The Daily Mail

Diamond 383 wrote:

The Teacher wrote:

I think referring to Israels incursion into Jenin in 2002 as a "holocaust" was one of the most offensive things I have ever read in my life...

You don't read your own posts then? Actually, I bet you didn't read that Guardian editorial anyway, just read about it somewhere else and copied your offence from someone else.

The Israelis really piss me off with this sort of shit. Quite happy to slaughter massive numbers of people for no good reason other than an impending election, then scream like fuck when someone uses the wrong word in a report about it and claim that the coverage is biased. I think the Guardian is spot on for refusing to accept the bullshit that the Israelis come out with about the crappy terrorist threat offered by Palestinian groups and quite correct to fully report, for example, the horror of the Israeli's wholesale slaughter of non-combatants, women and children with illegal weapons. It stands to reason that if Israel do more killing, they'll get more of the bad press.

As far as backing the baddies goes, the Daily Mail still holds the crown for supporting the Nazis up to the start of the second world war. "Hurrah for the Blacksirts" they wrote. And look what happened there: a real Holocaust.

I've actually got the paper somewhere in my boxes.

Its clear you havent read it, or the link about the apology. Where Rusbridger (The Editor) openly acknowledges the failings of the editororial and the offencen may have caused.

To a room full of Jews! Hardly the time to tell them to go and fuck themselves, was it?

Anyway, apologising for one word, in fact the capital letter at the start of one word, doesn't invalidate the newspaper's editorial policy.

You're right though, I didn't read it. But I never claimed to, did I?

What else do you have in your boxes? Other things you've taken offence at?

Am I in there?

The Teacher wrote: The Grauniad is all middle class, paranoid, elitist pseudo left New Labour bollocks.

Have to agree with that. It even makes The Independent look good. Very weak journalism!

The monthly music magazine with the Observer is quite good though.

QUOTE"after the state of Israel was established, they were banned and roundly criticised by the Israeli government" apart from members like Yitzhak Shamir, Israeli prime minister 1983-1984 and 1986-1992 and Natan Yellin-Mor, member of the Knesset 1949-1951. one mans terrorist is another mans freedom fighter....

Diamond 383 wrote: To a room full of Jews! Hardly the time to tell them to go and fuck themselves, was it?

Anyway, apologising for one word, in fact the capital letter at the start of one word, doesn't invalidate the newspaper's editorial policy.

You're right though, I didn't read it. But I never claimed to, did I?

What else do you have in your boxes? Other things you've taken offence at?

Am I in there?

Nah, only things I can learn from.

Incidentally, was The Grauniad Editorial where you got your rather odd definition of "Genocide" from?

Ger Boy wrote:

The Teacher wrote: The Grauniad is all middle class, paranoid, elitist pseudo left New Labour bollocks.

Have to agree with that. It even makes The Independent look good. Very weak journalism!

REALY?!? , you always struck me as a liberal minded individual.

What I did was read various reports about what was going on, watched a few things on the telly and then thought about what word could be used to describe it. I didn't read it anywhere, I made it up.

Just fancy that!

The most depressing thing about the Daily Mail is that it probably does echo the thoughts and beliefs of the majority of the British population. We can all sit and snigger at it and scratch our heads in disbelief at some of the rabid BS it comes away with but for everyone of us there's ten times as many nodding in approval.

Christ, we see enough examples of Daily Mail-esque thought posted on these very boards. Boards that you would assume (clearly quite wrongly) would be populated with individuals with a bit more of a broad minded/slightly 'alternative' outlook by virtue of the subject matter we're all meant to be discussing!

Look at the Karen Matthews posts that appeared here. Or some of the Madeline McCann stuff. It was like Brass Eye never happened.

Is that a spaceship firing water at an apricot?

Diamond 383 wrote: Is that a spaceship firing water at an apricot?

Like you haven't noticed before? You of all people.

Course I have. Just thought the tone needed lowering a bit.

It is possible, you know, to read something and not entirely agree with some of it. Opinion pieces are just that - things that offer an opinion for you to consider. There's no need to get upset if you don't agree with it. Mostly, the quality press make a clear distinction between news and editorial. My main objection to the so-called quality tabloids is that they present their opinions as news. They hardly ever have any tits in them, either.

Old Lead Foot wrote:

Ger Boy wrote:

The Teacher wrote: The Grauniad is all middle class, paranoid, elitist pseudo left New Labour bollocks.

Have to agree with that. It even makes The Independent look good. Very weak journalism!

REALY?!? , you always struck me as a liberal minded individual.

Right, so we have Andrew King, Uncle Liam and Ger Boy reading the Daily Mail - all of whom are slightly more right wing than Oswald Moseley...

Guess that's why I don't read it then!

No, Nick. That's not why at all is it?

EDIT: Can't believe how hard it was to find that - Google Image search for "Page 3" comes up will loads of images of a pages books and magazines. The third pages, I suppose.

Diamond 383 wrote:

My main objection to the so-called quality tabloids is that they present their opinions as news. They hardly ever have any tits in them, either.

But isn't that true for most newspapers? At least here in the States, almost all the papers do that to nausium.

Nick King wrote:

Old Lead Foot wrote:

Ger Boy wrote:

The Teacher wrote: The Grauniad is all middle class, paranoid, elitist pseudo left New Labour bollocks.

Have to agree with that. It even makes The Independent look good. Very weak journalism!

REALY?!? , you always struck me as a liberal minded individual.

Right, so we have Andrew King, Uncle Liam and Ger Boy reading the Daily Mail - all of whom are slightly more right wing than Oswald Moseley...

Guess that's why I don't read it then!

I never said I read the Mail. I said I would read the Mail over the Grauniad. I bought the Mail once, which was August 2001 when it endorsed Ken Clarke as Tory leader.

I read The Times. Every day.

Diamond 383 wrote:

The Teacher wrote:

I think referring to Israels incursion into Jenin in 2002 as a "holocaust" was one of the most offensive things I have ever read in my life...

You don't read your own posts then? Actually, I bet you didn't read that Guardian editorial anyway, just read about it somewhere else and copied your offence from someone else.

The Israelis really piss me off with this sort of shit. Quite happy to slaughter massive numbers of people for no good reason other than an impending election, then scream like fuck when someone uses the wrong word in a report about it and claim that the coverage is biased. I think the Guardian is spot on for refusing to accept the bullshit that the Israelis come out with about the crappy terrorist threat offered by Palestinian groups and quite correct to fully report, for example, the horror of the Israeli's wholesale slaughter of non-combatants, women and children with illegal weapons. It stands to reason that if Israel do more killing, they'll get more of the bad press.

As far as backing the baddies goes, the Daily Mail still holds the crown for supporting the Nazis up to the start of the second world war. "Hurrah for the Blacksirts" they wrote. And look what happened there: a real Holocaust.

Reasonably sure Max Moseley's dad had his own column in the Fail. SLIGHT giveaway. I get emails from mail readers every night in work. I delete their half-witted racist dribblings. Always emails though, they NEVER phone to complain about how THEY have to fill out a whole form AND pay money for passports, when (Insert this week's foreign group the mail don't like) get them handed to them for free when they crawl out of the tomato lorry. They make my fucking flesh creep.

I bet Liam really hates those cowardly French who kept carrying out terrorist outrages againt their lawful Nazi government in the 40's.

Old Lead Foot wrote: QUOTE"after the state of Israel was established, they were banned and roundly criticised by the Israeli government" apart from members like Yitzhak Shamir, Israeli prime minister 1983-1984 and 1986-1992 and Natan Yellin-Mor, member of the Knesset 1949-1951. one mans terrorist is another mans freedom fighter....

SHUT UP SHUT UP SHUT UP.

Before you know it you'll be saying that certain politicians from that land of milk and honey are actually wanted for the exact same war crimes trial in the Hague that the septics have bombed countries and their kiddies flat to get to blokes to drag them to.

Doctor? wrote:

Old Lead Foot wrote: QUOTE"after the state of Israel was established, they were banned and roundly criticised by the Israeli government" apart from members like Yitzhak Shamir, Israeli prime minister 1983-1984 and 1986-1992 and Natan Yellin-Mor, member of the Knesset 1949-1951. one mans terrorist is another mans freedom fighter....

SHUT UP SHUT UP SHUT UP.

Before you know it you'll be saying that certain politicians from that land of milk and honey are actually wanted for the exact same war crimes trial in the Hague that the septics have bombed countries and their kiddies flat to get to blokes to drag them to.

And how many Israeli politicians are wanted for War Crimes?

What people fail to recognise, that as a state which abides and enforces the rule of law, if crimes were committed, then the suspect would be tried in an Israeli court first and foremost. And that if a suspect was wanted by the International Courts, then Israel would have no problem handing them over.

This is of course in contrast to the Palestinians, who often use summary justice with no due process and no rule of law. Whose leaders admit they are terrorists, yet for some reason these people are feted.

I believe their former prime minister is wanted for leading a masaacre of a camp filled entirely with woman and children. Or so a human rights lawyer from Brussels (actually she's from Bellshaft, she just works in Brussels) told me. But what would she know.

Doctor? wrote: I believe their former prime minister is wanted for leading a masaacre of a camp filled entirely with woman and children. Or so a human rights lawyer from Brussels (actually she's from Bellshaft, she just works in Brussels) told me. But what would she know.

Evidently very little would appear to be the answer.

A quick google reveals just opinion.

I presume the Prime Minister in question is Ariel Sharon. Well, when Sharon was Prime Minister, he travelled abroad often enough to be arrested. As for a camp "filled entirely with woman and children." Well, thats an explosive statement which I'm surprised you've had the ignorance to believe.

Just Google "Israeli War Crimes". Over three million hits. Amnesty International, the Red Cross and countless other humanitarian organisations have complained about serious violations of international law. Human Shields, illegal weapons, targeting civilians and non-combatants.

They're bastards, Liam, and your continued refusal to accept this is pathetic.

Saying that the Palestinians are no angels is simply not a counter argument. So what if there are organisations within Palestine who use violence to further their aims? Does that give anyone the right to drop bombs onto schools and hospitals? If so, why didn't we bomb Cambo's school, or the hospital where he was born? There were some right horrible bastards in Ireland at the time.

Quote"that as a state which abides and enforces the rule of law" somthing israel is famed for adhearing to...

I know - pathetic isn't it?

You don't have to pick one side or another. It is possible to see the wrongs that both sides are committing. That's what grown-ups do.

Diamond 383 wrote: I know - pathetic isn't it?

You don't have to pick one side or another. It is possible to see the wrongs that both sides are committing. That's what grown-ups do.

Now now Colin, less of that extremist nonsense.

The Teacher wrote:

El Jarvo wrote:

The Teacher wrote: Its longstanding support for terrorist organisations such as Hamas and Hezbollah certainly wins no favours with me.

So where do you stand on the likes of the Stern gang killing our brave boys to lay the foundations of your Zionist state?

Or is that the acceptable face of terrorism in your book?

Certainly not. But its not like they had anything to do the creation of Israel. And after the state of Israel was established, they were banned and roundly criticised by the Israeli government. Although I dont know why they decided to recognise their achievements in 1980.

Then again, nobodys perfect. I mean, look at the adulation Nelson Mandela gets.

That's bollocks Liam, Begin was a terrorist and he'dbe turning in his grave if he knew people were saying he had nowt to do with the establishment of Israel

Liam, have you got a copy of today's Independent for your box?

Got one here, will send it to you if you like.