Join us FREE, we're FREE to use
Web's largest swingers site since 2006.
Already registered?
Login here
Join us FREE, we're FREE to use
Web's largest swingers site since 2006.
Already registered?
Login here
 | Back to forum list |
| Back to Politics |
| Jump to newest |  |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
 | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Surely it's a description of the Daily Mail? "Yes, I suppose so, the paper of the open-minded!  | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"would this not be better in the Lounge   "No, as you well know, this has reared its head in the politics forum. Hence my posting it here. Do you have any thoughts? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Didn't the Tories push this idea? David Cameron, the Conservative leader, has said that the restoration of family values and a new commitment to economic and social responsibility are key to repairing "broken Britain"." So, what are they and are they contradictory to a swinging lifestyle? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I guess Cameron was hinting at better parental control over their offspring, absent fathers changing their ways, and a return to the outdated ideal of the father of the family being the breadwinner while Mother plays at housekeeping...." Nothing wrong with most of that, if we lived in the 50s! | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"would this not be better in the Lounge
No, as you well know, this has reared its head in the politics forum. Hence my posting it here.
Do you have any thoughts? "nope no thoughts, don't care any more, far too much political correctness in all aspects of life, and if anyone says Black on here, someone else will argue white, so no bloody point, just cant be arsed anymore | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"would this not be better in the Lounge
No, as you well know, this has reared its head in the politics forum. Hence my posting it here.
Do you have any thoughts?
nope no thoughts, don't care any more, far too much political correctness in all aspects of life,
and if anyone says Black on here, someone else will argue white, so no bloody point, just cant be arsed anymore"Grey? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Many moons ago, I was just out of the LSE and in my first real job at United Rum Merchants in London, I'd only been there three months and was asked to go to the West Indies as part of a four person team on Rum production safety matters. My immediate boss was a real hard core Christian, his office had more crosses and pictures of the Holy Mother on the walls than your average Catholic Church. He was a real 'Family Values' advocate.....which all fell to pieces when a storm hit our hotel and his secretary was found trapped naked in his bedroom by a fallen tree. He soon dropped the 'holier than thou' attitude when we returned back to our London office. " I like that story! I'm wondering if the advocates of 'TFV' on here are open about their lifestyle choices? Or, whether one day, a metaphoric tree will fall on their room? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Surely it's a description of the Daily Mail?
Yes, I suppose so, the paper of the open-minded! "The paper for people who dont bury their head in the sand. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Surely it's a description of the Daily Mail?
Yes, I suppose so, the paper of the open-minded!
The paper for people who dont bury their head in the sand."No, the paper for those that can't think for themselves and need to be led like bleating sheep.... | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Surely it's a description of the Daily Mail?
Yes, I suppose so, the paper of the open-minded!
The paper for people who dont bury their head in the sand."Yawn. Move on, if you can't answer the original post. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Surely it's a description of the Daily Mail?
Yes, I suppose so, the paper of the open-minded!
The paper for people who dont bury their head in the sand.
No, the paper for those that can't think for themselves and need to be led like bleating sheep...."... and with little to no self-awareness of what that particular paper would make of this site and its users! It is beyond farcical. Saying that, half of them would probably be sat knitting at the guillotine goading the executioner to do 'their' work as the rest of us were being put to death for our immoral behaviour! | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"ok i will ignore you posts if you like no problem." Well, debate, discussion and conversation would be preferred. However, I am not sure you are capable of that. In context. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"The values that were taught in my family were things like: Love thy neighbour Make the world a better place Be kind to others Tell the truth Work hard and study hard Don't get anyone pregnant unless you're married to them Don't be racist, homophic, xenophobic etc. Don't break the law" Same here. I was also expected to stand by my principles even if I was against the world. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"The term 'Family Values' traditionally relates to a man and woman being married (the man working and the woman being the homemaker), children, and monogamy. Definitely does not include swinging. " Thank you. Which is what makes those hiding behind 'TFV' to back up their prejudices on this site, hypocritical. I am not saying they are not good people, but that term is incongruous to this lifestyle. Glad someone else can see that too. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"The values that were taught in my family were things like: Love thy neighbour Make the world a better place Be kind to others Tell the truth Work hard and study hard Don't get anyone pregnant unless you're married to them Don't be racist, homophic, xenophobic etc. Don't break the law Same here. I was also expected to stand by my principles even if I was against the world. " Yeah, that one too  | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"The term 'Family Values' traditionally relates to a man and woman being married (the man working and the woman being the homemaker), children, and monogamy. Definitely does not include swinging. " I agree that's what is usually thought of as TFV, but apart from monogamy, none of the rest of those things are actually values though. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I guess Cameron was hinting at better parental control over their offspring, absent fathers changing their ways, and a return to the outdated ideal of the father of the family being the breadwinner while Mother plays at housekeeping...." did he mention abandonment in the local pub..  | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I guess Cameron was hinting at better parental control over their offspring, absent fathers changing their ways, and a return to the outdated ideal of the father of the family being the breadwinner while Mother plays at housekeeping.... did he mention abandonment in the local pub.. "In fairness, we've all done that though haven't we? Erm, second thoughts, no! pmsl | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"The term 'Family Values' traditionally relates to a man and woman being married (the man working and the woman being the homemaker), children, and monogamy. Definitely does not include swinging. Thank you. Which is what makes those hiding behind 'TFV' to back up their prejudices on this site, hypocritical. I am not saying they are not good people, but that term is incongruous to this lifestyle. Glad someone else can see that too. " but what if they are single..? can they not use that as their cop out to talk about traditional family values even if they've never had one..? just playing Devils advocate..  | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I guess Cameron was hinting at better parental control over their offspring, absent fathers changing their ways, and a return to the outdated ideal of the father of the family being the breadwinner while Mother plays at housekeeping.... did he mention abandonment in the local pub..
In fairness, we've all done that though haven't we? Erm, second thoughts, no! pmsl "we once lost sight of ours in a shop, feckin ell it was a scare.. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"The term 'Family Values' traditionally relates to a man and woman being married (the man working and the woman being the homemaker), children, and monogamy. Definitely does not include swinging. Thank you. Which is what makes those hiding behind 'TFV' to back up their prejudices on this site, hypocritical. I am not saying they are not good people, but that term is incongruous to this lifestyle. Glad someone else can see that too. but what if they are single..? can they not use that as their cop out to talk about traditional family values even if they've never had one..? just playing Devils advocate.. "I suppose they could get away with that as an excuse for using an out-dated concept to back up their prejudice? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I guess Cameron was hinting at better parental control over their offspring, absent fathers changing their ways, and a return to the outdated ideal of the father of the family being the breadwinner while Mother plays at housekeeping.... did he mention abandonment in the local pub..
In fairness, we've all done that though haven't we? Erm, second thoughts, no! pmsl
we once lost sight of ours in a shop, feckin ell it was a scare..
"When my boys were small, we had a similar scare at a country park. Scariest two minutes of mine and my ex's life. The oldest was playing camps in the trees with another little lad! | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"The term 'Family Values' traditionally relates to a man and woman being married (the man working and the woman being the homemaker), children, and monogamy. Definitely does not include swinging. Thank you. Which is what makes those hiding behind 'TFV' to back up their prejudices on this site, hypocritical. I am not saying they are not good people, but that term is incongruous to this lifestyle. Glad someone else can see that too. but what if they are single..? can they not use that as their cop out to talk about traditional family values even if they've never had one..? just playing Devils advocate..
I suppose they could get away with that as an excuse for using an out-dated concept to back up their prejudice? "they could try.. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I guess Cameron was hinting at better parental control over their offspring, absent fathers changing their ways, and a return to the outdated ideal of the father of the family being the breadwinner while Mother plays at housekeeping.... did he mention abandonment in the local pub..
In fairness, we've all done that though haven't we? Erm, second thoughts, no! pmsl
we once lost sight of ours in a shop, feckin ell it was a scare..
When my boys were small, we had a similar scare at a country park. Scariest two minutes of mine and my ex's life. The oldest was playing camps in the trees with another little lad! "that possibly means to some and probably the daily hate that we are bad parents.. 
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I guess Cameron was hinting at better parental control over their offspring, absent fathers changing their ways, and a return to the outdated ideal of the father of the family being the breadwinner while Mother plays at housekeeping.... did he mention abandonment in the local pub..
In fairness, we've all done that though haven't we? Erm, second thoughts, no! pmsl
we once lost sight of ours in a shop, feckin ell it was a scare..
When my boys were small, we had a similar scare at a country park. Scariest two minutes of mine and my ex's life. The oldest was playing camps in the trees with another little lad!
that possibly means to some and probably the daily hate that we are bad parents..
"I would take the challenge to disprove them! I've two, hard-working, kind-hearted, non-judgemental, happy sons and two lovely daughters-in-law. Not sure what they would make of me on here to be honest mind | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I guess Cameron was hinting at better parental control over their offspring, absent fathers changing their ways, and a return to the outdated ideal of the father of the family being the breadwinner while Mother plays at housekeeping.... did he mention abandonment in the local pub..
In fairness, we've all done that though haven't we? Erm, second thoughts, no! pmsl
we once lost sight of ours in a shop, feckin ell it was a scare..
When my boys were small, we had a similar scare at a country park. Scariest two minutes of mine and my ex's life. The oldest was playing camps in the trees with another little lad!
that possibly means to some and probably the daily hate that we are bad parents..
I would take the challenge to disprove them! I've two, hard-working, kind-hearted, non-judgemental, happy sons and two lovely daughters-in-law.
Not sure what they would make of me on here to be honest mind "ditto..2 kids educated to degree and masters level, in employment and contributing.. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I guess Cameron was hinting at better parental control over their offspring, absent fathers changing their ways, and a return to the outdated ideal of the father of the family being the breadwinner while Mother plays at housekeeping.... did he mention abandonment in the local pub..
In fairness, we've all done that though haven't we? Erm, second thoughts, no! pmsl
we once lost sight of ours in a shop, feckin ell it was a scare..
When my boys were small, we had a similar scare at a country park. Scariest two minutes of mine and my ex's life. The oldest was playing camps in the trees with another little lad!
that possibly means to some and probably the daily hate that we are bad parents..
I would take the challenge to disprove them! I've two, hard-working, kind-hearted, non-judgemental, happy sons and two lovely daughters-in-law.
Not sure what they would make of me on here to be honest mind
ditto..2 kids educated to degree and masters level, in employment and contributing..
"Ah, but do they read the Daily Fail?! Haha | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"The term 'Family Values' traditionally relates to a man and woman being married (the man working and the woman being the homemaker), children, and monogamy. Definitely does not include swinging. " Are you not confusing the two as they are entirely unrelated. Family values are designed to create a stable and secure background for families , swinging is a past time that should be kept private and has no correlation to family values. You would only spend a very small amount of your time engaging in swinging activities and as no one should know about them in any event they become irrelevant. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"The term 'Family Values' traditionally relates to a man and woman being married (the man working and the woman being the homemaker), children, and monogamy. Definitely does not include swinging. Are you not confusing the two as they are entirely unrelated. Family values are designed to create a stable and secure background for families , swinging is a past time that should be kept private and has no correlation to family values. You would only spend a very small amount of your time engaging in swinging activities and as no one should know about them in any event they become irrelevant. " So, if I was an accountant and also a part-time shoplifter, one wouldn't have any correlation to the other? Bullshit. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"The term 'Family Values' traditionally relates to a man and woman being married (the man working and the woman being the homemaker), children, and monogamy. Definitely does not include swinging. Are you not confusing the two as they are entirely unrelated. Family values are designed to create a stable and secure background for families , swinging is a past time that should be kept private and has no correlation to family values. You would only spend a very small amount of your time engaging in swinging activities and as no one should know about them in any event they become irrelevant. " 'Family values' as a term very much refers to heterosexual monogamy. Obviously a person can be family orientated and still be a swinger, but 'family values' is a politicised expression. When a lot of people use the phrase, it's in the context that they believe gay people shouldn't get married, for example. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Surely it's a description of the Daily Mail?
Yes, I suppose so, the paper of the open-minded!
The paper for people who dont bury their head in the sand."And at least 3.5 million read or buy it daily so they must be doing most things right . If it was a boring , dull or produced inaccurate information people would simply not buy it. Those who dislike this paper are simply jealous of its success and ideas . In any event it is answerable to the press council so it's reporting has to be balanced and accurate . | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"The term 'Family Values' traditionally relates to a man and woman being married (the man working and the woman being the homemaker), children, and monogamy. Definitely does not include swinging. Are you not confusing the two as they are entirely unrelated. Family values are designed to create a stable and secure background for families , swinging is a past time that should be kept private and has no correlation to family values. You would only spend a very small amount of your time engaging in swinging activities and as no one should know about them in any event they become irrelevant. So, if I was an accountant and also a part-time shoplifter, one wouldn't have any correlation to the other? Bullshit. " Shop lifting is a criminal offence , as far as I am aware swinging is not . | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Surely it's a description of the Daily Mail?
Yes, I suppose so, the paper of the open-minded!
The paper for people who dont bury their head in the sand."The paper for 'all grown up' and 'look who's grown' photos of 16yr olds | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"The values that were taught in my family were things like: Love thy neighbour Make the world a better place Be kind to others Tell the truth Work hard and study hard Don't get anyone pregnant unless you're married to them Don't be racist, homophic, xenophobic etc. Don't break the law" I thought "Love thy Neighbour" was banned by the pc brigade as being racist back in the 70's | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"The term 'Family Values' traditionally relates to a man and woman being married (the man working and the woman being the homemaker), children, and monogamy. Definitely does not include swinging. Are you not confusing the two as they are entirely unrelated. Family values are designed to create a stable and secure background for families , swinging is a past time that should be kept private and has no correlation to family values. You would only spend a very small amount of your time engaging in swinging activities and as no one should know about them in any event they become irrelevant. So, if I was an accountant and also a part-time shoplifter, one wouldn't have any correlation to the other? Bullshit. Shop lifting is a criminal offence , as far as I am aware swinging is not ." You really are tedious. You can see exactly where I am coming from, you just cannot bring yourself to see that your chosen term of 'TVF' is at odds with the swinging / casual sex lifestyle. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"The values that were taught in my family were things like: Love thy neighbour Make the world a better place Be kind to others Tell the truth Work hard and study hard Don't get anyone pregnant unless you're married to them Don't be racist, homophic, xenophobic etc. Don't break the law I thought "Love thy Neighbour" was banned by the pc brigade as being racist back in the 70's" More deflection? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"The term 'Family Values' traditionally relates to a man and woman being married (the man working and the woman being the homemaker), children, and monogamy. Definitely does not include swinging. Are you not confusing the two as they are entirely unrelated. Family values are designed to create a stable and secure background for families , swinging is a past time that should be kept private and has no correlation to family values. You would only spend a very small amount of your time engaging in swinging activities and as no one should know about them in any event they become irrelevant. So, if I was an accountant and also a part-time shoplifter, one wouldn't have any correlation to the other? Bullshit. Shop lifting is a criminal offence , as far as I am aware swinging is not . You really are tedious. You can see exactly where I am coming from, you just cannot bring yourself to see that your chosen term of 'TVF' is at odds with the swinging / casual sex lifestyle. " I was unaware that I had to accept your views as gospel or for that matter accept your view . Shoplifting is a criminal offence . I am unaware of swinging is classed as being unlawfull. . | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" I was unaware that I had to accept your views as gospel or for that matter accept your view. Have I asked you to? Really, is that your perception? Shoplifting is a criminal offence . I am unaware of swinging is classed as being unlawfull. I haven't said it was, I used an analogy. " You are a petty, tedious man whom it is impossible to debate with in an adult manner. To the vast majority of Daily Mail readers, the 'backbone' of British society I think you referred to them as previously, the lifestyle that we are all involved in would be considered contrary to 'TFV'. Given the Daily Mail's propensity for publishing inflammatory and prejudicial headlines, I could well. imagine it making their front page: Seedy Swingers Seek To Destroy Traditional Family Values. Write to the Daily Mail, ask their stance on this lifestyle. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"According to the Audit Bureau of Circulation the Mail distributed under 1.6 million copies a day, and anyone who has ever had anything to do with the press will tell you that copies circulated doesn't equate to copies sold, with up to 30% of copies returned unsold every day in the UK. So let's not over estimate the popularity of the Mail." Maybe a better comparison might be the number of copies sold compared to the Guardian. The reality is that the Daily Mail is one of the UK most popular papers . It is a touch ironic that those who are so keen to critisize it seem to fail to accept that many newsagents who sell it are Asian. If it was that bad , these Asian newsagents would refuse to sell it . I just consider those who criticise the Daily Mail as being narrow minded bigots who are intolerant or jealous of other peoples views. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" I was unaware that I had to accept your views as gospel or for that matter accept your view. Have I asked you to? Really, is that your perception? Shoplifting is a criminal offence . I am unaware of swinging is classed as being unlawfull. I haven't said it was, I used an analogy. You are a petty, tedious man whom it is impossible to debate with in an adult manner. To the vast majority of Daily Mail readers, the 'backbone' of British society I think you referred to them as previously, the lifestyle that we are all involved in would be considered contrary to 'TFV'. Given the Daily Mail's propensity for publishing inflammatory and prejudicial headlines, I could well. imagine it making their front page: Seedy Swingers Seek To Destroy Traditional Family Values. Write to the Daily Mail, ask their stance on this lifestyle. " Why would anyone publicise their private life . You seem to be a bit unbalanced . I am unaware of any so called swingers seeking to destroy family values . I would think that most swingers would want to preserve them and value traditional family values . | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" Why would anyone publicise their private life. If that is a question, it is missing a question mark, I know how highly you value good grammar. I did not say anything about anyone publicising their private life. You seem to be a bit unbalanced. Spoken like a true Daily Mail reader. Rather than reasoned debate, lets resort to put downs. I am unaware of any so called swingers seeking to destroy family values. I used that as an example of a possible headline, as stated Don't twist my words to suit your own ends. I would think that most swingers would want to preserve them and value traditional family values. Traditional Family Values? I'm just leaving that there. " | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"It is a touch ironic that those who are so keen to critisize it seem to fail to accept that many newsagents who sell it are Asian. If it was that bad , these Asian newsagents would refuse to sell it . " What on earth are you talking about? This is the most farcical 'argument' I've ever come across? I mean, re-read it back to yourself. This speaks volumes | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Just wondering two things: - what the definition of 'traditional family values' is? - is that definition in concord with swinging and having casual sex with one or more partners? " I would expect there are at least a couple of definitions... The Victorian one (that's the one with all the double standards). That's where provided you have enough money you can fuck the whole staff and if any of the wenches fall pregnant you can sack them for immorality. Or the Dickensian one (which is where we seem to be heading). Which is like the above but the lower orders know their place and thank their honers for fucking them over. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"It is a touch ironic that those who are so keen to critisize it seem to fail to accept that many newsagents who sell it are Asian. If it was that bad , these Asian newsagents would refuse to sell it . What on earth are you talking about? This is the most farcical 'argument' I've ever come across? I mean, re-read it back to yourself. This speaks volumes "It might be to you but then maybe the truth hurts to people like you. One of thw newsagents from whom I purchase the paper is Asian and we chat. I don't see him condemning the paper or refusing to sell it .  | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"It is a touch ironic that those who are so keen to critisize it seem to fail to accept that many newsagents who sell it are Asian. If it was that bad , these Asian newsagents would refuse to sell it . What on earth are you talking about? This is the most farcical 'argument' I've ever come across? I mean, re-read it back to yourself. This speaks volumes It might be to you but then maybe the truth hurts to people like you.
One of thw newsagents from whom I purchase the paper is Asian and we chat.
I don't see him condemning the paper or refusing to sell it .
"For him its a business decision, where you to ask him what he honestly thinks about it and its content one would think he would be diplomatic in case you were offended and took your business else where.. he will also sell other products that he doesn't use personally.. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"It is a touch ironic that those who are so keen to critisize it seem to fail to accept that many newsagents who sell it are Asian. If it was that bad , these Asian newsagents would refuse to sell it . What on earth are you talking about? This is the most farcical 'argument' I've ever come across? I mean, re-read it back to yourself. This speaks volumes It might be to you but then maybe the truth hurts to people like you.
One of thw newsagents from whom I purchase the paper is Asian and we chat.
I don't see him condemning the paper or refusing to sell it .
"Ah, this you see is where your lack of self-awareness is evident. Whilst we have used terms like 'intolerant', 'bigoted' and 'prejudiced' about the Daily Mail, I haven't seen anyone tie 'race' per se into the discussion. You felt the need to use this ridiculous example, ergo, ypu identify the paper has having a bias against certain races. QED. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"he will also sell other products that he doesn't use personally." Possibly tampons? Or maybe he does use them as ear plugs when certain customers go into the shop? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I don't think tfv have much to do with hiw you conduct youself in your private life. For me it's about creating strong units that can sustain themselves and eachother. Please nobody jump down my kneck for sounding like a tori I'm not in Labour and proud. But there was a time when family's lookd after eachother. Where we cared for our elderly and relied less on social infostructure. I think that's what he refers to." Those are excellent family values. But it's the definition of a 'traditional' family that myself and others have an issue with. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"It is a touch ironic that those who are so keen to critisize it seem to fail to accept that many newsagents who sell it are Asian. If it was that bad , these Asian newsagents would refuse to sell it . What on earth are you talking about? This is the most farcical 'argument' I've ever come across? I mean, re-read it back to yourself. This speaks volumes It might be to you but then maybe the truth hurts to people like you.
One of thw newsagents from whom I purchase the paper is Asian and we chat.
I don't see him condemning the paper or refusing to sell it .
Ah, this you see is where your lack of self-awareness is evident. Whilst we have used terms like 'intolerant', 'bigoted' and 'prejudiced' about the Daily Mail, I haven't seen anyone tie 'race' per se into the discussion. You felt the need to use this ridiculous example, ergo, ypu identify the paper has having a bias against certain races.
QED. "The point is one is compelled to either read or buy the Daily Mail. Most people for some unknown reason mention race in the context of bigoted when discussing the Daily Mail. The stark reality is it is they that are the bigots and seem to bitterly resent the success of both the Daily Mail and its readers . | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"It is a touch ironic that those who are so keen to critisize it seem to fail to accept that many newsagents who sell it are Asian. If it was that bad , these Asian newsagents would refuse to sell it . What on earth are you talking about? This is the most farcical 'argument' I've ever come across? I mean, re-read it back to yourself. This speaks volumes It might be to you but then maybe the truth hurts to people like you.
One of thw newsagents from whom I purchase the paper is Asian and we chat.
I don't see him condemning the paper or refusing to sell it .
Ah, this you see is where your lack of self-awareness is evident. Whilst we have used terms like 'intolerant', 'bigoted' and 'prejudiced' about the Daily Mail, I haven't seen anyone tie 'race' per se into the discussion. You felt the need to use this ridiculous example, ergo, ypu identify the paper has having a bias against certain races.
QED. "It might be ridiculous to you but to those of us who prefer to live in the real world it is very relevant. The stark reality is if the paper was as bigoted as some people suggest people would not buy it. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"It is a touch ironic that those who are so keen to critisize it seem to fail to accept that many newsagents who sell it are Asian. If it was that bad , these Asian newsagents would refuse to sell it . What on earth are you talking about? This is the most farcical 'argument' I've ever come across? I mean, re-read it back to yourself. This speaks volumes It might be to you but then maybe the truth hurts to people like you.
One of thw newsagents from whom I purchase the paper is Asian and we chat.
I don't see him condemning the paper or refusing to sell it .
Ah, this you see is where your lack of self-awareness is evident. Whilst we have used terms like 'intolerant', 'bigoted' and 'prejudiced' about the Daily Mail, I haven't seen anyone tie 'race' per se into the discussion. You felt the need to use this ridiculous example, ergo, ypu identify the paper has having a bias against certain races.
QED. The point is one is compelled to either read or buy the Daily Mail.
Most people for some unknown reason mention race in the context of bigoted when discussing the Daily Mail.
The stark reality is it is they that are the bigots and seem to bitterly resent the success of both the Daily Mail and its readers . "Do you think that reading the Daily Mail is a sign of success? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"It is a touch ironic that those who are so keen to critisize it seem to fail to accept that many newsagents who sell it are Asian. If it was that bad , these Asian newsagents would refuse to sell it . What on earth are you talking about? This is the most farcical 'argument' I've ever come across? I mean, re-read it back to yourself. This speaks volumes It might be to you but then maybe the truth hurts to people like you.
One of thw newsagents from whom I purchase the paper is Asian and we chat.
I don't see him condemning the paper or refusing to sell it .
Ah, this you see is where your lack of self-awareness is evident. Whilst we have used terms like 'intolerant', 'bigoted' and 'prejudiced' about the Daily Mail, I haven't seen anyone tie 'race' per se into the discussion. You felt the need to use this ridiculous example, ergo, ypu identify the paper has having a bias against certain races.
QED. The point is one is compelled to either read or buy the Daily Mail.
Most people for some unknown reason mention race in the context of bigoted when discussing the Daily Mail.
The stark reality is it is they that are the bigots and seem to bitterly resent the success of both the Daily Mail and its readers .
Do you think that reading the Daily Mail is a sign of success? "it must be if you don't read it | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"It is a touch ironic that those who are so keen to critisize it seem to fail to accept that many newsagents who sell it are Asian. If it was that bad , these Asian newsagents would refuse to sell it . What on earth are you talking about? This is the most farcical 'argument' I've ever come across? I mean, re-read it back to yourself. This speaks volumes It might be to you but then maybe the truth hurts to people like you.
One of thw newsagents from whom I purchase the paper is Asian and we chat.
I don't see him condemning the paper or refusing to sell it .
Ah, this you see is where your lack of self-awareness is evident. Whilst we have used terms like 'intolerant', 'bigoted' and 'prejudiced' about the Daily Mail, I haven't seen anyone tie 'race' per se into the discussion. You felt the need to use this ridiculous example, ergo, ypu identify the paper has having a bias against certain races.
QED. The point is one is compelled to either read or buy the Daily Mail.
Most people for some unknown reason mention race in the context of bigoted when discussing the Daily Mail.
The stark reality is it is they that are the bigots and seem to bitterly resent the success of both the Daily Mail and its readers . "the daily mail is a vile rag which has a history of printing racist, homophobic crap which its readers swallow as quite frankly they like it as it provides them with food .. so when this rag printed a story that stated 'it would be absurdly unrealistic to find a middle class mixed race family living in their new build home. This was meant to be a representation of modern life in England but it is likely to be a challenge for the organisers to find an educated white middle aged mother and black father living together with a happy family in such a set up' this was an article by a mail journalist about the opening ceremony for the 2012 Olympics.. its clearly racist Pat, and to attempt to say in challenging and highlighting such statements is now the sign of a 'bigot' is to try and deflect reality and not a very good subject to use as ones basis given their history.. btw they withdrew the article once challenged.. oh and also what success of their readers do you think people are envious of? its an unrealistic assumption to try and make but humour me and at least have a go at clarifying your opinion.. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"our doctors surgery always used to have a copy of the daily mail and i know lots of people who buy it, we live in a nice area where most people are well mannered. Typical daily mail readers." sick people? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"our doctors surgery always used to have a copy of the daily mail and i know lots of people who buy it, we live in a nice area where most people are well mannered. Typical daily mail readers. sick people?" No far from it, decent people. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"It is a touch ironic that those who are so keen to critisize it seem to fail to accept that many newsagents who sell it are Asian. If it was that bad , these Asian newsagents would refuse to sell it . What on earth are you talking about? This is the most farcical 'argument' I've ever come across? I mean, re-read it back to yourself. This speaks volumes It might be to you but then maybe the truth hurts to people like you.
One of thw newsagents from whom I purchase the paper is Asian and we chat.
I don't see him condemning the paper or refusing to sell it .
Ah, this you see is where your lack of self-awareness is evident. Whilst we have used terms like 'intolerant', 'bigoted' and 'prejudiced' about the Daily Mail, I haven't seen anyone tie 'race' per se into the discussion. You felt the need to use this ridiculous example, ergo, ypu identify the paper has having a bias against certain races.
QED. The point is one is compelled to either read or buy the Daily Mail.
Most people for some unknown reason mention race in the context of bigoted when discussing the Daily Mail.
The stark reality is it is they that are the bigots and seem to bitterly resent the success of both the Daily Mail and its readers . "I am debating with a simpleton. I have proven my point entirely with the thread and am leaving it there. Utterly pointless in trying to debate or have a reasoned discussion with you. As for Eva Braun wading in with her two pennorth of facile, petty comment. I really am glad I live in a different part of the country to her. Dare I say it, I live in the real world?! | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"It is a touch ironic that those who are so keen to critisize it seem to fail to accept that many newsagents who sell it are Asian. If it was that bad , these Asian newsagents would refuse to sell it . What on earth are you talking about? This is the most farcical 'argument' I've ever come across? I mean, re-read it back to yourself. This speaks volumes It might be to you but then maybe the truth hurts to people like you.
One of thw newsagents from whom I purchase the paper is Asian and we chat.
I don't see him condemning the paper or refusing to sell it .
Ah, this you see is where your lack of self-awareness is evident. Whilst we have used terms like 'intolerant', 'bigoted' and 'prejudiced' about the Daily Mail, I haven't seen anyone tie 'race' per se into the discussion. You felt the need to use this ridiculous example, ergo, ypu identify the paper has having a bias against certain races.
QED. The point is one is compelled to either read or buy the Daily Mail.
Most people for some unknown reason mention race in the context of bigoted when discussing the Daily Mail.
The stark reality is it is they that are the bigots and seem to bitterly resent the success of both the Daily Mail and its readers .
the daily mail is a vile rag which has a history of printing racist, homophobic crap which its readers swallow as quite frankly they like it as it provides them with food ..
so when this rag printed a story that stated 'it would be absurdly unrealistic to find a middle class mixed race family living in their new build home. This was meant to be a representation of modern life in England but it is likely to be a challenge for the organisers to find an educated white middle aged mother and black father living together with a happy family in such a set up'
this was an article by a mail journalist about the opening ceremony for the 2012 Olympics..
its clearly racist Pat, and to attempt to say in challenging and highlighting such statements is now the sign of a 'bigot' is to try and deflect reality and not a very good subject to use as ones basis given their history..
btw they withdrew the article once challenged..
oh and also what success of their readers do you think people are envious of?
its an unrealistic assumption to try and make but humour me and at least have a go at clarifying your opinion..
"I've wanted him to clarify his opinion all along. He cannot do so. Utterly ridiculous comments made in an attempt to to put me (and others?) down. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"our doctors surgery always used to have a copy of the daily mail and i know lots of people who buy it, we live in a nice area where most people are well mannered. Typical daily mail readers. sick people? No far from it, decent people." Wonder why your Doctor stopped having the paper in the surgery? Ever asked? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"our doctors surgery always used to have a copy of the daily mail and i know lots of people who buy it, we live in a nice area where most people are well mannered. Typical daily mail readers. sick people? No far from it, decent people." What were they doing in the Dr's surgery if they weren't sick? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"our doctors surgery always used to have a copy of the daily mail and i know lots of people who buy it, we live in a nice area where most people are well mannered. Typical daily mail readers. sick people? No far from it, decent people. Wonder why your Doctor stopped having the paper in the surgery? Ever asked? " They dont have papers or magazines anymore only newsletters and pamphlets. Well i live in an upperclass area so they wouldnt have the mirror would they. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" Well i live in an upperclass area so they wouldnt have the mirror would they." No, of course not. You've said they only stock newsletters and pamphlets? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" Well i live in an upperclass area so they wouldnt have the mirror would they. No, of course not. You've said they only stock newsletters and pamphlets? " yes now they do but it was always the mail before same as my osteopath my osteopath said they couldnt get the mail one day and said they would never buy the mirror. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"OP some shocking derogatory comments to people who have made sensible comments. I can't be bothered joining in with your standard of answering people on the thread. Read back your posts and double check if you think they are prportionate." | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"OP some shocking derogatory comments to people who have made sensible comments. I can't be bothered joining in with your standard of answering people on the thread. Read back your posts and double check if you think they are prportionate." I am happy with the way I have answered being perfectly honest. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" I am happy with the way I have answered being perfectly honest. " Ok , I'm out of here. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"OP some shocking derogatory comments to people who have made sensible comments. I can't be bothered joining in with your standard of answering people on the thread. Read back your posts and double check if you think they are prportionate. I am happy with the way I have answered being perfectly honest. " frankly the vitriol you come out with is worse than anything any Mail reader has come out with. Time to maybe look in the mirror | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" The stark reality is if the paper was as bigoted as some people suggest people would not buy it. " Or maybe the bigoted and hideous way it presents some stories is like feeding oxygen to the fiery racist views of its readership? We have discovered since Brexshit and since Trumpton that those successes gave some kind of justification for those with lets say, more unpalatable points of view to have their voice heard. Maybe the Daily Mail is just plugging into the hard drive of an unsavoury large number of people who simply hate foreigners, homosexuals and Judges. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"It is a touch ironic that those who are so keen to critisize it seem to fail to accept that many newsagents who sell it are Asian. If it was that bad , these Asian newsagents would refuse to sell it . What on earth are you talking about? This is the most farcical 'argument' I've ever come across? I mean, re-read it back to yourself. This speaks volumes It might be to you but then maybe the truth hurts to people like you.
One of thw newsagents from whom I purchase the paper is Asian and we chat.
I don't see him condemning the paper or refusing to sell it .
Ah, this you see is where your lack of self-awareness is evident. Whilst we have used terms like 'intolerant', 'bigoted' and 'prejudiced' about the Daily Mail, I haven't seen anyone tie 'race' per se into the discussion. You felt the need to use this ridiculous example, ergo, ypu identify the paper has having a bias against certain races.
QED. The point is one is compelled to either read or buy the Daily Mail.
Most people for some unknown reason mention race in the context of bigoted when discussing the Daily Mail.
The stark reality is it is they that are the bigots and seem to bitterly resent the success of both the Daily Mail and its readers .
Do you think that reading the Daily Mail is a sign of success? "It sets many standards to which most people aspire , so yes . | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"It is a touch ironic that those who are so keen to critisize it seem to fail to accept that many newsagents who sell it are Asian. If it was that bad , these Asian newsagents would refuse to sell it . What on earth are you talking about? This is the most farcical 'argument' I've ever come across? I mean, re-read it back to yourself. This speaks volumes It might be to you but then maybe the truth hurts to people like you.
One of thw newsagents from whom I purchase the paper is Asian and we chat.
I don't see him condemning the paper or refusing to sell it .
Ah, this you see is where your lack of self-awareness is evident. Whilst we have used terms like 'intolerant', 'bigoted' and 'prejudiced' about the Daily Mail, I haven't seen anyone tie 'race' per se into the discussion. You felt the need to use this ridiculous example, ergo, ypu identify the paper has having a bias against certain races.
QED. The point is one is compelled to either read or buy the Daily Mail.
Most people for some unknown reason mention race in the context of bigoted when discussing the Daily Mail.
The stark reality is it is they that are the bigots and seem to bitterly resent the success of both the Daily Mail and its readers .
I am debating with a simpleton. I have proven my point entirely with the thread and am leaving it there.
Utterly pointless in trying to debate or have a reasoned discussion with you. As for Eva Braun wading in with her two pennorth of facile, petty comment. I really am glad I live in a different part of the country to her.
Dare I say it, I live in the real world?!"Charming comments . Nearly every comment that you post towards those that do not agree with you has an aggressive or derogatory undertone to it. Luckily derogatory comments are a reflection on the author of the comment and not the recipient . Most people exercise a degree of self control in what they write . | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" The stark reality is if the paper was as bigoted as some people suggest people would not buy it. Or maybe the bigoted and hideous way it presents some stories is like feeding oxygen to the fiery racist views of its readership? We have discovered since Brexshit and since Trumpton that those successes gave some kind of justification for those with lets say, more unpalatable points of view to have their voice heard. Maybe the Daily Mail is just plugging into the hard drive of an unsavoury large number of people who simply hate foreigners, homosexuals and Judges. " Out of curiousity do you actually read the Daily Mail or how did you come to this conclusion. ? Generally a newspaper will present facts and readers will draw their own conclusions . I am unaware of any Daily Mail readers who hate foreigners , homosexuals and judges . Supporting immigration control is very different to hating foreigners , refusing to bake a cake supporting gay rights is hardly hatred if it goes against your Christian beliefs and forming opinions on Judges is hardly hatred . Traditional family values are still of crucial inportance in society.. Are you saying that you want parts of the news censured .? We live in a free society and I want to know what is happening in the world . | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"our doctors surgery always used to have a copy of the daily mail and i know lots of people who buy it, we live in a nice area where most people are well mannered. Typical daily mail readers. sick people? No far from it, decent people."  | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"It is a touch ironic that those who are so keen to critisize it seem to fail to accept that many newsagents who sell it are Asian. If it was that bad , these Asian newsagents would refuse to sell it . What on earth are you talking about? This is the most farcical 'argument' I've ever come across? I mean, re-read it back to yourself. This speaks volumes It might be to you but then maybe the truth hurts to people like you.
One of thw newsagents from whom I purchase the paper is Asian and we chat.
I don't see him condemning the paper or refusing to sell it .
Ah, this you see is where your lack of self-awareness is evident. Whilst we have used terms like 'intolerant', 'bigoted' and 'prejudiced' about the Daily Mail, I haven't seen anyone tie 'race' per se into the discussion. You felt the need to use this ridiculous example, ergo, ypu identify the paper has having a bias against certain races.
QED. The point is one is compelled to either read or buy the Daily Mail.
Most people for some unknown reason mention race in the context of bigoted when discussing the Daily Mail.
The stark reality is it is they that are the bigots and seem to bitterly resent the success of both the Daily Mail and its readers .
the daily mail is a vile rag which has a history of printing racist, homophobic crap which its readers swallow as quite frankly they like it as it provides them with food ..
so when this rag printed a story that stated 'it would be absurdly unrealistic to find a middle class mixed race family living in their new build home. This was meant to be a representation of modern life in England but it is likely to be a challenge for the organisers to find an educated white middle aged mother and black father living together with a happy family in such a set up'
this was an article by a mail journalist about the opening ceremony for the 2012 Olympics..
its clearly racist Pat, and to attempt to say in challenging and highlighting such statements is now the sign of a 'bigot' is to try and deflect reality and not a very good subject to use as ones basis given their history..
btw they withdrew the article once challenged..
oh and also what success of their readers do you think people are envious of?
its an unrealistic assumption to try and make but humour me and at least have a go at clarifying your opinion..
"I do not quite follow your story about the olympics but if we accept it is valid , no one in life makes their decision based on one error . You are perfectly entitled to describe it as a vile rag but to many people this will be an unbalanced description. Do you actually read it or is your opinion based on heresay. I have previously stated that many news agents are Asian. I use different news agents in different areas and three are of Asian or foreign descent . On a simplistic basis these news agents would refuse to sell it if it was as vile as you suggest . To date no newsagent has attempted to throw me out of the shop because he considers buying a copy of the Daily Mail to be offensive . | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"OP some shocking derogatory comments to people who have made sensible comments. I can't be bothered joining in with your standard of answering people on the thread. Read back your posts and double check if you think they are prportionate. I am happy with the way I have answered being perfectly honest. frankly the vitriol you come out with is worse than anything any Mail reader has come out with. Time to maybe look in the mirror" Frankly, my dear, I don't give a damn. If you can show me where any of the points I have asked (statements made) have been adequately answered by Mr. Traditional Family Values, please do so. Is it OK for vitriolic comments to be made one way and not the other? Have I accused anyone of jealousy? Have I felt the need to talk about whether or not I live in an affluent area? Have I felt the need to bring race into the discussion, albeit dressed up in a pretty irrational equation of 'well Asians sell the Daily Mail don't they'? No. I asked a question that a Mr. TVF has been unable to answer, other than attempt to deconstruct every sentence I have written in order to avoid answering it. Deflection anyone? If you believe that is vitriolic, that is fine. As for a pet name I've given to another contributor, that has come about based on a judgement I have made following some of her, to my mind, extreme views being expressed and her support for Mr. TVF without clarification. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"It is a touch ironic that those who are so keen to critisize it seem to fail to accept that many newsagents who sell it are Asian. If it was that bad , these Asian newsagents would refuse to sell it . What on earth are you talking about? This is the most farcical 'argument' I've ever come across? I mean, re-read it back to yourself. This speaks volumes It might be to you but then maybe the truth hurts to people like you.
One of thw newsagents from whom I purchase the paper is Asian and we chat.
I don't see him condemning the paper or refusing to sell it .
Ah, this you see is where your lack of self-awareness is evident. Whilst we have used terms like 'intolerant', 'bigoted' and 'prejudiced' about the Daily Mail, I haven't seen anyone tie 'race' per se into the discussion. You felt the need to use this ridiculous example, ergo, ypu identify the paper has having a bias against certain races.
QED. The point is one is compelled to either read or buy the Daily Mail.
Most people for some unknown reason mention race in the context of bigoted when discussing the Daily Mail.
The stark reality is it is they that are the bigots and seem to bitterly resent the success of both the Daily Mail and its readers .
Do you think that reading the Daily Mail is a sign of success? It sets many standards to which most people aspire , so yes . "I have never considered, or heard others talk about reading the Daily Mail as being aspirational. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"It is a touch ironic that those who are so keen to critisize it seem to fail to accept that many newsagents who sell it are Asian. If it was that bad , these Asian newsagents would refuse to sell it . What on earth are you talking about? This is the most farcical 'argument' I've ever come across? I mean, re-read it back to yourself. This speaks volumes It might be to you but then maybe the truth hurts to people like you.
One of thw newsagents from whom I purchase the paper is Asian and we chat.
I don't see him condemning the paper or refusing to sell it .
Ah, this you see is where your lack of self-awareness is evident. Whilst we have used terms like 'intolerant', 'bigoted' and 'prejudiced' about the Daily Mail, I haven't seen anyone tie 'race' per se into the discussion. You felt the need to use this ridiculous example, ergo, ypu identify the paper has having a bias against certain races.
QED. The point is one is compelled to either read or buy the Daily Mail.
Most people for some unknown reason mention race in the context of bigoted when discussing the Daily Mail.
The stark reality is it is they that are the bigots and seem to bitterly resent the success of both the Daily Mail and its readers .
I am debating with a simpleton. I have proven my point entirely with the thread and am leaving it there.
Utterly pointless in trying to debate or have a reasoned discussion with you. As for Eva Braun wading in with her two pennorth of facile, petty comment. I really am glad I live in a different part of the country to her.
Dare I say it, I live in the real world?! Charming comments . Nearly every comment that you post towards those that do not agree with you has an aggressive or derogatory undertone to it.
Luckily derogatory comments are a reflection on the author of the comment and not the recipient .
Most people exercise a degree of self control in what they write . "As I said, utterly pointless in trying to debate with you. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"It is a touch ironic that those who are so keen to critisize it seem to fail to accept that many newsagents who sell it are Asian. If it was that bad , these Asian newsagents would refuse to sell it . What on earth are you talking about? This is the most farcical 'argument' I've ever come across? I mean, re-read it back to yourself. This speaks volumes It might be to you but then maybe the truth hurts to people like you.
One of thw newsagents from whom I purchase the paper is Asian and we chat.
I don't see him condemning the paper or refusing to sell it .
Ah, this you see is where your lack of self-awareness is evident. Whilst we have used terms like 'intolerant', 'bigoted' and 'prejudiced' about the Daily Mail, I haven't seen anyone tie 'race' per se into the discussion. You felt the need to use this ridiculous example, ergo, ypu identify the paper has having a bias against certain races.
QED. The point is one is compelled to either read or buy the Daily Mail.
Most people for some unknown reason mention race in the context of bigoted when discussing the Daily Mail.
The stark reality is it is they that are the bigots and seem to bitterly resent the success of both the Daily Mail and its readers .
the daily mail is a vile rag which has a history of printing racist, homophobic crap which its readers swallow as quite frankly they like it as it provides them with food ..
so when this rag printed a story that stated 'it would be absurdly unrealistic to find a middle class mixed race family living in their new build home. This was meant to be a representation of modern life in England but it is likely to be a challenge for the organisers to find an educated white middle aged mother and black father living together with a happy family in such a set up'
this was an article by a mail journalist about the opening ceremony for the 2012 Olympics..
its clearly racist Pat, and to attempt to say in challenging and highlighting such statements is now the sign of a 'bigot' is to try and deflect reality and not a very good subject to use as ones basis given their history..
btw they withdrew the article once challenged..
oh and also what success of their readers do you think people are envious of?
its an unrealistic assumption to try and make but humour me and at least have a go at clarifying your opinion..
I do not quite follow your story about the olympics but if we accept it is valid , no one in life makes their decision based on one error .
You are perfectly entitled to describe it as a vile rag but to many people this will be an unbalanced description. Do you actually read it or is your opinion based on heresay.
I have previously stated that many news agents are Asian. I use different news agents in different areas and three are of Asian or foreign descent .
On a simplistic basis these news agents would refuse to sell it if it was as vile as you suggest .
To date no newsagent has attempted to throw me out of the shop because he considers buying a copy of the Daily Mail to be offensive . "what part of it don't you follow and its a fact btw, it was racist drivel and they retracted it after being challenged.. like they did with their vile homophobic piece about Steven Gately, 25,000 complaints for that one.. the one about the hordes of Bulgarians and Romanians having brought all the available plane and coach tickets to invade us, false and they later 'corrected' it.. disabled babies being euthanized under the Liverpool Care Pathway.. children denied water at school because it was Ramadan.. 878,000 recipients had stopped claiming ESA rather than have a medical.. George Clooney and his Lebanese fiancé.. JK Rowling, big pay out that one Brian Paddicks partner, another homophobic piece of expensive drivel, £100k.. all factual, all false, all published then retracted and financial redress sought and paid where applicable.. and there are many, many more but you wont look as there's nothing so myopic as those who wont open their eyes.. homophobic, racism, attacking single families and disabled is simply how they work.. editorial policy is about causing division and resentment for anyone they deem to be not their type of citizen and they will happily lie in order to have some of the people who read it to buy into that.. take your blinkers off about who would sell it they are businesses and contracted to do so, surprised you have not said another newsagent is gay so the Mail must be ok.. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Just wondering two things: - what the definition of 'traditional family values' is? - is that definition in concord with swinging and having casual sex with one or more partners? " (I'm not interested in the Daily Mail stuff.) My definition of traditional family values is bringing up your children in a happy, safe, loving environment, where the needs of all the family especially the kids is paramount. Swinging as we do it doesn't influence that way of life at all. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Just wondering two things: - what the definition of 'traditional family values' is? - is that definition in concord with swinging and having casual sex with one or more partners? (I'm not interested in the Daily Mail stuff.) My definition of traditional family values is bringing up your children in a happy, safe, loving environment, where the needs of all the family especially the kids is paramount. Swinging as we do it doesn't influence that way of life at all." Thank you for your contribution, all of which I think is re Levan. I am not interested in the DM stuff either to be perfectly honest. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"It is a touch ironic that those who are so keen to critisize it seem to fail to accept that many newsagents who sell it are Asian. If it was that bad , these Asian newsagents would refuse to sell it . What on earth are you talking about? This is the most farcical 'argument' I've ever come across? I mean, re-read it back to yourself. This speaks volumes It might be to you but then maybe the truth hurts to people like you.
One of thw newsagents from whom I purchase the paper is Asian and we chat.
I don't see him condemning the paper or refusing to sell it .
Ah, this you see is where your lack of self-awareness is evident. Whilst we have used terms like 'intolerant', 'bigoted' and 'prejudiced' about the Daily Mail, I haven't seen anyone tie 'race' per se into the discussion. You felt the need to use this ridiculous example, ergo, ypu identify the paper has having a bias against certain races.
QED. The point is one is compelled to either read or buy the Daily Mail.
Most people for some unknown reason mention race in the context of bigoted when discussing the Daily Mail.
The stark reality is it is they that are the bigots and seem to bitterly resent the success of both the Daily Mail and its readers .
the daily mail is a vile rag which has a history of printing racist, homophobic crap which its readers swallow as quite frankly they like it as it provides them with food ..
so when this rag printed a story that stated 'it would be absurdly unrealistic to find a middle class mixed race family living in their new build home. This was meant to be a representation of modern life in England but it is likely to be a challenge for the organisers to find an educated white middle aged mother and black father living together with a happy family in such a set up'
this was an article by a mail journalist about the opening ceremony for the 2012 Olympics..
its clearly racist Pat, and to attempt to say in challenging and highlighting such statements is now the sign of a 'bigot' is to try and deflect reality and not a very good subject to use as ones basis given their history..
btw they withdrew the article once challenged..
oh and also what success of their readers do you think people are envious of?
its an unrealistic assumption to try and make but humour me and at least have a go at clarifying your opinion..
I do not quite follow your story about the olympics but if we accept it is valid , no one in life makes their decision based on one error .
You are perfectly entitled to describe it as a vile rag but to many people this will be an unbalanced description. Do you actually read it or is your opinion based on heresay.
I have previously stated that many news agents are Asian. I use different news agents in different areas and three are of Asian or foreign descent .
On a simplistic basis these news agents would refuse to sell it if it was as vile as you suggest .
To date no newsagent has attempted to throw me out of the shop because he considers buying a copy of the Daily Mail to be offensive .
what part of it don't you follow and its a fact btw, it was racist drivel and they retracted it after being challenged..
like they did with their vile homophobic piece about Steven Gately, 25,000 complaints for that one..
the one about the hordes of Bulgarians and Romanians having brought all the available plane and coach tickets to invade us, false and they later 'corrected' it..
disabled babies being euthanized under the Liverpool Care Pathway..
children denied water at school because it was Ramadan..
878,000 recipients had stopped claiming ESA rather than have a medical..
George Clooney and his Lebanese fiancé..
JK Rowling, big pay out that one
Brian Paddicks partner, another homophobic piece of expensive drivel, £100k..
all factual, all false, all published then retracted and financial redress sought and paid where applicable..
and there are many, many more but you wont look as there's nothing so myopic as those who wont open their eyes..
homophobic, racism, attacking single families and disabled is simply how they work..
editorial policy is about causing division and resentment for anyone they deem to be not their type of citizen and they will happily lie in order to have some of the people who read it to buy into that..
take your blinkers off about who would sell it they are businesses and contracted to do so, surprised you have not said another newsagent is gay so the Mail must be ok..
"I dont agree with everything their journalists say but they have got a right to their opinions same as their readers have and as for telling lies they arent the only ones who do sometimes all the media does. Just because you dont agree with their opinions doesnt mean they are wrong or not allowed to have them. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I'm not sure what classes as family values, but as for the Daily Mail, I have my own little anecdote. When I was 16/17 I was interested in joining the Royal Navy as an officer. The careers officer stressed the importance of knowledge of current affairs and international events, as this was important for passing the Admiralty Interview Board. So he made the point of reading 'proper' newspapers to keep up to date on events, so not The Sun or News of the World. I asked if the Daily Mail counted as a proper newspaper, as that's what my parents read. 'Certainly not' he said with some disdain. "My media studies tutor was of the same mind. He only recommended The Telegraph as 'newsworthy', this was in the early 90s. Come to think of it, for a media studies tutor, he didn't really have much belief in the media. He was anti-BBC too.  | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I dont agree with everything their journalists say but they have got a right to their opinions same as their readers have and as for telling lies they arent the only ones who do sometimes all the media does. Just because you dont agree with their opinions doesnt mean they are wrong or not allowed to have them." I think for many people, it is the fact that their journalists spew out opinions as fact. In the examples given, they were wrong in printing them and had to pay for their misrepresentations and mistruths The concern with the foregoing is that their readership may consume said 'facts' without question. The contention of some is that those consuming the information provided are therefore merely seeking to reinforce their prejudices. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"It is a touch ironic that those who are so keen to critisize it seem to fail to accept that many newsagents who sell it are Asian. If it was that bad , these Asian newsagents would refuse to sell it . What on earth are you talking about? This is the most farcical 'argument' I've ever come across? I mean, re-read it back to yourself. This speaks volumes It might be to you but then maybe the truth hurts to people like you.
One of thw newsagents from whom I purchase the paper is Asian and we chat.
I don't see him condemning the paper or refusing to sell it .
Ah, this you see is where your lack of self-awareness is evident. Whilst we have used terms like 'intolerant', 'bigoted' and 'prejudiced' about the Daily Mail, I haven't seen anyone tie 'race' per se into the discussion. You felt the need to use this ridiculous example, ergo, ypu identify the paper has having a bias against certain races.
QED. The point is one is compelled to either read or buy the Daily Mail.
Most people for some unknown reason mention race in the context of bigoted when discussing the Daily Mail.
The stark reality is it is they that are the bigots and seem to bitterly resent the success of both the Daily Mail and its readers .
the daily mail is a vile rag which has a history of printing racist, homophobic crap which its readers swallow as quite frankly they like it as it provides them with food ..
so when this rag printed a story that stated 'it would be absurdly unrealistic to find a middle class mixed race family living in their new build home. This was meant to be a representation of modern life in England but it is likely to be a challenge for the organisers to find an educated white middle aged mother and black father living together with a happy family in such a set up'
this was an article by a mail journalist about the opening ceremony for the 2012 Olympics..
its clearly racist Pat, and to attempt to say in challenging and highlighting such statements is now the sign of a 'bigot' is to try and deflect reality and not a very good subject to use as ones basis given their history..
btw they withdrew the article once challenged..
oh and also what success of their readers do you think people are envious of?
its an unrealistic assumption to try and make but humour me and at least have a go at clarifying your opinion..
I do not quite follow your story about the olympics but if we accept it is valid , no one in life makes their decision based on one error .
You are perfectly entitled to describe it as a vile rag but to many people this will be an unbalanced description. Do you actually read it or is your opinion based on heresay.
I have previously stated that many news agents are Asian. I use different news agents in different areas and three are of Asian or foreign descent .
On a simplistic basis these news agents would refuse to sell it if it was as vile as you suggest .
To date no newsagent has attempted to throw me out of the shop because he considers buying a copy of the Daily Mail to be offensive .
what part of it don't you follow and its a fact btw, it was racist drivel and they retracted it after being challenged..
like they did with their vile homophobic piece about Steven Gately, 25,000 complaints for that one..
the one about the hordes of Bulgarians and Romanians having brought all the available plane and coach tickets to invade us, false and they later 'corrected' it..
disabled babies being euthanized under the Liverpool Care Pathway..
children denied water at school because it was Ramadan..
878,000 recipients had stopped claiming ESA rather than have a medical..
George Clooney and his Lebanese fiancé..
JK Rowling, big pay out that one
Brian Paddicks partner, another homophobic piece of expensive drivel, £100k..
all factual, all false, all published then retracted and financial redress sought and paid where applicable..
and there are many, many more but you wont look as there's nothing so myopic as those who wont open their eyes..
homophobic, racism, attacking single families and disabled is simply how they work..
editorial policy is about causing division and resentment for anyone they deem to be not their type of citizen and they will happily lie in order to have some of the people who read it to buy into that..
take your blinkers off about who would sell it they are businesses and contracted to do so, surprised you have not said another newsagent is gay so the Mail must be ok..
I dont agree with everything their journalists say but they have got a right to their opinions same as their readers have and as for telling lies they arent the only ones who do sometimes all the media does. Just because you dont agree with their opinions doesnt mean they are wrong or not allowed to have them."they have to abide by certain rules and a code of conduct which in their case they regularly break, hence having to print a 'correction' or settle in or out of court.. there is a huge difference between your opinion and mine and a National publication, which when they print lies about groups, races or individuals causes harm and prejudice to them.. that you fail to see that is a surprise.. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"It is a touch ironic that those who are so keen to critisize it seem to fail to accept that many newsagents who sell it are Asian. If it was that bad , these Asian newsagents would refuse to sell it . What on earth are you talking about? This is the most farcical 'argument' I've ever come across? I mean, re-read it back to yourself. This speaks volumes It might be to you but then maybe the truth hurts to people like you.
One of thw newsagents from whom I purchase the paper is Asian and we chat.
I don't see him condemning the paper or refusing to sell it .
Ah, this you see is where your lack of self-awareness is evident. Whilst we have used terms like 'intolerant', 'bigoted' and 'prejudiced' about the Daily Mail, I haven't seen anyone tie 'race' per se into the discussion. You felt the need to use this ridiculous example, ergo, ypu identify the paper has having a bias against certain races.
QED. The point is one is compelled to either read or buy the Daily Mail.
Most people for some unknown reason mention race in the context of bigoted when discussing the Daily Mail.
The stark reality is it is they that are the bigots and seem to bitterly resent the success of both the Daily Mail and its readers .
the daily mail is a vile rag which has a history of printing racist, homophobic crap which its readers swallow as quite frankly they like it as it provides them with food ..
so when this rag printed a story that stated 'it would be absurdly unrealistic to find a middle class mixed race family living in their new build home. This was meant to be a representation of modern life in England but it is likely to be a challenge for the organisers to find an educated white middle aged mother and black father living together with a happy family in such a set up'
this was an article by a mail journalist about the opening ceremony for the 2012 Olympics..
its clearly racist Pat, and to attempt to say in challenging and highlighting such statements is now the sign of a 'bigot' is to try and deflect reality and not a very good subject to use as ones basis given their history..
btw they withdrew the article once challenged..
oh and also what success of their readers do you think people are envious of?
its an unrealistic assumption to try and make but humour me and at least have a go at clarifying your opinion..
I do not quite follow your story about the olympics but if we accept it is valid , no one in life makes their decision based on one error .
You are perfectly entitled to describe it as a vile rag but to many people this will be an unbalanced description. Do you actually read it or is your opinion based on heresay.
I have previously stated that many news agents are Asian. I use different news agents in different areas and three are of Asian or foreign descent .
On a simplistic basis these news agents would refuse to sell it if it was as vile as you suggest .
To date no newsagent has attempted to throw me out of the shop because he considers buying a copy of the Daily Mail to be offensive .
what part of it don't you follow and its a fact btw, it was racist drivel and they retracted it after being challenged..
like they did with their vile homophobic piece about Steven Gately, 25,000 complaints for that one..
the one about the hordes of Bulgarians and Romanians having brought all the available plane and coach tickets to invade us, false and they later 'corrected' it..
disabled babies being euthanized under the Liverpool Care Pathway..
children denied water at school because it was Ramadan..
878,000 recipients had stopped claiming ESA rather than have a medical..
George Clooney and his Lebanese fiancé..
JK Rowling, big pay out that one
Brian Paddicks partner, another homophobic piece of expensive drivel, £100k..
all factual, all false, all published then retracted and financial redress sought and paid where applicable..
and there are many, many more but you wont look as there's nothing so myopic as those who wont open their eyes..
homophobic, racism, attacking single families and disabled is simply how they work..
editorial policy is about causing division and resentment for anyone they deem to be not their type of citizen and they will happily lie in order to have some of the people who read it to buy into that..
take your blinkers off about who would sell it they are businesses and contracted to do so, surprised you have not said another newsagent is gay so the Mail must be ok..
"Interesting as all these points are, I am not quite sure as to why they would provide any valid backing as to why you consider the Daily Mail to be vile . If you wanted to make an objective view if its content , you would have to take a randomly generated sample of stories which it prints and then do an objective analysis by independent consultants . I suspect that the results would please most posters on here because it would confirm that what the paper writes is true and accurate . A few would be annoyed because they would hate to think that the Daily Mail was unbiased . No one on life should judge anyone on a few mistakes that they have made . What I also find odd is that it is mainly people who I would describe as white Zealots are those who critizise the Daily Mail.You see very little criticism of it from ethnic minority groups . I can only re iterate what I said previously . That fact that so many Asian newsagents sell it is proof that it is not vile , otherwise they would not be selling it. One news agent that I use even pulled me aside to seek advice a particular matter, another attended a funeral of a neighbour . These are hardly the actions of people who consider a newspaper to be vile . I work in a multi racial environment and run a small businness , of which a significant number of the clients are of non uk origin. Never once have any of them condemmed reading of the Daily Mail. Some have even asked to borrow it . Whilst I might appreciate the time that you soent in collecting the data , I fail to see its relevance in an overall assessment of the newspaper . Out of curiousity is there any reason as to why you have collected this data . Has a particular event occurred in your life that triggered you to collect data such as this ? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"It is a touch ironic that those who are so keen to critisize it seem to fail to accept that many newsagents who sell it are Asian. If it was that bad , these Asian newsagents would refuse to sell it . What on earth are you talking about? This is the most farcical 'argument' I've ever come across? I mean, re-read it back to yourself. This speaks volumes It might be to you but then maybe the truth hurts to people like you.
One of thw newsagents from whom I purchase the paper is Asian and we chat.
I don't see him condemning the paper or refusing to sell it .
Ah, this you see is where your lack of self-awareness is evident. Whilst we have used terms like 'intolerant', 'bigoted' and 'prejudiced' about the Daily Mail, I haven't seen anyone tie 'race' per se into the discussion. You felt the need to use this ridiculous example, ergo, ypu identify the paper has having a bias against certain races.
QED. The point is one is compelled to either read or buy the Daily Mail.
Most people for some unknown reason mention race in the context of bigoted when discussing the Daily Mail.
The stark reality is it is they that are the bigots and seem to bitterly resent the success of both the Daily Mail and its readers .
the daily mail is a vile rag which has a history of printing racist, homophobic crap which its readers swallow as quite frankly they like it as it provides them with food ..
so when this rag printed a story that stated 'it would be absurdly unrealistic to find a middle class mixed race family living in their new build home. This was meant to be a representation of modern life in England but it is likely to be a challenge for the organisers to find an educated white middle aged mother and black father living together with a happy family in such a set up'
this was an article by a mail journalist about the opening ceremony for the 2012 Olympics..
its clearly racist Pat, and to attempt to say in challenging and highlighting such statements is now the sign of a 'bigot' is to try and deflect reality and not a very good subject to use as ones basis given their history..
btw they withdrew the article once challenged..
oh and also what success of their readers do you think people are envious of?
its an unrealistic assumption to try and make but humour me and at least have a go at clarifying your opinion..
I do not quite follow your story about the olympics but if we accept it is valid , no one in life makes their decision based on one error .
You are perfectly entitled to describe it as a vile rag but to many people this will be an unbalanced description. Do you actually read it or is your opinion based on heresay.
I have previously stated that many news agents are Asian. I use different news agents in different areas and three are of Asian or foreign descent .
On a simplistic basis these news agents would refuse to sell it if it was as vile as you suggest .
To date no newsagent has attempted to throw me out of the shop because he considers buying a copy of the Daily Mail to be offensive .
what part of it don't you follow and its a fact btw, it was racist drivel and they retracted it after being challenged..
like they did with their vile homophobic piece about Steven Gately, 25,000 complaints for that one..
the one about the hordes of Bulgarians and Romanians having brought all the available plane and coach tickets to invade us, false and they later 'corrected' it..
disabled babies being euthanized under the Liverpool Care Pathway..
children denied water at school because it was Ramadan..
878,000 recipients had stopped claiming ESA rather than have a medical..
George Clooney and his Lebanese fiancé..
JK Rowling, big pay out that one
Brian Paddicks partner, another homophobic piece of expensive drivel, £100k..
all factual, all false, all published then retracted and financial redress sought and paid where applicable..
and there are many, many more but you wont look as there's nothing so myopic as those who wont open their eyes..
homophobic, racism, attacking single families and disabled is simply how they work..
editorial policy is about causing division and resentment for anyone they deem to be not their type of citizen and they will happily lie in order to have some of the people who read it to buy into that..
take your blinkers off about who would sell it they are businesses and contracted to do so, surprised you have not said another newsagent is gay so the Mail must be ok..
Interesting as all these points are, I am not quite sure as to why they would provide any valid backing as to why you consider the Daily Mail to be vile .
If you wanted to make an objective view if its content , you would have to take a randomly generated sample of stories which it prints and then do an objective analysis by independent consultants .
I suspect that the results would please most posters on here because it would confirm that what the paper writes is true and accurate . A few would be annoyed because they would hate to think that the Daily Mail was unbiased .
No one on life should judge anyone on a few mistakes that they have made .
What I also find odd is that it is mainly people who I would describe as white Zealots are those who critizise the Daily Mail.You see very little criticism of it from ethnic minority groups .
I can only re iterate what I said previously . That fact that so many Asian newsagents sell it is proof that it is not vile , otherwise they would not be selling it. One news agent that I use even pulled me aside to seek advice a particular matter, another attended a funeral of a neighbour . These are hardly the actions of people who consider a newspaper to be vile .
I work in a multi racial environment and run a small businness , of which a significant number of the clients are of non uk origin.
Never once have any of them condemmed reading of the Daily Mail. Some have even asked to borrow it .
Whilst I might appreciate the time that you soent in collecting the data , I fail to see its relevance in an overall assessment of the newspaper .
Out of curiousity is there any reason as to why you have collected this data . Has a particular event occurred in your life that triggered you to collect data such as this ? "you are clearly not able to process the publicly and easily available facts, took about 5 minutes to collate the above incidents of racism, homophobia etc.. as for taking an objective view then the courts of this land and or the IPSO are the arbiters in such issue's hence the mail has paid out huge sums when they have been challenged for their vile views.. you are clearly unable to accept that the racism that they print is wrong, your constant harking back to whomever sells it so it cant be bad is a patent nonsense, its not a logical stance for anyone given the issue and only looks like an attempt to ignore the obvious or to support such vile views.. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"It is a touch ironic that those who are so keen to critisize it seem to fail to accept that many newsagents who sell it are Asian. If it was that bad , these Asian newsagents would refuse to sell it . What on earth are you talking about? This is the most farcical 'argument' I've ever come across? I mean, re-read it back to yourself. This speaks volumes It might be to you but then maybe the truth hurts to people like you.
One of thw newsagents from whom I purchase the paper is Asian and we chat.
I don't see him condemning the paper or refusing to sell it .
Ah, this you see is where your lack of self-awareness is evident. Whilst we have used terms like 'intolerant', 'bigoted' and 'prejudiced' about the Daily Mail, I haven't seen anyone tie 'race' per se into the discussion. You felt the need to use this ridiculous example, ergo, ypu identify the paper has having a bias against certain races.
QED. The point is one is compelled to either read or buy the Daily Mail.
Most people for some unknown reason mention race in the context of bigoted when discussing the Daily Mail.
The stark reality is it is they that are the bigots and seem to bitterly resent the success of both the Daily Mail and its readers .
the daily mail is a vile rag which has a history of printing racist, homophobic crap which its readers swallow as quite frankly they like it as it provides them with food ..
so when this rag printed a story that stated 'it would be absurdly unrealistic to find a middle class mixed race family living in their new build home. This was meant to be a representation of modern life in England but it is likely to be a challenge for the organisers to find an educated white middle aged mother and black father living together with a happy family in such a set up'
this was an article by a mail journalist about the opening ceremony for the 2012 Olympics..
its clearly racist Pat, and to attempt to say in challenging and highlighting such statements is now the sign of a 'bigot' is to try and deflect reality and not a very good subject to use as ones basis given their history..
btw they withdrew the article once challenged..
oh and also what success of their readers do you think people are envious of?
its an unrealistic assumption to try and make but humour me and at least have a go at clarifying your opinion..
I do not quite follow your story about the olympics but if we accept it is valid , no one in life makes their decision based on one error .
You are perfectly entitled to describe it as a vile rag but to many people this will be an unbalanced description. Do you actually read it or is your opinion based on heresay.
I have previously stated that many news agents are Asian. I use different news agents in different areas and three are of Asian or foreign descent .
On a simplistic basis these news agents would refuse to sell it if it was as vile as you suggest .
To date no newsagent has attempted to throw me out of the shop because he considers buying a copy of the Daily Mail to be offensive .
what part of it don't you follow and its a fact btw, it was racist drivel and they retracted it after being challenged..
like they did with their vile homophobic piece about Steven Gately, 25,000 complaints for that one..
the one about the hordes of Bulgarians and Romanians having brought all the available plane and coach tickets to invade us, false and they later 'corrected' it..
disabled babies being euthanized under the Liverpool Care Pathway..
children denied water at school because it was Ramadan..
878,000 recipients had stopped claiming ESA rather than have a medical..
George Clooney and his Lebanese fiancé..
JK Rowling, big pay out that one
Brian Paddicks partner, another homophobic piece of expensive drivel, £100k..
all factual, all false, all published then retracted and financial redress sought and paid where applicable..
and there are many, many more but you wont look as there's nothing so myopic as those who wont open their eyes..
homophobic, racism, attacking single families and disabled is simply how they work..
editorial policy is about causing division and resentment for anyone they deem to be not their type of citizen and they will happily lie in order to have some of the people who read it to buy into that..
take your blinkers off about who would sell it they are businesses and contracted to do so, surprised you have not said another newsagent is gay so the Mail must be ok..
Interesting as all these points are, I am not quite sure as to why they would provide any valid backing as to why you consider the Daily Mail to be vile .
If you wanted to make an objective view if its content , you would have to take a randomly generated sample of stories which it prints and then do an objective analysis by independent consultants .
I suspect that the results would please most posters on here because it would confirm that what the paper writes is true and accurate . A few would be annoyed because they would hate to think that the Daily Mail was unbiased .
No one on life should judge anyone on a few mistakes that they have made .
What I also find odd is that it is mainly people who I would describe as white Zealots are those who critizise the Daily Mail.You see very little criticism of it from ethnic minority groups .
I can only re iterate what I said previously . That fact that so many Asian newsagents sell it is proof that it is not vile , otherwise they would not be selling it. One news agent that I use even pulled me aside to seek advice a particular matter, another attended a funeral of a neighbour . These are hardly the actions of people who consider a newspaper to be vile .
I work in a multi racial environment and run a small businness , of which a significant number of the clients are of non uk origin.
Never once have any of them condemmed reading of the Daily Mail. Some have even asked to borrow it .
Whilst I might appreciate the time that you soent in collecting the data , I fail to see its relevance in an overall assessment of the newspaper .
Out of curiousity is there any reason as to why you have collected this data . Has a particular event occurred in your life that triggered you to collect data such as this ?
you are clearly not able to process the publicly and easily available facts, took about 5 minutes to collate the above incidents of racism, homophobia etc..
as for taking an objective view then the courts of this land and or the IPSO are the arbiters in such issue's hence the mail has paid out huge sums when they have been challenged for their vile views..
you are clearly unable to accept that the racism that they print is wrong, your constant harking back to whomever sells it so it cant be bad is a patent nonsense, its not a logical stance for anyone given the issue and only looks like an attempt to ignore the obvious or to support such vile views..
"I think it is unbalanced and totally irrational to refer to the Daily Mails views at vile . As I suspect that you do not read this publication , I am at a total loss to understand how you would be able to pass judgement on it unless you are relying entirely on heresay . I would never in life base my opionion on a few isolated incidents . Judgement should be on the full package . If the newspaper was as vile as you have tried to suggest , Asian or ethnic minority agents would refuse to sell it . To date no ethnic minority newsagent has attempted to throw me out or ban me from ever entering his premises because he / she considers the publication that I requested to be vile !!1. To take an objective view of the publication , you would need to analyse a number of it articles which would have to be selected via a random sample selection process . Cherry picking a minute number of court cases over a number of years hardly proves anything . All a court does is give judgement on the day , it does not necessary mean that the correct conclusion is reached . ( or for that matter that the decision was fair ) From the way that your post is worded , you are stating that I must accept your opinion that the Mail is a racist paper . Whilst you are perfectly entitled to express an opinion , you are not entitled you attempt to force me to accept that your opinion is correct . If you were to produce a list of articles that were generated at random and analysed independently , I might be prepared to do a review of the papers stance I am not quite certain as to why you keep stating that the newspaper is vile . It seems a very odd stance to take and not one that many people would accept . If your opinion was logical , people would simply not buy it and in addition the ethnic minority newsagents would refuse to stock it . | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"FFS! Your 'argument' about the ethnicity of newsagents selling the paper is utterly ludicrous. Any newsagent will tell you (you seem to know many, so please ask them) that the sale of newspapers generates further sales: confectionery, tobacco products, small grocery items. Stocking an item and selling it does not mean they condone it. My aunt is a newsagent, she owns 5 outlets. She stocks a huge variety of confectionery products, but is diabetic. So, even though she is happy to sell them, she does not herself consume them. You are either extremely thick-skinned, playing the joker or totally clueless. I am still not entirely sure which it is you are. " That is hardly a like for like comparison. No one has tried to claim that sweets are vile. I am satisfied beyond all reeasonable manner of doubt that newsagents would not sell a newspaper product if they thought it was vile ( which what a very small minority of posters attempted to claim ). Whilst they are entitled to express an opinion , they are not entitled to expect everyone to be compelled to agrèe with their opinion . | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
Always thought it strange how they are acused of been right wing racist !
Yet did more than Any other newspaper to try and get justice for Stephen Lawence ! | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Quite like the Mail actually
Always thought it strange how they are acused of been right wing racist !
Yet did more than Any other newspaper to try and get justice for Stephen Lawence ! "Oversensitive types maybe. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I guess Cameron was hinting at better parental control over their offspring, absent fathers changing their ways, and a return to the outdated ideal of the father of the family being the breadwinner while Mother plays at housekeeping...." Better control over thier offspring that they are bannned from even giving a slap on the leg or harsh words ? 
Kids know they have the upper hand because the law says so
Nothing wrong when they the old system where the bloke went out to work and worked hard and the woman looking after home and the children but times change not always for the better but that's progress | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I guess Cameron was hinting at better parental control over their offspring, absent fathers changing their ways, and a return to the outdated ideal of the father of the family being the breadwinner while Mother plays at housekeeping.... Better control over thier offspring that they are bannned from even giving a slap on the leg or harsh words ?
Kids know they have the upper hand because the law says so
Nothing wrong when they the old system where the bloke went out to work and worked hard and the woman looking after home and the children but times change not always for the better but that's progress "Shhhhh don't tell anyone that you'll get banned
Good post | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"It is a touch ironic that those who are so keen to critisize it seem to fail to accept that many newsagents who sell it are Asian. If it was that bad , these Asian newsagents would refuse to sell it . What on earth are you talking about? This is the most farcical 'argument' I've ever come across? I mean, re-read it back to yourself. This speaks volumes It might be to you but then maybe the truth hurts to people like you.
One of thw newsagents from whom I purchase the paper is Asian and we chat.
I don't see him condemning the paper or refusing to sell it .
Ah, this you see is where your lack of self-awareness is evident. Whilst we have used terms like 'intolerant', 'bigoted' and 'prejudiced' about the Daily Mail, I haven't seen anyone tie 'race' per se into the discussion. You felt the need to use this ridiculous example, ergo, ypu identify the paper has having a bias against certain races.
QED. The point is one is compelled to either read or buy the Daily Mail.
Most people for some unknown reason mention race in the context of bigoted when discussing the Daily Mail.
The stark reality is it is they that are the bigots and seem to bitterly resent the success of both the Daily Mail and its readers .
the daily mail is a vile rag which has a history of printing racist, homophobic crap which its readers swallow as quite frankly they like it as it provides them with food ..
so when this rag printed a story that stated 'it would be absurdly unrealistic to find a middle class mixed race family living in their new build home. This was meant to be a representation of modern life in England but it is likely to be a challenge for the organisers to find an educated white middle aged mother and black father living together with a happy family in such a set up'
this was an article by a mail journalist about the opening ceremony for the 2012 Olympics..
its clearly racist Pat, and to attempt to say in challenging and highlighting such statements is now the sign of a 'bigot' is to try and deflect reality and not a very good subject to use as ones basis given their history..
btw they withdrew the article once challenged..
oh and also what success of their readers do you think people are envious of?
its an unrealistic assumption to try and make but humour me and at least have a go at clarifying your opinion..
I do not quite follow your story about the olympics but if we accept it is valid , no one in life makes their decision based on one error .
You are perfectly entitled to describe it as a vile rag but to many people this will be an unbalanced description. Do you actually read it or is your opinion based on heresay.
I have previously stated that many news agents are Asian. I use different news agents in different areas and three are of Asian or foreign descent .
On a simplistic basis these news agents would refuse to sell it if it was as vile as you suggest .
To date no newsagent has attempted to throw me out of the shop because he considers buying a copy of the Daily Mail to be offensive .
what part of it don't you follow and its a fact btw, it was racist drivel and they retracted it after being challenged..
like they did with their vile homophobic piece about Steven Gately, 25,000 complaints for that one..
the one about the hordes of Bulgarians and Romanians having brought all the available plane and coach tickets to invade us, false and they later 'corrected' it..
disabled babies being euthanized under the Liverpool Care Pathway..
children denied water at school because it was Ramadan..
878,000 recipients had stopped claiming ESA rather than have a medical..
George Clooney and his Lebanese fiancé..
JK Rowling, big pay out that one
Brian Paddicks partner, another homophobic piece of expensive drivel, £100k..
all factual, all false, all published then retracted and financial redress sought and paid where applicable..
and there are many, many more but you wont look as there's nothing so myopic as those who wont open their eyes..
homophobic, racism, attacking single families and disabled is simply how they work..
editorial policy is about causing division and resentment for anyone they deem to be not their type of citizen and they will happily lie in order to have some of the people who read it to buy into that..
take your blinkers off about who would sell it they are businesses and contracted to do so, surprised you have not said another newsagent is gay so the Mail must be ok..
Interesting as all these points are, I am not quite sure as to why they would provide any valid backing as to why you consider the Daily Mail to be vile .
If you wanted to make an objective view if its content , you would have to take a randomly generated sample of stories which it prints and then do an objective analysis by independent consultants .
I suspect that the results would please most posters on here because it would confirm that what the paper writes is true and accurate . A few would be annoyed because they would hate to think that the Daily Mail was unbiased .
No one on life should judge anyone on a few mistakes that they have made .
What I also find odd is that it is mainly people who I would describe as white Zealots are those who critizise the Daily Mail.You see very little criticism of it from ethnic minority groups .
I can only re iterate what I said previously . That fact that so many Asian newsagents sell it is proof that it is not vile , otherwise they would not be selling it. One news agent that I use even pulled me aside to seek advice a particular matter, another attended a funeral of a neighbour . These are hardly the actions of people who consider a newspaper to be vile .
I work in a multi racial environment and run a small businness , of which a significant number of the clients are of non uk origin.
Never once have any of them condemmed reading of the Daily Mail. Some have even asked to borrow it .
Whilst I might appreciate the time that you soent in collecting the data , I fail to see its relevance in an overall assessment of the newspaper .
Out of curiousity is there any reason as to why you have collected this data . Has a particular event occurred in your life that triggered you to collect data such as this ?
you are clearly not able to process the publicly and easily available facts, took about 5 minutes to collate the above incidents of racism, homophobia etc..
as for taking an objective view then the courts of this land and or the IPSO are the arbiters in such issue's hence the mail has paid out huge sums when they have been challenged for their vile views..
you are clearly unable to accept that the racism that they print is wrong, your constant harking back to whomever sells it so it cant be bad is a patent nonsense, its not a logical stance for anyone given the issue and only looks like an attempt to ignore the obvious or to support such vile views..
I think it is unbalanced and totally irrational to refer to the Daily Mails views at vile .
As I suspect that you do not read this publication , I am at a total loss to understand how you would be able to pass judgement on it unless you are relying entirely on heresay .
I would never in life base my opionion on a few isolated incidents . Judgement should be on the full package .
If the newspaper was as vile as you have tried to suggest , Asian or ethnic minority agents would refuse to sell it . To date no ethnic minority newsagent has attempted to throw me out or ban me from ever entering his premises because he / she considers the publication that I requested to be vile !!1.
To take an objective view of the publication , you would need to analyse a number of it articles which would have to be selected via a random sample selection process .
Cherry picking a minute number of court cases over a number of years hardly proves anything . All a court does is give judgement on the day , it does not necessary mean that the correct conclusion is reached . ( or for that matter that the decision was fair )
From the way that your post is worded , you are stating that I must accept your opinion that the Mail is a racist paper . Whilst you are perfectly entitled to express an opinion , you are not entitled you attempt to force me to accept that your opinion is correct .
If you were to produce a list of articles that were generated at random and analysed independently , I might be prepared to do a review of the papers stance
I am not quite certain as to why you keep stating that the newspaper is vile . It seems a very odd stance to take and not one that many people would accept . If your opinion was logical , people would simply not buy it and in addition the ethnic minority newsagents would refuse to stock it .
"head in the sand again.. it is what it is no matter how much you try to flannel it.. you are myopic or in agreement with its vile racist, homophobic views lest you would not heil it as much as you do.. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"It is a touch ironic that those who are so keen to critisize it seem to fail to accept that many newsagents who sell it are Asian. If it was that bad , these Asian newsagents would refuse to sell it . What on earth are you talking about? This is the most farcical 'argument' I've ever come across? I mean, re-read it back to yourself. This speaks volumes It might be to you but then maybe the truth hurts to people like you.
One of thw newsagents from whom I purchase the paper is Asian and we chat.
I don't see him condemning the paper or refusing to sell it .
Ah, this you see is where your lack of self-awareness is evident. Whilst we have used terms like 'intolerant', 'bigoted' and 'prejudiced' about the Daily Mail, I haven't seen anyone tie 'race' per se into the discussion. You felt the need to use this ridiculous example, ergo, ypu identify the paper has having a bias against certain races.
QED. The point is one is compelled to either read or buy the Daily Mail.
Most people for some unknown reason mention race in the context of bigoted when discussing the Daily Mail.
The stark reality is it is they that are the bigots and seem to bitterly resent the success of both the Daily Mail and its readers .
the daily mail is a vile rag which has a history of printing racist, homophobic crap which its readers swallow as quite frankly they like it as it provides them with food ..
so when this rag printed a story that stated 'it would be absurdly unrealistic to find a middle class mixed race family living in their new build home. This was meant to be a representation of modern life in England but it is likely to be a challenge for the organisers to find an educated white middle aged mother and black father living together with a happy family in such a set up'
this was an article by a mail journalist about the opening ceremony for the 2012 Olympics..
its clearly racist Pat, and to attempt to say in challenging and highlighting such statements is now the sign of a 'bigot' is to try and deflect reality and not a very good subject to use as ones basis given their history..
btw they withdrew the article once challenged..
oh and also what success of their readers do you think people are envious of?
its an unrealistic assumption to try and make but humour me and at least have a go at clarifying your opinion..
I do not quite follow your story about the olympics but if we accept it is valid , no one in life makes their decision based on one error .
You are perfectly entitled to describe it as a vile rag but to many people this will be an unbalanced description. Do you actually read it or is your opinion based on heresay.
I have previously stated that many news agents are Asian. I use different news agents in different areas and three are of Asian or foreign descent .
On a simplistic basis these news agents would refuse to sell it if it was as vile as you suggest .
To date no newsagent has attempted to throw me out of the shop because he considers buying a copy of the Daily Mail to be offensive .
what part of it don't you follow and its a fact btw, it was racist drivel and they retracted it after being challenged..
like they did with their vile homophobic piece about Steven Gately, 25,000 complaints for that one..
the one about the hordes of Bulgarians and Romanians having brought all the available plane and coach tickets to invade us, false and they later 'corrected' it..
disabled babies being euthanized under the Liverpool Care Pathway..
children denied water at school because it was Ramadan..
878,000 recipients had stopped claiming ESA rather than have a medical..
George Clooney and his Lebanese fiancé..
JK Rowling, big pay out that one
Brian Paddicks partner, another homophobic piece of expensive drivel, £100k..
all factual, all false, all published then retracted and financial redress sought and paid where applicable..
and there are many, many more but you wont look as there's nothing so myopic as those who wont open their eyes..
homophobic, racism, attacking single families and disabled is simply how they work..
editorial policy is about causing division and resentment for anyone they deem to be not their type of citizen and they will happily lie in order to have some of the people who read it to buy into that..
take your blinkers off about who would sell it they are businesses and contracted to do so, surprised you have not said another newsagent is gay so the Mail must be ok..
Interesting as all these points are, I am not quite sure as to why they would provide any valid backing as to why you consider the Daily Mail to be vile .
If you wanted to make an objective view if its content , you would have to take a randomly generated sample of stories which it prints and then do an objective analysis by independent consultants .
I suspect that the results would please most posters on here because it would confirm that what the paper writes is true and accurate . A few would be annoyed because they would hate to think that the Daily Mail was unbiased .
No one on life should judge anyone on a few mistakes that they have made .
What I also find odd is that it is mainly people who I would describe as white Zealots are those who critizise the Daily Mail.You see very little criticism of it from ethnic minority groups .
I can only re iterate what I said previously . That fact that so many Asian newsagents sell it is proof that it is not vile , otherwise they would not be selling it. One news agent that I use even pulled me aside to seek advice a particular matter, another attended a funeral of a neighbour . These are hardly the actions of people who consider a newspaper to be vile .
I work in a multi racial environment and run a small businness , of which a significant number of the clients are of non uk origin.
Never once have any of them condemmed reading of the Daily Mail. Some have even asked to borrow it .
Whilst I might appreciate the time that you soent in collecting the data , I fail to see its relevance in an overall assessment of the newspaper .
Out of curiousity is there any reason as to why you have collected this data . Has a particular event occurred in your life that triggered you to collect data such as this ?
you are clearly not able to process the publicly and easily available facts, took about 5 minutes to collate the above incidents of racism, homophobia etc..
as for taking an objective view then the courts of this land and or the IPSO are the arbiters in such issue's hence the mail has paid out huge sums when they have been challenged for their vile views..
you are clearly unable to accept that the racism that they print is wrong, your constant harking back to whomever sells it so it cant be bad is a patent nonsense, its not a logical stance for anyone given the issue and only looks like an attempt to ignore the obvious or to support such vile views..
I think it is unbalanced and totally irrational to refer to the Daily Mails views at vile .
As I suspect that you do not read this publication , I am at a total loss to understand how you would be able to pass judgement on it unless you are relying entirely on heresay .
I would never in life base my opionion on a few isolated incidents . Judgement should be on the full package .
If the newspaper was as vile as you have tried to suggest , Asian or ethnic minority agents would refuse to sell it . To date no ethnic minority newsagent has attempted to throw me out or ban me from ever entering his premises because he / she considers the publication that I requested to be vile !!1.
To take an objective view of the publication , you would need to analyse a number of it articles which would have to be selected via a random sample selection process .
Cherry picking a minute number of court cases over a number of years hardly proves anything . All a court does is give judgement on the day , it does not necessary mean that the correct conclusion is reached . ( or for that matter that the decision was fair )
From the way that your post is worded , you are stating that I must accept your opinion that the Mail is a racist paper . Whilst you are perfectly entitled to express an opinion , you are not entitled you attempt to force me to accept that your opinion is correct .
If you were to produce a list of articles that were generated at random and analysed independently , I might be prepared to do a review of the papers stance
I am not quite certain as to why you keep stating that the newspaper is vile . It seems a very odd stance to take and not one that many people would accept . If your opinion was logical , people would simply not buy it and in addition the ethnic minority newsagents would refuse to stock it .
head in the sand again..
it is what it is no matter how much you try to flannel it..
you are myopic or in agreement with its vile racist, homophobic views lest you would not heil it as much as you do..
"If the Mail is Racist ? Why did it help convict the Stephen Lawence Murderers ? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Quite like the Mail actually
Always thought it strange how they are acused of been right wing racist !
Yet did more than Any other newspaper to try and get justice for Stephen Lawence ! "Even a stopped clock is right twice a day? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Quite like the Mail actually
Always thought it strange how they are acused of been right wing racist !
Yet did more than Any other newspaper to try and get justice for Stephen Lawence !
Even a stopped clock is right twice a day?
"Lol true | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" If the Mail is Racist ? Why did it help convict the Stephen Lawence Murderers ?" it didn't 'help to convict' the 2 that were convicted was after a cold case review in 2011 following the double jeopardy changes in 2005.. the names of the 5 guys was common knowledge.. when the mail ran their front page I personally thought that it was the right thing to do but they did so with no new evidence in the piece and their stance had changed somewhat from just after he was murdered when they were deriding the campaign for justice.. so whilst albeit a legally safe thing for them to do given there was no legal aid for libel so the named could not pursue a case if they were innocent, it did focus attention on the issue so fair play.. on the salient point, just google 'lies in the daily mail or false stories in the daily mail'.. the information therein speaks for itself, its not as someone say's just an opinion its institutional in its regularity.. anyone objectively would conclude they have serious issue's .. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" If the Mail is Racist ? Why did it help convict the Stephen Lawence Murderers ? it didn't 'help to convict' the 2 that were convicted was after a cold case review in 2011 following the double jeopardy changes in 2005.. the names of the 5 guys was common knowledge.. when the mail ran their front page I personally thought that it was the right thing to do but they did so with no new evidence in the piece and their stance had changed somewhat from just after he was murdered when they were deriding the campaign for justice.. so whilst albeit a legally safe thing for them to do given there was no legal aid for libel so the named could not pursue a case if they were innocent, it did focus attention on the issue so fair play.. on the salient point, just google 'lies in the daily mail or false stories in the daily mail'.. the information therein speaks for itself, its not as someone say's just an opinion its institutional in its regularity.. anyone objectively would conclude they have serious issue's .." However , if you wanted to take and objective and independent approach , you will need to analyse a randomly selected sample of stories printed . Tying the words that you suggest into google is hardly going to give you an independent or unbiased result . It is guaranteed to give you the exact opposite | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"It is a touch ironic that those who are so keen to critisize it seem to fail to accept that many newsagents who sell it are Asian. If it was that bad , these Asian newsagents would refuse to sell it . What on earth are you talking about? This is the most farcical 'argument' I've ever come across? I mean, re-read it back to yourself. This speaks volumes It might be to you but then maybe the truth hurts to people like you.
One of thw newsagents from whom I purchase the paper is Asian and we chat.
I don't see him condemning the paper or refusing to sell it .
Ah, this you see is where your lack of self-awareness is evident. Whilst we have used terms like 'intolerant', 'bigoted' and 'prejudiced' about the Daily Mail, I haven't seen anyone tie 'race' per se into the discussion. You felt the need to use this ridiculous example, ergo, ypu identify the paper has having a bias against certain races.
QED. The point is one is compelled to either read or buy the Daily Mail.
Most people for some unknown reason mention race in the context of bigoted when discussing the Daily Mail.
The stark reality is it is they that are the bigots and seem to bitterly resent the success of both the Daily Mail and its readers .
the daily mail is a vile rag which has a history of printing racist, homophobic crap which its readers swallow as quite frankly they like it as it provides them with food ..
so when this rag printed a story that stated 'it would be absurdly unrealistic to find a middle class mixed race family living in their new build home. This was meant to be a representation of modern life in England but it is likely to be a challenge for the organisers to find an educated white middle aged mother and black father living together with a happy family in such a set up'
this was an article by a mail journalist about the opening ceremony for the 2012 Olympics..
its clearly racist Pat, and to attempt to say in challenging and highlighting such statements is now the sign of a 'bigot' is to try and deflect reality and not a very good subject to use as ones basis given their history..
btw they withdrew the article once challenged..
oh and also what success of their readers do you think people are envious of?
its an unrealistic assumption to try and make but humour me and at least have a go at clarifying your opinion..
I do not quite follow your story about the olympics but if we accept it is valid , no one in life makes their decision based on one error .
You are perfectly entitled to describe it as a vile rag but to many people this will be an unbalanced description. Do you actually read it or is your opinion based on heresay.
I have previously stated that many news agents are Asian. I use different news agents in different areas and three are of Asian or foreign descent .
On a simplistic basis these news agents would refuse to sell it if it was as vile as you suggest .
To date no newsagent has attempted to throw me out of the shop because he considers buying a copy of the Daily Mail to be offensive .
what part of it don't you follow and its a fact btw, it was racist drivel and they retracted it after being challenged..
like they did with their vile homophobic piece about Steven Gately, 25,000 complaints for that one..
the one about the hordes of Bulgarians and Romanians having brought all the available plane and coach tickets to invade us, false and they later 'corrected' it..
disabled babies being euthanized under the Liverpool Care Pathway..
children denied water at school because it was Ramadan..
878,000 recipients had stopped claiming ESA rather than have a medical..
George Clooney and his Lebanese fiancé..
JK Rowling, big pay out that one
Brian Paddicks partner, another homophobic piece of expensive drivel, £100k..
all factual, all false, all published then retracted and financial redress sought and paid where applicable..
and there are many, many more but you wont look as there's nothing so myopic as those who wont open their eyes..
homophobic, racism, attacking single families and disabled is simply how they work..
editorial policy is about causing division and resentment for anyone they deem to be not their type of citizen and they will happily lie in order to have some of the people who read it to buy into that..
take your blinkers off about who would sell it they are businesses and contracted to do so, surprised you have not said another newsagent is gay so the Mail must be ok..
Interesting as all these points are, I am not quite sure as to why they would provide any valid backing as to why you consider the Daily Mail to be vile .
If you wanted to make an objective view if its content , you would have to take a randomly generated sample of stories which it prints and then do an objective analysis by independent consultants .
I suspect that the results would please most posters on here because it would confirm that what the paper writes is true and accurate . A few would be annoyed because they would hate to think that the Daily Mail was unbiased .
No one on life should judge anyone on a few mistakes that they have made .
What I also find odd is that it is mainly people who I would describe as white Zealots are those who critizise the Daily Mail.You see very little criticism of it from ethnic minority groups .
I can only re iterate what I said previously . That fact that so many Asian newsagents sell it is proof that it is not vile , otherwise they would not be selling it. One news agent that I use even pulled me aside to seek advice a particular matter, another attended a funeral of a neighbour . These are hardly the actions of people who consider a newspaper to be vile .
I work in a multi racial environment and run a small businness , of which a significant number of the clients are of non uk origin.
Never once have any of them condemmed reading of the Daily Mail. Some have even asked to borrow it .
Whilst I might appreciate the time that you soent in collecting the data , I fail to see its relevance in an overall assessment of the newspaper .
Out of curiousity is there any reason as to why you have collected this data . Has a particular event occurred in your life that triggered you to collect data such as this ?
you are clearly not able to process the publicly and easily available facts, took about 5 minutes to collate the above incidents of racism, homophobia etc..
as for taking an objective view then the courts of this land and or the IPSO are the arbiters in such issue's hence the mail has paid out huge sums when they have been challenged for their vile views..
you are clearly unable to accept that the racism that they print is wrong, your constant harking back to whomever sells it so it cant be bad is a patent nonsense, its not a logical stance for anyone given the issue and only looks like an attempt to ignore the obvious or to support such vile views..
I think it is unbalanced and totally irrational to refer to the Daily Mails views at vile .
As I suspect that you do not read this publication , I am at a total loss to understand how you would be able to pass judgement on it unless you are relying entirely on heresay .
I would never in life base my opionion on a few isolated incidents . Judgement should be on the full package .
If the newspaper was as vile as you have tried to suggest , Asian or ethnic minority agents would refuse to sell it . To date no ethnic minority newsagent has attempted to throw me out or ban me from ever entering his premises because he / she considers the publication that I requested to be vile !!1.
To take an objective view of the publication , you would need to analyse a number of it articles which would have to be selected via a random sample selection process .
Cherry picking a minute number of court cases over a number of years hardly proves anything . All a court does is give judgement on the day , it does not necessary mean that the correct conclusion is reached . ( or for that matter that the decision was fair )
From the way that your post is worded , you are stating that I must accept your opinion that the Mail is a racist paper . Whilst you are perfectly entitled to express an opinion , you are not entitled you attempt to force me to accept that your opinion is correct .
If you were to produce a list of articles that were generated at random and analysed independently , I might be prepared to do a review of the papers stance
I am not quite certain as to why you keep stating that the newspaper is vile . It seems a very odd stance to take and not one that many people would accept . If your opinion was logical , people would simply not buy it and in addition the ethnic minority newsagents would refuse to stock it .
head in the sand again..
it is what it is no matter how much you try to flannel it..
you are myopic or in agreement with its vile racist, homophobic views lest you would not heil it as much as you do..
"You simply seem to repeat words such as myopic or head in the sand and expect people to agree with everything you say . I prefer to take a more open minded approach to life and make my judgement based on evidence and facts . As you do not appear to be a reader of the newspaper I am at a total loss to understand how you can consider yourself to be in a position to comment on it . I prefer to base decisions based on what I see in the world on a day to day basis , not from tying a few selected words into google search which is bound to return the results you want if you use a biased sampling technique | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" If the Mail is Racist ? Why did it help convict the Stephen Lawence Murderers ? it didn't 'help to convict' the 2 that were convicted was after a cold case review in 2011 following the double jeopardy changes in 2005.. the names of the 5 guys was common knowledge.. when the mail ran their front page I personally thought that it was the right thing to do but they did so with no new evidence in the piece and their stance had changed somewhat from just after he was murdered when they were deriding the campaign for justice.. so whilst albeit a legally safe thing for them to do given there was no legal aid for libel so the named could not pursue a case if they were innocent, it did focus attention on the issue so fair play.. on the salient point, just google 'lies in the daily mail or false stories in the daily mail'.. the information therein speaks for itself, its not as someone say's just an opinion its institutional in its regularity.. anyone objectively would conclude they have serious issue's .. However , if you wanted to take and objective and independent approach , you will need to analyse a randomly selected sample of stories printed . Tying the words that you suggest into google is hardly going to give you an independent or unbiased result . It is guaranteed to give you the exact opposite " wrong again.. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"It is a touch ironic that those who are so keen to critisize it seem to fail to accept that many newsagents who sell it are Asian. If it was that bad , these Asian newsagents would refuse to sell it . What on earth are you talking about? This is the most farcical 'argument' I've ever come across? I mean, re-read it back to yourself. This speaks volumes It might be to you but then maybe the truth hurts to people like you.
One of thw newsagents from whom I purchase the paper is Asian and we chat.
I don't see him condemning the paper or refusing to sell it .
Ah, this you see is where your lack of self-awareness is evident. Whilst we have used terms like 'intolerant', 'bigoted' and 'prejudiced' about the Daily Mail, I haven't seen anyone tie 'race' per se into the discussion. You felt the need to use this ridiculous example, ergo, ypu identify the paper has having a bias against certain races.
QED. The point is one is compelled to either read or buy the Daily Mail.
Most people for some unknown reason mention race in the context of bigoted when discussing the Daily Mail.
The stark reality is it is they that are the bigots and seem to bitterly resent the success of both the Daily Mail and its readers .
the daily mail is a vile rag which has a history of printing racist, homophobic crap which its readers swallow as quite frankly they like it as it provides them with food ..
so when this rag printed a story that stated 'it would be absurdly unrealistic to find a middle class mixed race family living in their new build home. This was meant to be a representation of modern life in England but it is likely to be a challenge for the organisers to find an educated white middle aged mother and black father living together with a happy family in such a set up'
this was an article by a mail journalist about the opening ceremony for the 2012 Olympics..
its clearly racist Pat, and to attempt to say in challenging and highlighting such statements is now the sign of a 'bigot' is to try and deflect reality and not a very good subject to use as ones basis given their history..
btw they withdrew the article once challenged..
oh and also what success of their readers do you think people are envious of?
its an unrealistic assumption to try and make but humour me and at least have a go at clarifying your opinion..
I do not quite follow your story about the olympics but if we accept it is valid , no one in life makes their decision based on one error .
You are perfectly entitled to describe it as a vile rag but to many people this will be an unbalanced description. Do you actually read it or is your opinion based on heresay.
I have previously stated that many news agents are Asian. I use different news agents in different areas and three are of Asian or foreign descent .
On a simplistic basis these news agents would refuse to sell it if it was as vile as you suggest .
To date no newsagent has attempted to throw me out of the shop because he considers buying a copy of the Daily Mail to be offensive .
what part of it don't you follow and its a fact btw, it was racist drivel and they retracted it after being challenged..
like they did with their vile homophobic piece about Steven Gately, 25,000 complaints for that one..
the one about the hordes of Bulgarians and Romanians having brought all the available plane and coach tickets to invade us, false and they later 'corrected' it..
disabled babies being euthanized under the Liverpool Care Pathway..
children denied water at school because it was Ramadan..
878,000 recipients had stopped claiming ESA rather than have a medical..
George Clooney and his Lebanese fiancé..
JK Rowling, big pay out that one
Brian Paddicks partner, another homophobic piece of expensive drivel, £100k..
all factual, all false, all published then retracted and financial redress sought and paid where applicable..
and there are many, many more but you wont look as there's nothing so myopic as those who wont open their eyes..
homophobic, racism, attacking single families and disabled is simply how they work..
editorial policy is about causing division and resentment for anyone they deem to be not their type of citizen and they will happily lie in order to have some of the people who read it to buy into that..
take your blinkers off about who would sell it they are businesses and contracted to do so, surprised you have not said another newsagent is gay so the Mail must be ok..
Interesting as all these points are, I am not quite sure as to why they would provide any valid backing as to why you consider the Daily Mail to be vile .
If you wanted to make an objective view if its content , you would have to take a randomly generated sample of stories which it prints and then do an objective analysis by independent consultants .
I suspect that the results would please most posters on here because it would confirm that what the paper writes is true and accurate . A few would be annoyed because they would hate to think that the Daily Mail was unbiased .
No one on life should judge anyone on a few mistakes that they have made .
What I also find odd is that it is mainly people who I would describe as white Zealots are those who critizise the Daily Mail.You see very little criticism of it from ethnic minority groups .
I can only re iterate what I said previously . That fact that so many Asian newsagents sell it is proof that it is not vile , otherwise they would not be selling it. One news agent that I use even pulled me aside to seek advice a particular matter, another attended a funeral of a neighbour . These are hardly the actions of people who consider a newspaper to be vile .
I work in a multi racial environment and run a small businness , of which a significant number of the clients are of non uk origin.
Never once have any of them condemmed reading of the Daily Mail. Some have even asked to borrow it .
Whilst I might appreciate the time that you soent in collecting the data , I fail to see its relevance in an overall assessment of the newspaper .
Out of curiousity is there any reason as to why you have collected this data . Has a particular event occurred in your life that triggered you to collect data such as this ?
you are clearly not able to process the publicly and easily available facts, took about 5 minutes to collate the above incidents of racism, homophobia etc..
as for taking an objective view then the courts of this land and or the IPSO are the arbiters in such issue's hence the mail has paid out huge sums when they have been challenged for their vile views..
you are clearly unable to accept that the racism that they print is wrong, your constant harking back to whomever sells it so it cant be bad is a patent nonsense, its not a logical stance for anyone given the issue and only looks like an attempt to ignore the obvious or to support such vile views..
I think it is unbalanced and totally irrational to refer to the Daily Mails views at vile .
As I suspect that you do not read this publication , I am at a total loss to understand how you would be able to pass judgement on it unless you are relying entirely on heresay .
I would never in life base my opionion on a few isolated incidents . Judgement should be on the full package .
If the newspaper was as vile as you have tried to suggest , Asian or ethnic minority agents would refuse to sell it . To date no ethnic minority newsagent has attempted to throw me out or ban me from ever entering his premises because he / she considers the publication that I requested to be vile !!1.
To take an objective view of the publication , you would need to analyse a number of it articles which would have to be selected via a random sample selection process .
Cherry picking a minute number of court cases over a number of years hardly proves anything . All a court does is give judgement on the day , it does not necessary mean that the correct conclusion is reached . ( or for that matter that the decision was fair )
From the way that your post is worded , you are stating that I must accept your opinion that the Mail is a racist paper . Whilst you are perfectly entitled to express an opinion , you are not entitled you attempt to force me to accept that your opinion is correct .
If you were to produce a list of articles that were generated at random and analysed independently , I might be prepared to do a review of the papers stance
I am not quite certain as to why you keep stating that the newspaper is vile . It seems a very odd stance to take and not one that many people would accept . If your opinion was logical , people would simply not buy it and in addition the ethnic minority newsagents would refuse to stock it .
head in the sand again..
it is what it is no matter how much you try to flannel it..
you are myopic or in agreement with its vile racist, homophobic views lest you would not heil it as much as you do..
You simply seem to repeat words such as myopic or head in the sand and expect people to agree with everything you say .
I prefer to take a more open minded approach to life and make my judgement based on evidence and facts .
As you do not appear to be a reader of the newspaper I am at a total loss to understand how you can consider yourself to be in a position to comment on it .
I prefer to base decisions based on what I see in the world on a day to day basis , not from tying a few selected words into google search which is bound to return the results you want if you use a biased sampling technique "your logic is biased and not logical in relation to this, that's fine you associate with them and support them and their views.. simply google lies of the daily mail, false stories by the daily mail and there are dozens nay scores of instance for which someone may peruse.. they are all open to cross reference if you prefer to have a balanced perspective.. will be a good way for you to exhibit your open mindedness and data analysis in relation to the issue of this vile rag.. you wont though, you'll come back with some hyperbolic flannel no doubt.. you cant polish a turd or wrap it in some false blanket of respectable decency when it regularly shows its still a turd.. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"It is a touch ironic that those who are so keen to critisize it seem to fail to accept that many newsagents who sell it are Asian. If it was that bad , these Asian newsagents would refuse to sell it . What on earth are you talking about? This is the most farcical 'argument' I've ever come across? I mean, re-read it back to yourself. This speaks volumes It might be to you but then maybe the truth hurts to people like you.
One of thw newsagents from whom I purchase the paper is Asian and we chat.
I don't see him condemning the paper or refusing to sell it .
Ah, this you see is where your lack of self-awareness is evident. Whilst we have used terms like 'intolerant', 'bigoted' and 'prejudiced' about the Daily Mail, I haven't seen anyone tie 'race' per se into the discussion. You felt the need to use this ridiculous example, ergo, ypu identify the paper has having a bias against certain races.
QED. The point is one is compelled to either read or buy the Daily Mail.
Most people for some unknown reason mention race in the context of bigoted when discussing the Daily Mail.
The stark reality is it is they that are the bigots and seem to bitterly resent the success of both the Daily Mail and its readers .
the daily mail is a vile rag which has a history of printing racist, homophobic crap which its readers swallow as quite frankly they like it as it provides them with food ..
so when this rag printed a story that stated 'it would be absurdly unrealistic to find a middle class mixed race family living in their new build home. This was meant to be a representation of modern life in England but it is likely to be a challenge for the organisers to find an educated white middle aged mother and black father living together with a happy family in such a set up'
this was an article by a mail journalist about the opening ceremony for the 2012 Olympics..
its clearly racist Pat, and to attempt to say in challenging and highlighting such statements is now the sign of a 'bigot' is to try and deflect reality and not a very good subject to use as ones basis given their history..
btw they withdrew the article once challenged..
oh and also what success of their readers do you think people are envious of?
its an unrealistic assumption to try and make but humour me and at least have a go at clarifying your opinion..
I do not quite follow your story about the olympics but if we accept it is valid , no one in life makes their decision based on one error .
You are perfectly entitled to describe it as a vile rag but to many people this will be an unbalanced description. Do you actually read it or is your opinion based on heresay.
I have previously stated that many news agents are Asian. I use different news agents in different areas and three are of Asian or foreign descent .
On a simplistic basis these news agents would refuse to sell it if it was as vile as you suggest .
To date no newsagent has attempted to throw me out of the shop because he considers buying a copy of the Daily Mail to be offensive .
what part of it don't you follow and its a fact btw, it was racist drivel and they retracted it after being challenged..
like they did with their vile homophobic piece about Steven Gately, 25,000 complaints for that one..
the one about the hordes of Bulgarians and Romanians having brought all the available plane and coach tickets to invade us, false and they later 'corrected' it..
disabled babies being euthanized under the Liverpool Care Pathway..
children denied water at school because it was Ramadan..
878,000 recipients had stopped claiming ESA rather than have a medical..
George Clooney and his Lebanese fiancé..
JK Rowling, big pay out that one
Brian Paddicks partner, another homophobic piece of expensive drivel, £100k..
all factual, all false, all published then retracted and financial redress sought and paid where applicable..
and there are many, many more but you wont look as there's nothing so myopic as those who wont open their eyes..
homophobic, racism, attacking single families and disabled is simply how they work..
editorial policy is about causing division and resentment for anyone they deem to be not their type of citizen and they will happily lie in order to have some of the people who read it to buy into that..
take your blinkers off about who would sell it they are businesses and contracted to do so, surprised you have not said another newsagent is gay so the Mail must be ok..
Interesting as all these points are, I am not quite sure as to why they would provide any valid backing as to why you consider the Daily Mail to be vile .
If you wanted to make an objective view if its content , you would have to take a randomly generated sample of stories which it prints and then do an objective analysis by independent consultants .
I suspect that the results would please most posters on here because it would confirm that what the paper writes is true and accurate . A few would be annoyed because they would hate to think that the Daily Mail was unbiased .
No one on life should judge anyone on a few mistakes that they have made .
What I also find odd is that it is mainly people who I would describe as white Zealots are those who critizise the Daily Mail.You see very little criticism of it from ethnic minority groups .
I can only re iterate what I said previously . That fact that so many Asian newsagents sell it is proof that it is not vile , otherwise they would not be selling it. One news agent that I use even pulled me aside to seek advice a particular matter, another attended a funeral of a neighbour . These are hardly the actions of people who consider a newspaper to be vile .
I work in a multi racial environment and run a small businness , of which a significant number of the clients are of non uk origin.
Never once have any of them condemmed reading of the Daily Mail. Some have even asked to borrow it .
Whilst I might appreciate the time that you soent in collecting the data , I fail to see its relevance in an overall assessment of the newspaper .
Out of curiousity is there any reason as to why you have collected this data . Has a particular event occurred in your life that triggered you to collect data such as this ?
you are clearly not able to process the publicly and easily available facts, took about 5 minutes to collate the above incidents of racism, homophobia etc..
as for taking an objective view then the courts of this land and or the IPSO are the arbiters in such issue's hence the mail has paid out huge sums when they have been challenged for their vile views..
you are clearly unable to accept that the racism that they print is wrong, your constant harking back to whomever sells it so it cant be bad is a patent nonsense, its not a logical stance for anyone given the issue and only looks like an attempt to ignore the obvious or to support such vile views..
I think it is unbalanced and totally irrational to refer to the Daily Mails views at vile .
As I suspect that you do not read this publication , I am at a total loss to understand how you would be able to pass judgement on it unless you are relying entirely on heresay .
I would never in life base my opionion on a few isolated incidents . Judgement should be on the full package .
If the newspaper was as vile as you have tried to suggest , Asian or ethnic minority agents would refuse to sell it . To date no ethnic minority newsagent has attempted to throw me out or ban me from ever entering his premises because he / she considers the publication that I requested to be vile !!1.
To take an objective view of the publication , you would need to analyse a number of it articles which would have to be selected via a random sample selection process .
Cherry picking a minute number of court cases over a number of years hardly proves anything . All a court does is give judgement on the day , it does not necessary mean that the correct conclusion is reached . ( or for that matter that the decision was fair )
From the way that your post is worded , you are stating that I must accept your opinion that the Mail is a racist paper . Whilst you are perfectly entitled to express an opinion , you are not entitled you attempt to force me to accept that your opinion is correct .
If you were to produce a list of articles that were generated at random and analysed independently , I might be prepared to do a review of the papers stance
I am not quite certain as to why you keep stating that the newspaper is vile . It seems a very odd stance to take and not one that many people would accept . If your opinion was logical , people would simply not buy it and in addition the ethnic minority newsagents would refuse to stock it .
head in the sand again..
it is what it is no matter how much you try to flannel it..
you are myopic or in agreement with its vile racist, homophobic views lest you would not heil it as much as you do..
You simply seem to repeat words such as myopic or head in the sand and expect people to agree with everything you say .
I prefer to take a more open minded approach to life and make my judgement based on evidence and facts .
As you do not appear to be a reader of the newspaper I am at a total loss to understand how you can consider yourself to be in a position to comment on it .
I prefer to base decisions based on what I see in the world on a day to day basis , not from tying a few selected words into google search which is bound to return the results you want if you use a biased sampling technique
your logic is biased and not logical in relation to this, that's fine you associate with them and support them and their views..
simply google lies of the daily mail, false stories by the daily mail and there are dozens nay scores of instance for which someone may peruse..
they are all open to cross reference if you prefer to have a balanced perspective..
will be a good way for you to exhibit your open mindedness and data analysis in relation to the issue of this vile rag..
you wont though, you'll come back with some hyperbolic flannel no doubt..
you cant polish a turd or wrap it in some false blanket of respectable decency when it regularly shows its still a turd..
"I prefer to take an objective and impartial view when analysing data . You use of words such as vile and turd is hardly impartial . If you do not buy or read the paper I am at a total loss as to how you can pass judgement on it . | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" If the Mail is Racist ? Why did it help convict the Stephen Lawence Murderers ? it didn't 'help to convict' the 2 that were convicted was after a cold case review in 2011 following the double jeopardy changes in 2005.. the names of the 5 guys was common knowledge.. when the mail ran their front page I personally thought that it was the right thing to do but they did so with no new evidence in the piece and their stance had changed somewhat from just after he was murdered when they were deriding the campaign for justice.. so whilst albeit a legally safe thing for them to do given there was no legal aid for libel so the named could not pursue a case if they were innocent, it did focus attention on the issue so fair play.. on the salient point, just google 'lies in the daily mail or false stories in the daily mail'.. the information therein speaks for itself, its not as someone say's just an opinion its institutional in its regularity.. anyone objectively would conclude they have serious issue's .." The Daily Mail was the driving force behind the campaign to secure the convictions . They ran a very high profile campaign and no doubt it was the newspapers campaign that ultimately forced the various authorities into action . The paper was relentless in the pursuit of justice for Stephen Lawrence . Without this campaign the matter may have just been left to lie . | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" simply google lies of the daily mail, false stories by the daily mail and there are dozens nay scores of instance for which someone may peruse.. they are all open to cross reference if you prefer to have a balanced perspective.. will be a good way for you to exhibit your open mindedness and data analysis in relation to the issue of this vile rag.. you wont though, you'll come back with some hyperbolic flannel no doubt.. you cant polish a turd or wrap it in some false blanket of respectable decency when it regularly shows its still a turd.. I prefer to take an objective and impartial view when analysing data . You use of words such as vile and turd is hardly impartial . If you do not buy or read the paper I am at a total loss as to how you can pass judgement on it . " predictable and expected.. that you have failed to work out that I am opposed to its racist, homophobic drivel is evident by your inability to read and accept the facts I have stated which if you want to you can easily verify.. but again you wont as that will mean taking your head out of the sand and accepting that it is vile.. to do that you would need to be open minded and able to objectively look at the evidence , you are blind to it.. is it because you are of the same mind..? I am happy to be biased against a racist rag, you can't even see it which is sad.. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" If the Mail is Racist ? Why did it help convict the Stephen Lawence Murderers ? it didn't 'help to convict' the 2 that were convicted was after a cold case review in 2011 following the double jeopardy changes in 2005.. the names of the 5 guys was common knowledge.. when the mail ran their front page I personally thought that it was the right thing to do but they did so with no new evidence in the piece and their stance had changed somewhat from just after he was murdered when they were deriding the campaign for justice.. so whilst albeit a legally safe thing for them to do given there was no legal aid for libel so the named could not pursue a case if they were innocent, it did focus attention on the issue so fair play.. on the salient point, just google 'lies in the daily mail or false stories in the daily mail'.. the information therein speaks for itself, its not as someone say's just an opinion its institutional in its regularity.. anyone objectively would conclude they have serious issue's .. The Daily Mail was the driving force behind the campaign to secure the convictions . They ran a very high profile campaign and no doubt it was the newspapers campaign that ultimately forced the various authorities into action . The paper was relentless in the pursuit of justice for Stephen Lawrence . Without this campaign the matter may have just been left to lie . " factually wrong, biased and doesn't take into account what happened.. fair play to them as I sad above but they did not bring forward any new evidence, there was no investigative journalism which uncovered anything.. the 2 who were convicted were rightly found guilty on the new analysis of forensic evidence held by the police all along.. the paper was less than relentless in the pursuit of justice when it was criticising some of the high profile black supporters of the family in the early days after he was murdered.. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" simply google lies of the daily mail, false stories by the daily mail and there are dozens nay scores of instance for which someone may peruse.. they are all open to cross reference if you prefer to have a balanced perspective.. will be a good way for you to exhibit your open mindedness and data analysis in relation to the issue of this vile rag.. you wont though, you'll come back with some hyperbolic flannel no doubt.. you cant polish a turd or wrap it in some false blanket of respectable decency when it regularly shows its still a turd.. I prefer to take an objective and impartial view when analysing data . You use of words such as vile and turd is hardly impartial . If you do not buy or read the paper I am at a total loss as to how you can pass judgement on it . predictable and expected.. that you have failed to work out that I am opposed to its racist, homophobic drivel is evident by your inability to read and accept the facts I have stated which if you want to you can easily verify.. but again you wont as that will mean taking your head out of the sand and accepting that it is vile.. to do that you would need to be open minded and able to objectively look at the evidence , you are blind to it.. is it because you are of the same mind..? I am happy to be biased against a racist rag, you can't even see it which is sad.. " I do think that many rational people would describe the content of the newspaper as drivel. I dont think that the 1.6 million people who buy it daily would describe it as drivel. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" simply google lies of the daily mail, false stories by the daily mail and there are dozens nay scores of instance for which someone may peruse.. they are all open to cross reference if you prefer to have a balanced perspective.. will be a good way for you to exhibit your open mindedness and data analysis in relation to the issue of this vile rag.. you wont though, you'll come back with some hyperbolic flannel no doubt.. you cant polish a turd or wrap it in some false blanket of respectable decency when it regularly shows its still a turd.. I prefer to take an objective and impartial view when analysing data . You use of words such as vile and turd is hardly impartial . If you do not buy or read the paper I am at a total loss as to how you can pass judgement on it . predictable and expected.. that you have failed to work out that I am opposed to its racist, homophobic drivel is evident by your inability to read and accept the facts I have stated which if you want to you can easily verify.. but again you wont as that will mean taking your head out of the sand and accepting that it is vile.. to do that you would need to be open minded and able to objectively look at the evidence , you are blind to it.. is it because you are of the same mind..? I am happy to be biased against a racist rag, you can't even see it which is sad.. I do think that many rational people would describe the content of the newspaper as drivel. I dont think that the 1.6 million people who buy it daily would describe it as drivel. " Most people who were brought up in this area of South London knew the names of the thugs that killed Stephen Lawrence long before the Mail printed their front page, the Daily Mail try to take the credit for the coverage but in actual fact the driving force behind the case was The (London) Evening Standard newspaper, and the South London Press newspaper.... But the biggest supporters of the Lawrence family were the Transport and General Workers Union, as it was known then, under the leadership of Bill Morris, who worked tirelessly to force the Met Police to come clean about the case. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" simply google lies of the daily mail, false stories by the daily mail and there are dozens nay scores of instance for which someone may peruse.. they are all open to cross reference if you prefer to have a balanced perspective.. will be a good way for you to exhibit your open mindedness and data analysis in relation to the issue of this vile rag.. you wont though, you'll come back with some hyperbolic flannel no doubt.. you cant polish a turd or wrap it in some false blanket of respectable decency when it regularly shows its still a turd.. I prefer to take an objective and impartial view when analysing data . You use of words such as vile and turd is hardly impartial . If you do not buy or read the paper I am at a total loss as to how you can pass judgement on it . predictable and expected.. that you have failed to work out that I am opposed to its racist, homophobic drivel is evident by your inability to read and accept the facts I have stated which if you want to you can easily verify.. but again you wont as that will mean taking your head out of the sand and accepting that it is vile.. to do that you would need to be open minded and able to objectively look at the evidence , you are blind to it.. is it because you are of the same mind..? I am happy to be biased against a racist rag, you can't even see it which is sad.. I do think that many rational people would describe the content of the newspaper as drivel. I dont think that the 1.6 million people who buy it daily would describe it as drivel. Most people who were brought up in this area of South London knew the names of the thugs that killed Stephen Lawrence long before the Mail printed their front page, the Daily Mail try to take the credit for the coverage but in actual fact the driving force behind the case was The (London) Evening Standard newspaper, and the South London Press newspaper.... But the biggest supporters of the Lawrence family were the Transport and General Workers Union, as it was known then, under the leadership of Bill Morris, who worked tirelessly to force the Met Police to come clean about the case." I didn't know that about the T&G. Thanks for sharing that. I met Bill Morris once (shook hands with him) he was either a guest speaker at a Unison conference or it was a TUC thing, not sure it was early 00s. A very imposing man from what I recall. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" simply google lies of the daily mail, false stories by the daily mail and there are dozens nay scores of instance for which someone may peruse.. they are all open to cross reference if you prefer to have a balanced perspective.. will be a good way for you to exhibit your open mindedness and data analysis in relation to the issue of this vile rag.. you wont though, you'll come back with some hyperbolic flannel no doubt.. you cant polish a turd or wrap it in some false blanket of respectable decency when it regularly shows its still a turd.. I prefer to take an objective and impartial view when analysing data . You use of words such as vile and turd is hardly impartial . If you do not buy or read the paper I am at a total loss as to how you can pass judgement on it . predictable and expected.. that you have failed to work out that I am opposed to its racist, homophobic drivel is evident by your inability to read and accept the facts I have stated which if you want to you can easily verify.. but again you wont as that will mean taking your head out of the sand and accepting that it is vile.. to do that you would need to be open minded and able to objectively look at the evidence , you are blind to it.. is it because you are of the same mind..? I am happy to be biased against a racist rag, you can't even see it which is sad.. I do think that many rational people would describe the content of the newspaper as drivel. I dont think that the 1.6 million people who buy it daily would describe it as drivel. Most people who were brought up in this area of South London knew the names of the thugs that killed Stephen Lawrence long before the Mail printed their front page, the Daily Mail try to take the credit for the coverage but in actual fact the driving force behind the case was The (London) Evening Standard newspaper, and the South London Press newspaper.... But the biggest supporters of the Lawrence family were the Transport and General Workers Union, as it was known then, under the leadership of Bill Morris, who worked tirelessly to force the Met Police to come clean about the case." . It should be noted that the Evening Standard and Daily Mail both have the same parent company . The Daily Mail were the driving force behind national publicity for the case. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" simply google lies of the daily mail, false stories by the daily mail and there are dozens nay scores of instance for which someone may peruse.. they are all open to cross reference if you prefer to have a balanced perspective.. will be a good way for you to exhibit your open mindedness and data analysis in relation to the issue of this vile rag.. you wont though, you'll come back with some hyperbolic flannel no doubt.. you cant polish a turd or wrap it in some false blanket of respectable decency when it regularly shows its still a turd.. I prefer to take an objective and impartial view when analysing data . You use of words such as vile and turd is hardly impartial . If you do not buy or read the paper I am at a total loss as to how you can pass judgement on it . predictable and expected.. that you have failed to work out that I am opposed to its racist, homophobic drivel is evident by your inability to read and accept the facts I have stated which if you want to you can easily verify.. but again you wont as that will mean taking your head out of the sand and accepting that it is vile.. to do that you would need to be open minded and able to objectively look at the evidence , you are blind to it.. is it because you are of the same mind..? I am happy to be biased against a racist rag, you can't even see it which is sad.. " If it was the racist rag that you suggest , the public would simply refuse to buy it . I did a google search as you suggested . The first complaint appeared to be written by someone with an axe to grind and I could not undertand what their objective was . I also took the time to look at complaints against other newspapers . I found the remarks of Trevor Philips who was the ex Chairman of the Council for racial equality very interesting . He actually states that we are intimidating those who dare to ask questions on race issues. I will not be judging a newspaper on a few minor complaints eapecially as there are complaints recorded against other newspapers as well. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" simply google lies of the daily mail, false stories by the daily mail and there are dozens nay scores of instance for which someone may peruse.. they are all open to cross reference if you prefer to have a balanced perspective.. will be a good way for you to exhibit your open mindedness and data analysis in relation to the issue of this vile rag.. you wont though, you'll come back with some hyperbolic flannel no doubt.. you cant polish a turd or wrap it in some false blanket of respectable decency when it regularly shows its still a turd.. I prefer to take an objective and impartial view when analysing data . You use of words such as vile and turd is hardly impartial . If you do not buy or read the paper I am at a total loss as to how you can pass judgement on it . predictable and expected.. that you have failed to work out that I am opposed to its racist, homophobic drivel is evident by your inability to read and accept the facts I have stated which if you want to you can easily verify.. but again you wont as that will mean taking your head out of the sand and accepting that it is vile.. to do that you would need to be open minded and able to objectively look at the evidence , you are blind to it.. is it because you are of the same mind..? I am happy to be biased against a racist rag, you can't even see it which is sad.. If it was the racist rag that you suggest , the public would simply refuse to buy it . I did a google search as you suggested . The first complaint appeared to be written by someone with an axe to grind and I could not undertand what their objective was . I also took the time to look at complaints against other newspapers . I found the remarks of Trevor Philips who was the ex Chairman of the Council for racial equality very interesting . He actually states that we are intimidating those who dare to ask questions on race issues. I will not be judging a newspaper on a few minor complaints eapecially as there are complaints recorded against other newspapers as well. "
comedy gold | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| Post new Message to Thread |
| back to top |  |
