Exposing James Hind: The Hypocrisy of a Self-Proclaimed Child Protection Advocate.

In October 2022, the sudden and tragic death of King Arthur researcher Ross Broadstock sent shockwaves through the historical research community and beyond. A devoted husband and father, Broadstock left behind his wife and three teenage boys, all of whom were under 12 at the time of his passing. His loss was a devastating blow to his family and the thousands of supporters of his work, which was dedicated to uncovering Britain's hidden history through the research of ancient Britain and King Arthur.
Yet, within a mere 48 hours of his death, James Hind, a self-proclaimed advocate for child protection, publicly posted a comment that revealed a shocking lack of empathy. Hind's message read: "Good riddance. This guy was turning ancient history and King Arthur into a farce. Now we can get back to serious and proper historical research." This callous statement not only insulted Broadstock's life's work but also inflicted emotional pain on the family he left behind - especially his three young sons.
The Hypocrisy of James Hind.
James Hind claims to be a champion of children's safety and wellbeing, yet his actions paint a different picture. As any real child protection advocate knows, abuse comes in three primary forms: sexual, physical, and emotional. Emotional abuse is no less harmful than the others, and in this case, Hind's public attack on a deceased man, especially so soon after his passing, crossed a line that no true child advocate would ever breach.
By saying "good riddance" to Broadstock’s death, Hind inflicted emotional abuse on the grieving family, particularly the three young boys who had just lost their father. Hind’s words compounded their pain and suffering at a time when they were most vulnerable. This act was not just heartless - it was abusive. No legitimate advocate for children would ever speak so cruelly about a father who had just passed away, let alone in a way that would undoubtedly hurt the children left behind.
Dismissing a Life's Work.
Hind didn't stop at belittling Broadstock’s death. He went further by demeaning the researcher’s contributions to British history, calling his work a "farce." For years, Ross Broadstock had been a leading figure in the Britain’s Hidden History group, which attracted thousands of supporters on YouTube and Facebook. His research was based on the respected work of historians Alan Wilson and Baram Blackett, who had authored numerous books on the history of ancient Britain and King Arthur.
Dismissing Broadstock’s work in such a flippant manner not only showed Hind's disdain for the deceased but also revealed his ignorance of the broader historical research community. The work that Broadstock championed was grounded in scholarship and had drawn the attention of a wide audience. Hind’s comment about getting back to "serious and proper historical research" was not only disrespectful but entirely unwarranted. It exposed his arrogance and willingness to tear down someone else's achievements without regard for the truth or the impact on others.
A False Advocate.
This incident serves as damning evidence that James Hind is not who he claims to be. No real child protection advocate would ever emotionally harm children, especially in such a public and deliberate manner. His cruel words, spoken in the aftermath of a tragedy, demonstrate a profound lack of empathy and an alarming willingness to inflict emotional pain on those who are suffering.
Moreover, Hind's continued efforts to malign and discredit others under the guise of child protection are becoming increasingly transparent. His attack on Broadstock and his family is just one example of a larger pattern of behaviour in which Hind appears to use his platform not to protect the vulnerable, but to further his own agenda. Whether by making baseless accusations or engaging in emotional abuse, Hind has shown that he is far from the advocate he pretends to be.
In Conclusion.
James Hind's actions following the death of Ross Broadstock reveal a disturbing truth: he is not a genuine advocate for child protection. His comment of "good riddance" to a man who left behind a grieving family, including three young boys, was not only callous but emotionally abusive. Hind’s behaviour proves that his priorities are not with protecting children or supporting the vulnerable. Instead, he appears more focused on tearing down others, even at the expense of those he claims to stand for.
The hypocrisy is clear. James Hind, who claims to be a voice for justice, is in fact a perpetrator of emotional harm. His words have hurt real children - Broadstock’s sons - and exposed his true nature as someone unfit to be called an advocate for child protection.

READ MORE -
https://guerrillademocracy.blogspot.com/2024/09/exposing-james-hind-hypocrisy-of-self.html