The gist of which is (A) a dirty trick she apparently pulled concerning a member of the UK Libertarian Party i.e. demands that said member be kicked out of the party over allegations she made against him, also referring to apparent mental health problems he apparently had (she claimed to have seen this person's medical records (!)) in a further effort to get him canned, (B) that she worked for the Court of Protection as a Lord Chancellor's visitor (you know, the same Court of Protection she's written several posts about, to promote the idea that she has an honest belief about their being a dangerous institution) and (C) the paragraph that really leaped out at me, which was this one:-
'I would call this a set-up simply because Susanne Nundy has a history. Wherever there is a story of abuse by officials, especially when it relates to children or paedophilia, up pops a swathe of names including Anna Raccoon, Susanne Nundy or under her maiden name Susanne Cameron-Blackie , all ready to ‘assist’, yet strangely the outcome is never the one that those originally abused, or their campaigners envisaged. More often than not they are ripped apart, labelled as nutters and thrown to the pack in the manner we saw with her post about Andrew Withers yesterday. Its almost as if she is a professional Trojan Horse.'
It would appear that we could quite possibly add these posts, in which she's conveniently also apparently a Duncroft girl, just like some of the women now coming out with accusations against Savile (who'd have thunk it!), to those stories.
I hesitate to speculate as to why a blogger who seems quite appreciated but who seems to have a deeply unsavoury side, if these stories are anything to go by, feels compelled to weigh in on this previously much-lauded public figure, now having become notorious with these allegations against him, to the effect that 'ah, um, maybe we'd better not put so much stock in what his accusers are saying about him'...
PS funnily enough, given that this comment didn't pass moderation on Nundy's own site, it seems she's fine with calling other people's credibility into question but not so OK with her own credibility being questioned.
Took me the best part of the morning to wade through them all but omigod...outstanding stuff.
ReplyDelete/gobsmacked.
Seven, now; I'm lost in admiration by them all...
ReplyDeleteI've only had time to read the first properly. This is not a series of posts to skim read if the first is anything to go by. Great stuff!
ReplyDelete"Seven, now.."
ReplyDeleteA marathon of blogging! I'm awestruck.
Yeah, I think I'm going to have to take Anna's posts with a pinch of salt, this is why:-
ReplyDeletehttp://parker-joseph.com/pjcjournal//2011/04/16/anna-raccoon-taken-at-face-value/
The gist of which is (A) a dirty trick she apparently pulled concerning a member of the UK Libertarian Party i.e. demands that said member be kicked out of the party over allegations she made against him, also referring to apparent mental health problems he apparently had (she claimed to have seen this person's medical records (!)) in a further effort to get him canned, (B) that she worked for the Court of Protection as a Lord Chancellor's visitor (you know, the same Court of Protection she's written several posts about, to promote the idea that she has an honest belief about their being a dangerous institution) and (C) the paragraph that really leaped out at me, which was this one:-
'I would call this a set-up simply because Susanne Nundy has a history. Wherever there is a story of abuse by officials, especially when it relates to children or paedophilia, up pops a swathe of names including Anna Raccoon, Susanne Nundy or under her maiden name Susanne Cameron-Blackie , all ready to ‘assist’, yet strangely the outcome is never the one that those originally abused, or their campaigners envisaged. More often than not they are ripped apart, labelled as nutters and thrown to the pack in the manner we saw with her post about Andrew Withers yesterday. Its almost as if she is a professional Trojan Horse.'
It would appear that we could quite possibly add these posts, in which she's conveniently also apparently a Duncroft girl, just like some of the women now coming out with accusations against Savile (who'd have thunk it!), to those stories.
I hesitate to speculate as to why a blogger who seems quite appreciated but who seems to have a deeply unsavoury side, if these stories are anything to go by, feels compelled to weigh in on this previously much-lauded public figure, now having become notorious with these allegations against him, to the effect that 'ah, um, maybe we'd better not put so much stock in what his accusers are saying about him'...
PS funnily enough, given that this comment didn't pass moderation on Nundy's own site, it seems she's fine with calling other people's credibility into question but not so OK with her own credibility being questioned.