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.

Censorship and hypocrisy (in spades)

In light of Tessa Jowell's misguided call for bloggers to adopt a Code of Conduct, self-proclaimed Libertarian hero Guido Fawkes (aka Paul Staines), has posted yet more hypocritical dribble for his rabid readership to agree with. You can just imagine them, no doubt in their bedrooms, agreeing like those shabby nodding dogs that you get free with a certain car insurer.

Of course the dear readers here at Guido 2.0 know better. We know that Guido is a hypocritical charlatan who – behind the mask - is terrified of 'the truth' and will use the full force of the law to suppress it. Won't you, Paul?

Johnny-Come-Latelies like Paul Staines and Precious Iain Dale don't care very much for what makes the blogosphere work, no, all they care about is what they can get out of it. Iain Dale promises us, "Just for the record, I never portray myself as an expert on blogging," yet he has the temerity to edit a Guide to Political Blogging! I mean, Iain, do you think we're that fucking stupid?

Likewise Paul Staines has the sheer cheek to write, "freedom of speech means you will find people saying disagreeable things in disagreeable ways," and yet Paul Staines has repeatedly done his best to hinder the work of those who are saying disagreeable things in disagreeable ways about him by preventing deep-linking to his site.

FYI - a credible commentary of Jowell's clanger can be found here.

Precious Iain Dale Launches Video Advertising on Blogs

Some of you may have choked back vomit after seeing videos playing across the blogosphere starring Iain Dale.

In the video advertisement launching GuidoSpace's new lickspittle-generated "Lite" advertising service he nauseatingly demonstrates two ways of advertising on Iain Dale. Press play to play with yourself.

Guido should declare an interest in that his legal bills (and a little bit more) are paid by GuidoSpace.

Rumour has it my very own parliamentary tea-boy is to star in the next video advert!

Hat-Tip: Guido 1.0

David Cameron's attack dog

Having just read Unity's demolition of Paul Staines' recent propaganda drive, I got thinking as to the nature of the Guido site's role within the Tory online operation.

Unity has clearly outlined some of Staines' salacious techniques, and exposed his use of evocation to project an air of scandal around Gordon Brown's relationship with the Smith Institute. But why is Staines spending so much time trying to set-up his ruse, especially when the evidence he draws upon is so tenuous?

As Unity has ably proven, the evidence Staines uses to further his conspiracy does not hold up to scrutiny, so clearly Staines is looking for something that may or may not be there. This leads me to one question: What came first… the 'evidence' or the conspiracy theory?

Is Staines just so desperate to find dirt on Brown that he'll concoct a story even if there is no conclusive proof?

Did one of Staines' "co-conspirators" send him documents that suggest Brown's relationship with the Smith Institute is in someway improper, or is Staines just hoping to sling enough dirt to sully the Chancellor's reputation prior to his expected premiership?

It’s strange how this attack by Staines seems to be coordinated with a concerted Tory front to hold the chancellor's toes to the fire over the current pensions outcry. But surely that’s just a coincidence, isn’t it?

The charges Staines alludes to on his blog are unsubstantiated, this we know, so one presumes Staines is doing the dirty work of The Conservative Party. After all, there is no way that Tory MPs could make such baseless accusations (such are the rules in the Commons), so what they'd need would be a medium that is dislocated from the official parliamentary rule book. Staines is also keen, at every possible opportunity, to remind those who read his blog that his blog is hosted in the States, a feature that offers him some cover from UK libel (although this is oft overplayed).

How much coordination Staines has with the official Tory apparatus is unclear, but a few minutes reading Francis Maude's contribution to Precious Iain Dale's Guide to political Blogging (he's a blogging expert, you know?), and you’re aware how important the party considers its premier bloggers. But the Nazis, I presume, loved their attack dogs too…

Freedom of Expression is Absolute (unless it's about me!)

Oh no! It's yet more faux-libertarianism and lies from Paul 'Guido Fawkes' Staines.

As Tim has already explained, Guido has posted a defence of his selective comment deletion. Guido wants you to think it's all about good blog housekeeping, but we know what Paul is really doing is ensuring that his cool persona is not tarnished by those in the know.

Yet - and this is very cheeky - in the very same breath, Staines is also seeking to big himself up as some kind of libertarian hero, spouting off in defence of jailed Iranian bloggers (all part of the spin people, all very MTfuckingV).

Sunny (Hundal, of Pickled Politics fame) pulls Staines up on his libertarian posturing, pointing out what a shallow charlatan the real Paul Staines really is: -

11:33 PM, April 11, 2007
Sunny said...
Absolute freedom of speech eh Guido? I'm not sure you believe in that since you've been known to attempt to sue people to withhold information about your past? I don't want to be posting links since you will probably delete my comment, but you know what I'm talking about.

Freedom of speech is never absolute so please stop pretending to be a hardcore libertarian. And I think you mis-understood the point of Jonathan's article.

Ouch! Methinks someone hit a nerve.

Guido, clearly smarting from Sunny's well-placed dagger of truth, is quick to respond: -

11:51 PM, April 11, 2007
Guido Fawkes Esq. said...
There was no "attempt to sue". There was a plain warning that if any false claims were made litigation would follow.

Re Freedland - it is a very poor argument to claim that someone "misunderstands" when you merely disagree. At a loss as to what you think was "misunderstood" given Freedland's argument isn't addressed here at all.

Incidentally, "the right to freedom of speech is absolute" would be a more accurate headline. So we almost agree on something.

Note that Guido doesn't actually refute what Sunny implies, but merely pulls at a loose thread in his comment, playing semantics if you like (Guido knows that his litigious threats had the desired effect - i.e. the link to an article from the Guardian, which showed a young Paul Staines in a very bad light, was removed from Sunny's site).

But Staines is also being a little economical with the truth. It wasn't "a plain warning that if any false claims were made litigation would follow," at all; Staines threatened legal action to have certain documents kept from the public sphere and claimed that he had a full retraction from the newspaper (he had a letter from the journo, but it could hardly be called a retraction). So not a warning, but a demand. Legal action was presented as a certainty if any reference to the article was not withdrawn, and at one stage it was presented as a certainty even if it was withdrawn.

Those of us who remember that fateful Sunday morning remember the free-speech defending Staines throwing his legal threats around with little regard for his libertarian pretensions (he even made a threat on his blog, but this was soon pulled so as not to burden his followers with the truth behind the mask).

Paul Staines, as part of the compromise that saw Sunny pull the offending post, promised an interview with Pickled Politics to settle the matter. This turned out to be a waste of everyone's time, as Paul - our defender of truth and warrior against the evils of spin, refused to discuss the matter at all.

You see this is our problem with Paul Staines. He's a nothing but a hypocrite and completely full of shit.

Sock-puppets etc.

As promised, here is a new article about sock-puppets and why the "If you don't like it, don't read it!" defence does not apply.

This is one of the key static articles on the brand new microsite Iain Dale's Dairy.

The site has launched with a clearly stated moderation policy, and a similar policy will be published here shortly after consultation with our site contributors.

Please stop wasting my time (1 & 2)

1. The new Recess Monkey video is in a sense a tribute video and further evidence that the contributors have a poverty of ideas. They would enjoy more success if they tried something less derivative and more novel.

2. This post is further proof of Guido's talent for spin. Apparently, his blog being private property and/or free-of-charge to the taxpayer makes the harm it does less significant. The "If you don't like it, don't read it." defence makes a repeat appearance, and there is also a suggestion that Staines acts as our great protector twice over... by not only fearlessly burning democracy to the ground, but also selflessly reigning in any possible negative side-effects of the arson process.

Bless him and his little cotton sock-puppets.

The latter point will be dealt with strenuously tomorrow.

(The short version for those who cannot wait: Paul Staines is a lying, selfish scumbag.... and the same applies to blogging 'expert' Iain Dale.)

A bucket of spin from the chummer-in-chief

I promised you a fisking of this post from Paul Staines, and here it is. Remember when you read this that it comes from a man who claims to hate spin:

Am away for the weekend and forgot to put comment moderation on. You-know-who posts five comments on one post - then cries "he deleted me" when the inevitable happens. Iain has now banned him as well, so he is starting an anti-Iain Dale blog to join his anti-Guido blog. That is fine by me, freedom of speech means he is entitled to publish his views.

It was four comments, with three of them refuting the usual bullshit from his gang on anonymous bullies (i.e. the abuse that is designed to undermine and discourage anyone exercising their right to free speech). But now those comments have been deleted, they can be anything Mr Staines wants them to be.

The difference in audience size enjoyed by the likes of Iain and Guido compared to the contributors to our respective anti-blogs is growing. Now readers will know that Guido, like Iain, is a humble type, shy and retiring even, so it is with some hesitation that Guido ventures to say that the reason Iain and Guido have far more readers is that we try to be entertaining and bring news. Now Guido may only aspire to gossip and tittle-tattle (over 80,000 people have watched the Gordon the Bogeyman story), but that seems to be what people want and enjoy.

Well, that audience may well appear to be growing at an impressive rate, but only because Staines uses the number of comments as a key aspect of measurement... and he's been busy fostering an audience of individuals who like to pose as multiple individuals. Each time his measurement-audience grows by one member, it appears to grow by 3, 6 or 12. The 'humble' comment I'll classify as sarcasm and put down to a rare moment of self-awareness... but it's a dark path that you walk down when your efforts to be entertaining interfere with the selection of news (or when, in an effort to be 'entertaining', you blur the line between news and editorial). As for giving people what they want... do I need to finish this sentence?

It may not be what others think Guido should write about, it may not be in the deferential style that others think should be employed, it certainly gets up the noses of the old media and the embedded-in-the-political-system journalists known as the Lobby. If you don't like it, don't read it.

I'm not sure if Staines is suggesting here that I'm a willing/unwilling tool of the establishment, but I can afford to let it go; the "If you don't like it, don't read it." fallacy is the highlight here. It's at blogs like that of Dale and Staines that a nugget of unsubstantiated gossip evolves into (or is deliberately reinforced as) an 'open secret'... and from that point is eventually unleashed to do its damage. I don't like it, but the only way to combat it is to show people how it's done. There is also the small matter of the anonymous bullies that spill over from such weblogs into the weblogs and lives of others. A fire does not go out because you turn your back on it.

Simple. Better still, offer a more compelling and attractive product that beats Guido in the competitive marketplace that is the blogosphere. That takes hard work. The easier path is just to call for censorship or attack and try to undermine the legitimacy of your rivals. Claim that Iain and Guido's ascendancy is not based on hard work or talent, but lies and fiction, claim that the two most successful and well known bloggers in Britain somehow undermine blogging. We have done so much to popularise this medium - it is not going to wash. Blogging is just an easy way of publishing, it is a software platform, not a religious movement. Get real.

Following the path of least resistance is hard work? News to me. There's also a staggering misrepresentation of our respective positions here:

1. As has been made clear, it is Guido who engages in censorship, and there has been no call from me to censor views that I do not like.

2. I have also shown on a number of occasions how anonymous bullies (and those who breed them and/or hide behind them) censor the views of others... usually by intimidating their rivals or (*cough*) undermining the legitimacy of their rivals.

3. There are lies and fiction at work in these claims to ascendancy, and also a fair amount of cheating... but I don't discount the actual popularity or level of awareness that exists. In fact, I've expressed concern about it:

4. When Iain Dale touts himself as an expert and says "This is what blogging is!", he provides an easy 'out' for those who don't wish to engage, and a master class for those who wish to subvert. Dale and Staines have not popularised the medium... they've enabled the dismissal of this medium and popularised its misuse.

5. I don't recall claiming blogging to be a religious calling. All I've been doing is promoting its legitimate and intelligent use... along the same lines that Dale and Staines claim to be doing:

"The power of blogging flows from directly connecting with the readers, key to that direct connection is honesty." - Paul Staines

"Blogging has become a phenomenon which can help shape the political and current affairs agenda. It can be a force for good as well as a means of destruction." - Iain Dale

The new anti-Iain blog is in a sense a tribute blog and further evidence that the contributors have a poverty of ideas. They would enjoy more success if they tried something less derivative and more novel. Meantime Dizzy wants an anti-blog as well. You're no one daahhling, if you haven't got one.

Ah, yes.... this is something that Iain can be proud of. No doubt I'll have to re-think my position lest I give the man more credit than he is due. Nice try. As for the tired old Tory line of 'poverty of ideas' (from the left)... isn't this a bit rich coming from the guy who emulates Drudge and brought the Popbitch concept to politics?

PS - I don't see Iain Dale criticising this actual copy of the Guido Fawkes format or presenting it as evidence of a 'poverty of ideas' from the right... do you?

More spin? I expected better from you, Paul*

Heh. Mr Staines sure is going to a lot of effort to show us how little he cares. And from an exotic location, no less. It just goes to show that one should not tangle with one's betters.

A fisk will have to wait... the Queen of Sheba awaits my attention in the throne room.

[*No I didn't.]

Ch-ch-ch-ch-changes

Hello, readers. Manic is here to answer your questions an*...

Ack!

Gah!

Gnnnnnnn!

Feel... strange sensation... normalcy... coursing through body!

Cannot... talk... or type... at normal rate.

Must... shed.... third-person.... charad*...

ARRRRRRRGH!

[silence]

Hello, readers. Ziggy is here to answer your questions a*...

Ack!

Gah!

Gnnnnnnnnnn!

ARRRRRRRGH!

[general panting and slurping noises]

[silence]

Ah.... I feel much better now.

I'd like to begin by thanking the many supporters who have emailed over the past few days (you know who you are) and pointed out that the 'third-person' gag was getting a bit old and getting in the way of the material. (Kind of like those "Thatcher is a cunt!" jokes of yore... we all knew she was a cunt.)

The watershed moment appears to have come when (as predicted here) Paul de Laire Staines insisted on being disguised and addressed as 'Guido Fawkes' on Newsnight. (A few emails had arrived before this moment, but after Newsnight they came in with machine-gun regularity.)

Praguetory spent an entire day yesterday finding out how difficult it was to satirise satire, and had this to say when he was finished wiping the white wee-wee from his (short) trousers: Blogging in the style of another blogger is fun for a day, but do it for an extended period could drive you nuts.

He's not far off the mark (for once).

As fun as it was watching supporters of Staines banging on about how moronic it was to post/comment in third-person and/or making out that doing so equated with their sock-puppet nonsense, the charade was very difficult to maintain, and I found myself wondering several times how Staines manages to keep it up so consistently without surrendering to the character and/or going completely fucking mental.

So... no more third-person, here or under comments on this blog or elsewhere.

I'm as relieved as you are... and it's not the only change to this weblog that starts from now:

Guido 2.0 will now also become a META-BLOG and will include contributions from a range of bloggers who are unimpressed with Paul Staines*, his antics, and the antics of the anonymous bullies that he hides behind.

Invites will be sent to potential contributors today.

Contributors will be expected to provide material for an upcoming 'about us' profile page, but apart from this and the necessary bits and bobs designed to stop us from treading on each other's toes, the only condition that will be laid down will be as follows:

You will need to always keep in mind that this is my weblog and it is hosted on my web space; I carry the legal risks and we're dealing with a very litigious 'libertarian', so on contentious issues I have the final say on what gets published here.

One major advantage to this arrangement; the new contributors are allowed to leave comments on Staines' website. He banned me for acting *exactly* like his gang of sock-puppeting morons... just not in his favour. If he bans people from commenting just because they contribute to this website, he's going to look a right twat (again).

Manic has....

Oops. That was a close one.

Cheers all.

[*Iain Dale? Well, he gets to keep his very own category in the short-term... but he should also keep an eye out for a prophecy fulfilled. Those who miss out on contributing to this meta-blog because of the need to keep author numbers to a manageable level need not worry... more opportunities await you in the future.]

Another major victory for Guido 2.0!

Iain Dale has finally introduced proper comment timestamps on his website. Manic would like to note for the record that Iain Dale did this while everyone was busy pointing and laughing at Paul Staines... was it a good day to bury an overdue update, Iain?

As promised, the Guido 2.0 microsite now also features comment timestamps that show both time and date... and Manic will now offer to switch on 'backlinks' and/or stop talking in third-person the moment Paul Staines does the same.

What use are comment timestamps that show both time and date? Well, they make it impossible for the author to go back at a later date and 'replay' a series of anonymous comments that initially did not turn out to his advantage. They also stop sneaky contributors/authors from popping into long-dead threads and appearing to have successfully had the last word.

Finally, and quite specifically, in threads like this one... they also make it clear how long one normally has to wait for Iain Dale to put up or shut up.

PS - If Manic ever runs quotes on the header images of his website telling everyone how great he is, he will be using the following quote from this exchange:

"You suggest I do something. I then do it." - Iain Dale

Manic has spoken. End communication.

'Guido Fawkes' (and his sock-puppets) on Newsnight

Paul Staines' gang of anonymous bullies have been trying ever-so-hard to put a positive spin on his epic 'crash and burn' on live television.

Perhaps some of them wish that they could have been on hand to help with the usual vicious pile-on of diversions, attacks, insults and smears.

Well, they need wish no more... for Manic is here to bring their dreams to life via the wonders of YouTube!!

[WARNING: Video contains NSFW audio.]

Manic is getting mighty sick of speaking in third-person. End communication.

'Guido Fawkes' (Paul Staines) on Newsnight: Video and Transcript

Paul 'Guido Fawkes' Staines on Newsnight (via Justin):

If you haven't seen it yet, the report filed by 'Guido' that preceded this interview is also now on YouTube (courtesy of Unity).

The following needs to be said before Manic provides a notated transcript:

1. Perhaps now 'Guido' knows how Sion Simon felt after his less-than-flattering appearance on Sky News.

2. 'Guido' is busy publishing (mostly anonymous) comments from an unknown number of acolytes, who are banging on about how aggressive/mean-spirited/unprofessional Michael White was... when the simple fact is that Paul Staines is an attack dog and all White did was hit him over the nose with a rolled-up newspaper.

3. 'Guido' is a twat, came across as a twat, and in doing so made all political bloggers look like twats. The twat.

Now, onto the transcript... all notation is in [brackets]:

TRANSCRIPT: JEREMY PAXMAN, MICHAEL WHITE AND 'GUIDO FAWKES' (PAUL DE LAIRE STAINES) ON BBC'S NEWSNIGHT, 28 MARCH 2007

Jeremy Paxman: Well, Mr Fawkes joins us now from Westminster, where he's insisted on being in darkness, and we're joined here in the studio by the Guardian journalist Michael White. Michael White, the accusation is that political journalists are too close to the people they report upon to act dispassionately in the interests of the citizen.

Michael White: It's an alright question to ask. It's true of course in all forms of journalism that you have a problem of how you deal with your sources. And some people are very aggressive, and some people are very friendly, and some people are complicit, but all the rules which our... friend Guido Fawkes has just asked [about] apply to sports journalism, to financial journalism, and notoriously so in entertainment journalism, so the issues...

Jeremy Paxman: It doesn't mean the accusation is not true.

Michael White: So the issues are there... but sometimes it's true. We all know people who are very cosy with their sources. You said in the programme that you can get frozen out. Well, you get frozen out, so life goes on. You seem to manage well enough, Jeremy. I'm not altogether convinced... the idea that you, Paxo, is... either a lackey of the establishment or so naive that you're manipulated by...

Jeremy Paxman: Well, this is going to get ludicrously self-regarding, so... but this isn't about... it's not only about the so-called 'Empty Chair'. It's also about the whole perspective from which political reporting comes.

Michael White: Yep, that's right.

Jeremy Paxman: Do you think that he has a point? Do you accept that he may?

Michael White: Sometimes, that happens. But I might say equally, with equal vigour of him... I've never appeared on television with anyone who has appeared anonymously before. I thought I was meant to be the hole-in-the-corner operator, hiding in the shadows, but... of course, sometimes you see it that way, but equally, you see a naive conspiratorial view of the political process and the politicians, which says - in effect - "they're all crooks, and they all ought to be in gaol"... and we will fearlessly expose them on the blogosphere. It isn't like that.

Jeremy Paxman: Mr Fawkes.. for so we must call you, I gather... why do you insist on this preposterous disguise?

'Guido Fawkes': Well, so I can go undercover. I can remember a year ago having a discussion with a senior Guardian journalist who didn't know who I was, having a drink with him a couple of months later, and probably if I bump into Michael next week in a pub, he won't know who I am then.

Michael White: Well, no, I saw you at a lunch once. Everyone else was wearing a tie, and you were wearing a rugby shirt, and somebody said "That's Paul Staines, he's Guido Fawkes"...

'Guido Fawkes': (laughter)

Michael White: ... and I said "Get away! Is it? He looks a bit of a prat" and I know you're not a prat...

Jeremy Paxman: (laughter)

Michael White: ... but you looked a bit of a prat on this occasion. So, next time I see you, unless you've really disguised yourself with a blonde wig, I will recognise you. (waves) Hi!

'Guido Fawkes': Hi, Michael. You're fantastic, but look how you reacted over John Prescott when he was in trouble. You were never off the screen defending him. You were out in the studios...

Michael White: He was being stitched up!

'Guido Fawkes': ... putting his case, making his [inaudible] for him all the time.

Michael White: He was being stitched up by people like you, and if he was such a villain, how come we've [the House of Lords] just voted...

'Guido Fawkes': I didn't stitch him up!

Michael White: ... against a casino being in Manchester. I thought the Prescott conspirators had this casino done and dusted down in Greenwich. Oh, Brown put the tax up on casino gambling again last week. Bit of a failure, your conspiracy theory there, wasn't it?

'Guido Fawkes': Well, I how come it was a showbiz reporter who exposed him for shagging his secretary, not you? You're his friend, you're off having, uh...

Michael White: I'm not...

'Guido Fawkes': ...going to his birthday party, 68th birthday party...

Michael White: I'm not his friend, look...

'Guido Fawkes': ...saying how he looks young for his age.

Michael White: I haven't been to his 68th birthday party, I didn't even know he was 68*. Carrying on like that at 68, eh? Pretty shocking. I don't know what you're talking about, Paul.

[*This claim is contradicted by this article by Michael White dated June 1, 2006, but casual observers should be wary of any claim or suggestion that this incorrect statement - or the article - equates to proof of White attending Prescott's 68th birthday party.]

'Guido Fawkes': Well, you were on [BBC] News24. You said you thought he looked good for his age and you'd been celebrating his 68th birthday party with him. That's when.

Michael White: Did I? I don't...

'Guido Fawkes': Yes.

Michael White: I don't think I did, Paul.

Jeremy Paxman: Do you understand, Mr Staines or Mr Fawkes... that it is slightly more difficult when newspapers, broadcasters have to operate within the constraints of the law... not a problem that applies as far as you're concerned.

'Guido Fawkes': Well that's... I don't know why you say that. I mean, I'm very careful.

Michael White: Well, because you're not worth suing, unlike Private Eye. You haven't got any money, I take it?

'Guido Fawkes': Er, that's for you to know... me to know, and you to wonder. And I am very careful, I mean, as we get close to Lord Levy's trial, I'm very careful of the contempt of court laws, you know... that's the problem that the BBC had.

Michael White: Lord Levy's trial? Who says?

'Guido Fawkes': Well, we'll see.

Michael White: Well, we will see, but you've just said as a statement of fact; "Lord Levy's trial"

'Guido Fawkes': Oh... it's a probability.

Michael White: Oh, you're backing off quite fast here...

Jeremy Paxman: That is the difficulty, isn't it? That... that facts are treated very, very loosely in the blogosphere, aren't they?

'Guido Fawkes': Well, you know, people make mistakes, but if I do make a mistake, my reputation's at risk, and my reputation's pretty good for not making mistakes.

[pause]

Jeremy Paxman: Well...

Michael White: What...

Jeremy Paxman: Sorry, go on, Michael White.

Michael White: Well...

'Guido Fawkes': I mean the Guardian made me Political Commentator of the Year...

Michael White: Well, the...

'Guido Fawkes': ... 30,000** of their readers thought I was the best political commentator....

[**This is (dare one say it?) a mistake. As can be seen here, over 30,000 users of the Guardian website (not all of whom could be classified as Guardian readers) appear to have voted in this category, but only 33% of them appear to have voted for Staines (i.e. regarded him to be "the best political commentator" out of those nominated). Also, the word 'appear' appears because many nominees, including 'Guido' himself, expressed doubts about the reliability of the voting process. 'Guido' actually asked to be withdrawn from the competition, but didn't appear to have any complaints after winning. (Well, maybe he struggled a bit.) Regardless, 'Guido' has presented an inflated version of figures that he regards to be meaningless to support a somewhat tangential case.]

Michael White: Well, that's terrific...

'Guido Fawkes': Maybe Michael White has a difference of opinion.

Michael White: Well, I do. It's a free country. I'm delighted you got an award. Everybody likes to get an award... but you can be pretty cavalier with the facts sometime. Much of the blog, for people who don't know it, this week is devoted to whether or not Gordon Brown picked his nose during... was it the Budget or some other recent event? That's... should it have been the top item...

Jeremy Paxman: The point about the blogosphere is that it is comment unmediated by people like you [White] and me and Nick Robinson and Adam Boulton and the rest of it... and there's some merit in that, isn't there?

Michael White: Of course there is. The technology allows it. If I make a mistake in the blogosphere, I don't get a letter on green ink from a vicar in Norfolk four days later; somebody comes on and says "You idiot! You're wrong!"... usually in much more abusive terms than that. It's really interesting...

Jeremy Paxman: And very often they're right.

Michael White: Yes, of course they are. That's why I mention it. That's interesting... and the debate can be interesting. It can be violent and sterile and abusive, depends what the issue is. I don't know whether Paul agrees with me. It depends what the issue is under discussion. Sometimes, the blogosphere is a waste of space... just abuse. But sometimes it's brilliant.

Jeremy Paxman: But the distinct... the key thing here is the distinction between comment and reporting has been removed.

Michael White: Oh, it's all comment.

Jeremy Paxman: Yeah.

Michael White: Isn't it? can we agree on that?

Jeremy Paxman: You'd accept that, wouldn't you, Mr Fawkes?

'Guido Fawkes': Well, I break stories quite often... I mean, it's not more than once...

Michael White: Give us a couple.

'Guido Fawkes': ... that I've...

Michael White: Give us a couple.

'Guido Fawkes': Well, the... the whole question of the second email system. I had the lobby... was following me on that for two days.

Michael White: But that... it isn't true.

[pause]

'Guido Fawkes': Well, it turned out there was... it wasn't an email system, there was a second system for doing documents called Lotus Notes. It was established, that.

Michael White: Well, no, I don't think we have, actually. But that illustrates the difficulty... I think you got that wrong.

'Guido Fawkes': Well, my source for that was Nick Robinson***, so maybe.

Jeremy Paxman: (laughter)

[***This claim has since been retracted by Staines. Robinson's response to the claim and retraction can be read here.]

Michael White: Well, maybe... I mean, Nick Robinson... we all make mistakes, we're agreed on that. Maybe Nick made one. I wonder where he got it from?

[pause]

Jeremy Paxman: OK, chaps... we'll leave it there. Thank you both very much indeed. (laughter)

END TRANSCRIPT

Please respond under comments or via email if you find any errors.

Manic has transcribed. End communication.

Sock-puppets look a bit silly when they point the finger and shout "Sock-puppet!"

Manic takes it back... this thread over at Paul Staines' website *did* become more interesting after moderation kicked in, as did this one.

This thread is equally educational in terms of overall content, but the former links are where we see a magical change in comment content from the moment Paul takes control.

1. Moderation kicked in at 11:50pm last night after Staine's appearance on Newsnight. From this point on, 'Guido' had complete control over what did and did not get published under comments.

2. Watch both of these threads from 11:50pm onwards for a pronounced increase in (mostly anonymous) comments claiming that Staines was the victim of a personal vendetta, a Fourth Estate conspiracy, a 'NuLab' conspiracy, or all three:

'Guido Fawkes' - Nick Robinson Regrets...
'Guido Fawkes' - Should Guido Audition to Replace Crick

3. While you're there, do enjoy how many of these mostly anonymous comments push forward the idea that the mostly anonymous comments *not* in Staines' favour are the work of enemy astro-turfers (see: Fourth Estate conspiracy, 'NuLab' conspiracy, etc. etc.)

Manic has spoken. End communication.

Hello, new visitors!

Welcome to the Guido 2.0 website!

Look around if you must, but if you are arriving just after Paul de Laire Staines' Newsnight performance, then the most interesting thing to look at right now is the comments under this post at the 'Guido Fawkes' weblog.

Manic's comment on this subject (which is sure to deleted soon along with all the others as soon as Paul gets home) read as follows:

Manic is struggling to find anything gracious or generous to say about Paul's performance... but he did enjoy Paxman's and White's breezy dismissal of his pointless 'anonymity' charade very much indeed.

Some excellent points from White, too. He nailed 'Guido' again and again and again.

Manic's only regret is that he couldn't watch Paul's face as it unfolded/unravelled (but he suspects this is a major reason for the silhouette nonsense).

Go for it, Mr Undercover!

Manic also enjoyed watching 'Guido' burn a source as he scrambled to save his own arse... he would not want to be a cat in the Staines household this evening!

Manic has spoken. End communication.

UPDATE (11:50pm) - Oh dear... 'Guido' is clearly feeling the pressure. Comment moderation has been switched on and Manic's comments have been hastily deleted ('Guido' will no doubt claim at a later date that Manic was being sweary and abusive). Outright arse-saving censorship and the sudden introduction of pre-vetting makes that comments thread far less interesting, so Manic will provide some key items of interest here instead.

Taking it decade-by-decade seems to be the simplest thing to do:

'Guido' being a twat in the eighties
'Guido' being a twat in the nineties
'Guido' being a twat in the noughties

Have fun.

PS - Tch! Dig *up*, stupid!

Manic has spoken again. End communication again.

Will Paul Staines masturbate live on Newsnight tonight?

Paul Staines and Iain Dale are busily tossing themselves stupid over a 'triumphant' appearance by Staines that is due to be broadcast this evening on BBC's Newsnight.

Manic urges you to watch the preview, and the broadcast (which may include a live interview if the self-important twat agrees to an appearance; no doubt in silhouette and with no use of his real name which Paul de Laire Staines claims is 'no big secret').


In the preview, 'Guido' repeats the big fib he told Newsnight last time he appeared:

If you have lunch with someone on a regular basis, you would feel inhibited going for the jugular," says Staines, who claims he has no ambition to be a journalist and that his only agenda is that he "hates" all politicians. - From Newsnight in July 2006

"On my blog, there's no holding back from going for the political jugular" - From Newsnight in March 2007

Oh, really? What about David Taylor? Policy Exchange?

In the first example, 'Guido' not only spiked a spicy story because it involved one of his informants... he also dished the dirt on that same informant quietly on the side... which makes him a hypocrite and a total bastard.

Manic needs to pull Paxman up on this, though:

"I'm sorry, but I just think that you're living in a pathetic conspiracy world." - Jeremy Paxman (to Paul Staines)

Paul Staines does not live in a pathetic conspiracy world; what he does is create the illusion of a conspiracy world to further his agenda and that of certain elements of the Conservative Party... while denouncing all those who catch him at it as 'conspiracy loons'.

PS - Paul, here's a free tip for you... you do not want to make the schoolboy error of going for the political jugular (when it suits you); instead, you want to go for the political carotid artery (when it suits you).

Manic has spoken. End communication.

Is 'Guido' a liar or a dimwit?

Today, Paul Staines describes a man posting under his own name as; "sock-puppetry of the highest order"

But it's not sock-puppetry in any way, shape or form!

The man did not hide his name or use a fake name; the man posted under a single identity... his own!

Manic would like to know... is Staines' post the result of confusion, delusion, or fabrication?

PS - Meanwhile, Manic has been watching 'Guido' busily deleting any comments under that post that mention his own role in an actual sock-puppet adventure. The man is a hypocrite. And a coward.

Manic has spoken. End communication.

A major victory for Guido 2.0! The 'war' is within measurable distance of its end!

Manic has been after Paul de Laire Staines (aka 'Guido Fawkes') to make one minor update to his website since waaaay back in January.

This update - the inclusion of time *and* date in comment timestamps - could have been done in minutes on the old version of Blogger that 'Guido' was on then, or the new version of Blogger that he switched to a few weeks ago.

Yesterday, 'Guido' had the builders in making a bit of a mess of his website. Major changes were made to the design template, but this simple 'switch it on' measure was still not taken... despite Paul Staines making a clear promise to do so in his Pickled Politics interview (see here and here).

So last night, Manic sent Paul an email:

----- Original Message -----
From: Tim Ireland
To: Guy Fawkes
Sent: Tuesday, March 27, 2007 8:48 PM
Subject: When you're ready II

You promised 'time and date' timestamps during your recent interview (the one where you mistook 'irony' for hypocrisy').

Where are they?

Tim

PS - They take seconds to turn on and a few minutes to propagate site-wide. It is not a template issue, but a core Blogger feature that is easy to access and enact. What exactly are you afraid of?

A few short hours later, Paul Staines finally made good on his promise and introduced comment timestamps with time *and* date (well, initially he went with the rather more clunky format of date *then* time, but cheeky beggars can't be choosers).

Manic plans to make a similar update to Guido 2.0, as there is little point satirising a state of play that no longer exists. However... with this in mind, Manic does not plan to take this measure until Iain Dale, that other major breeder of sock-puppets and anonymous bullies, makes a similar update to his website.

Manic would also appreciate Iain making a correction to his design template that allows readers to link to individual comments. It is a simple fix, and an important one, as the threads at his website are often almost as long as his record-breaking blogroll.

In fact, Manic sent an email to Iain Dale last night, too... and requested all of the above (a couple of links have been added for the benefit of newcomers):

----- Original Message -----
From: Tim Ireland
To: Iain Dale
Cc: Guy Fawkes
Sent: Wednesday, March 28, 2007 12:32 AM
Subject: Re: When you're ready II

Proper timestamps when you're ready, Iain. You jumped pretty quickly on that search function, and that was a much bigger ask than a simple 'turn it on' Blogger feature like this.

Tim

PS - And while you're tinkering, please have your webmonkey fix your comment permalinks. I'd like to be able to point to specific moments when you're a total hypocrite.

PPS - Goodbye! Forever! *gasp* *sigh*

Finally, in the interests of transparency, Manic would also like to publish the email he sent to both parties just before closing up shop for the night. For newcomers, it needs to be pointed out that this entire saga can be summed up as follows:

Manic expressed grave concern about the self-serving hypocrisy of Staines and Dale, and the impact that their reliance on anonymous bullies was having on the wider blogging community. Both responded by unwittingly confirming that they were selfish hypocrites on several fronts... but not before hiding behind their anonymous bullies, thereby pushing said bullies into the foreground for everyone to see... in action, no less!

This helped to prove Manic's point about the underhanded methods these anonymous bullies use to restrict free speech.

Dale and Staines also proved time and again that Manic was the only party central to the affair who could afford to say "Bring it on!" when push came to shove.

This helped to prove Manic's point about the importance of credibility to individual sustainability.

Here's the email:

----- Original Message -----
From: Tim Ireland
To: Iain Dale ; Guy Fawkes
Sent: Wednesday, March 28, 2007 1:04 AM
Subject: PS

In case I haven't mentioned it before, it is a mistake to let your opponent know what a coward you are. Both of you have, over the last few months, shown exactly what you are made of.

Your team of bullies have - with minor individual variations - made exactly the same error.

It's not the only mistake you've made, but there's a limit to my generosity, so I shall say no more.

Good luck in the coming months. Oh, and fuck you both.

Cheers

Tim

The shared cowardice Manic refers to is best displayed in the following manner:

Manic had this to say about Paul Staines. Did Staines have courage enough (or consideration enough for his readers) to actually link to it in his partial/misleading response? No, he did not.

Manic had this to say about Iain Dale. Did Dale have courage enough (or consideration enough for his readers) to actually link to it in his partial/misleading response? No, he did not.

Manic had this to say about 'Praguetory'. Did 'Praguetory' have courage enough (or consideration enough for his readers) to actually link to it in his partial/misleading response? No, he did not.

Manic had this to say about 'Dizzy'. Did 'Dizzy' have courage enough (or consideration enough for his readers) to actually link to it in his partial/misleading response? No, he did not.

Slam. Dunk. (x4)

PS - No, it is not good policy to interrupt your opponents when they are making a mistake... but it doesn't hurt to point the mistake out when (a) it proves educational to others (b) it is painfully obvious anyway and (c) the damage is irreversible.

:o)

Manic has spoken. End communication.

Selective moderation

In Guido's post where he delivers a pissweak excuse for poor design, a sock-puppeteer turned up in comments with a cack-handed impersonation of blogger Chris Paul.

This sock-puppeteer used the loophole Blogger provides when users opt for unrestricted comments on their system.

Using an open system is acceptable for smaller weblogs, and/or weblogs run by responsible users, but 'bloggers' like Paul Staines and Iain Dale allow readers to abuse the system (and/or abuse the system themselves) when it suits their purpose.

Also, by making it easy for readers (or themselves) to post under multiple pseudonyms, they give the impression of a larger interactive audience than actually exists. (You can see this issue being discussed here, after Iain Dale called a halt to his 'week-long comment registration experiment' after a few short days without the sock-puppets he has come to rely on.)

Meanwhile, Iain's sock-puppeteers bitch and moan about Manic's antics, when it should be clear to any reader that Manic uses a single online identity when dealing with Dale and Staines, and makes no secret of his true identity.

Anyway, let's get back to Chris Paul, his habit of calling Paul 'Guido' Staines on his bullshit, and Staines' rather petty patronage of anonymous bullies who impersonate that blogger...

Below is a screen capture of two comments from an impersonator that - at the time of writing - are still live in this thread (here and here).

Not only are the comments allowed to remain in clear contravention of Blogger's Terms of Service (which clearly state that you are not permitted to use the service to "impersonate any person or entity") but another anonymous comment, probably from the same person, reinforces the impersonation and the aspect of it that is clearly designed to undermine the target.

Staines has not deleted the offending comments or even made an effort to correct the 'error' in the reinforcing comment:


You may also note that, in this exchange, there is a genuine response from Iain Dale. Not long after this comment appeared, someone arrived to impersonate Dale and play drunk... i.e. someone did to Iain Dale exactly what had been done to Chris Paul.

Manic is sure that it will come as no surprise to you that Staines deleted the single impersonation of Iain Dale... but not the repeated impersonations of Chris Paul:


The message is clear; Staines doesn't mind you violating Blogger's Terms of Service and/or breaching blog etiquette on his website... just so long as you don't do it to his mates.

Manic has spoken. End communication.

'Guido' swings to the left

Manic is not sure, but he thinks that the crappy blurry thing under the title is the Houses of Parliament.

Manic has spoken. End communication.

UPDATE - Tch. All Staines has to say for himself for a totally shit* design is: Consider the blog to be in Beta version...

Funny... that's just what Paul said when he equated homosexuality with paedophilia. Perhaps he's laying ground for a pending lawsuit over all the "Gordon Brown is [censored]" claims he's been publishing.

[*Dark blue text and dark purple text over a dark background? What the fuck were they thinking? Is this a 'smoked glass and black velvet' hangover from Paul's blacklight/blackshirt glory days, or what?]

Manic has spoken again. End communication again.

Big baby bloggers and blogroll revenge

'Guido Fawkes' - Miliblogger Sulking, De-linking: Miliband has, in an incredibly revealing fit of pique, now removed his link to this blog from his blog-roll, (he only added Guido to his blog-roll a month ago for some blogospheric street cred). This follows the New Statesman recently removing their blog link last month after Guido criticised them for not covering the Smith Institute scandal, despite them sharing an office with the Sith. Is Guido bovvered? This proves Guido's oft made point about politicians and their alleged desire for an interactive online conversation with the public, they only want agreement and consent, not dissent. How enjoyably childish of Miliband.

Manic is amused. Not only has 'Guido' stolen Manic's line, but he has lifted the observation from one of Manic's key posts that points out that Paul 'Guido' Staines is a dissent/debate-hating blog-cheat much like Miliband.

There's also this to consider:



Does one dare to say it? One does...

How enjoyably childish!

On that note, Manic would also like to observe that Gordon Brown picking his nose is the scoop of the year.

Well done, 'Guido'!

Manic has spoken. End communication.

'Guido' is busy outwitting the half-wit again

'Guido Fawkes' - MiliBlogger Breaks the Rules: When Miliband started his ministerial blog he got a lot of criticism that it was party politics at the taxpayers expense, he promised that "because this is a Government site I won't lapse into party ranting". It would be a breach of the Civil Service Code if he did. So why today is he defending the Labour party against allegations of a history of animosity to the countryside and invoking Bevin in defence of his party on the taxpayer funded blog? That is a clear breach of the non-partisan rules and his own promises.

'Guido Fawkes' - Guido 2, Miliblogger 0: Miliband has just deleted the blog post where he broke the civil service rules and used his ministerial office to further party political goals. Given he gets his civil servants to deal with his blog, taxpayers were harmed in the making of this, he should refund the cost out of Labour party funds.

Manic loves it when 'Guido' lays into Miliband and his taxpayer-funded 'weblog' for two reasons:

1. Paul Staines is a bigger blog-cheat and control-freak than Miliband could ever hope to be.

2. Paul Staines is a self-confessed tax-dodger.

Manic has spoken. End communication.

Guido Fawkes: The Early Years

Below are some extracts from a book that has just come into Manic's possession; Altered State: The Story of Ecstasy Culture and Acid House.

If you wish, you may also browse this book online via Amazon.

(Note - In a case such as this, Manic would normally provide some highlights and observations, but he is busy chasing serious organised criminals at the moment. For now, he simply advises you to read, enjoy and share... ASAP. Paul de Laire Staines - aka Guido Fawkes - is sure to have a printed retraction personal letter of apology that explains everything allows him to forbid any form of re-publication.)



Extract from Chapter 3 (Pages 99-102)

It was time to recruit some tough lieutenants, check your gun-powder and mass your forces. The battle was on now, for sure, and the only weapons that counted were technology, strategy and sheer weight of numbers. Colston-Hayter still believed he could turn the negative coverage around, or at least parry it, and called on an old video-gaming friend. Paul Staines, a former Harrow schoolboy with an extrovert demeanour and a caustic wit, had met Colston-Hayter at an Atari Asteroids championships; Staines came in first ahead of his new friend. At university he was drawn to the radical libertarian wing of the Federation of Conservative Students, and was soon working as a political aide to the right-wing maverick, wealthy property developer and adviser to Margaret Thatcher, David Hart. Hart's philosophy was complete freedom of the marketplace and rabid anti-communism. He had played a key role in the Conservatives' 1983 election victory, been a member of Thatcher's so-called "alternative cabinet" and during the Miners' Strike of 1984-85 had used his cash and forceful personality to build a clandestine network of disaffected and strike-breaking miners, which eventually contributed to the defeat of Arthur Scargill and the National Union of Mineworkers.

A "conspiratorial... somewhat bizarre figure", Hart moved among the higher echelons of the security services, received substantial funding from Rupert Murdoch, and would go on to advise Michael Portillo, the darling of the Tory right in the nineties. Hart's organisation, Committee for a Free Britain, published two periodicals, the Cold War bulletin World Briefing, which was overseen by former CIA spook Herb Mayer, and British Briefing, a "monthly intelligence analysis of the activities of the extreme left". The latter's major impetus was to smear Labour MPs and left-leaning lawyers and writers. It had previously been run by MI6 veteran Brian Crozier and Paul Staines now helped to produce it. The twenty-one year old was having the time of his life.

"I was a fanatical, zealot anti-communist. I wasn't really a Tory, I was an anarcho-capitalist. I was lobbying at the Council of Europe and at Parliament; I was over in Washington, in Jo'burg, in South America. It was 'let's get guns for the Contras', that sort of stuff. I was enjoying it immensely, I got to go with these guys and fire off AK-47s. I always like to go where the action is, and for that period in the Reagan/Thatcher days, it was great fun, it was all expenses paid and I got to see the world. I used to think that World Briefing was a bit funny. The only scary thing about those publications was the mailing list - people like George Bush - and the fact that Hart would talk to the head of British Intelligence for an hour. I used to think it was us having a laugh, putting some loony right-wing sell in, and that somebody somewhere was taking it seriously. You've got to understand that we had a sense of humour about this."

He also had misgivings about his boss. "He's completely charming and can charm senior people like Thatcher and appear sane for a while. But any close proximity to him for a prolonged period of time, you know he's completely off his fucking head."

Between forays for Hart and work for the similarly right-wing Adam Smith Institute, Staines had begun to attend his friend Tony's parties. "The first E I took was at Apocalypse Now at Wembley Studios. I thought it was fantastic, I was down there, Smiley face T-shirt, shorts - never done acid, never done E, I'd never even heard of this MDMA. I had the E, it was pure MDMA, and I was so out of it, so in love with everybody, I had a little windowpane of acid, and that was it, I just tripped out. Wembley Studios has got those white walls with the curves, and I was lost, I was a wisp of smoke; it was a brilliant, fabulous experience."

Libertarian jet-setting was fun, for sure, but this was a better buzz altogether. After White Waltham, Staines became Sunrise's by publicity officer - at first running the operation out of Hart's premises. "My credibility was slowly going down in politics. One minute l would be on News at One saying 'there's no drugs at these parties' and the next minute I'm supposed to be talking about civil war in Angola. It wasn't working."

Extract from Chapter 3 (Pages 109-110)

In return, Staines poked fun at [Chief Superintendent Ken Tappenden] and his team by sending them joke faxes. Paul Staines claims that they were also being fed inside information from the Pay Party Unit's Gravesend headquarters. "One of the guys on the Sunrise team was bonking a secretary working down there," he laughs, "so we knew the score."

"They cut the lines on us; they were trying everything to nail us down," says Staines. "It was reasonably co-ordinated, there was a Home Office unit on the case. I remember being at something at the Home Office, I ended up in this blazing row [with a Home Office official]. He said 'look, I know who you are, we know all about you', became I had a Special Branch record from being in politics, working in extreme groups. They couldn't work it out: 'you're a right wing Tory why are you doing this? Because I'm doing loads of E and having a great time!"

Extract from Chapter 3 (Page 112)

Sunrise's parent company, the Transatlantic Corporation, was registered in the Virgin Islands tax haven. "The authorities could pursue it as much as they liked, it was an absolute dead end, " says Staines. "We couldn't get done of tax or anything. We were safe."

Extract from Chapter 3 (Page 117)

The Freedom to Party campaign rolled on without any hope of victory. They were just squeezing a few last pounds out of their premium-rate phone lines and merchandising. "We were making money out of the hats and T-shirts," says Staines. "That was the real reason at the back of my mind I was carrying on with it, because it was never going to be a successful campaign. All those demos cost us a fortune. It sounds money-grabbing, but we were there for the business as well."

Manic has leaked. End communication.

Is 'Guido' running out of friends?

Manic would love to take Paul Staines out to lunch... but has already had him for breakfast*!

(*This incredibly witty zinger has been recycled from a comment that 'Guido' swiftly deleted to preserve his Fonz-like status.)

Manic has spoken. End communication.

Spot the cheat

'Guido Fawkes' - Guido is Out to Catch SpAd Cheats
'Guido Fawkes' - Shop-a-SpAd : First Cheat Identified
'Guido Fawkes' - Shop-a-SpAd : Peter Hain's SpAd Has Resigned

Manic advises readers seeking an education in political blogging to observe the differences between this activity and what happened to Nick Boles and Iain Dale.

1. First-timers may need to be advised that Paul Staines studiously ignored the Policy Exchange matter... while his acolytes busied themselves trying to anonymously rubbish or downplay it (with many many 'ifs' and 'buts').

2. Long-timers will not need reminding that 'Guido' is stomping on thin ice by (again) playing the champion of the lowly taxpayer.

UPDATE - 'Guido Fawkes' - Phil Taylor Has Overnight Change of Plan

UPDATE - 'Guido Fawkes' - Oh What a Tangled SpAd

Manic has spoken. End communication.

Shocking left-wing bias of BBC revealed!

Manic thinks heads should roll over this.



Manic is speechless. End communication.

He got blumming good grades considering he did sod-all work 'cause he's so hard...

Paul de Laire Staines (aka Guido Fawkes) has again fallen prey to a desperate smack-down involving the shadowy hand of the establishment, as yet another decades-old document has been dragged out of the archives (no doubt by paid researchers of The Smith Institute) as part of an ongoing effort to discredit the notorious freedom-fighter and blogging hero.

This freshly-leaked article, which you can read in full here, claims that Staines failed a number of exams and then staged a self-serving sit-in on campus to highlight his shameful waste of taxpayer's money protest his subsequent dismissal.

That Staines is still a victim of the establishment today goes a long way to proving his theory that this dismissal was indeed part of a political conspiracy.

But don't take Manic's word for it... as always, he has proof to offer his readers!

Below is a printed retraction personal letter of apology that proves not only that the bulk of the article is based on political bias and fabrication, but also that the personal vendetta conducted against 'Guido' by PM-in-waiting Gordon Brown has far deeper roots than even his most faithful readers might suspect.

Click the article to view a full-sized version in a new window:


Manic has spoken. End communication.

Nick Boles and Iain Dale part company with Policy Exchange

A few weeks ago, via 18 Doughty Street, Iain Dale published an investigative report into one charity - The Smith Institute - without declaring his interest in another (some might say 'rival') charity... Policy Exchange.

Shortly after, 18 Doughty Street went live with an attack ad on Ken Livingston. Paranoid leftists were assured that this type of programming at 18 Doughty Street was under the direct control of Tim Montgomerie, and not Iain Dale. Therefore, it was a 'non-issue' that one of the potential candidates for London Mayor just happened to be a friend of Iain Dale and also director of... Policy Exchange.

While Iain was busy dodging relevant questions by hiding behind his resident gang of anonymous trolls and bullies, it came to Manic's attention that Nick Boles was quite serious about running for Mayor of London... so much so that he was foolish enough to register his soon-to-be-campaign website using the administrative facilities of... Policy Exchange.

This alone was a very naughty and stupid thing to do... but Manic also heard whispers of Nicholas Boles using Policy Exchange as an administrative base for his potential candidacy in other ways... and so decided to rattle Nick's cage in earnest.

Now we learn that two people are voluntarily parting ways with Policy Exchange... and those two people just happen to be Nick Boles and Iain Dale.

Iain 'Liar' Dale - Nicholas Boles Steps Down from Policy Exchange

Bloggerheads - Nick Boles steps down! (Nothin' to do with me, Guv'nor...)

The UK Today - Rattled?

Ministry of Truth - Look into my eyes….

Iain Dale is right now busy telling the world that it is a complete coincidence that he and Nick Boles chose now to walk the plank jump ship, and he's urging his readers not to fall prey to conspiracy theories.

Late yesterday, word of this development leaked into the Guido Fawkes blog via comments, and Team Guido (a bunch of anonymous bullies of indeterminate number) immediately started blaming Manic for every anonymous comment that mentioned the affair... because Manic is obviously part of a massive NuLab/Brownite conspiracy.

Paul de Laire Staines (aka Guido Fawkes) made a further contribution by publishing many anonymous smears about Manic. (Apparently Manic is in need of medication... to stop him from succumbing to conspiracy theories.)

Manic is very happy about all of this; he not only gets to enjoy a clear result, he can now sit back and watch as two of the biggest blog-cheats in the country use the same old tricks in a desperate attempt to downplay the significance of this development... and it's just this kind of two-faced spin-happy bully-boy bullshit that Manic wants to reveal to other bloggers.

In fact, Manic feels that this calls for a 21 Nelson Salute.

Cover your ears, children!








Manic has drawn blood. End communication.

Considering Paul's recent own-goals...

... Manic finds this quite fitting:

Guano Forks' blog of goals, corners and professional fouls

(Link via this notorious fence-sitter.)

Manic has plugged. End communication.

A busy week and a hefty legal bill for 'Guido'

Telegraph: Political blogger warned he could be jailed: The Charity Commission has warned an online blogger he could go to jail unless he submits information he has gathered about the activities of the Smith Institute, the left-wing think tank under investigation for links to the Labour Party. The formal direction was issued to Paul Staines, who runs the Guido Fawkes political website, ordering him to release documents relating to the institute by Friday.

Manic will now recline, relax and enjoy the fun as Paul's faithful acolytes 'hit back' with the notion that Gordon Brown may be in trouble, too.

Manic could not give a tuppeny toss what happens to Gordon Brown!

He would, however, like to remind readers of the role that Iain Dale and Fox News Lite played in this affair.

Manic has spoken. End communication.

(PS - Manic is a big fan of spin... and advises you to chew before you swallow. Heh.)

Free advice from Manic

To the individual who just tried to post the 1986 Guardian article about Paul Staines under comments at 12:01pm today:

1. Please click here to find out where things stand at the moment.

2. Please also be aware that Manic has logged your IP address for future reference and notices that you gain access to the web via a relatively small ISP that should have little problem identifying you, should things come to that.

3. You should be very grateful that moderation is on. Actually, perhaps Manic can give you the benefit of the doubt and assume that you knew he would not publish your comment, and you only wanted to forward it to me in an anonymous fashion. If so; thanks, I've seen it. I even have a scan of it from the British Newspaper Library. If not...

4. If you are going to be foolish enough to try something like this (and Manic really would advise you against it), at least have the courtesy to do it on your own damn website.

Manic has spoken. End communication.

It was only a matter of time...

External item #1:

This week will see some features and presentational changes to the blog, including an "about" section. - Paul de Laire Staines

Manic thinks it about fucking time.

External item #2:

See that the lefty thought police were out in force this weekend. When will they realise that you can't be vindictive and humorous at the same time? Had a look at the guido 2.0 site and thought this little gem sums up why the site is such a bore. "Guido Fawkes 2.0 is a non-governmental organisation devoted to raising blogging standards and reducing moral poverty in the developing blogosphere." In other words, Labour is crap at this blogging lark and want to spoil the party for everyone else! - a comment by 'chatterbox' on Staines' website

Manic has been waiting patiently for this:

Paul de Laire Staines (aka 'Guido Fawkes') used to run a 'long and boring' website at global-growth.org (which also enjoyed some time at global-growth.blogspot.com).

Take a look at the description of the website and Global Growth's mission:

PS - Dizzy also fell for this gag, but was lucky enough to have done so privately via email.

Manic has spoken. End communication.

He was young... he needed the muscle...

[EDIT (10:06AM) - CONTENT REMOVAL]

Manic has removed this post, but hopes to return to the subject in 25 hours.

Please read this.

Manic has spoken. End communication.

Seek help, 'Guido Fawkes'

Manic would love to tell you all about Iain Dale's new regime of comment censorship, but it will have to wait for now.

Today, we have to help a man with a very special kind of drinking problem:

"Charlie Kennedy ostentatiously drunk a Coca Cola, mind you he did leave early, (keeps the Tennents Extra at home obviously)." - Paul 'Guido' Staines

This cheap shot (insert chat-show joke here) was delivered by the same man who claims that, on the same night, he drank his way into the back of a police van. And then woke up in an incapacitated state, sweating vodka and nursing aching kidneys.

Paul Staines' problem appears to be that he is unable to admit that he has a problem... while mocking those who have a little thing known as courage (insert ale-based joke here).

Wait... strike that....

Apparently it's being a willing addict makes you a fucking hero. Well done, 'Guido'!

Manic hash schpoken. End conumi... commun*hic*... kayshun.

Kool-Aid Drinker of the Day

Telegraph - Channel 4 award for Brian Haw
Indymedia - Brian Haw wins Channel 4 political awards

"Guido did you have anthing [sic] to do with Ch4 and Brian Haw[?]" - Anonymous comment on the 'Guy Fawkes' website

Erm... no, he didn't. He ballsed-up an attempt to cash in on Brian Haw's popularity at the last minute and bash a Lib-Dem at the same time.

UPDATE - And he's still at it, folks!

Manic can just picture Staines and Haw enjoying a jolly pint or three as they discuss all the things they have in common...

Perhaps this explains why Iain Dale hasn't responded to being outed as a liar these past 18+ hours; Daddy was out on the razzle last night and he's too hung over to think straight this morning.

Manic has spoken. End communication.

Paul Staines announces his 'retirement' plans

A revealing exchange over at the Tygerland website:

"For a start, Guido shouldn’t be mistaken for a commentator or an activist. He’s a muckraker. He has great contacts and a salivating, committed readership. It works, for now. Most of Guido’s readership are gossip-loving Labour-hating Tories, many of whom do not share his Libertarian tendencies, so when the Tories next gain power, one wonders whether the site will remain as relevant. Will Guido turn on the inevitable Tory sleaze? And will his readership stomach it? Guido himself knows the lifespan of the Guido Fawkes model is finite." - Tyger

"I intend to keep going for at least two more years until after the election. The blog will no doubt continue - Wonkette still cojntinues [sic] without her - it is crap now, but hey…" - Paul 'Guido' Staines

Here, 'Guido' has revealed that he personally only intends to carry on only until the next election... and it is safe to assume that 'Guido' expects a Tory victory.

Manic personally thinks that the longer Blair staggers on, the more likely this victory becomes.

Note that Mr Ego regards himself to be indispensable... and also note what 'Guido' clearly regards to be his purpose (as indicated by his decision to stop being 'Guido' after the upcoming general election - when his character's job is done).

Paul Staines poses as a fun-loving anti-establishment type, and a hater of all politicians... but in reality he has set a clear schedule and an obvious agenda.

He just doesn't have the guts to make that clear on his own damn website, and Manic knows why... because it will cramp his style!

Many of his cheerleaders and informants would be far less forthcoming if they realised that 'Guido' plans to emulate his hero Matt Drudge and become a willing tool of the new establishment as soon as it comes to power. Judging by his activities on the 'Guido Fawkes' weblog (and some of the things Manic has been hearing about Staines' past), this will mostly involve a 'black ops' role; undermining any genuine grass roots messages that threaten the agenda of his Tory masters.

You can watch him putting those same skills to work right now; and Manic has no doubt that there will also be plenty work in the future for the most faithful and effective of his anonymous bullies.

You folks at home may not like the idea of getting into this tussle, but it is very much a case of fucking them before they fuck us.

Manic has spoken. End communication.

Nerved touched. Knee jerked. Foot firmly lodged in mouth.

Cheeky Tyger thinks he has scooped Manic, but he is wrong.

We already know that Paul 'Guido' Staines is an idiot.

Still, the dishonest right-wing bully-boy 'bloggers' that continue to shame the Conservatives have done us a huge favour by allowing their alpha-male to run off at the mouth about this, and the details are worth a look-see:

Paul Staines: That Godfather and Fairy Godmother Conspiracy

1. This is the first post from 'Guido' that even hints at an awareness of Manic since 'Guido' embarrassed himself almost two weeks ago (by equating his dumbfounding level of comment censorship with Manic's deletion of duplicate comments) . Such a pity. Manic misses the 'Blog Brother' reports, where Staines acted tough by dismissing Manic's initial charges as an irrelevance on his own weblog... while spending close to a month moaning about them on other people's weblogs.

Manic also misses the thrill of turning up in those threads and watching 'Guido' run away.

2. Note that, from the off, 'Guido' lays in with the conspiracy-loon spin cooked up by Iain Dale (which is based on contributions to Iain's website that he probably made himself).

Funny... Manic was under the impression that Guido hated spin!

3. 'Guido' also seeks to add flesh to the spin by delivering some context.

How odd.... Manic also recalls 'Guido' dismissing/deleting many comments by readers wishing to add context to his assertions about this or that... on the basis that details are 'boring'.

4. 'Guido' loftily assures us that there can be no question of impropriety over the planned Livingstone attack ad, as Tim Montgomerie is charge of the project. He then goes on to tell us what Tim Montgomerie thinks; "If there is one thing Tim Montgomerie wants almost as much as he wants to get rid of the current Mayor of London, it is to make sure that the next Mayor of London is not Nick Boles, the Cameroonie ultra." Too bad for 'Guido' that a (yes, genuine) comment by Tim Montgomerie followed... because in it, Tim M points out that he thinks no such thing. (And who better than he would know?)

Manic laughed out loud at this show of expert punditry!

5. An amazing feat here; Staines falls flat on his face with a poor understanding of "the internal dynamics of Conservative politics", yet he still manages to show himself up as a closet Tory with his detailed knowledge of individual contributors to the mix (i.e. while he often claims is "Not a Tory", Paul seems to 'know' an awful lot about them). It may pay to illustrate this difficult-to-master point with an example; there are a number of individuals who contribute to the ongoing protest outside Parliament, but most people will only be aware of the name 'Brian Haw'. Manic is aware of some of the other players and has even met some of them... but to even begin to understand how they interact and differ on certain issues, Manic would have to spend many nights on a cold pavement. Even then he could misread the relationships between these people, but that would not change the fact that he had spent a lot of time in their company.

Manic knows that Paul Staines is a Tory groupie.... and he also wishes to point out that only far-right-wing nutjobs use words like 'moonbat' in earnest.

6. To show his expertise, 'Guido' introduces us to the Cornerstone Group... but instead of linking to their website, he links to the website of Cornerstone Community Care (a charity devoted to the care of adults and children with learning disabilities).

Manic acknowledges that this may be a joke and not an error... Paul Staines likes to make 'mong'-related jokes because he is emotionally retarded.

7. Note how - through his reliance on Iain Dale's spin - 'Guido' has managed skip right over every pertinent question raised and every fact revealed... including the 'minor' fact that Nick Boles has used Policy Exchange as an administrative base for a personal website with a clear party-political purpose.... when Policy Exchange is forbidden from participating in any party-political activity!

Normally 'Guido' lives for this kind of thing. He has been on about similar shenanigans at the Smith Institute for weeks now, *and* he claims to hate all politicians... so why a sudden lack of interest in juicy details?

8. If you made a total arse of yourself on your weblog, and you were an honest blogger, you have to spend a rather awkward day or two wearing some well-deserved flak. Happily, 'Guido' can delete such comments at will because they are 'boring'. Also, Manic is forbidden to pose difficult questions himself... as 'Guido' banned him for asking one too many difficult questions.

A common technique Paul Staines uses is the instant deletion of difficult questions; especially those that risk showing him up as a total hypocrite. When faced with this kind of deletion, most normal contributors will persevere and repeat their question(s). If they are lucky, Staines will finally let the question(s) go live and stay live... but not before he bans that contributor for 'spamming' him. You can see a recent example of this here (see comments as well as the post).

Below is an even more recent example of the type of thing Staines likes to delete before claiming that it was 'spam', 'mindless abuse' and/or 'pointless frothing by conspiracy-moonbats'.

If 'Guido' is so sure of his ground, why is he afraid of such questions?


Paul 'Guido' Staines has, in a single post, not only shown that he is an idiot, but also reinforced Manic's contention that he is a disgrace to blogging... and a duplicitous spin-happy control-freak on par with Tony Blair for cheek and the avoidance of the realities not in keeping with his world-view.

In fact, Manic suspects that the bunker mentality has already taken hold.


Please continue to drink the Kool-Aid, mighty righties... but do make sure that you use a fresh batch of potassium cyanide this time. Your current 'walking dead' situation is freaking out the latest inductees... and Manic doesn't want you scaring them off before they don their white robes and line up at the vats!

Manic has spoken. End communication.

Nicked

Nicholas "Call me 'Nick'" Boles is one of the potential Conservative candidates for Mayor of London.

Nick is widely tipped as the favourite to be chosen by the Tories to run against Ken Livingston, but currently he is forced to stand hat-in-hand with a number of other Tory hopefuls while the Conservatives stuff about trying to decide when the ring will be open for business.

Still, he's using his time in limbo constructively; he is using email and a special website - hosted at nickboles.com - to ask the London public what they're concerned about... before, we can safely assume, he decides he is concerned about exactly the same things:


That's not to say that Nick doesn't have his own opinions; he recently sat on a panel joining ex-London mayoral candidate Steve Norris in calling for City Regions across the country. While there, Nick "was keen to draw a distinction between the approach of a Conservative London mayor and Ken Livingstone's micro-management of many London issues."

Manic is curious to know how this differs from The Smith Institute allegedly helping to formulate an anti-Cameron campaign strategy, and how this all fits in to a certain broadcast outfit run by Iain Dale (and championed by 'Guido Fawkes') suddenly deciding to run an anti-Livingston ad... especially when Iain Dale is a trustee of Policy Exchange and Nick Bowles is the Director of that same outfit (which also happened to be a part-sponsor of the event mentioned above), but he will let all that go for now.

Manic does not wish this post to become 'long and boring'!

Last night, Iain Dale was asked if Nick Boles was still in the running for the London mayoral candidacy, and he seemed very reluctant to answer, so Manic went to have a look for himself.

On his travels, Manic had a poke around the WHOIS information for the domain names relating to Nick Boles' campaign-preparatory website (nickboles.com, nickboles.net, nickboles.org and nickboles.co.uk) and he discovered that each and every one of them was registered using a Policy Exchange email address, the Policy Exchange mailing address and/or the main phone number for Policy Exchange:


Imagine for a moment the shit you would be in with your boss - even in an everyday job - if it was discovered that you were using work details, time and/or facilities to register domains intended for personal/political use... then consider this:

1. Nick Boles is no lowly employee; he is the Director of Policy Exchange.

2. Policy Exchange bills itself as an independent think-tank and it is a registered charity, and - as Unity points out here - "Registered charities are permitted, in Charity law, to engage in political activities but - and this is important - they may do so only on the basis of well-founded research and only in a non-partisan manner. Charities can ‘do’ politics but not party politics."

3. Nick Boles used details, time and/or facilities provided by Policy Exchange to create a home for a personal website with a clear party-political purpose.

Therefore, if he is a man of honour, he should either resign as Director of Policy Exchange or formally withdraw as a potential London mayoral candidate to save that organisation further embarrassment.... but Manic suspects he will instead try to spin the nickboles.com website as an extension of his research duties for Policy Exchange and/or offer a pissweak apology for 'a unfortunate oversight' (which was perhaps the work of an overzealous underling).

Manic is waiting, Nick; what's it going to be? Spin or substance? If you offer the latter, there are still all those tasty safe seats to look forward to!

Manic has spoken. End communication.

UPDATE - Now you've read that, read this:

We're going to have a little competition, oh yes we are. Click here for your chance to win!

Manic has spoken again. End communication again.

UPDATE (21 Feb) - Bloggerheads - Nick Boles steps down! (Nothin' to do with me, Guv'nor...)