the public’s reaction to the Neverendum so far.
By Moan McVulpine – Labouring hard to sound like Labour
THEY’RE A friendly bunch of folk in Kelty.
It’s part of the Cowdenbeath constituency, facing an unwelcome invasion of faux-sincere politicos on the make.
I was heartened by my visit last Thursday – I’m still breathing and still in possession of all my limbs.
Despite the cold and dark undercurrent, Natalie McGarry managed to keep up the pretence of saccharin sweetness. Good on her.
One conveniently fictional couple wanted to know about Skintland’s Future – although the fictional woman was more concerned about what I wanted to do with her tastily fictional husband.
But I digress – I’ve had enough of Newton Stewart divorce courts recently to last a cheesy blog time.
He said he normally voted Labour but would love Scotland to vote for ffrreeddoomm™. He said he would prefer to be run by an Edinburgh elite on the make as opposed to a Westminster elite on the make.
I assured him that on page 1314 of The 670 Commandments (Scotland’s Future) that’s exactly what independence would deliver.
An independent Scottish parliament would be no different from Westminster in that regard.
Ministerial, business and civil service roles would all still be disproportionately rewarded for failure. It’s all in the declaration of page 1320 of the Nationalist manifesto (Scotland’s Future).
Plus, I further reassured him, we would implement policies post-indpendence which we could do something about now. Y’know, childcare, Bedroom tax, centralisation of key institutions etc.
Scotland’s Future proposes to help MSPs who help themselves.
There are countless families in Skintland like the fictional one I met in Kelty. They all want a starring role in ‘The Scheme’ or ‘Benefits Street’.
They have a choice this year. Fifteen minutes of fame followed by crushing disappointment or fifteen minutes of fame followed by crushing disappointment.
That’s the future facing Scotland after a Yes or a No vote.
Ye cannae say fairer than that.
WE* like Nationalist blogger Peter Curran aka @Moridura. We* think he’s sanctimonious, self righteous, moralising and a pompous prig. But we* like him nevertheless. He’s the real deal – a genuine independinista with a mostly wholesome and intelligent commitment to the principles of independence. But he’s gone down in our* estimation. Way way down. You see, he’s been groomed – to the point of conversion/seduction – by Nationalist Front hate preacher Wingnuts Over Scotland. We’re not sure when, or how, it happened, but, happened it has. AhDinnaeKen – with crocodile tears of regret in our* eyes – investigates:
By Diss Gussted and Longshanker aka @Ergasiophobe
WE*’LL TRY and make this one short – #Wangswatch posts by AhDinnaeKen are inevitably too long and dull.
In general, Peter Curran, author, indy commentator and monitor of the independence debate, has a fair-ish perception of proceedings so far. He’s committed, relatively balanced, and he’s the real deal. A bit like Jim Fairlie with a differing outlook.
We* like and respect genuine, non-hate based, conviction in people – whether we* agree with them or not.
That’s why Peter is such an enigma to us*. You see, like Peter of yesteryear, we* also think that wee Stuarty Campbell of Wingnuts Over Scotland is a hate preaching extremist.
It’s just that Peter doesn’t appear to think that any more. He’s become a bit of a Wingnuts fanboy: A sycophantic “posturing catamite**” by proxy – if you like.
Consider the following exchange on Peter’s website/blog some time ago – dates included to expose the guilty:
RevStu Wednesday, April 18, 2012
Is it not curious that there isn’t a single known SNP supporter anywhere in the Beeb’s political department, whereas there are plenty known Labour and Tory supporters? (And I mean that on a factual basis – we surely can’t be pretending that former Labour councillor Catriona Renton, for example, isn’t still a Labour supporter.)
As I’ve blogged recently, there’s (obviously) absolutely nothing wrong with the BBC employing Labour supporters, but isn’t it curious that we’d struggle to name a single SNP one?
It’s worth pointing out that the intrepid ahem, ‘professional journalist’ (obviously) hadn’t ‘monitored’ or taken on board Derek Bateman’s broadcasts on Radio Scotland. Ho hum!
This was Peter’s reply:
Moridura Wednesday, April 18, 2012
You sound exactly like all the religious sectarian bigots who are constantly finding Catholics, or Protestant or Jews,or gays or whatever in major organisation, although your sectarian agenda is political, not religious.
I find it profoundly distasteful, profoundly undemocratic, McCarthyite and deeply unhelpful to the nationalist cause.
Please don’t try to suck me into such paranoid speculations – it makes me feel dirty.
I suggest you do a bit of reading and viewing about the McCarthy era in American politics, and try and achieve some sort of political maturity.
At the time we* discovered this little nugget of information, we* thought: “Well said Peter, you’ve articulated what we*’ve been thinking for some time. Thank Christ there are other guys out there who can see that the (little) Wings emperor wears no clothes.”
But, (obviously) somewhere along the road, Peter has experienced a Damascene conversion to the principles of ‘McCarthyism‘, ‘sectarianism‘, ‘bigotry‘, ‘paranoia‘ and ‘political immaturity’. It’s made us* “feel dirty” just thinking about it.
Since then, we* mostly lost interest in Peter because, y’know, he failed to comprehend, for whatever reason, our* suspicion of Scottish Nationalism under Salmond – no matter how ‘civic’, ‘inclusive’ or ‘progressive’ it pretends to be.
Recently though, some of Peter’s tweets and posts have taken the shape of an alarming ‘love in’ with the boy Campbell.
What we* want to know is this: Why, when and where did the switch occur? What changed Peter’s mind about Wingsy?
We* think that, the more people who convert to the hate based indy philosophy of Wings, the more it undermines the indy cause and negatively reflects on how badly it’s losing in the wider realm of the nation at large.
We* know Wing’s stuff, Peter’s stuff and AhDinnaeKen’s stuff is all online, and is ultimately meaningless anyway, but Peter’s got a surfeit of brains and he’s relatively pluralistic in outlook. What happened to change his mind so dramatically?
Anyone but a Klan Nationalist zealot can see straight through the Wingnuts agenda.
Ultimately, Wings is narcissism based – the clues are all there for the, less than, discerning to pick up on.
Peter had Wings sussed. What changed?
We*’re genuinely puzzled
* pluralis maiestatis used for ironic comedy effect throughout
** “posturing catamite” phrase plagiarised from 1980’s kids TV show Robin of Sherwood for non-homophobic ironic effect.
We*’ll leave the moralising over Scottish Labour’s stance on kids meals to others. Politically, the SNP cynically outmanoeuvred the Labourers – but it left a bad taste in the mouth nevertheless. As for media monitoring from Nationalist Front website Wingnuts Over Scotland – it’s time for the boy Campbell to get his facts right. AhDinnaeKen indulges a wee new year snigger:
By Ahmstill Laffin
LABOUR VOTED against the Nationalist government yesterday.
They had no choice.
To have voted for the Nationalist government’s provision would have meant that Labour would have supported independence as a necessity for childcare in Scotland.
The Nationalists knew that. It’s why they inserted the independence guff.
Ho hum! That’s cynical turnoff politics at its worst.
Step forward the internet’s hate preaching guardian of Nationalist morality, Wee Stuarty Campbell of Wingnuts Over Scotland.
Here’s what he wrote in a piece entitled “Conspiracies of silence“:
“…sure enough this morning’s papers execute a 100% news blackout of Labour’s opposition that stretches their credibility as impartial chroniclers of events to breaking point.
“The Scotsman, Herald, Daily Record, Scottish Daily Express and Guardian all choose to completely omit Labour’s vote from their coverage. Only STV’s Scotland Tonight reported it, inviting the party’s education spokeswoman Kezia Dugdale to defend the decision, which she did in an extraordinary way.”
Consider the picture above tweeted by Kevin Pringle, the Nationalists Strategic Communications Director.
Is that a Daily Record editorial I see?
Our message to Campbell. Go back to Media Studies class sonny. You’ve missed oot on too many lessons.
Despite my hoots of laughter, I’m embarrassed for you and all those half-wits who refer to your “trenchant insights” as facts.
If your piece “Conspiracies of Silence” is an example of media monitoring, leave it to the professionals.