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'?

[ummmm]

Ohhhhhhhhhh....so you can repeat what people have said on previous thread but they can't repeat what you say?

What a cop out...

[Kromovaracun]

Let's review this conversation in miniature, shall we?

SP1814: Tommy Robinson has been found out attempting to publicise the address and front door of someone criticising him.

AOG: Who cares.

Krom: So do you agree or disagree with this action, AOG? I'm going to assume you agree unless you tell me so, because you can be evasive sometimes.

AOG: YOU LYING LITTLE BLACKMAILER. HOW DARE YOU QUESTION ME. I REFUSE TO SAY ANYTHING ABOUT THIS PUNY QUESTION BECAUSE IT IS BENEATH MY INTEREST.

[anotheoldgit]

LazyGun

/// Frankly, to offer a comment which only queries the newsworthiness of this story is just odd. If you think it unworthy of discussion, why contribute at
all? ///

At last someone to say what I have been saying for a long time, If you haven't anything to say don't bother.

But what puzzles me is why you have never addressed that to the usual suspects?

I do not include you amongst them because we all know your contributions can not by any stretch of the imagination be classed as "one liners".

/// And you know, a topic does not have its importance defined by whether you decide to post on it or not, which is what this paragraph of yours appears to infer. ///

Then why are you al climbing on me demanding I make a contribution on a post that I from the beginning deemed unimportant?

I won't be wasting any more of my time turning over any more pagers of your lengthy publication.

[anotheoldgit]

In closing 83 answers to a pointless question, without the help from your old arch enemy AOG, it would have been difficult for it to reach 20.

[sp1814]

AOG

So to summarise, you think my question has no merit and you're not going to join the debate on whether the actions of Tommy Robinson are sinister.

Absolutely fantastic.

Brava maestro...brava.

[Gromit]

Before you hang up,

Would you care to withdraw the libel that I support dangerous people?

If you cannot substantiate such a claim, t is cowardly to not apologise for writing it.

[sp1814]

Gromit

Good luck with that. I've already asked three times.

[LazyGun]

@ AoG And you signally fail to understand the irony of your own comments

"At last someone to say what I have been saying for a long time, If you haven't anything to say don't bother.

But what puzzles me is why you have never addressed that to the usual suspects?"

So according to you - one should not say anything if one has nothing to say - so why did you contribute to this thread at all then, since you had nothing to say - according to you it was too trivial to be regarded as being newsworthy? Are you that blind that you cannot see the irony of this situation? How such an argument completely undermines your own contributions?

"/// And you know, a topic does not have its importance defined by whether you decide to post on it or not, which is what this paragraph of yours appears to infer. /// "

And again, a wilful failure to comprehend on your part. If you deem it unimportant, why contribute at all? Why keep coming back with further contributions, mostly attempting to trivialise the incident or to offer some sort of mitigations for this guys actions? All you can offer is some kind of attempted weak-ass attack on the length of my posts!

And still you evade the questions - You are a law abiding person. Do you condemn stalking, cyber-bullying, intimidation, possible incitement to violence, placing private personal information ( address, pictures of residence etc) into the public domain or not?

[FredPuli43]

AOG, you naturally took exception to the idea that , unless you said that Mr Robinson's behaviour was wrong, someone was entitled to assume that you agreed with it. Indeed youbad termed that suggestion blackmail, which could only mean that you were being threatened to say something which you did not wish to say or did not agree with, since you objected to your silence being interpreted as acceptance.

So I ask again, making the inference that you find Mr Robinson's visit as bad behaviour and you did not agree with it or approve, what do you think his motive was ?

[jno]

I imagine, from his post at 16:48, that Elvis has left the building.

[Gromit]

It is intesting to observe that the Daily Mail and AOG have both been cowardly in refusing to apologise given many opprtunities to do so.

I wonder if the paper reflects its readers or influences them?

[FredPuli43]

Does the Daily Mail refuse to answer a simple question like the one I have now asked AOG some three times? Particularly interesting because that question is not controversial.