Tag Archives: extremism

Campbell Gunn: Should have listened to AhDinnaeKen

AHDINNAEKEN’S NOT one for saying we* told you so to the SNP. But we* told you so SNP. Get yourselves embroiled with Wings Over Scotland, we said, and you’ll damage your cause. Yesterday, you got yourselves embroiled with Wings Over Scotland and you damaged your cause. You should have listened to AhDinnaeKen. As we* said earlier, we* told you so. AhDinnaeKen soporificates:

The face of the misogynistic Nationalist Front. Happy to call an ordinary mother a liar for expressing a view on the referendum. Check the Wehrmacht styled badge on the right of Mr Campbell's black-shirt.

The face of the misogynistic Nationalist Front. “Happy” to call an ordinary mother a “liar” for expressing a view on the referendum. In an irony free statement, he claimed that he had seen no one attacking Ms Lally.   Check the Wehrmacht styled badge on the right of Mr Campbell’s black-shirt.

By Longshanker aka @ergasiophobe

ON SUNDAY AhDinnaeKen posted a story entitled ‘Wings Over Scotland: The facts behind the Financial Times profile’.

We provided some free advice for the SNP. They didn’t listen.

And look what happened!

Campbell Gunn, one of the Firstminster’s £1 million inner Star Chamber, is fighting for his job.

Gunn appeared to make the mistake of believing that Wings Over Scotland is a credible news source.

In his official capacity as Firstminsterial special adviser, he attempted to undermine ordinary mother, Clare Lally, claiming she was the daughter of a former Labour Lord Provost.

Remarkably, and no doubt by complete coincidence, Wings Over Scotland had previously blogged this fraudulent, risibly inaccurate, information.

Coincidence or magic? You decide.

Wings Nationalist Front hate-preacher and entrenched misogynist, Stuart Campbell, finally conceded his error. But the damage was done – Gunn had embarrassed himself and the Firstminster, made his job unntenable, and proved AhDinnaeKen’s prediction that embracing Campbell would damage the SNP cause.

Campbell claimed it was all the fault of the “newspapers” who, according to his particular brand of pathology, had “published contradictory accounts”.

Mr Campbell is on record referring to himself as a “professional journalist”. He frequently cites that he has 20 years experience of the “profession”.

One of the first things any journalist wannabe learns is the checking of sources and facts. If you’re going to print, publish or post anything that relies on factual accuracy, it’s a fundamental journalistic imperative that you double check your sources. Basic stuff.

It’s clear from Mr Campbell’s defence of the “confusion” that his sources were the “newspapers”. He even cited the Clydebank Post, implying that they were to blame for his rank amateur error.

Mr Campbell’s subseqent appearances on television were also enlightening. We’ll leave it to others to decide what he looks like, but on BBC radio – where thankfully we didn’t have to look at his face – he called Ms Lally a “liar”.

He said: “I’m happy to call her a liar”.

No contrition, no regret, no empathy. The classic reaction of a narcissistic misogynist without a shred of human empathy. No wonder he lives with rats for companions.

On the same day that AhDinnaeKen posted our* piece on the FT profile, Ian Smart, the well known Labour lawyer and blogger, blogged on the history of the SNP and the type of people who constitute its membership.

It’s well worth reading. A couple of lines were most notable given the subequent events re Ms Lally, Campbell Gunn and Wings Over Scotland.

Mr Smart said: “...to drop the Donaldson lecture would infuriate a significant minority in nationalist ranks. Who would dissent, thus highlighting their views. And that would be disastrous for the SNP electorally.”

The SNP is home to some fringe loonies – loonies such as Wings who see political capital in attacking ordinary women struggling with extraordinary circumstances.

When loonies like Campbell get their views highlighted, achieving the kind of publicity he got yesterday, then the truth is out. The type is exposed for the nasty, unsympathetic extremists they truly are – all in the name of a flag and a concept. The outcome is damage to the party and the party’s cause.

Campbell claimed that the Daily Record had referred to Ms Lally as being part of “the political elite”.

This was a complete fabrication. The Record said the following, “Scottish Labour leader Johann Lamont said Clare would be the first of several non-political appointments.”

The headline in the paper was “Mum joins political elite to fight for carer’s rights” – hardly part of the political elite.

So how Mr Campbell managed to twist this into Ms Lally being part of the political elite is mindboggling. No doubt to certain Nationalist types it makes perfect sense, but that’s why Campbell Gunn is fighting for his job and Stuart Campbell has been exposed, yet again, as a nasty wee man with a grudge against the world which the independence referendum is giving a tediously depressing outlet to.

Roll on Sep 18. The sooner we see the back of the likes of Campbell and his swivel eyed cohorts, the better.

Next!

* pluralis majestatis used throughout for illustrative tediously unfunny comedy effect.

Advertisements

53 Comments

Filed under CyberNats, Wangs Watch

Wings Over Scotland: An absence of f**king irony

INDEPENDENCE CAMPAIGNER to be and hate-preaching guardian of the Nationalist Front psyche, Stuart Campbell of Wings Over Scotland, was lamenting the acrimonious side to the indy debate yesterday. In an irony free blog post covering the progress of current referendum discourse, the alleged Reverend discussed the treatment of the Weirs – the SNP’s largest donators to the cause. AhDinnaeKen investigates:

It was reported in Edinburgh that James MacKenzie and Calum Cashley spontaneously combusted yesterday upon such joyous news.

It was reported in Edinburgh yesterday that James MacKenzie, Calum Cashley and Euan McColm spontaneously combusted  upon hearing the joyous news.

By Longshanker aka @ergasiophobe

DIMINUTIVE DEMAGOGUE, wee Stuarty Campbell was in reflective mood yesterday.

The tone of the referendum’s discourse has taken a turn for the worse and he “reluctantly” chose to talk about “the odious and hateful side of the independence debate“.

Leaving aside that this is like a skunk complaining about bad smells in the environment, the ‘wee’ man reflected on the issue in a blog entitled ‘An absence of Respect‘.

It covered the abuse the Nationalist campaign’s largest donators, the Weirs, have suffered at the hands of the SNP’s opponents and, in particular, gorgeous George Galloway – the reason behind the capitalisation of the R in Respect.

In this instance, the Nationalist Front Ranter had a point, of sorts.

It’s unfortunate for Better Together’s motley crew that the Weirs won so much money, but that’s life. Get ower it! There’s no point in whinging about it. It just makes the whingers look and sound sour and gives self appointed proselytising pontiffs like Campbell the chance to act as if they were possessed of some kind of moral superiority.

Regular readers will know that AhDinnaeKen frequently refers to the Laird Wilcox Extremist Traits list to help point out Campbell’s varying forms of extremism.

Aside from numbers 1 and 2 – which are the most tediously obvious and commonly demonstrated Campbell/Wings traits – ‘An absence of Respect‘ demonstrates trait numbers: 5) ADVOCACY OF DOUBLE STANDARDS, 6) TENDENCY TO VIEW THEIR OPPONENTS AND CRITICS AS ESSENTIALLY EVIL and 7) MANICHAEAN WORLDVIEW.

So far, so stereotypical.

AhDinnaeKen’s chuckles of incredulity were amplified by this moralising statement in the blog: “Independence campaigners should expect an endless, rancid vomit-slick of this sort of provocation in the next four months.

Ironically, independence campaigners don’t have to wait, Campbell delivered it to their Twitter feed a long time ago and he’s still pumping it out from his rat infested bedsit.

The following is a flavour of the type of ‘progressive‘ and ‘civic‘ campaigning indy-ref voters/campaigners can expect from a soon to be ‘official‘ campaigner for the Yes side:

In a recent Scotsman article Lesley Riddoch said: "The way people are heard and treated today creates either confidence or doubt about the future."  I wonder what Wings supporting Lesley would think about being called a hypocrite.

In a recent Scotsman article Lesley Riddoch said: “The way people are heard and treated today creates either confidence or doubt about the future.” What kind of future does Wings supporting Lesley envision for us post Sep 18? AhDinnaeKen thinks we* should be told.

 

Forensic analysis backed up by facts in scrupulous detail. Aint you glad Wings is on the Yes side? Answers in green ink to SNP central headquarters.

Forensic analysis backed up by facts in scrupulous detail. Aint you glad Wings is on the Yes side? Answers in green ink to SNP central headquarters.

 

Fuck this and fuck that, Fuck it all and fuck a fucking brat, We* don't wanna baby that sounds like that I don't wanna baby that acts like that

F**k this and f**k that,
F**k it all and f**k a f**king brat,
We* don’t wanna baby that sounds like that
We* don’t wanna baby that acts like that – The Electoral Commission Sex Pistols (Independent Bodies)

 

Concise, incisive, eloquent and too the point. We* salute Wingsy's indefatigability.

Concise, incisive, eloquent and directly to the point. This is the future of online debate in an independent Scotland. We* salute Wingsy’s indefatigability – a herald of the indy zeitgeist.

 

This passes for humour in the ranks of the Nationalist Front. Not the Thatcher inspired use of Wet to describe people on his own side.

This apparently passes for humour in the ranks of the Nationalist Front. Note the Thatcher inspired use of “Wet” to describe people not quite onside.

 

The slogan of the independent future. Winning hearts and minds throughout the ancient kingdom of Alba.

The slogan of a brave new independent future. Winning hearts and minds throughout the ancient kingdom of Alba since 2012.

 

It's not just about a brighter future for Wingsy, it's also about equality and egalitarianism.

It’s not just about a brighter future for Wingsy, it’s also about equality and egalitarianism.

 

"Campaigners shouldn't attack the man they should attack the points being made."  Good to see that being adhered to here. Weel din Wingsy sark.

“Campaigners shouldn’t attack the man they should attack the points being raised.” Good to see that being adhered to here. Weel din Wingsy sark.

 

According to Bruce's father in the movie Braveheart, men are attracted to those unwilling to compromise. Worth remembering what happened to them as well - slaughtered on the battlefield and ritually disembowelled in front of the baying crowd.

According to Bruce’s father in the movie Braveheart, men are attracted to those unwilling to compromise. Worth remembering what happened to them as well – slaughtered on the battlefield and ritually disembowelled in front of the baying crowd.  We*’re speaking metaphorically, of course.

 

Steve's sister spent years of her life studying the reasons for the Hillsborough disaster. Her brother was one of the 96. This was how Campbell dealt with her because she had the temerity to disagree with him. What was that Lesley Riddoch said again about the way people are treated?

Steve’s sister spent years of her life studying the reasons for the Hillsborough disaster. Her brother was one of the 96. This was how Campbell dealt with her because she had the temerity to disagree with him. What was that Lesley Riddoch said again about the way people are treated?

 

 

 

 

 

6 Comments

Filed under CyberNats, MobNats, Wangs Watch

Nazi inspired Wings Over Scotland compares journalists to rats

WINGS OVER Scotland is flush with other people’s money. It’s proven that the front page of the Sunday Times can be purchased for circa £5000, and its editor is on an adrenalised ego fuelled high. Take note, Murdoch haters, the Thunderer’s headlines are up for grabs to extremists with a grievance. AhDinnaeKen decided to embark on a little sojourn into the post Panelbase rantings of diminutive demagogue, Stuart Campbell:

The danger of the extremist is that they deal in semi-plausible generalisms which can easily trap and seduce the unwary.

The danger of the extremist is that they deal in semi-plausible generalisms which can easily trap and seduce the unwary. Wings’ recent post, “Playing with fire” is a case in point.

By Longshanker aka @ergasiophobe

AHDINNAEKEN HAS long maintained that Wings Over Scotland is the mouth piece of a hate driven extremist/narcissist. The site’s rantings, frothings and polemics, invariably fit the cliched and archetypal behaviours of extremists as outlined in the handily compact Laird Wilcox list of ‘Extremist Traits’ .

Wilcox concocted the list over a period of several years having studied numerous high profile extremist groups operating on the fringes of American society: groups like the Ku Klux Klan, anti-abortionists, homophobic religious groups and Nazis, pseudo-Nazis etc.

As with any disseminators of extreme views, the modus operandi of Wings is uncannily similar to the disparate groups studied by Wilcox.

With its grievance based rhetoric, dedicated coterie of followers and well established hate figures to blame, the site displays all the stereotypical hallmarks associated with extremism.

The preface quote of the Wilcox list states, “The evil is not what they say about their cause, but what they say about their opponents.”

If you stripped all of the posts in the Wings site, which are almost exclusively dedicated to attacking Campbell’s perceived opponents, you’d be left, anecdotally speaking of course, with about twenty posts or fewer.

Despite all of its author’s sanctimoniously self righteous doom sayering, Wings is positivity-lite and overly reliant on negative ‘othering’ – the extremist’s precedent.

The definition of the logical fallacy of ‘damning the alternatives’ states that, so long as you’re blaming others and putting them on the back foot, you don’t have to pay too much attention to the holes in your own arguments. It’s the classic fall back of the partisan extremist.

The Wings site’s main philosophy takes this fallacy literally. It runs along the lines of: if Scotland doesn’t vote to break away from the subjugating chains of Westminster imposed serfdom, then we’re all doomed forever and a day to suffer at the hands of our Tory imperialist masters. Anything or anyone standing in the way of the chance to break away from such a doom laden scenario is to be treated with “merciless contempt”.

Such “contempt” invariably relies on a variety of colourful epithets and abusive analogies using colourful word such as: ‘c**ts’, retards, thickos, scum, cowards, spineless, illiterate, liars, dicks etc etc etc. Reading Wings has been compared to trying to swim in an effluent encrusted sewer after you’ve been punched in the solar plexus with a jack hammer and had your head thrust underneath the surface.

AhDinnaeKen has read Wings and we* reckon it’s much less pleasant than that.

Which brings us* to one of Wings latest posts on a subject matter the hate-preacher is increasingly desperate to see break out soon in the debate – street violence. Entitled ‘Playing with fire’, the piece is a powerplay of logical fallacy, irresponsible sweeping generalisations and outright repugnant nastiness – it relies on eleven links (count ’em) and a video of an unhinged individual committing a breach of the peace against some perfectly civilised Yes campaigners going about their campaigning business, to make its awful point.
Facebook Wings
The Wings Facebook page (see above), in an ironically hilarious paradox, heralds the post thus: “Terrified of the polls, the No camp tries to start a war:

Oh dear! Oh dear! More realistically, if the words ‘the’ and ‘No’ were replaced in that sentence by the words ‘Wings Over Scotland’, it would make much more sense. Otherwise it’s merely abusive analogy.

After reading the post, it’s plain for all to see that Campbell’s champing at the bit for something decidedly unpleasant to happen during the debate. It will give him the chance to ramp up the rhetoric, point the fevered righteous finger of blame at his perceived enemies and deliver some rousing ‘man the barricades’ styled polemic to whip up his “creepy as f**k” cabal of shadowy agentura and profligate donators.

In the shouty rant, he ignites several Nationalist grievances with a single incendiary flame: he compares the Scotsman to rats for changing their headline on a story reporting the latest indy Panelbase poll; stomps all over a foolish Lanarkshire Labour councillor; links an unhinged individual to the Better Together campaign; reminds his readers that the first casualty of violence in the indy debate was a pro-Yes campaigner; unbeknowingly highlights that Wings polemical style isn’t too far removed from that of George Galloway’s; evokes the spectre of sectarianism; claims that Yes campaigners have already been subjected to coordinated intimidation; and likens the Better Together camp to petrol bomb wielding Loyalist extremists.

It’s a post which encapsulates, to varying stereotypical degrees, almost every listed trait and cliche in the Laird Wilcox list.

Campbell likes to trumpet that his alleged ‘facts’ are sourced and cited as if that somehow gives them an unimpeachable credibility and integrity. It doesn’t. It just adds to the hilarity/shock value when you check the alleged cited sources. Invariably and inevitably the sources are Wingsy himself.

Of the eleven links provided in the story, eight of them source straight back to previous Wings posts. All things taken into consideration, it’s the professional equivalent of onanistic navel gazing or vanity led pseudo-journalistic narcissism, or both. Take your pick.

In effect Campbell is saying, “of course this piece is cited, sourced and factually correct, I wrote it myself”. Ye couldnae make it up.

AhDinnaeKen decided to delve a bit further for research purposes and checked all of the links.

We*’d like to say we were surprised by what we* discovered. But we* weren’t. Campbell’s linked sources are a mostly necrotic parasitic treatise of newspaper/media based voyeurism, ghoulishly raking over the bones of desperation and grievance which are fatally underpinned by some deeply unpleasant Nazi inspired propaganda. Or something like that.

AhDinnaeKen is fairly sure that any decent Nationalist or Yes campaigner is bound to be repelled by the hate-speech delivered within Campbell’s piece ‘Playing with fire’.

For example, the first link in the hatemongering polemic relies on some infamously notorious Nazi inspired imagery.

A frame from the 'Eternal Jew'. A film which used the same kind of language against the Jews as Campbell used against Scotsman journalists.

A frame from the ‘Eternal Jew’. A Nazi inspired propaganda film which used the same kind of dehumanising language against the Jews as Campbell used against Scotsman journalists. Coincidence or magic? You decide!

Castigating the Scotsman for its unexplained ‘jigging’ of a web based headline on the most recent referendum poll, the linked to piece entitled ‘Cornered rats’ unsurprisingly compares the Scotsman to ‘cornered rats’.

In the ‘Eternal Jew’, a pre-war Nazi propaganda film aimed at whipping up anti-semitic hatred, pictures of rats running through a sewer were likened to Jews corrupting the ‘purity’ of the German volk. It’s the epitome of hate induced incitement and its something which every right thinking individual should guard against and protest at in the strongest possible terms.

And while the Scots brand of Nationalism cannot and should not be associated with such repulsive imagery, the same cannot be said of Campbell himself. Why else would he make such a comparison to Scotsman journalists, complete with a picture of said rats? It’s anathema to, and has no place in, the independence debate.

Such imagery, analogy and comparison would normally be condemned out of hand by any pluralistic democrat. But not by Campbell’s acolytes. One even commented: “…treat them with the desdain (sic) they deserve, as they are not worthy of anything but contempt.”?!

Another self-referential link in Campbell’s hate piece refers to the physical assault of Yes supporting octogenarian, James McMillan, who was attacked in the street some time ago by a middle aged women suffering from an apparent rush of blood to the head.

There’s no excuse for such attacks on anyone, never mind a fragile old man. What Campbell likes to ignore in the original story printed in the Edinburgh Evening News however, is that the attacker is reported to have stood looking shocked at the consequence of what she had done – instantly remorseful.

Instead, Campbell chose to refer to the incident as a ‘brutal attack‘ rather than provide a balanced sense of perspective. It wouldn’t suit his purposes to refer to it any other way.

Balanced reporting would inevitably impede Campbell’s intention to ‘incite through moral outrage’ – a classic extremist trick – a variation of the Hun pitchforking babies no less.

One of the few non-Wings cited links concerns Campbell’s attack on everyone’s love to hate figure, George Galloway. Campbell implies that Galloway and his idiosycnratic brand of sectarian scaremongering is part of the Better Together campaign.

Here’s a quote from the Spectator regarding their view on Galloway: “It is a reminder that for all nationalists complain about Unionist ‘scaremongering’, the official campaign is a pussy-cat when compared to Gorgeous George’s approach.

Contrast and compare the above quote with Campbell’s froth. He raged: “But as an increasingly-desperate No campaign issues ever more shrill and incendiary allegations – the former Labour MP George Galloway is currently touring Scotland…”

The guilt by association – which doesn’t exist – is so transparent and easily debunked it’s embarrassing. It does expose, however, the mind set, pathology and driving philosophy behind Campbell’s site; othering, demonisation, obfuscation, guilt by tenuous association, polarisation and hatred.

Above all things though, Campbell wants his ‘side’ to be hated by the other side. He bluntly stated as such in a discussion forum he used to run, pre Wings, when he was still writing deeply meaningful treatises on the merits of the  Metal Slug 7 videogame over Metal Slug 3 and whether owning a Metal Slug port ROM on CD is as good as possessing the original cart.

Exciting and crucial stuff for a man in his 40s, we* know!

This is what Campbell said: “It’s not enough just not to care what idiots think. I actively want idiots to hate me. I want the battle lines clearly drawn, and I don’t want fuckwits on my side.”

AhDinnaeKen would have linked to this insightful and fundamental philosophy but, following our* exposure of the ‘courageous’ Campbell as an alleged rape apologist, access to the forum has been strictly denied to everyone and anyone.

"The WoS forums are now closed. Thanks to everyone who visited over the years." Wings acolytes could maybe ask Campbell why they* chose to close the forum. Scared of what else would be exposed?

“The WoS forums are now closed. Thanks to everyone who visited over the years.” Wings acolytes could maybe ask Campbell why they* chose to close the forum. Scared of what else would be exposed? Some of it was pretty damn embarrassing.

We* could go on, but this piece is way too long already.

The main thrust of Campbell’s diatribe centres around what is fairly disturbing footage of an alleged SDL member haranguing and harrassing peacable Yes campaigners going about their business.

The links peppered throughout the running narrative attempts to build an idea of a sense of desperation from the ‘other side’ which will result in some kind of violence which is neatly encapsulated by the disturbing video posted to accompany the piece.

The plain and simple truth of the matter is that the individual involved in the video should have received a warning from the police and been moved on or have been arrested. It makes unpleasant watching/listening, but it’s no more than the tribal idiocy of the football terraces invading the streets.

It’s this type of thing that Campbell wants to see more of. He’ll revel in it it if it happens. It fuels his brand of polarising hate-preaching extremism.

The real irony of the whole hateful piece is that Campbell’s the same type as the alleged SDL chap, only Campbell chooses to remain indoors with his keyboard and his horde of rat friends.

The really sinister message of Campbell’s hate polemic resides in its last two lines:

“With no small measure of grim, dark irony, we call on all independence campaigners to turn the other cheek, to keep calm and to carry on.”

It’s so heavily laden with the fallacy of ‘accent’ as to be meaningless and completely open to the interpretation of the reader.

As Ian Smart so sagely said to Nationalist Twitter personality, Natalie McGarry the other day: “If the Nats don’t break with Wings then the only conclusion is that he is your agent. Hope the papers do you proper for it.”

Campbell’s shameful piece is a textbook example of why some of the more touchy feely Wings supporting Nationalists such as Junior Minister Roseanna Cunningham MSP, Angus MacNeil MP, Stewart Hosie MP and Joan McAlpine MSP, need to reappraise their support/endorsement of Wings Over Scotland.

If they don’t reappraise and distance themselves publicly, sooner rather than later, you can guarantee that the Nationalists will get a doing. Not a physical doing, which would only serve their cause, but a political and populist doing. In general, the Scots, like all Brits, don’t like extremists much and rail against their toxic brew.

The Nationalists, via the guiding hand of Alex Salmond, have done well to exploit devolution to the degree that they’ve managed to weasel a referendum out of it – despite having no real ‘people’s mandate’ so to speak.

But if they let a pathological loose cannon like Campbell seduce them into thinking that he’s anything other than a one man band, hate preaching, narcissistic polemicist with a grudge against the world for not having made him taller, then they’re in for a big surprise.

Ian Smart

10 Comments

Filed under CyberNats, Wangs Watch

Exposed – ‘media monitoring’ Nationalist Front style.

AhDinnaeKen is indulging in a little experiment based on something we read somewhere written by a MobNat praising Wings Over Scotland. The MobNat claimed that no one ever holds the editor, Stuart Campbell, to account for his writings because they can’t. The sentiment ran along the lines that Unionists/BritNats/Quislings/whoever attacked Campbell on a personal basis because they couldn’t rebut the points he raised in his website. Stop laughing. We* know. Here’s an example of why no one bothers, it’s just too easy:

Political extremist does job. Advocating double standards with some special pleading thrown in for good measure.

Political extremist does job – advocating double standards with some special pleading thrown in for good measure.

By Longshanker aka @ergasiphobe

AHDINNAEKEN INTENDS embarking on a small feature series based on Wings Over Scotland’s alleged “monitoring” of the media – frothings, as they’re technically known in the NUJ card carrying trade.

This is just an experimental feature, to see how it goes.

Like Wings output, they will be highly selective, partially-truthful, mostly humourless and irony free distortions of what they report on – for the purpose of authenticity you understand.

The series will also, for reference purposes, point readers to Laird Wilcox’s handy 21 point guide to spotting the traits of political extremists.

This first feature concerns a commentary published in Wings on 13th October 2013 entitled “Organisation does job”. It’s a fine example of No.5 – ADVOCACY OF DOUBLE STANDARDS – in the Laird Wilcox list. (see You’ve been Longshanked below.)

Campbell took umbrage with a Sunday Post exclusive story which exposed the SNP Government for attempting to avoid public accountability. Perish the thought that the SNP would do such a thing. It’s not as if they have previous form or anything.

According to the Post’s Andrew Picken, by exploiting an “exceptional circumstances” loophole, the Scottish Government attempted to pull the wool over the eyes of the Scottish public in order to further their Independence agenda on defence.

At best, the action was a breach of the spirit of accountable governance, at worst it was a flagrant attempt at duping the sovereign people of Scotland.

The following was Campbell’s take on the matter:

What Andrew Picken’s keen journalistic nose appears to have EXCLUSIVELY uncovered is that the Scottish government is doing what it was democratically elected to do – pursue the policies in its manifesto. We’re not sure that’s strictly “news”.

Er, no. What Andrew Picken EXCLUSIVELY uncovered was that the Scottish Government avoided putting a defence advice contract out to tender by not following procurement rules which all democratically elected Scottish governments are expected to do. As can be seen from Campbell’s apologist advocacy, this essential point is conveniently ignored/forgotten.

As if to  soothe his gullible MobNat readers from the osmotic harm of exposure to “evil” MSM journalism, Campbell stamps his alleged ahem, ‘professional journalist’ authority on the matter:

Because taxpayers fund everything that every government does. They’re (more or less) a government’s only source of revenue. Governments raise tax, then spend it on policies which – ideally – are the ones that appeared in their election manifesto.

Like most extremist propaganda, this par has a grain of truth in it. Unfortunately for Campbell,  post-independence defence strategy was not what the SNP were elected for – they were elected to provide a referendum on Independence. Their 2011 victory allowed them to deliver on that manifesto commitment. We* certainly don’t remember voting SNP in 2011 so that the SNP could pick and choose which defence experts they spend our* taxes on.

And that’s why it’s good to know that there are journalists out there like Andrew Picken doing what journalists are supposed to do – making known what someone somewhere doesn’t want the public to know. Having to point out such a basic journalistic maxim to a self proclaimed ‘professional journalist’ like Campbell is embarrassing.

The next paragraph of Campbell’s emollient diatribe is where the real essence of ADVOCACY OF DOUBLE STANDARDS comes into play:

We don’t think anyone could accuse the SNP of hiding their desire for independence. So it seems fair that if the Scottish electorate give the SNP an unprecedented landslide victory in an election, as they did in 2011, it’d be reasonable for them to expect to pursue that objective as a government, which would involve spending money.

Er, hello. No one’s accusing the SNP of hiding their desire for independence. All Andrew Picken did was expose the SNP Government’s attempt to hide their hand picked ‘expert’ appointment and how much of our* money was being spent on doing so.

And no, Mr Campbell, it doesn’t seem fair that the SNP should interpret the 2011 victory as an excuse to spend undisclosed taxpayer monies pursuing a cloak and dagger styled independence agenda. They were elected to govern and legislate in a devolved parliament, not use their office to campaign for independence at taxpayers expense – the crux of Picken’s story.

As if it needs pointing out, the SNP were elected to follow the rules which all elected governments are expected to follow. Basic stuff. Professional journalists of all outlooks and persuasions know that. What’s Campbell’s excuse for being so clueless?

Then there’s this breathtaking admission of ignorance:

If a government is publishing a white paper setting out its aims, it’s entitled to use whichever experts it wants to make its case, not just whoever was prepared to give them an opinion at the lowest price. We’re not aware of the UK government having put any of its numerous anti-independence reports out to tender, nor are we aware of the cost of said reports being public knowledge.

Elsewhere, Campbell makes the laudable claim that he will cite facts and sources to back up his commentary and assertions. They’re risibly missing here. It seems he lied in this case. So far so what?

The party may be entitled to pick whatever experts it wants to make its case for Independence, but it can pay for them with party money. Governments are legally obliged to obtain best value for the electorate they were elected to serve. That’s why Picken’s story is a solid piece of ‘investigative’ journalism. The SNP government plainly wanted to avoid any kind of scrutiny or accountability over this action. Picken thwarted them in the attempt.

As for Campbell’s Tu Quoque argument regarding the UK government, does it need telegraphed to him that two wrongs do not make a right? Aren’t we supposed to be voting for Independence so that we can be rid of such allegedly sham Westminster style politics? He admits himself he’s “unaware” of the UK reports being put out to tender. They could have been. He doesn’t know. Outstanding or convincing journalism it aint.

Finally, we* have the formulaic, ubiquitous and tiresomely predictable grievance call to arms which, to the neutral observer, ensures that most of Campbell’s prolific output is strictly for polarised militants, conspiracy theorists, paranoid anoraks, Braveheart Commandos, rubber neckers and ill informed dimwits in his Nationalist based online world:

The Post’s story is simply the latest in a long line of attempts by the Scottish media to portray independence as some sort of illegitimate pursuit, an outrageous indulgence of vanity against the wishes and interests of the people rather than the core policy of the country’s biggest political party, backed by a clear democratic mandate.

Earth calling Campbell! Earth calling Campbell! Come in Campbell!

Pickens story is no attempt at portraying independence as any such thing. Picken’s report did what journalism is supposed to do – hold those in power to account. Simples.

So there we have it. With minimal effort, Campbell’s alleged forensic deconstruction and media analysis is shown up for what it really is – empty schoolboy rhetoric based on naive faith in the SNP government and an inability to grasp the basic tenets of journalism.

If that’s what passes for “trenchant insights” in the world of the partisan Nationalist media monitor, then long may they continue. The Indy campaign needs a laugh.

[ ADDENDUM – YOU’VE BEEN LONGSHANKED! ]

The SNP acts in the best interests of Scotland and doesn't need to be scrutinised by pesky professional journalists. Every MobNat worth their salt knows that.

The SNP acts in the best interests of Scotland and doesn’t need to be scrutinised by pesky professional journalists. Every MobNat ‘media monitor’ worth their salt knows that.

If anyone reading this has ever read Wings more than once they’ll pick up on Laird Wilcox’s No.5 trait (above) easily.

Campbell is very light, to the point of vacuousness, when it comes to criticising the SNP in government. It’s as if conceding any questionable point would somehow lessen the argument needed to build a compelling case for Independence. Kiddy stuff.

When governments, no matter the hue or intent, go to extra lengths to conceal information then it’s clear they have something to hide. Campbell plainly sees nothing wrong with this. In his little black and white polarised world the intention of the SNP government is benign ie they want to present a best case argument for Independence using taxpayer monies to do so.

Why shouldn’t they, runs the logic of Campbell’s argument – even when it breaks the rules of accountable governance – it’s for the greater good of the country after all. This type of apologist  argument is a prima facie case of special pleading.

Call AhDinnaeKen unduly cynical, but isn’t that kind of faith from someone with the temerity to call themselves an ahem, ‘professional journalist’ just a little bit tenuous? Not so much touching as touched?

The answer of course is yes, it’s laughably weak. And that’s why Campbell’s ludicrous attempt at rebuttal of Andrew Picken’s EXCLUSIVE is not just embarrassing, it’s cringeworthy. It’s not set in stone, but it is a good example of the mark of an extremist with a poor argument to peddle.

Journalists, no matter how partisan, are expected to hold those in power to some kind of account. To advocate against basic accountability because it fits in with your political view is either sadsack journalism or the mark of an extremist.

AhDinnaeKen knows which option you should plump for – both. Campbell isn’t a journalist, he’s a mob funded, public relations Nationalist extremist.

Time to wake up MobNats, you’re being sold a pup and you’re paying for the privilege. The only people who don’t know that are those who will soon find it out.

LONGSHANKER

Leave a comment

Filed under MobNats, Wangs Watch

Nationalist Front website editor praises Twin Towers fancy dress students

Wings Over Scotland editor Stuart Campbell today added his tuppenceworth – of other people’s money – to the outrage surrounding two Twin Towers fancy dress students. He claims they should be condoned for their sublime comedy act. AhDinnaeKen investigates:

“A single death is a tragedy; 3,000 deaths is a comedy statistic.” ― Rev Gollum Campbell

“A single death is a tragedy; 3,000 deaths is a comedy statistic.”
― Rev Gollum Campbell

By Longshanker aka @ergasiophobe

NATIONALIST FRONT misogynist, Stuart Campbell, has proclaimed that every “f**kwit” condemning the tasteless insensitivity of the Twin Towers fancy dress students should “get f**king real.”

He reckons that “any retarded BritNat moron unable to see this for its superb well crafted comedy value is not fit to pass comment.”

The controversy came to national prominence when two 19 year old students recently won first prize for dressing up as the Twin Towers.

Campbell alleged that the girls were being deliberately misunderstood in order to progress a mainstream media conspiracy narrative against tastelessness.

No stranger to the alleged comedy value of the 9/11 tragedy himself, in 2009 Campbell guffawed:

9/11 was brilliant. I watched it all on TV and I laughed the whole time.”

" a massively, obviously ironic and sarcastic joke comment on a videogames forum." - Oh my aching sides!

Campbell said that the above comment was, ” a massively, obviously ironic and sarcastic joke comment on a videogames forum.” – Oh my aching sides! More! More!

Of course, Campbell later attempted to justify the remark when held to account by his alleged Project Feartie enemies.

He said: “If you haven’t ever written anything that upset and offended some people, you’re doing it wrong.

“The 9/11 comment is part of my honestly-held personal views on topics unrelated to Scottish politics.

“By highlighting my reasonably held views on 9/11, women, homosexuals, trans-sexuals, jingoistic Britnat tossers, Rangers scum, Liverpool fan c**ts, sectarian Celtic fans and Nationalist wife beaters, the black hearted Bitter Together opponents of freedom loving Bath based Scots everywhere, are trying to villify me personally.

“They should go back home to what they’re best at – sucking off BritNat Tory monkeys dicks.”

Stuart Campbell, 45, edits Stormfront soundalike Nationalist Front website Wings Over Scotland – a political ‘media monitoring’ digest funded by tin foil hat wearers for tin foil hat wearers.

Yet more incisive "trenchant insights" by one of the Indy campaigns "important" commentators.

Yet more incisive “trenchant insights” by one of the Indy campaigns most  “important” commentators.

1 Comment

Filed under Wangs Watch

Salmond’s paragons of independence?

Independent countries to aspire to?

A lit bit of scrutiny goes a far way...

A lit bit of scrutiny goes a far way…

AhDinnaeKen isn’t sure what to make of Salmond’s fantasy future epitomised by the so called 30 independent countries list – cited as justification for the recently SNP asserted Independence timetable. We* thought we’d* take a closer look and check for ourselves.

AhDinnaeKen never has been and never will be closed to the idea of indpendence for any country, including Scotland. But, we* will always scrutinise anything asserted by a wee parochial Nationalist snake oil huckster like Tricky Dicky Salmond.

We* did enquire of Tricky Dicky as to how these countries had fared post-independence, but he was too busy preparing bunting for the midnight handover of the Butcher’s Apron in exchange for the self righteous purity of the sanctified saltire in 2016. Therefore, we*’ve had a quick flick through some of these paragons of independence and, to put it mildly, we*’re embarrassed for the man who would be Sun King.

AhDinnaeKen is embarrassed to present Salmond’s dirty dozen (in terms of the debate):

Senegal
The French colonies of Senegal and the French Sudan were merged in 1959 and granted their independence as the Mali Federation in 1960. The union broke up after only a few months. Senegal joined with The Gambia to form the nominal confederation of Senegambia in 1982. The envisaged integration of the two countries was never carried out, and the union was dissolved in 1989. The Movement of Democratic Forces in the Casamance (MFDC) has led a low-level separatist insurgency in southern Senegal since the 1980s, and several peace deals have failed to resolve the conflict.

 
Niger
Niger became independent from France in 1960 and experienced single-party and military rule until 1991, when Gen. Ali SAIBOU was forced by public pressure to allow multiparty elections, which resulted in a democratic government in 1993. Political infighting brought the government to a standstill and in 1996 led to a coup by Col. Ibrahim BARE. In 1999, BARE was killed in a counter coup by military officers who restored democratic rule and held elections that brought Mamadou TANDJA to power in December of that year.

 

Mali
The Sudanese Republic and Senegal became independent of France in 1960 as the Mali Federation. Rule by dictatorship was brought to a close in 1991 by a military coup that ushered in a period of democratic rule. Malian returnees from Libya in 2011 exacerbated tensions in northern Mali and Tuareg ethnic militias started a rebellion in January 2012.

 
Algeria
After more than a century of rule by France, Algerians fought through much of the 1950s to achieve independence in 1962. The Government of Algeria in 1988 instituted a multi-party system in response to public unrest, but the surprising first round success of the Islamic Salvation Front (FIS) in the December 1991 balloting led the Algerian army to intervene and postpone the second round of elections to prevent what the secular elite feared would be an extremist-led government from assuming power. The army began a crackdown on the FIS that spurred FIS supporters to begin attacking government targets, and fighting escalated into an insurgency, which saw intense violence between 1992-98 resulting in over 100,000 deaths.

 

Jamaica
Jamaica gained full independence when it withdrew from the Federation in 1962. Deteriorating economic conditions during the 1970s led to recurrent violence as rival gangs affiliated with the major political parties evolved into powerful organized crime networks involved in international drug smuggling and money laundering. Violent crime, drug trafficking, and poverty pose significant challenges to the government today.

 
Comoros
Comoros has endured more than 20 coups or attempted coups since gaining independence from France in 1975. In 1997, the islands of Anjouan and Moheli declared independence from Comoros. In 1999, military chief Col. AZALI seized power in a bloodless coup.

 
Djibouti
Unrest among the Afars minority during the 1990s led to a civil war that ended in 2001 following the conclusion of a peace accord between Afar rebels and the Issa-dominated government. In 1999, Djibouti’s first multi-party presidential elections resulted in the election of Ismail Omar GUELLEH;  The present leadership has longstanding ties to France, which maintains a significant military presence in the country, but also has strong ties with the US. Djibouti hosts the only US military base in sub-Saharan Africa.

 
Slovenia
 Dissatisfied with the exercise of power by the majority Serbs, the Slovenes succeeded in establishing their independence in 1991 after a short 10-day war.

 

Eritrea

On 30 November 2007, the Eritrea-Ethiopia Boundary Commission remotely demarcated the border by coordinates and dissolved itself, leaving Ethiopia still occupying several tracts of disputed territory, including the town of Badme. Eritrea accepted the EEBC’s “virtual demarcation” decision and called on Ethiopia to remove its troops from the TSZ that it states is Eritrean territory. Ethiopia has not accepted the virtual demarcation decision. In 2009 and 2011 the UN passed sanctions resolutions on Eritrea after accusing it of backing anti-Ethiopian Islamist insurgents in Somalia.

 

Macedonia

Since 2004, the United States and 133 other nations have recognized Macedonia by its constitutional name, Republic of Macedonia. Some ethnic Albanians, angered by perceived political and economic inequities, launched an insurgency in 2001 that eventually won the support of the majority of Macedonia’s ethnic Albanian population and led to the internationally-brokered Ohrid Framework Agreement, which ended the fighting and established guidelines for the creation of new laws that enhanced the rights of minorities.

 

Timor-Leste

On 20 May 2002, Timor-Leste was internationally recognized as an independent state. In 2006, internal tensions threatened the new nation’s security when a military strike led to violence and a breakdown of law and order. At Dili’s request, an Australian-led International Stabilization Force (ISF) deployed to Timor-Leste, and the UN Security Council established the UN Integrated Mission in Timor-Leste (UNMIT), which included an authorized police presence of over 1,600 personnel.

 

South Sudan

Since independence South Sudan has struggled with good governance and nation building and has attempted to control rebel militia groups operating in its territory. Economic conditions have deteriorated since January 2012 when the government decided to shut down oil production following bilateral disagreements with Sudan.

 

Croatia

Although Croatia declared its independence from Yugoslavia in 1991, it took four years of sporadic, but often bitter, fighting before occupying Serb armies were mostly cleared from Croatian lands, along with a majority of Croatia’s ethnic Serb population. Under UN supervision, the last Serb-held enclave in eastern Slavonia was returned to Croatia in 1998.

 

So there you have it. Conflict, insurgency, extremism, economic deterioration, violence and organised crime. What possessed Tricky Dicky Salmond to refer to these countries as reasons why we should become independent?

We*’d call it shooting yourself in the foot.

 

[ NB: All notes on countries sourced from CIA factbook. ]

 

2 Comments

Filed under Culture, Education, Newspeak