I didn't say anything about him - I'm criticising the format of the video you linked to, which is an anarchist "journo" who has achieved precisely nothing by doing what she does in the way she does. It was people like him going to Danczuk which led to the breakthrough after all, and I feel he's fully justified to feel the way he does - I also just so happen to think that what he did in that video was going about it the complete wrong way.
You seem to think I'm defending the practice they're trying to expose - I'm not, I'm saying they're going about it the wrong way. Swearing like a nutter in a blog or harassing politicians with screams does absolutely sod all except, I guess, make the person doing it feel better about themselves or something?
I'd rather look for constructive change than dab about in chaotic nonsense myself.
You have/had NO IDEA about what Maloney's done or gone through previously. As I've correctly surmised - you based your judgement on that video alone. You don't like his M.O. and that makes him fair game in your eyes.
Harassment? If they've got nowt to hide then why the flipping blink don't they SUE? Without people like him (I don't really care about poulton's contribution although it does bear another question about LD policies - You mentioned her; I didn't.....Other than to give her kudos for her efforts in helping Maloney) you - along with the vast majority of the populace, would've heard very little about any of this.
God forbid it happens to one of your own. Who knows how you'd react, eh? Oh, perhaps you'd be worried about being labelled a 'random anarchist' - is that it? I personally wouldn't give a flying one what people thought of me. If I had the evidence I'd expose the rats for everyone to see. That's
if I managed to keep me rag; else I'd be in a padded cell if I got close enough to them
You however, with your retort, appear to be the type to just grin & bear it. Wouldn't do to kick up a stink & use the means at your disposal now, would it? Makes you a
better person than Maloney, I guess, eh?
Chaotic nonsense? Constructive change? Oh, you're good, you.
Why should ANYONE take your word that the establishment is on our side when they've demonstrated the exact opposite in just about every single case? They WANT it swept under the Axminster...... Is that not plain enough? Your demeanour would give them exactly that. A passive, subconscious defence of their abhorrent actions in my opinion.
The way you see it = Some random anarchists dabbing about in chaotic nonsense.
The way I see it = A voice for the disenfranchised & rightfully disillusioned victims of child abuse doing what he has to do to expose an horrendous dirty secret the establishment don't want out in public
For someone pleading that you're not defending their actions, imo, by trying to discredit those two out of hand, you're doing EXACTLY what the establishment's want the rest of us to believe.
