Caught in the act

There's an old adage that says when you're in a hole, stop digging. This little snippet of wisdom has obviously eluded Paul Staines as he hacks away, revising this less than stellar post about Gordon Brown's campaign site.

Unity has done an excellent job of catching the duplicitous tax-dodger in the act of unmarked revisionism, assisted by Staines' javascripting fanboy, Dizzy.

First Staines spins a non-story into an example of fraud by the Brown camp, but gets some of the details wrong.

Then Dizzy steps up to the plate and, in a related post, points out Staines error.

Staines then revises his original post so as to give the impression that he had all the details correct in the first place.

It just so ironic that in spite of Dizzy being so full of himself as a l33t haxor and Staines' own pompous self-aggrandizement as the UK's leading Matt Drudge wannabe, neither of them is capable of putting together a coherent and consistent story of any consequence, instead taking a New Labour-esque approach to spinning and distortion. Compounding the irony is the fact that Staines' post would have carried more credibility if he had simply tagged the update, but his rampant desire to appear infallible precluded any such action.

Paul Staines is a fact-murderer!

Paul Staines has been caught playing fast and loose with the facts again... and again about Lord Levy.

For Those Who Came in Late #1: 'Guido Fawkes' declaring live on Newsnight that Levy will face trial.

In the original version of this post from Wednesday, 'Guido' declared that "this morning's papers are speculating about charges being placed", but when he was put on the spot about that, all he could dig up was one newspaper speculating about it. On Sunday. He also declared that the police were staying very close to Lord Levy and suggested very heavily that it wasn't necessarily for his protection.

When the possibility that these claims were somewhat inaccurate arose in comments, there was usual fuss and bluster involving both 'Guido' and some helpful sock-puppets, the basic gist of which was; "The almighty Guido is always right and you're wrong, so fuck off."

For Those Who Came in Late #2: You'll want to watch this alternative take of 'Guido Fawkes' on Newsnight.

But then... *gasp*... 'Guido' finally had to admit that he had made an error! To John Hirst no less!

For Those Who Came in Late #3: How the anonymous bullies who hang out with Dale/Staines like to avoid/undermine any point John Hirst raises by shouting "Axe murderer!" at him.

Take a look at Staines' comment and the anonymous comment that followed it:

Guido Fawkes Esq. said...

Actually, it seems you are correct for once. Calling Guido a liar for skim reading a Google alert that arrived (late) this morning seems a little harsh.

A correction will be made.

You are still a granny killer, that can't be corrected so easily.

3:50 PM, April 25, 2007

-

crackers said...

Hirst you axed a defenceless old lady. You do not regret your killing. You call it manslaughter. You know it to be killing in cold blood. Murder to us.You show no remorse. You are the lowest form of vermin. Of this I am 100% sure. Stay in your dung heap and shut the fuck up. Your pretentious self serving ramblings are utter bilge. Like you, scum.

4:27 PM, April 25, 2007

That second comment is worth including here because it follows to the letter the 'logic' behind calling someone convicted of manslaughter a murderer as outlined in this post. It's also worth noting that 'Guido' admits to deleting 50+ comments from this thread (see #5 below) but he thought that this one was worth keeping.

Now, onto Staines' comment:

1. In his post he claims to be doing research on Levy for an upcoming book. Under comments he claims that he only skimmed a Google alert about the subject of his book. Please raise your hand if you're buying it.

2. You are not on solid ground if you respond to a valid argument by screaming "Axe murderer!" at your opponent.

3. John Hirst (who really should try to avoid using sock-puppets for any reason, as it simply adds to the confusion) points out here that "there is no public record of my victim being a grandmother"... so, in trying to draw attention away from one glaring inaccuracy, 'Guido' has blurted out another!

4. But at least Paul Staines had the courage to do this himself instead of saying it via a sock-puppet... but we also have the far more passionate and detailed anonymous comment that followed to consider. When you rely heavily on sock-puppets to do your dirty work for you and they appear at just the right time with startling regularity, you only have yourself to blame when people suspect that you're a sock-puppeting loser who spends a great deal of time anonymously shouting down opponents and/or patting yourself on the back.

5. At the request of (ahem) an anonymous contributor, Staines closed comments at midnight and deleted "fifty or so" comments that pointed out what an arse he had been 'bored' him. Way to maintain that Fonzie-like demeanour, Paul.

So, the post has been updated, and comments have been closed. That's the end of it, right?

Well, no.

The updated version of the offending post still contains the following passage:

Guido is also working on another book, with the working title "The Trial of Lord Levy", for publication, on the advice of lawyers, after the verdict.

Verdict? You what? I think Paul will want to have another word with his lawyers.

One cannot have a verdict without a trial... and a trial generally doesn't take place until charges have been brought. To date, no charges have been brought against Lord Levy.

Just as he did on Newsnight, Paul Staines has again presented this possibility as a certainty. He'll want to watch it with that wishful thinking.