Nadine Dorries: Any excuse to smear an opponent

June 18th, 2011 § 3 comments

Whoa! Something has got Nadine Dorries pissed off this evening and she really wants to take it out on someone.

After two lines expressing her disappointment about the judgement of a plumber that harassed his wifes’ lover, with one of those two lines taken up by the hyperlink, Dorries embarks on a tirade against Tim…

I myself am in the position, as noted by Guido, of being subjected to a particularly nasty form of online harassment.

Noted by Paul Staines? With a link to his blog, not where he does actually note it. And what’s this ‘particularly nasty’ form of harassment? Being called out on lies? Bringing to the attention of the public rather large payments to a friend for not a lot work? Trying to get personal information someone is legally entitled to, but being ignored?

Mainly due to the fact that I campaign against late term abortion and for a more responsible society which allows our children to enjoy a childhood free from the influence of an over sexualised culture and for a more responsible approach to sex and relationship counselling.

No, this level of scrutiny is due to avoiding the truth, not telling the truth and hiding the truth, whilst being a public servant.

One of the especially ‘poorly’ compulsive obsessive’s, recently alarmed the Police enough for them to issue a verbal warning on tape following a five hour interview. Following the warning, his tweets and blogs have remain monitored, as are those of people he communicates with on a regular basis in which I am discussed or mentioned.

Oh, I just love the scare quotes around the word ‘poorly’, implying this person not well. Obviously, the scare quotes mean that that is not what is meant. But we know, don’t we? We’ve read newspapers, we know how they work, don’t we? *gives conspiratorial wink*

Yes, this man, fuck it. We all know she is talking about Tim. Yes, Tim was given a warning. A verbal warning. A verbal warning is not anything official, like a caution. It was for one incident, the Flitwick husting. Not for any series of events. If you’ve been following this saga, you would not be surprised that it took five hours for the police and Tim to discuss this issue and it’s complexities.

Seeing as I am in quite regular contact with Tim, and a member of the Nadine Dorries Project, can I assume that, and I am gonna ‘sex’ this up a bit, can i assume that I am being bugged? Probably not. You see, the letter from the police saying that Tim got a verbal warning, for which he had to ask for, also explains that the matter is closed and only relates to the one occassion. Why would the police monitor all the people Tim has contact with to keep an eye on any mentions of Dorries if all they can do is say ‘be a bit careful in future’?

Frankly, I remain blissfully unaffected. I don’t ever read them and never come into contact with anyone in my constituency who does. I believe that to read them lets a sliver of nastiness into my day that I just don’t need.

Dorries doesn’t read anything that isn’t from a supportive constituent either. She leaves it to her staff to filter out the non-supportive and supportive mail.

This particular man also harasses anyone he comes across who has any contact with me, by bombarding them with emails, freedom of information requests and repetitive telephone calls.

No. Tim asks questions. When he gets the run around, he investigates further as to why they are being evasive. And usually comes up with something that explains why they are being evasive.

He even travelled across the country into my constituency once to a local meeting pretending to be a local to film me and lied to the meeting organisers and the audience about what he was doing, until a Labour supporter ‘outed’him.

From Tims’ place to Flitwick is hardly ‘across the country’. Its an hour away. As for lieing to the organisers of the Flitwick hustings? Take a look for yourself…

TIms’ post about it is here, along with independent accounts here and here. Make up your own mind.

Therefore, I cannot mention on my blog where I am going, only where I have been and am very careful about photographing who I have seen, tagging or naming people on photographs. I don’t mention what people have said or who they work for. I am careful about mentioning the names of anyone I am in contact with, where they live or where I am or what I am doing on any particular day, until the day is done. I hardly mention anything, because I don’t want other people to be subjected to what Ed West, of the Daily Telegraph, describes as ‘deranged’ behaviour.

But Dorries does mention all those things, and twist things up. She used the stabbing of another MP as the reason she shut her blog down and closed her Twitter account, saying it was on police advise. The stabbing of the MP happened after she closed her blog though.

This online menace certainly appears deranged as the other people he harasses in a less public way than me will testify.

Who? Who will testify that Tim is that deranged that they have had to involve the police? No one. That would be why there is nothing on police record.

And therefore, for the sake of the people who work for me (he has already forced one member of staff to resign) I had really hoped for a different outcome today.

Dorries’ mate resigned when Tim looked into their business relationship and started asking questions about how little work was seemingly being done for the amounts being paid.

Let’s hope another court case comes up soon with more compelling evidence. Who knows, maybe it will have to be mine.

The amount Dorries bleats on, she should have plenty of evidence to get Tim banged up for a spell.

I wonder why the police have done so little, then…

Update: 18/6/2011 11.20am

Dorries’ post has now been removed, but I have a screen grab here (see next update if this link doesn’t work).

Update 19/6/11

Dorries has reposted her work of fiction, under the title of My Day In Court. It is pretty much the same but with added guff, and no more truth.

I have given the original screen grab a more permanent home. You can find it here, and a screengrab pof the new post can be found here. (Due to a plugin-in or something, you may need to copy and paste the URL into a new window/tab to get a full size look at the screengrabs.)

Tagged , ,

§ 3 Responses to Nadine Dorries: Any excuse to smear an opponent"

  • Rolo Tamasi says:

    Tim’s “warning” did make clear that no crime was committed.

    I wonder if Dorries has any perception that her continued false defamation of Tim is clearly harassment in order to undermine his valuable and value scrutiny of her behaviour in public office.

    Democracy is destroyed if politicians abuse the police to intimidate the electorate’s scrutiny of them.

  • Steve says:

    Not forgetting that the other reason she has to “cover up” her whereabouts is because she nearly got caught out on hardly ever being in her constituency house, yet claiming it as her first to pay for her huge “second home” in the expenses investigation she managed to wriggle her way out of!

    This is also where the legendary 70/30 bullshit excuse came from, and any mention of concealing her whereabouts because
    of “stalkers” after that is a bullshit smokescreen to further excuse her getting away with stealing the taxpayer’s money.

  • Carl says:

    She really does take the f’king biscuit doesn’t she?

    When she’s not pontificating on what I should be teaching my kids about sex education, she’s trying to ruin the life of a blogger with disabilities who dares to criticise her, (or any other blogger who criticised her for that matter… or anyone’s wife who suffers from alcoholism who criticisers her former friend for fucking her husband and gloating in the tabloid press about it…)

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

What's this?

You are currently reading Nadine Dorries: Any excuse to smear an opponent at Sim-O.