Podcast to be broadcast on City fire

Shah is a dreadful woman and politician. How on earth anybody could consider voting for her beats me

 

All this is, is a young journalist wanting to make a breakthrough by stirring up controversy and making the topic a wider discussion thus putting himself in the spotlight and making him plenty of money going forwards.

He has absolutely no interest whatsoever in BCFC, or the tragedy, this is just a selfish act.

 

I think we all know which demographic votes for her

 

Edited for accuracy -voted for Galloway and now Shah. Nuff said.

 

Ian Herbert in the Mail today raising the same questions about the fire. Plus his view that ppl who challenge the ‘accident’ conclusion are treated very badly. He is referring to a letter from West Yorkshire County Council warning Bradford that they risked a fire. He also mentions the podcasts and Martin Fletcher who lost several members of his family.

What they all fail to understand, it is extremely painful for city fans and especially for those fans who were at the match to have this constantly raked up. Whether it was accidental, or wilful neglect it doesn’t alter what happened that day. You cannot force ppl to confront such a terrible time, as I am sure many live with it every day. In my view that is why there is such hostility. Rightly or wrongly, fans feel journalists are making money on the back of ppl’s grief.

 

Shes a woman which makes the fact that the certain demographic who vote for her is even more baffling.

 

I'm not sure they care if I'm honest, just how low will these people stoop to make a living out of what is still a very emotive part of Bradford City fans history.

 

Latest episode today. Disappointing that he conned 95 year old Oliver Popplewell into giving him an interview. Daniel Taylor and Martin Fletcher still spouting Bollox as usual.

 

Herbert is terrible. Everything that's wrong with sports journalism in newspapers (especially those with on-line editions)

 

Bit racist

 

I'm more disappointed City fans are actually listening to this and getting the podcasters numbers up.

 

Shut up Silver.

 

I've listened to them all. Laughable when it claims to be putting a balanced view down when it's clearly a podcast cobbled together to try and get Martin Fletcher the justice he feels hasn't been given. For all the episodes it basically boils down to Stafford being the instigator behind the fire. They've clearly down their homework, try and discredit the evidence of the police and the 'apparent' guy who claimed to start the fire. To be fair my dad always had a scepticism of fires bei.g caused by discarded cigarettes and the length of time of the inquiry was unusually short for an incident of such tragic proportions. That said, they still cannot bring any different evidence to the table, like how exactly could a fire be started in a packed stadium deliberately and not have someone see it happen. And the big kicker, would Stafford really have risked the lives of thousands of fans of the club he absolutely adored? Until they bring something tangible to the table it's just pure conjecture.

 

Most people who get involved in things like this have no interest in the victims, they are out for themselves.

We also brace ourselves for the people who will use this disaster to bash Hillsbrough in a few weeks. You never hear about this disaster in the same way you hear about Hillsbrough is a well know trope. It's the same every single year.

I've not listen to it, I have no interest in listening to it or of the conspiracy theories which it fuels.

On another note, I don't think it's right to sing songs about it or to wear clothing or shirts depicting the victims as a number as it's extremely crass, yet it seems many of our fans feel that is fair game.

 

I hate it. I want remember them at the annual memorial service and nearly always attend. I don’t want ppl making money out of commercial clothing or items. Just my view. I still find it extremely distressing and this type of making things fit because the ppl they refer to are dead and cannot defend themselves is sickening.

 

The question isn't why people are voting for Shah, but the quality of opposition put against her.

We all know she's a chancer chasing the latest cause - but who is she even up against? In my constituency, it was some no name from Essex or something equally silly that promised to 'learn about Bradford'.

Anyone voting for that should just give up.

 

Not to move off topic but there are very few places in the Bradford district who actually vote for a different party.

Bradford South has been Labour since 1945.
Bradford West since 1974 has been Labour with a small period of George Galloway.
Bradford East has changed so only existed since 2010 when it was Lib Dems but has been Labour ever since. It was Labour from 1945 to 1974 before it was merged.
Shipley has been Tory since 1950 with a gap during the Blair years when it was Labour.

The only seat of note that actually doesn't vote the same way regardless of who is put forward is Keighley. It has swung between Labour and Conservative 11 times since 1945. More than double the changes of the other 4 constituencies combined.

If you think Bradford is a shithole or you are being let down, voting the same way every single election clearly isn't helping matters, but clearly many people just vote as they have done without thinking about it year after year. I can safely say Robbie Moore will be booted out of Keighley at the next election because their voters seem to judge the government on their actions, rather than voting in the same wasters year after year.

 

I agree, but blaming the voters isn't where it's at.

The Conservatives aren't even trying to win these seats, so it's impossible to complain about the votes staying the same. Anyone frustrated by how Bradford constituents vote should be aiming that frustration at the Conservative party, first and foremost - including those those that begrudgingly vote Labour.

 

The pocasts do touch upon certain aspects of what you mention but disappointingly seem to be reticent to follow because it would dilute the overall aim which is to point the finger of blame of the deaths at the door of Heginbotham and to a lesser degree Jack Tordoff. It's a tragedy that in hindsight should never been allowed to happen, but then we could say that about any disaster that takes the lives of innocent people.