Blogroll Me! How This Old Brit Sees It ...: This Old Brit's Been Banned By BlairWatch ...

08 April 2006

This Old Brit's Been Banned By BlairWatch ...





We would respectfully albeit strongly, suggest that readers DO NOT visit the British site, 'BlairWatch', not even out of curiosity after reading this post. It would merely serve to make their 'hit-counter' records somewhat healthier, and to further some of their [now, so obvious] hidden agenda[s].

For a while, This Old Brit & Richard have posted the odd comment there. For a longer while, 'Blair Watch' was even included in our blogroll. Furthermore, we had once posted a piece right here, praising the prats.

But as from today, things have changed.

They have said that we at This Old Brit, are spamming them.


That is, at best, an inexplicable error on their part. At worst it is a downright, deliberate lie. We have not spammed anybody, anywhere. Never. Not ever.

Our email correspondence querying said stupidity, has been completely ignored.

However, since searching for some sort of sign as to why such suspicious, shenanigans should have been instigated initially, we have received information which leads us to believe that this site very likely has strong links and/or ties and/or sympathies with the Communist Party.

Maybe we should have sussed them out sooner -- silly old us.


But better late than never. Eh ?

Needless to say, the bums have now been booted off our blogroll.

25 Comments:

Anonymous bluey said...

Well...whooda thunkit...Old Brit...
So ... it's bugger blairwatch then?
So be it.... if you and Rick say it ...it's good enough for me.
:=}

11:52 pm  
Blogger J.UL1R4 said...

Could be a mix up Richard, they say they are the recipient of a lot of spam.

Occasionally I have noticed some slightly bizarre things on blairwatch from time to time, one was their adulation of some recommendations by Baroness someone or other that included 'laws by petition', state funding of parties and such. But then it is easy to write things in haste on a blogs...

I hadn't interpreted them as communist, but maybe they do see themselves on the 'left' of things...and think Labour can be recovered; perhaps reflective of a similar ideological split in Labour between Lord Levy-funded Blairism (endless war, corporatism, dehumanization, ID slave grids, centralisation, globalisation etc) and the 'old Labour' who:

1) Have stood by and let it happen because they are took weak and corrupt themselves to deal with it

2) Mistakenly may incline to think that these things are the result of 'capitalism'

Open communists in the UK tend to be establishment puppets and deeply corrupt, look at the various union leaders in Britain, absolutely worthless and ridiculous highly corrupt individuals on fat salaries...for the(ir) greater good of course...

But communists should be very happy ... Gordon Brown is entirely devoted to the abolition of that terrorist threat called the middle class.

Something I do think is being controlled is the anti-War movement. Twice now to my surprise I've watched on TV the latest rally. I read a lot of news, a lot of alternative news, I never hear anything about these protests until I see them on TV and there's a reason for that. They don't actually want anyone turning up unless they are the stereotypical Citizen Smith/brainwashed student types to give the impression that only these people oppose the war.

I am becoming inclined agree with an opinion I heard from a guest on Webster Tarpley's show which is the anti-War movement may be a fraud and is going to ensure World War III happens.

3:10 pm  
Blogger Gert said...

Richard:

I reserve judgement on this: seems more like a mix-up to me.

As regards the "communism theory", do you have any evidence for this?

Jultra:

"I am becoming inclined agree with an opinion I heard from a guest on Webster Tarpley's show which is the anti-War movement may be a fraud and is going to ensure World War III happens."

Sorry but I find that not only ridiculous conspiracy twaddle but also quite offensive.

The anti-war movement is a very broad coalition from all sides of the political spectrum. There's a lot of dissent and discussion within that "group". They have neither the will or desire, nor the capability to "ensure WW III happens".

3:22 pm  
Blogger J.UL1R4 said...

Gert, the guest in question had some pretty controversial theories all round.

That said, the Anti-War movement need to do a much much better job to get their message out to everybody and that's my own observation.

There are a whole world of people who passionately want to express their disgust and horror and sadness over Iraq who may not neccessarily be regular readers of anti war activism. IMHO it is incumbent upon organizers to push their message out far and wide.

3:57 pm  
Blogger Richard said...

Jultra & Gert,

They actually quoted me my [unique] ISP number when they said it had been used to send them spam, and that therefore I wa banned from posting there again.

I kept calm originally and sent them a perfectly polite email suggesting that there had indeed been some mistake. I pointed out that as recently as their last [then] article I sent them info & BBC link to a report contaning info directly related to the subject matter. They updated/added the info & link - and even put in a 'thank you' message.

Additionally my query-email has been ignored, even though I know for a fact that someone is 'on duty' because other posts are still published - after being checked via 'moderation'.

As for hard "evidence" - I carefull chose my words so as to avoid that particular one. But as I did say 'I've received info which leads me to believe ......'

All I'll say publicly on that is that I've spoken to three different people about this and 'them'. All three had doubts re; their real agenda. Two had attended the Liverpool protest. One is a photographer.

To sum up - no error - no response nor 'evidence' from them regarding my alleged spamming. So since it's not an error -- it is a LIE - and I'll happily repeat that a million times publicly.

I am convinced they are something other than that 'intimated'.

4:23 pm  
Blogger Gert said...

Richard:

Fair points. And noted.

I remember you singing their praises not so long ago, and now to be accused of spamming is rather disgusting anyway.

Best of luck.

8:33 pm  
Blogger J.UL1R4 said...

Richard, just a quick thought- do you have a static IP address ? Otherwise it might be someone else who had that address for a while and they thought it was spam and maybe they aren't checking their email properly. It does sound a bit of a mystery though.

Also I apologise to Gert and others if I caused offence. I guess in retrospect I was being a tad glib...I do think anti war protest organisers do need to actually get their message out somewhat wider.

As for Blairwatch, not sure why they don't employ some kind of word verification for comments if actual spam is the problem...

8:49 pm  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Whatever else they may be, they sound like (ignorant) cowards too.

Who needs 'em? Certainly not you Brit\Richard - nor I.

9:57 pm  
Blogger Richard said...

Jultra,
I'm obviously not as tech aware as you. All I can tell you is that I've used this PC since new, and with current ISP since day one.

12:50 am  
Blogger D.F. Facti said...

HI, Richard -
Just stopped by to say, "Hi." I'm up to my ass in alligators at the moment. Hope you are doing A-OK.

2:10 am  
Blogger Natalia said...

Oh no. Pinkos! Anything but that!

(lol)

7:25 am  
Blogger Richard said...

dff,
Long time no see/hear -hope you're okay. I knew you'd gone awol but didn't know where. Alligators, sounds like Florida to me. Eh?

Oh, no! Now it's Natalia the White Russian. It appears there's a proliferation of them pesky pinkos - all ganging up on this poor old Brit. Heh. ;^)

11:44 am  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Heard anything from the bums yet?

7:45 pm  
Blogger Phyl said...

That's all just totally bizarre, Richard.

8:26 pm  
Blogger Richard said...

anon,

No. Niet. Nein. Non. Nothing. Nil. Nought. Nowt. Nada. In fact, sweet F-A. But thanks for asking. I suppose I'll simply have to lay awake, tossing & turning and weeping into the pillow all night long again, eh?

Heh. ;^]

11:31 pm  
Blogger Richard said...

This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

11:31 pm  
Blogger Richard said...

This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

11:31 pm  
Blogger Richard said...

Hi, Phyl.

Bizzare is an understatement as far as they are concerned I think. Still, you cane see by my reply to anon how uoset I am - NOT.

Thankfully, I think I've made far more friends than foes in the blogosphere. For example, Tom Rushing @ Current Era.

Oh, and btw, I do wish we could see/hear/meet/talk again at Tapa. It's such a stupid shame. I had a similar 'situation' with Zan not long ago. Remember. It seems the pressures get to ALL of us from time to time. What's that old song again? "You always hurt the one you love. The one you shouldn't hurt at all."

I hope things get 'back to normal' soon. Real soon. Truly I do.

11:42 pm  
Anonymous ringverse said...

Richard,
You emailed me this on 07/04/2006 23:43

realname: Richard - aka -This Old Brit
comment: I\'ve been blocked from posting ??? For recently posting spam ????

No way. You\'ve lately been publishing my comments without any problems. Most recently, you even thanked me for extra info [the arrested Seaforth anglers] and even added said info to your piece. Surely there\'s an error been made here?

Richard. (This Old Brit).

I replied to you 07/04/2006 23:58

Richard,
Sorry, it's the spam filter flapping, nothing personal, and completely in error.
We get battered by spam, and the filter gets a little over excited every now and then.
Including the words:
This Old Brit
should mean it knows you are never spam, if you get the message again, it should give you the option to click submit - then it should still go into the queue.

Thanks for the plug last week btw - I meant to mail you, but I am well behind on emails this week.

Cheers
Dan

I'll apologise again for the false spam accusation, but the queue is only manually moderated for spam, I have never censored a comment, especially the ones I don't agree with.
There is also a note at the top of the Blairwatch home page to this effect...

We have been coming under a concerted spam attack recently, hundreds of comments and trackbacks a day.

If you get a "Your comment has been treated as spam" message when you preview your comment, just ignore it and go ahead and click submit. Your comment will appear in the moderation queue, and one of us will post it.

As for the Communist crap, I'd love to know who has told you that, we are usually accused of being Conservatives [or Islamofacist]! I wasn't aware there still was an organised Communist party in this country?

But the fact you have been so easilly convinced highlights the fact I still haven't got round to doing an "About Us" section for Blairwatch. Which, as a result of this, I will.

All I'll say publicly on that is that I've spoken to three different people about this and 'them'. All three had doubts re; their real agenda. Two had attended the Liverpool protest. One is a photographer.

It is a mystery how anyone who attended the Liverpool Protest who doesn't know me could comment? Myself and my partner went to the LIPPA protest, joined the crowd to protest, took some photos and left. We returned for the evening protest, and did the same. I don't recall even talking to anyone at the evening protest about Blairwatch [though I can't be absolutely sure about that so am prepared to stand corrected], and there was nothing to identify me as connected to the site. Rather than questioning my motives, you might want to question your source's? Even if somebody recognised me from a photo off our site, which I find highly unlikely, there was nothing in my behaviour to mark me out from anybody else at the protest.

For the record, my politics are on Left of Labour, Jultra is pretty close in part of their first comment, though might do well go read a little deeper into Baroness Helena Kennedy's 'Power Report' than the tabloid headlines...

I am prepared to cavort with the anti war movement - specifically the Stop the War Coalition, much of which is to the left of me, because I believe that opposing this war and UK/US foreign policy requires a 'Coalition'. I'll march against Condi's visit alongside Respect, but I won't vote for them. Desperate times make for strange bedfellows, but Communist? Not even in my youth mate, I found 1980s 'Militant' to close to totalitarianism for my tastes.

I'm not a member of any political group, or political party [with the exception of the GMB Union through work].

These days, from a civil liberties perspective, I think I am as close to some from the Lib Dems or the left of the Conservative party than anything else, though I don't think I could ever quite bring myself to vote Tory!

Up untill 2001 I always voted Labour, in 2001 I put my X next to one of the minority lefty parties as a protest [I can't recall which one though] and in 2005 I went with the Lib Dems in a misguided fit of optimism. My Euro vote has always gone to the Greens, and in council elections I vote for the Liberal Party [Liberal not Lib Dem], not because of their politics, but because they are such good and active councillors, before I lived here, my council vote had been Labour or Lib Dem or Independent depending on where I was living.

My ideal government, in our current political circumstances, would be a hung parliament, with the Labour and Conservative party each holding the same number of seats, and the Lib Dems and a few Greens the balance. Thus ensuring the excess of the both main parties have to be curbed, and the Lib Dems having a significant say without having to be responsible for everything all on their own unsupervised;)
Hopefully this would mean a re alignment of the parties so we get a bit of a choice instead of them all scrabbling for the centre ground and electoral reform which might mean we get what we vote for, so our politicians might be more interested in representing us.

You might regard that as stupid, that's fair enough, but it doesn't make me a Communist.

My motives are simple, an ex labour voter who is from the left of the party, outraged at what is being done in our name. That's it, nothing else.
The site is run as a blog, like I'm sure yours is from my back room and Quarsan's back room in our spare time after work, between shifts, family duties, social life etc. There's no sponsorship or outside influence, not even any ads apart from a referral button from the webhost that gets me a free month when somebody uses it to sign up for hosting with Servage.

Apologies for the length of this, I've rambled a bit here, but I think this comment would do for the 'About Us' page I should have got round for doing for Blairwatch to avoid this kind of confusion. Also because I can see why if you were correct, you would be right to be so annoyed, but I think you have got, or been given the wrong end of the stick.

Do email me, I'll forward you the mail I sent you with headers so you can see I did what i said, when I said. I haven't received a 'bounce message, so it should be with you, it would be ironic if it had fallen into your, or your ISP's email spam filter...

I hope this goes some way to clearing this up.
Dan [ringverse]

12:39 am  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

maybe they get upset cos they get spam ... but no chips ....

seriously ..anyone who bans this old brit has got to be some kind of far out wingnut ..... right or left

stuff 'em !

12:43 am  
Blogger Gert said...

The way Dan portrays BlairWatch is exactly how I've always seen them.

Seems to me this is all a massive misunderstanding. Sadly, if the BlairWatch spammers were (or are)politically motivated, they've achieved their objective of disruption.

3:40 pm  
Blogger J.UL1R4 said...

Quick call off the commie-hunt :)

8:58 pm  
Blogger Phyl said...

Richard, you'll make me cry. I just sort of feel that it would be kinder to those who are upset that I can't "support" them when they're not kind to people who care about them, if they have a place where they're safe to grumble about me. I'm sure they can't be anything but aggravated if I'm around. :-(

But I'm checking into your blog much more often now. One good thing, at least.

9:29 pm  
Blogger Richard said...

Phyl,

It's such a shame. Let's hope the old adage re: time being a greatr healer is really true - especially in this case. My fingers are crossed, anyhow.

1:50 pm  
Blogger Richard said...

Dan, Gert, Jultra & everyone.

It's now become pretty clear that all this was indeed due to a combination of several coincidences & 'cock-ups'.

There's no need to have to show me any headers, Dan, since I'm now certain you're an honourable man. Without ANY ties to communists or indeed any particular partisan group. In fact, your comment left at our piece in question not only explains things well, but it shows we've even more in common than it appeared in the first place.

For the record, no email has yet showed up so it seems, as you suggested, my ISP's spam filter is acting as over zealously as yours.

I've been tied up for a few days with other things, as the piece I'll be putting up later today will show. It'll also show that the matter's been cleared up. Completely and without question, to everyone's satisfaction - I hope.

2:07 pm  

Post a Comment

COMMENTS and Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home