Terror victims as a resource
A truly awesome piece of lateral thinking from ‘moderate’ New Labour mouthpiece, Luke Akehurst:
Maybe instead of Labour fielding a candidate in Haltemprice & Howden we should find a Martin Bell type candidate - preferably a recently retired senior police officer, or a survivor or relative of a victim of a terrorist attack, to run under the following 5 word candidate description: “Independent - for detaining terrorism suspects”.
Really, it’s really just an extension of New Labour philosophy - we all have a role to play. We all have our rights and responsibilities. Terror victims, now is your moment. Ask not what the government can do for your pain, ask what your pain can do for the government.
Maybe New Labour could find a nicely disfigured one to front up. Not too disfigured mind, a photogenically disfigured one. One that Gordon Brown can put his arm around without looking too disturbed.
Or how about one still shaking with Post Traumatic Stress Disorder? Preferably a woman, who can be guaranteed to break down in tears at a debate. You know, to catch that easily manipulated vote. That’d show those cowardly Tories, I’d wager.
Keep an eye on Akehurst. With a easy way with suffering and misanthropy like that, and a child-like view of the terror debate, he’s got the makings of a future New Labour prime minister.
(Link via BlairWatch)
Update: Akehurst responds to being handed his arse by Rachel North:
I think Rachel’s position just goes to show that experiencing something first hand doesn’t necessarily lead you to come to the right conclusions about how to deal with it.
Those pesky terror victims and their first hand experience not necessarily leading them to the right conclusions, eh? If only we could refine terrorism as a brain-washing technique then no-one would be protesting against 42 days internment.
You see, Rachel is the wrong kind of victim, that is one who refuses to be used and, indeed, one who refuses to be a ‘victim’ full stop. In Akehurst’s universe we have to file her away with the wrong kind of snow and bad AIDS and find the ‘right’ kind of ‘victim’.
Still, the ability Akehurst shows in being able to hold two contradictory positions at once shows further Prime Ministerial credentials.
Update updated: More credentials. Akehurst is a …
Public Affairs consultant (specialising in advising defence and aerospace companies).
Jesus, was he grown in a New Labour laboratory or something? ‘Gentlemen, we have created the perfect candidate…’.
Posted on June 13th, 2008 at 7:58 pm
| See also • Links and stuff for May 19th • Moral flexibility • The Sun: the cream of British journalism |
Permalink • Trackback • Subscribe By Email • Print This Post • • • |
|
Filed under Miscellaneous misanthropy, New Labour |
What an arse. Heh. But I did have a right go at him in the comments, with at least 70 other people…( and the angry backlinks are stacking up)
Nick Robinson actually repeated this repellent idea on BBC News.
I threw a cushion at the telly.
Rachel North’s latest blog post… Reaction to Davis - and will Labour stand?
I love how, when rebutted by an actual 7/7 victim in the comments, he tells her that her experience (being feet away from a suicide blast on the Tube) may not necessarily mean that her opinions are now right.
Essentially he’s collapsed his own argument, then. Complete and utter pisscrane.
fatboyfat’s latest blog post… Well, it amazed me…
Oh blimey.
Just noticed that the respondent in question was Rachel who commented above me. Sorry for use of the ‘v’ word, Rachel. Thanks for your excellent comments on the thread in question, though.
Don’t sweat about the use of the ‘v’ word in this instance- we’re quoting the idiot not using it as a abel.
This is for real. He actually did think that, & was untouched by doubt, until the commentators flayed him alive for it.
I was going to comment, but endless other got there first…
Here is a bloke whose obviously never heard of Caeusescu.
Interesting choice of reading on his profile - the Almanacs of British, American and Australian politics (anyone seriously interested in American politics would include Chomsky in their reading, er, if they were working off anything remotely resembling reality that is); besides, these big books are basically titanic compendiums of backslapping smuggery with scarcely a hint of the voting suppressions and electoral roll purges that have taken place. Also signifies a whitebread angloyank-centricity. Gotta love his appreciation of simpler modes of crisis resolution, as evinced by being into Napoleonic military history, and a liking for Apocalypse Now and Gladiator….yeah, okay, mebbe I`m treading the borders of extrapolation here, but it seems slightly odd. He really comes across as, well, a Tory Boy, but then today’s Labour party is the natural home for such as they.
Oh good God….
http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/547f3a82-39ac-11dd-90d7-0000779fd2ac.html?nclick_check=1
The tantalising prospect of an election battle between Rupert Murdoch and David Cameron mesmerised Westminster yesterday, before the media tycoon moved last night to kill off the idea.
The genesis of a “Sun versus the Tories” by-election was a 40th birthday party thrown for Rebekah Wade, the tabloid’s editor, on Thursday night. The Sun, the principal media cheerleader for Gordon Brown’s contentious 42-days detention proposals, was outraged by David Davis’s resignation. A characteristically unrestrained leader in the tabloid yesterday, headlined “Crazy Davis”, fulminated against the former shadow home secretary’s “shabby act of treachery” and “petty grandstanding”.
Ms Wade and her team had on Thursday afternoon already been discussing a cunning plan to convert this print attack into a full-blown campaign battle, by approaching Rachel North, one of the survivors of the July 7 bombings, to stand against Mr Davis.
As journalists and politicians - including senior Tories but not Mr Cameron - mingled and gossiped at Ms Wade’s party, the idea gathered momentum. Mr Murdoch was among those captivated by the concept of a Sun campaign.
*rolls on floor*
But… but… WTF? One can only assume that Wapping’s finest minds have never even bloody ready your blog or seen you on the telly or your appearance before the Home Affairs Committee.
The Murdoch Empire - journalism at it’s finest. What a shower of utter berks.
I suppose it was hoping for too much that Ms. Wade et al. might have learned something from the John Tulloch debacle…..
yeah, this was a bit of a *clue*.
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/politics/article2889314.ece
Published in Mr Murdoch’s paper, the Sunday Times.
Hee hee, this week is like falling down the rabbit hole.
Awesome stupidity. Just awesome. There should be some kind of award for it.
I’d just like to brag that at 10.55 on 5 June on a bulletin board which Rachel will know, I posted “Luke Akehurst is an arsehole”.
Always one step ahead.