INFORMATION

This website uses cookies to store information on your computer. Some of these cookies are essential to make our site work and others help us to improve by giving us some insight into how the site is being used. For further information, see our Privacy Policy.

Angel Garden & Steve Paris still defame and harass others

Message
Author
Maria Mac
Site Admin
Posts: 8761
Joined: July 3rd, 2007, 10:34 pm

Angel Garden & Steve Paris still defame and harass others

#1 Postby Maria Mac » December 13th, 2013, 10:40 am

The other thread was getting rather long and, as their hate campaign is still going on, I'm starting a new one. I don't record every incident of nastiness, bullying, defamation and harassment by Angel Garden and Steve Paris of other people. All I've ever done is post a few highlights of what I've seen. It hasn't stopped them but, based on what they were doing before I even heard of them (two of their victims joined up and commented in the other thread), I've no reason to think ignoring them would stop them either.

To recap, back in February 2012, Angel Garden posted a comment on Andy Lewis's blog, which initially went into moderation because it was link-heavy. Angel, started to harangue Andy with tweets and emails, because she thought he was deliberately censoring her. In fact, he wasn't even on-line. When he finally read the comment Angel had submitted, he saw that it contained a paragraph sniping at a couple of other named individuals and he realised that Angel was trying to bring to his blog a personal squabble that had nothing to do with him. He politely explained to Angel that he would not be publishing her comment and why.

Angel has written all this in an account here, showing the tweets and emails in question. Andy has given his side of the story more concisely here. Funnily enough, these two accounts do not contradict each other.

I would urge anyone who is seriously interested in understanding this conflict to read Angel's account right to the bottom, however boring you find it.

Be sure to read the correspondence at the bottom. Then decide who you think was being reasonable and who was being unreasonable. If you think Angel's behaviour was reasonable, or Andy's unreasonable, please explain why. You are welcome to use this thread as long as you don't use it as a platform to repeat Angel and Steve's attacks on their various targets.

Edited 21.2.15 to add links to tweets Angel directed at Andy and tweets about him she directed at others.

For those who aren't that bothered in understanding the conflict, I'll just highlight Andy's second and final email to Angel:

From: Andy Lewis
Subject: Re: Comment policy on your blog
Date: 29 February 2012 09:40 (19 minutes after the last tweet)
To: Angel Garden

This is the last time I will communicate with you on this matter as it is a little bit boring.

Your original post would have been published had it not been flagged by my automatic spam catcher.

You have subsequently been attacking me on blog posts and tweets and left them there long after you knew the facts.

This behaviour does not fit within my definition of being in the spirit of good debate.

You clearly have issues with other people and these disputes are of no interest to me. Nor will my blog be used as a platform in anyway for others. It is my blog. This is not censorship. It is a private space and what is published there is at my sole discretion. You have your own spaces by the look of things.*

But to repeat, my issue with publishing your comments is primarily about your behaviour, not your views.

I hope this is clear to you,

Regards

Andy


*Italics added. Andy has one website, Angel has several. The comment Andy rejected contained links to two of them. Then there is the one linked to above, which in turn links to a fourth. They also have several Twitter accounts including: @amazonnewsmediam @gardenangel, @steinermentary, @sjparis. ETA: Steve has also stated that he has "several" youtube accounts.

Any reasonable person receiving that email would surely have given up the idea of posting a comment on that particular individual's blog but Angel is not reasonable, nor is her husband Steve. For 19 months they have harassed and smeared Andy because he wouldn't allow Angel's comment on his blog. Their allegation, repeated over and over and over again, is that Andy "ignores human rights", "is actually trashing kids", is "provably hostile to human rights", "disregards human rights", "dismisses human rights", "publishes untruths against kids", "hiding facts that could benefit his readers", etc, etc, etc.

Image
(DAL = Dr Andy Lewis)

Ask them for evidence of any of these allegations and they will slither and slide and respond with crass insults. For them - if not for anyone else - the fact that Andy didn't let them tell their story on his personal blog, together with the one blog post he has written in response to them is evidence in itself that he is doing all those terrible things they publicly accuse him of at every opportunity. In my next comment I'll bring things up to date. First, I'll leave you with the last exchange I had and intend to have with them. It begins with Angel quoting me.

Image
Last edited by Maria Mac on February 21st, 2015, 7:54 pm, edited 4 times in total.
Reason: To add screenshots of tweets.

Maria Mac
Site Admin
Posts: 8761
Joined: July 3rd, 2007, 10:34 pm

Re: Angel Garden & Steve Paris still defame and harass other

#2 Postby Maria Mac » December 13th, 2013, 10:44 am

Now to bring us up to date. A couple of weeks ago I spotted this comment by Angel under a piece by Nick Cohen in the Observer entitled:

Universities should be the last place to ban free speech

Image

I checked her user profile and found she had made a very similar one a month earlier, in the Guardian, under a piece entitled:

Whether it's Facebook or lads' mags, censorship should always be a last resort

Image

I'll leave it to readers to decide whether these comments were polite, useful, on-topic, etc, but the moderator at theguardian.com evidently agreed with me that they were in breach of forum standards and they were removed soon after I'd reported them.

I tweeted my thanks to the moderators (or "crowed" as Angel put it) and wasn't at all surprised to see, a short time later, this comment under the Nick Cohen piece. It's interesting for what it confirms about Angel's thinking process. I reported it and it was removed as well.

Image

Steve later tweeted something about moderators removing "non-aggressive" tweets. In Angel and Steve's world, it seems that stating that the BHA is giving a platform to someone who "openly disregards facts about real children...their welfare, their human rights," and all the rest of it, are "polite" and "non-aggressive". Note Angel's claim that these "facts are checkable in about 30 seconds" without giving readers a clue or a link to where one might find these so-called facts.

Again, anyone reading who thinks that this is a perfectly reasonable and just and ethical way to behave, please explain why? Please include how you think you yourself might feel if you were being targetted in this way. And if you were in charge of a newspaper and saw those allegations made on a website you are responsible for, what do you think you're reaction would be?

I was recently alerted to Angel's latest post which gives her side of the story. Do read it if you enjoy reading the usual 'me, me, me, I'm such a victim' (eta: plus plenty of vitriol about Andy Lewis) stuff and she still doesn't seem to know that three, not two, of her comments were moderated. The only notable thing in her piece, AFAIC, was this remark:
(I think I’m beginning to understand the deployment of Maria MacLachlan to “deal” with the situation.)

:D
In case, you're wondering what on earth she's talking about, Steve and Angel have officially adopted a strategy of denial that anyone who criticises or challenges them may actually have read all the evidence and come to a conclusion that is different to theirs. The stance they are taking is that we are all "mates" and, it seems, we are all mindless morons who can't see the truth for our "confirmation bias". (As I've said before, I hardly know Andy Lewis!) They've tweeted to that effect more times than I've had hot dinners and then whinge about people insulting them! I, apparently, am being "deployed"....jesus wept!

Angel and Steve would undoubtedly defend this ongoing insult against their critics is as another of their "facts". But at least you don't see me tweet dozens of tweets crying about how I'm being harassed, bullied and targetted. That's what Angel does - over and over and over again and without a trace of irony.

Cogent? Scary? Who cares?

According to a press release written by Angel Garden herself, she has a degree in drama (no surprise there) and is "a successful actor, producer and director", though - as with everything Angel claims - the evidence for this latter is somewhat sparse.

I have the greatest of admiration for actors, producers and directors. As she is so successful (according to her own definition of the word) at these pursuits, it's a shame she doesn't focus on them instead of continuing to try to exploit her child's unhappy experience at Steiner school four years ago to gain the attention she so desperately craves.

Why doesn't she and Steve just leave people who've made it clear they want nothing to do with her alone?

Maria Mac
Site Admin
Posts: 8761
Joined: July 3rd, 2007, 10:34 pm

Re: Angel Garden & Steve Paris still defame and harass other

#3 Postby Maria Mac » March 16th, 2014, 10:28 am

Image

Maria Mac
Site Admin
Posts: 8761
Joined: July 3rd, 2007, 10:34 pm

Re: Angel Garden & Steve Paris still defame and harass other

#4 Postby Maria Mac » April 9th, 2014, 10:24 pm

In case anyone feels like donating...
http://www.amazonnewsmedia.com/ANM/Support.html


2014-04-09_22h38_48.png
2014-04-09_22h38_48.png (102.73 KiB) Viewed 6598 times


"Currently fighting a court case against people who don't want this information shared". It sounds as if people are trying to sue them, doesn't it? Extraordinary.

:rolleyes:

User avatar
Dave B
Posts: 17809
Joined: May 17th, 2010, 9:15 pm

Re: Angel Garden & Steve Paris still defame and harass other

#5 Postby Dave B » April 10th, 2014, 9:35 am

I have totally lost track of this. I presume it is Garden and Paris, since they are the "reporters" for Amazon News, who are asking for subs?
"Look forward; yesterday was a lesson, if you did not learn from it you wasted it."
Me, 2015

User avatar
animist
Posts: 6030
Joined: July 30th, 2010, 11:36 pm

Re: Angel Garden & Steve Paris still defame and harass other

#6 Postby animist » April 10th, 2014, 9:51 am

tempting to help out their opponents, whoever they are!

Maria Mac
Site Admin
Posts: 8761
Joined: July 3rd, 2007, 10:34 pm

Re: Angel Garden & Steve Paris still defame and harass other

#7 Postby Maria Mac » April 10th, 2014, 12:26 pm

Goodness me. It really sounds as if they are fighting to defend their websites and youtube channel against nasty people who are trying to make their story disappear.

:idea:

I wonder why they don't spell it out - they'd surely get more support if they did.
Attachments
9.4.14.png
9.4.14.png (29.14 KiB) Viewed 6580 times

User avatar
Tetenterre
Posts: 3192
Joined: March 13th, 2011, 11:36 am

Re: Angel Garden & Steve Paris still defame and harass other

#8 Postby Tetenterre » April 18th, 2014, 9:44 am

Guess which poor, hard done-by, darlings :rolleyes: (diddums!) immediately lurched to mind when I saw this:

Image

(Also worth going clicky and doing the mouseover thing....)
Steve

Quantum Theory: The branch of science with which people who know absolutely sod all about quantum theory can explain anything.

Maria Mac
Site Admin
Posts: 8761
Joined: July 3rd, 2007, 10:34 pm

Re: Angel Garden & Steve Paris still defame and harass other

#9 Postby Maria Mac » April 18th, 2014, 11:24 am

:hilarity: Brilliant - absolutely spot on!

Maria Mac
Site Admin
Posts: 8761
Joined: July 3rd, 2007, 10:34 pm

Re: Angel Garden & Steve Paris still defame and harass other

#10 Postby Maria Mac » April 26th, 2014, 1:22 am

Attachments
kb sjp 23.4.14.png
kb sjp 23.4.14.png (28.06 KiB) Viewed 6429 times

Maria Mac
Site Admin
Posts: 8761
Joined: July 3rd, 2007, 10:34 pm

Re: Angel Garden & Steve Paris still defame and harass other

#11 Postby Maria Mac » April 26th, 2014, 11:35 am

So what have we got? Claims that there are people who "don't want this information shared", "want to hide it and make it disappear" and "force court action" together with an admission that nobody is suing them or apparently trying to get their websites etc., where they tell their story, taken down.

It's beginning to look as if they are the ones taking legal action against other people - but for what exactly? They don't say. If that is indeed the case then it is the most misleading appeal for funds I've ever seen.
Attachments
anm progressives force court action.png
anm progressives force court action.png (14.21 KiB) Viewed 6423 times

kbell
Posts: 1146
Joined: July 3rd, 2007, 11:27 pm

Re: Angel Garden & Steve Paris still defame and harass other

#12 Postby kbell » April 28th, 2014, 2:40 am

This is for Steve, who got a bit confused during our last exchange on Twitter. :yahbooh:


Kathryn
Kathryn

Maria Mac
Site Admin
Posts: 8761
Joined: July 3rd, 2007, 10:34 pm

Re: Angel Garden & Steve Paris still defame and harass other

#13 Postby Maria Mac » April 28th, 2014, 11:02 am

Nice one, K. In fairness, he wasn't the only one.

For anyone else: I think Kathryn aka @kittiebluebell responded to a couple of tweets Steve intended for me. As a result he thinks we're the same person. :)

Maria Mac
Site Admin
Posts: 8761
Joined: July 3rd, 2007, 10:34 pm

Re: Angel Garden & Steve Paris still defame and harass other

#14 Postby Maria Mac » April 28th, 2014, 5:00 pm

By the way,

Image

I see Steve ignored this question at the time. I wonder why? The screenshots of the DMs in question have the tweeter's named removed. Again, why?

Image

Image
Image

At least he acknowledges that sockpuppetry entrapment is "lying and deceiving".

Maria Mac
Site Admin
Posts: 8761
Joined: July 3rd, 2007, 10:34 pm

Re: Angel Garden & Steve Paris still defame and harass other

#15 Postby Maria Mac » August 9th, 2014, 7:01 pm

I'm sticking this in Angel and Steve's thread because they've been trying to wage another smear campaign on twitter, this time against the BHA (good luck with that! :D) and it may be useful for me to have something to point people to.

I discovered their latest nonsense when I happened on a tweet - addressed to BHA ceremonies, for some reason - from a tweeter called @1stClown yesterday. It said the BHA should "do something useful like stand up to Steiner school lies and bullying".

Excuse me? If it were not for the BHA battling and winning against the DfE, those lies and bullying would have stayed covered up. Now they are widely known about. How is that not useful?

On being challenged, s/he went on to say "their policy on Steiner is spineless and hypocritical" and s/he justified this with - surprise, surprise - a link to an article on one of Angel and Steve's numerous websites.

As this article contains nothing about BHA's policy on Steiner schools and certainly nothing that was either spineless or hypocritical. I asked Clownie where the beef was and s/he responded with
BHA don't mention it as a concern
Say it's not a concern of theirs
Then say it's always been a concern.

(The 'it' being bullying.) This allegation, of course, says nothing about the BHA policy on Steiner schools, which is consistent with its policy on religious schools which, in a nutshell, is that they should not be state funded because their students are being indoctrinated with dangerous and harmful BS. The allegation also says nothing about the fact that the BHA battled to get those documents as part of its campaign against Steiner schools. What is "spineless and hypocritical" about any of that? Maybe Clownie would like to register here and tell us?

Finally, it is an allegation that is demonstrably untrue. On the BHA web page where they have posted a report on the contents of the documents obtained, the BHA specifically states that their existing concerns about Steiner schools "can now be added to by those found in the briefings the DfE has been forced to release" (my emphasis). So they are NOT saying bullying has "always been a concern" of theirs, that's just a lie Clownie picked up from Steve/Angel.

Steve/Angel's gripe can be summed up thus: They have evidence of bullying in Steiner schools, the BHA didn't want to know about. Now it's a "sudden longstanding concern" of the charity and the BHA will end up getting the kudos that should rightfully go to Steve and Angel.

As they write in the article Clownie directed me to:
The truly awful implication, despite the fact that unchecked bullying is the most widely reported problem by families leaving Steiner schools worldwide, is that if the DfE memos had not mentioned it, the BHA would have continued to deny its relevance, thus obfuscating its importance within Steiner pedagogy as well as its dangers for children, while being praised for exposing them. After all, that was their clearly stated position until the Newsnight interview, where they then suddenly revealed, for the first time, that not only is unchecked bullying part of the pedagogy but they've always been worried about it.

Unmitigated bollocks from a pair of bitter, frustrated wannabes.

They tell us that when they contacted the BHA months ago to complain about the fact that bullying isn't mentioned in the BHA's briefing on Steiner schools, they were told by Richy Thompson that he hadn't looked into it and that it didn't need to be included because they had enough on Steiner schools without it.

This was true and it would still be true even if the evidence for bullying hadn't been unearthed, even if bullying really wasn't an issue in any Steiner School anywhere! The position of the BHA has not changed, it is opposed to Steiner schools because of Steiner pedagogy and pseudoscience regardless of whether this leads to bullying. The revelations of the DfE documents are simply revelations. Hopefully they will help to put parents off Steiner but they make no difference to the BHA's policy on Steiner schools and the praise the BHA is due is not for exposing bullying but for their for their persistence in trying to get the documents in the face of DfE opposition and for their wider campaign against Steiner and religious schools. I wonder if it ever occurred to Steve/Angel that getting that FOI request from the DfE would have been a more constructive use of time - both in campaigning against Steiner and getting the attention they are desperate for - than their pathetic smear campaigns against various individuals and the BHA?

Of course it didn't.

The problem with Steve/Angel is that their single-minded focus on bullying and their expectation that every opponent of Steiner should share that focus, even when they don't need to - and the BHA doesn't need to - blinkers them to any other perspective than their own. They are in denial about the fact that the BHA can manage perfectly well without their help and that, in fact, all they do when they contact BHA people who are working their nuts off on their various worthwhile campaigns, is waste their bloody time.

Maria Mac
Site Admin
Posts: 8761
Joined: July 3rd, 2007, 10:34 pm

Re: Angel Garden & Steve Paris still defame and harass other

#16 Postby Maria Mac » August 11th, 2014, 12:01 pm

I'm indebted to Angel for this demonstration of how her mind works. Here's a tweet from me last year that made her angry enough to bash out a rant of her website; I wrote about it in my second comment on this thread.
Image

I had publicly thanked the mods for removing comments I'd reported in order to alert Angel that her off-topic smearing comments had been removed. Angel is still so bitter about it that she still goes on about it thus:

Image
Image

Goodness knows how she interprets that tweet as gloating about having influenced anyone. I don't care for her use of the quotation marks around the word as if she's attributing it to me but at least it gifts me with yet another example of her unashamed mendacity.

Cheers, Angel. :thumbsup:

Maria Mac
Site Admin
Posts: 8761
Joined: July 3rd, 2007, 10:34 pm

Re: Angel Garden & Steve Paris still defame and harass other

#17 Postby Maria Mac » November 14th, 2014, 12:14 am

Boo! :yahbooh:

kbell
Posts: 1146
Joined: July 3rd, 2007, 11:27 pm

Re: Angel Garden & Steve Paris still defame and harass other

#18 Postby kbell » December 14th, 2014, 5:13 pm

Athena wrote:Boo! :yahbooh:

You little tease! I take it nothing's happened recently. [Edited by admin for legal reasons] He hasn't been on twitter for ages. Seems odd for someone who used to tweet so much to stop suddenly without explanation. Hope he's OK.
Kathryn

Maria Mac
Site Admin
Posts: 8761
Joined: July 3rd, 2007, 10:34 pm

Re: Angel Garden & Steve Paris still defame and harass other

#19 Postby Maria Mac » December 14th, 2014, 9:17 pm

You hope he's OK? Why's that then? I couldn't care less what he does as long as he's given up the harassment. ETA: I suspect he's still on twitter using one of their other accounts.

Sorry for editing your post but some things are better left unsaid at the moment.



Return to “"Whistleblowing" internet bullies especially Angel Garden (aka AmazonNewsMedia) and Steve Paris”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest