Tell the ****ers to stick the scummy rag where the sun don't shine....(pun very much intended). http://www.liverpoolecho.co.uk/news...efuse-join-suns-7235285#.U5Sqx5AXw-s.facebook
good for them, but the last bit worries me. “Any individual concerns will be handled sensitively with fairness, dignity and fully respecting the views of individuals. Local CWU representatives and delivery office managers will work together to agree sensible and amicable solutions.”
fair play to them. I would hope on some level that a) full resolution to the truth of tragedy occurs soon b) criminal charges are alid c) the rag tries at least to formally apologise but i can't see it ever making even a donation to the trust as a compensation even (sick fs) d) mcSCUMMY get his. e) the sun goes out of business as it should given the imminent demise of paper rags in favor of online
that means the rags will be binned in union speak. nobody wants a strike and nobody wants to be foolish and start a disciplinary thing. I hope it means managers are basically instructed to have a bonfire out back where their staff are complaining
Do they offer a free postal address for their letters or competitions...? If so, people could just them back along with plenty of other items they don't wish to have (just make sure theres no contact details on them) and they would have to pay the postage.
I get the S*n stuff obviously, and fair play to these fellas for sticking to their principles. But I wonder how many of them went home and turned Sky on? For me the issue was always with Mackenzie the absolute maggot, not the title of the publication he was the editor of, nor the owners of that publication.
I didn't want to say anything as this is a very touchy subject but I was thinking along similar lines.
Come on mate that **** Mackenzie hasn't been there for a long time yet the whole issue has still persisted. The anti-Liverpool agenda (city not just football club) goes back a long time before Hillsborough happened and has continued ever since. I even remember the first "apology" they printed which they unbelievably put on pg 11 in the bottom corner as if the whole thing had just been a ****ing misprint
If you live in Liverpool you don't buy that rag. Sky or whatever else the idiot owns has nothing to do with the s*** boycott. I don't have Sky and never will but that's because I don't want it. Linking the two has no meaning whatsoever otherwise how far do you go? .... don't go in a shop that sells the rag? .... It's very simple and attempts to add Sky into the equation are futile. Don't buy the rag!
Mackenzie was Thatchers henchman in the press, he was editor from the early 80's to the mid 90's. It was him though who authorised the headline and it was still him who ensured that they didn't put the record straight. It's a rag of a paper anyway, but for me, it's Mackenzie that's always deserved the ire.
Of course it has meaning. As the paper title is just that - a title. It's those that were behind the title and therefore those creating the 'story' that were the guilty parties, the title of the publication is inert..... Therefore if you're going to blame the institution i.e. the paper title, and not merely the man responsible for the printing the story i.e. Mackenzie, then you're pointing the finger at Murdoch.
I agree of course but it's been nearly 20 years since he left and the ****ish rag hasn't changed since. He undoubtedly fitted the bill perfectly for them but it's not as if the twats who have run it since are any better (e.g Mohan and his reactions to phone hacking scandal).
you know a scary thought just ran through my mind. I think the FA cup semi final was on BBC? i watch ti and frankly i just thought what if this had happened in the modern era of sky.. how do we think the saturation coverage of they do would have done if that makes sense? would sky have been the ones mkaing up **** and blamaing the innocent. I think ignore modern day technology and phone camera and stuff and think martin tyler in his shinny 1992 suit please log in to view this image please log in to view this image would this lot have done the same as the rag... live... or would they have been held to actual broadcasting standards or what.
Yep. If every employee moved from that rag to say, the Mirror over the course of a ten year period effectively meaning the Mirror had the exact same team as the rag had ten years previous, how daft would it seem to be boycotting "the title" over the individuals that wrote the bullshit in the first place?
