The Daily Mail

[Nibble]

All these qualities pale to nothing when we know she went back to her abusive boyfriend, Chris Brown, who pleaded guilty to assaulting her in 2009; that she promotes drug-taking, drinking and the sort of fashion sense on stage that surely invites rape at worst, disrespect at least.

Liz Jones’ on Rihanna (article published 24th June 2013 on the Mail Online)

 

[DavidinSouthampton]

All these qualities pale to nothing when we know she went back to her abusive boyfriend, Chris Brown, who pleaded guilty to assaulting her in 2009; that she promotes drug-taking, drinking and the sort of fashion sense on stage that surely invites rape at worst, disrespect at least.

Liz Jones’ on Rihanna (article published 24th June 2013 on the Mail Online)

What's that got to do with it? Genuine question. I would take it as another example of ridiculous stereotyping or false accusation.

 

[Buzzer]

..and reminded those who might have forgotten about the underlying nastiness of the Tory world and its media supporters..

Damian McBride
Derek Draper
Charlie Whelan
Alistair Campbell
Peter Mandelson
Jonathan Mendelson
Jo Moore
Kevin 'toilet' Maguire

Ring any bells? These guys took nasty to a level unprecedented in politics.

 

[Nibble]

What's that got to do with it? Genuine question. I would take it as another example of ridiculous stereotyping or false accusation.

The title of the thread reads "The Daily Mail" does it not? This is another example of their revolting "journalism". It has everything to do with it?

What do you mean "false accusation"? It was on their website slackwit."Ridiculous stereotyping"? Do you even know what you're on about?

 

[Buzzer]

It's a very odd world where people praise Alastair Campbell for moralising about dirty tricks and smears. He was directly responsible for the death of David Kelly when trying to smear a reporter, he lied and instructed others to lie in order to send Britain to war, he was caught out smearing tory politicians. He headed the dirty tricks department at Number 10.

He doesn't have the right to lecture others. The man is a grade 'A' scumbag.

 

[Nibble]

It's a very odd world where people praise Alastair Campbell for moralising about dirty tricks and smears. He was directly responsible for the death of David Kelly when trying to smear a reporter, he lied and instructed others to lie in order to send Britain to war, he was caught out smearing tory politicians. He headed the dirty tricks department at Number 10.

He doesn't have the right to lecture others. The man is a grade 'A' scumbag.

Agreed, shows the capricious nature of the public.

 

[Leighgull]

It's a very odd world where people praise Alastair Campbell for moralising about dirty tricks and smears. He was directly responsible for the death of David Kelly when trying to smear a reporter, he lied and instructed others to lie in order to send Britain to war, he was caught out smearing tory politicians. He headed the dirty tricks department at Number 10.

He doesn't have the right to lecture others. The man is a grade 'A' scumbag.

Even scumbags are right sometimes. He is on record (as is Blair) that they DIDN'T lie about the Iraq war so you need to point to the deliberate lies told...I don't mean flawed American and British intelligence I mean proper LIES i.e. deliberate premeditated untruths...you see I honestly believe that Blair believed that there were WMD, he was wrong, clearly, but I don't think he made the whole thing up.

I'm not sure where you are going with this mate. I agree with most of your comments, your clearly a clever bloke and have a lovely way with our Palace guests on here..I just don't agree that there was a massive lying campaign behind us going into Iraq.

Blair chose his friends badly and wanted to help Bush avenge 9/11, he got us into the wrong war but, I suspect, for the right reasons. He forced Bush back to the UN, he insisted that weapons inspectors were given another chance and demanded UN mandate for action.

I'm not an apologist for Blair or Campbell but your in danger of ramping up one of the conspiracies you so often dismiss with logic.

 

[Buzzer]

If Alistair Campbell was tripping over his words sometimes, it was probably because he was (justifiably) angry.

Absolute b*ll*cks and an insult to everyone's intelligence.

 

[brakespear]

I think you've collapse a lot of things together.

It is possible to despise the way a country is run, and the apparatus of the state, without despising the country itself. Just like Albion fans despised Bellotti, Archer and the Albion board, but that didn't mean they hated Brighton & Hove Albion. In fact the opposite was true. Similarly, Gandhi despised the way India was governed, but that didn't mean he despised India.

Similarly, I don't see how owning property is inconsistent with having Marxist beliefs. Are you saying you can only be a Marxist if you are poor? Miliband lived in a capitalist system and operated within it. Doesn't mean he couldn't see the limitations of it, and his own wealth to advocate a different system for himself and everyone else.

 

[Leighgull]

I'm British and patriotic but I don't like the Royal Family, the ruling class or the Church...does that mean I hate England. I suppose in 30 years time if one of my kids is leader of the opposition, that the Daily Mail will reprint this as "evidence" of me being a fifth columnist.

What a pile of shit that paper is

 

[Buzzer]

Even scumbags are right sometimes. He is on record (as is Blair) that they DIDN'T lie about the Iraq war so you need to point to the deliberate lies told...I don't mean flawed American and British intelligence I mean proper LIES i.e. deliberate premeditated untruths...you see I honestly believe that Blair believed that there were WMD, he was wrong, clearly, but I don't think he made the whole thing up.

I'm not sure where you are going with this mate. I agree with most of your comments, your clearly a clever bloke and have a lovely way with our Palace guests on here..I just don't agree that there was a massive lying campaign behind us going into Iraq.

Blair chose his friends badly and wanted to help Bush avenge 9/11, he got us into the wrong war but, I suspect, for the right reasons. He forced Bush back to the UN, he insisted that weapons inspectors were given another chance and demanded UN mandate for action.

I'm not an apologist for Blair or Campbell but your in danger of ramping up one of the conspiracies you so often dismiss with logic.

At the risk of derailing this thread, the terms of reference for the enquiries were so narrow that a lot of the dirty tricks behind the decision to go to war was never fully explored. Coupled with the fact that I and many others simply don't believe a word of what he has said. And there's no doubt at all that his decision to attack the BBC and Gilligan using Kelly as a pawn was the single biggest factor in Kelly's death.

Putting that to one side, his particular brand of dirty tricks is the reason that the likes of Whelan and McBride were allowed to operate and some of his smears, for instance on Michael Howard, were equally as bad. Incidentally, Labour posters designed and approved by Campbell demonising Michael Howard during the 2005 elections were withdrawn after accusations of anti-semitism and racism.

He may be right on the facts of what the Daily Mail have done but as I've said, he's got absolutely no right to start moralising about it. I wouldn't blow smoke up his arse even if he was shitting wasps.

 

[Mellotron]

http://toys.usvsth3m.com/are-you-hated-by-the-daily-mail/

 

[Leighgull]

At the risk of derailing this thread, the terms of reference for the enquiries were so narrow that a lot of the dirty tricks behind the decision to go to war was never fully explored. Coupled with the fact that I and many others simply don't believe a word of what he has said. And there's no doubt at all that his decision to attack the BBC and Gilligan using Kelly as a pawn was the single biggest factor in Kelly's death.

Putting that to one side, his particular brand of dirty tricks is the reason that the likes of Whelan and McBride were allowed to operate and some of his smears, for instance on Michael Howard, were equally as bad. Incidentally, Labour posters demonising Michael Howard during the 2005 elections were withdrawn after accusations of anti-semitism and racism.

He may be right on the facts of what the Daily Mail have done but as I've said, he's got absolutely no right to start moralising about it. I wouldn't blow smoke up his arse even if he was shitting wasps.

It's quite simple for me..if the war in Iraq was based on lies then do you really believe that, once the CIA or MI6 were in Baghdad, that they wouldn't have "found" some sarin or mustard gas hidden under Saddams palace?

The fact that the UN were straight in there strongly tells me that the US and British BELIEVED that some nastiness would turn up.

It never did because it turns out there really wasn't any. But don't forget...a big piece of the intelligence used was based on the testimony of a very senior member of Saddams secret service defecting and making up a very plausible story about a secret weapons programme in return for a few million dollars from a wounded and angry US government.

With Bush and Blair long gone from government and the problems in Iraq as bad as ever...if there were deliberate lies...someone would have bubbled. They haven't so I don't need a broad reaching enquiry to prove my point.

 

[Buzzer]

It's quite simple for me..if the war in Iraq was based on lies then do you really believe that, once the CIA or MI6 were in Baghdad, that they wouldn't have "found" some sarin or mustard gas hidden under Saddams palace?

The fact that the UN were straight in there strongly tells me that the US and British BELIEVED that some nastiness would turn up.

It never did because it turns out there really wasn't any. But don't forget...a big piece of the intelligence used was based on the testimony of a very senior member of Saddams secret service defecting and making up a very plausible story about a secret weapons programme in return for a few million dollars from a wounded and angry US government.

With Bush and Blair long gone from government and the problems in Iraq as bad as ever...if there were deliberate lies...someone would have bubbled. They haven't so I don't need a broad reaching enquiry to prove my point.

I think we'll have to agree to disagree. What about the other points I've posted about?

 

[cunning fergus]

I have just watched the snippet on I-player as well. I thought the deputy editor of the Mail was pathetic. Quite apart from Campbell, Emily Maitlis was clearly quite contemptuous of what the mail had done, or the conclusions they had reached. She was actually pointing out some of the inadequacies of their argument and their conclusions - such as "How can you say he hated this country when he signed up and fought for it as a refugee?"

If Alistair Campbell was tripping over his words sometimes, it was probably because he was (justifiably) angry. The calmness of the Mail deputy editor could not cover up the paucity or illogicality of his arguments. I think the Mail could well have done itself more harm than good in this.

The facts are though that before Miliband signed up for the RN after he had already signed up for a couple of years studying at the LSE under Laski. He was over 20 when he finally signed up in June 1943............by then the Germans had surrendered in North Africa, the Battle of the Atlantic was won, the US were a year into the war and the Allies were starting to land in Italy.

The conscription age for the UK after the conscription act in 1939 was 18, so Ralph could have technically signed up in Jan 1942..............to be fair as a refugee he didn't have to join up because he was exempt. That said, when he was in Belgium in 1940 conscription was introduced to all males 16 and over, and this was the event (Andy Beckett in the Guardian wrote) that compelled him to flee Brussels for the UK with his Dad.

http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2004/feb/28/schools.labour

Just saying like...............

 

[Leighgull]

I think we'll have to agree to disagree. What about the other points I've posted about?

Could there have been a Charlie Whelan or a Damian McBride without Campbell? We probably agree not. Was Campbell the most successful spin Doctor in British political history? Undoubtably yes. Was he an absolute menace to the enemies of New Labour? Yes. Was he worth every penny in electoral terms? Yes. Do I find him an interesting character who I would listen to? Definitely.

Was he a total *******? You betcha.

Is British politics better off without him at the prow? Well...it's a lot more beige.

 

[DavidinSouthampton]

The title of the thread reads "The Daily Mail" does it not? This is another example of their revolting "journalism". It has everything to do with it?

What do you mean "false accusation"? It was on their website slackwit."Ridiculous stereotyping"? Do you even know what you're on about?

As I said - and genuinely meant - in my post, it was a genuine question. I think your response is a little extreme. I haven't read the original article, can't say I am the world's expert on Rihanna and was genuinely interested. I won't bother again.

 

[User removed 4]

Could there have been a Charlie Whelan or a Damian McBride without Campbell? We probably agree not. Was Campbell the most successful spin Doctor in British political history? Undoubtably yes. Was he an absolute menace to the enemies of New Labour? Yes. Was he worth every penny in electoral terms? Yes. Do I find him an interesting character who I would listen to? Definitely.

Was he a total *******? You betcha.

Is British politics better off without him at the prow? Well...it's a lot more beige.

Of course there could , whelan was browns spin doctor well before campbell started working for blair.

 

[Nibble]

As I said - and genuinely meant - in my post, it was a genuine question. I think your response is a little extreme. I haven't read the original article, can't say I am the world's expert on Rihanna and was genuinely interested. I won't bother again.

Apologies.

 

[DavidinSouthampton]

Apologies.

I wasn't after an apology - but no problem.