Tag Archives: weakness

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