April 28, 2009 at 6:00 pm
http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/news/article2399352.ece
I can’t think of anything else to say…… I’m stunned……
By: Grey Area - 8th February 2011 at 07:38
Moderator Message
Right, let’s try again shall we?
GA
By: Moggy C - 8th February 2011 at 00:11
Ouch. thats a bit vitriolic Moggy
My screen name was not chosen at random.
😀
It’s just the mods do sometimes get a little tired of those who think it clever or big to have a go at us.
Moggy
By: Grey Area - 7th February 2011 at 20:18
Moderator Message
Right.
That’s enough.
I’m calling a time-out on this thread.
I’ll re-open it later by which time, hopefully, some of you will have calmed down a little.
GA
By: tornado64 - 7th February 2011 at 20:06
To be honest, an editor going over your posts would be a really great idea. You know, for stuff like grammar, interpunction, spelling.
tell it to the hand cos the face aint listening !!!
By: Lincoln 7 - 7th February 2011 at 19:30
Dear Mr Boyle,
You seem to be operating under a couple of false assumptions.
1) I have had the misfortune to read the Daily Mail on a number of occasions. It’s a god-awful rag, slanted to appeal to the tut-tutters of middle-England, highlighting the most obscure stories in a way that will have their readers nodding over their breakfast Horlicks “The country is going to the dogs” Thinly veiled racism is the rag’s stock in trade. Some may enjoy it, I find it distasteful.
2) Key are not my employers. All the moderators here are volunteers drawn from the forum membership. My taking on of that role for the benefit of all the members in no way restricts me from holding, or posting my personal views.
Consider this a ‘chiding’ if you wish. Your irritating digs, tedious though they are, will not earn you a ban, merely my contempt.
Moggy
Ouch. thats a bit vitriolic Moggy.:eek:
Lincoln .7
:diablo:
By: Arthur - 7th February 2011 at 18:54
…
i gave up when i wrote a letter to a local newspaper once complaining about the councils harsh actions about evicting some food stalls from a local tourist attractionit was so heavily edited and altered you could nearly believe it was a complaint from the opposite viewpoint
…
To be honest, an editor going over your posts would be a really great idea. You know, for stuff like grammar, interpunction, spelling.
By: Moggy C - 7th February 2011 at 04:46
Dear Mr Boyle,
You seem to be operating under a couple of false assumptions.
1) I have had the misfortune to read the Daily Mail on a number of occasions. It’s a god-awful rag, slanted to appeal to the tut-tutters of middle-England, highlighting the most obscure stories in a way that will have their readers nodding over their breakfast Horlicks “The country is going to the dogs” Thinly veiled racism is the rag’s stock in trade. Some may enjoy it, I find it distasteful.
2) Key are not my employers. All the moderators here are volunteers drawn from the forum membership. My taking on of that role for the benefit of all the members in no way restricts me from holding, or posting my personal views.
Consider this a ‘chiding’ if you wish. Your irritating digs, tedious though they are, will not earn you a ban, merely my contempt.
Moggy
By: DrPepper - 7th February 2011 at 04:43
Don’t you think educating them into society is better than being expelled, which is more or less condoning their behavior, and letting them get away with “Murder” as some do.unfortunately, and then wonder why the minority spoil it for the majority.If the “Decent” Muslims want peace and quite if not all do, then why on earth don’t they themselves sort the troublemakers out, what they need is a Muslim Charles Bronson, and take matters into their own hands.
Lincoln. 7
Quoted for it’s truth. It’s about time that the majority of the Muslims, if they really want peace, stood together with the rest of the British people of ALL faiths and said “enough is enough”.
Let them show their true colours.
By: J Boyle - 7th February 2011 at 02:19
Daily Mail and open mind both in the same post.
There’s something you don’t see very often.
Moggy
I didn’t mention the paper. Obviously, I don’t read it.
My post was in response to your hostility towards a paper you’ve since commented that you don’t read. ?
Doesn’t seem very enlightened, open minded or inclusive. :rolleyes:
My point was to help latecommers to the forum see your standard position of attacking any source that presents information that doesn’t fit into your preconcieved view of the world.
And that seems to apply not only to news outlets, but paying customers of your employer at this site.
I’m still waiting to be insulted, chided or banned, mr. moderator.
By: Lincoln 7 - 6th February 2011 at 14:16
Moggy, thats the best first liner I have heard for years. L.M.H.O. 😀
Lincoln .7
By: Moggy C - 6th February 2011 at 14:10
a typical politition side stepping the issue.
No. A typical politician would have lied. I told you the truth. I am sorry that it isn’t very helpful.
Lets put it another way, were you given a FREE newspaper every day which one would you choose?.
Almost certainly the EADT or EDP. But if as I suspect you mean a national, then I think from what I have seen that The Independent is the least worst of a bad bunch.
Moggy
By: Lincoln 7 - 6th February 2011 at 12:57
I disagree. Rules 5 and 11 are the key clauses and if we cannot debate a subject, any subject, without contravening these rules then it says little for our powers of rational debate.:(
Sorry, this should have been in response to your later post.
Peter, having read rules 5 and 11 this posting has certainly breached rule 5 in several postings here, and I think the Mods are being very lenient in letting some of us to keep posting, and not taking any action.(And NO, I am not licking their A***S).
Lincoln .7
By: Grey Area - 6th February 2011 at 12:57
Moderator Message
Hi GA, I know what you mean, and agree, however, we are supposed to be living in the land of free speech,which just by chance happens to be OUR Country…..
Nice rant. 🙂
However, this is a privately-owned website and the site owners make the rules.
Sky High has hit the nail firmly on the head in post #45.
Some of you may not like some of the rules that apply in here, but they’ll still be enforced.
Anyway, that’s quite enough navel contemplation for one thread.
GA
By: Lincoln 7 - 6th February 2011 at 12:51
[QUOTE=tornado64;1700356]
Reactions of anger are simply because we are bally SICK of it. SICK of so called oppressed minority groups of any shape colour or creed, coming into this country and literally taking the p1ss and taxpayers money that could and should be better spent elsewhere.
I have total support for Cameron, but he hasn’t gone far enough. A lesson from that Australian Politician woman in charge should be learned+1 i was all for pc when it was stopping genuine racism
but we are now at a point where we should be playing the racism card
some of the things the extreemists are doing in our country we would probably get stoned or beheaded for in thiers
so why should we be tollerant anymore
certain ellement need stamping out , cameron is bang on !! but as said ( too soft )
i often think if things are so bad and awfull for them living here , why are they so slow at going back to the countries they sing the praises of ??
maybe because the reality is they’d be sat with a begging bowl risking the daily threat of being murdered with no health service to patch them up !!
I think you have hit the nail well and truly on the head.
Lncoln. 7
By: Sky High - 6th February 2011 at 12:45
It IS a very emotive subject I agree. but I am afraid there are times when, like all of us we snap, everyone has their breaking point, and it only takes one or two ill placed words to be posted in the heat of the moment to get banned, What may seem perfectly innocent on a particular subject, may not be seen in the same light as the Mods see it.
If you want to carry on with this Post by all means do, but it’s a subject that will get us nowhere. Now if I were to honestly say what I think, I would be the first to be red carded.And Peter, how can we call this a debate on this posting, when there are restrictions in place to keep a “Debate” such as this, highly restricted by what we say.or what we would like to say.Lincoln .7
I disagree. Rules 5 and 11 are the key clauses and if we cannot debate a subject, any subject, without contravening these rules then it says little for our powers of rational debate.:(
Sorry, this should have been in response to your later post.
By: tornado64 - 6th February 2011 at 12:40
this is what i found out many years ago !!
you can’t have a debate on the internet that gets down to the actual underlying problems or get a true all sides factual reporting of news in papers / tv
without getting it blocked , censored or altered to suit the side in favours viewpoint
it is a rare time where we have reports of afghan or iraqis viewpoints the news is only reported from our point of view ( more than a little biased )
i treat newspapers for thier best use keep one handy incase your toilet roll runs out or collect a few for bonfire night
someone mentioned ( free speach ) ok try and set up on a corner in the uk and preach against the muslims way of life
free speach pfffft who are you trying to kid !!
By: Lincoln 7 - 6th February 2011 at 12:13
Regularly? None
When I happen upon one (library / pub / train), any.
Moggy
Now that young man is a typical politition side stepping the issue.
Lets put it another way, were you given a FREE newspaper every day which one would you choose?.
Lincoln .7
😉
By: Lincoln 7 - 6th February 2011 at 12:09
It is perfectly possible to debate this subject without the danger of being red-carded. Emotions have to kept in check, that’s all. But then that applies to any debate, worthy of the name.;)
It IS a very emotive subject I agree. but I am afraid there are times when, like all of us we snap, everyone has their breaking point, and it only takes one or two ill placed words to be posted in the heat of the moment to get banned, What may seem perfectly innocent on a particular subject, may not be seen in the same light as the Mods see it.
If you want to carry on with this Post by all means do, but it’s a subject that will get us nowhere. Now if I were to honestly say what I think, I would be the first to be red carded.And Peter, how can we call this a debate on this posting, when there are restrictions in place to keep a “Debate” such as this, highly restricted by what we say.or what we would like to say.
Lincoln .7
By: Sky High - 6th February 2011 at 11:47
It is perfectly possible to debate this subject without the danger of being red-carded. Emotions have to kept in check, that’s all. But then that applies to any debate, worthy of the name.;)
By: Moggy C - 6th February 2011 at 11:46
…what paper do YOU read as a matter of interest?.
Regularly? None
When I happen upon one (library / pub / train), any.
Moggy