@BritisherPaz49 Not sure if she thinks this is funny! Its not! Shes become the crazy lady - where are the cats? A real shame because i loved all her stuff back in the day! Someone needs to tell her to come off social media.
🚨I don’t have to like Danny Tommo to say this.
They published his mum. Name. Age. That she lives alone.
After he rang them and said she was grieving his dad.
She’s had to leave the house. The dog that sat with her since he died couldn’t go.
First time they’ve been apart.
That’s the play.
Not the protest.
The family.
You can argue about Dover.
You can argue about Portsmouth.
You don’t put a widow’s address in the paper because her son stood on a road.
This is what they do to anyone who gets in the way.
Secure the borders. Leave the families out of it. 🫡🏴
Credit: @RealDannyTommo
@TRobinsonNewEra He is just awful, patronising, naive and quite frankly stupid. I used to think he was ok, but cant even look at his face now - he makes me sick.
15 years ago I tried to warn on the BBC of how Muslim rape gangs were operating and this is what I was met with by Jeremy Paxman.
Instead of listening, the state have done everything in their power to silence me, destroy my life.
Gaslighting, excuses and cover ups led to untold numbers of British children being gang raped, pimped out, even killed at the hands of predominantly Pakistani Muslim men.
And I'll continue to be a voice for survivors until my last breath.
Jason Arday’s death is tragic. But please spare us the sanctimonious complaints that he was merely an ‘obscure’ academic who was the victim of a racist witch-hunt. The probing and questioning and exposure were entirely legitimate.
Arday was plainly guilty of plagiarism. He had also made a series of fantastical claims about his life and career. He ended up being appointed as a professor at one of the world’s most august seats of learning – where his students, who had worked extremely hard to get there, were paying large fees for the privilege of being taught by him.
Far from being obscure, Arday had happily engaged with the media over many years, often repeating his false claims. He appeared on numerous TV shows and guest edited Radio 4’s flagship Today programme. He even carried the Olympic torch.
Moreover, he had secured a major publishing deal for his autobiography, which was set to be released in Britain and the US just as the scandal broke. By no measure was this man ‘obscure’.
When a fellow academic in Plymouth began to question his credentials, Arday (or someone close to him) made a complaint to the police. When a journalist from Times Higher Education started investigating, he was subjected to a police inquiry and also received a threatening letter from the leading libel solicitors, Carter Ruck.
Arday and those around him were clearly not averse to hounding others when they felt like it.
It’s very possible that Arday did not have sufficient support measures in place when he was finally exposed – but that’s on others. The investigation and questions amounted to legitimate journalistic inquiry.
This was never just about Arday’s fabulism. It was also about the increasingly controversial philosophy of DEI, the obsession of our political, corporate and educational institutions with pushing that philosophy, and how it might have led to someone with Arday’s subpar credentials being appointed in the first place.
These are all valid questions to ask – and, by asking them, journalists are simply doing their jobs.