Laurence Easeman, the activist in Brand row: ‘I was smeared’
Your support helps us to tell the story
From reproductive rights to climate change to Big Tech, The Independent is on the ground when the story is developing. Whether it's investigating the financials of Elon Musk's pro-Trump PAC or producing our latest documentary, 'The A Word', which shines a light on the American women fighting for reproductive rights, we know how important it is to parse out the facts from the messaging.
At such a critical moment in US history, we need reporters on the ground. Your donation allows us to keep sending journalists to speak to both sides of the story.
The Independent is trusted by Americans across the entire political spectrum. And unlike many other quality news outlets, we choose not to lock Americans out of our reporting and analysis with paywalls. We believe quality journalism should be available to everyone, paid for by those who can afford it.
Your support makes all the difference.The activist at the centre of a row which led to the cancellation of a debate at the launch of Russell Brand’s new book has claimed he is the victim of a “politically motivated smear campaign” by bloggers.
Laurence Easeman, who was due to discuss issues raised in Revolution with fellow panellists on Wednesday night, denied in a statement any involvement with the Greek far-right party Golden Dawn, and said he had “no sympathy or affiliation with any ‘far-right’ or ‘far-left’ group”. He also denied being anti-Semitic, racist or working as a bailiff.
Mr Easeman said he had contacted Merseyside Police over the blogs. He also criticised fellow panellist Peter Tatchell who raised concerns with Brand after being alerted to the online postings.
“I find it perverse that the so-called human rights campaigner now acts like a modern-day Mugabe, ‘punching’ out of the debate anybody who doesn’t fall in line with his political position,” he said.
Join our commenting forum
Join thought-provoking conversations, follow other Independent readers and see their replies
Comments