David Gold was moved to post a link to a new Daily Mail ( some prefer Fail) link on his Facebook page today.
He did so with out comment which was surprising given that the headline read: “How did the Olympic Stadium fall into the hands of porn barons.”
The Mail – one of the most right wing newspapers in the country, but beloved of the middle England ladies at their tea parties, could hardly have found a more reactionary headline had they started.
Forget that the deal was handed out by the London Legacy Development Corporation and that they are therefore responsible it’s all West Ham’s fault.
The same relentless arguments are presented – most of them false at http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3198832/What-stench-s-icon-national-pride-earth-two-porn-barons-protegee-Baroness-Brady-allowed-Olympic-Stadium-deal-entirely-financed-taxpayer.html#ixzz3oLInv4JO
Under their headline – used solely to stir up more anger among the self righteous – they place a sub head just in case their more backward readers didn’t get the point.
It reads: “What a stench: It’s an icon of national pride. So how on earth were two porn barons and their protegee Baroness Brady allowed to take over the Olympic Stadium in a deal almost entirely financed by you the taxpayer?
It’s interesting this should appear just a couple of days after Gold told ClaretandHugh in an exclusive interview he believed the criticism of the deal could prove “endless.”
He clearly has no problem with articles carrying such jaundiced and prejudiced history lessons into his and David Sullivan’s background however unfair that may be.
And in response to “”How did the Olympic Stadium fall into the hands of porn barons.” he told ClaretandHugh a few minutes ago: “Because they had the courage, determination and relentless mission to get a deal – that’s how PRECISELY.”
We will bring more of DG’s thoughts on The Mail story later exclusively.
Sue the rag! Free advertising and the truth for once and for all will be revealed.
Well done whambam and my sympathies mate.
As for pigmouth, better than Tom & Jerry any day.
Yeah, they withdrew it out of a piggy bank
It has been open season on West Ham since the Tevez affair. Bad headline after bad headline.
It has got to the stage now where I largely ignore the lot but I felt sufficiently annoyed to respond to this one.
Gutter journalism at its worst. If the Mail wants to take the moral high ground then never mind “porn barons” (their words, not something I agree with btw) taking over the OS, how about the Country being taking over by a party lead by a man who puts his genitals in a dead pig’s mouth?
But did the taxpayer pay for the piggy?
The main thing that really gets my goat is all this ‘West Ham have been given a “£710m’ stadium F.O.C. there was a period of time (well 3 times really) when the deal was sent out for tender & each time West Ham were successful & were awarded the contract. If there was a better deal submitted then surely that deal would have been the winning bid?? So how can this deal now be the worst possible deal for the tax-payers? How much ££££ did the Olympic games bring in to the country, or the Athletic meetings this summer or Rugby World Cup games, future music concerts, motor sport, or the 2017 World Championship Athletics will attract? On the other hand if the upper tier was dismantled as originaly planned, how many of the above would have taken place at a 25,000 seater stadium?? Then how much of the tax-payers miney would be needed to prop up a not fit for purpose stadium?
It will end when people stop responding publically to it. The public don’t generally care, it would be helpful if the LLDC put out an official standard response that they are the owner and we are lessee for 25 days a year. After the first season as tennants there will be data to show what is the net benefit of the deal, not only within the stadium but to the surrounding community which is after all part of the legacy. Then the public can make up their minds based on facts, we are not responsible for the infrastructure costs we are part of the solution to paying it off, as has been mentioned previously it is a good deal for all parties including the tax payer.
I am getting sick and tired of everyone saying West Ham have taken over the OS.
WEST HAM HAVE IT FOR only 25 DAYS A YEAR, THAT LEAVES 340 DAYS WHERE THEY HAVE NO SAY IN ITS’ USE, it is then up to the LDC to make use of it.
That hardly constitutes a TAKE OVER of the Stadium.
I’d like to add that after a 30year campaign I was successful in getting the child killer 2 life sentences, no thanks to the Mail
Maybe have a converstion with ‘Lord’ Coe & ask why he & his lapdogs insisted on the design of the OS in the first place.. he has grown rich on tax payers money with all the consultation companies he has interests in that were awared contracts over the 2012 games. Also the government in power at the time the games were awarded..
I hate the Mail, when the newspapers were told by the Police not to print something that could hinder a case that a paedophile killer who killed my kid brother escape punishment, the only paper that went against the advise were the Mail, I can only guess that they sympathise with child killers and I’m willing to tell them and anyone else if they want to start talking about tarnished images
Unfortunately I agree with him, this will never end. Jealousy and rivalry will always fuel discussion on what happened with the LLDC and West Ham. Ironically they never linger on the fact that if it was not for Spurs and Hearn we would have been buying the potential “White Elephant” rather than renting. One thing I just don’t understand is that fact that the upkeep of a stadium or any other rental property is the responsibility of the Landlord. Yes the tenant has a responsibility to some day to day maintenance but WHU are not even the sole tenant. I think this entire situation really only highlights the ineptitude of those at the 2012 bid stage to not look into the future correctly and standing by the Athletics legacy as the only future use.
Unfortunately with West Ham being a “beloved” team, the media and others will only ever fixate on the scandal. “It’s not fair, he is getting something that I am not”. However deluded that view may be – reminds me of my young children…
I am sure that the riches earnt by the Davids have come from a lot more reputable and accountable sources than many other football clubs owners. I am sure they pay UK tax, employ lots of uk jobs etc etc.
Dail Fail truly is a pathetic rag…
I would be talking with the legal department by now to see if I could sue the arse out of these media outlets. Can any of these journalists put their hand on their heart & say they have never looked at a picture of a topless model or gone past a adult shop & not looked in?? If they have done so does that make them porn addicts or perverts??? ‘Porn Barons’ supply & demand, giving people jobs & paying taxs…..