If You Could Live In Another Decade,...
ChatterBank5 mins ago
Is The Daily Mail's Editor A Coward?
The Editor of the Daily Mail, Paul Dacre, has been accused of being a coward because he did not agree to be interviewed over the Ralph Milliband debacle on Newsnight
Instead, he sent a deputy, Jon Staefl, who Alistair Campbell wiped the floor with.
// The Daily Mail's deputy editor Jon Steafel was invited on to BBC Newsnight on Tuesday evening to defend his paper's decision to accuse Ed Miliband's father Ralph of “hating Britain”. He faced Alastair Campbell, who accused the paper's editor, Paul Dacre, of being a “bully and a coward” for not appearing himself, sending his deputy instead. //
http://
Do you think it was a mistake to send a minion to defend the paper?
Do you think he chickened out when he knew he would be on with Campbell?
Instead, he sent a deputy, Jon Staefl, who Alistair Campbell wiped the floor with.
// The Daily Mail's deputy editor Jon Steafel was invited on to BBC Newsnight on Tuesday evening to defend his paper's decision to accuse Ed Miliband's father Ralph of “hating Britain”. He faced Alastair Campbell, who accused the paper's editor, Paul Dacre, of being a “bully and a coward” for not appearing himself, sending his deputy instead. //
http://
Do you think it was a mistake to send a minion to defend the paper?
Do you think he chickened out when he knew he would be on with Campbell?
Answers
Let's have some respect and hold off the Daily Mail, shall we? Insulting it is like insulting someone's religion. There are one or two devout believers on here, who accept, without analysis or criticism, everything it says. That it sells many copies might be a cause of concern, but, like religion, it may have many who pay lip service to the beliefs but, in...
20:59 Wed 02nd Oct 2013
not necessarily; Dacre has always been extremely shy of publicity. (On the general principle of why should he put himself in the spotlight when he has a whole newspaper to trumpet his views?) You'll seldom see interviews with him or statements from him. So this is normal behaviour for him.
However, there does come a point when your product is so deep in the mire that anyone less than the boss defending it looks like a cop-out, and that's happened here. The responsibility for what appears in a paper is the editor's, and he should have been prepared to defend it in person.
However, there does come a point when your product is so deep in the mire that anyone less than the boss defending it looks like a cop-out, and that's happened here. The responsibility for what appears in a paper is the editor's, and he should have been prepared to defend it in person.
-- answer removed --
Althoughthe Daily Mail report was insensitive in attacking Milliband's dead father, they have been accused of telling lies, but it would seem not everyone believes they did.
http://
http://
The article was pretty accurate, Ralph was a card carrying marxist. So there is not much to talk about there. The main point of discussion would be as to why it was published. I'm no fan of Red Ed and the whole socialist shebang but I still think the Mail should not have brought Ed's father into it. So that leaves them to justify, not the article but why it was even published. Yes I'd say the editor bottled it.
from Rod Liddle's blog;
/But his political beliefs, and springing from those his dislike of Great Britain, /
err how so? Apparently he lived here happily most of his life.
No doubt his political views challenged some British 'sacred cows' but that is true of any radical views. There is no evidence that he wanted Britain eradicated and replaced by a mini Soviet Union.
So do all true patriots have to love everything about their country and criticise nothing?
In that case, people like aog are obviously in the /Hate Britain/ camp too.
/But his political beliefs, and springing from those his dislike of Great Britain, /
err how so? Apparently he lived here happily most of his life.
No doubt his political views challenged some British 'sacred cows' but that is true of any radical views. There is no evidence that he wanted Britain eradicated and replaced by a mini Soviet Union.
So do all true patriots have to love everything about their country and criticise nothing?
In that case, people like aog are obviously in the /Hate Britain/ camp too.
Was this a lie?
/// shortly after his arrival in Britain, the 17-year-old Miliband senior had confided to his diary: ‘The Englishman is a rabid nationalist. They are perhaps the most nationalist people in the world . . . you sometimes want them almost to lose [the war] to show them how things are’ ///
I am sure that it can easily be proven so, if that is what it is.
/// shortly after his arrival in Britain, the 17-year-old Miliband senior had confided to his diary: ‘The Englishman is a rabid nationalist. They are perhaps the most nationalist people in the world . . . you sometimes want them almost to lose [the war] to show them how things are’ ///
I am sure that it can easily be proven so, if that is what it is.
I think the mistake some reviewers make is in thinking that people are one dimensional. They think that Ed's dad was either ...
... a patriotic goodie (because he was in the armed forces) or
... a left wing baddie (because he was a Marxist)
It seems, in fact, that elements of both are true. He was in the armed forces. And yet he did become "seduced" by Marxism, and grew to despise the country that had taken him in. He became a revolutionary, and a subversive.
The Mail's analysis seems correct.
(did I just say something nice about the Daily Mail?)
(takes temperature and goes for lie down)
But, at the same time, they did display the characteristic behaviour of a "bully" by attacking someone who wasn't ready for it, and then running off to hide.
If the Mail had defended themselves a bit better, and their Ed had showed up, then Red Ed would have had to accept defeat, and do a bit of damage limitation. But they handled it all wrong.
Twenty years ago, a Labour leader would have been proud of a dad who spoke out for left wing beliefs. Now that the Labour Party is pretending to be the Conservative Party, poor old dad has become a bit of an embarrassment.
Power to the people!
... a patriotic goodie (because he was in the armed forces) or
... a left wing baddie (because he was a Marxist)
It seems, in fact, that elements of both are true. He was in the armed forces. And yet he did become "seduced" by Marxism, and grew to despise the country that had taken him in. He became a revolutionary, and a subversive.
The Mail's analysis seems correct.
(did I just say something nice about the Daily Mail?)
(takes temperature and goes for lie down)
But, at the same time, they did display the characteristic behaviour of a "bully" by attacking someone who wasn't ready for it, and then running off to hide.
If the Mail had defended themselves a bit better, and their Ed had showed up, then Red Ed would have had to accept defeat, and do a bit of damage limitation. But they handled it all wrong.
Twenty years ago, a Labour leader would have been proud of a dad who spoke out for left wing beliefs. Now that the Labour Party is pretending to be the Conservative Party, poor old dad has become a bit of an embarrassment.
Power to the people!
// shortly after his arrival in Britain, the 17-year-old Miliband senior had confided to his diary: ‘The Englishman is a rabid nationalist. They are perhaps the most nationalist people in the world . . . you sometimes want them almost to lose [the war] to show them how things are’ ///
aog
perhaps you can explain how one solitary diary entry by a 17 year old refugee just arrived in the country from Nazi occupied europe justifies the statement that he was
/The man who hated Britain/
or do you agree it is lurid, ott and ridiculous
aog
perhaps you can explain how one solitary diary entry by a 17 year old refugee just arrived in the country from Nazi occupied europe justifies the statement that he was
/The man who hated Britain/
or do you agree it is lurid, ott and ridiculous
Gromit
/// AOG ///
/// Your constant anti Royalist posts prove YOU hate Britain? ///
Ah once again I have hit on a sensitive nerve, so engage your diversionary measures
Those few and not 'CONSTANT' anti Royalist posts, are not even 'ANTI ROYALIST' in the republican sense of the word..
Has in Milliband's case where certain members of his family are not immune from criticism, the same can be said for the Royal Family.
Whereas I have never criticised the Queen or the Duke of Edinburgh, I admit I along with many other Royalists have had cause in the past to criticise some lesser members of the Royal family.
/// AOG ///
/// Your constant anti Royalist posts prove YOU hate Britain? ///
Ah once again I have hit on a sensitive nerve, so engage your diversionary measures
Those few and not 'CONSTANT' anti Royalist posts, are not even 'ANTI ROYALIST' in the republican sense of the word..
Has in Milliband's case where certain members of his family are not immune from criticism, the same can be said for the Royal Family.
Whereas I have never criticised the Queen or the Duke of Edinburgh, I admit I along with many other Royalists have had cause in the past to criticise some lesser members of the Royal family.
Related Questions
Sorry, we can't find any related questions. Try using the search bar at the top of the page to search for some keywords, or choose a topic and submit your own question.