copyright, Paul Staines, 2020
The sole source of the Guido expose appears to be this 10-year-old guardian article which inevitably tells a different story
www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2011/feb/24/1865-guardian-stance-us-civil-war
(, Fri 3 Jul 2020, 10:29, Reply)
The sole source? Apart from the contemporaneous quotes from The Guardian itself you mean?
Yes, I copied and pasted, well spotted. Why didn't I give any attribution or just post a link? Because a lot of people on here would simply say "it's a Guido story, therefore it's a lie, thus no need to stop wallowing in sanctimony."
But it's not a lie, it's just quoting the paper back at itself. Given that multiple writers in The Guardian demand apologies and even reparations from others for such historical associations, for example they simply adore trotting out quotes from Daily Mail editorials from the mid 1930s sympathetic to Hitler, shouldn't they hold themselves up to the same standards?
(
Prufrock Lucifer, son of the morning!, Fri 3 Jul 2020, 11:10,
Reply)
not sure what your point is here
They have trotted the quotes out. That's where guido found them
(, Fri 3 Jul 2020, 11:38, Reply)
could you point me to the daily mail article where they discuss 'Hurrah for the Blackshirts' please
(, Fri 3 Jul 2020, 12:18, Reply)
Just do a search on the Guardian website, love.
They're very up on holding others to account for their historical positions.
While you're at it, what was Piers Morgan's position on Justin Trudeau blacking up? What's his position on his own wearing of a Nazi uniform in public?
(
Prufrock Lucifer, son of the morning!, Fri 3 Jul 2020, 12:30,
Reply)
It's cute when right wingers try to apply liberal ethics to an obviously hypocritical attack on a left wing institution. Choose a fucking lane.
(
brb natural fistic, Fri 3 Jul 2020, 13:39,
Reply)