James and I...

Response to James Hind's Diatribe.
It's important to set the record straight, especially when confronted with narratives that distort reality to suit personal agendas. James Hind’s latest outburst paints a picture that is far removed from the truth, portraying me as some sort of obsessive stalker when, in reality, any reasonable person would see that my actions have been defensive, not offensive.
Let’s not forget how all of this really began. There was peace until James Hind decided to start making wild and damaging accusations, suggesting that I was “hovering” around schools with the intent to kidnap a child. Such serious, slanderous accusations require a response. As any responsible adult would, I defended myself against such grotesque fabrications. Failing to respond would have been interpreted as an admission of guilt, and I have a duty to myself, my family, and my community to maintain my good name.
James Hind’s attempts to paint himself and Project Night Watch (PNW) as innocent victims is nothing more than a diversion. He conveniently ignores the context of his own actions—years of harassment, baseless accusations, and malicious communications directed towards me and others. It is quite telling that he sees my reactions to his provocations as the problem, rather than his initial and ongoing behaviour that sparks these responses.
Let’s talk numbers, shall we? He claims an “estimated ten posts” from me for every one of his. This is a curious metric to focus on, considering that frequency of posts is a distraction from the content of the messages themselves. Yes, I have responded frequently. Why? Because every time he spreads more defamatory nonsense, I have to counter it to prevent further damage to my reputation. If he doesn't want a response, the solution is simple: stop giving me a reason to respond.
He also mentioned predictions I made about potential threats to my safety, such as President Putin sending a hit squad to Brighton. He cherry-picks statements out of context to make them sound delusional, yet he conveniently omits why such predictions were made. James Hind openly stated you would welcome a nuclear strike on Moscow to eliminate one leader, even if it meant the deaths of countless innocent civilians. In light of the 2018 Salisbury poisonings, where Russian agents did, in fact, target individuals on British soil, my concerns were not baseless. They were a legitimate response to his own reckless rhetoric. Context matters.
The narrative that I’ve targeted the “families and children of PNW team members” is another distortion. Unlike the false and disturbing claims he made against me, I have never crossed that line. To insinuate otherwise is disingenuous and an attempt to further smear my character. Let’s not confuse holding him accountable for his words and actions with the kind of obsessive behaviour he accuses me of. He wants people to forget that it was ‘he’ who escalated this conflict.
If he genuinely wants to see an end to this back-and-forth, the solution is straightforward: stop with the unfounded accusations, quit distorting the facts, and show some accountability for the harmful narratives he’s been spreading. The ball is in his court. Until then, I will continue to defend myself whenever necessary.
As they say, all was quiet on the Western Front until he decided to play the provocateur. If he doesn't like the consequences of his own actions, perhaps it’s time to reflect on how this all started in the first place.
Matthew Taylor