I imagine there were members of the sequinned cardigan brigade fainting all over their kitchen floors this morning. Steve revealed that he wears M&S Aertex pants! 
LBC General Chit-Chat (Part 31)
305 of 403
Originally Posted by niceguy1966:
“Her whole fake persona is the ballsy b**** that says what she thinks and what others are afraid to say. In reality she says whatever will get her most publicly and most money. ”
“Her whole fake persona is the ballsy b**** that says what she thinks and what others are afraid to say. In reality she says whatever will get her most publicly and most money. ”
The perfect summary of KH, in my opinion. Just another example of a so-called 'news' station trying to stir the pot to keep their listenership up.
Farage having a totally unfounded attack on the BBC again. Claiming they never mentioned that the Cologne mob was of North African/Arab origin when they did. I guess he's still mad at them for not packing the audience with kippers for the Leaders Debate.
Originally Posted by Talma:
“This, exactly. It sounded like the Prime Ministerial obligatory 'none of this (whatever it is) has anything whatsoever to do with Islam' introduction when talking about nasty or negative things that happen involving Muslims of any description.”
“This, exactly. It sounded like the Prime Ministerial obligatory 'none of this (whatever it is) has anything whatsoever to do with Islam' introduction when talking about nasty or negative things that happen involving Muslims of any description.”
I have listened to the clip from LBC's website, and KH came over as quite the hypocrite once again, telling Iain to let her talk, whilst never letting him get a word in edgeways, and so on.
However, out of interest, do you think that people like the Westboro Baptist Church or Timothy McVeigh represent Christianity?
Originally Posted by Cayce:
“What's happened on t'other thread? I can't get to the last page, and the mods have already been at work shearing posts?”
“What's happened on t'other thread? I can't get to the last page, and the mods have already been at work shearing posts?
”
Originally Posted by gurney-slade:
“I thought the whole point of it was no holds barred and anything goes!
”
“I thought the whole point of it was no holds barred and anything goes!
”
Troublemakers abound
Originally Posted by gurney-slade:
“Your assumption being that people who say they aren't racist must therefore be racist. Tell me how somebody who is genuinely not a racist can express that belief without actually saying they aren't a racist? Or must they keep it to them-self and hope people can read their mind?
Typical left wing double-think and knee jerk reaction.
”
“Your assumption being that people who say they aren't racist must therefore be racist. Tell me how somebody who is genuinely not a racist can express that belief without actually saying they aren't a racist? Or must they keep it to them-self and hope people can read their mind?
Typical left wing double-think and knee jerk reaction.
”
It's not for me to say what tahiti meant, but personally I think you've made a bit of a quantum leap here. I don't think that assumption you see is there in his/her original post. (And to be clear, if it were there, then I would be agreeing with your point).
However, the irony of your posting that little gem in bold does not escape me.
Originally Posted by BurlyBeaR:
“Troublemakers abound”
“Troublemakers abound
”
Nice and peaceful here - for the time being!
Originally Posted by makeba72:
“It's not for me to say what tahiti meant, but personally I think you've made a bit of a quantum leap here. I don't think that assumption you see is there in his/her original post. (And to be clear, if it were there, then I would be agreeing with your point).
However, the irony of your posting that little gem in bold does not escape me.”
“It's not for me to say what tahiti meant, but personally I think you've made a bit of a quantum leap here. I don't think that assumption you see is there in his/her original post. (And to be clear, if it were there, then I would be agreeing with your point).
However, the irony of your posting that little gem in bold does not escape me.”
It escapes me I'm afraid.
Gawd almighty, J O'B at his convoluted worst this morning. He's evolved an impenetrable analogy between rapists in Cologne and Ched Evans. I can't believe he's been sitting at his computer screen following (presumably on Twitter) posters' comments on the two and finding that they are contradictory. Finding a new angle on a topic is fine, and he's v. good at it, but he's straining it to the limit this morning.
I really shouldn't listen to JOB - it's bad for my blood pressure.
Can he give examples of any other incidents where 1000 plus young men have systematically groped, assaulted, touched up and even raped dozens of young women immediately outside the main railway station on a busy evening of a major Western European city?
He seems to be equating this mass wholesale abuse where people were seemingly acting with impunity with individual rapes conducted in private in bedrooms or back alleys,
The difference is that in the later case the appalling perpetrators do this in private as this minimises their risk of getting caught or arrested.
The difference here is that up to a thousand men felt they could do this in a very public city centre location and get away with it.
If the certain footballer he keeps mentioning - allegedly - had wandered along to Liverpool street station on a Friday night, grabbed a woman and attacked her on the station concourse you can bet he would be challenged and arrested immediately because they would know they would not get away with this in public.
That is the difference JOB!
Can he give examples of any other incidents where 1000 plus young men have systematically groped, assaulted, touched up and even raped dozens of young women immediately outside the main railway station on a busy evening of a major Western European city?
He seems to be equating this mass wholesale abuse where people were seemingly acting with impunity with individual rapes conducted in private in bedrooms or back alleys,
The difference is that in the later case the appalling perpetrators do this in private as this minimises their risk of getting caught or arrested.
The difference here is that up to a thousand men felt they could do this in a very public city centre location and get away with it.
If the certain footballer he keeps mentioning - allegedly - had wandered along to Liverpool street station on a Friday night, grabbed a woman and attacked her on the station concourse you can bet he would be challenged and arrested immediately because they would know they would not get away with this in public.
That is the difference JOB!
Originally Posted by gurney-slade:
“Nice and peaceful here - for the time being!”
“Nice and peaceful here - for the time being!
”
This thread is much improved. The Mods did good.
Originally Posted by gurney-slade:
“Gawd almighty, J O'B at his convoluted worst this morning. He's evolved an impenetrable analogy between rapists in Cologne and Ched Evans. I can't believe he's been sitting at his computer screen following (presumably on Twitter) posters' comments on the two and finding that they are contradictory. Finding a new angle on a topic is fine, and he's v. good at it, but he's straining it to the limit this morning.”
“Gawd almighty, J O'B at his convoluted worst this morning. He's evolved an impenetrable analogy between rapists in Cologne and Ched Evans. I can't believe he's been sitting at his computer screen following (presumably on Twitter) posters' comments on the two and finding that they are contradictory. Finding a new angle on a topic is fine, and he's v. good at it, but he's straining it to the limit this morning.”
What you call convoluted I would call digging a little deeper into how different people react to the same story. IMO JOB is not looking just to state the obvious, that rape is vile but looking more at the variable views about the same crime.
Cheddar Evans was mentioned because some on Twitter who were most outraged at the abuse of women in Germany were happy to excuse a convicted rapist in Evans.
Originally Posted by gurney-slade:
“It escapes me I'm afraid.”
“It escapes me I'm afraid.
”
Because you were complaining about someone making an absurd generalisation/extrapolation and having a knee-jerk reaction, by... well... having a knee-jerk reaction of your own and making an absurd generalisation.
Originally Posted by BanglaRoad:
“What you call convoluted I would call digging a little deeper into how different people react to the same story. IMO JOB is not looking just to state the obvious, that rape is vile but looking more at the variable views about the same crime.
Cheddar Evans was mentioned because some on Twitter who were most outraged at the abuse of women in Germany were happy to excuse a convicted rapist in Evans.”
“What you call convoluted I would call digging a little deeper into how different people react to the same story. IMO JOB is not looking just to state the obvious, that rape is vile but looking more at the variable views about the same crime.
Cheddar Evans was mentioned because some on Twitter who were most outraged at the abuse of women in Germany were happy to excuse a convicted rapist in Evans.”
Who exactly? Who is endorsing rape.
The issue with Evans was whether after having served his jail term he should be allowed to return to his job as a footballer. That is not the same as endorsing the offence he was convicted of committing.
And the difference is of course that these acts were committed in a public railway station in a systematic fashion against dozens of women where the perpetrators felt they could act with impunity.
Most vile rapists commit the act in private bedrooms or back alleys - not on the concourses of public railway stations. Why - because they know they would not get away with it if they did so in a busy public space. The difference is these men thought they could - and perhaps we need to ask why they thought they could.
Originally Posted by MARTYM8:
“Who exactly? Who is endorsing rape.
The issue with Evans was whether after having served his jail term he should be allowed to return to his job as a footballer. That is not the same as endorsing the offence he was convicted of committing.
And the difference is of course that these acts were committed in a public railway station in a systematic fashion against dozens of women where the perpetrators felt they could act with impunity.
Most vile rapists commit the act in private bedrooms or back alleys - not on the concourses of public railway stations. Why - because they know they would not get away with it if they did so in a busy public space. The difference is these men thought they could - and perhaps we need to ask why they thought they could.”
“Who exactly? Who is endorsing rape.
The issue with Evans was whether after having served his jail term he should be allowed to return to his job as a footballer. That is not the same as endorsing the offence he was convicted of committing.
And the difference is of course that these acts were committed in a public railway station in a systematic fashion against dozens of women where the perpetrators felt they could act with impunity.
Most vile rapists commit the act in private bedrooms or back alleys - not on the concourses of public railway stations. Why - because they know they would not get away with it if they did so in a busy public space. The difference is these men thought they could - and perhaps we need to ask why they thought they could.”
Did you listen to JOB when he told of the sexual assault by three young white men at the bus stop in South London?
Originally Posted by makeba72:
“Because you were complaining about someone making an absurd generalisation/extrapolation and having a knee-jerk reaction, by... well... having a knee-jerk reaction of your own and making an absurd generalisation.”
“Because you were complaining about someone making an absurd generalisation/extrapolation and having a knee-jerk reaction, by... well... having a knee-jerk reaction of your own and making an absurd generalisation.”
About what?
He was super puerile 10-11 this morning. Declining entry to people into other people’s territories is not ‘punishing’ them. One wonders if he ever thinks about how the demographic (and electoral implications) in Europe and England will be by the time his daughters are his age.
Originally Posted by BanglaRoad:
“Did you listen to JOB when he told of the sexual assault by three young white men at the bus stop in South London?”
“Did you listen to JOB when he told of the sexual assault by three young white men at the bus stop in South London?”
Yes - and horrible of course and I condemn them too.
But that's three people not 1000.
It was committed at a quiet bus stop in south London - not outside the main entrance of a major London railway station by up to 1000 men against 80 plus women where as a matter of course loads of police offers would have been in the station or close by on a busy evening.
Do you not get the difference - 3 vs up to a 1000, a busy public station in a city centre vs a bus stop on a suburb, dozens of women vs a few.
Are you seriously equating the two - cos I bet those 3 low life's would not have dared do that at a busy central London station as they would have been arrested in seconds.
Originally Posted by gurney-slade:
“Your assumption being that people who say they aren't racist must therefore be racist. Tell me how somebody who is genuinely not a racist can express that belief without actually saying they aren't a racist? Or must they keep it to them-self and hope people can read their mind?
Typical left wing double-think and knee jerk reaction.”
“Your assumption being that people who say they aren't racist must therefore be racist. Tell me how somebody who is genuinely not a racist can express that belief without actually saying they aren't a racist? Or must they keep it to them-self and hope people can read their mind?
Typical left wing double-think and knee jerk reaction.
”
Actually I was querying the following:
In statements of type 'I'm not a racist but ....' or 'my best friend is X but ...' , what is the point served by the opening declaration ?
Is it meant to soften the impact of what follows ?
Make it automatically irrefutable?
Provide some kind of personal guarantee ?
What?
I thought in 2015 this type of statement invited near - universal ridicule.
However Nick Ferrari used the second form last week (about Muslims - who else), and you used the first in your post so I thought I would ask.
Originally Posted by tahiti:
“Actually I was querying the following:
In statements of type 'I'm not a racist but ....' or 'my best friend is X but ...' , what is the point served by the opening declaration ?
Is it meant to soften the impact of what follows ?
Make it automatically irrefutable?
Provide some kind of personal guarantee ?
What?
I thought in 2015 this type of statement invited near - universal ridicule.
However Nick Ferrari used the second form last week (about Muslims - who else), and you used the first in your post so I thought I would ask.”
“Actually I was querying the following:
In statements of type 'I'm not a racist but ....' or 'my best friend is X but ...' , what is the point served by the opening declaration ?
Is it meant to soften the impact of what follows ?
Make it automatically irrefutable?
Provide some kind of personal guarantee ?
What?
I thought in 2015 this type of statement invited near - universal ridicule.
However Nick Ferrari used the second form last week (about Muslims - who else), and you used the first in your post so I thought I would ask.”
You're right to pick up on these modes of speech, and there's plenty of examples of people playing that card - in fairness to Nick Ferrari though, while I didn't hear that specific incident, he's dismantled many a anti-Muslim rant on his show, often using the example of his Muslim friend and recent events through his eyes.
Originally Posted by tahiti:
“Actually I was querying the following:
In statements of type 'I'm not a racist but ....' or 'my best friend is X but ...' , what is the point served by the opening declaration ?
Is it meant to soften the impact of what follows ?
Make it automatically irrefutable?
Provide some kind of personal guarantee ?
What?
I thought in 2015 this type of statement invited near - universal ridicule.
However Nick Ferrari used the second form last week (about Muslims - who else), and you used the first in your post so I thought I would ask.”
“Actually I was querying the following:
In statements of type 'I'm not a racist but ....' or 'my best friend is X but ...' , what is the point served by the opening declaration ?
Is it meant to soften the impact of what follows ?
Make it automatically irrefutable?
Provide some kind of personal guarantee ?
What?
I thought in 2015 this type of statement invited near - universal ridicule.
However Nick Ferrari used the second form last week (about Muslims - who else), and you used the first in your post so I thought I would ask.”
I'd explain if I knew which part of 'I'm not a racist' you don't understand. It's a statement of fact which hopefully qualifies my following comments.
AFAIC it needs no further discussion. You carry on if you wish.
Originally Posted by gurney-slade:
“I'd explain if I knew which part of 'I'm not a racist' you don't understand. It's a statement of fact which hopefully qualifies my following comments.
AFAIC it needs no further discussion. You carry on if you wish.”
“I'd explain if I knew which part of 'I'm not a racist' you don't understand. It's a statement of fact which hopefully qualifies my following comments.
AFAIC it needs no further discussion. You carry on if you wish.”
Lefties love calling people racists if they don't agree them. Like you said, knee-jerk reaction. And lazy lazy lazy
Originally Posted by gurney-slade:
“I'd explain if I knew which part of 'I'm not a racist' you don't understand. It's a statement of fact which hopefully qualifies my following comments.
AFAIC it needs no further discussion. You carry on if you wish.”
“I'd explain if I knew which part of 'I'm not a racist' you don't understand. It's a statement of fact which hopefully qualifies my following comments.
AFAIC it needs no further discussion. You carry on if you wish.”
I object to this type of statement because it makes it impossible to disagree without descending into ad hominem.
Speaking in general ( nothing to do with you or your post etc etc etc I hasten to add) the best way not to be mistaken for a racist is to not say racist things, as opposed to elaborate preludes, surely?
Originally Posted by gurney-slade:
“Typical left wing double-think and knee jerk reaction.”
“Typical left wing double-think and knee jerk reaction.
”
Originally Posted by gurney-slade:
“About what?”
“About what?”
As above.
Originally Posted by MARTYM8:
“Yes - and horrible of course and I condemn them too.
But that's three people not 1000.
It was committed at a quiet bus stop in south London - not outside the main entrance of a major London railway station by up to 1000 men against 80 plus women where as a matter of course loads of police offers would have been in the station or close by on a busy evening.
Do you not get the difference - 3 vs up to a 1000, a busy public station in a city centre vs a bus stopd on a suburb, dozens of women vs a few.
Are you seriously equating the two - cos I bet those 3 low life's would not have dared do that at a busy central London station as they would have been arrested in seconds.”
“Yes - and horrible of course and I condemn them too.
But that's three people not 1000.
It was committed at a quiet bus stop in south London - not outside the main entrance of a major London railway station by up to 1000 men against 80 plus women where as a matter of course loads of police offers would have been in the station or close by on a busy evening.
Do you not get the difference - 3 vs up to a 1000, a busy public station in a city centre vs a bus stopd on a suburb, dozens of women vs a few.
Are you seriously equating the two - cos I bet those 3 low life's would not have dared do that at a busy central London station as they would have been arrested in seconds.”
Probably not the thread for this Marty. The LBC Politics one is more suited. Not shying away from the discussion but feel that this thread is meant to be more light than shade and the general chitchat bit in the title is a guide.
305 of 403
