The world's most-read Scottish politics website

Wings Over Scotland

Cybernats and phantoms

Posted on May 20, 2014 by

One of the long-term goals of Wings Over Scotland is to put itself out of a job. By teaching people how to read newspapers in such a way as to understand what they’re NOT telling you, and to be wise to methods they use to create completely false ideas while not actually saying anything untrue, one day we’ll hopefully reach a situation where there’s no need for us to exist and we can go on holiday or something.


There’s a nicely subtle example of the craft of malicious spin in today’s Scottish Daily Mail, but it also sharply illustrates another toxic aspect of the media’s coverage of the independence debate – the rise of the phantom.

We were contacted by the Mail yesterday in relation to this story. We gave them a quote and it was duly covered in this morning’s paper, albeit in passing in a piece focusing on threats apparently made against Dunfermline Labour MSP Cara Hilton.

“CYBERNATS abused an MSP on Twitter and threatened her children – just days after the Queen called for ‘healing’ in the referendum debate.

Labour’s Cara Hilton, who was recently elected MSP for Dunfermline replacing disgraced wife beater Bill Walker, was called ‘Judas’ and a ‘moron’ online.

One person wrote: ‘I know where you live and where you go with your children on Saturdays.’

Meanwhile, a prominent ‘cybernat’ has been told living in Bath will not ‘shield him from the sound and the fury’ in a tweet by a Conservative councillor.

Stuart Campbell, an official campaigner for Yes and founder of the Wings Over Scotland blog, said he had previously contacted police about online threats – but it was even more ‘sinister’ when it came from an elected representative.”

We’re not fussed about the second billing. Our reaction on reading the story was mainly great anger at the individual who’d made such a vile threat to Ms Hilton and her family, and we resolved to electronically give them a piece of our mind. Quite aside from the repellent nature of doing such a thing, after all, it hardly does the Yes campaign any favours to hand such ammunition to the No side and a hostile press.

Being called rude names by internet nutters is a hazard of the job whether you’re a politician or a writer and shouldn’t be whined about, but implied threats of violence are where abuse crosses the line, and involving someone’s children is beyond the pale.

But there were two other disturbing aspects to the piece. One was that under a banner headline blaming “cybernats” for the utterly despicable threat against the Hiltons, I was then immediately described as a “cybernat” too, despite also being the subject of a threat in the story.

That’s actually quite a subtle piece of smearing by the Mail’s standards, which usually attacks rather more directly and is rarely shy of naming names.


And that was the second troubling thing. The person who’d allegedly threatened Ms Hilton wasn’t named. When we searched Twitter for anyone talking about her children so that we could upbraid them in no uncertain terms, there was no sign of the tweet.


Nor could we find any tweets from the MSP referring to this threat. There was no reply to the supposed “cybernat” saying “How dare you threaten my children?”, no mention of anyone having menaced her or them. Indeed, she’s never used the word “threat” in her entire Twitter history.


You might think that someone receiving such a vile comment would at least refer to it in some way. It would be the obvious and natural human reaction to say “Someone’s just threatened my kids – how disgusting” or similar, perhaps retweeting the offending comment by way of illustration.

But while Ms Hilton declined to either involve the police in this serious matter or mention the incident on the social-media site itself, she seemingly DID consider the matter significant enough to rush to the press with.


A front-page splash in yesterday’s Courier saw Ms Hilton and Labour MP Thomas Docherty repeat the allegations, and lay the blame firmly at the door of the SNP:

“The most recent attack — which compared her to convicted predecessor Bill Walker — left her ‘shocked and upset’ and prompted Dunfermline and West Fife MP Thomas Docherty to ask Peter Grant, the leader of Fife Council’s SNP group, to take action.

Speaking exclusively to The Courier Mrs Hilton said: ‘Sadly, I don’t think I’m getting any different kind of online attacks from cybernats than anyone else who dares to question them, or speak up for those who don’t agree with their brand of politics.’

‘You only have to read the newspapers to see the kind of online reaction that active cybernats across Scotland are capable of, often with foul, abusive or derogatory language. This seems a deliberate attempt to curb free speech and, as the referendum approaches, their nasty and personal attacks will no doubt intensify.’

Mrs Hilton, who works between 60 and 70 hours a week to represent her constituents, said she was incredibly proud to be an MSP.

‘I suspect many SNP members are equally appalled by the abusive and personal attacks,’ she said”

The Courier’s story didn’t frame Ms Hilton’s allegations as “claims”, but rather reported them – as the Mail does today – as empirical and unquestioned facts:

“New Fife MSP Cara Hilton, pictured, has revealed she is coming under increasingly personal attacks from opposition supporters. The Labour politician, who won the Dunfermline seat after a fierce battle with the SNP in last October’s by-election, has even had her children threatened.”

Yet not a single shred of evidence exists. As with numerous other media tales of “vile cybernat abuse”, most infamously the case of Susan Calman and the mythical “death threats” which even the comedian herself didn’t claim to have seen, completely unsupported assertions are presented as things which definitely happened.

Last week we noted the Telegraph doing the same thing, with alleged and unproven abuse against the “Vote No Borders” campaign group by unnamed “cybernats” presented as undisputed fact while the paper cast unwarranted doubt on actual, verifiable attacks on Yes-campaign donors Chris and Colin Weir by a Tory MSP.

Today the Mail buries an equally visible threat by a Tory councillor – which he admitted making and hasn’t deleted from his Twitter account, but brushed off in the Mail piece as “light-hearted” – while headlining as fact ones claimed by a Labour MSP which nobody can find, and which she never mentioned on Twitter or reported to the police but has used in two newspapers to attack the SNP, despite there being nothing to link the supposed comments to the party.

(Indeed, we can find no evidence supporting any of Ms Hilton’s claims. She told the Mail that she’d been called a “Judas”, and that “There was another one where they said my children must be ashamed of me. That really upset me”, but Twitter’s advanced search facility returns nothing for either.)



If the “cybernat” problem is as bad as the media and the No campaign would have you believe, people might be forgiven for finding it strange that so many of these cybernats are as elusive as ghosts, vanishing without trace from the internet – a difficult task under any circumstances – before anyone’s so much as managed to grab a screenshot of their comments or write down their usernames.

We hope readers don’t lie awake at night in fear, knowing that phantoms are abroad.

Print Friendly, PDF & Email

3 Trackbacks/Pingbacks

  1. 21 05 14 01:15

    Ireland And Scotland, Our Democracies, Our Voices | An Sionnach Fionn

  2. 12 06 14 12:09

    It Takes 2 to Tango | LinguaLoco | IndyLoco

  3. 27 08 14 15:53

    Return of the BritNats | Still Raining, Still Dreaming

244 to “Cybernats and phantoms”

  1. galamcennalath says:

    Someone threatens your children and you DON’T go to the police?

  2. Anne says:

    The police are very good at tracking down people who send threatening messages on Facebook and Twitter so I would have thought there would have been a large number of court cases now in which the evil cybernats had been prosecuted. Have there been any?

  3. TheeForsakenOne says:

    You can add a third paper. It’s in the Scottish Metro too although no mention of you.

  4. Alex Smith says:

    What’s the point of threatening or abusing Ms. Hilton? She’s just another nodding dog behind Lamont at FMQs, who was voted in on a promise to save a school which she then voted to close.Couldn’t get her nose off the party line if she tried!

  5. Greannach says:

    I hope Ms Hilton will now present these threats to the Police and have them investigated. I do not blame her for being upset at threats made to her children: if threats had been made children of mine, I wouldn’t be slow in getting the Police involved and having the person making the threats charged. Perhaps Ms Hilton and/or the Police can find the threats on Twitter and take the necessary action.

  6. donna b-s says:

    Didn’t I see a post worried about a single police force maybe not going to stand up to cybernat activity after a No vote? Maybe that’s why she didn’t report it, these unionist have some funny beliefs.

  7. bigGpolmont says:

    Very good point! Years ago I knew most of her Family and if anyone dared do that they would not hesitate to go to the police mind you they would also have made sure they had evidence before they made any allegations.

  8. Thomas William Dunlop says:

    This is disturbing. Phantom threats on one hand against NO supporters and the reality of actual physical violence against YES supporters in the other. One side is playing fast & loose with reality and fantasy.

    I fear that we might be in the build up for a “Burning of the Richstag” type of event. So keep you eyes & ears open and think twice before reacting (Keep calm!).

  9. KenC says:

    I let out a loud groan when I saw the Courier story yesterday. The dreaded cybernat army strikes again. Not.

    If there is a culprit, they should be brought to justice as quickly as possible. I won’t hold my breath though. As you rightly state rev, we’re still waiting for any concrete evidence in regard to Susan Calman. Even now, months after that non-event, I am informing people of the fact that no tweets have been found to substantiate that particular accusation.

    Tucked away in the Courier article is a recent poll, which apparently found that 21% of YES voters had been abused on-line compared to 8% of NO voters. A story which never makes the headlines strangely.

  10. geeo says:

    As you rightly state, ANY abuse and threats should be condemned at all times and by all sides.

    There is a however though.
    If you cannot prove or at least attempt to show some sort of fact bases evidence these things actually DID happen then the problem becomes this.

    You become the person putting the children at risk by giving the minority of nutcases that exist out there, an excuse in their sick minds to actually target you and your family when there may have been no threat to begin with.

    That is across the whole political spectrum of the debate.

    The way this person has run to the media knowing she would be instantly believed (and i am not saying this did not happen) reminds me of a comment i heard a while back about a guy who trips over a paving stone in a town centre and broke his arm.

    His wife is concerned and asks him ” do you need an ambulance” and he replies “no, a lawyer”.

  11. Ravelin says:

    “Cybernat” is becoming the new catch-all grouping for any online activity that is even remotely political and ‘abusive’. Even if there is no evidence, no link to SNP/Yes Campaign, it’ll be a Cybernat wot done it!

    Cybernats are the new Taliban.*

    *In the same way that anything even remotely terror related was/is reported to be connected to the Taliban, even although I’ve never really seen a coherent explanation of who the Taliban actually are. Oh, and just to be clear I am in no way comparing the two groups in terms of ideology or activity!

  12. Les Wilson says:

    Usual smear without substance or proof. It can easily be taken as party of the conspiracy by the Mail et al against the SG and the independence movement.

    We expected this stuff, with plenty more to come.
    IF it was real, then she does need to go to the police, however, I doubt she will. Mail, debunked!

  13. heedtracker says:

    We’re living through a dark age of UK state propaganda. It’s now at intensity that’s probably never been seen before in any “democracy” at any time and all with the sole purpose of closing down Scottish democracy.

    Vote no Scotland is everywhere you look and who’s in charge?

  14. Nobby Power says:

    At least in respect of a local primary school, Ms Hilton is the threat to children (or at least their education). No mention of that, eh?

    Funny old world, innit?

  15. Graeme Reid says:


  16. steviecosmic says:

    It would be interesting to know Ms Hilton’s legal position here. Isn’t it the case in Scottish Law that a crime need not be reported to the police by the victim, and that the police must investigate even if a complaint is made by a third party?

    I’m sure some upstanding citizen will do his public duty and report this vile threat to Police Scotland presently.

  17. Truth says:

    Hang on a minute. Can’t any member of the public report this to Police Scotland? After all, it is clearly reported as fact and would appear to be in breach of the law.

    How many times in the past can you recall newspapers saying “our file has been passed on to the police”. That’s right, loads of times. How about now?

    I’m inclined to agree with Cara when she says: “This seems a deliberate attempt to curb free speech…”

    Indeed it does, but not from the side of the debate she thinks.

  18. crisiscult says:

    reminds me of the story where the lady whose kids were (allegedly) subjected to anti English bullying at school went to Gordon Brown and the media as her first port of call.

    As for our media’s response, can I quote Chomsky?
    Any dictator would admire the uniformity and obedience of the [U.S – I think we can safely substitute UK] media.

    Having been subjected to Russia’s pyervy kanal coverage of what’s happening in Ukraine, I can also see very similar parallels to our media e.g. omit or downgrade any counter arguments or evidence, use language that instantly prompts emotional responses, and interview emotional people, present their experiences as fact, and don’t bother with corroborating evidence.

    Sadly, and excuse me if I sound a bit rude here, but large numbers of people in US, Russia, and UK, fall for it hook line and sinker. To quote Chomsky again, “Citizens of the democratic societies should undertake a course of intellectual self defense to protect themselves from manipulation and control, and to lay the basis for meaningful democracy”

  19. Airdrieonian says:

    Does it have to be Ms Hilton that makes a complaint to the Police? Could one of her constituents, after reading about it in the press, complain? That way light would be shed on the situation, and evidence, should it exist, be brought to the attention of the authorities. Or, Heaven forfend, if it was all a “mistake” then this would be shown too.

  20. steviecosmic says:

    It is the duty of the Yes side, while under full assault from all the instruments of state, to report this matter to the police immediately in order that we are seen to be rooting out the bad apples on our side and keeping this ‘debate’ fair.

  21. Alexandra-M- says:

    I will never condone threatening behaviour or conduct from any individual, regardless of which “side” it comes from, and regardless of whether it was online or in the street – Howver, given the lack of evidence, I find it incredible that these so called news outlets have chosen to run with this story as a statement of fact.

    I’m as frustrated as anyone supporting independence at the media spin and the blatant lies which they peddle for the No campaign, and the ignoring of real attacks of violence towards yes campaigners; but I think it’s important to rise above and not lower ourselves to their level in our own behaviour, whether online or not.

  22. Peter Macbeastie says:

    She is waging a war via the paper with a person I am aquainted with on Facebook. She knows damn well why he is criticising her; it’s her utterly hypocritical stance on the Fife Council (where she is still a councillor in spite of being elected MSP) proposal to close a number of primary schools. And I say hypocritical because she is now campaigning, as Cara Hilton MSP, to keep them open when, as Councillor Hilton, she was one of those who voted for the closure proposal. He is not making personal threats but you can bet your arse that if she ever goes near the police with this (doubtful, due to the apparent total lack of evidence you’ve found) he’ll get a knock on the door.

    No surprise to see her making pretty evidently unsubstantiated claims; she does have form for lying to promote her own position.

  23. Helena Brown says:

    As one of Ms Hilton’s reluctant constituents I would have absolutely no difficulty in telling her to her face how little I care for her, I certainly have called her a moron, well what does one call someone who says she has no memory of voting for a school closure, and who cannot read a prepared script. Certainly the possible name I was searching for is a Labour Politician of uncertain quality. I would certainly not go on Twitter, or Facebook and say those things, even if I got access. The difficulty is that who knows who is posting these things. Better Together, false flag? I certainly have no doubt that there are nut jobs out there but I credit the cybernats I know with a bit more class.
    I also wonder at the stooshie, surely the police should be called.

  24. Xaracen says:

    Interestingly, the Dundee edition carried the same report, not on page 1 but on page 10, so obviously it was much less important here.

    Even more interestingly, the first sentence is slightly different from the Fife edition one pictured above:

    Fife MSP Cara Hilton has revealed she is coming under increasingly personal attacks – some of them from opposition supporters.

    So some are from her own side?

  25. galamcennalath says:

    Sadly, the entire campaign now has nothing to do with truth, evidence, facts, debate, discussion, agrument etc … it’s just down to who believes what.

    Basically, how many Scots still believe that the world as portrayed by the MSM is reality? The higher that figure, the more likely a No win. As more people look beyond that portrayal, the more likely a Yes win.

  26. mathie says:

    the collusion of the media in the unending smear process is disappointing. There are still folk who think the media/ msm tell the truth. Gullible? Yes they are.

  27. HandandShrimp says:

    Who on earth would threaten Cara? She is utterly harmless, in fact since being elected I had forgotten she existed. I can’t think of a single thing she has said or done since taking up office.

    It is easy to take a print screen grab of any comment. In relation to the Tweet made to Stu we have all seen it as was the case regarding the ones about the Weirs, because they were copied. It strikes me more than a little odd that there have been numerous claims by Labour people that they have been abused on Twitter but then are spectacularly light when it comes to evidence. Especially when that evidence takes all of two seconds to obtain.

    Perhaps the problem is that Labour people are too stupid to operate computers. This might explain their abject terror at the thought they might have to run an independent Scotland one day.

    If someone did make such a threat then they deserve a visit from the polis, no question. Doing the wee sad face in the Mail (the paper that traduced Ed Miliband’s Dad’s name) as an alternative is just pathetic and smacks of In The Thick Of It rather than a genuine event.

  28. Helena Brown says:

    @ Peter Macbeastie, That is no surprise to me, another two faced lying little Labour cratur. I have much worse to say but given my feelings and I certainly do not want a knock at the door for this woman. Nothing surprises me, she was claiming loss of memory for voting for the closure before the election.

  29. Craig Murray says:

    Oh Rev, the abuse hasn’t even started yet. If the polls keep getting much closer you will start getting stories about your love life appearing in the tabloids, true or not. It’s what happens when you challenge the British state. I have been through it.

    Only thing to do is be brazen. I am going to commission a T-Shirt saying “Vauntie Cybernat”. Would you like one?

  30. Feeno says:

    The information provided on web sites like this one is powerful and giving people the truth, they don’t like the truth. Yet more dispicable tactics employed by the No side

  31. Stephen says:

    We need to rise above and keep it civil… The MSM and NO camp will keep getting lower and lower.

  32. steviecosmic says:

    Just read your latest blog this morning Craig. Chilling, is perhaps the best description. God help Scotland is there is a No vote.

  33. Mosstrooper says:

    When I first heard about these alleged threats my instant reaction was “well, let’s see the evidence.”

    I have no doubt that this is another farrago of absurdity and that there will be more of the same in the months to come.

    I can perhaps make the point that over the years I have been spat at, cursed, slapped by an elderly woman, kneed in the groin, sworn at, threatened and denied advancement in my profession all for being a supporter of my country’s desire for independence and all of the above actions by unionists of various colours.

    Have I stopped? no. If by some mischance there is a NO vote will I stop? not on your nelly. Will I need the services of a reconciliation church service? After more than 50 years of struggle I can confidently say *^@@%+ right off! The fight goes on until the box lid is nailed shut.

  34. BuckieBraes says:

    The ‘bile-spewing cybernat’ concept is fundamentally another element of the media’s determination to thwart the idea of Scottish independence becoming normalised.

    Yes supporters are presented as the unthinking acolytes of Alex Salmond, pursuing his obsession with ‘breaking up Britain’ (for in our media’s warped version of the world nobody wanted Scottish independence before Alex entered politics!). The press tries to remove us from the mainstream, penned into a kind of virtual enclosure, while normal people support the union, of course.

    The problem for them is most of us aren’t like that. We too are normal, rational people who can string two words together without being abusive. The idea of independence is becoming normalised, whether they like it or not.

  35. Muscleguy says:

    Rev did you catch Evan Davis’s attack on Alex Salmond just after 7am this morning on Today? Salmond was supposed to be there to talk about the Euro elections but Evans just hammered away at the ‘legal advice’ smear and would not let it go. I turned the radio off in disgust. It was the BBC in full on BT talking points mode, no attempt to inform the voter or discuss the issues.

  36. Jimmy Want Ball says:

    I can’t believe somebody called her a moron, I thought she was the most intelligent labour msp to come out of the dunfermline constituency

  37. Onwards says:

    Is it really any surprise that no proof exists?

    Any genuine threats would lead to IP addresses getting tracked, and police charges being made.

    Papers like the mail or the courier will print anything that goes along with their political agenda, without any sort of evidence needed.

  38. The Man in the Jar says:


    I know the feeling. Pass the hammer!

  39. Truth says:

    You only have to look at the knives being sharpened for UKIP in the media this week in advance of the European elections, to see the intensity of what will come our way as the big day approaches.

    And if it needs said, the only similarity UKIP and the Yes side have is that they are both bogeymen to the establishment.

  40. Lanarkist says:

    They have resorted to the process of ‘othering’ so that their print lies have a hook to hang on.

    All of their effort in promoting abuse from only one side whilst ignoring the greater abuse from the side they support is to create an element of fear from voters not already reading on line Information about the Referendum.

    The tactic seems to be to hang onto the voters they believe have already decided to vote No by making them terrified to engage in any form of information gathering or debate.

    The secret poll will have terrified them by showing that the drift from No to undecided, from undecided to Yes is greater than they expected and this is a concerted attempt across all media outlets to halt that migration.

    Stay polite, calm and humorous as you go about providing facts and debunking myths.

    Eventually people will realise that cybernats are just people like themselves, possibly relations, colleagues or friends and then this tactic will lose any traction.

    Just keep talking to everyone you meet, greet them with a huge optimistic smile and positive attitude and let them come to their own conclusion about which parties and individuals are doing the smearing!

  41. Truth says:

    Is it possible these alleged threats have been made on Facebook/email and not twitter.

    That might explain why we can’t find any evidence as it wouldn’t show up on internet searches.

    Either that or it’s all made up bull.

  42. Barbara Watson says:

    This can backfire on her, look at what happened to Murphy after he went squealing to the DM.

    We all need to keep pushing for the evidence and the truth of what she is, an opportunist!

  43. Alt Clut says:

    At a simple level all this could simply be yet another smear against us. If someone, somewhere was planning to play the provocateur, depending on who they were, they might have the ability to create this preparation for a bigger act or, if the current stuff is merely press bile, just piggy back it anyway.

    The more conspiratorial versions are quite possible but would it not be sensible for a serious provocateur to wait a while yet, until we are nearer Sept.18th, so that there is less danger of their shenanigans being unpicked and exposed before the referendum ?

    My guess is that deliberate ‘false flags’ will come but at the moment this is just business as usual in the nasty pit of ‘Mail-land’, and usual slavish copying without checking by other hacks.

  44. Colin Cameron says:

    My local MP Michael McCann was also a poor victim of cybernate abuse recently, yet for some reason is ignoring calls to name and shame, or at least provide evidence. Funny that.

  45. heedtracker says:

    “Rev did you catch Evan Davis’s attack on Alex Salmond just after 7am this morning on Today?”

    I did but does anyone know why the BBC attacks on Scottish independence are always at their most blatant first thing in the morning? BBC Scotland radio news from 6am has relentlessly attacked Scotland and SNP government every day for years now. Its actually quite a good way of getting the ticker going, if you’re up for tough day or a BBC in Scotland producer/propagandist.

  46. muttley79 says:

    This is becoming a regular feature of the independence campaign. The idea is to demonise independence supporters, through use of the cybernat phantom menace. We had the Susan Calman incident, then we had the wretched Ian Murray Stickergate fiasco. There was also that picture of Kezia Dugdale sitting staring at her PC in the Daily Heil! Now this. One consistent feature of the cybernat stories is no evidence is ever presented.

    On the other hand, we know there have been death threats against Alex Salmond and Nicola Sturgeon. Indeed, someone recently went to jail over one. Sturgeon has also effectively been stalked when she was at her constituency office. Salmond has also regularly been compared to mass murdering dictators by the MSM and Unionists. I can only assume from the MSM’s coverage of the referendum that they do not care about the personal security and safety of prominent Yes politicians. Presumably they think they have brought it on themselves by supporting democratic Scottish self determination.

  47. Training Day says:

    ‘You only have to read the newspapers to see the kind of online reaction the cybernats are capable of’.

    Yes indeed, Ms Hilton, you only have to read the newspapers. The same newspapers which are currently engaged in a war on Scottish self-determination and democracy. And yet you’d adduce them as ‘proof’ of cybernat heinousness.

    Enough said.

  48. Cod says:

    I’ve emailed Cara Hilton to ask her, very politely, if she would provide links to the Tweets in question, and to ask her if she made a complaint to the police.

    We shall see if she replies.

  49. Tattie-bogle says:

    I’m surprised she is not calling on Alex Salmond to resign over this alleged dreadful incident. Labour the party of sackings and resignations. 🙁 bunch that they are

  50. Findlay Farquaharson says:

    no evidence as usual. if its scottish labour you can bet a months wages it will be lies. one has to be a pathalogical liar to be scottish labour, scientific fact a scot labour member told me.

  51. Dcanmore says:

    Sounds like another big build up of ‘vile cybernats’ to hit the YES campaign with, and that is exactly what this is about, damaging the independence movement as much as possible.

    If Cara Hilton and her family were threatened and abused on Twitter then Police Scotland should be involved and the tweets published.

    It seems to me that The Daily Mail/Express/Telegraph/Scotsman will go after the Rev again now that he has signed himself up as an official campaigner. In their eyes that means he has become the personal responsibility of Blair Jenkins and Alex Salmond.

  52. Thomas Valentine says:

    A lie can run around the world before the truth can get it’s boots on.

  53. Catherine says:

    Running to the papers before the police actually puts her children at risk, or at the very least in the centre of a most unpleasant affair. It is beyond me to understand why anyone would do that. The ‘normal’ thing to do would be to

    a) record the offence in some way
    b)contact the police (you may think this is not a serious threat, but why take a chance where children are involved).

    Also, how does she know this person is a ‘cybernat’? It could just be one of the regular kind of crackpots you get, like the one who threatened Salmond and is now sitting in jail.

    This is totally made up, and it is even more shameful than stickergate, because she put her own children at risk to score political points. Wow!

  54. Col says:

    Surely when a member of the Scottish Parliament has her family threatened the police should be right on it whether she would like them to be or not?
    Something very “not right” here!
    Why does this woman think she can get away with slandering a group of people when if it was a named person she would have to prove the allegations?
    The media in this country are a disgrace to common decency and have no morals at all. I will never buy another lying, agenda pushing newspaper again. Ever! Not even a Sunday Herald because I quite simply don`t trust them. They will probably run with some crap right before the vote about how the vote is lost already and we should all forget about the whole silly episode and move forward as good obedient little Brit`s in it together.

    Look at how the media has behaved over the years, Hillsborough, Northern Ireland, demonization of Gays, Scots and foreigners. They are scum, lower than a snakes belly and we should remind people of this all the time. Who would be friends with an individual who has behaved like the media has done and still does?

  55. Oneironaut says:

    And the false flag tactics continue.

    How long till we’re accused of bombing buildings as the No campaign get even more desperate to discredit us and trick the gullible public (some of whom probably actually believe this trash) that we’re not to be trusted.

    I really hope someone is keeping a record of all of these smear campaigns, and that these lying sacks of [censored] are removed from their (probably overpaid) positions after the referendum!

  56. Robert Louis says:

    Really the international community (UN and EU) needs to sit up and take notice, at the mendacious deceptions being carried out in order to defeat a democratic, civil and peaceful movement in Scotland for true democratic rule via independence.

    If, as seems to now be the case, we are to be subjected to fake reporting of non existent events, then there is no longer any justification for calling Scotland or for that matter, the UK, a democracy.

    I happily welcome factual information on why I should change my mind and reject the restoration of Scottish independence, but having nothing but lies coming from unionists is just simply unacceptable.

    Maybe what unionists need to realise, is simply this, that after the vote, all of the people who have been informed of unionist lying (as demonstrated by actual factual evidence), will not simply go away. I have yet to hear the mythical, yet never seen, ‘positive case for the union’.

    I and many, many others now know that the case for keeping Scotland under London control, is not one of benefits to Scotland, but rather a paper thin tissue of lies, deception and misinformation. You might even say, the genie is out of the bottle, and it won’t go away. Or, to put things more simply, a large percentage of Scots now know that unionists and Westminster have been lying for the last three hundred plus years, and are still lying to this very day.

    The only rational choice in such circumstances, is to vote YES in September.

  57. steve andrews says:

    we need an ongoing list of MSM lies and smears. This would be helpful in arguments/discussions with the Undecideds to illuminate just how biased and underhand the Unionist friendly media really is – the conclusion being that the establishment can never be trusted especially in their scaremongering “facts” and their offers of greater powers on a No vote.

  58. Grouse Beater says:

    We should expect more of the same as we near the final reckoning – and can only be vigilant.

    Meanwhile, those demanding regulation on press abuse should receive our support. As the Mail might say of itself – “It’s a loose cannon.”

    The libellous Mail is but more evidence why Scotland needs to govern itself in the manner it expects of others.

  59. Papadox says:

    Don’t do as I do, do as I say. Establishment good, opposition bad. Rich good, poor bad.

    Aye ye canna whack democracy and truth?

  60. handclapping says:

    That’ll be Cathie Peatie’s wee girl then. I wouldnae worry, she’s always had problems with her memory. She cannae mind voting to close the school she promised to keep open so she’s probably mistaken the romance she’s just read for her real life. Wise not going to the polis though, she’d probably get a note for wasting Police time.

    On a more serious note, this should be brought to the attention of the Presiding Officer as a threat to members of the Parly is a threat to the whole Parly if members can be intimidated. Tricia should have a word in Kenny’s lughole.

  61. desimond says:

    Sory Stu but you lost me at “I gave the Mail a quote”.

    More fool you.

  62. HandandShrimp says:

    I recall the Daily Sport running a story Queen Mum Stalked by Killer Plant. The editor was on HIGNFY and was asked to justify the headline. He said the Queen Mum suffered from hay fever and her age it could be dangerous. I thought that was comedy gold. I had no idea that they were setting the trend for future journalism.

  63. Doug Daniel says:

    My motto for internet allegations is: screenshot, or it didn’t happen.

  64. a2 says:

    You read that wrong, it says :
    “has even had her children threatened.”

    Probably along the lines of “Simon tell them they are not getting to watch TV until their rooms are tidy”

  65. Kenny says:

    Slightly tangential point, Rev – given that you’ve been identified as Cybernat-in-Chief (presumably with a hotline straight to Alicsammin, who gives every order) and given that they routinely talk about “vile cybernats poisoning the debate,” couldn’t you make a pretty decent defamation/libel case? Libel, after all, can be quite non-specific – it can be whether or not the man on the Clapham omnibus could reasonably believe they were talking about you personally. And when it comes to the “poisoning the debate” question, isn’t the constant baseless smearing of “Cybernats” damaging to your reputation as a journalist and your opportunities to make money from your website because people are unwilling to engage with the “vile Cybernattery” you promote?

  66. thejourneyman says:

    No-one will condone the kind of alleged threats claimed in this article.

    However, Ms Hilton has form for saying things that will gain short term support and what she will learn in time is that her reputation will be judged over a longer period. She is well down the road of losing any credibility on important issues and would do well to recognise how the print media is far less transparent that social media, (hence we need Stu’s help!).

    Despite the church’s call for reconciliation after the referendum, it will be challenging to say the least to forget what some people in positions of privilege have done to win favour. She should take this to the police or apologise for misleading the public who pay her wages.

    Look what happened to Susan Calman, she now hosts a programme called Lies, how coincidental is that!

  67. fairiefromtheearth says:

    Dont worry folks in sure the uncurruptable police are on the job.

  68. Walter Scott says:

    This gets more laughable by the day. Any one of us who received a threat to our children would go straight to the police.

    The “victims” of this awful abuse should report it immediately. Cara Hilton said that she wasn’t getting different treatment from anyone else who speaks out against their brand of politics. Who was she talking about? This sounded like she was putting the “Cybernats” & the SNP in the same camp. Expect Johanne to make similar snide remarks directed at Salmond’s connection to cybernate hate & will ask if he’ll distance himself from it as if it’s a real movement.

    It’s all very well laughing at Labour nonentities making claims that they can’t prove or there’s no such record that anything untoward even happened. It sounds like Reverend Stuart reads yet another load of smears from Labour/Mail/All anti Yes & tries to prove how cretinous these people are. The readership on Wings are fairly well informed. No threats have been posted here that I’m aware of yet WoS is frequently described in the media as a website for Vile anti English abuse.

    My point is Rev, whilst we chuckle at the undignified spectacle of yet another Labour led smear campaign there is something to be worried about here. A lot of people don’t Read between the lines in newspaper articles & believe there’s something to these stories. Months ago Darling said on TV that he wanted a debate that was respectful without name calling or abuse, he said .. We in Better Together want a fair fight and a clean campaign.. Lets hope the Seperatists do as well.It lasted about 10 seconds. There’s a much dirtier side to Better Together than the public think. Expect worse.

  69. galamcennalath says:

    There’s probably something else going on here. The printed media just can’t hack it (no pun intended) online. They are struggling to maintain businesses dealing in physical newspapers which they sell in ever decreasing numbers.

    They are in the business of news output versus circulation and advertising revenues in. Where does the biggest challenge to their continued existence come from?

    Answer – Ordinary folks exchanging information and views in online social media, blogs and forums is their biggest threat. When it comes to news disemination, they are being taken out of the loop. In a Scottish context, the online news and political community is undoubted dominated by Indy orientated people. Setting aside the MSM’s political posturing and Unionist bias in Scotland, we are all a threat to their commercial viability because we exist.

    How much they dislike us because we are politically opposed to their stance, and how much they fear us because we challenge their very existence … isn’t clear. Both apply, I’m sure! We are their enemy not just as political foes, but as business competitors.

  70. Grouse Beater says:

    GCHQ plus MI5 equals: agent provocateurs, phony, synthetic posts placed on independence websites, and attacks on specific individuals by fabricated persons.

  71. Col says:

    It`s not like the unionist`s are gonna stop lying cos there`s a referendum on, they were always gonna ramp it up and deliver them via the compliant media. It has been so for far longer than i`ve been walking this earth. That they have to resort to such tactics tells you everything you need to know about what is right for this country and its people.

    There never was a good argument for Scotland being controlled from London.

    How these people can stand up and fight against their own countries interests is beyond me but maybe it just comes to personal greed at the end of the day.

  72. Grouse Beater says:

    the church’s call for reconciliation after the referendum

    A determined attempted to manufacture consent set against self-governance.

  73. Feeling left out. I’ve got the domain name and yet nobody from the SNP, let alone Ah Lick Salmon, ever gets in touch to issue any directives. 🙁

  74. Rev. Stuart Campbell says:

    “Sory Stu but you lost me at “I gave the Mail a quote”.
    More fool you.”

    I’ve got no beefs with how they’ve reported the McCaskill element. Silly not to take the chance to get it covered.

  75. Les Wilson says:

    I approached the SG about all the bias from the media and more. I asked that they get an international, reputable, agency to monitor this. Preferably coming from counties without strong UK ties. The reply I got said that there is provision for that.

    After getting further fed up with even more bias I wrote again, this time no reply. Perhaps the first reply was by someone who should have kept quiet, due to timing.

    So I do live in hope that when the real campaign gets going that monitors will be in place. Fingers crossed.

  76. bookie from hell says:

    If true

    papers before police


  77. prj says:

    Has Alex Salmond got the power to ask for a police investigation? Especially as it involves an MSP.

  78. mato21 says:

    The F.M should make it known that due to his concern about this reported threat and for the safety of all MSPs and their families he has asked the police to investigate

    That would make JoLa and company splutter

    I’m sure the police would take the FMs request seriously

  79. rab_the_doubter says:

    Interesting thing is she doesn’t seem to be a stranger to social media. Seems to be fairly active on twitter, so not being able to provide evidence just does’nt wash. This is a lie absolutely no question.

    Stu, can I be a ‘Prominent Cybernat’ too?

  80. heedtracker says:

    @ Grousebeater, there is no threatening tweets though, once again.

    If it was GCHQ dirty tricks branch, they’d leave them up on twitter and facebook for all to see. If you were MI5, its more than evident you don’t need to get involved at the social media level. Look at Susan Calman and the massive coverage the BBC gave her death threat con.

    BBC/Daily Mail etc are grotesque liars and unionist politicians know how to use them.

  81. a2 says:

    There’s a few things going on I think.

    Partly the broader agenda to Vilify social media itself and push legislation to hobble peer to peer communication which obviously doesn’t suit authoritarian administrators or the media.

    Partly an attempt to poke poke poke until somebody snaps and lashes out. Hurrah! a real vile nat story ensues, remember not everyone is reading this and taking notes and we do have some intemperates.

    Partly Laying the ground for false flags.

  82. HandandShrimp says:

    The bizarre thing about Calman was that she herself said that she never saw the threats but that that a journalist told her about them. Who for one second believes that a journalism would not have screen grabbed the comments?

    It was a stitch up but as to Calman’s complicity…who knows? She might simply have been used by those seeking to cause trouble.

  83. caz-m says:

    Scottish Labour Party in bed with the Daily Mail.

    Tory Party/David Cameron getting big pats on the back last week from editor of the Daily Record, David Clegg.

    Changed days, but proof that there is NO difference in policies between the Tory Party and the Labour Party.

    STOP buying these bias comics.

  84. HandandShrimp says:


    I agree with Doug regarding claims on the internet…Evidence or GTFO!

  85. Grouse Beater says:


    British secret police posing as if ordinary citizens protestoing at war or WMD, even to the extent of getting female protestors pregnant as long-term “cover,” remind us, that when it comes to retaining territory anything goes so long as you can disappear “into the night.”

  86. desimond says:

    ‘Silly not to take the chance to get it covered.’

    I fear it was more a valiant gamble and we know they play with a loaded deck

  87. Ann says:

    Probably the truth is that the complaints or threats as she says will not have come from so-called Cybernats, but from her constituents and parents at closure threatened Pitcorthie Primary School who have been let down badly by Cara as both a Councillor and an MSP.

    She promised the moon, the stars and the sun simply to win the Dunfermline seat………. and did nothing.

    She couldn’t change the minds of ANY of the Labour Councillors in Fife to back track from the closure.

    Personally if myself or my own daughter or for the matter any members of my immediate family had ever been threatened in any way. The first place I would go would be to the police.

    It is so easy in today’s world for the professionals to be able to track any kinds of cyber threats.

  88. HandandShrimp says:


    I heard Clegg (of the Record) say on the radio as an afterthought “I hope Cameron isn’t re-elected” – which I think is a measure of how much he realised he had sounded like an advocate for the Tories. I don’t think I believed him.

  89. prj says:

    This is the most documented election ever. I wonder what will happen after the election with this information.
    I avoided the word “repercussion” as this might be deemed offensive.

  90. rab_the_doubter says:

    We ALL need to watch our backs at the CH2 on 30th May.

  91. desimond says:

    Wait…there may be something in this.
    Cara Hilton is an anagram of:

    Ah I Can Trol!

  92. David Briggs says:

    Ms Hilton is a minor blip on any cybernat’s radar even the rabid amongst us and I haven’t come across any to be perfectly honest.

    Who honestly gives a monkey’s tadger for her views?

    Has she said anything anyone would make threats in retaliation for producing the one’s she claims were made?

    A nonentity.

  93. Calgacus MacAndrews says:

    I am Cybernatacus.

  94. Danny says:

    I take it that it would be simple enough to get a statement from the police. Usually along the lines that the police confirm they are investigating this case.

  95. desimond says:

    When will we get the first bit CYBERNOT abuse headline?

    Place yir bets…zzzzz

  96. joe kane says:

    Imagine using your children to smear innocent people whose only crime is they disagree with your own political views?

    What kind of a mother would do such a thing?

    Is their any moral depths Scottish Labour professional politicians won’t sink to in order to further their own careers?

  97. HandandShrimp says:

    As I said above I can’t recall Cara uttering a single syllable of interest since her election so I haven’t been following events. Am I to take it that her about turn over the school in her constituency was all so much election waffle and the school is to be shut after all?

  98. Defo says:

    With Chilcot in the news again, and with this obvious false flag garbage in mind, I am reminded of one of Radioheads less well aired albums ‘Hail to the thief’.
    Second favourite line (after the repeated “shoulder to shoulder”) is “me & my people are paying attention”.
    I’m shoulder to shoulder with the Anonymous lot. I will not forgive. I will not forget.
    Not a threat, but a promise.
    Democracy ? Aye right.
    If this period in our history were analogous with the cinematic classic The Wizard of Oz, we are past the curtain being drawn back, and only need to pass the unappetising news on to those munchkins who have been drawn in by the MSMs spell. Now where did I put those slippers…

  99. HandandShrimp says:

    I am Cybernatacus


    I am Cybernatacus

  100. Does the use of the term :- cyberNat (i.e. indicating a Scottish Nat.) somehow prevent a Scottish National Party Govt. from instigating (ordering) an investigation?

    When some threats are prosecuted and convictions result, it cannot be reasonable that False Threats can be allowed to be ignored by Govt. Any Govt..

    Do they rely upon THIS Holyrood Govt. to be stifled by a lying opposition M.S.P.?

    Allowed to thwart due legal process.?

  101. Ken MacColl says:

    Perhaps we should reflect that the “Scottish” Daily Mail, like its parent publication, is not really a newspaper but rather a nasty comic publication that would certainly not let the facts get in the way of a story.

    Does this qualify me as a cybernat ?

  102. heedtracker says:

    @ Grousebeater, knocked up by a spook. It’s fun to speculate the workings of GCHQ but it’s probably all surveillance up here and laying down the required levels of spying on Scotland after independence.

    The issue with the UK state attacking people is always the problem of sympathy building for the targets. The Black and Tan violence in Southern Ireland probably turned more Irish people against British rule than anything Republicans could do.

    And ofcourse this is exactly what these bizarre characters at the Daily Mail and in Labour are now trying to pull off and probably why SNP are keeping as far out of it as possible.

  103. Cod says:

    Ok, I received a reply from Cara Hilton, and I have asked for her permission to reproduce it here. Am just waiting on her reply now.

  104. HandandShrimp says:


    I agree, we should not forget a word these people have said. Regardless of outcome in the vote we need to remember all of this and hold them to account when they try to re-write history. Thankfully we are rather better at screen grabbing and archiving than they appear to be.

  105. Jamie Arriere says:

    I think we’ve seen enough of these “abuse” claims to realise that they are not concerned in the slightest about raising the level of the debate, or nipping this type of thing in the bud – otherwise there would be very straightforward prosecutions, which we’ve seen in response to every public disaster from Lee Rigby to The Clutha crash, even up to the poor teacher in Leeds.

    No, this is quite clearly a tactic to smear all pro-independence supporters, and I suspect there’s a rota agreed from now till September for a unionist politician to go greeting to the willing media each week.

    Unless you see the tweets/emails/facebook posts, they ain’t true.

  106. Truth says:

    Isn’t it possible to send direct messages on twitter that aren’t publicly viewable?

    Giving her the benefit of the doubt, perhaps that is what has happened.

    However, that still doesn’t explain why the police are not involved, or indeed how she knows it was a cybernat.

  107. Walter Scott says:

    Could it be that Holyrood could ask the Police to investigate this. The Presiding officer could say.. Nobody threatens any MSP’s on my watch and gets away with it.
    And,because it was the cybernats wot done it then it would get solid Labour support. Like the end of every episode of Scooby Doo when the mask is removed from the swamp monster we will all be shocked that it was ************ !!!!!!!!!!!!!All the time. And they would have got away with it as well if hadn’t had been for those pesky cybernats

  108. Defo says:

    Stop playing nice Cod, and just do it.
    Without a script, this ‘lady’ is bound to trip herself up.
    Getting that info out, via the MSM is another thing altoghether.

  109. Alba4eva says:

    How do we have to ‘watch our backs’ Rab?

    Don’t be daft.

  110. Les Wilson says:

    The SG are playing a very careful game, I understand their reasons for doing so. It is however, frustrating when they just ignore some issues when their followers would prefer at least sometimes, something more assertive.

    Although, they are deliberately doing so, in order to save giving the Unionist/ MSM et al, more things to misquote and use against them en masse. Which of course they would.

  111. Jim says:

    The press and media’s constant attacks on ordinary, decent law-abiding Scots as “cybernats” for simply supporting self-determination is simply unjust.

    It teaches us that we no longer live in a democracy, if indeed we ever did live in one at all.

  112. Gillie says:

    Cara Hilton has come in for a lot of public criticism in the closure of a local school. This so called threat is a poor attempt at deflecting such criticism by appealing to a urban myth of the “cybernat menace”.

    I like this twitter exchange on this apsect.

    The Courier may come to regret printing a story that is evidently a piece of fiction.

  113. Les Wilson says:

    Jim says:

    Jim, you are right,” if we ever did live in one at all”
    We do not,it is just more obvious as time goes on.
    We will have to make our own.

  114. desimond says:

    May I suggest the following name for such long winded highly noxious yet invisible claims:

    A Cyberfart!

  115. Cod says:

    Well, she has asked for me not to print her reply here, because she believes it may well just lead to further abuse, and I will honour that request, as I told her I would if she said no.

    I will say that she has confirmed that there were abusive messages sent to her on Twitter, which did mention her children – and she knows who sent them – and she has indeed spoken with the police about them. I’d like to think that we can all agree that such attacks are unwarranted and unacceptable.

    She also acknowledged that the abuse in the campaign for independence is coming from both sides, and mostly from a minority.

    I’m disappointed she didn’t want her reply reproduced in full here – I would also have printed my initial reply and my response to her, in the interests of fairness, but I can understand her reticence, both as a politician and as a woman. Sadly.

  116. Grouse Beater says:


    probably all surveillance up here and laying down the required levels of spying on Scotland after independence.

    That plus face-to-face intimidation of senior police officers, key politicians, a “firm” chat not physical intimidation, (and not necessarily SNP – yet) and BBC officials.

    “You go’ a problem wif our meffods, eh? Don’t you Scotties go around choppin’ off each ovvers sporrans Friday nights, and fings, eh? That’s wot we’ve ‘eard, mate.”

  117. Defo says:

    @ HandandShrimp
    Yes. The age of the internet has produced an entity which is far greater than the sum of its parts.
    One termite alone is almost always useless, but a colony is capable of bringing the whole house of cards down.

  118. HandandShrimp says:


    Well I guess we can watch with interest to see who the police arrest if the messages are real and the sender known.

  119. Since when did moron become a threat? Lol. I’ve seen worse language being used in the bloody news!

    Thin skinned little daisies.

  120. galamcennalath says:

    Gillie says:
    I like this twitter exchange on this apsect.

    Indeed. There is one amazing bit there …. “Sadly the separatists keep resorting to abuse because they are losing the argument” … brilliant. I was completely unaware any Unionists were actually putting forward any argument!

  121. Brian Macfarlane says:

    This really had nothing to do with online threats originally It sttarted when I wrote a highly critical letter to the Dunfermline Press aboput our wonderful new MSP In it I made fun of her (as ye do) and criticised her duplicitous election campaign and also her conduct around the closure of my old school. Her minder Thomas Docherty MP then used his Courtesy Press article to call me a Nasty vicious abusive cybernat.(Using the word Duplicitous to describe the red lipped one was apparently totally unacceptable) Which is strange for a letter to a Newspaper to be cyberous.

    Meanwhile that same edition had another letter from a constituent where he said Blah blah “so this is why we end up with Walker and Hilton as our MSP’s” Docherty then sent a Press release? To the Dundee Courier to which I had also wrote another highly critical letter about the School closure and Hilton on 12th May. This was when this affair started to grow arms and legs and the extra juicy child threatening bits appeared along with all Docherty’s BS It has now been repeated verbatim in the mail as the Rev described and on the Metro too this morning. I have this week sent another letter to the Dunfermline Press in which I complain about both Docherty and Hilton in a similar vein to previously. Whether they get published or not I would doubt but I’ve sent them anyway.

  122. Gillie says:


    Surely Cara Hilton cannot claim she wants no more publicity now when she has already gone fully public in the Daily Mail and the Courier.

    That is simply the Susan Calman defence.

  123. Bugger (the Panda) says:

    I wouldn’t put it past the DM to have fabricated the story, maybe even posted the odd twitter.

    Remember they have to have at least 5 “outrages” every edition. So maybe today they only had 4.

  124. Jim Marshall says:

    In war truth is the first casualty-Aeschylus.

    I am Cybernaticus.

  125. heedtracker says:

    @ Grouse Beater, I doubt they could intimidate, bribe more like. Keep voting no and that London promo’s yours Sir Brewer etc. cushtie.

    The ultimate problem for any GCHQ black ops up here is the web. You can only do your agent provocateur thing in a big crowd all in one place. There’s a huge YES vote online but they’re everywhere and anywhere. The DDOS attacks on WoS was probably as much as they can do without making fools of themselves and worse, discrediting BetterTogether even more.

  126. Davy says:

    You do have to wonder if the Daily Mail is working a flanker here and is trying to divert the attention away from the comments directed to Stu by the tory counciller.

  127. I’d like to think that we can all agree that such attacks are unwarranted and unacceptable.

    No doubt. any kind of intimidation is completely uncalled for. Threats are the trade of the guttertrash of society. If someone has indeed made threats against her children or herself, then they deserve to face the full force of the law in that regard.

    Regardless of which side the offender is on, any prosecution of a threatening figure is a victory for civil society

  128. Gillie says:

    No I am Cybernaticus

  129. Cod says:

    She didn’t, so far as I can tell, speak to the Daily Fail, and the Courier, it would appear, approached her, as a result of comments from another MP in the Dunfermline Press. Even if it hadn’t,to be fair, there is a vast difference between giving a quote to a newspaper and putting your head in the lions mouth – which having her comments reproduced here on WoS would be.

    And Defo, the reason I won’t simply reproduce her reply here without her permission is because I gave my word I wouldn’t if she asked me not to, and I keep my word. We wouldn’t want to stoop to the level of politicians after all, would we?

  130. Grouse Beater says:

    Back in the day I got threatened over a hairy week by a seriously psychopathic troll. When I complained to the website management in a confidential e-mail the troll answered. Collusion? You decide.

    The jury is still out on the efficacy of the Internet.

    Spies spy on us, spooks post phony abuse, governments shut it down in extremis. Ninety per cent of “chat” is banal drivel.

    On the other hand, site such as Wings are able to draw public attention to injustices; the word spreads; the rest of us can join the the debate to make our voices heard.

    Question: Do politicians act upon internet protest? Do our voices make the difference when it comes to policy or questions in parliament?

    There’s little evidence of that so far.

  131. Greannach says:

    I’m delighted Ms Hilton has contacted the Police, and I look forward to the court case.

    I’m very pleased about the Police being involved because it would be terrible to be cynical and imagine that Cara Hilton went to the papers (shunning publicity as the moth shuns the flame) because it was her turn on the Monstered-by-Cybernats rota to be a public victim.

    By going to the Police herself, Ms Hilton has saved a concerned constituent doing that on her behalf.

  132. john king says:

    I bumped into Car Hilton in Tesco’s in Dunfermline the week after the by election that she won by telling a pack of lies about the Labour party being responable for the abolishion of the bridge charges and such,
    so there I was, she knew I recognised her and you could sense she know what I was about to say she wouldnt like, and before I could open my mouth her kids care hairing round the corner bumping into us, I closed my mouth and wished her good day,
    we leave vile abuse to others and certainly dont involve innocent kids.

  133. Gillie says:


    If the police are involved then a approach to them will confirm Cara Hilton’s story.

  134. Ian Brotherhood says:

    If anyone ever deserved help with a fundraiser it’s our very own ‘Thistle’ at IndependenceLive:

  135. Grouse Beater says:

    Whoa! Half-a-dozen posts have disappeared!

  136. Clarinda says:

    Joe Kane – 1.09pm …. beat me to it.

    I hope her children are genuinely not at any risk physically or emotionally from whatever the origin, intent and/or effect of this alleged report. I assume the children will now have appropriate security in place – if not, why not?
    I’m at a complete loss as to why responsible parent would publicise a real threat to their children seemingly before legitimate legal action.

  137. HandandShrimp says:

    Well if the Tweets are real and the person known and the police informed I would be surprised if the individual concerned has not already been interviewed.

  138. Jim Marshall says:

    Grouse Beater 1.48

    ” Do politicians act upon internet protest”?

    They don”t even act on manifesto commitments when elected although the SNP are better than the others in this respect.

  139. Gillie says:


    Exactly and the local police will be able to confirm this.

  140. Grouse Beater says:

    They don”t even act on manifesto commitments

    Alas, all too true.

  141. Marcia says:

    I’d rather read about the New Wings Panelbase poll that wasting my time on Clara Hilton. 🙂

  142. Marcia says:

    Sign (twice) than = that. 🙁

  143. Vestas says:

    All you have to do is watch what’s happening to Farage right now & that’s only for Euro elections. Whatever your views of him the MSM are all signing from the same hymnsheet (which appears to have pretty much nothing but lies on it).

    By the time we get to August I would expect the “SNP/cybernat/fascist” slurs to have reached a quite unbelievable crescendo.

    Regardless of the result of the referendum I doubt people will forgive & forget the MSM lies/slurs/abuse – hands up who will be paying the BBC tax again for a start? I know I’ll never be paying it again. Nor will I ever view the Guardian as anything other than an unpleasant racist rag with the chief racist being the egregious Polly Toynbee who is frankly beyond parody these days.

  144. Ken Johnston says:

    With reference to Muscleguy @ 11.45, I don’t know if anyone has picked up on the Sunday Herald on P7, quoting Carmichael, “Coalition refuses to publish poll”. About 8 paras down, he, when asked if they ( Government) will ever publish says, quote ‘No. There’s an important principle here. The principle is that it’s government research and we don’t release it. It’s a bit like legal advice in that respect. This is not information that’s been gathered with a view to it being published.’

    Thus neatly confirming Alex’s stand on the Eu advice, or the advice he may or may not have got. But then the rules don’t apply to the SNP.

    On another matter, I read some posts, saying ‘We don’t want to peak too early’. What’s all that about. Some folk will say, Och, I’ve waited too long for this referendum, I’ve changed my mind, or maybe a fit of pique, I’m gonny vote no.

  145. desimond says:

    The most recent attack — which compared her to convicted predecessor Bill Walker — left her ‘shocked and upset’ and prompted Dunfermline and West Fife MP Thomas Docherty to ask Peter Grant, the leader of Fife Council’s SNP group, to take action.

    Therefore,along with what COD tells us, we know this:

    Cara Hilton knows who is involved.
    Cara Hilton knows objections were raised to the SNP

    Can we duly assume Cara Hilton KNOWS the cybernat is in the SNP then?

    I assume the SNP will soon expose and expel the member causing such a disgraceful act!

  146. donald anderson says:

    You callin’ the meejah a liar?

  147. Adrian B says:

    This sounds like yet another Labour MP/MSP manufactured story spun against those who favour the Independence Referendum producing a Yes result.

    The thing is there is another election this week and Labour need to get their support out to vote for their own EU candidates. The SNP look as if they could do well. Labour are in my mind smearing the SNP by associating the alleged event with Cybernat supporters.

    Labour polling for the Euro elections may or may not be accurate, but a smear story could yield a few more anti SNP votes for Labour – in their eyes at least. We can I am sure all remember how dirty the fight was for Cara Hiltons seat at the last election.

  148. Mike says:

    Said it the other day “Project Fear” is now “Project Smear” and will be right up until the vote is in.
    Everybody should do what they can to highlight this new low the No campaign are falling to.
    When the media is fully cooperating with the distribution of the smearing they don’t even need to provide a shred of evidence. Truly sickening and just another reason to vote yes.

  149. Tattie-bogle says:

    I like that cyberfarting: a person or persons falsely accusing online commentators of abuse

  150. Gillie says:

    Ode to Cybernattery

    They seek him here, they seek him there,
    The Daily Mail seek him everywhere.
    Is he in Crieff? — Is he in Cathcart?
    That damned, elusive cybernat!

  151. Liquid Lenny says:

    Ken Johnston
    The campaign on our side is being run by very smart people who have researched what has happened in historical referendums.

    The reasons its a long campaign has been fully explained on these pages before, basically its like a mourning period between the shock of a referendum and the actual poll and like mourning it takes a while to get over the shock of the loss of a loved one and get on with your life and make new life choices.

    Have 100% faith in the leaders of the YES campaign.

  152. Red Squirrel says:

    Abuse of any kind, from either side, is completely unacceptable. No ifs, buts or maybes.

    The outraged squealing about dastardly cybernats is only going to get worse – yes there are undoubtedly some nutters out there but we all need to be sure emails/tweets/comments make the point in a way that doesn’t threaten or abuse. No matter how tempting that might be – the argument is lost if we have to resort to responses that can be used against us.

  153. Gillie says:

    I vote for Cyberfarting.

  154. Tattie-bogle says:

    What is really sad is that they have cried wolf so many times you just can’t tell anymore.

  155. Dcanmore says:

    Always be aware folks that coverage of these ‘incidents’ serve another purpose, do deflect the case for Scotland to be independent of London, in other words the arguments that Better Together have lost or losing.

    Shutting down the debate and replacing it with obfuscation is the only thing Better Together are interested in.

  156. Bugger (the Panda) says:

    project Fear didn’t work.

    We now have Project Smear dovetailing into Project Intimidation.

    We are winning, they are losing.

  157. Tom Platt says:

    As readers of this site will know, Westminster and the London centric media seem to have a campaign to try to discourage internet use by trying to convert the word “cybernat” into a pejorative. Rev Stu has written about how our MP, Jim Murphy LAB, and the Daily Mail embarked on what seemed like a joint campaign to try to do this.

    Many here will know of the existence of a site of similar name. “A Cybernat writes” has a very direct, no nonsense style and some people might find it a little strong in places, but its heart appears to me to be in the right place:-


  158. The Man in the Jar says:

    I’m Cybernaticus and so is my wife!

  159. Alibi says:

    The problem that this Ms Hilton now has is that it appears she has been proved to be a liar. The evidence suggests she has made the whole thing up. Not what we expect from our elected members.

    I expect the next thing will be mysterious bomb attacks on remote electricity pylons or similar, causing little of no damage – attributed to the pro-independence movement but actually carried out by the black ops lot at MI6 or whoever they use nowadays.

  160. Famous15 says:

    I have a sneaking suspicion that there may be a grain of truth in her allegations since she even offended her own team by her unethical approach to the truth. Many Old Labour hands have a liking for straight talkin truth and were appalled by her. Not Cybernats but Cyberlabs. And I guess if you ask the dogs in the street they will know.

    If my kids were threatened the police would be involved double quick.Go figure!

  161. hetty says:

    Whatever happens it is still not clear that the abuse, if indeed true, was perpetrated by anyone that is a YES supporter, but the damage is done by it being pasted all over the papers anyway. No one would tolerate children being threatened for one moment, it is despicable, but we still need evidence.
    It is incredibly sad that this kind of thing gets so much attention in the msm, when the real debate is undermined by the bt camp at almost every opportunity. A deliberate attempt to stifle if not silence debate, it is a disgrace, democracy is all but dead in the water in this so called union.
    Publish the secret poll, we need to concentrate on what is really going on and get the message out about the consequences of a no vote as much as possible.

  162. Greannach says:

    Alibi: Either what you outlined will happen, something minor that was never going to harm someone, or else something much more serious will be said to have been thwarted just before it happened, showing how the UK security services never cease to work to protect the Scottish people from dangerous extreme nationalist elements that are out there.
    If they did it back in the 70s when it was only devolution that was on offer, imagine what they’ll get up to later on in the summer.

  163. Dr Ew says:

    As an MSP she must be aware of the laws which protect her from such threats. If ANYONE threatened my children I would be on to the police right away. It would be neglectful not to. As a public figure exposed in surgeries, meetings, etc. she must be aware that she is personally more vulnerable too. So why didn’t she go to the police? Possible reasons include:
    – It never happened, or
    – handing over easily produced evidence (her Twitter account) would initiate criminal investigations and bring charges for wasting police time if found to be fabricated.
    – which would lead to criminal proceedings, resulting in
    – her being forced to resign her seat.

    None of this stands up. Either she’s a dangerous publicity seeker or it’s part of a black op contrived by Labour Party apparachniks and/or Whitehall spooks. This woman must be publicly challenged on her slander.

  164. Cod says:

    Not enough people are reading the comments, instead just posting their own viewpoint.

    To recap: I emailed her and asked her about this – she knows who at least some of the comments / threats were made by, and she has, in fact, spoken with the local Dunfermline police about them. I’m not sure if charges are being laid by the police or not at this point.

  165. Gillie says:


    Did Hilton speak to the police before or after she gave an interview to the newspapers. Context matters.

  166. Ravelin says:


    Cod said this further up the thread….

    “She didn’t, so far as I can tell, speak to the Daily Fail, and the Courier, it would appear, approached her, as a result of comments from another MP in the Dunfermline Press.”

  167. Andy-B says:

    Unfortunately, this is the power the press posses, in today’s world, a story doesn’t even have to be true or contain much substance, for it to have the desired effect, as for The Daily Mail, Paul Dacre, really only goes in for sensationalism, not facts.


    David Cameron has hinted in a Radio 4 interview that Scotland will not get another chance to become independent if it votes no.

  168. Andy-B says:

    An excellent article, showing how 432 people own 50% of Scotland’s private land, and how feudalism is blocking development in Scotland. The owners of these lands, pay next to nothing in tax and receive millions in farm subsidies.

    The ruler of Dubai may receive, £439.000 for his estate in Wester Ross, the Duke of Westminster, could receive £764.000 a year, whilst the Duke of Roxburgh, could be enriched by £950.000 a year, after independence is gained, feudalism must end.

  169. starlaw says:

    I wouldn’t believe anything this woman would say after watching her behaviour in the bye election . Nor do I believe any polls regards the referendum after finding out one major pollster is doing the rounds of sheltered housing I suspect they are finding what suits them.
    I also remember the miners strike and the amount of Britania’s baubles handed out to news hacks and suspect its now open season for these and the hunt is on big time !

  170. Barontorc says:

    Cod – you’re a bit late on the scene with this info, has this just recently happened?

  171. Jim McIntosh says:

    None of these types of dirty tricks are new. Read Hunter S. Thompson’s “Fear and Loathing: On the Campaign Train ’72”. In it he tells a story of LBJ allegedly telling his campaign manager to leak a sordid story about his opponents sexual habits (I won’t go any further :))

    His aide baulked at the idea saying “No one would believe that”

    “I know,” LBJ replied “But lets make the SOB deny it”.

    Basically the situation the YES campaign and SNP are in against a hostile press.

  172. Cod says:

    @Barontorc, scan up quite a lot of comments, I first commented at 1.13pm, second post at 1.29pm

  173. Andy-B says:

    O/T. I really would love to see this happen,if for no other reason, than to piss-off Westminster and Washington.

  174. joe kane says:

    Hilton’s public behaviour put me in mind of a psychiatric disorder where those in charge of looking after others pretend that those in their care are at harm or are in danger in order to draw attention and sympathy to themselves.

    Munchausen syndrome by proxy

  175. Robert Kerr says:


    The essence of this site is the over-riding principle set by the Rev that links are given.

    Otherwise its a gossip column.

  176. Going to the papers before the police?Thats a bit moronic isant it?

    Surely that disgusting tweet of the Weirs depicted as pigs is more of a news story,and there is proof,but i guess this is the wonderful GREAT BRITISH newspaper industry were talking about…

  177. Cod says:

    @Robert Kerr

    I emailed her direct. I haven’t reproduced her replies to me here because she asked me not to. I’ve summarized the relevant parts.

  178. muriel robertson says:

    Cara Hilton is not exactly an example of professional integrity. Her Dunfermline campaign was riddled with false claims If her or her family have been threatened why would she want to protect the culprit? Anyone can invent a story and take it to a newspaper, it would be equally irresponsible of any paper to print something as malicious without seeing the proof.

  179. Juteman says:

    I could say that she admitted to me that she made it all up. Should folk believe me or you?

  180. Clootie says:

    This is going to be a story running right up to September. The need to counter the effectiveness of the online campaign which undermines the scare stories.

    It is obvious they are going to take turns “…at being threatened”. The MSM will print the story as fact without even the basic search as carried out by the rev.

    Who would not keep the evidence and send it straight to the police?
    I don’t believe her!

  181. Cod says:

    @Juteman, you can believe whatever you like. I have no reason to lie, I’m neither a Labour supporter nor a No supporter. I just like to try and get the details direct from the source, if possible. I make no claims on the veracity of those details, I’m just passing on what I can of what she told me. You can judge anything else for yourself.

  182. katsoft says:

    Oh my God Help me Help me.I received abusive and threatening e-mails from Better together.!!!!!!!!!!
    Somehow they got my mail address and keep sending me e-mails asking me to support their cause.
    This must count as threatening behaviour CYBERT**TS

  183. Gordon Hunter (@GordonHunter11) says:

    This is pure and utter media bullshit.Why everyone is getting uptight about it beats me.get a life,we all know that the Bitter Together mob will be flinging even worse at us over the next 120 days.Smile and Vote YES.

  184. Cath says:

    If someone did tweet that to Cara Hiton, and she’s reported it to the police, the person will be charged. So we’ll wait and see. I don’t believe a word of it personally. This is a classic smear campaign against yes voters and the media and establishment are upping the level week by week. We can all guess what it’s leading up to. Labour, and any Scottish politician involved should be ashamed of themselves and struggling to sleep at night.

  185. Robert Kerr says:


    Again without links this is unsubstantiated tittle-tattle.

    If you believe in getting to the truth you must do more than repeat yourself.

    I’m off line now

  186. crisiscult says:

    I’m sure we can all share our memories of media smear. Another one was how Scottish nationalists were responsible for the abuse of Farage outside the pub in Edinburgh. The fact that it wasn’t, and that several were English, didn’t get in the way of the story then or now i.e. the Scot nat thug theme. Russian media has the boogeyman ‘Praviy Sektor’ everywhere in Ukraine, Brit Media has the boogeyman nats and cybernats everywhere.

    On here, we’re largely preaching to the converted i.e. we know how the media system works and why there’s no reason for them to present objective verifiable facts, and there is reason to do the opposite. The trick is to make this more widely known. A lot of ordinary folk, through understandable enough reasons, are letting themselves be conned. When they are alerted to this, they’ll either stick their fingers in their ears and call us paranoid conspiracy theorists, or they’ll investigate further and hopefully be quite angry when they find out the truth. This is why I’d like to see Wings taking a more aggressive approach than the Yes campaign, really pulling no punches on exactly how and why the MSM lies.

  187. Cod says:

    Sure @Robert Kerr, I could just ignore the fact I gave my word to someone and print the correspondence between us, in full, on these pages. But then what sort of person would that make me? Believe or not, it’s up to you.

    Plus, even if I did post the entire correspondence you – or anyone else, for that matter – could claim it was still “unsubstantiated tittle tattle”.

    As I said, I’m just summarizing the relevant parts of what she told me. If you want to verify what I’m saying feel free to email her, or call her, or visit her office, yourself and do so. That’s entirely your prerogative.

  188. Craig says:

    Cod, if you want to have any credibility, post her reply here in full. This matter is more important than your word to her.

    She is a proven liar. No wonder she doesn’t want her reply published.

    What is she trying to hide? After all the whole fabrication has been published in the media.

  189. Truth says:

    I think this is all a bit harsh on Cod.

    Even if they did post the full email, someone would come along and say that was made up too. Therefore there is no value in posting the email, how could we verify it was real?

    It is perfectly reasonable to take Cod at face value and doubt what Cara Hilton has told him/her, but there’s no real value in fighting amongst ourselves.

    For what it’s worth, I don’t doubt Cod, but I do have doubts about Cara Hilton.

  190. Craig says:

    If we want to get to the bottom of this smear, we need to put all the information on record.

    Don’t forget the attack is on ‘Cybernats’, that is EVERYONE who posts a pro-independence online comment, that is including me and you. They are doing their best to vilify us and we must not let them get away with it.

    Whatever she has told Cod will almost certainly be lies, and we need to have it on public record.

    The best thing would be for someone in her area to actually report the matter to the police and provide a copy of this article to the police.

  191. Morag Graham Kerr says:

    The thing is, maybe there were real messages, from a real person, but they’re not being quoted in full and in context because that would reveal a very different picture from what Cara Hilton is trying to paint?

    Bear in mind the abuse Stuart gets. People say flat out he’s a misogynist, a homophobe, a transphobe, and that he blames the Hillsborough victims for their own deaths. If you ask for the evidence you’ll get very very selective quotes which don’t really support the accusations even out of context. If you find the context, a completely different picture emerges.

  192. Marian says:

    It appears then that Project Fear is now guilty of planting stories of “cybernat abuse” that have no evidence to back them up.

    i suppose it is a little more subtle than planting real bombs and then blaming the opposition as Whitehall’s spooks and their proxies have done in the past.

  193. Ken500 says:

    Insignificant politicans bid for some cheap publicity. Cheap tactics from the lying Labour Party. What about the children killed in Iraq? Total hypocrites.

    Works 60 to 70 hours a week? Aye right. What about the kids, there is so much concern about.

    Another troughing liar. The abusive MSP was cleared by the Labour/Unionists, when complaints were made. It was the SNP Scottish Gov that brought the behaviour to account.

  194. Stuart Black says:

    Stick to your guns, Cod. You gave your word, I like to think that means something to us on the Yes side. Leave the lies and backstabbing to the other mob.

    Surprised you’re taking flak for this, if we have no integrity, we have nothing at all.

  195. stehen says:

    I saw through the Hilton story right away. I emailed her asking if she had reported the matter to the police. She got back to me saying that she had. I have informed Hilton that I also, acting as concerned citizen, will contact the police seeking to have them investigate the matter.
    Its all to easy to make allegations to a unionist paper knowing they will run with it but the police are another matter.

  196. Hugh Wallace says:

    Stick to your guns, Cod. You gave your word, I like to think that means something to us on the Yes side. Leave the lies and backstabbing to the other mob.

    Surprised you’re taking flak for this, if we have no integrity, we have nothing at all.

    Ditto. As Truth says at 8:17pm, we can have our doubts about Ms Hilton but let’s not start attacking each other for saying something inconvenient for a particular story line.

  197. Paula Rose says:

    Can we all agree to leave this alone until Cara Hilton has sorted stuff out?

  198. Paula Rose says:

    btw Cara dear we all are part of the future but – Hilton? Not good dear.

  199. Calgacus MacAndrews says:

    Time for a jolly rendition of The Nasty Cybernat:

  200. Roddy McL says:

    Rev: Can you put a Freedon of Information Request (FOI) to the police to see how many reports of “cybernat” crime have been submitted? FOI requests have in the past been very useful for countering bogus claims about crime, e.g.:

  201. Cod says:

    “This matter is more important than your word to her”

    Not to me it isn’t. My word is more important than your opinion, or the opinion of anyone else, for that matter. If your word is so easily broken then what does that say about you @Craig?

    If you want to know whether she did in fact speak to the police, contact them yourself @Craig, instead of simply throwing accusations about. You, and other people doing similarly, are not making our side look any better.

    I, meanwhile, will stick to my guns, because I was brought up to believe that your word is your bond. If you’re willing to discard that for convenience then you might as well not bother counting your word as being worth spit.

    As for her labelling those who oppose her viewpoint, or those who may post abusive messages to her or others, as “cybernats”, using that as a pejorative appellation, I made that very point to her in my last email. She hasn’t addressed that yet, but hopefully she will reply tomorrow.

    Sadly many on both sides seem to be quite happy using derogatory terms – which must make the Westminster mob quietly laugh into their cups of Earl Grey. I’m pretty sure they laughed as the same tactics worked before the Union in 1707 too.

  202. Perez Hilton says:

    What mother and MSP doesn’t report threats to her and her children? After all surely the catching a Cybernat red-handed would be a Better Together vote winner? But no such complaints have been made. Set aside the fact that as a mother her instinct should have been to protect her family this lack of action will seem a tad unusual if not downright strange to those of us with children and probably quite a few without? The point is though that Ms Hilton and her party are no stranger to lies. Her by-election leaflet, which she endorsed, was full of half truths, inaccuracies and, dare I say it, lies!

    Quite recently a colleague of hers alleged vandalism of his constituency office, only to be completely disproved by a Wings Over Scotland investigation. What must happen here, not that I don’t believe her, is an investigation takes place whether she agrees or not. This matter must not be allowed to rest, perhaps she is so shocked, scared that she’s not making the same rational decisions to report this as the rest of us would. I think in the best interests of her children, especially after her apparent lack of concern, I think anyone who wishes to complain should contact the social work department in her area and ask them to take further action. After all a mother whose children have been threatened and who has taken no action to protect her children against those threats should be held to task.

    The Police also need to be contacted because if these allegations are true then the inaction of Miss Hilton should not be allowed to impact on the safety and well-being of her children. Please folks read this and contact the relevant organisations I’ve mentioned. After all how would we sleep at night if these so-called cybernats carried out these alleged threats and we had ignored such warnings as this one?

  203. Craig says:

    Cod, if you think your ‘word’ to a proven liar is more important than Scotland’s independence, so be it.

    Your word is your bond if you are dealing with honourable people. Here we are dealing with people resorting to the worst possible tactics to prevent Scotland’s independence.

    Don’t put the onus on me, you are the one who has made comments without providing the evidence.

    In fact I find it unbelievable that Cara Hilton has responded to your email so promptly. She could only have done that if you were a known supporter of her.

    You can prove me wrong by posting your correspondence with Cara Hilton here.

  204. Craig says:

    Cod, have you given anyone your ‘word’ not to post your own emails to her?

    If you haven’t, you should post them here, without your personal details of course, but clearly showing the times they were sent.

  205. Bill McLean says:

    I can’t remember ever seeing “Cod” on here before – maybe I’m wrong as I don’t get an opportunity to read Wings every day. Someone please enlighten!

  206. Rev. Stuart Campbell says:

    stehen: “I saw through the Hilton story right away. I emailed her asking if she had reported the matter to the police. She got back to me saying that she had.”

    Cod: “she has confirmed that there were abusive messages sent to her on Twitter, which did mention her children – and she knows who sent them – and she has indeed spoken with the police about them”

    Daily Mail: “She decided to ignore the threat to her children, although Labour colleagues have urged her to contact the police.”


  207. Rev. Stuart Campbell says:

    Oh, and folks – if Cod told Cara Hilton that her correspondence wouldn’t be published, that’s an end to it. I won’t have people pressured to break their word.

  208. Taranaich says:

    I can’t remember ever seeing “Cod” on here before – maybe I’m wrong as I don’t get an opportunity to read Wings every day. Someone please enlighten!

    Can’t recall Cod myself, and tentative google search shows nothing. We’ve had a lot of new visitors over the past few weeks, so it’s good for them to pop by the comments!

  209. Bill McLean says:

    Thank you Taranaich and I the Rev is absolutely correct if Cod gave his word no one should encourage that he break it!
    The fact that Cara Hilton is as dishonest as any politician I can think of should not change matters either!
    However, back to Cod, fishy!!!

  210. Cod says:

    No, you haven’t seen me posting on here before. What of it @Bill McLean? I have been on this site every day for months, even using the posts here as a resource for my own online postings. I simply chose yesterday to comment. Do you have a problem with that? Or is it that you think that, oh no, this could be a Unionist spy, or a Better Together plant? Like either of those groups are organised enough to do such a thing! They couldn’t, it would very much appear, organise a piss up in a brewery, much less plants and spies.

    Who are you going to believe – the Daily Mail or me?

    No doubt, some of you are no doubt feverishly working away at a reply now, accusing me of being some kind of false flag Unionist, on a mission to sow discord, blah blah blah. The sad truth, as this entire conversation, and the intimations of dishonesty leveled at me, shows is that there is no need for such operations. It would appear that we are quite capable of doing the job ourselves.

    Below I have screencapped and uploaded my initial message to her, the header from her first response (minus any text), and my initial reply, with the first part of my reply (I’ve deleted the rest of my text). All three come complete with time stamps, for those like @Craig who question my honesty. I’ll expect an apology from you Craig for that, for the intimation I am a liar. Not only do I keep my word, but I also don’t lie. I don’t need to.

    Initial message from me:

    Reply from her:

    Second message from me:

    But you know what @Craig? It’s not an issue worth breaking my word over. And do you know why? Because it’s one such incident in a sea of more important and bigger incidents, from both sides of the debate, and will be of no consequence at all when it comes to the vote. Because it doesn’t, despite the apparent frothing rage of people like you, matter in the slightest. Even if someone was arrested and jailed for threatening Hilton I’d still be voting Yes. Even if Hilton was arrested and jailed for lying, I’d still be voting Yes. Even if Hilton never existed, I’d still be voting Yes. And, I’d imagine, the same is true of most people.

  211. Cod says:

    Oh, and for anyone who wants to know where I stand on the issue of Independence – despite me saying more than once that I am very much on the Yes side – you can check out my G+ profile here:

    Have a look through my posts, or simply type in Cod Codliness #YesScotland in the search bar, or go direct to to find my independence posts.

    And then shut up.

  212. Bill McLean says:

    Mind your manners Cod, and recover a sense of humour! – I made it clear I don’t have time to read Wings every day. And I will repeat I have never seen you post on here before – fact! You are a wee bit too hysterical for my liking – maybe you are quite young. I take what you write as I would if you said it face to face.
    I am not implying anything – it’s you who are jumping to conclusions. I repeat what I said before – Cara Hilton is dishonest (check out schools in Fife) and I have never read you before and I also agreed that you should not have to publish responses from MS Hilton.

  213. crisiscult says:

    can I be self important (if I may be so bold) and encourage people to get angry on a wider level, rather than what Hilton did or didn’t say in a private email that does or does not exist?

    Can we come up with an advertising campaign that doesn’t break any laws but tells people in no uncertain terms that the MSM is laughing at them, taking them for mugs?

  214. Cod says:

    @Bill Mclean – mind my manners? Seriously? You must surely jest. Read my post again – I never said you personally were implying anything. I asked a couple of questions of you, in regard to you pointing out, quite unnecessarily, that you hadn’t see me on here before. Nothing less, nothing more.

    And hysterical? Seriously? I’ve been the the very voice of level headedness in all of my responses. Except perhaps the very last line of my last post. Which was warranted in my opinion. Maybe you’d like to dip into the Daily Mail’s grabbag of terms and refer to my postings as “the desperate attempts of Cod to change opinions”? Lol.

    As to age, our survey says “uh-uh”. Unless you count closer to 50 than 40 as young, in which case I guess you’re right.

    I have a perfectly good sense of humour, but it tends to not be used when I am being accused of being a liar (not by you, read the post again). No big surprise there, I would have thought.

    I’m glad you take what I write as if I said it face to face, that’s how I write it. So there should be no problem of mixed metaphors. I’m pretty straight forward in my writing, so if I say “do you have a problem with that”, or “what of it”, those are actual questions.

  215. Grouse Beater says:

    Cod: I have never seen you post on here before

    All things taken into account, no one should blame the Scots for being paranoid. I recall when I got challenged on Wings. It reminded me of school days when I couldn’t join the in-gang unless and until I allowed them to throw me in the local nettle patch wearing vest and pants only. I resisted.

  216. Bill McLean says:

    Cod – I don’t find manners or the absence of them “jest”.
    Once again – it is simply fact that I have never seen you on here before. You take it upon yourself, as is your right, to question Ms Hilton, she replies asking you not to publish her answers – correct? So why did you post about the exchange at all? Those who have been critical of you have simply transferred their feelings about Ms Hilton to you – unjustifiable but understandable. Ms Hilton has serious form in misleading people in this constituency in the area which concerns most people – the education of their children. Many are angry, many Labour supporters are disillusioned. To appear to be protecting Ms Hilton may be your biggest problem with your critics.

  217. Cod says:

    @Bill McLean, I’m protecting nobody. I just like to get the facts from the horse’s mouth if it’s at all possible, and preferably from both sides of the debate. As anyone involved should want to do. And that also nicely covers why I posted about the exchange. I certainly wasn’t expecting the Spanish Inquisition over it (but then, nobody expects the Spanish Inquisition).

    “It is simply fact that I have never seen you on here before”

    And you mentioned that, why? Not as a way of questioning who I was or whether I was, in fact, playing for the other side, so to speak? Just as something that, you know, you just decided to mention, for no reason at all, because, hey, that’s the sort of thing that people mention with no underlying reason. Of course.

    And no, she replied, I replied back and asked her if she’d mind me posting her replies on here in full, and she said she’d rather I didn’t. And to be honest, given the responses I’ve gotten, I’m quite frankly glad I didn’t, since it would appear that the responses she’d have gotten would quite probably have been a self fulfilling prophecy in terms of abuse.

  218. Morag says:

    The whole thing is a complete non-issue. Nobody has seen the alleged offensive messages, in full, verbatim and in context. Without that, we know nothing.

    We all know how some people can kick up a big fuss about how they’ve been insulted, so-and-so has said something completely indefensible and so on – then when you finally uncover the actual words it turns out they didn’t say that at all to any normal reading of the text. It gets done to Stu all the time.

    Even if we assume something was said, it doesn’t justify believing Cara Hilton’s take on it unless we know WHAT was said. For example, it may be that someone has said something disparaging along the lines of “why do these people in Dunfermline keep electing numpties like Bill Walker and Cara Hilton?” That would be comparing her to Bill Walker, but it’s hardly an accusation of serial, criminal domestic abuse.

    So, since we’re not going to be permitted to see the controversial words, in context, and everyone will have forgotten all about it by the day after tomorrow, can we maybe please stop falling out among ourselves?

  219. Bill McLean says:

    I’m glad you didn’t print her replies too. Still think that your posting all of this stuff is of little value. My point in commenting on not having seen you before was simply that I was bemused that someone I had never seen before turned up with nothing to say! “Facts from both sides of the debate” – did you mean to write that? I wrote to my daughter – she replied. You seem to be missing the point of my post. People post here from “the other side” – bothers me not all. I can only take you at face value – why would I do other? Maybe you are too suspicious and sensitive. I have tried to explain my view of people’s motives. I can do no more!

  220. Bill McLean says:

    Morag – not falling out a all. My view, like yours, is why bother with a non-story. Sure, it has upset some and in my view understandably so. Personally I am completely indifferent to Ms Hilton’s stories, opinions, political views et al – not because I’m not interested but because Ms Hilton is too say the least inconsistent! I just hope that someone gets to the bottom of all this soon.

  221. Morag says:

    There’s no doubt that the meta-story is important though. Unionists claim all sorts of abuse, and attribute this to cybernats, and this is all printed as if it were absolutely factual without one shred of evidence being produced. At the same time actual verbatim screen-shots are produced of elected representatives of unionist parties being extremely offensive and even threatening to nationalists, and this is hand-waved away as “alleged”.

    The bit that shocked me most was Gordon Brewer, on Newsnicht, at the time of the Susan Calman non-event. He stated that the language used to Susan was too offensive for the text to be shown or read out on the BBC. He clearly implied that he had sight of this text and knew what the language was. And yet as we all know, it didn’t exist. It didn’t happen. Even Susan herself didn’t claim to have read it, merely to have been told about it.

    This is the story, and the intricacies of what Cara Hilton is or isn’t claiming are really peripheral.

  222. dennis mclaughlin says:

    quote”And no, she replied, I replied back and asked her if she’d mind me posting her replies on here in full, and she said she’d rather I didn’t. And to be honest, given the responses I’ve gotten, I’m quite frankly glad I didn’t, since it would appear that the responses she’d have gotten would quite probably have been a self fulfilling prophecy in terms of abuse.”……….
    COD you don’t have a very high regard of the other users of this blog ,do you ?.

  223. Tom Platt says:

    Morag is absolutely correct IMO to say
    Unionists claim all sorts of abuse, and attribute this to cybernats, and this is all printed as if it were absolutely factual without one shred of evidence being produced. At the same time actual verbatim screen-shots are produced of elected representatives of unionist parties being extremely offensive and even threatening to nationalists, and this is hand-waved away as “alleged”

    I have just stopped watching BBC Scotland Referendum “news” except for laughs.

    If we don’t have an Enquiry into the news stories manufacturing then I don’t want to pay any more licence fees. There should be a clear difference between news and fiction. At the moment it seems as if their BBC Scotland News Producer might be so confused as to think that (s)he is working in the Drama Section.


  224. Cod says:

    I’d have thought the point of me posting it was utterly obvious. We had the story in the paper, and we all know how much faith should be put in those. It seemed prudent to go to the alleged source of the story. Which I did. And then I posted here roughly what she’d said. Whether people believe her or not, at least we weren’t trying to decipher the claimed facts from a newspaper article. And that was the point. In case you’d forgotten the thrust of the original article here, it was about truth and facts.

    For someone with a ”lack of interest in her stories, opinions or political views” Bill, you seem to have spent an inordinate amount of time arguing with me. It seems to me you’d perhaps have best served your lack of interest by not taking part in the conversation, no?

  225. Cod says:

    @Dennis McLaughlin – just some. The ones pretty much accusing me of lying, and questioning my integrity.

  226. crisiscult says:

    @Tom Platt

    I think the short term solution is to arm people with the skills to be able to reject the information they are being fed. Maybe someone can come up with some leaflets along the lines that Rev went with the subway adverts i.e. telling people who the media really are.

  227. Bill McLean says:

    Cod – I hadn’t considered our exchange of views an argument – it’s not that important to me! I don’t have “an inordinate amount of time” to waste on apparently pointless rhetoric since I have never felt I have to prove I’m right. Once again you miss the point – I was interested in the Ms Hilton story. Finally, and I mean finally, since discussing with you appears to offer you a vehicle to be bad-mannered as evidenced by your current refuge in sarcasm I won’t be bothering any more!

  228. Craig says:

    Cod, you yourself created doubts about your credibility by posting comments without providing evidence.

    Given that Stuart had done research and found no evidence of any abuse, why would anyone believe you or Cara Hilton?

    I don’t need to apologise to you for challenging you to provide evidence.

    The matter is all over the media so if Cara Hilton was telling you the truth, she wouldn’t want you to keep it hidden.

    The whole point of Stuart’s articles is to debunk lies by providing credible evidence.

    “Not only do I keep my word”—

    Get off the moral high ground. Have you NEVER broken your ‘word’ on any matter in your life?

    Scottish independence is worth infinitely more than your ‘word’ to a proven liar and her gang who are trying to thwart independence by vilifying every single person who posts a pro-independence comment online.

    If ‘whistleblowers’ had always kept their ‘word’, Westminster would be even more corrupt than it is now, if that is logically possible that is.

    Do you believe that ‘whistleblowers’ should ALWAYS keep their ‘word’?

  229. Tom Platt says:


    Yes, I agree that such a leaflet would be useful.

    It isn’t just leaflets though is it? A leaflet is particularly useful because it has an enduring quality if the person who accepts it values it.

    I hope that you agree that tweets, text messages, e-mails, bulletin board posts, knocking on doors, meetings, fun and other events, telephone calls, ads in cinemas, newspapers, on radio and TV, word of mouth, billboard ads, flags, badges, stickers, can all have their place too.

  230. crisiscult says:

    @tom platt

    Sure do 🙂

    If I have time, will get on photoshop and try to create ad of the type Rev is looking for. I imagine something in the V for Vendetta style (perhaps the mask), with array of faces (Blair, Cameron …) and newspapers behind them near the top, with text above them saying

    … conspired to corrupt your reason and rob you of your common sense …

  231. Cod says:

    Yep, that figures. Pretty much the reply I expected.

    Let me ignore the rest of your diatribe Craig and answer just one part:

    “Get off the moral high ground. Have you NEVER broken your ‘word’ on any matter in your life?”

    Answer: no.

    And now, hey look, a squirrel….

  232. Craig says:

    “Let me ignore the rest of your diatribe Craig and answer just one part:

    “Get off the moral high ground. Have you NEVER broken your ‘word’ on any matter in your life?”

    Answer: no.”

    I see you don’t have the honesty to answer the other question:

    If ‘whistleblowers’ had always kept their ‘word’, Westminster would be even more corrupt than it is now, if that is logically possible that is.

    Do you believe that ‘whistleblowers’ should ALWAYS keep their ‘word’?

  233. Cod says:

    @Craig, let’s have a wee meander through your comments on this conversation, and make some points regarding them.

    Cod, if you want to have any credibility, post her reply here in full. This matter is more important than your word to her.
    Your judgement on my credibility is irrelevant. And “this matter” is a minor incident in a sea of such incidents, of pretty much zero importance in the overall scheme. My word is more important, to me at least.

    Whatever she has told Cod will almost certainly be lies,
    You seem to be hot on claiming “evidence please” – so provide some to back up this claim. Can you prove she is lying or are you just guessing? Remember, guessing is not evidence.

    Your word is your bond if you are dealing with honourable people.
    My word is my bond regardless of who I am dealing with. How you operate is up to you.

    In fact I find it unbelievable that Cara Hilton has responded to your email so promptly. She could only have done that if you were a known supporter of her.
    Wrong. On both counts. And proven to be wrong. Evidence, you know. Also, an implication that I was lying or anti-independence, based on nothing other than, well, nothing. Your standards for evidence, when it comes to your own accusations, do seem somewhat…lacking.

    If you haven’t, you should post them here, without your personal details of course, but clearly showing the times they were sent.
    Done. Not that I had to. Which is what disproved the first part of your previous statement.

    Get off the moral high ground. Have you NEVER broken your ‘word’ on any matter in your life?
    Answered. Answer was no. How about you? Your word seems to be somewhat more elastic, if your statements regarding mine are anything to go by.

    Scottish independence is worth infinitely more than your ‘word’
    Scottish independence doesn’t hang on my word, so that’s a pointless statement. It also doesn’t hang on the incidents which are the subject of the original post, so it’s a pointless statement on that count too. Generally speaking, it’s a pretty pointless statement all round.

    I see you don’t have the honesty to answer the other question
    There you go again impugning my honesty – you seem to be making a habit of that. Besides which, I told you I was ignoring the rest of your post. But, in any case I wouldn’t bother answering that question because it’s a non sequitur (look it up).

    You should probably just stop now.

  234. Tom says:

    Rather than spending valuable positive energy in taking sides in the unfortunate disagreement that might be breaking out, crisiscult’s attitude is the winning approach IMO:-

    If I have time, will get on photoshop and try to create ad of the type Rev is looking for. I imagine something in the V for Vendetta style (perhaps the mask), with array of faces (Blair, Cameron …) and newspapers behind them near the top, with text above them saying
    “…conspired to corrupt your reason and rob you of your common sense “

    The heavy and detailed discussion that is continuing on this thread could become a distraction. .

    On detail though, my choice of words, if I was involved in the design, of crisiscult’s ad, might be different.
    “Together to rob you of your common sense” might be sufficient and more moderate. If the V is central to the idea “V for victory” (for common sense) might work also.


  235. Cod says:

    Although there is nothing wrong with the idea of a handy reference book of facts for the referendum, I’m not sure it would change that many minds. After all, it’s not like the facts aren’t available for anyone who chooses to look them up.

    Or maybe it just depends on how they are presented – after all, from the independence debates I’ve seen the before and after results of, the majority of them have seen a swing to the Yes amongst undecided and No voters. Perhaps what we really need is a tour of towns and cities with town hall style debates – but without any politicians, because nobody ever believes a word they say, regardless of which side they represent. The people I have personally spoken to who are undecided are mostly just afraid that the spiel they’ve been getting fed by Westminster is true.

    Many people still don’t know about the McCrone report, they don’t know about the fact Scotland has been more productive than almost every other part of the UK, and has paid more into the UK in the last three decades than it has received. They don’t know that the oil is nowhere near running out, and they don’t realise that it’s a fractional part of the Scottish economy.

    I keep pointing people towards sites like this, but, at the end of the day, people who are seeking reassurance respond better to the spoken word, to a person whom they can question and interact with than they do with a website or a factsheet – which would explain the higher success rate of in real life meetings to change minds.

  236. Tom Platt says: the end of the day, people who are seeking reassurance respond better to the spoken word, to a person whom they can question and interact with than they do with a website or a factsheet – which would explain the higher success rate of in real life meetings to change minds.

    I agree with this 100% Cod. It is hard to do it that way, everyone is so busy, but it is certainly the best way. I sometimes wear my “Yes” baseball cap and sometimes my badge when out and about. It encourages people who are interested in talking to approach me.

    All the best

  237. Craig says:

    Cod, it seems, for the second time, you failed to answer this question:

    If ‘whistleblowers’ had always kept their ‘word’, Westminster would be even more corrupt than it is now, if that is logically possible that is.

    Do you believe that ‘whistleblowers’ should ALWAYS keep their ‘word’?

  238. Craig says:

    “Get off the moral high ground. Have you NEVER broken your ‘word’ on any matter in your life?

    Answered. Answer was no.”

    100% a lie.

  239. Cod says:

    @Craig, apparently amongst your other failings is the inability to read. I didn’t fail to answer the question, I chose not to do so because it is a non sequitur, as I already said. If you don’t know what that is, and why it means there is no reason for me to furnish you with a reply then I suggest educating yourself. It’s also a false dichotomy – I’d have added that last time too, but I didn’t want to overload you with things to learn.

    Your second comment doesn’t even deserve a reply.

    You do realise you’re wasting your time, right? You seem to have a bit of a thing for me. I’d say I’m flattered but, really, I’m not. Now go away, wee boy, your mother is calling you in.

  240. Cod says:

    Lol, now that you’ve read that, I imagine you’re frothing away in an indignant rage, proclaiming “I’m not a wee boy, wait until I show him”, etc etc etc.

    Act like you’re not then.

  241. Craig says:

    “I didn’t fail to answer the question, I chose not to do so because it is a non sequitur, as I already said.”

    Despite listing every comment I had made you “chose not to answer” that question because it exposes your total hypocrisy.

    Let me ask you for the 3rd time:

    If ‘whistleblowers’ had always kept their ‘word’, Westminster would be even more corrupt than it is now, if that is logically possible that is.

    Do you believe that ‘whistleblowers’ should ALWAYS keep their ‘word’?

  242. Craig says:

    “Now go away, wee boy, your mother is calling you in.”

    “Lol, now that you’ve read that, I imagine you’re frothing away in an indignant rage, proclaiming “I’m not a wee boy, wait until I show him”, etc etc etc.

    Act like you’re not then.”

    Unlike you, I don’t have a massive ego which puts me before an unique opportunity for Scottish independence.

    What credibility does someone who claims not to have broken a word in whole life have?

    I have proved my point. No more need to respond to you.

  243. Craig says:

    For anyone who is still interested, Brian Macfarlane (20 May, 2014 at 1:35 pm) has given a detailed description of what actually happened.

    His letter has been printed in the press and a link was posted in another WoS article.

    Whom would you believe:

    What Brian says here and in his letter to the press, or,

    What Cara Hilton says to ‘Cod’ in an email not to be disclosed?

  244. John Walsh says:

    This is about shutting us up. They controlled MSM for years but now, we the people have a voice. Just for a wee while ? They will bring in legislation to shut us up. And when we question the propaganda they call it vile abuse. They don’t understand they no longer have control .

Comment - please read this page for comment rules. HTML tags like <i> and <b> are permitted. Use paragraph breaks in long comments. DO NOT SIGN YOUR COMMENTS, either with a name or a slogan. If your comment does not appear immediately, DO NOT REPOST IT. Ignore these rules and I WILL KILL YOU WITH HAMMERS.

↑ Top