Tommy Robinson - Proving That You Don't Need Brains To Lead The Edl

[sp1814]

Tommy Robinson, leader of the far right EDL, went to the house of Gary Moon, the editor of an anti-EDL website, took pictures of his front door, and then pictures of him holding up letters addressed to Mr Moon - proving that he'd been there.

Except it wasn't Gary Moon's flat. It was Garry Moon's flat - a man with no connection to the anti-EDL website:

http://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2013/oct/04/edl-leader-stalks-tweets-wrong-person

This leaves the question - why did Tommy Robinson go to those lengths to track down Gary Moon? Why did he tweet pictures of Garry Moon's address to his followers on Twitter?

After Nick Griffin published the address of the gay couple who sued the Christian B&B (encouraging BNP members to deliver them 'some drama), should we now be wary of upsetting these thugs, lest we too get 'personal calls'?

[Kromovaracun]

Yep.

[anotheoldgit]

Kromovaracun

/// AOG is okay with Tommy Robinson attempting to publicise the address and front door of someone who criticises him. ///

Blackmail and now total lies, and the likes of jim360 is gullible enough to be taken in, so much so that by agreeing with you, he has now landed himself along side you, not on the high ground, but on the lowest of the low, 'the pits'.

[jim360]

"He" can be addressed in person. So show me a bit more respect, please. In fact, not please. That's not a request. Show me respect.

AOG, do you condemn this or not? Yes we are interested in your opinion, so why not share it?

[ummmm]

And AOG wonders why sometimes it seems that people are ganging up on him.

[FredPuli43]

AOG, I, for one am "always interested in" your opinion. And so are you. It is the fundamental reason for your posting questions and answers on this site is it not? If not, why are you here?

Now, what do you think the motive of Mr Robinson was in visiting the address ?

[Kromovaracun]

"Blackmail and now total lies, "

I said that I would assume you thought it was fine unless you corrected me. That's what I'm doing.

[anotheoldgit]

jim360

/// "He" can be addressed in person. So show me a bit more respect, please. In fact, not please. That's not a request. Show me respect. ///

You cannot demand respect it has to be earned, but if you say "please" I may be good enough to bow to your request.

/// AOG, do you condemn this or not? Yes we are interested in your opinion, so why not share it? ///

Well I am not interested in yours or any other's opinion, especially when they are based on lies told by others.

[Kromovaracun]

AOG

The reason I informed you that I would make assumptions unless you corrected me is because you have a habit of not answering peoples' questions.

(And you haven't been blackmailed - because I haven't threatened you.)

[jim360]

Well that's very generous of you...

And you are still dodging the question. So I'm guessing you aren't earning my respect either. I don't expect you care much. But on the other hand for someone so concerned about the moral high ground you never seem to make much of an effort to justify claiming it. You just pretend that you sit there.

I'm not gullible either, that's completely false. I've merely observed that you have been asked if you condemn this action, several times, and have never answered. It's not gullible to notice that -- it's merely an observation of the truth.

[LazyGun]

I am curious now - If you are not interested in other peoples opinions, AoG, why do you post here?

"Well I am not interested in yours or any other's opinion, especially when they are based on lies told by others."

Facetious commentary aside, the notion of someone with a history of violence and leader of an extremist group "visiting" a critics house, whilst at the same time posting pictures and descriptions of front door and address of the person being visited is a very sinister thing to do.

Its exactly the same kind of tactic employed by Nick Griffin /BNP over the gay couple issue last year, and equally as sinister.

I am surprised a law-abiding, fair minded person like you undoubtedly view yourself could not find it in themselves to be able to criticize such an action, but instead seek to evade or deflect the question.

[anotheoldgit]

FredPuli43

/// AOG, I, for one am "always interested in" your opinion. And so are you. It is the fundamental reason for your posting questions and answers on this site is it not? If not, why are you here? ///

Well for one I did not post the question, and secondly I have posted some answers, but others may not agree with what I haven't said, so much so that they have invented what I have said.

/// Now, what do you think the motive of Mr Robinson was in visiting the address ? ///

Now if I had asked that question and then not made a personal comment either way, I could understand the demand that I commented on it.

But since I never asked the question, surely I have every right not to provide an answer?

But then if one does have an answer, why bother asking a question in the first place?

[Gromit]

// Seems like some of you have become interested in my opinion //

I'm not.

I'm interested in your lack of opinion. That is more telling.

[Kromovaracun]

AOG

So you posted on SP's question purely to exercise your right to refrain from giving an opinion.

Right.

[anotheoldgit]

Kromovaracun

/// I said that I would assume you thought it was fine unless you corrected me. That's what I'm doing. ///

Is this not total lies?

/// AOG is okay with Tommy Robinson attempting to publicise the address and front door of someone who criticises him. ///

Now I demand an answer (but unlike you, I won't blackmail you into giving me one) is what you put above lies or not?

[Gromit]

// Gromit,
Perhaps you should remember that when you support those who are really dangerous. //

I don't support anyone dangerous.

You may apologise for that false accusation if you like.

[jim360]

You do have a right not to answer. But absent such an answer we have a right to make whatever of that we will. And you have to expect that. Every time you call people who assume that refusal to comment implicitly means that you might agree with it liars -- well, what else might silence mean? Usually people who want to deny something do. And when they don't perhaps they feel that they can't because it wouldn't be honest.

Anyway. Absent an explicit and clear denial I think it's fair to assume that you don't want to condemn these actions because perhaps in some way you don't see a problem with them. If this is wrong, why not say so?

[FredPuli43]

AOG, you give opinions on other matters whether you posted the OP or not.

So, please tell us your opinion. What do you think Mr Robinson's motive was in visiting this address ?

[ummmm]

Unbelievable....

[anotheoldgit]

Kromovaracun

/// I will assume that he is in favour of it and I will make a point of raising it every time he ever tries to take the moral high ground on anything ever.) ///

Threatening to publicise something that I have not said based on assumptions alone, by raising the untruth every time I take the moral high-ground on anything ever.

And this is not blackmail??????