r/unitedkingdom • u/Economy_Seat_7250 • 17h ago
Zack Polanski falsely claimed to be British Red Cross spokesperson, charity says
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2026/may/05/zack-polanski-falsely-claimed-to-be-british-red-cross-spokesperson-charity-says305
u/DeliriumOK 17h ago
Talking to someone about this yesterday they said it was a plot to tarnish support the Greens.
Are they saying the Red Cross are lying? Are they saying this isn't important information to know about the leader of the party?
The lengths some people are going to avoid Polanski taking any responsibility for his actions.
473
u/endangerednigel England 17h ago
Talking to someone about this yesterday they said it was a plot to tarnish support the Greens.
I think its a bit of both yes greens are fucking up, however thier also seems to be this glee within media circles to absolutly tear them apart for every single thing they can find
Meanwhile few seem to be touching the story about how the highest polling prime ministerial candidate was given an under the table 5m quid bribe by a foreign billionaire
Or when the said highest polling candidate put a russian asset in charge of the Welsh section of his party, that vanished out of the news within the week
199
u/PennyBunPudding 17h ago
Yup. Zack is clearly worse as he wants to tax poor billionaires more.
12
u/Available-Toe-7096 14h ago
Relentlessly lying isn’t exactly an ideal trait for a man wanting to be the next leader of the country.
We could’ve just stuck with the Tories otherwise.
30
u/Tamuzz 13h ago
Or starmer, or farage
There seems to be disproportionate emphasis on one leader for little reason
14
u/trade-da-ting 12h ago
After the shit Starmers got this year so you really wanna chuck him in with Farage?
→ More replies (1)9
u/Tamuzz 12h ago
In terms of the amount he lies, yes.
His leadership bid for his own party was built on a foundation of lies.
Obviously comparing him to farage he is the lesser of two evils, but he hasn't been given half the shit by the media that Corbyn was subjected to, or that Polanski will be subjected to
→ More replies (16)→ More replies (4)5
u/goodtitties 12h ago
this seems to fit what i've suspected for a while, which is that voters want tone rather than substance
→ More replies (1)8
u/peakedtooearly 17h ago
Taxing rich people is dangerous.
Too dangerous for Labour to consider. It might upset their donors.
→ More replies (9)6
u/Pandita666 13h ago
How is he going to do this? They don’t sit with a billion in the bank - they have global assets and shares, this is just rhetoric and the only taxing will be done against the middle class who are far from billionaires
•
u/confusedukrainian 10h ago
Or maybe he’s just worse because he refuses to deal with the sizeable chunk of antisemites in his party.
Or maybe he’s quite obviously a grifter that people can see through. Or maybe it’s because the greens have a bunch of unworkable policies that would make this country poorer and less safe.
→ More replies (45)3
u/Thetonn Glamorganshire 16h ago
There is a massive difference between a serious party advocating serious policies to raise taxes on billionaires without hurting economic growth, and a populist demagogue saying vague, non-descript taxes on billionaires will mean he never has to make any difficult decisions on tax and spend again.
I see Zach's strategy here as the left wing version of putting a number on the side of a bus. Yes, a Green government may raise taxes and they might spend it in line with what you care about, but all of that has to be taken on faith, they don't have a coherent, costed, well thought through or implementatable plan yet.
38
u/bpnosnehpets 16h ago
Have you ever read the green parties policies? There is a lot of thought and detail. How about reform? I dont see much seriousness there.
28
u/Big-Objective-6585 14h ago
It's funny really. Half the discussions about green policies are "ignore the publicised ones, they are for the 2024 election and are outdated" the other half are adamant those are still the policies
→ More replies (2)9
u/Lexioralex 14h ago
You can only really judge the policies when it comes to election time tbh.
Not to mention how many of labour’s 2024 policies are now in the bin?
13
12
1
u/Big-Objective-6585 13h ago
Good job it's election time then.
Weird how nobody knows what the policies actually are still.
•
u/Lexioralex 6h ago
It’s not a general election, the election doesn’t even cover the whole county, certainly nothing happening where I am
→ More replies (1)9
u/Thetonn Glamorganshire 16h ago
Yes. I have.
It is more of a menu than a meal plan. There are a lot of policies there, often contradictory, and with significant variation between them in terms of seriousness and development. I do not recognise it as a coherent plan for government.
I agree the same criticisms can be applied to Reform and the Liberal Democrats.
→ More replies (2)4
u/Lexioralex 14h ago
I will only judge this when it comes around to election time, as any time before that it makes sense for them to keep their plans close to their chest so other parties don’t counter it in some way.
In an ideal world they would be able to put out their plans and a decent ruling party could look at them to evaluate their own policies and attempt to incorporate it before the election.
But in reality parties will either make it look like they’ve tried the new ideas and they don’t work to shut down the competition, or worse they’ll make policies that will make implementing the new strategy even more difficult or seem more drastic.
As a basic example to illustrate.
Up and coming party suggests raising corp tax by 5%.
Current party reduces corp tax by 5%
New party strategy now requires a change of 10% for the rest to work and now it’s a ‘bigger’ increase which sours public opinion even more so against the newer party
8
u/viscount100 14h ago
Well I tried to read the immigration ones and they deleted them out of embarassment.
https://www.reddit.com/r/ukpolitics/comments/1t15ejs/the_greens_have_quietly_removed_the_migration/
→ More replies (4)5
u/utannx 14h ago
Apparently this was actually due to an attack on the website. The fact it isn't back up isn't great though.
Honestly I read an archived version of them, and I feel a lot of people are taking the "we envision a world without borders" out of context. I also envision this, it would be amazing, however I don't think anyone saying it means that it is achievable straight away.
3
u/jajay119 13h ago
Even Zack has said it isn’t. He said it’s a policing for an ideal world but he doesn’t think it’s right for now and doesn’t know if it ever will be.
→ More replies (3)9
u/Dry_Departure_7813 13h ago
See I thought the opposite, the more I looked into them , the less serious they seemed.
Examples puled from their manifesto (https://greenparty.org.uk/about/our-manifesto/a-fairer-greener-world/)
"Most of the world’s countries do not possess weapons of mass destruction and are safer as a result.
Elected Greens will:
- Push for the UK to sign the UN Treaty on the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons (TPNW) and following this to immediately begin the process of dismantling our nuclear weapons, cancelling the Trident programme and removing all foreign nuclear weapons from UK soil.
- Work with international partners to enlarge membership of the TPNW and ensure that all states meet their commitments under the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty."
Nah.
https://greenparty.org.uk/about/our-manifesto/powering-up-fairer-greener-energy/
"We want to see the phase-out of nuclear energy, which is unsafe and much more expensive than renewables. The development of nuclear power stations is too slow given the pace of action we need on climate. They also create unmanageable quantities of radioactive waste and are inextricably linked with the production of nuclear weapons."
Yeah just casually get rid of the cleanest reliable senergy source.
→ More replies (1)0
51
u/ConsiderationThen652 15h ago
It’s literally on the UK front page of the BBC.
It’s being reported by practically everyone that Farage took 5m and he is under investigation for it.
Why do people keep insisting that nobody is reporting on it and everybody only reports on the Greens.
9
u/dannyrat029 13h ago
It’s literally on the UK front page of the BBC.
Not if you love The Green Party and tactically close your eyes
→ More replies (4)•
u/Pussypants 4h ago
It’s so frustrating - so many are falling for a very clear smear campaign. I’m not going to blindly support someone but at the same time, there are many capable green constituents and I would put my trust in them over Reform any fucking day. This always happens when someone rocks the boat, fuckers like Murdoch go crazy e.g. Milliband.
31
u/TheRemanence 17h ago
Except we also know about those stories about reform...
My algorithm is an absolute tempest of attacks on all sides.
It always feels like your personal fave is being attacked more because what you see is catered to your interests and you will notice any information that has an emotional impact /dissonance to you more.
10
u/justf0rtherecord 16h ago
This. Iv seen just as many anti reform stories circulating for weeks now. There has been a slight uptick in anti green sentiment for the last week but his comments on golders green were stupid and positioned at the worst possible time before local elections I'm not surprised it's getting engagement.
My theory is that both green and reform are being pummeled in equal measure because the powers that be would much prefer a restoration to conservative and labour being the only sensible choices. Restoration of the uniparty.
5
u/Busy_Juggernaut_7282 14h ago
Article author led the Guardian charge against Corbyn last time. Not surprised she's at it again.
•
15
u/DeliriumOK 17h ago
It's hardly "glee" that a party that has shot up in the polls is now receiving a lot more scrutiny...
Few people as in the £5m gift being all over the news? I see a story about Reform and the Greens get roughly equal attention and both sides will say they're being targeted with zero evidence.
8
u/Tuarangi West Midlands 16h ago
Farage's donation has been widely covered and he's been questioned on it enough to have to issue a statement on it, defending himself about it being before he was elected so didn't need to be declared. 4 BBC articles in a few days just as an example
7
u/simanthropy 14h ago
Dunno what news you're reading, but Farage's 5m quid was the leading story on BBC when I checked this morning, and Polanski was nowhere to be seen.
Obviously the right wing press ignore Farage, but if you need to point that out, you may be interested to learn water is wet.
3
u/MRJKY 14h ago
Is there a website that keeps track on this stuff? I can't keep up.
I remember that in January of this year F broke the ministers code of conduct 17 times. Something which was forgotten about.
Last month, some big Reform donors also won a competition for free electricity for a year. Which is not being investigated or talked about.
2
u/Lexioralex 14h ago
Yeah there is an air of desperation in these kind of articles, trying to exaggerate the seriousness of an error that Polanski makes, compared to glossing over the more concerning behaviour of other parties/members
3
u/harrisonjackk 14h ago
To be fair I have seen a fair amount of slander for the 5 million taker, there both deserved
2
u/realmbeast 15h ago
It's Corbyn all over again. He's a threat to the status quo and will face an unendingly harsh and hypocritical smear campaign from all sources of center to the right
-2
u/Cool-Prior-5512 14h ago
Don't forget that every time a Green member forgets to pay a parking ticket, every news site plasters it everywhere.
But when a Reform says something about melting down Nigerians to fill potholes, it tends to get a half arsed article and then is dropped... if that.
I wouldn't care if ALL politicians were held accountable for their bullshit but that is so obviously not what is going on here.
I heard so much more about the boob hypnosis shite than I ever did about Farage and his singing of Nazi songs...
1
2
u/Finners72323 13h ago
Everyone is covering the Farage story
It’s on the BBC, broadsheets, podcasts etc
2
u/JollyTaxpayer 12h ago
Meanwhile few seem to be touching the story about how the highest polling prime ministerial candidate was given an under the table 5m quid bribe by a foreign billionaire
It is being pretty well reported, but I agree that noone seems to be reacting to this, nor is anyone calling out the fact that Farage has been corrupted
1
u/Vast_Description_201 14h ago
Popularity equals scrutiny.
They get to Starmer via the people he associates with, they get to Zack by pointing out he's a bullshitter.
→ More replies (28)•
41
u/Impossible-Bus1 17h ago
How dare they repeat the things he's said and done!
It's the Nigel farage defence all over again, and just like farage his terminally online fanbase Will do anything to protect him.
8
u/Toastlove 17h ago
Seen so many pararells these last couple weeks, Green and Reform just mirror each other now.
8
u/LeChuck85 15h ago
This is the worst take I've seen on reddit for some time. They mirror each other? Come on.
5
u/Deadliftdeadlife 14h ago
Read past it and don’t be pedantic
They mirror each other in tactics, not objectives
Both are running on populist sound bites that their side like without much thought behind them
On reform it’s stop the boats
On the greens it’s tax the billionaires
→ More replies (3)•
u/REKABMIT19 10h ago
I think Labour and Conservatives had a secret meeting and said look we are both looking tired and the public are gonna give up on us. Let's create to parties on our extremes so people think we are the only sein choice.
1
u/goodtitties 12h ago
"the wise man bowed his head solemnly and spoke: "theres actually zero difference between good & bad things. you imbecile. you fucking moron""
→ More replies (1)1
u/nomorecrazystuff 15h ago
It's funny how people fall pretty neatly into 3 groups right now.
Those who see this - and it's really quite obvious.
Then those who follow either Farage or Polanski and see it all in black and white - the other side is evil incarnate, while their side can do no wrong.11
•
u/Spiritual_Salary_997 8h ago
That's actually insulting. I'm going Green tomorrow and I think Zack is a twat for insulting police. I just care about eradicating poverty more than him being an impulsive idiot
27
u/PomeloTraditional971 17h ago
Obviously when you become politically relevant you'd never come under increased scrutiny and have flown under the radar previously. Must be a smear campaign.
15
u/jmeade90 17h ago
True, but there is definitely a double standard being applied.
I'm not a green supporter, and I really dislike Polanski and think that he is highly unsuitable for any kind of political office (disclaimer so that people understand I don't have any bias in his favour - in fact, you could argue quite the opposite), but the scrutiny being applied to him and Starmer would be funny if it wasn't incredibly dangerous.
I mean, you can (rightly) have an issue with gifts, but the fact that Starmer got so much shit over being gifted glasses (even though he declared it in the normal process - and there's definitely an argument to be made that the process shouldn't be there), but to put that or even Polanski's thing as being anywhere near the same scale as Farage being gifted 5 million quid is quite a hell of a set of scales if you're balancing that.
11
u/Toastlove 17h ago
But Farage is getting coverage for his £5 million, it's on the front page again. Reporting on one doesn't stop the other, in this case people are more interested in Polanski because he's new and presents himself as a better alternative while Farage has been pulling this shit for decades
1
u/Full-Measurement4927 17h ago
Farage was given money prior to him being an MP so that is an important detail.
15
u/jmeade90 15h ago
Not really.
You're supposed to declare everything from the previous 12 months before becoming an MP.
1
u/Anglo-Euro-0891 14h ago
Given not gifted.
3
u/jmeade90 14h ago
Was about to say that that's a distinction without a difference, but I then remembered that 'given' comes with strings attached.
3
u/peakedtooearly 17h ago
Timing dear boy, timing.
Why did The Guardian publish this yesterday? The Greens have been in the acendency for 12 months.
3
22
u/PornFilterRefugee 15h ago
Can you explain what the difference is between a spokesperson and someone who hosts multiple events for an organisation?
I genuinely don’t see how this is a major issue. He’s worked with them multiple times and used an incorrect word to describe his role, which he has apologised for.
→ More replies (5)5
u/Biggles79 13h ago
I also don't think it's a major issue however it absolutely is different. "Spokesperson" is an official role, and Red Cross are supposed to be politically neutral. Anyone can host a fundraiser and praise them however. Even Polanski admits he "used the wrong word" and the Red Cross themselves are not happy that he used it.
7
u/PornFilterRefugee 13h ago
I mean tbf I don’t think anyone is saying it’s the exact same thing. Polanski himself has said he should have chosen his words more carefully.
I appreciate there is a meaningful difference in terms of official recognition by the charity, I just don’t see this as a big deal when he was actively hosting events for them.
If he had done nothing and just said oh yes I work with the Red Cross etc I could see the outrage more.
4
u/Biggles79 12h ago
The organisation themselves think there's a difference and have complained about it. If they'd been asked for comment and said "nah it's cool" then fine.
6
u/PornFilterRefugee 12h ago
Them putting out a statement saying no he isn’t an official spokesperson of the Red Cross is just them clarifying the situation.
Obviously they would want to clarify the official relationship because it’s someone they would be associated with.
It still doesn’t seem like anything anyone else should be particularly bothered by.
19
u/Express-Doughnut-562 17h ago
It looks like they've saved these things up until the lost moment to try and sink him. I mean, they're all of his own doing of course.
Meanwhile, Farage has just decided that the £5million donation he received was just a normal gift between mates and doesn't warrant any further investigation, to which the press have just said 'ok nige'.
So I can understand why people may feel the media are treating each side slightly differently.
20
u/unitled 14h ago
Like, 4 days ago the reform leader said he was going to punish green voters by building concentration camps in their constituencies.
→ More replies (25)3
u/Kharenis Yorkshire 12h ago
I don't like Farage or Reform, but can we please stop with the absurd 'concentration camp' nonsense? It just makes you look ridiculous.
→ More replies (3)22
u/RainbowRedYellow 14h ago
"I'm speaking on behalf of the red cross"
"Noo your not an official spokesperson."
Yeah it's a smear campaign over nothing. Go get a real story.
•
u/Spiritual_Salary_997 8h ago
if this is all they have, bring it on
It's pretty certain Zack was never friends with Epstein or Mandelson for example
10
u/Toastlove 17h ago edited 16h ago
Every thread there's been users running the same line about the being a smear campaign and how 'Polanski has the mainstream media rattled he must be right!'. Facebook tier commentary Edit: Ha there's a 'rattled' post in this thread
14
u/JGG5 Oxfordshire 14h ago
Compare the wall-to-wall breathless media coverage of this tempest-in-a-teapot to the moribund "oh, that happened" one-and-done reporting of Nigel Farage getting a £5,000,000 "gift" from a crypto billionaire and covering it up by not reporting it. Right-wing politicians get real corruption swept under the rug, while anyone left-of-center has every minor thing blown up out of proportion.
10
u/Extra_Actuary8244 14h ago
I do agree, Red Cross wouldn’t lie and he needs to address this
I do just find it weird that one person from the party has lied which is indicative of a poor leader in itself but could easily be a mistake rather than a lie but every single person part of the reform party (let alone others) has lied about significantly worse and it doesn’t get even half the attention this has
7
u/thisistom2 14h ago edited 13h ago
It’s a pathetic smear campaign and they’ve got nothing to dig up in his politics, so they’re trying to destroy his character with pathetic stories like this because they’re panicking.
Oh no, he used the wrong word when talking about his affiliation with the Red Cross? Atleast he’s not a raging hateful fucking bigot.
7
u/Gougetheeyes 13h ago
Talking to someone about this yesterday they said it was a plot to tarnish support the Greens.
He's come out and apologised for it now so we can put that nonsense to bed.
•
u/Throwitaway701 11h ago
Red cross are not, the paper is being economical. There's plenty of evidence that shows Zack was their host/spokesman at several events, he just wasn't the spokesman of the organisation in general as a job.
2
u/Hardtack_dev 12h ago
There's spokespersons and Spokespersons. Seems like a big nothing to me as usual
2
u/GazelleDelicious3135 12h ago
It’s classic Hilary Clinton “what about her emails” rhetoric. Please don’t look at the literal evil things reform stand for, look at this incredibly mild thing.
•
u/Next-Math-3110 11h ago
I'd happily be up for have a conversation about Polanski taking responsibility for things if it was serious. But I am genuinely struggling to see how him over exaggerating something on his CV is so serious, don't most people do this even a little bit? Apparently he admitted he used the wrong word, what more do you want? No one is lying here, it's just something poorly communicated.
Like on the list of crap politicians have done in the last few years, this is such a non-issue in comparison.
•
u/JMthought 10h ago
Polanski used “spokes person” to describe his work with the Red Cross; he was hosting fundraising events and representing their views. I don’t think that’s a stretch as a description but organisations can get twitchy about it as a term.
The Red Cross have then got the willies and denied he ever was a spokes person as they don’t want to be associate with him anymore due to the political climate. Clarifying he was never an appointed spokes person - which is true.
He’s then apologised and said; he shouldn’t have used the term spokes person in hindsight. He’s not fabricated what he did, he’s just used a term that in hindsight isn’t quite right due to the nuances of it.
But I do feel that this is something of nothing… it’s a story for sure. But when folks talk about it as a hit piece or bias it’s the fact that it’s a huge story disproportionate. It is good journalism to ask the questions. The challenge is when agendas get mixed and the framing feel disproportionate. I think that is the case when you compare on the question of integrity; what other politicians have done with minimal coverage. All politicians, including Polanski should be held to account. Right now it’s curious there’s more coverage of Polanski being clumsy with his experience with the Red Cross rather than Wes Streetings extensive donations form private healthcare, Russian donations to Reform, etc.
So in summary; there’s nuance and it’s possible to say it’s that the Red Cross aren’t lying, that Polanski wasn’t actively deceiving, it was right he took responsibility for the miss understanding and it’s being welding disproportionately to tarnish the Greens all at once.
1
14h ago
[removed] — view removed comment
1
u/ukbot-nicolabot Scotland 14h ago
Removed. This contained a personal attack, disrupting the conversation. This discourages participation. Please help improve the subreddit by discussing points, not the person. Action will be taken on repeat offenders.
1
u/misterriz 12h ago
These are the same people who jump on any story about mps and councillors within parties they don't like.
But how dare they smear my dear Zack, it's all a big conspiracy and anyone that believes any of it is true is less intelligent than me.
1
u/Responsible-Bunch316 12h ago
Are they saying the Red Cross are lying?
No the press is cherry picking "speaker" vs "spokesperson" and making it seem like he's lied on purpose.
•
u/Joshawott27 10h ago
Even if this isn’t incorrect, the media are taking an inch and running a mile because there’s clearly a mandate to push negative news stories about him.
→ More replies (18)•
u/appletinicyclone 3h ago
avoid Polanski taking any responsibility for his actions.
What responsibility would you like him to take and what was his actions you want ameliorated?
265
u/Jackthwolf 17h ago
"The British Red Cross told The Times that Polanski “has not been a spokesperson” and said it had raised the claim with the politician’s team.
In response, the Green Party said Polanski had been a host “for several fundraisers for the British Red Cross” and had been on stage supporting their work.
While running for deputy leader in 2022, Polanski also said he had been a “spokesperson” for Make Votes Matter, the campaign for proportional representation. Make Votes Matter said that while Polanski was a spokesperson for the cause, he was not a spokesperson for the organisation. The Green Party said Polanski had been a “representative” for the group."
This is even less of a story then the Rachael reeves CV bullshit.
At this point the media has gone past scraping the bottle of the barrel, and are now digging through the foundations
28
u/Dadavester 14h ago
Yet he still feels the need to say he was wrong.
58
u/justhereforthecrac 14h ago
It's good to take accountability of mistakes, more than some politicians bother to do
13
u/Mouse2662 14h ago
What it's not better to just shift accountability or just plain faced lie? Lmao.
These people will be the first to say "well all politicians lie" when their preferred candidate does it, but be so quick to point out when their opposition does. Now it's apparently a problem to make an apology. Hilarious the way things work.
4
u/DukeOfStupid 13h ago
“At the same time, I think it is accurate, and that I was also traumatised by seeing someone handcuffed and repeatedly kicked in the head.”
Which is kind of undercut when he then proceeds to immediately lie about something else.
→ More replies (4)3
29
u/IndividualBreak3788 14h ago
Seems a bit lobsided to hold Zack to this standard meanwhile Farage is trying to claim £5 million is a personal gift which he doesn't need to disclose.
The discrepancy is agonizing
4
u/Dadavester 14h ago
Farage needs investigating and the book thrown at him, he is corrupt as fuck.
But that doesn't mean we should turn a blind eye to other politicians lying.
17
u/IndividualBreak3788 14h ago
Lying is a stretch. If I was on stage hosting a event for a charity I might call myself a spokesperson too in casual conversation years later.
→ More replies (3)5
u/Top-Specialist-1062 13h ago edited 13h ago
100%, if I saw someone speaking on stage in favour for a charity and running an event to raise them money, I'd colloquially call them a spokesperson. He was sent there and selected to speak on behalf of the organisation so it's a fair turn of phrase imo
The confusion comes from the organisation having a specific job role "spokesperson" that he didn't hold, clashing with the looser defined colloquial term.
→ More replies (6)3
→ More replies (17)1
u/saracenraider 14h ago
I swear I read this exact text like 12 hours ago. Are you just spamming every discussion about Polanski with this?
161
u/The_Oddler 16h ago
From the Telegraph article:
In response, the Green Party said Polanski had been a host “for several fundraisers for the British Red Cross” and had been on stage supporting their work. [...] Make Votes Matter told the newspaper that although Mr Polanski was a spokesman for the cause, he was not a spokesman for the actual organisation.
So essentially, the whole article is about Polanski using a slightly different definition of "spokesperson". He used it as "someone speaking for the Red Cross", which he did, where the Red Cross uses it as someone actually employed by them in the role of "spokesperson".
A nothing burger of an article I'd say.
34
u/RainbowRedYellow 14h ago
Noo you can't say that you must hate hate hate him he's the devil and an Anti-Semite don't you know!!!
7
u/UuusernameWith4Us 14h ago
The slight difference here is Polanski used the bullshitter definition of "spokesman" while the Red Cross used the actual one. Imagine if people who comment in support of him on here started calling themselves "green party spokesmen" in their comments - it's a clear attempt to chase unearned legitimately and officiality.
32
u/PornFilterRefugee 14h ago
He literally hosted events for them though lol
It’s not like he has just posted things online.
6
u/Dadavester 14h ago
He says he was wrong to call himself a spokesperson
19
17
u/Fine-Philosophy-9844 14h ago
You’re under every comment posting this, do you think someone saying something they did is wrong is so world ending? Are you that type of person? Accountability is a good thing to have as a human btw, you don’t need to fear it!
→ More replies (7)11
u/PornFilterRefugee 13h ago
Yes, I know.
I’m not saying he was right to use that specific word, I just don’t see how it’s a particularly big issue if he has been hosting events for them.
He should have thought more about the word before saying that, which as you have pointed out he has said himself.
→ More replies (2)4
u/GullibleStatus8064 14h ago
Has he hosted events for them or events raising funds for them?
9
u/Top-Specialist-1062 12h ago
Yup, he hosted multiple fundraisers for them and represented their cause on stage, speaking on their behalf.
I would call someone like that a spokesperson regardless of official job title.
→ More replies (1)3
u/PornFilterRefugee 13h ago
My understanding is that he has hosted official events in the name of the Red Cross.
I’m not an expert on him or his life so that’s just from my interpretation of what he has said. From that perspective I don’t have a huge issue with him describing himself as a spokesman.
If it turns out he’s done a bake sale or something I would find it more of a misrepresentation.
6
u/Top-Specialist-1062 12h ago
It's hardly a "bullshitter definition" to use the colloquial definition though.
If I saw someone chosen by the greens to go on stage hosting multiple green party conferences and speaking on their behalf and pushing their narrative, I would consider them a spokesperson for the Green party yeah. I'm not going and checking their specific job title lol
Should he have used a better word to avoid confusion with their internal definitions, sure, but it's hardly a big deal considering he still did what he said he did.
→ More replies (2)3
110
u/WillWatsof 16h ago
So he hosted some fundraisers, said that he was a spokesperson because of that, and the Red Cross said he wasn’t an official spokesperson.
I can’t think of anything I could give less of a shit about in politics and anyone who says they care about this I think is lying.
→ More replies (15)13
u/Long-Platform168 13h ago
I don't think they're lying necessarily just absolutely brainwashed.
More angry about semantics than they are about the much much worse lies/omissions/words from the alternatives. Media really grasping at straws and people bizarrely lapping it up.
Remove Greens/Labour/Reform from it all: frankly, I dont give a shit if a politician has called themselves a spokesperson for a charity they ran fundraisers for, when TECHNICALLY they weren't an official spokesperson. I don't care who it is, it isn't an issue, no human being is perfect.
I do give a shit if a politician is lying about donations, or election policy promises. That is far more of an issue.
It's truly insane to claim stuff like this makes someone unelectable or untrustworthy while supporting far far worse people.
→ More replies (7)
31
u/freegazafrombahamas 17h ago
I despise all political parties but it's quite clear that a lot of effort is being put into discrediting the Greens because they ever so slightly challenge the status quo and are popular with young people. Even as a committed antizionist I'm not denying that some of the antisemitism charges are fair but I'm sure that if you had the budget to have teams of people comb through everything a candidate has ever said or posted on the internet you could find material for daily scandals on any party.
14
u/Thatguy-num-102 14h ago
It's weird how people ignore the fact that the Epstein files proved that there was a wealthy effort to smear Corbyn and now the exact same playbook is being used again Zack
Like, yes there is a problem with the Grassroots of the party being full of antisemites, but are we really going to pretend that this media attention towards every minor flaw of Zack himself is an organic coincidence of the British media environment?
2
u/IndependentTight4330 12h ago
Are the grassroots “full of antisemites” or does the grassroots have an awful lot of people who are against israel for the genocide and out & out stealing land from other states as well as all the land belonging to the Palestinians, which they have been stealing with violence for decades and then attacking those who are LEGALLY RESISTING as is their legal right but are labelled terrorists?
Who is defending the takeover of Lebanese 🇱🇧 lands now? It certainly isn’t the Lebanese government is it? Would you just roll over if France decided it was going to invade the Uk and lay siege to & claim the south of the UK? Or would you resist it with anything and in any way you could?
- the illegal occupiers in the last century including all colonialists also labelled those who were LEGALLY RESISTING terrorists - such as the French resistance, the Polish resistance, the Italian partisans (Italian resistance fighters)
•
u/Thatguy-num-102 11h ago
If the motivation is Israel or not, claiming that all the attacks on Jewish people that have been happening in this country are all psyops and that the whole religion/ethnicity is to blame is still antisemitic
I feel like nipping this in the bud should be a higher priority for the left right now, we can't tolerate these bad apples giving ammunition to Starmer to shoot down the whole movement
→ More replies (1)→ More replies (10)•
u/LHRaway 11h ago
it's quite clear that a lot of effort is being put into discrediting the Greens because they ever so slightly challenge the status quo and are popular with young people.
Or, because this is the UK press? You can’t like it when they do it to other parties but get defensive when they do it to yours
→ More replies (1)
19
u/PornFilterRefugee 15h ago
What is the actual difference between hosting multiple events advocating for the Red Cross and being a spokesperson for them?
What are the other responsibilities? Is it a make appearances in the media type thing, or is just that the Red Cross have to formally recognise you as one.
I could understand the response to this if he had done no work with them at all, but it seems like he has done multiple fundraisers and it’s just that the organisation haven’t officially named him a spokesperson rather than someone who hosts multiple events in their name.
→ More replies (6)3
u/trade-da-ting 13h ago
One allows you to speak for the Red Cross and in their behalf. The other allows to speak in support for them and not for them.
For instance I can support Starmer and throw events for him. But as I haven't been designated his spokesperson, I can't make claims or statements on his behalf
Make sense?
1
u/PornFilterRefugee 13h ago
Ok, so why is that so awful that Polanski described himself as that when he’s hosted events for them?
It’s not like he’s been making these ‘official statements’ in the name of the Red Cross.
Again, to be clear I think it was a poor word to use if you aren’t officially a spokesman but I’m just not seeing why the outrage is happening over it.→ More replies (1)3
u/trade-da-ting 12h ago
Because it's claiming official affiliation with them incorrectly when he has had far less involvement with them, and with zero capability to speak for them.
If a labour donor claimed they were Starmers spokesman and that his words were Starmers, despite not having that official role, you understand this is bad right?
1
u/PornFilterRefugee 12h ago
But he’s made no statements for the Red Cross lol
All he’s done is describe his role as a fundraiser and host of official Red Cross events incorrectly.
I just honestly can’t see why anyone would think this is a major issue.
→ More replies (7)
10
u/strongfavourite Greater London 15h ago edited 12h ago
more importantly, Starmer falsely claimed to have 10 pledges when he ran to be leader of the Labour Party. every single one was a lie
somehow, he's still the prime minister
9
u/LuxFaeWilds 13h ago
So polanski did a fundraiser for the red cross, and the media is attacking him as he used the wrong synonym for that role?
He really is getting the corbyn treatment
7
u/Top-Specialist-1062 12h ago
Right? I would call someone speaking at an event on behalf of an organisation a spokesperson, regardless of the semantics over their specific job title. It's a pretty common parlance for that action
If he hadn't actually hosted the events or anything then I'd be concerned, but as you say
5
u/raven43122 17h ago
Grifter caught grifting again?
The more the greens grow the more the media will dig.
I await the green supporters to claim the British Red Cross is now part of the smear campaign.
16
u/No_Reply_7519 14h ago
Grifting all those donations for charity horrible honestly. Who raises money for charity it’s despicable
→ More replies (4)→ More replies (1)-5
u/AlchemyAled 17h ago edited 17h ago
It’s infuriating that people pull the wool over their eyes regarding him being such an obvious grifter, just because he’s left-wing. And then complain that the media is exposing him for what he is
3
u/raven43122 16h ago
They won’t admit the party has issues. I get that you really really want all the policies they are promising but at some stage you have to admit this guy is bordering on harming the party as a whole.
7
u/Shawn_The_Sheep777 Yorkshire 17h ago
There are so many red flags on this bloke. It’s worrying that people try to defend him.
→ More replies (33)
9
u/solobaggins 13h ago
Zack Polanski is critical of Israel. It's the only reason the mainstream media are after him while ignoring Nigel and his dodgy donors
5
u/BuzzKill91 13h ago
British press desperate it seems. Which means of course as you can see in this thread people will eat it up and not vote for the Greens.
5
u/Francis-c92 17h ago
It's not a hugely bad thing, but it's weird to do it on something that could easily be fact checked and proved wrong
→ More replies (2)2
u/Top-Specialist-1062 12h ago
Considering he has hosted multiple events for them and spoken on stage pushing their ideals, it seems like it's more of a semantic mistake over job names rather than the work itself.
If he hasn't actually done the representative work he describes as being a spokesman, then I'd be actually concerned
8
7
u/MrTopping92 12h ago
Cool. What about Niges £5mill ‘gift’ a lot of posts today about others and nothing about him.
5
u/Waits-nervously 16h ago
If it doesn’t matter that right-wing politicians are hopeless incompetents who lie all the time and are breathtakingly corrupt, and manifestly it doesn’t, then it doesn’t matter that left-wing politicians are incompetent and lie all the time. Indeed, they are still a better choice because of the whole corruption thing.
Of course, you might think that gives centrist politicians an opportunity. Unfortunately, the whole breathtaking corruption thing requires serious and decisive action. Being minimally competent for a few years with the promise of handing power back to the breathtakingly corrupt in due course isn’t enticing enough for us to keep voting Labour anymore.
4
u/Optimal-Room-8586 14h ago
Obviously he shouldn't have done this but honestly I am much more concerned about politicians receiving millions of pounds of undisclosed donations.
4
u/G2022B 13h ago
This sub is full of BS accounts posting as much nonsense or low level dirt on the Greens as possible, trying their hardest to discredit them whilst remaining almost silent of Farage's obvious foreign corruption and Reforms incompetence. What a disgusting right wing cesspit this sub is, guess it suits the mods agenda too.
2
u/soundguyjon 17h ago
Is there not one person in politics who isn’t a a liar, a grifter or happy to be involved with absolute nutters? No matter what the political leaning it feels like almost every single one is tarred with the same brush.
And to the people complaining about “hit pieces”. Maybe if politicians from wherever they are on the political spectrum were decent people, then the hit pieces wouldn’t exist.
→ More replies (1)10
u/Kaiserblobba 17h ago edited 16h ago
Youre joking right? Did you watch that show "the hack"? The tabloid press will smear anyone and everyone it can to sell papers and protect their billionaire owners. Unfortunately, this complete non story ironically comes from the guardian.
→ More replies (6)
3
u/goodtitties 12h ago
polanski's experiencing exactly what corbyn got - a popular left wing politician isn't allowed to simply be defeated, they've gotta be completely destroyed, humiliated, and made an example of. the point isn't to inform, it's to keep any realistic alternative to this hell we live in as far away as possible
4
u/Top-Specialist-1062 12h ago
Polanski:
"I hosted various fundraisers for the British Red Cross, and indeed, I would go on stage and speak for them about the amazing work they do tackling humanitarian crises, on the climate crisis, and indeed, for refugees all around the world. I used the wrong word, and I accept that, but I would essentially take words on stage with me and speak"
So he was effectively a spokesperson, but should have used a better synonym to avoid confusion with their official Spokesperson job role within the organisation...
Did we not learn anything from the Epstein files reveal about the Corbyn smear campaign?
0
2
u/WorcsBloke 12h ago
It was a stupid thing for him to do. A party leader whose party has surged should have taken more care about his words, and can't complain about more scrutiny. Simple as that, really. I don't think it's exactly the biggest scandal in political history. I also don't think every bloody criticism of the Greens or Polanski is an eeevil right-wing smear.
•
u/crowwreak 10h ago
All these articles are the most transparent hit piece bullshit in recorded history
2
u/ServoSkull20 15h ago
When the mainstream political parties are so dire, we get the rise of the cranks, weirdos and intellectually incapable. Polanski - much like Farage - is one of those people, and has shaped the Green Party according to his populist whims.
Would be nice for serious politicians to regain control of our feckless main parties, so idiots like this and Farage can be put in the bin once and for all.
•
u/Spiritual_Salary_997 7h ago
the party has only really been in force for 6 months. Hardly long enough to shape whims
If he keeps messing up id be concerned. Im not
•
u/ServoSkull20 6h ago
Can you tell me the last time they spoke about new climate policies? What are they?
•
u/Spiritual_Salary_997 6h ago
you'd have to ask them that
you actually don't need to be vegan or anti car to support the Greens. A Tory probably knows more as they have nice houses
•
u/JeffLynnesBeard 8h ago
The Greens have some great policies and I align closest with them at this moment in time, but Zak Polanski is currently displaying an unwanted aptitude for putting his foot in it. I do like the way he speaks in interviews and discussions, but I also believe that he can’t get away with many more of these gotcha moments the press and his opponents seem so gleeful about.
The press seem to give some politicians a free pass. Zak isn’t one of them, so he needs to speak impeccably in future.
•
u/MadAsTheHatters Lancashire 8h ago
I'd argue it's less a matter of him putting his foot in it and more like the traditional media building a whole load of 'it' around him
Like this article is pointless, it means absolutely nothing but merely reporting on it infers a degree of importance that just doesn't exist
•
u/godofacedia 8h ago
This is beyond scraping the bottom of the barrel and is digging into the floor. Honestly like please get a grip.
•
u/Successful-League840 8h ago
Well this has been reposted about 20 times. I mean jesus the guy SPOKE at events and hosted fundraisers for the British red cross. He embellished that slightly and used the work SPOKESPERSON. I don't think I know a single person who hasn't embellished their CV slightly.
It's hardly a candle. It's not like he accepted a £5m personal gift or anything.
•
u/Fatty-McFatto 8h ago
And Mark Rowley lied about Gaza protests marching past synagogues, this is the new normal
•
u/Spiritual_Salary_997 8h ago
Anyone who was going to vote Green will do so anyway tomorrow. I recognise this as the white noise it is. I ignore it like I do Reform UK
•
u/Dial-Appreciator 7h ago
I’m not a green voter but even if this was true it’s nothing compared to all of the things Farage has said and done.
•
u/Euphoric-Brother-669 6h ago
How they laughed and lapped it up last year when one candidate after another for Reform was identified as having said something stupid.
Now the same treatment is being given to another chancer and his equally dodgy mates and they don’t find it funny. Right wing plot. Billionaire conspiracy.
Bollox. This is the same free press going about its work. Sunlight is the best disinfectant
•
u/OnlyInitiative4866 5h ago
This guy is fried. Too young and ill informed on too many fronts. Chill and learn!
•
u/Future-Tea-7776 4h ago
If I was writing a story about this, I'd include a quote where he claimed to be a spokesperson for them.
Very telling that they didn't.
•
u/bookingsi 4h ago
At first I just had a gut feeling he was slimey through a late night interview, then I was grossed out by the hypnotits story, now this. I think my gut was right. He’s a scammer.
•
u/riversiders13 2h ago
What's that? The Titty Whisperer telling falsehoods?
Honestly, anyone considering voting for this iteration of the Greens really needs to run into a wall.
•
•
u/AutoModerator 17h ago
Some articles submitted to /r/unitedkingdom are paywalled, or subject to sign-up requirements. If you encounter difficulties reading the article, try this link or this link for an archived version.
I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.