Monday 12 September 2016


There can be few Munguin readers, I imagine, who haven't by now heard of the furore over Wings of Scotland's suggestion on Twitter that Siobhan McFadyen was a disgrace

Stuart was reacting to her "pack of lies" article on the possibility of a second Scottish referendum. And she in return went ballistic. 

As you can see, however, from the above Tweet, McFadyen seems to think it's OK for her to use the term "disgrace" in the same way.

You can read all about it here, here here, and here, on Wings (or just look at the last few Wings' posts now that Blogger has got round to fixing the side bars).

I've read the Express articles and they were, without doubt, a disgrace. They bore not even passing resemblance to the truth, and like much of the Express coverage in the run up to the European election, they could easily have been taken, particularly by the average avid Express reader, as an incitement to violence. 

(It's not any surprise that there has been a massive rise in violence towards disabled people, and foreigners of any kind, in the recent past since papers like the Express [the Daily Mail and the Sun in particular, and their Sunday issues] have run campaigns of hatred against scrounging hordes of sick, disabled and foreign people, here apparently to deprive good hard working British family folk up and down the country, of what is rightly theirs!) 

Actually, far from abuse, and this may have annoyed McFadyen more than anything else, many independentistas by way of answer posted photographs of peaceful, happy rallies, or pictures of Nicola with bairns, with captions ridiculing McFadyen's piece.

She's become a laughing stock. Then again she works for the Express! It goes with the job.

Of course, when a complaint is made against someone, I think that Twitter is quite within its rights to suspend that person's account while it investigates.

However, it seems that Twitter isn't too good at communications. It seems near to impossible to get in touch with them. They investigate in their own good time without any interference from anyone. These of course, are the benefits of being big and powerful.  I'm pretty sure that when Twitter does investigate it will reinstate Wings' account.

In fairness there have been calls from some other unionist journalists to do so. Maybe McFadyen is a disgrace even to them.

Stuart isn't well known for political correctness. He doesn't suffer fools gladly and he calls a spade a spade. I make no bones, sometime it makes me cringe.

But he is one of the real and powerful driving forces of the independence movement. In the years he has been publishing, for all the hard stuff he's handed out to people, no one has ever taken action against him.  Now one has ever sued, including lawyers who could do so at no real expense.

He backs his stuff with hard facts and links to where he got them and he appears to have an encyclopaedic memory. Perhaps that's why no one sues him.

How the unionists must hate him.

He is quite simply, irreplaceable.


  1. Tris

    I don't know the Express woman and have little to no interest in reading anything in the Express but I agree with you on Wings Over Scotland. I donate during the fundraiser as I enjoy the hard work that Stuart does and I find him to be honest but also refreshing, he lets no one off the hook and I wish I had his skills. I think he has roasted me a couple of times on Twitter lol. Twitter is the social media account I use the most but it is mainly useful for links and a bit of silliness to be honest. I hope his account is restored as it would appear this woman from the Express has been arse kicked by Wings and just doesn't like, a bit of the JK's about her I suppose.


    1. I've never read the Express either, Bruce. But I've seen the racist headlines and the ones determinedly saying that sick or unemployed people are from the gutter.

      More recently it was foreigners, and the Express has to take at least some responsibility for the disgusting scenes of racial hatred we have experienced since Brexit.

      The Express is doing its level best to stir up hatred in Scotland. Or if it's not, there are some monumentally stupid editorial staff who have no clue what they are doing.

  2. I hate to be devil's advocate here(not that I'm calling anyone a devil) but there is a(subtle) difference between calling a story a disgrace and calling a person one.

    1. I take that point. But it's not unreasonable to call a person who writes a story deliberately designed to inflame trouble a disgrace. She is either a disgrace, or she is as thick as a plank or 20.

      If you make out that a pile of separatists are out to cause trouble like they did last time (even when they most markedly did not) then you are absolutely begging for the union jack waving, skinhead hard right wingers, who perpetrated violence all through the campaign here and there... you are begging for trouble.

      The unionists were there from the very first rally in Edinburgh when NF nutters were lifted by the the day of the result where the same kind of thugs were beating on little girls in George square.

      Seriously the Express looks liek it would welcome what never happened last time to happen this time, so they can report it.

      With pictures.

      Th article is a disgrace and she is a disgrace to journalist, even gutter journalism, for writing it.

    2. Even on the internet using a pseudonym (hmm, I suppose if you want to work out my real name it wouldn't be all that hard to join the dots)I would find it impossible to call another human being a disgrace. Of course, we should all be free to do exactly that because opinions about people shouldn't be censored. I guess I just think that winning the argument is more important than scoring some points with a "journalist". It's a bit of a dichotomy because the popularity of WoS is at least partly down to his style. That's true of pretty much all popular politics blogs. The drama of it all probably made his site more popular than ever. I just wish he had written, "your article is a disgrace" instead: a real person is at the other end, even if it is a "journalist".

      I wonder if newspapers see social media as an existential threat. If so, it's not surprising they attack it at every opportunity. If I was 20 I would likely never buy a physical newspaper or purposefully visit one online. The remaining demographic that still read papers (physical or online) probably think this is terrifying for democracy, while the papers themselves are afraid of their declining income. A newspaper like The Daily Express has no option but to lash out at new media where they can: they need to defeat it to survive and their elderly readers want to read exactly that kind of article. Personally, I'd leave them all to it.

    3. Can newspapers be divided into two categories: a) ones that attempt to co-opt social media by including twitter responses to breaking stories and b) ones that just attack social media as a general evil. Answers on a postcard to The Daily Express.

    4. I'm gonna make a wide stab at it and guess that your name is Terry!

      Probably wrong. But what the heck, it was free right?

      I take your point, but the Express and this poor excuse for a journalist is doing more than just putting out a pack of lies. We are used to that. Lord knows the state broadcaster does it with our money (well, not mine, but you know what I mean), when it's not treating itself to first class flights and covering up the sexual misdemeanours of its some of its less palatable highly paid employees.

      But either this was intended to foment violence, or the editorial staff are so stupid that that eventuality didn't occur to them.

      That is different from telling everyone that the SNP is baaaaaaad because, well it just is... It's madly irresponsible and wicked and yep, a disgrace. Maybe they hope to get a story out of someone being beaten up? or the First Minister's car being forced off the road...again!

      Mcfadyen may be a real person but she's either not a very nice one or she's not a very bright one.

      I think in fairness to Stuart, that his blog is wildly popular mainly because he reports the lies that the main stream media. He does it efficiently and effectively and in total truth. As i've said, he has blackened a lot of names and no one has come near him with a lawsuit. he may not be overly polite, to anyone, but he's bloody good at his job.

      I think that social media is seen as an existential threat to the papers. I bought a paper yesterday for the first time in about 6 months. I used to buy papers on a daily basis and read them in the car, or do the crossword in the canteen. It is a habit thing, and once you break it you realise just how much money you spent on something you only read 10% of.

      Now it never occurs to me to do so.

      The Daily Express, as I recall, was always a poor quality paper. When it was taken over by Desmond it plumbed the depths. One of the richest men in England apparently, he is a pornographer, according to his Wikipedia page. He is known as Dirty Des by Private Eye because of this, and he doesn't like it. Awww.

      He is a contributor to UKIP and a mate of Farage and in the run up to the referendum printed the most sickening front pages on a daily basis. Utter rubbish designed to cause hatred and division where there was none.

      His admittedly elderly readership (along with that of the Mail) love that sort of stuff because it panders to their prejudices. I'm sure most of them are far too old to go around stabbing Poles for speaking Polish, but unfortunately younger people see these headlines on newspaper stands in supermarkets. And they are fit enough to stab people for speaking a foreign language.

      Thank goodness I can struggle by in English.

      Was I right... is your name Terry?

    5. Please note, any answers to the Daily express should avoid words of more than two syllables, and certainly not more than 6 letters... preferably FOUR.


  3. Fair point. Which is why there is a lever. Also screaming "I'm a woman being oppressed" may have been a factor.

    1. Yes, she was being oppressed buy a lot of people tweeting lovely pictures of peaceful rallies and Nicola smiling with children. Frightening or what.

      Frankly it scared seven bells out of me... but then, I'm easily scared.

      Much more scared though about irresponsible incompetent low grade hacks ramping up hatred and me getting my heavily YES stickered car wrecked by the National Front nazis, or England First or whatever they are called.

  4. Well he's back the account has been reinstated - should never have been suspended in the first place. Whilst I agree with Tris sometimes Stu goes over the score, despite (or perhaps because of) his abrasive manner he is an excellent journalist. And a valuable asset to the Yes campaign

    As for the demented harridan at the Racist Excess just give her a wide berth - attention seeker of the Katie Hopkins variety.

    1. Oh I totally agree with you, his jourmnalist skills are beyond question. Every fact is double checked and cross referenced. There's little chance of error, which is why he can take challenges from the likes of Ian Smart and dare him to take action.

      And why they invariably back down.

      The MSM fear him because he calls them out on the lies/sloppy journalism they practise.

      I'm delighted he is reinstated. I look forward to his comments on that.

      TBH until this débacle I'd never heard of McFadyen. I expect that once it is over I never will again.

      I just hope that if there are any attacks on independence supporters int eh next few days, the likes of her will be aware of the part she played in it.

  5. wings over Scotland banned from Twitter? Am I the only one who sees the hand of the Brittish gov here? Please tell me I am, I much prefer this sort of thing in books than in real life.

    1. Hi Rab,

      You can bet the Brits' government know all about him. But I'm not sure that if they had been involved in getting him banned, he would, as PP has pointed out, be back on again.

      Nope, I think it was a hysterical washed up hack pestering the living daylights out of them that did it.

      Mind you, it would make a good story, if Mark Frankland is reading this... :)

  6. 'mon the wings !!!

    1. Well, he won. He's back, Anon.

      I think I've been fairly harsh at times on this post about him, whist acknowledging the enormous part he has played in the independence campaign.

      I'd like to point out too that when, somewhere in England a few months ago, there was a case of a starving girl, sanctioned by the mad DWP bastards for being a few minutes late, who pinched a packet of Mars Bars to keep herself alive.

      She was fined some ridiculous amount of money (which if she couldnt afford a pack of Mars Bars, she was never going to be able to pay). Stuart set up a crowd funder for her. He raised her fine and several thousand pounds extra which, if memory serves, he gave to food banks.

      As a side note, this was an English girl in an English town... And we are all reputed to hate the English... funny that!

  7. I don't use "social" media so have no clue about how businesses such as Twitter police themselves.
    My experience with companies who operate a virtual monopoly is that money talks and that may be the case here.
    People who use this medium,however,should be questioning whether it can be relied on to be independent and equitable.
    When I retired from IT the issue of the day was net neutrality where some people and organisations would be able to buy priority on the net at the expense of everyone else.
    If we want Open accountable social media then we are going to have to crowd fund it and have clear and transparent rules of conduct for everyone.

    1. I suspect that like everything else, money will always buy you what you want.

      I don't expect anything to be neutral or independent. And I would never demand that it be.

      We're not here. We are unashamedly pro independence, left of centre and pro European politically.

      We're also vehemently pro animal and child welfare; for decency towards the poor and the refugees whether on not we cased their plight.

      We'll rarely pitch an alternative view to that.

      We do expect though, that the BBC for which mos of our citizens pay, along with a subsidy to STV and Channel Four, should make an effort to be unbiased.

      Certainly int eh case of the BBC and Channel Four, they don't!

    2. Yup,
      Agreed,you get what you pay for...sometimes.

  8. Just noticed that your website appears to have relocated to the Netherlands (.nl)
    Are you going to continue the link to or should I link directly to your new one?

    1. I've still got .uk on my title bringiton.

      I really have no idea what blogger's been up to.

      Thought it would be nicer in Netherlands, I guess we'll stay in the UK.

    2. we'll stay in the UK.

      No we fucking won't Tris. ;)

    3. Aye, that was a faux pas Conan... I take it back.

  9. Just looking at the latest post from the winged one he has a couple of tweets from none other than Andrew Neil and Brian Wilson. Two more upright supporters of free speech you could not find anywhere else to be more supportive of our Stu.

    Oh ... wait a minute ... I got that wrong I think ... Two more upright ANTI supporters of free speech you could not find anywhere else to be more dismissive of our Stu.

    There got that fixed! LOL

    1. Yeah, Neil and Wilson did themselves no good at all there.

      Unlike some of the others who at least said that although they dislike him and his blog, shutting him down is anti democratic.

      Neil and Wilson come into the anti-democratic lot.

      Old Tories.

    2. Neil and Wilson - two establishment stalwarts who don't support change. Have the rich ever been against the status quo, especially "self-made" ones of the working-class Tory type.

    3. Yes. Two members of the establishment with more to lose than gain from an independent Scotland. Neil can be amusing with it. Wilson is just a boring old Tory.

  10. This is what my browser is showing as your web site address:

    1. wow that is so amazing...

      Munguin goes international!!

    2. Well, yes... but a Munguin can dream, can't he...