A Rebuttal To The 'Irate' Live-Stream On Us, Once We Stopped Face-Palming

Nice layout though, we have to concede that.
Seems like we're twisting the right tails, and hard, because 'IrateBear' on YouTube (nope, we'd never heard of him either) seemed to be rather, well, irate, with us - and chose to devote almost an entire 2 hour video about our work.

Er, we're ... honoured ? (we're really not)

The vid is lower down if you really want to listen/view - but unless your humour level is that of a 14 year old, or you really like a guy ranting about not very much for 2 hours, you won't get any enjoyment from it.
Apparently this is him.
Just as we imagined.
Well, we watched the stream - okay, we ff'warded through most of it, it's way too overlong and excruciatingly boring - and we have a few small comments. We just know he's panting with desire awaiting our reaction, like a little puppy dog, desperate for attention.

We actually thought of doing a point-by-point rebuttal, but seriously, it's all just too MHFW for that.

After working past 12 minutes of various 'bear' memes, wading through the 'Ghost Poo' (seriously, grow up, kid?) and being assaulted by third-rate metal (it wasn't even good metal) the stream finally began. By the end, we'd reached our conclusion : All rather uninformed, childish and of little merit or substance.

His main point seemed to be : He doesn't like what we do.

Well, gee, there's a shocker. Fine :-)

We hadn't even noticed what HE was doing. In fact, he seemed very upset that we hadn't even noticed him at all. He even stated "FRW will probably add me to one their little lists after they watch this back."

So, a few points of note :

  1. We enjoyed his frantic, lengthy and ultimately futile search for the article on our site that he actually wanted to discuss. And he never did find it. Nice preparation work, there.
  2. 'Fucking Lazy' he called us, on account of our short pieces. 'Concise and to the point' is our defence. In fact, the comments of value he actually came out with over 2 hours would have fitted in a 5 minute video. And we might have watched more of it. Seriously, 2 hours? Concise works.
  3. We were amused he thought we, or one of us, was Kevin Logan. We're sure Kev'll get a real kick out of that ... whoever he is :-)
  4. On Windrush, he claimed we were selling merchandise. We're not 'selling merchandise', of course, but we did promote the people who are, with profits to four charities, which he would have known had he read the piece. But that would mean being prepared and informed, and frankly neither seem to be his forte.
  5. He kept having to stop and start because he was cooking dinner, or his cat was in the way, or ... something. We couldn't really follow it.
  6. He managed to spend thirty minutes talking about a completely different, unconnected group of people, our USA friends at Right Wing Watch. Bravo. Fine work, that.
  7. And how nice that he taunted us from behind a wall. He asked for us to reply on stream -- after timing us out. Real integrity, there. He also stated he'd invite us back and never did. (Not that we'd bother with his amateur hour)
  8. He decried our sources. The difference is, of course ... that we have them.

In all, rather infantile. Still, the fact that someone would devote such time to attempt (and fail) to debunk us must mean something. We guess.

No idea what, though :-)

Here's the vid - and if you really must watch / listen, don't say we didn't warn you. :-)