Current

Sunday, March 23, 2008

Stop Boris: peddling lies

Posted by Devil's Kitchen at 3/23/2008 06:21:00 pm

Via Question That, I find this (supposedly) non-partisan Stop Boris website. They have a lot of rubbish on there (and some that might not be, according to your personal prejudices), but the thing that I'd like to concentrate on is their fifth Stop Boris poster, which brings up the subject of Boris's involvement with Darius Guppy and Stuart Collier.


First, I would like to draw your attention to the picture in this poster. It quite obviously purports to show a picture of Collier after he has been beaten up, the implication being that this was done by Guppy's thugs (rather than with Photoshop).

Collier was never beaten up by Guppy agents (that isn't meant to be sophistry: I just don't know if Collier has actually ever been beaten up by anyone else).

Next up, is (being kind) a clear and undisputed factual... er... error.
... but the transcript of the call, as reported by the Mail on Sunday, can be read online.

The call was not recorded by the Mail On Sunday. In fact, the linked article clearly states, [emphasis mine],
The tape recording was made by Peter Risdon, the man hired by Guppy and his partner Ben Marsh to help them fake a jewellery ‘robbery’ in the Halloran House Hotel, New York, in February 1990.

So, how seriously should we take the other information on this site when they clearly haven't bothered to read their own source material?

Further, the whole incident has been given an entirely false spin by opponents of Boris; I have dealt with it twice before, when Polly raised it and then when Neil Harding attempted to push it forward.

You see, one of the interesting things about this whole incident is that said Peter Risdon is, in fact, a blogger and he decided to set the record straight some time ago. [Emphasis mine.]
As I mentioned in an earlier post, when I suspected Guppy might have framed me for a robbery in New York, I tapped his telephone - or more accurately, caused it to be tapped - and I released one of the tapes to the press. I know something of the background to this plot. I did at the time. I knew the heavies Guppy had commissioned to carry out the beating. They had a simple plan: take a 50% payment up front, then never do anything further. This is obvious when you listen to the tape, in fact. "The other chap's a bit impatient," explains the contact. "A bit of cash would calm him down". It's quite funny.

Less funny is the possibility that this episode could unjustly affect Johnson's candidacy for Mayor of London. I don't especially support Johnson, though I loathe Livingstone, but I'd like to see a fair contest. So let me just explain Johnson's role, as far as I can make it out from the tapes I made at the time.

He didn't know the heavies were planning to rip Guppy off. It must have seemed a serious plot. Guppy made it clear that he could try other means of finding the journalist's address. Johnson assured him he didn't have to - and did absolutely nothing at all to find it himself. I actually had that confirmed by Clive Goodman, the now disgraced formed News of the World royal correspondent who listened to the tape. Johnson said he would approach a specific third party. He specifically didn't. The only conclusion I can draw is that he was trying to make sure Guppy didn't manage to have the man attacked. Rather, he was stalling, waiting for Guppy's attention span to expire - a safe bet for those who knew him well.

I have to admit, grudgingly, that it is to Johnson's credit that he stood by his friend during his subsequent trial and conviction. I'd have prefered it otherwise, for personal reasons, but Johnson didn't abandon his childhood friend when it would have been convenient. I'm not aware he subsequently had much to do with him, but he wouldn't join in the pecking party.

Perhaps it would be more accurate to say Johnson took the approach "never explain, never apologise". The full quote is: "Boldness has genius, power and magic in it... Never contradict. Never explain. Never apologise".

When I quoted this last time, Neil attempted to gainsay this evidence, which, I'll remind you, comes from the man who was involved in the whole thing and made the damn tape in the first place, and imply that I was spinning for Boris (like Peter Risdon, I am not (and never have been) a Conservative: I am a libertarian).

Peter replied very clearly to this comment.
If Guppy had found some willing thugs, and Johnson had not behaved as he did, the Screws journalist would have been beaten up. Johnson went to some lengths to stop Guppy trying other means of finding the address. He undertook to speak to two specific people in News International, where he had worked (at that time he was in Brussels working for the Telegraph). Clive Goodman made enquiries several months later and established that Johnson never approached these people.

It is, as DK might say, pretty fucking clear cut. The tapes have been in the public domain for years and there's no point my trying to distort this.

I don't think that you can actually get clearer than this, really. That the Stop Boris lot are attempting to wheel this out, whilst clearly implying that Collier was beaten up, borders on the libellous.

Of course, first one would have to find out who is behind the site, because they have gone to some lengths to hide their identities. The domain is registered through a proxy company in the US, and the Q & A section reveals only this:
  1. Who are you then?

    Boris has a lot of big money and powerful interests behind him. We don't. So we'd rather not say.

Well, that's all very well, except... Surely this site is trying to influence the outcome of a political election? As a result, should it not be registered with the Electoral Commission? Certainly, the identities of those behind it should be known, and certainly there should be a proper imprint on the posters.

Could anyone with a better knowledge of our electoral laws advise me here? Or should I just contact the Electoral Commission directly?

It's not that I hold a particular candle for Boris: I don't. But this site is attempting to influence the outcome of a democratic election and doing so by peddling lies, and I dislike that as much amongst "grassroots campaigners" as I do in politicians.

UPDATE: I've found this at the Electoral Commission website. [Emphasis mine.]
A third party is an organisation or individual who are not standing at an election, but who wish to campaign for or against a party or group of candidates. They have traditionally been subject to limits on the amount of money that they can occur opposing or supporting a specific candidate, but the limits introduced by the Political Parties, Elections and Referendums Act 2000 (PPERA) were the first attempt at controlling national third party activity.

The pages in this section give information about:

The Stop Boris campaign quite clearly comes under the definition of a third party; so, are they on the register of third parties?

No, and they do not have to be. Third parties only need to register under the following conditions.
Under the Political Parties, Elections and Referendums Act (PPERA) 2000, third parties that wish to spend more than £10,000 in England, or £5,000 in each of Scotland, Wales or Northern Ireland supporting or opposing a party or group of candidates must register with us as a recognised third party. Once registered as a recognised third party, a third party can spend more than these limits, but is required to manage its finances in accordance with the PPERA's regulatory regime.

Donations in kind to third parties must be declared.
When an organisation or individual is registered as a recognised third party, it is subject to controls on the donations that it can accept. These controls regulate any donations made to a recognised third party for the purpose of meeting controlled expenditure by or on behalf of it, and are similar to the controls binding on political parties.
Acceptance of donations
Recognised third parties are only legally allowed to accept donations of more than £200 from 'permissible donors'. Permissible donors are defined by the PPERA as:
  • an individual registered on a UK electoral register

  • a UK registered company

  • a UK registered trade union

  • a UK registered building society

  • a UK registered Limited Liability partnership

  • a UK registered friendly/building society

  • a UK based unincorporated association

Recognised third parties are prohibited from accepting donations of more than £200 other than from the above sources. Any donations of more than £200 from impermissible sources must be returned, and donations from unidentifiable sources cannot be accepted.

Types of donations
As for political parties, the PPERA gives a number of different examples of what counts as a donation. As well as straightforward cash gifts or bequests, the provision of non-cash support to help support controlled expenditure—such as providing free advertising space for a recognised third party to use to advertise—sponsorship must also be treated as a donation.

So, Stop Boris must only be registered as a third party if you can argue that the website and any other resources that they use amount to more than £10,000 (even if they were donations in kind, they'd have to be declared). Which I doubt.

Still, interesting stuff, eh? Just for your amusement, here are those that are registered as third parties.


The usual suspects then, but also some unusual names. Who on earth, for instance, is Mr Zaccheus Gilpin...?

UPDATE 2: Stop Boris responds and points out a few errors of mine.
The poster "quite obviously purports" to show Collier does it? Why would we, as John Trenchard has pointed out, have clearly credited the picture as being of Jon Snow then? The picture, like pretty much all the other poster pictures, are supposed to be representative, in a provocative way, of the kinds of things Boris stands for. Is the first of our posters 'obviously purporting to show' a statue of Bush in Parliament Square on the site of the Mandela statue because that is something Boris has built? I don't think so. The image of Jon Snow appearing to have suffered a beating represents the principle that Boris doesn't seem all that bothered by the idea of a journalist being beaten up - certainly not bothered enough to go to the trouble of, say, reporting Guppy's illegal intentions to the police.

You have also completely misread the first quote you have taken from the site and used your own misreading as an example of our factual error! It says the transcript of the call we have linked to is "as reported by the Mail on Sunday", not as *recorded* by the Mail on Sunday.

Nowhere has the site claimed anyone beat up the journalist. Indeed we even link to a video of Boris talking about it on Have I Got News For You, in which he clearly states that the journalist was not in the end beaten up.

You might want to read things more carefully in future before you make ridiculous accusations about factual errors and deliberate misrepresentations based on your own mistakes.

"So, how seriously should we take the other information on this site when they clearly haven't bothered to read their own source material?"

It seems the same could be said of your site!

Whoops! Mea culpa, and I apologise. I don't know my MSM journalists well enough it seems: I must watch more telly!

My substantial point stands, however; Boris did not assist Guppy and so to conclude that he "doesn't seem all that bothered by the idea of a journalist being beaten up" is mildly erroneous.

And what, precisely, would Boris have reported to the police? And with what evidence? Boris did not know that the phone call was being recorded.

Labels: , , , , ,


Posted by Devil's Kitchen at 3/23/2008 06:21:00 pm


11 Blogger Comments:

Anonymous Anonymous said...

Is it:
Ben Werdmuller
459 Marston Road
Oxford OX3 0JQ

used 'Registrant View' McAfee firewall

Or is that just the ISP

3/23/2008 07:58:00 pm  
Blogger Jules said...

That's the guy who runs the blog software Elgg.

3/23/2008 08:41:00 pm  
Anonymous cookie said...

'Interestingly, two individuals registered as third parties this year, Patrick Evershed and Zaccheus Gilpin. The latter, who only declared �405 in expenditure, would appear to be a “professional engineer, musician and entertainer” '

from:
www.unlockdemocracy.org.uk/?p=186


and, from: www.hitsquad.com/smm/wwwboard/messages/29774.html

'Master Musician Zaccheus Gilpin
Would like to give you his worldwide release album cassette
Zack is Back for £5 plus postage!
It is on limited edition release (and would be priced antique)
You should order now by emailing : eusebiou@yahoo.com.
MMZG is based in the UK, Black - British Artist!

Yours musically,
master musician zaccheus gilpin
beng(hons), msc, pgce(fe)'


So, probably a cunt.

3/23/2008 09:20:00 pm  
Blogger Newmania said...

Thats a superb post DK .I had thrust this incident to the back or my mind and filed it under " Well how would you like to have your worst moment taped"

This clears up a niggle for me and its really tremendous work. How infuriating that Polly Toynbee 'should recite it as gospel.


..and this woman was editor of social affairs ' for the BBC for most of the 90s ...yeeesh

3/23/2008 11:09:00 pm  
Blogger John Trenchard said...

hang on a minute - is it just me, or does the photo in that stop boris poster look like a side-on shot of Jon Snow, the C4 news presenter?

3/23/2008 11:35:00 pm  
Anonymous Stop Boris said...

The poster "quite obviously purports" to show Collier does it? Why would we, as John Trenchard has pointed out, have clearly credited the picture as being of Jon Snow then? The picture, like pretty much all the other poster pictures, are supposed to be representative, in a provocative way, of the kinds of things Boris stands for. Is the first of our posters 'obviously purporting to show' a statue of Bush in Parliament Square on the site of the Mandela statue because that is something Boris has built? I don't think so. The image of Jon Snow appearing to have suffered a beating represents the principle that Boris doesn't seem all that bothered by the idea of a journalist being beaten up - certainly not bothered enough to go to the trouble of, say, reporting Guppy's illegal intentions to the police.

You have also completely misread the first quote you have taken from the site and used your own misreading as an example of our factual error! It says the transcript of the call we have linked to is "as reported by the Mail on Sunday", not as *recorded* by the Mail on Sunday.

Nowhere has the site claimed anyone beat up the journalist. Indeed we even link to a video of Boris talking about it on Have I Got News For You, in which he clearly states that the journalist was not in the end beaten up.

You might want to read things more carefully in future before you make ridiculous accusations about factual errors and deliberate misrepresentations based on your own mistakes.

"So, how seriously should we take the other information on this site when they clearly haven't bothered to read their own source material?"

It seems the same could be said of your site!

3/24/2008 12:25:00 am  
Blogger John Trenchard said...

so have you got jon snows permission to use his visage in your campaign?

and if you have not, then does that not reveal a lot about the attitude behind your "stop boris" campaign?

is jon snow supportive or your campaign or not - yes or no?

3/24/2008 03:12:00 am  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

The only contact you should ever have with a journalist is between your boot and their teeth.

A couple of years ago my friends daughter in law was murdered and those pestilential media bastards descended on our village with the intention of digging up whatever dirt they could.

The scum sucking wankers even managed to steal the murdered girls wedding video from the photographer and the first time the family saw it, it was all over the news.

The only reason I didn't take a baseball bat to the heads of those involved was that I worked in a job where a criminal conviction would have put me straight on the dole and unable to pay my mortgage.

Fucking pricks, camped outside the bereaved families house for weeks, ambushing anyone who walked down the street. Fucking scum.

Rope, tree, journalist - some assembly required.

3/24/2008 03:48:00 am  
Blogger Little Black Sambo said...

Cui bono? Is Ken involved in this, or those "close to him"?

3/24/2008 02:15:00 pm  
Anonymous cookie said...

Well done, DK, for admitting your errors. Thats certainly more than we get out of the MSM, unless its brought about by force and months after the event.
In my opinion your essential question stands - whilst the campaign group are just about acting within the letter of the law by remaining anonymous, it certainly raises questions as to their possible identities; in particular for me the possibility of conflicts of interests, e.g. if any of those associated with this campaign are employed by the BBC or state-owned Channel 4.

3/24/2008 09:58:00 pm  
Anonymous tommy grasscutter said...

For the truth behind how Peter Risdon obtained the Johnson Tapes see:

www.nobodylikesagrass.com

In particular, see exhibits 2 and 3 - an affidavit by his business partner

The facts:

Risdon was a paid police informer

He was also an habitual and incompetent petty criminal.

He had a weird obsession with Guppy and only turned supergrass against him and others after he was caught attempting a diamond insurance fraud himself.

Since that time he has come up with excuses for his actions that would make most people fall off their chairs laughing (see Exhibits 48 and 49, for example).

He has even lost recently in a libel case brought against him by Guppy (see Exhibit 53).

He used to offer to sweep his clients' offices for bugs only to plant listening devices himself in the hope of being able to blackmail those clients at some future date.

That's how he obtained the Johnson tapes which he then offered to sell to the highest bidder on Fleet street and has bragged about it ever since.

Guppy sought to hire Risdon's business partner (the man who swore the affidavit in Exhibits 2 and 3) because a News of the World journalist had attempted to libel members of his family.

So what? Since when has beating up journalists been a distasteful activity?

Diddums to the poor News of the World.

It's a pity he didn't put a bullet in the man's head.

8/26/2008 04:47:00 pm  

Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home

Testimonials

  • "The best British political/libertarian blog on the web. Consistently excellent but not for the squeamish."—Christopher Snowdon
  • "[He] runs the infamous and fantastically sweary Devil’s Kitchen blog, and because he’s one of the naughtiest geeks (second only to the incredibly, incredibly naughty Guido Fawkes) he’s right at the top of the evil dork hierarchy."—Charlotte Gore
  • "I met the Devil's Kitchen the other night. What a charming young man he is, and considerably modest too..."—Peter Briffa
  • "The Devil's Kitchen exposes hypocrisy everywhere, no holds barred."—Wrinkled Weasel
  • "People can still be controversial and influential whilst retaining integrity—Devil's Kitchen springs to mind—and attract frequent but intelligent comment."—Steve Shark, at B&D
  • "Sometimes too much, sometimes wrong, sometimes just too much but always worth a read. Not so much a blog as a force of nature."—The Nameless Libertarian
  • "The Devil's Kitchen—a terrifying blog that covers an astonishing range of subjects with an informed passion and a rage against the machine that leaves me in awe..."—Polaris
  • "He rants like no one else in the blogosphere. But it's ranting in an eloquent, if sweary, kind of way. Eton taught him a lot."—Iain Dale
  • "But for all that, he is a brilliant writer—incisive, fisker- extraordinaire and with an over developed sense of humour... And he can back up his sometimes extraordinary views with some good old fashioned intellectual rigour... I'm promoting him on my blogroll to a daily read."—Iain Dale
  • "... an intelligent guy and a brilliant writer..."—A Very British Dude
  • "... the glorious Devil's Kitchen blog—it's not for the squeamish or easily offended..."—Samizdata
  • "... a very, smart article... takes a pretty firm libertarian line on the matter."—Samizdata
  • "By the way, DK seems to be on fucking good form at the moment."—Brian Mickelthwait
  • "Perhaps the best paragraph ever written in the history of human creation. It's our Devil on fine form."—Vindico
  • "Devil's Kitchen is the big name on the free-market libertarian strand of the British blogosphere... Profane rants are the immediate stand-out feature of DK's blog, but the ranting is backed up by some formidable argument on a wide range of issues particularly relating to British and European parliamentary politics, economics, and civil liberties."—Question That
  • "... an excellent, intelligent UK political blog which includes a great deal of swearing."—Dr Aubrey Blumsohn
  • "I like the Devil's Kitchen. I think it's one of the best written and funniest blogs in the business."—Conservative Party Reptile
  • "The. Top. UK. Blogger."—My Vast Right-Wing Conspiracy
  • "For sheer intelligence, erudition and fun, Iain Dale's Diary, Cranmer and Devil's Kitchen are so far ahead of the rest I don't see how they can figure in a top ten. They are the Beatles, Stones and Who of the blog world; the Astair, Bogart and Marlon Brando of the blog world; the Gerswin, Porter and Novello of the blog world; the Dot Cotton, Pat Butcher, Bette Lynch of the blog world..."—Wrinkled Weasel
  • "It's the blogging equivalent of someone eating Ostrich Vindaloo, washed down by ten bottles of Jamaican hot pepper sauce and then proceeding to breathe very close to your face while talking about how lovely our politicians are... But there's much more to his writing than four letter words."—Tom Tyler
  • "God bless the Devil's Kitchen... Colourful as his invective is, I cannot fault his accuracy."—Tom Paine
  • "The Devil's Kitchen is a life-affirming, life-enhancing blog ... This particular post will also lead you to some of the best soldiers in the army of swearbloggers of which he is Field Marshal."—The Last Ditch
  • "... underneath all the ranting and swearing [DK]'s a very intelligent and thoughtful writer whom many people ... take seriously, despite disagreeing with much of what he says."—Not Saussure
  • "... the most foul-mouthed of bloggers, Devils Kitchen, was always likely to provoke (sometimes disgust, but more often admiration)."—The Times Online
  • "The always entertaining Mr Devil's Kitchen..."—The Times's Comment Central
  • "Frankly, this is ranting of the very highest calibre."—The Nameless Libertarian
  • "I don't mean it literally, or even metaphorically. I just find that his atheism aside, I agree with everything the Devil (of Kitchen fame...) says. I particularly enjoy his well crafted and sharp swearing, especially when addressed at self righteous lefties..."—The Tin Drummer
  • "Spot on accurate and delightful in its simplicity, Devil's Kitchen is one of the reasons that we're not ready to write off EUroweenie-land just yet. At least not until we get done evacuating the ones with brains."—Anti-Idiotarian Rottweiler
  • "This hugely entertaining, articulate, witty Scottish commentator is also one of the most foul-mouthed bloggers around. Gird up your loins and have a look. Essential reading."—Doctor Crippen
  • "The Devil's Kitchen is one of the foremost blogs in the UK. The DK is bawdy, foul-mouthed, tasteless, vulgar, offensive and frequently goes beyond all boundaries of taste and decency. So why on earth does Dr Crippen read the DK? Because he reduces me to a state of quivering, helpless laughter."—Doctor Crippen's Grand Rounds
  • "DK is a take-no-prisoners sort of libertarian. His blog is renowned for its propensity for foul-mouthed invective, which can be both amusing and tiresome by turns. Nevertheless, he is usually lucid, often scintillating and sometimes illuminating."—Dr Syn
  • "If you enjoy a superior anti-Left rant, albeit one with a heavy dash of cursing, you could do worse than visit the Devil's Kitchen. The Devil is an astute observer of the evils of NuLabour, that's for sure. I for one stand converted to the Devil and all his works."—Istanbul Tory
  • "... a sick individual."—Peter Briffa
  • "This fellow is sharp as a tack, funny as hell, and—when something pisses him off—meaner than a badger with a case of the bullhead clap."—Green Hell
  • "Foul-mouthed eloquence of the highest standard. In bad taste, offensive, immoderate and slanderous. F***ing brilliant!—Guest, No2ID Forum
  • "a powerfully written right-of-center blog..."—Mangan's Miscellany
  • "I tend to enjoy Devil's Kitchen not only because I disagree with him quite a lot of the time but because I actually have to use my brain to articulate why."—Rhetorically Speaking
  • "This blog is currently slamming. Politics certainly ain't all my own. But style and prose is tight, fierce, provocative. And funny. OK, I am a child—swear words still crack a laugh."—Qwan
  • "hedonistic, abrasive but usually good-natured..."—The G-Gnome
  • "10,000 words per hour blogging output... prolific or obsessive compulsive I have yet to decide..."—Europhobia
  • "a more favoured blog from the sensible Right..."—Great Britain...
  • "Devils Kitchen, a right thinking man indeed..."—EU Serf
  • "an excellent blog..."—Rottweiler Puppy
  • "Anyone can cuss. But to curse in an imaginative fashion takes work."—Liftport Staff Blog
  • "The Devil's Kitchen: really very funny political blog."—Ink & Incapability
  • "I've been laffing fit to burst at the unashamed sweariness of the Devil's Kitchen ~ certainly my favourite place recently."—SoupDragon
  • "You can't beat the writing and general I-may-not-know-about-being-polite-but-I-know-what-I-like attitude."—SoupDragon
  • "Best. Fisking. Ever. I'm still laughing."—LC Wes, Imperial Mohel
  • "Art."—Bob
  • "It made me laugh out loud, and laugh so hard—and I don't even get all the references... I hope his politics don't offend you, but he is very funny."—Furious, WoT Forum
  • "DK himself is unashamedly right-wing, vitriolic and foul mouthed, liberally scattering his posts with four-letter-words... Not to be read if you're easily offended, but highly entertaining and very much tongue in cheek..."—Everything Is Electric
  • "This blog is absolutely wasted here and should be on the front page of one of the broadsheets..."—Commenter at The Kitchen
  • "[This Labour government] is the most mendacious, dishonest, endemically corrupt, power-hungry, incompetent, illiberal fucking shower of shits that has ruled this country..."—DK

Blogroll

Campaign Links

All: Daily Reads (in no particular order)

Politics (in no particular order)

Climate Change (in no particular order)

General & Humour (in no particular order)

Mac,Design Tech & IT (in no particular order)