Our Acceptable Hate Preachers

Try To Keep it News Based Rather Than Racism/Muslim Droning.
Keep The Personal Insults And Trolling In The Arms.
And, Login Punk!

Our Acceptable Hate Preachers

Postby Stooo » Tue Jun 20, 2017 12:11 am

Conjure up an image of a hate preacher. Go on, take a second to picture them in your head. Imagine the clothes they are wearing, the colour of their skin, the look on their face as they radicalise and the room in which they’re stood. I’m doing the very same as I type.

Sat in an office, somewhere deep in the Kensington Tower from where he dishes out his venom, is Paul Dacre – Editor of the Daily Mail, suit and tie no doubt pristine.

Is he who you were imagining?

With a circulation of 1.5 million, and hundreds of millions more online, this multi-millionaire media mogul has a platform and audience much greater than most clerics secretly whipping up tension.

How about Rupert Murdoch? Owner of the Sun. The tower block might be in London Bridge by the River Thames, but it’s pretty much the exact same picture.

Their words are as steeped in hatred as Abu Hamza and Anjem Choudary, their divisive rhetoric rampant with the same inhumanity and callous contempt. They wilfully spread lies about communities, find ways to divide and separate intent on destroying any chance of cohesion. But while some are placed onto watch lists, placed under house arrest and deported, the likes of Murdoch and Dacre are allowed to prosper, respectable figures invited to Downing Street and to the most exclusive of political events.

When news broke last night of the terror attack on the Finsbury Park Mosque in London, once again the English capital was thrown into mourning. One dead, multiple injured, it was an attack on innocent people peacefully going about their daily lives. For the most part the mainstream, established media have been uncompromising in their condemnation of the attacker, save maybe the Mail‘s disgraceful attempt at justification by citing a hate preacher who’d previously visited the mosque, as if to justify this terrorist’s action.


http://www.huckmagazine.com/art-and-cul ... rk-attack/

I kind of feel that this crap is actually pulling us together as a society.
User avatar
Stooo
Site Admin
 
Posts: 75841
Joined: Wed Oct 21, 2009 12:24 pm
Location: Eveywhere, like shit in a field.

Re: Our Acceptable Hate Preachers

Postby McAz » Tue Jun 20, 2017 12:28 am

It would be good to imagine Murdoch and Co as yesterday's news - they have done little other than corrupt our democracy. Whether people are finally wising up I cannot say - no evidence of that on here yet.
User avatar
McAz
 
Posts: 21678
Joined: Tue Oct 15, 2013 10:57 am

Re: Our Acceptable Hate Preachers

Postby Si_Crewe » Tue Jun 20, 2017 2:09 am

Stooo wrote:http://www.huckmagazine.com/art-and-culture/finsbury-park-attack/

I kind of feel that this crap is actually pulling us together as a society.


Nah,

I'm pretty sure that there are heaps of gullible people in this country who're daft enough to read that kind of shite and allow themselves to be fooled into thinking that the sort of prejudice that the DM produces should be considered "hate speech" in the same way that, say, radical islam is.

We live in a world where wars are being fought in the name of religion, where people are being executed live on the internet to generate publicity, where gay people are being thrown off buildings and where women are having their breasts hacked off with machetes so they can't nurse babies who might grow up to oppose their oppressors.
Only a fucking moron, or somebody who's deliberately attempting to misdirect people away from more serious issues, would even attempt to draw a comparison between that kind of behaviour and what's written in the DM.

I notice the fucking clown who wrote that article didn't bother to provide any actual evidence to support his assertion that the DM produces "hate speech".
Wonder why that might be?

Meanwhile, we've got Islamic clerics advocating the genocide of everybody who doesn't worship Admiral Ackbar, we've got BLM activists telling their supporters to go and kill white cops and we've even got a shadow-chancellor who has said that anybody who doesn't support the IRA should be kneecapped. FFS.

Only a complete cunt would attempt to compare what rags like the DM produce with real hate-speech.
And only a fucking imbecile would believe it.
User avatar
Si_Crewe
 
Posts: 4499
Joined: Mon Jan 27, 2014 11:33 am

Re: Our Acceptable Hate Preachers

Postby Si_Crewe » Tue Jun 20, 2017 2:21 am

McAz wrote:It would be good to imagine Murdoch and Co as yesterday's news - they have done little other than corrupt our democracy. Whether people are finally wising up I cannot say - no evidence of that on here yet.


I guess that depends on whether they were forced to stop or whether people just stopped buying their newspapers or watching their TV shows.

It'd also depend on whether opposing, equally militant, publications also disappeared too.
After all, if you're just intent on silencing any POV you don't agree with, chances are you're well on the way to living in some kind of dictatorship.

I'm not at all comfortable with this current fashion for claiming that disagreeable opinions are "hate speech" or "fake news" and then censoring their proponents, or de-platforming them, at every opportunity.
As far as I'm concerned, the only limitation on free-speech should be denying people the right to advocate violence.

*EDIT*
There's a relavent article on the site Stoo linked to, here:- http://www.huckmagazine.com/perspective ... sed-views/
The author might be "uncomfortable" with the idea of helping legitimise Choudary's views but the thing I'm vastly MORE uncomfortable with is allowing a bunch of journo's to decide what actually gets into the news at all.
User avatar
Si_Crewe
 
Posts: 4499
Joined: Mon Jan 27, 2014 11:33 am

Re: Our Acceptable Hate Preachers

Postby McAz » Tue Jun 20, 2017 2:47 am

Si_Crewe wrote:
McAz wrote:It would be good to imagine Murdoch and Co as yesterday's news - they have done little other than corrupt our democracy. Whether people are finally wising up I cannot say - no evidence of that on here yet.


I guess that depends on whether they were forced to stop or whether people just stopped buying their newspapers or watching their TV shows.

It'd also depend on whether opposing, equally militant, publications also disappeared too.
After all, if you're just intent on silencing any POV you don't agree with, chances are you're well on the way to living in some kind of dictatorship.

I'm not at all comfortable with this current fashion for claiming that disagreeable opinions are "hate speech" or "fake news" and then censoring their proponents, or de-platforming them, at every opportunity.
As far as I'm concerned, the only limitation on free-speech should be denying people the right to advocate violence.

*EDIT*
There's a relavent article on the site Stoo linked to, here:- http://www.huckmagazine.com/perspective ... sed-views/
The author might be "uncomfortable" with the idea of helping legitimise Choudary's views but the thing I'm vastly MORE uncomfortable with is allowing a bunch of journo's to decide what actually gets into the news at all.


I'm not intent on silencing or forcing anyone, I'd rather all POVs are discussed openly and challenged rather than drive them underground to fester - even the hate speech of Murdoch et al. The MSM's influence is being eroded by social media in any event - nature has a way of restoring balance, albeit frustratingly slowly at times.
User avatar
McAz
 
Posts: 21678
Joined: Tue Oct 15, 2013 10:57 am

Re: Our Acceptable Hate Preachers

Postby Guest » Tue Jun 20, 2017 9:15 am

Si_Crewe wrote:
Stooo wrote:http://www.huckmagazine.com/art-and-culture/finsbury-park-attack/

I kind of feel that this crap is actually pulling us together as a society.


Nah,

I'm pretty sure that there are heaps of gullible people in this country who're daft enough to read that kind of shite and allow themselves to be fooled into thinking that the sort of prejudice that the DM produces should be considered "hate speech" in the same way that, say, radical islam is.

We live in a world where wars are being fought in the name of religion, where people are being executed live on the internet to generate publicity, where gay people are being thrown off buildings and where women are having their breasts hacked off with machetes so they can't nurse babies who might grow up to oppose their oppressors.
Only a fucking moron, or somebody who's deliberately attempting to misdirect people away from more serious issues, would even attempt to draw a comparison between that kind of behaviour and what's written in the DM.

I notice the fucking clown who wrote that article didn't bother to provide any actual evidence to support his assertion that the DM produces "hate speech".
Wonder why that might be?

Meanwhile, we've got Islamic clerics advocating the genocide of everybody who doesn't worship Admiral Ackbar, we've got BLM activists telling their supporters to go and kill white cops and we've even got a shadow-chancellor who has said that anybody who doesn't support the IRA should be kneecapped. FFS.

Only a complete cunt would attempt to compare what rags like the DM produce with real hate-speech.
And only a fucking imbecile would believe it.


LOL there's no such word as gullible.
User avatar
Guest
 

Re: Our Acceptable Hate Preachers

Postby Vam » Tue Jun 20, 2017 10:08 am

Si_Crewe wrote:
Stooo wrote:http://www.huckmagazine.com/art-and-culture/finsbury-park-attack/

I kind of feel that this crap is actually pulling us together as a society.


Nah,

I'm pretty sure that there are heaps of gullible people in this country who're daft enough to read that kind of shite and allow themselves to be fooled into thinking that the sort of prejudice that the DM produces should be considered "hate speech" in the same way that, say, radical islam is.

We live in a world where wars are being fought in the name of religion, where people are being executed live on the internet to generate publicity, where gay people are being thrown off buildings and where women are having their breasts hacked off with machetes so they can't nurse babies who might grow up to oppose their oppressors.
Only a fucking moron, or somebody who's deliberately attempting to misdirect people away from more serious issues, would even attempt to draw a comparison between that kind of behaviour and what's written in the DM.


I notice the fucking clown who wrote that article didn't bother to provide any actual evidence to support his assertion that the DM produces "hate speech".
Wonder why that might be?

Meanwhile, we've got Islamic clerics advocating the genocide of everybody who doesn't worship Admiral Ackbar, we've got BLM activists telling their supporters to go and kill white cops and we've even got a shadow-chancellor who has said that anybody who doesn't support the IRA should be kneecapped. FFS.

Only a complete cunt would attempt to compare what rags like the DM produce with real hate-speech.
And only a fucking imbecile would believe it.



:yess:

The DM? I'll pass on that click bait dross, thanks :snooty:
User avatar
Vam
 
Posts: 10392
Joined: Mon Feb 17, 2014 10:57 am

Re: Our Acceptable Hate Preachers

Postby Guest » Tue Jun 20, 2017 10:24 am

Vam wrote:
Si_Crewe wrote:
Stooo wrote:http://www.huckmagazine.com/art-and-culture/finsbury-park-attack/

I kind of feel that this crap is actually pulling us together as a society.


Nah,

I'm pretty sure that there are heaps of gullible people in this country who're daft enough to read that kind of shite and allow themselves to be fooled into thinking that the sort of prejudice that the DM produces should be considered "hate speech" in the same way that, say, radical islam is.

We live in a world where wars are being fought in the name of religion, where people are being executed live on the internet to generate publicity, where gay people are being thrown off buildings and where women are having their breasts hacked off with machetes so they can't nurse babies who might grow up to oppose their oppressors.
Only a fucking moron, or somebody who's deliberately attempting to misdirect people away from more serious issues, would even attempt to draw a comparison between that kind of behaviour and what's written in the DM.


I notice the fucking clown who wrote that article didn't bother to provide any actual evidence to support his assertion that the DM produces "hate speech".
Wonder why that might be?

Meanwhile, we've got Islamic clerics advocating the genocide of everybody who doesn't worship Admiral Ackbar, we've got BLM activists telling their supporters to go and kill white cops and we've even got a shadow-chancellor who has said that anybody who doesn't support the IRA should be kneecapped. FFS.

Only a complete cunt would attempt to compare what rags like the DM produce with real hate-speech.
And only a fucking imbecile would believe it.



:yess:

The DM? I'll pass on that click bait dross, thanks :snooty:


What do you read? :dunno:
User avatar
Guest
 

Re: Our Acceptable Hate Preachers

Postby Vam » Tue Jun 20, 2017 10:53 am

Foreign publications, mostly, plus other news sources - there are plenty out there!

I sure as hell wouldn't read the sensationalist, lazy journalism masquerading as news and editorials in trash publications like the Mail :pointlaugh:
User avatar
Vam
 
Posts: 10392
Joined: Mon Feb 17, 2014 10:57 am

Re: Our Acceptable Hate Preachers

Postby Guest » Tue Jun 20, 2017 12:06 pm

Vam wrote:Foreign publications, mostly, plus other news sources - there are plenty out there!

I sure as hell wouldn't read the sensationalist, lazy journalism masquerading as news and editorials in trash publications like the Mail :pointlaugh:


Which British media? Just asking like
User avatar
Guest
 

Re: Our Acceptable Hate Preachers

Postby Red Okktober » Tue Jun 20, 2017 12:47 pm

What a wanky article Stooo, do you actually get taken in by this shite? Given your obsession with newspapers and old-fashioned views on how they control people's lives, I fear that you do.

It's just sensationalist tabloid trash a lot of the time, and has been around for ages, remember the 'Gotcha' stuff during the Falklands? It's been around far longer than hate preachers have been commonly spoken of.

I get that your side of the political fence is going through a hard time at the moment, as highlighted by all this barrel scraping 'the Tories' nonsense. I also get people on your side are pro-immigration, pro islam etc. But just because those you stick up for, have genuine hate preachers among them, people who actually tell people to murder for real, you are now trying to balance the books by suggesting newspaper men are also hate preachers? Seriously?

This isn't dissimilar to when those on the liberal left try and compare the BNP with Isis as being like for like.
User avatar
Red Okktober
 
Posts: 1656
Joined: Sat Feb 01, 2014 9:37 pm

Re: Our Acceptable Hate Preachers

Postby Stooo » Tue Jun 20, 2017 1:02 pm

Red Okktober wrote:What a wanky article Stooo, do you actually get taken in by this shite? Given your obsession with newspapers and old-fashioned views on how they control people's lives, I fear that you do.

It's just sensationalist tabloid trash a lot of the time, and has been around for ages, remember the 'Gotcha' stuff during the Falklands? It's been around far longer than hate preachers have been commonly spoken of.

I get that your side of the political fence is going through a hard time at the moment, as highlighted by all this barrel scraping 'the Tories' nonsense. I also get people on your side are pro-immigration, pro islam etc. But just because those you stick up for, have genuine hate preachers among them, people who actually tell people to murder for real, you are now trying to balance the books by suggesting newspaper men are also hate preachers? Seriously?

This isn't dissimilar to when those on the liberal left try and compare the BNP with Isis as being like for like.


Image
User avatar
Stooo
Site Admin
 
Posts: 75841
Joined: Wed Oct 21, 2009 12:24 pm
Location: Eveywhere, like shit in a field.

Re: Our Acceptable Hate Preachers

Postby Guest » Tue Jun 20, 2017 1:11 pm

Stooo wrote:
Conjure up an image of a hate preacher. Go on, take a second to picture them in your head. Imagine the clothes they are wearing, the colour of their skin, the look on their face as they radicalise and the room in which they’re stood. I’m doing the very same as I type.

Sat in an office, somewhere deep in the Kensington Tower from where he dishes out his venom, is Paul Dacre – Editor of the Daily Mail, suit and tie no doubt pristine.

Is he who you were imagining?

With a circulation of 1.5 million, and hundreds of millions more online, this multi-millionaire media mogul has a platform and audience much greater than most clerics secretly whipping up tension.

How about Rupert Murdoch? Owner of the Sun. The tower block might be in London Bridge by the River Thames, but it’s pretty much the exact same picture.

Their words are as steeped in hatred as Abu Hamza and Anjem Choudary, their divisive rhetoric rampant with the same inhumanity and callous contempt. They wilfully spread lies about communities, find ways to divide and separate intent on destroying any chance of cohesion. But while some are placed onto watch lists, placed under house arrest and deported, the likes of Murdoch and Dacre are allowed to prosper, respectable figures invited to Downing Street and to the most exclusive of political events.

When news broke last night of the terror attack on the Finsbury Park Mosque in London, once again the English capital was thrown into mourning. One dead, multiple injured, it was an attack on innocent people peacefully going about their daily lives. For the most part the mainstream, established media have been uncompromising in their condemnation of the attacker, save maybe the Mail‘s disgraceful attempt at justification by citing a hate preacher who’d previously visited the mosque, as if to justify this terrorist’s action.


http://www.huckmagazine.com/art-and-cul ... rk-attack/

I kind of feel that this crap is actually pulling us together as a society.


Fucking hell!

Tell you what, I'll put this down to you being out in the sun for too long Stoo.

Nobody can be this fucking dumb and and still hold down a job surely???
User avatar
Guest
 

Re: Our Acceptable Hate Preachers

Postby Red Okktober » Tue Jun 20, 2017 1:15 pm

A watercolour picture of a van?

You've convinced me - Rupert Murdoch and Paul Dacre must be hate preachers. I don't know why I couldn't see it before.
User avatar
Red Okktober
 
Posts: 1656
Joined: Sat Feb 01, 2014 9:37 pm

Re: Our Acceptable Hate Preachers

Postby Stooo » Tue Jun 20, 2017 1:35 pm

Red Okktober wrote:A watercolour picture of a van?

You've convinced me - Rupert Murdoch and Paul Dacre must be hate preachers. I don't know why I couldn't see it before.


It's from a newspaper Red.
User avatar
Stooo
Site Admin
 
Posts: 75841
Joined: Wed Oct 21, 2009 12:24 pm
Location: Eveywhere, like shit in a field.

Next

Return to News, Politics And Current Affairs

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Google [Bot] and 6 guests