Jump to content

Labour on the way!

Lloyd90

By Lloyd90,
in Off Topic

 Share

Recommended Posts

PeterHenry

PeterHenry

Posted
Posted (edited)

Peter Mandelson gave a rather interesting speech yesterday at an even organised by 'Future Countryside' - which appears to be headed by a mixture of figures on both the left and right of the political spectrum.

I'll post a link to the full speech below, but I found the following very interesting -

'...our message will not be heard if rural people feel we don’t understand them, or — worse — somehow want to pick a fight with them.

 Naturally politicians receive calls from pressure groups to take action. Some of these calls are right.

 But governments cannot behave like single issue groups.

 And if it is wrong for the Right to stoke culture wars against minorities, it is just as wrong for the Left to stoke culture wars against rural minorities.'

Those are admirable words as far as I'm concerned. Whether I can bring myself to put any faith in them is another thing. Further still is the question of if Madelson has any clout with the current leadership, given that his words appear so much at odds with what Kier Starmer has been saying recently....

https://www.futurecountryside.org/blog/peter-mandelson-address-future-countryside-event

Edited by PeterHenry
Link to comment
Share on other sites
DEAN C.

DEAN C.

Posted
Posted (edited)

The current lot are so corrupt it is a joke, but the thought of Starmer in office is even more terrifying. How can he stand in parliament when he said Saville had no case to answer?

None of them can be trusted to run anything .

Edited by DEAN C.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
PeterHenry

PeterHenry

Posted
Posted (edited)

This is the second time this week I have read things on this forum. Things written by members who have smeared public figures they don't like with either accusations of paedophilia, or association with pedophiles.

By all means criticise, but if anyone is going to attack someone's reputation, they better get their facts right - least they end up like that tit at Country Squire 'Magazine'.

Rant over

Edited by PeterHenry
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Lloyd90

Lloyd90

Posted
  • Author
Posted
41 minutes ago, PeterHenry said:

Peter Mandelson gave a rather interesting speech yesterday at an even organised by 'Future Countryside' - which appears to be headed by a mixture of figures on both the left and right of the political spectrum.

I'll post a link to the full speech below, but I found the following very interesting -

'...our message will not be heard if rural people feel we don’t understand them, or — worse — somehow want to pick a fight with them.

 Naturally politicians receive calls from pressure groups to take action. Some of these calls are right.

 But governments cannot behave like single issue groups.

 And if it is wrong for the Right to stoke culture wars against minorities, it is just as wrong for the Left to stoke culture wars against rural minorities.'

Those are admirable words as far as I'm concerned. Whether I can bring myself to put any faith in them is another thing. Further still is the question of if Madelson has any clout with the current leadership, given that his words appear so much at odds with what Kier Starmer has been saying recently....

https://www.futurecountryside.org/blog/peter-mandelson-address-future-countryside-event


I imagine when Labour do get back into power they’ll be much like the current Government, full of inner bickering and disagreement and not getting much done 🤣🤣

Link to comment
Share on other sites
DEAN C.

DEAN C.

Posted
Posted (edited)
5 minutes ago, PeterHenry said:

This is the second time this week I have read things on this forum. Things written by members who have smeared public figures they don't like with either accusations of paedophilia, or association with pedophiles.

By all means criticise, but if anyone is going to attack someone's reputation, they better get their facts right - least they end up like that tit at Country Squire 'Magazine'.

Was he not head of the CPS when this was going on?  How can that be smearing???? In my mind as a manager I am responsible for the people I look after, therefore he was responsible by default. By the way, I have never been anything other than working class with striking miners in my family going back to the 1926 strike, and building trades men on the other side going back two centuries. It doesn't mean I HAVE to vote for any of the clowns in particular, I will make my own mind up.

 

Edited by DEAN C.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
PeterHenry

PeterHenry

Posted
Posted (edited)
25 minutes ago, DEAN C. said:

Was he not head of the CPS when this was going on?  How can that be smearing???? I have never been anything other than working class with striking miners in my family going back to the 1926 strike, and building trades men on the other side going back two centuries. It doesn't mean I HAVE to vote for any of the clowns in particular, I will make my own mind up.

That Kier Starmer was head of the CPS during a period in time when Jimmy Saville was breathing means nothing. The head of the CPS does not make a decision on every potential prosecution.

You said in your post 'he said Saville had no case to answer?' Where have you read or heard that? Post a link or a photograph of a newspaper clipping or something - anything to substantiate it. Otherwise its just a half thought through, unfounded smear on someone's reputation. 

Edited by PeterHenry
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Gordon R

Gordon R

Posted
Posted
Quote

That Kier Starmer was head of the CPS during a period in time when Jimmy Saville was breathing means nothing. The head of the CPS does not make a decision on every potential prosecution.

That is correct. However, I find it hard to accept that he had no knowledge or input, when one of his staff was considering probably the biggest case of their career. It is not a decision taken at the lowest level. I would need to see a polygraph strapped to Starmer's arm when the question was put.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
udderlyoffroad

udderlyoffroad

Posted
Posted

It’s very simple.  Not only was Saville breathing when Steamer (sic) was head of the CPS, he was also arrested. Therefore he either

a) fostered a culture of plausible deniability such that a ‘hot potato’ case (such as a well connected celebrity with perhaps less-than-stellar witnesses) wouldn’t make it to snr management for review of a charging decision.

or

b) knew about it but decided not to prosecute for whatever reason 

Either way, the man is an absolute shower & not fit to be anywhere near power.

If you need further convincing, Google how many journalists he pursued on fatuous charges.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
PeterHenry

PeterHenry

Posted
Posted
Just now, Gordon R said:

That is correct. However, I find it hard to accept that he had no knowledge or input, when one of his staff was considering probably the biggest case of their career. It is not a decision taken at the lowest level. I would need to see a polygraph strapped to Starmer's arm when the question was put.

Your likely right - I wouldn't imagine it was a decision taken at the lowest level.

However, there are an awful lot of levels between the bottom and the top in my experience. It's also my understanding that not all decisions are made from a centralised office. Before I succeed in dragging everyone off course of the original - and more worthy topic of - discussion, my gist was only that accusations need to be backed up, and throwing pedophilia into the mix to smear someone you don't like is wrong.

Heavy words lightly thrown and all that.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
 Share
Go to topic listing

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...