Good post, guest. Now Keith, here's the thing. On the whole, I enjoy a reasonably convivial online relationship with Musket. I happen to see eye to eye with him on certain things, but on far from everything. I suspect that he's a bit less left than I am for a start. You will never in a million years see me using the language he occasionally employs. What you will see is me shutting up when you might think I'd chime in with him. That's possibly because I do not happen to agree with him. Likewise, I always notice when he fails to post occasionally when I've said summat he doesn't agree with. Thing is, Keith, he doesn't slag me off, call me a liar and tell me that I lose. And I'm the same with him. Why is that, Keith? Because we are mutual sycophants? Because we are in conspiracy against the world? I don't think so. He's seen something in me and I've seen something in him that engenders a smidgeon of mutual respect, if not agreement on a lot of things. That's as far it will probably ever go. You have been a complete, pig-headed twit in the last couple of days, Keith. You screwed up over the Guardian article but you twist and turn and writhe and wriggle and your erstwhile allies here are silent, not wishing to be tarred. Being a contrarian is great fun, Keith. I love being it myself sometimes. But you really do have to have some substance behind you first. Getting things wrong and failing to admit to what everybody here can plainly see you've done is a poor strategy, unless of course you revel in your lonely furrow. Hey, maybe you do.