SUN Editor : "We Were Right About Hillsborough"

Batman · Post by **Batman** » Fri Dec 01, 2006 6:07 pm

http://www.football365.com/story/0,1703 ... 44,00.html

Former Sun editor Kelvin MacKenzie has reportedly claimed that the newspaper's allegations about Liverpool supporters at Hillsborough was "the truth".

The Sun famously claimed that Liverpool fans had caused the tragedy - which claimed the lives of 96 people - by drunkenly storming the gates, and also alleged that fans urinated on the bodies of the dead and stole their wallets.

Then-editor MacKenzie made a grovelling apology the next day, but The Sun is still boycotted by many Liverpool fans because of those horrendous accusations.

The paper then issued a formal apology in 2004, saying they were "truly sorry" for making "the most terrible mistake in history."

But MacKenzie has now apparently told a business lunch in Newcastle that he was forced to apologise by owner Rupert Murdoch and he still stands by the allegations.

"I went on the World at One the next day and apologised. I only did that because Rupert Murdoch told me to," he said, according to the Liverpool Echo.

"I wasn't sorry then and I'm not sorry now because we told the truth.

"There was a surge of Liverpool fans who had been drinking and that is what caused the disaster."

77,78,81,84,05 · Post by **77,78,81,84,05** » Fri Dec 01, 2006 6:12 pm

nice person.

americantrotter · Post by **americantrotter** » Fri Dec 01, 2006 7:23 pm

Even if it was true, and I dont believe that it was, what a bitter man to even talk about it.

mummywhycantieatcrayons · Post by **mummywhycantieatcrayons** » Fri Dec 01, 2006 7:31 pm

americantrotter wrote:Even if it was true, and I dont believe that it was, what a bitter man to even talk about it.

Well, you say that, but he printed an account of the story that he believed was true and clearly still does, even though it has cost him a lot in his career.

He was asked a question and gave his honest answer (and a very short one at that). Insensitive and one sided as his story no doubt was, it seems unlikely to me that he created a pack of lies out of mid air.

If you look into Hillsborough in a bit of depth (which I think I have) then you might agree with me that the version of events that the Scouse emotional bullies put about is a bit more sanitised with regards to the culpability of the Liverpool away following of the late eighties than is really credible.

americantrotter · Post by **americantrotter** » Fri Dec 01, 2006 7:40 pm

Yes, but the fact is 96 people died, and it was bound to happen the way things were ran then. That is the tradgedy. To me their actions were no worse than the average large crowd of the time.

It was football's fault, and if it wasnt liverpool it would have been somebody else later.

communistworkethic · Post by **communistworkethic** » Fri Dec 01, 2006 7:48 pm

americantrotter wrote:Yes, but the fact is 96 people died, and it was bound to happen the way things were ran then. That is the tradgedy. To me their actions were no worse than the average large crowd of the time.

It was football's fault, and if it wasnt liverpool it would have been somebody else later.

Well that makes it all ok then.

americantrotter · Post by **americantrotter** » Fri Dec 01, 2006 7:55 pm

So I have a softer view than you as far as Liverpool are concerned.

Dont pick one thing out from a safe perch 20 years later. You know what it was like in those days. Hell we had a disaster at Burnden that wasnt alcohol related that I know of. It was incompetence and neglect that caused that tradgedy. (Hillsborough)

Proper attention to it after the fact has also helped crowd troubles. The powers that be wanted maximum output for minimum input. It was a dangerous situation, and I refuse to condemn a relative few people,in a tradgedy not of the majority's making.

communistworkethic · Post by **communistworkethic** » Fri Dec 01, 2006 7:58 pm

Ok then Herman Goering's actions weren't so bad, after all what he did was no different to lots of other Nazis. Hey they were all at in them days.

mummywhycantieatcrayons · Post by **mummywhycantieatcrayons** » Fri Dec 01, 2006 8:07 pm

americantrotter wrote:It was incompetence and neglect that caused that tradgedy. (Hillsborough)

If a zookeeper negligently lets a lion run free from its cage and it kills somebody, I don't think it's unreasonable to say that that the zookeeper has caused that person's death.

However, it's difficult to blame the zookeeper quite as much if you want to claim at the same time that he was only looking after an averagely boisterous dog.

americantrotter · Post by **americantrotter** » Fri Dec 01, 2006 8:09 pm

Brilliant. As usual you pick on one thing and ignore the main point. I havent the time nor the inclination to debate this with you. You win as usual commie. Congratulations you and the Scouse emotional bullies that mummy mentioned arent that different.

communistworkethic · Post by **communistworkethic** » Fri Dec 01, 2006 8:12 pm

Well if you make a stupid statement what do you expect?

If what mckenzie said is true, and I'm not going to argue that point, then to suggest that it's not that bad because all crowds were stupid in those days is quite ridiculous. Perhaps if you drew the parallel across to excusing racism in the US during the 60s because everyone did it and the authorities let them, so it was ok then.

americantrotter · Post by **americantrotter** » Fri Dec 01, 2006 8:15 pm

done.

Montreal Wanderer · Post by **Montreal Wanderer** » Fri Dec 01, 2006 8:16 pm

communistworkethic wrote:Well if you make a stupid statement what do you expect?

If what mckenzie said is true, and I'm not going to argue that point, then to suggest that it's not that bad because all crowds were stupid in those days is quite ridiculous. Perhaps if you drew the parallel across to excusing racism in the US during the 60s because everyone did it and the authorities let them, so it was ok then.

You referring to the 1760s or the 1860s there, commie? Certainly by the 1960s the federal government was imposing integration - unless by authorities you refer to a few southern redneck politicians.

communistworkethic · Post by **communistworkethic** » Fri Dec 01, 2006 8:25 pm

Montreal Wanderer wrote:
communistworkethic wrote:Well if you make a stupid statement what do you expect?

If what mckenzie said is true, and I'm not going to argue that point, then to suggest that it's not that bad because all crowds were stupid in those days is quite ridiculous. Perhaps if you drew the parallel across to excusing racism in the US during the 60s because everyone did it and the authorities let them, so it was ok then.

You referring to the 1760s or the 1860s there, commie? Certainly by the 1960s the federal government was imposing integration - unless by authorities you refer to a few southern redneck politicians.

The date matters not and you know it, you cantakerous coffin dodger.

mummywhycantieatcrayons · Post by **mummywhycantieatcrayons** » Fri Dec 01, 2006 9:34 pm

The Liverpool online indignation machine is whirring into action again:

http://www.redandwhitekop.com/forum/ind ... c=154769.0

A couple of highlights from the first page:

In some European countries they jail those who deny that the Holocaust ever happened.

Given that the official investigation into Hillsboro concluded that it occurred due to bad policing and overcrowding, shouldn't there be a law that means McKenzie gets jailed for continuing to peddle his lies.

as for Kelvin McKenzie being Chairman of the Wireless group which comprises JuiceFM - a LIVERPOOL RADIO STATION - I believe we should all boycott this radio station forthwith.................what do you think?

blurred · Post by **blurred** » Fri Dec 01, 2006 9:49 pm

mummywhycantieatcrayons wrote:If you look into Hillsborough in a bit of depth (which I think I have) then you might agree with me that the version of events that the Scouse emotional bullies put about is a bit more sanitised with regards to the culpability of the Liverpool away following of the late eighties than is really credible.

Is that just a generic '80s footie fans on terraces were bad' generalisation, or do you have a specific point behind that statement?

mummywhycantieatcrayons · Post by **mummywhycantieatcrayons** » Fri Dec 01, 2006 9:59 pm

blurred wrote:
mummywhycantieatcrayons wrote:If you look into Hillsborough in a bit of depth (which I think I have) then you might agree with me that the version of events that the Scouse emotional bullies put about is a bit more sanitised with regards to the culpability of the Liverpool away following of the late eighties than is really credible.
Is that just a generic '80s footie fans on terraces were bad' generalisation, or do you have a specific point behind that statement?

The point is that a lot of '80s 'away' fans did drink quite a lot and arrive to the ground late, and this was certainly with the case with the Liverpool fans on that day.

Liverpool's away support in the eighties was an unusually unfortunate mob.

blurred · Post by **blurred** » Fri Dec 01, 2006 10:02 pm

"All I did wrong there was to tell the truth"

"The only thing different we did was put it under the headline 'The Truth'"

Would this be 'the truth' that we stole from our own dead, when all families accounted for all the possessions of the deceased, as evidenced in the Taylor Report? Would this be 'the truth' that Liverpool fans beat up policemen and stopped lifesaving treatment to their friends and families, for which there is conveniently no evidence, yet bags of evidence to the contrary?

"There was a surge of Liverpool fans who had been drinking and that is what caused the disaster."

There had been surges on terraces for decades beforehand - it was poor crowd management, allied to a number of other causes including poor stadium layout, that led to overwhelmingly large numbers of Liverpool supporters in the central pen of the Leppings Lane as opposed to those to the side.

Doubtless there would have been injury and incident, but it was the inactivity, naivety, or general incompetence of those on the ground and of those in charge, including Duckenfield, that led to this becoming 'a disaster' and not merely 'an incident'.

blurred · Post by **blurred** » Fri Dec 01, 2006 10:06 pm

mummywhycantieatcrayons wrote:The point is that a lot of '80s 'away' fans did drink quite a lot and arrive to the ground late, and this was certainly with the case with the Liverpool fans on that day.

Liverpool's away support in the eighties was an unusually unfortunate mob.

Football fans drink today. Football fans arrive late today. We don't see scores of people dying in stadia week in and week out. This is because lessons have been learned, stadia have changed, and crowd management is light-years above what it was at Hillsborough. Police are aware of what is going on, and games are regularly delayed due to crowd congestion.

Police at Hillsborough were not aware of what was going on, and did nothing to alleviate the obvious 'congestion' (and to call it congestion is sanitising it immensely) in the central pen. To claim that fans had no part in it is impossible, because without fans there would be no problems, but to claim that Liverpool fans were 'to blame' for this is disrespectful, and I would say inaccurate.

americantrotter · Post by **americantrotter** » Fri Dec 01, 2006 10:09 pm

blurred wrote:
mummywhycantieatcrayons wrote:The point is that a lot of '80s 'away' fans did drink quite a lot and arrive to the ground late, and this was certainly with the case with the Liverpool fans on that day.

Liverpool's away support in the eighties was an unusually unfortunate mob.
Football fans drink today. Football fans arrive late today. We don't see scores of people dying in stadia week in and week out. This is because lessons have been learned, stadia have changed, and crowd management is light-years above what it was at Hillsborough. Police are aware of what is going on, and games are regularly delayed due to crowd congestion.

Police at Hillsborough were not aware of what was going on, and did nothing to alleviate the obvious 'congestion' (and to call it congestion is sanitising it immensely) in the central pen. To claim that fans had no part in it is impossible, because without fans there would be no problems, but to claim that Liverpool fans were 'to blame' for this is disrespectful, and I would say inaccurate.

Thank You. I gave up trying to get that point across as I am a shite writer who types extremely slowly. It was a football tradgedy, and if it didnt happen that day it would have happened on another, the people that ran the game didnt give a toss about fans or their safety in those days.

Connect with your social network account

SUN Editor : "We Were Right About Hillsborough"

SUN Editor : "We Were Right About Hillsborough"

Who is online