Tag Archives: hypocrisy

Joan McAlpine: In the grey 70s David Bowie was just a paedophile

MOAN reflects on Joan McAlpine’s reflection on music legend and not so secret paedophile David Bowie. His predilection for groupie children should make everyone think again – particularly mothers with teenage daughters – Joan McAlpine excepted. Obviously:

"...thrilling splash of colour and danger." or predatory paedophile abusing his fame, position and power? Joan decides.

“…thrilling splash of colour and danger?” or predatory paedophile abusing his fame, position and power? Joan McAlpine MSP decides.

By Moan McVulpine Ground control to Major Joan

“Evil will triumph when good men do nothing” sermonised Joan McAlpine in her Daily Record column of 16th July 2014.

It was a roaster of a piece, full of hellfire and brimstone aimed straight at British establishment “corruption at its most base and evil form”.

Her withering contempt was aimed at the systemic covering up of child abuse by those in the higher echelons of power in Britain.

As diatribes go, it generated enough passion and heat to set fire to a soggy chip poke full of yesterday’s news.

Whether Joan actually believed it, or was just using it as a big Nationalist stick of moral indignation and self righteousness to beat Indy unbelievers over the head with, is a moot point. The subtext of her polemic was as transparently crude as the presentation of the subject matter – vote No and you’re voting for paedophiles.

Moan suspects Joan didn’t care – that it was written for effect – like most of her columns.

How else could you explain her eulogising of David Bowie as some kind of god of sexual emancipation for gay men when other, more threatening, skeletons were lurking in his closet?

Describing the moment when Bowie draped himself over Mick Ronson on Top of the Pops, Joan drooled: “I know lots of gay people whose lives were changed at that moment. A decade before, they would have got married and stayed in the closet. Now they had options.”


It may or may not have been true. For Joan it certainly was.

Moan wonders if Joan knows lots of paedophiles. Surely, by the same logic, Bowie provided “options” for them too when he deflowered 13 year old virgin groupie Lori Maddox and then proceeded to engage in a threesome with Lori and her 13 year old best friend Sable Starr in his Beverly Hilton Hotel suite.

Both girls were children. Bowie was a grown man abusing his fame, position and power. These antics were no secret in pop fan circles. Why didn’t Joan say anything – anything at all – about that “moment”?

After all, she admitted that with Bowie’s gay emancipation routine, “Bowie knew exactly what he was doing.”

Columnist Julie Burchill summed it up poignantly in the Spectator when she pondered: “under some circumstances, would you excuse, worship, deify a man who has knowingly had sex with children, if he had created music which you passionately believe made the world a better place? Or not?”

Joan appeared to answer that: “He was David Bowie. He was untouchable.”


“Evil will triumph when good men do nothing” right enough.




Filed under Moan McVulpine, Morality

Sturgeon: Sincere or sleekit? You decide.

AN EXTRACT from Firstminster’s questions yesterday:

By Longshanker aka @ergasiophobe

TRUST ME! That was the crux of Sturgeon’s weak defence at FMQs yesterday.

Despite the Presiding Officer giving the Firstminster an unprecedented ‘out’, the Scottish Nationalist Party leader, instead, opted to evade head-on the public’s thirst for information on what she knew or didn’t know about Michelle Thomson MP’s business dealings.

She must think the people of Scotland’s collective heids zip up the back. (Though, given the reaction on social media, some clearly do.)

There are many pressing issues being forced on Scotland today. One of them is the risible belief that the SNP hold some sort of political moral high ground and can point the finger of puritanism and righteousness at the immorality and social injustice of their Unionist opposition.

No longer.

The predatory business conduct of Michelle Thomson – leaving any alleged illegalities aside – demonstrates that the Nationalists are no better than those they accuse of civic misgivings.

For Nicola Sturgeon to waste parliament and the country’s time evading the question of the ‘morality’ of Thomson’s business dealings – assuming they were legitimate – was an insult to every man, woman and child in the country whose concerns are ignored in the pursuit of political damage limitation.

FMQs is supposed to be the chance for the SNP government to showcase their probity and how competently they are running the devolved elements of the country.

Sturgeon’s lack of credible answers yesterday was damning.

Kezia Dugdale asked: “Can the First Minister tell parliament if anybody in the SNP, whether it’s Nicola Sturgeon herself, SNP politicians or SNP officials at any level, were aware of Michelle Thomson’s allegations before they were printed in the Sunday Times?”

At this point, the SNP Presiding Officer, Tricia Marwick, in an unprecedented move, stepped in to assist her Firstminster. She told her she didn’t have to answer.

Sturgeon, realising the further damage it would cause if she hid behind parliamentary protocol, insisted she had no problem in dealing with the Scottish Labour leader’s issue.

“As I said yesterday, the SNP did not have prior knowledge of any of these issues” she said.

It beggared belief and insulted the collective intelligence of the people of Scotland.

The Scottish Nationalist Party have one of the slickest, well oiled, media machines in the UK. Or, at least, they used to .

They have a backroom army of media monitors, schmoozers and PRs ready to report transgressions and potential damage to HQ at a moment’s notice.

The Scottish Sun, in July 2014 – a couple of months before the Neverendum vote – claimed they brought Michelle Thomson’s business dealings to the attention of the police:

Scottish Sun flagged it up to police in July 2014″ Tweeted the Scottish Sun’s Home Affairs Editor, Chris Musson.

Sun flagged up potential fraud

Is Nicola Sturgeon really expecting the people of Scotland to believe that nobody in the SNP, anywhere, was aware of this?

She’s either telling us that we’re all incredibly stupid or her party machine from the grass roots up is totally incompetent.

Neither conclusion is a good look for those claiming to be “Stronger for Scotland.”

For Sturgeon to persist in evading the ‘morality’ issue of Thomson’s predatory business deals – regardless of the legality – is a burning, shaming indictment of the state of Scotland’s official political government.

Now, it can’t be said that we’re not bothered about the insult to the collective intelligence of the people of Scotland. But Sturgeon’s credibility as a sincere politician is almost running on empty.

Her reputation was “dented” when it was revealed that she sought clemency for serial benefit fraudster Abdul Rauf who systematically stole £80,000 from honest taxpayers.

Her reputation took damage from her alleged ignorance of the wife beating past of Bill Walker when he was selected as the SNP MSP candidate for Dunfermline.

And she further compromised her reputation by defending Salmond’s blatant “lie” over European legal advice.

Her secret, undeclared, meeting with Rupert Murdoch in New York didn’t warm her to this correspondent either.

Now, she expects us to believe that she and her party knew nothing of Michelle Thomson’s business dealings. This, after the SNP vetting procedures for candidates was allegedly tightened up, following the Bill Walker scandal.

No, Scotland as a whole is shamed by this pitiful calibre of politician. If every SNP MP and MSP was to be replaced by random sheep and chimps, the nation would almost certainly be better served – though, admittedly, it would be difficult to tell the difference.

Nicola’s euphemistic ‘Trust me’ highlighted in the Youtube clip above might cut it for the hardcore Nationalists out there.

Anyone else really should reconsider just how much contempt sleekit Sturgeon is holding them in.

Sturgeon’s “commitment to social justice” is not “beyond any question”. It was questioned several times in yesterday’s FMQs.

And it was found wanting.


Filed under Morality, SNP-MPs

Moan McVulpine: SNP abandonment of core principles sends a clear message

MOAN says the Scottish Nationalist Party are so willing to abandon core principles in order to point score that nobody knows what they actually stand for – other than the obvious.


By Moan McVulpinehip hip, hypocrisy

SO, THE Nationalists have sold out their principles… again. By preparing to vote on the English only foxhunting bill at Westminster recently, they demonstrated that no one can trust a word they say.

Gesture politics over principle any day of the week. How cheap? How tawdry?

There are only so many principles you can ditch before you are left without a moral centre or a credible trustworthiness.

That sums up the Nationalists right now. They are prissy pathetic moralisers who don’t even stand up to the minimum of moral scrutiny themselves.

This latest about turn follows many others. Take their proposed privatisation of CalMac ferries. True to form, and yet another admission of their lack of principle, the Nationalists put the blame on Europe for having to tender the service.

Aye, right!

‘Independence within Europe’ doesn’t look so independent when you scrutinise the reasoning, or lack of reasoning, behind that pathetic excuse.

If the Nationalists really believed in “Stronger for Scotland” they would have sought out credible alternatives to leaving the ferry services as potential prey to a ‘questionable’ private operator like Serco.

Even the decomposing Labour party, when they were in power, inserted so many caveats, conditions and guarantees that only one operator tendered for the contract – guaranteeing services, jobs and working conditions. Unlike now.

As detractors, opponents and enemies of Nationalism are usually keen to point out, Nationalism only really works when there is a common enemy to vilify, ostracise and demonise.

For the Nationalists, somewhat bizarrely, that enemy is still the Labour Party: a mostly dead powerless party in Scotland and a dieing, powerless party in England.

Yet, as embarrassingly demonstrated by the Daily Record’s ginger whinger, Joan McAlpine, it’s still the Labour party the SNP whine and moan and ceaselessly whine about.

It’s the logical fallacy of ‘damning the alternatives’. So long as you’re focussing on how bad the other parties are – in the Nationalists case the Labour party – then nobody’s going to look too closely at how bad you are.

It’s been a winning fallacy and strategy for the Nationalists for the past eight years, but how long can they keep it going?

No doubt, it’s going to last well into the next SNP majority parliament after the Big Parish Cooncil elections next May.

Eventually, however, the sovereign will of the people of Scotland will wake up to the reality behind the Nationalists gesture politics.

Like Mhairi Black MP’s lie – cited by her as a fully researched “fact” in her parliamentary maiden speech – that William Wallace was born in her constituency in Elderslie, the assertion that the SNP have provided a ‘competent’ administration in Scotland is also a lie.

No one could possibly believe that a significant drop in literacy rates, for example, under the SNP’s watch is competent, yet the Nationalists continue to get away with it.

They’ve sold out our kids – in more ways than one – and still continue to claim the moral high ground. You can only do that so many times before the team, and perhaps more importantly its supporters, gives up and goes home.



Leave a comment

Filed under Moan McVulpine, Opinion

Crybaby Nationalist throws declared principles out of pram


HYPOCRISY IS the hallmark of the charlatan, crybaby Nationalist and partisan propagandist. When challenged and found to be wanting, these types inevitably resort to censorship and control and silencing of perceived dissent. The action they take is often in complete opposition to their stated aims and principles. AhDinnaeKen resurrects Laird Wilcox on Extremist Traits and investigates:

More than 500 comments were censored by Campbell. According to his own declared principles that makes him 'weak' and 'dishonest'. There's a thing.

More than 500 comments on this feature weren’t censored by comments moderator Stuart Campbell. An undeclared number were. According to his own declared principles that makes him ‘weak’ and ‘dishonest’. There’s a thing.


By Longshanker aka @ergasiophobe

SOME COMMENTS left under an AhDinnaeKen story highlighted an amusing little spat which apparently took place on the Wings Over Scotland blog recently.

If you take a look at the picture above and the figure to the right, the number reads 545. That figure is a tally of the number of comments left on the blog.

Yet, somewhat surprisingly, when counted, there were only – at time of writing – 39 comments!!??

Surely shome mishtake?

AhDinnaeKen was looking for the following posted comment which, according to our source, Major Disaster, was left by Stuart Campbell, editor of the blog and moderator of said comments:

Rev. Stuart Campbell says: 30 March, 2015 at 10:46 am

“but throwing your toys out of the pram and leaving said debate is a little self-defeating”

That’s enough. From now on anyone using the phrase “toys out of the pram” or anything similar gets deleted. Everyone has their own red lines, their own views on which compromises are acceptable and which aren’t. By all means debate the decision to resign, but I’m not having it in such insulting terms any more.

What’s important here is that Major Disaster also printed the timestamp for anyone interested enough to look for themselves.

AhDinnaeKen was amused at the thin skinned hissy fit diktat so we* decided to take a look to see if there were any other such nuggets of hilarity. (Un)surprisingly, the comment wasn’t there – it was censored, deleted, disappeared and spirited away for reasons undeclared.

[ Edit: Ignore the bit about the deletion of comments on Campbell’s post above. Today the April fool was AhDinnaeKen. As Twitter user PSflaps pointed out to us* this morning, the 500 comments on the article above, don’t appear to have been deleted. We*’ll put it down to experience and humbly recognise that it’s one of the dangers of banging something out in less than 80 minutes before going to work. The principle of the rest of the blog stands though. Campbell arbitrarily deletes comments he doesn’t like. As can be seen from the Twitter exchange below. ]

Wings Censor Twitter

We* got it wrong this time regarding 500 deleted comments – April fool! But as this thread shows, Campbell’s at it all the time. The principle point being raised stands.

Big deal, you may be thinking. The moderator of a blog’s comments threads has the absolute right to do what they want – even if it means binning/censoring over 500 comments.

According to an allegedly ‘switched on’ contemporary blogger: “The most telling aspect of any online entity is how it interacts with its users…

“If a site obsessively controls and censors reader comments, you can invariably take it as a sign of weakness. Comments are, at the end of the day, just some words on the internet.”

The blogger who wrote this sage wisdom of liberal principle and democratic philosophy was none other than Stuart Campbell of Wings Over Scotland. Entitled, “Courage and convictions: the state of the Scottish online media and blogosphere.”, the piece was written almost three years ago and was mostly an exercise in moral superiority underscored with the ulterior motive of attacking James Mackenzie of the Better Nation site’s comments moderation policy.

Of the Better Nation site, Campbell also said:

“I’d been searching for a while for a Scottish political blog that wasn’t abysmally written, appallingly designed, intellectually embarrassing or all three, and in 2011 I briefly thought I’d discovered it in an earlier version of Better Nation. That illusion lasted for the few hours it took to be summarily banned, without warning or explanation (and by person or persons still unidentified), from commenting on my own article. It was at this point I reluctantly acknowledged that I couldn’t count on being able to express my uncensored views on Scottish politics anywhere unless I took matters into my own hands.”

So, the birth of Wings Over Scotland was all James Mackenzie’s fault. Apparently. We hope James can live with himself. 🙂

The brazenly laughable hypocrisy of Campbell and his compromised principle is there for all to see. By Campbell’s own admission Wings Over Scotland’s moderation policy demonstrates nothing other than “weakness”.

Campbell also said: “There’s a legitimate case to make for not allowing comments at all, but every time you selectively censor one you simply don’t like you’re admitting that you’re incapable of addressing it honestly.”

And that sums up Campbell quite succinctly. As his behaviour on Twitter recently demonstrated – threatening people with the police, ordering people to delete Tweets and reporting people to the authorities for @-ing him (the bastards) – Campbell is “incapable” of addressing criticism honestly.

Besotted schmuck, Stephen Daisley of allegedly impartial broadcaster, Scottish Television said of Campbell:

Whatever one thinks of his politics or rhetoric, he cannot be charged with inauthenticity.”

Hmm. Quite! A bit of reappraisal required there we* think.

The last word however goes to Laird Wilcox’s excellent 21 point guide to extremist traits. Number 8 observes:


“This may include a very active campaign to keep opponents from media access and a public hearing, as in the case of blacklisting, banning or “quarantining” dissident spokespersons. They may actually lobby for legislation against speaking, writing, teaching, or instructing “subversive” or forbidden information or opinions. They may even attempt to keep offending books out of stores or off of library shelves, discourage advertising with threats of reprisals, and keep spokespersons for “offensive” views off the airwaves or certain columnists out of newspapers. In each case the goal is some kind of information control. Extremists would prefer that you listen only to them. They feel threatened when someone talks back or challenges their views.”

The last three lines are the most telling.

According to contemporary reports, many of the comments censored by Campbell were posted by Wings donors. We* bet they’re happy about that.

As to be expected with Campbell’s faux, toys oot the pram, authenticity, we’re still laughing.

Brazen double standards. It's the extremist way.

Brazen double standards. It’s the extremist way.




Filed under Opinion, Wangs Watch

Moan McVulpine: A child is a gift for politicians…they look great in photographs

MOAN says a child is not just for Xmas. She reckons they can be used to exploit the human side of a politician when half of Scotland views them as a big ‘N’ Nationalist hypocrite.
By Moan McVulpineputting the ‘hood’ into motherhood

THERE IS no such thing as an ex-political mother. A child is forever and so is the opportunity to exploit your human seeming domestic side for political gain.

That’s why political mums like to publish photographs with their kids.

But for many “empty nesters”, the feeling of being an ex-mother can be overwhelming and a flirtation and a fling with poison pen bloggers can often offer compensation by proxy.

So, this politics-free part of the column today can be viewed as an appeal for sympathy.

Mother’s day is not just for nice mothers, it’s for freewheeling, condescending politicians on the make ‘n’ aw.

At one end there is the embarrassment the kids suffer when their mother is publicly exposed and humiliated as a freeloading old swinger.

At the other end there is the very public scrutiny of Scottish taxpayer funded expenses used to pay off lovers; the embarrassment of televised censure when caught not doing your job in parliament – for the sixth time; and the hilarious hypocrisy enshrined by a driving ban when you’re on a committee for increasing road safety.

But that’s what political mothers are for – ensuring sideways and knowingly awkward glances amongst your peer group whenever her name is mentioned in your social circles.

But, despite the excruciating and public social embarrassment your political mother might have put you through, she’s still your mum and you’d have to have a heart of stone not to love her, even though you probably hate her at the same time.

Childhood memories are powerful drivers and mothers, above all, are the most powerful role models in a child’s brief and precious life.

It’s just a pity when, as they reach adolescence and adulthood, they have to face up to the fact that their mother is viewed by half of the country as a two faced, mad old shagger, without a shred of political credibility. That’s some memory to cherish.

So have a very Happy Mother’s Day, smug in the knowledge that you haven’t delivered public opprobrium and humiliation into your kids everyday life.



Filed under Moan McVulpine, Opinion

Moan McVulpine: Nationalist flag waving and branding is a transparent gesture

CONVIVIAL NATIONALIST, Joan McAlpine list MSP, wants to plaster Scotland in saltires and Scottish Government branding. Moan thinks such brazenly transparent Nationalism should serve as a warning of the political landscape to come.
Moan McVulpine providing 'service' to the Firstminster whenever he wants it.
By Moan McVulpinecondescending where no condescension has gone before.

FIRST IT was the councils, now the embedded Nationalists want to stake their claim on public spending, too.

They hope that, confronted with the misconception that the Scottish Government pays for things, gullible Alba-onians will flock to them in gratitude.

The polemic was dreamed up by Joan McAlpine, an alleged politician and actual SNP NEC member.

McAlpine, a list MSP apparatchick* (for the moment), has gone so native since the glorious defeat of the empowering referendum, she is known as the “most convivial Nationalist at the end of a Pinot Grigio bottle”.

She’s sown her oats, apparently, with even more gusto than her heroine Mata Hari.

Now she wants to turn Scotland into a ‘region’ of Nationalist lapdogs and obnoxious f**kwits.

She and her party appear to be halfway there already. Worryingly.

Joanie would have saltires and “Scottish Government branding” adorning  all publicly funded buildings – a ghastly and tasteless Orwellian styled Nationalistic nightmare.

And she would have you believe that these buildings were funded by the “Scottish Government” while any UK public projects were funded by the “Scottish taxpayer”.

Can she really be so arrogant and dismissive of the Scottish public’s perception that they won’t notice the brazen transparency of her insular Nationalist agenda.

So when it comes to sticking saltires up things, Joanie and her ilk know where  they can stick their saltires.

The sun doesn’t shine there, allegedly.


* deliberate misspelling for poorly conceived patronising joke


Filed under Moan McVulpine, Opinion

Why Wings Over Scotland is a thieving hypocrite

Hypocrisy is the practice of claiming to have higher standards or more noble beliefs than is the case. Thievery is the act or practise of stealing or thieving. Both of these actions are routinely practised by Wings Over Scotland. AhDinnaeKen presents a special feature length story on why Stuart Campbell of Wings Over Scotland is a thieving hypocrite who needs brought to book by the Scottish press:

The story Wings Over Scotland no longer wants you to see.  We* wonder why that is.

“Operation Apocalypse.” (above). The story Wings Over Scotland no longer wants you to see. We* wonder why that is.  Knowing smile.

By Longshanker aka @ergasiophobe

IN 2004 Stuart Campbell of Wings Over Scotland decided to take his ex-employer to court for copyright infringement.

Campbell claimed that Future Publishing owed him more than a quarter of a million pounds for infringing his intellectual property rights.

Finding himself blacklisted by the company, he embarked on a mostly inept self documented attempt at repatriating some of the monies he believed the company owed him.

He also wrote a vanity blog covering some of the more tediously pedantic month to month correspondence between himself and Future’s lawyers.

He recently deleted the blog, entitled “Operation Apocalypse – A tale of British justice”,  for reasons undeclared.

Here's what you see when you click the "Operation Apocalypse" link above. Do I smell a sepa-rat?

Here’s what you see when you click the “Operation Apocalypse” link above. Do I smell a sepa-rat?

When someone doesn’t want you to know something therein lies a news story.

As the deleted blog relates, Campbell chose to represent himself against Future Publishing – archetypally proving the old adage/cliche that “a man who is his own lawyer has a fool for a client”.

Future Publishing, at the time, was a multi-million pound publishing company with an impressive, though dwindling, portfolio of computer/video game magazines.

Campbell had almost achieved editorship of one of those magazines, Amiga Power, when his nastier side came to the fore. It earned him a severe rebuke and censure from the public at large; his work colleagues; and Future’s senior management.

Campbell had written on the contents pages of Amiga Power, “Old soldiers, I wish them all dead.”

This outburst of mean spirited and childish petulance was to become the hallmark of Campbell’s peculiar brand of narcissistic pathology from thereon in.

The background to the “old soldiers” comment may have contained the seed of what was to become Campbell’s pathological and increasingly obsessive vengeful hatred of Future Publishing.

The then Managing Director of Future, Greg Ingham, had been contacted by the Royal British Legion objecting to Amiga Power’s planned front cover depicting a poppy.

Nice cover. Shame about the timing. And the taste. And the repecercussions. And...

Nice cover. Shame about the timing. And the taste. And the repercussions. And…the fact it never made it onto the shelves.

The cover image was an iconic poppy, the same image intended to be used for the promotion of an Amiga computer game – Cannon Fodder.

“War has never been so much fun” ran Cannon Fodder’s strapline.

Both the game and the magazine’s release in the shops were planned to coincide with Remembrance day.

The Royal British Legion had been alerted to this future event and publicly objected in the strongest possible terms. They considered it disrespectful to the war dead.

Ingham who, up till then, appears to have been one of Campbell’s fans said: “I’d tell just about anyone trying to interfere with our magazines to f**k off, but not the Royal British Legion.”

An executive decision was made and the cover was duly pulled and replaced (sound familiar?). The Cannon Fodder game publishers also found a substitute for the iconic poppy illustration.

Campbell, in a fit of hysterical and spiteful pique wrote the old soldiers epithet which earned him a severe rebuke from his employers, lost him the trust of his magazine colleagues and saw him doorstepped by the Daily Star newspaper.

When Campbell's precious cover got pulled, he spat the dummy and had a hissy fit tantrum. The poor guy.

When Campbell’s precious cover got pulled, he spat the dummy and had a hissy fit tantrum. The poor wee misunderstood cherub.

The red top also demanded an explanation for another of Campbell’s toxic magazine comments where he likened the Royal British Legion to “conscientious objectors“.

Cue much wailing, tantrum throwing, gnashing of teeth and crybaby behaviour from the diminutive demagogue which ultimately witnessed him leaving Future Publishing to join Cannon Fodder’s creators, Sensible Software.

His writings however were still routinely commissioned on a freelance basis by Future editors.

Then, in 1998, following a hold up in payment for a 20 page feature he had written for Future’s ‘Edge’ Magazine, Campbell overplayed his hand.

After taking the company to the small claims court and winning, he set the bailiffs on them for non-payment of the monies owed.

The rights and wrongs of the action are moot, but the consequences were highly predictable.

Campbell found himself blacklisted by the company, resulting in him being virtually unemployable in the specialist geeky sphere of ‘videogame journalism’.

Plotting venegance on his ex-employers for such an affront to his ego and livelihood, Future presented him with a fait accompli circa 1999.

The company had included some of Campbell’s work on a series of cover mounted CDs for PC Gamer magazine.

According to Campbell, this “copyright infringement” amounted to a total of around a quarter of a million pounds in unpaid fees.

In a piece entitled ‘Operation Apocalypse’ Campbell wrote: “I also discovered that Future had been illegally reprinting some of my earlier work for PC Gamer on the magazine’s website.”

Campbell yet again took the company to the small claims court for the website infringement and won.

After approximately two years from 2004 – 2006 Campbell obsessively reported on how terrible and downright evil Future were and equally polemicised on how certain he was that his righteous crusade would achieve a positive outcome.

Sounds familiar again, doesn’t it?

After protracted to-ing and fro-ing of correspondence with Future’s lawyers, he was eventually offered a £10,000 out of court settlement.

He refused.

Such a piffling amount was considered an insult to his precious and greedy ego and he pressed on with his case.

It’s worth noting again that, throughout, Campbell was representing himself. What this says about his hubris/arrogance/intelligence tells you all you need to know: Ecce homophobe. Or something.

His means at this time must have been severely diminished and it appears that the only regular source of income he could secure was working for Imagine Publishing’s Retro Gamer magazine.

There’s a degree of speculation regarding Campbell’s employment status during and after this period. He clearly wasn’t a charity. Though he may have been a charitable case.

He may, indeed, have been a Jobseeker signing on at Bath Job centre.

There’s no shame in that if he was. Worklessness happens to just about everyone from time to time. Even ‘tribune’ egos like Campbell’s.

What would be shameful though would be claiming benefits while knowingly engaging in undeclared freelance work.

Campbell has friends everywhere. This is from the thread where he declared his comic enjoyment of 9/11.

Campbell has friends everywhere. This is from the discussion thread where he declared his comic enjoyment of the 9/11 tragedy.  Ironically, the editor of Imagine Publishing’s Retro Gamer magazine defended Campbell’s frothing and disturbing rant.

AhDinnaeKen contacted Imagine Publishing to see if they could shed some light on the speculation.

No one spoken to would, or could, confirm or deny the company had ever been contacted by the DWP concerning Campbell’s employment status.

Maybe Campbell, if he was feeling ‘charitable’, could clear that up – for the sake of clarity if nothing else.

Don’t hold your breath though.

If recent comments by Campbell concerning his former employer cum client Imagine Publishing and Retro Gamer magazine are anything to go by, it’s fairly safe to assume they don’t have a working relationship anymore.

Following a geeky ‘professional video game journalist’ argument in 2012 concerning which computer – the Commodore 64 or the ZX Spectrum – was the best, Campbell said of the magazine’s Commodore 64 verdict: “Last month’s Retro Gamer reached a similar conclusion for much the same set of spastic-faced reasons. (“Whine bleat SID chip wah wah wah.”).

“But fuck all of them, because they’re all cunts and they can suck our dicks.”

Hmm. Quite!?

Campbell certainly seemed reticent to confirm what status Wings Over Scotland currently has when questioned by Guardian journalist Severin Carrell recently.

Carrell revealed that Campbell had agreed a contract with advertising agency Primesight – through the Echosign process – which categorised Wings Over Scotland as a “charity”.

Self-employed? Charity? Copyright infringer? Maybe it is time for Campbell's legal status to be declared.

Self-employed? Charity? Copyright infringer? Hypocrite? Thief? Maybe it is time for Campbell’s legal status to be declared.

If Campbell hadn’t agreed to this, the political propaganda posters advertising his Nationalist Front website, would never have made it on to the Glasgow underground.

The “charity” status ensured the alleged ads weren’t vetted to Primesight’s usual standard –  though it’s worth noting that Primesight took the hit for the slip up and Campbell got his money back.

If the last few paragraphs have seemed like a bit of diversion, stay with it, the issues discussed are important to the conclusion of this story.

Campbell lost his court case with Future.

More than six years of whining, moaning and tediously dull bitching was resolved in a matter of minutes in court.

It left Campbell “shellshocked” and liable for legal costs of approximately thirty thousand, potentially bankrupting, pounds sterling.

Campbell’s argument was thrown out by the judge due to numerous “procedural errors” made by the  ‘professional journalist’ during  the pursuit of the case.

At this point it’s worth repeating again – for comedy effect you understand – the old adage, “a man who is his own lawyer has a fool for a client”.

As the recent advertising debacle with Primesight suggests, Campbell lacks intelligence and nous when it comes to ‘procedure’.

He emailed Primesight to tell them he wasn’t a “charity” but still acquiesed with the deal when company rep, Gerry McGread, told him, “that’s ok and not a problem.”

Campbell, if he had any brains, would have pulled out there and then.

Anyone who takes a rep on commision's word at face value needs to take a good hard look at themselves in the mirror.

Anyone who takes a rep on commision’s word at face value needs to ask their mummy for advice. Something isn’t quite happening in their lives.  Professional they aint.

The same could be said of his hilariously ill fated claim against Future.

It’s a truism that most ‘normal’ people learn from their mistakes. Can the same be said of Campbell? He seems doomed to repeat them.

The point of this feature concerns Campbell’s pursuit of Future Publishing for what he believed to be the theft of his copyright. It’s also concerned with his subsequent actions as the sole operator of Wings Over Scotland.

Campbell guarded his copyrighted material jealously – covetously so. And it would be moot not to agree that he was right to do so.

But, given that he is so aware of his own rights on copyright theft/infringement, why is it that he plays so loosely and contemptuously  with the copyright of others?

Campbell used the following phrase recently “Tick tock, Scottish newspapers. Tick tock.”  to vindictively taunt professional journalists worried about their jobs.

He relishes their prospective loss of employment due to the hemorrhaging of both revenues and circulation at papers such as the Herald and the Scotsman.

Yet, Campbell is a willing and active agent of those papers decline.

Using the archiving website Archive.is, he routinely archives the majority of the newspaper reports he links to from his site for his readers consumption.

The Archive.is site allows a snapshot of a page/story to be stored and a new shorter link to be created – all executed with “merciless contempt” for the convenience of his readers.

This serves the actively spiteful purpose of denying said papers much needed click through stats.

We*'d call that an admission that Mr Campbell knows that using Archive.is with the Herald is less than "honest".

We*’d call that an admission that Mr Campbell knows that using Archive.is with the Herald is less than “honest”. Dear dear. Time to get the cheque book out, we*thinks.

Higher figures makes the news sites more attractive to prospective advertisers meaning, ultimately, the papers can generate more revenue.

In terms of the Herald, the use of Archive.is, also bypasses their paywall system, further denying that paper potential revenues from their electronic subscription service.

Therefore, part of Campbell’s use of the Archive.is site is to to systematically and deliberately circumvent potential revenue streams. That’s theft, plain and simple.

It doesn’t so much make Campbell a “brigand” – as one snivellingly sycophantic acolyte put it yesterday – it makes him an every day common or garden tea leaf.

He’s welcome to sue AhDinnaeKen for saying so if he doesn’t like the simple truth of the matter.

Consider the Herald website’s terms and conditions of use:

“No part of the Site can be reproduced on, transmitted to or stored on any other web site or other form of electronic retrieval system, nor may any part of the site be accessed in such manner as to make it appear part of any third parties web site without our prior written consent.”

It couldn’t be any clearer.

Storing Herald stories using Archive.is is a breach of the Heralds terms and conditions (T&Cs) and thus a breach of contract over which the Scottish courts have exclusive jurisdiction.

Section 25 of the T&Cs also states:

“Framing or other techniques to enclose any part of the heraldscotland website are not permitted”

These terms and conditions are explicitly agreed to if you use the site.

Breaching them, at best, could be seen as an accident. Continually flaunting them goes beyond mere “procedural errors” and becomes something much more serious.

Effectively, Campbell’s site with its alleged readership of 233,296 individuals and 3,647,300 page views, is denying not inconsiderable chunks of revenue from Scottish newspapers.

And just like Tesco says, every little helps.

What Campbell’s ‘trusting’ and profligate readership have to understand is that they are paying him to “steal”, in their name.

High ranking acolytes such as Scott Minto aka @sneekyboy at least display an awareness of the malice aforethought behind what Campbell is up to.

Consider the following Twitter exchange:

Scott knows exactly why Wingsy exonerates the use of Archive.is. He understands the potential consequences.

Scott knows exactly why Wingsy recommends the use of Archive.is. He understands the potential consequences. With friends like that…etc.

Declining circulation is affecting newspapers worldwide, not just the Scottish press.

Campbell’s making himself rich at the expense of other journalists work – at a time when it can be least afforded.

Irony doesn’t come into it. Hypocrisy and thievery does.

For someone who so tenaciously pursued a third party for the ‘copyright infringement’ of his own work, Campbell seems pathologically unsympathetic to the wilful copyright infringement of others intellectual property.

Astonishingly, Wee Stuarty, with his impressively ‘BIG’ stats is happy to continue his relentless thievery to the commercial detriment of Scotland’s newspapers.

It’s unlikely to happen, but AhDinnaeKen implores the likes of the Scotsman, the Herald and the other newspapers whose websites Campbell routinely steals from, to make an example of his site.

He’s got the money available to pay adequate compensation, so,  the legal beaks should be set on him. Ensure you get your rightful share of his ill gotten gains.

Wings claimed some time ago to have a readership, “bigger than the sales of the Herald and Scotsman put together”.

Therefore, the site has absolutely no business stealing content from either of those sites – or any sites – whatever the alleged justificiation.

As his sojourn against Future Publishing proved, he’s more than aware of what constitutes copyright infringement.

And he’s equally aware that such infringement should be fiscally compensated for by the infringer.

What he seems less aware of is how this rank hypocrisy and wanton thievery looks to the wider world out there.

For the sake of any defamation challenge from Campbell, AhDinnaeKen would like to point out that we’re not calling him a “thief” in the strictly Scottish legal term, we*’re calling him a “thief” in the strictly, morally justifiable, term.

And we* believe that we’re fully justified in saying so.

Campbell’s previous actions have clearly demonstrated that he is, among other things, a thieving hypocrite.

AhDinnaeKen is calling him out on that. Sue us* Wingsy boy, if you can prove we*’re wrong.

The post which drew our attention to Campbell's sensitivity over his humiliating court defeat. Notice the car being stolen analogy. Kind of implies that Campbell considered Future's copyright infringement as theft.

The post which drew our attention to Campbell’s sensitivity over his humiliating court defeat. Notice the car being stolen analogy. Kind of implies that Campbell considered Future’s copyright infringement to be theft. Thanks Dual_Intention, whoever you are. Wish we could see your  original post.


Filed under CyberNats, Media, Morality, Wangs Watch