![]() |
KEN LIVINGSTONE: RACIST
Brimstone wrote:
Michael Hoffman wrote: Brimstone wrote: Killing people is irrelevant, That shows a lack of respect for human life. It's irrelevant to the discussion. You don't get to decide what is and is not relevant to the discussion. the excuse that one is "only following orders" is and is not sufficient excuse for behaving in an unreasonable manner to another person. You think the systematic slaughter of millions is simply "behaving in an unreasonable manner" and is on the order of magnitude of a few unfair articles? Get real. I didn't say it was of the same magnitude. Go back and read what I said, not what you think I said, but to do that it looks as if you'll have to get rid of your prejudices. You asked what the difference was. I thought that was a rhetorical question, but I will concede that if I take your words at face value you were only asking to be informed. You have now been so informed. And I now realize this thread is thoroughly off-topic so I won't be participating further. Cheers, -- Michael Hoffman |
KEN LIVINGSTONE: RACIST
On Thu, 17 Feb 2005 00:39:51 +0000 (UTC), Brimstone
wrote: Killing people is irrelevant, That would be your recommended defence for a murder defendant? the excuse that one is "only following orders" ....was not used by the reporter. Next! |
KEN LIVINGSTONE: RACIST
In message , Huge
writes Probably a bit harsh but when the newspaper with the monopoly on evening reading in London is always against anything you do you must be able to see how he feels No. The comparison is odious and you are a moron. As I don't live within 350 miles of London their local rag is a bit hard to get here, but I did hear his reply and it sounded a very creditable performance, regardless of the pressure he was under. It's about time a few more politicians had the same guts, then we might all get the truth instead of constant warnings telling us of impending disaster if London got bombed, and therefore we need them even more. -- Clive. |
KEN LIVINGSTONE: RACIST
In message , CAMILLE SAINT SAENS
writes However, back, as you say, to modern day the Mail does *not* have a history of 'constant attacks' on minority groups; it has a policy of attacking certain *attitudes* to minority groups. Is there a difference? -- Clive. |
KEN LIVINGSTONE: RACIST
Clive Coleman wrote:
In message , Huge writes Probably a bit harsh but when the newspaper with the monopoly on evening reading in London is always against anything you do you must be able to see how he feels No. The comparison is odious and you are a moron. As I don't live within 350 miles of London their local rag is a bit hard to get here, Except that it's on the internet. Did you realise that the Standard supported Livingstone at the last mayoral election? Or that Livingstone has worked for the Standard as a restaurant critic?. Try reading http://www.thisislondon.co.uk/news/a...ing%20Standard for the transcript of the incident if you haven't seen it. but I did hear his reply and it sounded a very creditable performance, regardless of the pressure he was under. Perhaps you should also read the journalist's view of the incident at http://www.thisislondon.co.uk/news/l...ing%20Standard -- Richard J. (to e-mail me, swap uk and yon in address) |
All times are GMT. The time now is 02:25 PM. |
Powered by vBulletin®
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2006 LondonBanter.co.uk