What can I say about the one-time leader of the Libertarian Party (UK) Andrew 'Hamster' Withers, bearing in mind his propensity to threaten legal action against all and sundry? I wouldn't want to libel him, nor would I want to state things that I don't know to be true, so I will refrain from drawing final conclusions.
Ever since Anna Raccoon's rocket up his arse, he has been laying very low. His websites are all offline to outsiders now, and Ian Parker Joseph has taken on the - presumably - unpaid role of media mouthpiece for his chum.
What is clear, is that in his capacity as leader of the party, he has acted in an appalling way. He has made no real attempt to rebut the accusations, or put his side of the story, and rather than do the decent thing and stand down, no matter what the truth of the matters under review, he has rather sought to destroy the party, to break it, so if he can't have it, no one can have it.
How to explain such behaviour? It indicates his utter contempt for ordinary members of the party. Also he has, as far as I am aware, obstinately tried to hang on to the party accounts. Why would he take this action? Even if he had nothing to hide, his behaviour suggests that he does indeed have something to hide.
Basically, in Anglo-Saxon, he's acted like a total cunt, and every party member has every reason to revile him for dragging the party down and refusing to explain himself, and Ian Parker Joseph shares his ignominy, for launching a pathetic smear against another party member who dared to question the Wither'd one, and accusing those who have tried to rescue the party.
Whatever the future for the party, or whatever phoenix rises from its ashes if Withers and his crew get their way, we will at least have the satisfaction of being rid of them.
Ever since Anna Raccoon's rocket up his arse, he has been laying very low. His websites are all offline to outsiders now, and Ian Parker Joseph has taken on the - presumably - unpaid role of media mouthpiece for his chum.
What is clear, is that in his capacity as leader of the party, he has acted in an appalling way. He has made no real attempt to rebut the accusations, or put his side of the story, and rather than do the decent thing and stand down, no matter what the truth of the matters under review, he has rather sought to destroy the party, to break it, so if he can't have it, no one can have it.
How to explain such behaviour? It indicates his utter contempt for ordinary members of the party. Also he has, as far as I am aware, obstinately tried to hang on to the party accounts. Why would he take this action? Even if he had nothing to hide, his behaviour suggests that he does indeed have something to hide.
Basically, in Anglo-Saxon, he's acted like a total cunt, and every party member has every reason to revile him for dragging the party down and refusing to explain himself, and Ian Parker Joseph shares his ignominy, for launching a pathetic smear against another party member who dared to question the Wither'd one, and accusing those who have tried to rescue the party.
Whatever the future for the party, or whatever phoenix rises from its ashes if Withers and his crew get their way, we will at least have the satisfaction of being rid of them.
No comments:
Post a Comment