No its just shows I couldn't care less about the rag or its opinions its time the Left wing ideas were consigned to rubbish heap they belong in and the dinosaurs who believe in it left the 19th century and joined everyone else in the 21st
No? What your subjective views are of the paper are irrelevant - I'm pointing out what you said vis a vis it always supporting Labour is factually incorrect.
Any chance of seeing these images of houses with NUMEROUS FLAGS? That must be something.
The SHEAR extent of the flags you refer to was three. LARGE extent amounts to three. Admittedly it was a small house. Perhaps that was the 'novelty' for Emily.
I think the novelty was that someone living in the servants quarters was English
No? What your subjective views are of the paper are irrelevant - I'm pointing out what you said vis a vis it always supporting Labour is factually incorrect.
Agreed?
It was an anti Brown stance not a pro Lib Dem stance that made them do that , they had been arguing that Labour should sack Brown for the previous 12 months
She always promotes the fact she spent some time in a council house - did no one support England where she lived. She rarely mentions her dad was Deputy Director General at the United Nations - not exactly a job at the local factory or cleaning the streets:D!
Her mother was the Mayoress of Guildford, so she probably picked herself a nice council house in a nice area, despite her father being able to afford a nice detached house, Guildford is hardly a deprived area.
Her mother was the Mayoress of Guildford, so she probably picked herself a nice council house in a nice area, despite her father being able to afford a nice detached house, Guildford is hardly a deprived area.
I dont think Emily was claiming shes had a hard life but rather using the fact to dismiss the idea that shes a snob.
Her mother was the Mayoress of Guildford, so she probably picked herself a nice council house in a nice area, despite her father being able to afford a nice detached house, Guildford is hardly a deprived area.
Of course you have no idea whether this happened or not. Pointless speculation!
True, but in this case it added nothing useful to the discussion. Just unpleasantness for the sake of it.
That was because the tweet didn't have any context. If she had added 'Oh look a house with load of flags' it might have stifled any speculation before it happened.
But seeing as all she added was 'Rochester' it left the photo open to interpretation.
I feel it was valid to interpret the photo as saying 'Here lies a racist thug, that's Rochester for you'.
That was because the tweet didn't have any context. If she had added 'Oh look a house with load of flags' it might have stifled any speculation before it happened.
But seeing as all she added was 'Rochester' it left the photo open to interpretation.
I feel it was valid to interpret the photo as saying 'Here lies a racist thug, that's Rochester for you'.
That wasn't the speculation I was referring to, but never mind!
people who used to live in a Council House cannot be a snob?
No not cannot be clearly but its legitmet for her to use as a supporting argument in her defence against claims shes a snob.Evidence not proof.
If she got along fine on the council estate and didnt judge or look down on others there then I see no traction in the claim shes a snob.Just as equally I could say to you cant well off people ever be down to earth and not snobby?Cuts both ways that logic.
No not cannot be clearly but its legitmet for her to use as a supporting argument in her defence against claims shes a snob.Evidence not proof.
If she got along fine on the council estate and didnt judge or look down on others there then I see no traction in the claim shes a snob.Just as equally I could say to you cant well off people ever be down to earth and not snobby?Cuts both ways that logic.
Im not sure what bearing this has on any point I made?
That was a council house believe it or not , not all council houses look like Coronation Street
It doesn't take very strenuous research to see that the previous tweet was also a picture of someone's house.
I'm not keen on using twitter so try to avoid it.
There was one tweet of one house which had clear context. E.g. she thought of a friend (or someone she knew) who had the same name (username) as the bill board in the garden.
Yes - and Labour are very happy to exploit that manufactured scandal and outrage when it suits them. Themedia attacks on UKIP prior to the EU elections and the SNP/Yes campaig just before the Scottish referendum being prime examples.
So drop the sob stories about Ms Thornberry - its just a bit much.
I don't think she deserves a sob story. She pitched her apology just about right imo.
She didn't gush insincerely, she just said she was sorry if people felt they were upset by what she'd posted (read: "if you are the type of person who thinks this very trivial thing is worth my resignation then I'll fall on my sword, but you need to get a sense of perspective")
I don't think she deserves a sob story. She pitched her apology just about right imo.
She didn't gush insincerely, she just said she was sorry if people felt they were upset by what she'd posted (read: "if you are the type of person who thinks this very trivial thing is worth my resignation then I'll fall on my sword, but you need to get a sense of perspective")
The old 'I'm sorry if I upset people' apology is just a get out clause.
She didn't explain why she tweeted the photo. But then I suspect she doesn't want to admit the real reason she thought the house was a 'novelty'. And how can something be a novelty if you are implying a whole town is like it?
Comments
No? What your subjective views are of the paper are irrelevant - I'm pointing out what you said vis a vis it always supporting Labour is factually incorrect.
Agreed?
She'd never seen a house with one window partially obscured?
I think the novelty was that someone living in the servants quarters was English
It was an anti Brown stance not a pro Lib Dem stance that made them do that , they had been arguing that Labour should sack Brown for the previous 12 months
http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2010/apr/30/the-liberal-moment-has-come
They weren't 100% convinced about the LIb Dems either , but what do you expect from the gutter press
Her mother was the Mayoress of Guildford, so she probably picked herself a nice council house in a nice area, despite her father being able to afford a nice detached house, Guildford is hardly a deprived area.
Check her twitter and compare the two pics:)
Its clear theres a contrast ,their drapped much more in the controversial pic or so called controversial pic.
I dont think Emily was claiming shes had a hard life but rather using the fact to dismiss the idea that shes a snob.
Which means nothing really as anyone can be a snob. Even a tramp can be a snob.
Of course you have no idea whether this happened or not. Pointless speculation!
Well if she has been tweeting photos of people's houses before this, then Labour should have pulled her up on it sooner.
I can only see one other photo of a house and that clearly has context with it.
Did you see the council house Robert Maxwell rented from Oxford council ?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Headington_Hill_Hall#mediaviewer/File:Oxford_brookes_headington_hill.JPG
Speculation is never pointless.
In many cases it is!
It just meant that in those cases the speculation never came to anything.
Humans have an innate sense of curiosity and speculating is part of using that curiosity.
True, but in this case it added nothing useful to the discussion. Just unpleasantness for the sake of it.
That was because the tweet didn't have any context. If she had added 'Oh look a house with load of flags' it might have stifled any speculation before it happened.
But seeing as all she added was 'Rochester' it left the photo open to interpretation.
I feel it was valid to interpret the photo as saying 'Here lies a racist thug, that's Rochester for you'.
That wasn't the speculation I was referring to, but never mind!
people who used to live in a Council House cannot be a snob?
No not cannot be clearly but its legitmet for her to use as a supporting argument in her defence against claims shes a snob.Evidence not proof.
If she got along fine on the council estate and didnt judge or look down on others there then I see no traction in the claim shes a snob.Just as equally I could say to you cant well off people ever be down to earth and not snobby?Cuts both ways that logic.
Im not sure what bearing this has on any point I made?
That was a council house believe it or not , not all council houses look like Coronation Street
Given my background Im well aware!
It doesn't take very strenuous research to see that the previous tweet was also a picture of someone's house.
I'm not keen on using twitter so try to avoid it.
There was one tweet of one house which had clear context. E.g. she thought of a friend (or someone she knew) who had the same name (username) as the bill board in the garden.
I don't think she deserves a sob story. She pitched her apology just about right imo.
She didn't gush insincerely, she just said she was sorry if people felt they were upset by what she'd posted (read: "if you are the type of person who thinks this very trivial thing is worth my resignation then I'll fall on my sword, but you need to get a sense of perspective")
She didn't explain why she tweeted the photo. But then I suspect she doesn't want to admit the real reason she thought the house was a 'novelty'. And how can something be a novelty if you are implying a whole town is like it?