As you may recall, my post on Doreen Lawrence's attack on Boris Johnson caused a lot of reaction. The followup one on Andrew Gilligan's article generated more than 100 comments. Two of them were by someone called "Simply the Facts". Scroll down to 5.53pm and 9.16pm to read the comments. That person's blogger file seems to have been registered the same day.
It's interesting that in his or her very long comments they quote from previous articles Boris had written. They appeared on this blog in exactly the same order and language as a list Ken Livingstone's spin doctors distributed to the ethnic media to try to wind them up.
So Ken is now resorting to sockpuppetry on blogs to diss Boris? I do hope there is no evidence of him using staff employed by his office and paid for by the London taxpayer to do this. What a shame Blogger doesn't allow you to trace IP addresses.
PS Anyone know what the Mayor's office IP address is?
I'm hacking into the account right now. The password is 1234.
ReplyDeletel was sure someone could track him or her down. They don't tend to be that careful covering their tracks.
ReplyDeleteLivingstone dirty tricks. Grrr!
ReplyDeleteOh please…..
ReplyDeleteParanoid grassy knoll conspiracy theorists.
For a start, it’s a bit arrogant to assume that the previous thread caused such public debate, that Ken felt obliged to respond,
No offence, but this is a good blogg, and I enjoy the banter, but to be so grandiose about its influence is slightly delusional.
Jim, I am constantly astonished at the people who tell me they read this blog - even Cabinet Ministers. I would bet money that people in Livingstone's office do.
ReplyDeleteIsn't Ken Livingstone himself a sockpuppet for Gerry Adams?
ReplyDeleteYes it is a shame Blogger doesn't allow you to trace IP addresses.
ReplyDeleteIf so we would probably find out that post you are discussing wasn’t from anyone associated with Ken or his office.
As Iain is obviously a Paranoid grassy knoll conspiracy theorists, here’s a theory for you. Maybe the post was from Tory HQ and is a double bluff.
If we could trace IP addresses, I’m sure we would also find many of the posts come from Iains Family and close friends, helping to sure up some of his discussions; and we would also discover that Newmania was posting from a mental institution.
Making the story the story again….Oh dear Tory HQ spinners are working OT.
I am constantly astonished at the people who tell me they read this blog - even Cabinet Ministers.
ReplyDeleteIf that the case I would like to remind Ruth Kelly that she belongs to a religious sect that collaborated with and propped up the evil fascist regime of General Franco in Spain.
Resign Ruth, resign now!
My postman Andy goes on holiday to Cuba and says he always meets Ken Livingstone there. What does Ken do when he's over there? Nothing ever gets put in the media about the Livingstone/Cuba home from home. Don't know why not. Any hackers got a clue about that.
ReplyDeleteIain Dale said...
ReplyDeleteJim, I am constantly astonished at the people who tell me they read this blog - even Cabinet Ministers. I would bet money that people in Livingstone's office do.
August 08, 2007 1:49 PM
Yes of course Iain. Only the other day I was having lunch with Bill Clinton, Stephan Fry, Paul Merton and Lulu. I tried for nearly an hour to re-direct the conversation towards a topic close to my heart – “Is Martin O’Neil the right choice for the Villa”, but they insisted on continuing their debate on how Ian Dales blog had influenced the political landscape, both here and abroad.
Now now Iain, theres a good chap, don’t spoil it all by going gar gar.
Or someone copied the list because it was readymade and easy to hand.
ReplyDeleteFrankly this is no evidence of sockpuppetry and to think that any serious amount of votes will be shifted because of comments below a newspaper piece is clearly fantasy island.
Ever heard of Ockham's razor? Plenty of people dislike Boris without being employed by Ken.
Sooner or later, a defector will own up the sock puppetry.
ReplyDeleteEverytime we slag off Labour, all these creepy people crawl out of the woodwork cutting and pasting like mad from the official Labour line.
Unlike Tories, who love to slag off themselves, Labour has this hysterical SS-like devotion to the Fuhrer and they are so unfunny and so po-faced about it all, you can spot them a mile off.
Real political types always harbour secret doubts, they do not always agree, they equivocate they argue from the heart. They even contradict themselves. In other words they are real.
Sock puppets are empty vessels, whose only recourse is repetition and bullying, and in some cases a tyrannical commitment to having the last word.
They exist alright. This aint no conspiracy theory Mr Jim.
despair O despair: First I cant get freeview unpixalated, sky wont install for me, [son has a/c] [its a bank thing the prat at sky told me]. gwenfor m. prosser's possibly successor is one Charlie Elphinke and now Iain is going off on one over that tother tosspot Livingstone. He [Livingstone] was in the back of my cab once. Yes I have had a rotten life!
ReplyDeleteRed Ken does not need to "diss" Boris.
ReplyDeleteHe (Boris) is quite capable of doing it himself.
Why is asking asking a question akin to being a "grassy knoll conspiracy theorist"? For sure, if there was certainity in a statement that there was a conspitracy then it might be a valid critcism, but as far as I can tell there wasn't.
ReplyDeleteIs Red Ken Using Sockpuppets to Diss Boris?
ReplyDeletePope... Catholic... bears... woods...
It's quite obvious that the aim of seeking to divert attention to theories you cannot substantiate is to avoid dealing with the actual issues posed by those who have participated in the debate on your blog.
ReplyDeleteThe actual issue is that Boris Johnson casually uses the term 'piccaninnies' and 'water melon smiles' to refer to black people, and that he has a range of stated views on other issues that are far to the right of much of public opinion in London.
To take other examples: he opposed the minimum wage; calls for the sacking of thousands of public sector workers; defended rail privatisation; he voted for and argued for the war in Iraq; backed the election and re-election of George W Bush; he is a self-confessed evangelist for nuclear power; supported Bush's refusal to sign the Kyoto Treaty on climate change; he supported in Parliament the commissioning of a new generation of nuclear weapons; he is rabidly pro fox and stag hunting; describes South African democracy under Nelson Mandela as 'the majority tyranny of black rule'; opposed devolution to Scotland; attacks Chinese culture; described the Macpherson inquiry into the murder of Stephen Lawrence as 'Orwellian', a 'witch-hunt', 'hysteria' and 'Ceaucescu-like'; and supported Silvio Berlusconi.
Such views would be anathema to sufficiently large numbers of people in London for it to be a real threat to his candidacy. For example they have already led to a backlash in the black community.
Hence the attempt to avoid discussing these actual views.
dizzy said...
ReplyDeleteWhy is asking a question akin to being a "grassy knoll conspiracy theorist"? For sure, if there was certainty in a statement that there was a conspiracy then it might be a valid criticism, but as far as I can tell there wasn't.
August 08, 2007 2:28 PM
I have corrected the spelling mistakes for you .
Iain has read a post on his blog, then came to the conclusion that the post was from a Ken Livingston spin doctor. Then further surmised that the author of the post was written by an employee of the London assembly; therefore Ken was abusing his office by using London taxpayer monies to formulate a surreptitious smear campaign against Boris. All on the back of a post on his blog…Now it that isn’t paranoid grassy knoll thinking I’d like to know what is.
Jim, in your haste to accuse me of a conspiracy theory you clearly did not read my post. I made clear that the comments by Simply the Facts were similar in order and language to that used in a briefing document given out by Livingstone's little helpers to the ethnic media. I think that entitles me to ask questions.
ReplyDeleteI'm not a fan of conspiracy theories, but this does seem to be remarkably orchestrated. You might also wish to consider the thread on commentisfree, when I twice explicitly accused a poster of being a stooge for Ken Livingstone. On neither occasion was a denial issued.
ReplyDeleteIf I were Boris
ReplyDeleteI would be sat in my underground command centre laughing at all these antics.The Trots have the trots.
The best thing he can do Is just be his charming self effacing self (we know its an act but its a good one)Dont say too much and just let these poisonous,vile ,incompetent left wing scum bags reveal themslves as the demons that they truly are.
Boris may be the type to try and seduce your wife but he wouldnt push a pregnant woman down a flight of stairs or drag a key down the side of your Range Rover.
VOTE BORIS.
Iain
ReplyDeleteI believe your point is prefectly proven by Peter Horrie's post, which pretty much mirrors gratuitous use of a supposedly offensive word, with supporting rhetoric an almost exact copy of many posts on the Andrew Gilligan blog thread.
Iain Dale wrote: 'I think that entitles me to ask questions.'
ReplyDeleteThe question actually raised is whether Johnson's candidacy is a terrible mistake for the Conservative party.
To take the example of what he says about Chinese culture, which he dismisses thus: 'Chinese cultural influence is virtually nil, and unlikely to increase… Indeed, high Chinese culture and art are almost all imitative of western forms: Chinese concert pianists are technically brilliant, but brilliant at Schubert and Rachmaninov. Chinese ballerinas dance to the scores of Diaghilev. The number of Chinese Nobel prizes won on home turf is zero, although there are of course legions of bright Chinese trying to escape to Stanford and Caltech… It is hard to think of a single Chinese sport at the Olympics, compared with umpteen invented by Britain, including ping-pong, I'll have you know, which originated at upper-class dinner tables and was first called whiff-whaff. The Chinese have a script so fiendishly complicated that they cannot produce a proper keyboard for it.' (From his book 'Have I got views for you').
These ramblings are offensive patrician rubbish from someone he seems to feel sure of his own superiority.
They are exacerbated by his caricaturing of Chinese peoples' pronunciation of English:
I awoke to find a sweet-faced Chinese air stewardess standing over me in my aisle seat. 'Prease, sir,' said the BA girl. 'Prease come with me. I have found a better seat for you in row 52…
…’ 'He's our father!' said someone. 'Oh,' said the stewardess, flummoxed. 'Velly solly.'
Spectator diary, 4/1/03
http://www.spectator.co.uk/archive/the-week/10729/part_3/diary.thtml
This is the person that the Conservative party will almost certainly be fielding as their candidate in a city with a large Chinese community and – perhaps more importantly – is a major destination for Chinese business.
A candidate who caricatures Chinese peoples' pronunciation of English in crude stereotypical terms and dismisses their culture.
David Cameron faces months of having to deal with the consequences for his party of having such a right wing figure as his party's public face in London, in the run up to a general election.
Who gives a **** what Boris calls blacks. Many young black people refer to themselves with the n-word al the time (NWA anyone?) and Derek Laud loves his nickname of 'Jolly'.
ReplyDeleteWords and symbols are not racist, people are.
C4 doesn't want to discuss what Johnson's stated comments are on black people. (This will not stop a huge debate taking place on it because it is a serious and legitimate issue). But Johnson's record is nonetheless worthy of consideration, given his desire to run our capital city.
ReplyDeleteHe is prepared, for example, to discuss how seriously a journalist should be beaten up and to supply his address to someone who wished to carry out an assault.
Take the telephone conversation he had with the convicted fraudster Darius Guppy about Guppy's plan to beat up journalist Stuart Collier beaten up. Guppy asked Johnson for Collier's address.
Johnson did not try to get rid of Guppy or consider reporting him to the police, but debated how badly Collier was to be beaten up and then agreed to help him:
GUPPY: Not badly at all.
JOHSON: I really want to know…
GUPPY: I guarantee you he will not be seriously hurt.
JOHNSON: How badly will he be…
GUPPY: He will not have a broken limb or broken arm. He will not be put into intensive care or anything like that. He will probably have a couple of black eyes and a… cracked rib or something like that.
JOHNSON: Cracked rib?
GUPPY: Nothing which you didn’t suffer at rugby, OK?
The conversation ended with Johnson saying OK, Darry, I said I'll do it and I'll do it.
It seems I will have to add Peter Horrie to the list of Livingstone sock puppets. He registered his Blogge profile a few days ago and a cursory Google search indicates that he has only ever posted on blogsites which have taken up the Doreen Lawrence story - James Cleverly, ConHome, Fairdealphil and here.
ReplyDeleteSo come on then Peter Horrie, who exactly are you?
This will not stop a huge debate taking place on it because it is a serious and legitimate issue
ReplyDeleteThat may be the case for the socialist elitist minority, but the libertarian majority don't give a damn because they have the common sense to know that for all his sins (such as forcing his mistress to have an abortion to save his current, second marriage) that he is not a racist - unlike Polly Toynbee, New Labour and Noreen Lawrence.
Oh God this is getting funny. Just imagine what it's going to be like when the mayoral race actually gets moving! Boris hasn't even been selected as a candidate yet.
ReplyDeleteThe forces of socialism will run out of steam (and quotes) before the election starts.
Newmania was posting from a mental institution
ReplyDeleteThat bit is certainly true.
:-)
But it does show that the Left is running scared of Boris. The Left's hysteria alone not only gives Boris credibility and is a boon nationally to David Cameron, it's also free publicity.
ReplyDeleteIain Dale said...
ReplyDeleteJim, in your haste to accuse me of a conspiracy theory you clearly did not read my post. I made clear that the comments by Simply the Facts were similar in order and language to that used in a briefing document given out by Livingstone's little helpers to the ethnic media. I think that entitles me to ask questions.
August 08, 2007 2:48 PM
Are ! so your Lawyers advised you of the wording of the piece, so that it just falls short of being libellous or slanderous.
So could you just clarify Iain “Simply the Facts” could equally and more likely just be another joe public blogger.
Iain, if you have the IP address, it can be tracked down. I use a program that gives me a map.
ReplyDeleteC4
ReplyDeleteCameron is dead in the water.
Boris will become mayor , then PM.
I normaly despise politcians of all shades , but Boris has the smell of greatness about him.
His prince Hal days are behind him , soon he will be king.
By "Prince Hal" I dont mean that he has ever put on a ginger wig , started bitch fights in clubs knowing that his CPO's will look after him or that he has shagged the little fat daughters of chums of Mugabe.
Boris is our next Winston.
I have to profess my ignorance about whether some of these Boris accusations are accurate, but if they are - and the lack of rebuttals makes it seem there may be a grain of truth to them - then surely it doesn't really matter where they came from.
ReplyDeleteIf boris has characterised Chinese people as ignorant and if he has colluded in an assault then whythe hell don't you ditch him and get another candidate? No point defending the indefensible - whether it is supplied by a sockpuppet or not.
Let's face it - even if these guys posting hereare stooges on Livingstone's payroll theyare doing a damn good job of turning up muck on Boris - if it was the other way round ( and an effective campaign should be doing exactly the same background check on Red Ken) then I doubt you would hesitate in praising such thhorough research.
in short - the gloves are off. Defend Boris if you can, or have him withdraw if you can't - no point moaning atwhat appearto be credulous accusations.
Horrid said - 'It's quite obvious that the aim of seeking to divert attention to theories you cannot substantiate is to avoid dealing with the actual issues posed by those who have participated in the debate on your blog.'
ReplyDeleteSounds like a lawyer to me - and not a very good one at that.
If you can substantiate or prove a theory, it's no longer a theory. It's a certainty.
Those who are used to controlling the media don't like the freedom of the blogs to comment at will, and they try to curtail it with all the tactics they can imagine - which are not all that many!
Iain Dale can spot them a mile off.
Anyway what kind of acts does Ken carry out in Cuba - 100% moral in all aspects?
How many times has Ken Livingstoen visited Cuba in the last five years?
ReplyDeleteiain (real)
ReplyDeletehave you also checked the identities of the apologists for Boris.
Amazing how many crawled out of the woodwork to attack me and others for suggesting it is offensive to refer to black people as "picccanninies" and Africans as having "watermelon smiles".
fair deal phil (real)
mark - i think you mean 'credible'.
ReplyDeletehorrid said - 'Such views would be anathema to sufficiently large numbers of people in London for it to be a real threat to his candidacy. For example they have already led to a backlash in the black community.'
I think that you are referring to the workings of the open democratic porcess of which Boris is no doubt aware, and happy to negotiate.
Dale is referring to the slightly dodgy way that Livingston's 'players' are engaging with the blogosphere.
It is a bit creepy to try to lead a national debate by using a series of untraceable identities.
I mean, what are you guys so ashamed of that you want to remain untraceable? Your unwillingness to be known does tend to undermine the legitimacy of your viewpoints.
And it reflects badly on KL making him seem evasive and shifty. Am I right? (Oh if you want to know who I am, I'm afraid you'll have to visit my blog).
Oh, I'm real Phil, I'm All 2 Real!
ReplyDeleteHorrie you are quite obviously a Labour mini Lord Haw Haw and your supposed concern for the Conservative Party is all the evidence we need that Boris is exactly what Ken does not want ,Iain does indeed get a lot of people looking in and you are trying to influence Conservatives who will mostly be the readers . It is objectionable for you to turn up here spouting propaganda when others are expressing opinions in an open way.
ReplyDeletecalls for the sacking of thousands of public sector workers;
Do you not think that there is at the very least that level of fat in the Public sector and as they cannot go out of business how else do you get rid of them. I appreciate you probably are one ( if you are employed at all) but some of us are paying for you and your tribe of fake jobs and would like some respect for the tax payer. Oh sorry you don1t think at all do you you just say " YES MASTER "
defended rail privatisation;
Well so have the Labour Party it’s a perfectly valid point of view. Not one I share actually
he voted for and argued for the war in Iraq;
He was one of the first to turn against it on the Conservative side much to my irritation actually and in any case Gordon Brown is prosecuting this war which he was complicit in lying about and Ken is a member of that Party . The lying one . Your one.
backed the election and re-election of George W Bush;
I `m not following you ?
he is a self-confessed evangelist for nuclear power;
Green , cheap and so on . not far from the Governments view point and another sound thing about him
supported in Parliament the commissioning of a new generation of nuclear weapons;
Ken unilateral disarmer then . Oh super I had no idea. A completely unelectable traitor . Goody...but then of course we know Ken`s views are those of a hard left loon left over from the 70s and are far less representative of London which is why the Labour Party so detested him...why am I talking you ..you won`t understand
" HE QUESTIONS ME MY MASTER HEAD HURTING...OOOOO FEEL CONFUSED"
he is rabidly pro fox and stag hunting;
Not rabidly he simply thinks it is an authoritarian measure as , lets face it , did Tony Blair and I doubt Gordon Brown gives a stuff
describes South African democracy under Nelson Mandela as 'the majority tyranny of black rule';
That was a certain stage in the progress of South Africa and the tyrrany of the majority is a legitimate problem . Don`t we know it after ten years of NewLabour arrogance
opposed devolution to Scotland;
Because he supported the Union . Do you not ? his prediction that the Union would break is coming true and he was in the mainstream of Conservative Opinion at the time .Now the English wish to go alone the Labour Party absurdly has picked up the flag gingerly and started towave it is a typical piece of nauseating dishonesty
attacks Chinese culture;
Pathetic I have read this piece it’s an amusing provocation . This is a bit of it “It is hard to think of a single Chinese sport at the Olympics, compared with umpteen invented by Britain, including ping-pong, I?ll have you know, which originated at upper-class dinner tables and was first called whiff-whaff.” Johnson also ridiculed Islam with the following remark: “Islam will only be truly acculturated to our way of life when you could expect a Bradford audience to roll in the aisles at Monty Python’s Life of Mohammed.”
described the Macpherson inquiry into the murder of Stephen Lawrence as 'Orwellian', a 'witch-hunt', 'hysteria' and 'Ceaucescu-like';
This is in his capacity as a right wing polemic journalist but his points about the deeply harmful Macpherson enquiry are sound
For example they have already led to a backlash in the black community.
Really ? You mean amongst left supporting black activists. I admit there are bridges to build here but those shouting are Labour and SWP supporters.
Why would a bother with a horrid little gopher like you Horrie you are only doing as you are told and no doubt fit in well to the ghastly Labour machine you live in . I think it is offensive to ordinary people who come here to express there views for you to misrepresent your self as one of them .
Your mere presence is a deceit and you attacks on Boris which I assume are the work of the Labour twaddle factory did not even take your work to find .Someone else did it and you have not read his books or his journalism which gives an amusing and rounded picture of a kind and good man .
" NEED MORE TWADDLE MY MASTER"
there there Horrie back to your cage
FAIR DEAL- If you mean me I can asily be found ..in London , not all white Lincolshire of course
Hitch. You must be sniffing some very strong linament righ now. Cameron is terrible. Boris is terrible. If the Tories want to be a proper party again they must stop being a bad copy of NuLab.
ReplyDeleteThere are three or four leading Tories who are leadership material. Surely you could pick one tomorrow and sort yourselves out.
Dangerous Dave writes another paragraph of his suicide note every day. As for Boris, he is not a racist, he is an everyone-else-ist.
How about Michael Gove? He may not be a Winston, but he could be a very good Atlee.
Oh, give it up! Boris is entertaining enough, but he's simply not a serious figure. No wonder his main cheerleader is Newmania.
ReplyDeleteBut, like many (perhaps all) such figures, he has a thoroughly nasty side, too. For one thing, he has a problem with the truth.
And for another, the Cameroons' throwback to the overpromoted incompetence of the Suez generation is bad enough, but Boris is a throwback to the generation before that, to possibly the most sinister chapter of all in the history of aristocratic Toryism.
Give him up!
Do we want another post-university education Atlee though? Hell no!
ReplyDeletePeter Horrie may be a sock puppet but that's an ad-hominem and won't cut the mustard with the London electorate. His arguments need to be countered by factual refutation, where possible, and a volume of similar negatives directed against the Great Serpent. Where are the CCHQ talking points regarding the Red One?
ReplyDelete1) Red Ken supports the Fifth Reich of Hugo Hitler in South America
ReplyDelete2) Red Ken claims that the English are responsible for an 800-year-long genocide in Ireland that is worse than Hitler's Holocaust.
3) Red Ken is a proven racist (calling Jews newspaper reporters German Concenration Camp guards)
I'm calling bullshit on Peter Horrie.
ReplyDeleteIs it the mere utterance of the terms 'piccaninnies' and 'water melon smiles' that offends or the context? If the former, then Horrie is equally guilty as Boris. If the latter, then in what way has Boris offended? Read the damned article and examine the context instead of simply parroting fatuous accusations.
[He] supported Bush's refusal to sign the Kyoto Treaty on climate change...
Oh, for crying out loud, is that canard still flapping about? How difficult is it in this day and age to find a copy of the US Constitution on-line and see who in their system has the authority to ratify treaties and who does not?
If this sort of drivel is typical of the British electorate's intellectual abilities then frankly I weep for the future of our democracy.
Iain,
ReplyDeleteIt should tell you what the server is, and Ken's server is labelled 'Greater London Authority'.
If it does, then you've got them.
This is not the first time the Mayor's office have spent a quiet afternoon on the blogs....
Never fear Ludingtonian, kinky ken claims to have a mandate from the people of london. well it wasn't that many of them actually.
ReplyDeletefrom mayor of london blog...
'Total votes for Ken Livingstone: 828,380
Electorate: 5,197,647
So only about 13% (1st choice) to 16% (including the 2nd choice votes) of the electorate chose to vote for him.
Even including the 2nd choice votes, to claim that "the votes of millions of Londoners" were cast in favour of Ken Livingstone is untrue.'
There wasn't even 1 million actually.
No wonder KK's worried by the upcoming challenge from Boris who might get at least 1 million to turn out just for a bit of political correctness snubbing, of the kind we're being peppered with here by Horrid and numerous other false identities.
2.46 there's no such thing as a spelling mistake and changing another's text is improper.
ReplyDeleteDavid, Serious and Boring are not the same thing . With time and therapy I will come to see that a pisturesque addled eccentric who believes we are going to return to some dimly conceived British Marxist Utopia is in no position to 'cast-aspersions' upon my seriousness. You probably think Gordon brown is sombre and so on but I see him an Buster Keaton. Noone else could tell such whopping lies with a straight face .Buster knew it’s the poker face that gets the belly laughs.
ReplyDeleteBack in your box Lindsay by your standards my gravitas is intercontinental
I hate Boris too so I must be posting directly from Ken's office, eh?
ReplyDeleteSorry to burst the bubble that Tories seem to reside in but actually plenty of people hate Boris's guts.
It's only the media and politicians that try to promote the image of Boris as a loveable harmless 'nice guy' because of his silly hairdo and daft plummy voice. But not many people actually buy it.
Ordinary people think he's an arrogant upper class Tory who lives a million miles away from the rest of us.
And now we see that (quelle surprise) he looks down on Johnny Foreigner too.
Ken may be a sell-out on a lot of things but we all know he will be re-elected with a comfortable majority. London doesn't want a xenophobic, warmongering toff for Mayor, as the Tories know only too well.
I always find it extraordinary how many people fall foul of the 'I am the world' delusion. Mary, for example.
ReplyDeleteOrdinary people think he's an arrogant upper class Tory who lives a million miles away from the rest of us.
As spokesman for 'ordinary people' maybe you can explain the only poll since Boris announced his candidature that gave him 46% of Londoners' votes?
Ken may be a sell-out on a lot of things but we all know he will be re-elected with a comfortable majority. London doesn't want a xenophobic, warmongering toff for Mayor, as the Tories know only too well
He didn't beat Steve Norris by all that much for God's sake - and if London doesn't want a xenophobe for Mayor, why on earth did it elect Livingstone in the first place?
Mary also has 'no profile available', another of KK's invisible friends.
ReplyDeleteDoes he have anyone on his side prepared to reveal an identity?
This lot are like rats pourring over the side of a sinking ship to die an anonymous death, and never be seen again.
Given that Boris is not yet the candidate, this sort of thing suggests they are running scared of Boris that they should resort to this sort of thing.
ReplyDeleteIt also suggests they are keen to avoid having him on the ballot if they are starting this early.
Sorry, Iain, it looks like you've caught a bad dose of the C4's. He is ranting here because no-one ever visits his WWF site.
ReplyDeleteAs for Iain complaining about sock puppets... that really takes the biscuit when you rad the comments regularly posted here attacking anyone who suggests a possible alternative to Iain's view of the world.
Finally, Jim... what did Lulu think of Martin. I know people are getting concerned in this neck of the woods.... buying two rejects from the team that should have been relegated if they hadn't cheated!
I'm calling bullshit on Mary.
ReplyDeleteOrdinary people think he's an arrogant upper class Tory who lives a million miles away from the rest of us.
Really? Do you mean ordinary people like the people up here in Newcastle? Do they count as ordinary people?
I can point you to loads of ordinary people, many of whom were still infants while Maggie was still in office and yet hate her with a passion and who would rather die than vote Tory, who would gladly have Boris for PM, never mind mayor of London.
And now we see that (quelle surprise) he looks down on Johnny Foreigner too.
Really? Are you sure? Can you please identify precisely which bits of Boris's statements on the influence of Chinese culture on Western culture are racist and/or xenophobic? Please, no amorphous twaddle about how 'you can't just dismiss a whole culture like that'. Give us facts.
I am assuming, of course, that you are able to distinguish between technological innovations (tea, gunpowder, printing, fireworks and so on) and cultural influences.
I can think of one - a short-lived passion for chinoiserie. But then Boris did say "virtually nil", not none at all.
213.86.122.0 - 213.86.122.255
ReplyDeleteKing Kenute will stoop much lower before the election date.
ReplyDeletePremiership - New Rules
quote:
ReplyDelete"As spokesman for 'ordinary people' maybe you can explain the only poll since Boris announced his candidature that gave him 46% of Londoners' votes?"
Because, once you are in the voting booth, your pencil gets strangely drawn to the Monster Raving Loony Party.
All the "none of the above" people are championing Boris simply because he is a posing hebephrenian; a natural son of Screaming Lord Sutch, and a protest vote against the grim greasy moustache of Trotskyism.
He is fit for a junior post in the Ministry of Silly Walks, and that's as far as it goes.
'The Ludingtonian said...
ReplyDelete[He] supported Bush's refusal to sign the Kyoto Treaty on climate change...
Oh, for crying out loud, is that canard still flapping about? How difficult is it in this day and age to find a copy of the US Constitution on-line and see who in their system has the authority to ratify treaties and who does not?'
It is worth recalling what Johnson actually wrote about Kyoto - which was not that he was worried about the US constitution, but opposed the emissions reduction targets:
'Because we need still need a rich, confident America; not just to provide the cash for the global military leadership that the United States has to give from the Gulf to Kosovo, but also to keep the world economy moving...
'If America were to meet its Kyoto targets now, it would require a cut of 30 per cent in emissions, and how, exactly, is that supposed to work in the current economic downturn...
'It would exacerbate the recession, and when Bush says no, he is doing what is right not just for America but for the world.'
("Lend Me Your Ears")
The Ludingtonian said...
'Read the damned article and examine the context instead of simply parroting fatuous accusations.'
Boris Johnson wrote in this article:
'It is said that the Queen has come to love the Commonwealth, partly because it supplies her with regular cheering crowds of flag-waving piccaninnies; and one can imagine that Blair, twice victor abroad but enmired at home, is similarly seduced by foreign politeness.
'They say he [Blair] is shortly off to the Congo. No doubt the AK47s will fall silent, and the pangas will stop their hacking of human flesh, and the tribal warriors will all break out in watermelon smiles to see the big white chief touch down in his big white British taxpayer-funded bird.'
Daily Telegraph, 10/01/02
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/opinion/main.jhtml?xml=/opinion/2002/01/10/do1002.xml
It is an indication of how far out of touch many Conservative supporters are that there is a debate going on about whether it is ok in any circumstances to call black people 'piccaninnies.'
But for good measure, Boris Johnson appears to have a record of using this phrase:
'Or perhaps sometimes the desire to make a joke overrides his principles? He cannot resist the sort of public-school joke that falls badly on black ears. Rod Liddle recalls that when he and Johnson went to Uganda together to look at the work of Unicef, Johnson cheerily remarked to the Swedish Unicef workers and their black driver: "Right, let's go and look at some more piccaninnies." If he does have any serious political ambitions - a question still to be resolved - he will need to wash his mouth out with soap.
Lynn Barber, Observer, 5/10/03
http://observer.guardian.co.uk/review/story/0,6903,1055894,00.html
newmania wrote of the claim that Johnson is rabidly pro fox and stag hunting: 'Not rabidly he simply thinks it is an authoritarian measure as , lets face it , did Tony Blair and I doubt Gordon Brown gives a stuff'
If one reads what Johnson actually thinks however it is clear that he is aggressively in favour of bloodsports:
'All the warning we had was a crackling of the alder branches that bend over the Exe, and the stag was upon us. I can see it now, stepping high in the water, eyes rolling, tongue protruding, foaming, antlers streaming bracken and leaves like the hat of some demented old woman, and behind it the sexual, high pitched yipping of the dogs. You never saw such a piteous or terrible sight...
'I remember the guts streaming, and the stag turds spilling out onto the grass from within the ventral cavity. Then they cut out the heart and gave it to my six-year-old brother, still beating, he claimed ever afterwards, or still twitching, and he went home singing "We’ve got the heart! We’ve got the heart!" so we cooked it up with a bit of flour and the German au pair left the next day.'
and:
'When the 80,000 or so marchers for the preservation of country sports arrive in Hyde Park tomorrow, they will have my support..
'the strongest argument for protecting the Devon and Somerset stag-hounds – and I pick the staghounds because those are the ones I have observed the closest and which are, in the popular imagination, even more brutal than the fox-hounds. The best argument in favour of keeping them is that hunting is the best for the deer.'
All of the above is from Johnson's own book, "Lend Me Your Ears."
He has also written:
'I will never vote to ban hunting. It is a piece of spite that has nothing to do with animal welfare, and everything to do with Blair's manipulation of rank-and-file Labour chippiness and class hatred.'
'I remember thinking to myself that if the future Member for Henley-on-Thames goes shooting, he should damn well look as though he knows the business.'
'Ok, I said to myself as I sighted the bird down the end of the gun. This time, my fine feathered friend, there is no escape.'
These quotes are all from "Friends, voters, countrymen"
Is this the image of a modern Conservative party proudly occupying the centre ground? No.
Finally, as Iain is having a spat with the Liberal Democrats here...
http://www.libdemvoice.org/another-boring-iain-dale-post-1144.html
...it is worth recalling Johnson's considered views on the Lib Dems:
'there is a third group, a minority, but a minority that possesses a characteristic human psychological deformity. They can't stand the pettiness of intellectual consistency. They want it all ways, and are capable of holding to mutually contradictory positions at once. Their policy on cake is pro-having it and pro-eating it, and they need a party that reflects them and their politically schizophrenic personalities… There are not many Lib Dems in Parliament, but even in that tiny group they incarnate dozens of diametrically opposing positions. You want to know what the Lib Dem policy is on taxation, for instance, and you want to know whether you are for or against a 50 per cent tax rate. One half of your cerebrum thinks it quite right that the rich should pay more; the other lobe thinks tax is quite high enough already. You are a perfect Lib Dem, a mass of contradictions, and your party supplies exactly what you are looking for.'
(From "Have I Got Views For You").
Hardly likely to endear the London Conservatives to Lib Dem voters.
Iain Dale is desperately attempting to avoid discussing the actual content of Boris Johnson's views - because he knows the damage that would result from doing so. And why, Jeremy Jacobs, is it 'dirty tricks' to reprint what Boris Johnson actually said? It is only a 'dirty trick' to reprint someone's views if they don't want them known – which undoubtedly Iain Dale doesn't want Boris Johnson's to be known.
ReplyDeleteSo here may be some reasons Iain Dale doesn't want to discuss the content, and why Jeremy Jacobs considers it a 'dirty trick' to report Boris Johnson's actual views:
First Boris Johnson on George W Bush: 'You know, whenever George Dubya Bush appears on television, with his buzzard squint and his Ronald Reagan side-nod, I find a cheer rising irresistibly in my throat. Yo, Bush baby, I find myself saying, squashing my beer can like some crazed redneck; you tell ‘em boy. Just you tell all those pointy-headed liberals where to get off.’ (Lend Me Your Ears p317)
Equally interesting will be Boris Johnson's declarations on the Iraq war; ‘If we know the Pentagon, there must be a very good chance that this will be an outstandingly successful and stress-free war.’ (Lend me your ears p363) And here is his account of his trip to Baghdad: '‘It was mesmerising, in April 2003, to stand in Baghdad and look at the contrast between the Americans and the people they had liberated. The Iraqis were skinny and dark, badly dressed and fed. The Americans rode in their Humvees (a vehicle that is eloquently bigger than our Land Rover: more slouching, bigger tyred, cooler)... They were taller and squarer than the indigenous people, with heavier chins and better dentition. They looked like a master race from outer space.' (Lend Me Your Ears p1) These judgements, of course, stand up particularly well in hindsight.
In London, which has among the most progressive views on gay rights in the world, Boris Johnson admitted he did not at the time know whether he supported gay civil partnerships and made the most extraordinary and degrading comparisons: 'if gay marriage was OK – and I was uncertain on the issue – then I saw no reason in principle why a union should not be consecrated between three men, as well as two men; or indeed three men and a dog.' ((Friends, voters, countrymen p96)
Because Boris Johnson, and on more than one occasion, had spoken of black people as 'picanninies' and also talked about the 'water melon smiles' of Africans. He has written on Uganda that: 'If left to their own devices, the natives would rely on nothing but the instant carbohydrate gratification of the plantain.' (The Spectator 2 February 2002) The full quotes can be found in the references Iain Dale gives to the earlier post and people should certain be encouraged to go back and read them. Indeed the more they read of Boris Johnson the better.
Moving onto other issues Boris Johnson opposed the Kyoto treaty on climate change (Lend Me Your Ears p318), has called for raising the speeding limit ((Have I got views for you p95), and strongly supports nuclear power.
If that were not enough Boris Johnson made clear his support not only fox but also for stag hunting. ''When the 80,000 or so marchers for the preservation of country sports arrive in Hyde Park tomorrow, they will have my support…the strongest argument for protecting the Devon and Somerset stag-hounds – and I pick the staghounds because those are the ones I have observed the closest and which are, in the popular imagination, even more brutal than the fox-hounds. The best argument in favour of keeping them is that hunting is the best for the deer.’ ((Lend me your ears p317)
Add to that opposition to the national minimum wage, support for rail privatisation, championing grammar schools and opposing the ban on smoking in pubs and restaurants.
Sorry to disappoint you Iain but Ken has lots of supporters out there and the only abuse of the 'London taxpayer' in making all this known is if Ken has somehow taken over Amazon. Have I got views for you, for example, is currently available for £2.40 and everyone should be encouraged to read it and Boris Johnson's other writings. Much better than the airbrushed job in Andrew Gimsons Boris: The Rise of Boris Johnson. But perhaps Amazon is part of the Livingstone plot. Probably better to demand that they stop selling Boris Johnson's books during the election campaign - people might find out what's in them. The fact that they haven't shows they are controlled by Ken.
Are supporters of Ken Livingstone putting out collections of what Boris Johnson actually wrote? Yes naturally they are. An excellent one is available at Luke Akehursts blog for example (http://lukeakehurst.blogspot.com/2007/08/boris-quotes.html) They will doubtless do worse things. They may write newspaper articles or even books. Or do TV interviews. At the election they may even stoop to canvassing. These are clear examples of the unimaginable depths to which the Livingstonite hordes will sink.
To repeat Iain, the reason you want to discuss everything other than the real content of Boris Johnson's views is because you know how damaging it would be to do so.
Indeed the only people who should worried about Boris Johnsons's views being known are those who support Boris Johnson. Which of course is why Iain Dale never discusses the content.
Much too risky Iain. That might mean dealing with something serious.
I might take that more seriously if you were to actually tell us who you are rather than hide behind a pseudonym.
ReplyDeleteThere is no way you would have access to all that if you weren't a Labour Party stooge/employee/hack.
It just shows how frightened of Boris you are.
By the way, could you actually point me to anywhere on this blog where I have actually said that I support Boris's candidacy? No, thought not. But your antics - and that of your partner in crime Peter Horrie- are certainly pushing me in that direction.
The Hitch said...
ReplyDelete'C4 Cameron is dead in the water.
Boris will become mayor , then PM.'
This is a useful point because so far Boris Johnson has not said whether he would give up his seat if he became Mayor. Perhaps he can let us know whether he intends to be Mayor part time, should he win?
Iain wrote: 'There is no way you would have access to all that if you weren't a Labour Party stooge/employee/hack.'
Presumably you haven't heard of bookshops and the Internet then.
A very neat way of avoiding the question. Let me put it to you again.
ReplyDeleteDo you work for Ken Livingstone or the Labour Party or a trade union and is Peter Horrie your real name?
'Iain Dale said...
ReplyDeleteA very neat way of avoiding the question. Let me put it to you again.
'Do you work for Ken Livingstone or the Labour Party or a trade union and is Peter Horrie your real name?'
Or, as it used to be put, 'Are you now or have you ever been...'
Perhaps you can point me to the occasions where each time someone posts a comment you agree with you have asked them if they work for the Conservative party, or Conservative-supporting think tanks, or are employees of Conservative groups on local authorities or devolved bodies. Please provide some examples from this thread where you have taken this approach with those you agree with or who are defending Johnson.
I'll take that as a yes then.
ReplyDeleteGood tactic, though, throwing back a uestion with an entirely different one. Do you really think people are so stupid that they can't see through you? A more subtle approah might have been a good idea. Because now we are all laughing at you.
But Iain, which part of what either Peter Horrie or Simply The Facts wrote is not true? Pro-hunting, pro-nuclear power, and a doubter about civil partnerships though I am, the rest does seem pretty damning, especially when it is all taken together.
ReplyDeleteI'm not pro-Livingstone, for reasons that you have set out before. But surely you must now come out and admit that Boris is totally unsuitable, whoever else might or might be, too?
Take a step back from the distorting detail that Ken's sockpuppets want Boris to drown in and think what it is that makes him so appealing to so many people across the political spectrum (which he is) and the reason he's put the wind up Stalinist types like Ken. It's because he's a man who speaks his mind and does not cringe before the stifling thought police of today's society. This slur about racism is a classic example. It hones in on words taken out of context, focusing on the letter and not the spirit of what Boris has said, which is not remotely racist. Boris is NOT a racist - he is an iconoclast. He does fight against the ever longer arm of a State that wants to smash free expression by declaring you are suffering from some 'ism' or other. I'm not remotely surprised that Ken has sent his bully boys out (or indeed they've sent themselves out - does it really matter?). They are the enemies of free speech. Boris is a great defender of free speech, free expression, largeness of vision. It's this that really threatens Ken and his acolytes.
ReplyDelete"Mary also has 'no profile available', another of KK's invisible friends."
ReplyDeleteMary doesn't have a profile because Mary doesn't have a blog. I'm signed in under my gmail account - I didn't realise it was sinister not to have a blog these days.
Mary is not one of Ken's invisible friends - Mary isn't even planning to give Ken her first vote for a start. He will get her second vote but not her first.
Mary is simply one of the millions of Brits who despise the Tories and who also happen to despise New Labour.
Iain Dale said...
ReplyDelete'I'll take that as a yes then.
'Good tactic, though, throwing back a uestion with an entirely different one. Do you really think people are so stupid that they can't see through you? A more subtle approah might have been a good idea. Because now we are all laughing at you.'
Interesting that Iain Dale's blog provides him with the ability to know what everyone reading this thinks. A bit spooky that, Iain. What next, fortune telling?
It's very notable that underneath all the bluster about 'sock puppets', the actual content of what Boris Johnson stands for - including a discussion about how much to beat up a journalist in which Johnson concluded the conversation by agreeing to assist with providing his details - is barely refuted, if at all.
As Ronald Reagan might say, there you go again...
ReplyDeleteOscar Miller wrote:
ReplyDelete'I'm not remotely surprised that Ken has sent his bully boys out (or indeed they've sent themselves out - does it really matter?). They are the enemies of free speech.'
Apparently it is now contrary to free speech to quote verbatim from a published author's books and articles. On the contrary I am for free speech - I recommend strongly that as many people as possible read Johnson's published writings because they set out in great detail his reactionary policies and beliefs.
For example, I am in favour of as many people as possible knowing that Johnson expressed his support for Silvio Berlusconi, that well known supporter of liberal values:
'If we are obliged to compare Silvio Berlusconi with Anna Lindh [the Swedish foreign minister], and other bossy, high-taxing European politicians, I agree with Farrell: as the narrator says of Jay Gatsby, a man Berlusconi to some extent resembles, he is "better that the whole damn lot of them".'
This is from his book "Have I Got Views for You".
Look Peter Horrie and chums you are transparently operating a politically motivated smear campaign against Boris Johnson and you aren't remotely interested in or concerned about racism. We all know that Ken uses anti-semitism as and when it's convenient - and 'loves the Jews' as and when it suits him too. Actually he's about only one thing - he loves being in power and will do anything to stay there. And it seems you will operate any dirty campaign to try to keep him there. Actually it strikes me that the Left is turning into the party of hate - these ridiculous and unfounded attacks on Boris Johnson are in my book the basis of the warped mentality that feeds vile ideologies like racism.
ReplyDelete'Oscar Miller said...
ReplyDeleteLook Peter Horrie and chums you are transparently operating a politically motivated smear campaign against Boris Johnson'
Again, it is not a 'smear' to quote verbatim from someone's published writings.
Perhaps you can set out which of the various quotes from Johnson's writings are refuted?
Iain, might you ask one of your friends at the London Assembly to ask a question of the Mayor as to how much time has been spent during office hours by his staff posting messages on websites and blogs? You're more likely to get a straight answer to that question (and that's not very likely) than you are from Peter Horrie.
ReplyDeleteThe reason that he is not denying it is because blogger and other websites possess means of tracing the poster. At that point, the story would become "Mayor office dirty tricks".
"Peter Horrie" and David Lindsay, if you are interested in answers to the questions that you posed, these questions were debated exhaustively on commentisfree over the last two days, and the refutations to the smears can still easily be found there. In the case of "Peter Horrie", I have a shrewd suspicion that you posted on that thread.
Oh dear sounds like Boris has a serial stalker.
ReplyDeletePeter, all of the various tomes you have written (and I'm rather impressed by how you can type so many words in such quick time) may well be true, but are way beyond the comprehension or attention span of the vast majority of voters (shown by the fact that many of them seemingly think Gordon Brown had absolutely no connection with Blair's government). Keep up the good work though.
I have reason to believe that "travis bickle" is an assumed name.
ReplyDeleteDear lord,
ReplyDeleteThe puppets are making my eyes bleed.
Make it stop Iain please. :P
Just block them from posting Iain. Simple as that. Labour, know the Right control the blogashpere, and are constantly trying to ruin, popular right-wing blogs, either by individuals randomly posting nonsense off their own backs or an organised attempt to target a specific issue, like Ken the w***er is doing at the moment. That is why you got rid of Anonymous comments isn't it? At least now, they will have to create new blogger accounts each time, if you block their accounts from posting. I am assuming the Blogger allows you to block other bloggers if you want?
ReplyDeleteGeezer, sadly Blogger doesn't have that capability.
ReplyDeletePerhaps you can set out which of the various quotes from Johnson's writings are refuted?
ReplyDeleteAugust 08, 2007 7:01 PM
Oh dear - you don't get it do you? It's quite extraordinary how a vicious ideology like racism has been banalised by people like you to a kind of tick box mentality that reduces the issue to a simple question of 'transgressive' language. You seem to think that the use of certain words = racism. It just isn't so. Words can be used in a myriad of ways and you have to seek the INTENTION beneath the words and the CONSEQUENCE of using them. You also have to have some kind of working definition of racism. I would go with this one:
"a belief or concept that differences in physical appearance between people (such as those upon which the concept of race is based) determine cultural or individual achievement, and may involve the idea that one's own 'race' is superior." Does Boris think that? No. Do his words encourage people to believe that? No. Has he ever proposed discrimination against anyone on the basis of race? No. He is not a racist. And I repeat you are only trying to make out he is to try and knock him out of the mayoral contest and not because you have demonstrated any concern whatsoever about the real problem that leads people to attack others on the basis of their colour, their creed, or their beliefs. I can assure you I fear Ken on that front. I don't fear Boris.
OK, think we all know how posters on this blog feel about Boris Johnson.
ReplyDeleteThink the real question is, how is BJ's Flying Circus playing out on the STREETS with LIKELY VOTERS???
WW makes a great point when he notes that BJ reportedly got 46% versus 40% for KL in YouGov survey published 2 Aug that included 170 London electors.
Interesting, but too small and untargeted a sample to tell much EXCEPT that BJ clearly does have excellent name ID and a VERY respectable base vote. Also that the incumbent has not (yet) sealed the deal.
More comprehensive polling by more than one pollster is clearly on-going. Will be VERY interesting to see toplines AND crosstabs, to find out how Borish is doing with Londoners in general AND among key groups of likely voters, both overall and with respect to specific issues, questions, controversies.
Will many voters perceive attacks on BJ as a racist to be over-the-top and unfair? IF answer is yes, and these include significant numbers of White working-class voters, would help BJ by neutralizing his upper-class twit quotient.
ON THE OTHER HAND methinks there may be even more White and minority middle-class, moderates attracted to Borish's "rogish charm" and open to change at the top (but not committed to it)for whom "picanninies" and "watermelon smiles" are questionable in a satirst and problematic in a politico.
By and large these folks are allergic to racism, and while they resist lumping BJ in with the BNP or KKK, the may well refrain from giving him their votes. They are also one of the key groups that (we though) David Cameron was working overtime trying to woo to the Tory Party.
NOTE also that BJ's support is almost certainly strongest among the YOUNGEST voters. Which is a problem for him in the actual election, because younger voters are less likely to actually cast a ballot in this election. Would seem the higher the turnout, the better BJ's chances.
re Horrie et al.
ReplyDeleteWhat did I tell you earlier about sock puppets having
"a tyrannical commitment to having the last word."
Labour glopzoids to a man.
"I have reason to believe that "travis bickle" is an assumed name."
ReplyDeleteIn the general spirit of answering such questions the answer is 42.......
David you are a foreigner what you have to say is irrelevant, it has nothing to do with you.
ReplyDeleteIt is worth recalling what Johnson actually wrote about Kyoto - which was not that he was worried about the US constitution, but opposed the emissions reduction targets:
No it is not especially and in any case his cynicism about the veracity of the climate change religionists is valid . You give yourself away horrid wannnabe . Only a Brown Reich floater would be so out of touch and only a hired lackey wouild write so like an estate agent`s blurb. Do you think Londoners have enjoyed being bullied over their cars and there lifestyle and paying endlessly higher taxes on some ridiculous green pretext . You do not live here do you , you do not drive either do you…..I `m beginning to see you creepy….its getting clearer,,,young …in an office
It is an indication of how far out of touch many Conservative supporters are that there is a debate going on about whether it is ok in any circumstances to call black people 'piccaninnies.'
You have neither listened to nor understood the discussion about that which was quite different . You are an intern is this why your views about the City are so weirdly unfocussed . You probably do not live here g. You are not here to listen your just here to squawk like a malignant parrot . All of this was delved into at great length the other day which shows you are not a blog regular , you appear not ever to have gone out of your room . Having said that of all the dirt you malodorous l Kennymen have dug up that is the most awkward and Boris , who is obviously not a racist , will have to make rapprochement with those who have been understandably upset.
I distresses me to give satisfaction to a state propagandist but there it is.
newmania wrote of the claim that Johnson is rabidly pro fox and stag hunting: 'Not rabidly he simply thinks it is an authoritarian measure as , lets face it , did Tony Blair and I doubt Gordon Brown gives a stuff'If one reads what Johnson actually thinks however it is clear that he is aggressively in favour of bloodsports:
Only if you speak English as a foreign language you smarmy gimp
'I will never vote to ban hunting. It is a piece of spite that has nothing to do with animal welfare, and everything to do with Blair's manipulation of rank-and-file Labour chippiness and class hatred.'
Quite right and the rest of it is a description iof the visceral reality of the experience. Are you saying being a good writer or conjuring a vivid scene is a bar. Does everyone have to be as much of a creep as Milliband and I bet you want to be just like him don’t you Brown -nose I expect you have Milliband underpants and rub poster so f him on your genitals at night “ Oh god let me be a boring nit just like David oooooo” .This is the type who would have shopped Anne Frank for a new Youth badge.
Is this the image of a modern Conservative party proudly occupying the centre ground? No.
Well; you say that but do you think a majority of the country is against hunting , do you? Fatuous ninny they do not care and most that notice would not want to spoil someone else fun. I would say that was a damn sight closer to the centre than a man who encourages the IRA and sympathises with those who wish to kill and maim Londoners …but then no doubt you are just learning that you do too traitor . As for the Lib Dems that’s fair comment but that does not make them bad people that makes them doctrinally inconsistent albeit expressed in a hyperbolical fashion. In fact Boris has a great rapport with Liberals having many views instinctively in common with them as a one nation Conservative. I think they can stand a little teasing without throwing a hissy fit and for any Liberal to support Ken Livingstsone would be a betrayal of everything they say holds them together . Liberality; and Boris as you have pointed out, is a very Liberal very easy going, he writes freely even polemically but he does not want to stop anyone lese doing the same.
Some Liberals are just cowardly socialists but there are some who still believe in freedom and they are not going to be impressed with a sneaky state commissar like Ken or his demonic helpers I do not believe you are a person at all I think deep in the Brown haus they have a vat and throw Mazola ,censoriousness bossy booted mean spiritedness and it all wafts out with the long sigh of a weak fart ..straight into a suit
Ha ha ha ha and you do work for Ken you nauseating state maggot and there it is cheating already Spending our money on himself via his vile grovelling court eunuchs so desperate for preferment that they`ll run around naked just to show willing .” What can I do for you now your ken ship …..is that a sore that needs licking ooo yummy”!
Yeah that right Londoners want to be rule by nerd acolytes like Horrie crawl back under your rock state slave you are the child of collaborators the father of traitors and the sum of quizzling invertebrate fawning arse kissers from down the ages.
Go away
Mary is simply one of the millions of Brits who despise the Tories
ReplyDeleteWhy Mary , I `m genuinely interested ?
Iain Dale said...
ReplyDelete"Geezer, sadly Blogger doesn't have that capability."
August 08, 2007 7:24 PM
Can't you make a complaint to the Blogger.com administrators?
Failing that, just say you suspect the offending posters of trying to groom youngsters! Just a thought:-)
What we have here is the next GE campaign in a microcosm. Someone is prepared - and it's not us.
ReplyDeletePeter Horrie: so Boris is a libertarian; should that be a crime in your books?
ReplyDeleteAnother ten years of Labour and it might be.
Presumably Horrid does know that Boris could take part in a long conversation and not mean every or even any word he speaks to be taken literally, as is sometimes the custom of those people who like to be ironic or humorous. Never mind....that's asking a lot to expect Horrid to understand I know.
ReplyDeleteIf Boris has committed a crime or acted as an accessory then let's hear it. In fact let the Police know it, and they can deal with the situation according to the law of the land.
It is often a good tactic when dealing with a loony to talk back to them in kind. It is not usually sensible to try to talk them round, especially in a brief phone call. It is better to try to empathise and see it all from their viewpoint and much quicker and safer to speak their language.
I would not imagine that a threatening angry phone call invariably leads to violent actions. In fact common sense usually intervenes at some point as rage subsides. It is better to allow the rage to run its course, and the phone is a great place to rage in the first place. Boris just acted out the poor bloke's fantasies and probably thought he was helping him to get it off his chest.
But then here am I trying to get Horrid to perceive what he is clearly incapable of seeing, and by so doing, I'm proving my point. If the other guy cannot see it, you're usually wasting your time trying to change his mindset. Boris was in exactly such a situation, and had few options available.
Only if we abolish humour totally will Horrid and his kind be able to begin to understand. Their world runs entirely around accusation, threat, blame and demands. They wouldn't recognise one where the likes of Boris flow their creative talents around. And they are not likely to do so at any time in the future.
The only way to resolve all this is not to muckrake over Ken's concentration camp comments and Boris. picanninnies etc but to ask the voters which they prefer - threats, accusations, blame and demands NuLab style or wit, humour, tolerance, caring and intelligence. If it's the latter, then it's Boris Johnson, I'm afraid and Horrid will have lost.
Mary, please continue. Why do you hate us again?
Didn't Ken the Jew Baiter try attack and drag his pregnant partner out of the party by her neck after catching her smoking? It was her friends who, fearing for her safety, threw Ken out. As he was battering on the door to get back in he was meant to have pushed that guy over the wall.( he was lucky, the man wasn't killed) All this was reported on at the time and Ken has never asked for a retraction (I wonder why?-Court procedings can be tricky as people have to give evidence on oath). Surely one of those friends could be pursuaded to give their version? I'd like to see another newspaper investigation into the events of that party just before the mayoral election. Ken is also hated by a few people who've worked with him and under him over the years, I'd quite like to see some of their stories popping out. There was an unsubstantiated story on Popbitch a couple of years ago (I know, hardly the most reliable source) where someone who claimed to live opposite Ken said he'd seen an incident between Emma and ken as they were entering their house. She was heavily pregnant at the time. I know the educationally challenged Liebour filth that keep posting on here have difficulty with the concept of irony, I'll explain it to them in terms they'll understand. I find it extremely ironic that Ken has hosted a conference on domestic violence.
ReplyDeleteWHAT CHANCE HAS BORIS
ReplyDelete"made horrendous political blunders"
"remains entirely capable of blowing the race despite a strong poll lead"
"Played out his personal life in public" and to full camera raising the spectre of sleaze
"Has unwisely focussed on the need for radical reform of the socially sensitive issues of immigration, the welfare state, and foreign policy"
"been accused of racism, homophobia, stupidity, Xenophobia"
been accused of "inflammatory statements"
of "adding fuel to the fire"
"Of staking out the right of the political field, excelling at outrageous macho statements"
"He criticises the immigrants' lobbies"
Opposes cultural relativism and believes human rights, freedom, and democracy are universal values to which all human beings aspire.
Has been accused of exploiting his immigrant origins and even irrationally labelled "The American"
YES, SARKOZY HAS DONE ALL OF THIS
Hat tip Flo
And now we see that (quelle surprise) he looks down on Johnny Foreigner too.
ReplyDeleteBecause we all know that Boris is pure blood English and can trace his anscestors back to King Arthur.
Except of course that his Grandfather was Turkish.
I love the idea that having certain views, (eg. Pro Hunting, pro Privatisation, Anti Kyoto) could make someone unsuitable to be mayor.
Such issues may form the basis for making a choice of whom to vote for, but immediate disqualification? A little harsh perhaps?
The fact that the Mayor of London's views on Fox Hunting are of interest to anyone, just shows what a warped little world we live in.
Iain, either reveal the IP address involved and/or somehow show a clear connection between those comments and the mayor's office or shut the hell up.
ReplyDeleteOn the sock-puppet front especially you do *not* have the credibility required to speculate in this way and expect to get away with it.
I love this obsession with IP addresses as if they're the mecca of source knowledge.. has no one heard of network address translation?
ReplyDeleteAlso, this idea that someone, on their personal website, is not allowed to speculate about something is complete bollocks too.
The point, Dizzy, is that Iain is far less curious about some sock-puppets than he is about others... so he should at the very least ditch the faux outrage.
ReplyDeletePS - "this idea that someone, on their personal website, is not allowed to speculate"
ReplyDeleteSorry? Who said that?
tim - this is iain dale's personal website. dizzy says he is allowed to speculate here. get it?
ReplyDeleteHmmm..This blog is rapidly going to hell in a handcart. First anonymous comments are determined to be insufficiently aligned to Iain Dale's views.
ReplyDeleteNow if one has signed up to Blogger, but not to every aspect of Iain Dale' s personal foibles and preferences one is threatened with being outed, to engender an atmosphere of self censorship and to put an end to a free and frank exchange of views.
It's only a short step to being like 'Bonkers' Dorries, where the only comments accepted are of the 'You're bloody loverlly Nadine and I want to impregnate you so there can be even more loverly girlies like you in the world, and er, did I mention that you are a fantastic MP, and that you are also, er, sexy and loverly..' Give me strength..
It would be fascinating to know if the anti-Boris tirade is coming direct from Livingstone's office - or even if one of the posters were actually Livingstone in person using a pseudonym.
ReplyDeleteWhen Iain speculates as with the Patrick Hennessy story, the more angry the response the more likely it seems that Iain's speculation is correct. If his thoughts are wrong, a simple calm denial would be sufficient, and a lot more convincing.
There certainly seems to be a bit of heat coming out of this thread which tends to suggest that Iain is spot on in this case.
"a simple calm denial"... perhaps issued through a mouthpiece blog using the classic "my password was '1234'" excuse?
ReplyDeletesockpuppeting issues aside, I really hope Peter Horries doesn't work for the public sector.
ReplyDeleteGiven the sheer volume of his oeuvre and the time he has to devote to making the same point ad nauseam I'd want a refund.
Tim: "The point, Dizzy, is that Iain is far less curious about some sock-puppets than he is about others... so he should at the very least ditch the faux outrage."
ReplyDeleteDid you miss the "About Iain" bit on the frontpage, where he states that he's a "right of centre political commentator" and a "former Conservative candidate"?
Partisan? On a personal website? My God!
Could you perhaps be angling for some sort of bloggers code of conduct to ensure BBC-like impartiality?
eml: Oh, well that's all right then
ReplyDelete(rolls eyes)
Presumable Livingstone does have a voice, Tim. He could come in and write his views directly if he wishes. And he could make it quite clear what his ID was.
ReplyDeleteIt's open 24/7.
A lot of the angst from the media or politicians being commented on in blogs is that they don't know how to deal with it. They don't want to acknowledge the blogs ,and yet they are worried by them.
It's actually very simple - if they want it to be. But they have to make that leap and open up a line into the blogs. Iain's here if Ken wants to speak to this audience, anytime.
The problem is that when the 'old world' media and politicians try to be clever with the blogs and carry out the kind of ops seen here yesterday, it doesn't actually work.
Writing is a very honest medium, and unlike on TV or the fast-moving world of spin, where time runs out in 60 seconds, there is all the time in the world here to debate and explain.
The problem for people like Ken Livingstone is that he doesn't want that amount of exposure and time spent on anything. He likes the world of quick accusation, quick clever comment and run off.
Well the blogs are different. He will have to engage with them sometime, and I think yesterday was a pretty poor start.
Hahahahahahaha! Tapestry, I'm having that comment framed. It can't be topped for sheer audacity (with bonus helpings of chutzpah).
ReplyDelete"Tim":
ReplyDelete"It can't be topped for sheer audacity (with bonus helpings of chutzpah)"
What the hell are you on, boy? You're really going to have to seek urgent medical attention. I mean, how does your comment bear any relationship to the previous remarks. For that matter how does your comment bear any relationship to anything except fluent gibberish?
"Audacity"? "Chutzpah"? What on earth are you on about?
The (repeated) suggestion that Livingstone is reduced to personally sock-puppeting websites coming from *this* website after *this*? Sorry, but that with added 'we are the bold truth-tellers of the blogosphere' nonsense takes the cake.
ReplyDelete"Writing is a very honest medium"
ReplyDeleteAs an erstwhile literary type, Tapestry, I have to take issue on several levels, but I know what you mean.
This thread has been a dialogue about veracity,intention and identity, so to that extent you are spot on.
In fact, I might do a study module entitled,
"veracity, intention and identity in post-Foucaultist cyber-culture"
Joking aside, (Somebody will pick this up for their dissertation for sure) the simple solution, as everybody knows, is for contributors to have something like a permanent verifiable web identity. The problem here has not been anonymous posters but ad hoc posters - people who pop up for the soul purpose of a single issue, who usually conform to the accepted term of "sock puppet"
The solution, if I may suggest one, is to transfer our host to a bulletine board platform. This would achieve two things: a.establish a consistent identity with a visible posting history and b. allow the banning of specific troublemakers and their ip address. It would be a radical step, but it does lead to greater accountabilty and more linear dialogue, if not honesty, which I doubt.
I simply cannot understand the mentality of anyone who thinks that blogs and/or comments on blogs are any more than expressions of opinion.
ReplyDeleteAnd what's all this 'we are the bold truth-tellers of the blogosphere' bollocks that you "Tim" have introduced? Was that said somewhere before? Have I missed it somehow?
For heaven's sake have a lie down and take some more of your medication. You'll be doing yourself an injury if you carry on like that.
Tim's just bitter because no-one reads his boring, badly written blog. So he stalks Ian and Guido's instead.Tim, If I give you £10 will you F**k off back to Austalia.
ReplyDeleteTextbook. Surely you can do better.
ReplyDeleteNo need to with you, Tim.
ReplyDelete(snort)
ReplyDeleteOK, so let's proceed by assuming that *you* are Ken Livingstone. Or perhaps someone more important and trustworthy, like Iain Dale.
Who said you could set the agenda? You sanctimonious tw*t. Christ, you're a chore of a man.
ReplyDeletetry and not be such a try hard you try hard c**t.
Chuck:
ReplyDelete"I simply cannot understand the mentality of anyone who thinks that blogs and/or comments on blogs are any more than expressions of opinion"
And your point is?
What do you suppose the historians of one hundred years in the future will be using as primary source material?
They will be using, by sifting and by powerful search engines, the chatter and "opinion" of the blogosphere. Iain Dale does not realise this, but in 20, 50 , 100 years time, his words will stil exist and be a very valuable resource for people who want to understand our era.
This, for example, is the era of Political Correctness, among other things. In 2107, it will be viewed with much amusement by GCSE sociology students, who will die laughing at the posturing and pouting of the scapegoat seeking loonies who currently have a bit of power.
You are being a bit blinkered. This is the future. Get used to it.
Tim Ireland: I think the business section of your site is far more entertaining than your "blog".
ReplyDeleteHave you re-read the "profile" section since it was first drafted? It's excruciatingly embarrassing to read.
Anyway, interesting to note that you actually "produced" Boris's blog - have you hidden some code in there, ready for the right moment to strike?
"people often use the word 'guru' around him"
ReplyDeletePriceless.
Not sure it's the word I'd go for.
NERO, eml, sockpuppet etc., I am not going to argue the point about Iain's position on sock-puppets with a bunch of sock-puppets... but thanks for showing us all (again) how tolerant Iain is of sock-puppets when they happen to be on his side.
ReplyDeleteBoring git!
ReplyDeletePeter Horrie: "The actual content of what Boris Johnson stands for . . . is barely refuted, if at all."
ReplyDeleteYou are referring to his writings. None of the quotations you have unearthed for us is remotely offensive, and I imagine far too many other people for your liking would be similarly unoffended. People like you have so devotedly pioneered being offended that you lost touch with commonsense humanity. Anyway, it is thoroughly enjoyable to watch all this offence being taken, and knowing it will do you NO GOOD.
The biggest sockpuppet on here is Newmania.
ReplyDeleteOh, do give it up! You are just making yourselves ridiculous. BORIS JOHNSON? I mean, come on! And that's all over now, anyway.
What do you suppose the historians of one hundred years in the future will be using as primary source material?
ReplyDeleteThey will be using, by sifting and by powerful search engines, the chatter and "opinion" of the blogosphere. Iain Dale does not realise this, but in 20, 50 , 100 years time, his words will stil exist and be a very valuable resource for people who want to understand our era.
This, for example, is the era of Political Correctness, among other things. In 2107, it will be viewed with much amusement by GCSE sociology students, who will die laughing at the posturing and pouting of the scapegoat seeking loonies who currently have a bit of power.
I think that Weasel is being far too optimistic about the future of humanity.
Wrinkled Weasel:
ReplyDeleteNo, this is 'today'. 'The future' comes afterwards. Did you go to some sort of State school by some dreadful misfortune?
Anyway, what a truly ghastly thought that the 'writings' (I use that term in its broadest sense) on blogs will last eternally. Virtually none of it is worth preserving for longer than, oh, about a week.
I couldn't care less what future 'historians' may use as their reference materials. Whatever they write will be just as crass as the work that most modern 'historians' produce today. 'History' is all too often a matter of opinion, or do you believe it's an absolute?
Chuck.
ReplyDeleteToday is the future to me. I was brought up in a bleak black and white world where America was still cool, where the height of sophistication was to make spag bol and where sex was a mystery.(It still is)
We read comics depicting the future where we would all wear stretchy suits, travel supersonic and use personal communicators no bigger than a pack of ten Woodbines.
Please forgive the awe of an old man who marvels everytime he uses Amazon.
Ephemera is the stuff of history. Its the trifles thought to be of no account that provides us with such a rich an authentic feel for the past.
Consider this missive:
"I suspect
my Brocchus wants to send me off so he can take up
with that Barbarian red-head who hangs around the fort
her hair shamelessly loose. She set her sights on Brocchus last September.
And I’m a fool for loving him so much. And is your Cerialis faithful?
How is your little son? I lost my child last month, it just bled out.
Life is either boring or painful, sister.
And if we’re lucky, the future
will make poetry of this, our letters, shopping lists and deaths.
Vindolanda will fall, another Cesar will rule,
and even our children will die. And yet we have to try.
Letter from Claudia Severa to Sulpicia Lepidina
Briga, 100 AD
Tch. And that's it? I only get to speak to Iain's usual gang of recently-registered bullies when the *subject at hand* is sock-puppets?
ReplyDeleteTo paraphrase tapestry; Presumably Iain Dale does have a voice. He could come in and write his views directly if he wishes.
Please explain to me Iain why anyone should trust a word you say regarding sock-puppets. Or anything regarding blogging for that matter.
Are you still here?
ReplyDeleteOh, yes. I'm waiting for a straight answer from a crooked blogger. Sometimes it takes a while.
ReplyDeleteI think the final word on this is that Iain is perfectly willing to bitch at me privately (via email) but, publicly, he wants to leave his response to my question about his position on sock-puppets... to a bunch of sock-puppets.
ReplyDeleteNo, can't I have the final word, please?!
ReplyDeleteLadies please! Put the handbags down and walk away...he's not worth it!
ReplyDelete