159 words and some pictures in defence of Anne Begg (@annebegg) and David Leask (@LeaskyHT).


Yesterday The Herald reported that Anne Begg (the former Labour MP for Aberdeen South – above) had been bullied online after Wings over Scotland suggested she knowingly campaigned with a member of the National Front with full knowledge of who he was. Ugly stuff, but Anne Begg does concede in the article that online abuse is not unique to nationalists.

How did nationalists react to the article? Wings over Scotland called the original headline a “complete and utter lie”:


15 minutes after publication, The Herald changed the text to:


Yesterday morning Wings over Scotland tweeted this:


Later in the day he tweeted Anne Begg directly:

begg1Of course, the evidence does exist that Wings over Scotland’s acolytes did call Anne Begg a Nazi:


But what about Wings over Scotland? Did he call Anne Begg a Nazi? Could this be true? After Wings over Scotland tweeted me earlier today, an alert reader sent me this:


It appears the offending tweet has now been deleted…

11 thoughts on “159 words and some pictures in defence of Anne Begg (@annebegg) and David Leask (@LeaskyHT).

  1. Daniel Jackson says:

    Leaving aside emotion, let’s look at this rationally.

    The majority of the media in Scotland will take any anti-independence story and run with it at full volume.

    The BBC et al should be jumping all over this

    …except, they aren’t.

    Now, why would the BBC, Mail, Express, Record etc etc leave this story well alone?

    What would prevent a Unionist media outlet running a story that attacked a Nationalist?

    The only answer I can come back with is “fear of defamation suit”. That’s been 3 days and there’s been a bit of back and forth (David Leask, a respected figure in the Unionist community, has been giving it fair publicity on twitter and tagging other journalists so it’s not like it’s slipped beneath the radar.

    Food for thought perhaps, Doctor?


      • Daniel Jackson says:

        Can you present a quote from Wings backing up that assertion? One quote where the writer you accuse refers to her as such. Think about what you’re trying to attack, perhaps?


      • Daniel Jackson says:

        Besides, if you had read my point rather than knee-jerked I’m pointedly not calling this a conspiracy. Quite the opposite. I’m saying the rest of the media, which you’ll admit leans away from the idea of independence, has taken a long look at this story and said “nope”. I’m saying there is a reason the rest of the media has not picked this up and that’s probably fear of a losing defamation suit.


  2. Daniel Jackson says:

    1) Nope, he makes a Strangelove joke.

    2) of course it is. You never once complained when Smart, Davidson, Starkey and the rest actually refer to Nationalists directly as Nazis, but when the time comes to twist a nationalists words to pretend he did then you’re right there. If it’s not about independence why the double standard, ‘doctor’?

    Again, for the third and final time. Why. Is. No. Other. Unionist. Media. Running. This. Story.

    If not because it’s false and actionable then why?

    It shouldn’t be a difficult question, but I fear I shan’t get an answer. My search for a rational, honest British Nationalist must continue it seems…


    • DrScottThinks says:

      1. What’s the basis of the “Strangelove joke”. Is it because she’s a Nazi or because she’s in a wheelchair? Both?

      2. Classic whataboutary. Nothing Smart said justifies WoS, or vice versa.

      3. WoS trolling people online is simply not news.


    • Daniel Jackson says:

      Why? We’ve established this is ideological, I’d be better off arguing with the Pope about the Virgin Birth.

      The ‘doctor’ thinks he’s guilty in spite of the evidence, because the accused is a Nationalist, whereas he has no interest in the principle (as he dismisses the equivalent Unionist cases, again in spite of the evidence).

      Al I can do is take my leave and leave this British Nationalist to his defamation suit. Have fun gentlemen…


Leave a Reply

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

WordPress.com Logo

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

Twitter picture

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

Facebook photo

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

Connecting to %s