Has @Moridura aka Peter Curran been groomed by the Nationalist Front?

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:

@Moridura (right) discusses how he's going to meet Abigail Hobbs aka Wings aka Stuart Campbell to take his picture at the Indy rally.

@Moridura (right) discusses how he’s going to meet Abigail Williams aka Wings Campbell to take his picture at the Indy rally on Calton Hill.

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.

What a beautifully cropped, framed and atmospheric desaturated picture. A labour of love? Who knows. Check http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eZMXV_H-aRQ

What a beautifully cropped, framed and atmospheric desaturated picture. A labour of love? Who knows? xx Check http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eZMXV_H-aRQ

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

RevStu,

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.

with contempt,

Peter

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.

We* got blocked by Peter on Twitter some time ago for referring him to this blog by us*. At the time, we* thought: “fair enough, it was a bit strong”.

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

Who's grooming who here? Answers in green crayon to...

Who’s grooming who here? Answers in green crayon on a postcard to…

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.

Advertisements

7 Comments

Filed under Wangs Watch

7 responses to “Has @Moridura aka Peter Curran been groomed by the Nationalist Front?

  1. John Ruddy

    Its not just him, there seems to have a a change in attitude of many of the more normal and rational nats to an almost extreme panglossian view, coupled with a move to supporting wings position…

    • Thankyou John

      I suppose the absolutism of extremist types like Wings provides an attractive brand of certainty/reassurance where none really exists and, by definition, helps bolster the faith required to take the leap into independence.

      But given the tone of Peter’s reply quoted above, I could never imagine him being the type to be taken in by the mostly substanceless frothings of Campbell.

      Regards

    • Do you think so, John? I thought it was more to do with putting on a brave face because the Yes campaign seems to be going nowhere. Thus Panglossian in the sense that it *looks* optimistic, but only because they know they have to play up the chances of winning rather than admitting that things aren’t going as planned. Of course, many will genuinely be of the opinion that despite what the opinion polls say it’ll all come right on the day, but surely more are increasingly seeing it all as a lost cause?

      By the same token, perhaps that’s why some are now holding their nose and jumping onto the Wings bandwagon – as well as being the main unofficial conduit for Yes opinion they may think it’s one of the only chances they have to turn things round, however unlikely that may sound, both in terms of the campaign generally, and in relation to Wings in particular.

      So as well as the likes of Ms McGarry and Peter Curran, even Lesley Riddoch casually mentioned Wings in her Scotsman column yesterday as if it was simply part of the established mainstream furniture rather than something which should appeal primarily to those towards the, er, wingnut wing of Scottish nationalism.

      But where I think they’ve misjudged is that if Wings ever did come into the public consciousness – and I don’t think it has, despite the (misleading) readership figures – then the MSM and BT would move quickly to discredit it, which wouldn’t be that difficult.

      So to that extent I think they’re doing themselves a disservice by associating themselves with Wings, because in the final analysis it can only be to their own discredit.

  2. Glasgow Steve

    I love Ah Dinnae Ken. I think unionists are well underrepresented in the Scottish blogosphere, such as it is, with explicitly anti-nationalist perspectives particularly lacking. Oh how i miss Bravehearts Blog, Scottish Unionist and Nationalist Mythbusting, but be careful not to dwell on the personal to much man. Wings over Scotland is administered by a nutcase, and any endorsement of it is to be questioned, but you’re much funnier and effective when your going after the bigger fish individuals and issues. But what do i know, keep up the good work!

    • Thankyou for the kind words Glasgow Steve

      I’m glad you like AhDinnaeKen.

      I’ll put you straight on one misconception. I’m not a Unionist. I am “explicitly anti-Nationalist” though. Or, at least, I think I am.

      I don’t think our brand of ‘civic’ Nationalists are particularly dangerous, but they have that potential.

      Wings’ growth is a possible indicator of Nationalist direction – intolerant, hateful, mean spirited and vindictive.

      When it comes to Westminster, if I was to blog about that institution, I’d probably sound like any of the frothing Nationalists out there.

      But that’s not what this blog is about.

      I know what you’re saying. It’s just that I’m getting a bit bored to the point of fatigue by the whole thing. Neverendum and the tediously cyclic nature of the arguments eventually wear you down.

      Sometimes I think that’s what the Nationalists want. They perform better electorally when there are smaller turnouts. 2011 was a point in case (and I voted for them in that election).

      Regards

      NB: Scottish Unionist was someone on top of his game. I sorely miss Planet Politics as well. 🙂

      • I am quite immensely confused by your discussion of the “potential” of nationalism in the context of Wings Over Scotland.

        If we are talking about the more unwelcome form of nationalist sentiment, we would most likely be discussing ethnic as opposed to the civic nationalism that myself and indeed the majority of supporters of independence (yes, really!) are committed to.

        If we are discussing ethnic nationalism in the context of Rev Stu and Wings Over Scotland, this would suggest that Wings (which, while not exactly being my FAVOURITE independence supporting commentary site), is spouting hate that was ultimately racist in nature, whether that be anti-English or otherwise. I would suggest that Rev Stu’s site, whilst not always a hive of positivity, does not express such sentiments. I can’t recall ever reading anything of that nature on Wings (although i’m probably as guilty as yourself for not actually reading it unless trying to make a point.) The worst of his vitriol is undoubtedly reserved for the mainstream Scottish media and those within the Scottish Labour Party.

        Of course, if this is not the definition you were intending then I am somewhat curious to grasp what exactly you were getting at, as it appears to transcend all definitions of nationalism that I am familiar with.

      • Thankyou Lindsey C

        Apologies for the length of time your comment was in moderation.

        “I am quite immensely confused by your discussion of the “potential” of nationalism in the context of Wings Over Scotland.”

        Don’t be. It’s straightforward and unsubtle. The potential is based on bigotry, hatred and demonisation of perceived enemies.

        “If we are discussing ethnic nationalism…”

        We’re not. Unless you want to discuss Campbell’s definition of “anti-Scots”.

        “The worst of his vitriol is undoubtedly reserved for the mainstream Scottish media and those within the Scottish Labour Party.”

        For now.

        It taps into the type of paranoid hateful sentiment which he finds easy to articulate, exaggerate and build upon. Absolutism is attractive to those who want simplicity in their lives.

        “… it appears to transcend all definitions of nationalism that I am familiar with.”

        With all due respect, you’re not very familiar with many “definitions” of Nationalism then. Peter Curran articulated one type when he replied to Campbell above.

        Regards

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s