From Reasonable Question to Vicious Pile-On: The Huntingdon Facebook Meltdown Over Christianity

In late January 2026, a public post I placed in the Huntingdon Facebook group questioned a meme that parodied a sacred Christian text. The post raised legitimate questions about double standards: if mockery of Christianity is acceptable in a historically, constitutionally and culturally Christian nation, why the rush to grant Islam special legal protections? The responses were not reasoned debate. Instead, they were a barrage of personal insults, AI smears and evasion.

This article analyses the full thread of comments across three posts. It groups the replies precisely, quoting them verbatim, and shows how they were almost entirely empty of argument, reasoning or basic courtesy. The pattern is stark and worrying: a small, vocal minority using bullying tactics to shut down discussion. This mirrors a wider problem in Britain today, where certain factions – often on the left or aligned with Islamist sensitivities – resort to labels, expletives and character attacks rather than engaging ideas. The silent majority, tired of such behaviour, needs to see this clearly so they can reclaim civil discourse.

The Original Meme and the Three Posts – What the Discussion Was Really About

The controversy began when Labour Councillor David Landon Cole posted a cartoon meme in the Huntingdon group on 21 December 2025. The meme showed two men at a table with a globe covered in peas and a large wheel of Gouda cheese. The caption read: “Peas on Earth, Gouda wheel, two men.” It was a deliberate parody of the angels’ announcement in Luke 2:14: “Glory to God in the highest, and on earth peace, goodwill toward men.”

My first post highlighted the clear double standard: such mockery of Christianity was met with amusement and likes, yet Labour continues to pursue non-statutory definitions of “anti-Muslim hostility” that risk creating special protections for Islam. The post asked why one faith or ideology should receive elevated status in a Biblically rooted nation.

Two follow-up posts were published after the initial wave of comments. These summarised the lack of engagement, highlighted the abusive tone of many responses, questioned the admins’ passive moderation, and challenged the repeated “AI wrote it” smears. The posts called for civil, substantive discussion on free speech, equal treatment of religions, and the documented persecution of Christians in Britain and worldwide.

Image 1: Original “Peas on Earth, Gouda wheel, two men” meme by David Landon Cole

Analysis of the Responses

The overwhelming majority of comments fell into clear categories, none of which engaged with the substance of the posts.

Admin Moderation: Rules for Some, Not for Others

The group administrators, David Landon Cole and Jo Harvey, confirmed early on that the original post broke no rules, yet they allowed repeated personal abuse against me to stand without intervention. Jo Harvey later stated she had checked the comments and found none out of order, while instructing users to report individual comments rather than acting as moderators.

This passive approach allowed insults such as “clown”, “snowflake”, “melt”, and “grow up” to remain visible.

The AI Smear Tactic

A minority of commentators immediately accused the posts of being “AI-generated” or “ChatGPT-written”. This is a lazy, dishonest tactic designed to avoid engaging with the arguments. The substance, arguments and principles are entirely original, drawn from decades of professional writing at senior levels in business, government and media.

Personal Insults and Bullying

The dominant response was straightforward abuse:

• Samson M Feeney: “you clown”, “Get some professional help… paranoid and wannabe politico nonsense”

• Alex Dale: “Man, what a snowflake”

• Paul Kirkby: “What a melt” (repeated)

• Daniel Ackerley-Holmes: “Grow up mate”

• AttractiveFish5335: “FOXTROT OFF! Nobody cares about you or your whinging posts”

These are not arguments. They are playground-level attacks designed to shame and silence.

Evasion and Irrelevant Attacks

When insults were not enough, commentators changed the subject entirely. Stephanie James focused on whether the author had privately contacted David Landon Cole. Others attacked past business matters or simply dismissed the posts as “too long”. Leah Naoj claimed there is “no evidence that Christians are persecuted in the UK”.

Not one commentator addressed the central questions: double standards on religious mockery, the risk of back-door blasphemy laws favouring Islam and Muslims, or the well-evidenced disparity in the treatment of Christian expression in Britain.

Image 2: Double Standards on Mockery

Image 3: Free Speech Includes the Right to Offend

Broader UK Context: The Silencing of the Silent Majority

This Huntingdon episode is not an isolated incident. Across Britain, a vocal minority – often self-described as “the left” or aligned with Islamist sensitivities – routinely shuts down debate through exactly these tactics: insults, AI smears, “far right”/“Nazi” labels, and demands for silence. Meanwhile, the silent majority of British citizens watch with growing frustration as free speech is eroded and Christianity, the historic foundation of the nation, is treated with contempt.

Christians in Britain face documented persecution – wrongful arrests for silent prayer, job losses for holding Biblical beliefs, and institutional bias – while proposals for special protections for Islam advance. The refusal to debate these realities fairly is deeply damaging to democratic culture.

Image 4: Persecution of Christians in the UK – Recent Cases

Conclusion

The Huntingdon threads provide clear evidence of a small but vocal group that is intellectually and morally incapable of engaging in reasoned discourse. Their response to a calm call for fairness was insults, smears and evasion. This behaviour is not “vibrant community discourse” – it is the closing down of discussion through bullying.

This is precisely how freedom dies in the modern age.

Totalitarian regimes of the past – Nazi Germany, Stalin’s USSR, and Mao’s China – began by normalising the silencing of dissent through personal attacks, public shaming, and the weaponisation of labels. Opponents were first ridiculed as “vermin”, “class enemies”, or “counter-revolutionaries”, before being destroyed. Millions paid with their lives.

Today, the same authoritarian spirit has reappeared less blatantly, but in no less dangerous form through modern cancel culture.

In Britain and across the West, a vocal minority – often on the left or aligned with Islamist sensitivities – uses exactly the same tactics seen in the Huntingdon group: relentless personal insults, AI smears, accusations of bigotry, “far-right”, “Islamophobe”, or “hater”, and demands that certain views be treated as unsayable.

Dissent is met not with argument but with pile-ons, deplatforming, professional ruin, and social ostracism.

Christians expressing Biblical views on marriage or gender, academics questioning gender ideology, and ordinary citizens raising concerns about mass immigration or the lack of Islamic integration have all faced this treatment. The goal is not to win the argument but to make the argument impossible.

The pattern is now embedded at institutional level. The UK Government has weaponised the judiciary against ordinary British citizens who express lawful concern: Lucy Connolly was jailed for 31 months for a single social-media post after the Southport murders; Peter Lynch died in prison after being imprisoned for his online comments.

Yet very serious offenders – including illegal immigrants who have committed rape, murder or terrorism – receive light sentences, suspended terms or are simply not deported despite repeated court orders and public outrage. This two-tier justice is not accidental; it is policy.

The mainstream (now legacy) media, led by the BBC and followed by The Guardian, The Independent and others, consistently favour a left-leaning, Marxist and Islamist-supporting narrative.

They amplify Hamas-propounded casualty figures from Gaza while downplaying or ignoring the horrors of the IRGC in Iran, the persecution of Christians and Jews, and the reality of Islamist extremism.

The same outlets relentlessly frame President Trump and any nationalist or conservative voice as “far-right” or “dangerous”, while giving sympathetic coverage to pro-Palestinian and other forms of extremism.

Balanced reporting has been replaced by propaganda

Universities have adopted the identical approach, turning campuses into echo chambers where free speech is actively suppressed. The Conservative Government’s Higher Education (Freedom of Speech) Act 2023 was designed to reverse this, but Labour has quietly abandoned it, allowing cancel culture, no-platforming and ideological conformity to flourish unchecked.

The deleterious impact is already visible. Honest debate is replaced by fear. The silent majority is cowed into silence. Truth becomes whatever the loudest, most aggressive group will permit. When people can no longer speak openly without risking their reputation, job, safety or liberty, democracy itself begins to wither. A society that cannot tolerate differing opinions is not free – it is on the road to tyranny, whether soft or hard.

The pattern seen in Huntingdon is a warning. What starts as casual abuse and evasion on a local Facebook group ends, if unchecked, in the systematic suppression of thought and belief.

Britain has travelled far down this path already.

The silent majority of British people – those who value courtesy, fairness, free speech and Britain’s Christian heritage – must now find their voice. Civilised society depends on the ability to disagree respectfully. The pattern seen in Huntingdon shows what happens when that ability is lost.

It is time for the decent majority to push back – firmly, consistently, and without apology – before the small, intolerant minority succeeds in turning Britain into a place where only one opinion is permitted.

History has shown how dangerous that opinion is.

Appendix: Full Thread of Posts and Comments

This appendix contains the complete, cleaned transcript of the original meme and Chan Abraham’s three posts, with every comment grouped directly under the post to which it was made. Unnecessary formatting, bullet points and redundant line breaks have been removed for readability.

1. Original Meme (Posted by David Landon Cole, 21 December 2025)

Image 1: Original “Peas on Earth, Gouda wheel, two men” meme by David Landon Cole

Cartoon of two men at a table with a globe covered in peas and a large wheel of Gouda cheese. Caption: “Peas on Earth, Gouda wheel, two men.”

Posted publicly in the Huntingdon Facebook group, attributed to Saul Jeavons. It received likes and positive reactions with no reported outrage at the time.

2. Chan Abraham’s First Post (19 January 2026)

Image 2: Double Standards on Mockery

𝑰𝒇 𝑴𝒐𝒄𝒌𝒊𝒏𝒈 𝑪𝒉𝒓𝒊𝒔𝒕𝒊𝒂𝒏𝒊𝒕𝒚 𝒊𝒔 𝑭𝒊𝒏𝒆, 𝑾𝒉𝒚 𝒕𝒉𝒆 𝑹𝒖𝒔𝒉 𝒕𝒐 𝑺𝒉𝒊𝒆𝒍𝒅 𝑰𝒔𝒍𝒂𝒎? 𝑨 𝑳𝒂𝒃𝒐𝒖𝒓 𝑴𝒆𝒎𝒆 𝑴𝒂𝒌𝒆𝒔 𝒕𝒉𝒆 𝑪𝒂𝒔𝒆

Full credit is due to Cllr David Landon Cole (Labour, Huntingdon Town Council) for posting a meme on 21 December 2025 in the Huntingdon FB group, attributing it to Saul Jeavons (former local Labour candidate/activist) who have shown it’s fine to ridicule Christianity right here in Huntingdon, and equally there should be no special laws to shield Islam from any criticism.

The meme was of two cartoon men at a table with a globe covered in peas and a sliced Gouda cheese wheel. Caption: “Peas on earth, Gouda wheel, two men.” Hilarious only if you know what it refers to.

It’s a clear, deliberate parody of Luke 2:14—the angels’ joyful announcement at Jesus’ birth: “Glory to God in the highest, and on earth peace, goodwill toward men.”

This verse is at the heart of the Christmas message: hope, true peace (shalom—wholeness and reconciliation with God and others), and God’s goodwill to humanity amid turmoil. It’s cherished by billions worldwide—in carols like “It Came Upon the Midnight Clear,” nativity plays, Christmas cards, and even the late Queen Elizabeth II’s broadcasts. In Britain, with our Christian constitution, heritage, culture, and values, mocking it ridicules something profoundly sacred to many, whether practising Christians or not.

Around 10-15 Huntingdon people liked or reacted positively here. No outrage, no calls for removal—just amusement. But would they create memes parodying Qur’anic verses or phrases central to Eid al-Fitr or Eid al-Adha—the two biggest Muslim festivals of joy, prayer, charity, and devotion—and share them here for laughs, especially during those times? If not, why not? This is a serious issue for all who want to maintain Britain’s cherished democratic values and especially Free Speech.

Labour continues to pursue a non-statutory definition of “anti-Muslim hostility” (rebranded from the old APPG “Islamophobia” wording that tied it to racism targeting “Muslimness”). This would guide councils, schools, police, and public bodies on prejudice toward Muslims—but critics (including free speech groups, Hindu/Sikh leaders, and experts) warn it risks a “back-door blasphemy law,” chilling legitimate criticism of Islam, ideas, or history while existing hate crime/equality laws already protect people from real harm.

British people of all faiths and none largely oppose it. Reports from think tanks like Policy Exchange, the Free Speech Union, and community leaders highlight dangers: unequal protections creating a “hierarchy of sensitivities,” potential discrimination against Christianity/Hinduism/Sikhism (e.g., suppressing discussions of historical persecution), “thought control” vibes, and deepening divisions.

It wasn’t in Labour’s manifesto, polls show it harms their support (shifting voters elsewhere), and many see no need—free speech, including the right to offend or critique religions, is a British value.

This meme unwittingly exposes the double standard: If Labour activists can parody and mock Christianity’s core Christmas message right here in Huntingdon without consequence, why push special legal shields for one faith only?

Credit David and Saul to them for highlighting the inconsistency—no special privileges needed for any religion.

Should Labour drop this unequal approach and ensure fair treatment for all?

What do you think, Huntingdon and the wider community? Share your views in the comments and let’s keep Free Speech alive for all.

Comments on First Post

Sam Booker

Anyone who considers ‘peas on Earth, gouda wheel, two men’ to be genuine malicious mockery of Christianity’s core message is being disingenuous. This post seems to be an attempt to stir up division for self-promotion rather than an attempt at good faith debate and discussion.

Chan Abraham

Sam Booker You’ve stated your opinion. Now please address the facts in the post.

Stephen Ferguson

Are you OK Chan?

Chan Abraham

Stephen Ferguson - what are your views on Labour’s approach addressed here in the context of the original meme?

Stephen Ferguson

I think this post is one of the silliest things that I have ever read, and that Saul and David are two of the finest gentleman that I have ever had the pleasure of calling my friends.

Darren Moseley

Stephen Ferguson hear hear

Matthew Hope

I doubt that the Christian meme is in any way anti-Christian its just funny word play/Pictionary and is really based on how deeply entrenched that Christianity and it year and teachings have become in western culture (and to an extent world culture due to the cultural impact of empire etc.)

Samson M Feeney

You don’t represent Christianity any more than I represent dog walkers. I have many Christian friends and they would very much agree that your kind of ‘Christianity’ is an anathema to the path that Jesus walked. As He would be raging at how the MAGA right, and the eejits around Tommy Ten Names abuse His name. He also wouldn’t give one sh1t about that cartoon you clown

Samson M Feeney

And to David Landon Cole and Saul Jeavons both - neither of you are the Messiah, you are both naughty boys lol

Darren Moseley

Samson M Feeney I’m NOT The Messiah either!

Nic Pheebs

Nice try, sunshine.

David Landon Cole

Using shalom to gloss ‘true peace’ in Luke is a bit odd, Chan Abraham - Changing Britain For Good. Luke is writing in Greek; the word in the text is eirene. I’m happy to concede that in Luke the overlap between eirene and shalom is relatively close. It’s certainly closer than in (say) Romans. Luke is drawing on Jewish conceptual worlds with eirene, and the echo is real. But that doesn’t make the terms interchangeable. They have different linguistic histories, different semantic ranges, and different theological trajectories. Even within the Hebrew Bible, shalom is not a single, stable concept. Shalom in Genesis is not shalom in Isaiah, still less in later prophetic or post-exilic contexts. The same variation applies to eirene, though obviously the time period is shorter. I think precision is important here.

David Landon Cole

Admin hat on - a couple of people have reported this post. It doesn’t break any of the group rules, and it can stay up. Thanks for flagging your concerns - it does make it much easier to admin the group when people report posts that might be problematic. Admin hat off.

Jo Harvey

Admin hat on: the rules haven’t changed in the last 30 minutes, so please, stop reporting this post! As David Landon Cole has already said, no rules are being broken here!!

If however there’s a comment that you think is out of order, please flag the individual comment. There are none at present - I’ve checked them all

Gӓreth Cheesmӓn

Good grief grow up

Alex Dale

Man, what a snowflake.

Daniel Ackerley-Holmes

What a truly silly post this is.

Stephanie James

Chan Abraham - Changing Britain For Good As a matter of interest, did you contact David and Saul directly to express your concern? I’m surprised you didn’t ‘tag’ them in your post to spark an open and honest debate.

I also note that you’ve posted this in other groups (eg Warboys) where the people you’ve named won’t be able to see or respond if they’re not members of the group. Did you not want them to have an opportunity to comment?

It all seems a tad unfair to me.

Anyway, if you should happen to be interested in my personal opinion, I’ve seen that money and religion cause more harm than anything else. If you’re trying to encourage people to vote for you in the future, I’d suggest you concentrate on potholes.

Danny Taylor

The fact people are getting upset and reporting it just kinda proves the point no?

Paul Kirkby

What a melt

3. Chan Abraham’s Second Post (28 January 2026)

Image 3: Free Speech Includes the Right to Offend

𝑴𝒐𝒄𝒌𝒆𝒓𝒚 𝒐𝒇 𝑪𝒉𝒓𝒊𝒔𝒕𝒊𝒂𝒏𝒊𝒕𝒚 𝒊𝒏 𝑯𝒖𝒏𝒕𝒊𝒏𝒈𝒅𝒐𝒏: 𝑹𝒆𝒔𝒑𝒐𝒏𝒔𝒆𝒔 𝑻𝒉𝒂𝒕 𝑹𝒆𝒊𝒏𝒇𝒐𝒓𝒄𝒆 𝒕𝒉𝒆 𝑵𝒆𝒆𝒅 𝒇𝒐𝒓 𝑭𝒂𝒊𝒓 𝑫𝒆𝒃𝒂𝒕𝒆

In the Huntingdon Facebook group, my post questioning a meme’s parody of a sacred Christian text—and its implications for equal treatment in light of Labour’s push for Islam and Muslims being given protected status in Britain—elicited responses heavy on insults but light on substance.

Rather than engaging with issues of fairness, free speech, and avoiding special privileges for Islam in our historically, constitutionally and culturally Christian nation, commentators resorted to personal attacks.

This post, a condensed response of my more detailed article, analyses those comments while restating the core concerns. Far from undermining my position, the reactions highlight its validity: mockery of Christianity is casually accepted, yet challenging inequalities provokes malice without rationale.

Admin Confirmations and Unexplained Reports

David Landon Cole, as admin, stated: “Admin hat on - a couple of people have reported this post. It doesn’t break any of the group rules, and it can stay up.” Jo Harvey added: “Admin hat on: the rules haven’t changed in the last 30 minutes, so please, stop reporting this post! As David Landon Cole has already said, no rules are being broken here!!”

Despite multiple reports, they confirmed no rules were violated. Yet, no explanation was given for the reports themselves. Why flag a post promoting equal treatment? This lack of rationale suggests discomfort with open discussion questioning Labour’s push for “anti-Muslim hostility” definitions that would privilege Islam and Muslims to the detriment of all else.

Abusive Comments: Irony and Potential Rule Breaches

Many responses (some shown below) were insulting, potentially breaching group rules against harassment. David Landon Cole and Jo Harvey please comment. The People of Huntingdon need to know how you make these judgments.

Samson M Feeney said: “You don’t represent Christianity any more than I represent dog walkers… your kind of ‘Christianity’ is an anathema… He also wouldn’t give one sh1t about that cartoon you clown.”

Alex Dale called me a “snowflake”, Paul Kirkby a “melt”, and Gӓreth Cheesmӓn urged “grow up”.

Daniel Ackerley-Holmes deemed it “a truly silly post”, while Nic Pheebs said “Nice try, sunshine.”

These are bullying and malicious, yet admins noted no “out of order” comments. The irony is profound: objectors to my reasoned post offered no basis for disagreement, instead unleashing abuse.

This underlines the double standard—tolerating offence to Christianity and Christians, while suppressing critique elsewhere.

Evasion of Core Issues

No commentator addressed equal treatment or Islam’s proposed privileges. Sam Booker claimed: “This post seems to be an attempt to stir up division for self-promotion.”

Matthew Hope argued the meme is “just funny word play”.

Stephanie James focused on process: “Did you contact David and Saul directly?.. concentrate on potholes.”

Such sidestepping reinforces why these issues must be restated: Labour’s “anti-Muslim hostility” risks a backdoor blasphemy law, chilling criticism of Islam and Muslims while Christianity and Christians face mockery.

In a democratic society, why do “Islamophobia” advocates impose this unlawfully? The question demands answers.

Irrelevant Personal Views

Stephen Ferguson wrote: “Saul and David are two of the finest gentleman that I have ever had the pleasure of calling my friends.” Darren Moseley agreed: “hear hear”.

Respectful friendships are fine, but they bear no relation to the post’s focus on free speech and fairness.

Danny Taylor noted: “The fact people are getting upset and reporting it just kinda proves the point”—intentionally or otherwise he was supporting my thesis.

On “Shalom”: Missing the True Biblical Depth (don’t rely on AI)

David Landon Cole commented: “Using shalom to gloss ‘true peace’ in Luke is a bit odd… precision is important here.”

While noting David’s limited and shallow analysis (likely AI-sourced), it overlooks “shalom’s” overarching role in Scripture—as wholeness and restoration, the Bible’s central objective for humanity and the rest of God’s creation. Luke’s “eirene” echoes this profound theme.

Overlooked Offence and Selective Sensitivity

None considered the meme’s potential offence to Christians, yet David Landon-Cole previously monitored 2024 General Election comments on “What is a woman?” for trans sensitivity—despite the later 2025 Supreme Court ruling on biological sex (that everyone knew would be stated). Why protect that particular group but not Christianity, Britain’s historic, moral and cultural foundation?

Free Speech Protected by Law

The meme and responses plainly show the authors believe it’s legal to be offensive towards, mock, parody and even vilify Christianity and Christians.

Article 10 ECHR safeguards expression that may “offend, shock or disturb” and the English courts confirmed this (Handyside v UK, 1976). The case of Redmond-Bate v DPP (1999) upholds the right to be provocative.

Freedom isn’t free without including offence; but unequal application erodes values. You can be offensive towards mock, satirise, vilify Islam and Muslims, just as you can Christianity and Christians and anybody else. This is why there is no basis for granting Islam and Muslims special status in Britain. Yet no one engaged with these matters of fact. Why?

UK Christianophobia Amid Global Persecution

But this also is serious and grave for other reasons: the active persecution of Christians in the UK and worldwide that exceeds all others but you won’t hear this from the BBC or the rest of the legacy media.

See my forthcoming article “Systemic Christianophobia in a Christian Nation” for irrefutable evidence of UK bias against Christians—arrests for “praying in your head”, job losses over beliefs—while Islam and Muslims gain privileges and support from government and even the monarch.

Globally, Nigeria saw 3,490 Christians killed in 2025-2026; North Korea suppresses faith totally; Muslim Pakistan’s blasphemy laws incite violence against Christians.

London Mayor Sadiq Khan’s “From the river to the sea” defence has been investigated by the Metropolitan Police, confirmed and registered as a hate incident against Jews. Enquiries are ongoing.

Geeta Guru-Murthy’s inappropriate “hiss” over a Christian rapper saying Jesus Christ was his hero shows BBC bias (and is being investigated by the BBC before going to OfCom). Would she or anyone at the BBC have reacted in this way to a Muslim speaking of Muhammed like this?

Martine Croxall was castigated for saying “pregnant women”, undermining Christian views on distinct genders.

Conclusion: We Can Do Better

These insulting, evasive responses prove my post’s point: Christianity endures mockery without outrage, reinforcing the need for equality.

Let’s demand transparent debate, rejecting privileges that divide. In Christian Britain, fairness for all faiths is essential. Let’s have this in Huntingdon, too.

Comments on Second Post

Stephanie James

Chan Abraham - Changing Britain For Good As you’ve only reposted part of my comment, and as you didn’t respond to my question the first time around, it’s here again in full - [full earlier comment about contacting David and Saul directly, posting in other groups, concentrating on potholes].

Chan Abraham

Stephanie James thank you for reposting your full comment and for continuing to engage. I’ve replied to you in each forum you’ve written, with similar content, although this one has some additional points. [full reply as provided].

Stephanie James

Chan Abraham - Changing Britain For Good I stand by my first comment (the part you didn’t feel the need to repost), ‘I’ve seen that money and religion cause more harm than anything else.’ So yes, please do sort out some of the other national issues including NHS, lack of prison spaces, infrastructure, living in one of the most nature depleted countries in the world etc etc etc.

4. Chan Abraham’s Third Post (29 January 2026)

Image 4: Persecution of Christians in the UK – Recent Cases

𝑭𝒐𝒍𝒍𝒐𝒘-𝒖𝒑 𝒕𝒐 “𝑴𝒐𝒄𝒌𝒆𝒓𝒚 𝒐𝒇 𝑪𝒉𝒓𝒊𝒔𝒕𝒊𝒂𝒏𝒊𝒕𝒚 𝒊𝒏 𝑯𝒖𝒏𝒕𝒊𝒏𝒈𝒅𝒐𝒏”: 𝑺𝒕𝒊𝒍𝒍 𝑵𝒐 𝑬𝒏𝒈𝒂𝒈𝒆𝒎𝒆𝒏𝒕 – 𝑱𝒖𝒔𝒕 𝑴𝒐𝒓𝒆 𝑫𝒆𝒇𝒍𝒆𝒄𝒕𝒊𝒐𝒏

I acknowledge those who have commented (and the silent readers watching). I’ll keep this post brief as some clearly are struggling.

Admin moderation (Jo Harvey, David Landon-Cole, Darren Moseley):

Jo Harvey, thank you for your reply but as Admins, you have the ability – and responsibility – to proactively moderate obvious bullying, harassment and personal insults (e.g. “clown”, “snowflake”, “melt”, “grow up”, repeated name-calling). Group rules exist to protect civil discussion. But if you’re waiting only for individual reports when abuse is plain to see, this is not the standard most people expect from community moderators. Please can you confirm whether you consider these comments acceptable under “the rules”? The people of Huntingdon deserve clarity: are these comments breaking group rules – or do you consider them acceptable?

The tired “AI wrote it” accusation:

The repeated claim that this is “ChatGPT” is simply a deflection because critics have no reasoned reply. I’ve never looked at CGPT. I have written and spoken at the highest levels in business, government and media for over 50 years. My content is original. I use tools only to research facts, sense-check and assemble data as I compile my arguments and principles – all are mine. Accusing someone of using AI is not an argument; it is an admission that the critic has nothing of value to say.

The pattern of insult and evasion remains clear:

Why do people only respond with insults but fail to engage with the actual issues? Evasion instead of engagement. And, still no one has addressed the actual issues: obvious double standards on mocking Christians and Christianity, while Labour opens a back-door blasphemy law favouring Muslims and Islam, while ignoring the shocking, well-evidenced persecution of Christians in Britain as they lawfully and peacefully conduct themselves in their work, in public and even on line.

I remain open to respectful discussion on the substance. Until then, the pattern of a small, evasive, incoherent ranting group in Huntingdon speaks for itself.

Kind regards

Comments on Third Post

AttractiveFish5335

If you don’t approve of the admin actions of this group there is a simple fix…… FOXTROT OFF! Nobody cares about you or your whinging posts. How on earth you thought you could become a politician is beyond me, you can’t even take any criticism.

AmbitiousKiwi6217

AttractiveFish5335 indeed, maybe he could set up his own group and moderate it as he pleases. At least then we won’t be bombarded with his ‘I’m right, you’re all wrong, I think I’m God!’ Posts.

Paul Kirkby

Here we go again

David Landon Cole

In this post, Chan Abraham - Changing Britain For Good, you say “Accusing someone of using AI is not an argument; it is an admission that the critic has nothing of value to say.” In your post yesterday, you said “While noting David’s limited and shallow analysis (likely AI-sourced)…”

Luke Viner

The post length is going in the right direction Chan

Leah Naoj

There is no evidence that Christians/Christianity are persecuted in the UK. Perhaps on a global scale, but in this country and particularly in our inclusive and vibrant community, certainly not. I think your argument is misguided and under researched. Just because the policies of a political group don’t align with your beliefs, doesn’t mean they are being ridiculed or oppressed. You write a lot without thoroughly backing up your claims or, really, making a cohesive point.

HumbleCorgi3374

The people of Huntingdon do deserve clarity; why do you keep posting?! Please let us be.

Will Lawrence

I have a fitting Cradle of Filth T shirt for this occasion

Daniel Ackerley-Holmes

Your aims with this type of religious weaponization are comically transparent. Grow up mate.

Trudy Blundell

Why has Chan Abraham opened and closed 35 companies over the years? … Not really very “Christian” of him.

Darren Moseley

Trudy Blundell he doesn’t like answering hard questions himself. When I asked him why we should vote for him after he had to resign from the housing company, he ignored my question and just blocked me.

Fee Jackson

Bordering satire at this point

Joe Legacy Lagrue

I am not going to engage the subject of the post here. But I will defend Chan here, in that I do not believe he uses AI to write these. I have had long discussions with Chan in the past and whilst there are em dashes and the uses of headers and so on, which could be signs of AI, I believe that he is more likely that Chan writes these responses outside of Facebook and pastes them in rather than just typing them in.

Nick Pieman

Looks like Chat GPT wrote this, m stops, Oxford commas and the rule of 3 …

HumbleCorgi3374

Chan, like someone previously stated, you seem adamant to stir up division and as your post did not land how you wanted it to, you’ve come back with more nonsense using ChatGPT. I look forward to seeing the HumbleCorgi3374 mentioned in your next post.

Samson M Feeney

You seriously need to get some professional help Chan. You’re evidently feeling persecuted but you can believe what you like, people don’t have an issue with you having your beliefs. It’s your ridiculous accusation that somehow when people take issue with your interpretation of Christianity, we are committing some kind of faith-based hate crime. I am not going to waste my time showing how your interpretation of the Supreme Court decision impacting trans people is wrong because I already know your extremely unchristian stance towards LGBTQ+ people. Get off the ChatGPT and get some therapy. You’re likely driving those around you batty with your paranoid and wannabe politico nonsense.

Darren Moseley

Samson M Feeney I’ll probably get mentioned in his next post because I’ve liked your comment. Apparently my agreeing with a comment regarding people’s decency was enough to rattle him last time.

Samson M Feeney

Darren Moseley liking my comments is malicious bullying dontcha know?!

Rox Anne

Samson M Feeney says the woman who gets offended anytime someone suggests biological sex isn’t relevant? You think misgendering someone should be a hate crime yet you’re all for free speech here

Samson M Feeney

Rox Anne oh it’s you again, poxy roxy the internalised misogynist. Get a life hun.

Rox Anne

Samson M Feeney do you often resort to name calling when you have no coherent reply?

Samson M Feeney

Rox Anne no I don’t. I just save it for those special eejits who see my name and think they can deliver a gotcha with a deliberate misgendering. Welcome to that club! BTW I’m quite sure you will just LOVE the court ruling today, won for trans women by the Good Law Project and a resounding loss for all who wanted to ban trans women from the Hampstead Ladies Pond. I’ll raise my non-alcoholic beverage to celebrate it with you

Rox Anne

Samson M Feeney I didn’t even know it was happening but I’m sure they’ll mount a challenge and win. Forcing women to share spaces with men when they don’t want to is a weird stance to take. An I’m not mishearing you, you look like a woman and you’re female right? So my pronouns are correct. If you want to be something else that’s sad, but unfortunately wishing doesn’t equate to reality.

Bryan Rich

Do adults still believe in imaginary friends?

Samson M Feeney

Also, if your idea of ‘malicious bullying’ includes Nic Pheebs saying “nice try, sunshine” then you have led the most sheltered life. Honestly man, it’s pathetic.

David Landon Cole

Evening, Chan Abraham - Changing Britain For Good. Do you want me to respond point by point?

Chan Abraham

David Landon Cole Please do. Indeed, if you are able to address my original post, and engage constructively with the content, you will be the first one in the Huntingdon FB group to do so. Kind regards

Mark Lynch

Im going to get my AI bot to look at your AI bot created statement and create an AI generated reply. Shall we just let the bots talk to each other and cut us out?

David Landon Cole

Mark Lynch

Luke Viner

Paul Kirkby

Again, MELT

Claire Bear

WTAF is going on here? I stopped reading after the paragraph that starts ‘this post is condensed’. If you want to make a point Chan, can you please deliver a two paragraph post and not a gospel.

Nick Pieman

Claire Simpson he didn’t write it, AI did.

Claire Bear

Nick Pieman AI has a lot to answer for!

Nic Pheebs

“Words are like leaves; and where they most abound, much fruit of sense beneath is rarely found.” — Alexander Pope

AttractiveFish5335

It’s quite ironic that on Chan’s profile he has a meme that says “no religion is above criticism”. And yet he’s RANTING on about Christianity being criticised and offended. How he honestly thought he could become an independent candidate for Huntingdon was laughable.

AttractiveFish5335

The use of AI to write this post is very similar to the bible in fact, a story tale full of mistakes, generated to delude people into thinking it’s real.

Jo Harvey

If you are going to quote me, please quote what I said in full. As a reminder, here’s what I said: “Admin hat on: the rules haven’t changed in the last 30 minutes, so please, stop reporting this post! As David Landon Cole has already said, no rules are being broken here!! If however there’s a comment that you think is out of order, please flag the individual comment. There are none at present - I’ve checked them all.” You did not report anything to my knowledge, and if you had done so, all the reported comments would have been dealt with as us admins felt appropriate. I have also explained this to you before, on another of your posts, and you thanked me for doing so. I can only conclude, therefore, that you actually aren’t offended and are happy with how admins are handling things. Do feel free to message any one of the three of us if that isn’t the case, and we will consider what action, if any, is appropriate.

Jayne Clifford-Greening

You go Chan!

Preston Bell

get a job

Steve Ingall

Give it a rest with this nonsense. You’re permanently offended, for the sake of being offended!