Hillsborough Report

[Rufus Gwertigan]

Interesting post Neil. However from when we start school we are taught to trust others once we are in large groups for instance with school fire drills. As we get older once in a crowd people just become sheep yet again. I have been stuck in some of the nasty bottlenecks you get at Glasto and people just dont listen, they move blithely on and it is only when they see a uniform will they heed instructions.

[lost]

Anyway, the people going after Boris - why?! This is something he wrote nearly 10 years ago and apologised for at the time. It was big news at the time. Why dig it up again? To get the same apology from him again? Deflecting attention from the people who need to be got.

There's bigger fish to fry.

Edited September 13, 2012 by lost

[The Nal]

I think some parts of the press are trying to make political capital out of the deaths, there was a report out two days ago which said if Boris replaced Dave it would completely wipe out Labours lead in the polls, may have something to do with it.

[Rachie]

Neil - regarding did you upset me, No you didn't, i remember you helping me get my point across. (i'm dyslexic and struggle getting my point across in writing regularly. )

And regarding my point that the last thread went around and around about 'drunk scousers' I didn't mean to make it sound that i don't think there was any (lmao of course there was!) i meant that it didn't really have anything to do with the price of cheese, it wasn't the point...the cover up/lies/injustice was my point.

[eFestivals]

Interesting post Neil. However from when we start school we are taught to trust others once we are in large groups for instance with school fire drills. As we get older once in a crowd people just become sheep yet again. I have been stuck in some of the nasty bottlenecks you get at Glasto and people just dont listen, they move blithely on and it is only when they see a uniform will they heed instructions.

I agree with the point you make - which is precisely why I included the bit about if I'd been there I would have acted no differently. I know that there becomes a "crowd mentality".

But surely all of what happened just gets to prove that we - people - should try harder to not be sucked into that "crowd mentality"? If we learn that lesson then the chances of something happening to the same degree is lessened.

I'm not trying to claim any "holier than thou" thing with my words here, I'm simply saying there's something we can learn from. I can remember piling into massive gate crushes at Glastonbury back in the late eighties with glee (because they were fun if you weren't scared of them), crushes that were so bad that people (including me at 6'3") would be lifted off the ground for sometimes minutes at a time by the crush, during the sometimes 10 minutes it would take to get thru that gateway.

When I think back to that I'm horrified by the thoughts of what could have happened, and what would have been my own thoughtless part in that.

[eFestivals]

All Boris was doing was echoing what was the "official" report at the time. He made a good point about Liverpool geographically (having docks and being on the wrong side of the country when they joined the EU) but it was all a bit ham fisted.

Anyway, the people going after Boris - why?! This is something he wrote nearly 10 years ago and apologised for at the time. It was big news at the time. Why dig it up again? To get the same apology from him again? Deflecting attention from the people who need to be got.

There's bigger fish to fry.

I think some parts of the press are trying to make political capital out of the deaths, there was a report out two days ago which said if Boris replaced Dave it would completely wipe out Labours lead in the polls, may have something to do with it.

Sad if thats the case and even more sad that the public are falling for it.

Bojo's comments 8 years ago are irrelevant in the grand scheme of things.

It's not "going after Boris", but I think he's got no less reason to make a further apology than Mckenzie had to make a first genuine one.

There's what was said - for which he apologised years ago - and then there's what he was thinking that allowed those words to be said.

The thinking he had which caused those words to be said has been proven as wrong. He needs to say that he was wrong, not just that he was wrong to say what was said.

[The Nal]

It's not "going after Boris", but I think he's got no less reason to make a further apology than Mckenzie had to make a first genuine one.

There's what was said - for which he apologised years ago - and then there's what he was thinking that allowed those words to be said.

The thinking he had which caused those words to be said has been proven as wrong. He needs to say that he was wrong, not just that he was wrong to say what was said.

[eFestivals]

But he was just going off the official report (which was flawed). Same as millions of others. He was hardly going to say "actually I think the filth lied about it and the Scum wrote a load of old bollocks."

Anyway, heres his latest apology from this morning.

Nope, he wasn't going from the official report. The official report had already put the blame squarely on the police, so Liverpudlians could not have been falsely feeling victims. What drove Boris's words were the false rumours that had been started by the old bill, and which had never properly been put to bed until now - thus leading the likes of Boris to keep belief in them.

Not only that, his previous apology was without doubt insincere. He apologised only when under pressure from his party leader to apologise, and managed to make clear that he was following instructions rather than meaning it.

I'm pleased to see that new apology, and that - as with Mckenzie yesterday - he realises now just how wrong he got it.

As far as I'm concerned, that's Boris done with - that's all he had to do.

[Essex_George]

Wish I could write down how I feel as well as you people on here! As you can tell from my name I'm not from Liverpool but I am a lifelong LFC supporter (I have heard all the jokes about being from Essex & supporting LFC before!) this is such an emotional subject its difficult for me or to put down in words how I feel but there been some excellent posts on here. It's a subject that is difficult for anyone, not just LFC fans.

Edited September 13, 2012 by Essex_George

[Essex_George]

Nope, he wasn't going from the official report. The official report had already put the blame squarely on the police, so Liverpudlians could not have been falsely feeling victims. What drove Boris's words were the false rumours that had been started by the old bill, and which had never properly been put to bed until now - thus leading the likes of Boris to keep belief in them.

Not only that, his previous apology was without doubt insincere. He apologised only when under pressure from his party leader to apologise, and managed to make clear that he was following instructions rather than meaning it.

I'm pleased to see that new apology, and that - as with Mckenzie yesterday - he realises now just how wrong he got it.

As far as I'm concerned, that's Boris done with - that's all he had to do.

[The Nal]

Fair enough Neil. But basically my point is that Bojo and MacKenzie shouldn't be compared or even mentioned in the same sentence. Bojo is just that, a clown, albeit an entertaining one. MacKenzie's article at the time was based on loose info and had a real nasty bite to the way it was worded.

Also, there are a few people who clearly covered this up, both at the time and for the last 23 years, (does anyone know who they are yet?) who need to be prosecuted on an infinite amount of levels.

P.S. Re: Boris - I'm still sure hes a "sleeper" super genius comedic satirical mastermind who will become PM and soon after unveil himself as a Chris Morris style plant who has infiltrated the highest office in the land in the name of a laugh.

Edited September 13, 2012 by The Nal

[eFestivals]

Fair enough Neil. But basically my point is that Bojo and MacKenzie shouldn't be compared or even mentioned in the same sentence. Bojo is just that, a clown, albeit an entertaining one.

I'm not putting both on the same level. But it's still the case that Boris was working from lies, and he needed to apologise for what he was responsible for.

Mckenzie is a c**t, because he withdrew the apology that Murdoch had forced him to give in the hope of regaining the lost Sun sales on Merseyside.

Boris is NOT a clown.....

Also, there are a few people who clearly covered this up, both at the time and for the last 23 years, (does anyone know who they are yet?) who need to be prosecuted on an infinite amount of levels.

absolutely. But I won't be holding my breathe.

P.S. Re: Boris - I'm still sure hes a "sleeper" super genius comedic satirical mastermind who will become PM and soon after unveil himself as a Chris Morris style plant who has infiltrated the highest office in the land in the name of a laugh.

He's not funny, he's not a clown, he's more-than-standard evil tory scum.

Add in a huge amount of proven incompetence, and it would be an unmitigated disaster if he ever became PM.

[Rufus Gwertigan]

But he was just going off the official report (which was flawed). Same as millions of others. He was hardly going to say "actually I think the filth lied about it and the Scum wrote a load of old bollocks."

Anyway, heres his latest apology from this morning.

[eFestivals]

Neil - regarding did you upset me, No you didn't, i remember you helping me get my point across.

Glad to hear it wasn't me.

That makes a change.

[thesecretingredientiscrime]

Apparently there's still over 150 serving offices who were on duty at Hillsborough

[Spartacus Mars]

Dear Memory Hole, good to see you again, and at the risk of repeating myself "I have a sense of Deja Vu about this".

Boris Johnson did not write the Spectator "leading opinion", that was Simon Heffer. As it was an anonymous editorial and Johnson was the editor, he took/was forced to take responsibility for it.

Certainly Boris would have approved it, but Heffer wrote it. So, please and kindly, phrase it "Heffer wrote", or "Boris agrees".

[t8yman]

Apparently there's still over 150 serving offices who were on duty at Hillsborough

[Essex_George]

http://contrast.org/hillsborough/

[strummer77]

There's bigger fish to fry.

[Rufus Gwertigan]

most of whom will have been about 12 years old when they served at that match.

[Spartacus Mars]

Even if they're retired they should still be prosecuted.

You wouldn't dream of not prosecuting a taxi-driving rapist because he's started working in a fish & chip shop. (You wouldn't, the police might...).

[eFestivals]

Even if they're retired they should still be prosecuted.

Only if they hold any responsibility for what went on of course.

A foot-soldier copper who just happened to be on duty that day is unlikely to have had any direct involvement in any conspiracy, and the most they might be guilty of is not revealing that their statements had been doctored (tho of course many might not know that they had been).

As for the calls for prosecutions for manslaughter, why? What benefit will it bring?

I don't see the point in prosecuting someone for a dreadful decision they made on the day - but a decision they'd have made with no bad intentions - for something which happened 23 years ago. If they don't know by now how bad their decision was and the consequences that came from it then they never will.

At some point those directly effected have to say "it's time to move on". Those who conspired to slur the fans should be prosecuted for a breech of their duty of office, and the inquests should be reheard, but I don't personally feel that there's any benefit in going further. For a start any case would be heard in today's terms of a duty of care, and not the very different terms which existed 23 years ago - and so any trial would be unfair.

[Spindles]

Even if they're retired they should still be prosecuted.

You wouldn't dream of not prosecuting a taxi-driving rapist because he's started working in a fish & chip shop. (You wouldn't, the police might...).

[eFestivals]

I am not opposed to hunting down and trying 90 year old nazis. If they were guilty on the day they are guilty today.

however, a crime of murder (or worse) is unchanging.

The "duty of care" towards a crowd of people has changed beyond belief in the last 23 years, making any trial which might be held today around that duty of care a farce - such as any trial for manslaughter from Hillsboro.

Edited September 14, 2012 by eFestivals

[Rufus Gwertigan]

Even if they're retired they should still be prosecuted.

You wouldn't dream of not prosecuting a taxi-driving rapist because he's started working in a fish & chip shop. (You wouldn't, the police might...).