Tuesday, 10 April 2012

No, Councillor

Welll, Ms Hacker shares a surname with the Yes, Minister character.  Flashing Blade has this to say on Reading Labour's twentieth-century broadcast-not-receive mode. She has forgotten to let through my comment on her post from yesterday, so here it is:

Hello Sarah. it wasn't the Tories who first mentioned the atrocious despicable dog-whistle racist Labour leaflet for Church ward, it was me. It was picked up by others afterwards. How shameful that you lend yourself to such tactics. I hope your constituents can forgive you for it.



and here is her reply by email:

I know. I saw your tweet. It's a nonsense. I am not shamed, my post is not shameful. Your opinion means nothing to me.


and here is my reply to that:

Oh yes it is. Shameful. You have lent yourself to lies. And racist

lies at that. Go talk to the Bajans and other ethnic minorities you
represent. You do talk to them don't you? I REALLY hope so. And
just a small question - you say "I know" i.e. you know that you lied
when you said it was the Tories who first mentioned the atrocious
dog-whistle racist Reading Labour leaflet - so how do you justify
saying you are rebutting the Tories when it was not their line in the
first place? Just asking.

>

6 comments:

Anonymous said...

Jane, you say :
" it wasn't the Tories who first mentioned the atrocious despicable dog-whistle racist Labour leaflet for Church ward, it was me. It was picked up by others afterwards."

There's a whiff of conspiracy about this "controversy". I assume the leaflet in question was delivered to residents of Church ward. You don't live there so we can infer that someone opposed to Reading Labour sent it to you, presumably via Cllrs Ballsdon or Willis. Their blogs were carefully coordinated and timed to follow yours - Ballsdon's links to Willis' and vice-versa. An observer would suspect that you are in private contact with at least one of those people.
You write supportively about Flashing Blade's blog and refer to him as a former Labour Councillor but fail to mention that he's your husband.
Of course the leaflet will be widely circulated in Reading and should be regarded as being in the public domain but are you prepared to tell us how you came about it and would you disclose the nature of your relationship with Reading Conservatives, specifically the two that I mentioned above ?

Jane Griffiths said...

you see a conspiracy if you choose to. That's not me. You can make what inferences you choose. Matters of fact: I am sent material from Reading quite often, from a variety of sources. I mentioned Flashing Blade for the first time only this week, and did not refer to that blogger as a former Labour councillor, although he is. He is my husband - so? No, I am not prepared to reveal my source for the picture of the leaflet. And I have no relationship with Reading Conservatives of any kind.

Anonymous said...

Oh so dull. Oh so dreary. Why the F would Jane be interested in piddling around with little Labour or Tory locals in Reading?

Why?

For a start, she has swum with the big fish so why party with minnows? And anyway - READING?!!!! It is an ugly little dump that failed to get city status. Oh perleaseeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee.

Anonymous said...

Yes, Anonymous 23:23, precisely. A question that Reading Labour Party no doubt frequently asks itself.

Why do more than half of Jane's blog posts comment on Reading Labour or specific members thereof when her de-selection took place eight years ago and she has not lived in the UK for most of the time since.

Year after year of 'oh so dreary' posts about Martin Salter's fishing habits or John Howarth's grammar.

The former MP has elevated bearing a grudge to an art form. Most of the protagonists in her de-selection have moved on with their lives. Reading Labour Party has many members who have never heard of her.

Perhaps she could perleaseeeeeeeeeeeeee move on herself.

Jane Griffiths said...

Indeed. Most of those involved have been driven from office, I am glad to say. But where wrongdoing remains I shall speak out. You wouldn't want me any other way. And, you know, if you don't like my blog you could just, in that sweet old-fashioned way yu have, not read it?

Anonymous said...

Perhaps they think it is something they have to endure every day like medicine - you know, 'I don't like it but it is good for me and if I force myself to read it I shall be storing up rewards in Heaven etc etc ad nauseum est......