The world's most-read Scottish politics website

Wings Over Scotland


The brick wall of bigotry

Posted on July 19, 2012 by

We had a fairly astonishing conversation on Twitter yesterday, after we ran this piece on an ugly incident at a July 12th parade (if that’s not tautology) in Belfast earlier this month. It was such a spectacular exhibition of doublethink, disingenuity and flat-out denial we felt it was worth sharing it with a wider audience.

We think it illustrates fairly neatly why Scotland still has a problem with sectarianism, and probably will for a long time to come. Have a read and judge for yourself.

—————————————————

ORIGINAL TWEET: “Scottish Labour and the Scottish Conservatives fight for the affections of violent bigots: [link]”

AngusCurran: “The footage itself wasn’t filmed in Scotland & people involved have no connection to the Orange Order or Conservative Party”

Wings over Scotland: Er, yes, I know it wasn’t filmed in Scotland. I am aware that Belfast, where I said it happened, is not in Scotland. There was another clue when I said “Given that the events took place in Northern Ireland”. And I made no assertion or suggestion whatsoever that the people filmed were connected to the Conservative Party.

AC: Ok, you are aware the person who filmed it stood as a Sinn Fein Candidate in the last election? Speaking of violent bigots. I don’t like the footage anymore than you, but saying the labour & conservative party are pandering to that is nonsense.

WoS: Er, they absolutely clearly are.

AC: Can you explain how/why the Labour or Conservative party are pandering to Shankill Rd flute bands?

WoS: In the ways I noted in the article. Did you read ANY of it?

AC: Yes, but the bit you fail to recognise is that the people in this video are not connected to the Orange Order.

WoS: Yeah, they really fooled me with that giant fake orange banner. I look stupid now.

AC: Did you bother to find out who the protagonists in this video were?

WoS: I’m pretty sure it’ll turn out they were actually the SNP or something. *rolleyes*

AC: The banner is Orange, but not from the Orange Order. The people in this video are from a completely separate organisation.

WoS: Yes. Completely separate. Of course they are. Yet on the Newsline report the Orange Order accepts responsibility. “The Orange Order says it will investigate the incident, and that it had never intended to stop at the chapel, but there’d been a slight delay in the parade.” Yeah, sounds like no connection there at all.

AC: You’re just showing your ignorance about the finite and complex details of Northern Irish politics.

WoS: Now stop wasting my time with your bigot-apologist pish. You’re clearly, demonstrably wrong, on every single count.

AC: Whose apologizing for them? You said the Orange Order were involved, anyone in the know will tell you they weren’t. Where do the orange order accept responsibility? [posts link in which the Belfast Grand Lodge is quoted as saying “The institution reviews all parades and will take any issues into account in that review.”]

WoS: Jesus Christ, you really don’t read anything at all, do you? In the quote I just gave you, from the BBC Newsline report.

AC: You obviously never read the BBC newsline report above.  Doesn’t mention the Orange order because they weren’t involved.

WoS: Seriously, you’ve lost it. I watched the Newsline report and what I gave you is a precise verbatim quote.

AC: I don’t have too, I know what went on. Unlike you. [No idea what “I don’t have too” (sic) refers to. We didn’t say he had to do anything.]

WoS: And even in that piece [that you’ve linked to], why are the “Belfast County Grand Lodge” taking anything into account if they’re unconnected?

AC: Because everyone locally already knows this, it appears we have to draw you a diagram.

WoS: Why aren’t they saying “We condemn this behaviour, which was by a totally separate organisation and nothing to do with us”?

AC: Well, hangers on to the main parade if caught misbehaving will be banned the next year.

WoS: So you’re saying the BBC were lying [about the Orange Order accepting they were responsible]? That’s your position?

AC: No, I’m saying you are wrong and the individuals involved had nothing to do with the Orange Order.  Do the BBC blame the OO?

WoS: I’m sorry, but I can’t debate with someone who either isn’t bothering to read my replies or doesn’t understand English.

AC: I can read fine, its seems you have difficulty reading BBC newsline reports. If you could, you would realise who was involved. [Angus still appears to be having some trouble differentiating between the BBC News story, which was written, and the BBC Newsline report, which was on television. As expert users will know, you read printed materials, but watch and listen to TV.]

WoS: My ears work fine. I quoted you the TV report.

AC: No you didn’t.

WoS (gobsmacked): Fuck me, REALLY? That’s REALLY your argument? That I’ve just made it up? You imagine that I’d say something like that without being able to back it up? You really are a mentalist.

AC: You said that Scottish politicians are pandering to the OO then posted footage of another organization outside a the church.

WoS: Here you go: [link] Now fuck off. [By this point a little irritated at having wasted time mistakenly treating such a bonehead like a rational, civilised human being.]

AC: I saw this already – now will you please find the BBC Newsline report that explicitly blames the OO?

WoS: “The Orange Order says it will investigate the incident, and that it had never intended to stop at the chapel.” Which word don’t you understand?

AC: Yeah – the Orange Order were not there. They marshall the parade, but they dont check every hanger on. And for the record – my children were baptized in that church. You seem hell bent on somehow associating Tory & Lab with this. Associating Scottish politicians with this is discgraceful, If you had done that to me I would have taken legal advise.  I understand fine, it seems you dont.

WoS: [gives up]

—————————————————

In summary, then: what’s absolutely plainly an Orange Order march, conducted by an Orange Order sub-group marching under an Orange Order banner and which the Orange Order has expressly accepted its responsibility for, has behaved in an openly provocative, offensive and sectarian manner, assaulting a member of the public who tried to record its entirely innocent activities on a public street.

(Hilariously, it subsequently attempted to claim that its stopping and circling directly outside a major Catholic chapel for 20 minutes was sheer coincidence, that it was merely playing a catchy Beach Boys song – for some unexplained reason, perhaps King Billy was a celebrated surfing aficionado or something – and that a few over-exuberant members of the public unfortunately joined in with the wrong words.)

Mr Curran (a Scot living in Belfast), however, indignantly asserts that the incident had nothing whatsoever to do with the Orange Order, and furthermore that the victim is himself a “violent bigot” – presumably on the grounds that he’s a member of Sinn Fein, which we’re not fans of but which the last time we looked was a democratic party of government in Northern Ireland and which formally renounced violence 15 years ago.

Mr Curran attributes the actions of the group to “hangers-on” completely unconnected to the Orange Order, adding that they’ll be banned from next year’s marches if found to have misbehaved. No such suggestion has in fact been made by the Order so far as we’ve seen, and in any event how could it take disciplinary action against people who (supposedly) have absolutely no links to its organisation in the first place?

Mr Curran finally insists that a TV news programme, which we sent him a link to and which explicitly quotes the Orange Order as accepting responsibility (“The Orange Order says… it had never intended to stop at the chapel“), doesn’t exist, and that we’ve made up what is in reality an exact verbatim quote from it.

We’re sure that Angus Curran doesn’t consider himself a vile sectarian bigot. (Does anyone?) We’re sure he genuinely believes that the bandsmen outside St Patrick’s Chapel last Thursday were just devoted Beach Boys fans, who were horrified by their audience’s mistake. We’re sure some of his best friends are Catholics, and so on.

But the unparallelled exercise in cognitive dissonance above shows how far we’ve yet to travel before we have any hope of cutting the sectarian cancer out of Scottish (and Northern Irish) society, and the depths some people will go to to defend the Union. Any lingering hopes of a mature, intelligent, respectful debate seem like a pipe-dream.

Print Friendly

    205 to “The brick wall of bigotry”

    1. Rev. Stuart Campbell says:

      Incidentally, this should go without saying, but please do NOT abuse Mr Curran on Twitter or anywhere else. I used his real Twitter name purely for purposes of verification, so that people can see I haven’t edited or misrepresented any comments. I would be extremely disappointed if it was used in any abusive way. Let’s be the good guys here.

    2. jimmyarab says:

      A wee bit disappointed that you fell for this and let it get to you. And that it did the job of making you think that we’ve really got far to travel in Scotland to fight sectarianism. It’s diverted you onto rocky ground where you will waste your energies.

    3. squidge142 says:

      Hmmm was it a full moon? This is the fourth incidence of  Internet madness that I have heard of today.  I am seriously starting to doubt the sanity of some posters. the ability of people to delude themselves is starting to make me wonder if there is a parallel universe out there which I am not privy too.  Thank goodness its bedtime.
       

    4. Appleby says:

      That person was bizarre. A confused and magical world of his own imagining shared with you via Twitter. It sounded rather sad and desperate in a way, but no doubt his own clique’s sources are feeding these excuses or cover stories out to their own to avoid undermining their beliefs in it. They will choose to believe even the flimsiest of excuses or cover stories (even if somewhere deep down they doubt it) rather than accept fault personally or that their groups were at fault.
       
      This form of bigotry and sectarianism has really barely been touched. There’s been no proper consistent efforts and with the wavering of the Tories and Labour (and even the almost public embracing of the Order by Labour) it is greatly undermining what little efforts have been made.
       
      As such, what should and could have been gone or only a whisper by now will be with us for another generation or two.

    5. charlie says:

      I’m not even sure why you’re losing sleep here, that radge isi n  a minority of a minority, he sounds like a cunt who tried to wind up my (Indian) mate in the pub and on being barred, stormed round saying ‘do you know who I am?’ A few looked up and realised the answer was ‘no’.

      the OO are okay [sarcasm alert], my (catholic) grandfather was shown round the lodge in portadown cause he was marrying a protestant and his name sounded okay (Alex Johnston). He loved telling that story cause the OO chased his mother’s family out of Glasgow.

      Anyhow back to fitba – Aberdeen are shite 😉

      Cheers
      Charlie

    6. Rev. Stuart Campbell says:

      Incidentally, Mr Curran has just tweeted that “Because you are putting my life and those of my wife and children at risk, I’ll be reporting this to the police.” I’m not quite sure how he’s suggesting that I’ve done such a thing.

    7. Appleby says:

      Presumably the voices in his head told him this as I don’t see any problems or threats with his public conversation unless you’ve got super-secret threats on Twitter or death squads after him.

    8. Angus Curran says:

      This is a disgusting representation, firstly my children were baptized in that church, secondly the point I’m making is the men in the video are not members of the Orange Order, they are members of a Flute Band from West Belfast – which is a completely different organisation.
      Mr Campbell however doesnt seem to want to make the distinction and plough on regardless with his own agenda, I dont like the marches or the music or the twelfth and I find this particular incident unsavoury and idiotic, but the whole concept of his arugment is that I was somehow backing the people doing this – I was not, I was pointing out he was blaming one organisation when in fact it was a completely different organisation and as someone who lives in a mainly nationalist area of Belfast Mr Campbell by following his own ignorant agenda has by his actions here endagered the lives of my family by alluding to my supposed support for these people
      By his own admission he has never been to Northern Ireland so is as ignorant to the Real Politik of the situation. One point I will make is that tomorrow morning I will be reporting him to the Police for harassment and taking legal advice.
       

    9. Christian Wright says:

      Rev. Stuart Campbell says:
      July 19, 2012 at 1:20 am

      Incidentally, Mr Curran has just tweeted that “Because you are putting my life and those of my wife and children at risk, I’ll be reporting this to the police.” I’m not quite sure how he’s suggesting that I’ve done such a thing.
       
      Well, with this statement he elevates himself to tinfoil hat wearer first class, and/or to that of political bull$hit artist from whom one would not buy a used car. Either way it destroys any credibility those more charitable than you or I may have yet afforded him.

      From his photograph I’d wager him to be the love child of Bamber Gascoigne (the consequences of such rarefied breeding are a lottery at best) . Here’s his starter for ten: What will be the detail of the complaint, and to whom in “the police” will he make it?
       
      Of course he wont answer this because the charge and the threat, being pulled directly from that orifice wherein the sun don’t shine, have no basis in any fact and are on their face, risible. So why would anyone paint themselves into a corner like this? Surely it is a presenting symptom evincing some pathology?

    10. Erchie says:

      The best thing to happen, with regard to the OO, in glasgow was Leslue Sharp.

      Being from Down South and not so steeped in making allowances for these ignorant bigots (King William, financed by the Pope, awarded a Papal Banner) meant that their thuggery was less operated.

      Living in an area with frequent walks, the trail of filth left by the followers was revolting, yet the OO didn’t steward them, because they are the friends and family of the marchers, not because they are not connected.

      If these crickets were not OO then all the OO has to do s condemn and disown them.

      It used to be said in Glasgow that “You don’t cross the Walk” because the cops would treat your subsequent intimidation and assault by OO members as selfinflicted. Despite Labour’s and the Tories plans, let’s not havethose days again 

    11. R Louis says:

      Rev,

      I think you are literally wasting you time with people such as the person you describe above. 

      Fortunately, N.Ireland is a much better place than it was 20 years ago, but a small minority (and they really are a minority) still cling on to the bigotry and hatred as though Prince William crossed the Boyne only yesterday.  It is a dying minority group, but having said that they are very, very loud.

      In all that has happened, from the attack on the person filming, right through to the nonsense conversations you have had on twitter, and then the frankly silly ‘I’m telling the police’ rubbish, we have what many including myself who know N.Ireland would recognise as quite standard pathetic bull from such people.  This is EXACTLY how such people play their games.

      There are many protestants, catholics and those of no faith whatsoever, in N.Ireland who literally despise the 12th, but they dare not say so in public, as they would be driven out of their homes by loyalist thugs if they did.  On the 12th, the thugs move in and take over.  If you live in a loyalist area and don’t fly the union jack on the 12th, you WILL be a target for at the very least abuse, possibly even direct intimidation.  If your children do not help build the local bonefire (‘all the kids are doing it’) for the night, you and your family will be regarded as ‘Not loyal’.  Many, many people in so-called loyalist areas are intimidated in such ways, and merely do what they need to do, to be seen as ‘part of it’.  Privately, many I have met, want it all to stop for good.

      Many choose to go on holiday during the 12th.

      However, then we come to Scotland.  We need to seriously ask, why in heavens name, do we still allow such blatant open bigotted marches (and I include catholic groups in this) to take place on Scotland’s streets.  It’s 2012, and most people in Scotland and Glasgow couldn’t give a flying ‘you know what’ about ‘King Billy’.

      If anything, this recent episode on your website has drawn attention to the nasty, but very real, underbelly of such groups.  You have shown it for what it is.  It has no place in modern society, and certainly NO PLACE in Scotland.

      That Labour and the Tories see such people as allies, just shows how craven they really are. 

    12. Scott Minto (Aka Sneekyboy) says:

      @Angus Curran

      Angus,

      I saw your exchanges with Rev Stu on twitter yesterday (as did about 3000 of Rev Stu’s followers). While I think that the Rev shouldnt have let you get under his skin, it doesnt change the fact however that you have openly broadcast these views over the web and as such ANYONE can read them.

      Regardless of your protestations, a flute band marching as part of an Orange Order parade and stopping in front of a Catholic chapel to march in circles playing sectarian songs (While Orange Order members hold up their banner next to them) is indeed an issue that the OO need to address and accept responsibility for.

      The OO even agrees with that position and (as noted by Rev Stu) states  “The Orange Order says it will investigate the incident, and that it had never intended to stop at the chapel, but there’d been a slight delay in the parade.”

      Your hanging your coat on a shoogly peg here and trying to imply that Rev Stu is responsible for consequences of YOUR COMMENTS that you openly broadcast is a bit low.

      Personally, just from a taste point of view, I would rather the Rev just ignored you and didnt post this article but in saying that, I still cannot see that he is a fault in doing so since YOU already broadcast these comments.

    13. Juan Solo says:

      Angus, I am a solicitor and I’d suggest you drop it.

      However, if you do proceed with obtaining legal advice elsewhere and your chosen solicitor responds with anything other than a look of absolute bewilderment swiftly followed by an invite to leave their office, I would be interested to hear about it!

      The OO’s attempts to fool anyone into thinking that their ‘celebrations’ are anything other than a gathering of like-minded drunken and bigoted imbeciles are being continually exposed as utter drivel.  

      Video’s like this are all too common, and of course, many people also have their own first hand experience of the trail of destruction left in their wake! 

    14. MajorBloodnok says:

      Personally, with my ‘let’s be civilised here’ hat on, I think that both Rev. Stu and Mr Curran should have walked away from that discussion much much earlier.  You can’t argue with the internet.

      I should add that watching that video yesterday gave me some rather alarming dreams last night…might have been the late night camembert though.

    15. Barbarian says:

      I think it would be best to keep away from squabbles on Twitter. In addition, accusing political parties of trying to gather support from an organisation is a waste of time and not very productive. Remember the SNP candidate who had links to Opus Dei?

      Personally I’d keep clear of NI issues and focus on getting marches banned in Scotland. The marches do not show Scotland in a good light, even if support for them is in a minority.

    16. Christian Wright says:

      Angus Curran: “One point I will make is that tomorrow morning I will be reporting him to the Police for harassment and taking legal advice.”

      No, you wont. Not unless you have the cognitive awareness of a lobotomized fruit fly and the political acumen of a cold mince pie.

      While I thought your defense of the OO and Unionist pols ludicrous, I gave you the benefit of the doubt, and considered it naught but the usual cynical positioning of a Unionist shill who has contempt for the ordinary punter – you know, feed them a line, no matter how ridiculous and some among the Great Unwashed will buy it. 

      But this attempt at intimidation is embarrassingly sophomoric at the very least. Nevertheless, let us take you at your word and ask you to come back to this thread today, with details of the actual complaint you have filed, the police station and the name of the officer who received your complaint, and the name of the solicitor whom you have retained to act on your behalf in pursuit of your complaint.

      Now, I’m betting you will never furnish this information because I think you are just a chancer, rather than clinically certifiable. However, I could be wrong. Your credibility is at stake here, old fruit. Enquiring minds want to know. It’s time for you to put up or shut up. 

      The floor is yours. 

    17. megabreath says:

      I think it is stretching the point somewhat to conclude from this chaps odd equivocation that Scotland has a problem with sectarianism.The actual incidence ot reported sectarian incidents is,per capita,extremely small and compared with incidents of racism extremely small indeed.I,d say racist abuse and violence against women are the REAL “Scotland’s Shame”.Heres a good article,a wee bit dated but fine nonetheless,by Prof Steve Bruce that puts the counter view quite well.
      http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/belief/2011/apr/24/scotland-sectarianism-research-data
      I blame Baron McConnell of Glensnoughtintrough for this conflation of what is certainly a problem in some areas with a generalised “Scotland’s Shame”.I always thought that term applied to the party of which McConnell was once heid duffer.Ahh Irony.Good God-its just hit me.Our country’s shame?the fact that time servers like McConnell are now Barons :-O.Yecoudnaemakeitup……….

    18. Rev. Stuart Campbell says:

      “I think it is stretching the point somewhat to conclude from this chaps odd equivocation that Scotland has a problem with sectarianism.”

      Completely irrespective of Mr Curran’s comments, I think it’s stretching the point somewhat to conclude that Scotland DOESN’T have a problem with sectarianism. That’s not to say that it’s on a scale with that of Ireland’s, nor that it’s massively significant outside the Central Belt (and in particular its western half), but it’s faintly absurd to say it doesn’t exist at all. The point of publishing the piece wasn’t to make any sort of assertions as to the SIZE of the problem, but rather to highlight the difficulty of addressing it when people are prepared to simply baldly state that black is white, and flat-out deny statements which have been made on national broadcast networks and published on countless websites.

    19. Juteman says:

      Luckily, living on the East coast, we don’t have to deal with this annual horror show.
      The MSM in Scotland are scared to lift their heads above the parapet in Glasgow, so full marks to Rev Stu for facing down these bullies head on.
      The distinctions AC is trying to draw between ‘official’ and ‘unofficial’ marchers is laughable.

    20. John Fulton says:

      @AngusCurran sadly shows all the bullyboy traits of the Orange Order Neanderthal organisation who continue to pollute with their bigotry racism sectarianism triumphalism. They’re a relic of a broken empire, trailertrash and have no regard for anyone’s “rights” but their own. Dinosaurs

    21. Cuphook says:

      A quick look at Angus Curran’s twitter feed shows that he has previous. http://twitter.com/Herring1967/status/67731544709660672 In this exchange with Richard Herring he is advised to check his facts. It’s a shame that he never took on board the advice. He also claims to be an atheist so I don’t know what his fixation with churches is. The quote in his profile about truth being a revolutionary act – what can I say?

      I would love to be a fly on the wall when he makes his complaint to the police. I’m sure that they’ve got time in the marching season to deal with this sort of thing. “Just fill out form ID10T and well make it our priority”.

    22. Angus Curran says:

      Okay, where am I defending the Orange Order? And can someone please explain why I am a bigot?

      I merely pointed out (correctly) Mr Campbell the blame lay with a completely separate organisation.

      I have also pointed out my children were baptized in that church or does that seem to be lost on everyone?

      His ignorance of cinema is obvious too with his remark about my profile picture – Just Google Napoleon Dynamite.

    23. Rev. Stuart Campbell says:

      “I have also pointed out my children were baptized in that church or does that seem to be lost on everyone?”

      The significance of it certainly is. Why would any of us care where your children were baptised?

    24. Angus Curran says:

      Its a Catholic Church – maybe the penny will drop soon enough.

    25. Rev. Stuart Campbell says:

      Er, yes, I’m aware it’s a Catholic church, given that I’ve stated that fact numerous times in the two pieces. So far we’ve established that you’re a Scottish Irish Unionist Tory Catholic atheist. What we haven’t established is what any of that has to do with what happened outside St Patrick’s chapel, or why it apparently forces you to keep denying the empirical reality of which organisations were involved.

      Have you been to the police station yet? Clearly I need to make some preparations if I’m going down for a long stretch.

    26. Cuphook says:

      @ Angus Curran

      Give it a rest. You’re just coming over as a pissant.

      Continually bleating that the Rev’s put your children in danger is showing you up to be a fool. You initiated the argument in a public forum.

      And really. Really?  “His  ignorance of cinema”. You, I’m sure, have an eidetic memory when it comes to all the characters of cinema. 

      Grow up.          

    27. douglas clark says:

      I read some of that exchange on Twitter last night.
      I imagine, if I lived in a Nationalist area of Belfast, that I’d be a bit, well, circumspect I suppose, in what I wrote on the internet about Loyalist marches. Sounding off as if one was siding with the Unionists would, indeed, be a dodgy thing to do.
      Unfortunately for Mr Curran it is his own words that are likely to cause him problems.

    28. Angus Curran says:

      You really are a complete moron.

      You have stated above that I am a bigot – are you going to retract that or not?

      Are you also still saying I support ther Orange Order – which I do not, are you going to retract that too?

      FOR THE LAST TIME, The organisation outside the church are from the YCV Flute band on the Shankill Rd NOT the Orange Order. They may have joined the parade with the Orders permission – but they are not members of the Order.

      The YCV Flute band are as different from the Orange Order as the Freemasons, Royal Black Perceptory, Ancient Order of Hibernians, The Knights of Columba, The Gay Pride movement, The Order of St Patrick, The British Legion, Help For Heroes, The Girl Guides, The Boys Brigade, The Scouts or any other organisation that has on occasion paraded through the streets of Belfast. 

      You really are showing what a parochial and ignorant oaf you are.

    29. Cuphook says:

      Trying to take something positive from this episode I would suggest that this is proof that it’s no longer Scotland’s best minds who are leaving the country.

    30. Angus Curran says:

      Well, I didnt call anyone a bigot like he did and I dont support any of the ‘Loyal Orders’ like he insinuated.

      So could someone inform me why letting him know that he got the name of the organisation outside the church 100% incorrect warrants the blog above?

      To me it reads like he is a hysterical buffoon.

    31. R Louis says:

      It was an orange order march.  The group were there as part of the orange order march, with an orange order banner.  To argue they are nothing to do with the orange order, is pseudo intellectual flim-flam.

       

    32. Rev. Stuart Campbell says:

      “You have stated above that I am a bigot. Are you also still saying I support ther Orange Order”

      Sorry, you’re going to have to quote where I stated either of those things.

    33. sneddon says:

      “The YCV Flute band are as different from the Orange Order as the Freemasons, Royal Black Perceptory, Ancient Order of Hibernians, The Knights of Columba, The Gay Pride movement, The Order of St Patrick, The British Legion, Help For Heroes, The Girl Guides, The Boys Brigade, The Scouts or any other organisation ”

      Angus give it up.
      I don’t recall any of these organisations’ marching with the OO.  Except, to my personal knowledge,  Black Lodge/Freemasons who were members of the OO.  Never met members of the scouts etc who were in the OO. Although in theory you could be a gay girl guide who raises funds for injured ex soldiers and be a member of the OO.  Also many bandsmen are members of the OO or at least ‘in tune’ (sorry) with the OO aims and objectives.   I’m writing as a former OO member (many years ago I wised up and rejected the pish I was brought up with) so don’t tell me there is no link between the band and the lodge.

      Walks like a duck, quacks like a duck etc. 

    34. R Louis says:

      Just a wee point.  In the video, we can see several people standing nearby wearing what APPEAR to be blue collarettes, which are different to the regular LOL style.  A quick google check suggests those collarettes are from Newtonards LOL 1973.  Is that correct??

      Maybe the people who were actually there would know better. 

    35. Embradon says:

      Enough already.
      One thing I have learned from all this is the words of the “Famine Song”.
      As a piece of racism, its bile is only surpassed by its ignorance.
      I feel inclined to have a wash after even seeing one of these parades.
      Trying to reason with them is a waste of cyberspace.

    36. MajorBloodnok says:

      Just a quick question – am I right in thinking that if any organisation affiliated to the Orange Order (or otherwise) was marching up and down outside a catholic church in Scotland doing that then an offence would have been committed under the new Sectarian legislation?

    37. Rev. Stuart Campbell says:

      Only if there was also a football match going on there…

    38. Chris says:

      I’d just like to say well done Stu! I don’t agree with others saying an angry twitter/internet exchange with someone you don’t know is a reason to stop talking on the internet/over twitter. That would be like saying one angry argument with a stranger and you should stop talking to anyone and stop trying to meet new people. It’s very frustrating but at least you have a blog where you can vent your well thought out arguments and have other people discuss and comment.
      You called him a mentalist and told him to fuck off, he called you a moron and an ignorant oaf. I can’t see where you called him a bigot or that he supported the orange order. When it gets to name calling the debate is over. You posted the (openly accessible) twitter exchange on your blog along with your thoughts about it, we can now do more research and make up our own minds as to who we agree with and what points are valid.
      So thanks!

    39. Angus Curran says:

      So, in summary.

      According to Stuart Campbell (the village idiot)

      As Scottish Irish Unionist Tory Catholic Atheist (allegedly on the last 5 counts) Hibs fan I am supporting these bandsmen walking round in circles outside the chapel where my children were baptized (for reasons he has not yet given)

      You also allude to our twitter exchange as an exmaple of what ‘We think it illustrates fairly neatly why Scotland still has a problem with sectarianism’ Can you explain why our twitter exchange has sectarian overtones? Or are you suggesting I have a problem with Catholics? If I ever have can you please demonstrate?

      He claims he is banging his head of the wall when in fact he is incorrect on most points he has made and in fact I’m the one banging my head off a wall at Stuart Campbell’s ignorance and stupidity about a place he has (by his own admission) never been

      If not then none of the blog above is not true – ergo he is a completely hysterical cretin

      It may sound like pseudo intellectual flim flam but to people who live here the finite details of these unfortunate parades can make the difference between a quiet night or a night of rioting, harassment or peace, life and death.

      To finish – Stuart Campbell (probably not a reverend given his obvious lack of intellect) got it wrong.

      Stupid is as stupid does……

    40. Angus Curran says:

      If you agree with his blog you are basically saying people who have valid reasons to disagree with him are bigots or am I missing something here?

    41. Rev. Stuart Campbell says:

      You seem to have forgotten to include those quotes. Also, YOU’RE the person who described yourself as an atheist, not me, so I’m not sure the word “allegedly” is appropriate, unless you’re saying you were lying.

    42. David Briggs says:

      Can I just butt in here and say that a few of the protagonists on this blog article don’t give the anti bigotry mob a very pleasant face.

      Actually I find that the anti bigotry mob are the worst bigots of the lot. 

      Some will fight over the most absurd things as is evidenced here. Both sides are convinced they are absolutely right. Will this ridiculous energy sapping twaddle ever cease?

      It strikes me that you won’t be satisfied till civil disorder ensues so you can say ‘I told you so’  

    43. Erchie says:

      MajorBloodnok
       
      If a band was doing this in Glasgow then they would get a grant from the Council (as per the Jubilee celebrations), so I assume it would be OK
       
      Mr Curran. Dearie me, Mr Curran
       
      Here is a simple question for you
      Do you support the behaviour of the individuals playing the famine song outside a Catholic Church as shown in this video?
      Never mind what their antecedents or affiliations, do you support this behaviour?

    44. Rev. Stuart Campbell says:

      “Actually I find that the anti bigotry mob are the worst bigots of the lot. “

      Feel free to tell us which comments have led you to that seemingly odd conclusion.

    45. Bugger (the Panda) says:

      That would be some 12th of July Parade in Belfast shoud
       
      “the Orange Order as the Freemasons, Royal Black Perceptory, Ancient Order of Hibernians, The Knights of Columba, The Gay Pride movement, The Order of St Patrick, The British Legion, Help For Heroes, The Girl Guides, The Boys Brigade, The Scouts or any other organisation that has on occasion paraded through the streets of Belfast”

      join in and have a jig in front of an RC Church whilst giving the Famine Song big laldy.

    46. MajorBloodnok says:

      @Bugger (the Panda)

      If you can get Ruth Davidson and Johann Lamont to do the choreography and/or make the tea, I’m in.

    47. Angus Curran says:

      I dont support any of that behaviour – Stuart Campbell has implied that I do.

      And yes – the anti-bigot mob here have basically done a character assasination of me for pointing out there own ignorance of what ACTUALLY happened here.

      So please – can Stuart Campbell now tell me how my responses above and on twitter alludes to his earlier assumption that this ‘illustrates fairly neatly why Scotland still has a problem with sectarianism’?

      How dare he make out that I contribute to the problem of sectarianism – This is why you STUART CAMPBELL are worse than the bigots you claim to dislike.

    48. sneddon says:

      “If you can get Ruth Davdison and Johann Lamont to do the choreography and/or make the tea, I’m in.”

      ‘Oh! the horror, the humanity’ 
       

    49. Sam says:

      You write a strange paragraph, Angus Curran. It’s like reading dialogue from a sci-fi film where the aliens refer to all humans by their full name. Or possibly that irritating elf from Harry Potter, Angus Curran.   

      From an SEO perspective.  The fact that you keep mentioning his full name, Angus Curran, is probably helping the site though. 

    50. Bugger (the Panda) says:

      @MajorBloodnok and @sneddon
       
      Bags I the video  rights.

    51. Erchie says:

      Now we have a slight movement forward Mr Curran
       
      So you do not support the activities of that bunch of people.
       
      Now, next question for you. If they are nothing to do with the Orange Order, why were the formed up with the Order, sharing the route, playing a song favoured by the Orange Order and its disgraceful football offshoots and why did the Orange Order stewards not politely request that they go away and observe respectful behaviour?

    52. Angus Curran says:

      Stuart Campbell writes an even stranger paragraph – he has said some pretty innocuous tweets of mine ‘illustrates fairly neatly why Scotland still has a problem with sectarianism’ 

      Yet he gives no proof, examples or accurate representation to back up this incredibly broad assumption.

      In short he is prejudiced and a coward.

    53. Erchie says:

      Mr Curran
       
      The chap filming it who was assaulted?
       
      Why were HIS political leanings or activities of any relevance?

      Why did you bring up that ad hominem attack?
       

    54. Angus Curran says:

      I have no idea – you’ll have to ask the Orange Order Erchie, protocol at parades is not one of my strongpoints.

    55. Erchie says:

      No Mr Curran, you raised that
       
      AC: Ok, you are aware the person who filmed it stood as a Sinn Fein Candidate in the last election?”


      Why was this information relevant?

      Did he force this group to sing this anti-Irish Catholic song in front of a Catholic Church?
      Was his assault legitimate because of his politics?
      Was the information rendered illegitimate because of his politics?
      Why did you feel it necessary to raise this?

    56. Angus Curran says:

      Erchie,

      The details of the attack were in the paper a few days later, also I’m told republicans and loyalists over here routinely film each other for the purposes of furthering there own politics, intimidating people and collecting ‘intelligence’.

      Stuart Campbell doesnt know the ‘Real Politik’ here as he has never been.

    57. Erchie says:

      Never mind how brain dead it is to play a song calling for Irish Catholics to return to Ireland IN IRELAND!

    58. Erchie says:

      Answer the question

      Why was it relevant?

    59. Angus Curran says:

      The protagonists play the victim when there is any trouble – real victims are almost never heard.

    60. Angus Curran says:

      Yeap – brain dead is one word for it.

      At the moment I’m looking for a retraction from Stuart Campbell from the insinuation that I am part of the wider sectarian problem when clearly I am not.

    61. Erchie says:

      Back to the first question
       
      If you claim that the Orange Order and this organisation were separate
       
      But you don’t know why the Orange Order did not step in to stop this disgraceful behaviour
       
      Then really you don’t know much about the situation at all do you?
       
      As far as you can show, or indeed know, this group was acting as part of the Orange Walk and with full blessing of the Order.
       
      Making your tweets and responses here a waste of time
       
      You owe Mr Campbell an apology

    62. Rev. Stuart Campbell says:

      “At the moment I’m looking for a retraction from Stuart Campbell from the insinuation that I am part of the wider sectarian problem when clearly I am not.”

      You’re going to have a long wait. Have you called the police yet?

    63. Barbarian says:

      @Panda

      Re the video, already on sale in the Barras…………beside the “two for a pound sports socks”

    64. Bugger (the Panda) says:

      Ruthie and Johann (may)pole dancing to the beat of a drum.
       
      Mind bleach time

    65. Angus Curran says:

      So you are still saying that my tweets Quote ‘illustrates fairly neatly why Scotland still has a problem with sectarianism’?

      Dodging every question wont work Stuart. You’ve been caught out playing at Journalism and you’ve harassed an innocent individual.

      You dont need to call them, there is an online form for harassment now.

    66. Angus Curran says:

      I dont speak for the Orange Order Eirchie, I dont think they would appreciate it. You should contact them yourself and see.

      And what do I owe an apology for? Considering I’ve been called a bigot and part of the sectarianism problem in Scotland.

    67. Rev. Stuart Campbell says:

      Still waiting for any quote where I called you a bigot.

    68. Angus Curran says:

      This is slander you imbicile.

      We’re sure that Angus Curran doesn’t consider himself a vile sectarian bigot. (Does anyone?) We’re sure he genuinely believes that the bandsmen outside St Patrick’s Chapel last Thursday were just devoted Beach Boys fans, who were horrified by their audience’s mistake. We’re sure some of his best friends are Catholics, and so on

      So you are saying the above statement doesnt collate to me supposedly being bigoted.

      Sure some of my best friends are Catholics? Your a disgusting little troll

    69. Angus Curran says:

      Also the name of the article – the brick wall of bigotry?? Allegedly about me defending bandsmen playing around a catholic church.

      Your disgusting.

    70. daneel says:

      It’d be libel, actually.

    71. R Louis says:

      I think the comments here, prove the truth of the headline of this article.

      ‘The brick wall of bigotry’.

      Methinks the headline hit the nail very squarely on the head.   Further discussion is pointless.

    72. Matt says:

      Angus, can you tell us who you were defending in your original twitter conversation with Rev Stu? You got very defensive, and have got quite wound up about this discussion (as has Stu), so it seems to me you must have been defending someone.

      It did appear that you were defending the Orange Order, but you tell us you were not. We will take you at your word on that, but there is still some confusion here as to your motivation in all of this.

      Any light you could shed on this issue would be greatly appreciated.

    73. Rev. Stuart Campbell says:

      “So you are saying the above statement doesnt collate to me supposedly being bigoted.”

      Yes. Yes I am. Partly because I have no idea what “collates to” is supposed to mean, but mostly because the purpose of the sentence is to imply that you’re an idiot, not a bigot.

      Are you saying that in fact NONE of your best friends are Catholics? Because that’d be a bit, y’know, bigoted.

    74. Angus Curran says:

      Really – how am I bigoted? R louis? Explain what I did that was bigoted?

    75. Angus Curran says:

      Really? Calling someone an idiot using the word bigot.

      I dont know the particular denomination of my friends because its irrelevant. Its people like you who obsess with such trifling matters as religion that I consider ‘bigoted’

      Sectarianism in Scotland came about through ignorance, which you have in abundance.

    76. Rev. Stuart Campbell says:

      I’m obsessed with religion? I’m not the one marching up and down a street with a flute playing offensive sectarian songs. And you asked me what specific church I belonged to, not the other way round. Why do you care?

    77. Angus Curran says:

      Matt,

      My motivation in all this was to point out that the people outside the church were members of a flute band NOT the orange order.

      Having lived in NI for 14 years you get ignorant comment from people like Stuart all the time.

      I’m defending my reputation from a pugnacious litlle oaf like Stuart Campbell – I have been called many things, but never bigoted or sectarian.

    78. Erchie says:

      Mr Curran
      So you don’t SPEAK for the Orange Order, but you are so intimate with them, so advised of their policies that you can state categorically with such certainty that anyone contradicting you is in serious error, that the Famine Song playing buffoons were in no way, shape form or manner connected to, approved of or even known to the sweet innocents of the Orange Order
       
      That’s a hell of a stretch to believe

    79. Rev. Stuart Campbell says:

      “My motivation in all this was to point out that the people outside the church were members of a flute band NOT the orange order.”

      No, your motivation was to point out that, and I’ll quote you directly, the “people involved have no connection to the Orange Order”, which isn’t the same thing at all. Especially given that they were on an Orange walk, marching behind an Orange banner and the Order accepted that it was responsible for them.

    80. Angus Curran says:

      I asked because I’m going to report you to the relevant church authorities.

      I dont march up and down the street playing offensive songs either, but you alluded that I possibly supported this or defended it.

    81. Rev. Stuart Campbell says:

      “I’m defending my reputation from a pugnacious litlle oaf like Stuart Campbell”

      A pugnacious little oaf LIKE me? Heavens, shouldn’t you be doing it on THEIR blog, then, rather than mine?

      “I asked because I’m going to report you to the relevant church authorities.”

      Before or after you call the police?

    82. Angus Curran says:

      Those are your words Erchie, but if you look through my previous posts here you will realise I am not defending the Orange Order at all – if anything I show a benign hostility towards them

      I’ve been called all the names under the sun by some of them and I’m a big enough boy to take it, what I wont take though is being called a bigot.

    83. Matt says:

      @Angus,
       
      So you don’t like the Orange Order, in fact you have “a benign hostility toward them”. Fair enough, we get that. Nonetheless you were still so keen on making it clear that there is “no connection” between the Orange Order and a group who have been filmed displaying despicable behaviour, that you have got yourself involved in a huge argument on a public forum, potentially (again, I will take you at your word) endangering the lives of your children. I’m sorry, but I still don’t understand WHY?

    84. Angus Curran says:

      Sorry Matt, I didnt post my name here – Stuart Campbell did, I believe he wrote the blog entry and put my name in it publicly. I wont allow that.

      People can read my tweets – fine, people taking them and putting them on a blog to incorrectly hint that I’m bigoted is repugnant.

      He started this whole process, I have to defend myself against the allegations that I’m sectarian or bigoted.

    85. douglas clark says:

      Matt @ 5:12pm,
       
      I don’t understand it either.

    86. Rev. Stuart Campbell says:

      I’m having trouble figuring out what “benign hostility” is. Isn’t that a bit like a “gay heterosexual”?

    87. Erchie says:

      Angus Curran
      Whatever else you are, you are a buffoon. 
       
      I think that is the long and short  of it

    88. Matt says:

      @Angus,
       
      You made the comments that you did on a public forum. Rev Stu was every bit as much a part of that public exchange as you were, and he is well within his rights to publish that (already public) conversation in full on his blog. You say he called you a bigot. I believe that claim is questionable, however even if he did, he is allowed to do so. If he wanted to he could have called you a bigot on twitter, where you had your exchange. Why is it different if he does it on his blog?
       
      You say you have come here to defend yourself against the suggestion that you are bigoted, and I completely understand that. I would do the same, however as a neutral observer I would have to say that you are not doing a very good job. I am still none the wiser as to why you were so intent on pointing out the distinction between the Orange Order and the flute band in the video.

      The explanation that you are yourself a member of the Orange Order (which I think is what Stu assumed was the case) would make perfect sense, but you say that is not the case. Fair enough, as I said, I will take you at your word on that. But if you wish to properly convince the people who are reading this, then you are going to have to give a feasible explanation of why you made the comments you did, that does not involve you being a member/supporter/sympathiser of the Orange Order.

      Such an explanation is possible. It could be that you are a supporter of either the Labour or Conservative party, and you objected to Stu portraying them as supportive of the actions of the flute band. If that is the case, then please say so, and this discussion can move onto more reasonable (and less personal) ground – namely, the ethics of political parties showing support for the Orange Order.

    89. Rev. Stuart Campbell says:

      For the record, I never assumed Mr Curran to be a member of the Orange Order.

    90. Angus Curran says:

      Matt,

      If you dont think getting the facts straight is important then what is?

      The fact is he made a connection between the Conservative & Labour party saying they pandered to the Orange Order than used this video of a Loyalist flute band outside a Catholic Church to suggest they are one and the same & stand for this – neither the Labour or Conservative party do.

      Its and insiduous peace of hackery – and rather disgraceful that he is calling my name into question for putting him straight about what actually happened and who the protagonists are.

      I was within my rights to report this as well.

    91. Rev. Stuart Campbell says:

      “The fact is he made a connection between the Conservative & Labour party saying they pandered to the Orange Order”

      Which they clearly do. Go and read either of the two recent Tory Hoose pieces for proof, or any of countless newspaper accounts of Gordon Matheson’s address to the Orange Order before the local elections in May.

      ” than used this video of a Loyalist flute band outside a Catholic Church to suggest they are one and the same”

      To suggest that WHO are one and the same? A Loyalist flute band and the Catholic Church? Half the problem here is that you’re pathologically incapable of putting together a coherent sentence in English (“benign hostility”?), so it’s extremely difficult to work out what you’re actually trying to say, even once we’ve made allowances for your abominable grammar, spelling and use of entirely the wrong words to refer to things.

      “he is calling my name into question for putting him straight about what actually happened”

      We can all see “what actually happened” for ourselves. Someone filmed it. We don’t need you interpreting it for us.

      “I was within my rights to report this as well.”

      Within what rights to report what to whom, exactly?

      I think we’d all still quite like to know what it ACTUALLY is you were originally so upset about. You claim to be an atheist and to have no partiality in sectarian matters (though for some reason you felt it important to repeatedly tell us your children were baptised in a Catholic chapel, despite nobody asking), so why do you apparently care so much about the finer details of the internal structures of the belligerent-Protestant movement?

    92. Erchie says:

      Mr Curran

      Gordon Matheson of the labour Party courted the Orange Order before the Scottish local elections.

      A Tory Activist on the Tories’ Scottish blog has advocated doing the same.

      These are not opinions, they are facts. 

    93. DG says:

      “Report you to the church” might just be the least scary threat in recorded history.

    94. Rev. Stuart Campbell says:

      Well, to be fair it would be quite a big deal during the Spanish Inquisition, which is roughly the sort of era the mindset of your average sectarian bigot still exists in.

    95. Angus Curran says:

      Average sectarian bigot? who is?

    96. James Morton says:

      Guys…seriously, stop feeding the troll

    97. Angus Curran says:

      You’ve never been to Northern Ireland, you never lived here and all you know is what you see on TV.  Are you going to lecture me on the finer points of Irish society all of a sudden? I’ve been here for 15 years, I think after that time I know the better than you the differnce in the people who come together to walk the streets, dont you?
      And the reason for my alluding to my families membership of said church is simple, if you knew anything you would know it would proclude my support for any loyal order
      Your just a coward who hides behind a blog
       

    98. Rev. Stuart Campbell says:

      Interesting definition of “hide”.

    99. Adam Davidson says:

      I’m going for my tea, but will be back shortly. Don’t stop, this is good stuff. it is always amusing seeing someone trying to defend the indefensible

    100. Dodgardiner says:

      This is almost as good as the surreal arguments people get into with Terry Kelly,  he’s still ahead in my book though (so far) for outright lunacy. 

    101. William T says:

      So the Tories and Labour party wish to develop an existing relationship with the OO …  Not exactly something  new.  I was at an event a couple of years ago for the Pub owners in Edinburgh and before the event we were expected to toast the Queen, unsurprisingly a lot of the crowd had there Masonic garb on show.

      Can we go back to discussing Rangers/Servco …  It was a lot less intense.

      P.S just because I mentioned Rangers/Servco in this post does not mean I am linking the two, please don’t report me to the Police or Church 😉

    102. Angus Curran says:

      What are you saying I’m defending here Adam?

    103. William T says:

      With regards to this being a Scottish problem …  I agree.  It is not as obvious an issue in the East but there were marches through Edinburgh. I distinctly remember a march going up Leith walk when I was a teenager (not too long ago).

    104. Matt says:

      From your response it would appear that you were in fact defending a political party, but are for some reason reluctant to admit it. However, let’s continue to trust your word and say that you were simply acting from a desire to “get the facts straight”. Since the facts in question are trivial if you don’t care about the political aspect, we will refer to this as “pedantry” henceforth.

      I understand pedantry. I am a massive pedant myself, so let’s imagine a hypothetical:

      I live near a Mosque, and I don’t like the BNP. Let’s say that one day I saw a group of racists outside that Mosque, chanting racist slurs and inviting the Muslims inside to “go home”. Let’s imagine that – somehow – I know for a fact that they are not in any way affiliated with the BNP. And let’s imagine that a video of the incident ends up on the internet along with the suggestion that the BNP were responsible.

      In this scenario I wouldn’t even dream of trying to set the record straight, because I don’t like the BNP, and anything that makes them look bad is fine with me. Furthermore, I am well aware that any attempt by me to set the facts straight would make me look like a BNP supporter.

      Are you really so much more of a pedant than me that you would ignore such considerations? I don’t think so.

      If you do not tell us your real agenda then you are the real coward here. So which are you? Labour or Tory? Although, it doesn’t really matter – these days, they’re both the same.

    105. Cuphook says:

      I can’t believe this is still going on. 

      A quick look at Tweet Tunnel shows that Mr Curran is “a hebridean lapsed Presbyterian atheist” and he asserts here that he had his children baptised in the Catholic chapel. Atheism can do without this sort of support. To be fair to him he has previously tweeted his dismay at sectarianism in football. 

       
      I can only assume that this argument started because Mr Curran is a know-it-all who likes the sound of his own voice so much that he doesn’t know when to zip it.     

    106. pictishbeastie says:

      Unfortunately I had the misfortune to witness a bunch of obnoxious numpties strutting down the street outside my flat in their ridiculous fancy dress playing their flutes and banging their drums like daft wee laddies. One of the bass drums had “Bridgeton” on it. I can only assume that they’d claim they were following a “traditional route” Trouble is that,in spite of being born and bred here,I can’t actually figure out where in Perth Bridgeton actually is? The sooner we ban these thugs from our streets the happier a place Scotland will be! SAOR ALBA!

    107. Cuphook says:

      I love thess tweets from Mr Curran on Dec 19 2011

      @malcolmx_1 starting arguments with perfect strangers online, you are sooo smart and intellectual, a veritable stalker with issues.

      @malcolmx_1 Whats embarassing is that you keep replying, even though you have nothing remotely original or interesting to say.
        

    108. Barbarian says:

      No one expects the Spanish Inquisition.

      Rev, expect the unexpected……….mwhahahaha…

      (time for my medication methinks)

    109. Angus Curran says:

      Matt,
      I’m not defending any party, I’ve lived in Belfast long enough to know most of these incidents are staged to annoy the opposing ‘tribes’ The man on the street knows this.
      The analogy about the BNP & Mosques are about 50% correct, however the difference is there is race & immigration is not the elephant in the room. Outwith the largely tolerant population of Northern Ireland the issue here is sectarianism mixed with constitutional politics, one side believes itself to be Irish and nothing else the other believes itself to be British and nothing else and its been going on for 3-400 years. Imagine 2 sets of teenagers winding each other up, some in there early teens who are purile and go out of there way to wind the opposing teenagers up, whereas the older wiser teens have a bit more savvy and do it in a smarter but still idiotic way. Thats the marching season in a nutshell.
      And yes cuphook, I am a smartarse.
       
       
       

    110. Angus Curran says:

      Going through my tweets from 2011 cuphook? you have issues.

    111. Appleby says:

      Angus, even if you aren’t a bigot you are still a bloody idiot and have only gone the extra mile to prove it.
       
      I can’t believe that this numpty is still arguing himself into a hole with his pettit lip for company. You’d think he’d have had a skelp around the ear from the better half by now and told to behave himself and stop being daft and pedantic on the internet. The sad thing is that Angus probably doesn’t even realise how bad he is making himself look in the process. Some people need to learn when it is time to stop.

    112. R Louis says:

      William T,

      quote “Can we go back to discussing Rangers/Servco …  It was a lot less intense.”

      I heartily agree.   

    113. Matt says:

      Angus,
       
      Not quite sure why you started comparing the difference between BNP/Islamic tensions and Protestant/Catholic tensions. My analogy had nothing to do with that. It was simply a device to illustrate why I cannot understand why you have acted in the way that you did, assuming that the things you say are true. Excellent segue though, changed the subject completely. Bravo!

    114. YesYesYes says:

      This is the funniest thread I’ve read in ages. The Norwegian Blue is dead, as in kaput, gone to a better place, met his maker, popped his clogs etc:
       
      http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4vuW6tQ0218

    115. Angus Curran says:

      Yes, lets talk football.

    116. YesYesYes says:

      Funnier by the minute.

    117. Cuphook says:

      @ Angus Curran

      I wouldn’t say I’ve got issues. I’m just fascinated by idiocy and the internet allows me to indulge in my hobby from the comfort  of a chair. 

      I read some of your tweets as you seem incapable of explaining yourself and your reasons for starting this argument. In your tweets you claim to have a 1st in law and a Masters in engineering. If the former is true then I don’t know what your earlier legal threats were about as surely you must have known that you didn’t have a leg to stand on.

    118. cynicalHighlander says:

      He could of made them legs here http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AdcDOa_FYRk

    119. Willie Zwigerland says:

      I see everything I’ve been told about the cyber-nats is true 🙁

    120. Appleby says:

      A cyber-nat turned me into a newt!
       
      I got better though…

    121. douglas clark says:

      Well, I’ve read all of this, which probably puts me in the ‘Cuphook’ camp.

      I have no clearer idea why an avowed Scot, atheist, legal eagle, family man, engineer and all round smart arse is so concerned about the minutae of who did what. (These are his own ways of describing himself, allegedly)

      I recall being somewhat surprised at some documentary or other about flute bands. I did not know that they were sub-contractors to parades in Scotland. Presumeably that is also the same in Northern Ireland?

      Does it make an iota of difference?

      Well, not to me. Nor, apparently to the Orange Order in Belfast. You are, after all, responsible for the behaviour of their sub-contractors.

      I have no idea why someone who appears to stand against this entire institution feels it incumbent on themselves to argue such a ridiculous case –  which is the outstanding point in this whole farrago.

      Matt deserves a straightforward answer to the question he put at 7:53pm, not a convenient deflection.

      Otherwise, Angus Curran will remain a mystery wrapped up in an enigma. Or someone who has now had his fifteen minutes of fame.

      I was – perhaps naively – somewhat concerned about his families exposure through all of this. It now appears that, as the ‘game’ is afoot, Mr Curran himself is no longer concerned about that.

      He just keeps replying and responding. So, the fear of threats has now lifted has it? I certainly hope so.

      Because threats of Police intervention into this spat are now reduced to reporting Stu to the church!

      Without a whole lot of questions being answered, am I alone is suspecting that this is just a wind up?
       

    122. Adam Davidson says:

      I think everyone has gone for a wee lie down. A few final words. if you are ever in the unfortunate position of seeing bigotry in action, remember to stop them and ask the precise organisation they belong to. We can’t risk offending influential organisations like the Shankhill Flute band or the Orange Order by mixing them up. Or more to the point we need to clarify which organisation is which, we can’t have Tories or Labour supporting the wrong organisation.

    123. Juteman says:

      Nobody has answered the important question.
      Is getting beat up from an official flute band more painful than a hiding from an unofficial one?

    124. Rev. Stuart Campbell says:

      “I see everything I’ve been told about the cyber-nats is true”

      Such as?

    125. douglas clark says:

      Adam Davidson / Juteman,

      On these wise words, I’m off to bed.

      Though Willie Wonka will give someone hours of amusement 🙁

      Not.

    126. Angus Curran says:

      Yes, lie down required, I’ve spent enough time answering questions and answered most points here. We are all adults and I dont think I need to explain why it was wrong what happened, I do think however there is a need to determine the protagonists of this sorry act, the actus reus and mens rea I’m sure are plain for all to see.
      On a sadder note, we are 2 days away from the 40th annivesary of Bloody friday, the BBC did a creditable documentary on it tonight which I watched,(I would urge anyone to catch it on iplayer) http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/b01kxsxn/Bloody_Friday/
      If you have a quick look on wikipedia page you can get the heads up, there is a photograph a third of the way down the page of a fireman shoveling the remains of a victim into a plastic bag I wonder if that will elicit the same gusto of replies?
      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bloody_Friday_%281972%29
      Puts the petulant and feverish responses to the idiotic flute band into perspective dont you think?
       

    127. Angus Curran says:

      On that little note about perspective – night all.

    128. Cuphook says:

      @ douglas clark

      Welcome to my camp. I wouldn’t worry too much about Mr Curran or his family. He’s just a troll seeking attention and not shy of making stuff up to try and win an argument.

      The surprising thing is that he appears to have his head firmly stuck up his own arse yet has no idea where all the shit’s coming from.

    129. Angus Curran says:

      I didnt ask for my name to be put on here Cuphook and I havent made anything up to win this argument, I will reply and respond as required. I wont let Stuart Campbell accuse me of bigotry or sectarianism for no other reason that showing him to be wholly ignorant of the facts.
      He has never even been to Northern Ireland so how would he know what goes on here from a 2 minute video clip? 
      Maybe he’ll grow a set an come over here to see for himself instead.
      Although I doubt it somehow.

    130. Holebender says:

      I have read this whole exchange with alternating feelings of bemusement and amusement. It all has a somewhat familiar ring… and then I remembered this; http://imgs.xkcd.com/comics/duty_calls.png
       
      I suspect Mr. Curran has suffered many a sleepless night correcting all the mistakes on the internet.

    131. Matt says:

      You didn’t ask for your name* to be on this blog, but you did attack the owner of the blog on a public forum, which essentially means that you are happy for the blog’s readers to see your name and the comments you were making, and surely you also realised that there was a possibility the person you were attacking might publicly call you some names, deserved or otherwise. How then can you complain that your comments have been published on this blog, and that its author has called you some names?
       
      I have only once ever stopped in Northern Ireland. I didn’t see any marches so I won’t claim any knowledge of what goes on there, but I do have one interesting anecdote. It was the day after Scotland played Northern Ireland in Dublin. In the morning my brother bought a copy of a Dublin newspaper (I forget its name) which reported scenes of violence, vandalism and sectarian songs from the Northern Irish fans. (Incidentally we ourselves witnessed some of these scenes the previous night) Then in Northern Ireland we stopped for petrol and one of our travel companions bought a copy of a Belfast paper, which reported on the “exemplary” behaviour of the Northern Irish fans. It’s a fucked up island, right enough. Perhaps that’s why they don’t go home?
       
      *If indeed that is your real name. I reckon there’s a pretty good chance that Angus Curran is not a real person at all but just the made-up name of an internet troll.

    132. redcliffe62 says:

      I do think if the BNP had stopped outside a mosque and played an anti islamic song it would have been stopped, or a multicultural fight would have occurred.
      It has to be the same rules for everyone or civil unrest will be the ongoing issue that incitement and antagonistic behaviour clearly still is for some people. 
      Not sure if Mr Curran said the wrong thing. I am sure he disagrees with what is in the video as well, so perhaps his choice of words could have been better is a nicer way of putting it.

    133. Christian Wright says:

      Angus Curran: “One point I will make is that tomorrow morning I will be reporting him to the Police for harassment and taking legal advice.”

      Another day has passed, and still no word from you on whether or not you have acted upon your threat.  Should we take it that you have not done so, and that indeed you never had any intention of doing so? That is to say, that when you issued this warning, you were simply lying your a$$ off? 

      The reason I’m pressing the point is because it is something unambiguous and indeed, concrete, upon which we can reasonably draw conclusions about your character and in particular, your veracity.

      In a previous post in this thread I offered that were you to act on your threat, it would indicate that you were a self-destructive loon, and that if you did not follow through on the threat, that you were simply one more carnival-barking Unionist shill.

      The good news is that your inaction serves to point to you being just another smoke-and-mirrors colonial chancer whose word means nothing, rather than a deranged unfortunate in need of custodial care. 

      Congratulations.

       

    134. MajorBloodnok says:

      @douglas clark re. Adam Davidson/Juteman
      Spot on.

      Hold the phone, isn’t there a Scottish MP with the surname Curran?  No connection I’m sure.

    135. Angus Curran says:

      Christian, seems to me your the bigot – have a problem with people who arent with the SNP do you?

      Matt, I’m Scottish, not Irish – and I didnt attack Stuart Campbell, I merely pointed out he blamed the wrong organisation outside that church – he was the one who alleged I’m part of the sectarian problem, when clearly I am not.

    136. Rev. Stuart Campbell says:

      “I’ve spent enough time answering questions and answered most points here.”

      LOLZ. You’ve dodged every single meaningful question put to you, answering only ones that nobody had asked.

    137. Juteman says:

      Seriously, AC. Go back and read your twitter exchange, and try to read it as an outsider.

    138. Angus Curran says:

      Really – what questions?

    139. Angus Curran says:

      You insinuated I’m sectarian Stuart, can you explain how? (simple question for you to answer there)

    140. Rev. Stuart Campbell says:

      “You insinuated I’m sectarian”

      No I didn’t. Still, I suppose at least we’ve moved to “insinuated” now, a downgrade from your previous insistence that I’d just flat-out said it, which you’ve been unable to support.

      As for questions you’ve dodged, how about this one from earlier?

      “I think we’d all still quite like to know what it ACTUALLY is you were originally so upset about. You claim to be an atheist and to have no partiality in sectarian matters (though for some reason you felt it important to repeatedly tell us your children were baptised in a Catholic chapel, despite nobody asking), so why do you apparently care so much about the finer details of the internal structures of the belligerent-Protestant movement?”

      And also: if the people involved had “no connection” to the Orange Order, why did the Order acknowledge responsibility for them, and in what way would it be entitled to apply the disciplinary action to which you referred?

      Thirdly: have you contacted the police yet?

      Fourthly: do you actually have a law degree, and if so which section of which law would you be reporting the blog under?

      Answer those for us and maybe we can start to move on. Otherwise fuck off, because I’m bored of your broken record now.

    141. Angus Curran says:

      I dont care about the internal structures of that organisation – I dont think I even mentioned them? I mentioned you got the name of the organisation outside the church incorrect because the facts matter – something you dont seem to care about.

      The orange order organised the parade – I’m assuming they werent too happy about people doing this and felt the need to let the wider public know via the media – for the record I dont like the Orange Order or any Loyal Orders, I see them as an anachronism

      Yes I have contacted the police under the harassment/sectarianism law (your attempt to hide the twitter exchange by blocking me didnt work – I already copied them and this article)

      So that said – can you please advise why you think our twitter exchange ‘illustrates fairly neatly why Scotland still has a problem with sectarianism’ and how this relates to me?

    142. Juteman says:

      FFS AC!
       When folk were being tortured during WW2, do you think they died thinking, “i wonder if my fingernails were being pulled by the SS or the Gestapo?”
       No more posts from me on this thread.

    143. Morag says:

      I recall being somewhat surprised at some documentary or other about flute bands. I did not know that they were sub-contractors to parades in Scotland.

      Well that’s slightly interesting because I didn’t know that either.  Despite growing up in darkest North Lanarkshire and playing the flute from age 12.

      I took up the instrument because I played the recorder, and wanted something a bit more “grown up”.  I played in my school orchestra, and in the Lanarkshire Youth Orchestra.  I must have been about 16 before it dawned on me why there were so many kids playing the flute rather than other instruments, and what most of my mates were doing at weekends.

      I didn’t stop to ask them whether they were “subcontracting” or not.  I ran a mile.  I really can’t see that telling me I was a “subcontractor” would have induced me to put on a uniform and march through Carluke playing “The Sash My Father Wore” or whatever it is they play.  Don’t be silly, basically.

      Actually, you can have a lot of fun in a recorder group, even as an adult.

    144. Rev. Stuart Campbell says:

      “(your attempt to hide the twitter exchange by blocking me didnt work – I already copied them and this article)”

      Dear lord. Blocking you on Twitter would of course “hide” nothing, and if I wanted to hide the conversation then publishing it all on my blog would be a very strange way to go about it. I blocked you – a couple of hours ago – because you’re a cretin and I try not to be followed by cretins if I can help it.

      “the harassment/sectarianism law”

      Um, which law is that exactly? (I note you didn’t answer whether you really have a law degree or not.) Regardless, I look forward to hearing from the agencies of law enforcement, and if it should happen to be the Metropolitan Police they send to investigate, for the record I’d like to be cremated and all my possessions sold in aid of the PDSA. Scatter my ashes in Willie Rennie’s face. Thanks!

    145. Angus Curran says:

      Went to school in Fife myself Morag, Recorder lessons were compulsory back then.

      I didnt know anyone who marched or paraded with the loyal orders.

      Watched the local colliery band a few times – the pits are gone now – sad times.

    146. Angus Curran says:

      Very good Stuart – can you stop deflecting and answer my original question now?
      ‘So that said – can you please advise why you think our twitter exchange ‘illustrates fairly neatly why Scotland still has a problem with sectarianism’ and how this relates to me?’

    147. douglas clark says:

      Morag,
      Well, I’m recalling something I saw a while ago, so I could be wrong. But it makes some sort of sense that bands travel to different marches, no? What did surprise me was that they appeared to be paid for it. hence the comment about sub-contractors.

      This shows that you can hire a flute band, although it didn’t work out too well:

      http://www.martinfrost.ws/htmlfiles/scotnews09/091117-tesco.html
       

    148. Rev. Stuart Campbell says:

      “The orange order organised the parade – I’m assuming they werent too happy about people doing this”

      Comedy gold, there.

    149. Matt says:

      Angus,

      Given that you believe that the Orange Order has nothing to do with this incident, that you believe it disapproves of this incident, and (by implication, going by your determination to demonstrate the first point) that it has never been in any way involved with any incidents like it, why is it that you don’t like the Orange Order?

      You tell us that you don’t like them, and yet you don’t have a bad word to say about them. I cannot see how it is possible that you are neither a troll, an imbecile, nor an undercover Orangeman. Whichever you are, this will be my last post on the subject.

      Cheeriebyes!

    150. Angus Curran says:

      Again Stuart,

      Can you answer the question below?

      ‘So that said – can you please advise why you think our twitter exchange ‘illustrates fairly neatly why Scotland still has a problem with sectarianism’ and how this relates to me?’

    151. Rev. Stuart Campbell says:

      “Can you answer the question below?”

      Still waiting for you to answer mine, love.

    152. Angus Curran says:

      And Matt,

      I think I have been unequivocal about my thoughts on the loyal orders, you may think I dont have a bad word to say about them, but I cant remember heaping praise on them, can you? You seem to think because I’m not condeming them at every turn I somehow approve or support there actions

      The reality is I really dont care about them or there organisation in the same way I dont care about the Knights of Columba, Ancient Order of Hibernians or any other pseudo religious organisation. They are an irrelevance to the modern world.

      I’m not trolling, I’m responding to the disgraceful blog above.

    153. Angus Curran says:

      Which question Stuart? In footballing parlance I never shirk a tackle.

      AGAIN – Can you answer the question below?
      ‘So that said – can you please advise why you think our twitter exchange ‘illustrates fairly neatly why Scotland still has a problem with sectarianism’ and how this relates to me?’

    154. Rev. Stuart Campbell says:

      I’ll number them to make it easy for you to follow.

      1. I think we’d all still quite like to know what it ACTUALLY is you were originally so upset about. You claim to be an atheist and to have no partiality in sectarian matters (though for some reason you felt it important to repeatedly tell us your children were baptised in a Catholic chapel, despite nobody asking), so why do you apparently care so much about the finer details of the internal structures of the belligerent-Protestant movement?

      (NB Saying “I don’t care” is not an acceptable reply, since you clearly care a very great deal, given that we’re now past 150 comments.)

       

      2. If the people involved had “no connection” to the Orange Order, why did the Order acknowledge responsibility for them, and in what way would it be entitled to apply the disciplinary action to which you referred?

      (NB “I don’t like the Orange Order” is not an answer to that question.)

       

      3. Do you actually have a law degree, and if so which section of which law would you be reporting/have you reported the blog under?

      (NB “The harassment/sectarianism law” is not an acceptable answer, since there is no law called “The Harassment/Sectarianism Law” on any statute books in the UK. Actual act and clause, please. Shouldn’t be hard to identify, what with you having a law degree and all.)

    155. Angus Curran says:

      Was there some sort of ambiguity or misunderstanding with the responses I previously gave below? I’ll highlight and elaborate so there is no mistake this time.

      I dont care about the internal structures of that organisation – I dont think I even mentioned them? I mentioned you got the name of the organisation outside the church incorrect because the facts matter – something you dont seem to care about.

      The orange order organised the parade – I’m assuming they werent too happy about people doing this and felt the need to let the wider public know via the media – for the record I dont like the Orange Order or any Loyal Orders, I see them as an anachronism

       I have no idea what sanctions they will take – I’m not a member – if you are so concerned maybe you should contact them.

      My educational and professional qualifications are none of your business & the complaint I have made will be handled by due process.
       

    156. Rev. Stuart Campbell says:

      “I have no idea what sanctions they will take”

      There you go again. Nobody asked you what sanctions they would take. I asked you why they had the right to take any sanctions at all, if they have, as you insist, “no connection” to the people involved in the incident, and I asked you why they acknowledged their responsibility for it if it was nothing to do with them.

      “the complaint I have made will be handled by due process”

      Nobody asked you how it would be handled. You were asked which law you filed a complaint under. Are you now refusing to confirm that you have a law degree, though? Because that would certainly explain why you can’t name the law you allege has been broken.

    157. Angus Curran says:

      AGAIN – Can you answer the question below?

      ‘So that said – can you please advise why you think our twitter exchange ‘illustrates fairly neatly why Scotland still has a problem with sectarianism’ and how this relates to me?’

    158. Rev. Stuart Campbell says:

      Happy to, once you’ve actually answered mine rather than dodging them.

    159. Angus Curran says:

      I havent dodged any questions – I have responded to all your frankly irrelevant and deflecting points. It appears you either cant answer or wont answer or are too scared or dim to answer.

      SO AGAIN
      ‘So that said – can you please advise why you think our twitter exchange ‘illustrates fairly neatly why Scotland still has a problem with sectarianism’ and how this relates to me?’

    160. Rev. Stuart Campbell says:

      “I havent dodged any questions – I have responded to all your frankly irrelevant and deflecting points.”

      You clearly haven’t – see here:

      http://wingsland.podgamer.com/the-brick-wall-of-bigotry/#comment-44324

      And since every post you make seems to merely confirm yet again your inability to understand simple English there seems no point in wasting any more time. You’ve been indulged far beyond your merit, but it’s run out of entertainment value. I’m done. Feel free to have the last word, but see if you can get a grown-up to at least help you construct it as a coherent sentence.

    161. Angus Curran says:

      More irrelevant nonsense to deflect from the point in hand

      AGAIN – Can you answer the question below?
      ‘So that said – can you please advise why you think our twitter exchange ‘illustrates fairly neatly why Scotland still has a problem with sectarianism’ and how this relates to me?’

    162. Angevin_Angel says:

      I’ve just read this thread with an increasing feeling of awe.
       
      Aw for fucks sake!
       
      Shut up and talk about something interesting instead.
       
      Bigotry is here to stay in one form or another. It exists everywhere in different forms. It’s part of the human condition. If it wasn’t we wouldn’t have wars.
       
      RevStu appears to be every bit as bigoted and big mouthed, if not more so, than Angus Curran. One of the other posters hit the nail on the head when he said the worst type of bigot is an anti-bigot.
       
      Admittedly the Rev is more articulate and certainly more grammatically precise than your average troll, or Curran for that matter. So what? Do you like your trolls to be eloquent to feed your sense of Trolling moral superiority?
       
      I’m actually quite shocked. I’m just new to the Rev’s stuff and, apart from the Rangers stuff, quite liked what he has to say.
      But he’s baiting this Curran guy for the sake of it. A troll’s a troll’s a troll and all that.
      Curran’s a confused troll, the Rev’s a cunt troll. Same species different type.
      I’ll not be back. Judging by some of the other comments here ye’s are all in it together, just like the chief troll Mr Campbell.
       
      Hang your heads in shame you clods. Mirror mirror on the wall etc.

    163. Rev. Stuart Campbell says:

      Cheerio then.

    164. MajorBloodnok says:

      Is it too late to go and get popcorn?

    165. maxstafford says:

      Ultimately, this appears to be an argument about whether one group of mindless, hate-filled rednecks in toy soldier uniforms is affiliated or not to a larger group of mindless, hate-filled rednecks in toy soldier uniforms…

    166. YesYesYes says:

      Never mind the popcorn Major, these bloody 3D glasses are useless.

    167. Angus Curran says:

      No, Stuart Campbell named me in the above blog & highlighted a twitter conversation as evidence of sectarianism when clearly it is not. I’ve answered all his stupid deflecting questions.
      I clearly have the right to know why he feels it was sectarian (without knowing me, knowing anything about me or even having met me). Hence the repeated question below. 
      ‘So that said – can you please advise why you think our twitter exchange ‘illustrates fairly neatly why Scotland still has a problem with sectarianism’ and how this relates to me?’
       
       
       
       
       

    168. YesYesYes says:

      Has anybody else ever wondered what a Scottish version of Alan Partridge would be like?

    169. Morag says:

      Well, I’m recalling something I saw a while ago, so I could be wrong. But it makes some sort of sense that bands travel to different marches, no? What did surprise me was that they appeared to be paid for it. hence the comment about sub-contractors.
      This shows that you can hire a flute band, although it didn’t work out too well:
      http://www.martinfrost.ws/htmlfiles/scotnews09/091117-tesco.html
       
      Oh, that’s funny!  Those aren’t flutes in that picture though, they’re fifes.  I didn’t know you got paid for it.  I still wouldn’t have done it.
       
      Interesting, they seem to be playing from memory.  I wondered how they did it.  I bought an attachment for my flute for holding music to play in the village Palm Sunday procession, and finally came to the conclusion that the learning curve to memorise the hymn tunes was a hell of a lot more manageable than mastering the impossible art of playing a flute that was trying to twist out of my hands.
       
      I wouldn’t go near that lot for a pension.
       
       
       

    170. Krafty Kris says:

      I’m starting to see sense now, bigotry is bad but anti-bigotry is worse.
      We will always have wars because it’s the people who fight the bigots that cause the wars so really the Nazi’s were the good guys in WWII.
      … I can’t bring myself to just be sarcastic about this comment and leave it like this. How is something which stands up against something bad also bad, or even worse? To suggest that all people are bigoted and we will never rid ourselves or society of the “human condition” which makes us bigoted and fight with each other is extremely defeatist. Your own argument is also outrageously hypocritical, you blame this whole argument on the human condition and say we should accept it as the way it is, yet you post a comment telling people to stop arguing. If it’s part of the human condition then surely you should just leave them to it and accept that they will always fight and never get on.

    171. Angus Curran says:

      Having been named in the above blog & highlighted twitter conversation, which is seen as evidence of sectarianism when clearly it is not. I think I have the right to know why he feels it was sectarian (without knowing me, knowing anything about me or even having met me). Hence the repeated question below.
       
      ‘So that said – can you please advise why you think our twitter exchange ‘illustrates fairly neatly why Scotland still has a problem with sectarianism’ and how this relates to me?’
      Is that unreasonable?

    172. Morag says:

      Been to the police yet, Angus?  Seen your lawyer?  What did he say?
       
      Do tell!

    173. Christian Wright says:

      Angus Curran: “Yes I have contacted the police under the harassment/sectarianism law (your attempt to hide the twitter exchange by blocking me didnt work – I already copied them and this article)”

       Well, given the dodging and diving and the ducking and weaving you have been doing in this thread, who would believe a word you write? Isn’t it in fact true Angus that you are naught but a dissembling windbag? You are an unalloyed humbug are you not? 

      Where are the details of the actual complaint you have filed? What is the name of the police station where it was filed, the name of the officer who received your complaint, and when did you file it? And what about the identity of the solicitor whom you have retained to act on your behalf in pursuit of your complaint?

      You see, with that detail we can corroborate your claims (or expose them as lies). One would think you’d be falling over yourself provide readily verifiable citation – if you were telling the truth.  

      This speaks directly to your character. Provide the detail or be exposed as a fraud. 

      You know, I wonder if falsely claiming to have filed a police complaint against an individual with the intent of harassing  and doing injury to that person, is in itself a crime? You should know, of course – you’re a lawyer, right? 🙂

      “I have contacted the police under the harassment/sectarianism law ”

      Boy that’s very imprecise, especially coming from a trained lawyer. CITATION PLEASE – which specific statute, section and part?

      You son,  are the personification of a three-card trick. 
       

    174. Angus Curran says:

      Irrelevant – Seems Stuart Campbell is getting his flunkies to distract from the perfectly valid question below. 
      Here goes again.
       
      ‘So that said – can you please advise why you think our twitter exchange ‘illustrates fairly neatly why Scotland still has a problem with sectarianism’ and how this relates to me?’

    175. Angus Curran says:

      I dont think I need to tell you anything Christian, do I?

    176. Christian Wright says:

      Angus Curran says:  dont think I need to tell you anything Christian, do I?”

      Well, yes. you do if you wish to be seen as more than a dissembling shyster.

      What are the details of the actual complaint you have filed and what specific law are you alleging Stuart violated?

      What is the name of the police station where it was filed, the name of the officer who received your complaint, and when did you file it?

      And what about the identity of the solicitor whom you pledged to retain to act on your behalf in pursuit of your complaint?

      An honest man would have no difficulty answering these questions. Alas, the evidence suggests you and the truth are not well acquainted.

    177. YesYesYes says:

      I would like to serve notice to this Reverend Stuart Campbell person (if that’s his real name) that I have pressed charges against him with the polis. I spoke to a polisman, to whom I was helpfully escorted to by one of his colleagues, a Sergeant ‘Tam’, at Fettes polis station in Edinburgh. I spoke to Sergeant Tam for at least 3 minutes, and he agreed that, and I quote, I had a “watertight case”.
       
      Under the Trade Descriptions Act (1831), Amendment 9, Article 4, Paragraph 23, it states that any ‘bloke’ (for which read ‘blog’) that tries to pass himself (itself) off as something other than what he actually advertises himself (itself) to be may be charged with said infringement(s) under Amendment 9, Article 4, Paragraph 23.
       
      This so-called ‘Reverend’ has indeed infringed this Act. He claims that his blog is a “(mainly) Scottish political media digest and monitor” but it is no such thing. This week, for example, I have almost died laughing at some of the content of this so-called ‘blog’. Indeed, it has made me quite ill. Incidentally, ‘Reverend’ Stuart Campbell, I shall be claiming damages for this also from you under the Injury to the Gormless Act (1956). If I wanted humour, I would buy a box set of Carry On films, not read a blog.
       
      This is no idle threat. I have secured the services of the world renowned Edinburgh solicitors, Hook Em, Fleece Em and Runaway to prosecute my case against you. So convinced are Hook Em, Fleece Em and Runaway of my, and I quote, “watertight case”, that they have agreed to give me a discount of 10% on their normal fee of £500 per hour. And they’ve told me that they may need to do “quite a lot of background research” to prosecute my case against you. I am happy for them to do this, particularly after they advised me that Wonga.com would be there to help if I needed any assistance with the fees.
       
      You should be very afraid ‘Reverend’ Stuart Campbell (if that is indeed your real name). I am an educated citizen. In 1996, I graduated with third class honours in accountancy from the Early Learning Centre, so I know what I’m talking about and I can assure you I am not in the habit of issuing idle threats. Be certain of this, you shall be hearing a lot more from me and my solicitors, Hook Em, Fleece Em and Runaway.

    178. maxstafford says:

      I can imagine the reaction of any cop who’s tray this job landed it. It would promptly be marked with the ‘BoS’ stamp.*

      *Bag of Shite. 

    179. YesYesYes says:

      You may mock Max, but Hook Em, Fleece Em and Runaway assure me that my case is much more, and I quote, “watertight” than some other cases they’ve heard of this week.

    180. douglas clark says:

      Yes,Yes,Yes,
       
      Your solicitors would be the Scottish branch of Sue, Grabit and Run, would they not?

    181. YesYesYes says:

      @Douglas Clark,
       
      The very one! Apparently their main office in George Street is being refurbished just now so they’re operating from a portacabin in Leith. But it’s just a temporary arrangement the lady told me. I checked up on them – you can’t be too careful these days – they are qualified and honourable solicitors, unlike the numerous rogues that you’ll find elsewhere in Edinburgh.  

    182. Angus Curran says:

      Fine Legal minds I can see, I should reveal all to you Christian because its obviously against the law not to tell people who claim to know better.
      So again – after even more deflection and bluster.

      ‘So that said – can you please advise why you think our twitter exchange ‘illustrates fairly neatly why Scotland still has a problem with sectarianism’ and how this relates to me?’

    183. YesYesYes says:

      By the way, if you’re thinking of using them, Hook Em does all personal injury claims, Fleece Em does divorces and Runaway specialises in estates. I’ve got Mr Hook Em. He’s very good but the only time that I’ve known him to fall silent is when I asked him a question that’s been troubling me for some time now.
       
      We were having a chat about my claim against this ‘Reverend’ Stuart Campbell person (if that’s his real name) and I asked him the following question: why was the Law Society, and the BMA for that matter, the only two ‘unions’ that were exempt from the vindictive Thatcherite crusade against closed shops in the 1980s? He didn’t answer verbally but simply tapped his index finger on the side of his nose. Funny that.

    184. Angus Curran says:

      Comedy Genius – honestly.
      again though
      ‘So that said – can you please advise why you think our twitter exchange ‘illustrates fairly neatly why Scotland still has a problem with sectarianism’ and how this relates to me?’

    185. douglas clark says:

      Angus Curran,

      It would seem to me that as a general rule deflecting a conversation away from the issue under discussion, which is sectarianism to a somewhat illusory distinction about who, apparently, perpetrated the act is an arguementative diversionary tactic. It really doesn’t matter if the thug claims allegience to one or another organisation. Indeed, it is entirely possible that at least some of the band members are also members of the Orange Order. AFAIK they are not mutually exclusive organisations. Concerning oneself about that degree of minutae seems entirely pointless.

       
      I have, elsewhere in this thread, speculated that the band may also have been paid by the march organisers to attend. Should that be the case, then the organisers of the march certainly do have a responsibility to control the actions of their sub-contractors.

      I see here a certain blindness to that central premise. Whether the person is / was a member of one or other organisation, or neither, is of no real import.

      The question remains, just why did you adopt the increasingly strident approach that you did in the initial Twitter exchange? Given what little you have chosen to reveal about yourself it appears you see this truth as paramount – that the wrong organisation was blamed – as rather more important than this more general truth that sectarianism is still a problem.

      Perhaps you were unaware of the recent statements by unionist spokespersons in Scotland about being more accomodating to the Orange Orders wishes, indeed courting them as vote fodder? You also seem to assume that what goes on in Northern Ireland stays in Northern Ireland. But the political landscape has changed in Scotland and whetever insulation we have had from this level of sectarianism is reduced by somewhat desparate politicians looking around for allies. It is not a happy turn of events for a fellow atheist (me).

      You are therefore unlikely to accept that your contribution, both on Twitter and here, has anything to do with supporting sectarianism. The problem you have is that, through your desire to make a narrow point – about who was to blame – you wrote things that looked to others as if you were attempting to deflect from the evidence of sectarianism.

      Presumeably that wasn’t your intention, but that is how it comes across.

      Others, viewing this whole thread, may agree or disagree with me on that analysis of what has occurred.

      May I suggest to you that you are unlikely to get the satisfaction you obviously want?

      Whilst I reserve the right to respond on any developments, I have now said all I want to.
       

    186. Angus Curran says:

      Thanks for your input Douglas,

      I await Stuart Campbells reponse to the question below(again)

      ‘So that said – can you please advise why you think our twitter exchange ‘illustrates fairly neatly why Scotland still has a problem with sectarianism’ and how this relates to me?’

    187. Adam Davidson says:

      Angus, I’ll answer your question, from my perspective reading the initial conversation. Your very first action was to defend the Orange Order, claiming it wasn’t them, some bad boys did it and ran away. If that wasn’t your intention then were you simply trying to be a smarty pants show off.
      Your next action was to point out that it was a member of Sein Fein doing the recording as if that made the recording less valid. Or again were you just trying to show how clever you are?
      Actually, how do you know this? Were you there, were you in fact taking part? M’lud, I put it to the accused that he is in fact a wolf in sheeps clothing. Perhaps even taking part. Handy with a drum are you Angus boyo?

    188. Angus Curran says:

      For the record Adam, I have never defended the Loyal orders, I have lived in Northern Ireland for 15 years and come to know the finer details of this sometime troubled society in the same way that when growning up in Scotland I became aware of the finer details of the old firm, football casuals and other associated individuals and groups who would take the time and effort to make trouble. I’m a secular and tolerant individual. I’ll leave you with the quote below – which I believe reflects accurately the sentiment of Stuart Campbells above blog.
       
      “It is morally as bad not to care whether a thing is true or not, so long as it makes you feel good, as it is not to care how you got your money as long as you have got it.”

      Edmund Way Teale

    189. Angus Curran says:

      That said Adam, I have to post the question below to be answered by Stuart Campbell.
       
      ‘So that said – can you please advise why you think our twitter exchange ‘illustrates fairly neatly why Scotland still has a problem with sectarianism’ and how this relates to me?’

    190. Adam Davidson says:

      I don’t think anyone else is paying attention any more. Can’t blame them. Time to move on, maybe you should too.

    191. Angus Curran says:

      If you had been publicly accused of sectarianism would you?

    192. Adam Davidson says:

      If it was true but I was trying to deny it and I had already made a big thing about it then I would probably keep hammering away relentlessly. If it wasn’t true, I would state my case, argue my points a bit more then move on to something more constructive as it would be a pointless argument. I’m not famous. My reputation doesnt affect me. Who cares if people I don’t know think I’m a bigot. The people that know me, know what I am, as I often say, I’m not a bigot, I hate everybody!

    193. Angus Curran says:

      I care because its wrong and because I happen to live in Northern Ireland.
      I never wanted to be associated with any of this, so here goes again.

      ‘So that said – can you please advise why you think our twitter exchange ‘illustrates fairly neatly why Scotland still has a problem with sectarianism’ and how this relates to me?’
       

    194. bill says:

      The Scottish and Northern Irish links are very strong, particularly with bigotry and sectarianism, Marches in Kirkcaldy also and they march through what was once catholic areas, now occupied by confused Polish immigrants.  The Tories et al will seek to exploit this trait to divide and conquer the Scots again! This thread has to end, its just wasting time.  Your blog is the best chance we have of getting the truth out about unionist lies.  You have admin rights to your own site, Id delete the page and blog and not engage with this individual who is delibrately sapping your resources, probably suits the purpose of unionists.  youve been derailed!  Delete delete delete the unionist troll…..

    195. Angus Curran says:

      Wrong on all counts, I’m not trolling I want an answer to the pertinent question below.

      Stuart Campbell got his facts wrong, by answering the question below it would probably illustrate why he is as bad as the people involved in this stunt outside the church

      ‘So that said – can you please advise why you think our twitter exchange ‘illustrates fairly neatly why Scotland still has a problem with sectarianism’ and how this relates to me?’  

    196. Rev. Stuart Campbell says:

      Crikey O’Reilly, is he still here?

      Angus old fruit, you can have your answer any time you like. You know what you have to do.

      The police haven’t been in touch yet, btw.

    197. Angus Curran says:

      You can answer this now.
      ‘So that said – can you please advise why you think our twitter exchange ‘illustrates fairly neatly why Scotland still has a problem with sectarianism’ and how this relates to me?’ 
      I dont have to do anything.

    198. bill says:

      its so obvious why the twitter thread was indicative of Scotlands roblem on bigotry.  Angus, can i guess, i might be wrong, but are you from the west coast of scotkand, glasgow, clydebank maybe, rangers fan, orange order member? am i wrong, sorry if i a mate, just trying to understand.

    199. Rev. Stuart Campbell says:

      “I dont have to do anything.”

      You do if you want an answer. Otherwise you can fuck off. Your call.

    200. Morag says:

      I just wanted the 200th comment.
       
      Thank you.  As you were.

    201. Angus Curran says:

      Your limited intellect, obvious prejudice, obsession with non issues and ignorance shine through as always Stuart.
      Simple facts are you are unable to answer the question below without showing how risible and cretinous you are. You’ve already had your say above, now its time to justify what you said.
      Again.
      ‘So that said – can you please advise why you think our twitter exchange ‘illustrates fairly neatly why Scotland still has a problem with sectarianism’ and how this relates to me?’ 
      I dont have to do anything.

    202. Morag says:

      Been to the police yet, Angus?  What did they say?  What did your solicitor think of your case?
       
      Do tell!
       
      You know, empty threats of legal action are one of the stupidest things you can do on the internet.  (Maybe threatening to report someone to a church whose identity you don’t even know counts as stupider, of course.)

    203. Angus Curran says:

      Actually Bill, I’m an east coast, working class, Hibs fan, atheist, secular, tolerant, internationalist and non prejudiced.
      I’m not a member of any of the loyal orders and nor do I want to be (for the record these organisations rules would forbid me from ever being a member) I just happen to be aware of my surroundings as an ex-pat living in Northern Ireland.
      Now that I have revealed this I hope you realise the reason for the repeated question below to Stuart Campbell after he levelled sectarian accusations with my name?
      ‘So that said – can you please advise why you think our twitter exchange ‘illustrates fairly neatly why Scotland still has a problem with sectarianism’ and how this relates to me?’ 

       
       

    204. Rev. Stuart Campbell says:

      You made your choice, Angus. You had every possible chance to debate like a civilised person, and we’ve wasted enough time on you. Banned for trolling, and for illustrating fairly neatly why Scotland still has a problem with sectarianism.

    205. Doug Daniel says:

      “Banned for trolling, and for illustrating fairly neatly why Scotland still has a problem with sectarianism.”
       
      Haha!!



    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. Ignore these rules and I WILL KILL YOU WITH HAMMERS.




    ↑ Top