Sky News ought to know better. The huge fuss about Michael Fallon’s remarks about Ed Miliband stabbing his brother in the back are misplaced. David Miliband is estranged from Ed, so much so that he refused to go to his wedding. It was hardly a case of two brothers openly applying for the same job, as Radio 4 pretended.So I suppose we can’t say Ed Miliband is a tax avoider either. What can we say? He liberated funds?
If politicians behave in a hypocritical way, what is the problem in saying that? I take huge issue with Sky’s claim that Lynton Crosby’s campaign “smeared” Ken Livingstone. An American pundit is on SKY right now saying campaigning is negative if there is no basis in truth. Lynton doesn’t do that. He makes damn sure it IS true, and then hammers the message home.
Ken Livingstone is an inveterate liar, and we could prove it. So we did.
Ken Livingstone mishandled public funds. And we could prove that, so we did.
He also abused the Jewish community and played divide and rule. We proved this time after time, until even The Times was horrified and wrote a leader.
In my view Ed Miliband sold out the Jewish community to get Ken elected. That is fact. So he stabbed his own people in the back too.
British politics is not like US politics, we do not propagate lies. I worked for Lynton Crosby and had the highest respect for his ethics. His research was fabulous, Ken’s misuse of public funds for example, was all verified from City Hall records.
There is a huge difference between spreading an unpalatable truth and spreading lies. No campaign I have worked on has ever done the latter. Ed Miliband knew Ken lied and he backed the lies. How ethical is that?? He also accuses others of tax avoidance while being a tax avoider himself, and attacks zero hour contracts, athough he knows they are widely used in the Labour Party.
If things are true, we have a duty to tell voters. The public has a right to know, and as for getting the truth out, there is nothing negative about it.