Andrew Gilligan's withering attack on the family of racist murder victim Stephen Lawrence really are beyond the pale. His argument to the effect that organisations and indeed individuals receiving public funding from city hall should not be able to exercise their right to free speech is, quite frankly, completely disgraceful. While I think most would accept that organisations such as the Mayor's officer and the GLA have a role in fostering good community relations, they would also accept that racism is political.
Boriswatch makes a similar point today on LabourHome.
Tuesday, February 05, 2008
Andrew Gilligan is attacking free speech
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
11 rants:
Could you quote the part of my article which "attacks" Mrs Lawrence, or indeed anything else? It is she that did the attacking. My article simply sets out the facts, one of which is that her trust got £1.9 million from Ken.
And it's not free speech chaps... it's very expensive (to the London taxpayer.) Thank goodness you live in Woking, eh!
"Ms Lawrence did not declare that her organisation, the Stephen Lawrence Charitable Trust, has received at least £1.9 million from Mr Livingstone's London Development Agency to build a new headquarters in south-east London. The trust did not reply to inquiries by the Standard."
Andrew, why on earth should she have to 'admit' such a thing? Where is the shame in it?
Much the same goes for the other organisations. You should be ashamed... you're attempting to drag people through mud which is a fiction entirely of the Standard's creation.
The implication of the article seems to be that any organisation that receives state funding should 'declare its interest' before commenting on policy matters.
That may or may not be a good idea but Ken Livingstone hardly has a monopoly on bankrolling organisations that also have a political role.
Oxfam, for example, a coupe of years ago went through a period of being heavily funded by DFID, while practically acting as its provisional wing in the arena of public debate.
And I hardly think that most people who've chosen to vote for Ken Livingstone in the last two mayoral elections will be surprised about that the organisations he and his team have chosen to support.
Gilligan's attack on the Stephen Lawrence centre as 'it's very expensive to the London taxpayer' shows how disgustingly low the Johnson camp is prepared to go. I am pround to live in a city where the memory of Stephen Lawrence is honoured and a contribution is made to the community in his name. Doreen Lawrence has helped London a better place through her campaign for justice. Gilligan by contrast just promotes cynicism and a Thatcherite Tory candidate who wants to cut the pressure for affordable homes, attacks measures to curb 4x4s and wants to reduce the size of the congestion zone.
Gilligan doesn't declare his own interests.
Andrew, why do you omit to declare that you have been in the pay of Boris Johnson, or that his magazine organised a 'save Andrew Gilligan' dinner for you.
By the way, what about the cost to the Iranian taxpayer of your relationship with the state-run Iranian channel Press TV?
Care to declare that?
Folks,
As far as I know, Oxfam never attacked one of Tony Blair's rivals during a general election campaign. And the issue is not whether it's appropriate for the Stephen Lawrence Centre to receive funding - it's that anyone reading Mrs Lawrence's attack on Boris would not have been in possession of an important fact that might have affected how seriously they took such an attack. I have no interests to declare. I have not written for the Spectator for more than two years. It did not organise or pay for the "save Andrew Gilligan" dinner - all the guests paid for themselves - and Boris was not even present.
Boris Gilligan really is a plonker of the highest order.
"And the issue is not whether it's appropriate for the Stephen Lawrence Centre to receive funding - it's that anyone reading Mrs Lawrence's attack on Boris would not have been in possession of an important fact that might have affected how seriously they took such an attack."
Still not clear.
Are you suggesting that a major factor in Mrs Lawrence criticising a politician for making racist remarks is that her organisation's got cash from one of her rivals?
If you're not suggesting that then I don't see how the fact you're revealing would alter how someone took her opinions.
Andrew Boris Gilligan's remarks are getting worse and worse and his racist assumptions more and more explicit. Now he declares on the Stephen Lawrence centre and Doreen Lawrence: 'My article simply sets out the facts, one of which is that her trust got £1.9 million from Ken. And it's not free speech chaps... it's very expensive (to the London taxpayer.) Thank goodness you live in Woking, eh!'
That explicitly attacks the money given to a trust dealing with one of the most notorious racist murders in London - which evidently Andrew Gilligan considers was money badly spent. Very clarificatory.
This current campaign to promote Boris Johnson and attack Livingstone is one of the most reactionary campaigns I can remember. The subtext seems to be that racism needs to be re-legitimised in London and the advances in race relations of the past 30 years should be rolled back. Johnson is unwilling to make an unqualified apology for the racist remarks refering to Black people as "piccaninnies" and their "watermelon" smiles.’ Gilligan questions the value of the Doreen Lawrence's advice on racism and London.
Best to make sure that Gilligan (Sorry I mean Johnson) is not elected this May.
I agree with you lot. Seeing the depths the Johnson campaign are prepared to plumb is not a pretty sight.
Has it occurred to you Andrew that Doreen Lawrence has an interest in not seeing a reactionary like Johnson elected, especially as the crass and insensitive comments he made *might* give succour to racists and bigots?
Andrew, Andrew, Andrew, How well do you sleep at night ?
Guys listen this is not about Mrs Lawreance or Ken. Its all about Mr Gilligan and trying to make a name for himself AGAIN.
Why again ?
Well this guy is WELL know for 'flawed reporting', if you want dirt this guy will be happy to dig for for WHATEVER makes him.
Don't believe this ?
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/media/andrew-gilligan-my-war-with-ken-livingstone-790429.html
http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2007/dec/14/sackandrewgilligan
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Andrew_Gilligan
Just look how much love he has for Boris
http://www.thisislondon.co.uk/standard/columnistarchive/Andrew%20Gilligan-columnist-162-archive.do
Type in 'andrew gilligan' into Google to see more of his reporting skills. From the BBC to Evening Standard says it all.
Poor Mr Kelly.
Mr Gilligan, 'You make it very difficult for readers who know about you, to take you serious again',
'Doing what your doing is not helping your reputation, but then again I guess it makes you feel important.'
Newspapers NEED news to sell papers. They must love you there.
'puppet journalists' comes to mind.
Don't you love the Internet and freedom of speech.
Post a Comment
Abusive, hateful or off topic: I delete as I please. Mods=Gods. Be nice