sjc Posted June 13, 2014 Share Posted June 13, 2014 Some folk have definitely taken it 'too far' (as they say) - and unfortunately due to the internet and social media this is happening with pretty much every cause or campaign. Now everyone's opinion is out there and unfortunately some folk are very thick. Quite often these folk shout the loudest and as a result things get out of hand (the referendum is arguably another example of this where some reasonable arguments are getting overtaken by arseholes who just fling shite at their opponents). Another example is the grief merchants that spunk emotion all over the place when a celebrity dies. Its something we have to get used to I guess . But its important to remember that at the heart of this topic there was a genuine miscarriage of justice - and because of the number of casualties that miscarriage was a big deal. I agree whole-heartedly......and it works both ways. As much as I disagree with people mocking the 96 that died I uphold the right to debate points of law regardless of how heartless that may appear on those who lost their lives/loved ones. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pandarilla Posted June 13, 2014 Share Posted June 13, 2014 I agree whole-heartedly......and it works both ways. As much as I disagree with people mocking the 96 that died I uphold the right to debate points of law regardless of how heartless that may appear on those who lost their lives/loved ones. Yep. I'd be very surprised if the actual campaign was apportioning all the blame for the deaths on the police. It was a tragic accident - in the sense that no one wanted it to happen. As far as I know there was some negligence - but the real anger relates to the aftermath (both immediate and more long-term). 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sjc Posted June 13, 2014 Share Posted June 13, 2014 Yep. I'd be very surprised if the actual campaign was apportioning all the blame for the deaths on the police. It was a tragic accident - in the sense that no one wanted it to happen. As far as I know there was some negligence - but the real anger relates to the aftermath (both immediate and more long-term). In terms of the anger relating to the cover up of the Police's/authoritories I totally concur with.......that was despicable.....but like I said previously....anyone old enough to remember football and the Governments attitude towards it back then wouldn't have been surprised by the cover up......not that this makes it right. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mizfit Posted June 14, 2014 Share Posted June 14, 2014 what has this milliband picture got to do with hillsborough. Exactly this. The sun released a special copy to encourage the country to get behind England in the build up to the World Cup, milliband would have obliged to do the picture without thinking of any possible link to Hillsborough. The fact he has had to apologise to the campaigners when nothing about Hillsborough was mentioned is pathetic. It wouldn't surprise me if they attempted to run for parliament soon 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pandarilla Posted June 14, 2014 Share Posted June 14, 2014 Exactly this. The sun released a special copy to encourage the country to get behind England in the build up to the World Cup, milliband would have obliged to do the picture without thinking of any possible link to Hillsborough. The fact he has had to apologise to the campaigners when nothing about Hillsborough was mentioned is pathetic. It wouldn't surprise me if they attempted to run for parliament soon Its not just about Hillsborough though - its about the whole connection with Rupert Murdoch. Milliband got a lot of credit over the NotW scandal - and it looked like their was an appetite to rid politics of Murdoch's influence. In saying that - its still a storm in a teacup. I personally wouldn't associate myself in any way with Murdoch's rag, but that's only one of the many reasons why I'm not the leader of the opposition. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
welshbairn Posted June 14, 2014 Share Posted June 14, 2014 Exactly this. The sun released a special copy to encourage the country to get behind England in the build up to the World Cup, Bollox, They did it to promote the Sun. No politician should have got involved. He was right to apologise even without the Hillsborough link. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sjc Posted June 14, 2014 Share Posted June 14, 2014 Its not just about Hillsborough though - its about the whole connection with Rupert Murdoch. Milliband got a lot of credit over the NotW scandal - and it looked like their was an appetite to rid politics of Murdoch's influence. In saying that - its still a storm in a teacup. I personally wouldn't associate myself in any way with Murdoch's rag, but that's only one of the many reasons why I'm not the leader of the opposition. Would there have been the same outrage if it was the Times he was holding up? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pandarilla Posted June 14, 2014 Share Posted June 14, 2014 Would there have been the same outrage if it was the Times he was holding up? No, not as much (in my opinion anyway). It can at least be called a newspaper. It has certain standards. Not my cup of tea, but in no way comparable to the Sun. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tamdunk Posted June 14, 2014 Share Posted June 14, 2014 Ed says sorry, but guess what group jump on the bandwagon to demonise him http://www.politics.co.uk/news/2014/06/13/ed-miliband-very-sorry-for-endorsing-the-sun I just glanced over that and this quote stood out "It begs the question - were the comments he made after the Hillsborough panel report sincere or just sound bites?" Has Ed Milliband ever said anything that wasn't a soundbite? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sjc Posted June 14, 2014 Share Posted June 14, 2014 No, not as much (in my opinion anyway). It can at least be called a newspaper. It has certain standards. Not my cup of tea, but in no way comparable to the Sun. The Times is owned by Murdoch as well though.... 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
~~~ Posted June 14, 2014 Share Posted June 14, 2014 Do Liverpool fans get upset when games are showing on Sky? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jambomo Posted June 17, 2014 Share Posted June 17, 2014 Liverpool fans get upset when the day of the week ends in a letter Y. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
~~~ Posted June 17, 2014 Share Posted June 17, 2014 Civil servant has been sacked for remarks on the Hillsborough wiki page 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sjc Posted June 17, 2014 Share Posted June 17, 2014 Civil servant has been sacked for remarks on the Hillsborough wiki page From the news report he was mocking the dead. As keen as I am for an open and frank debate on Hillsborough & for perhaps less pandering of the Campaign(ers)......mocking those that died like that is out of order imo. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
~~~ Posted December 31, 2014 Share Posted December 31, 2014 Surprised they have accepted the honour from the "establishment" “@SkySportsNewsHQ: BREAKING: Hillsborough campaigners Trevor Hicks and Margaret Aspinall awarded CBEs for their work in supporting bereaved families. #SSNHQ” 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
throbber Posted December 31, 2014 Share Posted December 31, 2014 Anyone not clued up on Hilsborough i would recommend watching the 30 for 30 documentary which you can get on youtube, brilliant stuff. As for the fault of who caused the accident... the Leppings lane was and still is a bottle neck and you can't get round the sides of the stand when your outside very easily and this was obviously unsafe from day one. There was one obvious entrance to the stand which fed supporters into the 2 central pens and a lot of supporters didn't know that the entrance to the wider pens was around the corner and just followed the crowd in which caused the eventual crushing. This site lay out wasn't the polices fault but wasn't addressed to before the game which resulted in an almighty clusterfuck. The idea of having supporters in pens in the first place was probably the most dangerous thing as had the pens not existed the fans would have dispersed out and found where was comfortable but because of these large fences that wasn't possible, again this wasnt the polices fault. The main problem was that there was a switch in police personel which let the inexperienced David Duckenfield in charge who had no experience in crowd control, wasn't the right person for the job and only got the job because of a horrible prank played by officers on a rookie constable months before which resulted in the removal of the chief constable who usually controlled these games. Duckenfield had no idea what to do on the day, the crowd were trying to get into the ground on time like any other supporters and it resulted in the disaster that was caused by poor organisation among the police and no leadership. Duckenfield then in the heat of the moment when asked what was going on blamed the supporters for rioting, like any f**k up in the work place when asked what went wrong he tried to shift the blame and then this lie continued for generations. I personally don't think Liverpool fans are to blame but there may well have been numerous fans blazing without tickets acting like rebels but the police shoulda handled it. Im off out now 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sjc Posted December 31, 2014 Share Posted December 31, 2014 Anyone not clued up on Hilsborough i would recommend watching the 30 for 30 documentary which you can get on youtube, brilliant stuff. As for the fault of who caused the accident... the Leppings lane was and still is a bottle neck and you can't get round the sides of the stand when your outside very easily and this was obviously unsafe from day one. There was one obvious entrance to the stand which fed supporters into the 2 central pens and a lot of supporters didn't know that the entrance to the wider pens was around the corner and just followed the crowd in which caused the eventual crushing. This site lay out wasn't the polices fault but wasn't addressed to before the game which resulted in an almighty clusterfuck. The idea of having supporters in pens in the first place was probably the most dangerous thing as had the pens not existed the fans would have dispersed out and found where was comfortable but because of these large fences that wasn't possible, again this wasnt the polices fault. The main problem was that there was a switch in police personel which let the inexperienced David Duckenfield in charge who had no experience in crowd control, wasn't the right person for the job and only got the job because of a horrible prank played by officers on a rookie constable months before which resulted in the removal of the chief constable who usually controlled these games. Duckenfield had no idea what to do on the day, the crowd were trying to get into the ground on time like any other supporters and it resulted in the disaster that was caused by poor organisation among the police and no leadership. Duckenfield then in the heat of the moment when asked what was going on blamed the supporters for rioting, like any f**k up in the work place when asked what went wrong he tried to shift the blame and then this lie continued for generations. I personally don't think Liverpool fans are to blame but there may well have been numerous fans blazing without tickets acting like rebels but the police shoulda handled it. Im off out now It's easily forgotten that football back then wasn't the warm, cuddly, family friendly game it is these days. It was blighted by hooliganism causing havoc across the Country/Continent.......anyone old enough to remember this won't be surprised by the finding of the inquiry that the Authorities covered things up. That doesn't mean I think they were right to do so. I've always maintained that the Police were negligent in there acts & omissions but so were the ticketless Liverpool fans that entered the Leppings Lane end that day. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The_BullyWee Posted December 31, 2014 Share Posted December 31, 2014 The Taylor report cleared ticketless fans did it not? To say the police were negligent is the biggest understatement possible. The complete mess they made of things on that day and to then begin a massive cover up like they did and the days after shows South Yorkshire Police to be the horrible force that they are when there had been serious problems in Semi Finals at that ground in previous years before 89. The 30 for 30 doc is supposed to be excellent but it won't be shown in the UK until the current proceedings are over. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
H_B Posted December 31, 2014 Share Posted December 31, 2014 I personally don't think Liverpool fans are to blame Of course they are to blame. It's merely their percentage culpability that is at issue. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
H_B Posted December 31, 2014 Share Posted December 31, 2014 The Taylor report cleared ticketless fans did it not? It certainly didn't clear the Liverpool fans. the Taylor Report makes it clear they take part of the share of the blame. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.