Men’s Groups Fear Over “Dangerous Sleazy” Journalist Predator Robert Armour From Sex Reporting Media Outlet “Third Force News.” Attempting to De-fame Innocent Man Adnan Ahmed

“Sleazy” Journalist Robert Armour Defames Adnan Ahmed – Who is Not Guilty of Any Crimes

Firstly, if you look up Robert Armour’s article on Adnan Ahmed, you will have to excuse his spelling mistakes and child-like writing style. Red Pill Rights is demanding an investigation into Robert Armour, who writes for the fake lying clowns at Third Force News; after complaints have been received that he has been harassing and alarming men in the Glasgow area through his online work.

RPR received reports that Robert Armour used sexual language towards other men. Victims called for police to take action against the “dangerous journalist predator,” as one called him. Another man said, “Robert wrote online in regards to me and made lued sexual claims and perverted references, it causes me fear, alarm and distress.”

Armour also wrote a false article about Adnan Ahmed aka Addy AGame. He stated that the useless reptilian woman’s group “Rape Crises Scotland demanded an investigation after complaints of harassing and alarming women in Glasgow.”

Ahmed is not accused of rape, has never been accused of rape and has no history of rape. These disgusting claims show how low the filthy aggressive feminist organisation “Rape Crises Scotland” is. Addy AGame has never harassed or alarmed any woman ever. Yet again the media make reference to “all women” in Glasgow, is that including the big heavy angry hefers at “Rape Crises Scotland,” no it is not. More about this ludicrous claim of all women in Glasgow later.

Adnan Ahmed is a dating/ life coach and stated his online footage is within legal boundaries, which is true . He faces no charges for his content. Robert Armour make reference to “intimate audio” posted by Ahmed on his YouTube channel, which there is no trace of. Robert Armour makes a stupid claim and should not write about audio’s that don’t exist, especially after allegations were made against the reporter in regards to sexual harassment.

Armour then tries to shame Ahmed by stating “a book he wrote last year details how to approach and bed random women.” Clearly this is a failed attempt by the dull journalist. This gives an indication that Robert Armour’s thinking is that approaching and bedding random women is a bad thing – he is entitled to his opinion, but so are others who think differently.

This also indicates that Robert Armour seems to think men should only approach and bed women?! Ok Robert, so what you’re saying is that all men in all nightclubs and random daytime scenarios should not speak to random females they don’t know and never try to bed them? That’s foolish Robert. Were your parents related or 2 random people?

Adnan Ahmed did achieve the app-laudable accomplishment of writing a spectacular book in 2018 and became an honorary published author. His book helped many men and women find love and achieve healthy sexual relationships, receiving rave reviews within the dating community as a phenomenal piece of literature.

Armour also said “Sandy Brindley from Rape Crises Scotland, said she had approached police Scotland with concerns about Ahmed.” The glorified bum, Sandy Brindley has never met Adnan Ahmed, however took it upon herself to approach the police regarding a man who has never raped anyone, nor ever been accused or linked with a horrible word like rape. Overweight and delusional Sandy Brindley is the ultimate stereotype of an irresponsible hate fuelled separatist feminazi, hell bent on destroying men because of her saggy emotional baggage in regards to being rejected by men. If Brindley would improve her pudgy appearance and horrid ignorant personality, maybe she wouldn’t face as much rejection.

Sandy belongs to a group of insecure women who are mad at men because inwardly they are mad at themselves for letting themselves down. Her self-loathing and victim mentality is disguised as empowered justice and women’s rights; which is used to hurt any and every man who doesn’t follow the ideal that all women should be worshipped regardless of them being aggressive, mean, criminal or even fat. No Sandy, all human beings have the choice of who they want to be with and who they find attractive.

Trying to brainwash men into accepting mean women or big women as a sexual preference, even if they don’t want to is insane. Some men have that fetish, fair enough, but instead of ranting about “fat-shaming,” isn’t it medically obvious that excess body weight equals heart disease, depression, diabetes, etc, etc. It is simply not healthy and an absolute cop out. Doctors urge that men and women should choose to lose weight and eat right to live long and content lives, everyone is capable of doing so unless they have a medical condition that prevents this. Blaming psychological or genetic reasons is a lame excuse and out of touch with reality.

Sandy Brindley is quoted by Robert Armour as saying “when someone is displaying what seems to be predatory behaviour.” After watching Ahmed’s online “game” videos it is clear that he is simply having short flirty conversations with females who are willing participants, which ends at most, with an exchange of content details. How is that predatory Sandy? The real predatory stalker behaviour is displayed by Brindley who contacted the police regarding this, to justify having her useless job, which serves no purpose in this instance, how about you actually help real rape victims Sandy or is that too difficult, as you may have to do some actual work rather than cheat the Scottish government to fund your bummy reptilian “Rape Crises” organisations.

The “intimate images” referred to by Brindley are not illegal and are permitted to be online. She goes onto say “…to establish whether or not consent has been given and the impact it is having on the women is approaching.” Any woman Ahmed has ever dated or slept with has not complained against him, they have had the opportunity to do so and did not. In fact, Ahmed has received support from a number of them. Addy AGame Ahmed is not the inventor of online YouTube dating videos, this is a concept that is global, especially in Western Nations. Uploads from massive multi-million pound dating companies happen on an almost daily basis. Ahmed’s videos are tame compared to his counterparts in London and the States. No one has faced backlash like this.

There is a clear link between this over reaction and the venomous women’s groups with small hick-town mentality in a place like Glasgow, compared to open-minded independent thinking women in London and the U.S.A who see this as a non-issue. Brindley continued “misogyny is not a crime but I think a number of behaviours shown in the videos I have seen – arguably are caught by criminal law, “this is utter non-sense. Sandy Brindley fumes at Ahmed meeting slim, pretty women and calls him a misogynist because he teaches other men to do the same. She fails to detail what behaviours are “arguably caught by criminal law.” The facts are that no one do.

Ahmed faces no charges in regards to his dating videos, because they contain nothing illegal, even the filming of the videos is legal. Brindley is surprisingly right about one thing – misogyny is not a crime, but labelling an innocent man misogynist (when he clearly is not) is slander and reporting it to the police is absolute lunacy.

Robert Armour then fumbles on by stating “as details on Ahmed’s tactics emerged his Facebook page was inundated with negative comments.” Robert you are a total idiot, Ahmed did not have a Facebook Page, he could only be found on YouTube and Instagram. The moron reporter meant BBC The Social’s Twitter feed comments section. Armour quoted one nameless radical feminist walderbeast as saying “approached on Buchanan Street, you’re a horrible person and a danger to women in Glasgow.”

We at Red Pill Rights, recently managed to get a statement from Mr Adnan Ahmed, he said;

“I didn’t talk to elderly, overweight, aggressive or unattractive women with romantic intentions. I only casually chatted to women aged 17-25 with slim figures and pretty faces, that were mostly foreign, in broad daylight on busy streets with hundreds of people around, for the purpose of coaching and demonstrating for clients. I have been with my girlfriend for over 2 years now and she was aware of my business from day 1 of us meeting. We met the same way as I was teaching my clients to meet women. I love my girlfriend, she has supported me 100% through all this media nonsense.”

Adnan Ahmed ran a professional dating business teaching men success with women. The description of the women he approached represents approximately around 10% of Scottish women. Various reporters have claimed he displayed “predatory behaviour” towards all women in Glasgow. Fake News!

This is a prime example of incompetent journalists sensationalising and twisting the truth to state it was all women in Glasgow as a whole. Again, 10% of women in Scotland are of the demographic Ahmed describes; these idiot reporters have proved to be bitter unreliable liars with lacklustre journalism skills.

The deeper reason for this maybe that the reporters as well as the online keyboard feminist hate mongers involved in Ahmed’s defamation fall into the category of unattractive females (both internally and externally), rather than Ahmed’s precisely described preferences. Hence why his defamation of character was exaggerated to all women. everyone wants to be the belle of the ball, especially low self-esteem attention seeking toxic feminazi’s.

BBC The Social hounded Glasgow dating coach for months, he reacted out to them and responded with a detailed explanation of his business model and background to his client base as well as the scientific reasoning behind this method of face to face daytime speed dating, which was in large ignored. Instead they used choice sentences to turn up the controversy in order to create a story and demonise an innocent man, who was working in the criminal justice field helping ex-offenders rehabilitate and integrate back into their communities.

Another chubby “MeToo” Feminazi monster is quoted as spewing “a small predatory man who calls women bitches, boasts of sleeping with dozens a week and spends all his time in Glasgow’s busiest street sexually harassing women. Aye you’re a catch.” This is exactly the poisonous madness we are trying to address at Red Pill Rights. This anonymous “MeToo” idiot was never approached by Mr Ahmed.

This irresponsible slob of a woman adds to the hate comments and deserves the title “bitch” for her terrible behaviour. Ahmed never boasted about sleeping with dozens of women per week, he has been with his fiancé for the last 2 years – who is a lovely lady with a dazzling size 6 figure and a kind disposition. A breath of fresh air compared to this flabby gutted online coward spitting venomous lies, whilst sitting on her fat ass living on social media all day – aye you’re a catch #nothanks.

Ahmed travelled the world teaching self-improvement, and was never limited to Glasgow. He has never sexually harassed anyone or ever been accused of sexual harassment.

Armour ends his article quoting a false accusation that was reported to the media by Nicole Venus Barrett against Adnan Ahmed. These false allegations are disgusting, Red Pill Rights cross-referenced statements regarding this matter from Adnan Ahmed, along with all eye witness statements from David Kasonga, against the accuser’s contradicting police statement and press statement.

In Robert Armour’s article, Venus Barrett states “she was 18 when Ahmed approached her on Glasgow’s Buchanan Street 3 years ago.” She claimed that “he was making me uncomfortable and tried to kiss me.” Ahmed responded “she gave me her number after a quick flirty interaction, we had a moment and nearly kissed, she turned away at the last moment saying I’m seeing someone, she gave her number afterwards”

Eye witness David Kasonga confirmed this saying, “I remember this girl because I saw her on the news after the media scandal concerning Adnan Ahmed. She lied on the news, they appeared to be having a conversation and laughing, he leaned his head slowly towards her as if he was whispering in her ear, she gave him her number afterwards.”

Barrett told the press “he tried to touch my hand…. I was scared.” In her police statement she contradicts this saying “he touched my face when he attempted to kiss me.” We asked Adnan Ahmed, he responded “I did not touch her face.” Eyewitness David Kasonga also confirmed “I know for a fact he didn’t touch her face, the only physical contact was a handshake when they parted ways, she did not seem scared or distressed at all, she was smiling.”

Barrett also told the press “I asked him what he was doing and not to come close to me, I had to phone a taxi and ask a member of the public if I could stand next to them.” Ahmed responded, “upon seeing her, I asked her what she was up to, this was not the first time we’d met, she said she was waiting for a taxi home, this was during the day outside Argos superstore on Stockwell Street with lots of people around, she didn’t go stand with anyone, I left after she gave me her number. If she had asked me not to come close to her I would have left, there was no sign or words of discomfort or fear, she was cracking jokes and smiling.”

Barrett further contradicted herself in the press stating “I took his number,” in her police statement she said “he texted me.” How can this be, how can you take his number and he texts you first? He would have to take her number to text her first! She also said (in her police statement), “I knew about his channel 3 years ago.” In the press Barrett said “she did not contact the police because she was scared.” She then said referring to the viral BBC The Social video defaming Ahmed “I was disgusted. I couldn’t believe that finally something had surfaced on this guy.”

Ok, so Barrett said she was “scared” to go to the police, but not scared to go to various media outlets and national television news to make false claims. She went to the press before she went to the police, she only spoke to the police months after going to the press because the police contacted her about making a statement to them to build a case. She actually didn’t go to the police even after the media scandal, they had to track her down.

We asked Ahmed about this, he said “she’s lying, she wants the fame from this horrible ordeal, her police statements and media statements contradict each other. I have an eye witness. I remember she looked like Lady Gaga when I first met her briefly in 2016. When I saw the press stuff she looked much less attractive, she didn’t age well, she did say she was into drugs, maybe that’s why.”

Nicole Barrett also claimed to the press that Mr Ahmed contacted her on Snapchat, texted and called her before she blocked his number. However, she told the police “he found me and contacted me on Instagram,” not mentioning Snapchat. In order to contact someone on Snapchat you have to have the person’s phone number or snap code, so either she gave her number to Ahmed or he is psychic.

We asked Mr Ahmed about this and he responded “I never contacted her on Instagram, check my followers/following lists, we did message briefly on Snapchat in 2016, she even told me the guy she was seeing was in prison at the time for something, she didn’t come out for a date, so I stopped contacting her, there was nothing more to discuss if we weren’t meeting up. I have never forced this girl, ever, and I was never blocked. I just stopped messaging. I deleted Snapchat around 2 years ago and used Instagram as it began to gain more popularity and had more features whilst Snapchat became less popular.”

Adnan Ahmed was set-up by BBC The Social’s video which caused mass hysteria depicting him as a terrifying figure, where in reality he is a good man and a caring father. He was working in Criminal Justice and studying in his 3rd year at university. He is in a committed relationship with a woman he says he loves dearly. People like Nicole Venus Barrett saw an opportunity for fame and added to the horrible negative publicity with no concern about ruining an innocent man’s life.

The worst part is that the Scottish Justice System is designed in such a way that females who make false accusations face limited punishment for their lies, if any legal repercussions at all. This is not justice, when did the media become more powerful that the law, this is a disgraceful miscarriage of justice.

Robert Armour ended his disgusting article be quoting Mr Ahmed from a separate press statement, making it look like a direct response to the false allegations. Ahmed did not give this statement in response to any specific allegations. The out of context quote is as follows “it’s just a bunch of guys talking to a bunch of girls. If the female declines to speak, the male has to respect that and leave. No one is at risk of rape or assault. I have women in my family that I love dearly and this is a terrible accusation for me and them.”

Police Scotland are quoted as saying Ahmed’s behaviour was “predatory and would cause fear and alarm”, after succumbing to media pressure from aggressive online feminists and blood thirsty journalists. Initially when BBC The Social’s video degrading Adnan Ahmed went viral, Police Scotland are quoted as saying “we cannot follow up on this as there is no actual crime to investigate, no crime has been committed.” They were quick to change their tune after BBC The Social’s video gained millions of views and began a witch-hunt amongst the public because of how it was edited and how it portrayed Adnan Ahmed as a demonic sexual caricature, rather than the responsible understanding life coach that he is.

It’s totally bizarre and shockingly worrying that a country’s police force can’t withstand pressure from online trolls and can be manipulated so easily by faceless crazies on the internet. Yes, Scotland is a very small country, but that does not excuse the stupid backward policing tactics used for this matter. There should never have been an arrest in the first place. The police were aware of Ahmed’s dating business 3 years prior to BBC The Social’s hate fuelled video falsely demonising him. They spoke to Mr Ahmed about it on a number of occasions in casual conversation. Both male and female officers approved of it. There are phone calls and written police reports to confirm this.

Adnan Ahmed worked in conjunction with the police, as his job as a Criminal Justice Practitioner made this inevitable. Ahmed’s behaviour was never “predatory”. He ran an online dating business on YouTube for all to see; his clients, video demonstrations and spontaneous conversations with any women were all during the day on well populated busy city centre streets. He wasn’t hiding anything, so how can his actions be described as predatory, shameful or dangerous?

Police Scotland are supposed to investigate matters neutrally and without prejudice. Instead they contributed to the media mayhem by making comments defaming a man who is not guilty of an actual crime, but was charged, indicted and remanded regardless. The police are now tying to fish for a conviction to cover their mistakes and to not face legal action themselves. At the time of writing this, Ahmed has been on remand for the past 6 months, he has been held in custody, untried and without the option of bail since January 2019.

The Sheriff Court indictment has been designed in such a way to convict Adnan Ahmed on a technicality of Scottish Law (Moorov/ corroboration) rather than using substantial hard evidence, because there is none. Ahmed is not permitted to present vital evidence that proves his innocence because of Scottish court laws that protect prosecution witnesses, even if they are lying.

Read our next blog about Sandy Brindley vs Adnan Ahmed: