3 ms·

That is my point exactly. Did Gordon Brown kill him or condoned his killing? No, and if you read the statement, Gordon Brown took the opportunity to blow his o

That is my point exactly. Did Gordon Brown kill him or condoned his killing? No, and if you read the statement, Gordon Brown took the opportunity to blow his own trumpet - "my how far we've come, things are so much better now" (I paraphrase). Quite a politically astute response, actually, since it makes them look good from a number of angles.

jacquesm 17y ago
Brown is a very smooth operator, and for sure he would try to do everything to spin this to his own benefit. That does not mean that nothing was achieved however. In my opinion, now it is time to press on and demand a formal pardon in light of this apology I don't see how it could be refused. He's pretty much admitted they got it wrong, a pardon is the next logical step.
- StrawberryFrog 17y ago
  He's pretty much admitted they got it wrong The language is ambiguous: If by "he" and "they" you are referring to the same entity, then no, no such admission has been made. And it's not clear that it should be. More like "thousands of other gay men who were convicted under homophobic laws were treated terribly ... I am proud that those days are gone ... " In other words "they got it wrong in the 1950s. We're better."
  - jacquesm 17y ago
    'He' refers to Brown today, the head of the current government, 'they' refers to the British Government in the past. Apologies for being ambiguous. Not sure what the downvote was all about, whether that was because of Brown being a smooth operator (he is), him trying to spin this in such a way that he benefits from it (he did, especially some of the words could have been a lot better chosen for an apology), whether they disagree that nothing was achieved (it was, there is an apology where there was none before) or whether they disagree with that this in my opinion is a first step (it is, it's my opinion, I should know ;) ).

jacquesm 17y ago

Brown is a very smooth operator, and for sure he would try to do everything to spin this to his own benefit. That does not mean that nothing was achieved however. In my opinion, now it is time to press on and demand a formal pardon in light of this apology I don't see how it could be refused. He's pretty much admitted they got it wrong, a pardon is the next logical step.

StrawberryFrog 17y ago
He's pretty much admitted they got it wrong The language is ambiguous: If by "he" and "they" you are referring to the same entity, then no, no such admission has been made. And it's not clear that it should be. More like "thousands of other gay men who were convicted under homophobic laws were treated terribly ... I am proud that those days are gone ... " In other words "they got it wrong in the 1950s. We're better."
- jacquesm 17y ago
  'He' refers to Brown today, the head of the current government, 'they' refers to the British Government in the past. Apologies for being ambiguous. Not sure what the downvote was all about, whether that was because of Brown being a smooth operator (he is), him trying to spin this in such a way that he benefits from it (he did, especially some of the words could have been a lot better chosen for an apology), whether they disagree that nothing was achieved (it was, there is an apology where there was none before) or whether they disagree with that this in my opinion is a first step (it is, it's my opinion, I should know ;) ).