This entry was posted on
Tuesday, January 30th, 2007 at
12:06 pm and is filed
under Anne Milton.
Our attic has recently been subjected to a cleansing, the like of which has rarely been seen outside of a comments thread hosted by Paul Staines.
Found in one dark and dusty corner was an old issue of Private Eye… from 1973.
On page 4 is an early appearance by none other Jeffrey Archer. This was not his first appearance in Private Eye… that appears to have been; “on the 5th December, 1969 (issue 208) when they set out in some detail allegations originating with Humphrey Berkeley, the chair at that time of the United Nations Association, that Archer had abused his expense account with that organisation.”
I meant to use this as a Pretty Good Example showing why Private Eye should get their arses in gear and introduce an online archive, but then this popped up when I was looking into the Humphrey Berkeley matter…
Michael Crick – I blame the establishment: Jeffrey has been indulged all his life… just as the White City starter showed surprising leniency with Archer’s impatience to get going, so too did Central Office grandees when he became a by-election candidate in 1969 and Humphrey Berkeley warned them about discrepancies in Archer’s expenses for the United Nations Association.
And just look at the fine, upstanding man that Jeffrey Archer has become… and what a great asset he is to the Conservative Party.
And now, what may at first appear to be a change of subject…
The Times – Muslims who seek Sharia as bad as BNP, says Cameron: In an uncompromising attack on Islamic radicals, Mr Cameron said: “Those who seek a Sharia state, or special treatment and a separate law for British Muslims are, in many ways, the mirror image of the BNP. They also want to divide people into ‘us’ and ‘them.’ And they seek out grievances to exploit.”
I caught the initial reports regarding this on TV last night and it was the phrase “they seek out grievances to exploit” that I thought deserved attention; especially because regular readers of Bloggerheads should be all too familiar with a Conservative activist who seeks out divisive grievances to exploit.
Dennis Paul and his compatriot Mike Chambers recently graduated from exploiting issues of nationality to exploiting issues of sexuality; in August of last year I produced proof that Mike Chambers was directly responsible for an anonymous smear campaign against his political opponent. Dennis Paul was heavily implicated in the creation/promotion of this same website.
The matter was referred to Conservative Central Office, and to the office of David Cameron. Neither office took action. Instead, the matter was passed to the local Conservative association who passed it to Anne Milton (who did sweet bugger all about it).
Cameron then went on to promote Milton.
This, I would argue, classifies as an ‘indulgence’.
So, how, I hear you ask, did Dennis Paul and Mike Chambers react?
Well, they kept their heads down for a few months, and now they’re back for more:
He’s learned how even time-only timestamps can give him away when he makes comments ‘from other people’ on his own website, so he’s switched to date-only… but if you look at the first two comments from ‘other people’ you’ll notice that both of these entries carry exactly the same user-error in their links…. which just happens to be exactly the same user-error that appeared in this comment, where the author and purpose should be clear.
Further, Dennis Paul has moderation on full-time, so the comment left by ‘Jonesy’ (also made on this same busy Saturday) has been knowingly cleared by him.
One defence put forward by (ahem) anonymous parties seeking to represent Chambers and Paul is that the ‘Jonesy12′ smear-blog is the work of Labour activists (or perhaps even me) seeking to smear the local Conservatives with a double-backflip-twist*. If this is the case, why in heaven’s name would Dennis Paul calmly allow the publication of a link to it on his website – and allow that link to pass without comment?
[*Psst! Recent updates to the ‘Jonesy12′ smear-blog and profile seek to re-brand ‘Jonesy’ as a Welsh far-left-of-centre Labour supporter… but I still have copies of the original versions.]
Confidence? You ain’t seen nothing yet…
If we check the ‘Jonesy12′ smear-blog for updates, we can see a recent comment purporting to be from former MP Sue Doughty… closely followed by ‘Jonesy’ accepting it as genuine.
Prior to this, ‘Jonesy’ graduated from his claims that his political opponent might be a paedophile to this: “It’s clearly true… case proven.”
Based on what? A series of anonymous comments that were probably submitted by the author?
Chambers takes another big step over the line here, pretty much daring anyone to stop him… check out this recent anonymous comment: Jonesy, I do not agree with the paedophile blog post I leave this comment in, but since Ward obviously endorses the Anne Milton blog by Tim, I thought it was only fair to provide a similar observation on on him so perhaps his voters can get a better idea of him before the elections in May. Some might say you reap what you sow.
So… here we are. The election in which Chambers hopes to stand against his political opponent is only a few short months away and – because of the baffling inaction by his superiors – Chambers appears to be preparing to use these smears as a weapon in that election in one way or another. Here’s another anonymous comment: What the fuck is Mohammed up to? I heard he tries to misrepresent people over the internet by registering sites in their name and linking it to smear sites. Still, the public will be fully informed of these issues – not over the internet – but direct mail.
[Note – Of course, as with the previous anonymous comment, this strays back to the oft-repeated claim that these anonymous smears somehow compare to – and are justified by – the scrutiny of Anne Milton.]
So I think the time has come – once again – to see what the Conservative Party is willing to indulge:
To: David Cameron
CC: Anne Milton; Conservative Central Office
From: Tim Ireland
I wish to bring up an issue regarding your speech on Muslim groups that – in your words – “seek out grievances to exploit”.
In 2005, I became aware of Dennis Paul, a Conservative activist who sought divisive grievances to exploit. Then-candidate Anne Milton failed to disown the pamphlet in question:
In 2006, I provided you with proof that Mike Chambers, another Conservative activist closely associated with Anne Milton, was directly responsible for a website airing claims that his political opponent might be a paedophile:
The website in question has since graduated from speculation to certainty. A recent comment published by the author claimed that; “It’s clearly true.”
Further comments on this same website have recently provided as ‘proof’ claims that the victim of the smear is a member of a gay dating site. I’m sure that you realise that this implies that being gay automatically makes you a paedophile, but I’ll leave that thought with you for a moment as you stop to take a look at Mike Chambers’ reaction to a recent speech you gave on marriage:
For now, it simply needs to be pointed out that the anonymous claims published at the URL http://jonesy12.blogspot.com/ are clearly libellous… and I would like to know why you would tolerate a Conservative activist publishing a link to a website that he knows contains libellous claims:
1. If the entry disappears, please get in touch. I have a copy of the web page containing the offending entry saved to disk
2. It needs to be noted that Dennis Paul has his website set up so he must read any comment and approve it before it is published; i.e. the entry containing this link was included knowingly.
Even from a pure-common-sense standpoint, this makes no sense. Why would Dennis Paul allow such a comment to be published at his website if he wishes to distance himself from these smears?
But from a moral point of view, we come a bit closer to home… and one reason why I think you will not take action:
If you infer or claim that being homosexual automatically makes you a paedophile, or even if you simply endorse/tolerate such a view, you are doing one of two things; you are proving that you are a homophobe or showing that you are willing to exploit homophobia to further your own agenda.
But on your webcameron.org.uk website, you clearly link to ‘Guido Fawkes’, the character responsible for this charming exchange, in your blogroll:
You, like Dennis Paul, have published a link to a website of a homophobe (or, at best, someone willing to exploit homophobia).
I don’t hold any great hope that you will request that either link be removed, or see to it that Mike Chambers is called to account for his smear campaign… I simply want to get it on record that you were informed of these matters. Again.
[Sidebar: If you have a peek in the code of both Dennis Paul’s weblog and Mike Chambers’ Jonesy12 site, you may notice that both parties have recently discovered the miracle of Statcounter.]
UPDATE (31 Jan) – Two developments as a result of this post:
1 – A screen capture has been added to this post, as Dennis Paul has now removed the comment he published that linked to the Jonesy12 weblog… but profile links count too, so he should also crack on with the removal of this comment and this comment if he wants to avoid a bollocking.
2 – ‘Jonesy’ (aka Mike Chambers) seems to be picking up pointers from Paul Staines; when people are looking at him and choking back vomit, all he cares about is that people are watching. Late yesterday afternoon, he went live with this comment; NEWSFLASH: MEGA HOT GOSSIP COMING SOON!!! Stay tuned to the Jonesy!
And one non-development:
No response from any of the recipients of the above email. A tenner says they’ll keep ignoring it as long as no-one in the mainstream media is baying for their blood.
UPDATE (1 Feb) – This says it all, really. I’ve been in touch with David Cameron’s office, and they have dismissed my concerns. Now here Cameron is shaking hands with Dennis Paul… today of all days.
David Cameron endorses Dennis Paul and everything he stands for. So much for Mr Nice Guy.