On his affiliation, you find this article by hopenothate.org.uk:@Bitmap do you have a source, please?
So we got to the nitty gritty of this and it would seem other than one tweet signifying an anti-immigrational mindset (perhaps there are a few more) there is no evidence of him being a member of either National Action or Generation Identity.Tom Rowsell, the 'historian', is an interesting chappie. No credentials apart from membership in a couple of racist organisations, including one now banned in the UK.
Well she's not going to defend her statement so on his affiliation, @Bitmap, what do you mean? Affiliation to that specific Free Speech rally or to Generation Identity and/or National Action?On his affiliation, you find this article by hopenothate.org.uk:
![]()
Inside Generation Identity UK: International Identitarian Report
Ben van der Merwe was inside GI UK. He attended their yearly conference and passed HOPE not hate thousands of internal messages and planning documents.www.hopenothate.org.uk
Those organisations don't exactly publish their member lists on some internet website for everyone to download. Unless somebody openly confesses to his affiliation, you're mostly left speculating.1. I'm not arsed about Hope Not Hate's piece or their tweeter's claims below as I know what they are and their tactics of misinformation and their doxing history. He might have attended a free speech rally but that does not make him a member of the outlawed National Action as CLAIMED by Etaoin nor do I see anything alluding to Generation Identity membership as CLAIMED by Etaoin. Nor do I see an AFFILIATION to anything other than himself attending a rally.
Now I'm not entirely sure why you would do that. As I said, the guy may have a dodgy background, but the video itself is rather innocuous and doesn't contain any political points ... or if it does, they must be too subtle for me to spot.I will apologize and remove the PIE video.
So you're speculating on affiliation? Ok well that needs to be expressed as there is a marked difference between speculation and evidence.Those organisations don't exactly publish their member lists on some internet website for everyone to download. Unless somebody openly confesses to his affiliation, you're mostly left speculating.
Well can you blame him? There are plenty of moderates and conservatives who attend Free Speech rallies but don't want their career and name killed because of it.He spoke at an event that even the continental Identitarians disapproved of, he wanted his presence to be hidden,
Ex National Action, you realize they are a terrorist group? Where is the proof for this? Do you know what Hope Not Hate are, the writers of that piece? I suggest you take EVERYTHING they say with a pinch of salt or at least cross reference with a more legitimate source.he brought friends who are reportedly ex-National Action and he doesn't exactly hide his opinions that coincide with some typical Identitarian points.
Neither do I care. I've ended up defending him when all I wanted to do was nip today's exchange in the bud.Make of that what you want. I have no hard feelings on that guy. I don't know him and I don't care about him much.
Because once I then decided to entertain her third or fourth attempt at that false statement (below)Now I'm not entirely sure why you would do that. As I said, the guy may have a dodgy background, but the video itself is rather innocuous and doesn't contain any political points ... or if it does, they must be too subtle for me to spot.
[cont]..at the halfway stage of exchange I then decided to apologize and remove video if he was indeed found to be a white supremacist or a member of National Action. Granted he's not a white supremacist to my mind nor a member of National Action or GI but his tweet on mass-immigration was souring to me even though I have no issues with him having that opinion and on the whole thought it best to remove the video.Another hint: if you don't want it pointed out that you post videos from members of banned racist groups, don't post videos from members of banned racist groups. Just an idea.
As I might have mentioned above, I don't care too much about that guy. I got a vague idea about the circles he moves in and the ideas he shares on twitter. It's irrelevant to me whether he pays his monthly membership fees given that all I had to say about him was that he seems to have a dodgy background.So you're speculating on affiliation? Ok well that needs to be expressed as there is a marked difference between speculation and evidence.
Yes but surely it's important if he is or isn't a member as they're in jail for terrorism. If it's a vague idea then it's at best a suspected affiliation based on his views in two tweets, and even at that it's a giant push of a connection. People are losing their careers and being destroyed over speculation today and they're mostly conservatives, I know you don't need me to tell you this.As I might have mentioned above, I don't care too much about that guy. I got a vague idea about the circles he moves in and the ideas he shares on twitter. It's irrelevant to me whether he pays his monthly membership fees given that all I had to say about him was that he seems to have a dodgy background.
Source.No credentials apart from membership in a couple of racist organisations, including one now banned in the UK.
Source.I merely pointed out that the presenter of a video was a member of several racist organisations.
Source.As I've said, I pointed out something about the presenter.
This? Source.You could have said that this changed your views on the videos.
Source.Another hint: if you don't want it pointed out that you post videos from members of banned racist groups, don't post videos from members of banned racist groups. Just an idea.
Source.I pointed out that he was a member of a couple of groups: if anyone cares, they're Generation Identity and the now-banned National Action. That is all I wanted to do.
Source.Added the names of the groups he's a member of.
Incorrect, still awaiting source.Bitmap managed to find it, so I'm sure you can.
You owe your statement a source if you want to be taken seriously else it's merely a groundless accusation and empty assertion, which in turn raises questions on your integrity.I owe you nothing, liar, so do your own research.
By all means be flabbergasted at my decision to call your bluff and go from telling you to pee off to entertaining your empty accusation but I'd sooner you put up your source if you're to be taken seriously.Wow. Just wow.