As I mentioned in my last post that explained where I've been in the last week or so, Barnbrook's blog is back at the Telegraph. Of the comments I've made (which I've done because it's important - and easy - to show how bad his arguments are in case anyone lurking might get taken in) one deserves it's own post - because you won't be able to read it below the blog post it refers to. Why is that? Because he's deleted the entire post.

Did he do that because of my comment? Have a look at my comment below the fold, and then decide.

The basic premise of the original post, "Throw the lot out" is that Barny thought he was in a dream because what was happening around him couldn't be happening in Britain. Cue a list of sub-Littlejohn rubbish that he said was all Labour's fault (yawn) and the only answer was to vote BNP. Here's the reply:
So much rubbish in such a short piece. It's difficult to know where to start. I've put your words in italics.

"When I read a few days ago that babies who don't like spicy food were to be reported for racism, it didn't really surprise me, however it will have shocked many people."

Here's the National Children's Bureau's reaction to the media coverage you base your statement on:

"‘It is an excellent resource which has been specially designed to help teachers and nursery leaders recognise what is, and just as importantly, what is NOT potentially racist behaviour and attitudes in youngsters in their care.

References to use of the word ‘yuk’, ‘spicy foods’ and reporting young children to local authorities, in this 366-page book, have been misrepresented and misunderstood as a consequence of that.’"

And as for Labour being responsible:

"This book is being funded by NCB from book sales alone – and not from government funding or from any grants, as has also been reported."


"Abu Qatada walks free, and yet he has been described by the Special Immigration Appeals Commission, as a "truly dangerous individual" who was "heavily involved, indeed at the centre of terrorist activities associated with al-Qa'eda."

No other government would allow that to happen unless of course that government happened to consist of the most wicked spiteful individuals. Labour is full of nasty politicians who hate the British people."

Here's Jaqui Smith's actual reaction to the news:

"I am appealing to the House of Lords to reverse the decision that it is not safe to deport Qatada," she said. "The government's priority is to protect public safety and national security and we will take all steps necessary to do so."

It's worth noting that he hardly 'walks free' since "He must wear an electronic tag and must not attend a mosque or lead prayers or religious instruction.

Abu Qatada must also stay in his west London home for at least 22 hours a day, and cannot attend any kind of meeting. He is also forbidden from using mobile phones, computers or the internet"

"Labour want to keep the terrorists here because they depend on the votes from the Muslims, and the Muslims have assured Labour that they will always vote for them as long as they don't come down too hard on any suicide bombers or jihadists."

And the Royal family are actually lizard-like aliens who feed on the blood of babies beneath Buckingham Palace. Meanwhile, in the real world:

"But the unpopularity of the Iraq war drove away many Muslim supporters. Fewer than half chose Labour at the last general election, according to the polling organisation, MORI. And other trends suggest the Muslim vote can no longer be taken for granted."

The answer to all this fantasy nonsense is to vote BNP. Lucky for everyone it is all a dream of yours.
I posted this, went away for a couple of hours and when I came back to see if there'd been a reply the entire post had been deleted. Now, this could have been for reasons unrelated to my comment, but it could well be because of an unexpected bonus of the way Telegraph blogs work.

Although people were worried about Barny getting a blog with the Telegraph's name on it rather than some generic blogger address (hey, like this one) was that it would give a bit of added respectability. The upside of that is that as far as I'm aware, blogger's can't delete individual comments - that has to be done by administrators.

The only recourse for people made to look stupid in a comment is to delete the entire blog post. That doesn't even remove the comment. It's still there in the profile of the person who made it.

This is great news for people who want to out argue the BNP here. There won't be any comment deleting shenanigans, and Barny might even have to take down his whole nonsense post if you make him look sufficiently silly. And what could signal that someone had been pwned more than that?


Cain said...

It doesn't appear that Barnbrook has put that entry up on his other blog either:


Five Chinese Crackers said...

He may well have put that one up only to take it down again too. My reply can still be read here, by the way. It's the second comment down.

To be fair, it may well not my reply that led to the post being deleted. There hasn't been that much crazy moonbat stuff since 'Blame the Immigrants'. Barny stopped posting for a couple of weeks shortly after that one, and the version that's still there (and not that easy to find) has had a lot of stuff edited out.

Could well be that the party doesn't want to ruin the opportunity of having a blog in a national newspaper by revealing too much of what the party is really about. I mean - "The Muslims have assured Labour that they will vote for them as long as they don't come down too hard on any suicide bombers or jihadists"? Who (except maybe Barny) wouldn't be embarrassed by that?

Cain said...

Mad Mel.

But I take your point. I just thought I should notify you of his other blog as well, just in case he felt like being a little more open on there. So far, no luck, though eventually he is bound to slip up. Mr Barnbrook is hardly a PR genius after all, as his alleged "writing" on the Telegraph blog shows all too well.