|
Post by elinorhelyn on Jul 11, 2021 12:14:42 GMT
Have the ward breakdowns been released yet?
|
|
neilm
Non-Aligned
Posts: 25,023
|
Post by neilm on Jul 11, 2021 16:10:48 GMT
Are we expecting ward breakdowns?!
|
|
lefty
Socialist
Posts: 845
|
Post by lefty on Jul 11, 2021 16:54:20 GMT
Impossible for me to know either way and not something I feel very strongly on but my argument is there could certainly be a motive for doing so and the people involved are willing to use their influence. Basically they have a motive, opportunity and a record of being willing use their influence (if not this exact scenario) although that doesn't actually mean they did commit the 'crime' There are too many variables for someone to very confidently do something like this and know how it is going to play out but that doesn't mean people would definitely not try. In terms of wanting rid of Hancock, clearly he hasn't got the right friends in high places but that would be one of a number of things of the right wing media would want which presumably they have to balance off against each other. Taking it back to the original tweet Is it that he alleges that the Sun had the story for a few days or do we know whether this is true or not or the implication he makes from that? I think the main motivation of any paper with a story like that is to get it out before any of their rivals. The incident happened well before but that is more likely a delay in the employee (assumed) releasing it and possibly negotiating a significant fee, esp. given the risk to their job. Personally I don't think Batley and Spen (where everyone in the bubble assumed the Tories would win anyway) came into it.. Aren't some of the newspapers loss makers anyway? I mean it isn't exactly conspiratorial to think at least with some of the newspapers ownership of them is more about political influence than it actually is about making money. Maybe I am just a huge cynic and Murdoch's motivation is merely honest journalism and informing the public, a valiant truth seeker in a world of misinformation. Motive, means and opportunity, I mean depending how precisely you think a previous example has to match you could argue it but there are certainly examples of newspapers acting for political influence rather than purely for sales or in search of the truth with how they treat stories. If I was to put this in criminal terms that would be massively massively short of a 'beyond reasonable doubt' criminal conviction standard. Without more evidence it would be nowhere near that if I was a jury member. If I was a detective investigating it would be something I would investigate further, unless I knew for sure something else had happened. I mean it isn't the twin towers were actually holograms level of claim. Also if the Sun DID sit on the story for a few days then pretty much everything Matt Zarb wrote in his tweet was actually true it is just the implication that the Sun might have had other motives that is.... outrageous?!
|
|
lefty
Socialist
Posts: 845
|
Post by lefty on Jul 11, 2021 17:12:58 GMT
I think the main motivation of any paper with a story like that is to get it out before any of their rivals. The incident happened well before but that is more likely a delay in the employee (assumed) releasing it and possibly negotiating a significant fee, esp. given the risk to their job. Personally I don't think Batley and Spen (where everyone in the bubble assumed the Tories would win anyway) came into it.. The cock eyed desperation of the left to try and prove that the result is down to the Rupert Murdoch trying to help Labour, while also taking out Hancock and therefore allowing the Tories to lift all restrictions and 'own freedom' is something to behold. Lewis Carroll would have been ashamed.
I do wonder if when Johnson said Hancock was an idiot it was his affair he was alluding to rather than his lack of competence in a job which he, after all appointed him to, and kept him in for a considerable time. Labour scraped the result with a much reduced majority with a Murdoch that is currently quite friendly to Labour because it has leadership it likes. Unless we are completely discounting media influence on voters then Labour just about holding on is in part thanks to a much friendlier media regardless of what happened with this story and why. Murdoch is certainly helping Kieth out with his media. I can understand the embarrassment from the right after spending years shouting about how unelectable the left are to come in and actually get worse results than them with the media actually being quite friendly must be completely galling. The media might be nice about it and rarely bring this up but people on the internet can be soooooo mean.
|
|
|
Post by manchesterman on Jul 11, 2021 18:05:04 GMT
I dont understand this narrative at all. If there were to be a snap GE called next month, are you seriously suggesting the Murdoch press would come out in favour of Starmer?!?!
|
|
cj
Socialist
These fragments I have shored against my ruins
Posts: 3,282
|
Post by cj on Jul 11, 2021 20:53:42 GMT
I dont understand this narrative at all. If there were to be a snap GE called next month, are you seriously suggesting the Murdoch press would come out in favour of Starmer?!?! No I think the point is that Murdoch is quite happy with Starmer as a safe/unelectable pair of hands on the rudder of the Labour Party that keeps the overall political climate the same, but that if there had been the loss of this seat it introduces the risk of political instability and change and that potentially another leader/platform for the Party to take which in turn could upset the status quo that he has invested resource in and that is pliant to his interests.
Your enemies enemy is your co-belligerent.
|
|
|
Post by curiousliberal on Jul 11, 2021 23:50:04 GMT
Why is it that the same people who think Murdoch is the Devil Incarnate also think that the pre-match genuflection, brought to you by Sky TV in association with Black Live Matters, is just fine and dandy? Pedantry demands I point out that Murdoch no longer owns a controlling stake in Sky. He sold that to the equally benevolent Comcast.
|
|
right
Conservative
Posts: 16,898
|
Post by right on Jul 15, 2021 21:05:50 GMT
|
|
|
Post by matureleft on Jul 16, 2021 6:25:00 GMT
Anti-Modi isn't the same as anti-Hindu let alone anti-India. That said I've already commented on whether "guilt by association" tactics are right.
|
|
right
Conservative
Posts: 16,898
|
Post by right on Jul 16, 2021 7:56:06 GMT
Anti-Modi isn't the same as anti-Hindu let alone anti-India. That said I've already commented on whether "guilt by association" tactics are right. In a vacuum they're not. But the Pakistani grievance does not stop with Modi and the BJP, it does extend to India and Hindus. Congress led governments weren't popular either. That's well understood by the Hindu community in the UK (and their grievances don't stop at particular leaders either) and that's why Labour Friends of India and Navendu Mishra have both condemned it. Yes, there are probably other agendas there particularly with Mishra, but these are not Tory troublemakers but Indians at the heart of Labour, and one presumes far less likely to be pro BJP than the average among British Indians. Just about every justification of this leaflet is by people who seem to have no South Asian friends, who've never had a Hindu, Sikh, Pakistani, Tamil or Bangladeshi friend bend their ear about the iniquities of the other side of whichever issue came up recently, and so have no idea about how the party political bleeds into national and confessional feelings. Kim Leadbeater was a good candidate who won against a perceived tide with a skilfully run but ultimately rather grotty campaign. That's life, and there's no need to be ashamed of the win or in denial about its nature.
|
|
|
Post by matureleft on Jul 16, 2021 8:22:29 GMT
Anti-Modi isn't the same as anti-Hindu let alone anti-India. That said I've already commented on whether "guilt by association" tactics are right. In a vacuum they're not. But the Pakistani grievance does not stop with Modi and the BJP, it does extend to India and Hindus. Congress led governments weren't popular either. That's well understood by the Hindu community in the UK (and their grievances don't stop at particular leaders either) and that's why Labour Friends of India and Navendu Mishra have both condemned it. Yes, there are probably other agendas there particularly with Mishra, but these are not Tory troublemakers but Indians at the heart of Labour, and one presumes far less likely to be pro BJP than the average among British Indians. Just about every justification of this leaflet is by people who seem to have no South Asian friends, who've never had a Hindu, Sikh, Pakistani, Tamil or Bangladeshi friend bend their ear about the iniquities of the other side of whichever issue came up recently, and so have no idea about how the party political bleeds into national and confessional feelings. Kim Leadbeater was a good candidate who won against a perceived tide with a skilfully run but ultimately rather grotty campaign. That's life, and there's no need to be ashamed of the win or in denial about its nature. I've known and represented a lot of Sikhs in my time, far fewer Hindus and Muslims. That experience certainly made me aware of how the politics and the history of the sub-continent played into UK politics. I can recall meeting some supporters of the International Sikh Youth Federation. I looked round the room of elderly men and asked what the age qualification was. I was told, with a laugh, that "we were all young once".
Yes, British politicians have to navigate with care. But I would say that Modi is a lightning rod and even his supporters would accept that he's no avuncular figure.
|
|
right
Conservative
Posts: 16,898
|
Post by right on Jul 16, 2021 9:14:04 GMT
In a vacuum they're not. But the Pakistani grievance does not stop with Modi and the BJP, it does extend to India and Hindus. Congress led governments weren't popular either. That's well understood by the Hindu community in the UK (and their grievances don't stop at particular leaders either) and that's why Labour Friends of India and Navendu Mishra have both condemned it. Yes, there are probably other agendas there particularly with Mishra, but these are not Tory troublemakers but Indians at the heart of Labour, and one presumes far less likely to be pro BJP than the average among British Indians. Just about every justification of this leaflet is by people who seem to have no South Asian friends, who've never had a Hindu, Sikh, Pakistani, Tamil or Bangladeshi friend bend their ear about the iniquities of the other side of whichever issue came up recently, and so have no idea about how the party political bleeds into national and confessional feelings. Kim Leadbeater was a good candidate who won against a perceived tide with a skilfully run but ultimately rather grotty campaign. That's life, and there's no need to be ashamed of the win or in denial about its nature. I've known and represented a lot of Sikhs in my time, far fewer Hindus and Muslims. That experience certainly made me aware of how the politics and the history of the sub-continent played into UK politics. I can recall meeting some supporters of the International Sikh Youth Federation. I looked round the room of elderly men and asked what the age qualification was. I was told, with a laugh, that "we were all young once".
Yes, British politicians have to navigate with care. But I would say that Modi is a lightning rod and even his supporters would accept that he's no avuncular figure.
But that wasn't the reaction this leaflet got from Labour supporters (and presumably not Modi friendly) It was seen as anti-Indian and if the partisan roles had been reversed you'd be making precisely the same criticisms with a couple of extra helpings of righteous indignation Hopefully I'd just acknowledge it, shrug and say that stopping a leadership election was worth a small bit of communal tension, but who knows?
|
|
|
Post by Davıd Boothroyd on Jul 16, 2021 9:16:44 GMT
Nothing on the face of that leaflet was anti-Indian. That's the end of the matter.
|
|
|
Post by grahammurray on Jul 16, 2021 10:42:14 GMT
Nothing on the face of that leaflet was anti-Indian. That's the end of the matter. Of course it was, otherwise why deliver it at all in those circumstances? That's the real end of the matter.
|
|
|
Post by Davıd Boothroyd on Jul 16, 2021 10:48:55 GMT
Nothing on the face of that leaflet was anti-Indian. That's the end of the matter. Of course it was, otherwise why deliver it at all in those circumstances? That's the real end of the matter. Not sure I'd accept your claims about things appearing on leaflets. We all know you can't back them up.
|
|
|
Post by grahammurray on Jul 16, 2021 11:07:03 GMT
Of course it was, otherwise why deliver it at all in those circumstances? That's the real end of the matter. Not sure I'd accept your claims about things appearing on leaflets. We all know you can't back them up. Maybe you'd prefer it being on Wikipedia.
|
|
|
Post by ibfc on Jul 16, 2021 11:14:17 GMT
In a vacuum they're not. But the Pakistani grievance does not stop with Modi and the BJP, it does extend to India and Hindus. Congress led governments weren't popular either. That's well understood by the Hindu community in the UK (and their grievances don't stop at particular leaders either) and that's why Labour Friends of India and Navendu Mishra have both condemned it. Yes, there are probably other agendas there particularly with Mishra, but these are not Tory troublemakers but Indians at the heart of Labour, and one presumes far less likely to be pro BJP than the average among British Indians. Just about every justification of this leaflet is by people who seem to have no South Asian friends, who've never had a Hindu, Sikh, Pakistani, Tamil or Bangladeshi friend bend their ear about the iniquities of the other side of whichever issue came up recently, and so have no idea about how the party political bleeds into national and confessional feelings. Kim Leadbeater was a good candidate who won against a perceived tide with a skilfully run but ultimately rather grotty campaign. That's life, and there's no need to be ashamed of the win or in denial about its nature. I've known and represented a lot of Sikhs in my time, far fewer Hindus and Muslims. That experience certainly made me aware of how the politics and the history of the sub-continent played into UK politics. I can recall meeting some supporters of the International Sikh Youth Federation. I looked round the room of elderly men and asked what the age qualification was. I was told, with a laugh, that "we were all young once".
Yes, British politicians have to navigate with care. But I would say that Modi is a lightning rod and even his supporters would accept that he's no avuncular figure.
I am not sure how Modi being a lightning rod is relevant here? Are you saying the British PM shouldn’t meet Modi officially because of this? The photo used in the leaflet essentially implies that Johnson shouldn’t have met Modi and this meeting means that Johnson is Islamophobic. As Modi is the PM of India (irrespective of the desires of Labour members or Muslims and whatever his popularity levels among Indians or Hindus), such a stance would logically be anti Indian and that’s how it has been construed in India by whoever actually pays attention to such stuff. It’s not even like Cameron who could’ve been said to have gone overboard by participating in Modi’s Wembley event in 2015. Here Johnson was just meeting Modi at some official function.
|
|
|
Post by Davıd Boothroyd on Jul 16, 2021 11:48:57 GMT
Not sure I'd accept your claims about things appearing on leaflets. We all know you can't back them up. Maybe you'd prefer it being on Wikipedia. Are you saying anything I wrote was inaccurate or untruthful? Please specify the precise edit. Or go away and sit under a bridge somewhere.
|
|
|
Post by timrollpickering on Jul 16, 2021 12:02:53 GMT
So anyway is Galloway taking a petition forward or is he just making hot air?
|
|
|
Post by matureleft on Jul 16, 2021 12:14:28 GMT
I've known and represented a lot of Sikhs in my time, far fewer Hindus and Muslims. That experience certainly made me aware of how the politics and the history of the sub-continent played into UK politics. I can recall meeting some supporters of the International Sikh Youth Federation. I looked round the room of elderly men and asked what the age qualification was. I was told, with a laugh, that "we were all young once".
Yes, British politicians have to navigate with care. But I would say that Modi is a lightning rod and even his supporters would accept that he's no avuncular figure.
I am not sure how Modi being a lightning rod is relevant here? Are you saying the British PM shouldn’t meet Modi officially because of this? The photo used in the leaflet essentially implies that Johnson shouldn’t have met Modi and this meeting means that Johnson is Islamophobic. As Modi is the PM of India (irrespective of the desires of Labour members or Muslims and whatever his popularity levels among Indians or Hindus), such a stance would logically be anti Indian and that’s how it has been construed in India by whoever actually pays attention to such stuff. It’s not even like Cameron who could’ve been said to have gone overboard by participating in Modi’s Wembley event in 2015. Here Johnson was just meeting Modi at some official function. I don't think you read my earlier posts in this lengthy exchange (going back to just after the election result). I made exactly that point. I was uncomfortable about the use of that image not for anxieties about stirring community tensions - Modi doesn't represent all Hindus, many of whom are appalled by the man. However I felt it was arguably unfair on Johnson, as most "guilt by association" propaganda is - and Labour is frequently on the receiving end of this. The leaflet implies "Don't vote Tory because they are mates with Modi". Simply meeting the man, as Indian prime minister, is part of the job. Unless Johnson made some laudatory comments about his past, or about his broader respect for human rights, then it isn't very fair to suggest a closer alignment. Or Labour should have made clear what we'd have said to Modi that was different. But these are qualms lost on all sides - these leaflets are common, showing a politician in the company of someone who people might not like or admire. It's my personal preference not to do that.
That concern isn't at all the same as the supposed concern about stirring community emnities that's been repeatedly spun.
|
|