The full uncut
Kitty Jones conversation
Sometimes
one just has to publish the entire conversation one has with another person and
let others judge the content. So here,
totally unedited by me, is the entire conversation I had with Sue ‘Kitty’ Jones
which I was unable to finish as I was booted out of the group it was taking
place in.
Ms
Jones states that I was calling people names and being abusive and that’s why I
was booted out the group. I maintain
that I did nothing of the sort. All I
can say is - judge for yourself who’s telling the truth here.
Please note: This conversation was copied verbatim at
approximately 03:45 on Tuesday 13th May 2014.
Glen Shaky Shakespeare We were on track for all
of that in 2010 until the electorate opted for failure instead. Mainly at the
behest of the BBC.
10 May at 20:57 · Like · 1
Sue Jones " Yes, Labour left a financial mess when they
left office but it was not all their fault as the major global banking crisis
too its toll as well. It would be nice if Labour held their hands up and
accepted some responsibility but I believe we are passed the point of
apportioning blame." Labour did not leave a mess, and the current
government have been officially rebuked for this lie,
10 May at 21:03 · Like · 1
Sue Jones Labour’s social and economic policy was a success,
and this is substantiated by the LSE’s definitive survey of the Blair-Brown
years:
“There is clear evidence that public spending worked, contrary to popular belief.” Nor did Labour overspend. It inherited “a large deficit and high public sector debt”, with spending “at a historic low” – 14th out of 15 in the EU.
Labour’s spending increased, and money was invested in public services and social programs, and until the crash was still “unexceptional”, either by historic UK standards or international ones. Until 2007 “national debt levels were lower than when Labour took office”.
After years of neglect during the previous Conservative administration, Labour inherited a mess: public services in very poor state, shabby and squalid public buildings and unforgivably neglected human lives that formed a social deficit much more costly than any Treasury debt. Labour Ministers set about addressing the causes and devastating effects of poverty and social marginalisation. Both poverty and inequality had risen to levels unprecedented in post-war history.
This process accelerated during the 1980s. Unlike every other post-war decade, in which the benefits of economic growth had been shared across social groups, the economic gains of the 1980s disproportionately benefited the rich at the expense of the poor (Hills, 2004). Social inequality on such a gross level was not only the result of Thatcher’s policies, she celebrated it. She declared that inequality is essential to fostering “the spirit of envy” and hailed greed as a “valuable spur to economic activity”.
The “mess” that Thatcher left is verified by several longitudinal studies. Dr. Alex Scott-Samuel and colleagues from the Universities of Durham, West of Scotland, Glasgow and Edinburgh, sourced data from over 70 existing research papers, which concludes that as a result of unnecessary unemployment, welfare cuts and damaging housing policies, the former prime minister’s legacy “includes the unnecessary and unjust premature death of many British citizens, together with a substantial and continuing burden of suffering and loss of well-being.”
“There is clear evidence that public spending worked, contrary to popular belief.” Nor did Labour overspend. It inherited “a large deficit and high public sector debt”, with spending “at a historic low” – 14th out of 15 in the EU.
Labour’s spending increased, and money was invested in public services and social programs, and until the crash was still “unexceptional”, either by historic UK standards or international ones. Until 2007 “national debt levels were lower than when Labour took office”.
After years of neglect during the previous Conservative administration, Labour inherited a mess: public services in very poor state, shabby and squalid public buildings and unforgivably neglected human lives that formed a social deficit much more costly than any Treasury debt. Labour Ministers set about addressing the causes and devastating effects of poverty and social marginalisation. Both poverty and inequality had risen to levels unprecedented in post-war history.
This process accelerated during the 1980s. Unlike every other post-war decade, in which the benefits of economic growth had been shared across social groups, the economic gains of the 1980s disproportionately benefited the rich at the expense of the poor (Hills, 2004). Social inequality on such a gross level was not only the result of Thatcher’s policies, she celebrated it. She declared that inequality is essential to fostering “the spirit of envy” and hailed greed as a “valuable spur to economic activity”.
The “mess” that Thatcher left is verified by several longitudinal studies. Dr. Alex Scott-Samuel and colleagues from the Universities of Durham, West of Scotland, Glasgow and Edinburgh, sourced data from over 70 existing research papers, which concludes that as a result of unnecessary unemployment, welfare cuts and damaging housing policies, the former prime minister’s legacy “includes the unnecessary and unjust premature death of many British citizens, together with a substantial and continuing burden of suffering and loss of well-being.”
10 May at 21:19 · Like · 1
Sue Jones There can't be any consensus between the parties
whilst the conservatives have adopted an authoritarian position, and certainly
not whilst they continue to lie to the public, the extent of the lying is
considerable, and it's constant - http://kittysjones.wordpress.com/.../tory-dogma-and.../
Valen
Cook You got that right, Glen.
Valen
Cook To make things palatable for the ConDem recipients, some
'greasing of the wheels' has to be done. By giving all the parties some share
of responsibility seemed the only way to get through to them.
Glen Shaky Shakespeare The Tories have no
interest in putting things right for the country. They are earning far too much
from the status quo.
10 May at 21:29 · Like · 2
Valen
Cook I totally agree that Labour's strategy was working but we have
to encourage all parties to come together, using some flannel might do the
trick.
Sue Jones I wish I could see that happening
Valen
Cook There has been consensus between the parties in the past - in
the aftermath of the Second World War - but I think now is the time to
dismantle the partisan system and have non-partisan leadership combining the
best aspects of all the political ideologies which will leave no single part of
the political spectrum wholly satisfied but may leave us with a much fairer
system.
Valen
Cook I totally agree, Glen. That's why we need to get rid of them.
Valen
Cook We have to dream, Sue, or we will just lose all the will to
fight for what's right.
Sue Jones I know that there was a postwar consensus, but since
Thatcher, that's been impossible to sustain. The ideological positions of left
and right are incommensurable
10 May at 21:35 · Edited · Like · 1
Sue Jones No Valen, we have to be realistic, face reality and
deal with what is
Glen Shaky Shakespeare Tory policy is only meant
to work for the richest at the expense of the poorest so any idea of political
consensus is total nonsense. It is impossible. They are far too selfish. They
have the wrong priorities. Our only hope is to get rid of them
10 May at 21:38 · Like · 1
Valen
Cook That's why we have to get rid of the partisan system, Sue. You
say face reality but all it takes is a leap of faith and the balls to carry it
through.
Valen
Cook Nothing is impossible, just implausible...until it's achieved.
It is better to try and fail than to not try at all.
Sue Jones The problem with your idea is that the ideologies
that policies are founded on are fundamentally grounded on very different
beliefs about society and human nature. Furthermore , each party formulates
policies which support a different section of society, with the tories
believing that only the wealthy are virtuous and worthy of support, they build
social hierarchies, whilst the left tends to support the vulnerable, and
support equality and inclusion. These beliefs are irreconcilable
Sue Jones Many people took a leap of faith and voted lib dem,
look where they landd
Glen Shaky Shakespeare I disagree. There is no
point in even attempting this. Labour would be working in the interests of the
country whilst the Tories would be fixated on the fortunes of millionaires.
Non-starter.
10 May at 21:44 · Like · 2
Sue Jones Just said the same ^ lol, great minds
Valen
Cook I'm not saying that I have all the answers, Sue, I'm not that
arrogant. Does that mean that we can't have a proper dialogue to try to come up
with a better solution? I voted Lib Dem in 2010 so I understand your reluctance
to take a leap of faith if you did the same but that shouldn't stop us trying
to change things for the better. Rid the system of party tribalism and you may
have a shot at a better type of government. If we don't try then people like
yourself and Glen have no reason to bitch about the system or the corrupt
parties it creates.
Nathan Burns What you're asking for, a 'solution'
in a time of crisis happened 6 years ago, when Gordon Brown was off trying to
be grown up and save the world while David Cameron was just having a whinge at
any attempt by the government to stop global financial armageddon. The real,
pressing crisis has past. What we have now is a problem with the structures of
our society and economy. Although these are arguably just as pressing as an
instant crisis like the one experienced in 2008 they are not problems going to
be solved by a coaltion. This is not WW2 and a matter of 'putting aside our
differences', we need a blueprint for the future based on a cohesive vision on
what we want our society to look like. You are not going to find that in a
short term coalition arrangement.
10 May at 21:52 · Like · 1
Sue Jones I disagree and have argued elsewhere that we needto
be more overtly partisan especially with much 'allthesame' propaganda around,
Furthermore, there are so many coalition policies that can NOT and must not be
endorsed or supported in any way. Think this through. The coalition are
responsible for the deaths of over 11,000 sick and disabled people because of
their policies.
10 May at 21:54 · Like · 1
Valen
Cook You would be best looking at the other entries on my blog for
my ideas on what could be done for a better way forward.
Sue Jones The only way forward is a labour vote
10 May at 21:55 · Like · 1
Sue Jones And a clear opposition to coalition policy
Valen
Cook Sue, every ideology has a good point. It is finding those good
points and combining them. If you truly believe that only a Labour vote is the
way forward then you are sadly misguided because Labour have not got the clear
opposition policy you're looking for.
Sue Jones You claim tory ideology has some good points, and
then you have the cheek to call ME 'sadly misguided'?
10 May at 21:59 · Like · 1
Glen Shaky Shakespeare The problems our country
faces come exclusively from the Tories. They can't be worked with, that much is
clear, they have absolutely no interest whatsoever in doing what's right for
the country. They still follow that fabled 'trickle down economics' theory.
They believe in that wholeheartedly whilst there is no evidence to support the
theory. In contrast Gordon Brown had engineered a strong recovery that would
have left all worries long behind us. It is I am afraid an impossible concept.
10 May at 21:59 · Like · 1
Glen Shaky Shakespeare That was just 2011 Sue.
They stopped counting after that.
Sue Jones There are so many coalition policies that can NOT
and must not be endorsed or supported in any way. Think this through. The
coalition are responsible for the deaths of over 11,000 sick and disabled
people because of their policies. Human rights violitions, oppressive policies,
and you think these are positive ?
Valen
Cook None of the political parties in the UK are worth anything. We
need to dismantle the corrupt system and create a new way forward. Anything
else is just postponing another UK Apocalypse like the one we have now because
all we'll get is a government that wings from Left to Right and back again ad
infinitum. Stagnation is all this current system offers because what good one
administration does the other undoes and vice versa.
Sue Jones Yes, i know Glen, and I am terrified at the thought
of what they are withholding from the public
Valen
Cook You are looking at partisan ideology and not the pure ideology
on which it is supposed to be based. Everything you have used as evidence to
remain with the status quo is to do with partisan politics, not pure ideology.
Sue Jones You may do better to inform yourself regarding facts
and policies before dismissing all political parties Valen. You clearly haven't
done that
Sue Jones Besides that, we have the system that we have, and
you certainly won't change that with a tory government in office.
Glen Shaky Shakespeare You are missing the main
point Valen. The Tories have never ever done anything positive for the country.
People need to learn not to vote Tory. They have to try thinking for
themselves. The Tories own the UK media so you are never going to get fair
coverage. Even the BBC decided to overtly campaign for them in 2010. Personal
responsibility is the key and I mean responsibility at the ballot box.
Sue Jones Valen proposes that parties merge and 'work
together' whilst criticising them for being 'allthesame'. Coz, like, THAT'S
coherent...not
10 May at 22:09 · Edited · Like · 1
Sue Jones Some 'debates' just aren't worth having
Glen Shaky Shakespeare I don't see anybody in the
Tory party Labour could possibly work with now. Even if there once was Cameron
has totally screwed that now.
10 May at 22:40 · Like · 2
Please
note: There is a typographical error on
my response made at 22:00 – the word ‘wing’ should read ‘swing’. I didn’t alter it in the body of the text
because I might have been accused of altering what I said but, as you can see
from the conversation above, the only editing has been done by Ms Jones on her
entries.
After being booted out of the group, I sent
Ms Jones a private message but she continued in much the same vein as the
conversation until she threw a hissy fit and prevented me from replying although
she keeps feeling the need to comment on my diary entry dated Saturday 10th
May on this very blog, hence this posting to put the record straight.
The 'editing' on my entries sare because I make typing errors sdue to severe eyesight issues, Valen.
ReplyDeleteI don't care what the reason was for the typo, Ms Jones. I simply pointed it out to prove that I was not editing your sections.
DeleteIf you put as much effort into criticising the tories,Valen, as you do slating disabled activists,we may well make some progress
ReplyDeleteActually I do, Ms Jones, you just haven't spent any time reading any of the pieces. I'm considered disabled myself so perhaps you should try to learn something about me first.
DeleteHere is a list of some of my anti-Tory blogs that you haven't bothered looking at, Ms Jones. Perhaps you can get someone to read them to you sometime.
Deletehttp://valen1971.blogspot.com/2013/12/tories-start-operation-mind-rape-on-uks.html
http://valen1971.blogspot.com/2014/01/the-tories-want-to-help-strivers-like.html
http://valen1971.blogspot.com/2014/02/iain-duncan-smith-incompetent-bungler.html
http://valen1971.blogspot.com/2014/04/uk-apocalypse-disappearing-freedoms.html
http://valen1971.blogspot.com/2013/05/the-bedroom-tax-camerons-poll-tax.html
http://valen1971.blogspot.com/2012/09/the-biggest-crime.html
http://valen1971.blogspot.com/2012/05/case-for-political-change.html
http://valen1971.blogspot.com/2012/04/big-brother-is-here-and-his-name-is.html
http://valen1971.blogspot.com/2012/03/workfare-modern-day-slavery.html
http://valen1971.blogspot.com/2012/02/turning-back-time-to-bad-old-days-of.html
http://valen1971.blogspot.com/2010/11/axeman-cometh.html
http://valen1971.blogspot.com/2010/11/axeman-comethpart-2.html
http://valen1971.blogspot.com/2010/11/axeman-comethpart-3.html
And you didn't post the PM's - which were the reason you were blocked :-)
ReplyDeleteEveryone has a right to an opinion, but you don't have a right to harass someone. I am not too sure if FB also have rules about conversations being published like this, too. You didn't ask permission, from FN, or from either Glen or myself
Oh dear, Ms Jones, if you can't accurately report the facts then you have no right to write comments on my blog trying to blacken my name or write a blog of your own. The private messages to which you refer were sent to you AFTER I was booted out of the group so your first sentence is quite incorrect. I cannot prove what I just stated is the truth because when you sent your final response you stopped me replying and I deleted the conversation. However, as my readers know full well, when dealing with personal matters I am nothing but brutally honest. I acknowledge that I was certainly angry at being kicked out of an open group for no real reason because you objected to my anti-Labour comments and I made no bones about it but I wasn't harassing you so just go to your corner of cyberspace and leave me alone.
DeleteI did not stop you from having an opinion, Ms Jones, but I do object to people such as yourself deliberately and continually misrepresenting or ignoring what I say so you can keep to your blinkered Labourite ideas instead of at least acknowledging that there may be another way.
As the conversation involved myself and was on an open forum, I don't have to seek permission from anyone because I am allowed to use it as evidence against YOUR comments.
Bit sad to continue the argument on your blog, and PMing Kitty Jones after you'd been booted out of the group could be construed as harassment. If I were her I would have blocked you. Let it go and get a life.
ReplyDeleteMs Stout, I was not continuing the argument on this blog. I was reporting the FACTS about a personal experience. I was not harassing Ms Jones, I was simply trying to finish the conversation that we were having and could not as she had me booted out of the group which was listed as an 'open' group.
DeleteAlso, if you look at the time stamp on the posting above, it has been over a month since the incident happened and I have not mentioned it since until I was forced to post these replies to Ms Jones' comments and yours. I did let it go, Ms Stout. It seems, however, that Ms Jones can't let it go because she is the one who has dragged it all up again over a month later. Quite frankly, I'd forgotten all about the entire incident until I saw the comments that have been posted here. I should really have just deleted Ms Jones' comments and yours, however, as I am such a believer in free speech, I will leave them here together with my replies, something I doubt you or she would do on your own blogs.
Hmmm ..... your words speak volumes! You started this argument by trying to shame Kitty publicly by smearing her character and posting the conversation between you both and now you're accusing her of dragging it up again because hey.... you've forgotten all about it, right? Wow! Go look up NPD and Projection! Your behaviour speaks volumes!
Delete"something I doubt you or she would do on your own blogs."
ReplyDeleteMaybe she just has important things to do.
Clearly, you do not.
Valon you are most certainly not alone in recieving this treatment from ms jones, the aim is a closed echo chamber of yes men voting labour. A one party state of blairites with ms jones at its head!
ReplyDeleteAnonymous: Stop being a flying monkey for Valen, distorting facts, exaggerating and attacking! Valen wanted one thing and one thing only. He wanted Kitty to agree with him on everything he said. It's not unusual for those seeking to control to feel "insulted" and go on to smear a person's character publicly and also harass them personally. Differences of opinion isn't the issue here between Valen and Kitty. It's about Valen throwing his rattle out of his pram (rage) just because Kitty didn't completely agree with him and it wouldn't surprise me if you, Anonymous, if not a flying monkey, are in fact Valen himself.
ReplyDelete