Daily Heil vs Harriet Harman
I can understand why she is upset, I struggle more with her slightly convoluted counter-arguments and the changes of strategy in the past 24 hours.
Not the Beeb and the Torygraph as well – it must be a conspiracy.
But wait, there’s the Guardian commenting on he “abrupt change of tack.” Phew not a conspiracy after all. Wonder why Chakrabati found it a lot easy to apologise about the links. How odd when there is nothing to apologise for.Posted 3 years ago
Sees like inflaming rather than deflating but she is big enough to know what she is doing I am sure. Publishing the pics of a 12 year old in a bikini, may be making a point, but hardly deflating things? And Ed’s right there behind her.
If you are innocent, you simply state the facts and move on. The other side will quickly look very silly. There is no need to take on an aggressive posture when it’s a non-story in her mind. Like all trolls, best just ignored. As that RW rag, the Guardian concludes
There is still space here for Hewitt, Harman and Dromey to “grab the conch”, as it were, to calmly tell their version of events, in context, explaining exactly what happened at the NCCL, and, where applicable, expressing regret. A calm, thorough, intelligent response is required to cut through the smokescreen of mischief and hysteria; they should answer the myriad important questions and issues arising from that time.
I dunno whether shes just basing her plan on the assumption that the world falls into 2 groups
people who hate harriet harmond (a lot of those are popping up) – their opinions wont change and a lot of them (secretly?) like the daily mail – well when it bashes labour MPs
people who hate the daily mail – wholl just ignore anything the rag saysPosted 3 years agoNobbySubscriber
Whats even more disgraceful is the absolute savaging that she got on Newsnight last night. It was appalling! Since when did the Fail start setting the news agenda, then use the BBC as its attack dog?!
Is there a small possibility it might just have something to do with how critical she was of the BBC (in particular the Newsnight team) when the Saville story broke?
I’d be asking the authorities why every member of PIE wasn’t under observation at the time…..amazed that such an organisation could even exist publicly.Posted 3 years ago16stonepigMember
Half the people you meet are thicker than that person and are consequently ruled more easily by their base emotions as opposed to rationality
How quaint to assume that intelligent people are more rational. I’m a bloody genius but an emotional, unstable, frothing firework.Posted 3 years agoTom_W1987Member
How quaint to assume that intelligent people are more rational. I’m a bloody genius but an emotional, unstable, frothing firework.
Not accounting for creative geniuses such as yourself 😛 You know what I mean, they listen to their “common sense”…. eg the kinds of people that think immigrants are baaaad because they look funny or a bunch of jews worshiping a dead carpenter as opposed to having a critical thought on the subject.Posted 3 years agoalexandersupertrampSubscriber
She was happy to work for a company took payment from people that did.
If that’s ok then I’m happy thAt I don’t think like you
I must confess I haven’t checked out the activities of every single company my pension scheme is invested in.
Well that’s up to you, maybe you should.Posted 3 years ago
They campaigned for to have legal sex with children as young as four. I thought I just heard that on Five live. Hope I heard wrong.
You lot would be happy to work for a company that would represent an organisation like that.
We live in a society which prides itself in allowing everyone, including those with abhorrent views, to express themselves. Paedophiles have a legal right to campaign for the abolition of the age of consent, or the lowering of the age of consent. This right is a civil rights issue.
Personally I reject this right and believe that no platform should be provided to pedophiles to attack the democratic right of children to have a childhood.
But you can’t have it both ways, ie, defend bourgeois democracy with the “I may disagree with what you have to say, but I shall defend to the death your right to say it” bollox, and then complain about its consequences.
The Paedophile Information Exchange was a legal organisation, no one was prosecuted for being a member. If the DM expects HH to apologise then the Tories need aplogise for not banning it when they were in government, and the DPP for not prosecuting.
I doubt there are many potential Labour voters out there reading the Mail.
Probably a lot more than you think. Half a million Daily Mail readers voted Labour last general election.Posted 3 years agoNorthwindSubscriber
teamhurtmore – Member
People who dive into the offensive first are usually those with something to hide.
What, you think that the Mail is on the attack because they’re trying to hide the fact that they’re blatantly paedophiles?
The Mail- sexual perverts
Nor do they utter a word of apology to the victims of PIE
What, Binners?Posted 3 years agoPJM1974Member
Personally, I find Harriet Harman almost as vile as the Daily Heil.
She seems to be able to put her principles aside on a whim, an example has to be her performance on Question Time immediately after the last election. In an idea world, the Mail and Harman would both cancel each other out.Posted 3 years agonoteethMember
it’s pretty hypocritical given how many long lens photos of 13 year olds in bikinis they print
It’s the Fail – if there had been a DM website during the ’30s, they’d probably have been drooling over pictures of the Hitler-Jugend swimming team…. come to think of it, perhaps that’s what Lord Rothermere meant by “Youth Triumphant”. 👿Posted 3 years ago
She has nothing for which to apologise.
The Mail with its sidebar of shame has more to apologise for in giving paedophiles something over which to legitimately masturbate without raising suspicion in CEOPS on its sidebar of shame.
I know some right wingers (including some of STW’s finest in this thread) are busy masturbating over HH’s difficulties this week, and I can only imagine that in their frictional frenzy, they haven’t quite realised that the enemy of their enemy being their friend is somewhat of a folly when that means their friend is the DM.Posted 3 years agojivehoneyjiveMember
Far too much emphasis is being put on the Daily Mail here…
P.I.E. was a group with extensive influence throughout the political elite, who were campaigning to lower the age of consent to 4…
and lets not forget the Tory Monday Club’s involvement with Spartacus Magazine and Elm Guest House
So much of this information has been in the public domain for ages, so why only now are they choosing to publicise it?Posted 3 years ago
The Guardian where I read about Hewitt’s comments is hardly a RW rag.
Read the article again THM, in it Patricia Hewitt makes it clear that Harman has nothing to apologise for. Quote :
“Harriet [Harman] did not join the NCCL staff until 1978. She was one of two legal officers, neither of whom was a member of the executive committee.”
She herself accepts responsibility. Quote :
Hewitt added: “As general secretary then, I take responsibility for the mistakes we made”.
Other people who haven’t apologised are the Daily Mail for not campaigning at the time to have the Paedophile Information Exchange legally banned, the clue after all was in the name “Paedophile”. And both Labour and Tory governments for not banning PIE.
PIE was regularly in the news at the time they were operating. No moves were ever made to have them banned.Posted 3 years ago
I’m unconcerned with Hewitt’s comments. If she wishes to roll over for the DM, then, let her do it.
I repeat, the DM has more for which to apologise than Harriet Harman when it comes to the sexualisation of children. It’s rather revealing that some would happily jump into bed with the DM, one of Europe’s vilest dailies, such is their pornographic hatred of the “left”. It certainly shines a light on their (lack of) principles for me.Posted 3 years ago
Not quite Ernie, she seeks to defend their specific roles. Subtedly different.
The Wail is a dreadful rag DD, but two wrongs don’t make a right IMO. If Hewitt and Chakrabati can respond correctly, so can an important, high profile politician. Poor judgement.Posted 3 years ago
If she wishes to roll over for the DM, then, let her do it.
I can’t see any evidence that Patricia Hewitt is ‘rolling over’ for the Daily Mail. The NCCL/Liberty has in the past issued an apology and admitted its mistakes for its past links with PIE, this has nothing to do with the Daily Mail. It’s quite appropriate that the former general secretary of the NCCL should restate those points at the present moment, with all the media coverage the issue is receiving.
It would in fact be quite ridiculous for those concerned to pretend that was nothing wrong with the NCCL accepting PIE under its umbrella.Posted 3 years ago
The Wail is a dreadful rag DD, but…
This reminds me of when people say “No offence, but…” * and “No disrespect intended, but…” *.
What does she have to apologise for (in this case) other than being a target of the DM after it’s catastrophic attempt to smear Ed Miliband? Or are you suggesting a politician apologise just to get the DM off its back? Should Ed have done the same? This is a smear campaign (to give it the most respectful term of which I can think at present) – be careful which smear campaigns on whose backs you’d jump to eek out an apology. Frankly, it’s a disgusting campaign by a paper which blatantly sexualises children – most likely written by hypocrites who don’t even believe it. That anybody with a modicum of self-respect would ally themselves to it because it might emote a response from one of his or her hate-figures is at best distasteful, at worst, loathesome.
* Go me with some Quoteyard Square brackets. 😀Posted 3 years ago
The topic ‘Daily Heil vs Harriet Harman’ is closed to new replies.