Katie Hopkins..

Sidney1st · Post by **Sidney1st** » Wed May 24, 2017 10:41 pm

I know what she writes about, I've read her stuff.

As a fat person it didn't offend me.

If a stupid code hadn't been suggested by Turtle as a lame explanation for how they've perceived the tweet I wouldn't bring it up.
I even had a quick read up about it because I've never heard of it before.

cloughyclaret · Post by **cloughyclaret** » Wed May 24, 2017 10:45 pm

Ok, I'll let it go is you still stand by it. But I still think you are being a stubborn ****

ClaretAndJew · Post by **ClaretAndJew** » Wed May 24, 2017 10:45 pm

You had a quick read up about what Sidney?

lovebeingaclaret · Post by **lovebeingaclaret** » Wed May 24, 2017 11:00 pm

No examples of nazism creeping into society yet?

How about offering up racist remarks by TR. That should be an easy one, shouldn't it?

Imploding Turtle · Post by **Imploding Turtle** » Wed May 24, 2017 11:10 pm

Sidney1st wrote:Hmm now lets have a look at that shall we...

You're tired of me twisting something you've said into something you didn't...
Can I direct you to the original tweet and ask why its been twisted into a what it has been on here?

Or doesn't the same apply?

It's not been twisted. She said something that can have duality of meaning. The problem is when you look at her history of saying deplorable **** at times like this one probable meaning stands out as far more likely than the other. Acknowledging that isn't "twisting" anything.

You however have repeatedly been twisting what i've been saying for weeks now. There isn't duality of meaning in what i say (and if there is i'm happy to clarify), what you're doing is ignoring parts of what i say in order to change the meaning of what i say and then attack the new meaning. It's called a strawman argument. For example your accusation of "So because its Hopkins it can't be a stupid mistake". But what i actually said was that if it was someone less controversial than Hopkins then there would be a "higher likelihood of if being a stupid mistake." This is an example of how you have twisted my words because there's no way a logical person can infer what you did from what i said, because the opposite of "higher likelihood" is not "impossible".

Now this is the bit where you backtrack and say it was all just a troll.

Right_winger · Post by **Right_winger** » Wed May 24, 2017 11:46 pm

She hasnt said anything wrong. If she has then I'm sure some libtard will interfere and try to get her sued again.

This libtard attitude really does rub people up the wrong way. People are fed up with it, trump and brexit is all anti Libtard. These extremists religious nutters keep pushing and the people will will get to a stage where they have had enough and start resolving things themselves. The hornets nest has already been prodded.

JohnMcGreal · Post by **JohnMcGreal** » Wed May 24, 2017 11:56 pm

When the person who calls for a Final Solution has a well documented history of using dehumanising language to describe a group of people, there's a very strong chance that they know precisely what they're saying, and the weight that it carries.

Hopkins has previously described migrants as:

A plague of feral humans
A swarm
Cockroaches

Those people weren't terrorists by the way, they were by and large innocent civilians fleeing war. Anyone with the faintest grasp of history will be able to place that sort of language in a heartbeat.

So if you want to ignore what she's said over the years and give her the benefit of the doubt over her latest Twitter excretion, then that's your choice. But don't expect people who can see the obvious to go along with you.

Imploding Turtle · Post by **Imploding Turtle** » Wed May 24, 2017 11:57 pm

Right_winger wrote:She hasnt said anything wrong. If she has then I'm sure some libtard will interfere and try to get her sued again.

This libtard attitude really does rub people up the wrong way. People are fed up with it, trump and brexit is all anti Libtard. These extremists religious nutters keep pushing and the people will will get to a stage where they have had enough and start resolving things themselves. The hornets nest has already been prodded.

A keyword search of you post using the word "abuse" yielded three examples of times when you've complained about either yourself or other people receiving personal abuse ostensibly as a result of holding a different opinion. Here they are.

August 15, 2016

Right_winger wrote: I won't abuse that person for having a differing opinion.

August 26, 2016

Right_winger wrote:The funny thing is people [...] seem to overlook that some of the posters on here actually get personal abuse for their views which differs from theirs.

These people are well versed on playing the man not the ball to divert the attention from their own flawed arguments, ...

May 23, 2017

Right_winger wrote:There's going to be people who will hurl abuse at you for this but you are pretty damn close to the mark.

You're wondering why would i bother? It's because you used "libtard" four times already in this thread to describe people who disagree with you.

Right_winger · Post by **Right_winger** » Thu May 25, 2017 12:03 am

JohnMcGreal wrote:When the person who calls for a Final Solution has a well documented history of using dehumanising language to describe a group of people, there's a very strong chance that they know precisely what they're saying, and the weight that it carries.

Hopkins has previously described migrants as:

A plague of feral humans
A swarm
Cockroaches

You mean like the so called refugees from Syria who were supposedly children.

Those people weren't terrorists by the way, they were by and large innocent civilians fleeing war. Anyone with the faintest grasp of history will be able to place that sort of language in a heartbeat.

So if you want to ignore what she's said over the years and give her the benefit of the doubt over her latest Twitter excretion, then that's your choice. But don't expect people who can see the obvious to go along with you.

You are basically decrying someone over what you think she meant.

Damo · Post by **Damo** » Thu May 25, 2017 3:18 am

cloughyclaret wrote:She has form in hatred - kids ,fat people, disabled - the list goes on.

Really? Hatred is a bit of a strong way of saying she upset some fat people and some people with chav kids names

Damo · Post by **Damo** » Thu May 25, 2017 3:21 am

"I'm all for freedom of speech unless it personally offends me"

Damo · Post by **Damo** » Thu May 25, 2017 3:51 am

Meanwhile, Rufus hound has used Twitter to insinuate that Theresa May has organised the Manchester atrocity to boost her chances of winning the election.
Have any of you phoned the police yet?

Imploding Turtle · Post by **Imploding Turtle** » Thu May 25, 2017 3:53 am

Damo wrote:"I'm all for freedom of speech unless it personally offends me"

Thought no one ever. Probably.

Imploding Turtle · Post by **Imploding Turtle** » Thu May 25, 2017 4:03 am

Damo wrote:Meanwhile, Rufus hound has used Twitter to insinuate that Theresa May has organised the Manchester atrocity to boost her chances of winning the election.
Have any of you phoned the police yet?

That's a civil matter, not a criminal matter. Unless he ended it with "so lets kill her".

But really, what the ****?

fake edit:
I looked it up and he didn't tweet it, he retweeted it and it wasn't exactly criminal, or even that bad, but it was pretty dumb "tinhattedness"

Here's what he retweeted as reported by Metro:
‘Given that the attacker was known to MI5, the timing seems unfortunate for [Prime Minister Theresa] May that an attack “slips through” as Labour are making progress…’

And these were Hound's words attached to the retweet:
Apologies for mild tinhattedness, but I've been thinking the same. Esp. as she was Home Secretary for so long. #reichstagFire

Since then here are his tweets.

It's a pretty desperate effort to suggest that a possible libelous tweet is even close to calling for a "final solution".

_Soclaretes_ · Post by **_Soclaretes_** » Thu May 25, 2017 6:26 am

Damo wrote:This isn't a case of someone being a c**t at a football match though is it?
It's someone who has made and implemented a complex plan to murder as many little girls as possible in the most barbaric way.
Your use of that analogy, which I have seen used multiple times in ways much more relivent than the way you are using it now, doesn't quite work here.
Also implying I'm generalizing Muslims because I used the word Islam is lazy. Your either not understanding my point or you are deliberately ignoring it, and using rhetoric and other people's sound bites to try and take some kind of moral highground

You're right, it isn't someone being a **** at a footy match (hence the wording in my post). But if you can't see the parallels in what I said then I'd say it was you who's either being deliberately ignorant or just plain unable to grasp it. I think it's the former as using such broad terms in staying that 'Islam' doesn't want to do anything about it, is pretty much the laziest response going.

It also hasn't bypassed me that you use ridicule and tenuous comparison to try and belittle my responses instead of just taking on the points I mention. There's nothing wrong with admitting that what you wrote was a little too simple for the discussion that was being had.

Back in point, do you represent, and therefore become responsible for, the actions of all British people? If the answer to that is no , then you can't hold a whole demographic responsible for an individual's actions within it. This makes your post pointless at best, damaging and inciteful at worst.

Falcon · Post by **Falcon** » Thu May 25, 2017 9:01 am

That tweet by Rufus Hound is awful but at least he's had the good sense to apologise.

Free speech is a funny thing. Rufus Hound has the right to post whatever he wants (within the law) but I have the right to call him 'a nasty conspiracy theorist making a political point out of the death of children' for posting it. Good fun.

Damo · Post by **Damo** » Thu May 25, 2017 11:14 am

_Soclaretes_ wrote:You're right, it isn't someone being a **** at a footy match (hence the wording in my post). But if you can't see the parallels in what I said then I'd say it was you who's either being deliberately ignorant or just plain unable to grasp it. I think it's the former as using such broad terms in staying that 'Islam' doesn't want to do anything about it, is pretty much the laziest response going.

It also hasn't bypassed me that you use ridicule and tenuous comparison to try and belittle my responses instead of just taking on the points I mention. There's nothing wrong with admitting that what you wrote was a little too simple for the discussion that was being had.

Back in point, do you represent, and therefore become responsible for, the actions of all British people? If the answer to that is no , then you can't hold a whole demographic responsible for an individual's actions within it. This makes your post pointless at best, damaging and inciteful at worst.

Of course I'm going to belittle your responses. You have completely missed my point then started implying I'm a racist, and then accused me of being inciteful.
You saw that I was (ever so slightfully) critical of the Islamic community and then implied that I thought all Muslims were the same and they were all to blame for the atrocity in Manchester.
Then like a buffoon you started throwing around rhetoric and other people analogies to try and prove your point.
I'm not going to engage you again on this subject because I have no time for political point scoring or people who want to prove to everyone how virtuous they are by posting soundbytes on a message board.
By the way, my original point was a suggestion to me by a Muslim. He, like me never stated that all Muslims were to blame for these attacks. His point was that it is a problem within Islam, and it is a problem that the Islamic community are best equipped to solve. He also thinks that the Islamic community do not do nearly enough to prevent things like this from happening and the Islamic community deserves some flack for inaction.
I will admit that my original point was a generalisation and probably a bit inflamitory. Parts of the community does want to do something about it, but not nearly enough of the uk's followers of the islamic faith do

_Soclaretes_ · Post by **_Soclaretes_** » Fri May 26, 2017 2:59 am

Damo wrote: I will admit that my original point was a generalisation and probably a bit inflamitory. Parts of the community does want to do something about it, but not nearly enough of the uk's followers of the islamic faith do

Thank you, I agree

claretdom · Post by **claretdom** » Fri May 26, 2017 10:34 am

Sacked by LBC

Steve-Harpers-perm · Post by **Steve-Harpers-perm** » Fri May 26, 2017 10:37 am

Oh no they'll have to find and pay someone else say really controversial things.

Imploding Turtle · Post by **Imploding Turtle** » Fri May 26, 2017 10:37 am

shame. She seemed like such a good egg.

Bordeauxclaret · Post by **Bordeauxclaret** » Fri May 26, 2017 11:00 am

She'll have to push it a lot further to get potted by The Daily Mail.

ClaretAndJew · Post by **ClaretAndJew** » Fri May 26, 2017 11:03 am

Gathered quite a lot of Twitter likes in the last half hour thanks to her sacking.

claretandy · Post by **claretandy** » Fri May 26, 2017 11:05 am

There's only free speech for terrorists and their sympathizers.

Bordeauxclaret · Post by **Bordeauxclaret** » Fri May 26, 2017 11:06 am

Tough when your heros fail isn't in Andy.

Wile E Coyote · Post by **Wile E Coyote** » Fri May 26, 2017 11:08 am

yes, she will soon find more outlets for her pigshit comments, as all ITV viewers and redtop readers are insane, they will be clamouring for her words of wisdom very soon, even if the work dries up, there's always Lorraine Kelly to soften the blow for the proles.

Lancasterclaret · Post by **Lancasterclaret** » Fri May 26, 2017 11:08 am

She can still partake in "free speech" Andy, just not got paid quite as much for it.

UpTheBeehole · Post by **UpTheBeehole** » Fri May 26, 2017 11:13 am

Steve-Harpers-perm wrote:Oh no they'll have to find and pay someone else say really controversial things.

They'll have to make do with Farage and Ferrari in the meantime.

LBC is Talksport for the next level up of *****.

Imploding Turtle · Post by **Imploding Turtle** » Fri May 26, 2017 11:14 am

claretandy wrote:There's only free speech for terrorists and their sympathizers.

You don't know what free speech is.

claretandy · Post by **claretandy** » Fri May 26, 2017 11:25 am

ClaretAndJew wrote:Gathered quite a lot of Twitter likes in the last half hour thanks to her sacking.

Not quite as many as her tweets though.

ClaretAndJew · Post by **ClaretAndJew** » Fri May 26, 2017 11:26 am

No but I'm not a racist.

Imploding Turtle · Post by **Imploding Turtle** » Fri May 26, 2017 11:34 am

ClaretAndJew wrote:No but I'm not a racist.

Uh oh. You used that word were not allowed to use to accurately describe the people we're not allowed to describe.

ClaretAndJew · Post by **ClaretAndJew** » Fri May 26, 2017 11:40 am

I'll call a spade a spade if I see it digging mate.

kentonclaret · Post by **kentonclaret** » Fri May 26, 2017 11:55 am

After her exit from TV show The Apprentice Sir Alan Sugar remarked "There's no way I could see anybody employing someone like that'.

Sir Alan had forgotten about The Sun.

Lancasterclaret · Post by **Lancasterclaret** » Fri May 26, 2017 1:58 pm

Shamelessly nicked from twitter

Katie Hopkins is going to use the time to write her autobiography, provisionally titled "My Struggle"

Lord Beamish · Post by **Lord Beamish** » Fri May 26, 2017 2:09 pm

Katie Hopkins, and her utterances are nothing more than a sleight of hand, a parlour trick. One intended to deflect the debate from where and what thoughtful people should be discussing, down a pointless and semantic rabbit-hole.

The best technique for coping with this pathetic excuse for a human being is to starve her of the thing she craves the most; publicity.

Ignore the pointless wretch.

claretblue · Post by **claretblue** » Fri May 26, 2017 3:01 pm

Lord Beamish wrote:Katie Hopkins, and her utterances are nothing more than a sleight of hand, a parlour trick. One intended to deflect the debate from where and what thoughtful people should be discussing, down a pointless and semantic rabbit-hole.

The best technique for coping with this pathetic excuse for a human being is to starve her of the thing she craves the most; publicity.

Ignore the pointless wretch.

well ignored your Lordship!

RingoMcCartney · Post by **RingoMcCartney** » Fri May 26, 2017 3:03 pm

Apparently Hopkins has written to the boss of channel 4 regards this

http://www.westmonster.com/channel-4-in ... n-t-shirt/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

quoonbeatz · Post by **quoonbeatz** » Fri May 26, 2017 3:17 pm

Tought tits, Katie, you sad ******* knobhead.

Wile E Coyote · Post by **Wile E Coyote** » Fri May 26, 2017 3:26 pm

the thick in society adore hopkins, they cannot see through the facade, same reason why talk sport has listeners, the sappy ***** actually believe the hosts are genuinely interested in their calls and topics. Piers morgan, just a nothing person who lies, but somehow the morons hang on his every word.

Murger · Post by **Murger** » Fri May 26, 2017 5:15 pm

Even though what she said was vile, is this just not another case of the left crying again? She offers (although extreme) the side of the argument that the people, media are scared to have?

ClaretAndJew · Post by **ClaretAndJew** » Fri May 26, 2017 5:18 pm

Nope. The left aren't crying. They are merely responding to an individual who represents a media outlet who's inciting genocide via the language she CHOSE to use by suggesting there needs to be a final solution.

Murger · Post by **Murger** » Fri May 26, 2017 5:22 pm

But isn't just expressing an opinion some might be feeling?

ClaretAndJew · Post by **ClaretAndJew** » Fri May 26, 2017 5:28 pm

If people are feeling that specific thing, I fear for the country.

Murger · Post by **Murger** » Fri May 26, 2017 5:33 pm

And you don't fear for the country already? These type of attacks are becoming more and more frequent, but you fear for the country because of a radio show presenters views?

Wile E Coyote · Post by **Wile E Coyote** » Fri May 26, 2017 5:36 pm

this is similar to loose women, where one of those nolan sisters attempts to talk about something semi serious using real words.
Her, and those other has been's, prattling on about nothing in particular , sadly, there are slack jawed berks out there who soak it all up.

FactualFrank · Post by **FactualFrank** » Fri May 26, 2017 5:36 pm

Murger wrote:Even though what she said was vile, is this just not another case of the left crying again? She offers (although extreme) the side of the argument that the people, media are scared to have?

No. She offers false opinions, which she doesn't actually believe. She offers false opinions because she knows it causes controversy. That's all it is. I don't think she believes what she's saying, she does it because she's a sick person and knows it'll spark fury amongst the public and in turn, give her publicity.

Bordeauxclaret · Post by **Bordeauxclaret** » Fri May 26, 2017 5:39 pm

Murger wrote:But isn't just expressing an opinion some might be feeling?

Do you think Andre Gray could have claimed that earlier in the year.

Murger · Post by **Murger** » Fri May 26, 2017 5:47 pm

Bordeauxclaret wrote:Do you think Andre Gray could have claimed that earlier in the year.

No he shouldn't. But let's just bury our head in the sand incase we say something that might offend.

Ps; how can someone have a wrong opinion?

ClaretAndJew · Post by **ClaretAndJew** » Fri May 26, 2017 5:48 pm

No one can have a wrong opinion mate. But having an opinion of the ilk that Katie Hopkins has/had is bound to incite upset and anger from people.

We're already reeling from tragedy and people are going on about mass deportation, internment camps, final solutions. It's weird. It's counter productive. It does nothing to preserve the fabrics of this country.