advertisement


Keir Starmer sacks RL-B

I presume that the boss said at the first cabinet, now I’m going to put this AS thing to bed. I won’t tolerate anything that could frame this intention in a bad light. Be careful what you tweet etc... Cast a shadow over this and I’ll sacrifice you rather than allow us to be cast as AS again. RLB didn’t play the team game. She’ll probably get another role when the dust settles, but in the mean-time she needs to ponder why she felt the need to tweet something she probably hadn’t read properly.
 
lordsummit said:
I presume that the boss said at the first cabinet, now I’m going to put this AS thing to bed. I won’t tolerate anything that could frame this intention in a bad light. Be careful what you tweet etc... Cast a shadow over this and I’ll sacrifice you rather than allow us to be cast as AS again. RLB didn’t play the team game. She’ll probably get another role when the dust settles, but in the mean-time she needs to ponder why she felt the need to tweet something she probably hadn’t read properly.
Click to expand...

To support her 'friend'. Starmer should have backed her when the Board of Deputies called, in the way that Drood has described (at the very least - but actually there was nothing in the slightest wrong with it. Do you think the Independent's lawyers would have let them post anything remotely AS?) As such the BoD now holds all the cards on Labour party appointments, and has a presumed right of veto.
 
Woodface said:
It appears that some overreactions are more acceptable than others.
Click to expand...
Says the man who sh*t himself in public when I made a crack about people who played golf.

Where's the overreaction? Have I called for Weekender's head? I pointed out to him that he was expressing prejudice. Some people do experience that as a kind of personal assault. I would call that the overreaction here. What you have to do with it I don't know.

Tony L said:
Indeed. Blind eyes all round to Labour anti-Semitism (I do not mean RLB here, as I don’t think she is at all) and Corbyn so happily waving through Farage’s white ethnic nationalism, but someone puts the word ‘Catholic’ in a sentence and all hell breaks loose! No wonder the Labour party is a lost cause...

PS I thought I was the one defending RL-B, but never underestimate the ability of a Labour activist to start an argument on their own in a room.
Click to expand...
That's a slur, isn't it? I've never turned a blind eye to antisemitism in the Labour Party. I've only ever said that using it as an opportunity to attack your political opponents isn't the best way of dealing with it, and nor was summary expulsion when someone wanders into a trope.

Weekender didn't "put 'Catholic' in a sentence", he said that RLB would probably take a position he disapproves of, because she's a Catholic. It's prejudice pure and simple, and a trope, and it repeats the anti-Irish smears that did the rounds during the leadership contest.

I'm surprised at Weekender, and at you (I'm not at all surprised at Woody). You talk like someone who's never been in anything other than dominant, majority position, and like someone who's completely unaware that only a few years ago the British ran death squads in Northern Ireland. You're on another thread denouncing British history and its legacy. Look inward a little.
 
gavreid said:
To support her 'friend'. Starmer should have backed her when the Board of Deputies called, in the way that Drood has described (at the very least - but actually there was nothing in the slightest wrong with it. Do you think the Independent's lawyers would have let them post anything remotely AS?) As such the BoD now holds all the cards on Labour party appointments, and has a presumed right of veto.
Click to expand...
Is this now a conspiracy?
 
ks.234 said:
You’ve called her lightweight when she very clearly is not. So you haven’t been critical of her, you’ve insulted her capabilities without foundation or any thought beyond disliking her for what she is.
Click to expand...

Well, that's is your opinion. I have a different one.
 
gavreid said:
When Jewish members of the Labour party (as opposed to Tories and personal friends of Johnson) say it isn't anti-semitic that should be enough for anyone.
Click to expand...

Sadly, in the spoutings of the UK press + twerper/farcebook/etc and their factories of fakery, "should be" in the above has consistently shown itself not to be a synonym of "is".
 
Seanm said:
Says the man who sh*t himself in public when I made a crack about people who played golf.

Where's the overreaction? Have I called for Weekender's head? I pointed out to him that he was expressing prejudice. Some people do experience that as a kind of personal assault. I would call that the overreaction here. What you have to do with it I don't know.


That's a slur, isn't it? I've never turned a blind eye to antisemitism in the Labour Party. I've only ever said that using it as an opportunity to attack your political opponents isn't the best way of dealing with it, and nor was summary expulsion when someone wanders into a trope.

Weekender didn't "put 'Catholic' in a sentence", he said that RLB would probably take a position he disapproves of, because she's a Catholic. It's prejudice pure and simple, and a trope, and it repeats the anti-Irish smears that did the rounds during the leadership contest.

I'm surprised at Weekender, and at you (I'm not at all surprised at Woody). You talk like someone who's never been in anything other than dominant, majority position, and like someone who's completely unaware that only a few years ago the British ran death squads in Northern Ireland. You're on another thread denouncing British history and its legacy. Look inward a little.
Click to expand...
Mm, no, I have been potty trained for a while. I didn’t overreact then, just pointed out that my FiL plays golf & that he is a decent bloke. This was expanded upon by another contributor.

I am married to a catholic & have defended the right for faith schools to exist.

I fail to see the relevance of your other points. You play the ‘substitute one word’ for another line of logic; I understand this & think it applies equally, others seem to have a blind spot.

Please don’t make me out to be some kind of racist or bigot.
 
Seanm said:
Weekender didn't "put 'Catholic' in a sentence", he said that RLB would probably take a position he disapproves of, because she's a Catholic. It's prejudice pure and simple, and a trope, and it repeats the anti-Irish smears that did the rounds during the leadership contest.
Click to expand...

I have to say I didn't notice any. I do remember someone saying on pfm before the leadership election that the next Labour leader would 'almost certainly be a woman', and thinking that this was a highly unlikely outcome.

But surely a person's religion is relevant in discussions about subjects where religion is, or may be, a factor, such as faith schools, or abortion? Or maybe we shouldn't be told anything about anyone's religious beliefs in case we knowingly or unknowingly reveal our prejudices.
 
Seanm said:
Weekender didn't "put 'Catholic' in a sentence"
Click to expand...
Sean it was certainly my intention to just put it in a sentence...which is why I also mentioned CofE schools. And I do not disapprove of RLB because she is Catholic. If the way I phrased it caused you and others offence then I apologise.
Joe Hutch said:
But surely a person's religion is relevant in discussions about subjects where religion is, or may be, a factor, such as faith schools, or abortion?
Click to expand...
This would be it.
 
kendo said:
You've been reading The Sunday Post again, haven't you?
Click to expand...

Some may find it's couthiness hard to take, but it's a richt bright tonic wi' a' the misery there is in the world.

In particular, I was taken by last week's leader "no one is saying it will be easy to get Scotland’s children back to school. It will be the opposite of easy but, look, let’s be clear, it has to be done." There you are the epitome of good, down to earth, common sense that your granny would appreciate, well when she has time to read papers with all the housework there is to be done!
 
gavreid said:
Very true, but we have to challenge them not just acquiesce
Click to expand...

Nice in theory. But in practice the 'press' will ensure that what you say won't be what they report. So in order to 'challenge' you also need to arrange people *can* hear what you're actually saying and doing. Otherwise you just compound the problem of never getting to a situation where you can actually *do* anything which is needed by the people you wish to help.

So, sadly, in our real world there is sometimes a situation where we have to choose between feeling we are correct in what we say, and being able to make things change for the better.

For real honest journalists simply speaking truth unto power may do. Their job is done, even if nothing changes.

But for politicians, power is required when changes are needed that those current *in* power want to block.

People can argue that this should not be so, but in reality, it is.
 
Jim Audiomisc said:
People can argue that this should not be so, but in reality, it is.
Click to expand...

Unfortunately cowardly actions by party leaders have ensured it's that way - it didn't happen by accident. Blair attempted to deal with the Devil in his own interest instead of putting in rigorous regulation.
 
Kirk said:
Well, that's is your opinion. I have a different one.
Click to expand...
Yes I have my opinion, but I’ve set out very clearly the external evidence basis of my opinion that RLB is very far from being a lightweight politician. Your opinion appears to be based on nothing but internal prejudice.
 
gassor said:
Some may find it's couthiness hard to take, but it's a richt bright tonic wi' a' the misery there is in the world.

In particular, I was taken by last week's leader "no one is saying it will be easy to get Scotland’s children back to school. It will be the opposite of easy but, look, let’s be clear, it has to be done." There you are the epitome of good, down to earth, common sense that your granny would appreciate, well when she has time to read papers with all the housework there is to be done!
Click to expand...

My parents used to buy the Sunday Post, at first along with other Sunday papers, then, as the quantity of 'filth' in those papers increased, just the Post. Mrs H was gobsmacked when she first read it; a Southerner by birth and parentage, the Post's peculiar blend of tweeness and triviality struck her as incredibly amusing. She was particularly fond of the readers' letters enquiring, in telegrammatic language "Where buy red wool in Glasgow?' with the equally terse response 'MacDonalds in Sauchiehall Street have plenty in stock'. Then there were Francis Gay's heartwarming stories with the wee moral at the end, The Broons, Oor Wullie, and the Scottish football reports, with the English results squeezed in as an afterthought at the foot of the page.
 
Joe Hutch said:
My parents used to buy the Sunday Post, at first along with other Sunday papers, then, as the quantity of 'filth' in those papers increased, just the Post. Mrs H was gobsmacked when she first read it; a Southerner by birth and parentage, the Post's peculiar blend of tweeness and triviality struck her as incredibly amusing. She was particularly fond of the readers' letters enquiring, in telegrammatic language "Where buy red wool in Glasgow?' with the equally terse response 'MacDonalds in Sauchiehall Street have plenty in stock'. Then there were Francis Gay's heartwarming stories with the wee moral at the end, The Broons, Oor Wullie, and the Scottish football reports, with the English results squeezed in as an afterthought at the foot of the page.
Click to expand...
Didn’t Francis Gay produce a series of books, I think they were popular among church goers of a certain age?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.


advertisement


Back
Top