For all of you who don't understand the disgust with the Daily Mail...

[Spero]

I have just been told they have published an article about John Hemming in which they name me. Both my real name and my user name.

Luckily for me I don't care. Luckily for me I decided long ago I would never put anything on line that I would be ashamed/upset/frightened for anyone else to read.

But for lots of people this would be a complete and utter disaster. People post really personal and sensitive stuff on this site about the worst times of their lives, looking for help and support. They must know that.

Note that they never bothered contacting me to find out which category I fell into.

So if anyone wants to start another wide eyed innocent thread - o I just don't understand why you all hate the Daily Mail so much!

Does this kind of thing help you understand a little more?

I will link to the scum bags but only because I hope people might leave some 'helpful' comments about JH.

www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2532649/MP-John-Hemming-banned-Mumsnet-posting-Italian-woman-forced-courts-caesarean.html?ITO=1490&ns_mchannel=rss&ns_campaign=1490

What a fucking Torag! Toerag!?

It is deeply disappointing that no journalist think his mad conspiracy frothings worthy of even comment, let alone investigation.

But if him being pissed on a thread and outing members of this forum is the hook that gets people into reading a bit more about him and all his cronies, then good, our work is done.

so, Spero, you think it is OK to be anonymous on here and to use words that your professional body disapproves of about him? seems a bit pot and kettle to me.

Indeed Maryz.

If he is so careless about posting a baby's name, I imagine he is just one slip of a fat finger away from - oooops! - posting an adopter's name.

And given that he ACTIVELY ENCOURAGES people to believe their babies have been stolen for money, this could have really serious consequences.

IMO it just highlights why JH was using the 'outing' of posters to flex his MP muscle. Imagine if the person he had outed was also asking for help with DV? This is why he wants us to be scared of him. Nasty little man.

Higgle

You seem to be missing the point.

It is precisely because I agreed it was not fair for me to be anonymous that I agreed to give JH my name.

So he could complain about me.

As has been demonstrated today in the national press, I clearly do NOT post here anonymously.

Higgle. She was told not to use one specific word. Which she hasn't. She was not told to use the other words she quoted above. You've read it wrong.

O and btw it was not 'words'. It was 'word'. One word.

And I still maintain that his behaviour fitted the dictionary definition of that word but because he had been absolved by Parliament of that particular offence I agreed not to use the word again.

But don't worry. I have plenty of others.

Oh sorry Spero. X post.

I might have guessed that the DM would be all over his particular brand of arseholery (SAHM and carer, no professional body to complain to, so I'll use the word that fits)

He has been making a twat of himself in front of 4.3 million voters, so that may make the lib dems reconsider their choices

The "didn't know" defence is just ridiculous. Even if he didn't know the italian law on it, he clearly knows the british law on family court/privacy because he is an active campaigner against it!

He is definitely aware that the recently fostered child lives in Britain, as that was what the entire discussion was about. So he has intentionally broken a british law that he campaigns against, bullshit was it an accident.

And any journalist that is accepting "oops" as an excuse needs to have a think about how gullible they are

I agree with todaysdate btw - this is a public forum, we have a slim veneer of anonymity, but it's not that difficult for somebody to figure out who somebody is if enough personal stuff is posted.

I try very hard to only post what I can 'afford' - emotionally and from a privacy point of view (some MNers know me in RL, know where I live and what I do for a living - and I am conscious of that).

Higgle...try reading the thread.

I have not complained about myself yet, that might be attention seeking to far.

Maryz have you been on the Baileys? J'accuse!

The kitchen, that's interesting.

Spero, recently C4 had reason to want to quote a friend, who was integral to the story. The editor /producer was v clear that it was their policy to contact people, not nec to gain consent, but to apprise them that they would be mentioned.

That is not the same, obv, as in this case, where your name is not integral. Even more therefore should they have contacted you and in this case asked consent.

It seems to me that you have a reasonable case to make. But the word the editor/ producer used was policy, no more.

That all said, it leaves a sour taste in the mouth. Sympathy and support.

Was he the cat man?

Fancy mistaking MN for Hansard! He's either a shyster for abusing parliamentary privilege or an incompetent (whereas an MP ought to ve at least vaguely interested in the law).

That's work.

At home.... welll....
But Mr Hemming said he was ‘not really that bothered’ about being banned. ‘My eight-year-old daughter is thrilled I'm on the naughty step and if she's happy, I'm happy,’ he said..

Disney Dad? Or "cool bad uncle"?

Spero, did yiu at least get to say, "Publish and be damned!"? Or were you robbed, as well?!

Yep. Cat man.

An MP who does't read rules on a site where he posts giving 'advice' and using his own name and job to back himself up, is, in effect an idiot.