Psst.
Have a word with JohnD for me - he has me on ignore apparently. Tell him he's wasting his time trying to weaponise an opinion of mine from a long while back.
View attachment 328639View attachment 328644
You can't weaponise someone's opinion.
You can disagree with it. You can argue aginst it, of course, that's called discussion.
You could blackmail someone if their desire/plan/objective is so outlandish, like wanting to blow up the HoP, and they were a member of the protection squad.
Or them supporting treason and they were an MP.
But that is blackmail, and the point of blackmail is threatening to publish what you know.
But you couldn't publish (by weaponising) what you know because then your ammunition would be shot, you'd have nothing left.
Whereas in 'weaponising' information that you have about another, you are publishing information/data etc, possibly frequently, in order to reduce your opponents voice or opinion, trying to shut them down, or cause them harm or distress, because you disagree with their opinion.
But you can't weaponise someone's voiced opinion. If it were possible to weaponise their opinion, or to blackmail them with it, they wouldn't have voiced it in the first place.
For sure, there are times, and have been times when some have claimed to 'weaponise' someone's opinion, but in those scenarios, it's invariably an incorrect, untrue allegation about their opinion, e.g. accusing someone of antisemitism when there's no evidence to suggest it, etc
That's not weaponising an opinion, that's just untrue allegations.
In this world of digital data being freely available to all who want it, are prepared to seek it, and take the time to accumulate it, we need to be vigilant in what we disclose on the internet.
I suspect that social media sites are favourite hunting grounds for such potential scammers and phishers.
