It is OK for oldish buggers like me, but young fellows like you need to get your act together. When I was your age I would never have behaved like you do. Get your arse down to a decent swill shop like this and then pull yourself some talent.

Nuff said. I’m back off to internet obscurity, till the next fruit-loop starts calling me names.

My apologies. Rather than giving any credence to Wightman’s attack piece, you merely gave credence to one of the absurd (and heavily loaded) questions that preceded it (see: ‘item 9′ in particular). It’s still Wightman’s bullshit, any way you slice it, and you were one of very few people chose to give it any credit, so my point stands.
http://pogsurf.blogspot.com/2009/09/on-honesty.html

If you’d like a denial to that sort of question, I have NEVER adopted a false persona/ID in order to attack someone’s reputation with no risk to my own (as you have… repeatedly).

As for your defence of the malicious use of the word stalker based on my facetious use of the same word years ago, here’s a dusty old email from my archives. It speaks for itself:

———————————————————–
—– Original Message —–
From: “Iain Dale” [iain.dale@politicos.co.uk]
To: [manic@bloggerheads.com]
Sent: Thursday, July 29, 2004 10:54 PM
Subject: Bloggerheads

> Tim
> I’d be soooo grateful if you’d add a link to my blog
> http://www.iaindale.blogspot.com.
>
> Idiot in The Guardian said I was candidate in Norwich North – it’s North
> Norfolk. Typical Guardian!
>
> Enjoyed your Tim Yeo blog.
>
> Iain
>
———————————————————–

If Iain Dale especially is going to call me a stalker based on that Tim Yeo blog alone, then I have one hell of a comeback.

(PS – You’ve chosen now, when I am being set upon by Wightman and his vicious trolls, to re-emerge and have a go at me, presumably because you’re still pissed that I caught you sock-puppeting. The timing alone suggests you are quite happy to go along with the Cheerleaders’ fun and games, or at least take advantage of their presence. You even seek to lend credibility to their ’stalker’ claims with a case that wouldn’t hold water even in the absence of the above email from Iain Dale. I have nothing further to say to you, especially not on someone else’s site where you are likely to make a mess. Go away.)

Exile:

Wightman suggested meeting in a specific place that happened to be a pub, so we met in a pub. I’ll not be drawn into an off-topic debate on alcohol and social inclusion, but I will offer you fresh evidence that Dominic Wightman is a being less-than-honest:
http://www.bloggerheads.com/archives/2009/10/dominic_wightma.asp

As for Wightman, I had never heard of him either until I read the piece that you linked to. So he says one thing and you say another. Now we know that you are a sad obsessive but we have no such evidence to make the same claim about this other bugger. On that basis I tend to believe him. I could dig deeper into the tale, but life is too short.

I too think Tim is silly. Not least because for four years he ran a blog which said he was stalking Tim Yeo MP. If others call him “stalker” he has zero comeback.

I have absolutely no truck with threats of violence or accusing others of criminal acts they have not committed. It’s unequivocally wrong. In this respect I have a great deal of sympathy for Tim, and I hope matters return to a suitable norm in a peaceful way.

And ‘boozing session’? We met so he could hand over audio on a USB stick and convey information (not all of it factual or accurate, I may add). I used the laptop to accept the audio file and take notes. Wightman deliberately misrepresented that (and everything else he didn’t simply invent).

Wightman claims to be backed by hoardes of invisible Tory well-wishers, but so far only two people have given his 7,000-word attack-piece the time of day; you and a chap I’ve already mentioned in this thread (‘Pogsurf’). Wightman even had a former editor of his site jump ship as a direct result of its publication (“I will not be asssociated with Westminster Journal while it is used as a vehicle for character attack and bile”, he said – check it out):
http://barthsnotes.wordpress.com/2009/09/14/dominic-wightman-the-story-of-an-encounter/

My comment was only “irrelevant” to someone who has problems with the old reading comprehension. The point I made was that far from being silly, you are actually a rather pathetic obsessive. You kindly provided a link to a piece by Westminster Journal which made that point as well. What kind of man turns up to a boozing session with a fucking laptop, with the obvious intention of wasting good supping time?

A sad man.