Prize Winning Tory Blogger: Libelling Litigious MP?

This is the headline on Mr Dale's latest attempt at journalism:
Libel Case Labour MP: "I Don't Give a S*** Who You Are".

Towards the end of the piece of nonsense prose which follows this unpromising start Mr Dale writes:

He says he told him: "I don't ...." etc

But which he is which? I put it to you, ladies and gentlemen of the libel jury, that Mr Dale has again stuffed up and that it is the MP who is alleging the guard said these words to him. Not vice versa as Iain's shoddy headline and report suggests. These particular words would not make sense the other way round. And even amended as reported in the update below they don't make that much sense.

Time to offer a sincere apology to the litigious MP I'd have thought? The case Dale is reporting is of course a complete waste of time. The Mail on Sunday have repeated some hearsay they cannot prove and should have retracted and apologised immediately rather than wasting everyone's time and money. The MoS is a newspaper not a shoddy blog and should raise the standards bar.

Iain Dale has a great blog. Very popular. Sometimes amusing and often informative. If only on how some Tories think. But there is a careless streak running through it, coupled with a "Dale Knows Best" approach to alternative views and facts which conflict with his own opinions.

Sunday before last he levelled some rather ridiculous claims and some rather unwanted professional advice at our Sunday papers. And this Sunday he followed that by repeating and embroidering some Observer garbage about Cameron having invented the telephone, or somesuch.

Yesterday he said I was making a fool of myself by covering this. He, that's Dale, was wrong then. And he, still Dale, appears to be wrong now.

UPDATE: Iain has taken down the post but reposted a rather tortured Daily Telegraph extract to keep us happy. In their report a similar quote to that in Iain's headline WAS attributed to the MP. But the "who" was "what" and, although this is still a big bunch of unqualified hearsay, that at least makes a bit more sense to be spoken by the MP.

Then again, still not much sense. Was the report compiled by some cub reporter? The Editor's niece on work experience perhaps?

UPDATE 2: In fact Mr Jones appears to have owned up to the "what you are" remark, crazy as it seems.