Current Affairs The Labour Party

Status
Not open for further replies.
Does he source his material in that?

He doesn’t “ name “ sources as such to protect them, but he refers heavily to documentation that has been buried, that’s been provided by the sources ( who can only be from within the FA etc ).

Broken Dreams is a book that you’d find fascinating Dave, as he goes to town on the likes of Sheepshanks, Ken Bates etc and completely turns around the lies peddled by the FA over the Wembley fiasco.

He also openly calls the likes of Venables, Rednap, Graham, Allardyce crooks, giving many detailed examples of their corrupt practises.

Non have sued him.

Seriously Dave you need to read that book.

Some of the stuff in it is jaw dropping and leaves you feeling very angry.
 
He doesn’t “ name “ sources as such to protect them, but he refers heavily to documentation that has been buried, that’s been provided by the sources ( who can only be from within the FA etc ).

Broken Dreams is a book that you’d find fascinating Dave, as he goes to town on the likes of Sheepshanks, Ken Bates etc and completely turns around the lies peddled by the FA over the Wembley fiasco.

He also openly calls the likes of Venables, Rednap, Graham, Allardyce crooks, giving many detailed examples of their corrupt practises.

Non have sued him.

Seriously Dave you need to read that book.

Some of the stuff in it is jaw dropping and leaves you feeling very angry.

I’m genuinely interested in having a look at that so I very likely will do . My concern will be as it was when I commented yesterday he misquoted Lammy or certainly twisted what was said , I haven’t got a dog in the fight but he was doing so from an obvious agenda point of view and that raises concerns.
 
I’m genuinely interested in having a look at that so I very likely will do . My concern will be as it was when I commented yesterday he misquoted Lammy or certainly twisted what was said , I haven’t got a dog in the fight but he was doing so from an obvious agenda point of view and that raises concerns.

Same here mate.

I`ll read the book and reserve judgement until then.
 
Evening Standard:

Senior members of the shadow cabinet have told The Londoner that they understand Jeremy Corbyn would like to step down as leader of the Labour Party.

The sources say that a number of those around the leader are also of the view that Corbyn, who is 70 in May, would like to pass on the reins of his surprisingly successful socialist project.
 
Evening Standard:

Senior members of the shadow cabinet have told The Londoner that they understand Jeremy Corbyn would like to step down as leader of the Labour Party.

The sources say that a number of those around the leader are also of the view that Corbyn, who is 70 in May, would like to pass on the reins of his surprisingly successful socialist project.

If this is true - a big "if", I know - it would be interesting to see who'd be in the running to succeed Corbyn. Any ideas from our Labour supporting friends?
 
There's a whole industry of these people now: minor celebrities and z-list actors trying to boost their pathetic careers by appealing to a twitter army of anti-LP trolls, get noticed, get interviewed, remind the world they still exist and then pick up a few tv appearances.

This is just self publicity, not a principled stand.


Meanwhile, the country is governed by the most feeble minded political class there's ever been.

David Baddiel & Gary Lineker to name just two.
 
In fairness to @Joey66 , as far as I`m aware Bowers has never been sued by any of the many people he has written books about.

What I take from that, is that his material is factual and watertight legally.

I haven`t yet read the book, so can`t comment on it, but I`ve read a couple of his others. They`re well written and researched.

I urge you to read these two reviews, by Stephen Bush and Peter Oborne:


Just because someone doesn't sue, it doesn't mean their material is factual and watertight legally; in fact with Bower a lot of his claims - and the central thesis - are demonstrably wrong.
 
I urge you to read these two reviews, by Stephen Bush and Peter Oborne:


Just because someone doesn't sue, it doesn't mean their material is factual and watertight legally; in fact with Bower a lot of his claims - and the central thesis - are demonstrably wrong.

Cheers, @Joey66 needs to read them too ;)
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Welcome

Join the Everton conversation today.
Fewer ads, full access, completely free.

🛒 Visit Shop

Support Grand Old Team by checking out our latest Everton gear!
Back
Top