Character assassination

During the debate on Cllr Paul Miller’s notice of motion calling for a small committee to be set up to investigate concerns over the administration of property grants in Pembroke and Pembroke Dock, the Leader Cllr Jamie Adams proposed that the matter be left to the politically balanced audit committee which could deal with “the facts not innuendo“.
A few moments earlier the Leader had told the council: “I concur that much has been said [about the grants] but what I submit is that much has been said by one person [me] and my question to Cllr Miller – and I’m sure it’s a question the electorate of Pembrokeshire are probably considering – is who is leading the agenda of the Labour Group?
Because it seems to me [interrupted by groans from the floor] that Cllr Miller is . . . it seems to me [loud banging of chairman’s gavel in an attempt to silence the protesters] Cllr Miller is acting in a way that is . . . if you like . . strings are being pulled by somebody else rather than the Leader of the Labour group.”
No innuendo there, then!
The Leader adopted exactly the same tack when the same matter was “debated” at Cabinet.
Perhaps he is at one with a famous twentietheth century propagandist who said that if you repeat something often enough people will eventually come round to accepting it as true.
And here is Cllr Adams’ cabinet colleague Cllr David Pugh on the same subject: “Cllr Stoddart reminds me of Don Quixote the fictional character whose madness drove him to see enemies in everyone and ended up tilting at windmills. I should of course add that Don Quixote was accompanied and assisted by by his faithful servant Sancho. I leave you all to decide . . [interrupted before asking who should be cast in the role of Sancho].
No innuendo there, either!
As I said at council, Cllr Miller is a highly-educated, highly-intelligent chap and the idea that I would seek to pull his strings, or, even more improbably, that he would allow me to pull them, is nonsense on stilts.
Unfortunately, even though this line of argument is unpopular, even with their own side, these two persist with their slurs, smears and character assassinations, regardless.
I blame the education system.
In a display of sheer bile, Cllr Pugh accused me of “a campaign of innuendo and smear” and of making allegations “without any evidence – just his unjustified opinions and self-proclaimed expertise”.
Having got that off his chest, he then accused me of failing to take account of “a third side elevation” when calculating the area of render at No. 25 Dimond Street (Rendered senseless), concluding: “So whether this is a deliberate untruth, or sheer incompetence on his behalf in not checking the facts, I’ll let you decide.”
Really getting into his stride, he referred to “many more spurious claims” based “purely on conjecture and speculation” before concluding that: “getting at the truth is apparently not on his agenda”.
He even suggested I was afflicted by madness like Don Quixote.
He can be assured that I am extremely mad, though not in the way he suggests.
Though I notice that he still hasn’t responded to my email sent at 9 am Monday morning asking for the precise location of the “third side elevation” that formed part of the basis for this poisonous tirade.
I’ll let you know when he does eventually get round to providing me with a reply.