Ken vs. Boris: It's So On

i remember that Harry's Place thing had some beef with that gilad atzmon guy mentioned in the link

Personally, I hate the vulgar multi-cultured metropolis which Ken has helped to create

I think he might be giving Ken a bit too much credit there.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2008/apr/30/pressandpublishing.london08

^^ interesting, though naturally decca aitkenhead is fathoms out of her depth.

i've come around to the idea of voting to ken, because having ken as mayor under a cameron government will be wtflol to the max.

"A lot of people say you can't support a Tory because you're a progressive," he says. "Well, actually, in some respects the Tories are more progressive than Labour now. It comes down to this idea of what's progressive. Under New Labour, the Labour party has forfeited progressiveness. It's doing things like starting wars and imposing ID cards and locking people up for six weeks without trial."

YEAH BECAUSE THEY HAD NO SUPPORT FROM THE TORIES FOR THOSE THINGS YOU DICKMUNCH

having ken as mayor under a cameron government will be wtflol to the max.

However having Boris as mayor under a Cameron government:

http://www.mimifroufrou.com/scentedsalamander/i/Anschluss_tears.jpg

I've just read Decca A's interview with Gilligan. I don't respect her much, normally, but I don't see much wrong with the job she's done here.

I think that piece is quite shocking. Perhaps one should not be shocked by anything nowadays, or by the conduct of the Standard. But I think it is the brazen openness with which the most prominent and influential (?) journalist in this campaign admits that, in reporting (not merely 'Comment'), he is following a personal agenda of grievance and hatred. If a Guardian journalist (nb I mean someone who seeks out facts, not a columnist / pundit -- some of them do still exist) admitted to that in relation to anyone (BJ, Cameron, Brown, McCain, Clinton, whoever), there would be a furore - this would not be regarded as proper journalism. A newspaper should not be the platform for a reporter to play out his personal grudges and grievances. For this to be so openly admitted really ... well, it really surprises me. Am I going to be alone in this country in feeling this way?

you're certainly quite naive.

when the guardian was pursuing jonathan aitken, how was that not openly partisan?

Aitken = a criminal. Ken isn't.

It's hardly the same thing! (xpost)

You are not alone, but it may be just the two of us. Gilligan is a odious cunt. xpost

hmm, Jonathon Aitken turned out to be a criminal.

In what way is Andrew Gilligan a "lefty"? Because of the David Kelly thing? I thought he was seriously being considered as a Tory candidate for something or other?

I agree that the piece is shocking. I don't know wether the guy is a hateful cunt, or a pathetic patsy, probably a bit of both I suppose. The guy is openly admitting that he's running a smear campaign against Livingstone, in any sane world he'd be sacked on the spot for this. This story should be bigger news than it is.

I'm sure Gilligan's still very happy about building a nice little career for himself on the back of a man he helped kill.

Why on earth would he be sacked?!

I mean, he is essentially gleefully going about doing his paymaster's bidding.

i'm not talking about the nature of the offence -- assuming handing out public funds to your friends isn't a criminal offence -- but the nature of the press campaign. when have newspapers ever been nonpartisan? well into the last century a large number of them were directly party-controlled, or, like the times, as near as damn it.

xpost

i think gilligan is somewhat -- a shitload -- less culpable for kelly's death than campbell and blair. i don't think he's a great guy, but the idea that what he did = opposition to labour = toryism, can fuck right off.

We're talking about what's he's doing NOW = Toryism, Enrique.

I mean in what universe did anyone claim opposition to the war = Toryism?

Lot of Countryside Alliance dudes on the original anti-War marches, Matt.

Alan Clark RIP and "we should just have left the Germans to get on with it" to thread.

xpost

Aggrieved at waste of ammunition better used on foxes, badgers, dogs, escaped coypu etc.

Dom, fair enough, but no one here ever claimed that opposition to the war, or opposition to the case for going to war, was de facto a Tory thing.

Meanwhile this bit is hilarious.

"My relationship with Boris is not that close, I promise. I've never been to his house, I've never had a non-professional relationship with him. In journalism you know lots of people whom you never see outside of work. And that's basically how it is with Bozza."

yeah that's one thing, but decca aitkenhead links the two, and i think that's indefensible.

xpost

I mean in what universe did anyone claim opposition to the war = Toryism?

-- Matt DC, Wednesday, April 30, 2008 10:45 AM (46 seconds ago) Bookmark Link

aitkenhead goes there:

For a journalist who swears by the impartiality of his investigations, it is interesting that he finds himself once again locked in mortal combat with a senior Labour politician. "This is just me, doing my job," he insists.

Is he sure it has nothing to do with revenge, I wonder? "What would I take revenge on Ken Livingstone for?" he says, and I'm not sure why he looks baffled. As he says himself, he considers the mayoral election a "surrogate" for national politics - and after Hutton, he would have good reason to feel vengeful towards the party that cost him so much. "That's not," he says, "the reason." For the only time during the interview, he looks properly annoyed.

It wasn't only the Guardian who went after Aitken, it was World In Action too, it wasn't a one-on-one thing like ES vs. KL. Also there was no concerted campaign by the Guardian against Aitken lasting years and years, they reported one story that Aitken objected to, not dozens of them.

pointless poll

lol rickroll

raefroll morelike

Of course Gilligan's campaign is pro-Boris and pro-Tory, I don't see Brian Paddick getting much in the way of positive coverage in the Standard. He's either being disingenuous or flat-out lying to claim otherwise.

Ed's link points to a world of words I don't care for...

London midmorning: Footsie lacks direction

London's leading index is lacking any real direction as falling miners weigh against results-driven gains.

Falling miners?

Perhaps, in the interests of all things anti-Ken being equal, the Standard could provide a photo-opportunity plus puff piece for Sian Berry as well?

Barnbrook centrespread in today's edition I'm reliably told.

That is a shitty trick Aiktenhead pulls at the end though.

It might have been nice if Aitkenhead had done some research before the interview and actually confronted Gilligan with some of these facts, rather than pulling a bitchmove and doing it afterwards.

If Ken wins I'm going to send Gilligan a big bunch of flowers saying 'fuck you baldy'.

Pashmina + Ed: thank you - glad to know I am not alone on this.

Does Gilligan seriously think that a Tory mayor would be less sympathetic to
big business?

"Yeah, I do. I really do."

Would be funny if it wasn't so fucking ridiculous.

The Peregrine Worstwerp article is just plain silly, eveyone knows that London's never been th same since the Huguenots turned up with their fancy weaving ways.

If Ken wins he ought to send the Operation Ore squad to Gilligan's gaff.

The Gilligan piece is kind of sad. He sounds a bit pathetic, desperate to be accepted by the establishment but rejected by them, trying to get in with the new (old) order, but he's never even been round Boris's house. And why should he, dreadful little oik, useful but not one would want to be friends with.

it was campbell who leaked kelly's name to the press in 2003, right? not gilligan.

If Ken wins he ought to send the Operation Ore squad to Gilligan's gaff.

-- Dingbod Kesterson, Wednesday, April 30, 2008 11:09 AM (1 minute ago) Bookmark Link

imagine the egg on ken's face if they shot the wrong guy though. oh, hang on, maybe not.

Are they shooting men who download child porn these days? Unlikely as so many of them are policeman...

Hey Andy, it's been a year, give Maddy back, we'll take your mental state into account.

ALLEGEDLY of course.

Ned Trifle - yes, I hadn't seen it that way, but your comment really reminds me of something - some novel or film with a character like that, who is out in the cold at the end after all his weaselly aid to the bad guys. Just can't think what it is. Feels a bit like Hollinghurst's Line of Beauty, but that doesn't really have such a character.

http://www.lostblog.net/postimages/michael.jpg

Gilligan looks disgruntled after being turned down from yet another senior role at the Telegraph.

Gilligan ain't no Anton Chigurh (xpost).

might photoshop that cunt AG and Boris faces on this later if i'm bored enough
http://static.flickr.com/21/90773360_3f3a3fbea8.jpg

Ned Trifle - yes, I hadn't seen it that way, but your comment really reminds me of something - some novel or film with a character like that, who is out in the cold at the end after all his weaselly aid to the bad guys

Gilligan: "Did I do good boss, did I? Did I?"
Boris: "Sure you did, Gilligan, sure you did."
Gilligan: "We nailed that Livingstone good and proper, didn't we boss? Huh?"
Boris: "What's wrong Gilligan, you look kinda noivous."
Gilligan: "Nuttin' boss, it's nuttin'... it's just..."
Boris: "Spit it out Gilligan."
Gilligan: "Well, seein' as how I dids a favour to you boss, I was wondrin'..."
Boris: "... if I could do youse a favour... why you I oughta!!"
Gilligan: "Now, don't get sore, boss... boss... boss? Put the gun away boss... I won't squeal boss! I won't say nuttin', I promise!"
Boris: "Why you yella..."

*BLAM*