September 22, 2011

Nadine Dorries vs Tim Ireland – soon to feature a knock down punch (metaphorically).

Filed under: Uncategorized — madaxeman @ 11:50 am

Nadine Dorries has published yet another series of amazing claims against Tim Ireland.

Let us remind ourselves that this is the man she considers poses a threat to her. Yes – that man – the one she’s spent the past couple of years repeatedly poking with a stick. Him. You might think such provocation is something that, in her shoes, you might have looked to avoid – but you just don’t understand you see – She’s Nadine! She’s right! All hail the great leadress!

Of course, and I don’t mean to be controversial here, it could just be that her claims are bullshit. I know – she’s an MP, and we ought to be able to expect a better standard etc. etc… But really, which is more likely?

If you happen to be me, it’s no longer a question of degrees – because I got off my backside and actually did some research myself. Tim Ireland has not accepted, and nor was he offered a caution. Nadine knows this to be the case. She’s a Member of Parliament, and not nearly so ignorant of the facts as she might choose to pretend. She also knows, as she always has known, that Tim was never warned by Police not to enter Bedfordshire. If she continues to maintain, or even continues to imply that either of these happened then I’m afraid we must consider her to be either ill, dishonest, or both. Whatever the truth, one wonders if Mid Bedfordshire are really getting value for money from this MP…

Researching this matter wasn’t very difficult either – just a matter of phoning the Bedfordshire Police and talking to them about it. This is all very odd really – because if I, just some interested bloke on the internet can do that, then you might be forgiven for expecting this not to be beyond the wit of the Conservative Party themselves, nor indeed that of certain members of the press… You would think that they might take a position on a Member of Parliament who seems to be throwing ridiculous slurs around in a seemingly desperate effort to throw off political scrutiny, wouldn’t you… But that’s not how politics is done in Britain any more…

Well, to her post again…

Some time ago, Tim Ireland, who hosts a number of objectionable websites, was questioned for five hours by Bedfordshire Police. Under caution and on tape, he was given a warning as to how his actions could be construed in relation to Section 2 of the Harassment Act.

I wasn’t there, so can’t comment as to exactly what happened – but I can say this for certain… Being interviewed under caution implies absolutely nothing in terms of whether the police believe, or any evidence suggests, that you are guilty of an offence. It merely ensures that the individual concerned has been advised of his / her rights, that the conversation will be admissible in court, and therefore is routinely used by the police whenever they question anyone whom might possibly be subjected to charges later. At the time, with an allegation having been made, it is perfectly right, indeed also proper, that the police would interview Tim under caution.

This is however very different to “having accepted a caution” – which refers to a suspect admitting guilt in a matter and having the matter recorded on his / her criminal record, but not going to court or facing any other punitive measure. Nadine is not an idiot (did I really type that?) – she knows this. If she didn’t, and she has a vote in the House of Commons, then both the House and the public at large need to be asking some seriously searching questions.

I also think it’s interesting to note that Nadine fails to describe this warning as a “formal warning”. Maybe I’m being pedantic, but I don’t think I am…

Before and after that interview I had a number of meetings with the Police at which notes were taken.

So what? I’ve had a meeting with clients today and then went out for a sandwich… My lunchtime indulgences cannot be said to lend any particular import or credence to the business transacted in that meeting… Similarly, by extension, I really don’t care if Nadine Dorries entered a police station armed with a notepad.

Weeks ago, Tim Ireland applied for and was sent the redacted notes using the FOI act. I assume he will publish them.

Oh I’m sure Nadine won’t be disappointed in that regard in the fullness of time, but since Tim is supposed to be the enbodiment of evil, how come he hasn’t published them already? Surely, this is what we would expect “a particularly obsessive” gentleman “bombarding her office” to do, is it not?

The truth is that at the moment, Tim is being careful not to prejudice a criminal trial – because the courts are currently engaged of someone who has made threats against Tim, and the Dorries stuff is involved in the trial. Tim appreciates that this is a serious matter, and knows that it means, for now, that he can’t publish everything this evening – as I’m sure he would like to do. However, Tim is a patient man, and each new dawn takes us one day closer.

I have had access to these documents, have studied them, and therefore know what they say. But it’s Tim’s right, when he is able, to break that story – not mine. I can’t possibly tell you what’s in those documents – but I will say this :

You really, REALLY want to know!

My lawyer’s details were on the notes and Tim Ireland has begun his usual tirade of repetitively contacting anyone whose name or details he obtains who has even the remotest connection to me.  My lawyers will not be responding to his requests.

I’m not falling for that one either…

I myself, having made a single solitary Freedom Of Information request in an attempt to learn how much time Nadine’s staff had spent monitoring the internet activity of Tim, myself, and other non-supportive individuals (that would be “None”, by the way…) only to have it thrown in my face that it would be interesting to see how much I cost the taxpayer. Nadine / her staff seem to play fast and loose with this sort of thing…

Of course, Carter Ruck are a well established law firm. Interesting that they haven’t made this allegation themselves then, or even supported it at all, isn’t it?

In the mean time Nadine, you’ve claimed time and time again that Tim has bombarded your office etc with emails, yet oddly when you have been asked (using the Data Protection Act) to provide copies, you’ve failed to do so… If these emails really do exist, publish them – complete with mail headers please. Or STFU. Your choice…

People who follow him on Twitter only see what he writes about me, they are not aware of the phone calls he makes or the emails he sends to third parties. This includes people to whom I may make a general reference on the blog who may not even have a connection to me or be even remotely political, which is both distressing for them and embarrassing for me.

Well, that’s probably because you never publish the evidence to allow us to judge it for ourselves? Let’s take the example of Forsaken shall we? Tim Ireland claims that the only messages he sent Forsaken prior to your claims that he was bombarding them were :

On 03 November 2010 at 15:26 [AT] wrote:

]  Hi,
] You just received a message via the contact form of your website.
] The message was sent from
] You can change the e-mail address form messages are sent to. Just log in
] to your website, click on the form and change the e-mail address in the
] text box “Send message to the following e-mail address”.
] Your message:
] ————————————-
] Name: Tim Ireland
] E_mail: [AT]
] Phone:
] Question: Nadine Dorries described you in the House of Commons as a
] charity. You are not registered with the Charity Commission. Was Dorries
] mistaken, perhaps? Would be grateful if you could clear this up for me.
] Cheers.


from Tim Ireland
to “info [AT]”
date Thu, Nov 4, 2010 at 8:24 AM
subject Re: Message via

Nadine Dorries spoke of you in the House of Commons as if you were an established institution. How long have you been operating? Is this your first financial year?


Please Nadine, explain to us how this counts? Or of course produce the silver bullet of evidence that Tim is hiding from us all – probably stashed down the back of the sock drawer over at his hollowed out volcano secret lair no doubt…

But if you can’t, then as I have asked above, please STFU.

He targets others too, Including Iain Dale and Guido amongst many, just with not quite the same ferocity. Which leads me and others to think that maybe his special hatred is reserved for women.

Just an idea, but maybe he’s just someone who thinks that people who enter parliament should expect, indeed welcome scrutiny – and gets a little bit annoyed when they libel him on multiple occasions in a pathetic attempt to avoid that same scrutiny. Maybe he doesn’t like being threatened…

Maybe this is a special, burning, passionate loathing he reserves just for Nadine. With all she has done to provoke him, I rather doubt any of us would hold it against him.


Leave a Comment »

No comments yet.

RSS feed for comments on this post. TrackBack URI

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

Blog at

%d bloggers like this: