The Political Weblog Movement

Eclectic link dump #25

Mr Jenvey is busy elsewhere early today, but he has promised to share a statement with us later.

I’m happy waiting for that, but here are a few extras for those of you who have looked through the old magazines and fiddled with the empty play-table and are now getting fidgety:

Teh Man somehow saw to it that I missed this epic thread.

Save the ‘ I Love Horses’ website!

Julian Petley cups John Beyer’s logical fallacies. (link via another great weekend link-fest from Septisicle)

Ignore the link if you like, and just love the headline; Arrest in Mandelson custard probe

Mail on Sunday – How MI5 colluded in my torture: Binyam Mohamed claims British agents fed Moroccan torturers their questions

Telegraph – Binyam Mohamed torture claims: Calls for judicial inquiry

And finally, as if some strange hand of fate were at work, I arrived at (pfft!) the Jack Straw weblog this morning to discover that is was updated yesterday with the following message:

With regret blog comment moderation has been turned on. Political argument is welcome (see posts below), but name-calling and general abuse is not and won’t be published.

So good luck bringing up any of that torture nonsense there and seeing anything substantial published; even thinking for a moment that the sainted Jack Straw would allow torture on his watch constitutes ‘abuse’. How very dare you.

-

UPDATE – You’re *still* bored? Tch. OK, I’ll have the nurse put some cartoons on:

Saturday Morning Watchmen (more) (via)

-

UPDATE – Tut. Me and my memory. Sir Paul Judge would like a quiet word with you about the party system.

Glen Jenvey is experiencing some difficulty

I’ve been very patient with our Mr Jenvey. I have gone to great lengths to better appreciate and even adopt his position on ummah.com (i.e. that they are in league with terrorists), but Mr Jenvey still persists with a Carnival of Irrelevant Evidence; an endless barrage of historical data, none of which is relevant to the matter at hand, and none of which provides an answer to the following question that he has gone to considerable effort to avoid again and again and again (and again):

Did you register to comment on ummah.com using the profile names ‘saddam01′ and/or ‘r.tims’?

Glen Jenvey has, in two responses, denied involvement with the ‘abuislam’ account. Again. He has also claimed that an unknown party has scanned a computer that he owns, ‘proving’ that this computer has not been used to post to ummah.com (ever ever ever), but this is only an alleged scan of a single machine (in a world where many people own or have access to at least two), and it does nothing to answer my question regarding specific profile registrations.

Also, after more than a day’s worth of email correspondence, Mr Jenvey still hasn’t decided if the audio featured in this post is authentic or not (when my initial request was for a statement regarding its authenticity).

Patrick Mercer’s people are kindly looking into the matter, but not a word has reached me from Sir Sherard Cowper-Coles or his staff.

I’m out ploughing the lower forty for most of the day, but my current thinking is that I should release more audio to help Mr Jenvey in his endeavour to make a ruling on its authenticity and maybe chase the alleged cousin/’Mike’ for comment.

Morning, all!

Two pretty things to kick us off:

1. I made an art.

2. While I’ve got you nicely freaked out, here’s a little sample of what manufactured pop used to sound like.

And now, to business:

I shared a direct email exchange with our Mr Jenvey last night and I expect our conversation to continue later today.

Also on the immediate horizon is a little show of numbers in the media war.

Brace yourselves.

-

UPDATE (12pm) – It goes slowly with Mr Jenvey, who has just signed off for a time. The short version is that I’m willing to take on board all claims of ummah.com’s involvement with terrorism and listen with great interest to anything he’s got to say on the record, but Glen’s doing everything he can to avoid answering this question:

Did you register to comment on ummah.com using the profile names ‘saddam01′ and/or ‘r.tims’ ?

(I should point out that, in reply to this question, Mr Jenvey has again denied posting as ‘abuislam’. Twice.)

Eclectic link dump #24

Outstanding: The Crisis of Credit Visualized (via)

Viz now has a website that’s even slightly less shit than before, which makes me very happy.

Some kind (and really quite true) words from Ian Appleby leading into the antics of the Indy and their bad habit of pretending to accept comments when they’d really rather you shut up and went away. It could be a simple case of poor housekeeping, but I’ve watched entire comment threads disappear from the Independent website; they’re as bad as many of the tabloids on most fronts. More newspapers have been willing to try the comments-lite solution since the public face of blogging was taken over by a bunch of comment cheats. Funny how that works, isn’t it?

The new and renewed Daily Mail Watch is about to loom on your horizon. You have been warned.

Via Carl comes news from (and of) another jolly useful site from the good people at mysociety.org:
FOI Request re: Mark Thompson’s trip to Israel for talks with Ariel Sharon

The Sun didn’t really discover Atlantis via Google Earth. I can tell by that look on your face that you’re totally shocked by that.

And now, some things you can see from Google Earth that The Sun would rather you didn’t.

(So is The Sun spending most their budget on watching Jade Goody die and filling in any blank spots with stuff they found on Google Earth? It certainly seems like it. And if you don’t mind me saying so, it’s this kind of clever newspapering that makes Rebekah Wade long overdue for a promotion.)

Iain Dale’s somewhat misinformed view on Star Wars reminded me of Starcrash, the world’s greatest space adventure movie ever, ever, ever. It’s even got a hairy-chested Hoff. Watch the whole thing here, if you like.

Speaking of hollow imitations dressed with shiny lights; here’s what the pollsters are saying about Sarah Palin’s future.

On the subject of Google-bombing YouTube, here’s a result you might enjoy (screengrab)

And finally, some good news from the land of we-don’t-do-torture:

AP Newsbreak: CIA destroyed 92 interrogation tapes
The Times – Britain admits rendition of terror suspects
Guardian – UN attacks Britain over torture claims
Septicisle – Rendition flashback
Justin McKeating – David Miliband and Jaqui Smith: something to hide, something to fear

Somebody’s really got it in for Glen Jenvey

Note – Any use of the audio featured in this post (or text from same) must include a link to Bloggerheads.com – ideally, a link to this post and/or any relevant update – or (for non-web use only) a clear text credit for ‘bloggerheads.com’

CURRENT STATUS OF AUDIO (LATEST AT TOP):
16 Mar 2009 – Audio confirmed here as authentic. These are two *actual* recordings of Glen Jenvey speaking to an unknown interviewer, recorded sometime after 05/02/2008, most likely on or about Monday 25/02/2008
02 Mar 2009 – Two alleged recordings of Glen Jenvey speaking to an unknown interviewer, recorded sometime after 05/02/2008

_______________________________

THE INTRODUCTION
_______________________________

I think it might be best to allow Glen Jenvey to introduce himself, as it’s that kind of post:

Glen Jenvey worked for several military attachés covering terrorist groups, including al-Qaida and their members in Britain. His sting led to the capture of Abu Hamza al-Masri, a major terrorist. Multiple other terrorists were also caught due to his efforts. He has been profiled and interviewed in major media across the globe, including in the US, UK, Russia, India, etc. He co-authored the book “War of the Web” with Jeremy Reynalds. (source)

In January of this year, I alleged that Glen Jenvey had been falsifying evidence of extremism after failing to troll Muslim communities for suitable tabloid fodder.

A moderator of the relevant forum (Ummah.com) declared that the same person who had registered a profile under the name ‘Abu Islam’ [abuislam] (used to falsify evidence of extremism) had also registered a profile under the name ‘Richard Tims’ [r.tims] (used to promote a website that was later discovered to be listed elsewhere as belonging to Mr Jenvey).

Since then, there have been many anonymous contributions seemingly in favour of Mr Jenvey’s position, but nothing verifiable… aside from the statements featured here in this article by the same Jeremy Reynalds:

In an e-mailed statement, Jenvey denied being Abu Islam, adding that some inflammatory posts formerly on the site have now been either removed or manipulated to the forum administrators’ advantage. He said, “Over the years I have monitored both www.ummah.net and www.ummah.com and their chat rooms. I know they hate me enough to try and discredit me.” (source)

Richard Bartholomew pointed out here and here that none of these statements addressed the identity of ‘Richard Tims’, so – via Jeremy Reynalds – I asked:

Glen Jenvey, do you deny posing as Richard Tims, using the name Richard Tims or knowing anyone by the name of Richard Tims?

This arrived on Saturday:

Hello Tim,

I have been in contact with Mr. Jenvey. He says that he is not Richard Tims, that law enforcement officers are looking into your site’s “hate comments” about him, and that he will be in touch with you soon.

Best regards,

Jeremy Reynalds

It is my understanding that, yes, Glen Jenvey has made a complaint to the police accusing me of hate crime… but I’m trying to be as understanding as possible about that, because it is now clear to me that Mr Jenvey himself is being actively targeted by al-Qaeda.

I know. But bear with me as we go through the evidence…

_______________________________

THE EVIDENCE
_______________________________

For now it’s important that you take a moment, as I did, to reflect on the following undeniable facts:

- Glen Jenvey denies being ‘abuislam’

- Glen Jenvey denies being ‘Richard Tims’

- Glen Jenvey feels aggrieved/confident enough to classify my assertions to the contrary to be a criminal act, motivated by hatred.

A gentleman does not make complaints to the police lightly, and I take Mr Jenvey to be a gentleman.

Therefore the onus is on me to revisit the evidence and make more of an effort to appreciate claims that much/all of it has been falsified as part of an extremist plot to discredit a successful independent anti-terrorism operative.

As I revisit this evidence, I will be presenting fresh evidence in the form of audio recordings, and seeking testimony from a British diplomat and a Conservative MP.

For the sake of clarity, I ask you to bear with me as I do all of this while maintaining the position that Glen Jenvey is being singled out for special attention by al-Qaeda operatives determined to destroy his reputation:

-

EXHIBIT #A – ‘Abu Islam’, ‘Richard Tims’, and The Sun

(This exhibit works best when read out in the voice of Fox Mulder.)

In July and August of 2008, al-Qaeda operatives submit sellyourstory.org to the following business directories under the name ‘Glen Jenvey’:
1Dir.biz, 10Directory, DirectoryHulk

They also take the calculated risk of promoting the URL on two websites that Jenvey reads on a regular basis; once on Lionheart, a website he is friendly with, and once on Ummah.com, a site he is monitoring for extremist content.

A month or two later, the same al-Qaeda operatives use the same computer to register a new profile at Ummah.com in the name of ‘abuislam’, and spend close to 3 months patiently ‘trolling’ the group with a series of provocative posts.

Finally, in January 2009, they hit paydirt; Jenvey sees a thread in which ‘abuislam’ is active and – playing right into the hands of al-Qaeda operatives – bases his entire story on the content posted by ‘abuislam’. This story is then passed on or sold to The Sun, who also decide to focus on the content posted by ‘abuislam’, and even feature a claim based on the ‘abuislam’ posts as their front page headline.

(Alan Sugar later sues The Sun over this front page claim, but there is no telling at this stage if this was down to pure luck or part of al-Qaeda’s brilliantly-conceived plan.)

A moderator at Ummah.com (quite possibly acting on instructions from al-Qaeda) uncovers the carefully-laid trail leading from ‘abuislam’ to ‘Richard Tims’, but does not investigate further and/or uncover the link to Glen Jenvey; this, brilliantly, is left partially – if not entirely – to chance.

This is where I come in and unwittingly aid al-Qaeda by independently uncovering the evidence connecting sellyourstory.org and Jenvey (that was, if you recall, planted by al-Qaeda operatives some 6 months earlier).

Granted, most of this seems somewhat unlikely at first, but you must remember:

(a) al-Qaeda is a fanatical, well-funded and far-reaching organisation

(b) for Jenvey himself to be behind the ‘Richard Tims’ post, he would also have to be the mastermind of a scheme where he established a website to compete with the story agency that feeds him by creating a website with a near-identical promotional domain name (SWNS attracts punters via sellusyourstory.com, while the site registered under Jenvey’s name made a similar pitch at sellyourstory.org)

(c) for Jenvey himself to be behind the ‘abuislam’ posts, he would have to knowingly and needlessly interfere with the security/publicity of several wealthy and powerful people; an act that makes no sense for a man in Jenvey’s position… with or without the risk of discovery.

Jenvey claims to be in the business of stopping extremism, not creating it or encouraging it. Stirring up any open forum with suggestions that readers take more militant action against specific individuals creates a needless risk that even most amateurs would understand to be beyond the pale, not least because you have no control over who will read and be influenced by your call to action.

But to better appreciate Mr Jenvey’s position, you must also consider the risk of discovery, which comes with the following immediate consequences:

- Alienating the news agency that supplies him with income

- Discrediting him in the eyes of a tabloid newspaper that supplies him with publicity/income

- Creating several wealthy/powerful enemies

But these consequences are only the beginning if al-Qaeda have their way…

-

EXHIBIT #B – The Wikipedia Edits

Much shorter and easier to appreciate this one; this archived version of a Wikipedia investigation is your doorway to a long list of edits made to Wikipedia seemingly in support of Glen Jenvey.

I say ‘seemingly’ because edits involving profiles for Abu Hamza, James Ujaama, Abu Izzadeen and others paint a picture where Glen Jenvey is repeatedly offering evidence to multiple recipients in security and law enforcement who universally reject it in favour of other evidence if/when matters ever lead to the inside of a court room.

Why would Glen Jenvey undermine his credibility by constantly describing repeated circumstances in which his reliability, the reliability his evidence, and/or the method(s) used to secure it are called into question?

Why would he raise the question (again and again and again) about what exactly might be stopping various authorities from using his evidence?

Also, what could he possibly hope to gain by attacking the PCC by making absurd claims that they are in league with terrorists?

The intention of al-Qaeda is clear and the pattern of their complex strategy now clearer; they seek to damage Jenvey by:

- Undermining his credibility

- Creating circumstances in which his past/methods may be subject to doubt or scrutiny

- Creating enemies within the PCC; an organisation that regulates the industry that supplies him with publicity/income

By now you should be aware of the ingenuity of al-Qaeda’s dastardly plot; Jenvey is fast running out of friends, and he appears to be the sole engineer of his own downfall.

It is about this stage that al-Qaeda strikes with a typically bold move that I hope will eventually lead to the undoing of these evil-doers.

-

EXHIBIT #C – Alleged recording of Glen Jenvey #1: The Diplomat and The Cousin

First, a word about these two clips:

* These clips are from a longer sample of audio presented to me as being part of an interview conducted with Mr Jenvey sometime in 2008.

* The only statement that I wish to make about the remaining audio at this time is that it exists and it is in my possession.

* These clips have been trimmed, but not edited in any way to rearrange or distort their original content/context.

[MINI-UPDATE - Yes, the audio is 'real' in that it was really sent into me and was really claimed to be a genuine audio recording of Jenvey and an unnamed interviewer. The audio is not something that I made up or invented for a laugh; it is instead a real thing that some people might choose to laugh at.]

* I have added the sub-titles (and a video background of the cave in which I imagine an al-Qaeda operative would operate) but the audio is 100% original, as delivered, fresh from the dead drop.

* I would like to stress that it makes absolutely no sense whatsoever for someone in Mr Jenvey’s position to be so candid in any interview, never mind a recorded one.

* Rather than subject these recordings to voice-print analysis (or even mere naked-ear comparison to other known audio of Jenvey) I instead choose to believe that this audio has been fabricated somehow by al-Qaeda operatives.

With that in mind, we arrive at the first audio file and the data therein:


Alleged recording of Glen Jenvey #1: The Diplomat and The Cousin from Tim Ireland on Vimeo.

Audio Transcript:

‘Jenvey’: I was… I basically… I basically uncovered all the films. With…. a university professor whose cousin, Sherard, is the British Ambassador to Afghanistan, but at that stage was the British Ambassador to Saudi Arabia. If I don’t think the cops are taking me seriously… or not acting on information given over to them or MI5… we bypass them and I will use one of my number of diplomatic contacts… or it will go to Sherard. And if that fails, I then go to the press.

The process described here deserves summary; when the police do not regard certain evidence to be useful/usable for some reason, they will be bypassed and high-placed contacts within our diplomatic corps will be put to work to see if justice can’t be meted out by some other means. If those avenues fail, it will be time for trial by media.

I’m sure you can imagine how such a claim – were it to be attributed to Mr Jenvey – would isolate him politically.

But unlike other claims made in Jenvey’s name, this claim does not involve a security outfit with a policy of never making public statements; instead, this claim is made about a public figure.

For the first time, it is possible to cast light upon the shadowy claims that surround Mr Jenvey:

To: Sir Sherard Cowper-Coles
From: Tim Ireland
Subject: ‘Glen Jenvey’ audio

Sir Sherard,

I have been presented with audio that purports to be part of an interview with terror expert Glen Jenvey. The authenticity of this audio has yet to be fully established and I feel it only fair to warn you that some people – Jenvey included – suspect an extremist plot to discredit him:

http://www.vimeo.com/3432225

http://www.bloggerheads.com/archives/2009/03/glen_jenvey_audio.asp

As you are named in the audio file, you’re in an excellent position to make a judgement about its reliability/accuracy, and I’d be most grateful if you could answer the following questions:

- Have you in the past and/or do you at the present time have an information/intelligence-sharing relationship with terror expert Glen Jenvey, either directly or via an intermediary?

- If so, would you regard the arrangements described in the first audio file to be a fair/reliable description of your relationship with Mr Jenvey?

- Just on the off-chance; are you aware of this cousin person, and – if so – may we have his/her name?

- What are your thoughts on the likelihood that this audio evidence has been fabricated (possibly by al-Qaeda operatives)?

I’m happy to publish any response you may have, so please reply soonest.

Cheers

Tim Ireland
www.bloggerheads.com

OK, that should clear things up pretty quickly on audio file #1. Watch for updates.

Moving on…

-

EXHIBIT #D – Alleged recording of Glen Jenvey #2: Richard Tims and Some Guy Called Mike

This second clip is longer, but it will reward those patient enough to listen to it in its entirety:


Alleged recording of Glen Jenvey #2: Richard Tims and Some Guy Called Mike from Tim Ireland on Vimeo.

Audio Transcript:

‘Jenvey’: I’ve been a bit cheeky. I can’t get onto actual, um… Hotmail at the moment, yeh? But… my old friend, Omar Bakri Mohammad…

Interviewer: Who’s not in this country at the moment, is he?

‘Jenvey’: No… (he) loves speaking to journalists.

Interviewer: All right.

‘Jenvey’: Right, so we find (inaudible)… [searches for file/folder]… Um… Can’t find it. Anyhow, Bakri’s… Ah! Here it is. [locates file/folder] Now, this is me… I phoned Bakri…

Interviewer: Yeah

‘Jenvey’: … on a mobile phone. Spoke to him… about Abu Izzadeen

Interviewer: Mm-hm

‘Jenvey’: Saying that I felt that… if the police had this so-called evidence for so long

Interviewer: Mmm-hm

‘Jenvey’: Um… on your computer…

Interviewer (reading): “Mr Richard Tims”

‘Jenvey’: That’s my… one of my false names.

Interviewer: That’s you, is it? OK.

‘Jenvey’: Unlike… I know MI5 do not use reporters… um… and… they don’t pose as press

Interviewer: Mmm

‘Jenvey’: However, I’m freelance so I pose as anyone… to get what I what.

Interviewer: OK

‘Jenvey’: This is Bakri making a statement.

Interviewer (reading): “To Mr…”

Interviewer: for the record…

Interviewer (reading): “To Mr Richard Tims”… <- a long emailed statement follows -> “… best regards, Sheikh Omar Bakri”

Interviewer: That’s what he said to you?

‘Jenvey’: Oh, yeah.

Interviewer: When was that?

Interviewer (reading): “5th February 2008″

‘Jenvey’: So basically, he’s saying they found <- interruption: he informs housemate of pasta status -> he’s saying that the police found it at his home in 2006.

Interviewer: Yeah.

‘Jenvey’: I gave the tape… originally to the police in 2005.

Interviewer: OK

‘Jenvey’: Mike went to the MI5 in two thousand and… I think he went in 2006… ‘cos I arranged a meeting

Interviewer: Mm

‘Jenvey’: Um… for Mike to go and visit MI5 and hand over tapes.

The first thing that strikes most people about this audio clip is the ‘Richard Tims’ admission, but even more worrying is the claim about a freelance spy posing as a journalist.

The involvement of real or fake journalists in the intelligence game is frowned upon in media circles for reasons that should be obvious.

Again, you should be able to see another aspect of al-Qaeda’s cunning plan that’s specifically designed to render Jenvey utterly friendless in the industry that sustains him.

Mr Jenvey works as both a spy and a journalist; this makes the charge that he would pose as one while acting as the other that much more believable.

(And note also the returning narrative of unused evidence – this time involving a mysterious go-between, ‘Mike’ – all of which appears designed to queer the deal with his intelligence contacts.)

Happily, we have to hand a trustworthy man who is familiar with both the spying and reporting aspects of Jenvey’s career, and he should be able to clear Jenvey’s name at a stroke:

To: Patrick Mercer, MP (Con.)
From: Tim Ireland
Subject: ‘Glen Jenvey’ audio

Dear Patrick,

I have been presented with audio that purports to be part of an interview with terror expert Glen Jenvey. The authenticity of this audio has yet to be fully established and I feel it only fair to warn you that some people – Jenvey included – suspect an extremist plot to discredit him:

You are known in media circles as a straight-talking man who is familiar with Jenvey’s intelligence-gathering capabilities and his work as a journalist. You are therefore in a good position to make a judgement about this audio file and its reliability/accuracy, and I’d be most grateful if you could answer the following questions:

- Have you in the past ever known Mr Glen Jenvey to not only work as a journalist and a spy, but also to pose as one while acting as the other?

- If so, would you regard the arrangements described in the first audio file to be a fair/reliable description of Mr Jenvey’s typical approach?

- Are there any reasons that you are personally aware of that might make evidence presented by Mr Jenvey somehow unsuitable for use inside of a courtroom?

- Just on the off-chance; are you aware of this ‘Mike’ person, and – if so – may we have his/her surname?

- What are your thoughts on the likelihood that this audio evidence has been fabricated (possibly by al-Qaeda operatives)?

I’m happy to publish any statement you may have, so please reply soonest.

Cheers

Tim Ireland
www.bloggerheads.com

So, pretty soon that should sort me for an answer to audio file #2.

_______________________________

THE INTERIM CONCLUSION
_______________________________

I have no doubt that this audio evidence is the hollow mockery of an empty sham, and that Jenvey will be proved to be entirely innocent of any wrong-doing.

After all, we know al-Qaeda is capable of worse… and the alternative to the ‘set up’ scenario is such an unthinkable political nightmare for all concerned that one dare not spell it out.

No way in hell are we going to find out that elements of our security, diplomatic, parliamentary and media channels have all been under the influence of a dim-witted, ego-driven and woefully indiscreet wannabe doofus.

(knocks on wood)

Oh, and before I forget…

_______________________________

ONE DIRECT QUESTION
_______________________________

To: Jeremy Reynalds
From: Tim Ireland
Subject: ‘Glen Jenvey’ audio

Hi Jeremy.

I’ve recently come around to your way of thinking on this, and I was wondering if Glen wouldn’t mind making a brief statement about the likely authenticity of the following recordings:

http://www.vimeo.com/3432225

http://www.bloggerheads.com/archives/2009/03/glen_jenvey_audio.asp

I’m happy to publish any statement he may have, so please reply soonest.

Cheers

Tim Ireland
www.bloggerheads.com

_______________________________

UPDATES
_______________________________

To follow. Let’s roll.

-

UPDATE (3:30pm) – All public-facing phone (and fax) lines to the British Embassy in Kabul are “not accepting calls at present”. I am making every effort to reach Sir Sherard Cowper-Coles by other means.

UPDATE (3:45pm) – Valid email address for Sir Sherard found. Message sent. Problem solved.

-

UPDATE (03 Mar, midday) – Patrick Mercer’s office isn’t entirely sure if they wish to comment on evidence that hasn’t been fully authenticated. No word from Sir Sherard’s office yet. Meanwile, Glen Jenvey is taking a very long time to decide if this audio is authentic or not.

-

UPDATE (10pm) – I just finished a short exchange of emails with Mr Jenvey, and I have been promised further correspondence later tomorrow. Still no word on the audio’s authenticity.

A year without cigarettes

It’s been a year since I smoked my last cigarette. I know that I’m never going back.

1. Stay away from cigarettes, kids! Be cool like your Uncle Tim and stick to the candy fags.

2. If you’re addicted to nicotine and you live in the UK Try. The. NHS. Stop. Smoking. Service. It’s bloody brilliant.

3. Bite me, Philip Morris. And your little dog, too. That’s £1650 you’ll never see. Fear my hearty laughter. Mwahahaha. And so on.

4. ‘Zero’ is the most perfect of all numbers. There should be more of it.

OK, job done. Back to the grindstone.

PS – Yay, Tom: Government levels the playing field for Open Source … oh, and thanks again for the NHS, and for the smoke-free environments, just in case that didn’t come across. Now, can we maybe tidy up this torture nonsense? Please? I’d be able to enjoy all of these benefits a lot more if they didn’t come at the cost of some poor soul having their genitals mutilated. It’s putting me off my tea.

Labour liars’ love-in goes mainstream

Kissy kissy.

Draper and many bloggers defend strategy

Derek Draper, editor of LabourList, has rejected suggestions that his web strategy is too Westminster-focused. He told PRWeek: ‘There is a massive spread of issues on the website. It should be about the whole country and the Westminster village is part of that.’

He also pointed out that top Labour politicians were onside: ‘When I have asked them to do something for LabourList, not a single member of the Cabinet has been anything other than keen.’

Draper was speaking in the wake of rumours that his web tactics were dividing the party.

One Labour insider claimed: ‘There are lots of people at all sorts of levels of the party very uncomfortable with the Derek Draper ego show.’

But Cabinet Office minister Tom Watson told PRWeek that Draper was doing ‘sterling work’.

Meanwhile, LabourHome’s Alex Hilton said: ‘The one thing that Derek really has brought to the table is that he has delivered buy-in from senior figures.’

Fellow LabourHome founder Jag Singh said: ‘He has done a good job of getting upper echelons to buy into his project.’

Blogging Labour MP Paul Flynn was also supportive, saying: ‘We were underperforming before. It is nice to have a presence at all.’

I’m loving this ham-fisted PR. So reassuring. So organic. So “2.0 without the hype”

I live in hope that Tom Watson’s quote is only two words long because they’re the only two words of praise they could dig* out of his statement.

(*See: Movie/theatre posters)

More love and kisses here. I can’t help but wonder if MessageSpace money was spent on this massage.

(Not that they have much of it. They throw some big names about, but I’ve seen a lot of Commission Junction ads filling their inventory lately.)

-

UPDATE – Alex Hilton and Jag Singh ‘disappeared’ two entire conversations from their website yesterday without so much as a placemarker (or gravestone). They do this in the name of using the authenticity of blogging to reach ‘normal’ people, you understand, and have no wish to dwell on the hang-ups of ‘anoraks’.

A valid question is being shamelessly dodged here and here, if you’d care to watch. The ‘nutter’ tag just made its first appearance (not far behind ‘obsessive’ and ‘anorak’), and here, I get a lecture about leaving politics to the experts.

(Grass roots, baby. Welcome to 21st century campaigning. Now, shut up and do what we say. … No, don’t do what he said. Besides, he didn’t say anything. … No, he didn’t. Look, here’s the big empty space that proves he didn’t say anything: ___________________ Satisfied? Now run along…)

-

UPDATE – Not that we’re anywhere near that stage, but wouldn’t it be funny if there were a major division about them trying to ‘disappear’ information about a minor division?

On the subject of retro-moderation

I’ve just made my very first post – ever – to Labourhome.

I hope it doesn’t get deleted or anything…

-

UPDATE – Prepare to choke back just a little bit of vomit; a joint statement from Alex Hilton and Derek Draper has just been released.

UPDATE – LabourList mirror here. Oh, and Tom’s likely to be disappointed if he’s seriously expecting me to kiss and ‘make up’ with Draper.

Here; I made an easy-to-understand diagram…

me and people I choose to associate with

__________________________________

lying, cheating scoundrels

Note the line. It’s not at all fuzzy. Also, Hilton and Draper are desperate for a Labour-oriented career. Me, not so much. Tom’s waiting for something that isn’t going to happen.

The Media Watch Project

I really wanted to have a better logo ready for today, but hopefully you can see where I’m going with this, and I won’t need a long paragraph explaining exactly what this change in priorities means for ‘Murdoch Watch’:

The Sun: Tabloid Lies needs a tidy up and some focus, but I’m very happy with the ‘document the lies’ strategy so far, and plan to expand on it very shortly with a similar project targeting The Daily Mail.

The latter project will finally stagger into a soft-launch following a post from me within the next week.

I found the time cataloguing the dishonesty of amateur hacks like Iain Dale and Paul Staines to be very useful on this front, because with up-and comers and amateurs it’s not only easier to see the strings, it’s also easier to jiggle them about a bit and watch where/how the puppet show falls apart (and, crucially, where/how it manages to keep the illusion going).

If you can picture the skills/experience/resource gap that exists between Derek Draper and Paul Staines, you can easily appreciate the skills/experience/resource gap that exists between Paul Staines and Rebekah Wade. All that really separates them is practice in (or access to) any given format; the techniques they use are almost identical.

[Psst! Those watching Paul closely these past few years will have noticed where Paul's character has, for example, evolved from showing casual indifference to torture, to having a more tabloid-like position; selective outrage (depending on who is doing the torturing, natch). Baby P was a watershed moment in this 'growth'.]

Some of the blow-back from the Glen Jenvey affair (that I’m not at liberty to share with you just yet, but it will blow your effing mind) follows the same attack pattern and plugs in neatly with my wider experience with tabloids especially.

The short version is this:

If you remain calm, and simply document outright lies, they will have very little to throw back at you.

It won’t stop them trying, mind, but they’ll be operating without a scrap of evidence (i.e. they will be forced to make shit up) and anybody who takes 30 seconds to look at your site will see…. evidence, evidence and more evidence.

What also helps is a united front. A group is harder to classify as being a bit mental, which is the usual charge thrown about by someone not wanting people to read clear evidence that they’ve been lying, cheating, stealing etc. (“He’s delusional! And it’s *catching*! Stay away, children!”).

[Note - 'Boring' is the other one; it's 'mental'-lite. But, I'm working with a variety of writers, each with their own engagement/communication skills. We should be resilient enough, and it's not a damaging tactic, so there's room for improvement on the fly.]

The only time this ‘mental’ tag is ever likely to become a problem with a group? When that group strays from the ‘lies only’ mission and editors begin to lose their independence.

Putting what I personally think of them to one side, the fact is that the position of ‘Biased BBC’ is easily undermined because they as a group operate on a single almighty assumption and build every case from this perspective.

‘Bias’ is a perilous area to go into, as many of us will have learned in the past.

It is a slippery slope, and you even need to watch your step near things like hypocrisy, omission and obfuscation. It’s going to be painful to stick with at times, but it is my opinion that you’re better off sticking with cataloguing outright lies, because if you have a worthy target, there will be plenty.

Even if you stick to this, there will be people that won’t believe you.

But that’s OK. I’ve grown beyond unrealistic expectations of stopping this or crushing that, and now work towards speaking to the ‘softs’ in any given audience.

Paul Staines will never admit it, but I’m one of the key reasons why he mainly has “window lickers” on the loose in his comments. His page views may have gone up, but the quality of his (public) feedback has plummeted. Reasonable people started abandoning him in droves once they realised what he’d been up to and Staines reacted by giving his shouty anonymongrels more and more room to play.

MORE SHOUTING! THAT’S THE TICKET!!! ZANU LABOUR! RAH RAH RARRRGH!

*ahem*

(Hell, I was one of those people once; I bought into Paul Staines’ bullshit, and it took me far too long to snap out of his spell, because I was so focused on the poor souls having their genitals slashed in the name of T.W.A.T. – the turning point came with Oaten and Paul’s attempt to put the whammy on me at a later facetime event. He’s a lying, manipulative scoundrel who will say pretty much anything to get you to do what he wants you to do, and Alex Hilton is a damn fool to trust him.)

So, starting with The Sun and The Daily Mail, I’ll be documenting lies in tabloid newspapers with the help of other talented writers and bloggers.

New projects will emerge as opportunities present themselves and/or priorities make themselves clear, but the prime directive will remain the same; show readers of any given title/broadcaster if/when they are being lied to.

Every day, millions of people in this country needlessly worry, rant and rave about stuff that Just. Isn’t. Real.

Perhaps I can ease their minds on one or two specific matters.

Maybe, just maybe, I can teach some people how to recognise (or identify!) habitual liars; the heartless fuckers who play on your fears to profit monetarily and/or politically.

I’ll probably do no more than dent, deter, or isolate people like Wade and Staines… but I’ll salt great swathes of earth for those who wish to follow them.

Hopefully, especially because it brings other bloggers along on projects, it will also set a better pattern of blogging development than the often shouty, spin-heavy not-at-all-credible strategy folks have been following behind Iain Dale, the grand ambassador of political blogging

(FFS, the sponsor of the UK guide to political blogging for three years running has been APCO. They *astroturf* for a bloody living! We need to step away from such influences if we want blogging to be any different or more democratic than other channels.)

So, just before I get started, does anyone see any downsides to the ‘lies only’ plan? Does anyone think I’m being a wee bit unfair to certain tabloid editors (or bloggers)?

Now’s the time to speak up, because this is where I want to take Bloggerheads for the next year or two at least… and this is not a strictly ‘my site, my rules’ issue.

I’ll be sharing power with a lot of other people, but everything will be built on this framework, and I trust you appreciate that this deliberate landscaping will have an impact on the layout of at least one corner of the playing field.

Eight(ish) items about Derek Draper and Paul Staines

1. The Draper ‘Downfall’ video comes to us anonymously. It a situation like this, I suspect sock-puppetry. The video gets no linky-love from me.

2. Given Draper’s wider antics and the excuse he provides for his use of the term “window lickers”…

Derek Draper – Apologies and regrets over the use of a derogatory term: At that point I thought the phrase meant someone looking in a window, like a kid at a candyshop, wishing they were inside.

… I thought you might be interested in this article from 2005:

Guardian – The lady and the scamp: Looking back on his “idiot years” now, after seven years of therapy – the last three in daily analysis – he attributes the self-destructive impulses to an unconscious need to get out of politics. “I believe now, as a psychotherapist, that most of what we do is motivated by the unconscious. And I think slowly, over a period of time, not being at the centre of power but having my face pressed up against the shop window, I’d unconsciously decided I didn’t really like what I saw. But it was very hard for me to recognise, because it was all I’d wanted to do since the age of 11.”

That article is linked prominently from Draper’s Wikipedia page, so the connection with that excuse could be coincidence, a product of the subconscious, or a lovely bit of weaselling.

3. Draper put himself in a position where he had to apologise for use of the word that Paul Staines throws about without a care in the world. He’s a fool, on top of everything else.

4. Paul Staines got in touch today to (finally) help with the ongoing uncertainty about his bankruptcy. He claimed (in a lofty, dismissive and contemptuous manner one normally expects from a bloody politician) that he was fully discharged from bankruptcy on 23 December, 2005, and that this is a matter of public record.

a) Pity nobody told these people about it.

b) We still only have Paul’s word for this. He refused to produce anything to back it up. The sniffy bastard.

c) He seemed so put out that I would dare to ask questions about it. FFS, his grand plan involves a two-bit banner-advertising network exclusive to political weblogs. WTF did he think would happen? Did he seriously think no-one would ask any questions, or does he still live in that fantasy world where everybody has to be held accountable except for him and his mates?

d) Anyone might think from his reaction that Paul doesn’t subject people to far worse treatment on the basis of even less evidence every damn day on his Guido Fawkes non-blog.

e) Staines even uses his anonymous free-for-all comments system to help baseless rumours evolve into ‘open secrets’. And he’s moaning because I’ve got some questions based on hard evidence? Forget him.

5. I’ve been thinking about it, and I can’t for the life of me work out how exactly a key member of a two-bit banner advertising network expects to benefit from a regularly-risky widely-damaging comments free-for-all that is constantly refreshed… in more ways than one. Unless it’s a matter of profit before principle/politics, of course; then it makes perfect sense.

6. I’ve noted elsewhere and wish to repeat here that Paul Staines appeared online earlier than 2005, failed miserably in his attempt to gain a worthwhile audience, and returned with a new identity. In short, he has such a boring and unpleasant personality that he had to invent a new one for his website. So far, people prefer Paul Staines’ invented personality to Derek Draper’s real one, but some might argue that this doesn’t make for a fair fight. Paul has had far more time to perfect his spin, smear, comment manipulation and censorship techniques, too.

7. Do take some time to think about how much Paul Staines and Derek Draper have in common, because there’s a lot; the early career-ending mistake, reinvention, crawling back into politics by faking it as a blogger, the endless cheating under comments, selective faux-outrage, a multi-faceted resemblance to David Brent… Staines even insisted today that he more than anyone was above scrutiny. I had to check the ‘From’ field to make sure I wasn’t getting my meatheads mixed up.

8. Finally, to close, a quick note about Derek Draper’s funding*; he’s New Labour, used to write for the Express newspaper, had his wedding snaps featured in OK! magazine, (reportedly) isn’t averse to a little adult-oriented entertainment… if anyone’s drawing up a list of possible LabourList backers, you might want to add the name Richard Desmond. Just a thought.

(*Paul Staines assures us that he’s had no secret backers. Ev-ah. He just magically emerged from a financial black hole with the capacity to blog pretty much full-time… and that seems a reasonable enough claim to me.)