In an effort to temporarily escape the nonsense of thin-skinned liars, right-wing drunkards and assorted mouth-breathers, I recently took to reading magazines that pre-dated even Paul Staines' 1986 adventures with the BNP... but I was a fool to think that this would shield me from the freaky underworld of absurd demands and retractions.

Take a look at this massive half-page item from the April 23, 1983 issue of Eagle that addresses a great injustice done in the single frame of an earlier issue where a fictional superhuman robot manages to pick a domestic door lock:

Incidentally, ASSA ABLOY no longer sell locks. Instead - stand by to tip the Eye - they offer 'door solutions'. They even claim to be "the global leader in door opening solutions".

:o)

(I kid you not; see here and here.)

Note - Nothing on any of the ASSA fleet of websites indicates how resilient their current products are to the efforts of robots, zombies, robot zombies, or lock-picking pixies... so be warned and do keep a shotgun handy.

Posted by Manic on January 5, 2009, 8:53 PM in Consume! | Permalink | Comments (2) | TrackBack (0)

"Tony's on holiday at the moment. [He] issued a statement and his work is very important to what we are doing." - Gordon Brown on Gaza and Blair (source) (via)

Well, clearly what's missing here is some quality spin, but the Tories seem to be in control of most suppliers of that lately, so let me have a crack at it in the hope that I might one day qualify to be the allegedly necessary leftist version of Iain Dale:

That this did not happen until Tony Blair went on holiday proves what an effective peacemaker he is. Clearly he is worth every penny, and should be paid overtime if and when he decides to interrupt his holiday.

I know it's missing the requisite level of feigned indignation/outrage that anyone would suggest otherwise, but I'm working on that.

Meanwhile, word reaches us from diplomatic circles that all is not what it seems in the ceasefire symphony. In fact, the orchestration appears to be subject to an entirely different arrangement:

Craig Murray - Gordon Brown Is a Murderous Two Faced Cunt: Brown is appeasing domestic horror at the Israeli massacre in Gaza by calling for a ceasefire. Meanwhile British diplomats on the United Nations Security Council are under direct instructions to offer "tacit support" to United States' efforts to block a ceasefire. I have been told this directly by a former colleague in the UK Mission to the United Nations.

It's unlike Craig to use profanity*, but he clearly did so with intent here, so I'm leaving the word uncensored and the message undiluted.

(*I suspect the influence of the recently-departed author and activist Harold Pinter.)

Related bloggage:
Flying Rodent - Happy New Year! (Yet More Bloody Lists)
Septicisle - Not concealing their enjoyment

-

UPDATE - An awesome photoshopping effort from Beau Bo D'Or! (via)

(Psst! I think it's a fair bet that IDF cheerleader Paul Staines won't be stealing this one.)

Posted by Manic on January 5, 2009, 1:39 PM in It's War! It's Legal! It's Lovely! | Permalink | Comments (1) | TrackBack (0)

... from FOX News (via).

Also, some perspective for you.

Posted by Manic on January 1, 2009, 3:44 PM in Rupert 'The Evil One' Murdoch | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBack (0)

Please read Phil BC and Unity on the plight of Hicham Yezza and consider any or all of the following measures.

I doubt very much if my MP (Anne Milton) will give a damn, especially if it looks like costing her anything (she sat back and paid mere lip service to the Iraq employees campaign, just like almost every other Tory did), but I will be writing to the Home Office via Phil Woolas.

-

*ding*

UPDATE - In fact, I just did. Your turn.

To: Phil Woolas
From: Tim Ireland
Subject: Hicham Yezza

Dear Phil,

I am not going to waste my breath pointing out the obvious inequities and injustices in the Hicham Yezza case; I am merely going to point out that it is cases like this that infuriate and further alienate the activists who might otherwise might be rather more supportive of your party in government.

Just so you know.

Cheers

Tim Ireland
www.bloggerheads.com

-

Posted by Manic on December 30, 2008, 2:16 PM in The War on Stupid | Permalink | Comments (4) | TrackBack (0)

The Night Before Christmas (Tabloid Edition)

by Tim Ireland

'Twas the night before Christmas, when all through the House
Not a creature was stirring, except for this louse;

The shocking news hung like a fart in the air,
That something caught knickerless soon would be there;

The MPs were nestled all snug in their beds,
While visions of peerages danced in their heads,

But stalking the halls, and consulting his map,
Still came the intruder; this unwholesome chap,

Who sniffed at them all and their law-making chatter,
Who judged himself best to know which judgments mattered.

Now quickly he dashed as he caught a quick flash,
In pursuit of the knickerless, offering cash!

The moon came out next and then footprints on snow,
The knickerless attempted escape down below!

Then, round and down corners and what should appear?
A knickerless front! No! A knickerless rear!

Attached to that bottom, so lively and quick,
Was a knickerless target... that knew it was nicked.

More rapid than ever he pursued his game,
And he whistled, and shouted, and called the thing names;

"Now, Dasher! now, Runner! now, Zippy and Speedo!
You Scumbag! you Maggot! you Faggot and Paedo!

I know what you are and my bum's to the wall!
Now suck on my! suck on my! suck on my balls!"

(Such messages mixed, and made on the fly,
Presented no obstacle; heaven knows why.)

So up to the House-top the runners they flew,
The unwholesome chap, and the knickerless too,

And then, in a twinkling, they fell off the roof,
Into the chavs and the have-nots and yoof!

The unwholesome chap's eyes darted around,
As down fell the knickerless, down to the ground,

"Kick it!" he yelled, "Before it kicks you!
If Jesus were here, He'd be kicking it, too!"

A bundle of knives were then plunged in its back,
As the knickerless was bent down and facing the sack,

It eyes -- how they darted! so startled! so trapped!
When facing the sack and this unwholesome chap.

(Its sad little face was then put on show,
And ironically entitled "Mind how you go.")

The stump of its limb was chewed on by teeth,
Its ear was chewed off with some dead woman's grief,

They chewed off its face and its heart and its belly,
They shook and they laughed when they watched it on telly!

They cheered and they paid the unwholesome chap,
For this freshly spun story of deeds and mishaps,

For the wink of his eye and the twist of his words,
And the signal that's silent but needs to be heard.

He bowed to the crowd, and returned to his work,
(He works for himself, so he works for a jerk),

And laying his finger inside of his nose,
He waved about cash and where most of it goes,

Then sprang to his feet, and shot off like a missile,
To the thundering sound of a million dog whistles.

But I heard him exclaim, as he shot out of sight,
"Mob justice for all (except me) and good-night!"

Have a safe and merry Winterval, and please don't drive if you've had a few. Cheers all.

Posted by Manic on December 24, 2008, 4:50 PM in Humanity | Permalink | Comments (2) | TrackBack (0)

Boris Watch - The Ever So 'Independent' LondonUnlocked.org: Also, there's only one registered user - 'Editor' - who has no email address, there are few or no comments, and who's this Maurice Bennett? .... So there we are, LondonUnlocked.org is funded and supported by a wealthy Conservative donor (to the tune of at least £500k) with business interests a lot of shops, presumably including some in central London. As far as I can see they don't mention the Conservative connection *anywhere*, although I'm open to correction. Personally, I think they've got some explaining to do.

But... but... but... surely we've been told time and again by independent right-wing bloggers that blogs don't cost money... and if blogs don't cost money, then surely there can't be Tory money behind any independent right-wing bloggers. It's simple logic, people.

(rolls eyes)

Details about clear party-political influence/affiliation do appear to be denied and hidden rather than declared and highlighted on the London Unlocked site. The author(s)/publisher(s) behind it should probably try to explain just what is going on over there.

-

UPDATE (24 Dec) - I asked a question and actually got an answer instead of feigned outrage and/or personal abuse. If it's a right-wing website, the author has lost their technical manual. Full text from that answer appears below the fold.

[----- fold ------]

Continue reading "LondonUnlocked: rather a bit too shy about their Tory donor roots"

Posted by Manic on December 20, 2008, 10:30 PM in Tories! Tories! Tories! | Permalink | Comments (4) | TrackBack (0)

I hope Debenhams release Santa from his contract before Christmas Eve, or there are going to be lots of disappointed boys and girls around the world.

Posted by Manic on December 19, 2008, 11:22 AM in Consume! | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBack (0)

Five Chinese Crackers - Smellyface Christmas, Everybody! (via)

Eric the Fish - More Fairy Tales

LeftieHippie - Richard Littlejohn and Google Maps

Even though he's got it wrong, is lying, or is just making stuff up for most if not all of his 'war on Christmas' list, Richard Littlejohn enjoys a safely censorious comments environment where scrutiny is frowned upon or ignored (if it is published at all) and mindless applause and reinforcement is the order of the day, so he's unlikely to be slowed by anything so banal as reality.

Still, if you can draw the BNP crowd and cash in on them without going so far as to sign up for a spiffy uniform yourself, where's the harm, eh?

(Hm. For some reason, I'm reminded of another right-wing populist and confirmed liar.)

Posted by Manic on December 18, 2008, 11:10 AM in Old Media | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBack (0)

- Camera in a Guy's Head has been a 'featured' video at YouTube (UK) for a couple of days now. Views are in their tens of thousands and comments in their hundreds. I'm still having trouble understanding the purpose of some of the comments some people will make on YouTube (example), but it's kind of nice all the same. (Cheers to BenSix for the heads-up.)

- My next video (on the subject of sock-puppetry) will most probably be on Vimeo, BTW. The animation insists on being unexpectedly awesome, and it'll require resolution that YouTube can't deliver. And more time. Like 'not before Christmas' time.

- Lame/duck interface: Person in Iraq throws shoes at Bush (via). Bush tells us it's no big deal*. Even the security services seem quite relaxed about it. So we're allowed to throw shoes at him now. He's quick enough to dodge them, he won't be fazed by it and burly men won't leap on top of you and/or shoot you in the back of the head several times if you try it. Trust me on this; Bush will be disappointed if he thinks up all those great shoe jokes for nothing. And do be quick about it, as you have less than 36 days in which conk the noggin while it's still worth a full 50 points.

(*He doesn't know or he doesn't care, or he doesn't care who thinks he doesn't know or doesn't care.)

- Respect, office, yadda yadda yadda (#1)

- Respect, office, yadda yadda yadda (#2)

- Rebekah Wade is flirting with mob justice again. Perhaps even invisible mob justice.

- More tabloid fun here.

- But, sadly, there's no outrage from tabloids over this. (Maybe if the miners had been famous pop singers or attractive teenage girls...?)

- This on the Menezes verdict (via Septicisle):

"Princess Diana, killed in a car crash - unlawful killing. Six passengers and four crew killed when a man drives his Land Rover off the M62 on to the Selby rail line - unlawful killing. Man throws his son from the roof of a Greek hotel - unlawful killing. A UK soldier is killed in Iraq when a US pilot opens fire on him - unlawful killing. BBC journalist Kate Peyton shot - unlawful killing. Two policemen shoot an innocent man seven times in the head on a train in front of witness who say no warning was given - not unlawful killing. Could someone please explain?" - Dan Tanzey - Thornton Cleveleys, Lancashire

- Yes, I've seen the mention of Paul Staines in Private Eye, but Paul doesn't want to talk about that. Or anything else. Sorry, Alex.

Posted by Manic on December 15, 2008, 5:55 PM in Updates | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBack (0)

Psst! I'm over here this morning.

Oh, and here's a little something for Alex Hilton, who claims to have missed the whole Usmanov thing; a video I made at the time, but neglected to release...

UK Libel Law (explained in post-it notes)

There's a newer and far funkier animation on the way (on the subject of sock-puppetry).

Oh, and if I can figure a way to write about it without some idiot throwing his idiot laywer at me, there will one day soon be an opaque post (containing tedious detail) that reflects on the issues of unmoderated user-generated content and profitability, and where these two issues might intersect in the most mysterious ways.

Posted by Manic on December 9, 2008, 11:11 AM in Rupert 'The Evil One' Murdoch | Permalink | Comments (5) | TrackBack (0)

As much I'd love to bring you an opaque post full of tedious detail, this is all you get today; Mr Popularity strikes again...

YouTube - Who wants to stand next to the President for a picture?

Posted by Manic on December 8, 2008, 12:19 PM in George W. Bush | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBack (0)

I don't think the good people at the Mirror really thought this one through:

Please see Septicisle for some thoughtful words on this topic.

-

- Also worth reading is Jean-Charles de Menezes summed up (via)

- While I remain deeply unimpressed with Alex Hilton, I will happily publicise this predicament and (*gasp*) maybe even pay attention to what is going on.

- Encouraging news on the Nigerian witch hunt front.

- You'll want to read this article on torture, even though it contains few surprises.

Posted by Manic on December 5, 2008, 2:21 PM in Old Media | Permalink | Comments (2) | TrackBack (0)

Why are the Tories trying to convince everyone that there's meat in the shit-sandwich they should be eating?

Rheotrical question, obviously.

Justin McKeating - V for Vacuity
Anton Vowl - Well yes, when you look at it that way...
Unity - The Purloined Policy... <--- long but potentially quite important
Paulie - David Davies - refusing to co-operate?

Iain Dale has not been able to show any substance behind his feigned outrage here and here. Challenges to his declaration that "...to most people nowadays, the word 'grooming' has only one connotation and it's related to paedophilia" have been ignored or dismissed.

You may also 'enjoy' Richard Littlejohn as he defies the British police state from within his gated community in Miami and waves Dr David Kelly's corpse around like a weapon.

(On the latter point, Littlejohn describes Kelly as being hounded to death "for telling the truth about Iraq's non-existent nuclear weapons"... but this the same man who, when at the Sun, dismissed a million people with doubts about WMD claims as selfish, naive peaceniks.)

-

UPDATE - They are so outraged, they can barely stop themselves... from smirking?! (via)

(Psst! First face I noticed in the footage was that of notorious sock-puppeteer Grant Shapps. I'm amazed that Cameron still has this clown in his cabinet.)

Posted by Manic on December 3, 2008, 11:58 AM in Tories! Tories! Tories! | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBack (0)

David Semple - Bloggers against libel: help Alex Hilton

No.

David T - Defend Alex "Recess Monkey" Hilton

No.

Iain Dale - "Some people may think I have lost my marbles when they read this post..."

No!

Alex Hilton - HELP! Please read

(reads)

Erm... no.

More details below the fold for those who need them:

[ ------------------ FOLD ------------------ ]

Continue reading "Alex Hilton vs. Johanna Kaschke"

Posted by Manic on December 3, 2008, 10:46 AM in UK Libel Law | Permalink | Comments (5) | TrackBack (0)

BBC - Row over Green 'grooming' claims: Senior Tories are furious that police who arrested MP Damian Green accused him of "grooming" a Home Office mole to leak him information... When police questioned Mr Green - the shadow immigration minister - they are said to have suggested to him that he had not "simply received leaked" information but "groomed" a civil servant who had allegedly passed him 20 confidential documents. The man, who has been named in newspapers, was a Conservative activist who is believed to have previously applied for jobs in Mr Green's office. There was Tory anger over the police's use of the controversial term "groomed" because it is usually used in relation to child sex offences.

Oh, spare me.

What possible reason could the police have to avoid using this word? I mean, apart from the selective hypersensitivity of Conservatives looking to gain recently-lost ground. (Oh, and perhaps mask a bit of misconduct, eh gents?)

FFS, they're charging about all over the place like hysterical pepperpots; there are causes for concern in this case, but this isn't one of them.

Don't wave a six of clubs in my face if you're trying to convince me that you're holding a royal flush.

-

Footnote about a footnote: the following was said about Paul Staines (aka 'Guido Fawkes') recently in relation to another matter, but it certainly applies here;

"Footnote: it's always enjoyable to catch Guido Fawkes in a tizz, the insouciant mask of worldly, non-partisan cynicism dropping as the Tories get into difficulty." - Michael White

See also: One of the shoutier wannabes from the Paul Staines stable declaring that the alleged mole had been somehow 'disappeared' as part of this "audatious" act.

MINI-UPDATE - Another example, and this time we are spelled for spoiling errors. Are these the "window liquors lickers" that Paul Staines speaks of when lamenting the sorry sewer-like state of his comments?

-

Related Bloggage:
Justin McKeating - That poor oppressed ruling class again
Jim Bliss - Tories living in Stalinist Britain
Septicisle - Green and a very suddenly established police state
This and more in a blogging round-up at Liberal Conspiracy

Teh (Alleged) Mole:
The Daily Pundit - Home Office mole, Chris Galley, claims Damian Green offered him inducements
Telegraph - Damian Green arrest: Chris Galley profile

[Psst! It may be a quiet one this week. A new animation is on the way. That, and I'm being paid by a Stalinist state to keep schtum.]

-

UPDATE (3:30pm) - Proof, if you need it, that the grooming 'smear' is only in the public domain because the Tories brought it into the open and presented it as a smear:

The Times - Damian Green is accused of orchestrating up to 20 leaks: In a welter of briefings from police, ministers, civil servants and Commons officials, the most incendiary came from a senior Conservative who said that Mr Green was accused of "grooming his contact" during his nine-hour detention on Thursday. "Damian was very angry at this clear attempt to provoke him and did not reply. As a party we want to make it clear that this was grossly inappropriate but symptomatic of the cack-handed way the police have conducted this investigation."

Independent - Arrested MP accused of 'grooming' mole: The Conservative MP Damian Green was accused by police of "grooming" a Home Office mole. The accusation came during nine hours of questioning by police investigating at least 20 leaks of secret documents from the department. As details of the investigation emerged, the shadow Immigration minister told friends he was livid that detectives resorted to "provocative" language used to describe sex offenders and suicide bombers.

Somehow, this became a Telegraph headline "Damian Green accused of 'grooming' Whitehall mole, claim police" when there is, in fact, no such claim from the police in that article or in any other that I can find; everything comes back to what unnamed sources close to Green have been saying.

The (alleged) accusation of Damian Green 'grooming' Chris Galley (for any purpose) is only in the public domain because Green and his supporters chose to bring it into the public domain, and they made damn sure that they and associated it with sex offenders and/or suicide bombers when they did so.

Either the police are devilishly clever in the way they go about smearing someone (and in the habit of leaving a lot to chance when they do so) or this 'outrage' has been feigned and fabricated by the Conservatives in order to draw attention away from some or all of the police investigation.

[Psst! Peek in comments for a link to Iain Dale's contribution.]

-

UPDATE - Or click here, I suppose.

Posted by Manic on December 1, 2008, 10:00 AM in Tories! Tories! Tories! | Permalink | Comments (11) | TrackBack (0)

You might initially think that this issue pales into insignificance next to the million assumptions that simply must be made immediately about matters in Mumbai today, but I for one believe that the reliability of information is important across the political spectrum, and identity is often key to this online.

Take, for example, the comments about Andrew Gilligan and/or his articles that would look very different once confirmed to be from Andrew Gilligan or one of his close associates.

Take, as another example, the many newspapers desperate to belittle blogs and bloggers while simultaneously scrambling to get in on the action, and their typical approach to comment moderation; (refuse substantial criticism no matter where it comes from, and publish almost any damn thing that doesn't harm them specifically... no matter where it comes from).

Most bloggers who have been talking about the Andrew Gilligan matter recently may have noticed a number of trolls seemingly designed to confuse the issue and mock concerns about the use of multiple false identities in the political arena.

Most if not all of these are the work of one man - Martin Wiesner - and that's just the tip of the iceberg.

-

Background

Martin Wiesner is billed here as the man who looks after communications for the Watford Area Green Party. Martin also ran as a Green candidate in 2004 Watford Borough Council Elections.

You most likely know him as 'Lobster Blogster' (CiF), one identity he carried on with for an extended period before adopting 'Tory Dipper' and then semi-outing himself as 'Martin' or 'Pogsurf' (CiF)... i.e. he somewhat belatedly declared a connection between some of his sock puppets, using an old nickname that - with research - might someday lead you to his real identity and some information about his political affiliations that he really should have declared in any number of instances in the first place.

As Lobster Blogster, Martin sought to involve himself with the whole Paul Staines thing and even earned a blogroll link on 'Guido 2.0'. Eventually it emerged that we disagreed on the crucial matter of identity and accountability (i.e. the issue at the heart of my problems with Paul Staines, aka 'Guido Fawkes') but it wasn't clear just how fundamental our differences were until I had cause to explore the edit history of a few entries at Wikipedia, most notably the entry for Paul Staines.

And on that note...

-

Wikipedia

Months ago, I asked Martin how many anonymous edits he had made to Paul Staines' Wikipedia entry. His response can best be described as acidic distortion:

Hang on Ireland! You want my help now? Maybe you should have thought about that before you started slagging me off on the internet. (Tory Dipper stands accused of the most hideous of internet crimes, sock-puppetry. Tim has yet to present his case, but of course he has already been found guilty by Justice Ireland.)

Just for the record, Tory Dipper is completely unaware of any way to make anonymous edits on Wikipedia. The Dipper has edited Wikipedia in the past, but only ever using the methods described at Pseudonymity, so the correct answer to his e-mail is "none".

Even with this 'pseudonymity' distortion in place (a pseudonym is often chosen for purposes of anonymity; only in some contexts are they separate concepts), Martin can easily be proved to be stupefyingly ignorant, forgetful, or a liar:

Most, if not all, of these anonymous edits were made by Martin Wiesner, who is clearly aware of how one might make anonymous edits on Wikipedia, but not wily enough, it appears, to avoid detection. I have evidence of my own that's quite distinct from the assertions of experienced Wikipedia editors, and I'm willing to have it tested in court (not that Martin will want to do anything other than cast doubt upon that evidence, or me personally).

There's more for those who care to poke around, but this response to his being indefinitely blocked from editing Wikipedia should be enough:

Please feel free to ban me again if you feel that is the right thing to do. There are many more names and IP addresses I could adopt, should the need arise.

Martin Wiesner is an unapologetic user of sock puppets (multiple false identities). This confirms it.

Sock-puppeting is regarded to be a harmless practice in some quarters, but not when sock-puppets are used in a way that impacts significantly on someone's reputation, and certainly not when the democratic process is involved...

-

Haltemprice and Howden by-election, 2008

In the showcase by-election prompted by the resignation of David Davis, the Greens were significant players (in fact, their candidate came second).

Though he failed on the follow-through, Martin Weisner sought to involve himself in that by-election with a website that mocked David Davis. Most importantly, he did so without declaring his association with the Green Party. Especially in a field with so many players and the two main players bowing out, saying something like "It should be obvious I'm not a Tory" just isn't good enough.

While the law has yet to catch up with reality (example), such antics are just as unacceptable as anonymous pamphlets in my view, and I suspect I'll be just as busy dealing with this issue at the next general election as I have been during recent council elections and by-elections.

-

Martin's current position on all of this is that I should be willing to live and let live... but this runs contrary to his actions that I'm objecting to in the first place, and even if I were to accept his reasoning on this front, we would still be left with the very real fact that I often get blamed for a lot of the crap that he does, which impacts on my reputation.

(Psst! Annoyingly, I even get blamed for a lot of the crap he does by a man who is himself an unapologetic user of sock-puppets; Phil 'Dizzy' Hendren.)

Martin is also prone to the use of outright distortion in his defence, and/or when throwing accusations in the face of his accusers (typically, just before retiring from the conversation).

One of the more worrying examples was his publishing a naked picture of himself (NSFW* link posted here) as 'proof' of his commitment to being more open about his identity in future or some such nonsense. When I referred to this bizarre action in a later email, the one-word reply from Martin was "Pervert!"

(*Link is also Not Safe For Lunch. You have been warned.)

Martin Weisner is currently dashing from website to website making a variety of attempts to confuse the Gilligan issue and/or mock Gilligan's accusers, without declaring (never mind discussing or defending) his own position regarding the use of multiple false identities.

There's more (so much more that the variety of attacks and the amount of time spent on these deceptions is alarming enough in itself), but this should be enough for most people who are considering the merits of banning Martin Weisner and his many sock-puppets from their weblogs.

Martin has 24 hours in which to respond under comments if he wishes to enjoy a right of reply, after which time he will be banned from this website.

If he persists with the use of distortions, diversions and groundless/irrelevant accusations, he will be banned immediately.

It is widely regarded as acceptable to blog on the subject of politics from behind a pseudonym, so long as your nicknames/accounts somehow clearly resolve to a single identity, you make it clear what your political allegiances are, and/or you avoid undeclared conflicts of interest.

It is widely regarded as totally unacceptable to use multiple/false identities in any act likely to impact on another person's reputation, not least because you will have done so without banking your own reputation on what you have to say.

That is the act of a coward and a bully.

Where I come from, there is a clear difference between standing up to someone and punching them in the back of the head and running away.

There is no place for Martin Weisner's antics in our community of political weblogs, and as long as he remains determined to continue with his antics, I would argue that there's no place for Martin Weisner, either.

[This post will also be submitted to the Green Party as the body of my complaint about the conduct of this member.]

-

UPDATE (2pm) - A few typos and a minor omission corrected; I'd best note this just in case any changes are leapt upon and presented/distorted as 'evidence' of something or other. I am also announcing here an exception to my general privacy policy; email responses from Martin Wiesner are likely to be published in whole or in part, depending on how educational I feel they might be.

UPDATE (3pm) - Name fixed. It is Weisner, and not Wiesman, as some later sentences suggested before that fix. The variation resulted from my typing much of this on the train, and therefore going from memory on the name.

Posted by Manic on November 27, 2008, 1:29 PM in The Political Weblog Movement | Permalink | Comments (6) | TrackBack (0)

After giving Andrew Gilligan puh-lenty of chances to either deny or defend the use of multiple false identities to praise/defend his own articles and/or undermine critics of Boris Johnson, I finally ran out of patience with the bloke and took the fight to his doorstep.

This morning I dropped by Northcliffe House, home of Associated Newspapers (publishers of the Evening Standard and the Daily Mail, as well as the freesheets Metro and London Lite) and handed out roughly 180 copies of my own A4 freesheet Ailing Standards... most of them to Mr Gilligan's colleagues as they entered the building.

Thanks to D-Notice for handling the camera work, Matt Buck for this 'gift to the world', and to security at Associated Newspapers Ltd, who acted like true gentlemen (knowing, as they must have done, that I had every right to stand on the pavement and hand out free newspapers).

Until further notice, I urge all of my readers to:-

- Download their own copy of Ailing Standards, print out as many versions as they can afford, and distribute them via any legal means they regard to be fair and proper

- Link to this post, so I may hope to one day soon be a top search result for 'andrew gilligan'

Text from the main article in Ailing Standards appears below, as does a video of my morning adventure. Apologies for the crudity of the cut and the traffic noise.

In separate instances months apart, bloggers have detected multiple visits to their sites originating from searches for 'andrew gilligan' and resulting in anonymous comments about Andrew Gilligan. It now appears that these comments may have come *from* Andrew Gilligan, but those seeking confirmation of their own suspicions should beware; Andrew bites!

When it emerged that suspicious comments had also appeared on the Guardian's 'Comment Is Free' (some of them containing specific phrases & claims that later appeared in articles by Gilligan), the journalist responded to the accusations of using multiple false identities (or 'sock-puppets') to praise/defend his own work and undermine critics by launching an attack on his accusers in the Evening Standard... without mentioning the accusations! In fact, the only denials from Gilligan so far involve:

- A vague claim about a marketing arm of the newspaper conducting "automated" research. (The Evening Standard denies that any such arm of their operation exists.)

- An even hazier claim from Gilligan that one suspected account belongs to his 'partner'. (Life partner? Business partner? Tennis partner? He won't say.)

No-one appears to be safe from the attentions of the mystery commenter, whose visits have been reliably traced back to Associated Newspapers Ltd; so far bloggers, journalists and even a professor of journalism have enjoyed his (or her!) attention.

So here we are on your doorstep, print media people. We really don't mind journalists leaving comments under articles by themselves, about themselves or involving themselves... we just really wish they wouldn't do so while pretending to be somebody *other* than themselves.

Andrew Gilligan - Ailing Standards

(Psst! The latest thread on this subject, containing yet another attempt by Gilligan to pass off a distortion as a denial, can be found here.)

-

UPDATE - I took some pictures of Northcliffe House while I was there.

Posted by Manic on November 26, 2008, 11:53 AM in Old Media | Permalink | Comments (19) | TrackBack (0)

This afternoon, I used the almighty Wiki Scanner to have a quick browse through some old anonymous edits made from an Associated Newspapers IP address.

(Primarily 195.234.243.2 by the looks of things, and you can browse from the most recent edit backwards starting here if you feel like taking a slightly different path; I'm sure there's plenty more to be found, especially among the more recent edits.)

I strayed upon someone who has read one of my favourite books.

I discovered that the personal life of Uma Thurman is fair game, but the personal life of Paul Dacre is not.

I saw some external link spamming of the borderline variety... oh, and the outright kind, too.

I spotted a dangerous leftist lurking in the bowels of their organisation.

I chanced upon distaste for "self-promoting articles in national newspapers".

I encountered someone who disagreed with a claim relating to the evidence in the Livingstone/Finegold matter.

I met a kindred spirit who shares my love for Tony Blair (if not the ability to express it coherently).

But the highlight of my afternoon was seeing this edit in a discussion about a list of animals displaying homosexual behaviour.

Where is real proof in the tiger actually showing homosexual behaivour? Personally I believe tigers would only be prone to show anti-homosexual behaivour, is it because of this people believe they might actually be closet homosexuals? --195.234.243.2 14:47, 16 March 2007 (UTC)

I can get past the spelling, but:

- Note the immediate switch from a demand for proof to a reliance on belief.

- Note the fear that the very idea that a tiger could be homosexual might be enough to 'turn' people (or at least make them a little bit curious).

- Note above all the deep-set affection for tigers that has been sadly absent from our newspapers since the retirement of Bill Watterson.

Tigers are nimble, and light on their toes. My RE-spect for tigers continually grows!

-

UPDATE - Meanwhile... Hey, everyone! Andrew's back!

Posted by Manic on November 25, 2008, 5:20 PM in Old Media | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBack (0)

This is the coolest thing you'll see all day, if not all week:

Chicken Head Tracking

(Loving the new widescreen setting on YouTube, BTW... even if it does date my entire collection.)

Posted by Manic on November 25, 2008, 11:20 AM in Video | Permalink | Comments (1) | TrackBack (0)

Boris Watch has spotted it, and it slipped under the Guardian's radar at the time, but I'd like to highlight this for regulars at Bloggerheads as a warm-up of sorts.

This is a comment left on the Guardian's website using the 'kennite' account. In other words, it is a comment made by Andrew Gilligan or his mysterious life/business/tennis partner (background).

I invite you to watch 'kennite' and marvel at the sheer gall of it all as he belittles Ken Livingstone (author of the article) and Brian Paddick ('BrianforMayor'):

kennite

Mar 23 08, 10:12pm

I've never seen this before: an incumbent Mayor, and two of the other candidates, posting on a talkboard. On a public holiday, too. Could they, perhaps, be desperate? Interesting to see that Boris doesn't feel the need to post.

[ link to single comment | link to entire thread ]

(rolls eyes)

Because what 'kennite' was doing - even if he is a 'partner' of Gilligan's and not an invention of Gilligan's - wasn't at all pathetic or desperate, was it?

Oh, I'm going to enjoy this...

(prepares stick)

Posted by Manic on November 25, 2008, 10:09 AM in Old Media | Permalink | Comments (1) | TrackBack (0)