Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

43483Re: Media Monitors and information gathering

Expand Messages
  • socfem59
    Jun 6, 2007
    • 0 Attachment

      Walks like, talks like etc

      You did accuse that person in your usual verbiage of exactly what Sue Bolton says.

      Unless you want to use Howard-like hair splitting.

      You said (in many, many words) he was,

      He is not

      You can't make it real by repeating it.

      Worker does job

      Boss drops him in it after controversy.

      Short and long of it.

      In left circles (you remember them? , no? sure you do!), such innuendo is, well it's
      unprincipled rubbish.

      You have utterly no idea what happened, but you want to hang to comrade out to try.

      And you accuse Sue of spin-doctoring!

      --- In GreenLeft_discussion@yahoogroups.com, "bobgould987" <bobgould987@...>
      > Spin doctor Sue
      > By Bob Gould
      > Sue Bolton in her two contributions on the question of Media Monitors
      > is engaged in what might kindly be called spin doctoring.
      > Firstly, Bolton attributes to me something I didn't say: that the
      > bloke in question who taped the meetings "has crossed over and is a
      > class traitor".
      > I certainly did attempt to sketch out what socialists can reasonably
      > do in the way of jobs, but I didn't prejudge the issue concerning this
      > bloke. I carefully asked some relevant questions, so Bolton is
      > verballing me in this instance.
      > The questions I asked remain relevant, and I think the key questions,
      > and they have to be answered by the leadership of the Socialist
      > Alliance and the bloke himself.
      > Bolton says in passing that she can confirm that the bloke is a member
      > of the Socialist Alliance. Big deal, that was never in dispute. The
      > question that I actually asked, by implication, is whether the bloke,
      > at least up to Friday when the story broke, a member of the Victorian
      > executive of the Socialist Alliance? Bolton should answer that implied
      > question.
      > Bolton acts as a kind of attorney for the bloke, who should in fact
      > speak for himself, and she recounts his version of events.
      > Well, Dean Mighell and other militant union officials have a somewhat
      > different version of events, one that's different to Bolton's and
      > which she doesn't adequately describe.
      > Bolton baldly asserts that it's only public parts of union meetings
      > that are recorded, but of course the quoted union officials deny that,
      > and some say that some tapes were obtained in a way not authorised by
      > the union. All that is in the public record in the newspapers.
      > Useful clarity on these questions might be achieved by answering the
      > following questions:
      > 1.Has the bloke in question or Sue Bolton, or anyone else on behalf of
      > the Socialist Alliance, had any direct communication with Dean Mighell
      > and other affected union officials since last Friday, when the story
      > broke?
      > 2.What version of events have the bloke in question, and Bolton or
      > other leading members of the Socialist Alliance, put to Mighell and
      > other union officials, and what has been their response? It's hard to
      > plead privacy on these aspects of the events because the events are
      > now very public and the radical and working class public is entitled
      > to have a more comprehensive explanation than the bland spin of Bolton.
      > I stress here that I'm only asking reasonable questions, which should
      > be answered, and I'm not prejudging the issue. I just want some
      > answers to these questions.
      > A further aspect of Bolton's spin-doctoring is her second post, which
      > has obviously been produced after a geeing up from someone in
      > authority in the DSP. She tries to divert discussion of these concrete
      > events into a general diatribe against Rudd and Gillard. I agree with
      > quite a bit of what she says on that matter, as I've said similar
      > things in more cautious language in several places. But it's pure spin
      > to try to divert attention from the concrete questions raised about
      > Media Monitors.
      > A further part of Bolton's spin is her equation of my justifiable
      > request that the curious man Raven withdraw his assertion that I'm an
      > agent provocateur, with my carefully asked questions about these
      > events concerning Media Monitors. I haven't accused anyone of being an
      > agent provocateur. I've simply asked questions that any experienced
      > socialist has a right to ask and have answered. Raven, on the other
      > hand, made a despicable accusation against me without any evidence.
      > Bolton and the bloke in the eye of the storm, so to speak, should
      > answer the questions that I've raised above.
    • Show all 21 messages in this topic