Mogg

Growstuff, I feel your reaction to me was rather extreme. I suggested the Yesbutnobut leave the thread only if she continued to berate Annie in such an unacceptable way. Other posters have noticed and commented on this, not just myself. You have admitted to Lemongrove that you didn’t know Annie’s Labour credentials therefore I don’t understand why you would be so extremely abrupt towards me.

More deflection away from criticism of Jacob Reece Mogg.

This thread has some interesting comments about Mogg, his inappropriate offensive comments about Granfell and the Stay Put advice.
I try to avoid commenting on individuals, not always successfully and until now I've kept out of what I see as a number of unnecessarily nasty comments directed at Anniebach.
For what it's worth, I remember Annie in her total support of Corbyn period on gransnet. I'm familiar with the LP credentials of Annie and her ancestors/family. I also remember the growing sadness Annie expressed when her feelings about Corbyn as Labour leader began to change.

Some of the comments here have that sniff of playground bullying in them, of othering and isolating one individual in an attempt to exclude them or to make any comments posted by them, seem useless.

Annie and I have often disagreed on various threads, sometimes in a polarised way. Surely, that's one of the positives of a forum, that we 'talk' to people we don't always agree with. Surely we ought to be able to do that with a modicum of respect all round.

Well, how about when anniebach states she never reads a forum members posts, but when that forum member posts on a past tragedy anniebach readily states she is upset by the content of the post.

Even then when the forum member apologises for upsetting her by the content of the post, but points out to anniebach that she had stated she never read the members contributions to the forum, anniebach will not accept that apology.

So, it may be worthwhile to end the attempt by some forum members to paint anniebach as someone who is always without fault, while those who state anything against her are in some way bullies of the worst kind.

With anniebach, the above is certainly not the situation in either circumstance.

Some people enjoy being a victim and their little coterie huddles round and facilitates the situation.

Message deleted by Gransnet. Here's a link to our Talk Guidelines.

Grandad43 you were not sorry that you said I and many others may have played a part in the deaths of 144 people, you apologised because I found it distressing.

As you have not the foggiest what the outcome may have been ,no one does, you posted your opinion of us as partly responsible. As this disaster had never occurred before or after 1966 anywhere else in this country you had nothing to base your allegations on.

I have repeated what you posted to others and await their reply

I thought you said you were leaving the thread gfp?

As they are besties, so sweet ?

Grandad please stop stirring. A number of us have tried to damp this issue down and turn this thread away from what looks like bullying and insulting a long standing and respected member of GN.

You do not agree with her, that's fine, I do not always agree with her, but am capable of doing this without bullying or insulting her.

You do yourself no service by trying to stoke the flames again.

whitewave we all do it at sometime or another.

Changing the subject briefly just to let you know that I am thinking of you Annie at this sensitive time of year.

You put it so well gonegirl

Jabber how kind, thank you so much .

gonegirl I meant to add a smiley ?

When I heard what JRM said about Grenfell, i do think there has been an overreaction, he worded what he said very badly, but I took from his words that he was speaking about if such an event happened again people would use their commonsense and get out and ignore requests to stay put.

Now I am not a Conservative supporter, and certainly have little time for JRM, but I get fed up with the way people jump on every infelicitously worded remark by a politician, and twist it and give it the worse meaning they can.

Haven't all of us at some point said something that comes out backwards and leaves us saying words whose meaning is the complete opposite of what we actually meant? I know I have.

Anniebach in regard to your post @17:37 today, I will repeat, you stated very disrespectfully that you never read any post contributed to the forum by myself.

It does no matter what the content of my original post was, as again in very disrespectfully replying to that post and my apology which followed, you demonstrated that in stating you never read my contributions that in reality "was not a fact".

Also in your above post you state, " have repeated what you posted to others and await their reply"

So, in that it very much would seem as if you are attempting to bring a bullying campaign against me in this thread. I will not comment on your action in that but leave it to the Judgment of others as the facts in your prosecutions are in the above.

grandad43 I repeated what you posted to others for confirmation that I and others did or did not in anyway play a part in killing 144 people.

Now I will take Gonegirl’s advice, hope you will do the same .

anniebach Quote [grandad43 I repeated what you posted to others for confirmation that I and others did or did not in anyway play a part in killing 144 people.] End Quote.

anniebach, please explain how "others" can confirm or not if you played any part in the killing of 144 people?

I don't see myself as part of any 'little coterie' facilitating Anniebach as a victim. I suspect many others would object to being described in that way.
Annie is more than capable of standing her ground. I'm often puzzled by the lengths some go to in order to get into an online, rather tedious row with her. Anyway, that's enough on this particular subject from me.
Reece Frog anyone>

Could someone explain, preferably by means of a diagram how this post has gone from being a discussion about a comment by Rees-Mogg to a discussion about Jeremy Corbin?

Sorry Corbyn obviously! Auto correct again!

Iam64, I certainly do not wish to seek online confrontation with anniebach. However, when that forum member becomes upset with something I post when at the same time that person states she never reads my posts I consider that as her seeking confrontation with me.

Further, even though I then apologise for upsetting her she then refuses that apology and accuses me of including her with involvement in the negligence with killed one hundred and forty-four very young persons.

Now, again, who is seeking confrontation with who?

anniebach has deliberately mis-directed this thread and has, as is so often her way, used it as an opportunity to attack the Labour Party, even though the disaster to which she refers happened in 1966.

Earlier in this thread, she said:

"seems I am the only one on this thread who questions "What would I have done?", referring to the actions of the people caught up in the fire.

Having posed that question, it makes no sense to support Mogg's comment. Many of us said that in a very frightening situation, from inside the tower block (we saw the flames rising quickly up the side of the tower but they were inside and they had been told to stay there by the LFB). However, in his great wisdom, Mogg said, had he and Ferrari been in that situation, common sense would have led them to evacuate the building. But he wasn't in that situation and nobody can say with any certainty how they would have behaved. Many of them realised too late that they needed to get out but by that time the corridors and stairs were full of smoke and they had no breathing equipment.

Many of *anniebach"'s posts following that one were making political points:

"Will the Tory government make the survivors pay towards the removal of the tower, as a Labour government made the people of Aberfan pay towards the removal of the tips?"

"Makes one doubt about nationalising everything".

"I do not read Granddad's epistles - read one, you have read them all".

"He is an expert because he says he is. He is a staunch supporter of the Labour Party but not a member, because he said he wasn't".

"I am a socialist, not a Marxist, and can never support an anti-semetic leader".

These posts demonstrate an agenda to move the discussion away from Mogg's comments and towards yet another rant about the current Labour party.

And one final sarcastic shot was:

"and they are besties, so sweet" - with a "smiley" emoji.

Does that sound like someone who is upset and who needs people to rush to her defence on the grounds that she is being "bullied"?

Grandad - I didn't single anyone out for seeking confrontation. I commented that Annie is capable of standing her ground.
You and I often disagree or develop a discussion, doesn't mean it deteriorates in the way this thread seems to have done