Good old bumbling Boris, eh? 'ee's a right laugh.

I'm surprised that anyone can think that the best efforts of Sth Yorks Police and Ambulance and the Thatcher Government were anything but class and politically inspired and indeed Jack Straw has said as much today and been shot down by Norman Tebbitt (like you'd trust his take on things), I can only think that those who suggest otherwise were probably too young to appreciate the vicious class war that was conducted throughout the 1980s, the battering of the unions, the crushing of the likes of Derek Hatton and Ken Livingstone - some of this may have been deserved depending on your point of view but when those in authority falsify documents and facts and then go further to incriminate those whom they regarded (at the time) as being from an area of direct opposition to them politically, then you are treading into very dangerous ground, the sort of distorting of the truth that we are more used to seeing in South American dictatorships, its hardly surprising that even senior Tories finally turned against Thatcher before we started to see opposition politicians "disappear" as in Chile and Argentina.

I have no idea why any football fan would ever vote Conservative. We are not proper citizens. We weren't then and we aren't now.



The fact I have no idea why anyone would ever vote Conservative is a side issue...

Every football thug involved in trouble at that time can take their share of the blame for my money! The outrageous behaviour of hundreds of numpties on a weekly basis lead to football grounds looking like zoos. The hideous fences then served to stop people escaping onto the pitch. Well done fellas!

I could be wrong but I don't think Boris Johnson actually wrote that article, he was the Editor of the magazine?

If so your image is quite misleading.

He has also apologised - twice, what more do people want from him.

Possibly not to OK such things in the first place. It's dripping with hatred for the oiks. Even if he didn't write it (I don't know, I'll admit) then as editor he nodded it through. It's the worst kind of bar room bo**ocks dressed up in flowery writing.

Nothing!

And if I was a Liverpudlian or a friend or family of one of the deceased, absolutely nothing!

McKenzie did the same, with his own (sick) embellishment

Yes it was an ill judges article, and I don't agree with the content but many people did at that time.

As I say, he's apologised - twice surely that should be it. Surely the last thing thats needed is hyperbole and the condemnation of anyone that has ever said or written anything about Liverpool supporters.

You best re-read that article if you think it was only relating to football supporters.

I was talking in general, still my point stands, what do you want from him? it was written (not by him) 8 years ago.

Nothing!

I fully understand the mentality of his thought process.

I know where he came from.

If you go back further, you could say that hooliganism came from 1960s liberalism.

To not have been such a b&stard in the first place. He's from an incredibly privileged background and benefitted massively from that, I would expect anyone, never mind someone from such a background to show a bit more responsibility when in such a role. That piece has no evidence to back it up and is further evidence if it were needed of what kind of people were and still are in positions of responsibility within British media.

Similarly, if 96 policemen had died, or even a tenth of that figure, you can bet your life that heads would have rolled within days.

He's apologised - twice, he was wrong he admitted that, everyone makes mistakes, his was irresponsible, it just seems ridiculous to focus on this rather than the absolutely disgusting things done by the authorities.

I don't think anyone is focussing on it, just because it's not the most important area doesn't mean it should be ignored. Partly because it's a nod towards what Mintball and Jerry were saying re class warfare.

But there are a lot of 'working class' people that held the same view about Liverpool as a city, and also the same about the Liverpool fans at hillsborough.

I was at Hillsborough, as I was the previous year. The previous year, fans were checked for tickets at the top of Leppings Lane by the police, if you did not have a ticket, you were not allowed past. The following year, there was no ticketing checks.

Whilst welcoming the panel's verdict, a few things do not sit pretty with me.
1/ The media response. A lot in the media have come onto various phone-ins in the last 24 hours, saying they knew the truth about Hillsborough. Well why did it keep it quiet and leave it to the families, 2 politicians and Brian Reade?
2/ Unfortunately, the feelings of some LFC fans there that day. I too find it sad and distressing, but don't call yourself survivors. Like me, you were lucky, as I was at Heysel aswell.
3/ What are the accounts of Bernard Ingram, Douglas Hurd and Thatcher? What were their conversions with South Yorkshire police? imo, Thatcher was backing the police as a thank you for their support during the miners' strike 5 years earlier.
4/ The cheap apologies ( except Camerons) from SWFC, the police etc. Why has it taken you 23 years to do so? Was you told to apologise?
5/ The sun's headline today.. Not acceptable. " WE LIED." would have been more suitable.

as for Kelvin MacKenzie

Murdoch's puppet and yes man.

Which was why the word 'hooligan' was derived from a 19th century music hall song – in the 19th century.

Contect my dear, context.

Absolutely. A very good analogy.

Perhaps (in part at least) because they have been fed a series of lies by by a supposedly working-class paper?

I'd point out that Murdoch can claim until the cows come home that he hates 'elitism' and has set out to destroy that, but Murdoch loves being part of the Establishment. You only need to see his recent behaviour re the Harry pictures to see that he behaves like a spoilt brat having a tantrum when anyone comes close to criticising him.

Why do working-class people read a paper that is ultimately against their own interests?

You might as well also ask why any woman ever reads the [iDaily Mail[/i, a paper that is hellbent on exploiting women's biggest fears about self-image and encouraging a sense of self loathing.

X cannot have been produced by a decade that occurred nearly a century after the word X was coined to describe X.

[url=http://kerlnickoff.wordpress.com/2012/09/12/dont-let-the-scouse-bashers-off-the-hook/Something about the politicisation of it all[/url