This topic has been archived, and won't accept reply postings.
http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2015/dec/27/lynton-crosby-knighthood-ne...
What a heart-warming story this is!
What a heart-warming story this is!
3
In reply to Yanis Nayu:
On the other hand.......
http://blogs.spectator.co.uk/2015/12/a-knighthood-lynton-crosby-deserves-a-...
On the other hand.......
http://blogs.spectator.co.uk/2015/12/a-knighthood-lynton-crosby-deserves-a-...
2
In reply to Oceanrower:
On their hand:
http://www.bat.com/group/sites/UK__9D9KCY.nsf/vwPagesWebLive/DO52ANVW?opend...
On their hand:
http://www.bat.com/group/sites/UK__9D9KCY.nsf/vwPagesWebLive/DO52ANVW?opend...
1
In reply to Yanis Nayu:
Worth every penny then.
> His personal involvement was the difference between defeat and victory – he kept Ed Miliband out of No10.
Worth every penny then.
2
15
1
19
In reply to Dave Cumberland:
Too right... Perish the thought that they'd have denied us the opportunity of being governed by a pig f*cker.
> Thank God he kept the socialist scumbags at bay.
Too right... Perish the thought that they'd have denied us the opportunity of being governed by a pig f*cker.
28
1
In reply to Yanis Nayu:
Also in the Guardian, but much funnier http://www.theguardian.com/artanddesign/2015/dec/29/five-fake-photos-viral-...
Also in the Guardian, but much funnier http://www.theguardian.com/artanddesign/2015/dec/29/five-fake-photos-viral-...
3
6
In reply to Clauso:
If the best response to this award Labour supporters have to offer is a personal insult based on an uncorroborated story written by a man with a grudge, then thank god Labour lost the last election.
> Too right... Perish the thought that they'd have denied us the opportunity of being governed by a pig f*cker.
If the best response to this award Labour supporters have to offer is a personal insult based on an uncorroborated story written by a man with a grudge, then thank god Labour lost the last election.
Post edited at 21:40
6
11
In reply to Dave Cumberland:
Do you think that people should be awarded honours by a political party for acting on behalf of that party?
Do you think that people should be awarded honours by a political party for acting on behalf of that party?
5
1
In reply to Yanis Nayu:
probably not but it's hardly a new event. All parties do it. Labour making a thing of it is hypocritical.
probably not but it's hardly a new event. All parties do it. Labour making a thing of it is hypocritical.
6
2
In reply to MG:
Indeed
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cash_for_Honours
Indeed
> In March 2006, several men nominated for life peerages by then Prime Minister Tony Blair were rejected by the House of Lords Appointments Commission. It was later revealed they had loaned large amounts of money to the governing Labour Party, at the suggestion of Labour fundraiser Lord Levy.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cash_for_Honours
2
1
In reply to Big Ger:
Funny you should bring up 'Lord' Ashcroft!
> If the best response to this award Labour supporters have to offer is a personal insult based on an uncorroborated story written by a man with a grudge, then thank god Labour lost the last election.
Funny you should bring up 'Lord' Ashcroft!
2
1
In reply to Big Ger:
Merely treating the award with the disdain that it deserves... And enjoying reminding the likes of you that your leader pokes pork.
> If the best response to this award Labour supporters have to offer is a personal insult based on an uncorroborated story written by a man with a grudge, then thank god Labour lost the last election.
Merely treating the award with the disdain that it deserves... And enjoying reminding the likes of you that your leader pokes pork.
7
2
2
In reply to Clauso:
Not proven. Mind you the charge that he indulged in some silliness as a student is obviously a great sin to Labour supporters than their own leader's support of the IRA bombing campaign.
Sense of perspective much?
> Merely treating the award with the disdain that it deserves... And enjoying reminding the likes of you that your leader pokes pork.
Not proven. Mind you the charge that he indulged in some silliness as a student is obviously a great sin to Labour supporters than their own leader's support of the IRA bombing campaign.
Sense of perspective much?
5
7
In reply to Yanis Nayu:
He should do an acceptance speech, "And of course many thanks to Nicola, couldn't have done it without you".
He should do an acceptance speech, "And of course many thanks to Nicola, couldn't have done it without you".
In reply to Yanis Nayu:
It is part of the system, google Ayesha Hazarika mbe, or Dame Rosie Winterton.
I probably agree with Corbyn on this.
> Do you think that people should be awarded honours by a political party for acting on behalf of that party?
It is part of the system, google Ayesha Hazarika mbe, or Dame Rosie Winterton.
I probably agree with Corbyn on this.
Post edited at 09:33
In reply to Mike Stretford:
Shit system. I think we accept crap like that too easily in this country, especially from the Tories.
Shit system. I think we accept crap like that too easily in this country, especially from the Tories.
2
In reply to Dave Cumberland:
if you believe ed moribund and co were socialists then something is clearly rotten in your head.
if you believe ed moribund and co were socialists then something is clearly rotten in your head.
In reply to Yanis Nayu:
So instead of this kind of harmless cronyism, would you rather we had a full-blown brown enevelope system like most of Africa, Venezuela, Russia or China?
If a meaningless award is enough to satisfy the egos of these kinds of people and keep the wheels oiled I'd rather stick with the honours system thanks. At least in Britain I can get my child educated and get healthcare and other local government services without needing to bung cash to some official.
So instead of this kind of harmless cronyism, would you rather we had a full-blown brown enevelope system like most of Africa, Venezuela, Russia or China?
If a meaningless award is enough to satisfy the egos of these kinds of people and keep the wheels oiled I'd rather stick with the honours system thanks. At least in Britain I can get my child educated and get healthcare and other local government services without needing to bung cash to some official.
Post edited at 11:08
2
In reply to Big Ger:
Cameron hasn't denied getting piggy with it, either, has he?... I'll bet that he loved it; the filthy sod. In fact, I imagine that he insists on his missus wearing a pig mask to bed.
As for Corbyn supporting the IRA's bombing campaign, where did you dream that one up? Jeremy takes a dim view of bombing from any side, in case it had escaped your notice... Or are you referring to his attempts at initiating political dialogue with Sinn Fein? You know, just like the government, at the time, was secretly doing? You know, the same dialogue that ultimately led to the Good Friday Agreement?
Try calibrating your own sense of perspective, huh?
Cameron hasn't denied getting piggy with it, either, has he?... I'll bet that he loved it; the filthy sod. In fact, I imagine that he insists on his missus wearing a pig mask to bed.
As for Corbyn supporting the IRA's bombing campaign, where did you dream that one up? Jeremy takes a dim view of bombing from any side, in case it had escaped your notice... Or are you referring to his attempts at initiating political dialogue with Sinn Fein? You know, just like the government, at the time, was secretly doing? You know, the same dialogue that ultimately led to the Good Friday Agreement?
Try calibrating your own sense of perspective, huh?
5
3
1
In reply to Yanis Nayu:
What short memories people have, or is it that splinter in the eye? Item no 1, the "Lavender list"
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1976_Prime_Minister%27s_Resignation_Honours
Item no.2: In 2006 the Sunday Times newspaper revealed that every donor who had given £1,000,000 or more to the Labour Party since 1997 was given a Knighthood or a Peerage. Moreover, the government had given honours to 12 of the 14 individuals who have donated more than £200,000 to Labour and of the 22 who donated more than £100,000, 17 received honours.
> What a heart-warming story this is!
What short memories people have, or is it that splinter in the eye? Item no 1, the "Lavender list"
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1976_Prime_Minister%27s_Resignation_Honours
Item no.2: In 2006 the Sunday Times newspaper revealed that every donor who had given £1,000,000 or more to the Labour Party since 1997 was given a Knighthood or a Peerage. Moreover, the government had given honours to 12 of the 14 individuals who have donated more than £200,000 to Labour and of the 22 who donated more than £100,000, 17 received honours.
Post edited at 19:25
1
1
In reply to abr1966:
Well, given the precedent set by the Labour party, I don't see why not. I think the system is a shambles anyway so he might as well be.
Do you think anyone who donates a million quid to a party should be knighted?
> Do you think Crosby should be knighted?
Well, given the precedent set by the Labour party, I don't see why not. I think the system is a shambles anyway so he might as well be.
Do you think anyone who donates a million quid to a party should be knighted?
Post edited at 19:27
1
In reply to Postmanpat:
So you agree with your items 1 and 2 on your previous post as acceptable also?
I agree it is a shambles....
No I think honours for people funding political parties should be heavily scrutinised. I think generally speaking that honours should go to people who have served their communities and especially to those who have sacrificed personal gain in the process...
So you agree with your items 1 and 2 on your previous post as acceptable also?
I agree it is a shambles....
No I think honours for people funding political parties should be heavily scrutinised. I think generally speaking that honours should go to people who have served their communities and especially to those who have sacrificed personal gain in the process...
Post edited at 19:32
In reply to abr1966:
No, I just think it's a shambles, and trying to make political capital out of one rather unexceptional appointment (in the context of previous appointments) is just cynical politicking.
> So you agree with your items 1 and 2 on your previous post as acceptable also?
No, I just think it's a shambles, and trying to make political capital out of one rather unexceptional appointment (in the context of previous appointments) is just cynical politicking.
2
In reply to Clauso:
Read more: http://www.newsletter.co.uk/news/northern-ireland-news/night-jeremy-corbyn-...
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/Jeremy_Corbyn/11924431/Revealed-Je...
Not big on facts are you?
Still even if he did it, it pales into insignificance beside Corbyn's support of the men who were killing civilians on the mainland UK, doesn't it?
> Following fresh revelations of Mr Corbyn£s connections with pre-ceasefire republicans in the Sunday Telegraph, the News Letter is able to shed new light on two of the existing controversies about his past actions, including one of his earliest recorded clashes with unionism. While he has condemned violence, when asked recently to condemn the actions of the IRA he was reluctant to do so. One frequently reported claim from his past is that Mr Corbyn stood in honour of eight members of an IRA gang who had been shot dead by the SAS in Loughgall in 1987 (as well as a civilian, who was wrongly targeted by the SAS).
Read more: http://www.newsletter.co.uk/news/northern-ireland-news/night-jeremy-corbyn-...
> It can be disclosed that for seven years running, while the IRA £armed struggle£ was at its height, Mr Corbyn attended and spoke at official republican commemorations to honour dead IRA terrorists, IRA £prisoners of war£ and the active £soldiers of the IRA.£ The official programme for the 1988 event, held one week after the IRA murdered three British servicemen in the Netherlands, states that £force of arms is the only method capable of bringing about a free and united Socialist Ireland.£ Mr Corbyn used the event to attack the Anglo-Irish Agreement, the precursor of the peace process.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/Jeremy_Corbyn/11924431/Revealed-Je...
Not big on facts are you?
> David Cameron has for the first time publicly denied allegations made in a biography written by the former Tory donor Lord Ashcroft that he was involved in a bizarre university club ritual with a dead pig£s head. The prime minister said everybody could see straight through the book published by Ashcroft, and confirmed he was disputing the specific allegation that he put a private part of his anatomy in a dead pig£s mouth at an event of the Piers Gaveston Society when he was a student.
Still even if he did it, it pales into insignificance beside Corbyn's support of the men who were killing civilians on the mainland UK, doesn't it?
Post edited at 20:54
5
2
In reply to Big Ger:
You'd be probably surprised if you knew about the degree of communication with the provisional IRA during the troubles, jumping on an anti Corbyn band wagon is surface tittle tattle.
Then again I'd put money on it that you e never been to Northern Ireland and gained a view for yourself...?
You'd be probably surprised if you knew about the degree of communication with the provisional IRA during the troubles, jumping on an anti Corbyn band wagon is surface tittle tattle.
Then again I'd put money on it that you e never been to Northern Ireland and gained a view for yourself...?
1
1
In reply to Postmanpat:
That stinks as well.
> What short memories people have, or is it that splinter in the eye? Item no 1, the "Lavender list"
> Item no.2: In 2006 the Sunday Times newspaper revealed that every donor who had given £1,000,000 or more to the Labour Party since 1997 was given a Knighthood or a Peerage. Moreover, the government had given honours to 12 of the 14 individuals who have donated more than £200,000 to Labour and of the 22 who donated more than £100,000, 17 received honours.
That stinks as well.
In reply to Big Ger:
Re the telegraph article- we did a thread on this some weeks ago when the story surfaced. I appeared to have been the only person who actually read the editorial- including the telegraph journalist, as the content of the editorial didnt support the article supposedly based on it.
Corbyn may indeed have supported the use of violence to advance the cause of Irish republicanism, but that link doesn't convincingly make the case
Re the telegraph article- we did a thread on this some weeks ago when the story surfaced. I appeared to have been the only person who actually read the editorial- including the telegraph journalist, as the content of the editorial didnt support the article supposedly based on it.
Corbyn may indeed have supported the use of violence to advance the cause of Irish republicanism, but that link doesn't convincingly make the case
1
1
In reply to abr1966:
Not "tittle tattle" but actual fact.
Archived documents showed Mr Corbyn attended several events supporting the IRA in the 1980s and '90s, and held a high-level position on a left-wing magazine that controversially sympathised with the Brighton Bombing in 1984, according to the Sunday Telegraph. The newspaper also reported that Mr McDonnell had received a commemorative plaque from IRA member Gerry Kelly in 2004 for his "unfailing political and personal support" at a Sinn Fein fundraising dinner.
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/jeremy-corbyn-refuses-to-comm...
> You'd be probably surprised if you knew about the degree of communication with the provisional IRA during the troubles, jumping on an anti Corbyn band wagon is surface tittle tattle.
Not "tittle tattle" but actual fact.
> shadow Chancellor John McDonnell's alleged "close links" to the IRA.
Archived documents showed Mr Corbyn attended several events supporting the IRA in the 1980s and '90s, and held a high-level position on a left-wing magazine that controversially sympathised with the Brighton Bombing in 1984, according to the Sunday Telegraph. The newspaper also reported that Mr McDonnell had received a commemorative plaque from IRA member Gerry Kelly in 2004 for his "unfailing political and personal support" at a Sinn Fein fundraising dinner.
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/jeremy-corbyn-refuses-to-comm...
1
2
In reply to Yanis Nayu:
Depends which type of honour. Knighthoods and the lessor honours such as MBE and OBE should imo be awarded for exceptional contributions to the community, either in a voluntary capacity or in circumstances where the contribution to the community greatly exceeds in worth the payment received for it. These honours should not be given for simply doing a well paid job competently, which would cut out a lot of current recipients.
Under our present system, life peerages should be given to people with the skills to enhance our law-making processes in the House of Lords. Working on behalf of a political party isn't and shouldn't be a bar. A life peerage is a job appointment, not an honour.
Martin
> Do you think that people should be awarded honours by a political party for acting on behalf of that party?
Depends which type of honour. Knighthoods and the lessor honours such as MBE and OBE should imo be awarded for exceptional contributions to the community, either in a voluntary capacity or in circumstances where the contribution to the community greatly exceeds in worth the payment received for it. These honours should not be given for simply doing a well paid job competently, which would cut out a lot of current recipients.
Under our present system, life peerages should be given to people with the skills to enhance our law-making processes in the House of Lords. Working on behalf of a political party isn't and shouldn't be a bar. A life peerage is a job appointment, not an honour.
Martin
In reply to Big Ger:
We should pull a thread together of politicians who facilitate/associate or have associated with organisations - political and otherwise - that are guilty of human rights abuses, violent oppression and/or terrorism, including specifically arms dealing, and resource exploitation (oil etc...). Corbyn is FAR from alone with dubious affiliations.
However I think you'd find McDonnell and Corbyn's activities may well have (in part) helped sow the seeds of the peace process, initiating dialogue between the Republican movement and Westminster. Crucially they didn't do this for personal enrichment.
We should pull a thread together of politicians who facilitate/associate or have associated with organisations - political and otherwise - that are guilty of human rights abuses, violent oppression and/or terrorism, including specifically arms dealing, and resource exploitation (oil etc...). Corbyn is FAR from alone with dubious affiliations.
However I think you'd find McDonnell and Corbyn's activities may well have (in part) helped sow the seeds of the peace process, initiating dialogue between the Republican movement and Westminster. Crucially they didn't do this for personal enrichment.
Post edited at 23:02
3
In reply to Shani:
And your evidence for this? McDonnell opposed the official peace process at crucial junctures until his republican mates persuaded him otherwise.
> However I think you'd find McDonnell and Corbyn's activities may well have (in part) helped sow the seeds of the peace process, initiating dialogue between the Republican movement and Westminster. Crucially they didn't do this for personal enrichment.
And your evidence for this? McDonnell opposed the official peace process at crucial junctures until his republican mates persuaded him otherwise.
In reply to Postmanpat:
An interview on Radio4 where he talked at length about compromise and the use of language that some (on the Right) might find unpalatable, in a bid to accommodate all sides, bring them together, build trust, and negotiate a peaceful settlement.
There is no 'one' route through a peace process. You'd have to provide specifics of what he opposed if you want us to discuss why he opposed them.
> And your evidence for this? McDonnell opposed the official peace process at crucial junctures until his republican mates persuaded him otherwise.
An interview on Radio4 where he talked at length about compromise and the use of language that some (on the Right) might find unpalatable, in a bid to accommodate all sides, bring them together, build trust, and negotiate a peaceful settlement.
There is no 'one' route through a peace process. You'd have to provide specifics of what he opposed if you want us to discuss why he opposed them.
1
In reply to Shani:
He criticised and voted against the 1985 Anglo Irish agreement (one of a tiny minority of MPs to do so, which included Corbyn), and resisted the negotiations which led to the Good Friday agreement on the grounds , as he told the IRA’s official newspaper , An Phoblacht, in 1998: “An assembly is not what people have laid down their lives for over thirty years. We want peace, but the settlement must be just and the settlement must be for an agreed and united Ireland.” Only when the IRA signed up di he miraculously change his mind.
It's quite clear that he wanted peace, in the same way that Zionists want peace in Greater Israel: on their terms. Offering support for one side and justification for its violence , whilst failing to make any attempt to speak to or understand the other is not a contribution to a peace process.
If you believe his pusillanimous retrospective explanations for his words and actions then I've got a bridge I can sell you.
> An interview on Radio4 where he talked at length about compromise and the use of language that some (on the Right) might find unpalatable, in a bid to accommodate all sides, bring them together, build trust, and negotiate a peaceful settlement.
> There is no 'one' route through a peace process. You'd have to provide specifics of what he opposed if you want us to discuss why he opposed them.
He criticised and voted against the 1985 Anglo Irish agreement (one of a tiny minority of MPs to do so, which included Corbyn), and resisted the negotiations which led to the Good Friday agreement on the grounds , as he told the IRA’s official newspaper , An Phoblacht, in 1998: “An assembly is not what people have laid down their lives for over thirty years. We want peace, but the settlement must be just and the settlement must be for an agreed and united Ireland.” Only when the IRA signed up di he miraculously change his mind.
It's quite clear that he wanted peace, in the same way that Zionists want peace in Greater Israel: on their terms. Offering support for one side and justification for its violence , whilst failing to make any attempt to speak to or understand the other is not a contribution to a peace process.
If you believe his pusillanimous retrospective explanations for his words and actions then I've got a bridge I can sell you.
1
1
In reply to Postmanpat:
I agree with your point that the whole thing stinks and this is in principle no different. But what you're missing is that Lynton Crosby is a far bigger c*nt than all (OK, most) of the rest of the them - people really hate him and might even want to see him publicly executed - and that's why it's a story.
> No, I just think it's a shambles, and trying to make political capital out of one rather unexceptional appointment (in the context of previous appointments) is just cynical politicking.
I agree with your point that the whole thing stinks and this is in principle no different. But what you're missing is that Lynton Crosby is a far bigger c*nt than all (OK, most) of the rest of the them - people really hate him and might even want to see him publicly executed - and that's why it's a story.
1
In reply to Jon Stewart:
He's hated largely because he's bloody good at his job and people don't like that job because it exposes the dark side of democracy. Actually, for choice I'd rather somebody got a gong for being good at their job than just by buying it.
> I agree with your point that the whole thing stinks and this is in principle no different. But what you're missing is that Lynton Crosby is a far bigger c*nt than all (OK, most) of the rest of the them - people really hate him and might even want to see him publicly executed - and that's why it's a story.
He's hated largely because he's bloody good at his job and people don't like that job because it exposes the dark side of democracy. Actually, for choice I'd rather somebody got a gong for being good at their job than just by buying it.
Post edited at 14:17
1
In reply to Postmanpat:
When the government was debating a policy to try to stop people dying appalling, avoidable deaths from lung cancer, for his own personal gain, LC was trying to ensure that as many people as possible died appalling, avoidable deaths from lung cancer. I don't care whether he was good or bad at this job, I care about the fact this psycopath's behaviour has enormous, real impacts on individuals and society.
When the government was debating a policy to try to stop people dying appalling, avoidable deaths from lung cancer, for his own personal gain, LC was trying to ensure that as many people as possible died appalling, avoidable deaths from lung cancer. I don't care whether he was good or bad at this job, I care about the fact this psycopath's behaviour has enormous, real impacts on individuals and society.
3
In reply to Postmanpat:
His job's being a cynical, manipulative Cnut though.
And that's a false choice.
> He's hated largely because he's bloody good at his job and people don't like that job because it exposes the dark side of democracy. Actually, for choice I'd rather somebody got a gong for being good at their job than just by buying it.
His job's being a cynical, manipulative Cnut though.
And that's a false choice.
2
2
In reply to Yanis Nayu:
Well, that's ruled out half the house of lords and most people in tough jobs then....
No it's not.
> His job's being a cynical, manipulative Cnut though.
Well, that's ruled out half the house of lords and most people in tough jobs then....
> And that's a false choice.
No it's not.
In reply to Postmanpat:
Yeah, all those nurses on the childhood cancer wards. Cynical, manipulative cnuts.
> and most people in tough jobs then....
Yeah, all those nurses on the childhood cancer wards. Cynical, manipulative cnuts.
2
2
In reply to Jon Stewart:
You know what I meant.....
> Yeah, all those nurses on the childhood cancer wards. Cynical, manipulative cnuts.
You know what I meant.....
2
2
This topic has been archived, and won't accept reply postings.
Loading Notifications...