Daily Wail does it again!

The Homebrew Forum

Help Support The Homebrew Forum:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.

Dutto

Landlord.
Joined
Jan 13, 2016
Messages
8,520
Reaction score
5,496
Location
Sleaford - Lincolnshire
Excerpt from the Daily Wail under the Headline: “Starmer DOES support strikes”:

“Sir Keir accused of hypocrisy after leaked documents from a meeting of Labour's ruling body reveal he privately supported action by rail workers despite insisting publicly he regrets the chaos they will unleash next week.”

I’m not sure of a number of things:
  1. Why is this “News”? Surely one of the purposes of the Labour Party is to support the actions of Unions.
  2. Why is Mr Starmer accused of “hypocrisy”? I would imagine that any sane person would “regret the chaos” that a rail strike will cause; no matter whether they support the strike or not.
  3. A “leaked document”? If the Daily Wail had to wait for a “leaked document” before making statements like the ones mentioned then they are very poorly informed!
:hat:
 

It would appear the whole article is about him publicly claiming to regret the chaos it is about to unleash, if Boris had said the same the papers would have been all over him like a rash!

Full article -
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...l-privately-supported-rail-strike-action.html
Sir Keir Starmer has been accused of hypocrisy after leaked documents reveal he privately supported strike action by rail workers – while publicly claiming to regret the chaos it is about to unleash.

The Mail on Sunday has obtained minutes from a meeting of Labour’s ruling body which record Sir Keir saying he opposed Government moves to restrict industrial action by the Aslef train drivers’ union.

But earlier this month, the Opposition leader insisted: ‘I don’t want to see strikes, nobody wants the strikes.’


The rail network will be paralysed for three days this week over a demand by workers for double-digit pay increases, while school summer holidays have been thrown into doubt after another Labour-affiliated union, the Transport Salaried Staffs’ Association (TSSA), raised the prospect of more strikes next month.

Sir Keir’s supportive comments came at a meeting of Labour’s National Executive Committee (NEC) last month, just eight days after Aslef members voted to retain their links to the party.

Last night, Transport Secretary Grant Shapps told The Mail on Sunday: ‘Keir Starmer’s claims to be on the side of the public have been exposed as a total sham.

While his union paymasters are driving their members towards a national strike under false pretences, he is saying one thing in public and another in private.

‘Far from not wanting the strikes to happen, behind closed doors he is giving them the green light, opposing efforts to prevent them and pocketing rail union cash.’
 
Last edited:
“The Mail on Sunday has obtained minutes from a meeting of Labour’s ruling body which record Sir Keir saying he opposed Government moves to restrict industrial action by the Aslef train drivers’ union.”

So? Only a Dictator would want to outlaw the right of an individual to withdraw their labour! i.e. strike

‘I don’t want to see strikes, nobody wants the strikes.”

Where exactly is the hypocrisy?

Personally, I think that women should decide what happens to their bodies; but I don’t wish to see abortions being used as a contraceptive.

Is this hypocritical?
 
So? Only a Dictator would want to outlaw the right of an individual to withdraw their labour! i.e. strike
There are professions where you are not allowed to strike police prison officers etc i wonder if they volunteered to have the right removed.


Is it not hypocrisy to -

publicly claim to regret the chaos the strikes will unleash saying ‘I don’t want to see strikes, nobody wants the strikes

then in private to say he opposed Government moves to restrict industrial action by the Aslef train drivers’ union.

No one knows what they mean by restricting industrial action its pure speculation i don't believe they have said ban them from striking!

Its not going to happen see post #9 -
Rail strikes: Not for government to intervene - Shapps



Personally, I think that women should decide what happens to their bodies; but I don’t wish to see abortions being used as a contraceptive.
FFS is there no low you wont stoop to try to win your argument?
 
Last edited:

Rail strikes: Not for government to intervene - Shapps

It is not for the government to intervene to stop rail strikes, the transport secretary has said - despite unions calling for talks.
Grant Shapps said the RMT union's request for a meeting was a "stunt" and the union was "determined to go on strike".
The union said politicians were failing to prevent its three days of industrial action next week.
Labour claimed ministers wanted the strikes to go ahead to "sow division".
Strikes will take place on almost all major lines across Britain on Tuesday, Thursday and Saturday, as well as on the London Underground on Tuesday.
There will also be knock-on effects on services on non-strike days, including Monday.
Even rail companies whose workers are not striking will be affected, as Network Rail workers are taking action - and they look after tracks and other infrastructure.
A special timetable will be in place across England, Scotland and Wales from Monday until Sunday.

The RMT said on Saturday that talks between the union and Network Rail had failed.
Speaking to BBC Radio 4's Broadcasting House programme, the RMT's Mick Lynch claimed rail operators were refusing to sit down for discussions altogether.
And he said Network Rail, which is government-owned, was being influenced by ministers.
"It's Shapps, [Boris] Johnson and Rishi Sunak who are stopping a deal being done in this dispute," he said.
But Network Rail said the RMT were dismissing talks before they had finished.

Full article - Rail strikes: Not for government to intervene - Shapps
 
Last edited:
The really sad thing here is that more people buy the Daily Mail each day than any other newspaper. This is from twitter

1655666975239.png
 
The really sad thing here is that more people buy the Daily Mail each day than any other newspaper. This is from twitter

I never knew that, i guess the daily sport readers had a hard choice when they stopped printing it ;)



Captpaperrure.jpg


 
There are professions where you are not allowed to strike police prison officers etc i wonder if they volunteered to have the right removed.

…….
FFS is there no low you wont stoop to try to win your argument?
Er …. to the first extract, they signed a waiver BEFORE they accepted the job.

To the second extract, in view of the massive amount of hypocrisy that surrounds the subject, why does giving it as an example mean that I am somehow lowering the tone of the discussion?

Please explain.
:hat:
 
Of the many examples you could have used you chose that, if you don't see what I meant there is no point in explaining.

Could I ask why you read the mail if you hate it so much why waste your time reading it then more time here moaning about what they print.
 
Last edited:
FYI, I read the front pages of most newspapers in the BBC App. I would sooner stick needles in my eyes than purchase a Daily Wail!

I particularly like Matt on the front of The Telegraph. A few days ago he had a man chopping down a tree and his wife telling a neighbour “He plants a tree to offset our carbon footprint - but the flights just been cancelled!”

Today’s Daily Wail headline is “Summer Strike Plague Spreads”!

A “plague”? Hypocrisy methinks!
:hat:
 
It makes no odds whether you buy it or read it online you still read it then come here moaning about what it says why not just ignore it and have a less miserable life?
 
It's an Englishman's (Welsh and Scots, too) inalienable right to be thoroughly miserable and to moan interminably about it.
Moreover, the more discerning among us have a duty to keep an eye on what lies the masses are being fed. The Heil isn't just a take-it-or-leave it journalistic rag, it's an active force for evil the viper in our midst. I agree with @Dutto to that extent, but I don't think the Torygraph is suitable reading for a politically bewildered gentle-person, either. Yes, Matt is a good cartoonist.
 
Back
Top