Site icon The Steeple Times

Scobie’s Childish Clownery Backfires

Scobie’s Childish Clownery Backfires

MeGain’s nodding dog PR peddler Omid Scobie claims “clownery” forced him to delete a tweet deemed by many “hateful” to a 4-year-old child, Prince Louis

After beginning his stint at Yahoo! News with a nonsensical “800-word rant” in May, the plastic-not-fantastic ‘Megamouthed Montecito Meddler’ that is Omid Scobie twisted his already leaky pen again last week with a feature titled: “Thomas Markle turned on his own daughter – Meghan owes him nothing.”

 

As ever, shockingly written and peppered with his trademark use of “snark” and “toxic,” the ‘author’ of the bag of bilge that is Finding Freedom concluded of “publicity-hungry” Mr Markle: “Meghan doesn’t owe him a damn thing” after effectively suggesting that Prince Harry’s wife for now’s father was “conveniently captured” by paparazzi as he arrived at a California hospital after having a stroke.

 

Aside from being unnecessarily insulting to a clearly unwell man – who he alleged also tells “twisted tales” and has supported “single-purpose-hate accounts about his daughter” – Scobie simply showed himself as ridiculous. Going further, this PR peddler continued in the same vein and yesterday in a tweet about the Duke and Duchess of Cambridge’s son, Prince Louis, again made a total prat of himself.

 

Later deleted after he was widely condemned for picking on a 4-year-old child, accompanying an image of the clearly nothing but playful youngster, Scobie wrote: “I did wonder why Prince Louis was taken out for a while. Kids will be kids, eh?”

 

Obviously a pointed jibe that aimed at hinting that the behaviour of the children of the House of Cambridge and the parenting skills of the heir to the throne and his wife are looked on differently to those of the Duke and Duchess of Sussex, Scobie was subsequently asked: “Why did you delete your tweet?”

 

His response – called out as “crying victim” – read: “Because despite turning off comments (something I now try to do on any tweet about royal children), there was negativity in the quote tweets and also some insane trolls claiming ‘kids will be kids, eh?’ is ‘inciting hate.’ I’m tired and have no time or patience for clownery.”

 

Predictably once again here is a circa 40-year-old mouthy-mouse-not-a-man who throws his toys out of the pram when criticised; equally, shown up by a 4-year-old child, here is a proof that Scobie likes to give it out but he most certainly has again proven he can’t take it back. This gobby gadabout ought to learn to think before he tweets and leave commentary to real journalists and grownups.

 

This tweet by the ‘Finding Freedom’ lasted less than a couple of hours. It was widely condemned as a “pointed jibe” and “offensive” and some went as far as to say it simply showed this PR peddler for the ‘House of Montecito’ to be a nasty piece of toerag and a pot stirring troublemaker.
Asked why he deleted the missive, pathetic pontificater Scobie threw his toys out of the pram and declared: “I’m tired and have no time or patience for clownery.” In doing so, he simply illustrated himself to be anything but thoughtful in his communications and skilled at nothing but drawing attention to himself by any means.
“Crying victim,” however, did not work out well for him and instead other Twitter users remarked of their view that he is the one “enabling hate” and “encouraging hate online against children.” He would have been wise not to have embarked on such a course of action in the first place, but having done so, his back peddling proved even more disastrous.
The ‘Daily Mail’s’ Richard Eden responded to last week’s ‘Yahoo! News’ article by suggesting that it is “the royal family [who owe] Meghan nothing” rather than her owing her father nothing.
Bragging about his article on 31st May on Twitter, the former ‘Heat’ magazine columnist and sometime mate of the titty flashing ‘glamour model’ Jodie Marsh called out the Duchess of Sussex’s father as a “toxic parent” who “has a long history of causing stress, anxiety and pain.” He argued: “Cutting them out is often the only answer” in spite of having no known knowledge of psychology.
Exit mobile version