Handy tips: how to get your comment published at Guido’s blog

All blog posts 2012 + Original, from 2006 to 2012

Click to tweet this post

Comment at end

15th June 2012

Let me say that I don’t actually subscribe to the view of some that Britain’s best-known blogger Guido Fawkes is a pile of manure. The picture is just visual licence as we bloggers have been entrusted it by the great know-all in internetyland. Guido will understand.

Guido has been a trendsetter in recent years showing the mainstream media how to get news, even ‘scoops’ without being in the mainstream. He has an understandable desire to retain this renegade position and at times is, therefore, inaccurate with the verity even if occasionally unintentionally. That aside, Guido has one major problem: his commenters.

Some of them are probably normal people, but to be honest, I’m yet to be convinced that there are that many. The pressure of his aim in life is such that Guido has a tendency not to monitor comments and I have from time to time had a little moan about some of them. Even some success in having some removed due to the intervention of an understudy of Guido’s. GF himself blocked me on twitter some time ago for some unknown reason.

The talk as the Leveson Inquiry into press/media standards nears its end is of regulation of the internet. That “threat” like every other threat Guido and his followers see every time they open their eyes in the morning is boosted by a general distrust, at least on internetland, of politics and politicians.

Sadly, it is my humble opinion that the way blogs, commenters, tweeps and other social network users often behave would itself be to blame for any regulation. So in an unintended way the civil rightists with instant-glue like determination to rant on about their rights while exercising little responsibility may well have brought regulation on themselves.

More blame for the moral descent of normally acceptable behaviour is to be laid at the feet of the mainstream press, the font of all knowledge information and stuff to twist around and then bash people with.  Lord Justice Leveson now knows this, as many of us have known for years. Although the papers themselves don’t scream (for) blue murder at (of) those with whom they disagree they lay the ‘freedom of speech’ trap for their commenters. And being ‘troof-finders’ the commenters fall straight into it.

So where was I? Oh yes, how to get your comment published at Guido’s, something which I signally failed to do with a recent one of mine. But I’ve worked it out now, just by taking a look at some of the commenters in a recent blog  –

  • First of all you need to be anti-government. Any government, but preferably a Labour one. Or a Tory one when it sounds too European. Lib Dem governments don’t count except when they do and then you have to dismiss them, anyway.
  • Make sure you agree with Guido on the gist of his particular post. He will still publish you some of the time if you disagree, but only if you don’t expose his shortcomings.
  • Make sure you talk loudly about things of which you know little are an undoubted expert, such as the Iraq war, legality or otherwise, decisions made in government re same, and of course who pulls the world’s strings and why. ‘Bilderberg’ is always useful to drop in here.
  • Make sure you bellow even louder about how at least one ‘Labourite’ is now ‘filthy rich’ after office and that by so being he has obviously impoverished the rest of us, while destroying the UK’s moral fabric and the world as we know it.
  • Never agree with any politician unless it’s an anti-European one or Tom Watkins or someone of his ilk. His agenda is the same as yours. And Guido’s.
  • Remember Guido’s is your home-from-home. This is not The Telegraph or even the Daily Mail, where they occasionally expect standards. Well, very occasionally. Think of it as your local pub.
  • Give yourself a good alias, so that others get your all about before you even tap anything out. Samples of this are – Tony Bliar didnt fool me / socialism is a mental illness / The future is NWO / One day one of his bodyguards will do him / and Lordy Mandelscum just stating the bleeding obvious
  • And of course don’t forget that you can suggest killing anyone, as long as he’s not the enemy, as we know it or rather knew it before the internet toddled along and told us all otherwise.

Also be as to-the-point as you like. For instance this kind of comment seldom if ever gets removed at Guido’s:

94 socialism is a mental illness says:

Blair is long overdue for the snipers bullet.

Well? Just a statement of fact! Not incitement or anything.

Then there’s this in reference to the same clearly ‘deserving’ individual:

92 Timothy Lloyd-Davies says:

June 14, 2012 at 6:25 pm

I pray to God that we see this vile piece of filth hanging by his neck one day!

Well? The commenter IS a religious man.
Then there’s this sort, more wordy so that you can sound ‘informed’ and a clued-up good egg:
62 One day one of his bodyguards will do him says:

Chief Inspectors that refuse to investigate claims of treason, malfeasance in public office, etc.

The HMRC officials that don’t care about shredded receipts, or his off-shore accounts.

The EU that pay him shitloads to ponce about as a peace (oh, the irony) envoy to the ME, the very place he brought war to.

The Humphreys in the the Civil Service, who know where the bodies are buried (possibly literally), yet keep schtum.

Probably the worst offenders in allowing this utterly vile piece of filth to continue breathing are the British public that voted for the twat 3 times, and don’t lynch him on sight now they can see he was nothing but a fraud.

Well? Three times “well”.  You mean you think this might be a touch OTT, with its suggestive alias an’ all? Not to mention the “lynch” bit? No, never. It’s at Guido’s.  It must be right. All of it.

Taranow. Take care.

Related:

Back to top

Click to tweet this post

Follow Blair Supporter on Twitter 

Guido, BBC, ITN, Huff all mislead re Tony Blair “loses cool, threatens” Hong Kong Grundy Numpty

All blog posts 2012 + Original, from 2006 to 2012

Click to tweet this post

Comment at end

14th June 2012

Guido Fawkes says:

“…former PM warned menacingly: “I wouldn’t come any further…”

Except the former PM didn’t say that!

I have spent some time looking through today’s video versions, edited and otherwise of this incident in Hong Kong. This is the only full version I can find.

Protester attempts to arrest Tony Blair in Hong Kong (1m 53s from YouTube channel telegraphtv)

The bad news is that this full unedited version – the truth and nothing but the truth (so help them Lord Justice Leveson) – originally appeared at the Huffington Post. Until that is, they realised it showed Tony Blair in far too good a light for their agenda.

So I am calling out the BBC, ITN, The Huffington Post & Guido Fawkes for messing with the facts.

Lord Justice Leveson, Sir. You ARE going to investigate ALL the broadcasters and the internet know-alls, aren’t you? After all, as David Cameron admitted today, the broadcasters are the ones whose reach is all-pervasive and who have by far the widest coverage. Especially the “blessed” BBC. Thus the broadcasters are the main target for those who wish to get a political message out instantly to millions.

Let’s take a closer look at today’s (video) editors.

1. If you read Guido Fawkes’s blog on the Grundy Numpty who tried and failed (as they always do and will) to arrest Tony Blair in Hong Kong today, you could almost believe that our former PM reached into his pocket for his pistol. In fact he didn’t “warn” the protester and spoke in NO WAY  “menacingly”. Nor did anyone present. Apart from Tom Grundy. (Isn’t he from “The Archers”?)

At Guido’s –

Blair Loses Cool, Threatens War Protester

Tony Blair lost his rag after being heckled by a protester during a speech to students at the University of Hong Kong. As the man approached Blair, accusing him of breaching the Geneva convention, the former PM warned menacingly: “I wouldn’t come any further…” Asia Pacific News claims that  Blair said “that’s democracy for you” as the man was led away.

Neither did anyone else threaten the protester, as a quick look at the only unedited video online proves (Telegraph video above). Well done, the Telegraph. Now please do not remove it!

Guido probably picked the story up from ChannelNewAsia. That sentence  was not mentioned by Peter Walker here at the Guardian.

2. At the Huffington Post video version things are actually even worse. Guido could be forgiven for just copying and pasting. After all he has to prove he’s on the ball. Quick with the story, inexact or not. But when I watched the Huff’s video and tweeted on it earlier, twice, I said this:

___

Blair Supporter Blair Supporter@blairsupporter Video of prize wally, Briton Tom Grundy’s #failed attempt at Citizens Arrest On Tony Blair In Hong Kong. http://huff.to/LFq79k @HuffPostUK

Just watched this video once: http://huff.to/LFq79k Check & see if you think Tony Blair “threatened” the Numpty in Hong Kong. Applause for TB

___

I would not have tweeted this if it was not clear that Tony Blair did NOT say it. So I tweeted twice again to Guido, though he has blocked me on twitter for some inexplicable reason.  (He’ll still read them, believe me)

I don’t think it was Tony Blair who said “don’t come any further” to that numpty in Hong Kong. Guido? @guidofawkes So no threat, eh?

Blair Supporter Blair Supporter@blairsupporter

. @Firebird734 @guidofawkes said TB threatened the guy. He didn’t. It was another voice saying “don’t come any further” Apologies Guido?

___

Now the Huff has got the huff and is showing the shortened ITN News version- 1:28 long. In this we do not hear those words uttered by anyone, nor much applause at the end. The Huff has also added to the text input of the protester, to include his denial over “harassment” something I, co-incidentally of course,  mentioned at twitter. Twice.

___

Blair Supporter@blairsupporter

@MarkKersten “Armed with the law”? That’s why they keep failing, & always will. GUILTY of harassment Arrest the “arrest Tony Blair” idiots

and

Blair Supporter@blairsupporter

Arrest this numpty for harassment. GUILTY! In Hong Kong reading out his charges to Tony Blair. @Daylifehttp://www.daylife.com/photo/0crs6xHcMZ4j5?__site=daylife&q=Tony+Blair&__site=daylife&__site=daylife

_____

Why did the Huff change their video? Imho,  two reasons: 1) sustained applause for Mr Blair at the end of the original clip, and 2) it was clearly NOT Mr Blair who spoke those dreadfully menacing words.

BROADCASTERS’ BIAS

3. The BBC/ITN

Both ITN and the Johnny-come-lately of broadcasting the BBC – in their talked-over video clips – edited out that remark. The BBC website even has this, a blatant LIE –

“As the heckler neared the podium, he was threatened with police action and left the auditorium peacefully.”

Really? Where was this “threat”?

As I tweeted earlier –

Blair Supporter@blairsupporter

@Axelfinance Another video this time from ‘honest’ #BBC which edits out fact that Blair did not threaten. BBC in cahoots w Guido Fawkes ;0)

and

. @MailRightMinds Love how the editors at ITN edited out the part that show Tony Blair did NOT threaten the Grundy Numpty. OK, @guidofawkes

___

The ever-trustworthy and truth-seeking Daily Mail used the ITN version. Again WHY? Simply because Tony Blair did not say it. Any of it. And showing the full video as above would have shown this. The chairman of the Faith & Globalisation meeting said it AND it was in no way threatening.

TBFF upcoming transcript Editing out the peripheral and unnecessary, hopefully.

_____

ADDENDUM Just spotted the longer version also here at Sky Watch it in full screen. You will then see clearly that it was the man standing immediately in front of Tony Blair who said “don’t come any further”.  NOTHING at all, by anyone, about a threat to arrest the protester.

ADDENDUM 2: The Telegraph disappoints me by spreading the lie/world/truth/boots on in its online article by saying, weakly, ‘Mr Blair reportedly told the protester: “I wouldn’t come any further … you can go.” ‘

For the umpteenth umpteenth – the man in front said that, NOT TONY BLAIR.

_____

RELATED

Back to top

Click to tweet this post

Follow Blair Supporter on Twitter 

‘Tony Blair was right’ – Parts 2 & 3

All blog posts 2012 + Original, from 2006 to 2012

Click to tweet this post

Comment at end

13th June 2012

A superfluity of “rightness”

First I noticed this from my friend John Rentoul on twitter:  Hugo Rifkind – “Gordon Brown’s brazen mangling of opinion and fact” or, to get to my point “Things Tony Blair Was Right About”

I used it here yesterday – quote: “the ones he was right about … academies, civil partnerships, the NHS. I shan’t go on because it upsets me, but on Monday it happened again. Because Blair was also right, I now realise, about the failings of the British press. And Brown isn’t.’

But these right things just keep pouring in.

There was this on 7th June Tony Blair was right (Btw, he certainly “meant to”!)

‘Speaking at the Leveson Inquiry, Tony Blair said something quite prescient, though he might not have meant to. “You can’t disagree with anyone in politics now… and the environment in which media and politicians now work is more raw, brutal and crude in terms of interaction.” His sentiments were perfectly emphasised by someone who, of all things, would like least to support an argument made by Blair – David Lawley-Wakelin, the anti-war protestor who breached security at the court and accused the former Prime Minister of war crimes.

Lawley-Wakelin’s tirade epitomises exactly what Blair was talking about – that we can’t simply disagree with the decisions our representatives make, now we have to demonise them. Blair was focusing on what Lord Leveson called the “fusion of news and comment” in the media, but the increasingly polarised nature of British politics has been spilling over into the public arena of protest for some time now.’

And on 10th June there was this referring to Jeremy Vine’s encounter with Tony Blair in 1997, here

Vine was replying to this question:

You worked as a Westminster correspondent for a long time. And you were on the Blair battle-bus in 1997, weren’t you?

‘I interviewed Tony Blair five or six times, but it’s off-air conversations that matter. Once, on the bus, he said: “I like tea” and I said: “I like tea, too” and then he said something like: “I hear you’re a Christian, Jeremy” and I said: “I’m just struggling, you know” and he said: “It’s the most important thing in my life.” And then I said: “Don’t you feel that actually the big stuff like what you’re going to do when you get into power is much less important than the small stuff, which is how you treat your next-door neighbour?” I realised that was a bad analogy because his neighbour was Gordon Brown. But he said: “I completely agree.”‘

Tony Blair, therefore, was also right about another thing: his deeply held religious belief.  It didn’t just manifest itself as a convenient ‘purge to his conscience‘ after Iraq.

Right?

Right.

Any more for any more?

_____

Related

Tony Blair Faith Foundation

_____

Back to top

Click to tweet this post

Follow Blair Supporter on Twitter 

“Things Tony Blair Was Right About”, by Hugo Rifkind

All blog posts 2012 + Original, from 2006 to 2012

Click to tweet this post

Comment at end

12th June 2012

OK, Blogger’s Rights (while they last) means I have adjusted this title somewhat. But let’s be blunt, I am not mingling opinion and fact. This is what the writer Hugo Rifkind thinks.

‘Gordon Brown’s brazen mangling of opinion and fact’ (source)

  • by: HUGO RIFKIND, From: The Times,  June 13, 2012 12:00AM (that’s tomorrow to we Brits.)

‘ON Monday I had a distressing experience. It consisted of listening to Gordon Brown address the Leveson Inquiry and having to add yet another item to the mental folder I keep in my skull entitled “Things Tony Blair Was Right About”.

I’m not proud of it. I wasn’t concentrating in my twenties, but I don’t remember ever voting for Blair. The one political event on which I managed to work up a passion, indeed, was The Big Thing Tony Blair Was Wrong About. And yet, too often, now I am concentrating, these things – the ones he was right about – crop up: academies, civil partnerships, the NHS. I shan’t go on because it upsets me, but on Monday it happened again. Because Blair was also right, I now realise, about the failings of the British press. And Brown isn’t.’

_____

To Mr Rifkind: it may take some time yet, but as we watch Syria descend into chaos, untroubled by the rest of us and particularly by the UN (Useless Nations), you may well come to wonder if intervention is a better option. In my humble opinion, Tony Blair was right about that too.

My thanks for the heads-up to fellow tweeting member of WFWHF (We Few, We Happy Few [Blair supporters]), John Rentoul

_____

Related:

Brown denies bid to grab No 10 job from Blair at Leveson Inquiry – In your dreams.

_____

Back to top

Click to tweet this post

Follow Blair Supporter on Twitter 

Dying for a smoke?

All blog posts 2012 + Original, from 2006 to 2012

Click to tweet this post

Comment at end

12th June 2012

A view none of us, smokers or not, is ever likely to see. Hopefully!

This is a ceiling mural in a Smokers’ Lounge.

PUBLIC TOILET

A public toilet in Houston from the outside

Now that you’ve seen the outside view, take a look at the inside view…


It’s made entirely of one-way glass! No one can see you from the outside, but when you are inside it’s like sitting in a clear glass box! Now would you… COULD YOU….???
_____

A PAINTED BATHROOM FLOOR

Tenth floor of a high-rise building… IMAGINE YOU ARE AT A PARTY … AND THEN YOU HAVE TO VISIT THE BATHROOM… You open the door…

NOW, REMEMBER THE FLOOR IS JUST A PAINTED FLOOR ! (scroll down)

IT TAKES YOUR BREATH AWAY, DOESN’T IT?

Would this mess up your mind? Would you be able to walk into this room?

That reminds me. Back to Leveson.

_____

Back to top

Click to tweet this post

Follow Blair Supporter on Twitter 

Gordon Brown at Leveson. Did he lie under oath? If so, Lord Justice Leveson, Sir…?

All blog posts 2012 + Original, from 2006 to 2012

Click to tweet this post

Comment at end

11th June 2012

From a tweep:

Stephen Bush@stephenkb

Wait, Gordon Brown didn’t plot to remove Blair? So TB remained in office and Labour won the 2010 election? Well, that’s good news. #leveson

Yes, if only.

If I were a disinterested observer of Mr Brown, I’d have applauded some, perhaps most of what he said today at Leveson. Very few of us could fail to sympathise with how the Sun treated him and his family over his son’s illness. Few of us can really believe that they would have gladly given permission for his condition to be broadcast to the world at a time when it seems they hadn’t told many in their own family. It is clear that either he lied or Rupert Murdoch and Rebekah Brookes did.

The thought does cross my mind as to why Paul Dacre’s paper The Daily Mail also used this story. Since they were such good friends, couldn’t Dacre have rung Gordon to check if he was happy about it?

Who leaked on Fraser Brown’s cystic fibrosis?

“We now accept that it is highly likely that, sometime in 2006, a member of staff in NHS Fife spoke, without authorisation, about the medical condition of Mr Brown’s son, Fraser.” 

One up to Mr Brown.

_____

Of course that is not the only issue over which Mr Brown is accused of being illiberal with the verity.

He also denied “declaring war” on Rupert Murdoch. And Murdoch stands by his story. So far, so many more (possibly) guilty of perjury?

According to Guido Fawkes, at the Leveson inquiry today Gordon Brown “lied and lied and lied”. He quotes others’ tweets on this. I won’t pretend I am always happy with Guido’s site. But he is invariably quick off the mark and clearly has his ‘sources’.  It’s just such a pity that his right-wing commenters are unutterably lowlife. Never mind censoring the media. Censor the ignorant, ranting, half-sane commenters.

Here’s Guido choice tweeps on this:

He Lied and Lied and Lied

overheard at RCJ veteran hack: either the police or men in white coats should be waiting for GB when he finishes.

Were his aides involved in trying to force Blair out. ‘I would hope not’. Did he say they could ‘No.’ Does he know he is on oath?

Gordon Brown’s comments on the activities of his press aides are prompting gasps of incredulity in the parliamentary lobby.

Wow. He ‘didn’t know’ about the September ’06 plot. Wow. My ghast is well and truly flabbered

No one on the Lobby corridor is even laughing at this display of disingenuous nonsense. The only sound is jaws hitting the floor

“We cannot learn the lessons about the media unless there is some honesty involved”. Well quite.

What will James Gordon Brown’s father think? Ex PM swore on bible to tell truth

One is forced to conclude GB has a problem facing reality.

Guilty, m’Lord.

_____

Back to top

Click to tweet this post

Follow Blair Supporter on Twitter 

At the Leveson Inquiry, were they too soft on Tony Blair?

All blog posts 2012 + Original, from 2006 to 2012

Click to tweet this post

Comment at end

5th June 2012

There were, in the main, two versions of Tony Blair at the Leveson Inquiry last week –

  • 1. “He was brilliant, as usual.”
  • 2. “He was despicable, as usual.”

In between there were, to be fairer to the press than some have been to him, some variations.

DOWN TO BUSINESS

Tony Blair at Leveson. Question: Was he thinking – “Hope I’ve got my glasses”? OR -“I’m going to make you an offer you can’t refuse”?  Answer: Depends who’s writing about him.

SMIRK (NOT) A LOT. YOU’RE ON CANDID CAMERA

As I watched the Leveson Inquiry (see it here am and here pm if you missed it) even I wondered at times if he was being given rather an easy pass. I suppose that’s because I’d like him to be more ‘guns-blazing’, to shut up the antis. This is no criticism of the Inquiry itself.  I’ve never criticised those involved in running the Inquiry or its procedures. Never apart from the other day when I mentioned the young lady on the left in the picture below.  Alone amongst the legal beavers and journalists behind Robert Jay QC she seemed to think an interloper at the Royal Courts of Justice was something to smirk about. I notice she hasn’t been around in that prominent position since then.

Mr Blair, on the other hand, never smirked or even smiled at inappropriate moments as I pointed out in this post. But if he had come out all guns blazing it might allow me some time to get my life back for a start. But enough of this selfishness.

  • He did come out at the Inquiry with the Daily Mail in his sights. For that we can all be grateful.
  • He also came out with reasons why he ‘flirted with’ Murdoch’s press. For that his party can be grateful.
  • He reminded us that he had mentioned much of the Leveson Inquiry’s issues in his feral press speech a couple of weeks before he left office. For that reminder some in the press will not be grateful.
  • He also pointed out that opining does not equal reporting, and that its differentiation has never been required to be made clear in the British press. For that… press… ungrateful etc.
  • He also made it clear that he understands the issues around today’s social media & lies-halfway-round-world-before-truth-boots. For that some semi-informed tweeps may not be so grateful.

In fact there was little in his evidence that could be countered as not being valid or of value.

As to my question – were they too easy on him? Only if you thought he was there to account for and justify the umpteen issues various factions of the press have with him. He wasn’t. He didn’t.

Much of the press couldn’t actually answer Mr Blair’s criticisms. Instead they chose just to pose some questions in quotation form. Yes, we get the innuendo.

If Mr Jay and Sir Brian Leveson treated him as though he were a civilised human being with some life experience rather than a barbarian (as some would have us believe) it is because the legal people are right, and the excessively opinionated wonks are wrong.

Mr Blair had laid out beforehand in his written evidence to the Inquiry most of what he had to say. They had clearly taken much of it onboard. By the time the Inquiry had got around to interviewing the former prime minister they knew much of the bones of the political viewpoint already. His evidence only gave that skeleton some flesh.

Tony Blair’s Witness statement to Leveson prior to his appearance.

Exhibit to Witness statement –  As in The Guardian (London), July 17, 1995 – BLAIR’S NEW LEFT WARNING TO MURDOCH, by Michael White And Christopher Zinn. Excerpt:

“TONY BLAIR warned the high command of Rupert Murdoch’s media empire last night that the Thatcherite free-market policies they espoused in the 1980s had failed to provide the social and economic stability needed to manage the technological revolution they unleash.”

_____

PREVIOUS POSTS ON THIS ISSUE

RELATED

Back to top

Click to tweet this post

Follow Blair Supporter on Twitter