Hello Joe,
I have been interested by the last three videos that you have posted on Youtube, not least because you have started criticising me and Western Spring directly.
Primarily however, I have been interested to note that we agree on a number of strategic points and I believe our positions are much closer than you or perhaps anyone else will have realised.
You make periodic requests in your videos for someone to give you feedback, to tell you when you might be going wrong, and to suggest ways other than electoral politics that might result in the acquisition of political power. If you are genuine in these requests and they are not just rhetorical devices, I would like the opportunity of obliging, and as I have said in the past, of meeting with you for a discussion of the way forward.
Firstly, a bit of feedback. I appreciate that you are sincere in what you do, but so far you have named and denounced, either as a conscious agent of our enemies, or as a ‘useful idiot’, virtually everyone who has either held, currently holds, or who aspires to hold a leadership position in British nationalism. In doing so you will of course, by use of this scatter gun approach, have been right in your denunciations in some instances, but you must also appreciate that you will be entirely wrong on others, and through your actions you will, if not careful, completely denude nationalism of all it’s potential leaders and make yourself a lot of enemies into the bargain. This is not a sensible approach.
Do you think it likely, that other than yourself, everyone else who is anyone in nationalism is either a ‘spy’ or a nincompoop? That’s not very likely, is it?
So it’s time to start mending some bridges, and as a first step, I would like to invite you to have lunch with me at a date not too far into the future, at which we can have a comradely, fraternal and productive discussion.
In your videos you refer to John Tyndall’s “infinite wisdom”. Well, he trusted me, and I can prove it, so why shouldn’t you?
You name the place and give me a couple of options regarding dates, and I will meet you.
Regards,
Max Musson
Please reply to [email protected]
Walter Greenway
- Edit
Great initiative, I hope it works out well.
drquartz
- Edit
Nicely put, Max.
I haven’t actually seen any of these videos, and frankly at this point I shan’t bother. If he accepts your invitation and discusses things with you – which I hope you will relay back on this site – then I will certainly look at his argument.
But I am always amazed at the playground name-calling that goes on.
What happened to dignity?
We heard this name calling very often from the Remain camp during the run up to the referendum – and indeed from our own Prime Minister who called those who opposed his view – ‘Quitters’.
This, of course, was the same David Cameron that, in the run up to the last election, referred to me (yes, I did take it personally) and many others as ‘swivel eyed loons’ for having the temerity to vote UKIP! Having voted Tory all my life I decided that there was little to chose between Labour and Conservative, and that British politics needed something fresh – and the then current politicians need a swift kick! Although UKIP didn’t figure greatly in the outcome, I do think that it woke up a few of these complacent career politicians….although they seem to have fallen asleep again now. And I will NEVER vote Tory again because of Cameron.
The other day Clegg had some derogatory remark about those who saw fit to get divorced from the EU. Shame he is on the side-lines. I always got a ‘good larffff’ from his statements
But the name calling is still going on.
I enjoy reading the comments to articles in the ‘Mail On Line’. There are the same sad Remainiac people posting on time after time – still name-calling, still unable to accept the way the referendum went.
One pointed out that the referendum had no legal standing and we should have another. He hasn’t been back on since I pointed out that if the one we just voted on had no legal standing and second referendum would have no legal standing either. Clearly he hadn’t thought of that!
Had the vote been to stay in the EU, whilst I would be bitterly disappointed, I hope I would be mature enough to accept it as a democratic vote by the majority (no matter how big or small that majority might be) and not take to the streets in protest or call those whose view was different to mine some stupid playground name.
Julius Nepos
- Edit
Wow a lot of books on Stalin & Trotsky in the background. I used to have more books but my wife actually makes me toss some out whenever we move. I’m limited now to two small bookcases tho I have some boxes in storage.
Robert
- Edit
Great initiative Max…DIVISION IS WEAKNESS – NATIONALIST UNITY IS STRENGTH!
We have enough enemies out there without falling out with each other.
Good luck!
You can find Joe Owens’ email address on his Youtube channel if you would like to discuss peace talks which is:
[email protected]
Albert
- Edit
Never heard of Joe Owens..So I checked his videos on U Tube…Not a very good orator…bit boring.
Nationalist4UK
- Edit
Joe Owens has just responded to this article.
Bentley Graves
- Edit
Good find, Nat!
Joe Owens is a fruitcake who accuses everyone of being a ‘spy’ whether he cares to admit it or not. He produces these videos on an almost daily basis and constantly repeats himself as you can see in the video above.
He claims to be someone important in the history of British Nationalism; this is the same Joe Owens who went to prison for sending razor blades through the post to some Jews.
Joe offers nothing that hasn’t been thought of many times before. His latest ‘bright idea’ is to accept non-whites and work with them, his logic being that we can never get rid of them so……. The guy is an idiot and it doesn’t surprise me that he has the comment section turned off under his YouTube videos as he knows full well the barrage of abuse he would get if he left them on.
Max is spot on when he says that Joe accuses so many people of working for the ‘State’ that eventually he is going to be right; that certainly doesn’t make him an insightful genius, just another gobshite who is damaging our chances of having a cohesive movement.
If anybody was state then my money would be on Joe as he does nothing positive for the movement, he only divides it by spreading rumours and mistrust of others. He is best avoided and ignored, don’t give him the publicity he seems to crave.
Joe thinks UKIP are going to save us all; do we really need to look any deeper than that?
While Joe offers us nothing in the way of solutions, our comrades across the pond are causing havoc for the establishment with targeted propaganda that is simple and brilliant!……. enter Pepe and Kek.
There is a new wave of youngsters that are spreading our message worldwide on the internet and doing it very effectively, so much so that MSM are now discussing green frogs. (Pepe) If you’ve seen a green frog on the internet then you’ve seen our lads and lasses at work.
In the meantime, if you’re reading this and you’re British, then ignore relics like Joe Owens, get involved in the Alt-Right and join Western Spring. Help us make the six pre-prerequisites a reality
https://www.dailystormer.com/media-panic-as-they-begin-to-understand-our-memes/
https://www.dailystormer.com/hillaryclinton-com-that-cartoon-frog-is-more-sinister-than-you-might-realize/
https://www.dailystormer.com/a-normies-guide-to-the-alt-right/
Barry Lukas
- Edit
I actually 100 percent agree with Joe Owens. Nationalists have been doing absolutely nothing politically for the past 5 years and the caliber of people I see on demos doesn’t give me optimism for the future. This is why I believe a totally new movement is needed.
Stefan
- Edit
I find him boring & repetitive, obsessed with spies, what is to gain with him on side apart from no criticism?
Does he bring a fan base or much else, probably not.
He gets too much attention for what he says.
I guess the books are about knowing your enemy?
John S.
- Edit
I agree. There’s clearly no discussion to be had with a man focused on diversionary witch-hunts.
Best we all ignore him.
Archer
- Edit
Apart from the fact that Joe thinks politics (pushing pretty pieces of paper through people’s doors so they can bin them along with the rest of the junk mail; doing nothing else but electioneering) is the be all and end all and that the culture war (metapolitics) is irrelevant, I must ask…
Is this action “politics”, Joe?
Heather
- Edit
I saw one of Joe Owens videos where he named many people as being agents for the state etc., and my initial thought was he’s watched too many espionage and counter-espionage films. I don’t recall his exact words towards the end, but I seem to have got the impression that he was painting himself as the sole salvation for Nationalism.
I won’t deny I think he made some good points regarding image, and behaviour on demonstrations.
So what does name calling, and stirring up suspicion actually achieve for Nationalism.
My own beliefs and wants for my Nation has always without me thinking about it, leant towards Nationalism, it seems only natural.
However, I have never been politically active before, or joined a party, and I am a “new kid on the block” regarding Nationalist literature, and the people in Nationalism past, and present.
If other people wake up to what’s going on around them, and come looking to the Nationalist movement, but see this kind of output, and have to wade through the politics of why X won’t work with Y and neither will work with Z, is it going to put a lot of potential supporters/recruits off. If they want to fight back against the destruction of our homeland and society, yet find all the fighting going on is in-house, they may not bother, and surely that’s a loss.
That’s just from the perspective of a fresh pair of eyes. So I hope the meeting goes ahead, and Nationalist aims benefit from it.
Michael Woodbridge
- Edit
Bentley Graves and Heather both make excellent points, as does John S when he urges us to ignore trouble makers. The old French Communists had a slogan, “No enemies on the Left.” We should emulate that slogan for the “Right”.
As Max Musson says, “No one is being dragged away in the middle of the night”. All this paranoia upon which Mr. Owens feeds isn’t because of any very real threat so much as a fear of social embarrassment in an age of “political correctness”. If we keep the law, and our sense of honour by telling the truth in all reasonable circumstances, we will have done more for our cause of race and nation than any amount of dirty tricks thought up in the fevered imagination of social misfits.
Eddy
- Edit
I originally looked at a couple of Joe Owens videos and thought them quite good, but now megalomania seems to have set in and he thinks he has to tell us every five minutes what’s best for British Nationalism. Fair enough vote for UKIP occasionally, but this party’s hatred of British Nationalism must never be forgotten.
Stead Steadman
- Edit
I am sad that such a friendly and good-natured offer of lunch was not accepted.
tony l
- Edit
Joe is right that Nationalism has been infiltrated. However, he points to too many characters to be credible.
.
He is also right as to how a Nationalist political party should conduct itself. We were doing that, as Joe says, from 1999-2010 or thereabouts. Nevertheless, we failed. The reasons for this failure have been covered by Max on this website elsewhere.
.
Basically, Nationalism needs more resources than was available to the BNP and it needs more than one expression.
John
- Edit
This critique of Joe is woefully ignorant and selective in it`s facts. If you are going to claim that Joe is out of touch with reality in his analysis of the infiltration of nationalism then please isolate a single example he has given and rationally explain why he is irrational in his suspicion?
Infiltration of subversive political groups is a fact of life that’s why MI5`s “subversive political groups unit” exists. Did you not see Joe`s video highlighting that it was admitted by security services that in the 1980s they had 100 strong spies/informants in the animal rights movement alone who were described as “worth every penny” they were paid? Did you not take Joe`s point that the relative threat posed by these people and back then, was nothing compared to the level of concern around nationalism currently?
Max Musson
- Edit
Hello John, what you describe as my ‘critique of Joe’ is in fact nothing of the sort. The open letter was never intended to be a complete refutation of Joe’s arguments, I merely chose to point out one error in his behaviour that was damaging both his own reputation and our movement as a whole.
.
You will notice that I began by expressing interest in the videos that Joe has produced, stating that he and I agree on a number of issues. My feedback to Joe was not uninvited. As I stated in my letter, Joe has actually asked people on a number of occasions to provide feedback to let him know when he is getting ‘it’ wrong, and I decided to oblige. However I chose not to make my criticism too condemnatory as my aim has all along been to entice Joe to join me and others in working towards greater unity within British nationalism. It is not my aim to discredit Joe.
.
I am well aware of the lengths that the security services went to in the 1980s to undermine the animal rights movement. It is not the case that nationalism presents a more ‘clear and present danger’ than the animal rights movement did back then. There were a number of emergent terrorist cells within the animal rights movement that committed a number of acts of extreme violence, particularly against the employees, directors and shareholders of Huntingdon Life Sciences and it was only to be expected that the security services would direct a great amount of resources towards combatting this. There is nothing in nationalism today that poses that kind of violent threat to the establishment and when we consider the threat from the 2,000 – 3,000 battlefield experienced Jihadists that currently roam this country, I think the security services will view even the most militant nationalist groups as a low priority by comparison.
.
In view of the fact that no-one within our movement is actually doing anything illegal, one wonders what Joe thinks all these imagined spies are reporting? We certainly don’t see the security services raiding peoples homes in the dead of night to drag poor betrayed nationalists off to the Gulag, do we? So why should we all be so paranoid?
.
There are some groups that engage in demo’s of dubious worth, some of which have been counter-productive as far as attracting public support is concerned, but that does not stop the rest of us from getting behind UKIP as Joe suggests, and there really isn’t any evidence to warrant the kind of accusations that Joe has been casting about.
.
More damage is done to our movement by people making wild accusations about others being enemy agents than has ever been done by ‘spies’. It has created a climate of suspicion and mistrust which has caused all but the most dedicated nationalists of old to drop out and become inactive. What could be worse than that?
.
As for disproving one of Joe’s accusations, it is not possible to prove a negative. If someone says so-and-so is a spy, how do you prove they are not?
.
Joe has now accused me of being an agent of our enemies, not because of any evidence he has, but simply because he thinks he disagrees with the strategy advocated by Western Spring, when in actual fact much of what he advocates is consistent with what we advocate. However I know that I am not an agent of our enemies, and if I’m not, why should I or anyone else believe any of Joe’s other accusations?
Eddie Stampton
- Edit
I never had you down as a “gangster’s moll” Max. Owens is a total PR disaster for the cause. If you and WS take him seriously, then I no longer take WS seriously.
Max Musson
- Edit
One thing you have to learn Eddie is that there is more than one way to skin a cat. It’s good to know that you take Western Spring seriously. Now all you need is to have faith. It’s hard in a political cesspit to have faith, but if we are to drag ourselves out of the mire, faith in those we know and trust is what is required.
Eddie Stampton
- Edit
I trust and respect you Max. Yo are a genuine gentleman and principled nationalist. Be wary of Owens though.
Stuart
- Edit
Eddie Stampton calling someone else a ‘total PR disaster for the cause’, and ‘crackpot’? Oh the irony.
Maybe he should familiarise himself with Robert Burns:-
O wad some Power the giftie gie us
To see oursels as ithers see us!
And who cares if he’s no longer going to take WS seriously? I mean really, is he a liability or an asset to any worthwhile organisation?
Eddie Stampton
- Edit
The difference is the stuff said about me is for the most part lies, whereas Owens revels in his notoriety.
Stuart
- Edit
Nonetheless, I won’t be employing you to tile my bathroom.
Max Musson
- Edit
Something for you to think about, Stuart, is that on HNH Insider’s Blog today is an article implying that I might be a state agent and claiming that both Eddie Stampton and Jez Turner definitely are. If as Joe Owens claims and most people believe, HNH is a state proxy, why would they tell everyone who their agents are?
.
As a state proxy, HNH would work hand-in-glove with the state and what they write would aim to wrongly accuse honest nationalists of being state agents, in order to discredit them in the eyes of genuine nationalists, while either ignoring their real agents or printing stuff to lionise them in the eyes of our movement.
.
This of course doesn’t mean that everyone mocked by HNH is to be followed or trusted, just that you shouldn’t believe anything they write and as their ‘modus operandi’ can be as convoluted as one’s imagination will allow, we should take no notice of people who claim to have ‘figured out’ that modus operandi to the point whereby they possess an ‘uncanny ability’ to interpret it correctly.
.
As a matter of principle, I take people AS I FIND THEM and I do not allow HNH or Searchlight or the anonymous voices of the nationalist chatterati to influence how I deal with people. This principle rarely wins me any plaudits and generally attracts much criticism, but I stick to it and in my dealings with both Eddie Stampton and Jez Turner I have found them to be honest and trustworthy. In fact, I have found the overwhelming majority of nationalists to be honest and trustworthy. Most accusations that someone is ‘state’ or a Searchlight or HNH informer are wrong and based at best on flawed logic and at worst based on jealousy and petty rivalry.
.
We have to start believing in our own fundamental righteousness. We are after all White men and women and as a matter of personal honour we should as far as is practical, be unerringly honest in our dealings with our fellow nationalists.
Robert
- Edit
Owens is now implying that Max and W.S., Jez, and L.F., and Eddie S. are “Secret State Agents” and proxies of Gable and Lowles – without any evidence or proof, so I now think it’s waste of time trying to reason with him. He bangs on in his videos about PR and “respectability” and getting behind UKIP, yet he himself has admitted to Merseyside gangster connections and sending razor blades in the post to jewish politicians!
Stuart
- Edit
Since my previous comment has been removed, I have sent Max Musson a private email so as to enlighten him to the full story.
Max Musson
- Edit
Hello Stuart,
As you will probably appreciate from reading articles published on Western Spring, one of our initiatives this year is to promote greater nationalist unity.
.
To that end we avoid taking sides in the petty squabbles in which nationalists have become embroiled in the past. We feel it is important that we promote an attitude of magnanimity, forgiveness and reconciliation and this can’t happen if we constantly harp on about real or imagined wrongs that years ago, one individual allegedly committed against another.
.
I am well aware that Eddie Stampton is a ‘Marmite’ character, that people either love or hate, but so are many other people in nationalism and if I shunned everyone I have heard bad stories about there would be few people left for us to try and build a movement with.
.
As I have already stated, I take people as I find them and this is a rule that I adhere to strictly. I don’t listen to tittle-tattle and my experience is that very often, the people who are denigrated by others the most, actually turn out to be decent people. I am also always strictly honest with people who deal with me honestly and by building a reputation for straight dealing and honesty I hope to become someone that all nationalists feel they can rely on for sound advice and good judgement.
.
I’m not asking you to clutch Eddie Stampton to your bosom and welcome him into your home, but by the same token, I don’t want the pages of this website to be used to spread, perpetuate or foment further nationalist division.
.
If I can work productively with Eddie Stampton and with people that Eddie Stampton hates, and who hate him back; if I can work with and trust Jez Turner and also the people who mistrust him; If I can find a way to productively harness the energy of men like Joe Owens as well as the people he denounces; if I can get all of the current warring factions to work together, then I will have found the ‘Holy Grail’ of nationalism and a future nationalist victory will become possible. So let us put aside the ‘he said’, that ‘I said’, that ‘they said’, that he dids, and concentrate on the positive things that will get us all ‘rowing’ in the same direction.
.
Regards,
Max.
Stuart
- Edit
Dear Max,
Do you really think that offensive comments on here including the ‘f’ word, drug taking, half breed, accusing others of being ‘deranged’ and putting one in their nuts, are conducive to getting public support? Do not forget, Western Spring is in the public domain. If you seriously think this is the way ahead, then please, think again.
It appears you have not informed Eddie Stampton of the high standards you now aspire to and asked him to play his part.
‘Promoting Nationalist Unity’? I ask in all seriousness does this mean turning a blind eye to unacceptable codes of conduct and foul language.
Can darkness and light meet? No, the darkness overcomes the light.
Kind regards,
Stuart.
Max Musson
- Edit
You were quite right Stuart, I had overlooked the need to moderate Eddie’s excesses. Something that I have now corrected. I don’t claim to be perfect, but I do my best.
Eddie Stampton
- Edit
Well why not send me a private email “Stuart” telling me the full “story” too, because that is likely all it is – a “story” of fiction or half-truth. Why not use your surname in your posts on here too, as I myself do??
[email protected]
Eddie Stampton
- Edit
In fact “Stuart”, put the “story” up here, so at least I can comment on it
C.B
- Edit
If people are to get anywhere in our aims and ambitions, what is important is that we find ways to move forward and not let the movement slip back into the kinds of quagmire that dogged nationalist politics for decades.
I realise we have to be careful, but I think a line has to be drawn under past issues, whatever they may be, so we can move forward. Life changes, people’s positions and insights can change. What is important is that people are now on board and are being good ambassadors or workers for the aims of this project.
If their actions or deeds are proven to be contrary to these aims, from here on in, then I think it should be more clear who the “agents” and “spies” could be.
I think it is to be expected that subversive people will join this movement, but this is not like previous movements (for example, sending in sleeper agents to scupper election chances, or destroy branches) and I would hope it would be more obvious as to who these people are by means of their actions and words. We have to carry on regardless of potential interlopers, otherwise nothing would ever get done.
People who insist on whispering and spreading gossip, giving away important information or partaking in idiotic actions that can only hinder this project, etc, should be clearly shown up for what they are.
If innocent and genuine people cannot bide doing these things, or being foul mouthed, antagonistic, or whatever, it perhaps shows more about them and their attitudes to this fight than anything else. They would seemingly rather win their personal fights (or go out ‘grandstanding’ in the streets with the opposition, for example) than secure a long term future for the indigenous people of this country.
We do not need dragging down in negativity and personal squabbles. Certain individuals are clearly masters of sowing this kind of discord and helping to feed Searchlight or “Hope Not Hate” as they do so. I would rather they were kept well away from this project for this very reason, no matter how genuine they may be. They risk being nothing but a poisonous return to past failures. In fact this disruptive nature is already manifesting itself in these articles and comment sections, and those of opponent organisations!
I personally think it is time people stopped fannying around by acting in ways that could be seen as dubious or antagonistic to the aims of this project. We have the six pre-requisites and the plan laid forth – and I think anything else ought to be deemed antithetical to this, like being a form of unwanted and undesirable extra-curricular activity that wastes effort and time.
If somebody is truly with this project, then I think their focus ought to solely be upon achieving its aims by means of sticking to the programme. If the parameters are set in this way, I think those who insist on deviating from this programme will show themselves up as being either suspicious or not fully appreciating the nature and intent of this project. Either way, in such circumstances, I think they should be ejected, maybe on a “three strikes and you’re out” basis, no matter who they are.
Max Musson
- Edit
I take on board what you say and I think you are right. My focus on Joe Owens in recent articles was in response to his allegations that I and Western Spring are ‘agents of the secret state’. Such accusations are slanderous and in the normal course of events, we would have the remedy of being able to sue the person spreading such allegations, however I believe Joe Owens to be in legal parlance ‘a man of straw’, i.e. someone with so little in the way of personal assets that it would be a pointless and expensive waste of time suing him.
.
In one of his earlier videos Joe Owens raises the fact that people he has slandered haven’t taken him to task over his allegations, and his assumption has been that if people don’t confront him then that should be taken as an admission of guilt. So I have confronted him, albeit in an unusually polite way, and while he has continued to defame other people, he appears to have thought again and stopped defaming me. Let us hope that lasts.
.
I know that many people find Joe’s many mannerisms, digressions, repetitions and his malapropisms quite funny, but beneath all of that I sense that he is honest in his endeavours and although his paranoia has caused him to unfairly condemn a number of people I believe to be good nationalists, he has undoubtedly been right with some of his accusations, and many of his tactical and strategic observations have also been accurate.
.
I’m very fond of the principle that wherever possible we should have people with us, ‘inside the tent, pissing out’, rather than ‘outside the tent, pissing in’, and this is why I have felt it appropriate to expend some effort to get Joe more on our side.
C.B
- Edit
I think you have handled the matter very fairly and responsibly. My comment was in no way a criticism of tackling the issue. I also see Joe Owens as being a passionate advocate of the cause, and I do share much of his positions on what kind of topics and material would be suitable for public consumption, etc, and indeed that some of those who tend to get carried away to the contrary can be “dafties”.
However, I do not feel he has either grasped – nor would be interested in grasping – the wider suggestions and rationale that Western Spring have put forward.
If he has grasped it, I have not seen much evidence of it yet – or evidence of him properly refuting it. In which case, he would being disingenuous and purposefully misrepresenting it in order to ply his own strategies (that we already know lead to failure, no matter what the message is, or how it is delivered).
I too normally take the view that people should be believed until shown otherwise – and I appreciate that we need pragmatism in terms of interacting with other people, other groups, and them working together.
However, a problem could soon arise where people who become associated with this movement decide to take on their own activities – activities that can bring unwelcome noise and risk to the aims and objectives of Western Spring.
I have been (and tend to remain) somewhat critical of all sorts of other endeavours – such as small street demonstrations, rallies, tweets, etc – even when it has gained some media coverage. People out with banners, megaphones, and so on – whilst, at the same time, reaching backwards to those like Joe (who do not seem to want to snap out of late 1990’s to mid 2000’s BNP electioneering processes), all seem to be a continuance of having the old “movement” rather than aiming to limit things to (and move ahead with) the pre-requisites laid out.
For various reasons, I have no right to say what others should or should not be doing. But as a general observer it seems that the original aims and objectives could start being lost in preference to, or in need of, recruiting those who either do not really believe in it, those who could drag it into the pantomimes of the past, or those who could prove to be liabilities.
It certainly isn’t an easy one to balance out. Bringing people on side and also asking them to curtail their other activities is going to be difficult. However, it may be much easier to identify friends from foes if this was the case.
If people behave, play their role, earn trust, keep their heads down – it moves things forward, whether they are state assets or not. Those who misbehave, take matters into their own hands, or endlessly give Searchlight all the gossip and rumours they need to keep us in a tiny argumentative box……well, they are the cells to cut out, no matter what their virtues and values may be.
drquartz
- Edit
I said I wouldn’t even bother to watch his earlier videos until he had accepted your offer of meeting for lunch to discuss various issues and you had reported back on what was said. And Indeed I haven’t done so.
But I did watch that latest one – or at least some of it – where he fails to accept your invitation. I have to say I got very bored with his repetition.
I found it a little difficult to follow some of his arguments, and actually found myself wondering which side of the fence he was on at times. A script might have helped him, I think.
But the worse part was – and it always bores me to tears – the constant use of the word ‘right’.
In most cases I have found that those pontificating, who constantly use this word, are actually trying to convince themselves they are correct, and seeking confirmation from their audience. I don’t think I shall waste my time with any more of his amateurish videos.
By the way. Who is Joe Owens? Where did he come from? What is his background? Until your Open Letter I’d never heard of him, and now I have heard of the man, I can’t say that he has enriched my life with his utterings.
Stefan
- Edit
I don’t think any of us have been enriched by Joe Owens, he’s had more than his fair share of the limelight now.
Stuart
- Edit
All this fuss because he called you ‘state’. So what. Why are you so sensitive after all these years. Stop whimpering like little boys. If you want to be involved in politics then the first thing you need to do is develop a thick skin. Take lessons from Jeremy Corbyn who had everything thrown at him; refused to quit, and proved he was an overcomer. You are in a battle for your very survival, a battle between good and evil, you are bound to have a few sharp words come your way. Shrug them off. No one could put it better than Shakespeare. Something about slings and arrows:-
To be, or not to be, that is the question:
Whether ’tis Nobler in the mind to suffer
The Slings and Arrows of outrageous Fortune,
Or to take Arms against a Sea of troubles,
And by opposing end them:
In modern parlance – Get over it.