Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
June 11, 2024, 07:22:55 am

Login with username, password and session length

Links


FSA logo

Author Topic: Triesman  (Read 2386 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

en aitch

  • Forum Member
  • Posts: 138
Triesman
« on May 17, 2010, 08:04:59 am by en aitch »
So has anyone got any thoughts about this daft t**t and the w**k Press that calls itself (this time round) the Mail on Sunday.

David Maxim Triesman - 66 years old and still doesn't know when to speak and when to keep his gob shut.
The Mail on Sunday - a bunch of opportunistic w**kers who no doubt will delight in telling all who will listen that they are proud to have exposed this silly old duffer.

If you were part of a team of people who had created 1752 pages of bedtime reading how would you feel that this had been offered up as journalism?



(want to hide these ads? Join the VSC today!)

The Red Baron

  • VSC Member
  • Posts: 16137
Re:Triesman
« Reply #1 on May 17, 2010, 10:02:05 am by The Red Baron »
When it comes to sporting matters, the press in this country seem to want it both ways. They claim to want successful teams, events held in this country, etc., but then they choose to run stories that are damaging to both.

What's the betting that there will be some \"scandal\" involving a member of the England World Cup squad either before or during the tournament?

Triesman was stupid to say the things he did, but I really wonder who benefits from all this?

RobTheRover

  • VSC Member
  • Posts: 17381
Re:Triesman
« Reply #2 on May 17, 2010, 02:42:23 pm by RobTheRover »
If Cameron/Clegg really want the best for the country they need to get all the newpaper editors in one room and read them the fcuking riot act.  Triesman has been stupid to blurt it out, but he was only saying what many people think - that some top football matches, and the decisions to award tournaments, are rigged.  History has proved him to be correct.

The press are the ones who need to learn to keep schtum, for whats best for the country.  England winning the right to host the 2018 world cup would bring billions into the economy over the next 8 years.  Now it looks like thats all gone up in smoke thanks to some t**t wanting to break a scoop.

There was a Paris-based liverpool fan on TalkSport a couple of weeks ago, speaking about the French press.  Nothing like the so-called scandals the British press revel in ever get reported in the French papers, because in France no one gives a toss who, lets say, Thierry Henry is or isn't nobbing.  Its all done to feed a quite unnatural interest in celebrity lives by the mindless majority.  Society wants to get a grip on whats important in life, and these scummy stories will never see the light of day.

BobG

  • VSC Member
  • Posts: 9825
Re:Triesman
« Reply #3 on May 17, 2010, 10:56:02 pm by BobG »
I blame that tosser Aussie. Err Yank. Err, tosser!

He started the whole chuffing thing decades ago now and every other silly bog roll editor has to run just to stand still.

Cheers

BobG

BillyStubbsTears

  • VSC Member
  • Posts: 37322
Re:Triesman
« Reply #4 on May 18, 2010, 12:04:17 am by BillyStubbsTears »
RobTheRover wrote:
Quote

There was a Paris-based liverpool fan on TalkSport a couple of weeks ago, speaking about the French press.  Nothing like the so-called scandals the British press revel in ever get reported in the French papers, because in France no one gives a toss who, lets say, Thierry Henry is or isn't nobbing.  Its all done to feed a quite unnatural interest in celebrity lives by the mindless majority.  Society wants to get a grip on whats important in life, and these scummy stories will never see the light of day.


And not only about sport. Francois Mitterand had an illegitimate child in the 80s and the story never came out. There's an unspoken agreement in France that politicians' ability to get on with doing their job (i.e. running the f**king country) is so important that it should not be shafted by sensationalist media stories.

It's dnagerous, for sure. There's the danger of politicians getting away with really naughty stuff without being exposed (and I don't class getting your end away as naughty - I mean politically naughty). But there's a f**king massive great danger in our system - that politics gets infantilised and paralysed by the terror of what Murdoch or the Mail might think/say/do.

The Expenses Scandal is the perfect example. The rest of the world is pissing itself laughing at us, the way that we got so worked up over a couple of million quid. The TOTAL sum repaid by MPs comes to less than the AVERAGE expense claim of a single US Senator. So, we've swept away a generation of decent, hardworking MPs in our moral panic. And even worse: we've ensured that in the NEXT generation, no-one with an ounce of talent or public spirit will even think about going into politics - why bother when you know that you'll be destroyed at the whim of some editor?

But f**k it eh? It sells papers and gives intellectually idle t**ts summat to talk about at work.

en aitch

  • Forum Member
  • Posts: 138
Re:Triesman
« Reply #5 on May 18, 2010, 06:32:32 am by en aitch »
So we allow the media - ie Sky / Sun / Screws of the World / Mail / Express etc. to actually govern - because when they squeal for some reason it is important.

The expenses thing ... its true, it was & is wrong to submit illegitimate claims, and it is really quite naughty if you're in a position of trust and public money funds those claims, but when one court case will take up all and more of what is recouped I fail to see any logic in the sensationalist behaviours out there ...

There is actually a lot to be said for the Daily Sport (is it still out there?) because it doesn't pretend to provide news (or it didn't use to) it provided pictures of pretty girls, big tits and unbelievable stories - at least you knew it was supposed to be for fun!

BobG

  • VSC Member
  • Posts: 9825
Re:Triesman
« Reply #6 on May 18, 2010, 10:01:30 pm by BobG »
There's another point that this moral panic missed entirely in the rush to judgement. For 30 years now successive Governments have shied away from paying an MP a decent wage. I know they are well enough paid by ordinary standards, but MP's are supposed to be a bit special. They are supposed to be above influence. They are supposed to be reasonably independent. But fear of the public has always meant that MP's have had to toe the party line when it came round to pay rise time. It would never do to have MP's busting whichever wage freeze was in force at the time.

And that has had utterly baleful consequences: not only were the missed pay rises made up with a 'nod and a wink' to 'Claim it on expenses old boy' (which has certainly been true for aeons now) but it has also led to the entirely corrupt growth of seats at boardroom tables in return for lovely salaries. And if that is not selling influence I don't know what is.

Pay the buggers half a million each and totally abolish all out of Parliament employment.

Cheers

BobG

 

TinyPortal © 2005-2012