FabSwingers.com > Forums > Politics > #StopFundingHate gets some success
#StopFundingHate gets some success
Jump to: Newest in thread
| |||
| |||
| |||
"Who decides what is causing hate and division? You want to censor free speech and think its a good thing? Hate and division is caused by bollocks like this and as usual the left turn into the biggest bigots and wannabe fascists!" Why such generalisation to the left? | |||
| |||
"Who decides what is causing hate and division? You want to censor free speech and think its a good thing? Hate and division is caused by bollocks like this and as usual the left turn into the biggest bigots and wannabe fascists!" You've contradicted yourself. Unless you decide what causes hate and division. Usually a difference in belief is what divides us. Left or right. Brexit or Remain. Isn't the free speech causing some of the hatred here. Where people argue that they should never had said something pathetic. Are you censoring toohot's freedom of speech? Does that make you a wannabe facist? I'm only putting your logic against you. | |||
"Who decides what is causing hate and division? You want to censor free speech and think its a good thing? Hate and division is caused by bollocks like this and as usual the left turn into the biggest bigots and wannabe fascists!" "The left?" Ironically I am a natural conservative, own my own businesses, bit of an internationalist and supporter of small state and lower taxes. However, I have always had a BIG problem associating myself with intolerance, incitement of division and in particular the so called right wing press. In my heart of hearts, I even understood the concept of Brexit but I just could not and cannot associate myself with people and media outlets who champion the cause of division and so by default promote hatred and hostility. Headlines and stories in the Express and Mail have just gone too far with me, particularly with the constant drip, drip, drill of emotive headlines like swarms, hoards, invasion etc etc I think the campaign #StopFundingHatred is noble and therefore I am unable to find fault with it. | |||
"Who decides what is causing hate and division? You want to censor free speech and think its a good thing? Hate and division is caused by bollocks like this and as usual the left turn into the biggest bigots and wannabe fascists! "The left?" Ironically I am a natural conservative, own my own businesses, bit of an internationalist and supporter of small state and lower taxes. However, I have always had a BIG problem associating myself with intolerance, incitement of division and in particular the so called right wing press. In my heart of hearts, I even understood the concept of Brexit but I just could not and cannot associate myself with people and media outlets who champion the cause of division and so by default promote hatred and hostility. Headlines and stories in the Express and Mail have just gone too far with me, particularly with the constant drip, drip, drill of emotive headlines like swarms, hoards, invasion etc etc I think the campaign #StopFundingHatred is noble and therefore I am unable to find fault with it." I was referring to the campaign as being organised by the left not that you were of the left. You think that the bullying and intimidation of companies by social media is somehow noble? Who knows when they will come for you? They should be aiming to win the argument by debate not attempting to shut it down. I dislike outlets like the Guardian and their hatred of the UK but I wouldn't want to silence them or feel the need to boycott their advertisers. A free press is important and people have a choice of which publications to read, unless of course, campaigns like this are succesful | |||
"Who decides what is causing hate and division? You want to censor free speech and think its a good thing? Hate and division is caused by bollocks like this and as usual the left turn into the biggest bigots and wannabe fascists! "The left?" Ironically I am a natural conservative, own my own businesses, bit of an internationalist and supporter of small state and lower taxes. However, I have always had a BIG problem associating myself with intolerance, incitement of division and in particular the so called right wing press. In my heart of hearts, I even understood the concept of Brexit but I just could not and cannot associate myself with people and media outlets who champion the cause of division and so by default promote hatred and hostility. Headlines and stories in the Express and Mail have just gone too far with me, particularly with the constant drip, drip, drill of emotive headlines like swarms, hoards, invasion etc etc I think the campaign #StopFundingHatred is noble and therefore I am unable to find fault with it. I was referring to the campaign as being organised by the left not that you were of the left. You think that the bullying and intimidation of companies by social media is somehow noble? Who knows when they will come for you? They should be aiming to win the argument by debate not attempting to shut it down. I dislike outlets like the Guardian and their hatred of the UK but I wouldn't want to silence them or feel the need to boycott their advertisers. A free press is important and people have a choice of which publications to read, unless of course, campaigns like this are succesful" I don't like the Guardian either, so I don't buy it, simple concept really. If people don't like the Express or the Daily Mail, then no one is forcing them to buy it, just ignore what you don't like and buy a different paper. | |||
"Who decides what is causing hate and division? You want to censor free speech and think its a good thing? Hate and division is caused by bollocks like this and as usual the left turn into the biggest bigots and wannabe fascists! "The left?" Ironically I am a natural conservative, own my own businesses, bit of an internationalist and supporter of small state and lower taxes. However, I have always had a BIG problem associating myself with intolerance, incitement of division and in particular the so called right wing press. In my heart of hearts, I even understood the concept of Brexit but I just could not and cannot associate myself with people and media outlets who champion the cause of division and so by default promote hatred and hostility. Headlines and stories in the Express and Mail have just gone too far with me, particularly with the constant drip, drip, drill of emotive headlines like swarms, hoards, invasion etc etc I think the campaign #StopFundingHatred is noble and therefore I am unable to find fault with it." Wasn't it David Cameron, who first used the word "swarm" to describe migrants? The same David Cameron who was leader of the Remain campaign. | |||
"Who decides what is causing hate and division? You want to censor free speech and think its a good thing? Hate and division is caused by bollocks like this and as usual the left turn into the biggest bigots and wannabe fascists! "The left?" Ironically I am a natural conservative, own my own businesses, bit of an internationalist and supporter of small state and lower taxes. However, I have always had a BIG problem associating myself with intolerance, incitement of division and in particular the so called right wing press. In my heart of hearts, I even understood the concept of Brexit but I just could not and cannot associate myself with people and media outlets who champion the cause of division and so by default promote hatred and hostility. Headlines and stories in the Express and Mail have just gone too far with me, particularly with the constant drip, drip, drill of emotive headlines like swarms, hoards, invasion etc etc I think the campaign #StopFundingHatred is noble and therefore I am unable to find fault with it. I was referring to the campaign as being organised by the left not that you were of the left. You think that the bullying and intimidation of companies by social media is somehow noble? Who knows when they will come for you? They should be aiming to win the argument by debate not attempting to shut it down. I dislike outlets like the Guardian and their hatred of the UK but I wouldn't want to silence them or feel the need to boycott their advertisers. A free press is important and people have a choice of which publications to read, unless of course, campaigns like this are succesful I don't like the Guardian either, so I don't buy it, simple concept really. If people don't like the Express or the Daily Mail, then no one is forcing them to buy it, just ignore what you don't like and buy a different paper. " 
what's next? A brick through the newsagents window? | |||
| |||
"Who decides what is causing hate and division? You want to censor free speech and think its a good thing? Hate and division is caused by bollocks like this and as usual the left turn into the biggest bigots and wannabe fascists! "The left?" Ironically I am a natural conservative, own my own businesses, bit of an internationalist and supporter of small state and lower taxes. However, I have always had a BIG problem associating myself with intolerance, incitement of division and in particular the so called right wing press. In my heart of hearts, I even understood the concept of Brexit but I just could not and cannot associate myself with people and media outlets who champion the cause of division and so by default promote hatred and hostility. Headlines and stories in the Express and Mail have just gone too far with me, particularly with the constant drip, drip, drill of emotive headlines like swarms, hoards, invasion etc etc I think the campaign #StopFundingHatred is noble and therefore I am unable to find fault with it. I was referring to the campaign as being organised by the left not that you were of the left. You think that the bullying and intimidation of companies by social media is somehow noble? Who knows when they will come for you? They should be aiming to win the argument by debate not attempting to shut it down. I dislike outlets like the Guardian and their hatred of the UK but I wouldn't want to silence them or feel the need to boycott their advertisers. A free press is important and people have a choice of which publications to read, unless of course, campaigns like this are succesful" Well said. | |||
"Who decides what is causing hate and division? You want to censor free speech and think its a good thing? Hate and division is caused by bollocks like this and as usual the left turn into the biggest bigots and wannabe fascists! "The left?" Ironically I am a natural conservative, own my own businesses, bit of an internationalist and supporter of small state and lower taxes. However, I have always had a BIG problem associating myself with intolerance, incitement of division and in particular the so called right wing press. In my heart of hearts, I even understood the concept of Brexit but I just could not and cannot associate myself with people and media outlets who champion the cause of division and so by default promote hatred and hostility. Headlines and stories in the Express and Mail have just gone too far with me, particularly with the constant drip, drip, drill of emotive headlines like swarms, hoards, invasion etc etc I think the campaign #StopFundingHatred is noble and therefore I am unable to find fault with it. I was referring to the campaign as being organised by the left not that you were of the left. You think that the bullying and intimidation of companies by social media is somehow noble? Who knows when they will come for you? They should be aiming to win the argument by debate not attempting to shut it down. I dislike outlets like the Guardian and their hatred of the UK but I wouldn't want to silence them or feel the need to boycott their advertisers. A free press is important and people have a choice of which publications to read, unless of course, campaigns like this are succesful I don't like the Guardian either, so I don't buy it, simple concept really. If people don't like the Express or the Daily Mail, then no one is forcing them to buy it, just ignore what you don't like and buy a different paper.
what's next? A brick through the newsagents window?"With Corbyn and his bunch of thugs around nothing would surprise me. | |||
| |||
| |||
"I think it's a great idea.... Power to the consumer "Consumers already have the power though, the power to chose to not buy a product if they don't like it. | |||
| |||
"It's a tricky one, in a free world, free people are free to write letters of complaint about company's they use, that's called leverage as a consumer it's very important to have leverage!. The free press is free, there's no laws forbidding it from printing stories except for exceptional cases like price harry or law court rulings. Unless the whole of country has suddenly turned left wing, there should be plenty of consumers to keep the right wing press in customers!. For all those people complaining about the bbc this was the entire purpose of them to have interference free journalism!. " The BBC is a slightly different animal. I would fully agree with interference free journalism but as a publicly funded body the BBC should show no bias in either direction. Sadly in many cases these days that doesn't happen. | |||
| |||
"It's a tricky one, in a free world, free people are free to write letters of complaint about company's they use, that's called leverage as a consumer it's very important to have leverage!. The free press is free, there's no laws forbidding it from printing stories except for exceptional cases like price harry or law court rulings. Unless the whole of country has suddenly turned left wing, there should be plenty of consumers to keep the right wing press in customers!. For all those people complaining about the bbc this was the entire purpose of them to have interference free journalism!. The BBC is a slightly different animal. I would fully agree with interference free journalism but as a publicly funded body the BBC should show no bias in either direction. Sadly in many cases these days that doesn't happen." . I think alot of it came from being London centric(London has never really been very in touch with the rest of the UK),i think it's slightly changing over the last few years after shifting their production around more | |||
 | |||
"I suppose it would be better to define "hatred" rather than just chucking the word around to justify a political point of view. " The looney left refuse to define half the terms they throw about because they know that doing so would destroy their arguement. What exactly is 'greed' when it's at home!? Oh and hashtags are the ultimate form of "look at me, I want to pretend I care without making any effort or effecting any real change". | |||
"I suppose it would be better to define "hatred" rather than just chucking the word around to justify a political point of view. For example is reporting migrants rioting in the Calais jungle stirring up hatred or is it a free press rightly reporting a story of public interest? Should it be censored just because it is an inconvenient truth for some? The same could be said about the very same migrants blocking motorways and causing life threatening car crashes. Should that be censored because it upsets the twitterati? What about migrants attacking women in Germany and Sweden? Should that be hushed up? Oh sorry most of it is already. It is a reporters duty to report whether some like it or not, and the day we get to censorship of the press is the first slide down the long and slippery slope to totalitarianism. As Voltaire famously said. I disapprove of what you say, but will defend to the death your right to say it." It's true. They should have the freedom to report on it. Journalists are also free to report on the effect of war in Syria. But it's the facts papers choose not to publish or just publish their opinion as if it's fact that causes people to generalise or react. For example, I see that people on the forum tend to know the difference between a refugee and an economic migrants. But when some of the papers and the BBC label them all as migrants it hides the real facts and make people believe we have a flood of migrants and blur the line between migrants and refugees. This is not aimed at anyone here but an observation from friends and social media. | |||
"Who decides what is causing hate and division? You want to censor free speech and think its a good thing? Hate and division is caused by bollocks like this and as usual the left turn into the biggest bigots and wannabe fascists!" Its ironic really a left wing group going after a left wing newspaper | |||
"I suppose it would be better to define "hatred" rather than just chucking the word around to justify a political point of view. For example is reporting migrants rioting in the Calais jungle stirring up hatred or is it a free press rightly reporting a story of public interest? Should it be censored just because it is an inconvenient truth for some? The same could be said about the very same migrants blocking motorways and causing life threatening car crashes. Should that be censored because it upsets the twitterati? What about migrants attacking women in Germany and Sweden? Should that be hushed up? Oh sorry most of it is already. It is a reporters duty to report whether some like it or not, and the day we get to censorship of the press is the first slide down the long and slippery slope to totalitarianism. As Voltaire famously said. I disapprove of what you say, but will defend to the death your right to say it. It's true. They should have the freedom to report on it. Journalists are also free to report on the effect of war in Syria. But it's the facts papers choose not to publish or just publish their opinion as if it's fact that causes people to generalise or react. For example, I see that people on the forum tend to know the difference between a refugee and an economic migrants. But when some of the papers and the BBC label them all as migrants it hides the real facts and make people believe we have a flood of migrants and blur the line between migrants and refugees. This is not aimed at anyone here but an observation from friends and social media." Thing is a refugee is supposed to seek asylum in the first safe country they arrive in so by definition alone by the time they reach calais they have transitioned into an economic migrant | |||
"I suppose it would be better to define "hatred" rather than just chucking the word around to justify a political point of view. For example is reporting migrants rioting in the Calais jungle stirring up hatred or is it a free press rightly reporting a story of public interest? Should it be censored just because it is an inconvenient truth for some? The same could be said about the very same migrants blocking motorways and causing life threatening car crashes. Should that be censored because it upsets the twitterati? What about migrants attacking women in Germany and Sweden? Should that be hushed up? Oh sorry most of it is already. It is a reporters duty to report whether some like it or not, and the day we get to censorship of the press is the first slide down the long and slippery slope to totalitarianism. As Voltaire famously said. I disapprove of what you say, but will defend to the death your right to say it. It's true. They should have the freedom to report on it. Journalists are also free to report on the effect of war in Syria. But it's the facts papers choose not to publish or just publish their opinion as if it's fact that causes people to generalise or react. For example, I see that people on the forum tend to know the difference between a refugee and an economic migrants. But when some of the papers and the BBC label them all as migrants it hides the real facts and make people believe we have a flood of migrants and blur the line between migrants and refugees. This is not aimed at anyone here but an observation from friends and social media. Thing is a refugee is supposed to seek asylum in the first safe country they arrive in so by definition alone by the time they reach calais they have transitioned into an economic migrant" | |||
"I suppose it would be better to define "hatred" rather than just chucking the word around to justify a political point of view. For example is reporting migrants rioting in the Calais jungle stirring up hatred or is it a free press rightly reporting a story of public interest? Should it be censored just because it is an inconvenient truth for some? The same could be said about the very same migrants blocking motorways and causing life threatening car crashes. Should that be censored because it upsets the twitterati? What about migrants attacking women in Germany and Sweden? Should that be hushed up? Oh sorry most of it is already. It is a reporters duty to report whether some like it or not, and the day we get to censorship of the press is the first slide down the long and slippery slope to totalitarianism. As Voltaire famously said. I disapprove of what you say, but will defend to the death your right to say it. It's true. They should have the freedom to report on it. Journalists are also free to report on the effect of war in Syria. But it's the facts papers choose not to publish or just publish their opinion as if it's fact that causes people to generalise or react. For example, I see that people on the forum tend to know the difference between a refugee and an economic migrants. But when some of the papers and the BBC label them all as migrants it hides the real facts and make people believe we have a flood of migrants and blur the line between migrants and refugees. This is not aimed at anyone here but an observation from friends and social media. Thing is a refugee is supposed to seek asylum in the first safe country they arrive in so by definition alone by the time they reach calais they have transitioned into an economic migrant "An asylum seeker and refugee are legal terms. Check out our government site. Economic migrant is a term to define anyone travelling through country to country for a better life. So it doesn't define if they are escaping prosecution or just migrating. They can still seek asylum in the uk, but have to enter uk territory. If approved they become a refugee. So there is no real data to support their cause. So how do we deal with it? | |||
"I suppose it would be better to define "hatred" rather than just chucking the word around to justify a political point of view. For example is reporting migrants rioting in the Calais jungle stirring up hatred or is it a free press rightly reporting a story of public interest? Should it be censored just because it is an inconvenient truth for some? The same could be said about the very same migrants blocking motorways and causing life threatening car crashes. Should that be censored because it upsets the twitterati? What about migrants attacking women in Germany and Sweden? Should that be hushed up? Oh sorry most of it is already. It is a reporters duty to report whether some like it or not, and the day we get to censorship of the press is the first slide down the long and slippery slope to totalitarianism. As Voltaire famously said. I disapprove of what you say, but will defend to the death your right to say it. It's true. They should have the freedom to report on it. Journalists are also free to report on the effect of war in Syria. But it's the facts papers choose not to publish or just publish their opinion as if it's fact that causes people to generalise or react. For example, I see that people on the forum tend to know the difference between a refugee and an economic migrants. But when some of the papers and the BBC label them all as migrants it hides the real facts and make people believe we have a flood of migrants and blur the line between migrants and refugees. This is not aimed at anyone here but an observation from friends and social media. Thing is a refugee is supposed to seek asylum in the first safe country they arrive in so by definition alone by the time they reach calais they have transitioned into an economic migrant
An asylum seeker and refugee are legal terms. Check out our government site.
Economic migrant is a term to define anyone travelling through country to country for a better life. So it doesn't define if they are escaping prosecution or just migrating. They can still seek asylum in the uk, but have to enter uk territory. If approved they become a refugee.
So there is no real data to support their cause. So how do we deal with it?". You've got to start at source.... Listen the third world is a relative shit hole for many many reasons but it's time the first world stopped fucking about with aid and started actually acting on making it a better place to live.. I don't know if anybodys ever considered the little fact of something like water as turning a tap on to drink it!. I'll break down very simply. In the whole of Africa there isn't one country you can drink from the tap from In the whole of south America and central America there isn't one country you can drink from the tap from. In Asia there's about five countries, that's at a guess Japan, s Korea, Hong Kong, Singapore, Israel. In fact you can draw a line East of Poland and rule out eastern Europe as well. So what 18 in every 20 people on planet earth can't drink tap water in the 21 St century and honestly I'll tell you the third world is going to get completely fucking hammered by western emissions from climate change, that's you and everybody else enjoying yourself going on holiday, driving your car, eating fast food, just everyday life!. . . I don't have all the answers to your problems or the third world's problems but I'd start with proper UN action on fuckwit leaders, I'd start by stop selling every shit hole country weapons that they mostly use on their own citizens, I'd start by stop giving monetary aid thats used to prop up most of the dictatorships, you know dictatorships with no money and no weapons would last about 30 minutes!. If you really wanna give aid, then let's make the un build schools everywhere with the money, start at the source and give every child a half decent education and if they fuck up after that, that's there problem!. I get sick of hearing about 20,000 immigrants in Calais that we should save because we're the rich west.... Well what about the other 1.2 billon Africans?... What fuck them, they're playing by the rules, nobody gives a shit?. . . The planets a fucking mess and quite frankly your making it worse and your solution is "let them in" because A it's no skin off your nose and B you don't want to sound like an uncaring cunt. If you wanna solve things get down to the root cause? | |||
"I suppose it would be better to define "hatred" rather than just chucking the word around to justify a political point of view. For example is reporting migrants rioting in the Calais jungle stirring up hatred or is it a free press rightly reporting a story of public interest? Should it be censored just because it is an inconvenient truth for some? The same could be said about the very same migrants blocking motorways and causing life threatening car crashes. Should that be censored because it upsets the twitterati? What about migrants attacking women in Germany and Sweden? Should that be hushed up? Oh sorry most of it is already. It is a reporters duty to report whether some like it or not, and the day we get to censorship of the press is the first slide down the long and slippery slope to totalitarianism. As Voltaire famously said. I disapprove of what you say, but will defend to the death your right to say it. It's true. They should have the freedom to report on it. Journalists are also free to report on the effect of war in Syria. But it's the facts papers choose not to publish or just publish their opinion as if it's fact that causes people to generalise or react. For example, I see that people on the forum tend to know the difference between a refugee and an economic migrants. But when some of the papers and the BBC label them all as migrants it hides the real facts and make people believe we have a flood of migrants and blur the line between migrants and refugees. This is not aimed at anyone here but an observation from friends and social media. Thing is a refugee is supposed to seek asylum in the first safe country they arrive in so by definition alone by the time they reach calais they have transitioned into an economic migrant
An asylum seeker and refugee are legal terms. Check out our government site.
Economic migrant is a term to define anyone travelling through country to country for a better life. So it doesn't define if they are escaping prosecution or just migrating. They can still seek asylum in the uk, but have to enter uk territory. If approved they become a refugee.
So there is no real data to support their cause. So how do we deal with it?.
You've got to start at source.... Listen the third world is a relative shit hole for many many reasons but it's time the first world stopped fucking about with aid and started actually acting on making it a better place to live..
I don't know if anybodys ever considered the little fact of something like water as turning a tap on to drink it!.
I'll break down very simply.
In the whole of Africa there isn't one country you can drink from the tap from
In the whole of south America and central America there isn't one country you can drink from the tap from.
In Asia there's about five countries, that's at a guess Japan, s Korea, Hong Kong, Singapore, Israel.
In fact you can draw a line East of Poland and rule out eastern Europe as well.
So what 18 in every 20 people on planet earth can't drink tap water in the 21 St century and honestly I'll tell you the third world is going to get completely fucking hammered by western emissions from climate change, that's you and everybody else enjoying yourself going on holiday, driving your car, eating fast food, just everyday life!.
.
.
I don't have all the answers to your problems or the third world's problems but I'd start with proper UN action on fuckwit leaders, I'd start by stop selling every shit hole country weapons that they mostly use on their own citizens, I'd start by stop giving monetary aid thats used to prop up most of the dictatorships, you know dictatorships with no money and no weapons would last about 30 minutes!.
If you really wanna give aid, then let's make the un build schools everywhere with the money, start at the source and give every child a half decent education and if they fuck up after that, that's there problem!.
I get sick of hearing about 20,000 immigrants in Calais that we should save because we're the rich west.... Well what about the other 1.2 billon Africans?... What fuck them, they're playing by the rules, nobody gives a shit?.
.
.
The planets a fucking mess and quite frankly your making it worse and your solution is "let them in" because A it's no skin off your nose and B you don't want to sound like an uncaring cunt.
If you wanna solve things get down to the root cause?"Wow. A lot to take in. Chile and Argentina are developed countries. Not third world. You can drink water in Chile in South America. They eradicated cholera years ago. It's just not advisable for tourists because you'll get the shits for a few days which can happen because you're not use to it. But then you're fine. I'm not saying let them all in. You jumped to that conclusion. I was clarifying the definition of migrant and asylum seekers. Solve the root cause... I agree. | |||
"I suppose it would be better to define "hatred" rather than just chucking the word around to justify a political point of view. For example is reporting migrants rioting in the Calais jungle stirring up hatred or is it a free press rightly reporting a story of public interest? Should it be censored just because it is an inconvenient truth for some? The same could be said about the very same migrants blocking motorways and causing life threatening car crashes. Should that be censored because it upsets the twitterati? What about migrants attacking women in Germany and Sweden? Should that be hushed up? Oh sorry most of it is already. It is a reporters duty to report whether some like it or not, and the day we get to censorship of the press is the first slide down the long and slippery slope to totalitarianism. As Voltaire famously said. I disapprove of what you say, but will defend to the death your right to say it. It's true. They should have the freedom to report on it. Journalists are also free to report on the effect of war in Syria. But it's the facts papers choose not to publish or just publish their opinion as if it's fact that causes people to generalise or react. For example, I see that people on the forum tend to know the difference between a refugee and an economic migrants. But when some of the papers and the BBC label them all as migrants it hides the real facts and make people believe we have a flood of migrants and blur the line between migrants and refugees. This is not aimed at anyone here but an observation from friends and social media. Thing is a refugee is supposed to seek asylum in the first safe country they arrive in so by definition alone by the time they reach calais they have transitioned into an economic migrant
An asylum seeker and refugee are legal terms. Check out our government site.
Economic migrant is a term to define anyone travelling through country to country for a better life. So it doesn't define if they are escaping prosecution or just migrating. They can still seek asylum in the uk, but have to enter uk territory. If approved they become a refugee.
So there is no real data to support their cause. So how do we deal with it?.
You've got to start at source.... Listen the third world is a relative shit hole for many many reasons but it's time the first world stopped fucking about with aid and started actually acting on making it a better place to live..
I don't know if anybodys ever considered the little fact of something like water as turning a tap on to drink it!.
I'll break down very simply.
In the whole of Africa there isn't one country you can drink from the tap from
In the whole of south America and central America there isn't one country you can drink from the tap from.
In Asia there's about five countries, that's at a guess Japan, s Korea, Hong Kong, Singapore, Israel.
In fact you can draw a line East of Poland and rule out eastern Europe as well.
So what 18 in every 20 people on planet earth can't drink tap water in the 21 St century and honestly I'll tell you the third world is going to get completely fucking hammered by western emissions from climate change, that's you and everybody else enjoying yourself going on holiday, driving your car, eating fast food, just everyday life!.
.
.
I don't have all the answers to your problems or the third world's problems but I'd start with proper UN action on fuckwit leaders, I'd start by stop selling every shit hole country weapons that they mostly use on their own citizens, I'd start by stop giving monetary aid thats used to prop up most of the dictatorships, you know dictatorships with no money and no weapons would last about 30 minutes!.
If you really wanna give aid, then let's make the un build schools everywhere with the money, start at the source and give every child a half decent education and if they fuck up after that, that's there problem!.
I get sick of hearing about 20,000 immigrants in Calais that we should save because we're the rich west.... Well what about the other 1.2 billon Africans?... What fuck them, they're playing by the rules, nobody gives a shit?.
.
.
The planets a fucking mess and quite frankly your making it worse and your solution is "let them in" because A it's no skin off your nose and B you don't want to sound like an uncaring cunt.
If you wanna solve things get down to the root cause?
Wow. A lot to take in.
Chile and Argentina are developed countries. Not third world. You can drink water in Chile in South America. They eradicated cholera years ago. It's just not advisable for tourists because you'll get the shits for a few days which can happen because you're not use to it. But then you're fine.
I'm not saying let them all in. You jumped to that conclusion. I was clarifying the definition of migrant and asylum seekers.
Solve the root cause... I agree.". It wasn't really directed at you it was more picking up from your point. | |||
" It wasn't really directed at you it was more picking up from your point. " I didn't take it too personally, just a little. My family are originally from Chile. So I had knowledge to share. 
But I agree with your conclusion. | |||
| |||
| |||
"Lego have now also pulled out of future promotional work with The Mail and Gary Lineker says that he is pushing hard to get Walkers parent complaint to stop advertising in the Sun." Have Lego ever advertised in the Daily Mail? Maybe they should stick to the Toys R us catalogue? | |||
"Lego have now also pulled out of future promotional work with The Mail and Gary Lineker says that he is pushing hard to get Walkers parent complaint to stop advertising in the Sun. Have Lego ever advertised in the Daily Mail? Maybe they should stick to the Toys R us catalogue? "I can't remember ever seeing walkers advertising their snacks in any newspaper either. | |||
"Lego have now also pulled out of future promotional work with The Mail and Gary Lineker says that he is pushing hard to get Walkers parent complaint to stop advertising in the Sun. Have Lego ever advertised in the Daily Mail? Maybe they should stick to the Toys R us catalogue? "They advertise by giving their products away through the paper? | |||
"Lego have now also pulled out of future promotional work with The Mail and Gary Lineker says that he is pushing hard to get Walkers parent complaint to stop advertising in the Sun. Have Lego ever advertised in the Daily Mail? Maybe they should stick to the Toys R us catalogue?
They advertise by giving their products away through the paper? "So the Mail readers rip out a coupon, travel into town to collect 10p worth of plastic to please their children/grandchildren? They must be terrible people | |||
"Despite being a relatively recent campaign #StopFundingHate has managed to get Specsavers to apologise, remove an advert and review future advertising campaigns. This as a result of Specsavers ads appearing alongside inflammatory stories in the Daily Express. #StopFundingHate is targeting consumer brands that pay to advertise in newspapers and magazines that publish inflammatory and xenophobic stories for the seemingly sole purpose of stirring hatred, resentment and division. Well done them. Keep up the good work." what a load of utter nonsense from the pc brigade you don't like what you read TURN THE PAGE or stop buying I only read the first few comments of this thread and thought what a load of shite, im not going to shift through all these posts that people are wasting time on, so after reading the first few here is my comment, god knows what others have written on this subject of pc drivle | |||
"Lego have now also pulled out of future promotional work with The Mail and Gary Lineker says that he is pushing hard to get Walkers parent complaint to stop advertising in the Sun. Have Lego ever advertised in the Daily Mail? Maybe they should stick to the Toys R us catalogue?
They advertise by giving their products away through the paper?
So the Mail readers rip out a coupon, travel into town to collect 10p worth of plastic to please their children/grandchildren? They must be terrible people"Who said that? I merely pointed out that they advertise their products by giving them away through the paper? To the question: Have Lego ever advertised in the Daily Mail? I have no opinion at all on the rest of the thread. I don't read any newspapers, I do peruse Mail Online now and again. Stopped using Lego when I was about 10. I just do not understand why people on here constantly have to add shitty little comments, such as your: they must be terrible people. Freudian slip maybe? Did you mean 'we' (pluralis majestatis)? | |||
| |||
"Lego have now also pulled out of future promotional work with The Mail and Gary Lineker says that he is pushing hard to get Walkers parent complaint to stop advertising in the Sun. Have Lego ever advertised in the Daily Mail? Maybe they should stick to the Toys R us catalogue?
They advertise by giving their products away through the paper?
So the Mail readers rip out a coupon, travel into town to collect 10p worth of plastic to please their children/grandchildren? They must be terrible people
Who said that? I merely pointed out that they advertise their products by giving them away through the paper? To the question: Have Lego ever advertised in the Daily Mail? I have no opinion at all on the rest of the thread. I don't read any newspapers, I do peruse Mail Online now and again. Stopped using Lego when I was about 10.
I just do not understand why people on here constantly have to add shitty little comments, such as your: they must be terrible people. Freudian slip maybe? Did you mean 'we' (pluralis majestatis)? "'We'? Nope, but the point I was trying to make is that the people who read the daily Mail are maybe not all hate filled and terrible as some on here like to suggest. Don't see why that was a shitty comment | |||
 | |||
"Lego have now also pulled out of future promotional work with The Mail and Gary Lineker says that he is pushing hard to get Walkers parent complaint to stop advertising in the Sun. Have Lego ever advertised in the Daily Mail? Maybe they should stick to the Toys R us catalogue?
They advertise by giving their products away through the paper?
So the Mail readers rip out a coupon, travel into town to collect 10p worth of plastic to please their children/grandchildren? They must be terrible people
Who said that? I merely pointed out that they advertise their products by giving them away through the paper? To the question: Have Lego ever advertised in the Daily Mail? I have no opinion at all on the rest of the thread. I don't read any newspapers, I do peruse Mail Online now and again. Stopped using Lego when I was about 10.
I just do not understand why people on here constantly have to add shitty little comments, such as your: they must be terrible people. Freudian slip maybe? Did you mean 'we' (pluralis majestatis)?
'We'? Nope, but the point I was trying to make is that the people who read the daily Mail are maybe not all hate filled and terrible as some on here like to suggest. Don't see why that was a shitty comment"It was a reply to my point. I've never criticised the Daily Mail, so it came across as shitty to add it. | |||
"The left only call it hate if they disagree with the views ! I don't see them denouncing Grorge Galloway for his Blatant hate if Israel ! " Never had any looks on him. Champagne Socialist of the worst calibre. He is an excellent debater though. His views on Israel are extreme, although he has his supporters in the Jewish anti-zionist movement. (I hope I don't have to explain what I mean by Jewish anti-zionists.) | |||
" As Voltaire famously said. I disapprove of what you say, but will defend to the death your right to say it." Actually what he said was; "Je désapprouve ce que vous dites, mais je me battrai jusqu’à la mort pour que vous ayez le droit de le dire". It is open to interpretation; but given the structure of formal French language at the time, the meaning of this sentence is not very clear. But when analyzed, a more accurate interpretation is that it means " I will defend the right of others to say things that are disapproved until they die", The difference is that it is not a rigorous legal statement. Most importantly, It is a philosophical concept that freedom of expression is your duty to give to others and not an advantage to be claimed for yourself. | |||
"The left only call it hate if they disagree with the views ! I don't see them denouncing Grorge Galloway for his Blatant hate if Israel ! Never had any looks on him. Champagne Socialist of the worst calibre. He is an excellent debater though. His views on Israel are extreme, although he has his supporters in the Jewish anti-zionist movement. (I hope I don't have to explain what I mean by Jewish anti-zionists.)" Of course not, there is one I heard speaking in Brighton a few years back. It amazes me how militant Zionism actually is, and for a Jewish person to speak out against it doesn't go down well at all... | |||
"It's a tricky one, in a free world, free people are free to write letters of complaint about company's they use, that's called leverage as a consumer it's very important to have leverage!. The free press is free, there's no laws forbidding it from printing stories except for exceptional cases like price harry or law court rulings. Unless the whole of country has suddenly turned left wing, there should be plenty of consumers to keep the right wing press in customers!. For all those people complaining about the bbc this was the entire purpose of them to have interference free journalism!. The BBC is a slightly different animal. I would fully agree with interference free journalism but as a publicly funded body the BBC should show no bias in either direction. Sadly in many cases these days that doesn't happen." The British Brainwashing Corporation | |||
"It's a tricky one, in a free world, free people are free to write letters of complaint about company's they use, that's called leverage as a consumer it's very important to have leverage!. The free press is free, there's no laws forbidding it from printing stories except for exceptional cases like price harry or law court rulings. Unless the whole of country has suddenly turned left wing, there should be plenty of consumers to keep the right wing press in customers!. For all those people complaining about the bbc this was the entire purpose of them to have interference free journalism!. The BBC is a slightly different animal. I would fully agree with interference free journalism but as a publicly funded body the BBC should show no bias in either direction. Sadly in many cases these days that doesn't happen. The British Brainwashing Corporation" Or the Biased Broadcasting Corporation. | |||
"It's a tricky one, in a free world, free people are free to write letters of complaint about company's they use, that's called leverage as a consumer it's very important to have leverage!. The free press is free, there's no laws forbidding it from printing stories except for exceptional cases like price harry or law court rulings. Unless the whole of country has suddenly turned left wing, there should be plenty of consumers to keep the right wing press in customers!. For all those people complaining about the bbc this was the entire purpose of them to have interference free journalism!. The BBC is a slightly different animal. I would fully agree with interference free journalism but as a publicly funded body the BBC should show no bias in either direction. Sadly in many cases these days that doesn't happen. The British Brainwashing Corporation Or the Biased Broadcasting Corporation. " Perhaps Biased Brainwashing Coruptoration | |||
"Lego have now also pulled out of future promotional work with The Mail and Gary Lineker says that he is pushing hard to get Walkers parent complaint to stop advertising in the Sun. Have Lego ever advertised in the Daily Mail? Maybe they should stick to the Toys R us catalogue?
They advertise by giving their products away through the paper? "Daily Mail released a statement last night saying that their agreement with Lego had reached the end of its pre arranged contract time line anyway. | |||
"It's a tricky one, in a free world, free people are free to write letters of complaint about company's they use, that's called leverage as a consumer it's very important to have leverage!. The free press is free, there's no laws forbidding it from printing stories except for exceptional cases like price harry or law court rulings. Unless the whole of country has suddenly turned left wing, there should be plenty of consumers to keep the right wing press in customers!. For all those people complaining about the bbc this was the entire purpose of them to have interference free journalism!. The BBC is a slightly different animal. I would fully agree with interference free journalism but as a publicly funded body the BBC should show no bias in either direction. Sadly in many cases these days that doesn't happen. The British Brainwashing Corporation Or the Biased Broadcasting Corporation. Perhaps Biased Brainwashing Coruptoration " Brazen Bullshitting Crapartists | |||
"The left only call it hate if they disagree with the views ! I don't see them denouncing Grorge Galloway for his Blatant hate if Israel ! Never had any looks on him. Champagne Socialist of the worst calibre. He is an excellent debater though. His views on Israel are extreme, although he has his supporters in the Jewish anti-zionist movement. (I hope I don't have to explain what I mean by Jewish anti-zionists.) Of course not, there is one I heard speaking in Brighton a few years back. It amazes me how militant Zionism actually is, and for a Jewish person to speak out against it doesn't go down well at all..." I admire people who stand up against extremism, in its forms. | |||
| |||
| |||
"The left only call it hate if they disagree with the views ! I don't see them denouncing Grorge Galloway for his Blatant hate if Israel ! Never had any looks on him. Champagne Socialist of the worst calibre. He is an excellent debater though. His views on Israel are extreme, although he has his supporters in the Jewish anti-zionist movement. (I hope I don't have to explain what I mean by Jewish anti-zionists.)" No you don't I an fairly well up on it . | |||
| |||
"Despite being a relatively recent campaign #StopFundingHate has managed to get Specsavers to apologise, remove an advert and review future advertising campaigns. This as a result of Specsavers ads appearing alongside inflammatory stories in the Daily Express. #StopFundingHate is targeting consumer brands that pay to advertise in newspapers and magazines that publish inflammatory and xenophobic stories for the seemingly sole purpose of stirring hatred, resentment and division. Well done them. Keep up the good work." However members of the public can decide what they wish to buy. No one is compelled to buy the Daily Mail. What conntribution has stopfundinghate ever made to society. ? Daily Mail readers represent the back ground of British Society and have no interest in such an organisation. The Daily Mail is a great paper and its readers should not be bullied by those who do not believe in freedom of speech. Who defines hatred , resentment and division.? If we all adhered to tbe values promoted by the Daily Mail , the UK would be a better place . Well done to the Daily Mail for standing up for UK citizens . | |||
"Despite being a relatively recent campaign #StopFundingHate has managed to get Specsavers to apologise, remove an advert and review future advertising campaigns. This as a result of Specsavers ads appearing alongside inflammatory stories in the Daily Express. #StopFundingHate is targeting consumer brands that pay to advertise in newspapers and magazines that publish inflammatory and xenophobic stories for the seemingly sole purpose of stirring hatred, resentment and division. Well done them. Keep up the good work. However members of the public can decide what they wish to buy. No one is compelled to buy the Daily Mail. What conntribution has stopfundinghate ever made to society. ? Daily Mail readers represent the back ground of British Society and have no interest in such an organisation. The Daily Mail is a great paper and its readers should not be bullied by those who do not believe in freedom of speech. Who defines hatred , resentment and division.? If we all adhered to tbe values promoted by the Daily Mail , the UK would be a better place . Well done to the Daily Mail for standing up for UK citizens . " The Daily Mail supported the rise of fascism in the 30s......hasn't improved much in the interim. Vicious, bigoted and mean spirited journalism for mean spirited members of society.....perfect synchronicity | |||
"It's a tricky one, in a free world, free people are free to write letters of complaint about company's they use, that's called leverage as a consumer it's very important to have leverage!. The free press is free, there's no laws forbidding it from printing stories except for exceptional cases like price harry or law court rulings. Unless the whole of country has suddenly turned left wing, there should be plenty of consumers to keep the right wing press in customers!. For all those people complaining about the bbc this was the entire purpose of them to have interference free journalism!. The BBC is a slightly different animal. I would fully agree with interference free journalism but as a publicly funded body the BBC should show no bias in either direction. Sadly in many cases these days that doesn't happen. The British Brainwashing Corporation Or the Biased Broadcasting Corporation. " or the Blair broadcasting company as it was once called | |||
"Despite being a relatively recent campaign #StopFundingHate has managed to get Specsavers to apologise, remove an advert and review future advertising campaigns. This as a result of Specsavers ads appearing alongside inflammatory stories in the Daily Express. #StopFundingHate is targeting consumer brands that pay to advertise in newspapers and magazines that publish inflammatory and xenophobic stories for the seemingly sole purpose of stirring hatred, resentment and division. Well done them. Keep up the good work. However members of the public can decide what they wish to buy. No one is compelled to buy the Daily Mail. What conntribution has stopfundinghate ever made to society. ? Daily Mail readers represent the back ground of British Society and have no interest in such an organisation. The Daily Mail is a great paper and its readers should not be bullied by those who do not believe in freedom of speech. Who defines hatred , resentment and division.? If we all adhered to tbe values promoted by the Daily Mail , the UK would be a better place . Well done to the Daily Mail for standing up for UK citizens . The Daily Mail supported the rise of fascism in the 30s......hasn't improved much in the interim. Vicious, bigoted and mean spirited journalism for mean spirited members of society.....perfect synchronicity " Were you around in the 30s. ? If not how wouls you be able to come to that cobclusion ? Do you actually buy and read the paper. ? If not how would you be able to judge it ? | |||
"Despite being a relatively recent campaign #StopFundingHate has managed to get Specsavers to apologise, remove an advert and review future advertising campaigns. This as a result of Specsavers ads appearing alongside inflammatory stories in the Daily Express. #StopFundingHate is targeting consumer brands that pay to advertise in newspapers and magazines that publish inflammatory and xenophobic stories for the seemingly sole purpose of stirring hatred, resentment and division. Well done them. Keep up the good work. However members of the public can decide what they wish to buy. No one is compelled to buy the Daily Mail. What conntribution has stopfundinghate ever made to society. ? Daily Mail readers represent the back ground of British Society and have no interest in such an organisation. The Daily Mail is a great paper and its readers should not be bullied by those who do not believe in freedom of speech. Who defines hatred , resentment and division.? If we all adhered to tbe values promoted by the Daily Mail , the UK would be a better place . Well done to the Daily Mail for standing up for UK citizens . " Bloody good newspaper, The Express even better. Good post!    | |||
"Despite being a relatively recent campaign #StopFundingHate has managed to get Specsavers to apologise, remove an advert and review future advertising campaigns. This as a result of Specsavers ads appearing alongside inflammatory stories in the Daily Express. #StopFundingHate is targeting consumer brands that pay to advertise in newspapers and magazines that publish inflammatory and xenophobic stories for the seemingly sole purpose of stirring hatred, resentment and division. Well done them. Keep up the good work. However members of the public can decide what they wish to buy. No one is compelled to buy the Daily Mail. What conntribution has stopfundinghate ever made to society. ? Daily Mail readers represent the back ground of British Society and have no interest in such an organisation. The Daily Mail is a great paper and its readers should not be bullied by those who do not believe in freedom of speech. Who defines hatred , resentment and division.? If we all adhered to tbe values promoted by the Daily Mail , the UK would be a better place . Well done to the Daily Mail for standing up for UK citizens . The Daily Mail supported the rise of fascism in the 30s......hasn't improved much in the interim. Vicious, bigoted and mean spirited journalism for mean spirited members of society.....perfect synchronicity Were you around in the 30s. ? If not how wouls you be able to come to that cobclusion ? Do you actually buy and read the paper. ? If not how would you be able to judge it ?" For someone who purports to be 'educated' you are also very naive. The support by the Daily Mail of Fascism is very well known, one needn't have been "around in the 30s." Rothermeee the propreitor of the paper was a personal friend of both Mussolini and Hitler and directed his papers editorial stance to be pro-Fascism. Rather than just wading in, putting someone down, then leaving maybe you should research before posting? Im not expecting a reply to this, as you weren't able to reply to other counter posts I've made on other threads. Do some research and dont be a sheep. | |||
"Despite being a relatively recent campaign #StopFundingHate has managed to get Specsavers to apologise, remove an advert and review future advertising campaigns. This as a result of Specsavers ads appearing alongside inflammatory stories in the Daily Express. #StopFundingHate is targeting consumer brands that pay to advertise in newspapers and magazines that publish inflammatory and xenophobic stories for the seemingly sole purpose of stirring hatred, resentment and division. Well done them. Keep up the good work. However members of the public can decide what they wish to buy. No one is compelled to buy the Daily Mail. What conntribution has stopfundinghate ever made to society. ? Daily Mail readers represent the back ground of British Society and have no interest in such an organisation. The Daily Mail is a great paper and its readers should not be bullied by those who do not believe in freedom of speech. Who defines hatred , resentment and division.? If we all adhered to tbe values promoted by the Daily Mail , the UK would be a better place . Well done to the Daily Mail for standing up for UK citizens . The Daily Mail supported the rise of fascism in the 30s......hasn't improved much in the interim. Vicious, bigoted and mean spirited journalism for mean spirited members of society.....perfect synchronicity Were you around in the 30s. ? If not how wouls you be able to come to that cobclusion ? Do you actually buy and read the paper. ? If not how would you be able to judge it ? For someone who purports to be 'educated' you are also very naive. The support by the Daily Mail of Fascism is very well known, one needn't have been "around in the 30s." Rothermeee the propreitor of the paper was a personal friend of both Mussolini and Hitler and directed his papers editorial stance to be pro-Fascism. Rather than just wading in, putting someone down, then leaving maybe you should research before posting? Im not expecting a reply to this, as you weren't able to reply to other counter posts I've made on other threads. Do some research and dont be a sheep. " Just wait until CandM4U come along and tell you that Hitler and Mussolini weren't fascists, there were socialists! | |||
"Despite being a relatively recent campaign #StopFundingHate has managed to get Specsavers to apologise, remove an advert and review future advertising campaigns. This as a result of Specsavers ads appearing alongside inflammatory stories in the Daily Express. #StopFundingHate is targeting consumer brands that pay to advertise in newspapers and magazines that publish inflammatory and xenophobic stories for the seemingly sole purpose of stirring hatred, resentment and division. Well done them. Keep up the good work. However members of the public can decide what they wish to buy. No one is compelled to buy the Daily Mail. What conntribution has stopfundinghate ever made to society. ? Daily Mail readers represent the back ground of British Society and have no interest in such an organisation. The Daily Mail is a great paper and its readers should not be bullied by those who do not believe in freedom of speech. Who defines hatred , resentment and division.? If we all adhered to tbe values promoted by the Daily Mail , the UK would be a better place . Well done to the Daily Mail for standing up for UK citizens . The Daily Mail supported the rise of fascism in the 30s......hasn't improved much in the interim. Vicious, bigoted and mean spirited journalism for mean spirited members of society.....perfect synchronicity Were you around in the 30s. ? If not how wouls you be able to come to that cobclusion ? Do you actually buy and read the paper. ? If not how would you be able to judge it ? For someone who purports to be 'educated' you are also very naive. The support by the Daily Mail of Fascism is very well known, one needn't have been "around in the 30s." Rothermeee the propreitor of the paper was a personal friend of both Mussolini and Hitler and directed his papers editorial stance to be pro-Fascism. Rather than just wading in, putting someone down, then leaving maybe you should research before posting? Im not expecting a reply to this, as you weren't able to reply to other counter posts I've made on other threads. Do some research and dont be a sheep. Just wait until CandM4U come along and tell you that Hitler and Mussolini weren't fascists, there were socialists! "Their parties may have been. I know a neo-facist dictator was the right hand man of a Marxist. He was just bought out by the Americans. I wonder if the three rules for rulers give some truth on dictatorship vs democracy. The video is from CGP grey on YouTube. | |||
"Despite being a relatively recent campaign #StopFundingHate has managed to get Specsavers to apologise, remove an advert and review future advertising campaigns. This as a result of Specsavers ads appearing alongside inflammatory stories in the Daily Express. #StopFundingHate is targeting consumer brands that pay to advertise in newspapers and magazines that publish inflammatory and xenophobic stories for the seemingly sole purpose of stirring hatred, resentment and division. Well done them. Keep up the good work. However members of the public can decide what they wish to buy. No one is compelled to buy the Daily Mail. What conntribution has stopfundinghate ever made to society. ? Daily Mail readers represent the back ground of British Society and have no interest in such an organisation. The Daily Mail is a great paper and its readers should not be bullied by those who do not believe in freedom of speech. Who defines hatred , resentment and division.? If we all adhered to tbe values promoted by the Daily Mail , the UK would be a better place . Well done to the Daily Mail for standing up for UK citizens . The Daily Mail supported the rise of fascism in the 30s......hasn't improved much in the interim. Vicious, bigoted and mean spirited journalism for mean spirited members of society.....perfect synchronicity Were you around in the 30s. ? If not how wouls you be able to come to that cobclusion ? Do you actually buy and read the paper. ? If not how would you be able to judge it ? For someone who purports to be 'educated' you are also very naive. The support by the Daily Mail of Fascism is very well known, one needn't have been "around in the 30s." Rothermeee the propreitor of the paper was a personal friend of both Mussolini and Hitler and directed his papers editorial stance to be pro-Fascism. Rather than just wading in, putting someone down, then leaving maybe you should research before posting? Im not expecting a reply to this, as you weren't able to reply to other counter posts I've made on other threads. Do some research and dont be a sheep. Just wait until CandM4U come along and tell you that Hitler and Mussolini weren't fascists, there were socialists! "Nothing would surprise me, especially on this site!  | |||
"Despite being a relatively recent campaign #StopFundingHate has managed to get Specsavers to apologise, remove an advert and review future advertising campaigns. This as a result of Specsavers ads appearing alongside inflammatory stories in the Daily Express. #StopFundingHate is targeting consumer brands that pay to advertise in newspapers and magazines that publish inflammatory and xenophobic stories for the seemingly sole purpose of stirring hatred, resentment and division. Well done them. Keep up the good work. However members of the public can decide what they wish to buy. No one is compelled to buy the Daily Mail. What conntribution has stopfundinghate ever made to society. ? Daily Mail readers represent the back ground of British Society and have no interest in such an organisation. The Daily Mail is a great paper and its readers should not be bullied by those who do not believe in freedom of speech. Who defines hatred , resentment and division.? If we all adhered to tbe values promoted by the Daily Mail , the UK would be a better place . Well done to the Daily Mail for standing up for UK citizens . The Daily Mail supported the rise of fascism in the 30s......hasn't improved much in the interim. Vicious, bigoted and mean spirited journalism for mean spirited members of society.....perfect synchronicity Were you around in the 30s. ? If not how wouls you be able to come to that cobclusion ? Do you actually buy and read the paper. ? If not how would you be able to judge it ? For someone who purports to be 'educated' you are also very naive. The support by the Daily Mail of Fascism is very well known, one needn't have been "around in the 30s." Rothermeee the propreitor of the paper was a personal friend of both Mussolini and Hitler and directed his papers editorial stance to be pro-Fascism. Rather than just wading in, putting someone down, then leaving maybe you should research before posting? Im not expecting a reply to this, as you weren't able to reply to other counter posts I've made on other threads. Do some research and dont be a sheep. Just wait until CandM4U come along and tell you that Hitler and Mussolini weren't fascists, there were socialists!
Nothing would surprise me, especially on this site! "here we go again  I'v never said they weren't fascists, they were. And socialists.
Learn some history. Where their politics and ideology came from, which parties they were members of and where national socialism came from and what fascism is. | |||
"Despite being a relatively recent campaign #StopFundingHate has managed to get Specsavers to apologise, remove an advert and review future advertising campaigns. This as a result of Specsavers ads appearing alongside inflammatory stories in the Daily Express. #StopFundingHate is targeting consumer brands that pay to advertise in newspapers and magazines that publish inflammatory and xenophobic stories for the seemingly sole purpose of stirring hatred, resentment and division. Well done them. Keep up the good work. However members of the public can decide what they wish to buy. No one is compelled to buy the Daily Mail. What conntribution has stopfundinghate ever made to society. ? Daily Mail readers represent the back ground of British Society and have no interest in such an organisation. The Daily Mail is a great paper and its readers should not be bullied by those who do not believe in freedom of speech. Who defines hatred , resentment and division.? If we all adhered to tbe values promoted by the Daily Mail , the UK would be a better place . Well done to the Daily Mail for standing up for UK citizens . The Daily Mail supported the rise of fascism in the 30s......hasn't improved much in the interim. Vicious, bigoted and mean spirited journalism for mean spirited members of society.....perfect synchronicity Were you around in the 30s. ? If not how wouls you be able to come to that cobclusion ? Do you actually buy and read the paper. ? If not how would you be able to judge it ? For someone who purports to be 'educated' you are also very naive. The support by the Daily Mail of Fascism is very well known, one needn't have been "around in the 30s." Rothermeee the propreitor of the paper was a personal friend of both Mussolini and Hitler and directed his papers editorial stance to be pro-Fascism. Rather than just wading in, putting someone down, then leaving maybe you should research before posting? Im not expecting a reply to this, as you weren't able to reply to other counter posts I've made on other threads. Do some research and dont be a sheep. " It might just be what happened in the 30s is of no interest to me . I make my judgement based on what is happening in the World today , not 80 years ago. | |||
"Despite being a relatively recent campaign #StopFundingHate has managed to get Specsavers to apologise, remove an advert and review future advertising campaigns. This as a result of Specsavers ads appearing alongside inflammatory stories in the Daily Express. #StopFundingHate is targeting consumer brands that pay to advertise in newspapers and magazines that publish inflammatory and xenophobic stories for the seemingly sole purpose of stirring hatred, resentment and division. Well done them. Keep up the good work. However members of the public can decide what they wish to buy. No one is compelled to buy the Daily Mail. What conntribution has stopfundinghate ever made to society. ? Daily Mail readers represent the back ground of British Society and have no interest in such an organisation. The Daily Mail is a great paper and its readers should not be bullied by those who do not believe in freedom of speech. Who defines hatred , resentment and division.? If we all adhered to tbe values promoted by the Daily Mail , the UK would be a better place . Well done to the Daily Mail for standing up for UK citizens . The Daily Mail supported the rise of fascism in the 30s......hasn't improved much in the interim. Vicious, bigoted and mean spirited journalism for mean spirited members of society.....perfect synchronicity Were you around in the 30s. ? If not how wouls you be able to come to that cobclusion ? Do you actually buy and read the paper. ? If not how would you be able to judge it ? For someone who purports to be 'educated' you are also very naive. The support by the Daily Mail of Fascism is very well known, one needn't have been "around in the 30s." Rothermeee the propreitor of the paper was a personal friend of both Mussolini and Hitler and directed his papers editorial stance to be pro-Fascism. Rather than just wading in, putting someone down, then leaving maybe you should research before posting? Im not expecting a reply to this, as you weren't able to reply to other counter posts I've made on other threads. Do some research and dont be a sheep. It might just be what happened in the 30s is of no interest to me . I make my judgement based on what is happening in the World today , not 80 years ago." Reasoned argument right there folks! | |||
"Despite being a relatively recent campaign #StopFundingHate has managed to get Specsavers to apologise, remove an advert and review future advertising campaigns. This as a result of Specsavers ads appearing alongside inflammatory stories in the Daily Express. #StopFundingHate is targeting consumer brands that pay to advertise in newspapers and magazines that publish inflammatory and xenophobic stories for the seemingly sole purpose of stirring hatred, resentment and division. Well done them. Keep up the good work. However members of the public can decide what they wish to buy. No one is compelled to buy the Daily Mail. What conntribution has stopfundinghate ever made to society. ? Daily Mail readers represent the back ground of British Society and have no interest in such an organisation. The Daily Mail is a great paper and its readers should not be bullied by those who do not believe in freedom of speech. Who defines hatred , resentment and division.? If we all adhered to tbe values promoted by the Daily Mail , the UK would be a better place . Well done to the Daily Mail for standing up for UK citizens . The Daily Mail supported the rise of fascism in the 30s......hasn't improved much in the interim. Vicious, bigoted and mean spirited journalism for mean spirited members of society.....perfect synchronicity Were you around in the 30s. ? If not how wouls you be able to come to that cobclusion ? Do you actually buy and read the paper. ? If not how would you be able to judge it ? For someone who purports to be 'educated' you are also very naive. The support by the Daily Mail of Fascism is very well known, one needn't have been "around in the 30s." Rothermeee the propreitor of the paper was a personal friend of both Mussolini and Hitler and directed his papers editorial stance to be pro-Fascism. Rather than just wading in, putting someone down, then leaving maybe you should research before posting? Im not expecting a reply to this, as you weren't able to reply to other counter posts I've made on other threads. Do some research and dont be a sheep. Just wait until CandM4U come along and tell you that Hitler and Mussolini weren't fascists, there were socialists!
Nothing would surprise me, especially on this site!
here we go again I'v never said they weren't fascists, they were. And socialists.
Learn some history. Where their politics and ideology came from, which parties they were members of and where national socialism came from and what fascism is. "They weren't actually socialists, in the case of the NAZIs, they just attached the term socialism to their name. Back to school for some of you, methinks! | |||
"Despite being a relatively recent campaign #StopFundingHate has managed to get Specsavers to apologise, remove an advert and review future advertising campaigns. This as a result of Specsavers ads appearing alongside inflammatory stories in the Daily Express. #StopFundingHate is targeting consumer brands that pay to advertise in newspapers and magazines that publish inflammatory and xenophobic stories for the seemingly sole purpose of stirring hatred, resentment and division. Well done them. Keep up the good work. However members of the public can decide what they wish to buy. No one is compelled to buy the Daily Mail. What conntribution has stopfundinghate ever made to society. ? Daily Mail readers represent the back ground of British Society and have no interest in such an organisation. The Daily Mail is a great paper and its readers should not be bullied by those who do not believe in freedom of speech. Who defines hatred , resentment and division.? If we all adhered to tbe values promoted by the Daily Mail , the UK would be a better place . Well done to the Daily Mail for standing up for UK citizens . The Daily Mail supported the rise of fascism in the 30s......hasn't improved much in the interim. Vicious, bigoted and mean spirited journalism for mean spirited members of society.....perfect synchronicity Were you around in the 30s. ? If not how wouls you be able to come to that cobclusion ? Do you actually buy and read the paper. ? If not how would you be able to judge it ? For someone who purports to be 'educated' you are also very naive. The support by the Daily Mail of Fascism is very well known, one needn't have been "around in the 30s." Rothermeee the propreitor of the paper was a personal friend of both Mussolini and Hitler and directed his papers editorial stance to be pro-Fascism. Rather than just wading in, putting someone down, then leaving maybe you should research before posting? Im not expecting a reply to this, as you weren't able to reply to other counter posts I've made on other threads. Do some research and dont be a sheep. Just wait until CandM4U come along and tell you that Hitler and Mussolini weren't fascists, there were socialists!
Nothing would surprise me, especially on this site!
here we go again I'v never said they weren't fascists, they were. And socialists.
Learn some history. Where their politics and ideology came from, which parties they were members of and where national socialism came from and what fascism is.
They weren't actually socialists, in the case of the NAZIs, they just attached the term socialism to their name.
Back to school for some of you, methinks! "Don't waste your breath .... | |||
| |||
"Despite being a relatively recent campaign #StopFundingHate has managed to get Specsavers to apologise, remove an advert and review future advertising campaigns. This as a result of Specsavers ads appearing alongside inflammatory stories in the Daily Express. #StopFundingHate is targeting consumer brands that pay to advertise in newspapers and magazines that publish inflammatory and xenophobic stories for the seemingly sole purpose of stirring hatred, resentment and division. Well done them. Keep up the good work. However members of the public can decide what they wish to buy. No one is compelled to buy the Daily Mail. What conntribution has stopfundinghate ever made to society. ? Daily Mail readers represent the back ground of British Society and have no interest in such an organisation. The Daily Mail is a great paper and its readers should not be bullied by those who do not believe in freedom of speech. Who defines hatred , resentment and division.? If we all adhered to tbe values promoted by the Daily Mail , the UK would be a better place . Well done to the Daily Mail for standing up for UK citizens . The Daily Mail supported the rise of fascism in the 30s......hasn't improved much in the interim. Vicious, bigoted and mean spirited journalism for mean spirited members of society.....perfect synchronicity Were you around in the 30s. ? If not how wouls you be able to come to that cobclusion ? Do you actually buy and read the paper. ? If not how would you be able to judge it ? For someone who purports to be 'educated' you are also very naive. The support by the Daily Mail of Fascism is very well known, one needn't have been "around in the 30s." Rothermeee the propreitor of the paper was a personal friend of both Mussolini and Hitler and directed his papers editorial stance to be pro-Fascism. Rather than just wading in, putting someone down, then leaving maybe you should research before posting? Im not expecting a reply to this, as you weren't able to reply to other counter posts I've made on other threads. Do some research and dont be a sheep. Just wait until CandM4U come along and tell you that Hitler and Mussolini weren't fascists, there were socialists!
Nothing would surprise me, especially on this site!
here we go again I'v never said they weren't fascists, they were. And socialists.
Learn some history. Where their politics and ideology came from, which parties they were members of and where national socialism came from and what fascism is.
They weren't actually socialists, in the case of the NAZIs, they just attached the term socialism to their name.
Back to school for some of you, methinks!
Don't waste your breath ...."I just wish we could have a reasoned debate about facts, not as some to here, about biased opinion. The level of debate is akin to a school yard argument of late. Worryingly so.. | |||
"Despite being a relatively recent campaign #StopFundingHate has managed to get Specsavers to apologise, remove an advert and review future advertising campaigns. This as a result of Specsavers ads appearing alongside inflammatory stories in the Daily Express. #StopFundingHate is targeting consumer brands that pay to advertise in newspapers and magazines that publish inflammatory and xenophobic stories for the seemingly sole purpose of stirring hatred, resentment and division. Well done them. Keep up the good work. However members of the public can decide what they wish to buy. No one is compelled to buy the Daily Mail. What conntribution has stopfundinghate ever made to society. ? Daily Mail readers represent the back ground of British Society and have no interest in such an organisation. The Daily Mail is a great paper and its readers should not be bullied by those who do not believe in freedom of speech. Who defines hatred , resentment and division.? If we all adhered to tbe values promoted by the Daily Mail , the UK would be a better place . Well done to the Daily Mail for standing up for UK citizens . The Daily Mail supported the rise of fascism in the 30s......hasn't improved much in the interim. Vicious, bigoted and mean spirited journalism for mean spirited members of society.....perfect synchronicity Were you around in the 30s. ? If not how wouls you be able to come to that cobclusion ? Do you actually buy and read the paper. ? If not how would you be able to judge it ? For someone who purports to be 'educated' you are also very naive. The support by the Daily Mail of Fascism is very well known, one needn't have been "around in the 30s." Rothermeee the propreitor of the paper was a personal friend of both Mussolini and Hitler and directed his papers editorial stance to be pro-Fascism. Rather than just wading in, putting someone down, then leaving maybe you should research before posting? Im not expecting a reply to this, as you weren't able to reply to other counter posts I've made on other threads. Do some research and dont be a sheep. Just wait until CandM4U come along and tell you that Hitler and Mussolini weren't fascists, there were socialists!
Nothing would surprise me, especially on this site!
here we go again I'v never said they weren't fascists, they were. And socialists.
Learn some history. Where their politics and ideology came from, which parties they were members of and where national socialism came from and what fascism is.
They weren't actually socialists, in the case of the NAZIs, they just attached the term socialism to their name.
Back to school for some of you, methinks!
Don't waste your breath ....
I just wish we could have a reasoned debate about facts, not as some to here, about biased opinion. The level of debate is akin to a school yard argument of late. Worryingly so.."It is not as bad as it has been but honestly, I have never heard a school yard argument quite like this one .... kids have more awareness | |||
"Despite being a relatively recent campaign #StopFundingHate has managed to get Specsavers to apologise, remove an advert and review future advertising campaigns. This as a result of Specsavers ads appearing alongside inflammatory stories in the Daily Express. #StopFundingHate is targeting consumer brands that pay to advertise in newspapers and magazines that publish inflammatory and xenophobic stories for the seemingly sole purpose of stirring hatred, resentment and division. Well done them. Keep up the good work. However members of the public can decide what they wish to buy. No one is compelled to buy the Daily Mail. What conntribution has stopfundinghate ever made to society. ? Daily Mail readers represent the back ground of British Society and have no interest in such an organisation. The Daily Mail is a great paper and its readers should not be bullied by those who do not believe in freedom of speech. Who defines hatred , resentment and division.? If we all adhered to tbe values promoted by the Daily Mail , the UK would be a better place . Well done to the Daily Mail for standing up for UK citizens . The Daily Mail supported the rise of fascism in the 30s......hasn't improved much in the interim. Vicious, bigoted and mean spirited journalism for mean spirited members of society.....perfect synchronicity Were you around in the 30s. ? If not how wouls you be able to come to that cobclusion ? Do you actually buy and read the paper. ? If not how would you be able to judge it ? For someone who purports to be 'educated' you are also very naive. The support by the Daily Mail of Fascism is very well known, one needn't have been "around in the 30s." Rothermeee the propreitor of the paper was a personal friend of both Mussolini and Hitler and directed his papers editorial stance to be pro-Fascism. Rather than just wading in, putting someone down, then leaving maybe you should research before posting? Im not expecting a reply to this, as you weren't able to reply to other counter posts I've made on other threads. Do some research and dont be a sheep. Just wait until CandM4U come along and tell you that Hitler and Mussolini weren't fascists, there were socialists!
Nothing would surprise me, especially on this site!
here we go again I'v never said they weren't fascists, they were. And socialists.
Learn some history. Where their politics and ideology came from, which parties they were members of and where national socialism came from and what fascism is.
They weren't actually socialists, in the case of the NAZIs, they just attached the term socialism to their name.
Back to school for some of you, methinks!
Don't waste your breath ....
I just wish we could have a reasoned debate about facts, not as some to here, about biased opinion. The level of debate is akin to a school yard argument of late. Worryingly so..
It is not as bad as it has been but honestly, I have never heard a school yard argument quite like this one .... kids have more awareness "You are quite correct, I should have shown more respect for the younger generation! | |||
"Despite being a relatively recent campaign #StopFundingHate has managed to get Specsavers to apologise, remove an advert and review future advertising campaigns. This as a result of Specsavers ads appearing alongside inflammatory stories in the Daily Express. #StopFundingHate is targeting consumer brands that pay to advertise in newspapers and magazines that publish inflammatory and xenophobic stories for the seemingly sole purpose of stirring hatred, resentment and division. Well done them. Keep up the good work. However members of the public can decide what they wish to buy. No one is compelled to buy the Daily Mail. What conntribution has stopfundinghate ever made to society. ? Daily Mail readers represent the back ground of British Society and have no interest in such an organisation. The Daily Mail is a great paper and its readers should not be bullied by those who do not believe in freedom of speech. Who defines hatred , resentment and division.? If we all adhered to tbe values promoted by the Daily Mail , the UK would be a better place . Well done to the Daily Mail for standing up for UK citizens . The Daily Mail supported the rise of fascism in the 30s......hasn't improved much in the interim. Vicious, bigoted and mean spirited journalism for mean spirited members of society.....perfect synchronicity Were you around in the 30s. ? If not how wouls you be able to come to that cobclusion ? Do you actually buy and read the paper. ? If not how would you be able to judge it ? For someone who purports to be 'educated' you are also very naive. The support by the Daily Mail of Fascism is very well known, one needn't have been "around in the 30s." Rothermeee the propreitor of the paper was a personal friend of both Mussolini and Hitler and directed his papers editorial stance to be pro-Fascism. Rather than just wading in, putting someone down, then leaving maybe you should research before posting? Im not expecting a reply to this, as you weren't able to reply to other counter posts I've made on other threads. Do some research and dont be a sheep. Just wait until CandM4U come along and tell you that Hitler and Mussolini weren't fascists, there were socialists!
Nothing would surprise me, especially on this site!
here we go again I'v never said they weren't fascists, they were. And socialists.
Learn some history. Where their politics and ideology came from, which parties they were members of and where national socialism came from and what fascism is.
They weren't actually socialists, in the case of the NAZIs, they just attached the term socialism to their name.
Back to school for some of you, methinks!
Don't waste your breath ....
I just wish we could have a reasoned debate about facts, not as some to here, about biased opinion. The level of debate is akin to a school yard argument of late. Worryingly so..
It is not as bad as it has been but honestly, I have never heard a school yard argument quite like this one .... kids have more awareness
You are quite correct, I should have shown more respect for the younger generation!"That's because facts don't mean anything anymore to some people. We are living in a post truth world. You can't have a reasonable discussion when one side just refuses to accept facts, like facism being on the right, or the number of counties in the single market, its like trying to debate with a toddler. | |||
"Despite being a relatively recent campaign #StopFundingHate has managed to get Specsavers to apologise, remove an advert and review future advertising campaigns. This as a result of Specsavers ads appearing alongside inflammatory stories in the Daily Express. #StopFundingHate is targeting consumer brands that pay to advertise in newspapers and magazines that publish inflammatory and xenophobic stories for the seemingly sole purpose of stirring hatred, resentment and division. Well done them. Keep up the good work. However members of the public can decide what they wish to buy. No one is compelled to buy the Daily Mail. What conntribution has stopfundinghate ever made to society. ? Daily Mail readers represent the back ground of British Society and have no interest in such an organisation. The Daily Mail is a great paper and its readers should not be bullied by those who do not believe in freedom of speech. Who defines hatred , resentment and division.? If we all adhered to tbe values promoted by the Daily Mail , the UK would be a better place . Well done to the Daily Mail for standing up for UK citizens . The Daily Mail supported the rise of fascism in the 30s......hasn't improved much in the interim. Vicious, bigoted and mean spirited journalism for mean spirited members of society.....perfect synchronicity Were you around in the 30s. ? If not how wouls you be able to come to that cobclusion ? Do you actually buy and read the paper. ? If not how would you be able to judge it ? For someone who purports to be 'educated' you are also very naive. The support by the Daily Mail of Fascism is very well known, one needn't have been "around in the 30s." Rothermeee the propreitor of the paper was a personal friend of both Mussolini and Hitler and directed his papers editorial stance to be pro-Fascism. Rather than just wading in, putting someone down, then leaving maybe you should research before posting? Im not expecting a reply to this, as you weren't able to reply to other counter posts I've made on other threads. Do some research and dont be a sheep. Just wait until CandM4U come along and tell you that Hitler and Mussolini weren't fascists, there were socialists!
Nothing would surprise me, especially on this site!
here we go again I'v never said they weren't fascists, they were. And socialists.
Learn some history. Where their politics and ideology came from, which parties they were members of and where national socialism came from and what fascism is.
They weren't actually socialists, in the case of the NAZIs, they just attached the term socialism to their name.
Back to school for some of you, methinks! "Really? Mussolini was a member of the Italian Socialist Party from 1901-1914. He didn't just change from socialist to 'fascist' he simply became a socialist that had a stronger belief in a united nation that overcame social hierarchy through labour for the benefit of the sate. The NSDAP was the NAZI party, they didn't just attatch socialism to their name
Hitler may have denounced socialism because of his war against the USSR but privately admitted he was a left winger. He stated plainly that the whole of national socialism was based on Marxism. People find it difficult to understand how Hitler could have been a socialist because they misread the true history of socialist thought. Prior to WW2 socialists had established a tradition of advocating eugenics, genocide and ethnic cleansing.
So, who needs to go back to school and learn some history? | |||
| |||
"Despite being a relatively recent campaign #StopFundingHate has managed to get Specsavers to apologise, remove an advert and review future advertising campaigns. This as a result of Specsavers ads appearing alongside inflammatory stories in the Daily Express. #StopFundingHate is targeting consumer brands that pay to advertise in newspapers and magazines that publish inflammatory and xenophobic stories for the seemingly sole purpose of stirring hatred, resentment and division. Well done them. Keep up the good work. However members of the public can decide what they wish to buy. No one is compelled to buy the Daily Mail. What conntribution has stopfundinghate ever made to society. ? Daily Mail readers represent the back ground of British Society and have no interest in such an organisation. The Daily Mail is a great paper and its readers should not be bullied by those who do not believe in freedom of speech. Who defines hatred , resentment and division.? If we all adhered to tbe values promoted by the Daily Mail , the UK would be a better place . Well done to the Daily Mail for standing up for UK citizens . The Daily Mail supported the rise of fascism in the 30s......hasn't improved much in the interim. Vicious, bigoted and mean spirited journalism for mean spirited members of society.....perfect synchronicity Were you around in the 30s. ? If not how wouls you be able to come to that cobclusion ? Do you actually buy and read the paper. ? If not how would you be able to judge it ? For someone who purports to be 'educated' you are also very naive. The support by the Daily Mail of Fascism is very well known, one needn't have been "around in the 30s." Rothermeee the propreitor of the paper was a personal friend of both Mussolini and Hitler and directed his papers editorial stance to be pro-Fascism. Rather than just wading in, putting someone down, then leaving maybe you should research before posting? Im not expecting a reply to this, as you weren't able to reply to other counter posts I've made on other threads. Do some research and dont be a sheep. Just wait until CandM4U come along and tell you that Hitler and Mussolini weren't fascists, there were socialists!
Nothing would surprise me, especially on this site!
here we go again I'v never said they weren't fascists, they were. And socialists.
Learn some history. Where their politics and ideology came from, which parties they were members of and where national socialism came from and what fascism is.
They weren't actually socialists, in the case of the NAZIs, they just attached the term socialism to their name.
Back to school for some of you, methinks!
Don't waste your breath ....
I just wish we could have a reasoned debate about facts, not as some to here, about biased opinion. The level of debate is akin to a school yard argument of late. Worryingly so..
It is not as bad as it has been but honestly, I have never heard a school yard argument quite like this one .... kids have more awareness
You are quite correct, I should have shown more respect for the younger generation!
That's because facts don't mean anything anymore to some people. We are living in a post truth world. You can't have a reasonable discussion when one side just refuses to accept facts, like facism being on the right, or the number of counties in the single market, its like trying to debate with a toddler. "However even facts are open to debate and may not even be accurate . It is not maybe a post truth world , it might juse be that people feel free to express their opinions and are less suppressed. On many posts on here I have noticed that those who are keen on facts are the most intolerant of all posters . They are only interested in facts if it backs their point of view. | |||
"Despite being a relatively recent campaign #StopFundingHate has managed to get Specsavers to apologise, remove an advert and review future advertising campaigns. This as a result of Specsavers ads appearing alongside inflammatory stories in the Daily Express. #StopFundingHate is targeting consumer brands that pay to advertise in newspapers and magazines that publish inflammatory and xenophobic stories for the seemingly sole purpose of stirring hatred, resentment and division. Well done them. Keep up the good work. However members of the public can decide what they wish to buy. No one is compelled to buy the Daily Mail. What conntribution has stopfundinghate ever made to society. ? Daily Mail readers represent the back ground of British Society and have no interest in such an organisation. The Daily Mail is a great paper and its readers should not be bullied by those who do not believe in freedom of speech. Who defines hatred , resentment and division.? If we all adhered to tbe values promoted by the Daily Mail , the UK would be a better place . Well done to the Daily Mail for standing up for UK citizens . The Daily Mail supported the rise of fascism in the 30s......hasn't improved much in the interim. Vicious, bigoted and mean spirited journalism for mean spirited members of society.....perfect synchronicity Were you around in the 30s. ? If not how wouls you be able to come to that cobclusion ? Do you actually buy and read the paper. ? If not how would you be able to judge it ? For someone who purports to be 'educated' you are also very naive. The support by the Daily Mail of Fascism is very well known, one needn't have been "around in the 30s." Rothermeee the propreitor of the paper was a personal friend of both Mussolini and Hitler and directed his papers editorial stance to be pro-Fascism. Rather than just wading in, putting someone down, then leaving maybe you should research before posting? Im not expecting a reply to this, as you weren't able to reply to other counter posts I've made on other threads. Do some research and dont be a sheep. Just wait until CandM4U come along and tell you that Hitler and Mussolini weren't fascists, there were socialists!
Nothing would surprise me, especially on this site!
here we go again I'v never said they weren't fascists, they were. And socialists.
Learn some history. Where their politics and ideology came from, which parties they were members of and where national socialism came from and what fascism is.
They weren't actually socialists, in the case of the NAZIs, they just attached the term socialism to their name.
Back to school for some of you, methinks!
Don't waste your breath ....
I just wish we could have a reasoned debate about facts, not as some to here, about biased opinion. The level of debate is akin to a school yard argument of late. Worryingly so..
It is not as bad as it has been but honestly, I have never heard a school yard argument quite like this one .... kids have more awareness
You are quite correct, I should have shown more respect for the younger generation!
That's because facts don't mean anything anymore to some people. We are living in a post truth world. You can't have a reasonable discussion when one side just refuses to accept facts, like facism being on the right, or the number of counties in the single market, its like trying to debate with a toddler. However even facts are open to debate and may not even be accurate . It is not maybe a post truth world , it might juse be that people feel free to express their opinions and are less suppressed.
On many posts on here I have noticed that those who are keen on facts are the most intolerant of all posters . They are only interested in facts if it backs their point of view. " | |||
"Despite being a relatively recent campaign #StopFundingHate has managed to get Specsavers to apologise, remove an advert and review future advertising campaigns. This as a result of Specsavers ads appearing alongside inflammatory stories in the Daily Express. #StopFundingHate is targeting consumer brands that pay to advertise in newspapers and magazines that publish inflammatory and xenophobic stories for the seemingly sole purpose of stirring hatred, resentment and division. Well done them. Keep up the good work. However members of the public can decide what they wish to buy. No one is compelled to buy the Daily Mail. What conntribution has stopfundinghate ever made to society. ? Daily Mail readers represent the back ground of British Society and have no interest in such an organisation. The Daily Mail is a great paper and its readers should not be bullied by those who do not believe in freedom of speech. Who defines hatred , resentment and division.? If we all adhered to tbe values promoted by the Daily Mail , the UK would be a better place . Well done to the Daily Mail for standing up for UK citizens . The Daily Mail supported the rise of fascism in the 30s......hasn't improved much in the interim. Vicious, bigoted and mean spirited journalism for mean spirited members of society.....perfect synchronicity Were you around in the 30s. ? If not how wouls you be able to come to that cobclusion ? Do you actually buy and read the paper. ? If not how would you be able to judge it ? For someone who purports to be 'educated' you are also very naive. The support by the Daily Mail of Fascism is very well known, one needn't have been "around in the 30s." Rothermeee the propreitor of the paper was a personal friend of both Mussolini and Hitler and directed his papers editorial stance to be pro-Fascism. Rather than just wading in, putting someone down, then leaving maybe you should research before posting? Im not expecting a reply to this, as you weren't able to reply to other counter posts I've made on other threads. Do some research and dont be a sheep. Just wait until CandM4U come along and tell you that Hitler and Mussolini weren't fascists, there were socialists!
Nothing would surprise me, especially on this site!
here we go again I'v never said they weren't fascists, they were. And socialists.
Learn some history. Where their politics and ideology came from, which parties they were members of and where national socialism came from and what fascism is.
They weren't actually socialists, in the case of the NAZIs, they just attached the term socialism to their name.
Back to school for some of you, methinks!
Don't waste your breath ....
I just wish we could have a reasoned debate about facts, not as some to here, about biased opinion. The level of debate is akin to a school yard argument of late. Worryingly so..
It is not as bad as it has been but honestly, I have never heard a school yard argument quite like this one .... kids have more awareness
You are quite correct, I should have shown more respect for the younger generation!
That's because facts don't mean anything anymore to some people. We are living in a post truth world. You can't have a reasonable discussion when one side just refuses to accept facts, like facism being on the right, or the number of counties in the single market, its like trying to debate with a toddler. However even facts are open to debate and may not even be accurate . It is not maybe a post truth world , it might juse be that people feel free to express their opinions and are less suppressed.
On many posts on here I have noticed that those who are keen on facts are the most intolerant of all posters . They are only interested in facts if it backs their point of view. "You obviously don't even understand the word "fact" Like I said, its like debating with a toddler | |||
"Despite being a relatively recent campaign #StopFundingHate has managed to get Specsavers to apologise, remove an advert and review future advertising campaigns. This as a result of Specsavers ads appearing alongside inflammatory stories in the Daily Express. #StopFundingHate is targeting consumer brands that pay to advertise in newspapers and magazines that publish inflammatory and xenophobic stories for the seemingly sole purpose of stirring hatred, resentment and division. Well done them. Keep up the good work. However members of the public can decide what they wish to buy. No one is compelled to buy the Daily Mail. What conntribution has stopfundinghate ever made to society. ? Daily Mail readers represent the back ground of British Society and have no interest in such an organisation. The Daily Mail is a great paper and its readers should not be bullied by those who do not believe in freedom of speech. Who defines hatred , resentment and division.? If we all adhered to tbe values promoted by the Daily Mail , the UK would be a better place . Well done to the Daily Mail for standing up for UK citizens . The Daily Mail supported the rise of fascism in the 30s......hasn't improved much in the interim. Vicious, bigoted and mean spirited journalism for mean spirited members of society.....perfect synchronicity Were you around in the 30s. ? If not how wouls you be able to come to that cobclusion ? Do you actually buy and read the paper. ? If not how would you be able to judge it ? For someone who purports to be 'educated' you are also very naive. The support by the Daily Mail of Fascism is very well known, one needn't have been "around in the 30s." Rothermeee the propreitor of the paper was a personal friend of both Mussolini and Hitler and directed his papers editorial stance to be pro-Fascism. Rather than just wading in, putting someone down, then leaving maybe you should research before posting? Im not expecting a reply to this, as you weren't able to reply to other counter posts I've made on other threads. Do some research and dont be a sheep. Just wait until CandM4U come along and tell you that Hitler and Mussolini weren't fascists, there were socialists!
Nothing would surprise me, especially on this site!
here we go again I'v never said they weren't fascists, they were. And socialists.
Learn some history. Where their politics and ideology came from, which parties they were members of and where national socialism came from and what fascism is.
They weren't actually socialists, in the case of the NAZIs, they just attached the term socialism to their name.
Back to school for some of you, methinks!
Don't waste your breath ....
I just wish we could have a reasoned debate about facts, not as some to here, about biased opinion. The level of debate is akin to a school yard argument of late. Worryingly so..
It is not as bad as it has been but honestly, I have never heard a school yard argument quite like this one .... kids have more awareness
You are quite correct, I should have shown more respect for the younger generation!
That's because facts don't mean anything anymore to some people. We are living in a post truth world. You can't have a reasonable discussion when one side just refuses to accept facts, like facism being on the right, or the number of counties in the single market, its like trying to debate with a toddler. However even facts are open to debate and may not even be accurate . It is not maybe a post truth world , it might juse be that people feel free to express their opinions and are less suppressed.
On many posts on here I have noticed that those who are keen on facts are the most intolerant of all posters . They are only interested in facts if it backs their point of view.
You obviously don't even understand the word "fact"
Like I said, its like debating with a toddler Despite being a relatively recent campaign #StopFundingHate has managed to get Specsavers to apologise, remove an advert and review future advertising campaigns.
This as a result of Specsavers ads appearing alongside inflammatory stories in the Daily Express.
#StopFundingHate is targeting consumer brands that pay to advertise in newspapers and magazines that publish inflammatory and xenophobic stories for the seemingly sole purpose of stirring hatred, resentment and division.
Well done them. Keep up the good work. However members of the public can decide what they wish to buy. No one is compelled to buy the Daily Mail. What conntribution has stopfundinghate ever made to society. ?
Daily Mail readers represent the back ground of British Society and have no interest in such an organisation.
The Daily Mail is a great paper and its readers should not be bullied by those who do not believe in freedom of speech.
Who defines hatred , resentment and division.?
If we all adhered to tbe values promoted by the Daily Mail , the UK would be a better place .
Well done to the Daily Mail for standing up for UK citizens .
The Daily Mail supported the rise of fascism in the 30s......hasn't improved much in the interim. Vicious, bigoted and mean spirited journalism for mean spirited members of society.....perfect synchronicity Were you around in the 30s. ? If not how wouls you be able to come to that cobclusion ? Do you actually buy and read the paper. ? If not how would you be able to judge it ?
For someone who purports to be 'educated' you are also very naive. The support by the Daily Mail of Fascism is very well known, one needn't have been "around in the 30s."
Rothermeee the propreitor of the paper was a personal friend of both Mussolini and Hitler and directed his papers editorial stance to be pro-Fascism.
Rather than just wading in, putting someone down, then leaving maybe you should research before posting?
Im not expecting a reply to this, as you weren't able to reply to other counter posts I've made on other threads. Do some research and dont be a sheep.
Just wait until CandM4U come along and tell you that Hitler and Mussolini weren't fascists, there were socialists!
Nothing would surprise me, especially on this site!
here we go again I'v never said they weren't fascists, they were. And socialists.
Learn some history. Where their politics and ideology came from, which parties they were members of and where national socialism came from and what fascism is.
They weren't actually socialists, in the case of the NAZIs, they just attached the term socialism to their name.
Back to school for some of you, methinks!
Don't waste your breath ....
I just wish we could have a reasoned debate about facts, not as some to here, about biased opinion. The level of debate is akin to a school yard argument of late. Worryingly so..
It is not as bad as it has been but honestly, I have never heard a school yard argument quite like this one .... kids have more awareness
You are quite correct, I should have shown more respect for the younger generation!
That's because facts don't mean anything anymore to some people. We are living in a post truth world. You can't have a reasonable discussion when one side just refuses to accept facts, like facism being on the right, or the number of counties in the single market, its like trying to debate with a toddler. However even facts are open to debate and may not even be accurate . It is not maybe a post truth world , it might juse be that people feel free to express their opinions and are less suppressed.
On many posts on here I have noticed that those who are keen on facts are the most intolerant of all posters . They are only interested in facts if it backs their point of view.
You obviously don't even understand the word "fact"
Like I said, its like debating with a toddler
"why not just pick out the part of the comment you want to reply to, rather than use the whole quote like this above, it all gets terribly boring | |||
"Despite being a relatively recent campaign #StopFundingHate has managed to get Specsavers to apologise, remove an advert and review future advertising campaigns. This as a result of Specsavers ads appearing alongside inflammatory stories in the Daily Express. #StopFundingHate is targeting consumer brands that pay to advertise in newspapers and magazines that publish inflammatory and xenophobic stories for the seemingly sole purpose of stirring hatred, resentment and division. Well done them. Keep up the good work. However members of the public can decide what they wish to buy. No one is compelled to buy the Daily Mail. What conntribution has stopfundinghate ever made to society. ? Daily Mail readers represent the back ground of British Society and have no interest in such an organisation. The Daily Mail is a great paper and its readers should not be bullied by those who do not believe in freedom of speech. Who defines hatred , resentment and division.? If we all adhered to tbe values promoted by the Daily Mail , the UK would be a better place . Well done to the Daily Mail for standing up for UK citizens . The Daily Mail supported the rise of fascism in the 30s......hasn't improved much in the interim. Vicious, bigoted and mean spirited journalism for mean spirited members of society.....perfect synchronicity Were you around in the 30s. ? If not how wouls you be able to come to that cobclusion ? Do you actually buy and read the paper. ? If not how would you be able to judge it ? For someone who purports to be 'educated' you are also very naive. The support by the Daily Mail of Fascism is very well known, one needn't have been "around in the 30s." Rothermeee the propreitor of the paper was a personal friend of both Mussolini and Hitler and directed his papers editorial stance to be pro-Fascism. Rather than just wading in, putting someone down, then leaving maybe you should research before posting? Im not expecting a reply to this, as you weren't able to reply to other counter posts I've made on other threads. Do some research and dont be a sheep. Just wait until CandM4U come along and tell you that Hitler and Mussolini weren't fascists, there were socialists!
Nothing would surprise me, especially on this site!
here we go again I'v never said they weren't fascists, they were. And socialists.
Learn some history. Where their politics and ideology came from, which parties they were members of and where national socialism came from and what fascism is.
They weren't actually socialists, in the case of the NAZIs, they just attached the term socialism to their name.
Back to school for some of you, methinks!
Don't waste your breath ....
I just wish we could have a reasoned debate about facts, not as some to here, about biased opinion. The level of debate is akin to a school yard argument of late. Worryingly so..
It is not as bad as it has been but honestly, I have never heard a school yard argument quite like this one .... kids have more awareness
You are quite correct, I should have shown more respect for the younger generation!
That's because facts don't mean anything anymore to some people. We are living in a post truth world. You can't have a reasonable discussion when one side just refuses to accept facts, like facism being on the right, or the number of counties in the single market, its like trying to debate with a toddler. However even facts are open to debate and may not even be accurate . It is not maybe a post truth world , it might juse be that people feel free to express their opinions and are less suppressed.
On many posts on here I have noticed that those who are keen on facts are the most intolerant of all posters . They are only interested in facts if it backs their point of view.
You obviously don't even understand the word "fact"
Like I said, its like debating with a toddler Despite being a relatively recent campaign #StopFundingHate has managed to get Specsavers to apologise, remove an advert and review future advertising campaigns.
This as a result of Specsavers ads appearing alongside inflammatory stories in the Daily Express.
#StopFundingHate is targeting consumer brands that pay to advertise in newspapers and magazines that publish inflammatory and xenophobic stories for the seemingly sole purpose of stirring hatred, resentment and division.
Well done them. Keep up the good work. However members of the public can decide what they wish to buy. No one is compelled to buy the Daily Mail. What conntribution has stopfundinghate ever made to society. ?
Daily Mail readers represent the back ground of British Society and have no interest in such an organisation.
The Daily Mail is a great paper and its readers should not be bullied by those who do not believe in freedom of speech.
Who defines hatred , resentment and division.?
If we all adhered to tbe values promoted by the Daily Mail , the UK would be a better place .
Well done to the Daily Mail for standing up for UK citizens .
The Daily Mail supported the rise of fascism in the 30s......hasn't improved much in the interim. Vicious, bigoted and mean spirited journalism for mean spirited members of society.....perfect synchronicity Were you around in the 30s. ? If not how wouls you be able to come to that cobclusion ? Do you actually buy and read the paper. ? If not how would you be able to judge it ?
For someone who purports to be 'educated' you are also very naive. The support by the Daily Mail of Fascism is very well known, one needn't have been "around in the 30s."
Rothermeee the propreitor of the paper was a personal friend of both Mussolini and Hitler and directed his papers editorial stance to be pro-Fascism.
Rather than just wading in, putting someone down, then leaving maybe you should research before posting?
Im not expecting a reply to this, as you weren't able to reply to other counter posts I've made on other threads. Do some research and dont be a sheep.
Just wait until CandM4U come along and tell you that Hitler and Mussolini weren't fascists, there were socialists!
Nothing would surprise me, especially on this site!
here we go again I'v never said they weren't fascists, they were. And socialists.
Learn some history. Where their politics and ideology came from, which parties they were members of and where national socialism came from and what fascism is.
They weren't actually socialists, in the case of the NAZIs, they just attached the term socialism to their name.
Back to school for some of you, methinks!
Don't waste your breath ....
I just wish we could have a reasoned debate about facts, not as some to here, about biased opinion. The level of debate is akin to a school yard argument of late. Worryingly so..
It is not as bad as it has been but honestly, I have never heard a school yard argument quite like this one .... kids have more awareness
You are quite correct, I should have shown more respect for the younger generation!
That's because facts don't mean anything anymore to some people. We are living in a post truth world. You can't have a reasonable discussion when one side just refuses to accept facts, like facism being on the right, or the number of counties in the single market, its like trying to debate with a toddler. However even facts are open to debate and may not even be accurate . It is not maybe a post truth world , it might juse be that people feel free to express their opinions and are less suppressed.
On many posts on here I have noticed that those who are keen on facts are the most intolerant of all posters . They are only interested in facts if it backs their point of view.
You obviously don't even understand the word "fact"
Like I said, its like debating with a toddler
why not just pick out the part of the comment you want to reply to, rather than use the whole quote like this above, it all gets terribly boring"OK | |||
"Despite being a relatively recent campaign #StopFundingHate has managed to get Specsavers to apologise, remove an advert and review future advertising campaigns. This as a result of Specsavers ads appearing alongside inflammatory stories in the Daily Express. #StopFundingHate is targeting consumer brands that pay to advertise in newspapers and magazines that publish inflammatory and xenophobic stories for the seemingly sole purpose of stirring hatred, resentment and division. Well done them. Keep up the good work. However members of the public can decide what they wish to buy. No one is compelled to buy the Daily Mail. What conntribution has stopfundinghate ever made to society. ? Daily Mail readers represent the back ground of British Society and have no interest in such an organisation. The Daily Mail is a great paper and its readers should not be bullied by those who do not believe in freedom of speech. Who defines hatred , resentment and division.? If we all adhered to tbe values promoted by the Daily Mail , the UK would be a better place . Well done to the Daily Mail for standing up for UK citizens . The Daily Mail supported the rise of fascism in the 30s......hasn't improved much in the interim. Vicious, bigoted and mean spirited journalism for mean spirited members of society.....perfect synchronicity Were you around in the 30s. ? If not how wouls you be able to come to that cobclusion ? Do you actually buy and read the paper. ? If not how would you be able to judge it ? For someone who purports to be 'educated' you are also very naive. The support by the Daily Mail of Fascism is very well known, one needn't have been "around in the 30s." Rothermeee the propreitor of the paper was a personal friend of both Mussolini and Hitler and directed his papers editorial stance to be pro-Fascism. Rather than just wading in, putting someone down, then leaving maybe you should research before posting? Im not expecting a reply to this, as you weren't able to reply to other counter posts I've made on other threads. Do some research and dont be a sheep. Just wait until CandM4U come along and tell you that Hitler and Mussolini weren't fascists, there were socialists!
Nothing would surprise me, especially on this site!
here we go again I'v never said they weren't fascists, they were. And socialists.
Learn some history. Where their politics and ideology came from, which parties they were members of and where national socialism came from and what fascism is.
They weren't actually socialists, in the case of the NAZIs, they just attached the term socialism to their name.
Back to school for some of you, methinks!
Don't waste your breath ....
I just wish we could have a reasoned debate about facts, not as some to here, about biased opinion. The level of debate is akin to a school yard argument of late. Worryingly so..
It is not as bad as it has been but honestly, I have never heard a school yard argument quite like this one .... kids have more awareness
You are quite correct, I should have shown more respect for the younger generation!
That's because facts don't mean anything anymore to some people. We are living in a post truth world. You can't have a reasonable discussion when one side just refuses to accept facts, like facism being on the right, or the number of counties in the single market, its like trying to debate with a toddler. However even facts are open to debate and may not even be accurate . It is not maybe a post truth world , it might juse be that people feel free to express their opinions and are less suppressed.
On many posts on here I have noticed that those who are keen on facts are the most intolerant of all posters . They are only interested in facts if it backs their point of view.
You obviously don't even understand the word "fact"
Like I said, its like debating with a toddler Despite being a relatively recent campaign #StopFundingHate has managed to get Specsavers to apologise, remove an advert and review future advertising campaigns.
This as a result of Specsavers ads appearing alongside inflammatory stories in the Daily Express.
#StopFundingHate is targeting consumer brands that pay to advertise in newspapers and magazines that publish inflammatory and xenophobic stories for the seemingly sole purpose of stirring hatred, resentment and division.
Well done them. Keep up the good work. However members of the public can decide what they wish to buy. No one is compelled to buy the Daily Mail. What conntribution has stopfundinghate ever made to society. ?
Daily Mail readers represent the back ground of British Society and have no interest in such an organisation.
The Daily Mail is a great paper and its readers should not be bullied by those who do not believe in freedom of speech.
Who defines hatred , resentment and division.?
If we all adhered to tbe values promoted by the Daily Mail , the UK would be a better place .
Well done to the Daily Mail for standing up for UK citizens .
The Daily Mail supported the rise of fascism in the 30s......hasn't improved much in the interim. Vicious, bigoted and mean spirited journalism for mean spirited members of society.....perfect synchronicity Were you around in the 30s. ? If not how wouls you be able to come to that cobclusion ? Do you actually buy and read the paper. ? If not how would you be able to judge it ?
For someone who purports to be 'educated' you are also very naive. The support by the Daily Mail of Fascism is very well known, one needn't have been "around in the 30s."
Rothermeee the propreitor of the paper was a personal friend of both Mussolini and Hitler and directed his papers editorial stance to be pro-Fascism.
Rather than just wading in, putting someone down, then leaving maybe you should research before posting?
Im not expecting a reply to this, as you weren't able to reply to other counter posts I've made on other threads. Do some research and dont be a sheep.
Just wait until CandM4U come along and tell you that Hitler and Mussolini weren't fascists, there were socialists!
Nothing would surprise me, especially on this site!
here we go again I'v never said they weren't fascists, they were. And socialists.
Learn some history. Where their politics and ideology came from, which parties they were members of and where national socialism came from and what fascism is.
They weren't actually socialists, in the case of the NAZIs, they just attached the term socialism to their name.
Back to school for some of you, methinks!
Don't waste your breath ....
I just wish we could have a reasoned debate about facts, not as some to here, about biased opinion. The level of debate is akin to a school yard argument of late. Worryingly so..
It is not as bad as it has been but honestly, I have never heard a school yard argument quite like this one .... kids have more awareness
You are quite correct, I should have shown more respect for the younger generation!
That's because facts don't mean anything anymore to some people. We are living in a post truth world. You can't have a reasonable discussion when one side just refuses to accept facts, like facism being on the right, or the number of counties in the single market, its like trying to debate with a toddler. However even facts are open to debate and may not even be accurate . It is not maybe a post truth world , it might juse be that people feel free to express their opinions and are less suppressed.
On many posts on here I have noticed that those who are keen on facts are the most intolerant of all posters . They are only interested in facts if it backs their point of view.
You obviously don't even understand the word "fact"
Like I said, its like debating with a toddler
why not just pick out the part of the comment you want to reply to, rather than use the whole quote like this above, it all gets terribly boring"Sorry | |||
"Is the Democratic Peoples Republic of Korea (aka North Korea) Democratic?" nope but then isn't it a communist/socialist state? So could their leader be described as a fascist? If not, maybe you could explain the difference to the toddlers here? | |||
"Is the Democratic Peoples Republic of Korea (aka North Korea) Democratic? nope but then isn't it a communist/socialist state? So could their leader be described as a fascist? If not, maybe you could explain the difference to the toddlers here?" So it says its Democratic, but it's not Democratic.......... | |||
"Is the Democratic Peoples Republic of Korea (aka North Korea) Democratic? nope but then isn't it a communist/socialist state? So could their leader be described as a fascist? If not, maybe you could explain the difference to the toddlers here? So it says its Democratic, but it's not Democratic.........." Yes it's Fascist;fascist doesn't mean " far right"; in fact fascism is completely different to the concepts of " left" and " right" , but is exceptionally " nationalistic" "a way of organizing a society in which a government ruled by a dictator or central committee controls the lives of the people and in which people are not allowed to disagree with the government" The German NAZIs were " socialists " (NAZI is short for national socialist). The Italian Fascisti under Mussolini were in fact effectively centrist nationalists. North Korea , which is communist in name only, is a dictatorship, and a and effectively Fascist. Fascist is a rather overused term which is bandied about too easily by people who don't really understand. | |||
| |||
"Is the Democratic Peoples Republic of Korea (aka North Korea) Democratic? nope but then isn't it a communist/socialist state? So could their leader be described as a fascist? If not, maybe you could explain the difference to the toddlers here? So it says its Democratic, but it's not Democratic.......... Yes it's Fascist;fascist doesn't mean " far right"; in fact fascism is completely different to the concepts of " left" and " right" , but is exceptionally " nationalistic" "a way of organizing a society in which a government ruled by a dictator or central committee controls the lives of the people and in which people are not allowed to disagree with the government" The German NAZIs were " socialists " (NAZI is short for national socialist). The Italian Fascisti under Mussolini were in fact effectively centrist nationalists. North Korea , which is communist in name only, is a dictatorship, and a and effectively Fascist. Fascist is a rather overused term which is bandied about too easily by people who don't really understand." thank you | |||
" Fascist is a rather overused term which is bandied about too easily by people who don't really understand." I agree, but what do you expect in a post-truth, "we've had enough of experts" world? | |||
" Fascist is a rather overused term which is bandied about too easily by people who don't really understand. I agree, but what do you expect in a post-truth, "we've had enough of experts" world? " your problem is that you only 'know' what you already know, what you've been led to believe, you never question anything, which is quite sad for someone so young | |||
"Despite being a relatively recent campaign #StopFundingHate has managed to get Specsavers to apologise, remove an advert and review future advertising campaigns. This as a result of Specsavers ads appearing alongside inflammatory stories in the Daily Express. #StopFundingHate is targeting consumer brands that pay to advertise in newspapers and magazines that publish inflammatory and xenophobic stories for the seemingly sole purpose of stirring hatred, resentment and division. Well done them. Keep up the good work. However members of the public can decide what they wish to buy. No one is compelled to buy the Daily Mail. What conntribution has stopfundinghate ever made to society. ? Daily Mail readers represent the back ground of British Society and have no interest in such an organisation. The Daily Mail is a great paper and its readers should not be bullied by those who do not believe in freedom of speech. Who defines hatred , resentment and division.? If we all adhered to tbe values promoted by the Daily Mail , the UK would be a better place . Well done to the Daily Mail for standing up for UK citizens . The Daily Mail supported the rise of fascism in the 30s......hasn't improved much in the interim. Vicious, bigoted and mean spirited journalism for mean spirited members of society.....perfect synchronicity Were you around in the 30s. ? If not how wouls you be able to come to that cobclusion ? Do you actually buy and read the paper. ? If not how would you be able to judge it ? For someone who purports to be 'educated' you are also very naive. The support by the Daily Mail of Fascism is very well known, one needn't have been "around in the 30s." Rothermeee the propreitor of the paper was a personal friend of both Mussolini and Hitler and directed his papers editorial stance to be pro-Fascism. Rather than just wading in, putting someone down, then leaving maybe you should research before posting? Im not expecting a reply to this, as you weren't able to reply to other counter posts I've made on other threads. Do some research and dont be a sheep. Just wait until CandM4U come along and tell you that Hitler and Mussolini weren't fascists, there were socialists!
Nothing would surprise me, especially on this site!
here we go again I'v never said they weren't fascists, they were. And socialists.
Learn some history. Where their politics and ideology came from, which parties they were members of and where national socialism came from and what fascism is.
They weren't actually socialists, in the case of the NAZIs, they just attached the term socialism to their name.
Back to school for some of you, methinks!
Don't waste your breath ....
I just wish we could have a reasoned debate about facts, not as some to here, about biased opinion. The level of debate is akin to a school yard argument of late. Worryingly so..
It is not as bad as it has been but honestly, I have never heard a school yard argument quite like this one .... kids have more awareness
You are quite correct, I should have shown more respect for the younger generation!
That's because facts don't mean anything anymore to some people. We are living in a post truth world. You can't have a reasonable discussion when one side just refuses to accept facts, like facism being on the right, or the number of counties in the single market, its like trying to debate with a toddler. However even facts are open to debate and may not even be accurate . It is not maybe a post truth world , it might juse be that people feel free to express their opinions and are less suppressed.
On many posts on here I have noticed that those who are keen on facts are the most intolerant of all posters . They are only interested in facts if it backs their point of view. "some of the worst ones are those who state a 'fact' to enforce their prejudice about a group, then when they are asked for their source to validate said 'facts' they backtrack and their 'fact's' become just their opinion and never to be challenged.. then there are the ones who come out with when I get to heaven God will ask all those I have ever met to confirm i am wonderful so there that the debate over.. comedy gold, even python didn't spot that gem.. | |||
" Fascist is a rather overused term which is bandied about too easily by people who don't really understand. I agree, but what do you expect in a post-truth, "we've had enough of experts" world? your problem is that you only 'know' what you already know, what you've been led to believe, you never question anything, which is quite sad for someone so young" And you don't know what you know huh? Anyone who knows me personally would find it hilarious that you think I never question anything. | |||
" Fascist is a rather overused term which is bandied about too easily by people who don't really understand. I agree, but what do you expect in a post-truth, "we've had enough of experts" world? " People have had enough of experts because they are increasingly getting it wrong. A polling 'expert' in America said "if Trump wins I'll eat a bug on national television." The footage of him eating said bug was on Newsnight on BBC 2 last night. | |||
" Fascist is a rather overused term which is bandied about too easily by people who don't really understand. I agree, but what do you expect in a post-truth, "we've had enough of experts" world? People have had enough of experts because they are increasingly getting it wrong. A polling 'expert' in America said "if Trump wins I'll eat a bug on national television." The footage of him eating said bug was on Newsnight on BBC 2 last night. "Nice one hope he enjoyed it.  | |||
"Despite being a relatively recent campaign #StopFundingHate has managed to get Specsavers to apologise, remove an advert and review future advertising campaigns. This as a result of Specsavers ads appearing alongside inflammatory stories in the Daily Express. #StopFundingHate is targeting consumer brands that pay to advertise in newspapers and magazines that publish inflammatory and xenophobic stories for the seemingly sole purpose of stirring hatred, resentment and division. Well done them. Keep up the good work. However members of the public can decide what they wish to buy. No one is compelled to buy the Daily Mail. What conntribution has stopfundinghate ever made to society. ? Daily Mail readers represent the back ground of British Society and have no interest in such an organisation. The Daily Mail is a great paper and its readers should not be bullied by those who do not believe in freedom of speech. Who defines hatred , resentment and division.? If we all adhered to tbe values promoted by the Daily Mail , the UK would be a better place . Well done to the Daily Mail for standing up for UK citizens . The Daily Mail supported the rise of fascism in the 30s......hasn't improved much in the interim. Vicious, bigoted and mean spirited journalism for mean spirited members of society.....perfect synchronicity Were you around in the 30s. ? If not how wouls you be able to come to that cobclusion ? Do you actually buy and read the paper. ? If not how would you be able to judge it ? For someone who purports to be 'educated' you are also very naive. The support by the Daily Mail of Fascism is very well known, one needn't have been "around in the 30s." Rothermeee the propreitor of the paper was a personal friend of both Mussolini and Hitler and directed his papers editorial stance to be pro-Fascism. Rather than just wading in, putting someone down, then leaving maybe you should research before posting? Im not expecting a reply to this, as you weren't able to reply to other counter posts I've made on other threads. Do some research and dont be a sheep. Just wait until CandM4U come along and tell you that Hitler and Mussolini weren't fascists, there were socialists!
Nothing would surprise me, especially on this site!
here we go again I'v never said they weren't fascists, they were. And socialists.
Learn some history. Where their politics and ideology came from, which parties they were members of and where national socialism came from and what fascism is.
They weren't actually socialists, in the case of the NAZIs, they just attached the term socialism to their name.
Back to school for some of you, methinks!
Don't waste your breath ....
I just wish we could have a reasoned debate about facts, not as some to here, about biased opinion. The level of debate is akin to a school yard argument of late. Worryingly so..
It is not as bad as it has been but honestly, I have never heard a school yard argument quite like this one .... kids have more awareness
You are quite correct, I should have shown more respect for the younger generation!
That's because facts don't mean anything anymore to some people. We are living in a post truth world. You can't have a reasonable discussion when one side just refuses to accept facts, like facism being on the right, or the number of counties in the single market, its like trying to debate with a toddler. However even facts are open to debate and may not even be accurate . It is not maybe a post truth world , it might juse be that people feel free to express their opinions and are less suppressed.
On many posts on here I have noticed that those who are keen on facts are the most intolerant of all posters . They are only interested in facts if it backs their point of view.
some of the worst ones are those who state a 'fact' to enforce their prejudice about a group, then when they are asked for their source to validate said 'facts' they backtrack and their 'fact's' become just their opinion and never to be challenged..
then there are the ones who come out with when I get to heaven God will ask all those I have ever met to confirm i am wonderful so there that the debate over..
comedy gold, even python didn't spot that gem.."Someone's opinion is good enough for me. In any event why do posters need to distinguish between opinions and facts ?. It is only a discussion forum. Some of the most boring posts are from those who cross reference their posts back to facts. Do they honestly think anyone would waste time checking their cross reference or facts . If anyone had time to do this they would need to review how they were spending their free time. These forums should be for people to express opinions . It can probably be assumed that in most cases people are already aware of the facts . | |||
" Fascist is a rather overused term which is bandied about too easily by people who don't really understand. I agree, but what do you expect in a post-truth, "we've had enough of experts" world? your problem is that you only 'know' what you already know, what you've been led to believe, you never question anything, which is quite sad for someone so young And you don't know what you know huh? Anyone who knows me personally would find it hilarious that you think I never question anything." . I just find you hilarious  | |||
" Fascist is a rather overused term which is bandied about too easily by people who don't really understand. I agree, but what do you expect in a post-truth, "we've had enough of experts" world? " An expert is only expressing their opinion in a defined set of circumstances. It may be important to be an expert in topics such as engineering but in topics such as politics or the economy no one can predict the future and as such the view of experts are best to be ignored . If we take the stock market it is recognised that anyone who attempted to time the markets will have lost money. Shares are along term investment and no one can predict the future of an economy . | |||
"Despite being a relatively recent campaign #StopFundingHate has managed to get Specsavers to apologise, remove an advert and review future advertising campaigns. This as a result of Specsavers ads appearing alongside inflammatory stories in the Daily Express. #StopFundingHate is targeting consumer brands that pay to advertise in newspapers and magazines that publish inflammatory and xenophobic stories for the seemingly sole purpose of stirring hatred, resentment and division. Well done them. Keep up the good work." Do you actually read the Daily Mail and how did you come to the conclusion that their paper stirs hatred and resentment . The reality is that many people still believe in traditional family values. | |||
"Despite being a relatively recent campaign #StopFundingHate has managed to get Specsavers to apologise, remove an advert and review future advertising campaigns. This as a result of Specsavers ads appearing alongside inflammatory stories in the Daily Express. #StopFundingHate is targeting consumer brands that pay to advertise in newspapers and magazines that publish inflammatory and xenophobic stories for the seemingly sole purpose of stirring hatred, resentment and division. Well done them. Keep up the good work. However members of the public can decide what they wish to buy. No one is compelled to buy the Daily Mail. What conntribution has stopfundinghate ever made to society. ? Daily Mail readers represent the back ground of British Society and have no interest in such an organisation. The Daily Mail is a great paper and its readers should not be bullied by those who do not believe in freedom of speech. Who defines hatred , resentment and division.? If we all adhered to tbe values promoted by the Daily Mail , the UK would be a better place . Well done to the Daily Mail for standing up for UK citizens . The Daily Mail supported the rise of fascism in the 30s......hasn't improved much in the interim. Vicious, bigoted and mean spirited journalism for mean spirited members of society.....perfect synchronicity Were you around in the 30s. ? If not how wouls you be able to come to that cobclusion ? Do you actually buy and read the paper. ? If not how would you be able to judge it ? For someone who purports to be 'educated' you are also very naive. The support by the Daily Mail of Fascism is very well known, one needn't have been "around in the 30s." Rothermeee the propreitor of the paper was a personal friend of both Mussolini and Hitler and directed his papers editorial stance to be pro-Fascism. Rather than just wading in, putting someone down, then leaving maybe you should research before posting? Im not expecting a reply to this, as you weren't able to reply to other counter posts I've made on other threads. Do some research and dont be a sheep. Just wait until CandM4U come along and tell you that Hitler and Mussolini weren't fascists, there were socialists!
Nothing would surprise me, especially on this site!
here we go again I'v never said they weren't fascists, they were. And socialists.
Learn some history. Where their politics and ideology came from, which parties they were members of and where national socialism came from and what fascism is.
They weren't actually socialists, in the case of the NAZIs, they just attached the term socialism to their name.
Back to school for some of you, methinks!
Really? Mussolini was a member of the Italian Socialist Party from 1901-1914. He didn't just change from socialist to 'fascist' he simply became a socialist that had a stronger belief in a united nation that overcame social hierarchy through labour for the benefit of the sate.
The NSDAP was the NAZI party, they didn't just attatch socialism to their name
Hitler may have denounced socialism because of his war against the USSR but privately admitted he was a left winger. He stated plainly that the whole of national socialism was based on Marxism. People find it difficult to understand how Hitler could have been a socialist because they misread the true history of socialist thought. Prior to WW2 socialists had established a tradition of advocating eugenics, genocide and ethnic cleansing.
So, who needs to go back to school and learn some history?"Socialism in its purest form they WERE NOT. I know my history, I am not merely popping along to Wikipedia to back up misguided prejudices. Hitler 'privately admitted he was a left-winger'? Popped around to visit your relatives for tea did he? Discussed his beliefs over a nussecken? | |||
" Do you actually read the Daily Mail and how did you come to the conclusion that their paper stirs hatred and resentment . The reality is that many people still believe in traditional family values. " Any of their news stories and headlines about immigration etc will tell you that. What family values are you talking about? How about you write to the Daily Mail, tell them how you, a SWINGER, are valiantly fighting their corner on a SEX Site and see Huw supportive of your chosen lifestyle they are. Family values?! Don't make me fucking laugh. More pathetic than bringing religion or The Bible into the conversation. | |||
"Despite being a relatively recent campaign #StopFundingHate has managed to get Specsavers to apologise, remove an advert and review future advertising campaigns. This as a result of Specsavers ads appearing alongside inflammatory stories in the Daily Express. #StopFundingHate is targeting consumer brands that pay to advertise in newspapers and magazines that publish inflammatory and xenophobic stories for the seemingly sole purpose of stirring hatred, resentment and division. Well done them. Keep up the good work. However members of the public can decide what they wish to buy. No one is compelled to buy the Daily Mail. What conntribution has stopfundinghate ever made to society. ? Daily Mail readers represent the back ground of British Society and have no interest in such an organisation. The Daily Mail is a great paper and its readers should not be bullied by those who do not believe in freedom of speech. Who defines hatred , resentment and division.? If we all adhered to tbe values promoted by the Daily Mail , the UK would be a better place . Well done to the Daily Mail for standing up for UK citizens . The Daily Mail supported the rise of fascism in the 30s......hasn't improved much in the interim. Vicious, bigoted and mean spirited journalism for mean spirited members of society.....perfect synchronicity Were you around in the 30s. ? If not how wouls you be able to come to that cobclusion ? Do you actually buy and read the paper. ? If not how would you be able to judge it ? For someone who purports to be 'educated' you are also very naive. The support by the Daily Mail of Fascism is very well known, one needn't have been "around in the 30s." Rothermeee the propreitor of the paper was a personal friend of both Mussolini and Hitler and directed his papers editorial stance to be pro-Fascism. Rather than just wading in, putting someone down, then leaving maybe you should research before posting? Im not expecting a reply to this, as you weren't able to reply to other counter posts I've made on other threads. Do some research and dont be a sheep. Just wait until CandM4U come along and tell you that Hitler and Mussolini weren't fascists, there were socialists!
Nothing would surprise me, especially on this site!
here we go again I'v never said they weren't fascists, they were. And socialists.
Learn some history. Where their politics and ideology came from, which parties they were members of and where national socialism came from and what fascism is.
They weren't actually socialists, in the case of the NAZIs, they just attached the term socialism to their name.
Back to school for some of you, methinks!
Really? Mussolini was a member of the Italian Socialist Party from 1901-1914. He didn't just change from socialist to 'fascist' he simply became a socialist that had a stronger belief in a united nation that overcame social hierarchy through labour for the benefit of the sate.
The NSDAP was the NAZI party, they didn't just attatch socialism to their name
Hitler may have denounced socialism because of his war against the USSR but privately admitted he was a left winger. He stated plainly that the whole of national socialism was based on Marxism. People find it difficult to understand how Hitler could have been a socialist because they misread the true history of socialist thought. Prior to WW2 socialists had established a tradition of advocating eugenics, genocide and ethnic cleansing.
So, who needs to go back to school and learn some history?
Socialism in its purest form they WERE NOT. I know my history, I am not merely popping along to Wikipedia to back up misguided prejudices.
Hitler 'privately admitted he was a left-winger'? Popped around to visit your relatives for tea did he? Discussed his beliefs over a nussecken?
"sorry mate, you obviously don't know your history. And none of what I said came from wikipedia | |||
"Despite being a relatively recent campaign #StopFundingHate has managed to get Specsavers to apologise, remove an advert and review future advertising campaigns. This as a result of Specsavers ads appearing alongside inflammatory stories in the Daily Express. #StopFundingHate is targeting consumer brands that pay to advertise in newspapers and magazines that publish inflammatory and xenophobic stories for the seemingly sole purpose of stirring hatred, resentment and division. Well done them. Keep up the good work. However members of the public can decide what they wish to buy. No one is compelled to buy the Daily Mail. What conntribution has stopfundinghate ever made to society. ? Daily Mail readers represent the back ground of British Society and have no interest in such an organisation. The Daily Mail is a great paper and its readers should not be bullied by those who do not believe in freedom of speech. Who defines hatred , resentment and division.? If we all adhered to tbe values promoted by the Daily Mail , the UK would be a better place . Well done to the Daily Mail for standing up for UK citizens . The Daily Mail supported the rise of fascism in the 30s......hasn't improved much in the interim. Vicious, bigoted and mean spirited journalism for mean spirited members of society.....perfect synchronicity Were you around in the 30s. ? If not how wouls you be able to come to that cobclusion ? Do you actually buy and read the paper. ? If not how would you be able to judge it ? For someone who purports to be 'educated' you are also very naive. The support by the Daily Mail of Fascism is very well known, one needn't have been "around in the 30s." Rothermeee the propreitor of the paper was a personal friend of both Mussolini and Hitler and directed his papers editorial stance to be pro-Fascism. Rather than just wading in, putting someone down, then leaving maybe you should research before posting? Im not expecting a reply to this, as you weren't able to reply to other counter posts I've made on other threads. Do some research and dont be a sheep. Just wait until CandM4U come along and tell you that Hitler and Mussolini weren't fascists, there were socialists!
Nothing would surprise me, especially on this site!
here we go again I'v never said they weren't fascists, they were. And socialists.
Learn some history. Where their politics and ideology came from, which parties they were members of and where national socialism came from and what fascism is.
They weren't actually socialists, in the case of the NAZIs, they just attached the term socialism to their name.
Back to school for some of you, methinks!
Don't waste your breath ....
I just wish we could have a reasoned debate about facts, not as some to here, about biased opinion. The level of debate is akin to a school yard argument of late. Worryingly so..
It is not as bad as it has been but honestly, I have never heard a school yard argument quite like this one .... kids have more awareness
You are quite correct, I should have shown more respect for the younger generation!
That's because facts don't mean anything anymore to some people. We are living in a post truth world. You can't have a reasonable discussion when one side just refuses to accept facts, like facism being on the right, or the number of counties in the single market, its like trying to debate with a toddler. However even facts are open to debate and may not even be accurate . It is not maybe a post truth world , it might juse be that people feel free to express their opinions and are less suppressed.
On many posts on here I have noticed that those who are keen on facts are the most intolerant of all posters . They are only interested in facts if it backs their point of view.
some of the worst ones are those who state a 'fact' to enforce their prejudice about a group, then when they are asked for their source to validate said 'facts' they backtrack and their 'fact's' become just their opinion and never to be challenged..
then there are the ones who come out with when I get to heaven God will ask all those I have ever met to confirm i am wonderful so there that the debate over..
comedy gold, even python didn't spot that gem.. Someone's opinion is good enough for me. In any event why do posters need to distinguish between opinions and facts ?. It is only a discussion forum. Some of the most boring posts are from those who cross reference their posts back to facts. Do they honestly think anyone would waste time checking their cross reference or facts . If anyone had time to do this they would need to review how they were spending their free time.
These forums should be for people to express opinions .
It can probably be assumed that in most cases people are already aware of the facts . "Or that some call their opinion a fact to give it credibility when it has none? | |||
" Do you actually read the Daily Mail and how did you come to the conclusion that their paper stirs hatred and resentment . The reality is that many people still believe in traditional family values. Any of their news stories and headlines about immigration etc will tell you that. What family values are you talking about? How about you write to the Daily Mail, tell them how you, a SWINGER, are valiantly fighting their corner on a SEX Site and see Huw supportive of your chosen lifestyle they are. Family values?! Don't make me fucking laugh. More pathetic than bringing religion or The Bible into the conversation. " Somehow I just can't make the correlation between 'family values' and the daily hate .. | |||
" sorry mate, you obviously don't know your history. And none of what I said came from Wikipedia " I know my history well enough to know the difference between pure socialism and the perversity that became national socialism. Likewise that people will say one thing whilst doing another - this forum alone is proof of that. Also, I doubt we'd ever be 'mates', so please refrain from referring to me in that way. | |||
| |||
" sorry mate, you obviously don't know your history. And none of what I said came from Wikipedia I know my history well enough to know the difference between pure socialism and the perversity that became national socialism. Likewise that people will say one thing whilst doing another - this forum alone is proof of that. Also, I doubt we'd ever be 'mates', so please refrain from referring to me in that way. " if you think that pure socialism has ever turned out better than national socialism then you really don't know your history, mate | |||
" sorry mate, you obviously don't know your history. And none of what I said came from Wikipedia I know my history well enough to know the difference between pure socialism and the perversity that became national socialism. Likewise that people will say one thing whilst doing another - this forum alone is proof of that. Also, I doubt we'd ever be 'mates', so please refrain from referring to me in that way. if you think that pure socialism has ever turned out better than national socialism then you really don't know your history, mate" But that's not the issue at hand, the issue we are discussing is that fascism, is on the right | |||
" sorry mate, you obviously don't know your history. And none of what I said came from Wikipedia I know my history well enough to know the difference between pure socialism and the perversity that became national socialism. Likewise that people will say one thing whilst doing another - this forum alone is proof of that. Also, I doubt we'd ever be 'mates', so please refrain from referring to me in that way. if you think that pure socialism has ever turned out better than national socialism then you really don't know your history, mate" Don't deflect the debate, that wasn't the contention of the discussion as commenced by the OP. As stated, I am familiar with history, well the history of this thread at least! You right-wing apologists are really tedious, petty people. Mo wonder you read the Daily Mail, you seek a source of 'news' that agrees with your deep-seated, barely hidden, prejudices. Got Fox News on in the background per chance, MATE? | |||
"Despite being a relatively recent campaign #StopFundingHate has managed to get Specsavers to apologise, remove an advert and review future advertising campaigns. This as a result of Specsavers ads appearing alongside inflammatory stories in the Daily Express. #StopFundingHate is targeting consumer brands that pay to advertise in newspapers and magazines that publish inflammatory and xenophobic stories for the seemingly sole purpose of stirring hatred, resentment and division. Well done them. Keep up the good work. Do you actually read the Daily Mail and how did you come to the conclusion that their paper stirs hatred and resentment . The reality is that many people still believe in traditional family values. " | |||
 | |||
"i do hope that the expert bashers on this forum don't visit their doctors when they are sick, or when they need their boiler or car fixed they just ask whoever is walking passed their house, you know, rather than getting an expert to have a look at it. Do you know how stupid you look when you try to bash experts? No, obviously not." It's a perfectly valid position to question the integrity of experts especially when they get it wrong on a regular occurrence. As for the examples you gave, Doctors, plumbers and car mechanics also get their decisions wrong on occasion. Have you never heard of a Doctor prescribing the wrong medication (it is more common than you think). To put your blind faith in 'experts' is extremely foolish, how has putting your faith in experts who said Remain would win the EU referendum and Hillary Clinton would win the Presidential election served you? These so called polling experts were wrong on both occasions. | |||
"i do hope that the expert bashers on this forum don't visit their doctors when they are sick, or when they need their boiler or car fixed they just ask whoever is walking passed their house, you know, rather than getting an expert to have a look at it. Do you know how stupid you look when you try to bash experts? No, obviously not. It's a perfectly valid position to question the integrity of experts especially when they get it wrong on a regular occurrence. As for the examples you gave, Doctors, plumbers and car mechanics also get their decisions wrong on occasion. Have you never heard of a Doctor prescribing the wrong medication (it is more common than you think). To put your blind faith in 'experts' is extremely foolish, how has putting your faith in experts who said Remain would win the EU referendum and Hillary Clinton would win the Presidential election served you? These so called polling experts were wrong on both occasions. " So do you use expert doctors plumbers or mechanics? Or do you just trust the guy on the street? | |||
"Oh, quelle surprise, Fab's very own Eva Braun has turfed up with a double thumb bump! When is the next BNP meeting planned for you guys? "my we are touchy arent we. | |||
"Oh, quelle surprise, Fab's very own Eva Braun has turfed up with a double thumb bump! When is the next BNP meeting planned for you guys?
my we are touchy arent we."Is that a question or a statement? Perplexed, bewildered and bemused, but not touchy. I prefer a debate, however, past experience with you has shown you to be incapable of such. Your double-thumb of that particular comment was adding nothing to the debate. And there hasn't been enough intolerance in my opinion, so when I'd seen you'd posted I was hoping you'd show your true colours, not merely bump the thread. | |||
"Oh, quelle surprise, Fab's very own Eva Braun has turfed up with a double thumb bump! When is the next BNP meeting planned for you guys?
my we are touchy arent we." Sadly quite a few posters on here are totally intolerant of other people's posts . May also incapable of posting relevant comments . | |||
"Oh, quelle surprise, Fab's very own Eva Braun has turfed up with a double thumb bump! When is the next BNP meeting planned for you guys?
my we are touchy arent we. Sadly quite a few posters on here are totally intolerant of other people's posts . May also incapable of posting relevant comments ."Im saying nothing. | |||
"Oh, quelle surprise, Fab's very own Eva Braun has turfed up with a double thumb bump! When is the next BNP meeting planned for you guys?
my we are touchy arent we. Sadly quite a few posters on here are totally intolerant of other people's posts . May also incapable of posting relevant comments ."You can't even answer a question? Can't back up your own bullshit. Traditional Family Values. I'm still fucking laughing. At you. | |||
"Oh, quelle surprise, Fab's very own Eva Braun has turfed up with a double thumb bump! When is the next BNP meeting planned for you guys?
my we are touchy arent we. Sadly quite a few posters on here are totally intolerant of other people's posts . May also incapable of posting relevant comments .
You can't even answer a question? Can't back up your own bullshit. Traditional Family Values. I'm still fucking laughing. At you. "Any need to use offensive language or do you have an anger management problem ? Most rational people manage to refrain from the use of bad language . | |||
| |||
"Oh, quelle surprise, Fab's very own Eva Braun has turfed up with a double thumb bump! When is the next BNP meeting planned for you guys?
my we are touchy arent we. Sadly quite a few posters on here are totally intolerant of other people's posts . May also incapable of posting relevant comments ."Lots of people disagree, but I only see one side telling people to shut up, and trying to shut down discussion. | |||
| |||
| |||
"^ And you still can't answer the question/s! Most people use profanity in order to show exasperation. 'Offensive language', are you actually for real? I'm beginning to wonder... " You have included offensive language in one of your posts. It just shows a lack of self control. | |||
"Oh, quelle surprise, Fab's very own Eva Braun has turfed up with a double thumb bump! When is the next BNP meeting planned for you guys?
my we are touchy arent we.
Is that a question or a statement?
Perplexed, bewildered and bemused, but not touchy.
I prefer a debate, however, past experience with you has shown you to be incapable of such. Your double-thumb of that particular comment was adding nothing to the debate.
And there hasn't been enough intolerance in my opinion, so when I'd seen you'd posted I was hoping you'd show your true colours, not merely bump the thread. "If members agree with a post there is no reason as to why they should not give it a thumbs up. Not every one wants to spend endless time making posts. Members are at liberty to confirm that they agree with another members post . | |||
" Do you actually read the Daily Mail and how did you come to the conclusion that their paper stirs hatred and resentment . The reality is that many people still believe in traditional family values. Any of their news stories and headlines about immigration etc will tell you that. What family values are you talking about? How about you write to the Daily Mail, tell them how you, a SWINGER, are valiantly fighting their corner on a SEX Site and see Huw supportive of your chosen lifestyle they are. Family values?! Don't make me fucking laugh. More pathetic than bringing religion or The Bible into the conversation. " A charming use of language . Has no one advised you that swearing is ill mannered and offensive. ? | |||
"Oh, quelle surprise, Fab's very own Eva Braun has turfed up with a double thumb bump! When is the next BNP meeting planned for you guys?
my we are touchy arent we.
Is that a question or a statement?
Perplexed, bewildered and bemused, but not touchy.
I prefer a debate, however, past experience with you has shown you to be incapable of such. Your double-thumb of that particular comment was adding nothing to the debate.
And there hasn't been enough intolerance in my opinion, so when I'd seen you'd posted I was hoping you'd show your true colours, not merely bump the thread. If members agree with a post there is no reason as to why they should not give it a thumbs up. Not every one wants to spend endless time making posts. Members are at liberty to confirm that they agree with another members post . " | |||
"Has no one advised you that swearing is ill mannered and offensive. ?" So is prejudice. Give me a foul-mouthed cunt over an intolerant, smarmy cunt any day of the week. | |||
"Has no one advised you that swearing is ill mannered and offensive. ? So is prejudice. Give me a foul-mouthed cunt over an intolerant, smarmy cunt any day of the week. " Prejudice is a manner of opinion and those who use the term against others tend to be exceptionally narrow minded individuals . Use of bad language is pointless and ill mannered . It shows a total lack of self control. On a simplistic basis those using offensive language are unable to express a valid point or opinion so just use this language as a measure of last resort . | |||
| |||
"Specsavers are a bunch of pussies then, wouldnt go there again. Wasnt very impressed with the glasses i got there anyway." When I went there they referred me to a specialist at the hospital. On further investigation it was simply a case that spec savers got the prescription wrong . | |||
"Has no one advised you that swearing is ill mannered and offensive. ? So is prejudice. Give me a foul-mouthed cunt over an intolerant, smarmy cunt any day of the week. Prejudice is a manner of opinion and those who use the term against others tend to be exceptionally narrow minded individuals . Use of bad language is pointless and ill mannered . It shows a total lack of self control. On a simplistic basis those using offensive language are unable to express a valid point or opinion so just use this language as a measure of last resort . " Unable to express a valid point of opinion? Er, take a look back at your own, ridiculous posts. You have absolutely no self-awareness whatsoever. I am erudite and, when I need to be, eloquent. Debating with you requires neither of those things. Your reasoning borders on the childlike and your failure to answer any of the points I've raised says it all. | |||
"Specsavers are a bunch of pussies then, wouldnt go there again. Wasnt very impressed with the glasses i got there anyway." Weren't you the lady who preferred nut to meet Guardian readers? | |||
"Specsavers are a bunch of pussies then, wouldnt go there again. Wasnt very impressed with the glasses i got there anyway. Weren't you the lady who preferred nut to meet Guardian readers? "thats right. | |||
"Specsavers are a bunch of pussies then, wouldnt go there again. Wasnt very impressed with the glasses i got there anyway. Weren't you the lady who preferred nut to meet Guardian readers?
thats right."I thought so. Always used to make me smile. | |||
"Who decides what is causing hate and division? You want to censor free speech and think its a good thing? Hate and division is caused by bollocks like this and as usual the left turn into the biggest bigots and wannabe fascists! "The left?" Ironically I am a natural conservative, own my own businesses, bit of an internationalist and supporter of small state and lower taxes. However, I have always had a BIG problem associating myself with intolerance, incitement of division and in particular the so called right wing press. In my heart of hearts, I even understood the concept of Brexit but I just could not and cannot associate myself with people and media outlets who champion the cause of division and so by default promote hatred and hostility. Headlines and stories in the Express and Mail have just gone too far with me, particularly with the constant drip, drip, drill of emotive headlines like swarms, hoards, invasion etc etc I think the campaign #StopFundingHatred is noble and therefore I am unable to find fault with it. I was referring to the campaign as being organised by the left not that you were of the left. You think that the bullying and intimidation of companies by social media is somehow noble? Who knows when they will come for you? They should be aiming to win the argument by debate not attempting to shut it down. I dislike outlets like the Guardian and their hatred of the UK but I wouldn't want to silence them or feel the need to boycott their advertisers. A free press is important and people have a choice of which publications to read, unless of course, campaigns like this are succesful I don't like the Guardian either, so I don't buy it, simple concept really. If people don't like the Express or the Daily Mail, then no one is forcing them to buy it, just ignore what you don't like and buy a different paper. " I don't like the Guardian or the Mail but I often read both. But then I like to challenge my own beliefs rather that simply sticking to sources of information that confirm my own bias. Maybe you should try it. | |||
"Who decides what is causing hate and division? You want to censor free speech and think its a good thing? Hate and division is caused by bollocks like this and as usual the left turn into the biggest bigots and wannabe fascists! "The left?" Ironically I am a natural conservative, own my own businesses, bit of an internationalist and supporter of small state and lower taxes. However, I have always had a BIG problem associating myself with intolerance, incitement of division and in particular the so called right wing press. In my heart of hearts, I even understood the concept of Brexit but I just could not and cannot associate myself with people and media outlets who champion the cause of division and so by default promote hatred and hostility. Headlines and stories in the Express and Mail have just gone too far with me, particularly with the constant drip, drip, drill of emotive headlines like swarms, hoards, invasion etc etc I think the campaign #StopFundingHatred is noble and therefore I am unable to find fault with it." I know exactly how you feel because I feel similar myself. However I'm coming more and more to the realisation that one of the reasons why the middle is not holding against the populist arguments of both the 'loony left' and the 'rabid right' is because, rather than engaging in the arguments, we've often seem to be trying to shut it down. We need to face up to the simplistic and populist arguments from both the left and the right, exposing them with good argument and facts for what they are. Remember what happened to Nick Griffin on Question Time. We can, and will, ultimately win the reasoned argument if we persistently and continually make the case. | |||
"Despite being a relatively recent campaign #StopFundingHate has managed to get Specsavers to apologise, remove an advert and review future advertising campaigns. This as a result of Specsavers ads appearing alongside inflammatory stories in the Daily Express. #StopFundingHate is targeting consumer brands that pay to advertise in newspapers and magazines that publish inflammatory and xenophobic stories for the seemingly sole purpose of stirring hatred, resentment and division. Well done them. Keep up the good work. However members of the public can decide what they wish to buy. No one is compelled to buy the Daily Mail. What conntribution has stopfundinghate ever made to society. ? Daily Mail readers represent the back ground of British Society and have no interest in such an organisation. The Daily Mail is a great paper and its readers should not be bullied by those who do not believe in freedom of speech. Who defines hatred , resentment and division.? If we all adhered to tbe values promoted by the Daily Mail , the UK would be a better place . Well done to the Daily Mail for standing up for UK citizens . " It clearly agrees with you then. My personal opinion of the Mail is similar to my opinion of the Guardian; the journalism can sometimes be quiet good but they are both ruined by their own political bias. However they are both useful if used to question your own outlook on the world and get a handle on what others think. | |||
"Despite being a relatively recent campaign #StopFundingHate has managed to get Specsavers to apologise, remove an advert and review future advertising campaigns. This as a result of Specsavers ads appearing alongside inflammatory stories in the Daily Express. #StopFundingHate is targeting consumer brands that pay to advertise in newspapers and magazines that publish inflammatory and xenophobic stories for the seemingly sole purpose of stirring hatred, resentment and division. Well done them. Keep up the good work. However members of the public can decide what they wish to buy. No one is compelled to buy the Daily Mail. What conntribution has stopfundinghate ever made to society. ? Daily Mail readers represent the back ground of British Society and have no interest in such an organisation. The Daily Mail is a great paper and its readers should not be bullied by those who do not believe in freedom of speech. Who defines hatred , resentment and division.? If we all adhered to tbe values promoted by the Daily Mail , the UK would be a better place . Well done to the Daily Mail for standing up for UK citizens . The Daily Mail supported the rise of fascism in the 30s......hasn't improved much in the interim. Vicious, bigoted and mean spirited journalism for mean spirited members of society.....perfect synchronicity Were you around in the 30s. ? If not how wouls you be able to come to that cobclusion ? Do you actually buy and read the paper. ? If not how would you be able to judge it ? For someone who purports to be 'educated' you are also very naive. The support by the Daily Mail of Fascism is very well known, one needn't have been "around in the 30s." Rothermeee the propreitor of the paper was a personal friend of both Mussolini and Hitler and directed his papers editorial stance to be pro-Fascism. Rather than just wading in, putting someone down, then leaving maybe you should research before posting? Im not expecting a reply to this, as you weren't able to reply to other counter posts I've made on other threads. Do some research and dont be a sheep. It might just be what happened in the 30s is of no interest to me . I make my judgement based on what is happening in the World today , not 80 years ago." Absolutely. I mean there is really no reason at all to look back and try to learn the lessons of history, is there? | |||
"Has no one advised you that swearing is ill mannered and offensive. ? So is prejudice. Give me a foul-mouthed cunt over an intolerant, smarmy cunt any day of the week. Prejudice is a manner of opinion and those who use the term against others tend to be exceptionally narrow minded individuals . Use of bad language is pointless and ill mannered . It shows a total lack of self control. On a simplistic basis those using offensive language are unable to express a valid point or opinion so just use this language as a measure of last resort . Unable to express a valid point of opinion? Er, take a look back at your own, ridiculous posts. You have absolutely no self-awareness whatsoever. I am erudite and, when I need to be, eloquent. Debating with you requires neither of those things. Your reasoning borders on the childlike and your failure to answer any of the points I've raised says it all. " As far as I am aware no one is compelled to answer anyone of the points raised by a poster . Another poster commented on a number of your rather objectionable comments aimed at other posters . On one post you were rude and sneared at a lady and one at least two replies you used foul language ( swear words ) . Use of foul language is hardly the actions of a rational and controlled individual . You also make a point about various members replying to your posts . It might just be that they have no interest in replying to your posts or have better things to do with their lives. | |||
"Despite being a relatively recent campaign #StopFundingHate has managed to get Specsavers to apologise, remove an advert and review future advertising campaigns. This as a result of Specsavers ads appearing alongside inflammatory stories in the Daily Express. #StopFundingHate is targeting consumer brands that pay to advertise in newspapers and magazines that publish inflammatory and xenophobic stories for the seemingly sole purpose of stirring hatred, resentment and division. Well done them. Keep up the good work. However members of the public can decide what they wish to buy. No one is compelled to buy the Daily Mail. What conntribution has stopfundinghate ever made to society. ? Daily Mail readers represent the back ground of British Society and have no interest in such an organisation. The Daily Mail is a great paper and its readers should not be bullied by those who do not believe in freedom of speech. Who defines hatred , resentment and division.? If we all adhered to tbe values promoted by the Daily Mail , the UK would be a better place . Well done to the Daily Mail for standing up for UK citizens . The Daily Mail supported the rise of fascism in the 30s......hasn't improved much in the interim. Vicious, bigoted and mean spirited journalism for mean spirited members of society.....perfect synchronicity Were you around in the 30s. ? If not how wouls you be able to come to that cobclusion ? Do you actually buy and read the paper. ? If not how would you be able to judge it ? For someone who purports to be 'educated' you are also very naive. The support by the Daily Mail of Fascism is very well known, one needn't have been "around in the 30s." Rothermeee the propreitor of the paper was a personal friend of both Mussolini and Hitler and directed his papers editorial stance to be pro-Fascism. Rather than just wading in, putting someone down, then leaving maybe you should research before posting? Im not expecting a reply to this, as you weren't able to reply to other counter posts I've made on other threads. Do some research and dont be a sheep. Just wait until CandM4U come along and tell you that Hitler and Mussolini weren't fascists, there were socialists!
Nothing would surprise me, especially on this site!
here we go again I'v never said they weren't fascists, they were. And socialists.
Learn some history. Where their politics and ideology came from, which parties they were members of and where national socialism came from and what fascism is.
They weren't actually socialists, in the case of the NAZIs, they just attached the term socialism to their name.
Back to school for some of you, methinks!
Really? Mussolini was a member of the Italian Socialist Party from 1901-1914. He didn't just change from socialist to 'fascist' he simply became a socialist that had a stronger belief in a united nation that overcame social hierarchy through labour for the benefit of the sate.
The NSDAP was the NAZI party, they didn't just attatch socialism to their name
Hitler may have denounced socialism because of his war against the USSR but privately admitted he was a left winger. He stated plainly that the whole of national socialism was based on Marxism. People find it difficult to understand how Hitler could have been a socialist because they misread the true history of socialist thought. Prior to WW2 socialists had established a tradition of advocating eugenics, genocide and ethnic cleansing.
So, who needs to go back to school and learn some history?"I don't think it really matters if NAZIism or fascists are right or left of centre, any more than it matters whether Stalin was really a socialist or a fascist also. What does matter is that all three claimed to have democratic mandates but we're all extremist, authoritarian, antidemocratic dictators who, especially in the cases of the NAZIs and Mussolini's fascists, tried to offer simplistic and populist solutions to complex problems but the solutions they offered actually ended up making things worse. | |||
" Fascist is a rather overused term which is bandied about too easily by people who don't really understand. I agree, but what do you expect in a post-truth, "we've had enough of experts" world? An expert is only expressing their opinion in a defined set of circumstances. It may be important to be an expert in topics such as engineering but in topics such as politics or the economy no one can predict the future and as such the view of experts are best to be ignored . If we take the stock market it is recognised that anyone who attempted to time the markets will have lost money. Shares are along term investment and no one can predict the future of an economy . " You don't need to be an expert to understand that if you take actions that will make doing business with your biggest, closest and richest customers it's not goin to turn out well. | |||
"Despite being a relatively recent campaign #StopFundingHate has managed to get Specsavers to apologise, remove an advert and review future advertising campaigns. This as a result of Specsavers ads appearing alongside inflammatory stories in the Daily Express. #StopFundingHate is targeting consumer brands that pay to advertise in newspapers and magazines that publish inflammatory and xenophobic stories for the seemingly sole purpose of stirring hatred, resentment and division. Well done them. Keep up the good work. Do you actually read the Daily Mail and how did you come to the conclusion that their paper stirs hatred and resentment . The reality is that many people still believe in traditional family values. " What's that got to do with reading the Daily Mail? | |||
" As far as I am aware no one is compelled to answer anyone of the points raised by a poster . Another poster commented on a number of your rather objectionable comments aimed at other posters . On one post you were rude and sneared at a lady and one at least two replies you used foul language ( swear words ) . Use of foul language is hardly the actions of a rational and controlled individual . You also make a point about various members replying to your posts . It might just be that they have no interest in replying to your posts or have better things to do with their lives. " You are confusing threads now. The poster whom you referred to as challenging me, I have answered. In that thread. I am awaiting their response. It seems fine for you to make an assumption about my state of mind or my self-control, but I can't question your opinions? Hardly fair that. Almost like running to nanny when one of the big kids has hit you without informing her that you struck out first. | |||
| |||
" As far as I am aware no one is compelled to answer anyone of the points raised by a poster . Another poster commented on a number of your rather objectionable comments aimed at other posters . On one post you were rude and sneared at a lady and one at least two replies you used foul language ( swear words ) . Use of foul language is hardly the actions of a rational and controlled individual . You also make a point about various members replying to your posts . It might just be that they have no interest in replying to your posts or have better things to do with their lives. You are confusing threads now. The poster whom you referred to as challenging me, I have answered. In that thread. I am awaiting their response. It seems fine for you to make an assumption about my state of mind or my self-control, but I can't question your opinions? Hardly fair that. Almost like running to nanny when one of the big kids has hit you without informing her that you struck out first. " You can question someones opinion anytime . What is completely unacceptable is to use foul language and snarkey remarks . Use of swear words in my opinion just illustrates a lack of self control. This is not aimed at your peronally , it applies to anyone who sees the need to use offensive language or make sarcastic remarks. | |||
"You can question someones opinion anytime . What is completely unacceptable is to use foul language and snarkey remarks . Use of swear words in my opinion just illustrates a lack of self control. This is not aimed at your peronally , it applies to anyone who sees the need to use offensive language or make sarcastic remarks." Well you did aim it at me, several times. I don't have a problem with profanity, far from it. However, I really am bored of the sticks and stones of this argument. You are never going to come around to my side of the argument and I won't to yours. So let us let sleepimg dogs lie? | |||
| |||
"Remember what happened to Nick Griffin on Question Time." The extremists saw Nick Griffin hang himself by his own rope on Question Time and they changed tactics. Instead of saying things straight out they use dog whistle phrases. Unfortunately the BBC have not adapted to this change in tactic so Farage and Le Pen can go on Marr and he sits there like a nodding dog and their views become more and more sanitised because they are on the BBC. Ironically, their most right-wing interviewer Andrew Neil actually grills these people and points out when they are talking contradictory bullshit. | |||
"Remember what happened to Nick Griffin on Question Time. The extremists saw Nick Griffin hang himself by his own rope on Question Time and they changed tactics. Instead of saying things straight out they use dog whistle phrases. Unfortunately the BBC have not adapted to this change in tactic so Farage and Le Pen can go on Marr and he sits there like a nodding dog and their views become more and more sanitised because they are on the BBC. Ironically, their most right-wing interviewer Andrew Neil actually grills these people and points out when they are talking contradictory bullshit." Yes Andrew Neil is the most watchable for me, even if he is Right of centre he gives no-one an easy ride in interviews if they go down the bullshit route. | |||
"The campaign is not demanding censorship, it is just asking customers of the companies that advertise in those papers to politely let the companies know if they strongly disagree with such advertising. . It's not censorship. . It's called consumer power. . It doesn't stop you buying that paper and quoting the bollox it spews. . It doesn't stop you getting your knickers in a twist thinking it's only "lefties" who get their knickers in a twist about things they don't like. " Eventually the papers close down because papers depend on advertising. After a few years we would be left with a few papers that comply with the views of a small group of 'comrades.' Other papers would be too scared to report on anything that might offend the 'comrades' and so eventually all papers your the state line. Not censorship? Sounds very sinister to me. | |||
" Eventually the papers close down because papers depend on advertising. After a few years we would be left with a few papers that comply with the views of a small group of 'comrades.' Other papers would be too scared to report on anything that might offend the 'comrades' and so eventually all papers your the state line. Not censorship? Sounds very sinister to me." So if you don't lap up what the Daily Mail prints you're a communist? | |||
" Eventually the papers close down because papers depend on advertising. After a few years we would be left with a few papers that comply with the views of a small group of 'comrades.' Other papers would be too scared to report on anything that might offend the 'comrades' and so eventually all papers your the state line. Not censorship? Sounds very sinister to me. So if you don't lap up what the Daily Mail prints you're a communist? "Yup, and only commies control the media and buy newspapers. | |||
" Eventually the papers close down because papers depend on advertising. After a few years we would be left with a few papers that comply with the views of a small group of 'comrades.' Other papers would be too scared to report on anything that might offend the 'comrades' and so eventually all papers your the state line. Not censorship? Sounds very sinister to me. So if you don't lap up what the Daily Mail prints you're a communist? "Nope, hence my use of inverted commas. I could have used the phrase 'a small group of like minded individuals' but 'comrades' was shorter. | |||
| |||
