# Katie Hopkins



## Buckaroo (Jan 3, 2015)

"Sending us Ebola bombs in the form of sweaty Glaswegians just isn't cricket."

http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-scotland-glasgow-west-30641705

"Pauline Cafferkey, a public health nurse at Blantyre Health Centre in South Lanarkshire, has been receiving specialist treatment at the Royal Free Hospital in north London".

"Hopkins' comments came after it emerged that the nurse, who volunteered to help Save the Children in the fight against Ebola, was diagnosed on her return from Sierra Leone."

Pauline Cafferkey is now in a critical condition.
http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-30666265


----------



## DRINK? (Jan 3, 2015)

hopkins is a cunt


----------



## editor (Jan 3, 2015)

Vile, publicity-desperate waste of space that really isn't even worthy of discussion.


----------



## Dan U (Jan 3, 2015)

Can't believe the police are reportedly investigating her comments. 

Everyone can see her for what she is.


----------



## Hocus Eye. (Jan 3, 2015)

That nurse is very sick, but not as sick as the Hopkins person.


----------



## Wilf (Jan 3, 2015)

She's a fixed part of the equation, a pointless shit drip.  Her constant spewage does though say a lot about the broadcasters and newspapers who pay her.  What was it Stewart Lee said about Clarkson - 'the racist views which he holds, for money'.


----------



## Buckaroo (Jan 3, 2015)

editor said:


> Vile, publicity-desperate waste of space that really isn't even worthy of discussion.



Then maybe don't join a discussion about her?


----------



## Wilf (Jan 3, 2015)

Dan U said:


> Can't believe the police are reportedly investigating her comments.


 Me too, though I'd have no objection to her finding her way into a locked room full of Glaswegians.


----------



## treelover (Jan 3, 2015)

Pauline is a very very brave woman and exemplifies the best of human kind

btw, the Mail was also going on about these volunteers bringing 'danger' back to the U.K


----------



## D'wards (Jan 3, 2015)

She's far more of a carefully constructed character than Dapper Laughs


----------



## ShiftyBagLady (Jan 3, 2015)

Ugh, do we have to?
Being talked about is her reason d'être, do you we have to indulge the cretin?


----------



## a_chap (Jan 3, 2015)

I despise the woman so much I refuse to read this thread or comment upon it.

Er...


----------



## Jon-of-arc (Jan 3, 2015)

It is shit that the police have become involved, no matter how utterly hideous KH and every contrived controversial opinion (Wilf  "that's printed every single week for money") she manages to spout actually are, when you start to even contemplate criminalising the act of telling a shit & sick joke that incorporates a mildly offensive stereotype, you are blurring the line between "hate speech" and "being a knob", which is a fairly useful distinction to make.  IMO, obvs.


----------



## J Ed (Jan 3, 2015)

Jon-of-arc said:


> It is shit that the police have become involved, no matter how utterly hideous KH and every contrived controversial opinion (Wilf  "that's printed every single week for money") she manages to spout actually are, when you start to even contemplate criminalising the act of telling a shit & sick joke that incorporates a mildly offensive stereotype, you are blurring the line between "hate speech" and "being a knob", which is a fairly useful distinction to make.  IMO, obvs.



I agree although her celebrity will probably ensure that she is not prosecuted while ordinary people texting this stuff increasingly fall victim to our state's policing of twitter


----------



## JHE (Jan 3, 2015)

Dan U said:


> Can't believe the police are reportedly investigating her comments.



Recently on some daft TV prog Hopkins was rude to some fat people.  One of them stormed off in high dudgeon to phone the police in the belief that Hopkins had committed a "hate crime".  This is where we have got to:  people believe that comments they find offensive are criminal.


----------



## Wilf (Jan 3, 2015)

JHE said:


> Recently on some daft TV prog Hopkins was rude to some fat people.  One of them stormed off in high dudgeon to phone the police in the belief that Hopkins had committed a "hate crime".  This is where we have got to:  people believe that comments they find offensive are criminal.


Nah, I don't think they think the comments are unambiguously criminal, they are dealing with shit in an era where equality campaigns have been taken over and sanitized by personnel departments and opportunistic lawyers.  Can't say I agree with people who go to plod when the likes of Hopkins spew this stuff out, but they are just using whatever tool is available to get back at her.  I doubt that the complainants themselves _really_ believe this should be about the criminal law.


----------



## eatmorecheese (Jan 3, 2015)

Hopkins is boring and tedious, and the sooner she fucks up her controversial cash cow formula by going too far to be able to continue booking media slots, the better.


----------



## J Ed (Jan 4, 2015)

eatmorecheese said:


> Hopkins is boring and tedious, and the sooner she fucks up her controversial cash cow formula by going too far to be able to continue booking media slots, the better.



You would have assumed that her comments re: Palestinians would have done that, she seems to be posh enough to be able to say whatever she wants short of an actual racial slur and still get invited on to This Morning etc


----------



## Lurdan (Jan 4, 2015)

eatmorecheese said:


> cash cow



Well put.


----------



## Chilli.s (Jan 4, 2015)

"Sending us Ebola bombs in the form of sweaty Glaswegians just isn't cricket."

Reads like a double racist joke to me. Poor.


----------



## Nancy_Winks (Jan 4, 2015)

I don't know how she lives with herself. How does she cope with those 3am moments of utter shame.


----------



## izz (Jan 4, 2015)

Nancy_Winks said:


> I don't know how she lives with herself. How does she cope with those 3am moments of utter shame.


Well the straightforward answer to that is of course she doesn't have them. People can be addicted to fame as well as anything else, I would guess that the first time she said anything mildly controversial she became hooked on the response and has been trying to trigger something as satisfying again but has to try harder each time.

Best not to dwell.


----------



## ItWillNeverWork (Jan 4, 2015)

It stops being offensive the moment you realise she's just trolling pathetically.


----------



## Wilf (Jan 4, 2015)

cynicaleconomy said:


> It stops being offensive the moment you realise she's just trolling pathetically.


It's the desperation of her though.  A monkey throwing shit on cue.


----------



## Nancy_Winks (Jan 4, 2015)

izz said:


> Well the straightforward answer to that is of course she doesn't have them. People can be addicted to fame as well as anything else, I would guess that the first time she said anything mildly controversial she became hooked on the response and has been trying to trigger something as satisfying again but has to try harder each time.
> 
> Best not to dwell.


I think she must. It's really unusual behaviour though.


----------



## killer b (Jan 4, 2015)

Not that unusual! Look at all the dickheads who get off on upsetting people on here for examples of the same mindset. She's just ninjaboy given a national platform.


----------



## kenny g (Jan 4, 2015)

Wait a few years for her "I was on smack, cocaine and benzo's" shame tell-all. I can't believe anyone could be naturally like that.


----------



## izz (Jan 4, 2015)

Surely the only thing we should feel for her is pity, it must be dreadful to have to rely on people's loathing to make you feel good.


----------



## Mation (Jan 4, 2015)

Who is Katie Hopkins?


----------



## Nancy_Winks (Jan 4, 2015)

Mation said:


> Who is Katie Hopkins?


She was in The Apprentice and now goes on This Morning saying vile shit about people less lucky than her.


----------



## Mation (Jan 4, 2015)

Nancy_Winks said:


> She was in The Apprentice and now goes on This Morning saying vile shit about people less lucky than her.


Thanks


----------



## Minnie_the_Minx (Jan 4, 2015)

Mation said:


> Thanks



Seriously?  Have you really never heard the vile bitch?  

Just do a search on here for her.  Alternatively, there's probably loads of her on YouTube.  I hate to give her more publicity though, but I'm informing you, just in case you stumble upon her, recognise her and want to give her a slap or a load of verbal abuse


----------



## Mation (Jan 4, 2015)

Minnie_the_Minx said:


> Seriously?  Have you really never heard the vile bitch?
> 
> Just do a search on here for her.  Alternatively, there's probably loads of her on YouTube.  I hate to give her more publicity though, but I'm informing you, just in case you stumble upon her, recognise her and want to give her a slap or a load of verbal abuse


No, I hadn't heard of her, and I didn't particularly want to search for her as she sounds horrible.


----------



## xenon (Jan 4, 2015)

I've just watched some of her stuff on YouTube as a reminder. It's hard to feel really offended by people like her and Jeremy Clarkson. In a weird way I sort of like her. I mean she so transparently shit, desperate pathetic trolling hard to take seriously. Mind you I don't watch the apprentice or this morning. You kind of get what you asked for if you do.


----------



## Looby (Jan 4, 2015)

I particularly liked it when she bitched about kids with 'common', made up names then about kids named after places. Holly or Phillip pointed out that her daughter is called India. [emoji1]


----------



## Minnie_the_Minx (Jan 4, 2015)

sparklefish said:


> I particularly liked it when she bitched about kids with 'common', made up names then about kids named after places. Holly or Phillip pointed out that her daughter is called India. [emoji1]



Holly politely told her to 'stop it'.  I'm sure she wanted to say something stronger


----------



## cypher79 (Jan 4, 2015)

She's a irl troll and people keep feeding her.


----------



## Wilf (Jan 4, 2015)

cypher79 said:


> She's a irl troll and people keep feeding her.


Yeah, I think we get it. Don't think it demeans us to note how desperate she/the little group of journos she must must work with have become in the generation of their weekly pukeathon.


----------



## Jon-of-arc (Jan 4, 2015)

J Ed said:


> I agree although her celebrity will probably ensure that she is not prosecuted while ordinary people texting this stuff increasingly fall victim to our state's policing of twitter



The absolute best thing that could happen from her POV is to be arrested and prosecuted. Total troll vindication - imagine the headlines and the opportunity to publicly decry the erosion of her "right to free speech". She dreams of this moment.


----------



## Sasaferrato (Jan 5, 2015)

Dan U said:


> Can't believe the police are reportedly investigating her comments.
> 
> Everyone can see her for what she is.



I agree. What she said was repulsive and offensive, however, it does not merit any interference by the police.

Police involvement in matters of _this _kind is quite sinister. She made no threat to anyone, therefore broke no law. She was 'racist' towards the Scots, but the courts have already decided that derogatory comments about Scots people is not racist, therefore, again, no law broken.

I would not like to live in a society where all comments have to be sweetness and light, otherwise the law is invoked. Robust comment has a place in society.


----------



## DotCommunist (Jan 5, 2015)

makes ron liddle look like an intellectual giant


----------



## JTG (Jan 5, 2015)

Mation said:


> No, I hadn't heard of her, and I didn't particularly want to search for her as she sounds horrible.


Me too, no idea who she is. Sounds like a Mail article personified, someone people here enjoy being outraged about because it makes them feel like nicer people


----------



## Ax^ (Jan 5, 2015)

she just edwin currie mark 2 is she not


----------



## Roadkill (Jan 5, 2015)

Sasaferrato said:


> I agree. What she said was repulsive and offensive, however, it does not merit any interference by the police.
> 
> Police involvement in matters of _this _kind is quite sinister. She made no threat to anyone, therefore broke no law. She was 'racist' towards the Scots, but the courts have already decided that derogatory comments about Scots people is not racist, therefore, again, no law broken.
> 
> I would not like to live in a society where all comments have to be sweetness and light, otherwise the law is invoked. Robust comment has a place in society.



I agree with that - so long as the rest of us can tell her where to shove her odious (and just plain idiotic) views in equally robust terms without having our collars felt.  I imagine, however, that Hopkins would be among the first to cry foul if she started having to take what she dishes out.


----------



## Looby (Jan 5, 2015)

She's a nasty fucking cunt and whilst I think any police investigation is a bit silly if it makes tv bookers think twice, I'll be happy. 

I don't read the mail and don't watch this morning but I still can't get away from her.


----------



## NoXion (Jan 6, 2015)

I don't agree with the labeling of Katie Hopkins as a troll, because it carries the implication that she'll go away if ignored. She won't, because she's not a newfangled troll - she's an old-fashioned bully, using her position to get away with the kind of behaviour that would get more ordinary people smacked around or into deep shit. Bullies don't go away if you ignore them, they just become bolder in their attempts to get a rise out of their victims.

Hopkins seems determined to demonstrate to the world what a horrible fucking bitch she is, which suggests to me that the way to way to ultimately destroy her lies not in trying to ignore her, because that approach will fail utterly. Instead, given sufficient time her behaviour could become widely disreputable enough for her to be goaded into saying and/or doing something that crosses the line and makes her utterly toxic, or otherwise sufficiently beyond the pale that nobody except her gives a shit that she's had her teeth kicked in.


----------



## pinkmonkey (Jan 6, 2015)

She would go away if she were ignored. No one would employ her if she didn't get attention. The Mail employs her (and people like her - Josie Cunningham NHS boob job woman is another) because she gets them loads of website hits and more hits = more website revenue. These days the Mail itself is just one big fuck- off troll to make money. And it's so profitable.


----------



## NoXion (Jan 6, 2015)

pinkmonkey said:


> She would go away if she were ignored. No one would employ her if she didn't get attention. The Mail employs her (and people like her - Josie Cunningham NHS boob job woman is another) because she gets them loads of website hits and more hits = more website revenue. These days the Mail itself is just one big fuck- off troll to make money. And it's so profitable.



All of which strongly suggests that the "ignore her" strategy is a complete non-starter. If her or her employers ever begin to feel that people aren't paying as much attention to her as they think people should, what do you think is more likely to happen; that they will just give up and go home, or ratchet things up a notch or two?

This insistence that "she'll go away if ignored" is not borne out by the actual behaviour of trolls and bullies.


----------



## NoXion (Jan 6, 2015)

Furthermore, saying "ignore her" also puts the onus on the wrong people - ordinary decent folk who are quite rightly disgusted at Hopkins' privileged bullying shite should not be the ones changing their behaviour - Hopkins is the one whose behaviour needs to change.

Besides, can anyone point to examples where just ignoring such shit-stirrers has ever actually worked?


----------



## Ponyutd (Jan 6, 2015)

DotCommunist said:


> makes ron liddle look like an intellectual giant


Would that be Rod Liddle's younger brother?


----------



## sim667 (Jan 6, 2015)

Nancy_Winks said:


> She was in The Apprentice and now goes on This Morning saying vile shit about people less lucky than her.


 
"I can't stand it when people name their children after places"

"But your daughter is called India"

Never forget.


----------



## eatmorecheese (Jan 7, 2015)

Channel 5 desperately try to raise Big Brother viewing figures. So there she is. FFS.


----------



## Ax^ (Jan 7, 2015)

ah tbf it keeps her from interacting with the outside world for a while and she find it hard to be so controversial without a constant drip feed of new news


she'll be kicking herself for missing remarking on the paris shooting so maybe not a bad thing

who watches CBB to be fair


----------



## bemused (Jan 7, 2015)

She's got the same act as Frankie Boyle, she just does it better than him. Some of the stuff she says honestly makes me giggle (shameful I know) other stuff (i.e. the nurse possibly dying) makes me rage.


----------



## Ax^ (Jan 7, 2015)

*adds another name to the list*


----------



## Nylock (Jan 8, 2015)

bemused said:


> She's got the same act as Frankie Boyle, she just does it better than him. Some of the stuff she says honestly makes me giggle (shameful I know) other stuff (i.e. the nurse possibly dying) makes me rage.


Giggling at what? Her utter cuntitude or the person/people she's singling out for her own 'unique' brand of attention-seeking twattery?


----------



## Notapaedo (Jan 8, 2015)

The sad thing is that she is one of the most interesting comedians in Britain 

She could get much more response than someone like Stewart Lee and all she does is say stupid things with a straight face. Gutted for you posh liberals who think the world revolves around your half baked opinions, hers are more important and she is a moron on purpose, but well done on the degree and the slr camera for shots of coffee cups and empty buildings. I care


----------



## dogDBC (Jan 8, 2015)

^ Hi, Hopkins.


----------



## bemused (Jan 8, 2015)

Nylock said:


> Giggling at what? Her utter cuntitude or the person/people she's singling out for her own 'unique' brand of attention-seeking twattery?



She recently said now she's lost weight she no longer has a 'gunt' which made me laugh. I don't chuckle at much she says but once and a while she makes me smile. I don't take her seriously it's an act she's a professional troll.


----------



## J Ed (Jan 8, 2015)

Notapaedo said:


> The sad thing is that she is one of the most interesting comedians in Britain
> 
> She could get much more response than someone like Stewart Lee and all she does is say stupid things with a straight face. Gutted for you posh liberals who think the world revolves around your half baked opinions, hers are more important and she is a moron on purpose, but well done on the degree and the slr camera for shots of coffee cups and empty buildings. I care



Is this how you spend the tail end of most of your nights?


----------



## Athos (Jan 8, 2015)

DotCommunist said:


> makes ron liddle look like an intellectual giant



In the land of the blind...


----------



## Supine (Jan 8, 2015)

Lets all  just enjoy the next few weeks while the odious woman is locked inside the bb house.


----------



## pinkmonkey (Jan 8, 2015)

By 'ignore her' I meant, don't click on articles she is featured in, don't follow her on Twitter and complain about her in the relevant places. She is clickbait, don't give her oxygen.


----------



## a_chap (Jan 8, 2015)

pinkmonkey said:


> don't give her oxygen.



I'm in favour of that.


----------



## twentythreedom (Jan 8, 2015)

the person she hates the most is herself


----------



## tonysingh (Jan 8, 2015)

I have a considered and erudite opinion on Katie Hopkins.

She's a fucking cunt.


----------



## Urbanblues (Jan 8, 2015)

Ax^ said:


> who watches CBB to be fair



CBB?


----------



## Ax^ (Jan 8, 2015)

that piece of shit on channel five

hth


----------



## tonysingh (Jan 8, 2015)

Urbanblues said:


> CBB?



Celebrity Big Brother.....innit.


----------



## 8ball (Jan 8, 2015)

Urbanblues said:


> CBB?



Ooh!  I know this one!  They show Tellytubbies and stuff like that.


----------



## Urbanblues (Jan 8, 2015)

Celebrity Big Brother shows the Tellytubbies and stuff?


----------



## 8ball (Jan 8, 2015)

Ah  - a quick Google confirms I was thinking of Cbeebies.


----------



## Ax^ (Jan 8, 2015)

less this, more katie hopkins in the show i was talking about

but just imagine... cannot watch cbeebies already without feeling the need to do drugs


----------



## Nylock (Jan 8, 2015)

twentythreedom said:


> the person she hates the most is herself


She's doing a fairly creditable impression of someone who thinks they are fucking awesome, tbf....


----------



## Chick Webb (Jan 11, 2015)

Supine said:


> Lets all  just enjoy the next few weeks while the odious woman is locked inside the bb house.


I saw a few minutes of this last night cos my sister was watching it.  Weird, self absorbed celebs that they are (KH was right about that) people are on to her.  Within a short time two of the other contestants had accused her of just saying outrageous things/holding offensive opinions for money. Her replies of "I'm just being honest" came across as quite feeble.


----------



## bemused (Jan 11, 2015)

Reading the papers this morning it seems she may actually walk out of there looking the most human. You've got one guy leaving after tying to undress someone and another being warned that being racist and homophobic isn't acceptable.


----------



## likesfish (Jan 12, 2015)

That's damming with faint praise.

She probably safe from terrorists though on the grounds they generally try to terrorise rather than improve things


----------



## TheVengefulBard (May 16, 2015)

In light of her more recent bitchery, I have something I'd like to share...

I'd like to take time, if I may
To comment on the news today
And Katie Hopkins who, I'm sure,
You'll sadly have heard of before.
This paragon of modern news
Is known for her courageous views
In taking on such vicious foes
As disabled kids from struggling homes.
She also takes excessive joy
In picking on the unemployed-
Of course it's better to be paid
For spreading ridicule and hate!
She mocks the unschooled, though she's not witty;
And the overweight, though she's far from pretty:
She would do well to look inside
Before she starts to criticise.
She's just a bully with a bigger playground,
Shrieking because she likes the sound
And I, for one, feel that it's time
To take her toys and draw the line.
Turn off her show and skip her column,
And get your news from a different forum.
Soon enough she'll fall from grace
And the world will be a kinder place.


----------



## 8den (May 16, 2015)

pinkmonkey said:


> By 'ignore her' I meant, don't click on articles she is featured in, don't follow her on Twitter and complain about her in the relevant places. She is clickbait, don't give her oxygen.



This there was a sharp spike in my blood pressure in the short time I found myself following her on twitter. Once I unfollowed her account, the sun rose and a great feeling of calm descended over my world.

Jesus I every day I encounter things in reality that should have a unfollow button.

ETA the VengefulBard was much more eloquent in his response. And his fucking rhythmed. Bastard.


----------



## Fingers (Aug 3, 2015)

Awkward

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/p...-brain-surgery-to-cure-epilepsy-10432500.html


----------



## joustmaster (Aug 3, 2015)

Fingers said:


> Awkward
> 
> http://www.independent.co.uk/news/p...-brain-surgery-to-cure-epilepsy-10432500.html


WWKHP


----------



## Diamond (Aug 3, 2015)

Hmm...

She's not a very nice person but epilepsy's not very much fun either and if, as she claims, she is having three to four seizures per night that requires neurosurgery to solve, that's a pretty big deal.

I'm a little bit suspicious of the double dislocations though - that definitely can happen but you need to be having some pretty major seizures for that to occur and I suspect that you would be looking at at least some bone fractures too.


----------



## Orang Utan (Aug 3, 2015)

after all she has said about disability, it would be almost poetic if....


----------



## tufty79 (Aug 3, 2015)

joustmaster said:


> WWKHP


?


----------



## Looby (Aug 3, 2015)

Jon Ronson did a piece on her in the Guardian or Observer (can't remember) and I think he ended up feeling quite sorry for her. I'll try and find it.

Here we are, she's a very strange woman. 
http://www.theguardian.com/media/2015/jul/18/katie-hopkins-jon-ronson-interview


----------



## joustmaster (Aug 3, 2015)

tufty79 said:


> ?


what would katie hopkins post.


----------



## Buckaroo (Aug 3, 2015)

Hopefully the part of her brain's that operated on will be ok after surgery to remove Katie Hopkins.


----------



## 8ball (Aug 3, 2015)

Bloody epileptics - just attention seekers.  Like those depressives and autistic people.


----------



## DotCommunist (Aug 3, 2015)

I suppose I should feel some sympathy for someone scared about a medical procedure, when they give you percentages and that it must be terrifying. And yet, for some reason, I'm struggling to raise a fuck to give here.


----------



## Buckaroo (Aug 3, 2015)

8ball said:


> Bloody epileptics - just attention seekers.  Like those depressives and autistic people.



Yeah they're a nuisance alright, just don't put spoons in their mouth.


----------



## 8ball (Aug 3, 2015)

She's definitely an odd one - some funny wiring going on in there.

She appears to lack bits of both cognitive and affective empathy (autistics generally lack the former and psychopaths the latter).
Made me think of a kid absorbed in the business of pulling wings off flies.


----------



## gosub (Aug 3, 2015)

presumably, were the operation to end badly, whomever writes the most offensive tweet about it will be awarded her Sun column


----------



## Ax^ (Aug 3, 2015)

show us the brain matter




*shakes fist at sky*


----------



## Bakunin (Aug 3, 2015)

gosub said:


> presumably, were the operation to end badly, whomever writes the most offensive tweet about it will be awarded her Sun column



I'm sure I could manage something if I sat down and thought about it for a really, really long time. If that would help at all.


----------



## existentialist (Aug 3, 2015)

Fingers said:


> Awkward
> 
> http://www.independent.co.uk/news/p...-brain-surgery-to-cure-epilepsy-10432500.html


Thing is, it's easy for someone who has a genuine health issue (and we have no reason to doublt that Katie Hopkins' epilepsy is a genuine health issue) to blame everything they do on it. Sometimes, it might even be true...but that does not excuse it.

Unless the health issue is manifesting as a compulsion to get her vitriol published in the mainstream media and be prepared to be interviewed at every turn in order to vent that vitriol further, she has some agency. Let's face it, if she's got the mental capacity to recognise the possible impact on her of brain surgery, I cannot see how she can lack the capacity to recognise the harm her words do.

I don't know if she is actually using her epilepsy as an excuse for what she writes, but if she is, then she goes down even further in my estimation.

In the meantime, I don't think there is anything wrong with having views on that writing, no matter what other trials she might be enduring. Some people, after all, go through the most terrible things and it doesn't make them into hate-filled monsters. To some extent, there is some choice being exercised, and if she chooses to write that stuff and get it published, then she deserves to be held to account for that choice.

It doesn't mean nobody would wish her well in her surgery.


----------



## gosub (Aug 3, 2015)

existentialist said:


> Thing is, it's easy for someone who has a genuine health issue (and we have no reason to doublt that Katie Hopkins' epilepsy is a genuine health issue) to blame everything they do on it. Sometimes, it might even be true...but that does not excuse it.
> 
> Unless the health issue is manifesting as a compulsion to get her vitriol published in the mainstream media and be prepared to be interviewed at every turn in order to vent that vitriol further, she has some agency. Let's face it, if she's got the mental capacity to recognise the possible impact on her of brain surgery, I cannot see how she can lack the capacity to recognise the harm her words do.
> 
> ...


i don't think anybody thinks her opinions are in anyway related to epilepsy.  Its the little Bill Grundy she has in her head, constantly urging her to say something outrageous, that propels her 'career' forward to the inevitable train crash.


----------



## existentialist (Aug 3, 2015)

gosub said:


> i don't think anybody thinks her opinions are in anyway related to epilepsy.  Its the little Bill Grundy she has in her head, constantly urging her to say something outrageous, that propels her 'career' forward to the inevitable train crash.


 I agree. But some people may feel that, because she's talking about her epilepsy, it's somehow awkward or unfair to hold her to account for her views. It isn't.

I don't follow her "writings" particularly closely, but I do get a bit of a sense that she uses the epilepsy as a way of excusing herself from the consequences of writing such nasty stuff - if I'm wrong, I'm glad to be corrected.


----------



## Fingers (Aug 3, 2015)

It seems she has got some legal problems

http://www.mirror.co.uk/3am/celebri...olice-inciting-6188487#ICID=sharebar_facebook


----------



## 8ball (Aug 4, 2015)

Epilepsy has been confused with Satanic possession a great deal over the centuries.

It's a shame Father Schofield failed in his attempt to rectify things.


----------



## J Ed (Aug 4, 2015)

Fingers said:


> It seems she has got some legal problems
> 
> http://www.mirror.co.uk/3am/celebri...olice-inciting-6188487#ICID=sharebar_facebook



Good, I'm not sure what I think about state laws on hate speech generally but we're in a stupid place if ordinary people with an audience of two on twitte are prosecuted for something that someone with a column in a newspaper with a circulation of millions isn't.


----------



## Looby (Aug 4, 2015)

existentialist said:


> I agree. But some people may feel that, because she's talking about her epilepsy, it's somehow awkward or unfair to hold her to account for her views. It isn't.
> 
> I don't follow her "writings" particularly closely, but I do get a bit of a sense that she uses the epilepsy as a way of excusing herself from the consequences of writing such nasty stuff - if I'm wrong, I'm glad to be corrected.


I don't read her shit but according to that Ronson article about her, she hasn't really talked about it until now, or her daughter's ASD diagnosis.
What struck me the most in that article is how normal and even nice her husband seems to be. He works for a donkey sanctuary according to Hopkins. Even if she's nothing like her media persona, I'm not sure I could separate the two if I was married to her. 

It's all very odd.


----------



## pesh (Aug 4, 2015)

if i was married to her i'd replace the bathroom light with with a strobe.


----------



## two sheds (Aug 4, 2015)

Looby said:


> I don't read her shit but according to that Ronson article about her, she hasn't really talked about it until now, or her daughter's ASD diagnosis.
> What struck me the most in that article is how normal and even nice her husband seems to be. He works for a donkey sanctuary according to Hopkins. Even if she's nothing like her media persona, I'm not sure I could separate the two if I was married to her.
> 
> It's all very odd.



Yes, and as I recall she asked for her husband to be left alone by the media, in exactly the same way she doesn't leave other people she abuses alone.


----------



## likesfish (Aug 4, 2015)

I'm disabled so if I can make a successful "career" why are you on benefits you waster is her stick?

Theres a limited number of slots for writing offensive crap  or we'd all be doing it.


----------



## hash tag (Sep 7, 2015)

This is rather demeaning of the refugees, but amusing none the less Katie Hopkins petition launched to SWAP star for 50,000 refugees


----------



## muscovyduck (Sep 8, 2015)

pesh said:


> if i was married to her i'd replace the bathroom light with with a strobe.


Well at least now she's epileptic we're allowed to be cunts about about it?


----------



## pesh (Sep 8, 2015)

Yes


----------



## weltweit (Sep 8, 2015)

I don't know what Katie Hopkins gets up to because I don't read that newspaper and don't follow her tweets. If everyone was like me she would be starved of the oxygen of readers and like most things starved that way would wither and die. I recommend everyone take this action, completely avoid getting outraged by her utterings and live in an ex Hopkins world. You know it makes sense!


----------



## likesfish (Sep 8, 2015)

hash tag said:


> This is rather demeaning of the refugees, but amusing none the less Katie Hopkins petition launched to SWAP star for 50,000 refugees



thats just the starting bid I think we will have to go a lot higher if we want to get rid of her


----------



## JHE (Sep 8, 2015)

existentialist said:


> ...if she's got the mental capacity to recognise the possible impact on her of brain surgery, I cannot see how she can lack the capacity to recognise the harm her words do.



What harm do the silly arse's words do?


----------



## existentialist (Sep 8, 2015)

JHE said:


> What harm do the silly arse's words do?


Idiots read her drivel and believe it to be fact.


----------



## Almor (Sep 8, 2015)

existentialist said:


> Idiots read her drivel and believe it to be fact.



And people in the situations that she gobs off about don't need to believe what she says to be hurt, or afraid that there are people out there who agree with her hatred of them.


----------



## 5t3IIa (Dec 10, 2015)

A perfect couple...


----------



## Pickman's model (Dec 10, 2015)

JHE said:


> What harm do the silly arse's words do?


lots.

next.


----------



## frogwoman (Dec 10, 2015)




----------



## hash tag (Dec 10, 2015)

Until 5t3lla posted that tweet of Mr trumps, I would have guessed she was in the nation's favourite rag, maybe even displaying her assets 
Does that mean she and trumpy are getting together


----------



## tonysingh (Dec 10, 2015)

hash tag said:


> Until 5t3lla posted that tweet of Mr trumps, I would have guessed she was in the nation's favourite rag, maybe even displaying her assets
> Does that mean she and trumpy are getting together


#

Given what the Daily Show had on last night, i rather suspect Trump will want to shag his daughter first. Maybe they can go twos up?


----------



## Nylock (Dec 11, 2015)

Bokes


----------



## frogwoman (Dec 11, 2015)

I think she's a comedian (though still a twat). I don't actually think she believes anything she says tbh.


----------



## J Ed (Dec 11, 2015)

frogwoman said:


> I think she's a comedian (though still a twat). I don't actually think she believes anything she says tbh.



That's sort of part of the schtick of 4chan 'white supremacists' and even Donald Trump, people are saying that they are going for the comedy but they are nodding along because the punchline is about people who they hate. The end result is the same whether it is comedy or not.


----------



## frogwoman (Dec 11, 2015)

J Ed said:


> That's sort of part of the schtick of 4chan 'white supremacists' and even Donald Trump, people are saying that they are going for the comedy but they are nodding along because the punchline is about people who they hate. The end result is the same whether it is comedy or not.



yes I agree.


----------



## J Ed (Dec 11, 2015)

She may not actually think that Palestinians are cockroaches or that we should shoot refugees but clearly her views can't be that far from the ones which she is willing to state in a newspaper with an audience of millions otherwise she would never have said what she has said in the first place.


----------



## frogwoman (Dec 11, 2015)

yes, in a way it actually makes her worse.


----------



## DotCommunist (Dec 11, 2015)

recall a comedians line about Littlejohn 'All those opinions that he has, for money'


----------



## FabricLiveBaby! (Dec 12, 2015)

DotCommunist said:


> recall a comedians line about Littlejohn 'All those opinions that he has, for money'



I think that quote was about Clarkson, actually.  Not that it makes much difference.


----------



## 8den (Dec 12, 2015)

J Ed said:


> She may not actually think that Palestinians are cockroaches or that we should shoot refugees but clearly her views can't be that far from the ones which she is willing to state in a newspaper with an audience of millions otherwise she would never have said what she has said in the first place.



I suspect she hold fairly right wing views. Jon Ronson did a good profile of her. I think she realised that there's good money in being controversial.


----------



## Gromit (Dec 12, 2015)

J Ed said:


> otherwise she would never have said what she has said in the first place.



For enough money (say about a tenner) she'd publicly state that she wishes all children get cancer, allegedly*. 
Do not underestimate what she'll do for fame and fortune.

* my lawyers insisted i insert that word


----------



## LDC (Dec 17, 2015)

She's currently on Radio 4 Women's Hour talking about how she hates 'fat people'. FFS, why is she given the airtime?


----------



## danny la rouge (Dec 17, 2015)

LynnDoyleCooper said:


> She's currently on Radio 4 Women's Hour talking about how she hates 'fat people'. FFS, why is she given the airtime?


Does she, aye?


----------



## DotCommunist (Dec 17, 2015)

getting paid to be an obnoxious shit. Not even a subtle one, just a boorish oaf. I'm in the wrong game


----------



## LDC (Dec 17, 2015)

DotCommunist said:


> getting paid to be an obnoxious shit. Not even a subtle one, just a boorish oaf. I'm in the wrong game



She's moved from being simply boorish and obnoxious to being clearly fucking nasty and encouraging discrimination and hate against certain groups of people.

She was asked if she'd give a job to someone with epilepsy (which she has) in the interview, and she said she'd find it hard to.


----------



## hash tag (Dec 17, 2015)

" why is he given the airtime?" possibly the same reason as she is still be talked about on here?


----------



## weltweit (Dec 17, 2015)

I didn't hear much of it except that she had apparently put 4 stone on as a test and then lost it to prove she could. But that does not prove anything. She is naturally a thin person, for her losing the weight is not so significant compared to someone who is naturally over weight doing the same.


----------



## D'wards (Dec 17, 2015)

Listening to a Richard Herring podcast where he was offered £10k to go on her show - a huge amount cos no one wants to go on.
Although he needed the money he declined cos even if you are going on to challenge her aggressively, you are still carrying on the brand by participating.
Although they did suggest that you go on and kill her with unrelated kindness - "who hurt you Katie? *whispering* who hurt you?, who hurt you?" type thing i think.


----------



## LDC (Dec 17, 2015)

weltweit said:


> But that does not prove anything. She is naturally a thin person, for her losing the weight is not so significant compared to someone who is naturally over weight doing the same.



I agree it proves nothing (of real worth) but I disagree with the 'naturally thin/naturally over-weight person' bit of what you said as there's no such thing.

I think what she (of course) missed were the structural issues around poverty, access to info/healthcare/advice, and all sorts of issues around power/class that make up significant contributions to whether someone is over weight or not, rather than it being some pre-determined biological thing.


----------



## DotCommunist (Dec 17, 2015)

she doesn't give a shit either way, its just 'fat people lol'


----------



## weltweit (Dec 17, 2015)

LynnDoyleCooper said:


> I agree it proves nothing (of real worth) but I disagree with the 'naturally thin/naturally over-weight person' bit of what you said as there's no such thing.


But you would not disagree that some people just are thin while some others just are overweight, without either of them having done anything substantive to create that difference?


----------



## LDC (Dec 17, 2015)

Excluding some medications and some very rare conditions that make people gain weight, and assuming we're talking about people outside the reasonably wide spectrum of normal/healthy body weight range, then no, people are not 'just overweight' without having done anything significant to be like that.

But the whole thing is so loaded with ideology and cultural specifics though it's pretty hard to make sense of any of it. But I know her just saying "Look I gained 4 stone and then lost it again so _you_ can too" is fucking ignorant and dangerous.

She'd be much better off campaigning for an end to or restriction of night shifts for all workers as that's proven to lead to weight issues among workers that do them. Or a wage increase. Or basically anything.

I'd like to see her lose about a stone. From the neck up.


----------



## weltweit (Dec 17, 2015)

LynnDoyleCooper said:


> Excluding some medications and some very rare conditions that make people gain weight, and assuming we're talking about people outside the reasonably wide spectrum of normal/healthy body weight range, then no, people are not 'just overweight' without having done anything significant to be like that.
> ..


I find that difficult to follow.

What you are effectively saying is that if two or more random people followed the same diet and exercise regime they would end up as the same proportional size / weight. Is there any evidence to support this idea?


----------



## Libertad (Dec 17, 2015)

LynnDoyleCooper said:


> [/snip]
> 
> I'd like to see her lose about a stone. From the neck up.


----------



## LDC (Dec 17, 2015)

Within some slight variable range (like they won't end up the _same_ weight obviously) and depending on a few other factors like age/metabolism/living situation, yes. And yes!

Conversely, are you saying people are just 'naturally' a particular weight with no difference made by energy input/output?


----------



## weltweit (Dec 17, 2015)

LynnDoyleCooper said:


> Within some slight variable range (like they won't end up the _same_ weight obviously) and depending on a few other factors like age/metabolism/living situation, yes. And yes!


So you concede different people can have different metabolisms? Surely this is enough to explain in many cases why different people have different BMIs?


----------



## sim667 (Dec 17, 2015)

Basically LynnDoyleCooper is saying the sole reason people are fat is because they're lazy and its their own fault, apart from a few exceptions.


----------



## LDC (Dec 17, 2015)

sim667 said:


> Basically LynnDoyleCooper is saying the sole reason people are fat is because they're lazy and its their own fault, apart from a few exceptions.



Did you even read what I wrote?

That's the exact opposite of what I've said. I said it's largely down to what they eat and what they do, but that is almost entirely NOT THEIR FAULT, but is because of structural issues around class, power, culture, poverty, etc. etc..


----------



## LDC (Dec 17, 2015)

weltweit said:


> So you concede different people can have different metabolisms? Surely this is enough to explain in many cases why different people have different BMIs?



I think we need some clarity here...

Forget BMI.

I'm not paying any attention what this fucked up society considers overweight, which is anyone outside a horribly restricted set of parameters.

And yes, on some level metabolic differences between people play a small part in someone's weight.

But I'm talking about overweight that's a health and cultural (i.e. bullying/exclusion/access to services) issue, where the metabolic differences play an insignificant part.

If someone is 5'10" and between 10 or 13 stone then metabolism might play a part as to which weight they are. If someone is 5'10" and between 21 or 23 stone then it's largely not their metabolism.

Doesn't mean it's their fault FFS. But that doesn't mean it's just 'naturally' the way they are. That lets society off the hook as much as the other end of the argument that blames them for over eating.


----------



## sim667 (Dec 17, 2015)

LynnDoyleCooper said:


> Excluding some medications and some very rare conditions that make people gain weight, and assuming we're talking about people outside the reasonably wide spectrum of normal/healthy body weight range, *then no, people are not 'just overweight' without having done anything significant to be like that.*
> 
> But the whole thing is so loaded with ideology and cultural specifics though it's pretty hard to make sense of any of it. But I know her just saying "Look I gained 4 stone and then lost it again so _you_ can too" is fucking ignorant and dangerous.
> 
> ...





LynnDoyleCooper said:


> Within some slight variable range (like they won't end up the _same_ weight obviously) and depending on a* few other factors like* age/metabolism/living situation, yes. And yes!
> 
> Conversely, are you saying people are just 'naturally' a particular weight with no difference made by energy input/output?





LynnDoyleCooper said:


> Did you even read what I wrote?
> 
> *That's the exact opposite of what I've said.* I said it's largely down to what they eat and what they do, but that is almost entirely NOT THEIR FAULT, but is because of structural issues around class, power, culture, poverty, etc. etc..



No, your first two posts quoted, absolutely contradict your response to me.


----------



## LDC (Dec 17, 2015)

Then you've misunderstood what I wrote, either due to my bad sentence structure or lack of clarity, or through your ignorance or some issues around the subject, as that's not what I think at all.

I never mentioned 'blame' or 'fault' and my posts were attacking Hopkins for her saying that.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Dec 17, 2015)

LynnDoyleCooper said:


> If someone is 5'10" and between 10 or 13 stone then metabolism might play a part as to which weight they are. If someone is 5'10" and between 21 or 23 stone then it's largely not their metabolism.


Not sure where you've got this from. While it's absolutely true that there are societal and lifestyle issues here - there exist societies where being overweight is very rare indeed - that doesn't mean differences in metabolism are not a crucial factor in explaining why, under the same societal and lifestyle pressures, some become overweight and others don't.


----------



## LDC (Dec 17, 2015)

I've assumed we're talking about the UK here, as I acknowledged earlier that if you bring cultural issues concerning other societies (Polynesian for an easy example) into it it becomes even more complicated.

Blaming largely metabolism lets society, power in-balances, gender issues, and the fucked up culture around food and body weight/image off the hook.

If people think I'm blaming individuals then I'm really sorry, that's not what I think, nor what I intended to say when I wrote any of the above.


----------



## sim667 (Dec 17, 2015)

LynnDoyleCooper said:


> Then you've misunderstood what I wrote, either due to my bad sentence structure or lack of clarity, or through your ignorance or some issues around the subject, as that's not what I think at all.
> 
> I never mentioned 'blame' or 'fault' and my posts were attacking Hopkins for her saying that.


Ill take your word for it.


----------



## Pickman's model (Dec 17, 2015)

LynnDoyleCooper said:


> Excluding some medications and some very rare conditions that make people gain weight, and assuming we're talking about people outside the reasonably wide spectrum of normal/healthy body weight range, then no, people are not 'just overweight' without having done anything significant to be like that.





LynnDoyleCooper said:


> If people think I'm blaming individuals then I'm really sorry, that's not what I think, nor what I intended to say when I wrote any of the above.


so what you're saying is that rather having done anything, those people have had stuff done to them.


----------



## Pickman's model (Dec 17, 2015)

sim667 said:


> Ill take your word for it.


that shows a good spirit


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Dec 17, 2015)

LynnDoyleCooper said:


> Blaming metabolism lets society, the inbalance of power, and the fucked up culture around food and weight off the hook.


But the truth is more nuanced than 'either metabolism or fucked-up culture'. It can be the combination of both.


----------



## LDC (Dec 17, 2015)

Thank you, and apologies again.


----------



## Sweet FA (Dec 17, 2015)

sim667 said:


> Basically LynnDoyleCooper is saying *the sole reason people are fat is because they're lazy and its their own fault*, apart from a few exceptions.


No she isn't for fuck's sake 

"restriction of night shifts for all workers as that's proven to lead to weight issues among workers that do them. Or a wage increase. Or basically anything."
"age/metabolism/living situation"
"it's largely down to what they eat and what they do, but that is almost entirely NOT THEIR FAULT, but is because of structural issues around class, power, culture, poverty, etc. etc."


----------



## sim667 (Dec 17, 2015)

Sweet FA said:


> No she isn't for fuck's sake
> 
> "restriction of night shifts for all workers as that's proven to lead to weight issues among workers that do them. Or a wage increase. Or basically anything."
> "age/metabolism/living situation"
> "it's largely down to what they eat and what they do, but that is almost entirely NOT THEIR FAULT, but is because of structural issues around class, power, culture, poverty, etc. etc."



You've missed peak timing to try and start a bunfight, we've moved on now.


----------



## Pickman's model (Dec 17, 2015)

sim667 said:


> You've missed peak timing to try and start a bunfight, we've moved on now.


yeh Sweet FA's tardy intervention sadly missed the boat


----------



## DotCommunist (Dec 17, 2015)

the day is yet young though


----------



## Sweet FA (Dec 17, 2015)

sim667 said:


> You've missed peak timing to try and start a bunfight, we've moved on now.


Yeh, I've got loads of form for that. Pointing out where I think you've been a penis isn't starting a fight, it's pointing out that you've been a penis. 

Posters post whilst other poster is writing a post shocker.


----------



## Pickman's model (Dec 17, 2015)

DotCommunist said:


> the day is yet young though


sun barely above yardarm


----------



## sim667 (Dec 17, 2015)

Sweet FA said:


> Yeh, I've got loads of form for that. Pointing out where I think you've been a penis isn't starting a fight, it's pointing out that you've been a penis.
> 
> Posters post whilst other poster is writing a post shocker.



Says the penis who won't let it drop.

I've already said I'd take Lynn's word for it.... move on and do something more productive with your day please.


----------



## weltweit (Dec 17, 2015)

I think, if you took 100 British males at random, fed them the same and made them take the same exercise for a period of perhaps a few months or more, you would get a wide range of BMIs at the end. Suggesting that there is more than diet and exercise at work, i.e. different metabolisms and perhaps natural genetic tendencies.


----------



## LDC (Dec 17, 2015)

weltweit said:


> I think, if you took 100 British males at random, fed them the same and made them take the same exercise for a period of perhaps a few months or more, you would get a wide range of BMIs at the end. Suggesting that there is more than diet and exercise at work, i.e. different metabolisms and perhaps natural genetic tendencies.



Yes, within a relatively small range you would - although BMI is a terrible yardstick for measuring this.

But to be significantly outside that range other much more complicated issues come into play.

Anyway, I'm going to stop now, as I just seem to fuck things up online today.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Dec 17, 2015)

weltweit said:


> I think, if you took 100 British males at random, fed them the same and made them take the same exercise for a period of perhaps a few months or more, you would get a wide range of BMIs at the end. Suggesting that there is more than diet and exercise at work, i.e. different metabolisms and perhaps natural genetic tendencies.



You would need to conduct several experiments, though. With one set of diet and exercise, they may well end up within a fairly narrow range, but with another set they may react very differently. My guess would be that the further away from a 'healthy' regime you got, the wider the differences would become. And the same people may end up at different places on the spectrum depending on the regime.


----------



## weltweit (Dec 17, 2015)

littlebabyjesus are you saying you don't think genetics are such a large issue? Because my thinking is that they are probably massive.

For example, I know a couple, both of whom are overweight. They have two children, both of whom are overweight. Are the children overweight because their parents are over feeding them? or because of their genetics?

Equally I am sure we all know families where both parents are slim as are their offspring.


----------



## kabbes (Dec 17, 2015)

weltweit said:


> littlebabyjesus are you saying you don't think genetics are such a large issue? Because my thinking is that they are probably massive.
> 
> For example, I know a couple, both of whom are overweight. They have two children, both of whom are overweight. Are the children overweight because their parents are over feeding them? or because of their genetics?
> 
> Equally I am sure we all know families where both parents are slim as are their offspring.


Are you really, seriously saying that a child's diet is in any way independent from it's parents' diet?


----------



## weltweit (Dec 17, 2015)

kabbes said:


> Are you really, seriously saying that a child's diet is in any way independent from it's parents' diet?


I am saying it may not be, but that genetics remain the elephant in the room.
Are you saying genetics don't influence the situation?


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Dec 17, 2015)

kabbes said:


> Are you really, seriously saying that a child's diet is in any way independent from it's parents' diet?




Mine is


----------



## kabbes (Dec 17, 2015)

weltweit said:


> I am saying it may not be, but that genetics remain the elephant in the room.
> Are you saying genetics don't influence the situation?


I'm not saying anything.  You're the chump seriously trying to use the size of children as some kind of evidence that weight is genetic.  Children prove absolutely nothing one way or the other, because there are way too many factors involved.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Dec 17, 2015)

weltweit said:


> littlebabyjesus are you saying you don't think genetics are such a large issue? Because my thinking is that they are probably massive.
> 
> For example, I know a couple, both of whom are overweight. They have two children, both of whom are overweight. Are the children overweight because their parents are over feeding them? or because of their genetics?
> 
> Equally I am sure we all know families where both parents are slim as are their offspring.


As ever in nature/nurture arguments, the answer is 'both'. It is nurture of nature. 

So yes, genetics are a large issue. But no, it is not down to genetic changes in the population that obesity levels have risen. 

So it's a nuanced picture, and all the points have some merit. Yes, genetic differences play their part (and other developmental issues that might have led to different metabolisms) ; as do cultural and lifestyle issues, some of which, when examined at the class level, have very clear class-related explanations ; and, when looking at individuals, there is also stuff they can do as individuals to change their circumstances - we do still have  some individual agency when faced with the genetic, developmental and socio-economic forces that act upon us.


----------



## weltweit (Dec 17, 2015)

kabbes said:


> I'm not saying anything.  You're the chump seriously trying to use the size of children as some kind of evidence that weight is genetic.  Children prove absolutely nothing one way or the other, because there are way too many factors involved.


For someone who claims they are not saying anything you are actually saying quite a lot.

Can I assume from your statement that "there are way too many factors involved" means that genetics are indeed probably one of these many factors?


----------



## kabbes (Dec 17, 2015)

weltweit said:


> For someone who claims they are not saying anything you are actually saying quite a lot.
> 
> Can I assume from your statement that "there are way too many factors involved" means that genetics are indeed probably one of these many factors?


What does it matter what I think one way or other?  I'm not the one trying to prove anything.  You're the one making claims here.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Dec 17, 2015)

weltweit said:


> For someone who claims they are not saying anything you are actually saying quite a lot.
> 
> Can I assume from your statement that "there are way too many factors involved" means that genetics are indeed probably one of these many factors?


One problem here is that you've jumped from 'different people have different metabolic rates' to 'different metabolic rates are due to genetic factors'. The one doesn't follow from the other. All kinds of things while growing up may have influenced the resultant 'natural for me' metabolism.


----------



## weltweit (Dec 17, 2015)

littlebabyjesus said:


> One problem here is that you've jumped from 'different people have different metabolic rates' to 'different metabolic rates are due to genetic factors'. The one doesn't follow from the other. All kinds of things while growing up may have influenced the resultant 'natural for me' metabolism.


What I have argued springs from my belief that had Katie Hopkins actually put on and then lost 4 stone in weight, that may have been easier for her to do than others, faced with the same weight loss, because her natural state is as a skinny person, and other's natural states may differ.

I accept there is nature and nurture involved, and that individuals can influence their own position to varying extents.


----------



## kabbes (Dec 17, 2015)

weltweit said:


> had Katie Hopkins actually put on and then lost 4 stone in weight, that may have been easier for her to do than others, faced with the same weight loss, because her natural state is as a skinny person, and other's natural states may differ.


So far, so uncontroversial

But leaping from that to saying that overweight children of overweight parents is evidence that it's genetic is just daft.  Even if it _is_ genetic -- even if it is _totally_ genetic -- the _argument_ is still completely bogus.


----------



## weltweit (Dec 17, 2015)

kabbes said:


> So far, so uncontroversial
> 
> But leaping from that to saying that overweight children of overweight parents is evidence that it's genetic is just daft.  Even if it _is_ genetic -- even if it is _totally_ genetic -- the _argument_ is still completely bogus.


Perhaps you missed my earlier post that we take 100 men of similar age at random and submit them to the same diet and exercise regime for a number of months and see what emerges.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Dec 17, 2015)

weltweit said:


> What I have argued springs from my belief that had Katie Hopkins actually put on and then lost 4 stone in weight, that may have been easier for her to do than others, faced with the same weight loss, because her natural state is as a skinny person, and other's natural states may differ.
> 
> I accept there is nature and nurture involved, and that individuals can influence their own position to varying extents.


Fair enough. Problem is that this kind of argument is often reduced to 'either a or b'. Fuckwits like Hopkins make their living reducing arguments to this. But the correct counter to her argument for 'a not b' is not to argue 'b not a'. Why people like her are invited onto Radio 4, I do not know.


----------



## kabbes (Dec 17, 2015)

weltweit said:


> Perhaps you missed my earlier post that we take 100 men of similar age at random and submit them to the same diet and exercise regime for a number of months and see what emerges.


No, I didn't miss that.  Subject to lbj's correction of your suggestion, I didn't have an issue with that.

I had an issue with you claiming that overweight children of overweight parents is evidence of something that it is not evidence of.


----------



## weltweit (Dec 17, 2015)

littlebabyjesus said:


> One problem here is that you've jumped from 'different people have different metabolic rates' to 'different metabolic rates are due to genetic factors'. The one doesn't follow from the other. All kinds of things while growing up may have influenced the resultant 'natural for me' metabolism.


Indeed. There are many factors.


----------



## weltweit (Dec 17, 2015)

kabbes said:


> .. I had an issue with you claiming that overweight children of overweight parents is evidence of something that it is not evidence of.


Except that I don't recall making an absolute claim, I recall asking a question which was pretty much "nature or nurture!"


----------



## weltweit (Dec 17, 2015)

littlebabyjesus said:


> Fair enough. Problem is that this kind of argument is often reduced to 'either a or b'. Fuckwits like Hopkins make their living reducing arguments to this. But the correct counter to her argument for 'a not b' is not to argue 'b not a'. Why people like her are invited onto Radio 4, I do not know.


I was a bit surprised to hear her on there myself. Perhaps her reach is expanding which isn't a good thing.


----------



## kabbes (Dec 17, 2015)

weltweit said:


> Except that I don't recall making an absolute claim, I recall asking a question which was pretty much "nature or nurture!"



You said this:



weltweit said:


> For example, I know a couple, both of whom are overweight. They have two children, both of whom are overweight. Are the children overweight because their parents are over feeding them? or because of their genetics?
> 
> Equally I am sure we all know families where both parents are slim as are their offspring.


----------



## Sweet FA (Dec 17, 2015)

sim667 said:


> Says the penis who won't let it drop.
> 
> I've already said I'd take Lynn's word for it.... move on and do something more productive with your day please.


----------



## weltweit (Dec 17, 2015)

kabbes said:


> You said this:


Yes, a question kabbes, just as I said : "Are the children overweight because their parents are over feeding them? or because of their genetics?"


----------



## kabbes (Dec 17, 2015)

weltweit said:


> Yes, a question kabbes, just as I said : "Are the children overweight because their parents are over feeding them? or because of their genetics?"


The question is utterly meaningless though.  It is a non-sequitur.  Asking the same question without referring to the weight of the parents would have been no different.

You were implying that the weight of the parents might tell you something either way.  But it doesn't.


----------



## sim667 (Dec 17, 2015)

Sweet FA said:


>



Still trying


----------



## weltweit (Dec 17, 2015)

kabbes said:


> .. You were implying that the weight of the parents might tell you something either way.  But it doesn't.


So despite your protestations you are saying genetics don't apply.


----------



## kabbes (Dec 17, 2015)

weltweit said:


> So despite your protestations you are saying genetics don't apply.


Am I?  How so?

What protestations, anyway?


----------



## weltweit (Dec 17, 2015)

kabbes said:


> Am I?  How so?


You dismissed my proposition that overweight parents might either through nature or nurture have something to do with their kids being overweight, by stating that the fact the parents were overweight made no difference. Whereas to my questions on nature (genetics) or nurture that fact was important.



kabbes said:


> What protestations, anyway?


Your protestations that you were not the one making a point rather it was me!


----------



## Louis MacNeice (Dec 17, 2015)

Try this for a longitudinal study that looks at the possible interaction of genes and behaviors with regard to obesity: Quebec Family Study

The notion of a genetically determined metabolism which explains weight, doesn't really hold up; while it is a factor it is only one amongst many, including other genetic indicators around things such as appetite and exercise.

And of course all the genetic factors in the world don't explain the increase in obesity seen in certain western countries in the last half century; the social, economic and cultural environments in which we live have dramatically altered changing both the incidence of obesity and its meanings.

Cheers - Louis MacNeice


----------



## kabbes (Dec 17, 2015)

weltweit said:


> You dismissed my proposition that overweight parents might either through nature or nurture have something to do with their kids being overweight, by stating that the fact the parents were overweight made no difference. Whereas to my questions on nature (genetics) or nurture that fact was important.
> 
> 
> Your protestations that you were not the one making a point rather it was me!


You really don't understand conceptually the point here.


----------



## Pickman's model (Dec 17, 2015)

kabbes said:


> You really don't understand conceptually the point here.


are there other ways to understand?


----------



## killer b (Dec 17, 2015)

Attributing weight gain to social rather than genetic causes isn't blaming people for their own ill-health: the social factors that contribute to how we eat are incredibly powerful, and incredibly difficult to combat - but to be able to combat them, it is necessary to be able to correctly identify what they are. 

Saying _some people are just bigger than others, because genetics_ is a banal cop out, as well as being pretty dodgy science. While there may be a genetic aspect, it's the last thing that should be considered, when the actual causes of the modern rise in obesity is so obvious and well documented.


----------



## Shechemite (Dec 17, 2015)

Obe thing that fucks me off about a lot of media comment on obesity/smoking/addiction etc is it sets up the choice as a) people's problems are down to things beyond their control (genes for example) or b) they are useless, lazy, selfish etc and we should be horrible to them. 

Trying to explain to my mum that me, other family members, doctors etc saying that smoking is bad for her triggers off loads of 'don't judge me' etc. When nothing to do with judging, just trying to support to make healthy choices. 

A kinder society would make it a lot easier for people to take on board feedback about self destructive behaviours. Being cunts isn't helpful. 

Someone being overweight doesn't have to be down to their genes in order not to be a dick to such a person. Who came up with this notion that the two states in life are victim or  bastard.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Dec 17, 2015)

MadeInBedlam said:


> Obe thing that fucks me off about a lot of media comment on obesity/smoking/addiction etc is it sets up the choice as a) people's problems are down to things beyond their control (genes for example) or b) they are useless, lazy, selfish etc and we should be horrible to them..


Thatcher's children, innit? Either it's beyond anyone's control or it's the individual's fault. There is no such thing as society, so how can it bear any of the blame?


----------



## weltweit (Dec 18, 2015)




----------



## fishfinger (Dec 18, 2015)

weltweit said:


>



Such a shame


----------



## existentialist (Dec 18, 2015)

weltweit said:


> littlebabyjesus are you saying you don't think genetics are such a large issue? Because my thinking is that they are probably massive.
> 
> For example, I know a couple, both of whom are overweight. They have two children, both of whom are overweight. Are the children overweight because their parents are over feeding them? or because of their genetics?
> 
> Equally I am sure we all know families where both parents are slim as are their offspring.


You simply cannot use a one-case anecdote to make an argument for genetic influence, weltweit - that's laughable.


----------



## existentialist (Dec 18, 2015)

Pickman's model said:


> are there other ways to understand?


In the circumstances...


----------



## sim667 (Apr 4, 2016)

Katie Hopkins to host LBC radio show

Some idiots given this cunt her own radio show.


----------



## ruffneck23 (Apr 4, 2016)

I'm not surprised this is the station that has Nick Ferrari


----------



## Sasaferrato (Apr 4, 2016)

JHE said:


> Recently on some daft TV prog Hopkins was rude to some fat people.  One of them stormed off in high dudgeon to phone the police in the belief that Hopkins had committed a "hate crime".  This is where we have got to:  people believe that comments they find offensive are criminal.



Thanks to the SNP, in Scotland, they may well be.


----------



## Sasaferrato (Apr 4, 2016)

Notapaedo said:


> The sad thing is that she is one of the most interesting comedians in Britain
> 
> She could get much more response than someone like Stewart Lee and all she does is say stupid things with a straight face. Gutted for you posh liberals who think the world revolves around your half baked opinions, hers are more important and she is a moron on purpose, but well done on the degree and the slr camera for shots of coffee cups and empty buildings. I care



I fear I'm entering my dotage. I cannot make any sense of this post at all, can someone elucidate? Or does no one else understand it either. It's like cutting a page of print in two, then putting it back together a couple of lines out of alignment.


----------



## Sasaferrato (Apr 4, 2016)

Ax^ said:


> less this, more katie hopkins in the show i was talking about
> 
> but just imagine... cannot watch cbeebies already without feeling the need to do drugs



It's not that bad. I watch occasionally whilst looking after next door's children. I quite like Peppa Pig. (Or is that on one of the other teenies TV channels?). I'll be glad when they graduate to the real hardcore stuff like 'Road Runner'.


----------



## Gromit (Apr 4, 2016)

ruffneck23 said:


> I'm not surprised this is the station that has Nick Ferrari


Nick Ferrari is the perfect talk radio host in my opinion. His job is to get people talking and he will often play devil's advocate to make the discussion interesting.
Never assume that the viewpoint he is arguing is actually his. His job is to provide entertainment and thats all he's doing. If arguing that the sky is pink when it is obviously blue provides entertainment then as part of his job thats what he'll do.
I've heard him argue one side one month and then a couple of months later argue the other side.

Katie Hopkins on the other hand is just pure troll. She will choose topics and sides to deliberately upset the majority of reasonable people. I'm rather disappointed in LBC in resorting to such base cheap methods.


----------



## Libertad (Apr 4, 2016)

Gromit said:


> Nick Ferrari is the perfect talk radio host in my opinion.



Nicky Campbell is the master.


----------



## Sasaferrato (Apr 4, 2016)

Looby said:


> Jon Ronson did a piece on her in the Guardian or Observer (can't remember) and I think he ended up feeling quite sorry for her. I'll try and find it.
> 
> Here we are, she's a very strange woman.
> Katie Hopkins: ‘I definitely identify with that murderer thing, where you click off’



That is an interesting article.


----------



## ruffneck23 (Apr 4, 2016)

I didn't realise she went through major brain surgery recently , and I'm not that callous to think she deserved it but maybe it's been a factor towards her vileness , I had a friend who from that sort of stuff totally changed his personality , il listen to her show once and shall see..

As for Ferrari , the amount of times I used to argue with him on my way to work ( in my head ) I think I've just got a hatred from him , but you're right he does get a reaction


----------



## Nylock (Apr 4, 2016)

The surgery changed fuck-all, she was back to her vile trolling as soon as the anaesthesia wore off and she could get online....


----------



## Anudder Oik (Apr 4, 2016)

She went all out mouth-frothing rabid to champion the nazis who gatecrashed the floral tribute in Brussels. Disgusting.


----------



## xenon (Apr 4, 2016)

It's a phone in show on Sunday morning. That tells you quite a lot.  Who the fuck cares. Are you going to listen.  I can't even remember who she is replacing. She has been on there before though.


----------



## bluescreen (Apr 5, 2016)

xenon said:


> I can't even remember who she is replacing.


I can't even remember who she is.


----------



## ruffneck23 (Apr 5, 2016)

To be fair I probably won't be listening , I didn't realised she came back from the surgery and started mouthing off again , sod her then


----------



## Shechemite (Apr 5, 2016)

Nylock said:


> The surgery changed fuck-all, she was back to her vile trolling as soon as the anaesthesia wore off and she could get online....



???


----------



## Nylock (Apr 5, 2016)

MadeInBedlam said:


> ???


read the post above the one you quoted, it was an off-the-cuff response to it


----------



## Kesher (Apr 6, 2016)

I listened to her when she stood in for James O'Brien. Despite her strong opinions  she actual gave callers with opposing views a much easier time than someone like O'Brien or even some  of the other LBC presenters would.


----------



## teqniq (May 21, 2016)

Katie Hopkins has made an embarrassing error



> Katie Hopkins has been mocked for sharing a photoshopped version of a road sign including Arabic translations underneath, apparently believing it to be real....


----------



## nino_savatte (May 21, 2016)

The source for that photoshopped image is a self-styled 'Christian' and member of Pegida, who claims - surprise, surprise - to be 'pro-Israel'. For a Christian, she's not too keen on other Christians. 
Juliette (@Juliet777777) on Twitter


----------



## toblerone3 (May 21, 2016)

When is she going to do the naked run?


----------



## ViolentPanda (May 21, 2016)

toblerone3 said:


> When is she going to do the naked run?



She won't be entirely naked, as she'll have a sausage stuffed up her Gary.


----------



## albionism (May 21, 2016)

Volunteers prepare Katie Hopkins' naked run sausage.


----------



## gosub (May 21, 2016)

ViolentPanda said:


> She won't be entirely naked, as she'll have a sausage stuffed up her Gary.



As the woman IS an arse, she has the cop out of doing the thing dressed as a sausage.


----------



## BoxRoom (May 21, 2016)

The logistics of how that sausage is going to stay in place, let alone the initial insertion (frozen?? cooked and cooled??), and not vanish all up within the gary is tearing my mind apart.


----------



## YouSir (May 21, 2016)

BoxRoom said:


> The logistics of how that sausage is going to stay in place, let alone the initial insertion (frozen?? cooked and cooled??), and not vanish all up within the gary is tearing my mind apart.



Frozen on entry, fried on removal. And clenching.


----------



## BoxRoom (May 21, 2016)

YouSir said:


> Frozen on entry, fried on removal. And clenching.



poor sausage


----------



## existentialist (May 21, 2016)

albionism said:


> Volunteers prepare Katie Hopkins' naked run sausage.
> View attachment 87323


The fork's a nice touch


----------



## Chilli.s (May 21, 2016)

Should really be fired up there with the sausage gun.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (May 21, 2016)

A twatter user should inform her that Isis have issued a fatwa against her if she uses a pork sausage rather than a chicken one.


----------



## nino_savatte (May 21, 2016)

toblerone3 said:


> When is she going to do the naked run?


I think an extra sausage should be added for each day since the day she was supposed to run down Oxford Street naked (*shudders*), with a sausage in her mouth arse.


----------



## Idris2002 (May 21, 2016)

OK, I think we're getting into some weird and unpleasant territory here. . .


----------



## bluescreen (May 21, 2016)

Yeah, appalling as Hopkins is, don't you think some of these comments are a bit, erm, sexist?
Though come to think of it, she's probably only got herself to blame for planting this image in your mind in the first place.


----------



## YouSir (May 21, 2016)

bluescreen said:


> Yeah, appalling as Hopkins is, don't you think some of these comments are a bit, erm, sexist?
> Though come to think of it, she's probably only got herself to blame for planting this image in your mind in the first place.



Aye, she did start the whole idea off, to not take the piss now that she's fallen silent would be a terrible injustice.


----------



## bluescreen (May 21, 2016)

You mean, she was asking for it?


----------



## YouSir (May 21, 2016)

bluescreen said:


> You mean, she was asking for it?



That's a bit of a leading way to put it isn't it?


----------



## bluescreen (May 21, 2016)

(Me and my big wooden spoon.)


----------



## YouSir (May 21, 2016)

bluescreen said:


> (Me and my big wooden spoon.)



Ah well, don't think I'll get involved in that one. Massive racist, xenophobic, right wing attention seeker says stupid thing and people take the piss - not a matter deserving of great debate imo.


----------



## bluescreen (May 21, 2016)

I dunno, tbh. A little while ago I'd never heard of her. Now she pisses me off big time. I loathe what she stands for. I'm just a bit queasy about how people take her misogynist bait.


----------



## Gromit (May 21, 2016)

Idris2002 said:


> OK, I think we're getting into some weird and unpleasant territory here. . .


You're on a thread about Katie Hopkins...

... Just saying.


----------



## billy_bob (May 21, 2016)

Idris2002 said:


> OK, I think we're getting into some weird and unpleasant territory here. . .





bluescreen said:


> Yeah, appalling as Hopkins is, don't you think some of these comments are a bit, erm, sexist?
> Though come to think of it, she's probably only got herself to blame for planting this image in your mind in the first place.



Personally I do think rising above it rather than sinking to her level of crassness and spite might reflect better on us, but sexist? No.Imagine if Clarkson or Littlejohn had made a similar pledge. We'd be falling over ourselves offering to construct extra-large sausages made of polonium or razor blades, whilst also begging for brain bleach.


----------



## bluescreen (May 21, 2016)

It's maybe just me who has a problem with violent hyperbole, whether directed to Hopkins or Clarkson.  #wimp


----------



## bluescreen (May 21, 2016)

God, I loathe them both.


----------



## cyril_smear (May 21, 2016)

Did she die?


----------



## teqniq (May 21, 2016)

nino_savatte said:


> The source for that photoshopped image is a self-styled 'Christian' and member of Pegida, who claims - surprise, surprise - to be 'pro-Israel'. For a Christian, she's not too keen on other Christians.
> Juliette (@Juliet777777) on Twitter


When I first saw the story I initially though she'd been trolled by someone, but then along comes you with a link to the originator of the pic who actually turns out to be a bigger wingnut than Hopkins. It's like being shot up by friendly fire. Karma.


----------



## ViolentPanda (May 22, 2016)

bluescreen said:


> It's maybe just me who has a problem with violent hyperbole, whether directed to Hopkins or Clarkson.  #wimp



Violent hyperbole?
What, such as kindly - IMO - suggestion that the put the sausage in her mouth, rather than up her bum?
Or perhaps the repetition of her own original suggestion is "violent hyperbole"?


----------



## billy_bob (May 23, 2016)

ViolentPanda said:


> Violent hyperbole?
> What, such as kindly - IMO - suggestion that the put the sausage in her mouth, rather than up her bum?
> Or perhaps the repetition of her own original suggestion is "violent hyperbole"?



Quite. In fact, considering how carefully calibrated the fictional character 'Katie Hopkins' is, it's a pretty smart move to use that particular suggestion in the first place: detractors can't engage, seriously or otherwise, in attacking her over it without by definition having to talk about the anal insertion of meat products into a female public figure - with all the opportunity for accusing those detractors of misogyny that then creates.


----------



## Pickman's model (May 23, 2016)

bluescreen said:


> It's maybe just me who has a problem with violent hyperbole, whether directed to Hopkins or Clarkson.  #wimp


What are you doing on urban then?


----------



## bluescreen (May 23, 2016)

Pickman's model said:


> What are you doing on urban then?


Fair comment.  It was the reference to the fork that made me wince. If she's OK with it all it's none of my business, and I shall paddle off to the calmer waters of the world politics forums , where CR  reigns in all his glory.


----------



## Pickman's model (May 23, 2016)

bluescreen said:


> Fair comment.  It was the reference to the fork that made me wince. If she's OK with it all it's none of my business, and I shall paddle off to the calmer waters of the world politics forums , where CR  reigns in all his glory.


no, cr reins in all his glory.


----------



## bluescreen (May 23, 2016)

Pickman's model said:


> no, cr reins in all his glory.


If only he would rein it in!


----------



## Pickman's model (May 23, 2016)

bluescreen said:


> If only he would rein it in!


wouldn't want it raining on his parade


----------



## bluescreen (May 23, 2016)

Ew. I think he heard us.


----------



## existentialist (May 23, 2016)

bluescreen said:


> Fair comment.  It was the reference to the fork that made me wince. If she's OK with it all it's none of my business, and I shall paddle off to the calmer waters of the world politics forums , where CR  reigns in all his glory.


 As far as I can tell, I'm the only one on this thread who has mentioned the fork in the photo of the enormous sausage, by saying it was a "nice touch".

Is this somehow being construed as "violent hyperbole"?


----------



## bluescreen (May 23, 2016)

existentialist said:


> As far as I can tell, I'm the only one on this thread who has mentioned the fork in the photo of the enormous sausage, by saying it was a "nice touch".
> 
> Is this somehow being construed as "violent hyperbole"?


Not really - was reading through the thread very fast at the time and without the close attention it clearly deserved. I take it all back, OK?


----------



## two sheds (May 23, 2016)

bluescreen said:


> Not really - was reading through the thread very fast at the time and without the close attention it clearly deserved. I take it all back, OK?



AHA! So violent hyperbole's ok now is it?


----------



## existentialist (May 23, 2016)

bluescreen said:


> Not really - was reading through the thread very fast at the time and without the close attention it clearly deserved. I take it all back, OK?


Yup, that's OK


----------



## billy_bob (May 23, 2016)

two sheds said:


> AHA! So violent hyperbole's ok now is it?



Yay! *Gets sausages back out*


----------



## ViolentPanda (May 23, 2016)

billy_bob said:


> Yay! *Gets sausages back out*



From Hopkins's Gary?
Ew!!!!


----------



## Chilli.s (May 23, 2016)

Like U75 version of a Punch and Judy show.


----------



## fishfinger (May 23, 2016)

Chilli.s said:


> Like U75 version of a Punch and Judy show.


That's the way to do it.


----------



## existentialist (May 23, 2016)

*whacks policeman with sausages*


----------



## D'wards (May 29, 2016)




----------



## billy_bob (May 29, 2016)

D'wards said:


>




Sadly predictable that most people think the best way to respond to that is to call Hopkins herself (or worse, her kids) ugly.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Aug 1, 2016)

Listen to Katie Hopkins falling for M25 week-long closure spoof



> Katie Hopkins fell for a spoof story and told her millions of radio listeners that the M25was going to be closed for ONE WHOLE WEEK this summer.
> 
> Having been discussing RideLondon road closures on air during her weekend London LBC show on Saturday (July 30), the controversial presenter then moved on to say: "The M25 motorway is due to close for one whole week in August as the Department of Health and sports officials are organising a fitness event which is being billed as the ultimate endurance race.
> 
> ...




Christ she's a cunt.


----------



## teqniq (Aug 25, 2016)

Hopkins sinks to a new low.

Police report Katie Hopkins over Camber Sands deaths poll


----------



## gosub (Aug 25, 2016)

TBF It has been three long headline bereft weeks for Ms Hopkins


----------



## teqniq (Aug 25, 2016)

My heart bleeds.


----------



## krtek a houby (Aug 25, 2016)

What drives this non person? Does she get off on her own guff?


----------



## fishfinger (Aug 25, 2016)

She gets paid for it.


----------



## krtek a houby (Aug 25, 2016)

fishfinger said:


> She gets paid for it.



Yeah. She's a real champion of (paid for) free speeh


----------



## fishfinger (Aug 25, 2016)

Some people will do or say anything for money


----------



## Chilli.s (Aug 26, 2016)

fishfinger said:


> She gets paid for it.


Yeah it's a sorry state of affairs when being an offensive insensitive twat is so richly rewarded.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Sep 22, 2016)

Has she done it yet?


----------



## krtek a houby (Dec 19, 2016)

An "apology"

Katie Hopkins apologises to family over al-Qaeda claims - BBC News


----------



## DJWrongspeed (Dec 19, 2016)

Heard her on LBC the other day. I'm minded to report her to OFCOM not because she may have breached the guidelines but to annoy LBC. If enough people lodged complaints the station would be overwhelmed with paper work and probably sack her.


----------



## Casually Red (Dec 19, 2016)

bluescreen said:


> It's maybe just me who has a problem with violent hyperbole, whether directed to Hopkins or Clarkson.  #wimp



Then avert your precious little eyes away from it and retreat to a safe space , officer funpolice . Maybe it's just me who has a problem with grown adults being lectured like they were 5 year olds .


----------



## DJWrongspeed (Dec 19, 2016)

Mail pays compensation to muslim family. Her column is costing the Daily Mail a bit.


----------



## krtek a houby (Dec 19, 2016)

DJWrongspeed said:


> Mail pays compensation to muslim family. Her column is costing the Daily Mail a bit.



I'd say "good" but what with all the crap she comes out with...  hopefuly they show her the door in the not so distant future


----------



## TheHoodedClaw (Dec 19, 2016)

krtek a houby said:


> I'd say "good" but what with all the crap she comes out with...  hopefuly they show her the door in the not so distant future



She's being sued for libel early next year by Jack Monroe, and I think it's for tweets rather than a newspaper article. She'll be on the hook for that on her own.


----------



## existentialist (Dec 20, 2016)

Casually Red said:


> Then avert your precious little eyes away from it and retreat to a safe space , officer funpolice . Maybe it's just me who has a problem with grown adults being lectured like they were 5 year olds .


Well, you certainly seem to have a problem with an awful lot of other things...


----------



## albionism (Dec 20, 2016)

Just hurry up and die you horrible cunt.


----------



## Dan U (Dec 20, 2016)

TheHoodedClaw said:


> She's being sued for libel early next year by Jack Monroe, and I think it's for tweets rather than a newspaper article. She'll be on the hook for that on her own.



yeah iirc she confused Jack Monroe and Laurie Penny and started accusing Jack Monroe supporting things Penny supported.

Katie Hopkins sued by Jack Monroe over vandalism accusation


----------



## not a trot (Dec 20, 2016)

albionism said:


> Just hurry up and die you horrible cunt.


Totally uncalled for.

A long drawn out painful death would be more preferable.


----------



## Sasaferrato (Dec 20, 2016)

Diamond said:


> Hmm...
> 
> She's not a very nice person but epilepsy's not very much fun either and if, as she claims, she is having three to four seizures per night that requires neurosurgery to solve, that's a pretty big deal.
> 
> I'm a little bit suspicious of the double dislocations though - that definitely can happen but you need to be having some pretty major seizures for that to occur and I suspect that you would be looking at at least some bone fractures too.



Not necessarily. When a shoulder has come out a few times, it cab take very little to make it come out again. Rugby players quite often have tohave surgery, to shorthen the muscles, and give the shoulder more support. Putti-Plat the procedure is called.


----------



## teqniq (Dec 22, 2016)

Katie Hopkins rushed to hospital after choking on apology to Muslim family


----------



## SqueakyBumTime (Dec 22, 2016)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> Has she done it yet?
> 
> View attachment 92825


From memory, she has quite a nice bum and therefore it would be most pleasant to see it "plus sausage"


----------



## Casually Red (Dec 22, 2016)




----------



## krtek a houby (Dec 22, 2016)

SqueakyBumTime said:


> From memory, she has quite a nice bum and therefore it would be most pleasant to see it "plus sausage"



How so, exactly?


----------



## Nylock (Dec 25, 2016)

Guess we'll never know now the time-wasting fuckstick has been banned... oh well, life goes on....


----------



## panpete (Dec 26, 2016)

I reckon she's got a personality disorder. Nowt against PD's Im one myself, but I know I am one, I daresay auld Katie doesn't and continues in her arrogance. Shame but my sister reminds me of her.


----------



## gosub (Dec 29, 2016)




----------



## panpete (Dec 29, 2016)

It's KH's job, her artistic form of expression, how to be a bitch.
She could probably write a good book, but she would need time away from people, so she would not get her supply of energy her behaviour sucks out of people, and would have to fall back on her own resources instead of taking from others.


----------



## Orang Utan (Dec 30, 2016)

panpete said:


> It's KH's job, her artistic form of expression, how to be a bitch.
> She could probably write a good book, but she would need time away from people, so she would not get her supply of energy her behaviour sucks out of people, and would have to fall back on her own resources instead of taking from others.


I read this and thought she must have written a book by now, but she just has a book of baby names.
There is this, though:
How I Created Katie Hopkins by Adolf Hitler:Amazon.co.uk:Kindle Store


----------



## panpete (Dec 30, 2016)

Orang Utan said:


> I read this and thought she must have written a book by now, but she just has a book of baby names.
> There is this, though:
> How I Created Katie Hopkins by Adolf Hitler:Amazon.co.uk:Kindle Store


mad. she is a professional master of the art of being obnoxious, like inverted creativity.
All her energy is diverted towards negaitivity


----------



## joe cooley (Jan 6, 2017)

It is an outrage that in the 21st century there are people who hold opinions that are out of step with the group think of the left wing Borg!

To compound this outrage, said deviants dare to express their unacceptable opinions in a fashion the Borg find repulsive!

Surely there should be camps where such deviants can be sent for "re-education",for their own good of course.

FFS.

Get a grip snowflakes.


----------



## Orang Utan (Jan 6, 2017)

joe cooley said:


> It is an outrage that in the 21st century there are people who hold opinions that are out of step with the group think of the left wing Borg!
> 
> To compound this outrage, said deviants dare to express their unacceptable opinions in a fashion the Borg find repulsive!
> 
> ...


To the acid mines with you


----------



## existentialist (Jan 6, 2017)

joe cooley said:


> It is an outrage that in the 21st century there are people who hold opinions that are out of step with the group think of the left wing Borg!
> 
> To compound this outrage, said deviants dare to express their unacceptable opinions in a fashion the Borg find repulsive!
> 
> ...


----------



## mystic pyjamas (Jan 6, 2017)

snowflakes? Very alt right expression .


----------



## DotCommunist (Jan 6, 2017)

Your biological and technological distinctiveness will be added to our own


----------



## BoxRoom (Jan 6, 2017)

I prefer cupcakes. They last longer and are tasty.

I'm not sure where I was going with that.

But that's beside the point, has she carked it yet?


----------



## Orang Utan (Jan 6, 2017)

BoxRoom said:


> I prefer cupcakes. They last longer and are tasty.
> 
> I'm not sure where I was going with that.
> 
> But that's beside the point, has she carked it yet?


It doesn't matter.
When a drone is damaged beyond repair, it is discarded, but its memories continue to exist in the collective consciousness.


----------



## BoxRoom (Jan 6, 2017)

Orang Utan said:


> It doesn't matter.
> When a drone is damaged beyond repair, it is discarded, but its memories contine to exist in the collective consciousness.


Damn. I was afraid of that.


----------



## SqueakyBumTime (Jan 7, 2017)

krtek a houby said:


> How so, exactly?



How else do you want me to say I think KH has a nice bum?




Nylock said:


> Guess we'll never know now the time-wasting fuckstick has been banned... oh well, life goes on....



Temp ban, Nylock. Temp ban. Fuckstick is a bit harsh :-(


----------



## Cheesypoof (Jan 7, 2017)

snowflakes fella is right. She dont scare me one bit.


----------



## existentialist (Jan 7, 2017)

SqueakyBumTime said:


> How else do you want me to say I think KH has a nice bum?
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Oh, I dunno...


----------



## taffboy gwyrdd (Jan 7, 2017)

The other day, KH retweeted something by a group called "anti Juden SS". 

When mainstream fake-news gives her undue attention, they do so in full knowledge of such far right and anti semitic connections. 

They think that stuff is edgy. If it was someone vaguely connected to the Labour Party doing that it would be cooked up into a crisis of leadership lasting months, because the opposition to anti semitism is not based on concern for welfare of Jewish people but on political opportunism, using bigotry to score points as and when useful.


----------



## Max Evans (Jan 7, 2017)

publicity is like air to her hopefully one day it gets cut off


----------



## not a trot (Jan 7, 2017)

Max Evans said:


> publicity is like air to her hopefully one day it gets cut off



I fart in her general direction.


----------



## existentialist (Jan 7, 2017)

not a trot said:


> I fart in her general direction.


I think she gets off on that kind of thing  It's the attention...


----------



## panpete (Jan 7, 2017)

I'd be really intimidated by her if I knew her, I know shes talks bollocks, but she is so loud and talks over people, and doesn't listen to the other person talking to her.
I just freeze in the presence of people like that when i wish i could put them in their place, cos ive been targeted by a few sorts of katie hopkins personality type, loud, arrogant, talks shit etc,, not so bad, but you get my drift, and i always come away from them hating myself more for failing to take care of myself and give them a piece of my mind.


----------



## Orang Utan (Jan 7, 2017)

I bet she's nice as pie one on one. 
I think her online/TV persona is quite a money spinner, so she's ended up digging herself a lucrative hole that's impossible to escape from.


----------



## taffboy gwyrdd (Jan 8, 2017)

Obviously, mentioning her is problematic because it gives the attention she wants. My problem is less with her though, there are plenty of far rightists out there, it's that her opinion is considered worthy of airtime by mainstream fake-news.

The comment I referenced upthread included that "racism has no meaning anymore" - this, again, in a retweet of "anti juden SS".

Which ever mainstream fake-news still employs her is de facto endorsing the most vile anti semitism and bona fide nazi-ism. That's the real issue here, the mainstreaming of the far right and she is far from the only example.


----------



## panpete (Jan 8, 2017)

taffboy gwyrdd said:


> Obviously, mentioning her is problematic because it gives the attention she wants. My problem is less with her though, there are plenty of far rightists out there, it's that her opinion is considered worthy of airtime by mainstream fake-news.
> 
> The comment I referenced upthread included that "racism has no meaning anymore" - this, again, in a retweet of "anti juden SS".
> 
> Which ever mainstream fake-news still employs her is de facto endorsing the most vile anti semitism and bona fide nazi-ism. That's the real issue here, the mainstreaming of the far right and she is far from the only example.


yeahshe is deffo far rite.
Right wing ppolitics seems harmful and dangerous to me and i cannot understand why so many people like it, who likes being in danger and harmed?
RW politics seems so negative


----------



## SqueakyBumTime (Jan 14, 2017)

I'll bet she's nice as cherry pie. Uses the media to stir up publicity in order to stir up publicity to make money. So what, who cares? We've all got to make a bean.


----------



## panpete (Jan 14, 2017)

SqueakyBumTime said:


> I'll bet she's nice as cherry pie. Uses the media to stir up publicity in order to stir up publicity to make money. So what, who cares? We've all got to make a bean.


Better to make a bean in an unoffensive way though.


----------



## SqueakyBumTime (Jan 14, 2017)

panpete said:


> Better to make a bean in an unoffensive way though.


Always someone going to be offended, whatever you do or say


----------



## ItWillNeverWork (Jan 14, 2017)

SqueakyBumTime said:


> Always someone going to be offended, whatever you do or say



You can offend all the people some of the time, and you can offend some of the people all the time, but you cannot offend all the people all the time. Unless you're Katie Hopkins.


----------



## SqueakyBumTime (Jan 14, 2017)

ItWillNeverWork said:


> You can offend all the people some of the time, and you can offend some of the people all the time, but you cannot offend all the people all the time. Unless you're Katie Hopkins.


Wow. Incisive.


----------



## panpete (Jan 14, 2017)

SqueakyBumTime said:


> Always someone going to be offended, whatever you do or say


True, but Katie's character, whether real or not is definitely obnoxious.


----------



## Celyn (Jan 14, 2017)

ItWillNeverWork said:


> You can offend all the people some of the time, and you can offend some of the people all the time, but you cannot offend all the people all the time. Unless you're Katie Hopkins.


I'd say she does not offend her bank manager. The paper she writes for is not known for its thoughtfulness and I'm sure she is well paid for her evil scribbles, which, in a previous era, would all have been done in green ink.


----------



## SqueakyBumTime (Jan 14, 2017)

panpete said:


> True, but Katie's character, whether real or not is definitely obnoxious.


I disagree. Her "character" resonates with many, hence her popularity.


----------



## Cheesypoof (Jan 14, 2017)

im not offended by her at all....she can say whatever she wants. She is a journalist and i was one too for many years.... i subscribe very much to Oscar Wildes point of view.


----------



## SqueakyBumTime (Jan 14, 2017)

Anyway, I don't want to sound like a KH buttock-chum, so I'll sign off gracefully and let you guys and gals thrash out the detail.


----------



## ItWillNeverWork (Jan 14, 2017)

SqueakyBumTime said:


> I disagree. Her "character" resonates with many, hence her popularity.





Cheesypoof said:


> im not offended by her at all....she can say whatever she wants. She is a journalist and i was one too for many years.... i subscribe very much to Oscar Wildes point of view.



Everything popular is wrong?


----------



## Cheesypoof (Jan 14, 2017)

ItWillNeverWork said:


> Everything popular is wrong?



Well that is absolutely true. But not that about this 'particular' one.


----------



## SqueakyBumTime (Jan 14, 2017)

Cor, centenary quotage


----------



## xenon (Jan 14, 2017)

SqueakyBumTime said:


> I'll bet she's nice as cherry pie. Uses the media to stir up publicity in order to stir up publicity to make money. So what, who cares? We've all got to make a bean.





SqueakyBumTime said:


> Wow. Incisive.





SqueakyBumTime said:


> Anyway, I don't want to sound like a KH buttock-chum, so I'll sign off gracefully and let you guys and gals thrash out the detail.



 Keep them coming. We need more incisive comment like this.


----------



## likesfish (Jan 14, 2017)

Her views are no worse than idiots you hear on the bus but those idiots dont get airtime and newspaper articles to spread their hate and idiocy.


----------



## existentialist (Jan 14, 2017)

SqueakyBumTime said:


> Always someone going to be offended, whatever you do or say


Wow. Controversial.


----------



## existentialist (Jan 14, 2017)

SqueakyBumTime said:


> Anyway, I don't want to sound like a KH buttock-chum, so I'll sign off gracefully and let you guys and gals thrash out the detail.


Too late. 

Not that I imagine anyone thinks your cosying up to KH is any more than a slightly desperate attempt to be Dangerously Edgy.


----------



## panpete (Jan 14, 2017)

SqueakyBumTime said:


> I disagree. Her "character" resonates with many, hence her popularity.


That sounds scary. Runs and hides.


----------



## panpete (Jan 14, 2017)

likesfish said:


> Her views are no worse than idiots you hear on the bus but those idiots dont get airtime and newspaper articles to spread their hate and idiocy.


There's plenty of people with the same views, like people who have problems with refugees etc.


----------



## SqueakyBumTime (Jan 15, 2017)

existentialist said:


> Too late.
> 
> Not that I imagine anyone thinks your cosying up to KH is any more than a slightly desperate attempt to be Dangerously Edgy.



No desire to be edgy, dangerously so or otherwise.


----------



## existentialist (Jan 15, 2017)

SqueakyBumTime said:


> No desire to be edgy, dangerously so or otherwise.


Jolly good.


----------



## likesfish (Jan 15, 2017)

She panders to the worst of us.
Makes hate and bigatory acceptable like the stupid show with the shouting chavs on it.
  Be hard or the brown and poor stupid people will take what you have, your hard working and normal you deserve what you have.
  Unlike the scoungers and foreigners and weirdos.
 She'd be burning witches on live TV if she could probably doesnt even belive half the  crap she comes out with.


----------



## 8den (Feb 27, 2017)

Hopkins V Jack Monroe libel case is in court at the moment.


----------



## DotCommunist (Mar 1, 2017)

I hope she gets taken to the cleaners


----------



## 8den (Mar 1, 2017)

KATIE HOPKINS reports from Scandi-lib paradise of Sweden | Daily Mail Online

She's not at the trial, she's imperilled herself by going to the lawless wilds of suburban Sweden.


----------



## hash tag (Mar 1, 2017)

Why have I just looked at this thread about some pointless excuse of an individual?


----------



## gosub (Mar 1, 2017)

hash tag said:


> Why have I just looked at this thread about some pointless excuse of an individual?


For the same reason people rubber neck a motorway crash


----------



## hash tag (Mar 1, 2017)

I came on here, looked at last few posts and then it struck me....why?


----------



## MikeMcc (Mar 1, 2017)

hash tag said:


> I came on here, looked at last few posts and then it struck me....why?


Pretty much the same. Unfortunately I was hoping that someone, by now, would have a counter argument for the bilious witch


----------



## existentialist (Mar 1, 2017)

hash tag said:


> Why have I just looked at this thread about some pointless excuse of an individual?


Because she might just be about to get her sausage-filled arse handed to her on a plate.


----------



## Celyn (Mar 1, 2017)

She never did do that sausage thing, did she?  Hmm. Naughty fibbing waste of skin.


----------



## existentialist (Mar 1, 2017)

Celyn said:


> She never did do that sausage thing, did she?  Hmm. Naughty fibbing waste of skin.


No, she didn't. Like 99% of everything she says, it was done for effect, not because she meant it.


----------



## Mrs Miggins (Mar 1, 2017)

Oh christ why did I look at this thread and then google to find out about the sausage thing. Ugh. I really do not want to know anything about Katie sodding Hopkins. Unless Jack Monroe succeeds in suing her arse - sausaged or otherwise.


----------



## existentialist (Mar 1, 2017)

Mrs Miggins said:


> Oh christ why did I look at this thread and then google to find out about the sausage thing. Ugh. I really do not want to know anything about Katie sodding Hopkins. Unless Jack Monroe succeeds in suing her arse - sausaged or otherwise.


It would be nice to think that, if Jack Monroe were to win, the court might order Hopkins to honour her bet. Not nice to watch, obviously, but it would be quite a petard to hoist the poisonous harpy by.


----------



## Mrs Miggins (Mar 1, 2017)

existentialist said:


> It would be nice to think that, if Jack Monroe were to win, the court might order Hopkins to honour her bet. Not nice to watch, obviously, but it would be quite a petard to hoist the poisonous harpy by.


Sadly, we do not live in Westeros.....


----------



## hash tag (Mar 2, 2017)

existentialist said:


> Because she might just be about to get her sausage-filled arse handed to her on a plate.



Am I bovvered? She is still pointless and vile.


----------



## Celyn (Mar 2, 2017)

existentialist said:


> ... but it would be quite a petard to hoist the poisonous harpy by.



The sausage thing might lead to a few embarrassing petards in the sense of "fart", too.


----------



## Wookey (Mar 2, 2017)

Jack Monroe has been very badly advised on this libel case,  I'd say there's very little chance she'll win and it'll end up costing her a fortune she doesn't have.  Wish I could spend ten minutes with her to dissuade her! Lol


----------



## Shechemite (Mar 2, 2017)

Wookey said:


> Jack Monroe has been very badly advised on this libel case,  I'd say there's very little chance she'll win and it'll end up costing her a fortune she doesn't have.



Why do you say that?


----------



## William of Walworth (Mar 2, 2017)

Wookey said:


> Jack Monroe has been very badly advised on this libel case,  I'd say there's very little chance she'll win and it'll end up costing her a fortune she doesn't have.  Wish I could spend ten minutes with her to dissuade her! Lol



Don't get that at all. From what I read the other day (but can't find link just now  ), JM's got a pretty damned strong case? Please explain ...


----------



## Cheesypoof (Mar 3, 2017)

Ridiculousness all round.


----------



## existentialist (Mar 3, 2017)

Cheesypoof said:


> Ridiculousness all round.


I wouldn't go that far.

In fact, I'd go about 180° less far.


----------



## Cheesypoof (Mar 3, 2017)

existentialist said:


> I wouldn't go that far.
> 
> In fact, I'd go about 180° less far.



Oh i dont know....to claim defamation over a tweet (and I have been a journalist myself so I speak from that vantage point) seems extreme.


----------



## Shechemite (Mar 3, 2017)

Cheesypoof said:


> Oh i dont know....to claim defamation over a tweet (and I have been a journalist myself so I speak from that vantage point) seems extreme.



Why?


----------



## existentialist (Mar 3, 2017)

Cheesypoof said:


> Oh i dont know....to claim defamation over a tweet (and I have been a journalist myself so I speak from that vantage point) seems extreme.


Except that I don't think Monroe would "describe herself as a journalist". She's an activist, who writes. And as such, I can entirely see why she might feel under some obligation to protest at Hopkins' attempt to discredit her position by inaccurately lumping her in with other types of activist.

ETA: and I'd hope that nobody's thinking of Hopkins as a journalist...


----------



## Cheesypoof (Mar 3, 2017)

MadeInBedlam said:


> Why?



Why? Because tweets are like patters of rain, mostly meaningless. A journalist can complain about it but should have more backbone and resilience than to whinge about their entire reputation being at stake.


----------



## existentialist (Mar 3, 2017)

Cheesypoof said:


> Why? Because tweets are like patters of rain, mostly meaningless. A journalist can complain about it but should have more backbone and resilience than to whinge about their entire reputation being at stake.


"It's only the Internet". So 90s.


----------



## Cheesypoof (Mar 3, 2017)

existentialist said:


> Except that I don't think Monroe would "describe herself as a journalist". She's an activist, who writes. And as such, I can entirely see why she might feel under some obligation to protest at Hopkins' attempt to discredit her position by inaccurately lumping her in with other types of activist..



Protest about it and defend yourself but no need to bring a tweet to the courts! think about it


----------



## Cheesypoof (Mar 3, 2017)

existentialist said:


> "It's only the Internet". So 90s.



well, it is. You write something and many many folks will kick off. Someone gets their facts wrong, you should have the confidence to make your defence and move on.


----------



## Jeff Robinson (Mar 3, 2017)

> Shortly after Hopkins’s original message, Monroe tweeted in response: “I have NEVER ‘scrawled on a memorial’. Brother in the RAF. Dad was a Para in the Falklands. You’re a piece of shit.”



I fear that that Monroe might get sued for liable too. By a piece of shit for being compared to Katie Hopkins.


----------



## snadge (Mar 3, 2017)

Cheesypoof said:


> Why? Because tweets are like patters of rain, mostly meaningless. A journalist can complain about it but should have more backbone and resilience than to whinge about their entire reputation being at stake.




I agree with you to a certain extent, twitter shite is like the 'nothing but the rain' ( BSG reference) tinkling to us norms BUT, it is increasingly being used for disinformation purposes and political smearing against people that are followed by huge amounts of people.

Although I don't care for Monroe, I do detest Hopkins though, I hope Jack gouges Hopkins a new one.


----------



## existentialist (Mar 3, 2017)

snadge said:


> I agree with you to a certain extent, twitter shite is like the 'nothing but the rain' ( BSG reference) tinkling to us norms BUT, it is increasingly being used for disinformation purposes and political smearing against people that are followed by huge amounts of people.
> 
> Although I don't care for Monroe, I do detest Hopkins though, I hope Jack gouges Hopkins a new one.


TWO sausages down Oxford Street!


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Mar 3, 2017)

existentialist said:


> TWO sausages down Oxford Street!



A Bratwurst up Bond Street!


----------



## existentialist (Mar 3, 2017)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> A Bratwurst up Bond Street!


A Curly Cumberland down Curzon Street.


----------



## likesfish (Mar 3, 2017)

tbf Hopkins fucked up got called on it and instead of apologising she doubled down on it.
  regardless of what you feel about war memorials claiming somebody was ok with vandalising one when they weren't is highly offensive so Hopkins finally gets nailed for something.


----------



## Orang Utan (Mar 3, 2017)

Katie Hopkins is the worst by far, but this Jack Monroe is pretty objectionable too, and I don't see much merit in their case.


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 3, 2017)

Orang Utan said:


> Katie Hopkins is the worst by far, but this Jack Monroe is pretty objectionable too, and I don't see much merit in their case.


in what ways do you find jack monroe objectionable?


----------



## Wookey (Mar 3, 2017)

William of Walworth said:


> Don't get that at all. From what I read the other day (but can't find link just now  ), JM's got a pretty damned strong case? Please explain ...



Libel actions are nearly always a bad idea... The way the law works in the UK makes it an expensive and very unpredictable way to wash your linen in public.  And as Jack herself admits,  she's been through 18 months of Hell... For what? For a misdirected comment from a certified loon that was deleted in a couple of hours? Really?? She has better and more important things to work on... We all do.  

So from a legal as well as spiritual viewpoint she should have walked on by,  rather than turning a throw-away digital quip aimed at someone else,  into front page news.  Jack did that,  not Katie Hopkins!


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 3, 2017)

Pickman's model said:


> in what ways do you find jack monroe objectionable?


Orang Utan can you answer the question?


----------



## William of Walworth (Mar 5, 2017)

Thanks for that post Wookey -- it got me rethinking about this case I must say.


----------



## Dan U (Mar 10, 2017)

Hopkins lost. 24k damages.


----------



## teqniq (Mar 10, 2017)




----------



## Dan U (Mar 10, 2017)

Looks like costs still being discussed according to twitter.


----------



## DaveCinzano (Mar 10, 2017)

Food writer wins Katie Hopkins libel battle - BBC News


----------



## killer b (Mar 10, 2017)

Dan U said:


> Looks like costs still being discussed according to twitter.


no, her barrister is just rubbing salt into the wound, by announcing Monroe offered to take 5 grand on the day of the tweet.


----------



## JimW (Mar 10, 2017)

Dan U said:


> Hopkins lost. 24k damages.


It's all a conspiracy to fabricate an illusion of "British justice"


----------



## killer b (Mar 10, 2017)

(which was refused by Hopkins)


----------



## Dan U (Mar 10, 2017)

killer b said:


> no, her barrister is just rubbing salt into the wound, by announcing Monroe offered to take 5 grand on the day of the tweet.



Take a look at @Law_and_policy's Tweet: 

David Green has led me to believe otherwise but could be me not understanding the ins and outs of all this.


----------



## killer b (Mar 10, 2017)

oh sorry - thought you meant the award...


----------



## DaveCinzano (Mar 10, 2017)

Twenty-four grand isn't a bad result for two insulting tweets


----------



## 8den (Mar 10, 2017)

The Judgement is quite hilarious, some samples 

" Ms Hopkins has sometimes been described in the print media as “rentagob”

"Later on 18 May 2015 the Claimant published the following on Twitter: “BA_DA_BOOM! It lies! It smears! It’s wrong! It panics! It blocks! It’s @KTHopkins everyone!” (With six pictures of a chicken) "

https://www.judiciary.gov.uk/wp-con...onroe-v-hopkins-2017-ewhc-433-qb-20170310.pdf


----------



## DotCommunist (Mar 10, 2017)

DaveCinzano said:


> Twenty-four grand isn't a bad result for two insulting tweets


at some point twitter chat became srs bssnss but I can't call where that line is. early oo's?


----------



## sim667 (Mar 10, 2017)

killer b said:


> no, her barrister is just rubbing salt into the wound, by announcing Monroe offered to take 5 grand on the day of the tweet.


She didn't even offer to take it, she said as a charity donation.


----------



## DaveCinzano (Mar 10, 2017)

DotCommunist said:


> at some point twitter chat became srs bssnss but I can't call where that line is. early oo's?


Twitter was only launched in 2006.


----------



## weltweit (Mar 10, 2017)

How do I get Hopkins to libel me then? how?


----------



## killer b (Mar 10, 2017)

She's been awarded £107,000 costs - which isn't the full amount. That's why Hopkins and her ilk can libel all they like most of the time - most people can't afford to risk that kind of money.


----------



## killer b (Mar 10, 2017)

(in fact, if it's only 60% of the costs as David Allen Green suggested, she's still out of pocket by the best part of 50 grand)


----------



## gosub (Mar 10, 2017)

DaveCinzano said:


> Food writer wins Katie Hopkins libel battle - BBC News



 She'll have to do more media 'work' to pay for it.


----------



## weltweit (Mar 10, 2017)

Fucking hell, just how expensive must barrister hours be?


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 10, 2017)

Cheesypoof said:


> well, it is. You write something and many many folks will kick off. Someone gets their facts wrong, you should have the confidence to make your defence and move on.


yeh but as the song goes, there's always something there to remind me. what you write in haste now may come back and haunt you later on, be it weeks, months, or with increasing frequency, years later.


----------



## Dan U (Mar 10, 2017)

Over 100k of costs to be paid on account, i.e immediately. More later I think


----------



## DaveCinzano (Mar 10, 2017)

gosub said:


> She'll have to do more media 'work' to pay for it.


Right then - I'm sticking in a claim for mental anguish


----------



## DaveCinzano (Mar 10, 2017)

weltweit said:


> Fucking hell, just how expensive must barrister hours be?


One firm quotes between £150 and £500 per hour.

Harcourt Barristers Direct - How much will it cost


----------



## weltweit (Mar 10, 2017)

DaveCinzano said:


> One firm quotes between £150 and £500 per hour.
> 
> Harcourt Barristers Direct - How much will it cost


aha. Thing is I can't imagine a barrister having to do many hours of work before deciding Hopkins was libellous, even at £500 an hour that is a lot of hours!


----------



## killer b (Mar 10, 2017)

The barrister doesn't decide she's libellous, they argue she's libellous (or not) in court.


----------



## DaveCinzano (Mar 10, 2017)

weltweit said:


> aha. Thing is I can't imagine a barrister having to do many hours of work before deciding Hopkins was libellous, even at £500 an hour that is a lot of hours!



There would also have been solicitors' work to account for - consultations, meetings, letters, fees etc - before it even got into court.


----------



## killer b (Mar 10, 2017)

according to the judgement,



> The trial has been short



too...


----------



## weltweit (Mar 10, 2017)

killer b said:


> The barrister doesn't decide she's libellous, they argue she's libellous (or not) in court.


picky today kb! they will likely determine if the case is winnable, (i.e. if Hopkins was libellous) before advising their client to go ahead with the case.


----------



## ska invita (Mar 10, 2017)

killer b said:


> (in fact, if it's only 60% of the costs as David Allen Green suggested, she's still out of pocket by the best part of 50 grand)


it cost jack monroe 185K to bring this case??
winning back £105k in costs plus the £25k damages??


----------



## killer b (Mar 10, 2017)

ska invita said:


> it cost jack monroe 185K to bring this case??
> winning back £105k in costs plus the £25k damages??


I'm not sure - tbh I'm speculating the amounts based entirely on the limited info that's been reported so far - should probably shut up.


----------



## DaveCinzano (Mar 10, 2017)

killer b said:


> I'm not sure - tbh I'm speculating the amounts based entirely on the limited info that's been reported so far - should probably shut up.


BUT THIS IS THE INTERNET - SHUTTING UP IS NOT AN OPTION


----------



## agricola (Mar 10, 2017)

ska invita said:


> it cost jack monroe 185K to bring this case??
> winning back £105k in costs plus the £25k damages??



The award seems to break down to:

£105k fees
£25k damages
One "_Make the Mail Great Again_" baseball cap
An apology of 140 characters or less
a single tear


----------



## ska invita (Mar 10, 2017)

agricola said:


> The award seems to break down to:
> 
> £105k fees
> £25k damages
> ...


right...but what were her costs in the first place...and does this leave JM out of pocket?
I want to know mainly to boggle at how much this kind of process costs / how the lawyers always win etc


----------



## DaveCinzano (Mar 10, 2017)

Hopkins' biggest mistake would seem to be cussing Monroe via Twitter rather than on the _Mail _website.


----------



## weltweit (Mar 10, 2017)

DaveCinzano said:


> Hopkins' biggest mistake would seem to be cussing Monroe via Twitter rather than on the _Mail _website.


Do you not think the mail will cover Hopkin's costs?


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 10, 2017)

weltweit said:


> Do you not think the mail will cover Hopkin's costs?


no


----------



## weltweit (Mar 10, 2017)

Pickman's model said:


> no


Oh well. from looking like a lose lose it now looks like a win!


----------



## DaveCinzano (Mar 10, 2017)

weltweit said:


> Do you not think the mail will cover Hopkin's costs?


They're not under any legal obligation to


----------



## Wilf (Mar 10, 2017)

DaveCinzano said:


> They're not under any legal obligation to


 Mutiny on the Byline.


----------



## 8den (Mar 10, 2017)

killer b said:


> (in fact, if it's only 60% of the costs as David Allen Green suggested, she's still out of pocket by the best part of 50 grand)






Are you sure, by the sounds of it, additional costs will have to be paid by Hopkins, I don't think Munroe is out of pocket.


----------



## jakethesnake (Mar 10, 2017)

DaveCinzano said:


> They're not under any legal obligation to


I like how the bare-foot man in the picture is making the wanker sign.


----------



## killer b (Mar 10, 2017)

.


killer b said:


> I'm not sure - tbh I'm speculating the amounts based entirely on the limited info that's been reported so far - should probably shut up.


----------



## killer b (Mar 10, 2017)

(although he did also say that full costs hadn't been awarded, and it's usually 60%, I think)


----------



## killer b (Mar 10, 2017)

although...


----------



## DaveCinzano (Mar 10, 2017)

Wilf said:


> Mutiny on the Byline.


"I 'ate you, Butthurt!"


----------



## killer b (Mar 10, 2017)

Plus there's her own costs. Looking at the same again I suppose? She's the best part of half a million down.


----------



## butchersapron (Mar 10, 2017)

haf now terminated assoc with wookey and walworth LLP.


----------



## rutabowa (Mar 10, 2017)

Lessons will be learnt I bet.


----------



## stockwelljonny (Mar 10, 2017)

I wonder if Hopkins thinks of libel damages as incidental expenses in her line of spite spiel 
stuff, a bit like a travel card for normal people..


----------



## butchersapron (Mar 10, 2017)

What's laurie's cut?


----------



## Dan U (Mar 10, 2017)

Dan U said:


> Over 100k of costs to be paid on account, i.e immediately. More later I think



Well that sure escalated.

Take a look at @Law_and_policy's Tweet: 

He goes on to tweet that this is in addition to Hopkins own costs. 

Fucking lawyers sure know how to charge.


----------



## Wilf (Mar 10, 2017)

DaveCinzano said:


> "I 'ate you, Butthurt!"


 Interestingly, the writers of On the Buses named their main character after reading some of Judith Butler's early works. Reg Varney himself was a Maoist.


----------



## DaveCinzano (Mar 10, 2017)

Coming to a basic Freeview package channel near you soon:

_I'm A Bankrupt Get Me Out Of Here!_


----------



## Dan U (Mar 10, 2017)

butchersapron said:


> What's laurie's cut?



Honourable mention in the judgement and a chapter in a forthcoming book no doubt.


----------



## Monkeygrinder's Organ (Mar 10, 2017)

stockwelljonny said:


> I wonder if Hopkins thinks of libel damages as incidental expenses in her line of spite spiel
> stuff, a bit like a travel card for normal people..



I doubt it tbh. I'm sure she gets paid well by the Mail but my guess is that's it's nowhere near enough to make the sort of money being talked about here incidental. She's not that valuable to them IMO - other hateful gobshites are easily available.


----------



## beesonthewhatnow (Mar 10, 2017)

Expect a "how can I afford my kids education now" piece soon


----------



## ska invita (Mar 10, 2017)

lol


----------



## killer b (Mar 10, 2017)

500 grand is a lifechanging amount of money for Hopkins. She isn't a multimillionaire I don't think.


----------



## 8den (Mar 10, 2017)

I think the splendid part of this is, Munroe offered to settle this ages okay if Hopkins donated 5k to charity, now it's going to cost her 300k.


----------



## killer b (Mar 10, 2017)

8den said:


> now it's going to cost her 300k.


plus her own costs.


----------



## rutabowa (Mar 10, 2017)

Dan U said:


> Well that sure escalated.
> 
> Take a look at @Law_and_policy's Tweet:
> 
> ...



Doesn't surprise me, I read Bleak House and not much has changed since then I guess.


----------



## Wilf (Mar 10, 2017)

Monkeygrinder's Organ said:


> I doubt it tbh. I'm sure she gets paid well by the Mail but my guess is that's it's nowhere near enough to make the sort of money being talked about here incidental. She's not that valuable to them IMO - *other hateful gobshites are easily available*.


Rod Liddle's about to tweet something hateful about Loose Women in the next 5 minutes. It's what passes for a job application nowadays.


----------



## beesonthewhatnow (Mar 10, 2017)

killer b said:


> 500 grand is a lifechanging amount of money for Hopkins. She isn't a multimillionaire I don't think.


It's hard to work out really - all the TV she's done will pay well, but I imagine the costs of maintaining the lifestyle she puts across won't be cheap.


----------



## rutabowa (Mar 10, 2017)

8den said:


> I think the splendid part of this is, Munroe offered to settle this ages okay if Hopkins donated 5k to charity, now it's going to cost her 300k.


well about double that, if she hired as expensive lawyers herself.


----------



## Wilf (Mar 10, 2017)

beesonthewhatnow said:


> It's hard to work out really - all the TV she's done will pay well, but I imagine the costs of maintaining the lifestyle she puts across won't be cheap.


Some useful advice from her employer (from the period when Labour were in office, naturally):
Cash-strapped Britons are selling kidneys to pay mortgages and clear debts | Daily Mail Online


----------



## Vintage Paw (Mar 10, 2017)

Hopkins is hawking the shit out of her new book today.


----------



## not-bono-ever (Mar 10, 2017)

*schadenfreude*

ˈʃɑːd(ə)nˌfrɔɪdə,German ˈʃɑːdənˌfrɔydə/
_noun_
noun: *Schadenfreude*; noun: *schadenfreude*

pleasure derived by someone from another person's misfortune.
"a business that thrives on Schadenfreude"


----------



## Jeff Robinson (Mar 10, 2017)

Good. I'm not a fan of this country's libel laws, but the more suffering and humiliation felt by Hopkins and other such trash and vermin the better.


----------



## 8den (Mar 10, 2017)

Vintage Paw said:


> Hopkins is hawking the shit out of her new book today.



An author gets (roughly) 10% of a books cover price.

If her book is retailing at 8.99, thats a fuck tonne of rainforest thats needs to felled before it covers her costs.

556173 copies?


----------



## DaveCinzano (Mar 10, 2017)

Wilf said:


> Some useful advice from her employer (from the period when Labour were in office, naturally):
> Cash-strapped Britons are selling kidneys to pay mortgages and clear debts | Daily Mail Online


----------



## Wilf (Mar 10, 2017)

Suppose she could crowdfund it. The Hate Filled Shitbasket Community are always there when you need them.


----------



## DaveCinzano (Mar 10, 2017)

Wilf said:


> Suppose she could crowdfund it. The Hate Filled Shitbasket Community are always there when you need them.


KickBeggars.com


----------



## Kaka Tim (Mar 10, 2017)

over half a million is a big bite for hopkins to cough up. i  don't imagine she has that sort of amount lieing around. She may have a hefty mortgage to pay off as well. She will be feeling a lot of pain today and we should all take a moment to reflect on her suffering .....


----------



## Casual Observer (Mar 10, 2017)

Don't think I've laughed so much since Jeffrey Archer was banged up.


----------



## 8den (Mar 10, 2017)

Casual Observer said:


> Don't think I've laughed so much since Jeffrey Archer was banged up.


 Neil Hamilton?


----------



## Wilf (Mar 10, 2017)

8den said:


> Neil Hamilton?


The moment where she wondered about going with the offer of a 5k hit was no doubt like The Great Huhne thinking 'hmmm, perhaps _she_ could take the points, _that_ might work'.

Great Moments in History - an occasional series.


----------



## DaveCinzano (Mar 10, 2017)

butchersapron said:


> What's laurie's cut?


Pixie with a hint of Pageboy


----------



## killer b (Mar 10, 2017)




----------



## butchersapron (Mar 10, 2017)

Jack wins again.


----------



## BigMoaner (Mar 10, 2017)

Dan U said:


> Well that sure escalated.
> 
> Take a look at @Law_and_policy's Tweet:
> 
> ...



she'll probably have to pay a tenner a month for the next 12394 years, or something, or some such shit.


----------



## phillm (Mar 10, 2017)

The Apprentice sure has a lot to answer for.


----------



## Bakunin (Mar 10, 2017)




----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Mar 10, 2017)




----------



## 19sixtysix (Mar 10, 2017)

phillm said:


> The Apprentice sure has a lot to answer for.



Trump & Hopkins. The creator of the programme really should be up placed up against the wall.


----------



## 8den (Mar 10, 2017)

Mark Bennett, he's also holding the rushes of from the Apprentice in a vault somewhere, rumour has it there was enough shit in the raw footage to sink trump forever. 

Fucker should be in the Hague for crimes against humanity


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 10, 2017)

19sixtysix said:


> Trump & Hopkins. The creator of the programme really should be up placed up against the wall.


----------



## 8den (Mar 10, 2017)

I dont think schadenfreuden is a strong enough work to capture my emotional state right now


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 10, 2017)

8den said:


> I dont think schadenfreuden is a strong enough work to capture my emotional state right now


----------



## mrs quoad (Mar 10, 2017)




----------



## hash tag (Mar 10, 2017)

And a £,107,000 costs, approx.


----------



## billbond (Mar 10, 2017)

I see someone is  setting up a page to pay for her costs via donations
And the women who won the case is getting even more pelters
someone has even put her address up on social media asking for her to be "coxed"
she does  have a lot of "fans" ol hoppo
Think  i will stick to urban


----------



## billbond (Mar 10, 2017)

BigMoaner said:


> she'll probably have to pay a tenner a month for the next 12394 years, or something, or some such shit.


so can we all do this ?
if on twitter and someone says something we dont like 
what if the person has no money to pay you out in ref to the verdict
seems a bit off if its only so called names that can do this
I find some of lilly druggie allens stuff repulsive and offensive 
where is this all going to end 
Could be a good way of getting your hands on some cash


----------



## Kaka Tim (Mar 10, 2017)

billbond said:


> so can we all do this ?
> if on twitter and someone says something we dont like
> what if the person has no money to pay you out in ref to the verdict
> seems a bit off if its only so called names that can do this
> ...



Has Lilly Allen made specific allegations about you then? If not - I suggest you look up definition of terms like "libel" and "slander" and how they differ from "when somebody says something I find offensive".


----------



## likesfish (Mar 10, 2017)

billbond said:


> I see someone is  setting up a page to pay for her costs via donations
> And the women who won the case is getting even more pelters
> someone has even put her address up on social media asking for her to be "coxed"
> she does  have a lot of "fans" ol hoppo
> Think  i will stick to urban




Might send her the contents of her copper jar


----------



## hash tag (Mar 10, 2017)

Don't bother, It would probably cost you more than its worth.


----------



## A380 (Mar 10, 2017)

I am an atheist. But sometimes I feel there may be a god.


----------



## billbond (Mar 10, 2017)

likesfish said:


> Might send her the contents of her copper jar



ha ha nothing under the setee


----------



## billbond (Mar 10, 2017)

hash tag said:


> Don't bother, It would probably cost you more than its worth.



oh well back to poverty
Make you right, 
I think some people will be much more careful now on twatter
Surely this will go on, higher court, possibly challenge it
Everything else is dragged out now


----------



## phillm (Mar 10, 2017)

.


----------



## Dogsauce (Mar 10, 2017)

I hope Monroe donates a reasonable chunk of the award to a refugee charity or something like that, ideally in a very ostentatious way with as much gloating as possible - maybe one of those massive cardboard cheques they use on stuff like Children in Need - "Pay: _Refugee Action_"; "The sum of: _Fifteen thousand pounds of Katie Hopkins Money_".


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 10, 2017)

billbond said:


> oh well back to poverty
> Make you right,
> I think some people will be much more careful now on twatter
> Surely this will go on, higher court, possibly challenge it
> Everything else is dragged out now


You need to work on your scanning and metre


----------



## rutabowa (Mar 10, 2017)

billbond said:


> seems a bit off if its only so called names that can do this


Agreed (well it's not "names" but money that makes you eligible to join in the game)


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 10, 2017)

billbond said:


> oh well back to poverty
> Make you right,
> I think some people will be much more careful now on twatter
> Surely this will go on, higher court, possibly challenge it
> Everything else is dragged out now


if i may revise, how about

oh katie hopkins you're broke and bitter
and everyone i know will titter 
people will be careful on twitter
in court more people will witter
everything else now is dragged out

what say you Badgers?


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Mar 10, 2017)

''Tis odd, the Guardian has a report of the outcome of the trial, but that Mail Online hasn't yet picked up on it?


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 10, 2017)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> ''Tis odd, the Guardian has a report of the outcome of the trial, but that Mail Online hasn't yet picked up on it?


lots of top stories in the mail


----------



## Treacle Toes (Mar 10, 2017)

She really is a scumbag.... Part of her pretense at not being bothered at all today has been to post stuff like this..


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 10, 2017)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> ''Tis odd, the Guardian has a report of the outcome of the trial, but that Mail Online hasn't yet picked up on it?



KATIE HOPKINS: Scared being killed by a right wing nutter  | Daily Mail Online


----------



## J Ed (Mar 10, 2017)

Rutita1 said:


> She really is a scumbag.... Part of her pretense at not being bothered by the decision today has been to post stuff like this..




I love the idea that somehow terrorism isn't reported on


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Mar 10, 2017)

Pickman's model said:


> lots of top stories in the mail
> View attachment 101994



Well, if a magpie is nicking keys I guess there's no room for 'nasty, orrible cunt gets stung for liable'


----------



## J Ed (Mar 10, 2017)

Pickman's model said:


> lots of top stories in the mail
> View attachment 101994



The magpie story is good


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 10, 2017)

Rutita1 pls take a screengrab


----------



## Treacle Toes (Mar 10, 2017)




----------



## phillm (Mar 10, 2017)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> Well, if a magpie is nicking keys I guess there's no room for 'nasty, orrible cunt gets stung for liable'



For some reason the flaunty Binky Felstead (who she ed?) has captured my attention ....


----------



## DaveCinzano (Mar 10, 2017)

Pickman's model said:


> View attachment 101995
> KATIE HOPKINS: Scared being killed by a right wing nutter  | Daily Mail Online


It's enough to make one idly wonder whether the _Mail'_s target demographic is, perchance, simply not the sort of person who might find themself in the crosshairs of a white, right wing nutter; and further, to extrapolate from that exactly what the role of said organ of fair and balanced reporting might be in relationship to said frothing-mouthed, pale-skinned terroristic types


----------



## Manter (Mar 10, 2017)

Pickman's model said:


> View attachment 101995
> KATIE HOPKINS: Scared being killed by a right wing nutter  | Daily Mail Online


<<puts hand up>>


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 10, 2017)

Final version

oh katie hopkins you're broke and bitter
and everyone i know will titter
people will be careful on twitter
in court more people will witter
your columns all go down the shitter

what say you Badgers?


----------



## Monkeygrinder's Organ (Mar 10, 2017)

Rutita1 said:


> She really is a scumbag.... Part of her pretense at not being bothered at all today has been to post stuff like this..




She has to double down because if the Mail ditch her she's no use to anyone.


----------



## DaveCinzano (Mar 10, 2017)

Monkeygrinder's Organ said:


> She has to double down because if the Mail ditch her she's no use to anyone.


"Breitbart UK...Breitbart UK... Breitbart UK..."


----------



## phillm (Mar 10, 2017)

DaveCinzano said:


> "Breitbart UK...Breitbart UK... Breitbart UK..."



Yea Milo's hasty departure has left a Brit shaped hole to be bile-filled.


----------



## teqniq (Mar 10, 2017)

Kaka Tim said:


> over half a million is a big bite for hopkins to cough up. i  don't imagine she has that sort of amount lieing around.


Lying around. /pedant (and you may well be dyslexic for all I know). However under the circumstances it's a happy error.


----------



## ska invita (Mar 10, 2017)

Rutita1 said:


> View attachment 101998









Did we find out for certain her real total expenses payout yet? 500k feels too good to be true


----------



## cyril_smear (Mar 10, 2017)

hang the bastard


----------



## ViolentPanda (Mar 10, 2017)

Dan U said:


> Hopkins lost. 24k damages.



Laugh? I fucking well did!


----------



## ViolentPanda (Mar 11, 2017)

Pickman's model said:


> Final version
> 
> oh katie hopkins you're broke and bitter
> and everyone i know will titter
> ...



I reckon the last line should read "so stick that sausage up your shitter", in homage to her broken promise to run naked down Regents St with a sausage up her bum.


----------



## Smoking kills (Mar 11, 2017)

ViolentPanda said:


> I reckon the last line should read "so stick that sausage up your shitter", in homage to her broken promise to run naked down Regents St with a sausage up her bum.


Line 2: Jack Munroe is richer and fitter?


----------



## albionism (Mar 11, 2017)

I hope the court costs bankrupt the fucker.


----------



## Raheem (Mar 11, 2017)

albionism said:


> I hope the court costs bankrupt the fucker.



If that happens Jack Monroe, regardless of anything else, should go directly to the House of Lords.

I know it's not really on to comment on people's appearance, but Hopkins is apparently 42. Nothing wrong with being 42 and looking 70. It's just a bit unusual.


----------



## kabbes (Mar 11, 2017)

Raheem said:


> I know it's not really on to comment on people's appearance...


Then don't, for fuck sake.

It doesn't suddenly become "on" just because you don't like the person.  It doesn't stop being corrosive to general psychological well-being.  It doesn't stop being a method of control over _all _women.  It doesn't stop being the action of an utter twat.


----------



## billbond (Mar 11, 2017)

Pickman's model said:


> if i may revise, how about
> 
> oh katie hopkins you're broke and bitter
> and everyone i know will titter
> ...



ha ha very good that
You have a talent, possibly needs a wider audience 
Anyone  on twitter ?
Maybe pass on to a certain person(oh no would be too long for twitter  now i think about it)
Hard to find words to rhyme with hopkins tbf


----------



## billbond (Mar 11, 2017)

Raheem said:


> If that happens Jack Monroe, regardless of anything else, should go directly to the House of Lords.
> 
> I know it's not really on to comment on people's appearance, but Hopkins is apparently 42. Nothing wrong with being 42 and looking 70. It's just a bit unusual.



Not being nasty, honest, 42 i thought she was older(are you allowed to say this i hope so)
Her Appearance on The Apprentice my next door neighbor	at the time  was on the same show when i lived at Grove park, mind as anyone who knows grove park  will know it was more of a existence than living ha
he was not much of a talker but i recall he said the tasks were "silly" and sugar  was a bit of a c...
Little side note I remember his wife (now Ex) telling me for taking part in it the programme makers paid there mortgage up for 1 year


----------



## existentialist (Mar 11, 2017)

billbond said:


> ha ha very good that
> You have a talent, possibly needs a wider audience
> Anyone  on twitter ?
> Maybe pass on to a certain person(oh no would be too long for twitter  now i think about it)
> Hard to find words to rhyme with hopkins tbf


"Cock rings" should do it. Have fun working that into the narrative...


----------



## Spymaster (Mar 11, 2017)

kabbes said:


> Then don't, for fuck sake.
> 
> It doesn't suddenly become "on" just because you don't like the person.  It doesn't stop being corrosive to general psychological well-being.  It doesn't stop being a method of control over _all _women.  It doesn't stop being the action of an utter twat.


There's nothing particularly corrosive in commenting that someone looks aged beyond their years. And Hopkins does. Strikingly so.


----------



## existentialist (Mar 11, 2017)

Spymaster said:


> There's nothing particularly corrosive in commenting that someone looks aged beyond their years. And Hopkins does. Strikingly so.


Hate seems to age people, men and women alike.


----------



## billbond (Mar 11, 2017)

Spymaster said:


> There's nothing particularly corrosive in commenting that someone looks aged beyond their years. And Hopkins does. Strikingly so.



Joan Collins could be her nan


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 11, 2017)

existentialist said:


> Hate seems to age people, men and women alike.


So does time, which the rolling stones observed could destroy a woman's face


----------



## Libertad (Mar 11, 2017)

Pickman's model said:


> So does time, which the rolling stones observed could destroy a woman's face



Unfortunately she's not doing any.


----------



## Lazy Llama (Mar 11, 2017)

Words fail me.


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 11, 2017)

existentialist said:


> "Cock rings" should do it. Have fun working that into the narrative...


Katie Hopkins doesn't like the gang
Who used her name for rhyming slang
Now when men enter katie hopkins
It's not her, they've popped on a cock ring

What think you Badgers


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 11, 2017)

Lazy Llama said:


> View attachment 102031
> 
> Words fail me.


The knives round the heart give me an idea


----------



## Sasaferrato (Mar 11, 2017)

Dan U said:


> Hopkins lost. 24k damages.


I recall a case decades back where the damages were a farthing. This is the modern equivalent.

Costs? That is a different matter.


----------



## ATOMIC SUPLEX (Mar 11, 2017)

Raheem said:


> If that happens Jack Monroe, regardless of anything else, should go directly to the House of Lords.
> 
> I know it's not really on to comment on people's appearance, but Hopkins is apparently 42. Nothing wrong with being 42 and looking 70. It's just a bit unusual.


I'm constantly amazed that this woman is younger than me. Looks aside, she has the attitude of a horrible right wing snob. I find it difficult to imagine some who grew up in the same age as me could be so revolting.

. . . But if we are taking looks, She obviously forgot to leave that portrait in the attic that's for sure.


----------



## Southlondon (Mar 11, 2017)

Pickman's model said:


> So does time, which the rolling stones observed could destroy a woman's face


 while Keith Richards shows that aging is not inevitable


----------



## Southlondon (Mar 11, 2017)

Sasaferrato said:


> I recall a case decades back where the damages were a farthing. This is the modern equivalent.
> 
> Costs? That is a different matter.


But of course Rothermere will probably stump up for her. No publicity is bad publicity etc


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 11, 2017)

Southlondon said:


> View attachment 102033


Keith Richards has at least said some sensible things over the years


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 11, 2017)

Southlondon said:


> But of course Rothermere will probably stump up for her. No publicity is bad publicity etc


Being done for libel for claiming someone graffiti'd war memorials is pretty close to bad publicity


----------



## billbond (Mar 11, 2017)

Southlondon said:


> View attachment 102033


----------



## Southlondon (Mar 11, 2017)

Pickman's model said:


> Keith Richards has at least said some sensible things over the years


Like the lyrics to Brown sugar -originally titled black pussy 
"(Gold coast slave ship bound for cotton fields / Sold in the market down in New Orleans / Scarred old slaver knows he's doing alright / Hear him whip the women" etc etc
I wouldn't hold these millionaire mysoginists up as an example of feminism con the music business tbh


----------



## Southlondon (Mar 11, 2017)

Southlondon said:


> Like the lyrics to Brown sugar -originally titled black pussy
> "(Gold coast slave ship bound for cotton fields / Sold in the market down in New Orleans / Scarred old slaver knows he's doing alright / Hear him whip the women" etc etc
> I wouldn't hold these millionaire mysoginists up as an example of feminism con the music business tbh


Or the unforgettable "under my thumb" a great way to talk about women.


----------



## ska invita (Mar 11, 2017)

Southlondon said:


> Like the lyrics to Brown sugar -originally titled black pussy
> "(Gold coast slave ship bound for cotton fields / Sold in the market down in New Orleans / Scarred old slaver knows he's doing alright / Hear him whip the women" etc etc
> I wouldn't hold these millionaire mysoginists up as an example of feminism con the music business tbh


"Though credited, like most of their compositions, to the singer/guitarist pair of Mick Jagger and Keith Richards, *the song was primarily the work of Jagger, who wrote it sometime during the filming of Ned Kelly in 1969.*[6] Originally recorded over a three-day period at Muscle Shoals Sound Studio in Muscle Shoals, Alabama from 2–4 December 1969, the song was not released until over a year later due to legal wranglings with the band's former label, though at the request of guitarist Mick Taylor, they debuted the number live during the infamous concert at Altamont on 6 December. The song was written by Jagger with Marsha Hunt in mind; Hunt was Jagger's secret girlfriend and mother of his first child Karis. It is also claimed it was written with Claudia Lennear in mind. Lennear made this claim on BBC's Radio 4 (25 February 2014, _Today_), saying that it was written with her in mind because at the time when it was written, Mick Jagger used to hang around with her."


Southlondon said:


> Or the unforgettable "under my thumb" a great way to talk about women.


Also lyrics by Jagger...Im sure Keith has said his fair share of shite, but he gets a bly on these two songs


----------



## ATOMIC SUPLEX (Mar 11, 2017)

ska invita said:


> Did we find out for certain her real total expenses payout yet? 500k feels too good to be true


Katie Hopkins’ legal bills to top £300,000 after losing High Court battle to Jack Monroe

Not sure if this includes her own costs but I expect it does. I'd like it to be higher, I'd like to imagine Hopkins hired a very very very expensive lawyer.


----------



## billbond (Mar 11, 2017)

Having a go about peoples looks is it a bit small time  and brings you down to a low level
This is where i agree with many women there are loads of ugly old blokes on tv, ha now im doing it
I mean Bruce forsyth for example
Joan collins has hammered michael buerk in a newspaper today for being ageist and a misogynist
Bit harsh on the hoppo for looks , how about Janet street Porter a vile women and a few others on that shit programme Loose women


----------



## ska invita (Mar 11, 2017)

ATOMIC SUPLEX said:


> Katie Hopkins’ legal bills to top £300,000 after losing High Court battle to Jack Monroe
> 
> Not sure if this includes her own costs but I expect it does. I'd like it to be higher, I'd like to imagine Hopkins hired a very very very expensive lawyer.



"But Monroe’s lawyers confirmed to _The Independent_ that Hopkins will also pick up the bill for legal costs in excess of £300,000."
so no, it doesnt sound as if it includes her own costs


----------



## billbond (Mar 11, 2017)

ATOMIC SUPLEX said:


> Katie Hopkins’ legal bills to top £300,000 after losing High Court battle to Jack Monroe
> 
> Not sure if this includes her own costs but I expect it does. I'd like it to be higher, I'd like to imagine Hopkins hired a very very very expensive lawyer.



ha ha talking about this last nite to a bloke, a real sarf london type his comment was "Thats nothing her old man will pay that off his a millionaire"
I  would be looking at a weekly pay off package if it was me tbh !


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 11, 2017)

Southlondon said:


> Like the lyrics to Brown sugar -originally titled black pussy
> "(Gold coast slave ship bound for cotton fields / Sold in the market down in New Orleans / Scarred old slaver knows he's doing alright / Hear him whip the women" etc etc
> I wouldn't hold these millionaire mysoginists up as an example of feminism con the music business tbh


Nice use of the auld straw man


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 11, 2017)

billbond said:


> Having a go about peoples looks is it a bit small time  and brings you down to a low level
> This is where i agree with many women there are loads of ugly old blokes on tv, ha now im doing it
> I mean Bruce forsyth for example
> Joan collins has hammered michael buerk in a newspaper today for being ageist and a misogynist
> Bit harsh on the hoppo for looks , how about Janet street Porter a vile women and a few others on that shit programme Loose women


Bruce Forsyth famously no longer on TV.


----------



## Southlondon (Mar 11, 2017)

Pickman's model said:


> Nice use of the auld straw man


Just saying Keith Richards said some pretty revolting things as well as some sensible things. His comment when asked if he would like a knighthood following Jagger's, was good " I wouldn't let that dysfunctional family near me with a sharpened stick, never mind a sword, showed great foresight what with the near blinding of Ed Sheren. He should have listened to Keith


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 11, 2017)

Southlondon said:


> Just saying Keith Richards said some pretty revolting things as well as some sensible things. His comment when asked if he would like a knighthood following Jagger's, was good " I wouldn't let that dysfunctional family near me with a sharpened stick, never mind a sword, showed great foresight what with the near blinding of Ed Sheren. He should have listened to Keith


No, that isn't just what you said.


----------



## Southlondon (Mar 11, 2017)

Pickman's model said:


> No, that isn't just what you said.


You said Keith Richards at least said some sensible things, I said he also sang/said some pretty detestable things and had a generally mysogenistic  attitude, at least as a young man. This is way off subject now, point is, plenty of ways to criticise evil Hopkins without resorting to comments on her physical appearance, which I'm sure you agree with, and plenty of lyrics to quote that aren't from bands that had such a shit attitude to women


----------



## weltweit (Mar 11, 2017)

Southlondon said:


> .. never mind a sword, showed great foresight what with the near blinding of Ed Sheren. He should have listened to Keith


The Ed Sheeran sword story was made up, it didn't happen.


----------



## Southlondon (Mar 11, 2017)

weltweit said:


> The Ed Sheeran sword story was made up, it didn't happen.


Really? Or is the palace PR machine in action. That rotten bunch of inbreds are capable of far worse and then covering up. But, back to Katie Hopkins, isn't it likely the mail will pick up the tab?


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 11, 2017)

Southlondon said:


> I wouldn't hold these millionaire mysoginists up as an example of feminism con the music business tbh


This is your strawman. Do you remember saying it now? No one is arguing that so why the fuck did you say it and why the fuck have you denied saying it?


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 11, 2017)

Southlondon said:


> Really? Or is the palace PR machine in action. That rotten bunch of inbreds are capable of far worse and then covering up. But, back to Katie Hopkins, isn't it likely the mail will pick up the tab?


No

As I said earlier in the thread


----------



## Southlondon (Mar 11, 2017)

Pickman's model said:


> This is your strawman. Do you remember saying it now? No one is arguing that so why the fuck did you say it and why the fuck have you denied saying it?


Mate, I don't even know what a straw man is but talk about pedantic. I was saying that I don't see the stones as a particularly pleasant bunch of people - as with most rich businessmen, so I personally wouldn't refer to lyrics from their songs myself to support anything I was arguing. You differ- good. This is well off subject. Have a nice day and let's move on. -just looked up straw man in this context, but still a little confused -but please don't bother trying to clarify its a weeny little point


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 11, 2017)

Southlondon said:


> You said Keith Richards at least said some sensible things, I said he also sang/said some pretty detestable things and had a generally mysogenistic  attitude, at least as a young man. This is way off subject now, point is, plenty of ways to criticise evil Hopkins without resorting to comments on her physical appearance, which I'm sure you agree with, and plenty of lyrics to quote that aren't from bands that had such a shit attitude to women


Oh and I don't know why you're fixated on lyrics as though he only existed on stage


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 11, 2017)

Southlondon said:


> Mate, I don't even know what a straw man is but talk about pedantic. I was saying that I don't see the stones as a particularly pleasant bunch of people - as with most rich businessmen, so I personally wouldn't refer to lyrics from their songs myself to support anything I was arguing. You differ- good. This is well off subject. Have a nice day and let's move on. -just looked up straw man in this context, but still a little confused -but please don't bother trying to clarify its a weeny little point


I didn't refer to lyrics from their songs to support anything. I never said they were pleasant. You can't stop yourself, can you?

E2A it isn't pedantic to say you're lying, which is in effect what a strawman is. Don't post things you can't or won't defend.


----------



## kabbes (Mar 11, 2017)

Spymaster said:


> There's nothing particularly corrosive in commenting that someone looks aged beyond their years. And Hopkins does. Strikingly so.


Of course there fucking is.  It's another little reminder to all of us -- women in particular -- that we are constantly being judged on our appearance.  And god help you if your genetics (or otherwise) leads you to looking older than you are, because people will laugh at you for it.  That's the definition of socially corrosive.


----------



## farmerbarleymow (Mar 11, 2017)

Sasaferrato said:


> I recall a case decades centuries back where the damages were a farthing groat. This is the modern equivalent.
> 
> Costs? That is a different matter.



I think that is what you mean.


----------



## spirals (Mar 11, 2017)

weltweit said:


> The Ed Sheeran sword story was made up, it didn't happen.



It did happen, he sung for one of the nurse, she's a massive fan and still hasn't shut up about it!


----------



## Spymaster (Mar 11, 2017)

kabbes said:


> Of course there fucking is.  It's another little reminder to all of us -- women in particular -- that we are constantly being judged on our appearance.  And god help you if your genetics (or otherwise) leads you to looking older than you are, because people will laugh at you for it.  That's the definition of socially corrosive.


What a load of old shit. No one's judging and no one's laughing. Get a fucking life.


----------



## killer b (Mar 11, 2017)

Eh? That's exactly what they're doing.


----------



## dylanredefined (Mar 11, 2017)

ATOMIC SUPLEX said:


> Katie Hopkins’ legal bills to top £300,000 after losing High Court battle to Jack Monroe
> 
> Not sure if this includes her own costs but I expect it does. I'd like it to be higher, I'd like to imagine Hopkins hired a very very very expensive lawyer.


			   As it was a mistake why not just say sorry?


----------



## Spymaster (Mar 11, 2017)

killer b said:


> Eh? That's exactly what they're doing.


Nonsense. The initial comment didn't, it simply observed that Hopkins looks older than she is. That's not judging her, it's a factually accurate observation of the type made daily by millions without comment. The only judgement made was subsequently by existentialist who suggested that hate aged people, but that didn't seem to bother anyone.


----------



## rutabowa (Mar 11, 2017)

Milo, he looks good for his age (said no one)


----------



## Yossarian (Mar 11, 2017)

Think I have a double standard here because I think it's generally not really on to criticize a woman's appearance if you don't like her politics, even when it's Katie Hopkins, though I have no problem saying that Steve Bannon, for example, looks like a rotten piece of fruit brought to life by an evil wizard.


----------



## rutabowa (Mar 11, 2017)

Yossarian said:


> Think I have a double standard here because I think it's generally not really on to criticize a woman's appearance if you don't like her politics, even when it's Katie Hopkins, though I have no problem saying that Steve Bannon, for example, looks like a rotten piece of fruit brought to life by an evil wizard.


i think if it's funny enough sometimes it get a pass. Just saying "she looks older than she is" tho is totally unimaginative, counterproductive and dumb.


----------



## Hocus Eye. (Mar 11, 2017)

The thing that amazes me about this case is that Katie Hopkins confused Jack Monroe and Laurie Penny!


----------



## existentialist (Mar 11, 2017)

Hocus Eye. said:


> The thing that amazes me about this case is that Katie Hopkins confused Jack Monroe and Laurie Penny!


Maybe all "lefties" look the same to right wing trolls?


----------



## Raheem (Mar 11, 2017)

Yossarian said:


> Think I have a double standard here because I think it's generally not really on to criticize a woman's appearance if you don't like her politics, even when it's Katie Hopkins, though I have no problem saying that Steve Bannon, for example, looks like a rotten piece of fruit brought to life by an evil wizard.



Hard to tell based on appearances alone whether the wizard is actually evil or could just do with a bit more practice, though. Unless Bannon is actually seriously ill, in which case, how dare you?


----------



## Raheem (Mar 11, 2017)

rutabowa said:


> i think if it's funny enough sometimes it get a pass. Just saying "she looks older than she is" tho is totally unimaginative, counterproductive and dumb.



It wasn't aimed at avoiding any of those things, it was just an observation, so lighten up a little.


----------



## rutabowa (Mar 11, 2017)

Raheem said:


> It wasn't aimed at avoiding any of those things, it was just an observation, so lighten up a little.


and i just made an observation on your observation, how you like that


----------



## Raheem (Mar 11, 2017)

rutabowa said:


> and i just made an observation on your observation, how you like that



I just don't get why you feel the need to be a twat. But don't let me stop you.


----------



## rutabowa (Mar 11, 2017)

You got called out on something. Take it or leave it.


----------



## Treacle Toes (Mar 11, 2017)

Now this is funny...or will be if it works 



> This OUTRAGEOUS decision is set to cost Katie £324,000 in legal fees and damages.
> 
> We believe that having to find such an enormous sum of money could jeopardise Katie's glittering career in journalism, and we are not prepared to sit here and watch her disappear from our screens and newspapers!
> 
> ...



Read Chief's story


----------



## TruXta (Mar 11, 2017)

So is this the second cunt that Cheesypoof has told us is just a silly rascal?


----------



## Treacle Toes (Mar 11, 2017)

TruXta said:


> So is this the second cunt that Cheesypoof has told us is just a silly rascal?



One of the many, yes.


----------



## Shechemite (Mar 11, 2017)

TruXta said:


> So is this the second cunt that Cheesypoof has told us is just a silly rascal?



Mean to tag her, she'll have a gruesome hangover atm


----------



## DaveCinzano (Mar 11, 2017)

Rutita1 said:


> Now this is funny...or will be if it works
> 
> 
> 
> Read Chief's story



A fake news website crowdfunding to pay for Hopkins' stupidity? Very C21!


----------



## Treacle Toes (Mar 11, 2017)

dylanredefined said:


> As it was a mistake why not just say sorry?



Because she's an arsehole.


----------



## existentialist (Mar 11, 2017)

Rutita1 said:


> Because she's an arsehole.
> 
> View attachment 102043


I wonder how her sense of humour is doing this morning?


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 11, 2017)

existentialist said:


> I wonder how her sense of humour is doing this morning?


Wizened and dessicated


----------



## dylanredefined (Mar 11, 2017)

Rutita1 said:


> Because she's an arsehole.
> 
> View attachment 102043


 People who think "Never say sorry it is a sign of weakness" are morons who really don't get how humanity works. it wasn't  just an offensive remark it was a plain mistake.
 £350,000 + is an expensive lesson.
 If you make a mistake you say sorry and try and put it right. Allways saves time and money in the long run.
Stupidity combined with arrogance and a huge ego will get you a long way. Chris Lowe. Seems to sum her up.


----------



## phillm (Mar 11, 2017)

Hocus Eye. said:


> The thing that amazes me about this case is that Katie Hopkins confused Jack Monroe and Laurie Penny!



Maybe that should be an 'alternate fact' , Kelly-Anne would be a slightly better photo-fit.


----------



## Treacle Toes (Mar 11, 2017)

Monroe v Hopkins 2017 EWHC 433 QB


----------



## Treacle Toes (Mar 11, 2017)

DaveCinzano said:


> A fake news website crowdfunding to pay for Hopkins' stupidity? Very C21!



Eh? 



> LEGAL BIT: We're actually going to give the money to The Trussell Trust - a FANTASTIC cause who help to provide foodbanks all over the UK. Because irony ... REMEMBER TO GIFT AID!!!!


----------



## Southlondon (Mar 11, 2017)

Pickman's model said:


> I didn't refer to lyrics from their songs to support anything. I never said they were pleasant. You can't stop yourself, can you?
> 
> I really don't know what you're talking about, and I didn't infer you were a liar. I think you're getting a little confused. And this must be a boring diversion for others on here, so I'm moving on. Take a chill pill
> 
> E2A it isn't pedantic to say you're lying, which is in effect what a strawman is. Don't post things you can't or won't defend.


----------



## brogdale (Mar 11, 2017)

Should have been imprisoned for her 'poetry' alone...



That was tweeted on the day, 3 years ago, when Bob Crow's death was announced.


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 11, 2017)

Southlondon I said you were lying. And sort out the quote.


----------



## Southlondon (Mar 11, 2017)

Pickman's model said:


> Southlondon I said you were lying. And sort out the quote.


Sort yourself out fella. The point was you referred to the words of a stones song, and in the context of referring to a woman's perceived beauty/age I thought it poor on the grounds of they being a mysogenistic group of multimillionaires who wrote some very poor taste lyrics. Just move on, as this must be boring for others


----------



## 8den (Mar 11, 2017)

Lazy Llama said:


> View attachment 102031
> 
> Words fail me.



We all forget the lesser known parts of the Sermon on the Mount, "Blessed are those who gun down desperate refugees drowning in the Med..."


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 11, 2017)

Southlondon said:


> Sort yourself out fella. The point was you referred to the words of a stones song, and in the context of referring to a woman's perceived beauty/age I thought it poor on the grounds of they being a mysogenistic group of multimillionaires who wrote some very poor taste lyrics. Just move on, as this must be boring for others


Yeh, and in the course of doing so you've included a strawman and a number of lies. Perhaps you could recognise this, apologise, and move on. Also, the only people I've met said fella are plod. Catch yourself on.


----------



## Southlondon (Mar 11, 2017)

Pickman's model said:


> So does time, which the rolling stones observed could destroy a woman's face


This is the piece I was talking about, , is when you quote the stones about time destroying a woman's face, I think that is retro sexist shite, illustrated by the photo of wizened old Keith Richards a man that time has also not been kind to. It's the point of - what relevance is Hopkins looks to anything? 
I don't really know what you're going on about, so end of this from me


----------



## Southlondon (Mar 11, 2017)

Pickman's model said:


> Yeh, and in the course of doing so you've included a strawman and a number of lies. Perhaps you could recognise this, apologise, and move on. Also, the only people I've met said fella are plod. Catch yourself on.


Plod??? What you on about ? things have moved on from Dixon of dock green. But from where I come from, we don't accuse eachother of being a "straw man"  whatever the fuck vocabulary that is either. Plod. - it makes me think of some old Ealing comedy. And no I'm not old bill


----------



## kabbes (Mar 11, 2017)

I don't understand the claims of £300k+.  According to the Guardian's story this morning, all lawyers were on no win, no fee.  So Hopkin's own costs will be zero and Munroe's will be whatever she has been awarded, no more (i.e. £104k).  Unless I've missed something out?


----------



## kabbes (Mar 11, 2017)

Spymaster said:


> Nonsense. The initial comment didn't, it simply observed that Hopkins looks older than she is. That's not judging her, it's a factually accurate observation of the type made daily by millions without comment. The only judgement made was subsequently by existentialist who suggested that hate aged people, but that didn't seem to bother anyone.


Oh yeah, context-free observation with no overtone of suggested humour, judgement or any other actual reason to make the comment.  Absolutely, mate.


----------



## Raheem (Mar 11, 2017)

kabbes said:


> I don't understand the claims of £300k+.  According to the Guardian's story this morning, all lawyers were on no win, no fee.  So Hopkin's own costs will be zero and Munroe's will be whatever she has been awarded, no more (i.e. £104k).  Unless I've missed something out?



She's been ordered to make a downpayment on the costs pending a decision on the full amount. The lawyers are asking for 300k, according to a tweet.


----------



## Sasaferrato (Mar 11, 2017)

farmerbarleymow said:


> I think that is what you mean.



Damn! I keep forgetting you are the same age as me. 

Things good with you?


----------



## Sasaferrato (Mar 11, 2017)

Raheem said:


> She's been ordered to make a downpayment on the costs pending a decision on the full amount. The lawyers are asking for 300k, according to a tweet.



Interim payment of £107k according to the Guardian. 

I wonder how much the Mail pays her?


----------



## DaveCinzano (Mar 11, 2017)

Sasaferrato said:


> Damn! I keep forgetting you are the same age as me.



Where did you meet him, Isandlwana?


----------



## Wilf (Mar 11, 2017)

kabbes said:


> Oh yeah, context-free observation with no overtone of suggested humour, judgement or any other actual reason to make the comment.  Absolutely, mate.


Agree with you entirely, there's no place for comments on her appearance regardless of how much of a monster she is - and regardless of willing _she is_ to be personal about all kinds of people (Ebola nurses, Bob Crow, take your pick).  I'm pretty certain I've made comments about Trump's hair, is that any different?  _Probably_, yes, I think so. It goes to his vanity and the way his extreme self regard has morphed into a project that will fuck the poor of America and beyond.  But then have I/we been thinking that every time we've taken the piss, probably not.  As always, its about context and blurred lines - however there's no _conceivable way_ Hopkin's appearance should have come into this discussion.


----------



## Hocus Eye. (Mar 11, 2017)

kabbes said:


> I don't understand the claims of £300k+.  According to the Guardian's story this morning, all lawyers were on no win, no fee.  So Hopkin's own costs will be zero and Munroe's will be whatever she has been awarded, no more (i.e. £104k).  Unless I've missed something out?


 Yes, but Hopkins' lawyer lost so that means that Monroe's _did _win and the fee becomes due.


----------



## A380 (Mar 11, 2017)

let's just sit back and remember the big picture.

Hopkins has been shown to be an idiot and it's probably going to cost her a third of a million pounds.

Ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha.

Ha ha.


----------



## Sasaferrato (Mar 11, 2017)

DaveCinzano said:


> Where did you meet him, Isandlwana?



Hell no, we were both to old for active service then.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Mar 11, 2017)

kabbes said:


> I don't understand the claims of £300k+.  According to the Guardian's story this morning, all lawyers were on no win, no fee.  So Hopkin's own costs will be zero and Munroe's will be whatever she has been awarded, no more (i.e. £104k).  Unless I've missed something out?



I read it as neither Hopkins nor Monroe would have to pay their own lawyer's fees if they lost as both sides were confident that costs would be awarded if they won, therefore Hopkins has to pay Monroe's lawyer's fees. Presuming Hopkins' lawyers weren't so confident in winning that they didn't offer to underwrite the costs of losing...

So £24k damages. And costs of £100k for now whilst they work out the full costs that are due.


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 11, 2017)

Southlondon said:


> This is the piece I was talking about, , is when you quote the stones about time destroying a woman's face, I think that is retro sexist shite, illustrated by the photo of wizened old Keith Richards a man that time has also not been kind to. It's the point of - what relevance is Hopkins looks to anything?
> I don't really know what you're going on about, so end of this from me


You jumped in here looking for a barney.

You've been shown up about the brown sugar lyrics you quoted so gleefully. You've been shown up putting words in other people's mouths. You haven't looked at the context of the post.

Perhaps you could simply apologise and we can all move on. Don't bother replying and we'll just take it as read that you regret your dishonesty.


----------



## farmerbarleymow (Mar 11, 2017)

DaveCinzano said:


> Where did you meet him, Isandlwana?



In a cave in Gondwana ~500mya.  Sass was collecting taxes (in the form of beads) from people even back then.


----------



## Sasaferrato (Mar 11, 2017)

farmerbarleymow said:


> In a cave in Gondwana ~500mya.  Sass was collecting taxes (in the form of beads) from people even back then.



Much simpler in those day, if they didn't pay, you just brained them with a rock. We're supposed to persuade them to pay up now.


----------



## ATOMIC SUPLEX (Mar 11, 2017)

dylanredefined said:


> As it was a mistake why not just say sorry?


I'm sure Monroe's lawyer was on the case. 
Man that's a shit excuse, how did she pay so much for such shit legal advice? 
Surely a decent lawyer would have said "probably should just give five grand to charity and say sorry"


----------



## farmerbarleymow (Mar 11, 2017)

Sasaferrato said:


> Much simpler in those day, if they didn't pay, you just brained them with a rock. We're supposed to persuade them to pay up now.



I see your attitude towards 'customer service' hasn't caught up with the times.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Mar 11, 2017)

Spymaster said:


> What a load of old shit. No one's judging and no one's laughing. Get a fucking life.



TBF, when Kris shared a pic of your facial wrinkles on facebook, we all laughed and judged you.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Mar 11, 2017)

rutabowa said:


> Milo, he looks good for his age (said no one)



Every time I see a picture of him, I can't help but think that his role model is Dorian Gray's portrait, as each new picture seems to show him as a bit more raddled, a bit more dissipated.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Mar 11, 2017)

TruXta said:


> So is this the second cunt that Cheesypoof has told us is just a silly rascal?



I think that Cheesy may need to have her cuntometer significantly recalibrated.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Mar 11, 2017)

DaveCinzano said:


> Where did you meet him, Isandlwana?



Marathon.


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 11, 2017)

ViolentPanda said:


> TBF, when Kris shared a pic of your facial wrinkles on facebook, we all laughed and judged you.


You should see pa with his mud pack on


----------



## kabbes (Mar 11, 2017)

ATOMIC SUPLEX said:


> I'm sure Monroe's lawyer was on the case.
> Man that's a shit excuse, how did she pay so much for such shit legal advice?
> Surely a decent lawyer would have said "probably should just give five grand to charity and say sorry"


How do you know that isn't exactly what the lawyer recommended?


----------



## weltweit (Mar 11, 2017)

Stop celebrating Katie Hopkins libel loss - it could set a dangerous precedent for social media


----------



## kabbes (Mar 11, 2017)

weltweit said:


> Stop celebrating Katie Hopkins libel loss - it could set a dangerous precedent for social media


What do you think of the claims being made in that article, weltweit?


----------



## weltweit (Mar 11, 2017)

kabbes said:


> What do you think of the claims being made in that article, weltweit?


The days of twitter being a free for all have passed.


----------



## Shechemite (Mar 11, 2017)

weltweit said:


> The days of twitter being a free for all have passed.



When was twitter a free for all?


----------



## Treacle Toes (Mar 11, 2017)

weltweit said:


> Stop celebrating Katie Hopkins libel loss - it could set a dangerous precedent for social media



Bullshit. Only lying, rentagob, shock-jocks need worry. What cost Hatie was her arrogance and belief that she is untouchable. She could have avoided this completely by simply correcting her mistake once she was asked.


----------



## Shechemite (Mar 11, 2017)

Rutita1 said:


> Bullshit. Only lying, rentagob, shock-jocks need worry. What cost Hatie was her arrogance and belief that she is untouchable. She could have avoided this completely by simply correcting her mistake once she was asked.



I'd like to believe that was true, but could one still be liable even if one apologises for and deletes the offending tweet(s)?


----------



## Treacle Toes (Mar 11, 2017)

MadeInBedlam said:


> I'd like to believe that was true, but could one still be liable even if one apologises for and deletes the offending tweet(s)?



Depends whether the person you lie about/offend decides your apology isn't enough and takes you to court? No idea how the court would view this scenario though.


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 11, 2017)

MadeInBedlam said:


> I'd like to believe that was true, but could one still be liable even if one apologises for and deletes the offending tweet(s)?


Yes


----------



## existentialist (Mar 11, 2017)

Rutita1 said:


> Bullshit. Only lying, rentagob, shock-jocks need worry. What cost Hatie was her arrogance and belief that she is untouchable. She could have avoided this completely by simply correcting her mistake once she was asked.


Yes. Any risk that this ruling might "chill" speech on Twitter is far outweighed by the message it sends to thugs like Hopkins and those who would emulate her that you can't get away with that unpleasantness there any more.


----------



## Shechemite (Mar 11, 2017)

Rutita1 said:


> Depends whether the person you lie about/offend decides your apology isn't enough and takes you to court? No idea how the court would view this scenario though.



So yes then


----------



## kabbes (Mar 11, 2017)

weltweit said:


> The days of twitter being a free for all have passed.


You think that, or you think that what is being claimed in the article?


----------



## weltweit (Mar 11, 2017)

kabbes said:


> You think that, or you think that what is being claimed in the article?


I think that and I think the article supports my view.


----------



## kabbes (Mar 11, 2017)

MadeInBedlam said:


> I'd like to believe that was true, but could one still be liable even if one apologises for and deletes the offending tweet(s)?


I think it would be very hard to show the damages necessary to prove libel if you had publicly apologised for a mistake and deleted the tweet the moment you were aware of the error.  To be doubly sure of protecting yourself, it would probably be worth following up on any retweets or other repercussions by reiterating that you had made an error.


----------



## Shechemite (Mar 11, 2017)

weltweit said:


> I think that and I think the article supports my view.



When was twitter a 'free for all'?


----------



## kabbes (Mar 11, 2017)

weltweit said:


> I think that and I think the article supports my view.


Can you provide any evidence for either position?  Because I think you are wrong, your premise is wrong and the article doesn't support it either.

Right now, you have literally just provided a link and run away.


----------



## Shechemite (Mar 11, 2017)

kabbes said:


> I think it would be very hard to show the damages necessary to prove libel if you had publicly apologised for a mistake and deleted the tweet the moment you were aware of the error.  To be doubly sure of protecting yourself, it would probably be worth following up on any retweets or other repercussions by reiterating that you had made an error.



That's slightly different then. Have apologies/retractions had legal impacts in the event of libel action taking place (rather than merely soothing the anger of the offended)?


----------



## Treacle Toes (Mar 11, 2017)

MadeInBedlam said:


> So yes then



Well no, not really, given we don't know how a court would rule in that scenario.


----------



## weltweit (Mar 11, 2017)

MadeInBedlam said:


> When was twitter a 'free for all'?


Oh I think in its early days a lot more abuse was thrown around especially where prominent users were concerned, you only have to see people like Fry who regularly left because of what he considered to be abuse, and there are others in that situation today. Prominent women receiving rape threats, politicians finding they cannot debate things on twitter without receiving shed loads of direct insults.

The question remains if in future libel and or abuse will continue or decline. My bet is people will start to take it more seriously and it will have to decline.


----------



## kabbes (Mar 11, 2017)

MadeInBedlam said:


> That's slightly different then. Have apologies/retractions had legal impacts in the event of libel action taking place (rather than soothing the anger of the offended)?


You have your requirements back to front.  The presumption is no libel, and you have to prove it exists.  To prove it, you have to show material damage as a consequence of something incorrect being said about you.  Such a task can made nothing but trickier if the period that an error was extant was short and mitigated by the actions of the propogator of the error.


----------



## kabbes (Mar 11, 2017)

weltweit said:


> Oh I think in its early days a lot more abuse was thrown around especially where prominent users were concerned, you only have to see people like Fry who regularly left because of what he considered to be abuse, and there are others in that situation today. Prominent women receiving rape threats, politicians finding they cannot debate things on twitter without receiving shed loads of direct insults.
> 
> The question remains if in future libel and or abuse will continue or decline. My bet is people will start to take it more seriously and it will have to decline.


You do know that libel and abuse are totally different things, don't you?


----------



## weltweit (Mar 11, 2017)

kabbes said:


> .. your premise is wrong and the article doesn't support it either. ..


Your opinion is noted.


----------



## weltweit (Mar 11, 2017)

kabbes said:


> You do know that libel and abuse are totally different things, don't you?


Probably that is why I listed them separately, so yes thanks, enough of your pointless pickiness.


----------



## kabbes (Mar 11, 2017)

weltweit said:


> Your opinion is noted.


But you aren't going to do anything at all to back up any of your claims?  Not that it is now easier to prove libel on twitter, nor that the article backs up that claim? 


weltweit said:


> Probably that is why I listed them separately, so yes thanks, enough of your pointless pickiness.


Jesus, dude.  This isn't pickiness, it's fundamental.  Why are you talking about abuse when it's utterly irrelevant to your claim about libel?


----------



## Shechemite (Mar 11, 2017)

kabbes said:


> You have your requirements back to front.  The presumption is no libel, and you have to prove it exists.  To prove it, you have to show material damage as a consequence of something incorrect being said about you.  Such a task can made nothing but trickier if the period that an error was extant was short and mitigated by the actions of the propogator of the error.



There have been instances where libel actions have failed, or been dropped/left, as consequence of the damage-limiting effect of apology/retraction/deletion?

I suppose what I'm taking issue with is the idea that libel actions on twitter will only be brought against the nasty and hubristic; rather than by those with the means to pursue action - that it (apparently) becoming easier to prove libel on twitter is something we should have no concerns about


----------



## Shechemite (Mar 11, 2017)

weltweit said:


> Oh I think in its early days a lot more abuse was thrown around especially where prominent users were concerned, you only have to see people like Fry who regularly left because of what he considered to be abuse, and there are others in that situation today. Prominent women receiving rape threats, politicians finding they cannot debate things on twitter without receiving shed loads of direct insults.
> 
> The question remains if in future libel and or abuse will continue or decline. My bet is people will start to take it more seriously and it will have to decline.



So twitter hasn't been a 'free for all' for a while then


----------



## kabbes (Mar 11, 2017)

MadeInBedlam said:


> There have been instances where libel actions have failed, or been dropped/left, as consequence of the damage-limiting effect of apology/retraction/deletion?
> 
> I suppose what I'm taking issue with is the idea that libel actions on twitter will only be brought against the nasty and hubristic; rather than by those with the means to pursue action


Yes, of course.  Tonnes of them!  This very case is an example of a libel action that would have been dropped had an apology been issued.

If you want another, this is a famous example of dropping the case: Gaddafi's son settles for apology in libel case

Here's the court ruling on what happens if you refuse an apology:  http://www.5rb.com/case/mawdsley-v-guardian-newspapers-ltd/

Quoting from that:



> Held
> The Claimant had failed to mitigate his loss by unreasonably refusing to accept the final offer by the Defendant of an apology, which the Press Complaints Commission regarded as reasonable. Summary relief would adequately compensate the Claimant.
> 
> *Comment*
> This is a warning to all Claimants not unreasonably to object to the publication of an apology. The Court held that in defamation, just as with any other tort, the Claimant has a duty to mitigate his loss.


----------



## billbond (Mar 11, 2017)

Owen Jones has just announced he is giving up posting on social media 
says its because of the vile abuse from the Left AND Right abuse !
May put up events,rallys etc but no comments
I think personally this taking people to court will grow dangerous times people will have to be careful what they post
Question what if you have no money to pay out ha


----------



## Shechemite (Mar 11, 2017)

kabbes said:


> Yes, of course.  Tonnes of them!  This very case is an example of a libel action that would have been dropped had an apology been issued.
> 
> If you want another, this is a famous example of dropping the case: Gaddafi's son settles for apology in libel case
> 
> ...



Ta

Although in the guardian/mawdsley case, they did concede and pay him £10,000...


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 11, 2017)

billbond said:


> Owen Jones has just announced he is giving up posting on social media
> says its because of the vile abuse from the Left AND Right abuse !
> May put up events,rallys etc but no comments
> I think personally this taking people to court will grow dangerous times people will have to be careful what they post
> Question what if you have no money to pay out ha


If you post something on twitter 
Trolls from left and right may slag yer
But please don't become bitter 
Libel money will buy yer titfers


----------



## ATOMIC SUPLEX (Mar 11, 2017)

kabbes said:


> How do you know that isn't exactly what the lawyer recommended?



I don't. 
I imagine he did say that and Hopkins said "no, we are going to take that sniveling little bitch to the cleaners"


----------



## billbond (Mar 11, 2017)

ATOMIC SUPLEX said:


> I don't.
> I imagine he did say that and Hopkins said "no, we are going to take that sniveling little bitch to the cleaners"



Just said on the radio she is going to fight it , take it further
Mind it did come from a caller on a phone in LBC
This seems the way of it now brexit and Gina miller house of lords/commons etc , Trumps  "plans" being over ruled etc
Any do  twitter ?  any good


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Mar 11, 2017)

ATOMIC SUPLEX said:


> I don't.
> I imagine he did say that and Hopkins said "no, we are going to take that sniveling little bitch to the cleaners"



Just what could have gone through Hopkins' mind though? She knew that she had falsely accused the daughter of a Falklands veteran of being happy with the desecration of a war memorial. How could this ever have panned out any other way?


----------



## kabbes (Mar 11, 2017)

In all the legal cases I've been involved with, I've never had a lawyer claim more than an 80% chance of winning even when they have said it is open and shut.  To refuse a £5k payment to charity (£2k of which can be reclaimed in tax!) in the face of a genuine libel case coming your way is just insanity.


----------



## Treacle Toes (Mar 11, 2017)

billbond said:


> Just said on the radio she is going to fight it , take it further
> Mind it did come from a caller on a phone in LBC
> This seems the way of it now brexit and Gina miller house of lords/commons etc , Trumps  "plans" being over ruled etc
> Any do  twitter ?  any good


Eh?


----------



## Treacle Toes (Mar 11, 2017)

kabbes said:


> In all the legal cases I've been involved with, I've never had a lawyer claim more than an 80% chance of winning even when they have said it is open and shut.  To refuse a £5k payment to charity (£2k of which can be reclaimed in tax!) in the face of a genuine libel case coming your way is just insanity.


Arrogance and entitlement.


----------



## brogdale (Mar 11, 2017)

i presume her contract with the Mail would have included any costs involved in opening the Overton window on behalf of the fascists.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Mar 11, 2017)

kabbes said:


> In all the legal cases I've been involved with, I've never had a lawyer claim more than an 80% chance of winning even when they have said it is open and shut.  To refuse a £5k payment to charity (£2k of which can be reclaimed in tax!) in the face of a genuine libel case coming your way is just insanity.



The whole £5k could have been written off against tax, it's just an operating expense. She's lodged herself with HMRC as a journo, so she can probably write the whole £300k off too, but to do so of course you need to have the dough in the first place and at the end of the day it's still money clean out of her shitcunt pocket.


----------



## Kaka Tim (Mar 11, 2017)

billbond said:


> Just said on the radio she is going to fight it , take it further
> Mind it did come from a caller on a phone in LBC
> This seems the way of it now brexit and Gina miller house of lords/commons etc , Trumps  "plans" being over ruled etc
> Any do  twitter ?  any good



I think to have grounds for appeal she would have to show that the original trial was faulty in some way - evidence misrepresented/withheld from defence, m'leaned friend was pissed when he gave his summing up. So not going to happen basically.  Its completely difference to Gina miller thing - that was a dispute over interpretation of the law - this was over weather jack munroe had been libelled.


----------



## DaveCinzano (Mar 11, 2017)

Rutita1 said:


> Arrogance and entitlement.



Hubris? What hubris?


----------



## kabbes (Mar 11, 2017)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> The whole £5k could have been written off against tax, it's just an operating expense. She's lodged herself with HMRC as a journo, so she can probably write the whole £300k off too, but to do so of course you need to have the dough in the first place and at the end of the day it's still money clean out of her shitcunt pocket.


I'm not particularly familiar with business tax write-offs, but doesn't it amount to the same thing?  I.e. A reduction in her profit, which would save her about £2k?  (Except £1k because I forgot she will be paying corporate tax rates, not PAYE).


----------



## Treacle Toes (Mar 11, 2017)

DaveCinzano said:


> Hubris? What hubris?


Funny. I saw a interview with yianno-cunt today where he stated he was doing God's work.


----------



## DaveCinzano (Mar 11, 2017)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> She's lodged herself with HMRC as a journo, so she can probably write the whole £300k off too



Well, this from HMRC suggests definitely not the £24k.



> *7. Legal and financial costs*
> 
> Accountancy, legal and other professional fees can count as allowable business expenses.
> 
> ...


----------



## maomao (Mar 11, 2017)

DaveCinzano said:


> Well, this from HMRC suggests definitely not the £24k.


Did she 'break the law'? It was a civil matter surely.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Mar 11, 2017)

DaveCinzano said:


> Well, this from HMRC suggests definitely not the £24k.





kabbes said:


> I'm not particularly familiar with business tax write-offs, but doesn't it amount to the same thing?  I.e. A reduction in her profit, which would save her about £2k?  (Except £1k because I forgot she will be paying corporate tax rates, not PAYE).



Depends how she's set herself up. If she is a ltd company or an LLP then the company pays. Even if she's only employee/shareholder.

The bosses of Audi,BP etc. did not have to pay billions out of their own pockets. More's the pitty...


----------



## kabbes (Mar 11, 2017)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> Depends how she's set herself up. If she is a ltd company or an LLP then the company pays. Even if she's only employee/shareholder.
> 
> The bosses of Audi,BP etc. did not have to pay billions out of their own pockets. More's the pitty...


But it still comes back on her, because if she is the only shareholder then she's the only one taking the hit for the company's loss of earnings.  Unless it's enough to declare bankruptcy for the company, of course.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Mar 11, 2017)

kabbes said:


> But it still comes back on her, because if she is the only shareholder then she's the only one taking the hit for the company's loss of earnings.  Unless it's enough to declare bankruptcy for the company, of course.



Doesn't matter, if it is a Ltd or LLP she's an employee of her company, her employee has fucked up and saddled the outfit with a cost.

If that is the case it is still her money, just her untaxed dosh, which is still hers.

Hopefully she'll be a sole trader, in which cash she'll have to pay tax on the money before paying the fine.

Either way, I've not met even multi millionaires who wouldn't be pretty fucking upset at £300k being thrown down the pan.


----------



## DaveCinzano (Mar 11, 2017)

maomao said:


> Did she 'break the law'? It was a civil matter surely.



A libel can be criminally defamatory, and besides _the law_ is not only the criminal law but also the civil.


----------



## Southlondon (Mar 11, 2017)

Pickman's model said:


> You jumped in here looking for a barney.
> 
> You've been shown up about the brown sugar lyrics you quoted so gleefully. You've been shown up putting words in other people's mouths. You haven't looked at the context of the post.
> 
> Perhaps you could simply apologise and we can all move on. Don't bother replying and we'll just take it as read that you regret your dishonesty.


What a plum you are


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 11, 2017)

Southlondon said:


> What a plum you are


Yeh. But at least I'm not a liar


----------



## ViolentPanda (Mar 11, 2017)

Pickman's model said:


> The knives round the heart give me an idea



Pfft.
They gave *me* a boner!


----------



## teqniq (Mar 11, 2017)




----------



## DaveCinzano (Mar 11, 2017)

From yesterday but only just seen it:


----------



## albionism (Mar 12, 2017)

Doubt The Mail will bail her out,having done so
previously for her talking vile shite.
Mail pays out £150,000 to Muslim family over Katie Hopkins column


----------



## existentialist (Mar 12, 2017)

albionism said:


> Doubt The Mail will bail here out,having done so
> previously for her talking vile shite.
> Mail pays out £150,000 to Muslim family over Katie Hopkins column


There's a difference: the Muslim stuff was in a column posted in their vile rag; this bollocks was posted directly to Twitter by the hate-filled bag of bile herself.


----------



## killer b (Mar 12, 2017)

They won't bail her out because they didn't publish the libel, that's all. They didn't pay last time out of the goodness of their hearts.


----------



## Treacle Toes (Mar 13, 2017)

Spoof fundraising page 'for Katie Hopkins' legal fees' raises thousands for food banks


----------



## ffsear (Mar 13, 2017)

She will be covered by Personal liability insurance.


----------



## existentialist (Mar 13, 2017)

ffsear said:


> She will be covered by Personal liability insurance.


I've never had a good look at such insurance, but my suspicion is that you will be expected to exercise some level of due care to minimise risk. I wouldn't be surprised if such a policy had a provision requiring you to minimise the insurer's exposure by, for example, settling at a suitable point in proceedings. It certainly won't be a licence to play fast and loose with the libel laws and only involve the insurer when it's all gone south.


----------



## kabbes (Mar 13, 2017)

Yes, at the very least the insurer would expect to be consulted during the process. It's very unlikely they would accept her turning down an offer of 5k!

Insurance may not even cover libel anyway.


----------



## killer b (Mar 13, 2017)

There is now way this would have ended up in court if insurance had any involvement. Not the faintest chance.


----------



## Monkeygrinder's Organ (Mar 13, 2017)

Anyone who'd cover Katie Hopkins for libel damages is a total idiot tbh. You don't give insurance against stuff that's more likely to happen than not.


----------



## Spymaster (Mar 13, 2017)

Defamation insurance to defend claims does exist but I reckon there'd be a clause enabling the insurer to cut someone lose if they turn down a settlement offer and then lose the case.


----------



## not-bono-ever (Mar 13, 2017)

If Katie shitkins does not have PI cover, then she is fucked. If She did have PI cover - which given her *job* is pretty important - then she would not have been allowed to proceed with the case unless the insurer backed it and had a say in any costs accrued- these things are never open ended - given the opportunity to settle a measly £5K to avoid going to court would have been far more efficient for an insurer - its about a days work invoice for a QC.

I don think she had PI backing for this case- I cannot see any sensible insurer opting to back her for a hugely damaging and expensive hearing when it is blates obviously that she was bang to rights.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Mar 13, 2017)

In the same way that you have life assurance rather than insurance as you can't insure against an inevitable event, surely Hopkins can't have any kind of defamation insurance, her whole thing is defaming people.


----------



## kabbes (Mar 13, 2017)

I also think that even if she had dfamatioon insurance, she would have threatened its validity when she didn't mitigate her error by apologising or anything close to it.


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 13, 2017)

No fucker will give her insurance now anyway


----------



## Wilf (Mar 13, 2017)

Monkeygrinder's Organ said:


> Anyone who'd cover Katie Hopkins for libel damages is a total idiot tbh. You don't give insurance against stuff that's more likely to happen than not.


Yes, it would be a bit like offering Alf Inge Haaland cover for his knee 5 minutes after Roy Keene had launched him into orbit.


----------



## 8den (Mar 13, 2017)

kabbes said:


> I also think that even if she had dfamatioon insurance, she would have threatened its validity when she didn't mitigate her error by apologising or anything close to it.



 I think most policies are voided by the traditional "you're on your own when you're a lying gobby twat" clause.


----------



## ffsear (Mar 13, 2017)

She 100% will be insured.   She's 1 person from a pool of thousands of PI policies that will be packed together and placed as 1 risk with premiums running into the £££££ millions.  £107k is peanuts. No one insurance company will assume the entire risk.  Everyone else is paying for her stupidity.


----------



## kabbes (Mar 13, 2017)

The classic ffsear insistence about a subject they have no experience of or knowledge about, there.


----------



## DaveCinzano (Mar 13, 2017)

kabbes said:


> The classic ffsear insistence about a subject they have no experience of or knowledge about, there.


How terribly Hopkinesque!


----------



## existentialist (Mar 13, 2017)

ffsear said:


> She 100% will be insured.   She's 1 person from a pool of thousands of PI policies that will be packed together and placed as 1 risk with premiums running into the £££££ millions.  £107k is peanuts. No one insurance company will assume the entire risk.  Everyone else is paying for her stupidity.


If there's one thing that is a given with insurers, it is that they don't blindly put themselves on risk without having some way of mitigating that risk. And you don't insure a gobby hatemonger with a track record of losing court cases without making sure there are Ts & Cs which reduce the risk of an open-ended liability.

Interesting, too, that you seem happy to work with the ultra-conservative estimate of her likely liability for costs, too - one might almost begin to suspect an undeclared agenda.


----------



## 8den (Mar 13, 2017)

kabbes said:


> The classic ffsear insistence about a subject they have no experience of or knowledge about, there.



He's halfway to boathappy already.


----------



## Spymaster (Mar 13, 2017)

existentialist said:


> If there's one thing that is a given with insurers, it is that they don't blindly put themselves on risk without having some way of mitigating that risk. And you don't insure a gobby hatemonger with a track record of losing court cases without making sure there are Ts & Cs which reduce the risk of an open-ended liability.


The thing is though, a lot of these policies are packaged. Our company insurance includes employers liability, professional indemnity, VAT investigation, and loads of other stuff. It's not beyond the realms of possibility that she could have some level of defamation insurance included in a general 'industry package' but it would be subject to all sorts of terms and conditions.


----------



## ffsear (Mar 13, 2017)

existentialist said:


> If there's one thing that is a given with insurers, it is that they don't blindly put themselves on risk without having some way of mitigating that risk. And you don't insure a gobby hatemonger with a track record of losing court cases without making sure there are Ts & Cs which reduce the risk of an open-ended liability.
> .



No one said it won't be.  Her premium will be sky high no doubt while all insurance polices have limits. There is no such thing as open ended liability.


----------



## Yossarian (Mar 13, 2017)

Monkeygrinder's Organ said:


> Anyone who'd cover Katie Hopkins for libel damages is a total idiot tbh. You don't give insurance against stuff that's more likely to happen than not.



It'd be like selling Piers Morgan insurance against being a twat.


----------



## 8den (Mar 13, 2017)

ffsear said:


> No one said it won't be.  Her premium will be sky high no doubt while all insurance polices have limits. There is no such thing as open ended liability.



If you insured Kate Hopkins for Libel, you'd find that in the dictionary under "examples of open-ended liability", and "what the fuck were you thinking, you dozy fucking twat?!?!"


----------



## not-bono-ever (Mar 13, 2017)

I doubt very much that shitkins would have an OTC PI policy, give the profile and history. Anyone who placed this will have had to be satisfied that there are all manner of escape clauses that can be invoked if she gets a bit naughty. If this was placed as part of a generic PI tranche - just like CDO's were a decade ago , then Lloyds deserve to go under


----------



## Wilf (Mar 13, 2017)

8den said:


> If you insured Kate Hopkins for Libel, you'd find that in the dictionary under "examples of open-ended liability", and "what the fuck were you thinking, you dozy fucking twat?!?!"


Insuring Ursine mammals against defecation in glades, copses and other areas defined by a cluster of trees.


----------



## likesfish (Mar 13, 2017)

tbf they sell squaddies kit insurance

though strangely the Viking that was blown up in afghan with five plasma screens a playstation 4 a full multi gym and high end gaming rig omboard the claim was disallowed bastards


----------



## existentialist (Mar 13, 2017)

Spymaster said:


> The thing is though, a lot of these policies are packaged. Our company insurance includes employers liability, professional indemnity, VAT investigation, and loads of other stuff. It's not beyond the realms of possibility that she could have some level of defamation insurance included in a general 'industry package' but it would be subject to all sorts of terms and conditions.


Yes - I did a little nose around, and it looks like this kind of action would be covered by a "media liability" policy (or element of an overall policy). But I also noticed that a lot of these liability policies are written around the notion of "errors and omissions"; I'd be astonished if a policy, especially a general one, would even begin to cover a situation where someone had made a false (and fairly serious) allegation against someone and then refused to retract it.

Which doesn't mean such a policy doesn't exist, and I'm well aware that we're all speculating like crazy here...and it will be unlikely that we'll know unless Hopkins files for bankruptcy or something.

In any event, there's always that question on policy renewal forms about previous claims, so I suspect that even if Hopkins did have insurance to cover her, and even if it pays out, she might find herself with some special terms at renewal *cough*


----------



## existentialist (Mar 13, 2017)

ffsear said:


> No one said it won't be.  Her premium will be sky high no doubt while all insurance polices have limits. There is no such thing as open ended liability.


That was probably a poor choice of words on my part - I meant it more in terms of an insurance company putting themselves on risk for someone doing something that they a) could have avoided doing in the first place, and b) could have mitigated given that they had.


----------



## existentialist (Mar 13, 2017)

likesfish said:


> tbf they sell squaddies kit insurance
> 
> though strangely the Viking that was blown up in afghan with five plasma screens a playstation 4 a full multi gym and high end gaming rig omboard the claim was disallowed bastards


And I bet he still had all the bits, too!


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Mar 13, 2017)

I'd insure her. Cover up to £100,000.00 of damages for £110k.


----------



## Nylock (Mar 13, 2017)

I wonder if there's an excess on this insurance of hers... If so, I hope she went for a high excess in order to keep the premium costs down (in the mistaken belief she would win a libel trial)


----------



## ffsear (Mar 13, 2017)

kabbes said:


> The classic ffsear insistence about a subject they have no experience of or knowledge about, there.



Have worked in insurance for 12 years.  ACII qualified.


----------



## T & P (Mar 13, 2017)

ffsear said:


> Have worked in insurance for 12 years.  ACII qualified.


Please stop raining on our parade though. We're all hoping Hopkins will have to pay in full and it will all but destroy her. In these very dark and depressing times, allow us to have a ray of sunshine.


----------



## ffsear (Mar 13, 2017)

T & P said:


> Please stop raining on our parade though. We're all hoping Hopkins will have to pay in full and it will all but destroy her. In these very dark and depressing times, allow us to have a ray of sunshine.



Fair enough.


----------



## 8den (Mar 13, 2017)

ffsear said:


> Have worked in insurance for 12 years.  ACII qualified.



Having worked in Broadcasting, TV News, Current Affairs and a variety of other kinds of media, I've never once encountered the kind of liability insurance you're talking about, but I know plenty of times were if it was available it would have been taken and used.


----------



## Spymaster (Mar 13, 2017)

8den said:


> Having worked in Broadcasting, TV News, Current Affairs and a variety of other kinds of media, I've never once encountered the kind of liability insurance you're talking about ...



It's been around for years. 

It's no secret.


----------



## 8den (Mar 13, 2017)

ffsear said:


> Have worked in insurance for 12 years.  ACII qualified.



dp


----------



## 8den (Mar 13, 2017)

Spymaster said:


> It's been around for years.
> 
> It's no secret.



None of them cover the kind of libel or defamation we're talking about.

Let me clarify. Ffsear is saying that Hopkins' insurance (if it exists) will still cover her in this situation. If you look at any ruling on a libel case with libel insurance it's quite clear that the policies will not cover you for factual errors.


----------



## Spymaster (Mar 13, 2017)

8den said:


> None of them cover the kind of libel or defamation we're talking about.


I just Googled "defamation insurance" and they were the first results. It's very well known and has been a thing for as long as I can remember.

What kind of defamation are we talking about then?


----------



## Buckaroo (Mar 13, 2017)

ffsear said:


> Have worked in insurance for 12 years.  ACII qualified.


----------



## ffsear (Mar 13, 2017)

8den said:


> None of them cover the kind of libel or defamation we're talking about.
> 
> Let me clarify. Ffsear is saying that Hopkins' insurance (if it exists) will still cover her in this situation. If you look at any ruling on a libel case with libel insurance it's quite clear that the policies will not cover you for factual errors.



comes under Media Liability

*A type of errors and omissions (E&O) liability insurance designed for publishers, broadcasters, and other media-related firms. The policies are typically written on a named perils basis and cover the following broad areas: defamation, invasion of privacy, infringement of copyright, and plagiarism.

media liability coverage - Insurance Glossary | IRMI.com*


----------



## 8den (Mar 13, 2017)

Spymaster said:


> I just Googled "defamation insurance" and they were the first results. It's very well known and has been a thing for as long as I can remember.
> 
> What kind of defamation are we talking about then?



It's about intent. You must have car insurance policy and you pay a premiere because you're a professional driver, but if you get behind the wheel drunk, your extra premium won't give you extra coverage. 

Some examples of where liability insurance has been used on TV programs I've worked on. On one show a music producer cleared a particular song, however when it came to the mix, by accident, the same song by a different artist was used. Once you can demonstrate that you did not malicious intent to use the song without paying for it, your insurance covers the cost. 

In the Hopkins instance, she said something demonstrably untrue, about a recognised person, and furthermore was given ample opportunity to retract the claims. 

*See this

My libel victory underlines the need for journalists to check their facts | Sarah Thornton*


----------



## 8den (Mar 13, 2017)

[


ffsear said:


> comes under Media Liability
> 
> *A type of errors and omissions (E&O) liability insurance designed for publishers, broadcasters, and other media-related firms. The policies are typically written on a named perils basis and cover the following broad areas: defamation, invasion of privacy, infringement of copyright, and plagiarism.
> 
> media liability coverage - Insurance Glossary | IRMI.com*



Did you read that before copying and pasting it.


"*errors and omissions" 
*
This insurance will cover you for accidental instances of all of the above, the clue is "errors"

If you accidentally plagiarise, if you accidentally breach copyright, accidentally breach privacy, if you accidentally defame someone.

If an overworked sub editor puts up the wrong photo next to the wrong headline and you accidentally accuse an innocent man of murder, your insurance company will only stop laughing at you long enough to show you the door out of his office. You're paying for that. If your sub editor got his photo from the official police incident report, then your insurance will cover you.

Or try, say, sampling the Beatles, and then try and use your copyright/plagiarism insurance. Or take photos up Kate Middleton's skirt and try and use your insurance to pay for the invasion of privacy legal team.


----------



## Spymaster (Mar 13, 2017)

8den said:


> It's about intent. You must have car insurance policy and you pay a premiere because you're a professional driver, but if you get behind the wheel drunk, your extra premium won't give you extra coverage.
> 
> Some examples of where liability insurance has been used on TV programs I've worked on. On one show a music producer cleared a particular song, however when it came to the mix, by accident, the same song by a different artist was used. Once you can demonstrate that you did not malicious intent to use the song without paying for it, your insurance covers the cost.
> 
> ...


Ok, but none of that negates the fact that it's possible to insure against defamation claims.

I'm not sure what you are trying to argue.


----------



## ffsear (Mar 13, 2017)

8den said:


> [
> 
> 
> Did you read that before copying and pasting it.
> ...



No.

Errors and omissions is a "class" of insurance that contains a wide range of different policies.   The same way that Cargo and Hull both come under the "Marine" class of insurance.	That does not mean they insure the same thing.

You're taking it word for word.  Its a little more complicated then that.


----------



## 8den (Mar 13, 2017)

Spymaster said:


> Ok, but none of that negates the fact that it's possible to insure against defamation claims.
> 
> I'm not sure what you are trying to argue.



I'm pointing out that ffsear claim's that IF Hopkins was sensible enough to invest in this insurance (and if she was sensible enough to invest in it, she would have been sensible enough not to do something like this in the 1st place) it still wouldn't indemnify her in this case.


----------



## 8den (Mar 13, 2017)

ffsear said:


> No.
> 
> Errors and omissions is a "class" of insurance that contains a wide range of different policies.   The same way that Cargo and Hull both come under the "Marine" class of insurance.	That does not mean they insure the same thing.
> 
> You're taking it word for word.  Its a little more complicated then that.



No it's not. The principal here is "duty of care". Hopkins completely failed in her duty of care as a "journalist" by not making a cursory effort to fact check what she tweeted before she wrote it. Furthermore it's compounded by the injured party repeatedly pointing out the error. That's what her alleged insurers would say to her while they tore up their non-existant contract.


----------



## Spymaster (Mar 13, 2017)

8den said:


> No it's not.


He's right though.

You are misunderstanding what is meant by Errors and Omissions Insurance.


----------



## ffsear (Mar 13, 2017)

8den said:


> No it's not. The principal here is "duty of care". Hopkins completely failed in her duty of care as a "journalist" by not making a cursory effort to fact check what she tweeted before she wrote it. Furthermore it's compounded by the injured party repeatedly pointing out the error. That's what her alleged insurers would say to her while they tore up their non-existant contract.



What are you on?  Duty of care relates to negligence!   This is not a matter of negligence,   its a matter of liable/slander.  Learn the difference!


----------



## 8den (Mar 13, 2017)

ffsear said:


> What are you on?  Duty of care relates to negligence!   This is not a matter of negligence,   its a matter of liable/slander.  Learn the difference!



And no libel or insurance policy will cover you if you if it's not accidental libel or defamation through negligence.

If I wrote an article talking about "ffsear the well known dog fucker" & accidentally showed you, who (as we all know) are an entirely different ffsear, who (to the best of our knowledge) does not carnally enjoy dogs, such insurance may well apply.

However, if I wrote an article declaring you, ffsear, had been intimately aware of several neighbouring dogs and if I clearly identified you as said dog fucker. You might rightfully sue, and unless I could prove this in court, I could not show that as a journalist, I had taken my duty of care, to write what I know is true and therefore no policy would cover me.


----------



## DaveCinzano (Mar 14, 2017)

Just to clarify, in this hypothetical case are we to take it that dog fucking is wrong?


----------



## 8den (Mar 14, 2017)

DaveCinzano said:


> Just to clarify, in this hypothetical case are we to take it that dog fucking is wrong?



Also, the defence might argue "would an unfounded accusation of dog fucking hurt ffsear's reputation among upstanding citizens"? (in this case, the posters of urban)


----------



## 8den (Mar 14, 2017)

x


----------



## DaveCinzano (Mar 14, 2017)

Is a rutting Bassett Hound sitting on your mouse?


----------



## DaveCinzano (Mar 14, 2017)

‘Mouse’ is, of course, a euphemism


----------



## DaveCinzano (Mar 14, 2017)

Not to be confused with a euphonium


----------



## DaveCinzano (Mar 14, 2017)

You can blow the latter without ending up on a register


----------



## teqniq (Mar 14, 2017)

It blows in a lowish register by default.


----------



## xenon (Mar 14, 2017)

So Katie Hopkins  fucks dogs? 
 I knew it. She seems the type. Although that might of been a different Katie Hopkins.


----------



## 8den (Mar 14, 2017)

DaveCinzano said:


> You can blow the latter without ending up on a register





teqniq said:


> It blows in a lowish register by default.



Neither of you grasp the scale of this problem. 

It's been orchestrated.


----------



## xenon (Mar 14, 2017)

Although the famous Katie Hopkins who let's be honest probably doesn't fuck dogs,  is giving  a bad name to that other Katie Hopkins who did fuck a dog. It's terrible


----------



## 8den (Mar 14, 2017)

xenon said:


> Although the famous Katie Hopkins who let's be honest probably doesn't fuck dogs,  is giving  a bad name to that other Katie Hopkins who did fuck a dog. It's terrible



She did promise to run through west london with a pork sausage up her arse if Khan became Mayor. 

Maybe it's a fetish...


----------



## DaveCinzano (Mar 14, 2017)

xenon said:


> Although the famous Katie Hopkins who let's be honest probably doesn't fuck dogs,  is giving  a bad name to that other Katie Hopkins who did fuck a dog. It's terrible


Wait what? Who fucked the dog, the real Katie Hopkins, the fake robot one, or ffsear? Or did 8den fabricate the whole canine clusterfuck?


----------



## DaveCinzano (Mar 14, 2017)

I'm starting to doubt there even is a dog.

What breed is this _so-called dog_, 8den?


----------



## teqniq (Mar 14, 2017)




----------



## 8den (Mar 14, 2017)

DaveCinzano said:


> I'm starting to doubt there even is a dog.
> 
> What breed is this _so-called dog_, 8den?



For legal reasons, the alledged dog is simply referred to as "Ms Y". Not that we're saying there is a dog. But if there was, which we aren't strictly saying there is.


Clear?


----------



## xenon (Mar 14, 2017)

I'm starting to regret the whole Katie Hopkins  Fucks dogs thing up.   Not that one. 


 I think it was a St Bernard, consenting  Saint Bernard .  Not that one.


----------



## teqniq (Mar 14, 2017)

8den said:


> She did promise to run through west london with a pork sausage up her arse if Khan became Mayor.
> 
> Maybe it's a fetish...


Maybe it's a sausage dog.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Mar 14, 2017)

teqniq said:


> Maybe it's a sausage dog.



So what you're actually saying is that the dog fucked her up the arse, in lieu of a pork sausage being stuck up there?


----------



## kabbes (Mar 14, 2017)

ffsear, I take it back about you not knowing about insurance.

You are still wrong here though.

The standard exclusion in E&O goes along the lines of

Malicious, dishonest, criminal or illegal acts, including intentional violation of any law, regulation, statute or ordinance
That's because it isn't intended to cover the moral hazard of you doing the fuck you want because you are covered.

Look at the exclusions in this example of a libel extension clause:

http://openspace.ace-ina.com/policy_wordings/Documentation/Policy Wordings/UK/03 Casualty/1 - Primary/PRIMARY LIABILITY CLAUSE BANK (CasPrim, medEQUIP, Offshore Liability policies)/LIBEL AND SLANDER EXTENSION - PL - L83 (to 30-04-09).pdf

Now look at exclusions b and e and tell me Hopkins would still be on coverage.

For that matter, look at conditions 1 and 3.

There is no way an insurer is paying for this.


----------



## JimW (Mar 14, 2017)

kabbes said:


> ffsear, I take it back about you not knowing about insurance.
> 
> You are still wrong here though.
> 
> ...


Come on, that doesn't even mention dogs, or any other companion animal for that matter.


----------



## Nanker Phelge (Mar 14, 2017)

xenon said:


> I think it was a St Bernard, consenting  Saint Bernard .  Not that one.



St Bernard or Sir Bernard?


----------



## Spymaster (Mar 14, 2017)

kabbes said:


> ffsear, I take it back about you not knowing about insurance.
> 
> You are still wrong here though.
> 
> ...



I'm not sure why everyone is so keen to insist that insurers won't be involved here.

Exclusions b), and e), wouldn't apply because neither were the case at the time the Tweet was made. Hopkins didn't know the statement was false because she thought she was responding to Laurie Penny. Similarly, she didn't bear Munroe any previous ill-will because she didn't know who she was ... she thought she was Laurie Penny.

Conditions 1), and 3), refer to legal advice that _was_ sought.

Reading more about this this morning you can see how this has come about.

The first Tweet was posted at 7.20am on 18th May. This was the one mistakenly accusing Munroe of defacing war memorilas.

Munroe responded three times at 7.33am ('this is wrong'), 7.46am ('please retract or i'll sue'), and 8.14am. The 8.14am Tweet was the offer to settle for £5k to charity.

Hopkins deleted the Tweet at 9.47am, but instead of retracting or apologising she called Munroe "social anthrax" 

Both lawyers thought they could win this. We know this because they were both acting on "no win no fee". What this rested on was whether or not "serious harm" had been caused to Munroe's reputation. Jonathon Price (for Hopkins) argued that the Tweet had been deleted quickly and was only visible for under 2 hours in the early morning. Also that Hopkins had issued a correction, albeit not until June 2nd after solicitors had got involved.

So it was "serious harm" that was pivotal and it was argued that this didn't occur. This wasn't quite the slam-dunk for Munroe as people seem to think. Price, along with others, genuinely thought he'd win, and this case has lowered the bar regarding what constitutes "serious harm" in libel cases.

Insurance may or may not come into play here but nothing posted so far precludes it.


----------



## kabbes (Mar 14, 2017)

The reasons the exclusions come into play is because of Hopkin's immediate response, where she refuses to back down (thus knowingly propagating the error) and makes it clear that she DOES have personal spite against Munroe.

She did not act to mitigate her actions, which also places her in contravention of the conditions.


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 14, 2017)

Spymaster said:


> I'm not sure why everyone is so keen to insist that insurers won't be involved here.
> 
> Exclusions b), and e), wouldn't apply because neither were the case at the time the Tweet was made. Hopkins didn't know the statement was false because she thought she was responding to Laurie Penny. Similarly, she didn't bear Munroe any previous ill-will because she didn't know who she was ... she thought she was Laurie Penny.
> 
> ...


Not your most persuasive case, pa


----------



## Spymaster (Mar 14, 2017)

kabbes said:


> The reasons the exclusions come into play is because of Hopkin's immediate response, where she refuses to back down (thus knowingly propagating the error) and makes it clear that she DOES have personal spite against Munroe.
> 
> She did not act to mitigate her actions, which also places her in contravention of the conditions.


Nothing in the terms you've posted says she has to back down. On the contrary, they switch the onus to her counsel:


> 3. *Unless a Queen's Counsel or similar legal authority (to be mutually agreed upon by the Insured and the Company) shall advise that any proceedings could be contested with the probability of success* the Insured shall in the event of a claim or occurrence which may give rise to a claim under this Extension
> 
> i) tender such apologies and offer such amends as such Counsel or legal authority shall advise should properly be made in the circumstances
> 
> ii) agree to the withdrawal of the offending matter or the publication of any amendment or alteration necessary to secure withdrawal of the claim.


Given that her QC intended to argue "serious harm" it's quite possible that he'd have given such advice.


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 14, 2017)

Spymaster said:


> Nothing in the terms you've posted says she has to back down. On the contrary, they switch the onus to her council:


Not her local authority but her lawyer - counsel.


----------



## 8den (Mar 14, 2017)

Spymaster said:


> I'm not sure why everyone is so keen to insist that insurers won't be involved here.
> 
> Exclusions b), and e), wouldn't apply because neither were the case at the time the Tweet was made. Hopkins didn't know the statement was false because she thought she was responding to Laurie Penny. Similarly, she didn't bear Munroe any previous ill-will because she didn't know who she was ... she thought she was Laurie Penny.



Her legal team tried that defence, it's novel, in that it can only be described as ridiculous, "I thought the person I slandered and abused was someone else, because I'm incapable of basic fact checking"

Another tactic for her own defence team was to try and claim no right thinking person would take Hopkins seriously, and Hopkin's own barrister referred to her as "rentagob"



> Hopkins deleted the Tweet at 9.47am, but instead of retracting or apologising she called Munroe "social anthrax"
> 
> Both lawyers thought they could win this. We know this because they were both acting on "no win no fee". What this rested on was whether or not "serious harm" had been caused to Munroe's reputation. Jonathon Price (for Hopkins) argued that the Tweet had been deleted quickly and was only visible for under 2 hours in the early morning. Also that Hopkins had issued a correction, albeit not until June 2nd after solicitors had got involved.
> 
> ...



It precludes that idea that you can purchase rental insurance that allows you to have free speech without consequences, and that Hopkins' insurance (if it existed) would cover her in this situation.


----------



## Spymaster (Mar 14, 2017)

Pickman's model said:


> Not your most persuasive case, pa


You think, son?

Here's the judgement.


----------



## Spymaster (Mar 14, 2017)

Pickman's model said:


> Not her local authority but her lawyer - counsel.


Good spot, son. Proud of ya.

Edited.


----------



## kabbes (Mar 14, 2017)

Spymaster said:


> Given that her QC intended to argue "serious harm" it's quite possible that he'd have given such advice.


That she should call the person she'd libelled "social anthrax", thus both multiplying the harm AND demonstrating personal spite against her?

If that's the QC's level of advice, it's no wonder she lost.


----------



## ffsear (Mar 14, 2017)

Ksbbes,  you've just pulled out a random  exclusion and she's not covered.  But that exclusion could be bolted onto any policy.  We don't know to what type of policy it applies,  but I very much doubt it attaches to a media liability policy.

Look and at this example




I could use this example say she is covered.  But both are irrilevent as they are taken out of context.

E&O policies are Taylor made to suit the company or indavidual


----------



## kabbes (Mar 14, 2017)

ffsear said:


> Ksbbes,  you've just pulled out a random  exclusion and she's not covered.  But that exclusion could be bolted onto any policy.  We don't know to what type of policy it applies,  but I very much doubt it attaches to a media liability policy.
> 
> Look and at this example
> 
> ...


You've not listed the exclusions on that policy.

I do know exactly the kind of policy my extension applies to, though.  It is a libel extension that is for application to any primary casualty cover in which libel coverage is deemed appropriate.  The wording is standard because it's not 2005 any more and underwriters are not trusted to just come up with their own wording on the fly.  The desire for contract certainty has led to wording for clauses drafted by lawyers in advance.


----------



## 8den (Mar 14, 2017)

kabbes said:


> That she should call the person she'd libelled "social anthrax", thus both multiplying the harm AND demonstrating personal spite against her?
> 
> If that's the QC's level of advice, it's no wonder she lost.



Also surely they can't have been her counsel when she rejected the 5k...


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Mar 14, 2017)

Spymaster said:


> So it was "serious harm" that was pivotal and it was argued that this didn't occur. This wasn't quite the slam-dunk for Munroe as people seem to think. Price, along with others, genuinely thought he'd win, and this case has lowered the bar regarding what constitutes "serious harm" in libel cases.



Ehrm, no. 

Jack Monroe wins Twitter libel case against Katie Hopkins



> The judge, Mr Justice Warby, found that Hopkins’ tweets were defamatory and that there had been damage to Monroe’s reputation, “albeit not very serious or grave”.



Hence the relatively low award of £24k.


----------



## Spymaster (Mar 14, 2017)

kabbes said:


> That she should call the person she'd libelled "social anthrax", thus both multiplying the harm AND demonstrating personal spite against her?


You're barking up the wrong tree. Personal ill-will indicates something that pre-existed. If you and I had a history of beef and I were to Tweet "Kabbes fucks dogs" that would be based on personal ill-will.


> If that's the QC's level of advice, it's no wonder she lost.


Well again, he would have been advising her based on the defence that he intended to mount. In this case "serious harm" and at the time it was not an unreasonable one. 

Have you read the judgement?


----------



## Spymaster (Mar 14, 2017)

8den said:


> Also surely they can't have been her counsel when she rejected the 5k...


Lawyers hadn't been engaged at the point that offer was made. It was made on the morning or the tweets on Twitter.


----------



## killer b (Mar 14, 2017)

I don't work in insurance, but I have dealt with a number of claims against the company I work for, and IME insurance companies are massively risk averse and will mostly settle early regardless of how valid the claim is, rather than go to court. 

That Hopkins' lawyers thought she could win is pretty irrelevant here isn't it? If she had insurance, her insurers would have looked at the 5 grand offer on the table and said 'yep that's fine' and paid it. They simply wouldn't have been prepared to risk a court case which would likely have cost them more than that regardless who won.


----------



## kabbes (Mar 14, 2017)

Spymaster said:


> You're barking up the wrong tree. Personal ill-will indicates something that pre-existed. If you and I had a history of beef and I were to Tweet "Kabbes fucks dogs" that would be based on personal ill-will.


The fact that she called her "social anthrax" combined with the timing of it strongly indicates pre-existing ill-will.  Certainly enough so that I would expect an insurer to avoid the claim.  Something tells me she probably has some prior history of other insults too, just to add fuel to the fire.


----------



## Spymaster (Mar 14, 2017)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> Ehrm, no.
> 
> Jack Monroe wins Twitter libel case against Katie Hopkins
> 
> ...


Ehrm, that's exactly what I've been saying!


----------



## kabbes (Mar 14, 2017)

killer b said:


> I don't work in insurance, but I have dealt with a number of claims against the company I work for, and IME insurance companies are massively risk averse and will mostly settle early regardless of how valid the claim is, rather than go to court.
> 
> That Hopkins' lawyers thought she could win is pretty irrelevant here isn't it? If she had insurance, her insurers would have looked at the 5 grand offer on the table and said 'yep that's fine' and paid it. They simply wouldn't have been prepared to risk a court case which would likely have cost them more than that regardless who won.


This is precisely the point that I made right at the start of this whole insurance diversion.  It's absolutely the case.


----------



## 8den (Mar 14, 2017)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> Ehrm, no.
> 
> Jack Monroe wins Twitter libel case against Katie Hopkins
> 
> ...



Part of Hopkin's legal defence was that no right-thinking person would take what she says seriously and she was and I quote a "rentagob". When your own brief is using that line.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Mar 14, 2017)

Spymaster said:


> Ehrm, that's exactly what I've been saying!



Not it ain't; you've been saying that Monroe's team were after Hopkins due to the serious harm the tweets caused and that, " this case has lowered the bar regarding what constitutes "serious harm" in libel cases."

Which of course it doesn't as the judge quite rightly pointed out that the harm was not serious.


----------



## Spymaster (Mar 14, 2017)

kabbes said:


> The fact that she called her "social anthrax" combined with the timing of it strongly indicates pre-existing ill-will.  Certainly enough so that I would expect an insurer to avoid the claim.  Something tells me she probably has some prior history of other insults too, just to add fuel to the fire.


You're right that the second Tweet aggravated the situation, and that was accepted by the judge:


> It is said that Ms Hopkins acted maliciously in sending the Second Tweet, knowing it was untrue to suggest that Ms Monroe had vandalised or condoned the vandalisation of a war memorial. I do not know what Ms Hopkins’ actual state of mind was, as she has not given evidence, nor has she explained her position otherwise than through her lawyers. If she had done so, and persuasively rebutted what Ms Monroe says about these matters, I might have disregarded this part of the claimant’s evidence. But in the absence of any rebuttal I conclude that Ms Monroe’s response was and remains a reasonable one. I remain of the view I expressed in Barron v Vines [2016] EWHC 1226 (QB) [22], that when malice is alleged in aggravation of damages, “… the issue is not the actual state of mind of the defendant. It is whether the claimants have suffered additional injury to feelings as a result of the defendant’s outward behaviour. If the defendant has behaved in a way which leads the claimants reasonably to believe he acted maliciously that is enough.”


But saying that it shows pre-existing ill-will is drawing a conclusion that's not supported. 

This of course, all assumes that Hopkins was insured.


----------



## kabbes (Mar 14, 2017)

Right, I'm not saying pre-existing ill-will was demonstrated _in the libel trial_.  I'm saying that if Hopkins had libel coverage and tried to claim on it, one of the exclusions the insurers would be relying on in their _own_ legal case (if it went that far) to avoid paying the claim would be that Hopkins had pre-existing ill-will against Munroe, and the "social anthrax" comment is one of the pieces in demonstrating that ill-will.

(But the aggravation of the initial offence is _in itself_ enough to void the coverage in any case.)


----------



## killer b (Mar 14, 2017)

kabbes said:


> This is precisely the point that I made right at the start of this whole insurance diversion.  It's absolutely the case.


Oh, I know - it just looks like the diversion is now wrangling over things that are much further down the line than the point at which the insurers would have coughed up (if they existed at all).


----------



## Spymaster (Mar 14, 2017)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> Not it ain't; you've been saying that Monroe's team were after Hopkins due to the serious harm the tweets caused and that, " this case has lowered the bar regarding what constitutes "serious harm" in libel cases."
> 
> Which of course it doesn't as the judge quite rightly pointed out that the harm was not serious.


No. Again, read the judgement.

It's not about what Munroe's team were "after Hopkins for". It was that Hopkins defence were arguing that that "serious harm" had not been caused. 

You're agreeing with me.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Mar 14, 2017)

Spymaster said:


> No. Again, read the judgement.
> 
> It's not about what Munroe's team were "after Hopkins for". It was that Hopkins defence were arguing that that "serious harm" had not been caused.
> 
> You're agreeing with me.







What do you mean by this:  this case has lowered the bar regarding what constitutes "serious harm" in libel cases.


----------



## ffsear (Mar 14, 2017)

8den said:


> Also surely they can't have been her counsel when she rejected the 5k...



Well she rejected the 5k on Twitter.  Which I don't think is classed an actual claim.  It would be notice of a circumstance that could give rise to a claim.  Do we actually know what the claimats lawyers actually asked for when the wrote to Hopkins lawyers?  I'm guessing it would have been a lot more once the lawyers  (the real winners here!) got involved.


----------



## Spymaster (Mar 14, 2017)

killer b said:


> That Hopkins' lawyers thought she could win is pretty irrelevant here isn't it? If she had insurance, her insurers would have looked at the 5 grand offer on the table and said 'yep that's fine' and paid it. They simply wouldn't have been prepared to risk a court case which would likely have cost them more than that regardless who won.





kabbes said:


> This is precisely the point that I made right at the start of this whole insurance diversion.  It's absolutely the case.



This assumes that the £5k offer was still on the table by the time lawyers got involved. It was an off-the-cuff offer made by Monroe on the morning of the Tweet exchange, not a serious offer made through lawyers.

<edit: as ffsear says above>


----------



## 8den (Mar 14, 2017)

christ urban hair splitting.

These last two pages have been about whether Hopkins

A) Had insurance.

B) Said insurance would cover her liability.

But there's no evidence Hopkins had said insurance and as demonstrated, there's no way an insurance company would feel obliged to honour Hopkins using it to cover her costs.


----------



## DotCommunist (Mar 14, 2017)

she should take it all out in tenners then post a vid of herself bathing in it while going 'Katie's money, feels so good on mah skin' like cartman.


----------



## ffsear (Mar 14, 2017)

8den said:


> But there's no evidence Hopkins had said insurance and as demonstrated, there's no way an insurance company would feel obliged to honour Hopkins using it to cover her costs.




I agree,  no evidence that she actually had insurance.  But i just think you'd be fucking mental to take a 22 month legal battle all the way to the high court if you didn't have insurance company picking up some of the costs.   Then again,  she is fucking mental


----------



## 8den (Mar 14, 2017)

ffsear said:


> I agree,  no evidence that she actually had insurance.  But i just think you'd be fucking mental to take a 22 month legal battle all the way to the high court if you didn't have insurance company picking up some of the costs.   Then again,  she is fucking mental



Oh thank god, he's beginning to get it.

Kate Hopkins had (NHS) surgery to remove part of her brain earlier this year (no really) and doctors are amazed to discover that Lobotomys appear to not effect I.Q. in either direction.


----------



## Spymaster (Mar 14, 2017)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> What do you mean by this:  this case has lowered the bar regarding what constitutes "serious harm" in libel cases.


Again, read the judgement. It goes into complex detail as to what is "serious harm" and what is just 'hurt feelings'.




			
				Bahnhoff Strasse said:
			
		

> Which of course it doesn't as the judge quite rightly pointed out that the harm was not serious.


No, you're wrong. And so is the Guardian piece that you got that from:




			
				The Judgement said:
			
		

> In this case, however, the issues on serious harm have developed, and the evidence and argument has spawned a reasonably complex set of interlocking or overlapping sub-issues. This is mainly due to the way that the case for Ms Hopkins has been pleaded and pursued. There are no less than 11 main issues.* I have reached the clear conclusion that the Serious Harm requirement is satisfied,* on the straightforward basis that the tweets complained of have a tendency to cause harm to this claimant’s reputation in the eyes of third parties, of a kind that would be serious for her.


----------



## Dogsauce (Mar 14, 2017)

ffsear said:


> I agree,  no evidence that she actually had insurance.  But i just think you'd be fucking mental to take a 22 month legal battle all the way to the high court if you didn't have insurance company picking up some of the costs.   Then again,  she is fucking mental



I dunno, suddenly everyone is talking about Katie Hopkins. Isn't that the sort of thing she wants? Probably cheap for the money as it'll enhance her profile and career. Plus she gets to play the victim, and enhance her edginess, 'the truth they don't want you to hear' and all that shite.


----------



## kabbes (Mar 14, 2017)

ffsear said:


> Well she rejected the 5k on Twitter.  Which I don't think is classed an actual claim.  It would be notice of a circumstance that could give rise to a claim.  Do we actually know what the claimats lawyers actually asked for when the wrote to Hopkins lawyers?  I'm guessing it would have been a lot more once the lawyers  (the real winners here!) got involved.


If she was insured, as soon as she received an offer of any kind, she would have had to have placed it in the hands of the insurers.


----------



## killer b (Mar 14, 2017)

300 grand on a libel case isn't a cheap profile raising. 

We probably should stop talking about her tho


----------



## Spymaster (Mar 14, 2017)

ffsear said:


> I agree,  no evidence that she actually had insurance.  But i just think you'd be fucking mental to take a 22 month legal battle all the way to the high court if you didn't have insurance company picking up some of the costs.


Unless perhaps you were confident of winning and had a barrister telling you that you would.


----------



## 8den (Mar 14, 2017)

killer b said:


> 300 grand on a libel case isn't a cheap profile raising.
> 
> We probably should stop talking about her tho



Napkin maths, I think she'll need to roughly sell half a million copies of her new book just to cover the costs of this trial, which means it'd need to be one of the best sellers of the year. Unlikely.


----------



## Spymaster (Mar 14, 2017)

kabbes said:


> If she was insured, as soon as she received an offer of any kind, she would have had to have placed it in the hands of the insurers.


Who would've told her to speak to a lawyer (QC) if she wanted to defend the action, according to the terms you posted earlier.


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 14, 2017)

Spymaster said:


> Who would've told her to speak to a lawyer (QC) if she wanted to defend the action, according to the terms you posted earlier.


to a barrister, who may or may not be a queen's counsel. you don't have to be a qc to be a good barrister


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 14, 2017)

8den said:


> Napkin maths, I think she'll need to roughly sell half a million copies of her new book just to cover the costs of this trial, which means it'd need to be one of the best sellers of the year. Unlikely.


if there is a great shortage of toilet paper she may be onto a winner.


----------



## Spymaster (Mar 14, 2017)

Pickman's model said:


> to a barrister, who may or may not be a queen's counsel. you don't have to be a qc to be a good barrister


No, but the terms that Kabbes posted earlier require the advice of "a QC or similar".


----------



## kabbes (Mar 14, 2017)

Spymaster said:


> Who would've told her to speak to a lawyer (QC) if she wanted to defend the action, according to the terms you posted earlier.


The insurers would absolutely not just leave it up to her as to whether or not she takes an offer on the table.  If you have casualty insurance then once the claim is reported, the insurer effectively becomes you from a legal perspective.  You give up the right to make those kind of decisions, pretty much.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Mar 14, 2017)

Spymaster said:


> Again, read the judgement. It goes into complex detail as to what is "serious harm" and what is just 'hurt feelings'.
> 
> 
> No, you're wrong. And so is the Guardian piece that you got that from:




How on earth does this lower the bar?

*



			I have reached the clear conclusion that the Serious Harm requirement is satisfied,
		
Click to expand...

*


> on the straightforward basis that the tweets complained of have a tendency to cause harm to this claimant’s reputation in the eyes of third parties, of a kind that would be serious for her.



Anyone reading Hopkins' tweet would be disgusted that the daughter of a Falklands veteran approves of the defiling of war memorials, which would satisfy serious harm.

The fact that the tweet was removed in a relatively short space of time meant that the level of harm that actually did result was not so serious.

Hence the relatively low award of £24k.


----------



## Spymaster (Mar 14, 2017)

kabbes said:


> The insurers would absolutely not just leave it up to her as to whether or not she takes an offer on the table.


Of course not. They'd involve lawyers. In this case "a QC or similar".


----------



## Spymaster (Mar 14, 2017)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> Anyone reading Hopkins' tweet would be disgusted that the daughter of a Falklands veteran approves of the defiling of war memorials, which would satisfy serious harm.


 A minute ago you were saying that it didn't.



			
				Bahnhoff Strasse said:
			
		

> ... as the judge quite rightly pointed out that the harm was not serious


----------



## not-bono-ever (Mar 14, 2017)

Why does everything have to descend to pedantry ? let us all be united in the joy of katey shitkins being publicly humiliated


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Mar 14, 2017)

Spymaster said:


> A minute ago you were saying that it didn't.



Did you read the whole of post #765?



> The fact that the tweet was removed in a relatively short space of time meant that the level of harm that actually did result was not so serious.
> 
> Hence the relatively low award of £24k.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Mar 14, 2017)

not-bono-ever said:


> Why does everything have to descend to pedantry ? let us all be united in the joy of katey shitkins being publicly humiliated



We have capacity for pedantry and schadenfreude, ta.


----------



## not-bono-ever (Mar 14, 2017)

Multitasking skillz


----------



## 8den (Mar 14, 2017)

Spymaster said:


> Of course not. They'd involve lawyers. In this case "a QC or similar".



Oh for fucks sake, can we just quit with the pedantic navel gazing, ffsear was wrong, and it's baffling what point you're trying to make still.


----------



## DotCommunist (Mar 14, 2017)

not-bono-ever said:


> Why does everything have to descend to pedantry ? let us all be united in the joy of katey shitkins being publicly humiliated


and she almost certainly not insured anyway, she's an arrogant prick who's used to talking shit about people and getting away with it. Looks like its cost her this time.


----------



## Spymaster (Mar 14, 2017)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> Did you read the whole of post #765?


Yes. It's a bollocks post that contradicts itself. 

The extent of the harm is either serious (enough to satisfy the requirement) or it isn't (and the requirement, and therefore the action, fails). 

There is no requirement as to HOW SERIOUS the "serious harm" should be


----------



## Spymaster (Mar 14, 2017)

8den said:


> Oh for fucks sake, can we just quit with the pedantic navel gazing, ffsear was wrong, and it's baffling what point you're trying to make still.


He may have been wrong to assert that insurers would definitely be involved but nothing has been posted to categorically confirm that they weren't/aren't.


----------



## 8den (Mar 14, 2017)

So we're all in agreement that her hypothetical insurance will not cover her costs.


----------



## Spymaster (Mar 14, 2017)

8den said:


> So we're all in agreement that her hypothetical insurance will not cover her costs.


I don't think we are.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Mar 14, 2017)

Spymaster said:


> Yes. It's a bollocks post that contradicts itself.



No, the tweet was bad enough to cross the threshold of serious harm. The fact that the actual harm caused was not so serious was more luck than judgement. Had serious harm resulted the damages would likely have been far greater than £24k, but the judge would not let Hopkins off with no damages cos she's a nasty, vicious shitcunt.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Mar 14, 2017)

8den said:


> So we're all in agreement that her hypothetical insurance will not cover her costs.



All except spy, who I think should present us with other examples of insurance that exempt us from the consequences of our criminal behaviour.


----------



## Spymaster (Mar 14, 2017)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> No, the tweet was bad enough to cross the threshold of serious harm. The fact that the actual harm caused was not so serious was more luck than judgement. Had serious harm resulted the damages would likely have been far greater than £24k, but the judge would not let Hopkins off ...


To coin a cliché, this post should be taken out and shot!


> ... she's a nasty, vicious shitcunt.


Agreed.


----------



## weltweit (Mar 14, 2017)

I just checked out Hopkins's twitter feed, the court decision doesn't seem to have slowed her output, she is still churning it out, presently attacking the "Ginger Dwarf of the North" ..


----------



## DaveCinzano (Mar 14, 2017)

not-bono-ever said:


> Why does everything have to descend to pedantry ? let us all be united in the joy of katey shitkins being publicly humiliated


----------



## 8den (Mar 14, 2017)

weltweit said:


> I just checked out Hopkins's twitter feed, the court decision doesn't seem to have slowed her output, she is still churning it out, presently attacking the "Ginger Dwarf of the North" ..


Best to ignore her from now on. She's desperate for attention to pay her fees.

Worse case scenario if she does become destitute over this, I'm sure Jack Monroe can offer her some budget catering tips. (nicked off some clever sod off twitter)


----------



## DotCommunist (Mar 14, 2017)

weltweit said:


> I just checked out Hopkins's twitter feed, the court decision doesn't seem to have slowed her output, she is still churning it out, presently attacking the "Ginger Dwarf of the North" ..


safe behind the Mails massive massive libel fund.


----------



## Spymaster (Mar 14, 2017)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> All except spy, who I think should present us with other examples of insurance that exempt us from the consequences of our criminal behaviour.


I don't need to. A couple of posters here have been claiming that there's _"no way" _that defamation insurance (assuming she had it) would cover her costs. That might be the case, but so far nothing has been posted here to categorically support that claim.


----------



## Kaka Tim (Mar 14, 2017)

Im no exeprt, but im pretty sure that you cant get insurance to cover the potential legal costs of you deliberately cunting someone off on the internet - anymore than you can get health insurance to cover the medical bills resulting from deliberately setting fire to your own bollocks.


----------



## Spymaster (Mar 14, 2017)

DaveCinzano said:


>


We'll have reached a sorry state of affairs if we can't have a bunfight on a Hopkins thread!!!


----------



## brogdale (Mar 14, 2017)

DotCommunist said:


> safe behind the Mails massive massive libel fund.


Exactly; the cost of brand building and (Overton) window moving. Would probably be tax deductible if they pay any.


----------



## killer b (Mar 14, 2017)

Kaka Tim said:


> Im no exeprt, but im pretty sure that you cant get insurance to cover the potential legal costs of you deliberately cunting someone off on the internet - anymore than you can get health insurance to cover the medical bills resulting from deliberately setting fire to your own bollocks.


I'd imagine most private health plans would cover self-harm wouldn't they?


----------



## Treacle Toes (Mar 14, 2017)

weltweit said:


> I just checked out Hopkins's twitter feed, the court decision doesn't seem to have slowed her output, she is still churning it out, presently attacking the "Ginger Dwarf of the North" ..



Of course she's keen to pretend that this case hasn't bothered her in the slightest. I don't believe her for one second.


----------



## 8den (Mar 14, 2017)

Spymaster said:


> I don't need to. A couple of posters here have been claiming that there's _"no way" _that defamation insurance would cover her costs. That might be the case, but so far nothing has been posted here to categorically support that claim.



No ffsear claimed that everything would be covered by her liability insurance, and I said there's no insurance that would cover that type of libel, and we got a few links to general media insurance policies who clearly state they wouldn't cover this.


----------



## 8den (Mar 14, 2017)

killer b said:


> I'd imagine most private health plans would cover self-harm wouldn't they?



That'd be under mental health.

This would be like if Hopkins' was a doctor and she stabbed someone and then expecting her medical insurance to cover it.


----------



## Spymaster (Mar 14, 2017)

8den said:


> No ffsear claimed that everything would be covered by her liability insurance, and I said there's no insurance that would cover that type of libel ...


You said that but you didn't evidence it. So far it's just a claim made by 8den on the internet. You also didn't qualify what you meant by "that type of libel".


> ... and we got a few links to general media insurance policies who clearly state they wouldn't cover this.


I missed those. Can you quote the relevant bits.


----------



## teqniq (Mar 14, 2017)

ViolentPanda said:


> So what you're actually saying is that the dog fucked her up the arse, in lieu of a pork sausage being stuck up there?


It was merely speculation ociffer, honest.


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 14, 2017)

Spymaster said:


> No, but the terms that Kabbes posted earlier require the advice of "a QC or similar".


yes, an experienced barrister would be "similar"


----------



## Spymaster (Mar 14, 2017)

Pickman's model said:


> yes, an experienced barrister would be "similar"


Probably. They do go on to define it as someone "to be mutually agreed upon by the insured and the company".


----------



## 8den (Mar 14, 2017)

Spymaster said:


> You said that but you didn't evidence it. So far it's just a claim made by 8den on the internet. You also didn't qualify what you meant by "that type of libel".
> .



In that it will cover libel and defamation where it is shown to be accidental or in that journalist made a genuine error while showing due care and attention.


----------



## existentialist (Mar 14, 2017)

ffsear said:


> I agree,  no evidence that she actually had insurance.  But i just think you'd be fucking mental to take a 22 month legal battle all the way to the high court if you didn't have insurance company picking up some of the costs.   Then again,  she is fucking mental


She probably didn't feel she had a choice. 1, because she doesn't strike me as someone who would find it easy to deliver a wholehearted mea culpa, and 2. because if she may have felt that if she backed down on this, she'd be forever backing down.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Mar 14, 2017)

teqniq said:


> It was merely speculation ociffer, honest.



Of what breed was the speculated-upon dog?


----------



## Wilf (Mar 14, 2017)

Only on urban, part 94:

Only on urban could you find a discussion of journalism and insurance intertwined, double helix fashion, with an exploration of sex with out canine chums.


----------



## Libertad (Mar 14, 2017)

Wilf said:


> Only on urban, part 94:
> 
> Only on urban could you find a discussion of journalism and insurance intertwined, double helix fashion, with an exploration of sex with out canine chums.



And hide the sausage.


----------



## Wilf (Mar 14, 2017)

Libertad said:


> And hide the sausage.


I think that if you check your policy exclusions...


----------



## Spymaster (Mar 14, 2017)

8den said:


> In that it will cover libel and defamation where it is shown to be accidental or in that journalist made a genuine error while showing due care and attention.


It was clearly accidental initially. She thought it was someone else. That's the absolute epitome of "an accident"!!!


----------



## Spymaster (Mar 14, 2017)

existentialist said:


> She probably didn't feel she had a choice. 1, because she doesn't strike me as someone who would find it easy to deliver a wholehearted mea culpa, and 2. because if she may have felt that if she backed down on this, she'd be forever backing down.


And 3. the lawyers said she could win.


----------



## 8den (Mar 14, 2017)

Spymaster said:


> It was clearly accidental initially. She thought it was someone else. That's the absolute epitome of "an accident"!!!



She made no effort  to verify her source or identify Munroe before making her accusation, she failed her duty of care.


----------



## 8den (Mar 14, 2017)

Spymaster said:


> And 3. the lawyers said she could win.



And they did.


----------



## Spymaster (Mar 14, 2017)

8den said:


> She made no effort  to verify her source or identify Munroe before making her accusation, she failed her duty of care.


Now you're just making stuff up. Kabbes posted a list of exclusions to a defamation policy, none of which would seem to prevent a claim being made in this case. You need to evidence your case with some exclusions that would, not just keep banging on about stuff that _you firmly think is true_.

Show me: a) what was her "duty of care"? b) how she failed in it, c) that it would preclude her claiming costs on a defamation insurance policy (if she had it) ...

With links and stuff, rather than just thumping the table.


----------



## Spymaster (Mar 14, 2017)

8den said:


> She made no effort  to verify her source or identify Munroe before making her accusation, she failed her duty of care.


You keep saying this!

Show me a policy clause where it defines and excludes "failing in duty of care" with respect to defamation. Is it even legally defined?


----------



## Spymaster (Mar 14, 2017)

8den said:


> She made no effort  to verify her source or identify Munroe before making her accusation ...


But she did subsequently admit that she was wrong.


----------



## Spymaster (Mar 14, 2017)

8den said:


> And they did.


----------



## ginger_syn (Mar 14, 2017)

8den said:


> And they did.


This makes no sense at all did you forget a smilie


----------



## kabbes (Mar 14, 2017)

Spymaster said:


> Now you're just making stuff up. Kabbes posted a list of exclusions to a defamation policy, none of which would seem to prevent a claim being made in this case.


You're the only one who seems to think this.


----------



## Spymaster (Mar 14, 2017)

kabbes said:


> You're the only one who seems to think this.


I doubt it. It's possible that there are exclusions that would negate her making a claim. You haven't posted anything that supports that yet though. Neither has 8den. You're just agreeing with each other.


----------



## kabbes (Mar 14, 2017)

Spymaster said:


> I doubt it. It's possible that there are exclusions that would negate her making a claim. You haven't posted anything that supports that yet though. Neither has 8den. You're just agreeing with each other.


:shrug:

I posted the exclusions.  They're self-evident.  If you want to argue that black is white then knock yourself out.  I don't need you to agree with me on it.


----------



## Spymaster (Mar 14, 2017)

kabbes said:


> I posted the exclusions.  They're self-evident.


They are. But they don't say what you think they do. On the contrary, they refute your position.


----------



## kabbes (Mar 14, 2017)

Spymaster said:


> They are. But they don't say what you think they do.


If only one of us was used to dealing with insurance contracts and had been in countless insurance litigations.


----------



## killer b (Mar 14, 2017)




----------



## Spymaster (Mar 14, 2017)

kabbes said:


> If only one of us was used to dealing with insurance contracts and had been in countless insurance litigations.


Ah, the appeal to authority. Wondered when that was coming!

Clearly your experience is in another area of insurance because you've made a very obvious mistake here but are refusing to back down. Why you insist on clinging to it, I don't know. It doesn't change much.


----------



## Athos (Mar 14, 2017)

Spymaster said:


> They are. But they don't say what you think they do. On the contrary, they refute your position.



They really don't. You're taking bollocks.


----------



## kabbes (Mar 14, 2017)

Spymaster said:


> Ah, the appeal to authority. Wondered when that was coming!


Oh come on, it was funny.



> You've made a very obvious mistake here but are refusing to back down. Why you insist on clinging to it, I don't know. It doesn't change much.


Yes, it's a mystery why one clings on to self-evident truths.

Look, exclusion c is:


> liability arising from material which to the knowledge of the Insured is false or is likely to result in a claim for Libel or Slander


You have already acknowledged that the judge himself identified the "social anthrax" tweet as being an aggravating factor.  You yourself posted the judge's comments:


> I remain of the view I expressed in Barron v Vines [2016] EWHC 1226 (QB) [22], that when malice is alleged in aggravation of damages, “… the issue is not the actual state of mind of the defendant. It is whether the claimants have suffered additional injury to feelings as a result of the defendant’s outward behaviour. If the defendant has behaved in a way which leads the claimants reasonably to believe he acted maliciously that is enough.”


So Hopkins presented material that to the knowledge of the Insured is likely to result in a claim for Libel or Slander.

Bear in mind that the interpretation of these clauses is based on the spirit of the clause -- the intent of the contract -- not the absolute letter.  To equivocate about whether the "social anthrax" tweet was itself libel is to misunderstand the nature of these cases.  It clearly made a claim for libel more likely, hence it would void the policy.

That's without even considering the other exclusions.


----------



## Spymaster (Mar 14, 2017)

Athos said:


> They really don't. You're taking bollocks.


 Ahhh, there you are. Wondered when you'd turn up, dickhead!


----------



## kabbes (Mar 14, 2017)

And my interpretation of the exclusions fits the "reasonable man" understanding too.  Nobody would reasonably expect that a libel policy allows you to say what you want, when you want and follow it up however you want, safe in the knowledge that you are covered by an insurer.  A reasonable person would expect that they have some kind of duty to reasonably avoid bringing a libel case against themselves.  That is the spirit of the exclusions.


----------



## Athos (Mar 14, 2017)

Spymaster said:


> Ahhh, there you are. Wondered when you'd turn up, dickhead!



Great comeback. 

Unfortunately, this is another example of you pontificating on a subject where you know far less than you think, and far less than the person with whom you're disagreeing.


----------



## rutabowa (Mar 14, 2017)

If insurance pays out on this I will streak through london with a sausage


----------



## DotCommunist (Mar 14, 2017)

use a cumberland curled one to cover your shame


----------



## rutabowa (Mar 14, 2017)

I'm not going to have to do it cos even a 4 year old child could see it is obviously not going to happen, i dunno how there are pages and pages discussing it ha


----------



## Spymaster (Mar 14, 2017)

kabbes said:


> And my interpretation of the exclusions fits the "reasonable man" understanding too.  Nobody would reasonably expect that a libel policy allows you to say what you want, when you want and follow it up however you want, safe in the knowledge that you are covered by an insurer.  A reasonable person would expect that they have some kind of duty to reasonably avoid bringing a libel case against themselves.


That's not at issue though. It's highly unlikely that she thought "I'm going to libel you because I have insurance (if indeed she had)"

At the time she (Hopkins) could reasonably have thought that she hadn't libelled Munroe because, a) she had the wrong person, and b) she removed the tweet when she realised that she had the wrong person. The aggravating tweet, Hopkins would just say (at the time) was her being rude to someone she had de facto admitted she was wrong about by removing the tweet, and _that was argued_ during the trial.

You're viewing this with hindsight knowing that she lost the case.


----------



## kabbes (Mar 14, 2017)

Spymaster said:


> That's not at issue though. It's highly unlikely that she thought "I'm going to libel you because I have insurance (if indeed she had)"
> 
> At the time she (Hopkins) could reasonably have thought that she hadn't libelled Munroe because, a) she had the wrong person, and b) she removed the tweet when she realised that she had the wrong person. The aggravating tweet, Hopkins would just say (at the time) was her being rude to someone she had de facto admitted she was wrong about by removing the tweet, and _that was argued_ during the case.
> 
> You're viewing this with hindsight knowing that she lost the case.


... and the fact that she argued this and lost is exactly why an insurer would have been falling over themselves to avoid risking such loss by reaching for the £5k offer.

You can argue that the £5k offer was "just a tweet", but there is no evidence whatsoever that Hopkins ever went back to try to make good on it.

But either way, the insurer _does_ get to avoid the claim in hindsight.  They would avoid it by citing the judge's decision that she aggravated the situation rather than attempting to mitigate it.


----------



## DotCommunist (Mar 14, 2017)

if the tweet itself is taken seriously enough to be actionable surely the offer from monroe of a 5k apology is of equal weight? You can't say 'its just twitter' when the case surrounds shit said on 'just twitter'


----------



## ffsear (Mar 14, 2017)

kabbes said:


> You can argue that the £5k offer was "just a tweet", but there is no evidence whatsoever that Hopkins ever went back to try to make good on it.
> 
> .




The requested was to pay £5k to charity was it not?   That would be an admission of liability, and then she would have left herself wide open to a liable claim.  That is not mitigation in the eyes of an insurance company.

I've never dealt with this kind of matter, but i do deal with professional indemnity and E&O for architects, engineers, banks and Accountants.  The first step in mitigation is always contacting your insurance company first and let them or their lawyers draft a response to the claimant.


----------



## Spymaster (Mar 14, 2017)

kabbes said:


> ... and the fact that she argued this and lost is exactly why an insurer would have been falling over themselves to avoid risking such loss by reaching for the £5k offer.


Unless on the advice of lawyers they felt that they could avoid paying even the £5k by successfully defending the action.


> You can argue that the £5k offer was "just a tweet", but there is no evidence whatsoever that Hopkins ever went back to try to make good on it.


I'm not arguing that, but we do know that the 5k offer was withdrawn by Munroe, via solicitors, in August. The court proceedings weren't issued until December.


----------



## ffsear (Mar 14, 2017)

She also could have bought ATE insurance.

After the Event (ATE) Insurance


----------



## killer b (Mar 14, 2017)

I think any pleasure available has been wrung from this wretched diversion. Time to move on now please.


----------



## Athos (Mar 14, 2017)

ffsear said:


> The requested was to pay £5k to charity was it not?   That would be an admission of liability, and then she would have left herself wide open to a liable claim.  That is not mitigation in the eyes of an insurance company.
> 
> I've never dealt with this kind of matter, but i do deal with professional indemnity and E&O for architects, engineers, banks and Accountants.  The first step in mitigation is always contacting your insurance company first and let them or their lawyers draft a response to the claimant.



If she had insurance and didn't contactthem at the very earliest opportunity, that'd likely amount to them being able to avoid the claim.  And, if she had notified them, it's highly unlikley tht the insurer would have chosen to fight this rather than settle for £5K.


----------



## Athos (Mar 14, 2017)

ffsear said:


> She also could have bought ATE insurance.
> 
> After the Event (ATE) Insurance



It's practically impossible to get ATE insurance as the defendant in a defamation suit.


----------



## mojo pixy (Mar 14, 2017)

_I'm calling to get insurance for my car. Yes, I have just crashed it..._


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Mar 14, 2017)

mojo pixy said:


> _I'm calling to get insurance for my car. Yes, I have just crashed it DELIBERATELY..._


----------



## 8den (Mar 14, 2017)

Spymaster said:


> Now you're just making stuff up. Kabbes posted a list of exclusions to a defamation policy, none of which would seem to prevent a claim being made in this case. You need to evidence your case with some exclusions that would, not just keep banging on about stuff that _you firmly think is true_.
> 
> Show me: a) what was her "duty of care"? b) how she failed in it, c) that it would preclude her claiming costs on a defamation insurance policy (if she had it) ...
> 
> With links and stuff, rather than just thumping the table.





Spymaster said:


> You keep saying this!
> 
> Show me a policy clause where it defines and excludes "failing in duty of care" with respect to defamation. Is it even legally defined?



Sorry, I explained what a what a "duty of care" is using an analogy in a previous post. 

Yes of course "duty of care" is legally defined.

Duty of care - Wikipedia

*IF* Hopkins had insurance covering libel, she would have (or should have) understood, that entering into her agreement with the insurance company that required her to adhere to a "duty of care". Much in the way the vast majority of insurance policies will be void if you drive drunk, because by driving drunk you've  breached the "duty of care" you agreed to with the insurance policy. Someone with libel insurance must adhere to a duty of care in what they publish or say, or they will find the insurance invalid. 

Is that clear? Or shall I dumb it down a bit more? 




ginger_syn said:


> This makes no sense at all did you forget a smilie



D'oh.


----------



## 8den (Mar 14, 2017)

kabbes said:


> :shrug:
> 
> I posted the exclusions.  They're self-evident.  If you want to argue that black is white then knock yourself out.  I don't need you to agree with me on it.



QFT.


----------



## Spymaster (Mar 14, 2017)

8den said:


> Or shall I dumb it down a bit more?


No need. I'd rather that you just do as you've been repeatedly asked and provide evidence that she would have failed in this duty of care.

I'm bored with this now and you're just blustering, so please refer to posts #803, 807, 827, and 831.


----------



## 8den (Mar 14, 2017)

Spymaster said:


> No need. I'd rather that you just do as you've been repeatedly asked and provide evidence that she would have failed in this duty of care.
> 
> I'm bored with this now and you're just blustering, so please refer to posts #803, 807, 827, and 831.



If. Hopkins. Had. This. Insurance. She. Would. Have. Had. A. Duty. Of. Care. To. Check. If. Something. Was. True. Before. Publishing. It.


----------



## Spymaster (Mar 14, 2017)

8den said:


> If. Hopkins. Had. This. Insurance. She. Would. Have. Had. A. Duty. Of. Care. To. Check. If. Something. Was. True. Before. Publishing. It.


Prove. It.

I'd agree that she would have a duty not to knowingly libel someone but you're going much further than that.


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 14, 2017)

8den said:


> If. Hopkins. Had. This. Insurance. She. Would. Have. Had. A. Duty. Of. Care. To. Check. If. Something. Was. True. Before. Publishing. It.


Yeh. You sound like a lobotomised cyberman with a grammar disorder. Words make more sense when combined in a 'sentence'.


----------



## killer b (Mar 14, 2017)

The Wikipedia definition of 'duty of care' defo won the argument there.


----------



## Athos (Mar 14, 2017)

Spymaster said:


> Prove. It.
> 
> I'd agree that she would have a duty not to knowingly libel someone but you're going much further than that.



It's practically impossible to prove the negative in a case such as this, but, assuming Kabbes' sample policy is an industry standard, why wouldn't para g exclude her from cover for the tweets?


----------



## 8den (Mar 14, 2017)

Spymaster said:


> Prove. It.



Yeah No.



> I'd agree that she would have a duty not to knowingly libel someone but you're going much further than that.



No that's' the cut and dry of it.

Why wouldn't this particular policy apply a duty of care to Hopkins? From the insurer's point of view that'd be lunacy, they'd be on the hook for ANYTHING Hopkins said. 

A "Duty of Care" is standard legal definition, that you'll find in every insurance policy you've ever taken. Whether it's house/personal/car/libel insurance you have a duty of care to adhere to take reasonable steps when performing certain acts that may potentially harm others. It'd be extraordinary for Hopkin's contract *NOT* to have this.

You're asking me to prove that Hopkins' insurance, (which may or may not have had existed) has a clause in it that allows her to libel someone and she does not need to adhere to a standard principle of tort law?

You may as well ask me what unicorn tears taste like, or what dragon farts smell like?


----------



## Spymaster (Mar 14, 2017)

8den said:


> Yeah No.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


[/QUOTE]
Show us a clause that equates to what you are saying, ffs! (i.e. that her "duty of care" to the insurance company extends to _checking that everything she writes is true_).

That's what you are arguing.


----------



## 8den (Mar 14, 2017)

Show us a clause that equates to what you are saying, ffs! (i.e. that her "duty of care" to the insurance company extends to _checking that everything she writes is true_).[/QUOTE]

You want me to show you a clause in a document that may or may not exist?


----------



## Spymaster (Mar 14, 2017)

8den said:


> Show us a clause that equates to what you are saying, ffs! (i.e. that her "duty of care" to the insurance company extends to _checking that everything she writes is true_).



You want me to show you a clause in a document that may or may not exist?[/QUOTE]

I want you to produce evidence that what you're saying is true and not just something that you've made up, as is my suspicion.

Kabbes produced a document that showed that if someone_ knowingly libels someone else_ they wouldn't be covered. You should be able to do something similar to support your assertion that 'if the insured does not check that what they are writing is true, they are not covered', or even simply something that defines the extent of "duty of care" in relation to defamation insurance. Or, anything close to that!!!


----------



## Athos (Mar 14, 2017)

Spymaster said:


> I want you to produce evidence that what you're saying is true and not just something that you've made up, as is my suspicion.
> 
> Kabbes produced a document that showed that if someone_ knowingly libels someone else_ they wouldn't be covered. You should be able to do something similar to support your assertion that 'if the insured does not check that what they are writing is true, they are not covered', or even simply something that defines the extent of "duty of care" in relation to defamation insurance. Or, anything close to that!!!



But it was in her knowledge; she knew that LP had defended the desecration of war memorials; that knowledge is not negated by her sloppy misattribution to Jack Munroe.


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 14, 2017)

8den said:


> Yeah No.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Let's ask another legal eagle's opinion, diamond's


----------



## Athos (Mar 14, 2017)

Furthermore Spymaster, Kabbes' document says:



> Conditions applicable to this Extension
> 1. The Insured shall take all reasonable precautions to avoid Libel or Slander...



The requirement to take all reasonable precautions is akin to what 8den refers to as the duty of care.  Given she published without even the most basic fact check, Hopkins failed to take all reasonable precautions to avoid libel or sander, and so would have breached the first condition, meaning she wouldn't be covered if any applicable policy had similar terms (which it's alomst inconceivable that it wouldn't).


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 14, 2017)

Spymaster why are you acting like this? I'm really quite concerned, pa


----------



## Spymaster (Mar 14, 2017)

Pickman's model said:


> Spymaster why are you acting like this? I'm really quite concerned, pa


You know me, son. If there ain't a fight, start one.


----------



## Athos (Mar 14, 2017)

Spymaster said:


> You know me, son. If there ain't a fight, start one.



You can start them, ok; just not finish them.


----------



## 8den (Mar 14, 2017)

Spymaster said:


> You know me, son. If there ain't a fight, start one.



And now you've made Athos look good, I hope you're happy.


----------



## Athos (Mar 14, 2017)

8den said:


> And now you've made Athos look good, I hope you're happy.



He's used to it.


----------



## Spymaster (Mar 14, 2017)

8den said:


> And now you've made Athos look good, I hope you're happy.


Is he still out there?


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Mar 14, 2017)




----------



## Athos (Mar 14, 2017)

Spymaster said:


> Is he still out there?



Very convenient for you to imply that you're ignoring me (despite replying to me a few hours ago), now I've blown your argument out of the water, in a number of respects. Lol.


----------



## twentythreedom (Mar 14, 2017)

You guys


----------



## not a trot (Mar 14, 2017)

As Hopkins is an annoying cunt perhaps she used that other annoying cunts Go Compare site for insurance


----------



## teqniq (Mar 14, 2017)

ViolentPanda said:


> Of what breed was the speculated-upon dog?


Erm the sausage or dachshund variety ...maybe.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Mar 14, 2017)

teqniq said:


> Erm the sausage or dachshund variety ...maybe.



Poor little doggies.


----------



## wiskey (Mar 15, 2017)

She's on the R4 media show, I don't often hear her speak (don't know why R4 is giving her air space tbh)  - she's just vile isn't she! 'I think the defamation bar is as low as my labia'... She's slimy and vulgar and how the hell the presenter put up with her I don't know.


----------



## phillm (Mar 15, 2017)

She should have waited until she was dead before making the assertion..like that paedo McAlpine ..


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 15, 2017)

wiskey said:


> She's on the R4 media show, I don't often hear her speak (don't know why R4 is giving her air space tbh)  - she's just vile isn't she! 'I think the defamation bar is as low as my labia'... She's slimy and vulgar and how the hell the presenter put up with her I don't know.


she's there as the bailiffs are waiting outside her home


----------



## Treacle Toes (Mar 15, 2017)

Hatie speaks... Self serving, self assured and full of fucking shit. Apparently on twitter it's different, cos no-one believed her.

BBC Radio 4 - Radio 4 in Four, Katie Hopkins: “The word sorry is used too much nowadays”

_The bar is set as low as her labia_ apparently? She's going full on Milo now with such crass ohhhhhhhhhhhh aren't I edgy bollocks.


----------



## Shechemite (Mar 15, 2017)

Rutita1 said:


> Hatie speaks... Self serving, self assured and full of fucking shit. Apparently on twitter it's different, cos no-one believed her.
> 
> BBC Radio 4 - Radio 4 in Four, Katie Hopkins: “The word sorry is used too much nowadays”
> 
> _The bar is set as low as her labia_ apparently? She's going full on Milo now with such crass ohhhhhhhhhhhh aren't I edgy bollocks.



'Hatie' sounds too much like 'Haiti'. Isn't fair to associate the two, the latter's been through enough as it is


----------



## existentialist (Mar 15, 2017)

wiskey said:


> She's on the R4 media show, I don't often hear her speak (don't know why R4 is giving her air space tbh)  - she's just vile isn't she! 'I think the defamation bar is as low as my labia'... She's slimy and vulgar and how the hell the presenter put up with her I don't know.


TBH, I do wonder if perhaps she's, ah, "not well". That's such a blatantly gratuitous sexualisation of a concept, it's as if she just wanted to talk about her genitals, whatever the excuse.


----------



## existentialist (Mar 15, 2017)

MadeInBedlam said:


> 'Hatie' sounds too much like 'Haiti'. Isn't fair to associate the two, the latter's been through enough as it is


"Hattie", perhaps?


----------



## Shechemite (Mar 15, 2017)

existentialist said:


> TBH, I do wonder if perhaps she's, ah, "not well". That's such a blatantly gratuitous sexualisation of a concept, it's as if she just wanted to talk about her genitals, whatever the excuse.



Previously our Katie has been perfectly normal


----------



## existentialist (Mar 15, 2017)

MadeInBedlam said:


> Previously our Katie has been perfectly normal


----------



## Shechemite (Mar 15, 2017)

existentialist said:


> TBH, I do wonder if perhaps she's, ah, "not well". That's such a blatantly gratuitous sexualisation of a concept, it's as if she just wanted to talk about her genitals, whatever the excuse.



TBH I'm not sure her point. That she has particularly low (droopy?) labia, or that any labia would be a low bar for libel - as opposed to an elbow perhaps?


----------



## Shechemite (Mar 15, 2017)

existentialist said:


>



Well do you think her behaviour marks a significant departure from her normal presentation and/or is indicative of an episode of something or other?


----------



## fishfinger (Mar 15, 2017)

I thought she was referring to her facial labia. What she spews out of them has been cause for concern.


----------



## existentialist (Mar 15, 2017)

MadeInBedlam said:


> Well do you think her behaviour marks a significant departure from her normal presentation and/or is indicative of an episode of something or other?


No, not that. We know that Hopkins aims to shock - and appears to derive considerable delight from doing so. I think that is going to be the cross she ends up bearing - having to constantly calibrate her desire to be shocking with the need not to go too far. But society's tolerance of someone calling refugees "cockroaches" is at considerable odds to its willingness to hear a woman talking about her genitalia - to be shocking without wobbling dangerously over the line requires finesse, awareness (not least self-awareness), and humour. Her awareness seems to fluctuate, and the fact that she's willing to use such a gratuitously sexual metaphor to describe her reaction to this case suggests to me that maybe it's fluctuating on the low side.

So I guess what I mean by saying she's "not well" is that some external stress has caused her to overcompensate rather extravagantly in the other direction. In needing to be "not wrong" by being found against in the libel case, she has gone way too far in her attempt to discredit the standard by which she was judged: in other words, the extravagance of her metaphor is an indication of the distress this judgement is causing her.

Great, if it's all a carefully calculated and rational process on her part...but comments like the "labia" one make me wonder if she might not actually be operating from a particularly rational position. She's still accountable - up to the point that someone decides she's not competent to make such judgements - but...you know, it's that thing where someone suddenly takes a drugs overdose or checks into the Priory with some unspecified mental disorder, and we (some of us) start wondering if we haven't been a bit too harsh. Most people in their right minds don't refer gratuitously to their bits - and perhaps it's just a bit of Hopkins Hyperbole - but I can't help but wonder if she is hitting a major challenge right now.

Perhaps it will be the making of her. Certainly, anything that stops her torrent of bile and hatred would be a good thing.


----------



## Shechemite (Mar 15, 2017)

existentialist said:


> No, not that. We know that Hopkins aims to shock - and appears to derive considerable delight from doing so. I think that is going to be the cross she ends up bearing - having to constantly calibrate her desire to be shocking with the need not to go too far. But society's tolerance of someone calling refugees "cockroaches" is at considerable odds to its willingness to hear a woman talking about her genitalia - to be shocking without wobbling dangerously over the line requires finesse, awareness (not least self-awareness), and humour. Her awareness seems to fluctuate, and the fact that she's willing to use such a gratuitously sexual metaphor to describe her reaction to this case suggests to me that maybe it's fluctuating on the low side.
> 
> So I guess what I mean by saying she's "not well" is that some external stress has caused her to overcompensate rather extravagantly in the other direction. In needing to be "not wrong" by being found against in the libel case, she has gone way too far in her attempt to discredit the standard by which she was judged: in other words, the extravagance of her metaphor is an indication of the distress this judgement is causing her.
> 
> ...



Came across more like someone who enjoys behaving in a way that causes others discomfort continuing that logical progression.

Someone who enjoys the (feeling of) power by her use of words.  Talking about others has caused her problems, so now she needs to talk about herself instead.

Upsetting others by talking about oneself neccessitates talking about more uncomfortable subjects.


----------



## hipipol (Mar 15, 2017)

Dearie, Dearie Me.......
9 yr old "look at me" spawn of satans anal gonads grows up to be "utter self centred bitch" shocker
Its all so "unexpected" I may nee a small lie down........


----------



## Shechemite (Mar 15, 2017)

hipipol said:


> Dearie, Dearie Me.......
> 9 yr old "look at me" spawn of satans anal gonads grows up to be "utter self centred bitch" shocker
> Its all so "unexpected" I may nee a small lie down........



This is a useful contribution


----------



## hipipol (Mar 15, 2017)

MadeInBedlam said:


> This is a useful contribution


So kind
She may have been a Gateway for evil but guess what? Robespierre is dead, the "general" lurks in the wings
Todays battles, not yesterdays wars


----------



## Shechemite (Mar 15, 2017)

hipipol said:


> So kind
> She may have been a Gateway for evil but guess what? Robespierre is dead, the "general" lurks in the wings
> Todays battles, not yesterdays wars



Perhaps that lie down is the right move


----------



## hipipol (Mar 15, 2017)

MadeInBedlam said:


> Perhaps that lie down is the right move



Lovely coat geeze......


----------



## DaveCinzano (Mar 16, 2017)

Rutita1 said:


> Hatie speaks... Self serving, self assured and full of fucking shit.





MadeInBedlam said:


> 'Hatie' sounds too much like 'Haiti'. Isn't fair to associate the two, the latter's been through enough as it is



'Hatie speaks' sounds too much like 'Hattie Jacques'. Isn't fair to associate the two, the latter's been through enough as it is.


----------



## DaveCinzano (Mar 16, 2017)

existentialist said:


> "Hattie", perhaps?


Goddammit, this is what happens when one JC3s through a thread after being stuck at work all day


----------



## Shechemite (Mar 16, 2017)

hipipol said:


> Lovely coat geeze......




And a nice nap too


----------



## Wilf (Mar 16, 2017)

The Hopkins version


----------



## Treacle Toes (Mar 16, 2017)

Wilf said:


> The Hopkins version




Yep, she is that dog.


----------



## MrSpikey (Mar 16, 2017)

Spymaster said:


> I don't need to. A couple of posters here have been claiming that there's _"no way" _that defamation insurance (assuming she had it) would cover her costs. That might be the case, but so far nothing has been posted here to categorically support that claim.



Someone way upthread claimed that both sides were on "no win, no fee" deals with their legal teams.

I don't know if that is true or not, but if it were the case, it would imply Hopkins wasn't covered by insurance in this instance - if she were, the insurance company would appoint the legal team and deal with the costs whatever the result, at no cost to Hopkins (aside any excess etc on the policy). 

If she proceeded under "no win, no fee", then I think that's strong evidence she wasn't covered by defamation insurance in this matter.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Mar 16, 2017)

We have no idea if Ms Hopkins has an unusually low hanging labia as her offer to air it on Regent Street turned out to be yet another of her lies.


----------



## gosub (Mar 16, 2017)

Katie Hopkins 'very likely' to challenge Jack Monroe libel ruling

Not finished putting lawyers kids through public school just yet then.


----------



## Shechemite (Mar 16, 2017)

Rutita1 said:


> Yep, she is that dog.



First the Haitians, now poor Fenton


----------



## not-bono-ever (Mar 16, 2017)

No win/ no fee for both sides. I am assuming this  means that the losers legals  get nothing  and it left to shitkins to cover the losers costs ?  if this is the case, then shitkins legals have nothing to lose  apart from allocating a bit more time to the appeal. if however she gets stuffed again, then the judge can demand further costs from her ?


----------



## Wilf (Mar 16, 2017)

MadeInBedlam said:


> First the Haitians, now poor Fenton


If I'm ever faced with an angry guardianista commentator, 'Fenton hacked my twitter account' will be my first line of defence.


----------



## Smangus (Mar 16, 2017)

existentialist said:


> "
> Perhaps it will be the making of her. Certainly, anything that stops her torrent of bile and hatred would be a good thing.



I'm hoping it will be the unmaking of her.


----------



## phillm (Mar 16, 2017)

nothing less than a stake in the heart , silver bullett in the head on a full moon night on the summer solstice followed by a lead coffin , covered in concrete on a Glastonbury ley line will be the undoing of her more's the pity .. .


----------



## Treacle Toes (Mar 16, 2017)

MadeInBedlam said:


> First the Haitians, now poor Fenton



She's full on bedlam, I know.


----------



## weltweit (Mar 16, 2017)

There should be a forum rule:
Don't discuss Katie Hopkins, it only encourages her !


----------



## DaveCinzano (Mar 16, 2017)

Coming soon:



> ...But this book is an introduction to a quieter Katie too, one people seldom see. She takes us beyond her front door and into the privacy of her home, writing as a mum of three, sharing things even she feels awkward saying.



Excuse me, what was that?



> *writing as a mum*



...



> *writing as a mum*



...



> *writing as a mum*








Rude | Biteback Publishing


----------



## NoXion (Mar 16, 2017)

weltweit said:


> There should be a forum rule:
> Don't discuss Katie Hopkins, it only encourages her !



You really think she reads this forum?

Also, since when has ignoring bullies ever worked?


----------



## existentialist (Mar 16, 2017)

NoXion said:


> You really think she reads this forum?
> 
> Also, since when has ignoring bullies ever worked?


"Ignore them" is one of those platitudinous bits of crap I see altogether far too much of in my schools work. It's impossible to do, doesn't work anyway, and just plays into the hands of bullies who are thus free to intimidate with impunity.


----------



## NoXion (Mar 16, 2017)

existentialist said:


> "Ignore them" is one of those platitudinous bits of crap I see altogether far too much of in my schools work. It's impossible to do, doesn't work anyway, and just plays into the hands of bullies who are thus free to intimidate with impunity.



I'll tell you something that has worked at least once in my own experience:

For some reason I can't quite remember, a fellow pupil at my secondary school took a dislike to me and started bullying me. His favourite way of doing this was while I was walking home and he was on his bike (what the fuck is it with bullies and bikes? they often seem to go together!), and he would pull shit like riding too close to me and shit like that. 

Naturally I got fed up with this, and resolved to take matters into my hands. I took an extra item with me to school. Come home time, he started up his usual crap. That's when I drew out the screwdriver and threatened him with it. He didn't bother me after that.

This and other experiences have taught me that bullies are fucking chickenshits who will shy away from a sudden show of strength. I know what I did wouldn't have met with the approval of "sensible adults", but those same "sensible adults" were at the same time utterly fucking useless, because the bullying was happening out of their sight and it was my word against his.


----------



## Wilf (Mar 17, 2017)

DaveCinzano said:


> Rude | Biteback Publishing


Peter Kaye - 'Me Mum Wants a Bungalow Tour'
Katie Hopkins - 'Me Lawyer Wants £3000,000 Book'


----------



## weltweit (Mar 17, 2017)

NoXion said:


> You really think she reads this forum?



Well, I wouldn't put it past her to google her name from time to time. But having a thread about her reach 31 pages means people will be off to check her out on twitter etc etc .. I think she is nothing more than a rude troll and an attention seeker and it is an effective way to deal with a troll by not responding to it.



NoXion said:


> Also, since when has ignoring bullies ever worked?



I don't think she is a bully, I think she is a troll and an attention seeker.


----------



## existentialist (Mar 17, 2017)

weltweit said:


> Well, I wouldn't put it past her to google her name from time to time. But having a thread about her reach 31 pages means people will be off to check her out on twitter etc etc .. I think she is nothing more than a rude troll and an attention seeker and it is an effective way to deal with a troll by not responding to it.
> 
> 
> 
> I don't think she is a bully, I think she is a troll and an attention seeker.


No, she's a bully by any definition of the word. She targets weaker, less articulate groups (and individuals), and she has no concern for the harm or distress she is causing them. The fact that she doesn't hit people or trip them up in the playground doesn't excuse her from being a bully.

And the "ignore it" thing is a mantra that is all about "don't make your problem my problem". What it really means is "I want to ignore this, so you must too".

Yes, not responding to people who are bullying (or trolling - it's much the same thing a lot of the time) is certainly a useful damage limitation strategy in the moment, but the reality is that people who bully are expert at goading and needling people beyond their ability to not respond. And when that line gets crossed, all you've done is to create in the person being bullied a sense that they're all out of options - they can feel ashamed for not being good enough as a victim.

Fuck that.

No, the way you tackle bullying is that you stand shoulder-to-shoulder with the victim(s), and you include them in your world. You ally with them, you create a "we", and you face the bully and say "so, you want to bully *us*? All of us? Or just the weak ones? Or maybe...you'd like to join us?"

What you don't do is ignore them, or the bullying.


----------



## gosub (Mar 17, 2017)

NoXion said:


> You really think she reads this forum?
> 
> Also, since when has ignoring bullies ever worked?



I hope not. Not a fan, but neither am I fan of Laura Penny but I think she (LP) had a point about the thread about her, and there are aspects of this thread that are similar.


----------



## NoXion (Mar 17, 2017)

weltweit said:


> Well, I wouldn't put it past her to google her name from time to time. But having a thread about her reach 31 pages means people will be off to check her out on twitter etc etc .. I think she is nothing more than a rude troll and an attention seeker and it is an effective way to deal with a troll by not responding to it.
> 
> 
> 
> I don't think she is a bully, I think she is a troll and an attention seeker.


 the kind of trolling Hopkins engages in is pretty much tantamount to bullying in my book. If she fails to get a rise out of a target, she'll keep moving on until she gets a bite. Ignoring her in this case simply means she'll find someone eventually who does respond. She's not going to give up easily, that is how she makes money after all.


----------



## weltweit (Mar 17, 2017)

existentialist said:


> No, she's a bully by any definition of the word. She targets weaker, less articulate groups (and individuals), and she has no concern for the harm or distress she is causing them. The fact that she doesn't hit people or trip them up in the playground doesn't excuse her from being a bully.
> 
> And the "ignore it" thing is a mantra that is all about "don't make your problem my problem". What it really means is "I want to ignore this, so you must too".
> 
> ...


Trolling in here (urban) is different from bullying. Both happen, frequently, but a troll is usually ignorable. While your sentiments about standing up to bullies is admirable, there have been plenty of instances of people being bullied in here and I have yet to see you standing shoulder to shoulder with the victim, I will look forward to seeing it in future.


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 17, 2017)

weltweit said:


> Trolling in here (urban) is different from bullying. Both happen, frequently, but a troll is usually ignorable. While your sentiments about standing up to bullies is admirable, there have been plenty of instances of people being bullied in here and I have yet to see you standing shoulder to shoulder with the victim, I will look forward to seeing it in future.


perhaps you should look harder


----------



## YouSir (Mar 17, 2017)

gosub said:


> I hope not. Not a fan, but neither am I fan of Laura Penny but I think she (LP) had a point about the thread about her, and there are aspects of this thread that are similar.



Was that the one where she ignored all considered criticism and insulted a load of people?


----------



## Shechemite (Mar 17, 2017)

gosub said:


> I hope not. Not a fan, but neither am I fan of Laura Penny but I think she (LP) had a point about the thread about her, and there are aspects of this thread that are similar.



Penny popped round to post piddle?


----------



## existentialist (Mar 17, 2017)

weltweit said:


> Trolling in here (urban) is different from bullying. Both happen, frequently, but a troll is usually ignorable. While your sentiments about standing up to bullies is admirable, there have been plenty of instances of people being bullied in here and I have yet to see you standing shoulder to shoulder with the victim, I will look forward to seeing it in future.


Trolling can be different from bullying, but it's a fine line. And when there's a big power imbalance (eg a newspaper columnist vs a group of disenfranchised people), it's that much easier for the trolling to shade over into bullying. Hopkins stands to cause actual harm to groups of people because of the false legitimacy her views have from being published so widely, so ignoring it is not an option - that is to ignore the increases in racism and intolerance that result from the expression of those views.

To address your comment re Urban - the power imbalances here are far smaller. Each of us has only one voice, and it is no louder than anyone else's. Teasing someone on Urban is a very different matter from publishing some off-the-cuff bit of mouthbreathing nonsense that Hopkins specialises in.


----------



## NoXion (Mar 17, 2017)

weltweit said:


> Trolling in here (urban) is different from bullying. Both happen, frequently, but a troll is usually ignorable. While your sentiments about standing up to bullies is admirable, there have been plenty of instances of people being bullied in here and I have yet to see you standing shoulder to shoulder with the victim, I will look forward to seeing it in future.



Most trolls on Urban don't have highly-paid jobs in the national media.


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 17, 2017)

weltweit said:


> Trolling in here (urban) is different from bullying. Both happen, frequently, but a troll is usually ignorable. While your sentiments about standing up to bullies is admirable, there have been plenty of instances of people being bullied in here and I have yet to see you standing shoulder to shoulder with the victim, I will look forward to seeing it in future.


what about the times when existentialist has been the victim?

never seen you standing four square with him then. why not, weltweit?


----------



## Athos (Mar 17, 2017)

I sometimes wonder whether the concept of bullying isn't cheapened by expanding its definition to include anonymous adults taking the piss out of other anonymous adults on a site like this. It's not really in the same league as, say, a kid who is scared of going to school in case he gets a kicking.


----------



## existentialist (Mar 17, 2017)

Athos said:


> I sometimes wonder whether the concept of bullying isn't cheapened by expanding its definition to include anonymous adults taking the piss out of other anonymous adults on a site like this. It's not really in the same league as, say, a kid who is scared of going to school in case he gets a kicking.


Getting slightly OT now, but an extension of that is the individual who gains power from accusing others of bullying them - when something is put beyond the pale (eg sexual abuse, physical chastisement, bullying), there will always be some people for whom that is a way of exercising control over others. Playing the victim card can be very effective.


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 17, 2017)

Athos said:


> I sometimes wonder whether the concept of bullying isn't cheapened by expanding its definition to include anonymous adults taking the piss out of other anonymous adults on a site like this. It's not really in the same league as, say, a kid who is scared of going to school in case he gets a kicking.


or who is harassed until they kill themselves


----------



## B.I.G (Mar 17, 2017)

Adults might have felt bullied on urban until they felt suicidal.


----------



## existentialist (Mar 17, 2017)

B.I.G said:


> Adults might have felt bullied on urban until they felt suicidal.


Not by Katie Hopkins, though. So far as we know.


----------



## B.I.G (Mar 17, 2017)

existentialist said:


> Not by Katie Hopkins, though. So far as we know.



As far as we know. She is a leopard tho.


----------



## Athos (Mar 17, 2017)

B.I.G said:


> Adults might have felt bullied on urban until they felt suicidal.



I'm sure some would claim so. But I suspect that's attention seeking bullshit and/or an attempt to emotionally manipulate others. Is there any evidence that anyone has ever killed themselves as a result of any of the millions of posts here? And, even if they did, that might just as easily be evidence of their own frailty as of any bullying; some people overreact to fair criticism.  I hate bullies, but I think sometimes the significance of what is said by trolls online is exaggerated.


----------



## B.I.G (Mar 17, 2017)

Athos said:


> I'm sure some would claim so. But I suspect that's attention seeking bullshit and/or an attempt to emotionally manipulate others. Is there any evidence that anyone has ever killed themselves as a result of any of the millions of posts here? And, even if they did, that might just as easily be evidence of their own frailty as of any bullying; some people overreact to fair criticism.  I hate bullies, but I think sometimes the significance of what is said by trolls online is exaggerated.



Wow! Ok then. Everyone you know must be mentally strong.


----------



## weltweit (Mar 17, 2017)

I think bullying on Urban tends to occur when a number of posters are having a go at one individual. As such it becomes harder for the victim to ignore, although that might be the best solution.

I can't speak for what Hopkins does because I am neither exposed to it, nor do I seek it out. But I suppose if people feel it is bullying, and that it takes place on twitter, then twitter might be the place to have a go back at her, assuming she reads it which is probably questionable.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Mar 17, 2017)

Athos said:


> I'm sure some would claim so. But I suspect that's attention seeking bullshit and/or an attempt to emotionally manipulate others. Is there any evidence that anyone has ever killed themselves as a result of any of the millions of posts here? And, even if they did, that might just as easily be evidence of their own frailty as of any bullying; some people overreact to fair criticism.  I hate bullies, but I think sometimes the significance of what is said by trolls online is exaggerated.


I think pretty much the exact opposite of what you say here is true, and that it is very easy to underestimate the significance of nastiness on the internet from people you don't even know. It's the nature of the medium - you're sat at a computer, very often on your own, and it is extremely easy to let things get to you that you really shouldn't and lose any wider perspective on how it doesn't actually matter. 

And imo there are a few posters on here who would do well to remember this.


----------



## Athos (Mar 17, 2017)

littlebabyjesus said:


> I think pretty much the exact opposite of what you say here is true, and that it is very easy to underestimate the significance of nastiness on the internet from people you don't even know. It's the nature of the medium - you're sat at a computer, very often on your own, and it is extremely easy to let things get to you that you really shouldn't and lose any wider perspective on how it doesn't actually matter.
> 
> And imo there are a few posters on here who would do well to remember this.



That some people overreact to something that's essentially trivial isn't the opposite of what I'm saying, at all.  My point was that those things to which they overreact often can't sensibly be described as bullying.


----------



## gosub (Mar 17, 2017)

YouSir said:


> Was that the one where she ignored all considered criticism and insulted a load of people?



That is also true


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Mar 17, 2017)

Athos said:


> That some people overreact to simmering that's essentially trivial isn't the opposite of what I'm saying, at all.  My point was that those things to which they overreact often can't sensibly be described as bullying.


They can if the person doing them has some idea of the distress they're causing and does it anyway.

That is bullying. Plenty of shit on here qualifies on that score. Plenty of posts whose _intention_ is to make another poster feel shit about themselves.


----------



## Athos (Mar 17, 2017)

littlebabyjesus said:


> They can if the person doing them has some idea of the distress they're causing and does it anyway.
> 
> That is bullying. Plenty of shit on here qualifies on that score. Plenty of posts whose _intention_ is to make another poster feel shit about themselves.



Yeah. Posting with the intention of making someone feel shit would be bullying (albeit a relatively trivial example, since it can easily be avoided). But I'd say that's very, very rare, here. More often, people make points for non-malicious reasons, to which others take umbrage. In that case, I'd say it's more incumbent on the person who overreacts to avoid that stimulus than it is on others to avoid making what would otherwise (i.e. but for the overreaction) be reasonable points.


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 17, 2017)

B.I.G said:


> Wow! Ok then. Everyone you know must be mentally strong.


So you're saying people affected by - who feel the effects of - bullying are by contrast mentally weak? I hope that's not the contrast you imply


E2A is this one of your famous wind-ups?


----------



## B.I.G (Mar 17, 2017)

Pickman's model said:


> So you're saying people affected by - who feel the effects of - bullying are by contrast mentally weak? I hope that's not the contrast you imply
> 
> 
> E2A is this one of your famous wind-ups?



Lol its what Athos is saying.


----------



## Athos (Mar 17, 2017)

B.I.G said:


> Lol its what Athos is saying.



Err... no, it's not. 

At its highest, what I'm saying could be interpreted as: those who overreact to conduct which falls short of bullying are emotionally weak. Which isn't a criticism or value judgement; it's a self-evident fact.


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 17, 2017)

B.I.G said:


> Lol its what Athos is saying.


Is it? Not according to Athos, who might be expected to know what he's saying.


----------



## existentialist (Mar 17, 2017)

Athos said:


> Yeah. Posting with the intention of making someone feel shit would be bullying (albeit a relatively trivial example, since it can easily be avoided). But I'd say that's very, very rare, here. More often, people make points for non-malicious reasons, to which others take umbrage. In that case, I'd say it's more incumbent on the person who overreacts to avoid that stimulus than it is on others to avoid making what would otherwise (i.e. but for the overreaction) be reasonable points.


I agree with what you are saying, although it may provoke outrage! There are two sides to a bullying relationship, and both sides bear some degree of control (if they only knew it) as to how the relationship operates. That is not about "blame", but about the kind of people who find themselves being bullied working out how to make themselves more resilient against bullying, as much as those doing the bullying need to do something to change their behaviour.

In the real world, you can rail all you like at the evil deeds of the bully, but it's very difficult to do anything to force them to change - for a start, they're not usually the ones who seek help in connection with bullying, but their victims. So you work with what you can change - making bullying victims more resilient and therefore less of an attractive target to those who, for whatever reason, feel the need to bully. I should know - I was one of those people who did seem to invite that sort of attention, and it's taken me a very long time to see that and get past it. There are more efficient ways


----------



## Monkeygrinder's Organ (Mar 17, 2017)

Athos said:


> Err... no, it's not.
> 
> At its highest, what I'm saying could be interpreted as: those who overreact to conduct which falls short of bullying are emotionally weak. Which isn't a criticism or value judgement; it's a self-evident fact.



It seems to me obvious who you're talking about and I also think your behaviour there absolutely is bullying.

Make of that what you will. I'm not going to get into it, just saying how it looks.


----------



## maomao (Mar 17, 2017)

The biggest bullies in any online community are generally amongst the most popular and established posters because those are the only real weapons available to an online bully. Because of this it's pretty much impossible to have a sensible discussion on the subject.


----------



## Athos (Mar 17, 2017)

Monkeygrinder's Organ said:


> It seems to me obvious who you're talking about and I also think your behaviour there absolutely is bullying.
> 
> Make of that what you will. I'm not going to get into it, just saying how it looks.



Needless to say, I disagree entirely, though I agree it's best we don't make this about any individual.  But, should you be able point to a single instance of bullying in that regard, I'd be happy to hear of it by PM.


----------



## B.I.G (Mar 17, 2017)

Athos said:


> Err... no, it's not.
> 
> At its highest, what I'm saying could be interpreted as: those who overreact to conduct which falls short of bullying are emotionally weak. Which isn't a criticism or value judgement; it's a self-evident fact.



Emotionally weak being close enough to mentally weak.


----------



## Athos (Mar 17, 2017)

B.I.G said:


> Emotionally weak being close enough to mentally weak.



If you like; a lack of robustness to reasonable criticism is a mental weakness.


----------



## existentialist (Mar 17, 2017)

B.I.G said:


> Emotionally weak being close enough to mentally weak.


Careful, now. I think you are in danger of escalating the molehill of what might merely have been a slightly inept way of expressing a point into some great mountain.


----------



## B.I.G (Mar 17, 2017)

Athos said:


> If you like; a lack of robustness to reasonable criticism is a mental weakness.



Unlucky Pickers.


----------



## Athos (Mar 17, 2017)

B.I.G said:


> Unlucky Pickers.



He was right, though.  I wasn't refering to the victims of bulying, as you suggested.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Mar 17, 2017)

Athos said:


> Needless to say, I disagree entirely, though I agree it's best we don't make this about any individual.  But, should you be able point to a single instance of bullying in that regard, I'd be happy to hear of it by PM.


I've no desire to make this about you at all, but bullying isn't always, or even mostly, about single instances. It emerges through extended _patterns_.


----------



## B.I.G (Mar 17, 2017)

Athos said:


> He was right, though.  I wasn't refering to the victims of bulying, as you suggested.



One in a million


----------



## Athos (Mar 17, 2017)

littlebabyjesus said:


> I've no desire to make this about you at all, but bullying isn't always, or even mostly, about single instances. It emerges through extended _patterns_.



And you think there's a pattern of me bullying (as Monkeygrinder's Organ seems to)? Again, happy to hear about it by PM.


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 17, 2017)

Athos said:


> And you think there's a pattern of me bullying (as Monkeygrinder's Organ seems to)? Again, happy to hear about it by PM.


I'll pass on anything I hear


----------



## Athos (Mar 17, 2017)

Pickman's model said:


> I'll pass on anything I hear


Grass!


----------



## not a trot (Mar 17, 2017)

Athos said:


> Grass!



My wife bullied me into mowing ours today.


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 17, 2017)

not a trot said:


> My wife bullied me into mowing ours today.


Get her posting on here and we'll put her right


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Mar 17, 2017)

Athos said:


> And you think there's a pattern of me bullying (as Monkeygrinder's Organ seems to)? Again, happy to hear about it by PM.


I was genuinely talking generally. The nature of damaging online behaviour is generally a cumulative thing. The nature of bullying is generally a cumulative thing. To give an example from the past in here, phildwyer ended up really upsetting another poster, who I won't name - not pretend upsetting, really upsetting - because he just wouldn't let stuff lie. But there probably isn't one post you could point to and say 'there, that's it'.


----------



## Athos (Mar 17, 2017)

littlebabyjesus said:


> I was genuinely talking generally. The nature of damaging online behaviour is generally a cumulative thing. The nature of bullying is generally a cumulative thing. To give an example from the past in here, phildwyer ended up really upsetting another poster, who I won't name - not pretend upsetting, really upsetting - because he just wouldn't let stuff lie. But there probably isn't one post you could point to and say 'there, that's it'.



I don't know the incident to which you're referring, so, again, I make a general point: the fact that someone is upset isn't necessarily evidence of bullying. Some people have fragile egos, and overreact to others' quite reasonable behaviour. Some here are are quick to play the victim, to score points.


----------



## newbie (Mar 17, 2017)

on which basis the toughest, least empathetic, players determine the boundaries, erecting ever thicker personal emotional armour in order to ensure they themselves never show fragility, and effectively justifying and escalating  ruthlessness.  Those who are not able or willing to compete must either seek protection or expect to suffer should they ever step mildly out of line.

Taken to extremes, it's the line of self-justification used by monsters throughout history: _they deserved what they got because they were too fragile, too quick to play the victim_.


----------



## Athos (Mar 17, 2017)

Any idea is ridiculous when taken to extremes.  But there's no reason to do so. And, short of the extreme, there's a happy medium between people being nasty and others wrongly accusing people of nastiness to stifle legitimate comment.


----------



## newbie (Mar 17, 2017)

uh huh, you seem convinced that you can determine the happy medium, based on the thickness of your armour, the fragility of your ego.  So long as you're right there's no possibility of your comment crossing the line, anyone appearing to be harmed is just pretending, for effect and to punish you. 

Of course, should you ever encounter someone more ruthless, willing to pierce your armour, that would be proper nastiness, or bullying.


----------



## Treacle Toes (Mar 18, 2017)

Bullys are in my experience are all too happy to input on the terms/conditions  of what constitutes bullying , what they are really  doing is legitimising abuse  by bemoaning their ability to be a self important cunt.


----------



## phillm (Mar 18, 2017)

Pickman's model said:


> Get her posting on here and we'll put her right



I quite like being bullied by my wife as it makes me do stuff instead of wasting my time posting here !


----------



## mrs quoad (Mar 18, 2017)

"Weak / strong" strikes me as a bizarre - and frankly ridiculous - binary for emotions. 

In this thread, "emotionally strong" appears to include psychopaths, bullies, the terminally unfeeling and perpetual narcissists. 

_I am emotionally strong! Let me punch you. 
_
Which seems like a rayt fucking odd characterisation.


----------



## Athos (Mar 18, 2017)

newbie said:


> uh huh, you seem convinced that you can determine the happy medium, based on the thickness of your armour, the fragility of your ego.  So long as you're right there's no possibility of your comment crossing the line, anyone appearing to be harmed is just pretending, for effect and to punish you.
> 
> Of course, should you ever encounter someone more ruthless, willing to pierce your armour, that would be proper nastiness, or bullying.



We all make a judgement about where the line is, though.  You included.  

And, yes, I am best placed to judge my intention. I may well say something that upsets someone, but, when they've overreacted to something that was said without malice, I don't think it can be properly described as bullying. 

I can't imagine being bullied here. I'd just ignore it; nobody and nothing here is that important.


----------



## Athos (Mar 18, 2017)

Rutita1 said:


> Bullys are in my experience are all too happy to input on the terms/conditions  of what constitutes bullying , what they are really  doing is legitimising abuse  by bemoaning their ability to be a self important cunt.



Do you impose terms/conditions on what constitutes bullying? I guess you must to be able to define the bullys to whom you refer. By doing so, does that make you a self-important cunt?

The point is, we all draw the lines somewhere: at one extreme, bullys draw them at a point that justifies bullying; at the other, some people draw them, passive-aggressively, in a place to silence others (increasingly a tactic of the liberal identity/student politics 'left').

Surely there is some middle ground where substantive comments made without malice, and which would not cause undue distress to anyone of reasonable fortitude, cannot sensibly be described as bullying, notwithstanding that they may upset some people.

Being pissed of or upset (particularly on a site like this) is not necessarily the same as being bullied. Those who conflate the two cheapen the latter.


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 18, 2017)

littlebabyjesus said:


> I was genuinely talking generally. The nature of damaging online behaviour is generally a cumulative thing. The nature of bullying is generally a cumulative thing. To give an example from the past in here, phildwyer ended up really upsetting another poster, who I won't name - not pretend upsetting, really upsetting - because he just wouldn't let stuff lie. But there probably isn't one post you could point to and say 'there, that's it'.


Yeh but let's ignore all the times it's very much a joint enterprise and effectually condoned,when people leap on a new poster and give them the most horrendous abuse on the slight basis someone thinks they're a banned returner. The posts in those circumstances look individually and collectively very much like bullying.


----------



## Athos (Mar 18, 2017)

Pickman's model said:


> "... the most horrendous abuse..."



Hyperbole! There's nothing one anonymous adult can say to another anonymous adult on a site like this which could come remotely close to "the most horrendous abuse". I don't like the way some new posters are treated, but let's keep a sense of proportion, and say something like 'rude' or even 'aggressive'. Rather than cultivating a culture of looking for and exaggerating any perceived slight; we'd just end up with some anodyne, ersatz forum.


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 18, 2017)

Athos said:


> Hyperbole! There's nothing one anonymous adult can say to another anonymous adult on a site like this which could come remotely close to "the most horrendous abuse". I don't like the way some new posters are treated, but let's keep a sense of proportion, and say something like 'rude' or even 'aggressive'. Rather than cultivating a culture of looking for and exaggerating any perceived slight; we'd just end up with some anodyne, ersatz forum.


We already have a number of ersatz posters.


----------



## newbie (Mar 18, 2017)

Athos said:


> We all make a judgement about where the line is, though.  You included.
> 
> And, yes, I am best placed to judge my intention. I may well say something that upsets someone, but, when they've overreacted to something that was said without malice, I don't think it can be properly described as bullying.
> 
> I can't imagine being bullied here. I'd just ignore it; nobody and nothing here is that important.



Yes, including me.  Because I've observed it happening I can 'imagine' bullying on here. 

 It's not happened to me or, sfaik, by me, but there's no doubt in my mind that individuals have been picked on, chased around, harassed, continually insulted and tormented by both other individuals and by groups.  Sometimes those groups appear organised.  Once somebody is isolated as a target, their time on here becomes unpleasant and they leave, or do something stupid and get banned.

I'm not trying to be personal here, I've no idea what battles you individually fight or with whom, but I'd suggest that only self serving bullies would pretend that what I've described doesn't or couldn't happen.	

Which raises a general question: if the rules of engagement are determined by those who can't imagine being personally bullied, where does that leave the rest of us, who can?


----------



## Athos (Mar 18, 2017)

newbie said:


> Yes, including me.  Because I've observed it happening I can 'imagine' bullying on here.
> 
> It's not happened to me or, sfaik, by me, but there's no doubt in my mind that individuals have been picked on, chased around, harassed, continually insulted and tormented by both other individuals and by groups.  Sometimes those groups appear organised.  Once somebody is isolated as a target, their time on here becomes unpleasant and they leave, or do something stupid and get banned.
> 
> ...



I'm not denying that bullying can happen; I'm saying that I can't imagine it happening to me, and that, in my opinion, some of what's described as bullying isn't. 

I'm not suggesting I should set the rules, though; I fully accept that I would tolerate a more robust approach than that which would welcomed by the majority of posters. 

But I do perceive (and fear) a drift towards a culture where we define bullying by the recipient's claimed perception, rather than the intention of the speaker, or some more objective measure, and the chilling effect that can have on legitimate discussion. 

There are important topics that are increasingly difficult to discuss here without a handful of posters having a shit fit, and fucking up an otherwise interesting debate. Typically this entails accusations of bullying, or other negative behaviours or attitudes.


----------



## kabbes (Mar 18, 2017)

The label isn't important anyway, it's the behaviour that is important.  We should all be capable of reflecting on our own behaviour and as a first step knowing ourselves whether or not that behaviour was appropriate or reasonable.


----------



## Athos (Mar 18, 2017)

kabbes said:


> The label isn't important anyway, it's the behaviour that is important.  We should all be capable of reflecting on our own behaviour and as a first step knowing ourselves whether or not that behaviour was appropriate or reasonable.


I'm sure everyone does that. Surely the issue is where there's a clash of opinions around reasonableness. And how, as a society, we raping to that in a way that balances the need to protect the vulnerable against the value of debate and discussion that may upset some.


----------



## bimble (Mar 18, 2017)

Athos said:


> I'm sure everyone does that.


If so it's surprising how very rarely people having reflected come back and say Sorry I was wrong that was unwarranted.


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 18, 2017)

bimble said:


> If so it's surprising how very rarely people having reflected come back and say Sorry I was wrong that was unwarranted.


When was the last time you did it?


----------



## Athos (Mar 18, 2017)

bimble said:


> If so it's surprising how very rarely people having reflected come back and say Sorry I was wrong that was unwarranted.



You're right.  I've apologised for things I've said, many times. 

But there's some here whose egos are so fragile that they wouldn't apologise even when shown to be completely wrong e.g. having mistakenly accused another poster of lying.


----------



## xenon (Mar 18, 2017)

Are we talking online interactions or real world?   Quite clearly, 'everyone' does not or is not capable of reflecting on their own actions.


----------



## Athos (Mar 18, 2017)

xenon said:


> Are we talking online interactions or real world?   Quite clearly, 'everyone' does not or is not capable of reflecting on their own actions.



No, you're right. I should have said most - there's exceptions to every rule.


----------



## bimble (Mar 18, 2017)

Pickman's model said:


> When was the last time you did it?


I've said I was wrong quite a few times, and as I recall you've taken the piss out of me quite often for having done so, as if admitting to wrongness is a weakness and it would be more admirable to just persevere.


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 18, 2017)

bimble said:


> I've said I was wrong quite a few times, and as I recall you've taken the piss out of me quite often for having done so, as if admitting to wrongness is a weakness and it would be more admirable to just persevere.


When was the last time you said to someone "I am sorry for the way I behaved to you, it was unwarrantable" or similar? When was the last time you said sorry and actually meant it?


----------



## existentialist (Mar 18, 2017)

weltweit said:


> I have yet to see you standing shoulder to shoulder with the victim


I wouldn't expect you to have an encyclopaedic knowledge of my posting history, but the examples are there should you choose to see them.


----------



## xenon (Mar 18, 2017)

Anyway trying to steer away from the personal.  Sometimes you get that phenominum  which appears as bullying  but is just a series of  autonomous  posters  reacting.


----------



## existentialist (Mar 18, 2017)

Athos said:


> But I do perceive (and fear) a drift towards a culture where we define bullying by the recipient's claimed perception, rather than the intention of the speaker, or some more objective measure, and the chilling effect that can have on legitimate discussion.


If someone believes they are being bullied, then to some extent that's a self-evident truth: they are feeling bullied. It doesn't necessarily follow from there that there is a duty on the person they feel is bullying them to act differently. They may choose to, if they are made aware of the other person's feelings, but they may equally feel that there is nothing wrong with how they behaved and that they are happy to continue as before, regardless of the complaints. I don't see anything particularly wrong with that: it means that an accusation of bullying does not automatically have that chilling effect, but enables the person who feels bullied to articulate their feelings, and offers the alleged bully the opportunity to address that.


----------



## xenon (Mar 18, 2017)

I say sometimes, I mean most of the time actually.


----------



## xenon (Mar 18, 2017)

But it is quite possible I am oblivious to some of the more targeted personal beefs.


----------



## Athos (Mar 18, 2017)

xenon said:


> Anyway trying to steer away from the personal.  Sometimes you get that phenominum  which appears as bullying  but is just a series of  autonomous  posters  reacting.



Yes, becuase it's atomised and becuase people don't take turns to speak as they might in a face-to-face scenario, you often get a load of posts disagreeing with someone, all at once, which might look like mobbing, but is, actually, just people acting independently and in good faith.


----------



## existentialist (Mar 18, 2017)

bimble said:


> If so it's surprising how very rarely people having reflected come back and say Sorry I was wrong that was unwarranted.


IRL, I am a lot more ready to do this (not in connection with bullying - just admitting mistakes) than I find myself to be on Urban. I'm not entirely sure why that is, but I do have a sense that any admission on here tends to invite a somewhat rapacious response. I think if I'd been truly out of order with someone here, I'd probably attempt to mend fences via PM rather than on-thread.


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 18, 2017)

existentialist said:


> IRL, I am a lot more ready to do this (not in connection with bullying - just admitting mistakes) than I find myself to be on Urban. I'm not entirely sure why that is, but I do have a sense that any admission on here tends to invite a somewhat rapacious response. I think if I'd been truly out of order with someone here, I'd probably attempt to mend fences via PM rather than on-thread.


I am always willing to act as a go-between


----------



## bimble (Mar 18, 2017)

Pickman's model said:


> When was the last time you said to someone "I am sorry for the way I behaved to you, it was unwarrantable" or similar? When was the last time you said sorry and meant it?


On here? On here I've said sorry for angry drunken ranting and also for when I've said something stupid which i later realise was stupid, but haven't ever picked on anyone or attacked them unwarrantedly I don't think. Saying sorry is hard in real life anyway (did manage a real one recently, to my sister, took me a few days to get brave enough for that phonecall).


----------



## Athos (Mar 18, 2017)

existentialist said:


> If someone believes they are being bullied, then to some extent that's a self-evident truth: they are feeling bullied. It doesn't necessarily follow from there that there is a duty on the person they feel is bullying them to act differently. They may choose to, if they are made aware of the other person's feelings, but they may equally feel that there is nothing wrong with how they behaved and that they are happy to continue as before, regardless of the complaints. I don't see anything particularly wrong with that: it means that an accusation of bullying does not automatically have that chilling effect, but enables the person who feels bullied to articulate their feelings, and offers the alleged bully the opportunity to address that.



Not sure I buy into the idea that bullying is independent of the alleged bully's state of mind; that it's entirely predicated on the "victim's" upset. Else you could be bullied by the bus being late, if you're someone who gets easily upset by such vissisitudes of life; the word 'bullying' becomes meaningless.  But, more importantly, it's not usually used by 'victims' in the relatively neutral way you suggest; it's increasngly (mis)used (sometimes dishonestly) as a tactic to shut others down.  If I don't like what you say and can't counter it with any argument, I can scream bully, hope others do the same, and silence you.


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 18, 2017)

bimble said:


> On here? On here I've said sorry for angry drunken ranting and also for when I've said something stupid which i later realise was stupid, but haven't ever picked on anyone or attacked them unwarrantedly I don't think. Saying sorry is hard in real life anyway (did manage a real one recently, to my sister, took me a few days to get brave enough for that phonecall).


And do you think that is sufficient? Once you've done this is your duty discharged?


----------



## ViolentPanda (Mar 18, 2017)

Rutita1 said:


> Bullys are in my experience are all too happy to input on the terms/conditions  of what constitutes bullying , what they are really  doing is legitimising abuse  by bemoaning their ability to be a self important cunt.



I never bemoan my ability to be a self important cunt, I just exercise it.


----------



## Treacle Toes (Mar 18, 2017)

ViolentPanda said:


> I never bemoan my ability to be a self important cunt, I just exercise it.



The funny thing is I have no actual recollection of writing that post.  But I clearly meant it when I did!


----------



## SqueakyBumTime (Mar 19, 2017)

Most people agree with Hopkins whether you like it or not


----------



## Combustible (Mar 19, 2017)

Not really, she wouldn't have had the media career she has had if that was the case.


----------



## ginger_syn (Mar 19, 2017)

SqueakyBumTime said:


> Most people agree with Hopkins whether you like it or not


Prove it.


----------



## mikey mikey (Mar 19, 2017)

Squeakybumtime knows most people and also knows what they think. He's a god.


----------



## brogdale (Mar 19, 2017)

mikey mikey said:


> Squeakybumtime knows most people and also knows what they think. He's a god.


Given his posting, I'm quite prepared to believe that most of the people he knows agree with the views expressed by Hopkins. That does not make him a god.


----------



## mikey mikey (Mar 19, 2017)

Perhaps he is in his own mind. 

Judging by the comments under the Mail's KH "articles", I would say that the narcicism that pervades Hopkins readership reflects Katie's own.


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 19, 2017)

SqueakyBumTime said:


> Most people agree with Hopkins whether you like it or not


What, most people think jack monroe vandalises war memorials?


----------



## Nylock (Mar 19, 2017)

SqueakyBumTime said:


> Most people agree with Hopkins whether you like it or not


Most people think immigrants should be machine-gunned in the water?
Most people think Laurie Penny is Jack Monroe? 
Most people think being caught out libelling someone on social media and then doubling-down until it REALLY costs them is a good idea?

Jog on you two-bob rent-a-gob.


----------



## existentialist (Mar 19, 2017)

SqueakyBumTime said:


> Most people agree with Hopkins whether you like it or not


I think you know full well that isn't true.


----------



## Ranbay (Mar 19, 2017)

SqueakyBumTime said:


> Most people agree with Hopkins whether you like it or not



Fuck off you melon.


----------



## Ranbay (Mar 19, 2017)

Help raise £324000 to Help raise the money for Katie Hopkins' unjust legal fees and libel damages. But for real.


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 19, 2017)

Ranbay said:


> Fuck off you melon.


(((melons)))


----------



## 19force8 (Mar 21, 2017)

KH now claiming she was blackmailed by Monroe!

Zelo Street: Katie Hopkins Blackmail Clanger

Was £650k* just a first instalment?

* according to Zelo Street


----------



## stockwelljonny (Mar 21, 2017)

Ranbay said:


> Help raise £324000 to Help raise the money for Katie Hopkins' unjust legal fees and libel damages. But for real.



"I've started this page as, although I don't necessarily agree with everything Katie says, I'm sick and tired of people thinking their feelings somehow have rights. Katie made a mistake & rectified it, but she still got taken to court. If the roles were reversed would everyone be quite so happy about the result? 

Katie's no saint, but free speech needs to be protected. If you can accidently include someone's twitter handle in a tweet, delete that tweet and say you made a mistake, and STILL be prosecuted against, well, we could all be in deep trouble at some point. 

This is the link to the judgement so you can read the court case for yourself... https://www.judiciary.gov.uk/wp-con...onroe-v-hopkins-2017-ewhc-433-qb-20170310.pdf

I wish to remain anonymous, but all funds raised WILL go to Katie Hopkins. Please contact me via this page if you wish to get in contact."

Its raised £10 of £342k


----------



## Nylock (Mar 21, 2017)

The messages of support are truly heartwarming *sniff*


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Mar 21, 2017)

Nylock said:


> The messages of support are truly heartwarming *sniff*



Spunk-trumpet


----------



## 19force8 (Mar 21, 2017)

stockwelljonny said:


> This is the link to the judgement so you can read the court case for yourself... https://www.judiciary.gov.uk/wp-con...onroe-v-hopkins-2017-ewhc-433-qb-20170310.pdf


Thanks for an interesting read at lunch.

As for Hopkins' retraction I hadn't realised quite how niggardly it was:



> para 72(11)The defendant’s tweet of 2 June 2015. This was several weeks later, early in the morning. It was not self-explanatory. It was inconspicuous and carried no apology. It was sent as a reply, and hence to the *common followers only*.



I can't imagine many follow both KH and JM. Though what do I know about Twitter?


----------



## Kaka Tim (Mar 21, 2017)

please please please let her get sued again.


----------



## gosub (Mar 23, 2017)




----------



## Orang Utan (Mar 24, 2017)

Marina Hyde has a talent for blistering takedowns of pompous slebs and she excels herself this morning:
"To read Katie Hopkins is to know that she would have disagreed with the Enlightenment if she thought there was a Loose Women appearance in it. She writes like a not-very-bright sixth former trying to ape the prose style of Tony Parsons – no argument, just a portentous moodboard. Her Westminster article reads like a series of Google calendar reminders to herself. “Shots fired. An Asian man rushed to hospital. And I grew colder. And more tiny.”
Look out, America! Here comes Katie Hopkins with her London-loathing hate speech


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 24, 2017)

Orang Utan said:


> Marina Hyde has a talent for blistering takedowns of pompous slebs and she excels herself this morning:
> "To read Katie Hopkins is to know that she would have disagreed with the Enlightenment if she thought there was a Loose Women appearance in it. She writes like a not-very-bright sixth former trying to ape the prose style of Tony Parsons – no argument, just a portentous moodboard. Her Westminster article reads like a series of Google calendar reminders to herself. “Shots fired. An Asian man rushed to hospital. And I grew colder. And more tiny.”
> Look out, America! Here comes Katie Hopkins with her London-loathing hate speech


Yeh but kh not like a 6th former of any sort,more like a shockjock 14 year auld


----------



## Orang Utan (Mar 24, 2017)

Pickman's model said:


> Yeh but kh not like a 6th former of any sort,more like a shockjock 14 year auld


Many 11 year olds write better than her


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 24, 2017)

Orang Utan said:


> Many 11 year olds write better than her


Good


----------



## SqueakyBumTime (Mar 25, 2017)

Pickman's model said:


> Yeh but kh not like a 6th former of any sort,more like a shockjock 14 year auld


What is this "auld" affectation about?


----------



## existentialist (Mar 25, 2017)

SqueakyBumTime said:


> What is this "auld" affectation about?


Your mum.


----------



## Red Cat (Mar 25, 2017)

Bullying is always about groups IME. The 'victim' is used by the group for all sorts of unconscious reasons and that happens here as well all the time. I think in many threads it moves around, gets passed back and forth; its very easy to get pulled into dynamics based on projections in an online community because you don't actually know people.


----------



## SqueakyBumTime (Mar 25, 2017)

existentialist said:


> Your mum.


My mum what? Bear in mind you're no longer addressing me, but a 70+ woman.


----------



## existentialist (Mar 26, 2017)

SqueakyBumTime said:


> My mum what? Bear in mind you're no longer addressing me, but a 70+ woman.


So this is your posting style *under maternal supervision? 
*
Perhaps we should be grateful for small mercies.


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 26, 2017)

SqueakyBumTime said:


> My mum what? Bear in mind you're no longer addressing me, but a 70+ woman.


70+ what? IQ? Inches? Pounds?


----------



## ViolentPanda (Mar 26, 2017)

Pickman's model said:


> 70+ what? IQ? Inches? Pounds?



Lovers at the same time?


----------



## existentialist (Mar 26, 2017)

ViolentPanda said:


> Lovers at the same time?


Assuming she's not some esoteric kind of tubeworm, that does feel, frankly, rather far-fetched.


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 26, 2017)

existentialist said:


> Assuming she's not some esoteric kind of tubeworm, that does feel, frankly, rather far-fetched.


Could be like out of the Dunwich horror and SqueakyBumTime is some sort of latter day Wilbur Whateley


----------



## Buckaroo (Mar 28, 2017)

Mad as a box of frogs. Look Katie we survived the Blitz. This is Trumpland where we belong. We will stand, lost to the liberals. London. Obama on steroids. Difficult questions in my column. He was teaching English and when he came back. Extremist community. Home Grown terrorists, how many other Khalids?
Was he on Google? They're running around like ants in the magnifying glass, running around in the sun and are we going to wait around and get stood on like ants because you know what they do, they carry on as normal and wait for the next footstep. Piffle and waffle to stop people like me asking the difficult questions.


----------



## Magnus McGinty (Mar 28, 2017)

34 pages dedicated to some shock jock.


----------



## inva (Mar 28, 2017)

Magnus McGinty said:


> 34 pages dedicated to some shock jock.


not that many for a 2 year old thread


----------



## Buckaroo (Mar 28, 2017)

Magnus McGinty said:


> 34 pages dedicated to some shock jock.


and?


----------



## inva (Mar 28, 2017)

Buckaroo said:


> and?


34 pages and 1


----------



## Magnus McGinty (Mar 28, 2017)

Buckaroo said:


> and?



Therefore...


----------



## Buckaroo (Mar 28, 2017)

inva said:


> 34 pages and 1


. 

Sorta.


----------



## Magnus McGinty (Mar 28, 2017)

Giving oxygen to whelks.


----------



## Buckaroo (Mar 28, 2017)

Magnus McGinty said:


> Therefore...



and


----------



## Buckaroo (Mar 28, 2017)

Magnus McGinty said:


> Giving oxygen to whelks.


----------



## Magnus McGinty (Mar 28, 2017)

Buckaroo said:


> and



Fog on the Tyne is all mine.


----------



## Libertad (Mar 28, 2017)

Buckaroo said:


> Mad as a box of frogs. Look Katie we survived the Blitz. This is Trumpland where we belong. We will stand, lost to the liberals. London. Obama on steroids. Difficult questions in my column. He was teaching English and when he came back. Extremist community. Home Grown terrorists, how many other Khalids?
> Was he on Google? They're running around like ants in the magnifying glass, running around in the sun and are we going to wait around and get stood on like ants because you know what they do, they carry on as normal and wait for the next footstep. Piffle and waffle to stop people like me asking the difficult questions.




"Journalist" lol


----------



## petee (Mar 29, 2017)

i found my way to this topic by a circuitous route.



> One of the peculiarities of practising criminal law is repeat clients. When defending, the notion of repeat custom effectively depends on people taking advantage of your good work to go on to commit, or at least to get themselves accused of committing, further criminal offences. It presents something of a moral bind.
> 
> For society’s sake, you want your clients to desist from their wicked ways. As I say in sincerity to each defendant at the end of every case: I genuinely hope I never see you again. However, for the sake of paying a mortgage, it is, regrettably, really quite helpful if they veer away from the straight and narrow and in the direction of a sustained and ambitious crime wave.
> 
> ...



it goes on in equally mordant style, and includes a link to the judge's ruling.

https://inews.co.uk/opinion/comment/131000-katie-hopkins-realise-trolling-twitter-expensive-hobby/


----------



## Captain Christy (Mar 29, 2017)

She'd give it back fairly small


----------



## existentialist (Mar 29, 2017)

Captain Christy said:


> She'd give it back fairly small


By which you mean...?


----------



## wiskey (Mar 29, 2017)

About the only good thing about today news-wise was that Hopkins got refused the right to appeal.


----------



## Buckaroo (Mar 29, 2017)

wiskey said:


> About the only good thing about today news-wise was that Hopkins got refused the right to appeal.



No matter, she's never been appealing. Bless her cotton picking socks.


----------



## Smangus (Mar 29, 2017)

wiskey said:


> About the only good thing about today news-wise was that Hopkins got refused the right to appeal.



This is one story that seems to be getting better and better


----------



## Grandma Death (Mar 29, 2017)

Smangus said:


> This is one story that seems to be getting better and better




The best thing about the story was Monroe offering to drop the case if she donated 5k to a charity that helps immigrants. There was no way Gobkins was gonne 1. Back down. 2. Give money to that charity

Bet she wishes she had now


----------



## Smangus (Mar 29, 2017)

Yeah, the arrogant tart


----------



## 8den (Mar 29, 2017)

Libertad said:


> "Journalist" lol



It's worth pointing out that Tucker Carlson is human garbage in a bow tie



This interview with John Stewart got his show cancelled.


----------



## Orang Utan (Mar 29, 2017)

Smangus said:


> Yeah, the arrogant tart


uppity, is she?


----------



## wiskey (Mar 29, 2017)

8den said:


> It's worth pointing out that Tucker Carlson is human garbage in a bow tie
> 
> 
> 
> This interview with John Stewart got his show cancelled.




That's glorious, what a twat


----------



## mojo pixy (Mar 30, 2017)

Orang Utan said:


> uppity, is she?



opinions and a loud mouth. tsk tsk tsk. women like that eh?


----------



## mojo pixy (Mar 30, 2017)

(obvious sarcasm is ideally, obvious)


----------



## Orang Utan (Mar 30, 2017)

mojo pixy said:


> opinions and a loud mouth. tsk tsk tsk. women like that eh?





mojo pixy said:


> (obvious sarcasm is ideally, obvious)


Well, quite


----------



## mojo pixy (Mar 30, 2017)

I always find it hard to be sarcastic with anonymous strangers in writing. Paranoia kicks in, like it did there.

Anyway obviously the point of all the lols is (might as well do the sincere version too since sarcasm scares me) _tart _is probably not the best thing to be calling Hopkins or any woman, however objectionable they are personally.
Smangus


----------



## xenon (Mar 30, 2017)

Yes.  Hysterical surplus shitmongering   Diseased arsehole.


----------



## mojo pixy (Mar 30, 2017)

Smug ignorant filth-peddling disease.


----------



## Orang Utan (Mar 30, 2017)

calling her a disease and surplus is using the same kind of language she uses


----------



## xenon (Mar 30, 2017)

Shut up you tart.


----------



## editor (Mar 30, 2017)

Such beautiful news



> Columnist Katie Hopkins has been told she cannot appeal against a libel action which landed her with a six-figure bill.
> 
> The pundit and radio host was ordered to pay £24,000 in damages to food blogger Jack Monroe earlier this month.
> 
> ...


Katie Hopkins cannot appeal Jack Monroe libel tweet case - BBC News


----------



## mojo pixy (Mar 30, 2017)

Orang Utan said:


> calling her a disease and surplus is using the same kind of language she uses



Good, in her case both are true.


----------



## petee (Mar 30, 2017)

editor said:


> Such beautiful news
> 
> Katie Hopkins cannot appeal Jack Monroe libel tweet case - BBC News



from the right hand side of that page
Japan turns to Basil Fawlty in race for Olympic English - BBC News



> Teachers in Fukuoka Prefecture have been using Fawlty Towers and Red Dwarf to get students used to hearing spoken English.
> 
> It raises the prospect of a generation of Japanese students sounding like Basil, Sybil or even Manuel.


----------



## Smangus (Mar 30, 2017)

mojo pixy said:


> I always find it hard to be sarcastic with anonymous strangers in writing. Paranoia kicks in, like it did there.
> 
> Anyway obviously the point of all the lols is (might as well do the sincere version too since sarcasm scares me) _tart _is probably not the best thing to be calling Hopkins or any woman, however objectionable they are personally.
> Smangus



Tbh I can think of a lot worse for her.


mojo pixy said:


> Smug ignorant filth-peddling disease.



So is this any better?


----------



## mojo pixy (Mar 30, 2017)

Yes cos it's not sexist, just really insulting.


----------



## bimble (Mar 30, 2017)

Haven't heard anyone use the word tart as an insult for such a long time, I wonder if Smangus is ancient.


----------



## Smangus (Mar 30, 2017)

mojo pixy said:


> Yes cos it's not sexist, just really insulting.


.

Tbf I use the same for blokes.

Anyway if you think it's better to refer to a woman as a disease then fine. I take that on board.

I am more ancient than I care to admit, failing hearing, lungs and sense of humour tell me otherwise.


----------



## Athos (Mar 30, 2017)

Smangus said:


> .Anyway if you think it's better to refer to a woman as a disease then fine. I take that on board.




The difference is that, whilst both are insulting to the intended target, 'tart' is also offensive to many women by virtue of it being a gender-specific term, used as a derogatory reference to a woman's sex life.  That's how it's generally used and understood (notwithstanding that you use it in respect of both sexes).


----------



## Smangus (Mar 30, 2017)

Understand, my point is that to refer to women as disease is in itself a misogynistic position and no better.


----------



## Smangus (Mar 30, 2017)

"Smangus, shut it yoo slaaaag!"


----------



## mojo pixy (Mar 30, 2017)

"Disease" is non gender-specific. How could it be a worse name for a woman than a man? Like, say, _tart_ (with its issues as outlined above)


----------



## mojo pixy (Mar 30, 2017)

Also, just to be clear, Katie Hopkins, her opinions and views, and the mindset that forms them, are akin to (if not actually) a disease. That's an opinion I personally will stand by, and gladly.


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 30, 2017)

mojo pixy said:


> Also, just to be clear, Katie Hopkins, her opinions and views, and the mindset that forms them, are akin to (if not actually) a disease. That's an opinion I personally will stand by, and gladly.


i prefer to think of her as wilbur whateley's long-lost sister.


----------



## Smangus (Mar 30, 2017)

Well I think she's fucking nutjob and as unpleasant and self serving as they come.


----------



## Smangus (Mar 30, 2017)

I was referring to her acid tongue.


----------



## Libertad (Mar 30, 2017)

Pickman's model said:


> i prefer to think of her as wilbur whateley's long-lost sister.



Dean Stockwell *shudder*


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 30, 2017)

Smangus said:


> I was referring to her acid tongue.


----------



## Athos (Mar 30, 2017)

Smangus said:


> Understand, my point is that to refer to women as disease is in itself a misogynistic position and no better.



But it's not a reference to 'women'; it's a reference to one woman, that is no more applicable to other women than it is to men; unlike 'tart', it's not a gender-specific insult. 'Tart' has a basis in a sexist conception of female sexuality; 'disease' has no sexist connotation.  It's not misogynistic (in itself), and is much better.


----------



## Orang Utan (Mar 30, 2017)

But referring to other humans as a disease or as surplus is fascist shit we don't need to hear as well. The same thing as referring to humans as cockroaches, like Hopkins did.


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 30, 2017)

Orang Utan said:


> But referring to other humans as a disease or as surplus is fascist shit we don't need to hear as well. The same thing as referring to humans as cockroaches, like Hopkins did.


i suppose you're using 'fascist' in its sense of 'people i don't like'

what do you think of this, ou?


----------



## Orang Utan (Mar 30, 2017)

Pickman's model said:


> i suppose you're using 'fascist' in its sense of 'people i don't like'


in the sense of fascists deigning humans to be 'useless eaters' and the like


----------



## mojo pixy (Mar 30, 2017)

Which is why an insult like _disease_, say, _cockroach_ or _surplus_ is in her case would be both appropriate and accurate.

I honestly think she in particular doesn't deserve the concern you're expressing.


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 30, 2017)

Orang Utan said:


> in the sense of fascists deigning humans to be 'useless eaters' and the like


yes. again this isn't a fascist novelty. dehumanising people went on long before 1923.


----------



## Orang Utan (Mar 30, 2017)

mojo pixy said:


> Which is why an insult like _disease_, say, _cockroach_ or _surplus_ is in her case would be both appropriate and accurate.
> 
> I honestly think she in particular doesn't deserve the concern you're expressing.


it doesn't matter who you use it against, it's out of order imo


----------



## Orang Utan (Mar 30, 2017)

Pickman's model said:


> yes. again this isn't a fascist novelty. dehumanising people went on long before 1923.


perhaps not, but katie hopkins certainly has fash tendencies


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 30, 2017)

Orang Utan said:


> perhaps not, but katie hopkins certainly has fash tendencies


she's somewhere on that continuum, certainly.


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 30, 2017)

Orang Utan said:


> it doesn't matter who you use it against, it's out of order imo


don't care. i'll continue saying plague of fascists, fascists are social lepers and so on no matter what you think.


----------



## Smangus (Mar 30, 2017)

looks like I'm going to have to up the quality of my insults...


----------



## xenon (Mar 30, 2017)

Orang Utan said:


> But referring to other humans as a disease or as surplus is fascist shit we don't need to hear as well. The same thing as referring to humans as cockroaches, like Hopkins did.



utter bollocks. Folowing your rationale, you'd only be able to use the prissiest, wettest terms to insult someone.


----------



## mojo pixy (Mar 30, 2017)

Orang Utan said:


> it doesn't matter who you use it against, it's out of order imo



I profoundly disagree. Someone like Hopkins has earned it, and worse.


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 30, 2017)

xenon said:


> utter bollocks. Folowing your rationale, you'd only be able to use the prissiest, wettest terms to insult someone.


i suspect if we look back over ou's contributions we'd find at least a few occasions in which he has contravened the policy he would desire others to follow.


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 30, 2017)

Smangus said:


> looks like I'm going to have to up the quality of my insults...


yeh raise your game smangus


----------



## Smangus (Mar 30, 2017)

Pickman's model said:


> yeh raise your game smangus



Booked in for some CPD insult training now, suitably vetted by feminist theorists....

(meeting mates in the pub to get wankered)


----------



## ViolentPanda (Mar 30, 2017)

xenon said:


> Yes.  Hysterical surplus shitmongering   Diseased arsehole.



Is the diseased arsehole the reason she hasn't done her sprint up Regent's Street with a sausage up her Gary yet?


----------



## MrSpikey (Mar 31, 2017)

editor said:


> Such beautiful news
> 
> 
> Katie Hopkins cannot appeal Jack Monroe libel tweet case - BBC News



I'm actually a little disappointed she isn't going to be allowed to fritter away even more money chasing her ego-driven windmills. Give her enough rope, and all that.


----------



## existentialist (Mar 31, 2017)

MrSpikey said:


> I'm actually a little disappointed she isn't going to be allowed to fritter away even more money chasing her ego-driven windmills. Give her enough rope, and all that.


Don't worry. She's dumb enough to "protest" at not being able to appeal by uttering more libels. Perhaps she'll libel the judges.


----------



## SqueakyBumTime (Apr 1, 2017)

Pickman's model said:


> 70+ what? IQ? Inches? Pounds?



All of those. We're not talking about an uneducated dwarf.


----------



## SqueakyBumTime (Apr 1, 2017)

Pickman's model said:


> Could be like out of the Dunwich horror and SqueakyBumTime is some sort of latter day Wilbur Whateley



Tee hee. Who the fuck is Wilbur Whateley?


----------



## fishfinger (Apr 1, 2017)

SqueakyBumTime said:


> Tee hee. Who the fuck is Wilbur Whateley?


The son of Lavinia Whateley and Yog-Sothoth.


----------



## DotCommunist (Apr 1, 2017)

rolls in every 5 point three days to chat shit- waste of space, get off the internet


----------



## Libertad (Apr 1, 2017)

SqueakyBumTime said:


> All of those. We're not talking about an uneducated dwarf.



We only have your word for that.


----------



## Pickman's model (Apr 1, 2017)

SqueakyBumTime said:


> All of those. We're not talking about an uneducated dwarf.


Near enough six foot tall and fucking five stone? Sure she's not dead?


----------



## SqueakyBumTime (Apr 1, 2017)

DotCommunist said:


> rolls in every 5 point three days to chat shit- waste of space, get off the internet



I know you're one of the biggest posters here, but you're totally unable to enforce my removal from the internet. You bore.


----------



## DotCommunist (Apr 1, 2017)

mores the pity


----------



## xenon (Apr 1, 2017)

SqueakyBumTime said:


> I know you're one of the biggest posters here, but you're totally unable to enforce my removal from the internet. You bore.



 You are proper shit though.  Say something. What do you think about Katie Hopkins.


----------



## SqueakyBumTime (Apr 2, 2017)

xenon said:


> You are proper shit though.  Say something. What do you think about Katie Hopkins.


I think she has more to say than you. 

Ok?


----------



## DotCommunist (Apr 2, 2017)

SqueakyBumTime said:


> I think


this isn't true at all. You don't think, you certainly have no internal voice. You are a bag of wind who thinks mocking the doley and waving your tax returns around like they are a picture of your dick is going to impress anyone. Just go away, you aren't wanted.


----------



## existentialist (Apr 2, 2017)

SqueakyBumTime said:


> I think she has more to say than you.
> 
> Ok?


Quantity isn't everything. But then it's not surprising that someone like you wouldn't be factoring any kind of quality into the equation...


----------



## 2hats (Apr 2, 2017)

DotCommunist said:


> this isn't true at all. You don't think, you certainly have no internal voice. You are a bag of wind who thinks mocking the doley and _waving your tax returns around_ like they are a picture of your dick is going to impress anyone. Just go away, you aren't wanted.


You forgot their genius stroke of publishing name and address at the same time.


----------



## millyb (Apr 2, 2017)

f
my boss is a bully and fits the profile of a full on narcissist, ...its taken nearly a year of trying to rise above and not react to the constant nitpicking, gaslighting, goalpost shifting, not to mention the disciplinary talks she has her hubby give me on shit im not even aware ive done...when she asks me to justify  actions and i do, her stock response is either im making excuses, or being defensive, to which i answer, no im not.. im just explaining myself, like u asked!... finally, last friday, whilst her hubby was at the shop in the back room...she stood there shouting at me for serving the wrong piece of fish from the range,right after she stood there n watched me serve it(i tried telling her i didnt know what order they shouldve come out, and that whateva I'd done would have been wrong) then immediately tried to apologise and own the mistake but she just shouted over me and as her hubby comes running out she's shouting to him how i messed up obviously looking for his backup, but he just shouted at her to her to calm down realisin just how out of order she was acting, so i went out the back, heard him tell her she had no right talking to me in that manner and what the hell did she think she was playing at!...Anyway, fp to the bloke, he came out and apologised for her,saying plz dont be upset... I told him I was ok and that Im used to it...tho i also told him how this isbringing me down and that I feel victimised and totally on edge in work and depressed at home....so, friday ended on a strained, but civil note..... saturday nite at work was less verbal, on account she totally ignored me (fine by me)....I know i should have done this sooner, but I,ve started jobhunting in earnest today, wish me luck.....p.s hope u dont mind me venting, dont even know you, tho gotta be honest, I feel a whole lot better getting it down...thanx


----------



## Buckaroo (Apr 2, 2017)

millyb said:


> f
> my boss is a bully and fits the profile of a full on narcissist, ...its taken nearly a year of trying to rise above and not react to the constant nitpicking, gaslighting, goalpost shifting, not to mention the disciplinary talks she has her hubby give me on shit im not even aware ive done...when she asks me to justify  actions and i do, her stock response is either im making excuses, or being defensive, to which i answer, no im not.. im just explaining myself, like u asked!... finally, last friday, whilst her hubby was at the shop in the back room...she stood there shouting at me for serving the wrong piece of fish from the range,right after she stood there n watched me serve it(i tried telling her i didnt know what order they shouldve come out, and that whateva I'd done would have been wrong) then immediately tried to apologise and own the mistake but she just shouted over me and as her hubby comes running out she's shouting to him how i messed up obviously looking for his backup, but he just shouted at her to her to calm down realisin just how out of order she was acting, so i went out the back, heard him tell her she had no right talking to me in that manner and what the hell did she think she was playing at!...Anyway, fp to the bloke, he came out and apologised for her,saying plz dont be upset... I told him I was ok and that Im used to it...tho i also told him how this isbringing me down and that I feel victimised and totally on edge in work and depressed at home....so, friday ended on a strained, but civil note..... saturday nite at work was less verbal, on account she totally ignored me (fine by me)....I know i should have done this sooner, but I,ve started jobhunting in earnest today, wish me luck.....p.s hope u dont mind me venting, dont even know you, tho gotta be honest, I feel a whole lot better getting it down...thanx



.


----------



## Nylock (Apr 3, 2017)

SqueakyBumTime said:


> I think she has more to say than you.
> 
> Ok?


She has more to say than most. So what when most *all* of it is poisonous garbage? Do you agree with her worldview? I think everyone can guess at the answer so go on, *really* commit. It's not like you have anyone's respect to lose, is it?


----------



## ginger_syn (Apr 3, 2017)

SqueakyBumTime said:


> I think she has more to say than you.
> 
> Ok?


Yes but what she says is  mostly spiteful unimaginative drivel,which just makes her a sad hate mongering windbag.


----------



## petee (Apr 5, 2017)

SqueakyBumTime said:


> I think she has more to say than you.
> 
> Ok?



you know who else had alot to say?


----------



## existentialist (Apr 5, 2017)

ginger_syn said:


> Yes but what she says is  mostly spiteful unimaginative drivel,which just makes her a sad hate mongering windbag.


I think our squeaky-arsed friend is projecting: what he means is "She has more to say than me".

Which, TBF, wouldn't be difficult, even for Hatey Kopkins.


----------



## SqueakyBumTime (Apr 7, 2017)

DotCommunist said:


> this isn't true at all. You don't think, you certainly have no internal voice. You are a bag of wind who thinks mocking the doley and waving your tax returns around like they are a picture of your dick is going to impress anyone. Just go away, you aren't wanted.


Unfortunately for you, SOME people are more impressed by a fella's income than another fella's politics. 
Wanted or not.


----------



## Shechemite (Apr 7, 2017)

SqueakyBumTime said:


> Unfortunately for you, SOME people are more impressed by a fella's income than another fella's politics



Oh go away you boring tit


----------



## SqueakyBumTime (Apr 7, 2017)

MadeInBedlam said:


> Oh go away you boring tit


There's room in this world for more than one opinion.


----------



## SqueakyBumTime (Apr 7, 2017)

Even yours


----------



## SheilaNaGig (Apr 7, 2017)

SqueakyBumTime said:


> Unfortunately for you, SOME people are more impressed by a fella's income than another fella's politics.
> Wanted or not.




That's what's known as a "jerk circle".

It's a cul-de-sac.


----------



## SqueakyBumTime (Apr 7, 2017)

I loved PJHarvey when I was your age


----------



## billy_bob (Apr 8, 2017)

The quality of trolling on this site's really in a slump.


----------



## existentialist (Apr 8, 2017)

SqueakyBumTime said:


> Unfortunately for you, SOME people are more impressed by a fella's income than another fella's politics.
> Wanted or not.


Pissed up again?


----------



## kabbes (Apr 8, 2017)

SqueakyBumTime said:


> Unfortunately for you, SOME people are more impressed by a fella's income than another fella's politics.
> Wanted or not.


That's a bizarre claim.  I've never come across anybody that would fall into that bracket.  The richer they are, in fact, the more they care about your politics over your money.


----------



## DotCommunist (Apr 8, 2017)

SqueakyBumTime said:


> Unfortunately for you, SOME people are more impressed by a fella's income than another fella's politics.
> Wanted or not.


oh I know, all wonderful p/b whiners and climbers like you. Also you just tacitly admitted that you pay for respect rather than earning it. For someone so big on the work ethic thats a bit of a contradiction isn't it. Never mind eh. Same time next week, three can dan?


----------



## Pickman's model (Apr 8, 2017)

existentialist said:


> Pissed up again?


If there's a d in the day then yes


----------



## Pickman's model (Apr 8, 2017)

billy_bob said:


> The quality of trolling on this site's really in a slump.


We'd like new trolls but as you can see the quality's not available


----------



## Pickman's model (Apr 8, 2017)

DotCommunist said:


> oh I know, all wonderful p/b whiners and climbers like you. Also you just tacitly admitted that you pay for respect rather than earning it. For someone so big on the work ethic thats a bit of a contradiction isn't it. Never mind eh. Same time next week, three can dan?


P/b pissed bastard? Paperback?


----------



## brogdale (Apr 8, 2017)

Pickman's model said:


> P/b pissed bastard? Paperback?


My guess = pub-bore.


----------



## Pickman's model (Apr 8, 2017)

brogdale said:


> My guess = pub-bore.
> 
> View attachment 103869


Or all three


----------



## cantsin (Apr 8, 2017)

millyb said:


> f
> my boss is a bully and fits the profile of a full on narcissist, ...its taken nearly a year of trying to rise above and not react to the constant nitpicking, gaslighting, goalpost shifting, not to mention the disciplinary talks she has her hubby give me on shit im not even aware ive done...when she asks me to justify  actions and i do, her stock response is either im making excuses, or being defensive, to which i answer, no im not.. im just explaining myself, like u asked!... finally, last friday, whilst her hubby was at the shop in the back room...she stood there shouting at me for serving the wrong piece of fish from the range,right after she stood there n watched me serve it(i tried telling her i didnt know what order they shouldve come out, and that whateva I'd done would have been wrong) then immediately tried to apologise and own the mistake but she just shouted over me and as her hubby comes running out she's shouting to him how i messed up obviously looking for his backup, but he just shouted at her to her to calm down realisin just how out of order she was acting, so i went out the back, heard him tell her she had no right talking to me in that manner and what the hell did she think she was playing at!...Anyway, fp to the bloke, he came out and apologised for her,saying plz dont be upset... I told him I was ok and that Im used to it...tho i also told him how this isbringing me down and that I feel victimised and totally on edge in work and depressed at home....so, friday ended on a strained, but civil note..... saturday nite at work was less verbal, on account she totally ignored me (fine by me)....I know i should have done this sooner, but I,ve started jobhunting in earnest today, wish me luck.....p.s hope u dont mind me venting, dont even know you, tho gotta be honest, I feel a whole lot better getting it down...thanx



ffs, horrible to read, have to get out of there asap....had a horrible 12 months working with a deeply unpleasant bod recently, it wasn't until I got out of the situation that i realised what an effect it was having on mental wellbeing - best of luck with it all


----------



## billy_bob (Apr 8, 2017)

Pickman's model said:


> We'd like new trolls but as you can see the quality's not available



It's the real unspoken tragedy of Austerity Britain.


----------



## BigTom (Apr 8, 2017)

Pickman's model said:


> P/b pissed bastard? Paperback?





brogdale said:


> My guess = pub-bore.
> 
> View attachment 103869



Petit bourgeois I think


----------



## brogdale (Apr 8, 2017)

BigTom said:


> Petit bourgeois I think


Ah...yep, probs.


----------



## DotCommunist (Apr 8, 2017)

and I'm not talking about pencils when I type h/b


----------



## brogdale (Apr 8, 2017)

DotCommunist said:


> and I'm not talking about pencils when I type h/b


l/p?


----------



## DotCommunist (Apr 8, 2017)

brogdale said:


> l/p?


you know me


----------



## Nylock (Apr 9, 2017)

BigTom said:


> Petit bourgeois I think


Potayto/Potahto


----------



## SqueakyBumTime (Apr 14, 2017)




----------



## SqueakyBumTime (Apr 14, 2017)

"I'm here where are the rest of you?"


----------



## xenon (Apr 14, 2017)

Katie Hopkins is still an arsehole.  She makes me almost miss Richard Littlejohn.  He used to be on the telly and that.  Where is he now, dead?


----------



## existentialist (Apr 14, 2017)

SqueakyBumTime said:


> "I'm here where are the rest of you?"


Shocking as it may seem, there really is only room for you up your own squeaky arse.


----------



## Corax (Apr 16, 2017)

It's nice that she has own radio show and newspaper columns, but I do wish Katie Hopkins would tell us more about her views on immigration.

*Katie Hopkins: The Migrant Tidal Wave Is Still Coming*


----------



## not-bono-ever (Apr 16, 2017)

xenon said:


> Katie Hopkins is still an arsehole.  She makes me almost miss Richard Littlejohn.  He used to be on the telly and that.  Where is he now, dead?




I think he lives in the great Satan, Florida, these days. probabaly spending his days in a hot tub filled with his own vitriol and heated by the sheer energy of his own fury


----------



## SqueakyBumTime (Apr 17, 2017)

Pickman's model said:


> If there's a d in the day then yes





brogdale said:


> My guess = pub-bore.
> 
> View attachment 103869





DotCommunist said:


> and I'm not talking about pencils when I type h/b



scared little boys


----------



## Pickman's model (Apr 17, 2017)

SqueakyBumTime said:


> scared little boys


D. Must try harder.


----------



## Corax (Apr 17, 2017)

I'm assuming lumpen proletariat for l/p, but I'm drawing a blank on h/b...


----------



## brogdale (Apr 17, 2017)

Corax said:


> I'm assuming lumpen proletariat for l/p, but I'm drawing a blank on h/b...


Haute.


----------



## brogdale (Apr 17, 2017)

Pickman's model said:


> D. Must try harder.


Obviously gets lonely after drinking alone all night.


----------



## Pickman's model (Apr 17, 2017)

brogdale said:


> Obviously gets lonely after drinking alone all night.


Sbt made it onto the back page of today's mirror


----------



## existentialist (Apr 17, 2017)

SqueakyBumTime said:


> scared little boys


So what's that make you, then?


----------



## Pickman's model (Apr 17, 2017)

existentialist said:


> So what's that make you, then?


He's a wet fart


----------



## Pickman's model (Apr 17, 2017)




----------



## bimble (Apr 17, 2017)

Pickman's model said:


> He's a wet fart


((wet farts))


----------



## DotCommunist (Apr 17, 2017)

I think littlejohn has handed over the spite-for-coins mantle. As for what SBT thinks I'm scared of, well I think he may have mistaken violent hatred for fear. Never mind.


----------



## mx wcfc (Apr 17, 2017)

brogdale said:


> My guess = pub-bore.
> 
> View attachment 103869



The Unspeakable in the presence of the Undrinkable.


----------



## William of Walworth (Apr 17, 2017)

SqueakyBumTime said:


> There's room in this world for more than one opinion.



Preferably not yours though, ultra-dull-cliche recycler


----------



## brogdale (Apr 17, 2017)

Isn't it about now that he gets in from spoons?


----------



## DotCommunist (Apr 17, 2017)

he's at the coalface tomorrow, early night with a horlicks and a bash


----------



## SqueakyBumTime (Apr 18, 2017)

brogdale said:


> Isn't it about now that he gets in from spoons?


Claps


----------



## SqueakyBumTime (Apr 18, 2017)

existentialist said:


> Shocking as it may seem, there really is only room for you up your own squeaky arse.


The problem with this forum is: you think I'm the cunt!


----------



## SqueakyBumTime (Apr 18, 2017)

Pickman's model said:


> He's a wet fart


Oh do fuck off dewey


----------



## SqueakyBumTime (Apr 18, 2017)

DotCommunist said:


> I think littlejohn has handed over the spite-for-coins mantle. As for what SBT thinks I'm scared of, well I think he may have mistaken violent hatred for fear. Never mind.


---- mate, I really don't care what you think


----------



## NoXion (Apr 18, 2017)

SqueakyBumTime said:


> --- mate, I really don't care what you think



Yet here you are all the same. Why are you here?


----------



## DotCommunist (Apr 18, 2017)

well we share a common ground then, cos I couldn't give a toss what you think either. Don't call me by my name either, snidey fucker.


----------



## bimble (Apr 18, 2017)

Why are any of us here? It's half past midnight on the Katie Hopkins thread.


----------



## NoXion (Apr 18, 2017)

I need a distraction while finishing off me dinner.


----------



## bimble (Apr 18, 2017)

My book is a bit boring.


----------



## DotCommunist (Apr 18, 2017)

theres only so many wanks a man can have in one day


----------



## bimble (Apr 18, 2017)

7?


----------



## xenon (Apr 18, 2017)

I have been steadily drinking for the last few hours.  And I don't have work tomorrow.  I'm feeling too lazy to read or play guitar. Not tired enough to go to bed.  That is pretty pathetic I admit.


----------



## xenon (Apr 18, 2017)

Wanking is rubbish though.


----------



## editor (Apr 18, 2017)

SqueakyBumTime said:


> ----- mate, I really don't care what you think


Why are you using his real name? It's against the rules.


----------



## brogdale (Apr 18, 2017)

SqueakyBumTime said:


> Claps


66 minutes out.
Not bad?


----------



## brogdale (Apr 18, 2017)

editor said:


> Why are you using his real name? It's against the rules.


Cuntishness.


----------



## Pickman's model (Apr 18, 2017)

bimble said:


> My book is a bit boring.


Perhaps you should jazzz it up before sending it to a potential publisher


----------



## Pickman's model (Apr 18, 2017)

SqueakyBumTime said:


> Oh do fuck off dewey


Ah bliss


----------



## Pickman's model (Apr 18, 2017)

SqueakyBumTime said:


> The problem with this forum is: you think I'm the cunt!


And they're right to do so


----------



## existentialist (Apr 18, 2017)

SqueakyBumTime said:


> The problem with this forum is: you think I'm the cunt!


The problem with this forum is that I'm not alone in thinking that.


----------



## SqueakyBumTime (Apr 18, 2017)

editor said:


> Why are you using his real name? It's against the rules.


Maybe It was a guess. He acts and sounds like a _____.

Was I right?

Or maybe ... when "Mister X" posts videos of himself on the world's largest video sharing website with his NAME IN THE TITLE OF THE VIDEO then his "right to privacy" is reduced inexorably.


----------



## William of Walworth (Apr 18, 2017)

PostingUtterShiteTrollingTime said:
			
		

> "right to privacy" is reduced altogether



Not in the Urban75 rules it isn't. Have you seen them? I expect you have ...  

Oh woe is me, help help I'm being oppressed!!!!1!!1!!!
 The "Urban Monothought Clique" (R, TM)  are intolerant-of any-different opinion-ly ganging up on me !   

</channeling usual troll-cliche-recycling-shite here, just so you know, Mr Soon To Be Banned  >

ETA : Mr Formerly Banned Returner, that is. Spotting one a mile off


----------



## Nylock (Apr 19, 2017)

SqueakyBumTime said:


> Maybe It was a guess.


and maybe it wasn't you cockend


----------



## Corax (Apr 19, 2017)

To be fair, I'm sure I recall Albathwaite using own his name quite openly on here himself.


----------



## editor (Apr 19, 2017)

SqueakyBumTime said:


> Maybe It was a guess. He acts and sounds like a _____.
> 
> Was I right?
> 
> Or maybe ... when "Mister X" posts videos of himself on the world's largest video sharing website with his NAME IN THE TITLE OF THE VIDEO then his "right to privacy" is reduced inexorably.


Take another warning for acting like a dick.

Oh, it's made an automatic temp ban start up. Well, there you go.


----------



## Dom Traynor (Apr 19, 2017)

That Hopkins idiot is polluting the radio waves in New Zealand now can you lot take her back please?


----------



## Pickman's model (Apr 19, 2017)

Dom Traynor said:


> That Hopkins idiot is polluting the radio waves in New Zealand now can you lot take her back please?


Let's split the difference and send her back on Malaysian


----------



## DotCommunist (Apr 20, 2017)

SqueakyBumTime said:


> Maybe It was a guess. He acts and sounds like a _____.
> 
> Was I right?
> 
> Or maybe ... when "Mister X" posts videos of himself on the world's largest video sharing website with his NAME IN THE TITLE OF THE VIDEO then his "right to privacy" is reduced inexorably.


Thats not why you used my name though is it mr 55k PA. You did it in an unsubtle 'I see you' type approach didn't you. Jog the fuck on.


----------



## DotCommunist (Apr 20, 2017)

You'll read this when you get off your ban- I've been suprised at your ferocity at someone like me but then I realised you are unused to being played for the fool by people you consider your inferior both socially and economically. I've met enough of you before. If you want to keep digging away then do you stalky fucking prick.


----------



## Pickman's model (Apr 20, 2017)

DotCommunist said:


> You'll read this when you get off your ban- I've been suprised at your ferocity at someone like me but then I realised you are unused to being played for the fool by people you consider your inferior both socially and economically. I've met enough of you before. If you want to keep digging away then do you stalky fucking prick.


i am surprised he is unused to mockery as that's all he's worth, taking the piss out of.


----------



## Corax (Apr 20, 2017)

Pickman's model said:


> i am surprised he is unused to mockery as that's all he's worth, taking the piss out of.


People like him tend to surround themselves only with people that will reinforce their egos.  Often people that only hang around with them because they know he'll pick up the bar tab.


----------



## billbond (Apr 20, 2017)

shes been busy tonite with the news of the police killing in Paris via twitter


----------



## hash tag (Apr 30, 2017)

I see Jack is standing for the national health action party in southend west, deposit paid for by MS Hopkins!


----------



## Thimble Queen (Apr 30, 2017)

"We do not accept trash of any kind" - Katie Hopkins gets rinsed by PoC Twitter.


----------



## Nylock (Apr 30, 2017)

So who did the Iraqis pass the problem on to then?


----------



## agricola (Apr 30, 2017)

Nylock said:


> So who did the Iraqis pass the problem on to then?



Islamic State.  They didn't have a problem with her, or any of her utterances.


----------



## Who PhD (Apr 30, 2017)

To think, her star was once so bright: being outclassed by a Sir Delboy and his Amstrad Empire on a reality show.


----------



## Thimble Queen (May 2, 2017)

There's a petition going round for LBC to sack KH after this disgusting tweet.

 

You can sign it here: LBC Radio: LBC to sack Katie Hopkins for Racist Tweet


----------



## ruffneck23 (May 2, 2017)

Signed fwiw


----------



## Who PhD (May 2, 2017)

Of course twitter does nothing.

Blah blah blah robust opinion blah blah blah no one's forcing you to read it

All the usual excuses as to why this rancid piece of shit is continually allowed and indeed encouraged to spew this vile shit.

I hate and despise her.


----------



## Corax (May 2, 2017)

She's essentially a 'hate-preacher'.

I wonder if The Mail will make any demands for her expulsion.

There's no swampland in the UK, so assumedly she wasn't born hatched here.


----------



## Who PhD (May 2, 2017)

Corax said:


> She's essentially a 'hate-preacher'.
> 
> I wonder if The Mail will make any demands for her expulsion.
> 
> There's no swampland in the UK, so assumedly she wasn't born hatched here.


She's a desperate attention seeker, a failure in business, and is more than willing to air the most vile shit which makes her attractive to the likes of the redtops and some shameful radio broadcasticunts like this LBC shower, who also have that shitbag Nick Ferrari as well as Farage. FFS.

I can't stand this. What the hell happened to society that we allowed these manipulate wankers to take control of the collective conscious or to have at the very least positions of influence.


----------



## Orang Utan (May 2, 2017)

Thimble Queen said:


> There's a petition going round for LBC to sack KH after this disgusting tweet.
> 
> View attachment 105825
> 
> You can sign it here: LBC Radio: LBC to sack Katie Hopkins for Racist Tweet


She didn't delete another equally racist tweet directed towards Dianne Abbot but I'm not repeating it here.


----------



## Nylock (May 3, 2017)

signed. Fully expecting some mealy-mouthed wafflebollocks from LBC as to why they're going to keep her on but I hope to be surprised...


----------



## Thimble Queen (May 3, 2017)

Prob won't get her sacked but it's good to say NO! Thr petition up to neatly 800 signatures. It was only 80 when I first posted here. That's pretty good going.


----------



## Pickman's model (May 3, 2017)

Corax said:


> She's essentially a 'hate-preacher'.
> 
> I wonder if The Mail will make any demands for her expulsion.
> 
> There's no swampland in the UK, so assumedly she wasn't born hatched here.


I think we need to have a chat about where journalists come from


----------



## Who PhD (May 3, 2017)

Pickman's model said:


> I think we need to have a chat about where journalists come from


I'd rather have a chat about wherethey should go


----------



## Pickman's model (May 3, 2017)

Who PhD said:


> I'd rather have a chat about wherethey should go


they're not going to dig canals on south georgia, you'll have to find your own remote gulag.


----------



## Thimble Queen (May 3, 2017)

Pickman's model said:


> they're not going to dig canals on south georgia, you'll have to find your own remote gulag.



I hear the island of Exuma is perfect this time of year.


----------



## Pickman's model (May 3, 2017)

Thimble Queen said:


> I hear the island of Exuma is perfect this time of year.


nah. rockall i think, much better.


----------



## Thimble Queen (May 3, 2017)

Pickman's model said:


> nah. rockall i think, much better.



The JaRulag is probably a bit too pleasant with those lovely cabanas and wild dogs.


----------



## Pickman's model (May 3, 2017)

Thimble Queen said:


> The JaRulag is probably a bit too pleasant with those lovely cabanas and wild dogs.


wouldn't want to poison the dogs...


----------



## Thimble Queen (May 3, 2017)

The petition has got 4205 signatures now


----------



## not-bono-ever (May 3, 2017)

there is no such thing as bad PR for Hopkins. These lightly engineered outbursts  of bile will pay for her kids education


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (May 3, 2017)

Petition needs amending: not only is LBC's silence complicit in her racism, Global Radio's silence is complicit, Capital, Heart, Classic, Xfm etc.


----------



## Who PhD (May 3, 2017)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> Petition needs amending: not only is LBC's silence complicit in her racism, Global Radio's silence is complicit, Capital, Heart, Classic, Xfm etc.


LBC also hires Farage, Nick Ferrari, and satan knows who else, this won't bother them


----------



## agricola (May 3, 2017)

Who PhD said:


> LBC also hires Farage, Nick Ferrari, and satan knows who else, this won't bother them



"knows who else" is probably a redundant part of that sentence, tbh


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (May 3, 2017)

Who PhD said:


> LBC also hires Farage, Nick Ferrari, and satan knows who else, this won't bother them



Start calling Johnny Vaughan  racist and he'll get the hump. Doubt Moyles will, the cunt.


----------



## SqueakyBumTime (May 7, 2017)

DotCommunist said:


> You'll read this when you get off your ban- I've been suprised at your ferocity at someone like me but then I realised you are unused to being played for the fool by people you consider your inferior both socially and economically. I've met enough of you before. If you want to keep digging away then do you stalky fucking prick.


Stalky fucking prick. No wonder I have such a high opinion of you and "people like you".
I don't consider you inferior in any sense by the way, except that you obvs like dishing but get all antsy when taking.


----------



## SqueakyBumTime (May 7, 2017)

Pickman's model said:


> i am surprised he is unused to mockery as that's all he's worth, taking the piss out of.


Cutting


----------



## DaveCinzano (May 7, 2017)

Fuck off


----------



## DotCommunist (May 7, 2017)

in he reels, full of vim and vigour.


----------



## DotCommunist (May 7, 2017)

SBT tried to rage re-resister on his last banning and got it extended by a week. I laughed anyway.


----------



## existentialist (May 7, 2017)

SqueakyBumTime said:


> Stalky fucking prick. No wonder I have such a high opinion of you and "people like you".
> I don't consider you inferior in any sense by the way, except that you obvs like dishing but get all antsy when taking.


Ah, you managed to save up for a big bottle of cider. Bless.


----------



## Pickman's model (May 7, 2017)

SqueakyBumTime said:


> Stalky fucking prick. No wonder I have such a high opinion of you and "people like you".
> I don't consider you inferior in any sense by the way, except that you obvs like dishing but get all antsy when taking.


People like him
But they don't like you


----------



## butchersapron (May 7, 2017)

Classic wife-beater behaviour by SBT - the post pub rage. Every single weekend. I think a permanent separation would be best for all. Except maybe, the next victim. Woo knows, maybe he'll ask for some help before then?


----------



## Gromit (May 7, 2017)

Who PhD said:


> LBC also hires Farage, Nick Ferrari, and satan knows who else, this won't bother them


Bother them? It's free advertising. They love it. 

If people stopped paying attention to her crap *then* they'd get someone else. 
Petitions and her opinions going viral just keep her in business. 
Yep Facebook campaigns against her saying sign the petition is in fact people making her go viral. Well done. 

'Do not feed the troll' works but it's funny how incapable people are of actually doing it.


----------



## existentialist (May 7, 2017)

butchersapron said:


> Classic wife-beater behaviour by SBT - the post pub rage. Every single weekend. I think a permanent separation would be best for all. Except maybe, the next victim. Woo knows, maybe he'll ask for some help before then?


Maybe while he's bothering us he's not leering drunkenly at some poor soul who's been unfortunate enough to miss the last bus home? Perhaps us tolerating his presence here is a public service.


----------



## existentialist (May 7, 2017)

Gromit said:


> Bother them? It's free advertising. They love it.
> 
> If people stopped paying attention to her crap *then* they'd get someone else.
> Petitions and her opinions going viral just keep her in business.
> ...


Which is why it's pointless saying "do not feed the troll". As pointless as the advice kids are given to "just ignore the bullying".

ETA: apart, of course, from making the people telling us not to feed the troll feel a little bit more superior and slightly better-than-us.


----------



## ItWillNeverWork (May 7, 2017)

existentialist said:


> Which is why it's pointless saying "do not feed the troll". As pointless as the advice kids are given to "just ignore the bullying".



Except that those two things are nothing like each other.


----------



## existentialist (May 7, 2017)

ItWillNeverWork said:


> Except that those two things are nothing like each other.


I completely agree. Except for the ways in which they are similar.


----------



## Athos (May 7, 2017)

existentialist said:


> Which is why it's pointless saying "do not feed the troll". As pointless as the advice kids are given to "just ignore the bullying".
> 
> ETA: apart, of course, from making the people telling us not to feed the troll feel a little bit more superior and slightly better-than-us.



Not comparing like with like. Ignoring trolls is as simple and easy as two clicks.


----------



## existentialist (May 7, 2017)

Athos said:


> Not comparing like with like. Ignoring trolls is as simple and easy as two clicks.


So if it really is that easy, why do you think people don't?

To me, this smacks of "losing weight is easy - just consume fewer calories than you use". Yet we're in the middle of an epidemic of obesity.

Just because something appears superficially simple, it doesn't follow that it's easy for the majority of people to do.

ETA: when something looks so simple that it's possible to put "just" in front of the injunction to do it, it usually turns out not to be so.


----------



## Athos (May 7, 2017)

existentialist said:


> So if it really is that easy, why do you think people don't?
> 
> To me, this smacks of "losing weight is easy - just consume fewer calories than you use". Yet we're in the middle of an epidemic of obesity.
> 
> ...



But there are deep seated psychological, sociological and economic reasons for obesity. Again, you're not comparing like for like. Nobody feels compelled to read what trolls post, do they? It really is a matter of just hit 'ignore'. People don't because, for whatever reason, they'd rather read it than not e.g. comedy, righteous indignation, or simply that out doesn't bother them that much, etc., etc..


----------



## bimble (May 7, 2017)

Athos said:


> But there are deep seated psychological, sociological and economic reasons for obesity. Again, you're not comparing like for like. Nobody feels compelled to read what trolls post, do they? It really is a matter of just hit 'ignore'. People don't because, for whatever reason, they'd rather read it than not e.g. comedy, righteous indignation, or simply that out doesn't bother them that much, etc., etc..


What you're saying in effect is that anyone who is bothered by being attacked online it's their own silly fault for not being 'strong' enough to turn a blind eye. I think that's .. not very insightful.


----------



## mojo pixy (May 7, 2017)

Hitting "ignore" in a forum doesn't mean a reader can magically hit "ignore" in their own mind.


----------



## ItWillNeverWork (May 7, 2017)

existentialist said:


> I completely agree. Except for the ways in which they are similar.



Scenario 1: Flicking through radio stations and coming across a twat speaking shite.
Scenario 2: Kid getting the shit beat out of them every day at school.

Yeah, exactly the same. Silly me.


----------



## bimble (May 7, 2017)

Athos is basically describing the attitude that twitter has though (beloved haunt of great armies of trolls). On there they will only take any action if there is a direct specific and credible real-world threat to you as an individual.


----------



## Athos (May 7, 2017)

bimble said:


> What you're saying in effect is that anyone who is bothered by being attacked online it's their own silly fault for not being 'strong' enough to turn a blind eye. I think that's .. not very insightful.



No. I accept that that is more akin to bullying, and much harder to ignore.  But the vast majority of trolling isn't being on the receiving end of a personal attack, is it? It's just knobs saying contentious stuff for the sole purpose of getting a rise.  When it becomes obvious that's what they're up to, it didn't ought to be too hard to ignore.


----------



## bimble (May 7, 2017)

Athos said:


> No. I accept that that is more akin to bullying, and much harder to ignore.  But the vast majority of trolling isn't being on the receiving end of a personal attack, is it? It's just knobs saying contentious stuff for the sole purpose of getting a rise.  When it becomes obvious that's what they're up to, it didn't ought to be too hard to ignore.


There's a big murky crossover / grey area in between, at least as I experience it (eg raging anti-semites on twitter).


----------



## Athos (May 7, 2017)

bimble said:


> Athos is basically describing the attitude that twitter has though (beloved haunt of great armies of trolls). On there they will only take any action if there is a direct specific and credible real-world threat to you as an individual.



That seems a sensible threshold for restricting free speech. Otherwise, hurt feelings is the thin end of a big wedge.


----------



## Athos (May 7, 2017)

bimble said:


> There's a big murky crossover / grey area in between, at least as I experience it (eg raging anti-semites on twitter).


 Maybe.  But, for the common out garden knobs, like the SBT character on this thread, nor responding is probably a simple and effective solution.


----------



## bimble (May 7, 2017)

yeah i agree.


----------



## existentialist (May 7, 2017)

ItWillNeverWork said:


> Scenario 1: Flicking through radio stations and coming across a twat speaking shite.
> Scenario 2: Kid getting the shit beat out of them every day at school.
> 
> Yeah, exactly the same. Silly me.


Yes, because I did say "exactly the same"


----------



## Gromit (May 7, 2017)

existentialist said:


> Yes, because I did say "exactly the same"


This is Urban. Land of idiots who try and take everything literally.


----------



## existentialist (May 7, 2017)

Gromit said:


> This is Urban. Land of idiots who try and take everything literally.


I don't think it's unique to Urban...


----------



## Who PhD (May 7, 2017)

Gromit said:


> Bother them? It's free advertising. They love it.
> 
> If people stopped paying attention to her crap *then* they'd get someone else.
> Petitions and her opinions going viral just keep her in business.
> ...


It doesn't work. It's just not realistic. These people aren't stopped by lack of publicity, they just keep going. The 'sticks and stones' argument belongs in fairytales


----------



## Pickman's model (May 7, 2017)

Who PhD said:


> It doesn't work. It's just not realistic. These people aren't stopped by lack of publicity, they just keep going. The 'sticks and stones' argument belongs in fairytales


Don't think it appears in fairytales


----------



## Pickman's model (May 7, 2017)

Who PhD said:


> It doesn't work. It's just not realistic. These people aren't stopped by lack of publicity, they just keep going. The 'sticks and stones' argument belongs in fairytales


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (May 7, 2017)

"Ready, aim, fire!" Are words that can be fairly catastrophic.


----------



## ViolentPanda (May 7, 2017)

DotCommunist said:


> in he reels, full of vim and vigour.



...and dog-spunk.


----------



## Corax (May 7, 2017)

"Let him have it"


----------



## Who PhD (May 7, 2017)

Pickman's model said:


> Don't think it appears in fairytales


I never said it did.


----------



## NoXion (May 7, 2017)

The problem with "don't feed the trolls" is that trolls are just about smart enough to realise that if they're attacking a target who refuses to bite, they'll keep moving on until they find someone who will (I think I've explained this point on this thread before, but it seems that it hasn't sunk in among some). This facility is amplified by sites like Twitter which provide a target-rich environment not only in the form of the people who have accounts there, but since also because tweets are usually not private, potentially anyone else using the internet as well.

Therefore, when some troll is casting the net so wide, expecting everyone to simply ignore them, when the trolls are doing their absolute best to provoke others, is completely unrealistic. And even if people are hearing the warnings not to feed the troll and still do not heed them, I think it's wrong to put the blame on the people being thus provoked. The trolls are the ones in the wrong here. They get away with the shit they do because you can't punch trolls repeatedly in the face over the internet until there is nothing but a bloody mess. It is this possibility that stops trolls from behaving that way in meatspace.


----------



## Who PhD (May 7, 2017)

NoXion said:


> The problem with "don't feed the trolls" is that trolls are just about smart enough to realise that if they're attacking a target who refuses to bite, they'll keep moving on until they find someone who will (I think I've explained this point on this thread before, but it seems that it hasn't sunk in among some). This facility is amplified by sites like Twitter which provide a target-rich environment not only in the form of the people who have accounts there, but since also because tweets are usually not private, potentially anyone else using the internet as well.
> 
> Therefore, when some troll is casting the net so wide, expecting everyone to simply ignore them, when the trolls are doing their absolute best to provoke others, is completely unrealistic. And even if people are hearing the warnings not to feed the troll and still do not heed them, I think it's wrong to put the blame on the people being thus provoked. The trolls are the ones in the wrong here. They get away with the shit they do because you can't punch trolls repeatedly in the face over the internet until there is nothing but a bloody mess. It is this possibility that stops trolls from behaving that way in meatspace.


That's true, but in the case of people like KH they do behave like that in meatspace and are protected from being punched to death by the legal system and the privilege of powerful patrons.


----------



## Pickman's model (May 7, 2017)

Who PhD said:


> I never said it did.


You said it belonged in fairytales. It's not in or from fairytales. You know not of what you witter.


----------



## Pickman's model (May 7, 2017)

Who PhD said:


> That's true, but in the case of people like KH they do behave like that in meatspace and are protected from being punched to death by the legal system and the privilege of powerful patrons.


Bollocks. Bilge. Did the legal system save a single murder victim in the past 500 years?


----------



## existentialist (May 7, 2017)

Pickman's model said:


> Bollocks. Bilge. Did the legal system save a single murder victim in the past 500 years?


I think he has a point re privilege. People like Katie Hopkins can afford to lead lives that need never bring her into much contact with the people she vilifies: they can live in gated developments, secluded suburban enclaves, or fortified apartment blocks secure in the knowledge that the objects of their fury are always being kept at arm's length from them.


----------



## Pickman's model (May 7, 2017)

existentialist said:


> I think he has a point re privilege. People like Katie Hopkins can afford to lead lives that need never bring her into much contact with the people she vilifies: they can live in gated developments, secluded suburban enclaves, or fortified apartment blocks secure in the knowledge that the objects of their fury are always being kept at arm's length from them.


Pity he was making a different, flawed, point


----------



## Who PhD (May 7, 2017)

Pickman's model said:


> You said it belonged in fairytales. It's not in or from fairytales. You know not of what you witter.


I said it belongs in fairytales. Doesn't entail it came from fairytales.


----------



## Pickman's model (May 7, 2017)

Who PhD said:


> I said it belongs in fairytales. Doesn't entail it came from fairytales.


Why does it belong in fairytales? Surely if it belonged in fairytales you would find it in fairytales.


----------



## Who PhD (May 7, 2017)

Pickman's model said:


> Bollocks. Bilge. Did the legal system save a single murder victim in the past 500 years?


Do you think there would be a greater than current chance of KH facing some form of consequence if that consequence was made legal?


----------



## Who PhD (May 7, 2017)

Pickman's model said:


> Why does it belong in fairytales? Surely if it belonged in fairytales you would find it in fairytales.


Because it's a childish attitude that doesn't bear out in reality


----------



## Pickman's model (May 7, 2017)

Who PhD said:


> Do you think there would be a greater than current chance of KH facing some form of consequence if that consequence was made legal?


So kh's recent libel loss not iyo a consequence.


----------



## Pickman's model (May 7, 2017)

Who PhD said:


> Because it's a childish attitude that doesn't bear out in reality


You clearly don't know much about fairytales.


----------



## Who PhD (May 7, 2017)

Pickman's model said:


> So kh's recent libel loss not iyo a consequence.



You're answering my question with a question


----------



## Who PhD (May 7, 2017)

Pickman's model said:


> You clearly don't know much about fairytales.


How is that relevant?


----------



## Pickman's model (May 7, 2017)

Who PhD said:


> You're answering my question with a question


It's not a question. A question has ? at the end of it.


----------



## Pickman's model (May 7, 2017)

Who PhD said:


> How is that relevant?


Your ignorance surely relevant when you introduce a claim which on examination is tosh.


----------



## Who PhD (May 7, 2017)

Pickman's model said:


> It's not a question. A question has ? at the end of it.


Now you're dodging.

Clearly we were discussing physical consequences such as punching the likes of KH in the face for the things they write. That is legally proscribed behaviour. So I don't know what libel has to do with it. Besides to bring a case of libel one needs money, that's part of the problem.


----------



## Who PhD (May 7, 2017)

Pickman's model said:


> Your ignorance surely relevant when you introduce a claim which on examination is tosh.


Do you have a point that isn't ad hominem?


----------



## Pickman's model (May 7, 2017)

Who PhD said:


> Now you're dodging.
> 
> Clearly we were discussing physical consequences such as punching the likes of KH in the face for the things they write. That is legally proscribed behaviour. So I don't know what libel has to do with it. Besides to bring a case of libel one needs money, that's part of the problem.


It is only legally proscribed if a court decides you're guilty of assault or affray or gbh etc. And that's if you end up there anyway. You've still to say when your vaunted legal system ever saved a single murder victim.


----------



## Pickman's model (May 7, 2017)

Who PhD said:


> Do you have a point that isn't ad hominem?


It's not ad hominem to say you don't know something when you have made clear you don't know it.


----------



## Who PhD (May 7, 2017)

Pickman's model said:


> It is only legally proscribed if a court decides you're guilty of assault or affray or gbh etc. And that's if you end up there anyway. You've still to say when your vaunted legal system ever saved a single murder victim.


I've no idea how many murders have been prevented by the criminalisation of murder. How would we determine such a thing?


----------



## Who PhD (May 7, 2017)

Pickman's model said:


> It's not ad hominem to say you don't know something when you have made clear you don't know it.


You didn't refute the claim you called me ignorant. If you have a problem with me saying that sticks and stones is a childish attitude then I'm happy to discuss that. If you want to play the man not the ball then I'm not interested.


----------



## Pickman's model (May 7, 2017)

Who PhD said:


> I've no idea how many murders have been prevented by the criminalisation of murder. How would we determine such a thing?


I'm clearly not talking about the criminalisation of murder. Let's make it the last thousand years, then, has the legal system in the UK saved a single murder victim?


----------



## Pickman's model (May 7, 2017)

Who PhD said:


> You didn't refute the claim you called me ignorant. If you have a problem with me saying that sticks and stones is a childish attitude then I'm happy to discuss that. If you want to play the man not the ball then I'm not interested.


I'm not refuting a claim which is true. More to the point, you're nor refuting it either. I expect there are lots of things on which you are knowledgeable. Fairytales are not among them.


----------



## Who PhD (May 7, 2017)

Pickman's model said:


> I'm clearly not talking about the criminalisation of murder. Let's make it the last thousand years, then, has the legal system in the UK saved a single murder victim?



You're repeating the question I've already answered: I have no idea how we would ever know how many murders have been prevented by making murder illegal in the UK. How could we know this? I assume a number greater than zero if that's any help. 

But you haven't answered my question: if it weren't for the legal consequences, do you think KH would have been attacked somehow, say punched in the street, for what she says?


----------



## Who PhD (May 7, 2017)

Pickman's model said:


> I'm not refuting a claim which is true. More to the point, you're nor refuting it either. I expect there are lots of things on which you are knowledgeable. Fairytales are not among them.



I think we're talking past each other here.


----------



## Pickman's model (May 7, 2017)

Who PhD said:


> You're repeating the question I've already answered: I have no idea how we would ever know how many murders have been prevented by making murder illegal in the UK. How could we know this? I assume a number greater than zero if that's any help.
> 
> But you haven't answered my question: if it weren't for the legal consequences, do you think KH would have been attacked somehow, say punched in the street, for what she says?


Why not? People have been attacked in the street for far less. Btw as ought to be clear the legal system has never saved a single murder victim.


----------



## Who PhD (May 7, 2017)

Pickman's model said:


> Why not? People have been attacked in the street for far less. Btw as ought to be clear the legal system has never saved a single murder victim.


How could you possibly know how many people wouldn't have been murdered if murder was legal?

Ok, let me rephrase the question because that wasn't what I originally asked: I meant to say - is the existence of law prohibiting such behaviour making it more likely that people won't punch KH in the face on the street, in your view?


----------



## Athos (May 7, 2017)

NoXion said:


> The problem with "don't feed the trolls" is that trolls are just about smart enough to realise that if they're attacking a target who refuses to bite, they'll keep moving on until they find someone who will (I think I've explained this point on this thread before, but it seems that it hasn't sunk in among some). This facility is amplified by sites like Twitter which provide a target-rich environment not only in the form of the people who have accounts there, but since also because tweets are usually not private, potentially anyone else using the internet as well.
> 
> Therefore, when some troll is casting the net so wide, expecting everyone to simply ignore them, when the trolls are doing their absolute best to provoke others, is completely unrealistic. And even if people are hearing the warnings not to feed the troll and still do not heed them, I think it's wrong to put the blame on the people being thus provoked. The trolls are the ones in the wrong here. They get away with the shit they do because you can't punch trolls repeatedly in the face over the internet until there is nothing but a bloody mess. It is this possibility that stops trolls from behaving that way in meatspace.


Let's be honest, the people who get upset by them, and who can't just ignore them, are the very people who are least likely to punch them in real life.

And it's not expectation or blame; rather advice - ignoring trolls is likely to be more fruitful than railing against them.


----------



## Pickman's model (May 7, 2017)

Who PhD said:


> How could you possibly know how many people wouldn't have been murdered if murder was legal?
> 
> Ok, let me rephrase the question because that wasn't what I originally asked: I meant to say - is the existence of law prohibiting such behaviour making it more likely that people won't punch KH in the face on the street, in your view?


If someone's a murder victim they're already dead. Obviously.

That's a daft question. What KH says makes it more likely someone will punch her. No one else would ask a question about laws against assault making assault more likely.


----------



## Who PhD (May 7, 2017)

Pickman's model said:


> If someone's a murder victim they're already dead. Obviously.
> 
> That's a daft question. What KH says makes it more likely someone will punch her. No one else would ask a question about laws against assault making assault more likely.



I didn't say laws against assault make assault more likely. I asked you if you thought that it would be more likely for her to be assaulted if those laws didn't exist. obviously the act is predicated on what she says, that's not in dispute. 

The point, which you've completely ignored, was in relation to the comment made above about trolls in meatspace facing real consequences. But she won't face those consquences because she has power that the people she targets don't have. Specifically in the case of being punched. Even libel laws are in her favour simply because she is more likely to have the means to go to court than those she smears can afford a prosecution. Jack Monroe is the exception not the norm.


----------



## Pickman's model (May 7, 2017)

Who PhD said:


> I didn't say laws against assault make assault more likely. I asked you if you thought that it would be more likely for her to be assaulted if those laws didn't exist. obviously the act is predicated on what she says, that's not in dispute.


You don't know what you asked  why not reread your question?



> The point, which you've completely ignored, was in relation to the comment made above about trolls in meatspace facing real consequences. But she won't face those consquences because she has power that the people she targets don't have. Specifically in the case of being punched. Even libel laws are in her favour simply because she is more likely to have the means to go to court than those she smears can afford a prosecution. Jack Monroe is the exception not the norm.


Tbh anyone can have KH over libel as no lawyer would advise her now to defend in court, but to settle outside. Bur I would be interested in the means by which you can be so sure she will never face consequences. What form of divination did you use?


----------



## Grandma Death (May 7, 2017)

Gromit said:


> Bother them? It's free advertising. They love it.
> 
> If people stopped paying attention to her crap *then* they'd get someone else.
> Petitions and her opinions going viral just keep her in business.
> ...




I dont buy this. She gets her radio slot/newspapers slot because shes controversial and there's an audience out there for it. Whether we stop getting outraged/angry/start petitions wont change what she's doing. I personally welcome any opposition to her-whether its useful or not.


----------



## Who PhD (May 7, 2017)

Pickman's model said:


> You don't know what you asked  why not reread your question?
> 
> Tbh anyone can have KH over libel as no lawyer would advise her now to defend in court, but to settle outside. Bur I would be interested in the means by which you can be so sure she will never face consequences. What form of divination did you use?


Don't tell me what I know.

I asked you this: is it more likely that if it were legal to do so people would seek to punch KH.

I also never said she wouldn't face consequences, you're misrepresenting my positoin

Simple enough.


----------



## Pickman's model (May 7, 2017)

Who PhD said:


> Don't tell me what I know.
> 
> I asked you this: is it more likely that if it were legal to do so people would seek to punch KH.
> 
> ...


Could you make your mind up what you're asking pls, this is I think the third question you've asked. Maybe fourth.


----------



## Who PhD (May 7, 2017)

Pickman's model said:


> Could you make your mind up what you're asking pls, this is I think the third question you've asked. Maybe fourth.


It's the same question, though you're obviously not interested in answering so why waste my time?


----------



## Pickman's model (May 7, 2017)

Who PhD said:


> It's the same question, though you're obviously not interested in answering so why waste my time?


The only person wasting time here is you with your shitty hypotheticals. I don't suppose the question of legality enters many people's mind before they smack (or indeed refrain from smacking) other people. Other issues e.g. will they smack me back would, I believe, weigh rather more heavily than 'oh noes there's a law against this'.


----------



## campanula (May 7, 2017)

I kinda disagree, Pickman's. Possibly not so much to reckless anarcho types (pointing no fingers whatsoever) but for many other people, the law (and consequences of contravening such) most definitely do go through people's heads...even for smacking, punching and other spontaneous acts of furious violence. Certainly, when I was on the point of slapping a particularly horrid neighbour, my main thoughts (as I sat on my hands) were along the lines of 'this will not look good for me - granny detained for violent punch-up'.

Sadly though, I did find my hands were round her neck before I came to my senses (although her mad glittering eye's convinced me it was a pre-emptive act of self defence).


----------



## Pickman's model (May 7, 2017)

campanula said:


> I kinda disagree, Pickman's. Possibly not so much to reckless anarcho types (pointing no fingers whatsoever) but for many other people, the law (and consequences of contravening such) most definitely do go through people's heads...even for smacking, punching and other spontaneous acts of furious violence. Certainly, when I was on the point of slapping a particularly horrid neighbour, my main thoughts (as I sat on my hands) were along the lines of 'this will not look good for me - granny detained for violent punch-up'.


Yeh. Not that the act might be against the law but the probability of getting caught, a separate thing.


----------



## xenon (May 7, 2017)

FFS stop talking about hitting KH. It's pathetic.


----------



## Pickman's model (May 7, 2017)

Who PhD said:


> I didn't say laws against assault make assault more likely. I asked you if you thought that it would be more likely for her to be assaulted if those laws didn't exist. obviously the act is predicated on what she says, that's not in dispute.
> 
> The point, which you've completely ignored, was in relation to the comment made above about trolls in meatspace facing real consequences. But she won't face those consquences because she has power that the people she targets don't have. Specifically in the case of being punched. Even libel laws are in her favour simply because she is more likely to have the means to go to court than those she smears can afford a prosecution. Jack Monroe is the exception not the norm.


What you in fact started asking about was the beating to death of katie hopkins, something you now seem to have forgotten.


----------



## campanula (May 7, 2017)

Apols xenon....but nope, Pickman's - getting caught and _punished under the law.._.and subsequently reported and shamed - all part of a continuum.

Ah yes, I had forgotten the main thrust of the thread - really don't know why I am entering the fray.


----------



## Pickman's model (May 7, 2017)

campanula said:


> Apols xenon....but nope, Pickman's - getting caught and _punished under the law.._.and subsequently reported and shamed - all part of a continuum.


Yes, this is separate from (at least one of) the questions posed by who phd, which concerned the existence of the law rather than the chances of being caught or convicted or being in the papers.


----------



## Who PhD (May 7, 2017)

Pickman's model said:


> The only person wasting time here is you with your shitty hypotheticals. I don't suppose the question of legality enters many people's mind before they smack (or indeed refrain from smacking) other people. Other issues e.g. will they smack me back would, I believe, weigh rather more heavily than 'oh noes there's a law against this'.


Grow up mate


----------



## NoXion (May 7, 2017)

Athos said:


> Let's be honest, the people who get upset by them, and who can't just ignore them, are the very people who are least likely to punch them in real life.
> 
> And it's not expectation or blame; rather advice - ignoring trolls is likely to be more fruitful than railing against them.



Even if what you say is true, that doesn't make it right. Ignoring trolls does not solve the fundamental problem of some gobshite going round trying to provoke people. Especially when said gobshite is being paid big bucks to do so. They're not just going to give up easily.


----------



## Pickman's model (May 7, 2017)

Who PhD said:


> Grow up mate


What was that you were saying about ad hominems you hypocritical ageist shit?


----------



## Who PhD (May 7, 2017)

Pickman's model said:


> Yeh. Not that the act might be against the law but the probability of getting caught, a separate thing.


goalposts...shifting


----------



## Who PhD (May 7, 2017)

Pickman's model said:


> What was that you were saying about ad hominem you ageist shit?




Stop being such an ass, I asked you a simple question and repeated it because you kept avoiding it. Now you want to call me 'ageist' because I caught you behaving like a child? That's ageist how exactly; you'r enot being discriminated against so dry your eyes and let's try and have a civil conversation.


----------



## Who PhD (May 7, 2017)

xenon said:


> FFS stop talking about hitting KH. It's pathetic.


You're missing the point. No one is talking about hitting, the point was about whether trolls face consequences in the real world unlike online


----------



## Pickman's model (May 7, 2017)

Who PhD said:


> goalposts...shifting


Not at all. Reread your questions which involve the existence of laws and not the probability of arrest, conviction or punishment. On the subject of shifting goalposts, tho, your move from punching KH to death to just punching KH...


----------



## twentythreedom (May 7, 2017)

You guys


----------



## Pickman's model (May 7, 2017)

Who PhD said:


> Stop being such an ass, I asked you a simple question and repeated it because you kept avoiding it. Now you want to call me 'ageist' because I caught you behaving like a child? That's ageist how exactly; you'r enot being discriminated against so dry your eyes and let's try and have a civil conversation.


Yeh, as I said you're being ageist. Your attitude to children's appalling: behaving like a child? Have a word with yourself.


----------



## Who PhD (May 7, 2017)

Pickman's model said:


> Not at all. Reread your questions which involve the existence of laws and not the probability of arrest, conviction or punishment. On the subject of shifting goalposts, tho, your move from punching KH to death to just punching KH...


both of which would fall under the banner of criminality which was the point.

My question has remained the same, though repeating it at this point seems...pointless.


----------



## Who PhD (May 7, 2017)

Pickman's model said:


> Yeh, as I said you're being ageist. Your attitude to children's appalling.


Why don't you tell me all about my attitude to children?


----------



## Pickman's model (May 7, 2017)

Who PhD said:


> Why don't you tell me all about my attitude to children?


Why don't you just apologise and we'll move on.


----------



## Who PhD (May 7, 2017)

Pickman's model said:


> Why don't you just apologise and we'll move on.


Apologise for what?


----------



## Pickman's model (May 7, 2017)

Who PhD said:


> Apologise for what?


For your unjustifiable ad hominems, which you affect to deplore in others.


----------



## Who PhD (May 7, 2017)

Pickman's model said:


> For your unjustifiable ad hominems, which you affect to deplore in others.


I don't think you understand ad hominem. When I told you to grow up, I wasn't seeking to make an argument. I was trying to get you to stop behaving like a clown. In response you decided that was ageist, which you've yet to justify, along with telling me I have a poor attitude to children. Does this seem productive to you? Shall we go back to the topic?


----------



## Pickman's model (May 7, 2017)

Who PhD said:


> I don't think you understand ad hominem. When I told you to grow up, I wasn't seeking to make an argument. I was trying to get you to stop behaving like a clown. In response you decided that was ageist, which you've yet to justify, along with telling me I have a poor attitude to children. Does this seem productive to you? Shall we go back to the topic?


You're attacking me as you've given up attacking what I've been saying. You were all "it's an ad hominem" when I dared say you were not omniscient - and I justified my statement. You've mentioned nothing about clowns, but been distinctly uncomplimentary about children. Now, if I'm nasty about e.g. Asians, I'm racist, no need to show I've discriminated against anyone. It's the same thing with age. You use behaving like a child to mean bad behaviour - clearly prejudicial language. Apology pls for your unjustifiable ad hominems.


----------



## TheHoodedClaw (May 7, 2017)

Tedious pedant urban is worst urban.


----------



## kabbes (May 8, 2017)

There's an irony to somebody discussing ignoring trolls and then being provoked by Pickmans into a two page pick-fest.


----------



## Corax (May 8, 2017)

xenon said:


> FFS stop talking about hitting KH. It's pathetic.


_Anarchist Internet Forum Plots Violent Assault On National Radio Show Host_


----------



## Smangus (May 8, 2017)

. Gah! Stoopid fat fingered post quoting bollocks!


----------



## existentialist (May 8, 2017)

I see she's rolling out her trademark charm for Macron...


----------



## Dogsauce (May 8, 2017)

Grandma Death said:


> I dont buy this. She gets her radio slot/newspapers slot because shes controversial and there's an audience out there for it. Whether we stop getting outraged/angry/start petitions wont change what she's doing. I personally welcome any opposition to her-whether its useful or not.



There's also plenty of profit to be made from employing her because outraged people share and comment on the webpages of the media organisations that give her a platform, thus increasing page hits and advertising revenue. Not sharing the fake reactionary crap these withered foreskins publish might make them less employable. 

I get a bit tired telling Facebook mates not to stick up some Daily Mail article so they can display their outrage to followers.


----------



## Grandma Death (May 8, 2017)

kabbes said:


> There's an irony to somebody discussing ignoring trolls and then being provoked by Pickmans into a two page pick-fest.


I read three pages of that bun fight and it reminded me of why I frequent the boards rarely these days. I also lost five minutes of my life reading it which I'll never ever get back again. 

Sent from my SM-G955F using Tapatalk


----------



## kabbes (May 8, 2017)

Grandma Death said:


> I read three pages of that bun fight and it reminded me of why I frequent the boards rarely these days. I also lost five minutes of my life reading it which I'll never ever get back again.
> 
> Sent from my SM-G955F using Tapatalk


When I see several pages of somebody apparently arguing with themself, I know exactly what's happening and just scroll straight on through!


----------



## DaveCinzano (May 8, 2017)

kabbes said:


> When I see several pages of somebody apparently arguing with themself, I know exactly what's happening and just scroll straight on through!


Really, is that the best you can do?


----------



## DaveCinzano (May 8, 2017)

No seriously, he's right.


----------



## DaveCinzano (May 8, 2017)

You can fuck off as well you twat


----------



## agricola (May 8, 2017)

existentialist said:


> I see she's rolling out her trademark charm for Macron...



Hopefully someone will point out her employer's past in that regard.


----------



## DaveCinzano (May 8, 2017)

What kind of an arsehole would agree with him? Oh, that's right, you, you muppet


----------



## DaveCinzano (May 8, 2017)

STOP NITPICKING


----------



## MightyTibberton (May 8, 2017)

Dogsauce said:


> There's also plenty of profit to be made from employing her because outraged people share and comment on the webpages of the media organisations that give her a platform, thus increasing page hits and advertising revenue. Not sharing the fake reactionary crap these withered foreskins publish might make them less employable.
> 
> I get a bit tired telling Facebook mates not to stick up some Daily Mail article so they can display their outrage to followers.



I don't know if it's still going, but there used to be a DM site you could link to that wasn't the DM somehow - a "mirror"? I'm not at all techy I'm afraid.


----------



## DaveCinzano (May 8, 2017)

See, when kabbes agrees with you you know you're on the side of righteousness


----------



## DaveCinzano (May 8, 2017)

DON'T SAY THAT ABOUT THE KABBSTER 

Totally out of order, you know he has no control over it


----------



## xenon (May 8, 2017)

MightyTibberton said:


> I don't know if it's still going, but there used to be a DM site you could link to that wasn't the DM somehow - a "mirror"? I'm not at all techy I'm afraid.



Lord Camomile  did a website like that, don't know if he still maintains it.


----------



## twentythreedom (May 8, 2017)

MightyTibberton said:


> I don't know if it's still going, but there used to be a DM site you could link to that wasn't the DM somehow - a "mirror"? I'm not at all techy I'm afraid.


mirror.co.uk


----------



## Smangus (May 8, 2017)

DaveCinzano said:


> DON'T SAY THAT ABOUT THE KABBSTER
> 
> Totally out of order, you know he has no control over it



DaveCinzano please start your own thread, I'd love to read it!


----------



## DaveCinzano (May 8, 2017)

TheHoodedClaw said:


> Tedious pedant urban is worst urban.


Sometimes urban is 100% Dullest Hamlet


----------



## Wilf (May 8, 2017)

If there's one set of attitudes I tend to avoid like the plague, it's my own.


----------



## Buckaroo (May 8, 2017)

Can we just kill this thread? It's shit. It's not about Katie Hopkins and if it was it would be worse. editor


----------



## SqueakyBumTime (May 9, 2017)

Five pages back to the little comment I made all the way back when...


----------



## existentialist (May 9, 2017)

SqueakyBumTime said:


> Five pages back to the little comment I made all the way back when...


...when you were last pissed off your face?


----------



## SqueakyBumTime (May 10, 2017)

existentialist said:


> ...when you were last pissed off your face?


No :-(


----------



## Raheem (May 23, 2017)

Sorry to bump the thread and remind you she's still alive.






Since deleted.


----------



## Thimble Queen (May 23, 2017)

Raheem said:


> Sorry to bump the thread and remind you she's still alive.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



There's no low she won't stoop to.


----------



## Who PhD (May 23, 2017)

Raheem said:


> Sorry to bump the thread and remind you she's still alive.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


 Deleted, yeah right. She knows what she's saying. Evil old witch. I hope she gets shot. 

And no i don't fucking care. I've had enough of her poison on social media, in the press, and everywherelse that seems content to give this fucking cunt airspace.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (May 23, 2017)

Who PhD said:


> Deleted, yeah right. She knows what she's saying. Evil old witch. I hope she gets shot.
> 
> And no i don't fucking care. I've had enough of her poison on social media, in the press, and everywherelse that seems content to give this fucking cunt airspace.



Make it known. I normally listen to Johnny Vaughan at this time of day, just emailed the show to tell them that until he stops associating with the vile piece of dirt I shall be listening to Six Music instead.


----------



## Who PhD (May 23, 2017)

If we can get that slug, Yanoupolis, off twitter, we can get this creature off too.


----------



## Pickman's model (May 23, 2017)

Who PhD said:


> Evil old witch. I hope she gets shot.


hanging too good etc i suppose


----------



## NoXion (May 23, 2017)

Final solution? Come the fuck on, she blatantly knew what she was writing. Although I bet some slimy lawyer prick would be able to weasel a way out for her.


----------



## gosub (May 23, 2017)

Who PhD said:


> If we can get that slug, Yanoupolis, off twitter, we can get this creature off too.



really isn't worth the time, energy, or effort.


----------



## gosub (May 23, 2017)

NoXion said:


> Final solution? Come the fuck on, she blatantly knew what she was writing. Although I bet some slimy lawyer prick would be able to weasel a way out for her.


----------



## likesfish (May 23, 2017)

Really pity she survived sandhurst a fit while holding a grenade would have been quick


----------



## DaveCinzano (May 23, 2017)

The rule of law applies to everyone. Even Manchester hate peddlers like Katie Hopkins | Hugh Muir


----------



## ElizabethofYork (May 24, 2017)

*This is what she tweeted last night:  
*
"Western men. These are your wives. Your daughters. Your sons. Stand up. Rise up. Demand action. Do not carry on as normal. Cowed."


----------



## NoXion (May 24, 2017)

ElizabethofYork said:


> *This is what she tweeted last night:
> *
> "Western men. These are your wives. Your daughters. Your sons. Stand up. Rise up. Demand action. Do not carry on as normal. Cowed."



You see, that's what I'd call an example of a more ambiguous statement, unless there's something I'm missing. But maybe the more well-cloaked dog whistles and elliptical calls to vague action aren't getting her the response she requires. Hence the "final solution" shit. Here's hoping that in her increasingly desperate attempts to court controversy she says something that effectively ends her


----------



## Pickman's model (May 24, 2017)

ElizabethofYork said:


> *This is what she tweeted last night:
> *
> "Western men. These are your wives. Your daughters. Your sons. Stand up. Rise up. Demand action. Do not carry on as normal. Cowed."


----------



## taffboy gwyrdd (May 24, 2017)

I suppose LBC and Murdoch are still employing this open genocidalist. As disgusting at it is, perhaps it's a useful signal to those who take note of such things that open genocidalism is now relatively mainstream.


----------



## bmd (May 24, 2017)

ElizabethofYork said:


> *This is what she tweeted last night:
> *
> "Western men. These are your wives. Your daughters. Your sons. Stand up. Rise up. Demand action. Do not carry on as normal. Cowed."



When deciding on the appropriate response to these horrific events, what kind of mind would you need in order to think "I'm taking _my_ cue from Katie!"

She's just an idiot who EDLs it up.


----------



## Dogsauce (May 24, 2017)

Maybe she's suggesting that we 'rise up' to demand an end to the war, killing and looting of the past couple of decades, that we should demand peace, solidarity and an end to capitalist oppression. Yes, that's probably it
.


----------



## Pickman's model (May 24, 2017)

Dogsauce said:


> Maybe she's suggesting that we 'rise up' to demand an end to the war, killing and looting of the past couple of decades, that we should demand peace, solidarity and an end to capitalist oppression. Yes, that's probably it
> .


----------



## Kaka Tim (May 24, 2017)

ElizabethofYork said:


> *This is what she tweeted last night:
> *
> "Western men. These are your wives. Your daughters. Your sons. Stand up. Rise up. Demand action. Do not carry on as normal. Cowed."



translated: "white blokes! dont be wimps. burn a mosque today."


----------



## Grandma Death (May 24, 2017)

Who PhD said:


> Deleted, yeah right. She knows what she's saying. Evil old witch. I hope she gets shot.
> 
> And no i don't fucking care. I've had enough of her poison on social media, in the press, and everywherelse that seems content to give this fucking cunt airspace.




She did delete it. Quite quickly. Its one of two things here. She knew what she was doing and wanting to shock OR she doesnt understand the ramifications of using the words 'final solution',

Either way she's a cunt

She also called on western man to stand up etc.

If this has been a mulsim calling for a final solution for christians-and for muslims to 'rise up' the police wouldve moved a lot quicker.

Im hoping her tweets are the straw that breaks the camels back and she's sacked fom LBC.

She's an absolute vile scrote of a human being


----------



## Who PhD (May 25, 2017)

Grandma Death said:


> She did delete it. Quite quickly. Its one of two things here. She knew what she was doing and wanting to shock OR she doesnt understand the ramifications of using the words 'final solution',
> 
> Either way she's a cunt
> 
> ...


won't happen, this is why she deletesthe tweets. She knows exactly what she's doing. By deleting them it shows she's not interested in taking any responsibility. She's a vicious troll who has no place in civil discourse.


----------



## Johnny Vodka (May 25, 2017)

Aaargh.  Faceache friends sharing out Katie Hopkins/Daily Mail articles.


----------



## bmd (May 25, 2017)

Johnny Vodka said:


> Aaargh.  Faceache friends sharing out Katie Hopkins/Daily Mail articles.



God how I hate Fb. I don't have one for this reason. My final straw was a friend having found Jesus, somewhere, and wondering if the rest of us knew where to find him.


----------



## gosub (May 25, 2017)

bmd said:


> God how I hate Fb. I don't have one for this reason. My final straw was a friend having found Jesus, somewhere, and wondering if the rest of us knew where to find him.



 South American Phone Directory?


----------



## bmd (May 25, 2017)

gosub said:


> South American Phone Directory?



I do actually like Mexican Jesus best. I mean, if I had to choose.


----------



## Pickman's model (May 25, 2017)

bmd said:


> I do actually like Mexican Jesus best. I mean, if I had to choose.


Yeh, it's the jalapeños in the salad and the chipotle sauce which make a mexican jesus burrito


----------



## Who PhD (May 25, 2017)

Yesterday's Sun headline was pure incitement. How they get away this I will never (£££) know.

Something has to change.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (May 25, 2017)

http://newsthump.com/2017/05/24/abh...e-doing-bidding-of-other-abhorrent-dickheads/

*Abhorrent dickheads intent on a holy war against non-Muslims are getting a lot of help today from another bunch of abhorrent dickheads calling for basically the same thing.*

With many dead, and many more victims fighting for their lives in Manchester hospitals, frothing right-wing bigots have called for authorities to ‘bomb the hell out of the mooslims’ in a move that would be the preferred next step of any Islamic terror organisation that might claim responsibility.

“We should start a war on these mooslims, show ‘em who’s boss,” explained Simon Williams, a follower of precisely the sort of Facebook pages you’d expect.

“Chuck all the mooslims out of the country, then nuke the rest of them, that’s what I reckon we should do,” he said with a predictable level of candour.

“The only way to beat them is to blow them all to hell,” he concluded with the sort of certainty only ever heard from the truly ignorant.

“Yes, that would be lovely, thank you,” explained one ISIS official.

“Seeing as we do all this terror attack stuff purely in the hope of luring you infidels into a holy war, it would be just lovely if you could jump right in and start the fighting today?

“We call on your Katie Hopkins, your Paul Nuttall, your Britain First to do precisely as we expect them to do.  They are a great help in times like this.

“Isolating more moderate Muslims would also be welcome, so maybe you could attack a few of them insisting they’re members of our group?

“As you know, every little helps.”


----------



## Johnny Vodka (May 25, 2017)

bmd said:


> God how I hate Fb. I don't have one for this reason. My final straw was a friend having found Jesus, somewhere, and wondering if the rest of us knew where to find him.



TBF I'm sharing out at least 5 anti-Tory posts a day right now.   I'm wondering what some of these 'friends' make of me - friends I've either never met IRL (who you'd think were liberal due to conversing on drug forums) or haven't seen for a long time.


----------



## peterkro (May 25, 2017)

She's pissing people in NZ off by peddling her poison to a phone in radio station:

Newstalk ZB: why haven't you sacked vile commentator Katie Hopkins


----------



## bmd (May 25, 2017)

Johnny Vodka said:


> TBF I'm sharing out at least 5 anti-Tory posts a day right now.   I'm wondering what some of these 'friends' make of me - friends I've either never met IRL (who you'd think were liberal due to conversing on drug forums) or haven't seen for a long time.



That's a fair trade for having an account.


----------



## souljacker (May 26, 2017)

She's been sacked by LBC. lol

Katie Hopkins to leave LBC 'immediately' - BBC News


----------



## Fingers (May 26, 2017)

I an enjoying this Friday.


----------



## skyscraper101 (May 26, 2017)

Excellent


----------



## Thimble Queen (May 26, 2017)

souljacker said:


> She's been sacked by LBC. lol
> 
> Katie Hopkins to leave LBC 'immediately' - BBC News



I came to say the same thing. Happy Friday everyone!


----------



## ffsear (May 26, 2017)

Close thread


----------



## existentialist (May 26, 2017)

ffsear said:


> Close thread


Not so fast...

Anyway, I'm disappointed that her sacking from LBC needed her agreement. I'd have much preferred a tweet from LBC saying "Katie Hopkins need not return to work here. This tweet is her notice."


----------



## Thimble Queen (May 26, 2017)

Fuck off Hatey Twatkins


----------



## Teaboy (May 26, 2017)

Its an odd thing when these rent-a-gobs get hired because they are _edgy and controversial_ but then get sacked because they say the wrong thing. What on earth were LBC thinking was going to happen? Twats.


----------



## Pickman's model (May 26, 2017)

skyscraper101 said:


> Excellent



you wouldn't believe who lbc hired next



Spoiler


----------



## skyscraper101 (May 26, 2017)

I think Global have been deliberately going for the big names to get huge ratings since LBC went national. Hopkins and Farage were no doubt part of that strategy.

Wish they would get rid of Nick Ferrari too.


----------



## Pickman's model (May 26, 2017)

skyscraper101 said:


> I think Global have been deliberately going for the big names to get huge ratings since LBC went national. Hopkins and Farage were no doubt part of that strategy.
> 
> Wish they would get rid of Nick Ferrari too.


wish they would just shut down


----------



## skyscraper101 (May 26, 2017)

Pickman's model said:


> wish they would just shut down



I don't mind it occasionally. I used to really enjoy it back before Global took over but it's lost a lot of what it was.


----------



## Pickman's model (May 26, 2017)

skyscraper101 said:


> I don't mind it occasionally. I used to really enjoy it back before Global took over but it's lost a lot of what it was.


was much better in the '80s


----------



## Gromit (May 26, 2017)

skyscraper101 said:


> I think Global have been deliberately going for the big names to get huge ratings since LBC went national. Hopkins and Farage were no doubt part of that strategy.
> 
> Wish they would get rid of Nick Ferrari too.


Farage has surprised me. 
I thought he'd be as biased as possible with his show. Cutting off people who didn't follow his views. 
Instead he's been really even handed and willing to listen to anyone's point. 
Still a racist fuckwit but runs his show without bias. 

James O'Brien is the saving grace for LBC. Don't mind too much who fills the airwaves whilst he isn't on. He is the only one worth listening to.


----------



## skyscraper101 (May 26, 2017)

Gromit said:


> James O'Brien is the saving grace for LBC. Don't mind too much who fills the airwaves whilst he isn't on. He is the only one worth listening to.



yes he's good. I like when he does Newsnight too.


----------



## xenon (May 26, 2017)

Nick Abbott is good too. Ian Collins winds me up but sometimes worth a listen


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (May 26, 2017)

skyscraper101 said:


> yes he's good. I like when he does Newsnight too.



He is a good journo, but he's lacking a surprising amount of knowledge as a person, e.g. had never heard of concept of terminal velocity.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (May 26, 2017)

And, whoop, whoop re cunty-chops hatekins.


----------



## Gromit (May 26, 2017)

xenon said:


> Nick Abbott is good too. Ian Collins winds me up but sometimes worth a listen


I listened to Ian Collins yesterday and he was like Thank you, great call, Thank you amazing point, Thank you brilliant message there etc etc to EVERY call no matter how good or crap they were. I couldn't work out if he genuinely thought everyone was dropping pearls of wisdom or his way of getting more callers (by giving everyone a nice pat on the back).


----------



## skyscraper101 (May 26, 2017)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> He is a good journo, but he's lacking a surprising amount of knowledge as a person, e.g. had never heard of concept of terminal velocity.



I've noticed that. I've also always thought Clive Bull was extremely unaware/naive about stuff, but then I'm also unsure if it's just deliberate faux-naivety which he's worked out is part of his charm.


----------



## Gromit (May 26, 2017)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> He is a good journo, but he's lacking a surprising amount of knowledge as a person, e.g. had never heard of concept of terminal velocity.


Terminal velocity is the speed that airport development reaches before it becomes unstoppable by protesters. Yes?!


----------



## kenny g (May 26, 2017)

I think they pay Farage a stack of cash so he is probably quite happy to have the exposure and the money in exchange for acting like a good egg. I quite enjoy his show too.


----------



## Gromit (May 26, 2017)

skyscraper101 said:


> I've noticed that. I've also always thought Clive Bull was extremely unaware/naive about stuff, but then I'm also unsure if it's just deliberate faux-naivety which he's worked out is part of his charm.


He does a lot of "oh I don't know the arguments against this" when he blatantly does and is leaving it open for others to make them. So he is no stranger to faux ignorance. James that is.


----------



## Gromit (May 26, 2017)

kenny g said:


> I think they pay Farage a stack of cash so he is probably quite happy to have the exposure and the money in exchange for acting like a good egg. I quite enjoy his show too.


He certainly seems happy with life and in no rush to do anything other than sit back and enjoy chatting shit for money.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (May 26, 2017)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> Make it known. I normally listen to Johnny Vaughan at this time of day, just emailed the show to tell them that until he stops associating with the vile piece of dirt I shall be listening to Six Music instead.



And as soon as Lauren Laverne is done at 1 o'clock I shall be switching back to X


----------



## 8den (May 26, 2017)




----------



## Bungle73 (May 26, 2017)

Gromit said:


> Farage has surprised me.
> I thought he'd be as biased as possible with his show. Cutting off people who didn't follow his views.
> Instead he's been really even handed and willing to listen to anyone's point.
> Still a racist fuckwit but runs his show without bias.
> ...


He's the only part I listen to at all these days, and then only the Mystery Hour section, and only via the podcast. And I used to have LBC on all the time back in the day.

What about Clive Bull? I used to love listening to his show, but haven't for years,


----------



## ruffneck23 (May 26, 2017)

skyscraper101 said:


> I think Global have been deliberately going for the big names to get huge ratings since LBC went national. Hopkins and Farage were no doubt part of that strategy.
> 
> Wish they would get rid of Nick Ferrari too.


I was listening to that Nick Ferrari this morning and forgot how much he winds me up , he was literally shouting down a caller who didn't fit in with his right wing rhetoric.


----------



## Fingers (May 26, 2017)

To be honest, I was a bit worried as I have been finding Farage's show reasonably listenable. He reigns in the foaming mouthbreathers to a certain extent as well. I thought it was just me!


----------



## Pickman's model (May 26, 2017)

Fingers said:


> To be honest, I was a bit worried as I have been finding Farage's show reasonably listenable. He reigns in the foaming mouthbreathers to a certain extent as well. I thought it was just me!


reins  REINS  reign is what the queen does.


----------



## Spymaster (May 26, 2017)

Who PhD said:


> Yesterday's Sun headline was pure incitement. How they get away this I will never (£££) know.
> 
> Something has to change.


That's a pretty friggin useless post unless you tell us what the headline was


----------



## Pickman's model (May 26, 2017)

Spymaster said:


> That's a pretty friggin useless post unless you tell us what the headline was


don't expect a reply, pa. who phd a brave sir robin for the twenty-first century


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (May 26, 2017)

Strange, but I can find no mention of the Hopkins sacking on the Mail online, surely they'd not miss a story being carried by the Guardian, BBC, Inde, Telegraph, Evening Standard, Mirror and even Stuff.co.nz ?


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (May 26, 2017)

Come on Daily Mail, pull yer finger out!


----------



## Pickman's model (May 26, 2017)

unilad seem to have made an effort to find the most unflattering picture


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (May 26, 2017)

Pickman's model said:


> unilad seem to have made an effort to find the most unflattering picture
> View attachment 107775



I like the Kenneth Williams that Arab News are running with


----------



## Who PhD (May 26, 2017)

peterkro said:


> She's pissing people in NZ off by peddling her poison to a phone in radio station:
> 
> Newstalk ZB: why haven't you sacked vile commentator Katie Hopkins





Spymaster said:


> That's a pretty friggin useless post unless you tell us what the headline was


----------



## Who PhD (May 26, 2017)

DING DONG THE WITCH IS DEAD!

By which I mean, not dead and probably off to suck Farage's cock over at Fox or perform sex acts on Bill o Reilly for money. Either way I hope she falls down a manhole and dies.


----------



## Pickman's model (May 26, 2017)

right. sean o'callaghan.

O'Callaghan - the truth | An Phoblacht


----------



## ItWillNeverWork (May 26, 2017)

Who PhD said:


>




I get the feeling that this line of attack against Corbyn might actually backfire. It's so blatant as to be offensive. People don't like the media insulting their intelligence.

[/WishfulThinking]


----------



## Dr. Furface (May 26, 2017)

Pickman's model said:


> unilad seem to have made an effort to find the most unflattering picture
> View attachment 107775


It's the New York Dolls' singer David Johansen!


----------



## Pickman's model (May 26, 2017)

Dr. Furface said:


> It's the New York Dolls' singer David Johansen!







by george you're right


----------



## Gromit (May 26, 2017)

Who PhD said:


>



That headline went to print before the attack happened. 

I don't like defending the Sun but sticking to facts makes me better than them.

If you want to attack them do it for the one that replaced it. Picture of the attacker's face front page next to the 8 yr old victim he killed.


----------



## Rob Ray (May 26, 2017)

They ran it online as well and it's still up, with only a slightly tweaked headline. Pickman's is the current one. They're also still running this:


----------



## bemused (May 26, 2017)

I've seen people in the Internet seriously suggest she wasn't talking about the Nazi FinaonSolution because it was written in lower case.  Plus the normal crap about an attack on free speech.


----------



## Pickman's model (May 26, 2017)

Rob Ray said:


> They ran it online as well and it's still up, with only a slightly tweaked headline. Pickman's is the current one. They're also still running this:
> 
> View attachment 107787


o'callaghan looks like a broken down auld gentleman of the afternoon, which is after all what he is the auld perjurer


----------



## Who PhD (May 26, 2017)

Gromit said:


> That headline went to print before the attack happened.
> 
> I don't like defending the Sun but sticking to facts makes me better than them.
> 
> If you want to attack them do it for the one that replaced it. Picture of the attacker's face front page next to the 8 yr old victim he killed.


Ok, but even if there hand' tbeen an attack that headline wuld still be offensive hateful bullshit


----------



## not-bono-ever (May 26, 2017)

O'Callaghans ramblings didn't stand up to scrutiny last century, there is even less to suggest that his ramblings have any relevance during this one. Taking the Suns shilling will probabaly get him a beach holiday this eyear I suppose


----------



## Who PhD (May 26, 2017)

ItWillNeverWork said:


> I get the feeling that this line of attack against Corbyn might actually backfire. It's so blatant as to be offensive. People don't like the media insulting their intelligence.
> 
> [/WishfulThinking]


We can but hope.

There can never be enough hate for Hopkins.


----------



## A380 (May 26, 2017)

It was an actual snake, reveals LBC


----------



## danny la rouge (May 26, 2017)

Not a spoof.


----------



## Mation (May 26, 2017)

danny la rouge said:


> View attachment 107793
> 
> Not a spoof.


Not a spoof, but a joke. She's taking the piss out of herself. She is a horrible person with despicable views but I don't think it helps counter her to pretend or not to see that she doesn't take herself seriously, even while she means some of what she says.


----------



## danny la rouge (May 26, 2017)

Mation said:


> Not a spoof, but a joke. She's taking the piss out of herself. She is a horrible person with despicable views but I don't think it helps counter her to pretend or not to see that she doesn't take herself seriously, even while she means some of what she says.


Half joking hail earnest.


----------



## Who PhD (May 26, 2017)

Mation said:


> Not a spoof, but a joke. She's taking the piss out of herself. She is a horrible person with despicable views but I don't think it helps counter her to pretend or not to see that she doesn't take herself seriously, even while she means some of what she says.


I've no idea if she believes the bile she spews, and I don't think it matters. I don't udnerstand why Twitter hasn't banned her given that it saw fit to ban Milo for racism. The fewer outlets that give her a platform the better.


----------



## Grandma Death (May 27, 2017)

Katie Hopkins' colleagues burst into ‘cheers and applause’ after she left

This made me smile. Id have helped her exit-through the window though


----------



## Grandma Death (May 27, 2017)

Who PhD said:


> I've no idea if she believes the bile she spews, and I don't think it matters. I don't udnerstand why Twitter hasn't banned her given that it saw fit to ban Milo for racism. The fewer outlets that give her a platform the better.




I believe (although I could be wrong) she had her account suspended but she's never been banned. Like yourself I dont understand why she hasnt been banned-she called refugees cockroaches-that alone shouldve binned her IMO. Im currently on a 12 hour ban for calling Piers Morgan a twat FFS


----------



## Who PhD (May 27, 2017)

Grandma Death said:


> I believe (although I could be wrong) she had her account suspended but she's never been banned. Like yourself I dont understand why she hasnt been banned-she called refugees cockroaches-that alone shouldve binned her IMO. Im currently on a 12 hour ban for calling Piers Morgan a twat FFS


Really? :O

Seems to be calling piers morgan a twat is a public service

I've called numerous public wankers rude names (a bit sad perhaps), but never been banned! Must try harder!


----------



## maomao (May 28, 2017)

Who PhD said:


> Really? :O
> 
> Seems to be calling piers morgan a twat is a public service
> 
> I've called numerous public wankers rude names (a bit sad perhaps), but never been banned! Must try harder!


Not been banned from Twitter but you've been banned from here at least 3 times haven't you?


----------



## Who PhD (May 28, 2017)

maomao said:


> Not been banned from Twitter but you've been banned from here at least 3 times haven't you?


What?


----------



## maomao (May 28, 2017)

Who PhD said:


> What?


Awesome Wells, Biscuitician and the other one before that. All banned from here.


----------



## Who PhD (May 28, 2017)

maomao said:


> Awesome Wells, Biscuitician and the other one before that. All banned from here.


What do you hope to achieve from these accusations? Either I ignore them and you carry on and spread nasty rumours, which makes it impossible for me to participate, or I respond, like this, and the same thing happens. Thanks.


----------



## butchersapron (May 28, 2017)

Who PhD said:


> What?


This didn't go very well for you any time you have tried this before did it? Your lying is what gets people up more than your inane posts I feel. You might have had a chance if you took another approach.


----------



## maomao (May 28, 2017)

Who PhD said:


> What do you hope to achieve from these accusations? Either I ignore them and you carry on and spread nasty rumours, which makes it impossible for me to participate, or I respond, like this, and the same thing happens. Thanks.



I'm entitled to point out who you are and will continue to do so thanks.


----------



## Who PhD (May 28, 2017)

maomao said:


> I'm entitled to point out who you are and will continue to do so thanks.


Are you entitled? To stir the shit about someone online? If it wasn't for the fact you're obviously trying to cause me grief even though I'm not whoever it is you think I am, that would be irony in a thread about katie hopkins. Well done for drawing me into your psychodrama.


----------



## Wookey (May 28, 2017)

_*reaches gingerly for deckchair*_


----------



## Who PhD (May 28, 2017)

Wookey said:


> _*reaches gingerly for deckchair*_


----------



## Wookey (May 28, 2017)

I ain't renting.

I've brought my own. A fishing chair with a pocket for my remote and some sweets.


----------



## maomao (May 28, 2017)

Who PhD said:


> Are you entitled? To stir the shit about someone online? If it wasn't for the fact you're obviously trying to cause me grief even though I'm not whoever it is you think I am, that would be irony in a thread about katie hopkins. Well done for drawing me into your psychodrama.


You're right. I shouldn't shit stir. You're a banned returner. Just report.


----------



## mikey mikey (May 28, 2017)

Do members need proof or is this just a free-for-all witch hunt?


----------



## maomao (May 28, 2017)

mikey mikey said:


> Do members need proof or is this just a free-for-all witch hunt?


I doubt anyone would have sanctions of any kind taken against them on the basis of a single reported post.


----------



## mikey mikey (May 28, 2017)

Can you explain why somebody as polite as Who PhD wuould give you reason to think that they had previosuly been banned?


----------



## strung out (May 28, 2017)

maomao said:


> Awesome Wells, Biscuitician and the other one before that. All banned from here.


Wishface


----------



## YouSir (May 28, 2017)

With Katie Hopkins fading away we all just turn on each other


----------



## maomao (May 28, 2017)

mikey mikey said:


> Can you explain why somebody as polite as Who PhD wuould give you reason to think that they had previosuly been banned?


No (as in not willing to disrupt the thread any further rather than not able).


----------



## mikey mikey (May 28, 2017)

strung out said:


> Wishface


Eh? 
Is this like, once you reach a sufficient number, you mob-report somebody off the board?

C'mon! Why is this poster suddenly a returner?

EVIDENCE PLEASE!


----------



## mikey mikey (May 28, 2017)

maomao said:


> No (as in not willing to disrupt the thread any further rather than not able).



Just enough to smear a perfectly innocent member of the forum. Got it.


----------



## butchersapron (May 28, 2017)

Zxspectrum too.


----------



## bimble (May 28, 2017)

Grandma Death said:


> I believe (although I could be wrong) she had her account suspended but she's never been banned. Like yourself I dont understand why she hasnt been banned-she called refugees cockroaches-that alone shouldve binned her IMO. Im currently on a 12 hour ban for calling Piers Morgan a twat FFS


Twitter only takes action in cases where there's a specific threat made against a particular named individual. Milo got banned not for racism but for targeted attack on a particular person. Twitter is crawling with the most extreme racists of every kind, full on nazis etc, if you click 'report' on something the response it to ask if you personally are being threatened, if not then no action is ever taken far as i know.


----------



## Who PhD (May 28, 2017)

bimble said:


> Twitter only takes action in cases where there's a specific threat made against a particular named individual. Milo got banned not for racism but for targeted attack on a particular person. Twitter is crawling with the most extreme racists of every kind, full on nazis etc, if you click 'report' on something the response it to ask if you personally are being threatened, if not then no action is ever taken far as i know.


Actually, even though I despise Milo thoroughly, the decision was totally subjective. He was guilty of a great many things and I've no doubt he's a self laothing homophobic transphobic misogynistic racist piece of jizzshit, but, AFAICT, he didn't actually direct that attack. Not that he did anything to stop it or speak out against it, given his attitude toward the film and the actor. I think he got banned because the owner of twitter was friends with Leslie Joseph. Still a clear case of the right conclusion, wrong reason. I shed no tears that he was banned and there's a billion other reasons why he should have been banned.


----------



## butchersapron (May 28, 2017)

Hence why you started a thread on it.


----------



## B.I.G (May 28, 2017)

You got to be quite precious to be bothered about people thinking you are someone else. The horror!


----------



## Pickman's model (May 28, 2017)

mikey mikey said:


> Do members need proof or is this just a free-for-all witch hunt?


Yes


----------



## Who PhD (May 28, 2017)

B.I.G said:


> You got to be quite precious to be bothered about people thinking you are someone else. The horror!


I made it clear what the problem with that was, why are you deliberately missing the point?


----------



## mikey mikey (May 28, 2017)

B.I.G said:


> You got to be quite precious to be bothered about people thinking you are someone else. The horror!



I think it is perfectly natural not to want people lying about you. And trying to get inocent posters booted off on fake charges is a dick move.


----------



## B.I.G (May 28, 2017)

mikey mikey said:


> I think it is perfectly natural not to want people lying about you. And trying to get inocent posters booted off on fake charges is a dick move.



People lie all the time. There is no way to tell. They are or they aren't. Who cares. 

You have held your own lately in the ongoing urban war


----------



## mikey mikey (May 28, 2017)

Cheers, B.I.G.

Appreciated.


----------



## maomao (May 28, 2017)

mikey mikey said:


> I think it is perfectly natural not to want people lying about you. And trying to get inocent posters booted off on fake charges is a dick move.


It's not fake. If someone's been banned (at least) four times for good reasons you think they should just stroll back on without comment?  At the very least it's a massive fuck you to the site admin. Why are you getting involved anyway? You've barely been here five minutes and don't have a fucking clue about any of it.


----------



## B.I.G (May 28, 2017)

Wannabe mod.


----------



## maomao (May 28, 2017)

B.I.G said:


> Wannabe mod.


Actual cock.


----------



## mikey mikey (May 28, 2017)

I only know Who PhD as Who PhD and I frankly don't believe accusations unless I see proof.

Too easy to just to smear somebody that you don't like.

Fuck that shit.

Proof up of STFU.

Oh and at least you know that I am a newcomer.

We'll see if that lasts, however.


----------



## maomao (May 28, 2017)

mikey mikey said:


> I only know Who PhD as Who PhD and I frankly don't believe accusations unless I see proof.
> 
> Too easy to just to smear somebody that you don't like.
> 
> ...


You are extremely tedious and now on ignore.


----------



## B.I.G (May 28, 2017)

maomao said:


> Actual cock.



Devastating. Enjoying the home of brexit?


----------



## mikey mikey (May 28, 2017)

Well at least I won't have maomao saying that I am somebody else for no given reason.

toodlepip


----------



## Pickman's model (May 28, 2017)

B.I.G said:


> People lie all the time. There is no way to tell. They are or they aren't. Who cares.
> 
> You have held your own lately in the ongoing urban war


No he hasn't, don't lie to him


----------



## maomao (May 28, 2017)

B.I.G said:


> Devastating. Enjoying the home of brexit?


If you mean my hometown that you gave an ignorant slagging on another thread then yes, me and my family are very happy there, thanks. I spent forty minutes on your side of the water this morning. It stunk and I was overjoyed to get in the tunnel.


----------



## B.I.G (May 28, 2017)

maomao said:


> If you mean my hometown that you gave an ignorant slagging on another thread then yes, me and my family are very happy there, thanks. I spent forty minutes on your side of the water this morning. It stunk and I was overjoyed to get in the tunnel.



Romford is your hometown??? Its where you live no? Not your hometown. 

And I'm far more informed about Romford than you. Something you would be aware of if it wasn't an anonymous message board.


----------



## maomao (May 28, 2017)

B.I.G said:


> Romford is your hometown??? Its where you live no? Not your hometown.
> 
> And I'm far more informed about Romford than you. Something you would be aware of if it wasn't an anonymous message board.


It's where I'll probably live out my days now. I have no connection to the part of London I was born in anymore. So, yes, my adopted hometown. And given the ignorant prejudiced shite you were spouting you really can't know it that well.


----------



## B.I.G (May 28, 2017)

maomao said:


> It's where I'll probably live out my days now. I have no connection to the part of London I was born in anymore. So, yes, my adopted hometown. And given the ignorant prejudiced shite you were spouting you really can't know it that well.



I hope you feel at home there. Sadly tho. Its still hideously white.

London for those that don't like London if you will.


----------



## Magnus McGinty (May 28, 2017)

B.I.G said:


> I hope you feel at home there. Sadly tho. Its still hideously white.
> 
> London for those that don't like London if you will.



Like most places outside of cities then?


----------



## B.I.G (May 28, 2017)

Magnus McGinty said:


> Like most places outside of cities then?



Yes  but Romford is part of Greater London. Its a white ghetto.


----------



## maomao (May 28, 2017)

B.I.G said:


> I hope you feel at home there. Sadly tho. Its still hideously white.
> 
> London for those that don't like London if you will.


See, now you're saying 'hideously white' to try and wind me up but it just makes you look like an ignorant prick. 

And as for anonymous message board, what's anonymous? I've been posting here fifteen years. I'm not part of the Brixton scene but there are people here who know who I am. There's tonnes on here to identify me and I'm happy to stand by what I say. Bowling up with a new log in doesn't make someone a different person, nor should it.


----------



## Magnus McGinty (May 28, 2017)

B.I.G said:


> Yes  but Romford is part of Greater London. Its a white ghetto.



I don't know if it is or isn't but so bloody what if it is. Are you going to start slating former pit villages for being 'hideously' white?


----------



## maomao (May 28, 2017)

B.I.G said:


> Yes  but Romford is part of Greater London. Its a white ghetto.


It's not remotely a white ghetto. Especially not my street or even my house and family. But what it does have is a more settled population (my next door neighbours are third generation Sikh immigrants) than most of the less wealthy boroughs of London and hence still some remnants of London's working class culture which people like B. I. G. find unacceptable.


----------



## B.I.G (May 28, 2017)

maomao said:


> See, now you're saying 'hideously white' to try and wind me up but it just makes you look like an ignorant prick.
> 
> And as for anonymous message board, what's anonymous? I've been posting here fifteen years. I'm not part of the Brixton scene but there are people here who know who I am. There's tonnes on here to identify me and I'm happy to stand by what I say. Bowling up with a new log in doesn't make someone a different person, nor should it.



This is an anonymous message board. Identifying people is expressly against the rules. Although people do it. It doesn't matter if people know who you are. People know who I am too  

And Romford is hideously white. That's not meant to wind you up. A lot of people are happy to live their because they are close to central London, relatively affordable and they don't have to deal with people that aren't like them. Hence why they voted for brexit in their masses. To keep it as white as english as possible.


----------



## Pickman's model (May 28, 2017)

Magnus McGinty said:


> I don't know if it is or isn't but so bloody what if it is. Are you going to start slating former pit villages for being 'hideously' white?


Or dulwich village


----------



## B.I.G (May 28, 2017)

Magnus McGinty said:


> I don't know if it is or isn't but so bloody what if it is. Are you going to start slating former pit villages for being 'hideously' white?



No. Is their a pit town that is a load of non-white people live in just nearby this white town? So people from Romford can keep their town as white as possible. Ilford and Romford are very close and yet strangely not that mixed.


----------



## Magnus McGinty (May 28, 2017)

B.I.G said:


> No. Is their a pit town that is a load of non-white people live in just nearby this white town? So people from Romford can keep their town as white as possible. Ilford and Romford are very close and yet strangely not that mixed.



The term hideously white is objectionable. Unless you're a quota ticking liberal twat.


----------



## B.I.G (May 28, 2017)

maomao said:


> It's not remotely a white ghetto. Especially not my street or even my house and family. But what it does have is a more settled population (my next door neighbours are third generation Sikh immigrants) than most of the less wealthy boroughs of London and hence still some remnants of London's working class culture which people like B. I. G. find unacceptable.



I find London's working class culture uncceptable? What's the difference between them and me?


----------



## B.I.G (May 28, 2017)

Magnus McGinty said:


> The term hideously white is objectionable. Unless you're a quota ticking liberal twat.



If you say so. I'm against areas that try and keep themselves of a certain race.


----------



## bimble (May 28, 2017)

wtf am i reading.


----------



## maomao (May 28, 2017)

B.I.G said:


> This is an anonymous message board. Identifying people is expressly against the rules. Although people do it. It doesn't matter if people know who you are. People know who I am too
> 
> And Romford is hideously white. That's not meant to wind you up. A lot of people are happy to live their because they are close to central London, relatively affordable and they don't have to deal with people that aren't like them. Hence why they voted for brexit in their masses. To keep it as white as english as possible.


I'm not getting dragged into the Brexit argument with you as long as you continue to spout lies and bullshit about my home.


----------



## maomao (May 28, 2017)

bimble said:


> wtf am i reading.


A message board for elderly left-wingers.


----------



## 19force8 (May 28, 2017)

bimble said:


> wtf am i reading.


Pay attention - Romford, not Reading


----------



## maomao (May 28, 2017)

B.I.G said:


> I find London's working class culture uncceptable? What's the difference between them and me?


I don't know. You're attitude genuinely puzzles me.


----------



## B.I.G (May 28, 2017)

maomao said:


> I don't know. You're attitude genuinely puzzles me.



I just don't like Romford. Why is their such a seperation between Ilford and Romford when all over London people live side by side.  

But I've nothing against you so I'm our now. I'm happy you have a home of your own to raise a family.


----------



## maomao (May 28, 2017)

Anyway B.I.G.  I've had you on ignore for months and am already regretting taking you off to talk to you. Bye again.


----------



## Pickman's model (May 28, 2017)

bimble said:


> wtf am i reading.


Urban, chuck


----------



## B.I.G (May 28, 2017)

maomao said:


> Anyway B.I.G.  I've had you on ignore for months and am already regretting taking you off to talk to you. Bye again.



I Engage and explain. But you prefer a fiction. 

No wonder you love Brexit loving romford.


----------



## sealion (May 28, 2017)

B.I.G said:


> I Engage and explain. But you prefer a fiction.
> 
> No wonder you love Brexit loving romford.


Are you six years of age or just drunk all of the time ?


----------



## Pickman's model (May 28, 2017)

Sea Lion said:


> Are you six years of age or just drunk all of the time ?


He's not six...


----------



## B.I.G (May 28, 2017)

Sea Lion said:


> Are you six years of age or just drunk all of the time ?



Drunk on a sat. Sober the rest of the time. Mainly.


----------



## brogdale (May 28, 2017)

B.I.G said:


> Drunk on a sat. Sober the rest of the time. Mainly.


Bank holidays?


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (May 28, 2017)

B.I.G said:


> No. Is their a pit town that is a load of non-white people live in just nearby this white town?



Ignorant of Yorkshire as well as London.


----------



## sealion (May 28, 2017)

B.I.G said:


> Drunk on a sat.


No kidding.


----------



## B.I.G (May 28, 2017)

brogdale said:


> Bank holidays?



Not particularly. 50/50.


----------



## B.I.G (May 28, 2017)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> Ignorant of Yorkshire as well as London.



Are you saying it happens or it doesn't in Yorkshire. 

Romford / Ilford is a tragic example.


----------



## YouSir (May 28, 2017)

B.I.G said:


> This is an anonymous message board. Identifying people is expressly against the rules. Although people do it. It doesn't matter if people know who you are. People know who I am too
> 
> And Romford is hideously white. That's not meant to wind you up. A lot of people are happy to live their because they are close to central London, relatively affordable and they don't have to deal with people that aren't like them. Hence why they voted for brexit in their masses. To keep it as white as english as possible.



Are you from Romford or do you know it well?


----------



## B.I.G (May 28, 2017)

YouSir said:


> Are you from Romford or do you know it well?



3 generations of my family were born and died in Romford. Sadly for me. I was born there too and lived 5 mins away for 23 years.


----------



## YouSir (May 28, 2017)

B.I.G said:


> 3 generations of my family were born and died in Romford. Sadly for me. I was born there too and lived 5 mins away for 23 years.



What race are you?


----------



## B.I.G (May 28, 2017)

YouSir said:


> What race are you?



White.


----------



## bimble (May 28, 2017)

I've never been to Romford. Your attempt to basically accuse someone of being a racist because they and their family live there is utterly ridiculous though, even if you're pissed.


----------



## B.I.G (May 28, 2017)

bimble said:


> I've never been to Romford. Your attempt to basically accuse someone of being a racist because they and their family live there is utterly pathetic though.



I never accused them of being racist. I dont think they are a racist. As far as I think, they are not white themselves. Not that means they can't be racist. It does preclude them from being a racist white person though. 

Sorry bimble you aren't really on it here.


----------



## DotCommunist (May 28, 2017)

stroud voted Remain BIG so thats your theory done


----------



## YouSir (May 28, 2017)

B.I.G said:


> White.



So are you part of the 'hideously white' Romford clique as well then?

Also Maomao, want to redact your comments about South London stinking? Northern heathen that you are.


----------



## maomao (May 28, 2017)

YouSir said:


> Also Maomao, want to redact your comments about South London stinking? Northern heathen that you are.


May have been a temporary situation caused by all the shit a certain Peckham resident has been talking.


----------



## B.I.G (May 28, 2017)

YouSir said:


> So are you part of the 'hideously white' Romford clique as well then?
> 
> Also Maomao, want to redact your comments about South London stinking? Northern heathen that you are.



I got out of romford as soon as I can. I prefer to live somewhere with some diversity of thought.


----------



## bimble (May 28, 2017)

South London does in fact stink, my bit of it at least. It bloody stinks, you get used to it but coming back from anywhere else the first day is kind of rough.


----------



## Magnus McGinty (May 28, 2017)

White wacists


----------



## YouSir (May 28, 2017)

maomao said:


> May have been a temporary situation caused by all the shit a certain Peckham resident has been talking.



Alas, our border controls are lax, fuckers always coming over the river for one thing...



B.I.G said:


> I got out of romford as soon as I can. I prefer to live somewhere with some diversity of thought.



Can only go by the people I know from Romford but judging by them alone - bullshit. It's a place, a place with cunts, a place with good people, neither group defines it.



bimble said:


> South London does in fact stink, my bit of it at least. It bloody stinks, you get used to it but coming back from anywhere else the first day is kind of rough.



Something about meeting a bastard once a day vs meeting one every day... mind you, I'll be landing back home in a couple of days, so I may change my mind. Do remember last time I quit smoking though, got my sense of smell back and everyone in London fucking stank, part of the reason why I took it up again, I wanted to be part of the stank crowd.


----------



## B.I.G (May 28, 2017)

YouSir said:


> Alas, our border controls are lax, fuckers always coming over the river for one thing...
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Its hideously white. Don't remember saying if it has more cunts than usual.


----------



## YouSir (May 28, 2017)

B.I.G said:


> Its hideously white. Don't remember saying if it has more cunts than usual.



I took it as you implying a load of racism. The fuck does 'hideously white' mean then?


----------



## Magnus McGinty (May 28, 2017)

B.I.G said:


> Its hideously white. Don't remember saying if it has more cunts than usual.



So the hideous whites keeping it deliberately white (how?) aren't cunts?


----------



## B.I.G (May 28, 2017)

YouSir said:


> I took it as you implying a load of racism. The fuck does 'hideously white' mean then?



It means its full of white people who would prefer to live with other white people.


----------



## Magnus McGinty (May 28, 2017)

YouSir said:


> I took it as you implying a load of racism.



That's exactly what he meant.


----------



## B.I.G (May 28, 2017)

Magnus McGinty said:


> So the hideous whites keeping it deliberately white (how?) aren't cunts?



I think they are cunts but I didnt say that. I have now though. Brexit types generally are.


----------



## YouSir (May 28, 2017)

B.I.G said:


> Its hideously white. Don't remember saying if it has more cunts than usual.



I took it as you implying a load of racism. The fuck does 'hideously white' mean then?


----------



## Pickman's model (May 28, 2017)

YouSir said:


> So are you part of the 'hideously white' Romford clique as well then?
> 
> Also Maomao, want to redact your comments about South London stinking? Northern heathen that you are.


South London possesses a stench all its own


----------



## YouSir (May 28, 2017)

B.I.G said:


> I think they are cunts but I didnt say that. I have now though. Brexit types generally are.



So I was right in assuming what you meant? Why skirt around it then? Was obvious enough.

Also, as a Brexit voter, you can add me to the list of people thinking increasingly less of you, along with Romfordites, northern scum though they may be.


----------



## YouSir (May 28, 2017)

Pickman's model said:


> South London possesses a stench all its own



The smell of divine creation, being the original site of the Garden of Eden and all.


----------



## Corax (May 28, 2017)

bimble said:


> wtf am i reading.


Fuck knows.

But one thing that's certainly "unacceptable" is the number of their/there/they're and your/you're errors on the last few pages.  Fuck returnee infringements, it's _*this*_ that deserves the wielding of a mighty banhammer. 

Anyway, have we decided who ninjaboy is these days?


----------



## bimble (May 28, 2017)

I voted remain and live in a very not white place but I too think the B.I.G. is a complete and utter arsehole. So..so their.


----------



## Pickman's model (May 28, 2017)

YouSir said:


> The smell of divine creation, being the original site of the Garden of Eden and all.


Possessing the original compost heap


----------



## Pickman's model (May 28, 2017)

bimble said:


> I voted remain and live in a very not white place but I too think the B.I.G. is a complete and utter arsehole. So..so their.


Their what?


----------



## Corax (May 28, 2017)

bimble said:


> I voted remain and live in a very not white place but I too think the B.I.G. is a complete and utter arsehole. So..so their.


You did that deliberately you fucker.


----------



## DotCommunist (May 28, 2017)

back to the pop up boutique football forum pls BIG


----------



## Corax (May 28, 2017)

YouSir said:


> The fuck does 'hideously white' mean then?


Dulux vs Farrow & Ball


----------



## B.I.G (May 28, 2017)

YouSir said:


> So I was right in assuming what you meant? Why skirt around it then? Was obvious enough.
> 
> Also, as a Brexit voter, you can add me to the list of people thinking increasingly less of you, along with Romfordites, northern scum though they may be.



Why? As a brexit voter I blame you for what is happening to this country. Effectively a return to the little england so nicely shown by Romford.


----------



## B.I.G (May 28, 2017)

DotCommunist said:


> back to the pop up boutique football forum pls BIG



Everyone stops waffling on and asking me questions about romford and I can relax.


----------



## bimble (May 28, 2017)

'Hideously white' is a shit phrase but i do get what it means - i have to go to Switzerland (for work) every few months, going again in few days - and every time I get home, coming up out of Brixton tube,  it is a joy to be back because not everyone looks the fucking same. I love London for this. But I don't feel the need to slyly accuse everyone who happens to live in Swissland of being a racist cunt, though in that particular case it might arguably be justified, more than Romford anyhow.


----------



## B.I.G (May 28, 2017)

bimble said:


> 'Hideously white' is a shit phrase but i do get what it means - i have to go to Switzerland (for work) every few months, going again in few days - and every time I get home, coming up out of Brixton tube,  it is a joy to be back because not everyone looks the fucking same. I love London for this. But I don't feel the need to slyly accuse everyone who happens to live in Swissland of being a racist cunt, though in that particular case it might arguably be justified, more than Romford anyhow.



Im sure the people of romford would love to have the same restrictions as the people of switzerland.


----------



## mrs quoad (May 28, 2017)

YouSir said:


> I took it as you implying a load of racism. The fuck does 'hideously white' mean then?


Guildford and Godalming, historically 

Edit: basically, exactly what bimble posted, only substitute "Switzerland" for "Guildford and Godalming".


----------



## YouSir (May 28, 2017)

B.I.G said:


> Why? As a brexit voter I blame you for what is happening to this country. Effectively a return to the little england so nicely shown by Romford.




Ask why, answer your own question and go back to digs at Romford. Followed by a post asking people to stop calling you out on the stupid shit you say. Keep going, this will pan out brilliantly for you I'm sure.


----------



## bimble (May 28, 2017)

B.I.G said:


> Im sure the people of romford would love to have the same restrictions as the people of switzerland.


Which do you mean?


----------



## YouSir (May 28, 2017)

mrs quoad said:


> Guildford and Godalming, historically



Does Godalming really exist? I'm sceptical.


----------



## YouSir (May 28, 2017)

Taking in the tone of some posters - racial diversity, a healthy novelty to add appeal to your working day...


----------



## B.I.G (May 28, 2017)

bimble said:


> Which do you mean?


----------



## B.I.G (May 28, 2017)

bimble said:


> Which do you mean?



Becoming a citizen


----------



## mrs quoad (May 28, 2017)

YouSir said:


> Does Godalming really exist? I'm sceptical.


I feel the same about Dorking. 

Bahnhof Strasse insists it does, though. And, Tbf, I did used to get pissed there.


----------



## maomao (May 28, 2017)

bimble said:


> 'Hideously white' is a shit phrase but i do get what it means - i have to go to Switzerland (for work) every few months, going again in few days - and every time I get home, coming up out of Brixton tube,  it is a joy to be back because not everyone looks the fucking same. I love London for this. But I don't feel the need to slyly accuse everyone who happens to live in Swissland of being a racist cunt, though in that particular case it might arguably be justified, more than Romford anyhow.


Can you understand how in parts of London that have historically had lower immigration for economic and geographical reasons, especially in places like Romford where that is accompanied by lower than average levels of education and higher levels of poverty than other outer London boroughs that using a phrase like that just makes him sound like a horrible stuck up cunt who doesn't like working class people? 

It's also demonstrably not true. The borough of Havering is approaching 20% non white British and the vast majority of that 20% is in Romford itself. It's hardly a remote pit town with minimal immigration. 

And to clarify some comments made above, I am white but my wife and daughter aren't. Not that that matters.


----------



## DotCommunist (May 28, 2017)

see stroud is 98.2% white according rto wikipedia. I've been there loads over the years as me nan lives that way. Yet it voted Remain BIG. Where does that leave your logic?


----------



## B.I.G (May 28, 2017)

DotCommunist said:


> see stroud is 98.2% white according rto wikipedia. I've been there loads over the years as me nan lives that way. Yet it voted Remain BIG. Where does that leave your logic?



Sensibe white people? Don't know anything about it.


----------



## Magnus McGinty (May 28, 2017)

B.I.G said:


> I think they are cunts but I didnt say that. I have now though. Brexit types generally are.



Fuck off!


----------



## YouSir (May 28, 2017)

B.I.G said:


> Sensibe white people? *Don't know anything about it*.



A recurring theme there.


----------



## Magnus McGinty (May 28, 2017)

B.I.G said:


> Sensibe white people? Don't know anything about it.



Cunts like you think the EU is progressive as you're not particularly under its heel, unlike those racist cunts whose intentions you haven't a clue about.


----------



## B.I.G (May 28, 2017)

Magnus McGinty said:


> Cunts like you think the EU is progressive as you're not particularly under its heel, unlike those racist cunts whose intentions you haven't a clue about.



I don't think I expressed an opinion about the progressiveness of the EU.


----------



## YouSir (May 28, 2017)

B.I.G said:


> I don't think I expressed an opinion about the progressiveness of the EU.



You seem to have a line in that, 'I didn't directly say x but yes, I meant x'. Not much of an evasion.


----------



## B.I.G (May 28, 2017)

YouSir said:


> You seem to have a line in that, 'I didn't directly say x but yes, I meant x'. Not much of an evasion.



Not really. Its nice everyone wants to defend Romford. I place I know very well. Surely everyone can move on now.


----------



## YouSir (May 28, 2017)

B.I.G said:


> Not really. Its nice everyone wants to defend Romford. I place I know very well. Surely everyone can move on now.



Alas no, slag off a load of people and, bizarrely, they don't just let it go because you've realised that you've dug yourself a shitty hole.


----------



## YouSir (May 28, 2017)

B.I.G said:


> Not really. Its nice everyone wants to defend Romford. I place I know very well. Surely everyone can move on now.



Also, as you started with 'hideously white' and ended slating Brexit voters you've covered far more than Romford.


----------



## B.I.G (May 28, 2017)

YouSir said:


> Also, as you started with 'hideously white' and ended slating Brexit voters you've covered far more than Romford.



Brexit voters are like tories that just want to pay less personal tax. Sacrificing the good of the country for their own personal benefit.


----------



## YouSir (May 28, 2017)

B.I.G said:


> Brexit voters are like tories that just want to pay less personal tax. Sacrificing the good of the country for their own personal benefit.



You're a fucking idiot. 

Really, there's a year's worth of discussion on Brexit on these boards, read through it and try to gain some vague idea of why people may have voted Leave before talking shite.


----------



## B.I.G (May 28, 2017)

YouSir said:


> You're a fucking idiot.
> 
> Really, there's a year's worth of discussion on Brexit on these boards, read through it and try to gain some vague idea of why people may have voted Leave before talking shite.



It doesn't matter how they want to justify it. The results are there.


----------



## YouSir (May 28, 2017)

B.I.G said:


> It doesn't matter how they want to justify it. The results are there.



And you're still a fucking idiot. Anything more to add? Or are people from Romford, the 'hideously white' and Brexit voters all just scum without any justification?


----------



## keybored (May 28, 2017)

This term "hideously white" actually reminds me more of white liberals parodied on sites like "Black People Love Us" than it does of the people of Romford.


----------



## B.I.G (May 28, 2017)

YouSir said:


> And you're still a fucking idiot. Anything more to add? Or are people from Romford, the 'hideously white' and Brexit voters all just scum without any justification?



Let it go.


----------



## Magnus McGinty (May 28, 2017)

B.I.G said:


> It doesn't matter how they want to justify it. The results are there.



Austerity everywhere and the rise of the far right. That's what those terrible white wacists voted to leave.


----------



## YouSir (May 28, 2017)

B.I.G said:


> Let it go.



Why? I'm back from the pub and not yet asleep, you're the one clinging to the bollocks you've been talking as if it has any value beyond the random excretions of someone who blatantly hasn't thought any of it out.


----------



## imposs1904 (May 28, 2017)




----------



## Corax (May 28, 2017)

Magnus McGinty said:


> Austerity everywhere and the rise of the far right. That's what those terrible white wacists voted to leave.


The rise of the far right on the mainland is exactly why I voted to stay.  Obligation to do whatever we can to influence prevention.  Which some might claim was the point of tying European countries' fates to each other in the first place.


----------



## Magnus McGinty (May 28, 2017)

Corax said:


> The rise of the far right on the mainland is exactly why I voted to stay.  Obligation to do whatever we can to influence prevention.  Which some might claim was the point of tying European countries' fates to each other in the first place.



The EU is regressive in many ways. The fact it's trumpeted as progressive by those doing well, who see themselves an non racist, and like foreign travel, wasn't enough to counter its downfall.
Racists will have voted against the EU, but characterising all Brexit voters as racist is bigoted itself. As they simply aren't.


----------



## Corax (May 29, 2017)

Magnus McGinty said:


> The EU is regressive in many ways. The fact it's trumpeted as progressive by those doing well, who see themselves an non racist, and like foreign travel, wasn't enough to counter its downfall.
> Racists will have voted against the EU, but characterising all Brexit voters as racist is bigoted itself. As they simply aren't.


Well yeah.  I've not been arsed to read the many reams of Brexit discussion on here, but I rather suspect (or hope anyway) that the only sensible conclusion that can have been reached is that a variety of people voted both for and against EU membership, for a variety of reasons.


----------



## xenon (May 29, 2017)

B.I.G said:


> Brexit voters are like tories that just want to pay less personal tax. Sacrificing the good of the country for their own personal benefit.



 Why do you bother. You're an idiot.  No analysis. Just name-calling crap. Hideously white.  Well done, you move to an area which is more ethnically diverse. Is that your politics. Is that the end of it.  I live near some brown people. They are not like Brexit voters,  Who are all white an have the audacity to live outside your corner of London.


----------



## B.I.G (May 29, 2017)

xenon said:


> Why do you bother. You're an idiot.  No analysis. Just name-calling crap. Hideously white.  Well done, you move to an area which is more ethnically diverse. Is that your politics. Is that the end of it.  I live near some brown people. They are not like Brexit voters,  Who are all white an have the audacity to live outside your corner of London.



I'm very suspicious of people that say "is that your politics". Its a huge warning sign. 

You say name calling crap a sentence after calling me an idiot. Makes a difference from people being shocked that I am clever I suppose. 

I did the brexit thing before but I never said they are all white. That is a fiction you have invented because you don't want to deal with the truth.


----------



## xenon (May 29, 2017)




----------



## B.I.G (May 29, 2017)

xenon said:


>




We have a song for that.


----------



## xenon (May 29, 2017)

B.I.G said:


> I'm very suspicious of people that say "is that your politics". Its a huge warning sign.
> 
> You say name calling crap a sentence after calling me an idiot. Makes a difference from people being shocked that I am clever I suppose.
> 
> I did the brexit thing before but I never said they are all white. That is a fiction you have invented because you don't want to deal with the truth.



 Because you're not interested in thinking about why people voted Brexit. They're just racist. I don't know it's your argument.  Hideously white etc.


----------



## B.I.G (May 29, 2017)

xenon said:


> Because you're not interested in thinking about why people voted Brexit. They're just racist. I don't know it's your argument.  Hideously white etc.



I know why people voted for brexit because they publicise it. They aren't all racist. Some are deluded. Some are stupid. 

But even if they have the best reason in the world that won't be any consolation to the people that might have to go back where they came from.


----------



## xenon (May 29, 2017)

A lot of stupid, racist people voted to remain.  A lot of non white people vote Tory.


----------



## B.I.G (May 29, 2017)

xenon said:


> A lot of stupid, racist people voted to remain.  A lot of non white people vote Tory.



A lot of non-white people are racist. Not seeing why racists would vote to keep a situation where migration cannot be controlled but ok. But I guess its possible. 

After all I read an interview with someone who voted UKIP but wanted to stay in the EU. 

People are idiots.


----------



## Corax (May 29, 2017)

B.I.G said:


> Makes a difference from people being shocked that I am clever I suppose.


Oh dear.


----------



## RD2003 (May 29, 2017)

B.I.G said:


> People are idiots.



Well you said it...


----------



## maomao (May 29, 2017)

YouSir said:


> Also Maomao, want to redact your comments about South London stinking? Northern heathen that you are.


I did my insomnia-caused O2 to Cutty Sark walk again on the way to work this morning and I'm sorry but it's definitely a bit whiffier than the north side of the river. Like a damp fishy sort of smell.


----------



## kabbes (May 29, 2017)

maomao said:


> I did my insomnia-caused O2 to Cutty Sark walk again on the way to work this morning and I'm sorry but it's definitely a bit whiffier than the north side of the river. Like a damp fishy sort of smell.


You walked along a river then complain it smelt damp and fishy?


----------



## maomao (May 29, 2017)

kabbes said:


> You walked along a river then complain it smelt damp and fishy?


Yes. Though I walked through Woolwich and Greenwich rather than the river path. Also am comparing to North side of the same river.


----------



## isvicthere? (May 29, 2017)

Magnus McGinty said:


> The EU is regressive in many ways. The fact it's trumpeted as progressive by those doing well, who see themselves an non racist, and like foreign travel, wasn't enough to counter its downfall.
> Racists will have voted against the EU, but characterising all Brexit voters as racist is bigoted itself. As they simply aren't.



But, surely, it's naive to suggest that racism wasn't a huge determining factor in the brexit vote.


----------



## Magnus McGinty (May 29, 2017)

isvicthere? said:


> But, surely, it's naive to suggest that racism wasn't a huge determining factor in the brexit vote.



Only if objections to immigration = racism. I'm sure racists object to immigration for racist reasons (although why would white supremacists object to white Europeans immigrating?) but I'm fairly certain a lot of folk who object to immigration aren't racist.


----------



## maomao (May 29, 2017)

Magnus McGinty said:


> although why would white supremacists object to white Europeans immigrating



You know that Hitler wasn't fond of the slavs right?


----------



## ViolentPanda (May 29, 2017)

Wookey said:


> I ain't renting.
> 
> I've brought my own. A fishing chair with a pocket for my remote and some sweets.



longdog will be round to smash up your fishing chair, and explain to you how much more economically-sensible it is, to rent a chair from his chair rental franchise.


----------



## 19force8 (May 29, 2017)

Magnus McGinty said:


> Only if objections to immigration = racism. I'm sure racists object to immigration for racist reasons (although why would white supremacists object to white Europeans immigrating?) but I'm fairly certain a lot of folk who object to immigration aren't racist.


I'm curious as to how that would work. How would it be possible to hold a racist opinion for non-racist reasons?

Can I object to immigrants living next door to me for good, non-racist reasons?


----------



## ViolentPanda (May 29, 2017)

mikey mikey said:


> Just enough to smear a perfectly innocent member of the forum. Got it.



And you know they're "perfectly innocent" because...?


----------



## Magnus McGinty (May 29, 2017)

19force8 said:


> I'm curious as to how that would work. How would it be possible to hold a racist opinion for non-racist reasons?
> 
> Can I object to immigrants living next door to me for good, non-racist reasons?



If somebody points out that their local services are under strain and perhaps the area wouldn't cope with more and more people where extra funds aren't forthcoming, this makes them racist?


----------



## bmd (May 29, 2017)

19force8 said:


> I'm curious as to how that would work. How would it be possible to hold a racist opinion for non-racist reasons?
> 
> Can I object to immigrants living next door to me for good, non-racist reasons?



Of course! They all smell funny.


----------



## Pickman's model (May 29, 2017)

Magnus McGinty said:


> If somebody points out that their local services are under strain and perhaps the area wouldn't cope with more and more people where extra funds aren't forthcoming, this makes them racist?


Could make them opposed to gentrification as in e.g. hackney or whitechapel where the local authority is complicit in increasing the population density.


----------



## Pickman's model (May 29, 2017)

19force8 said:


> I'm curious as to how that would work. How would it be possible to hold a racist opinion for non-racist reasons?
> 
> Can I object to immigrants living next door to me for good, non-racist reasons?


You don't want to embarrass yourself with your parochial ways


----------



## mikey mikey (May 29, 2017)

ViolentPanda said:


> And you know they're "perfectly innocent" because...?



Presumed innocent until _proven _guilty.

Or, if you like, I can just make up some shit about how you were previously banned for spamming the forum with ads for lawnmowers. Yes you were and I don't need proof. I know who you are  l@nm0w3rman


----------



## ViolentPanda (May 29, 2017)

Pickman's model said:


> Or dulwich village



TBF, it wouldn't be slating Dulwich village to call it "hideously white".


----------



## 1927 (May 29, 2017)

mikey mikey said:


> Presumed innocent until _proven _guilty.
> 
> Or, if you like, I can just make up some shit about how you were previously banned for spamming the forum with ads for lawnmowers. Yes you were and I don't need proof. I know who you are  l@nm0w3rman


Presumed innocent UNLESS proven guilty!


----------



## ViolentPanda (May 29, 2017)

bimble said:


> South London does in fact stink, my bit of it at least. It bloody stinks, you get used to it but coming back from anywhere else the first day is kind of rough.



You don't know you're born! 

A *REAL* stink was Battersea, when Garton's Glucose, Prices Candles and Morgan Crucible were all running back in the '60s and '70s. Just passing by on the bus was enough to have everyone retching!


----------



## ViolentPanda (May 29, 2017)

Magnus McGinty said:


> White wacists



White wiberal wacists.


----------



## mikey mikey (May 29, 2017)

Not any more. Presumed innocent unless Violent Panda. a.k.a.* l@nm0w3rman* aka *love2mosh *


----------



## ViolentPanda (May 29, 2017)

YouSir said:


> I took it as you implying a load of racism. The fuck does 'hideously white' mean then?



When Greg Dyke originally used the term, he was talking about middle to upper management at the beeb, and if you take "hideously" to mean "over-representative of", he was right.  Same with Dulwich village - over-representatively white when the surrounding demographic is taken into account, although in DV's case it's easily explained by the cost of housing, and the fact that fewer ethnic minorities can afford it.


----------



## ViolentPanda (May 29, 2017)

Pickman's model said:


> South London possesses a stench all its own



Wandsworth High Street used to smell lovely when Youngs still brewed there.


----------



## ViolentPanda (May 29, 2017)

YouSir said:


> The smell of divine creation, being the original site of the Garden of Eden and all.



Although that site is *NOT* Carshalton, as some Lib-Dem-loving weirdoes have claimed, but is in fact Brockwell Park.


----------



## ViolentPanda (May 29, 2017)

Corax said:


> Anyway, have we decided who ninjaboy is these days?



Don't care about who he is.  It's what he is that interests me, which is dead if I have my way.


----------



## Pickman's model (May 29, 2017)

mikey mikey said:


> Presumed innocent until _proven _guilty.
> 
> Or, if you like, I can just make up some shit about how you were previously banned for spamming the forum with ads for lawnmowers. Yes you were and I don't need proof. I know who you are  l@nm0w3rman


Top lying tip: you won't be believed if you tell people you're about to lie.


----------



## ViolentPanda (May 29, 2017)

Pickman's model said:


> Possessing the original compost heap



YHWH's dunghill which, naturally, smells of roses and lavender (and possibly a bit of myrhh).


----------



## Pickman's model (May 29, 2017)

ViolentPanda said:


> YHWH's dunghill which, naturally, smells of roses and lavender (and possibly a bit of myrhh).


Yeh but over time the smell has become less pleasant


----------



## ViolentPanda (May 29, 2017)

mikey mikey said:


> Presumed innocent until _proven _guilty.
> 
> Or, if you like, I can just make up some shit about how you were previously banned for spamming the forum with ads for lawnmowers. Yes you were and I don't need proof. I know who you are  l@nm0w3rman



You said "perfectly innocent".  You made an assumption as to their state of guilt.  You didn't say "presumed innocent until proven guilty".  You just added that because you realised that saying "perfectly innocent" made you look like a twat.

Now go bang Jocasta, Oedipus .


----------



## ViolentPanda (May 29, 2017)

Pickman's model said:


> Top lying tip: you won't be believed if you tell people you're about to lie.



He's not even the sharpest spoon in the cutlery drawer, let alone the sharpest knife.


----------



## 19force8 (May 29, 2017)

Magnus McGinty said:


> If somebody points out that their local services are under strain and perhaps the area wouldn't cope with more and more people where extra funds aren't forthcoming, this makes them racist?


Yep, heard that one before. Tell me, is the problem immigration or the inadequacy of local services? Because it seems to me if the solution is to stop immigration then it must be the immigrants that are the problem. Not racist at all.


----------



## maomao (May 29, 2017)

19force8 said:


> Yep, heard that one before. Tell me, is the problem immigration or the inadequacy of local services? Because it seems to me if the solution is to stop immigration then it must be the immigrants that are the problem. Not racist at all.


How about if the solution is essential* immigration only until the infrastructure has been put in place to cope with an increased population? Do you think it's a positive thing that Romanians and Poles with degrees and professional training are coming over here to do shit jobs because of market forces? Should capitalism just be allowed to have its way whatever?

(* I don't have a definitive definition but would include refugees and people joining their families at a minimum)


----------



## kabbes (May 29, 2017)

maomao said:


> Yes. Though I walked through Woolwich and Greenwich rather than the river path. Also am comparing to North side of the same river.


Most of "south of the river" is not quite that close to the river


----------



## Pickman's model (May 29, 2017)

kabbes said:


> Most of "south of the river" is not quite that close to the river


Well spotted


----------



## Pickman's model (May 29, 2017)

19force8 said:


> Yep, heard that one before. Tell me, is the problem immigration or the inadequacy of local services? Because it seems to me if the solution is to stop immigration then it must be the immigrants that are the problem. Not racist at all.


Just deeply stupid


----------



## Magnus McGinty (May 29, 2017)

19force8 said:


> Yep, heard that one before. Tell me, is the problem immigration or the inadequacy of local services? Because it seems to me if the solution is to stop immigration then it must be the immigrants that are the problem. Not racist at all.



The solution isn't necessarily to stop immigration. It could be to increase funding or find areas whose services aren't heavily oversubscribed. 
What's irksome though is when liberal cunts dip their noses in and start calling people racists for raising concerns about an area where the liberal cunts don't even live! 
There's a certain degree of class hatred about it I think.


----------



## keybored (May 29, 2017)

mikey mikey said:


> Presumed innocent until _proven _guilty.



This isn't a court of law and you need to lurk more.


----------



## teqniq (May 29, 2017)

keybored said:


> This isn't a court of law and you need to lurk more.


That could be akin to asking a child to stop incessantly hitting a xylophone.


----------



## likesfish (May 29, 2017)

I think people object to being lied to only 50000 from eastern europe prime example.
   Also zero action from goverment to make any attempt to provide extra funding or anything when a suprise extra million turn up


----------



## 19force8 (May 29, 2017)

Magnus McGinty said:


> The solution isn't necessarily to stop immigration. It could be to increase funding or find areas whose services aren't heavily oversubscribed.
> What's irksome though is when liberal cunts dip their noses in and start calling people racists for raising concerns about an area where the liberal cunts don't even live!
> There's a certain degree of class hatred about it I think.


Those liberal cunts sure are irksome, but nobody's being called a racist here.

E2A "a"


----------



## maomao (May 29, 2017)

19force8 said:


> Those liberal cunts sure are irksome, but nobody's being called racist here.


You're not specifically calling any poster on the boards racist but post 1586 seems to me to be you saying that you consider any complaint about immigration to be racist. If that's not correct please do clarify.


----------



## Libertad (May 29, 2017)

ViolentPanda said:


> You don't know you're born!
> 
> A *REAL* stink was Battersea, when Garton's Glucose, Prices Candles and Morgan Crucible were all running back in the '60s and '70s. Just passing by on the bus was enough to have everyone retching!



I raise you, LRC on Stockwell Road.


----------



## isvicthere? (May 29, 2017)

19force8 said:


> Yep, heard that one before. Tell me, is the problem immigration or the inadequacy of local services? Because it seems to me if the solution is to stop immigration then it must be the immigrants that are the problem. Not racist at all.



Not sure, but - filtered through the internet - I can't tell whether or not you're being sarcastic.


----------



## 19force8 (May 29, 2017)

isvicthere? said:


> Not sure, but - filtered through the internet - I can't tell whether or not you're being sarcastic.


Never sure about sarcasm myself. When people talk about problems with immigration they're indirectly saying that migrants are a problem or cause a problem. This isn't necessarily racist, it depends on the nature of the "problem" and the proposed solutions.


----------



## Magnus McGinty (May 29, 2017)

19force8 said:


> Never sure about sarcasm myself. When people talk about problems with immigration they're indirectly saying that migrants are a problem or cause a problem. This isn't necessarily racist, it depends on the nature of the "problem" and the proposed solutions.



Given that immigration is a function of capitalism, and capitalism tends to fuck over workers regardless of whence they came, it often surprises me just how aggressive parts of the left get towards anything approaching criticism of it. I mean, the people who benefit the most aren't the immigrants or the communities they move into, but the capitalists themselves. 
Heaven forbid communities having objections to how rapidly their neighbourhoods change, they're just the racist buggers who grew up there!


----------



## 19force8 (May 29, 2017)

Magnus McGinty said:


> Given that immigration is a function of capitalism, and capitalism tends to fuck over workers regardless of whence they came, it often surprises me just how aggressive parts of the left get towards anything approaching criticism of it. I mean, the people who benefit the most aren't the immigrants or the communities they move into, but the capitalists themselves.
> Heaven forbid communities having objections to how rapidly their neighbourhoods change, they're just the racist buggers who grew up there!


Yeah! Fucking capitilism! They should absolutely be allowed to put posters in their windows saying "No dogs, no Irish, no blacks" because they don't want their neighbourhoods to change. Or is that not what you meant?


----------



## Magnus McGinty (May 29, 2017)

19force8 said:


> Yeah! Fucking capitilism! They should absolutely be allowed to put posters in their windows saying "No dogs, no Irish, no blacks" because they don't want their neighbourhoods to change. Or is that not what you meant?



Is this the sort of counter position you adopt to silence those with objections to raise? I was going to suggest that perhaps engaging with them might be more fruitful but then it dawned on me that you probably never even set foot in the places you demand accept more and more people, so what's the point?


----------



## maomao (May 29, 2017)

19force8 said:


> Yeah! Fucking capitilism! They should absolutely be allowed to put posters in their windows saying "No dogs, no Irish, no blacks" because they don't want their neighbourhoods to change. Or is that not what you meant?


So how can people stop their communities being turned into dormitory towns for cheap labour? Or does a million Poles coming over here to do our shit jobs for shit money and live in shit houses that aren't fit for families any more constitute 'freedom of movement'? It doesn't look like freedom to me. It looks like the working classes being pushed about in order to support their families.


----------



## Magnus McGinty (May 29, 2017)

maomao said:


> So how can people stop their communities being turned into dormitory towns for cheap labour? Or does a million Poles coming over here to do our shit jobs for shit money and live in shit houses that aren't fit for families any more constitute 'freedom of movement'? It doesn't look like freedom to me. It looks like the working classes being pushed about in order to support their families.



Moreover, I don't see how it benefits Poland either stripping communities of their workers to come and work for a pittance here. 
But this is the sort of progressive non racism Bremain voters are all about.


----------



## 19force8 (May 29, 2017)

Magnus McGinty said:


> Is this the sort of counter position you adopt to silence those with objections to raise? I was going to suggest that perhaps engaging with them might be more fruitful but then it dawned on me that you probably never even set foot in the places you demand accept more and more people, so what's the point?


No, this is the attitude I take to liberal left wankers when I get sick and tired of their using fake anti-capitalist rhetoric because they think they have to pander to the working class. Who in their vast experience are overwhelmingly racist.*

* (for isvicthere? and others, that last sentence was meant sarcastically)


----------



## maomao (May 29, 2017)

Magnus McGinty said:


> Moreover, I don't see how it benefits Poland either stripping communities of their workers to come and work for a pittance here.
> But this is the sort of progressive non racism Bremain voters are all about.


It benefits the Polish government because it brings money into the economy for zero investment and lets them run with relatively high unemployment. I'm not sure how that benefits Poland as a nation or a society though.


----------



## 19force8 (May 29, 2017)

Magnus McGinty said:


> Moreover, I don't see how it benefits Poland either stripping communities of their workers to come and work for a pittance here.
> But this is the sort of progressive non racism Bremain voters are all about.


Clearly then, we should ban Polish immigrants - for their own good.

ffs


----------



## maomao (May 29, 2017)

19force8 said:


> Clearly then, we should ban Polish immigrants - for their own good.
> 
> ffs


There's no middle ground with people like you is there?


----------



## mikey mikey (May 29, 2017)

Ask a Polish person here, if you know one.


----------



## B.I.G (May 29, 2017)

I don't know any people born outside the UK or any working class people.


----------



## Magnus McGinty (May 29, 2017)

mikey mikey said:


> Ask a Polish person here, if you know one.



Given we all just make up who we are anyway maybe I could play the genuine pole worker?


----------



## 19force8 (May 29, 2017)

mikey mikey said:


> Ask a Polish person here, if you know one.


I don't know any Polish people on Urban. Those I know irl would regard me as a dickhead if I suddenly started spouting like Magnus McGinty


----------



## Magnus McGinty (May 29, 2017)

19force8 said:


> No, this is the attitude I take to liberal left wankers when I get sick and tired of their using fake anti-capitalist rhetoric because they think they have to pander to the working class. Who in their vast experience are overwhelmingly racist.*
> 
> * (for isvicthere? and others, that last sentence was meant sarcastically)



When the far right eventually get in and come to murder you in the night, give yourself a liberal pat on the head, if you're not shitting yourself too much.


----------



## maomao (May 29, 2017)

I am working class and I know a lot more immigrants than I know British people.


----------



## B.I.G (May 29, 2017)

Me too. Oh dear.


----------



## 19force8 (May 29, 2017)

Magnus McGinty said:


> Given we all just make up who we are anyway maybe I could play the genuine pole worker?


I didn't know you had it in you Magnus McGinty


----------



## 19force8 (May 29, 2017)

The "best" chatroom biography I've ever read is one I saved earlier this year:


> *Jellytot on 18 January, 2017 at 3:23 pm said:*
> 
> Yes, I am a Irish/English Londoner with a Chinese wife, Biracial kids, a Canadian passport, US Green Card, properties in the US, Canada and China, a business in Thailand, who speaks fluent Mandarin, passable Thai and Japanese. Is a former member of the SWP, ran very briefly with Red Action and AFA, activist in the ANL in the 90’s and currently a LP member, HnH supporter and financier and who has just joined Momentum……and happen to support immigration controls. I may be many things but a Powellite “little Englander” I am not.


You couldn't make it up!

and to prove *I* didn't, here's the link - Socialist Unity | Debate & analysis for activists & trade unionists Post 95


----------



## Kaka Tim (May 29, 2017)

maomao said:


> So how can people stop their communities being turned into dormitory towns for cheap labour? Or does a million Poles coming over here to do our shit jobs for shit money and live in shit houses that aren't fit for families any more constitute 'freedom of movement'? It doesn't look like freedom to me. It looks like the working classes being pushed about in order to support their families.



but the most _brexity_ areas have been those least affected by immigration. In clacton - for example - you will struggle to see a non-white face and last time i was there (two months ago) i did not hear a  single non-essex accent - or spot a polish deli - (although there was an eastern european seciton in the local morrisons). 
Yet you will still hear plenty of locals moaning about the eastern european's "taking our jobs",  "taking over" etc. 
Its long term economically deprived and this has got worse - but people seem to find it easier to blame this on the EU and a (perceived) increase in immigration rather than austerity and the banking crash.


----------



## ViolentPanda (May 29, 2017)

Libertad said:


> I raise you, LRC on Stockwell Road.



BOKE!


----------



## ViolentPanda (May 29, 2017)

19force8 said:


> The "best" chatroom biography I've ever read is one I saved earlier this year:
> 
> You couldn't make it up!
> 
> and to prove *I* didn't, here's the link - Socialist Unity | Debate & analysis for activists & trade unionists Post 95



That's actually a bloke wanker called Daffyd Humphreys.


----------



## billy_bob (May 29, 2017)

19force8 said:


> The "best" chatroom biography I've ever read is one I saved earlier this year:
> 
> You couldn't make it up!
> 
> and to prove *I* didn't, here's the link - Socialist Unity | Debate & analysis for activists & trade unionists Post 95



If he's so fucking right-on, why's he using the word 'biracial' about his own kids fffs?


----------



## B.I.G (May 29, 2017)

billy_bob said:


> If he's so fucking right-on, why's he using the word 'biracial' about his own kids fffs?



Do they use the word biracial? I always use mixed race. No idea if that is how most people identify. I could be wildly insensitive on the current appropriate description.


----------



## 19force8 (May 29, 2017)

ViolentPanda said:


> That's actually a bloke wanker called Daffyd Humphreys.


Definitely not a "Little Englander" then.


----------



## 19force8 (May 29, 2017)

billy_bob said:


> If he's so fucking right-on, why's he using the word 'biracial' about his own kids fffs?


Yeah, should be triracial.


----------



## maomao (May 29, 2017)

billy_bob said:


> If he's so fucking right-on, why's he using the word 'biracial' about his own kids fffs?


What's wrong with biracial? Hadn't heard it before but sounds a bit nicer than mixed race and a bit easier to say than dual heritage.


----------



## ViolentPanda (May 29, 2017)

19force8 said:


> Definitely not a "Little Englander" then.



Nope.  Middle class, middle-aged, middle-brow plastic revo wanker, though.


----------



## billy_bob (May 29, 2017)

B.I.G said:


> Do they use the word biracial? I always use mixed race. No idea if that is how most people identify. I could be wildly insensitive on the current appropriate description.



Who do you mean by 'they'?

Yes, plenty of people self-identify as mixed race, but there are others who consider it inaccurate, if not offensive, because there's no such thing as race, so there's nothing there biologically, as the term implies, that a person can have in only partial or mixed form. 'Dual heritage' may be a mouthful, as maomao says, but the number of syllables isn't the only criteria in play as far as appropriate terminology goes, and I know people who prefer it. 

Anyway, it's not really that pertinent in the present context. I was only being mildly satirical in response to someone whose attempt to prove his internationalist credentials includes a reference to his extensive property portfolio


----------



## B.I.G (May 29, 2017)

billy_bob said:


> Who do you mean by 'they'?
> 
> Yes, plenty of people self-identify as mixed race, but there are others who consider it inaccurate, if not offensive, because there's no such thing as race, so there's nothing there biologically, as the term implies, that a person can have in only partial or mixed form. 'Dual heritage' may be a mouthful, as maomao says, but the number of syllables isn't the only criteria in play as far as appropriate terminology goes, and I know people who prefer it.
> 
> Anyway, it's not really that pertinent in the present context. I was only being mildly satirical in response to someone whose attempt to prove his internationalist credentials includes a reference to his extensive property portfolio



The children. 

I was only curious. Terminology changes over time. I don't go around asking children how they identify so I like to check when an opportunity arises.


----------



## 19force8 (May 29, 2017)

B.I.G said:


> Terminology changes over time. I don't go around asking children how they identify so I like to check when an opportunity arises.


Probably a good idea. When mine were little they resolutely refused to identify (unknown) adults by gender, it was always "the person" or "that person" never him or she. Which seems almost prescient if what they now tell me about students is becoming more widespread.


----------



## Grandma Death (May 29, 2017)

YouSir said:


> With Katie Hopkins fading away we all just turn on each other




This like Lord of The Flies-The Hatie Gobkins Remix


----------



## Corax (May 29, 2017)

ViolentPanda said:


> Don't care about who he is.  It's what he is that interests me, which is dead if I have my way.


Blimey.  I've either forgotten or missed some beef of epic proportions by the sound of it.


----------



## ViolentPanda (May 29, 2017)

Corax said:


> Blimey.  I've either forgotten or missed some beef of epic proportions by the sound of it.



A couple of months ago he had a dig at my late wife - who was always kind to him - because he was too gutless to have a go at me.  I told him that if I ever got my hands on him, I'd kill him.  Cause and effect.


----------



## Corax (May 29, 2017)

ViolentPanda said:


> A couple of months ago he had a dig at my late wife - who was always kind to him - because he was too gutless to have a go at me.  I told him that if I ever got my hands on him, I'd kill him.  Cause and effect.


Fuck.

Fair enough. I know you're pretty sound and it'd have had to be something pretty nasty to provoke that kind of response.  That'd do it.  (((VP)))


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (May 29, 2017)

Regarding Brexit etc.

Are there areas that voted more than 70% either way? Can't be fucked to look it up, but my area is regarded as 'remain', yet it was about 40-60, which whilst a clear remain was a fuck of a lot of leave, so to declare my area as non-whateveryoucallbrexitvoters sounds a bit stupid.


----------



## bmd (May 29, 2017)

ViolentPanda said:


> A couple of months ago he had a dig at my late wife - who was always kind to him - because he was too gutless to have a go at me.  I told him that if I ever got my hands on him, I'd kill him.  Cause and effect.



What a cunt. Him not you btw.


----------



## DotCommunist (May 29, 2017)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> Regarding Brexit etc.
> 
> Are there areas that voted more than 70% either way? Can't be fucked to look it up, but my area is regarded as 'remain', yet it was about 40-60, which whilst a clear remain was a fuck of a lot of leave, so to declare my area as non-whateveryoucallbrexitvoters sounds a bit stupid.


----------



## Corax (May 29, 2017)

DotCommunist said:


>


That 4.1% on the Rock voting leave is almost as ridiculous as the 2% of UKIP members who voted remain.


----------



## YouSir (May 29, 2017)

DotCommunist said:


>



South Holland? Thank God we voted Leave if the Dutch are conspiring to take over our elections


----------



## Magnus McGinty (May 30, 2017)

19force8 said:


> Yeah! Fucking capitilism! They should absolutely be allowed to put posters in their windows saying "No dogs, no Irish, no blacks" because they don't want their neighbourhoods to change. Or is that not what you meant?



What about when it's the Irish who have objections, or black people? 
What about when settled Polish people object to new Polish arrivals. How is it racism?


----------



## B.I.G (May 30, 2017)

Magnus McGinty said:


> What about when it's the Irish who have objections, or black people?
> What about when settled Polish people object to new Polish arrivals. How is it racism?



Selfishness innit.


----------



## Treacle Toes (May 30, 2017)

billy_bob said:


> If he's so fucking right-on, why's he using the word 'biracial' about his own kids fffs?



Why do you get to decide how he should describe his own childrens' ethnic origins?


----------



## B.I.G (May 30, 2017)

Rutita1 said:


> Why do you get to decide how he should describe his own childrens' ethnic origins?



Shouldn't you be quoting his explanation post later down the thread if its not enough for you.


----------



## Treacle Toes (May 30, 2017)

B.I.G said:


> Shouldn't you be quoting his explanation post later down the thread if its not enough for you.



I read his explanation and my question still stands, so no, I shouldn't and don't need telling what to do from you. Thanks.


----------



## B.I.G (May 30, 2017)

Rutita1 said:


> I read his explanation and my question still stands, so no, I shouldn't and don't need telling what to do from you. Thanks.



Classic Rutita1 

Hopefully he won't bother replying.


----------



## Magnus McGinty (May 30, 2017)

B.I.G said:


> Selfishness innit.



It can be seen to be challenging people's social position so is driven by self interest (or collective interest) rather than bigotry.


----------



## B.I.G (May 30, 2017)

Magnus McGinty said:


> It can be seen to be challenging people's social position so is driven by self interest (or collective interest) rather than bigotry.



I agree. Same difference tho.


----------



## Magnus McGinty (May 30, 2017)

B.I.G said:


> I agree. Same difference tho.



Not really.


----------



## B.I.G (May 30, 2017)

Magnus McGinty said:


> Not really.



I think it could be. Is racism caused by hatred of someone's skin or location. Or is it fear of the other?


----------



## Treacle Toes (May 30, 2017)

B.I.G said:


> Classic Rutita1
> 
> Hopefully he won't bother replying.



Are you suggesting that I should merely accept his explanation even if I think it's inadequate?

Also, fuck off with this 'classic rutita' nonsense. You are not the boss and don't get to police what I post, nor the questions I ask.

Well done for hiding behind your name change though.


----------



## B.I.G (May 30, 2017)

Rutita1 said:


> Are you suggesting that I should merely accept his explanation even if I think it's inadequate?
> 
> Also, fuck off with this 'classic rutita' nonsense. You are not the boss and don't get to police what I post, nor the questions I ask.



Who's policing. You go right ahead. 

Its still classic Rutita1 tho. Enjoy!


----------



## Magnus McGinty (May 30, 2017)

B.I.G said:


> I think it could be. Is racism caused by hatred of someone's skin or location. Or is it fear of the other?



But as I've pointed out, settled immigrants can object to new immigrants of their ethnicity. And not for reasons of where they're from. More because they've established themselves but feel they'll be lumped in as immigrants all over again.


----------



## Treacle Toes (May 30, 2017)

B.I.G said:


> Who's policing. You go right ahead.
> 
> Its still classic Rutita1 tho. Enjoy!



Pathetic. Does this conversation make you uncomfortable? If so you can simply look away you know.

Perhaps you think your understanding of the subject and opinions are all that should discussed?


----------



## Gromit (May 30, 2017)

billy_bob said:


> If he's so fucking right-on, why's he using the word 'biracial' about his own kids fffs?


Is there something wrong with bi-racial?
Sounds great to me. 
Half caste used to imply only half of something and therefore inferior. 
Mixed is the common phrase now but it still for me implies a bit of this a bit of that. 
Bi implies two. Two is double. Double is more. More is positive. Bi gives you the option two switch to which you fancy at that time. Bi lingual. I can speak Welsh. I can speak English. Doesn't make my English half. It's as full as I like it to be.


----------



## B.I.G (May 30, 2017)

Magnus McGinty said:


> But as I've pointed out, settled immigrants can object to new immigrants of their ethnicity. And not for reasons of where they're from. More because they've established themselves but feel they'll be lumped in as immigrants all over again.



Its generally a question of Im alright Jack. Something I generally disapprove of.


----------



## B.I.G (May 30, 2017)

Rutita1 said:


> Pathetic. Does this conversation make you uncomfortable? If so you can simply look away you know.
> 
> Perhaps you think your understanding of the subject and opinions are all that should discussed?



It doesn't make me uncomfortable. You get stuck in.


----------



## Magnus McGinty (May 30, 2017)

B.I.G said:


> Its generally a question of Im alright Jack. Something I generally disapprove of.



So we've boiled it down to objections to immigration are either 'I'm alright jack' or 'racism'.


----------



## B.I.G (May 30, 2017)

Magnus McGinty said:


> So we've boiled it down to objections to immigration are either 'I'm alright jack' or 'racism'.



Pretty much.


----------



## Treacle Toes (May 30, 2017)

B.I.G said:


> It doesn't make me uncomfortable. You get stuck in.



You seem a little confused. I don't need your permission.


----------



## B.I.G (May 30, 2017)

Rutita1 said:


> You seem a little confused. I don't need your permission.



Its not permission. Its endorsement. And no one says you need it but I'm getting the full Rutita1 experience, which is great.


----------



## Pickman's model (May 30, 2017)

B.I.G said:


> Its not permission. Its endorsement. And no one says you need it but I'm getting the full Rutita1 experience, which is great.


the rest of us are getting the full B.I.G experience, which is not so great


----------



## Treacle Toes (May 30, 2017)

B.I.G said:


> Its not permission. Its endorsement. And no one says you need it but I'm getting the full Rutita1 experience, which is great.


You are not getting the full anything. You are simply being told to back off and stop trying to police the questions I ask and why.


----------



## B.I.G (May 30, 2017)

Rutita1 said:


> You are not getting the full anything. You are simply being told to back off and stop trying to police the questions I ask and why.



I think I am  100% Rutita1 

Its almost like a flow chart is being followed.

I'm not on the attack. Let it go. 

You ask whatever questions you like with no policing from me. On any subject you like. Or the same subject. Whatever.


----------



## Treacle Toes (May 30, 2017)

B.I.G said:


> I think I am  100% Rutita1


No, I am 100% me.  



> Its almost like a flow chart is being followed.
> 
> I'm not on the attack. Let it go.
> 
> You ask whatever questions you like with no policing from me. On any subject you like. Or the same subject. Whatever.



Well if that is true what was the point of these comments? 



> Shouldn't you be quoting his explanation post later down the thread if its not enough for you.





> Classic Rutita1
> 
> Hopefully he won't bother replying.



You got pointlessly stuck into me in a really catty way and are now bemoaning my defending myself.

Classic example of not being able to take what you dish out.


----------



## B.I.G (May 30, 2017)

Rutita1 said:


> No, I am 100% me.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



I can't take it. How astute. You see into my very soul.


----------



## bimble (May 30, 2017)

What does B.I.G. stand for ?


----------



## Pickman's model (May 30, 2017)

bimble said:


> What does B.I.G. stand for ?


boot in gob


----------



## B.I.G (May 30, 2017)

Rutita1 said:


> Well done for hiding behind your name change though.



Attention mikey mikey 

Look what I got??

Who was I before then Rutita1 that I am now hiding from?

The great urban bantz of you were so and so before ))


----------



## maomao (May 30, 2017)

Pickman's model said:


> the rest of us are getting the full B.I.G experience, which is not so great


I'm not. I've got him on ignore.


----------



## Pickman's model (May 30, 2017)

maomao said:


> I'm not. I've got him on ignore.


----------



## maomao (May 30, 2017)

bimble said:


> What does B.I.G. stand for ?


Byebye I'm Going hopefully.


----------



## billy_bob (May 30, 2017)

Well, I feel slightly tarnished by likes now I see how many people are against him.

Just to reiterate on the point which I think set this off (although I take it there's history...):

I don't have any problem, or imagine for a moment that I'd have the right to have a problem, with anyone self-identifying as 'biracial' or any other term they like. All I intended was to lightly take the piss out of the person whose remarks included it, because he appeared to be arguing his unimpeachably right-on credentials in a way that wasn't particularly self-aware (cf previous comment about property portfolio), and pedantically picking holes in that was funny to me. People who self-identify as biracial or any other kind of -racial will generally be aware that some people don't like the term 'race' and why that is.


----------



## B.I.G (May 30, 2017)

maomao doesnt like the fact I don't care for Romford. Pickman's model doesn't like the fact I mention that he loves to post anything just to boost his post count. 

Generally no one like their own pet likes from being challenged but Urban has its own little community that reinforces its own opinions. 

Nothing wrong with that. Happens all over the world. 

They also love to accuse people of being someone else. Which is probably a sign of something or other. 

It is what is is.


----------



## Pickman's model (May 30, 2017)

B.I.G said:


> Pickman's model doesn't like the fact I mention that he loves to post anything just to boost his post count.


it's a fact you mention it.

it is not a fact that i give a fuck about my postcount.


----------



## hash tag (May 30, 2017)

Post count snobbery


----------



## 19force8 (May 30, 2017)

Magnus McGinty said:


> What about when it's the Irish who have objections, or black people?
> What about when settled Polish people object to new Polish arrivals. How is it racism?


Racism isn't some logical, well defined set of concepts, it's a nasty insidious tool used by the ruling class to divide workers and pit them against each other and against their own interests. Being subjected to racism doesn't inoculate you against it.

When established groups complain about migrants reflecting the common racist assumptions of the day it's still racism. Even if the only difference between themselves and the new arrivals is the date of arrival. So, yes, it is possible for Poles to be racist about Poles just as it's possible for Jews to be anti-semitic and Muslims to be Islamophobic.


----------



## Magnus McGinty (May 30, 2017)

19force8 said:


> Racism isn't some logical, well defined set of concepts, it's a nasty insidious tool used by the ruling class to divide workers and pit them against each other and against their own interests. Being subjected to racism doesn't inoculate you against it.
> 
> When established groups complain about migrants reflecting the common racist assumptions of the day it's still racism. Even if the only difference between themselves and the new arrivals is the date of arrival. So, yes, it is possible for Poles to be racist about Poles just as it's possible for Jews to be anti-semitic and Muslims to be Islamophobic.



But I never did any of that. What I did was say the concept of immigration exists to suit the needs of the capitalist class and therefore those whose communities are affected by it shouldn't be cunted off as 'racist' by people who don't even live in those communities. 

Now, from your POV I'm a racist cunt but from mine you're not willing to listen to working class communities if it works against your theories.


----------



## 19force8 (May 30, 2017)

Magnus McGinty said:


> But I never did any of that. What I did was say the concept of immigration exists to suit the needs of the capitalist class and therefore those whose communities are affected by it shouldn't be cunted off as 'racist' by people who don't even live in those communities.
> 
> Now, from your POV I'm a racist cunt but from mine you're not willing to listen to working class communities if it works against your theories.


You're straw manning like crazy here.

First we have "the concept of immigration" that "exists to suit the needs of the capitalist class," which must mean arguments about racism are irrelevant because being anti-immigration is anti-capitalist. Also, it denies migrants any agency in their movements which just "suit the needs of the capitalist class" and are therefore against the interests of the working class. In a way this reminds me of the old SPGB line about the wages system benefiting "the needs of the capitalist class" and therefore we shouldn't fight for better pay*. There might be a certain truth in both positions, but they ignore the real world class struggle.

Then we have these hypothetical "working class communities" that are in complete agreement about immigration - because people who disagree with them "don't even live in those communities." As if anti-racism was something imposed on the working class by well meaning, but naive, liberals. It might surprise you to know there's a strong anti-racist current within the working class, and I consider myself part of it.

Finally, I'm supposed to think you're a racist cunt - presumably to fit your idea of liberals who cunt off working class communities, etc. If I thought that I wouldn't have carried on the discussion. As it is I thought we were having a conversation about arguments about immigration. If I suggest some of those arguments are racist that isn't because I'm some liberal elitist twat with "theories," but because they are predicated on racist assumptions which, however inadequately, I have spelt out. Simply saying it's an argument made by working class people doesn't negate that racism.

* Not sure if this was actually a thing or just apocryphal.


----------



## Corax (May 30, 2017)

This is a marvellous thread.  Well done all.


----------



## 19force8 (May 30, 2017)

Corax said:


> This is a marvellous thread.  Well done all.


You're right, we have kind of slipped off topic. I'll stop now.


----------



## comrade spurski (May 31, 2017)

Gromit said:


> Is there something wrong with bi-racial?
> Sounds great to me.
> Half caste used to imply only half of something and therefore inferior.
> Mixed is the common phrase now but it still for me implies a bit of this a bit of that.
> Bi implies two. Two is double. Double is more. More is positive. Bi gives you the option two switch to which you fancy at that time. Bi lingual. I can speak Welsh. I can speak English. Doesn't make my English half. It's as full as I like it to be.



Hate half caste...always pissed me off even as a kid. Mixed race is fine but hate bi racial.
Just my opinion but many mixed race people come from more than 2 cultures/races. My family come from Trinindad and there are Afro Caribbean, Chinese, Asian and White in my background and fhis is not unusual. So it would be inaccurate so we'd start having
 bi-racial and tri- racial etc. But the reason I hate it is cos it simply sounds poncey and something that Owen Jones or Laurie Penny would call me!
Just my opinion though


----------



## stethoscope (Jun 8, 2017)

19force8 said:


> I don't know any Polish people on Urban. Those I know irl would regard me as a dickhead if I suddenly started spouting like Magnus McGinty



I had a Polish grandad, and actually he wouldn't have had too many criticisms of what Magnus and mao have written here actually. He wasn't keen on the way that the EU was going because he could see the working class (which included himself and those who came to settle here post-WW2) were being squeezed by capital and class interests throughout the neoliberalism of the last 30 or so years. He didn't have much pleasant to say about the EU and particularly Merkel but that's a whole another level beef.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jun 8, 2017)

19force8 said:


> You're right, we have kind of slipped off topic. I'll stop now.


----------



## not-bono-ever (Jun 22, 2017)

anyone see that prog on B2 tonight about immigrants, presented by that Ian Hislop ? - focused on the East end and migration up to the end of the WW1. He interviewed KH about her articles and views- I was expecting a savvy and sharp to and fro, some sort of nuanced irony about her articles. She came across as utterly utterly vile and hateful. I know this is not a shock to many, but usually with an experienced  provocative jouno, you do get a bit of intelligence IRL and an understanding of why they are doing it. She is just nasty and fucking horrendous. urgh


----------



## keybored (Jun 22, 2017)

not-bono-ever said:


> anyone see that prog on B2 tonight about immigrants, presented by that Ian Hislop ? - focused on the East end and migration up to the end of the WW1. He interviewed KH about her articles and views- I was expecting a savvy and sharp to and fro, some sort of nuanced irony about her articles. She came across as utterly utterly vile and hateful. I know this is not a shock to many, but usually with an experienced  provocative jouno, you do get a bit of intelligence IRL and an understanding of why they are doing it. She is just nasty and fucking horrendous. urgh


Not seen it (and it sounds worth a watch) but what were you expecting? If it's all an act she has too much invested in it to let the mask slip. Or she really is just that vile.


----------



## not-bono-ever (Jun 22, 2017)

watch it. Its not a bad programme actually for the history aspect- but i try to avoid her TV appearneces- she is fuelled with utter hate, no tact. Hislops face was a mask of disgust as he quizzed her on her headline grabbing lines


----------



## DotCommunist (Jun 23, 2017)

to be fair thats his resting face


----------



## not-bono-ever (Jun 23, 2017)

indeed, but last night he looked like he had been served with a piping hot croque monsieur made with human faeces rather than cheese


----------



## Who PhD (Jun 23, 2017)

Sooner she dies, the better. What an appalling performance. She seems to think it's ok to be massively racist just because some people aren't.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jun 23, 2017)

Who PhD said:


> Sooner she dies, the better. What an appalling performance. She seems to think it's ok to be massively racist just because some people aren't.


aren't what?


----------



## likesfish (Jun 24, 2017)

Hopkins it isnt actually just a ploy she belives this shit I made it anyone can and if they cant they desrved to be crushed. Unless their muslim then they deserve to be doubly crushed for being brown and being in the uk


----------



## Raheem (Jun 24, 2017)

Pickman's model said:


> aren't what?



Is that a relative of Doctor Who?


----------



## Pickman's model (Jun 24, 2017)

Raheem said:


> Is that a relative of Doctor Who?


----------



## Spymaster (Jun 24, 2017)

Raheem said:


> Is that a relative of Doctor Who?


Very good


----------



## Pickman's model (Jun 24, 2017)

Spymaster said:


> Very good


Don't encourage him pa


----------



## teqniq (Jun 26, 2017)

That's concrete evidence of inciting racial hatred right there. Will she get charged for it? I hope so but I am not optimistic.

Muslim man attacked by thugs who then vandalised his home quoting a racist Katie Hopkins tweet


----------



## NoXion (Jun 26, 2017)

She should have been done for that cockroaches comment from what seems like ages ago. I have no idea how she got away with it, it was blatantly obvious unlike the usual wink-wink nudge-nudge dogwhistle poison.


----------



## Treacle Toes (Jul 25, 2017)

Katie Hopkins causes outrage for joining far-right, anti-immigrant ship in the Mediterranean


----------



## not-bono-ever (Jul 25, 2017)

Crowdfunding for a workers submarine is required


----------



## Pickman's model (Jul 25, 2017)

Rutita1 said:


> Katie Hopkins causes outrage for joining far-right, anti-immigrant ship in the Mediterranean



Will the submarine nautilus come in pls, a mission is available


----------



## not-bono-ever (Jul 25, 2017)

3 posts this morning, 2 of which advocate execution of miscreants. Fucking hell. I need a holiday


----------



## Nylock (Jul 26, 2017)

not-bono-ever said:


> Crowdfunding for a workers submarine is required


As is crowdfunding for an array of workers torpedoes.... After all, the workers submarine is merely the platform for delivery of the final glorious message through the medium of a full salvo of workers torpedoes...


----------



## ViolentPanda (Jul 26, 2017)

Nylock said:


> As is crowdfunding for an array of workers torpedoes.... After all, the workers submarine is merely the platform for delivery of the final glorious message through the medium of a full salvo of workers torpedoes...



Conventional or nuclear warheads, comrade?  Remember, the wrong answer will earn you a vacation at the Proletarian Democracy Holiday Re-education Camp at Clacton-on-Sea.


----------



## Nylock (Jul 26, 2017)

ViolentPanda said:


> Conventional or nuclear warheads, comrade?  Remember, the wrong answer will earn you a vacation at the Proletarian Democracy Holiday Re-education Camp at Clacton-on-Sea.


Nuclear of course! How else can we successfully purge the fascists than through incineration in the stellar fires of the workers bomb miniaturised to fit on the tip of the workers torpedo?


----------



## ViolentPanda (Jul 26, 2017)

Nylock said:


> Nuclear of course! How else can we successfully purge the fascists than through incineration in the stellar fires of the workers bomb miniaturised to fit on the tip of the workers torpedo?



It's good to see you have not deviated from doctrine, comrade.


----------



## albionism (Jul 28, 2017)

http://hopenothate.org.uk/2017/07/27/people-smuggling-charges-owner-crew-far-right-ship/


----------



## Nylock (Jul 29, 2017)

Can't that bunch of cunts get pirated or summat? I'd pay good money to watch Hopkins walk the plank or get keel-hauled.


----------



## likesfish (Jul 30, 2017)

not-bono-ever said:


> Crowdfunding for a workers submarine is required




 A folding kayak Wayland Harpoon I and Proximo I Basic / Expedition single folding kayaks canoes - Specifications

http://www.aiad.it/aiad_res/cms/documents/MN110PiovraLimpetMineOK.pdf


go old school
and after hopkins boat has gone next stop Monaco  to do phillip greens boat and any other super yacht that needs sinking


----------



## 8den (Jul 30, 2017)

Katie Hopkins hospitalised after suffering 'agonising' shoulder injury at train station | Buzz.ie

Hopkins will ironically receive world class free health care from the same NHS that she vilifies and says should be privatised.


----------



## albionism (Jul 31, 2017)




----------



## Gromit (Jul 31, 2017)

8den said:


> Katie Hopkins hospitalised after suffering 'agonising' shoulder injury at train station | Buzz.ie
> 
> Hopkins will ironically receive world class free health care from the same NHS that she vilifies and says should be privatised.


Will she?
Surely she has private healthcare?


----------



## Spymaster (Jul 31, 2017)

Gromit said:


> Will she?
> Surely she has private healthcare?


The emergency attention at Paddington and treatment she received at St Mary's will be on the NHS.


----------



## Gromit (Jul 31, 2017)

Spymaster said:


> The emergency attention at Paddington, and treatment she received at St Mary's will be on the NHS.


You mean she didn't shout out to the paramedics "scuse me, I'm with Buba, take me there".


----------



## Spymaster (Jul 31, 2017)

Gromit said:


> You mean she didn't shout out to the paramedics "scuse me, I'm with Buba, take me there".


I very much doubt it. Most health insurance excludes direct admission and emergency attention, and requires an initial NHS diagnosis/referral prior to private treatment being authorised.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jul 31, 2017)

Gromit said:


> You mean she didn't shout out to the paramedics "scuse me, I'm with Buba, take me there".


not sure shouting 'i'm with buba' would work as you expect Buba London Bags and Jewellery


----------



## 8den (Jul 31, 2017)

Gromit said:


> You mean she didn't shout out to the paramedics "scuse me, I'm with Buba, take me there".



There should be no difference in emergency care in the UK whether you are in Bupa, or not, you'll be picked up by the ambulance service and sent to A&E where you will be triaged like everyone else, as Spymaster said.


----------



## Smangus (Jul 31, 2017)

Hope the ambulance went over loads of speed bumps , really really quickly.


----------



## gosub (Jul 31, 2017)

I wonder if she has ever gone down the "don't you know who I am route?".  Cos  I can't see it helping her at all


----------



## Spymaster (Jul 31, 2017)

Smangus said:


> Hope the ambulance went over loads of speed bumps , really really quickly.


Unfortunately St Mary's is adjacent to the station


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Jul 31, 2017)

Pickman's model said:


> not sure shouting 'i'm with buba' would work as you expect Buba London Bags and Jewellery



Quite effective in Louisiana though.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jul 31, 2017)

Spymaster said:


> Unfortunately St Mary's is adjacent to the station


one way system?


----------



## Spymaster (Jul 31, 2017)

Pickman's model said:


> one way system?


Nah. 50 yards down speed-bump-free London Street.


----------



## Wilf (Jul 31, 2017)

not-bono-ever said:


> anyone see that prog on B2 tonight about immigrants, presented by that Ian Hislop ? - focused on the East end and migration up to the end of the WW1. He interviewed KH about her articles and views- I was expecting a savvy and sharp to and fro, some sort of nuanced irony about her articles. She came across as utterly utterly vile and hateful. I know this is not a shock to many, but usually with an experienced  provocative jouno, you do get a bit of intelligence IRL and an understanding of why they are doing it. She is just nasty and fucking horrendous. urgh


Just watched a 2 minute clip of them going at it.  Even when you know you are about to click on something vile, it's still a shock to actually see it in all its unapologetic form.  It reminds you how thick she is as well.


----------



## wiskey (Jul 31, 2017)

Spymaster said:


> Nah. 50 yards down speed-bump-free London Street.


Speed bump free because the ambulance service petitioned for them to be removed.


----------



## Smangus (Jul 31, 2017)

wiskey said:


> Speed bump free because the ambulance service petitioned for them to be removed.



Never roadwork diversions around when you need them.


----------



## likesfish (Jul 31, 2017)

The evil witch always thought she was above the law should have been dishourably discharged from sandhurst for lying about her epilepsy. Weapons and blackouts  don't mix


----------



## DotCommunist (Jul 31, 2017)

when she started out I swear she wasn't _this _much of a nailed on bigot and racist. Like she's hardened over the years. Maybe it was always there and I didn't see it. Anyway, hopefully theres some MRSA floating around the hospital


----------



## Spymaster (Jul 31, 2017)

DotCommunist said:


> when she started out I swear she wasn't _this _much of a nailed on bigot and racist. Like she's hardened over the years. Maybe it was always there and I didn't see it.


She's nurtured it. 

Katie Hopkins, the dullard off The Apprentice, would soon have been forgotten. Being Katie Hopkins, the racist fuckstick, has made her quite wealthy.


----------



## 8den (Jul 31, 2017)

DotCommunist said:


> when she started out I swear she wasn't _this _much of a nailed on bigot and racist. Like she's hardened over the years. Maybe it was always there and I didn't see it.



I genuinely think she doesn't believe half the shit she espouses shes just so unprincipled she's found her niche and is trying to exploit it. But the suing of Jake Monroe was a massively stupid move, maybe she is just that thick and ignorant. 



> Anyway, hopefully theres some MRSA floating around the hospital



Wonderfully dark dude.


----------



## wiskey (Jul 31, 2017)

likesfish said:


> The evil witch always thought she was above the law should have been dishourably discharged from sandhurst for lying about her epilepsy. Weapons and blackouts  don't mix


I didn't know she went to Sandhurst. That's... Baffling


----------



## Kaka Tim (Jul 31, 2017)

wiskey said:


> I didn't know she went to Sandhurst. That's... Baffling



shes more like something thats escaped from a lab at porton down.


----------



## Corax (Jul 31, 2017)

wiskey said:


> I didn't know she went to Sandhurst. That's... Baffling


Via the TA.  I'll bet she loved running around with a gun feeling powerful.  She is, after all, basically a bully.


----------



## Idris2002 (Aug 24, 2017)

not-bono-ever said:


> O'Callaghans ramblings didn't stand up to scrutiny last century, there is even less to suggest that his ramblings have any relevance during this one. Taking the Suns shilling will probabaly get him a beach holiday this eyear I suppose


Since this is the latest thread on which he was mentioned, I suppose I should post this link here.

IRA informer Sean O'Callaghan dies aged 62 - BelfastTelegraph.co.uk


He has died aged 62.

Why exactly didn't his "ramblings" not "stand up to scrutiny", though? I have to admit that wasn't one I had followed much.


----------



## Favelado (Aug 25, 2017)

She is without doubt awful, but these shoulder dislocations she suffers as a result of her epilepsy are brutal. I wish she'd become a better person but won't stoop to her level by celebrating this.


----------



## Teaboy (Aug 25, 2017)

Favelado said:


> She is without doubt awful, but these shoulder dislocations she suffers as a result of her epilepsy are brutal. I wish she'd become a better person but won't stoop to her level by celebrating this.



No worries.  I have no such qualms so happy to do the pointing and laughing on your behalf.


----------



## Streathamite (Aug 25, 2017)

likesfish said:


> A folding kayak Wayland Harpoon I and Proximo I Basic / Expedition single folding kayaks canoes - Specifications
> 
> http://www.aiad.it/aiad_res/cms/documents/MN110PiovraLimpetMineOK.pdf
> 
> ...


you're kinda channelling the cockleshell raid here, fishy....


----------



## Streathamite (Aug 25, 2017)

likesfish said:


> The evil witch always thought she was above the law should have been dishourably discharged from sandhurst for lying about her epilepsy. Weapons and blackouts  don't mix


I didn't know she went there. my opinion of sandhurst's talent-spotters has just gone through the floor.


----------



## Smangus (Aug 25, 2017)

Streathamite said:


> I didn't know she went there. my opinion of sandhurst's talent-spotters has just gone through the floor.



Blonde- check
Face like a horse- check
Reasonable plummy accent - check
Rancid right wing views - check

Why the surprise? Sounds like ideal Sandhurst candidate material to me


----------



## Streathamite (Aug 25, 2017)

there may be something in that...


----------



## Teaboy (Aug 25, 2017)

Streathamite said:


> I didn't know she went there. my opinion of sandhurst's talent-spotters has just gone through the floor.



Umm.  Talent.....

My g/f had an offer to go to Sandhurst after leaving Uni, she said the qualification requirements (particularly the physical test) for female recruits was comically low.


----------



## A380 (Aug 25, 2017)

Corax said:


> Via the TA.  I'll bet she loved running around with a gun feeling powerful.  She is, after all, basically a bully.


Actually, apparently she didn't like the running bit much and so couldn't make the standards.  Which was part of the reason she got kicked out, sorry resigned .


----------



## krtek a houby (Aug 29, 2017)

Smangus said:


> Blonde- check
> Face like a horse- check
> ...



Best not sink to her level, mind


----------



## Smangus (Aug 29, 2017)

krtek a houby said:


> Best not sink to her level, mind



got a long, long way to go before that happens.


----------



## ddraig (Sep 27, 2017)

"Stand Strong" apparently KH speaking in schools, gotta love the case studies


----------



## Spymaster (Sep 27, 2017)

What kind of schools let fucking Hopkins talk to their pupils???


----------



## ddraig (Sep 27, 2017)

this article reckons "confirmed" bookings in Wales and Scotland! 
Katie Hopkins is booked to do talks in Welsh schools


----------



## ATOMIC SUPLEX (Sep 27, 2017)

WTF??


----------



## Spymaster (Sep 27, 2017)

ddraig said:


> this article reckons "confirmed" bookings in Wales and Scotland!
> Katie Hopkins is booked to do talks in Welsh schools


 I'm surprised the parents aren't kicking off.


----------



## bemused (Sep 27, 2017)

Spymaster said:


> What kind of schools let fucking Hopkins talk to their pupils???



I once was her talk about epilepsy and it was rather good.


----------



## wiskey (Sep 27, 2017)

Tbf epilepsy is about the only subject I think she might stand a chance of knowing her stuff.


----------



## butchersapron (Sep 27, 2017)

No bookings are really happening ffs it's self-promotion. And the whole thing is shit version of milo's version of tours of US campus. 

Oh yeah, bemused is a total fucking idiot.


----------



## Spymaster (Sep 27, 2017)

bemused said:


> I once was her talk about epilepsy and it was rather good.


Adults choosing to see her is one thing, children at school is quite different.

My kid would be having a day off if she was showing up. Poisonous fucking witch.


----------



## ATOMIC SUPLEX (Sep 27, 2017)

I wonder if there is a chance talk back, because if so, going on her past track record, I'm sure a key stage 4 could rip her to shreds on all those subjects.
Be an easy and satisfying research project.


----------



## A380 (Sep 28, 2017)

wiskey said:


> Tbf epilepsy is about the only subject I think she might stand a chance of knowing her stuff.


That and how to consistently fail at running three miles at Sandhurst...


----------



## Clair De Lune (Sep 28, 2017)

If she came to my eldests school I'd want him to go and ask her awkward questions ...or just boo her. But tbh I don't think this is really happening...its all just courting controversy as usual.


----------



## Treacle Toes (Sep 28, 2017)

Clair De Lune said:


> If she came to my eldests school I'd want him to go and ask her awkward questions ...or just boo her. But tbh I don't think this is really happening...its all just courting controversy as usual.



She'll probably get invites onto breakfast TV to discuss her _tour_ plans...she'll get loads of negative SM comments/press and she'll use them to further her 'victim' of PC status. She really is a fucking snake.

Interesting that she is promoting this for schools and not colleges/universities...anyone would think she is too scared to talk to anyone over the age of 16.


----------



## DaveCinzano (Sep 28, 2017)

A380 said:


> That and how to consistently fail at running three miles at Sandhurst...


----------



## Spymaster (Sep 28, 2017)

Rutita1 said:


> She'll probably get invites onto breakfast TV to discuss her _tour_ plans...she'll get loads of negative SM comments/press and she'll use them to further her 'victim' of PC status. She really is a fucking snake.
> 
> Interesting that she is promoting this for schools and not colleges/universities...anyone would think she is too scared to talk to anyone over the age of 16.


Rutita1 , check PMs


----------



## Treacle Toes (Sep 28, 2017)

Spymaster said:


> Rutita1 , check PMs


----------



## Plumdaff (Sep 28, 2017)

ddraig said:


> this article reckons "confirmed" bookings in Wales and Scotland!
> Katie Hopkins is booked to do talks in Welsh schools



There are no actual schools named. She's a bullshit merchant and Wales Online is the definition of clickbait. This is fluff.


----------



## Libertad (Sep 28, 2017)

ddraig said:


> "Stand Strong" apparently KH speaking in schools, gotta love the case studies




"Satan's Mother Limited" (C)


----------



## wiskey (Sep 28, 2017)




----------



## Dogsauce (Sep 29, 2017)

Twitter types seem to be taking the bait, as intended. Nothing like getting the message out.


----------



## krtek a houby (Oct 10, 2017)

Katie Hopkins stands by tweets in wake of Natural History Museum crash
_The columnist said she stands by a series of tweets – despite later deleting them – and cast doubt on the police verdict that the crash was a road traffic accident._

Well, of course she does. Ugh.


----------



## agricola (Oct 10, 2017)

krtek a houby said:


> Katie Hopkins stands by tweets in wake of Natural History Museum crash
> _The columnist said she stands by a series of tweets – despite later deleting them – and cast doubt on the police verdict that the crash was a road traffic accident._
> 
> Well, of course she does. Ugh.



There really is no substitute for what people from the internet tell you about an incident - its vastly superior to the experience of dozens of people who were actually there, or actual experience of what that road is like.


----------



## A380 (Oct 11, 2017)

KH “ The police told people to run, run,run”. 

A bit like the thing that Katie consistently failed to be able to do at Sandhurst...


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Oct 11, 2017)

A380 said:


> KH “ The police told people to run, run,run”.
> 
> A bit like the thing that Katie consistently failed to be able to do at Sandhurst...



Or has failed to do down Regents St as she’d promised.


----------



## gosub (Oct 11, 2017)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> Or has failed to do down Regents St as she’d promised.


On the plus side that spares the use of mind bleach


----------



## Silas Loom (Oct 11, 2017)

She's now the subject of a musical about her assassination. Which, as odd ideas go, lands somewhere in between Channel 4's pseudoreality execution of Gary Glitter, and Brass Eye's Sutcliffe - The Musical.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Oct 12, 2017)

gosub said:


> On the plus side that spares the use of mind bleach



I have to admit that the thought of Hatie Kopkins running down Regent's Street naked, with a British banger up her Gary, is an effective contraceptive!!!


----------



## A380 (Oct 13, 2017)




----------



## ViolentPanda (Oct 14, 2017)

A380 said:


> View attachment 117729



"So please, please, please, let me get what I want,
Lord knows, it would be the first time".


----------



## A380 (Oct 26, 2017)

This morning apparently. She took it down a bit later...

Change.org have a petition to LBC about it.


----------



## krtek a houby (Oct 26, 2017)

A380 said:


> This morning apparently. She took it down a bit later...
> 
> Change.org have a petition to LBC about it.
> 
> View attachment 118790



Deja vu about this one,I'd swear she done this before?

ETA; yup, back in May

Katie Hopkins deletes 'racist' tweet about Dear White People


----------



## not-bono-ever (Oct 26, 2017)

The reich propaganda ministry would have been proud that their teachings are still embraced in the 21st century. Awful woman


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Oct 26, 2017)

Hold your nose and click on mailonline, note their advertisers, email them and say you will boycott until the mail removes that bag of shit from their payroll. Enough people do this and she's gone.


----------



## bemused (Oct 26, 2017)

Her TV bookings must have dropped.


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 26, 2017)

A380 said:


> This morning apparently. She took it down a bit later...
> 
> Change.org have a petition to LBC about it.
> 
> View attachment 118790


she has a point. why do people of any hue stab, punch or shoot anyone in the same boat when they could stab, punch or shoot katie hopkins and become national heroes?


----------



## dylanredefined (Oct 26, 2017)

wiskey said:


> View attachment 116630[/QUOTE
> 
> 
> Well I've learned something today


----------



## ruffneck23 (Nov 27, 2017)

Katie Hopkins deletes social media as she leaves Mail Online


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Nov 27, 2017)

Oh dear, losing all her work just when she’s been handed a rather large legal bill for her libel case, dashed bad timing for her.


----------



## ruffneck23 (Dec 13, 2017)

more cuntyness 

Katie Hopkins sparks outrage with Keith Chegwin tweet


----------



## Sprocket. (Dec 13, 2017)

She appears to be no more than a needy, attention seeking vulture picking sustenance from the dead.


----------



## Pickman's model (Dec 13, 2017)

ruffneck23 said:


> more cuntyness
> 
> Katie Hopkins sparks outrage with Keith Chegwin tweet


yeh. 2 of the people in those pictures are dead. how long till the third joins them?


----------



## ruffneck23 (Dec 13, 2017)

one was hoping she would follow suit pretty sharpish


----------



## Pickman's model (Dec 13, 2017)

ruffneck23 said:


> one was hoping she would follow suit pretty sharpish


in a particularly painful and publick death


----------



## ruffneck23 (Dec 13, 2017)

that works for me


----------



## Pickman's model (Dec 13, 2017)

ruffneck23 said:


> that works for me


maybe even today


----------



## agricola (Dec 13, 2017)

Pickman's model said:


> in a particularly painful and publick death



choking to death on some muslin?


----------



## Pickman's model (Dec 13, 2017)

agricola said:


> choking to death on some muslin?


something like that


----------



## likesfish (Dec 13, 2017)

Pickman's model said:


> she has a point. why do people of any hue stab, punch or shoot anyone in the same boat when they could stab, punch or shoot katie hopkins and become national heroes?


 
That’s what you call a real terrorist having the means to kill Hopkins but refusing to do so


----------



## Coconutjob (Dec 13, 2017)

Sprocket. said:


> She appears to be no more than a needy, attention seeking vulture picking sustenance from the dead.


If only she could trade her "popular vote" numbers for the equivalent U75 post count and change her name to some silly gothic short story.

Grr.


----------



## krtek a houby (Dec 14, 2017)

Coconutjob said:


> If only she could trade her "popular vote" numbers for the equivalent U75 post count and change her name to some silly gothic short story.
> 
> Grr.



You could always ignore her. Plenty do. She thrives on attention.


----------



## Coconutjob (Dec 14, 2017)

krtek a houby said:


> You could always ignore her. Plenty do. She thrives on attention.


Ignore Hopkins but revere Pickman's Model? WHY? They both bully!


----------



## krtek a houby (Dec 14, 2017)

Coconutjob said:


> Ignore Hopkins but revere Pickman's Model? WHY? They both bully!



I cannot speak of the latter but the former has been around for a while. She knows her core audience and also knows the more she winds people up, the more she gains notoriety. The best option is to filter her out of your life. In no time at all, you'll wonder what you were annoyed about in the first place.


----------



## Coconutjob (Dec 14, 2017)

krtek a houby said:


> I cannot speak of the latter but the former has been around for a while. She knows her core audience and also knows the more she winds people up, the more she gains notoriety. The best option is to filter her out of your life. In no time at all, you'll wonder what you were annoyed about in the first place.


Sage advice, but not sure why you're aiming it at me lol


----------



## Dom Traynor (Dec 14, 2017)

Wow is that you Katie?


----------



## ddraig (Dec 14, 2017)

which returner is this with the stupid username then?


----------



## Dogsauce (Dec 15, 2017)

ddraig said:


> which returner is this with the stupid username then?



According to other posts, someone that Pickmans has successfully wound up. That should narrow it down...


----------



## Jon-of-arc (Dec 15, 2017)

What's his face - the one that wishes cancer on other posters.  Awesome Wells.  Took me 30 seconds of hard concentration to remember that.  I am king of remembering banned u75 returnees.


----------



## Grandma Death (Dec 15, 2017)

Sprocket. said:


> She appears to be no more than a needy, attention seeking vulture picking sustenance from the dead.




She's been sacked from various jobs. Her whole idea of a speaking tour to our schools fell flat on it face. Her book sales are shit and her twitter fanbase appears to have shrunk somewhat-so she's absolutely fucking desperate to maintain some sort of profile. So its logical to me anyway-she'll say even more controversial reactionary bollocks to stay in the public eye.

The fact she didnt get her contract renewed by The Daily Mail shows just how fucked she is.

On the plus side-she'll die at some point. When that day arrives I'll be one happy motherfucker.

She is the epitome of wanky oxygen thief


----------



## Coconutjob (Dec 17, 2017)

Grandma Death said:


> On the plus side-she'll die at some point. When that day arrives I'll be one happy motherfucker


Wishing death on another person is awful
My goodness, your username suggests evil but your words deliver the promise.


----------



## B.I.G (Dec 17, 2017)

Coconutjob said:


> Wishing death on another person is awful
> My goodness, your username suggests evil but your words deliver the promise.



Grandma Death was not evil 

She was an author


----------



## Smoking kills (Dec 17, 2017)

Coconutjob said:


> Wishing death on another person is awful
> My goodness, your username suggests evil but your words deliver the promise.


Heavens to Betsy, your posts suggest ignorance with an agenda but hoping to outlive your enemies is not cursing, ffs. 
I like right wing snowflake trolls as much as the next motherfucker, I just wish they'd up their game a bit.


----------



## krtek a houby (Dec 17, 2017)

Coconutjob said:


> Wishing death on another person is awful
> My goodness, your username suggests evil but your words deliver the promise.



You don't remember all this from your previous incarnation here?


----------



## xenon (Dec 17, 2017)

Oh God not this crap again.


----------



## existentialist (Dec 17, 2017)

Coconutjob said:


> Wishing death on another person is awful
> My goodness, your username suggests evil but your words deliver the promise.


Just a small point, but I think the post you're clutching your pearls over was quite carefully NOT wishing death on someone, but merely pointing out that it will happen at some point.

I presume you had to exaggerate their expression of anticipated pleasure at the prospect of Hopkins' death into "wishing death", in order to HAVE some pearls to clutch?


----------



## bubblesmcgrath (Dec 17, 2017)

ruffneck23 said:


> more cuntyness
> 
> Katie Hopkins sparks outrage with Keith Chegwin tweet




What a monumental scumbag


----------



## Grandma Death (Dec 17, 2017)

Coconutjob said:


> Wishing death on another person is awful
> My goodness, your username suggests evil but your words deliver the promise.




Sorry I dont buy into this hand wringing shit. We all have a sliding moral scale-and simply put...I will rejoice the day she dies. I got pissed when Thatcher died and I'll get even more muntered when she goes.

And whilst I realise Im invoking Godwins law here-would you not have wished Hitlers death before he got to the final solution? 


My username delivers the name of a character from Donnie Darko-nothing more...nothing less


----------



## Grandma Death (Dec 17, 2017)

existentialist said:


> Just a small point, but I think the post you're clutching your pearls over was quite carefully NOT wishing death on someone, but merely pointing out that it will happen at some point.
> 
> I presume you had to exaggerate their expression of anticipated pleasure at the prospect of Hopkins' death into "wishing death", in order to HAVE some pearls to clutch?




I want her dead. I hope she dies. I pray she dies. Ive given her the pearls to clutch.


----------



## existentialist (Dec 17, 2017)

Grandma Death said:


> I want her dead. I hope she dies. I pray she dies. Ive given her the pearls to clutch.


Fair enough. So long as coconutjob knows where he/she stands 

I don't generally wish people dead, because if it did any good, I'm sure someone would have successfully wished me to death by now (with far less justification!), but if ever there were a candidate for a single Wish of Death, I think Hopkins would be at the top of quite a few people's lists, including mine. There's nothing nastier than a privileged hatemonger.

There you are, nutjob. Clutch your pearls at that, motherfucker


----------



## keybored (Dec 17, 2017)

Grandma Death said:


> Sorry I dont buy into this hand wringing shit. We all have a sliding moral scale-and simply put...I will rejoice the day she dies. I got pissed when Thatcher died and I'll get even more muntered when she goes.
> 
> And whilst I realise Im invoking Godwins law here-would you not have wished Hitlers death before he got to the final solution?
> 
> ...


"Don't feed the troll"

(This works on 2 levels here)


----------



## Grandma Death (Dec 17, 2017)

existentialist said:


> Fair enough. So long as coconutjob knows where he/she stands
> 
> I don't generally wish people dead, because if it did any good, I'm sure someone would have successfully wished me to death by now (with far less justification!), but if ever there were a candidate for a single Wish of Death, I think Hopkins would be at the top of quite a few people's lists, including mine. There's nothing nastier than a privileged hatemonger.
> 
> There you are, nutjob. Clutch your pearls at that, motherfucker




Some people are so loathsome they deserve nothing but. Their death serves many purposes-and thats subjective from one person to the next. I just never have bought into this idea wishing death is a 'dont even go there' scenario. Some people are better dead.


----------



## Coconutjob (Dec 17, 2017)

existentialist said:


> Just a small point, but I think the post you're clutching your pearls over was quite carefully NOT wishing death on someone, but merely pointing out that it will happen at some point.
> 
> I presume you had to exaggerate their expression of anticipated pleasure at the prospect of Hopkins' death into "wishing death", in order to HAVE some pearls to clutch?



Well...



Grandma Death said:


> On the plus side-she'll die at some point. When that day arrives I'll be one happy motherfucker.



It seems very much like "wishing death" to me. "On the plus side", Grandma Death will be "one happy motherfucker" when Katie Hopkins dies. I think she's made her feelings fairly clear. 

The plus side, you see. A positive thing (plus is +). Hopkins will die at some point. Someone dying. So far, it's a positive thing that Hopkins will die. When that happens, Grandma Death will be "one happy motherfucker". Meaning said person will be happy because of the death of Katie Hopkins. 

Where is the exaggeration or pearl clutching?


----------



## butchersapron (Dec 17, 2017)

Over by Christmas. Just ignore it.


----------



## Coconutjob (Dec 17, 2017)

Grandma Death said:


> Sorry I dont buy into this hand wringing shit. We all have a sliding moral scale-and simply put...I will rejoice the day she dies. I got pissed when Thatcher died and I'll get even more muntered when she goes.
> 
> And whilst I realise Im invoking Godwins law here-would you not have wished Hitlers death before he got to the final solution?
> 
> ...


Hand wringing shit?
You're the one trying to justify your happiness at someone's death, love, not me. 
Comparing Hitler to Hopkins is laughable.


----------



## mojo pixy (Dec 18, 2017)

Coconutjob is Katy Hopkins and I claim my bitcoin.


----------



## Coconutjob (Dec 18, 2017)

mojo pixy said:


> Coconutjob is Katy Hopkins and I claim my bitcoin.


Wrong, but FYI Litecoin is where it's at.


----------



## mojo pixy (Dec 18, 2017)

Whatever it is, I want it in silver.


----------



## Coconutjob (Dec 18, 2017)

mojo pixy said:


> Whatever it is, I want it in silver.


Ok, Bluebeard. But take a risk and invest in crypto. One day you'll thank me


----------



## mojo pixy (Dec 18, 2017)

I'll do it now and get it out of the way. Thank you


----------



## Coconutjob (Dec 18, 2017)

mojo pixy said:


> I'll do it now and get it out of the way. Thank you


Good


----------



## Gromit (Dec 18, 2017)

You don't need to wish her dead. 
You just need to stop caring what she says. Just don't read it. 

She's probably said some awful things in the last week, days, month.  
It hasn't affected me or anyone who hasn't bothered to look up what she is saying because:

1. She is a nobody with no real power. She doesn't affect government policy or any other real impact. 
2. The people who agree with her would hold those views whether she states them or not. She doesn't convert non bigots into bigots with her magic words.


----------



## existentialist (Dec 18, 2017)

Gromit said:


> You don't need to wish her dead.
> You just need to stop caring what she says. Just don't read it.
> 
> She's probably said some awful things in the last week, days, month.
> ...


She influences thought. She legitimises the attitudes of bigots. Ignoring her is not the answer.


----------



## chilango (Dec 18, 2017)

> Katie Hopkins has withdrawn her participation and this event will not be going ahead. Students who registered interest in attending are being informed.
> 
> The Reading University Free Thought society has invited newspaper columnist Katie Hopkins to speak at the Whiteknights campus on Thursday 23 November.



Two things.

Free Thought society? Oh fuck off!

And Hopkins withdrawing? Ha ha. Reading is hardly a bastion of student radicalism. Lack of an audience (inside or outside her talk) one suspects. I didn’t even know she was coming.


----------



## redsquirrel (Dec 18, 2017)

butchersapron said:


> Over by Christmas. Just ignore it.


This. Seriously this one is even more of a waste of time than Happy Larry.


----------



## Libertad (Dec 18, 2017)

redsquirrel said:


> This. Seriously this one is even more of a last of time than Happy Larry.



Indeed, needs a good shoeing.


----------



## Grandma Death (Dec 18, 2017)

Coconutjob said:


> Hand wringing shit?
> You're the one trying to justify your happiness at someone's death, love, not me.
> Comparing Hitler to Hopkins is laughable.


I think you need to read my post again. Try it this time with your eyes open. I hear it increases your attention by a factor of at least 100%

Sent from my SM-G955F using Tapatalk


----------



## Grandma Death (Dec 18, 2017)

Coconutjob said:


> Well...
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Get over yourself snowflake. I'm admitting I want her to die. There. 

Sent from my SM-G955F using Tapatalk


----------



## Grandma Death (Dec 18, 2017)

existentialist said:


> She influences thought. She legitimises the attitudes of bigots. Ignoring her is not the answer.


This

Sent from my SM-G955F using Tapatalk


----------



## existentialist (Dec 18, 2017)

Grandma Death said:


> I think you need to read my post again. Try it this time with your eyes open. I hear it increases your attention by a factor of at least 100%
> 
> Sent from my SM-G955F using Tapatalk


Eyes open might be manageable - I think it's the mind bit that presents the challenge.


----------



## Gromit (Dec 18, 2017)

existentialist said:


> She influences thought. She legitimises the attitudes of bigots. Ignoring her is not the answer.


No she doesn't. Biggots think she legitimises them but she legitimises nothing. 
Teresa May agreeing with bigots and proposing law changes that legitimises. 

Fuck all this over importance on minor sleb opinion.


----------



## NoXion (Dec 18, 2017)

Gromit said:


> No she doesn't. Biggots think she legitimises them but she legitimises nothing.
> Teresa May agreeing with bigots and proposing law changes that legitimises.
> 
> Fuck all this over importance on minor sleb opinion.



If bigots think she legitimises their views then that alone is bad enough. It's not as if said bigots live in a completely separate society from the rest of us, you know.

Also, she's a bully and bullies love it when they get ignored. It means they have free reign to go for their victims.


----------



## Gromit (Dec 18, 2017)

NoXion said:


> If bigots think she legitimises their views then that alone is bad enough. It's not as if said bigots live in a completely separate society from the rest of us, you know.


Bigots and loons are quite adept at finding something, anything to make themselves feel legitimised. They don't need Katie Hopkins to do it. There are plenty of substitutes.

She really is only relevant if you make her relevant. It's quite easy not to.


----------



## NoXion (Dec 18, 2017)

Gromit said:


> Bigots and loons are quite adept at finding something, anything to make themselves feel legitimised. They don't need Katie Hopkins to do it. There are plenty of substitutes.
> 
> She really is only relevant if you make her relevant. It's quite easy not to.



Just because Hopkins isn't the only one, doesn't make it okay.

I agree, it's quite easy for *me* to ignore her if I want to. It's much harder for those who are victimised by her or by people who think like she does. This individualist nonsense you're spouting is part of the reason that society is in the mess it's in at the moment.


----------



## Kaka Tim (Dec 18, 2017)

she encourages other cunts to be cunts. she cant have enough shit thrown at her - if only to emphasise that the shit she comes out with is unacceptable.


----------



## existentialist (Dec 18, 2017)

Gromit said:


> Bigots and loons are quite adept at finding something, anything to make themselves feel legitimised. They don't need Katie Hopkins to do it. There are plenty of substitutes.
> 
> She really is only relevant if you make her relevant. It's quite easy not to.


This is very reminiscent of the advice given to every bullying victim in school - "just ignore it". Which actually means "we don't want to have to deal with this".

And, as every bullying victim knows, it doesn't work. On the contrary, it simply gives those doing the bullying the space to do it with impunity. Why do you think totalitarians and oppressors have, since time immemorial, devoted such energy to suppressing dissent? If they really thought that having dissenters made their arguments for them, they'd be encouraging it, not discouraging it.

Hopkins is relevant all the time she has a platform on which she is able to make her specious claims, unchallenged.


----------



## Gromit (Dec 18, 2017)

existentialist said:


> This is very reminiscent of the advice given to every bullying victim in school - "just ignore it". Which actually means "we don't want to have to deal with this".
> 
> And, as every bullying victim knows, it doesn't work. On the contrary, it simply gives those doing the bullying the space to do it with impunity. Why do you think totalitarians and oppressors have, since time immemorial, devoted such energy to suppressing dissent? If they really thought that having dissenters made their arguments for them, they'd be encouraging it, not discouraging it.
> 
> Hopkins is relevant all the time she has a platform on which she is able to make her specious claims, unchallenged.


Rubbish analogy. She's not like an impossible to ignore school bully. 

If she is like a bully then she is like a bully at another school from you and you are traveling to that school, seeking where the bully is and walking up to them asking to be bullied. 

She currently has 830k followers. 
200k of which are journalists waiting for her to say something they can report. So that you people will buy it to read so that you can froth over it. 

If it was Brad Pitt with a real platform I'd accept some of what people are saying. 

But it's a nothing, a nobody with a self created platform consisting of nothing more than the platform itself.


----------



## NoXion (Dec 18, 2017)

Gromit said:


> Rubbish analogy. She's not like an impossible to ignore school bully.
> 
> If she is like a bully then she is like a bully at another school from you and you are traveling to that school, seeking where the bully is and walking up to them asking to be bullied.
> 
> ...



So the migrants asked her to refer to them as roaches and "spreading like the norovirus"? Fuckwit.

Number of followers on Twitter is irrelevant, it's a popular public platform. That she's got journalists reporting on her outbursts makes her harder to avoid, not less. You don't have to buy newspapers to be aware of the news.


----------



## existentialist (Dec 18, 2017)

Gromit said:


> Rubbish analogy. She's not like an impossible to ignore school bully.
> 
> If she is like a bully then she is like a bully at another school from you and you are traveling to that school, seeking where the bully is and walking up to them asking to be bullied.
> 
> ...


All credit to you, you're working hard at this.


----------



## gosub (Dec 18, 2017)

Grandma Death said:


> This
> 
> Sent from my SM-G955F using Tapatalk



oh a Galaxy S8, HOW NICE.   Tapatalk person icon in top right,   settings  ,   signature   slide to OFF


----------



## Gromit (Dec 18, 2017)

NoXion said:


> So the migrants asked her to refer to them as roaches and "spreading like the norovirus"? Fuckwit.
> 
> Number of followers on Twitter is irrelevant, it's a popular public platform. That she's got journalists reporting on her outbursts makes her harder to avoid, not less. You don't have to buy newspapers to be aware of the news.


The migrants aren't reading her. 

The only time migrants know who she the hell she is, is when friends of theirs republish what Hopkins has said so that they can show what special little flowers they are by condemning this stupid woman. 
Look what this woman said about you Fatima, aren't you upset?
I wasn't but I am now. Thanks for that. 
I'll rant about her on your behalf. 
Yeah great thanks. Makes me feel soooo much better, not that I wasn't even better still before you came along to show me how much this stranger hates me. 

It's you people hurting the migrants by exposing them to her filth. 99% of migrants don't subscribe to her feeds. The 1% that do are looking to be outraged, they're masochists, she completes them and she's doing them a great service. We should thanking her for giving them the thing they want to be outraged by.


----------



## NoXion (Dec 18, 2017)

Gromit said:


> The migrants aren't reading her.
> 
> The only time migrants know who she the hell she is, is when friends of theirs republish what Hopkins has said so that they can show what special little flowers they are by condemning this stupid woman.
> Look what this woman said about you Fatima, aren't you upset?
> ...



Most migrants don't read Hopkins, this is probably true. So fucking what? Not many Jews read anti-Semitic literature either. That doesn't make the people who write such shit any less scummy.

You're making excuses for scum like Hopkins, and blaming those who are attacking her for the damage that her words cause.

Now fuck off you terrible cunt.


----------



## Gromit (Dec 18, 2017)

NoXion said:


> Most migrants don't read Hopkins, this is probably true. So fucking what? Not many Jews read anti-Semitic literature either. That doesn't make the people who write such shit any less scummy.
> 
> You're making excuses for scum like Hopkins, and blaming those who are attacking her for the damage that her words cause.
> 
> Now fuck off you terrible cunt.


I'm criticising those who fan the meagre flames of her fame for repeating her filth in whatever context and perpetuating her media existence further. 
That you fail to see the damage you are doing is the grand irony. 

Expend your energies where it will actually do some good instead.


----------



## existentialist (Dec 18, 2017)

Gromit said:


> The migrants aren't reading her.
> 
> The only time migrants know who she the hell she is, is when friends of theirs republish what Hopkins has said so that they can show what special little flowers they are by condemning this stupid woman.
> Look what this woman said about you Fatima, aren't you upset?
> ...


No, the migrants aren't hearing her, in the same way that kids don't hear the whispering campaigns against them in the playground. But they feel the ostracism and the violence.



Gromit said:


> It's you people hurting the migrants by exposing them to her filth. 99% of migrants don't subscribe to her feeds. The 1% that do are looking to be outraged, they're masochists, she completes them and she's doing them a great service. We should thanking her for giving them the thing they want to be outraged by.


If you're not just on a windup for attention, there is something _seriously _wrong with your attitude


----------



## SheilaNaGig (Dec 18, 2017)

Gromit said:


> Bigots and loons are quite adept at finding something, anything to make themselves feel legitimised. They don't need Katie Hopkins to do it. There are plenty of substitutes.
> 
> She really is only relevant if you make her relevant. It's quite easy not to.




Legitimising bigotry enables extreme outcomes. Like running down protesters in the street. Like putting a bigot in the White House. Like the way racist behaviour and hate crime increased after the Brexit result.

If you really think that not giving any weight to extremist views has no extreme results then you’re not paying attention. From the Stanford experiment to Charlottesville to white vans mowing down worshipers after Friday Prayers, it all happens because someone felt that their hate was acceptable and legitimate. It doesn’t happen in a vacuum, Gromit .

At the other end of the spectrum, there are men saying that women are overreacting and need to be ignored, there’s no need to address our grievances. The alternative is that listening to women’s views and taking us seriously is making a difference.

If society exists (clue: it does) then what those people over there are thinking and saying has a material real world impact on these people over here.


----------



## Gromit (Dec 18, 2017)

You don't get it. I'm not criticising people for fighting extreme views. That's worthwhile. You need to be effective though. 

Trump has publicity because he is president. 
Meryl Streep has publicity because she acts. 
They will have publicity regardless of people repeating them. 

Katie Hopkins has publicity because people repeat her. No other reason. Not even because she was once on a TV show. They repeat her in agreement and they repeat her in disagreement. Then they argue with each other. 
Doesn't matter which side you are on you are making her money. 

Stop repeating her and that's one less bigot with influence. The bigots alone are not enough to support her existence. You need the naysayers too.


----------



## existentialist (Dec 18, 2017)

Gromit said:


> You don't get it. I'm not criticising people for fighting extreme views. That's worthwhile. You need to be effective though.
> 
> Trump has publicity because he is president.
> Meryl Streep has publicity because she acts.
> ...


Applying your own logic to your posts, nobody should be replying to you, should they?


----------



## MightyTibberton (Dec 18, 2017)

it's true now that she only has her Twitter account and the TV appearances and conference speeches she can rustle up in the States, but until recently she had a radio phone-in show and a national newspaper column. 

I think it's a difficult question. On social media, I think the ideal solution would be for everyone (who disagrees with them) to unfollow, block what have you Hopkins, Paul Joseph Watson or whoever and have one designated person to respond, "Oh, fuck off, Katie/Paul you idiot" each time she tweets.


----------



## Gromit (Dec 18, 2017)

existentialist said:


> Applying your own logic to your posts, nobody should be replying to you, should they?


Yep. But you can't help yourselves. Which is why we still have Katie Hopkins.


----------



## existentialist (Dec 18, 2017)

Gromit said:


> Yep. But you can't help yourselves. Which is why we still have Katie Hopkins.


It must be a wonderful view from that ivory tower.


----------



## MightyTibberton (Dec 18, 2017)

Gromit said:


> Yep. But you can't help yourselves. Which is why we still have Katie Hopkins.



A while ago I had to do some work on marketing on social media and had to read up about it. Stuff that upsets us is among the stuff that we are most likely to share (also stuff that makes us laugh and stuff that makes us look clever/nice iirc!). Throw in the fact that the sites are desperate for us to spend as much time staring at their bit of the interweb for as long as possible, and the algorithms that say if you like a bit of something you would probably like a bit more of a stronger version of it and social media is the perfect machine to grow extreme views.

It might not matter much if you like Green Day and you end up being shown some original punk and then progressively noisier harcore, but I honestly think that it's behind a lot of what is going on at the moment. My own personal example was of taking an interest in meditation on YouTube. Sam Harris - who I'd never heard of - had done a book on meditation so soon an interview of his popped up, and before I knew it - this is really like Buddhism to KNIGHTSTEMPLARSDEFENDEUROPE in 10 clicks - I was being shown really hard-core islam-hating stuff as an option.

I'm sure the process has always happened this way - we get progressively more and more deeply interested in things that engage our passions - but I think this is much faster, it's also completely machine driven in a way that is new, and the way that interactive screens engage and demand our attention is (I think, and find this personally) different from the older media. Plus the (essentially) infinite availability or opinions/news/content means you need to be extreme and noisy to attract and vitally keep attention on you. 

And, thinking all that, I still don't know what to think about Hopkins et al, or, rather what to do in reaction to them. They operate in what I've seen called the "attention/outrage" economy, but does withdrawing eyeballs work? Does disputing them in real time work? I still don't know and am grateful for advice - personally, I now try to avoid them but that's just for personal wellbeing rather than any idea of the greater good I'm afraid. Mmmm.


----------



## NoXion (Dec 18, 2017)

MightyTibberton said:


> A while ago I had to do some work on marketing on social media and had to read up about it. Stuff that upsets us is among the stuff that we are most likely to share (also stuff that makes us laugh and stuff that makes us look clever/nice iirc!). Throw in the fact that the sites are desperate for us to spend as much time staring at their bit of the interweb for as long as possible, and the algorithms that say if you like a bit of something you would probably like a bit more of a stronger version of it and social media is the perfect machine to grow extreme views.
> 
> It might not matter much if you like Green Day and you end up being shown some original punk and then progressively noisier harcore, but I honestly think that it's behind a lot of what is going on at the moment. My own personal example was of taking an interest in meditation on YouTube. Sam Harris - who I'd never heard of - had done a book on meditation so soon an interview of his popped up, and before I knew it - this is really like Buddhism to KNIGHTSTEMPLARSDEFENDEUROPE in 10 clicks - I was being shown really hard-core islam-hating stuff as an option.
> 
> ...



If there's money to be made in generating outrage, then they're relying on the fact that somebody will pay attention - in fact, multiple someobodies inevitably will, this is a social not an individual thing. Telling individual people to ignore it won't work because of that, never mind that such "advice" misses an entire half of the problem in that not everyone who pays attention to people like Hopkins are in disagreement.

Ignoring things doesn't make them go away.


----------



## Gromit (Dec 18, 2017)

NoXion said:


> If there's money to be made in generating outrage, then they're relying on the fact that somebody will pay attention - in fact, multiple someobodies inevitably will, this is a social not an individual thing. Telling individual people to ignore it won't work because of that, never mind that such "advice" misses an entire half of the problem in that not everyone who pays attention to people like Hopkins are in disagreement.
> 
> Ignoring things doesn't make them go away.


I bet you more of her audience is in disagreement than in agreement. 

People who liked Howard Stern at the start listened an average 20 minutes longer to him than regular DJs. 
People who hated Howard Stern listened on average 40 minutes longer. 

We are a perverse race.


----------



## Pickman's model (Dec 18, 2017)

existentialist said:


> It must be a wonderful view from that ivory tower.


Don't think he'd be allowed in any decent ivory tower


----------



## NoXion (Dec 18, 2017)

Gromit said:


> I bet you more of her audience is in disagreement than in agreement.
> 
> People who liked Howard Stern at the start listened an average 20 minutes longer to him than regular DJs.
> People who hated Howard Stern listened on average 40 minutes longer.
> ...



If you think that's true, then your "ignore her" advice is not just fucking stupid, but was given in bad faith to be a shit-stirring cunt.

So, off you fuck.


----------



## Gromit (Dec 18, 2017)

NoXion said:


> If you think that's true, then your "ignore her" advice is not just fucking stupid, but was given in bad faith to be a shit-stirring cunt.
> 
> So, off you fuck.


Don't be perverse, outraged, rubber necking cunts is still good advice whether people take it or not.

The best advice is rarely followed.


----------



## NoXion (Dec 18, 2017)

Gromit said:


> Don't be perverse, outraged, rubber necking cunts is still good advice whether people take it or not.
> 
> The best advice is rarely followed.



It's not the best advice, because if it had been followed and right-thinking people had ignored her, then she would still spewing her crap on LBC.


----------



## Gromit (Dec 18, 2017)

NoXion said:


> It's not the best advice, because if it had been followed and right-thinking people had ignored her, then she would still spewing her crap on LBC.


No she wouldn't. 
LBC would look at listening figures. See they were crap and swap her out. Happens all the time. 

It's why Pat Sharp isn't still on the radio. 

LBC swapped her out when loads threatened to stop listening when she finally went too far. 

If people hadn't of been paying attention to her in the first place they'd have never employed her to begin with. You outragers got her the job. Then admittedly lost her the job. You'll get her next job for her though.


----------



## NoXion (Dec 18, 2017)

Gromit said:


> No she wouldn't.
> LBC would look at listening figures. See they were crap and swap her out. Happens all the time.
> 
> It's why Pat Sharp isn't still on the radio.
> ...



You're assuming that most people who listened to Hopkins did so in accordance with this simplistic fantasy of yours, in which a majority only did so to get their daily dose of outrage. An assumption without basis, aside from some figures you've spouted about a completely different radio personality in another country, figures which, as far as I know, you could have pulled directly out of your suppurating arsehole.

Yeah, LBC swapped her out. Because loads of people *didn't* ignore her and complained.


----------



## MightyTibberton (Dec 18, 2017)

And people like to be outraged and they like to be upset and angry, and if Katie Hopkins won't provide the ammunition we can do it ourselves!


----------



## Smoking kills (Dec 18, 2017)

Gromit said:


> No she wouldn't.
> LBC would look at listening figures. See they were crap and swap her out. Happens all the time.
> 
> It's why Pat Sharp isn't still on the radio.
> ...


If she wasn't on telly and a gobshite newspaper columnist, pandering to and paid by swine, no-one would heard of her?
Any thoughts on Nigel Farage? UKIP? Britain First?


----------



## Gromit (Dec 19, 2017)

Smoking kills said:


> If she wasn't on telly and a gobshite newspaper columnist, pandering to and paid by swine, no-one would heard of her?
> Any thoughts on Nigel Farage? UKIP? Britain First?


The MEP who has political power. 
The political party who doesn't. 
Britain First who?


----------



## existentialist (Dec 19, 2017)

Gromit said:


> The MEP who has political power.
> The political party who doesn't.
> Britain First who?


Britain First is the organisation whose leaders' tweets Donald Trump recently tweeted. That's why ignoring is not an option. HTH.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Dec 19, 2017)

existentialist said:


> All credit to you, you're working hard at this.



He's hoping he'll get rewarded by Hopkins.


----------



## existentialist (Dec 19, 2017)

ViolentPanda said:


> He's hoping he'll get rewarded by Hopkins.


In the only way he knows how?


----------



## ViolentPanda (Dec 19, 2017)

existentialist said:


> In the only way he knows how?



Yep.  He wants to be the sausage in her Regent Street sprint.


----------



## MightyTibberton (Dec 19, 2017)

The problem with engaging with accounts on social media is that that's what the platforms reward. It doesn't matter if it's 10,000 people saying THIS IS AMAZING or 10,000 people saying THIS IS FUCKING AWFUL YOU NAZI SCUM! it's all the same to Twitter, which promotes it as "interesting" stuff that people are talking about and worthy of your attention.


----------



## Grandma Death (Dec 20, 2017)

existentialist said:


> This is very reminiscent of the advice given to every bullying victim in school - "just ignore it". Which actually means "we don't want to have to deal with this".
> 
> And, as every bullying victim knows, it doesn't work. On the contrary, it simply gives those doing the bullying the space to do it with impunity. Why do you think totalitarians and oppressors have, since time immemorial, devoted such energy to suppressing dissent? If they really thought that having dissenters made their arguments for them, they'd be encouraging it, not discouraging it.
> 
> Hopkins is relevant all the time she has a platform on which she is able to make her specious claims, unchallenged.




I agree with this. Ignoring her doesnt work. She not only reinforces bigotry-and confirms what some bigots may think. She also has a platform-and how big that platform is and the extent of its reach is debatable-but its a platform. That platform has a far bigger reach than most of us will never have. 

And even if she wins over ONE gullible mind-thats one gullible mind too many.

I sat and watched just 15 minutes of her 1 hour interview with milo yiannopoulos on youtube the other day. Im no 'snowflake' but I was disgusted that she chose to engage in banter about fat ginger people-and the pair of cunts giggled like school kids.

Sorry but its vile passive aggressive nastiness-that legitimises bullying...and thats even before wev'e started on her racist fucking bullshit.

I just want her to die. And now.


----------



## Grandma Death (Dec 20, 2017)

Gromit said:


> You'll get her next job for her though.



Dont buy that for 1 minute. She's running out of options to the extent she's shoe horning herself into far right echo chambers. Its quite clear Hopkins is operating on diminishing returns. The fact she wasnt taken back on by the daily mail illustrates that beautifully IMO


----------



## krtek a houby (Dec 21, 2017)

Grandma Death said:


> Dont buy that for 1 minute. She's running out of options to the extent she's shoe horning herself into far right echo chambers. Its quite clear Hopkins is operating on diminishing returns. The fact she wasnt taken back on by the daily mail illustrates that beautifully IMO



I wonder, with increasingly limited options, just how extreme Hopkins will go and into what strange alliances?


----------



## RD2003 (Dec 21, 2017)

krtek a houby said:


> I wonder, with increasingly limited options, just how extreme Hopkins will go and into what strange alliances?


Doesn't matter what she does. She's an irrelevant idiot, and only idiots take any notice of her whether they agree or disagree.


----------



## krtek a houby (Dec 21, 2017)

RD2003 said:


> Doesn't matter what she does. She's an irrelevant idiot, and only idiots take any notice of her whether they agree or disagree.



I try to ignore her as she doesn't have any impact on my life. But then, I think her comments do have an impact on the lives of others, friends, colleagues, those who are targetted by her various incitements to hatred. Her words whip up frenzied types. Some who may translate that into physical abuse and some who leave it at verbal/online abuse.

I should ignore but what if her vitriol leads someone out there to kill another human being? Am I complicit in my ignorance/silence?


----------



## flustercuck (Dec 21, 2017)

krtek a houby said:


> I wonder, with increasingly limited options, just how extreme Hopkins will go and into what strange alliances?



She'll go for whoever pays her. Fox News US might take her on, given that Fox News US has very little reach into the UK marketplace but will then see her as an (un)informed UK perspecitve to back up whatever crazy conspiraloon rubbish theygo on about. After all, didn't Fox news recently just throw out the possibility that the FBI had been  planning to assassinate Trump in order to prevent him taking the Presidency? Yes, they did.

Breibart would love to have her, but can they afford her is just the first of many questions about that.


----------



## RD2003 (Dec 21, 2017)

krtek a houby said:


> I try to ignore her as she doesn't have any impact on my life. But then, I think her comments do have an impact on the lives of others, friends, colleagues, those who are targetted by her various incitements to hatred. Her words whip up frenzied types. Some who may translate that into physical abuse and some who leave it at verbal/online abuse.
> 
> I should ignore but what if her vitriol leads someone out there to kill another human being? Am I complicit in my ignorance/silence?


It's easy enough to ignore her full stop.

Do we have any evidence of some frenzied type who became a Katy Hopkins-inspired murderer? And no, you wouldn't be complicit. You'd just be yet another individual who chose to ignore the mediocre, self-aggrandizing fucking arsehole. Stop worrying about nothing.


----------



## krtek a houby (Dec 21, 2017)

RD2003 said:


> It's easy enough to ignore her full stop.
> 
> Do we have any evidence of some frenzied type who became a Katy Hopkins-inspired murderer? And no, you wouldn't be complicit. You'd just be yet another individual who chose to ignore the mediocre, self-aggrandizing fucking arsehole. Stop worrying about nothing.



Well, of course there's no hard evidence that she's directly inspiring folk to do mad, bad things but then again, do the likes of Thomas Mair and sympathisers  draw some comfort that they have a voice or an ally in Hopkins various diatribes?


----------



## RD2003 (Dec 21, 2017)

krtek a houby said:


> Well, of course there's no hard evidence that she's directly inspiring folk to do mad, bad things but then again, do the likes of Thomas Mair and sympathisers  draw some comfort that they have a voice or an ally in Hopkins various diatribes?


They might, but they are fucking insane or deluded.

You can't do much about insane or deluded people who might think good old Katy is their ally (she isn't when it comes down to it), by sweating over the crap she writes all the time. 

She's another celebrity wanker who probably doesn't believe in half of what she says. World is full of 'em now.


----------



## xenon (Dec 21, 2017)

Good God there’s a lot of po faced what about the children stuff on here. She is an arsehole.Sub Richard Littlejohn crap.   Not even good copy so she won’t be bothering mainstream media for a while.

How many Katie Hopkins   does i take to change a lightbulb?


----------



## mojo pixy (Dec 21, 2017)

None, she'd use a Pole to do it.


----------



## Monkeygrinder's Organ (Dec 21, 2017)

flustercuck said:


> Breibart would love to have her, but can they afford her is just the first of many questions about that.



I think she probably comes pretty cheap these days.


----------



## gosub (Dec 21, 2017)

xenon said:


> Good God there’s a lot of po faced what about the children stuff on here. She is an arsehole.Sub Richard Littlejohn crap.   Not even good copy so she won’t be bothering mainstream media for a while.
> 
> How many Katie Hopkins   does i take to change a lightbulb?


Actually, I know someone who used to sub her stuff - her copy wasn't that bad apparently


----------



## Grandma Death (Dec 22, 2017)

RD2003 said:


> Doesn't matter what she does. She's an irrelevant idiot, and only idiots take any notice of her whether they agree or disagree.



So essentially all discourse we disagree with we should ignore? Do you realise how idiotic that sounds?


----------



## RD2003 (Dec 22, 2017)

Grandma Death said:


> So essentially all discourse we disagree with we should ignore? Do you realise how idiotic that sounds?


Play her game if it pleases you. It's what she's there for after all.


----------



## weltweit (Dec 22, 2017)

Interesting to me that this thread has such legs. I am just not exposed to Hopkins, she just does not register to me, I don't hear or see her from one year to the next. 

Yay me


----------



## Grandma Death (Dec 22, 2017)

RD2003 said:


> Play her game if it pleases you. It's what she's there for after all.




Its not about playing her game. Yes she's a fucking idiot. But words dont exist in some sort of vacuum-they have power. They can shape opinions. Influence thoughts. She may see it as a 'game' (although Im not convinced thats the case-she really believes in what she says) but ignoring her doesnt mean the 'game' stops. I for one am glad that all those people complained to LBC about her 'final solution' comment-cause if those people simply ignored it-she'd likely still be there. In fact she's running out of jobs because of the outrage and controversy-and thats because of people doing something.


----------



## NoXion (Dec 22, 2017)

weltweit said:


> Interesting to me that this thread has such legs. I am just not exposed to Hopkins, she just does not register to me, I don't hear or see her from one year to the next.
> 
> Yay me



Lately this thread has largely been kept going by people going on about how little they care about Hopkins, and making sure everyone else in the thread knows that. You know, just to show how little they're interested.


----------



## Grandma Death (Dec 22, 2017)

NoXion said:


> Lately this thread has largely been kept going by people going on about how little they care about Hopkins, and making sure everyone else in the thread knows that. You know, just to show how little they're interested.




Well I for one am glad to say the complete opposite. She grips my shit


----------



## RD2003 (Dec 22, 2017)

Grandma Death said:


> Its not about playing her game. Yes she's a fucking idiot. But words dont exist in some sort of vacuum-they have power. They can shape opinions. Influence thoughts. She may see it as a 'game' (although Im not convinced thats the case-she really believes in what she says) but ignoring her doesnt mean the 'game' stops. I for one am glad that all those people complained to LBC about her 'final solution' comment-cause if those people simply ignored it-she'd likely still be there. In fact she's running out of jobs because of the outrage and controversy-and thats because of people doing something.


And we all get one step nearer to the promised land each time Katie loses a job.


----------



## Grandma Death (Dec 22, 2017)

RD2003 said:


> And we all get one step nearer to the promised land each time Katie loses a job.



My promised land is when she stops breathing.

When she had that brain op I was praying the surgeon had a skinful the night before and he was using a butter knife to do the job.


----------



## RD2003 (Dec 22, 2017)

Grandma Death said:


> My promised land is when she stops breathing.
> 
> When she had that brain op I was praying the surgeon had a skinful the night before and he was using a butter knife to do the job.


Your promised land is the day when Katie Hopkins is released from all her suffering, quite possibly after the sickly revelation that everything she's ever done has been nonsensical and a total waste of time?

Is it really?


----------



## Grandma Death (Dec 22, 2017)

RD2003 said:


> Your promised land is the day when Katie Hopkins is released from all her suffering, quite possibly after the sickly revelation that everything she's ever done has been nonsensical and a total waste of time?
> 
> Is it really?




Yep. Sooner the better.


----------



## RD2003 (Dec 22, 2017)

Grandma Death said:


> Yep. Sooner the better.


Oh.


----------



## albionism (Dec 22, 2017)

Every time I see there's a new post on this thread, I'm hoping
it's to inform everyone that she's carked it.


----------



## DotCommunist (Jan 4, 2018)

looks like she's joined a canadian far right platform 'Rebel Media' to chat shite. Well, it was always going to end up thus


----------



## butchersapron (Jan 4, 2018)

Rebel media is falling apart - big name backers running away form its open anti-semitism. That Gavin McInnes prick being one.


----------



## pengaleng (Jan 4, 2018)

I fuckin love this fuckin mental bint, her interview with milo was hilarious

people with opinions are fucking jokes


----------



## Thimble Queen (Jan 4, 2018)

albionism said:


> Every time I see there's a new post on this thread, I'm hoping
> it's to inform everyone that she's carked it.



I came here to post that


----------



## bemused (Jan 5, 2018)

DotCommunist said:


> looks like she's joined a canadian far right platform 'Rebel Media' to chat shite. Well, it was always going to end up thus



Isn't Rebel Media a live action version of Terrence and Philip?


----------



## Yossarian (Jan 5, 2018)

She's blogging for Canada's 3,404th most popular website, but I think she may still have some distance to fall.


----------



## Grandma Death (Jan 5, 2018)

bemused said:


> Isn't Rebel Media a live action version of Terrence and Philip?




edit


----------



## MightyTibberton (Jan 5, 2018)

If anyone else is on the hellsite that is Twitter then you might enjoy the parody account, Kruntie Plopkins: 

Kruntie Plopkins (@ktplopkins) on Twitter


----------



## pengaleng (Jan 6, 2018)

people still care about parody? whos got time for that?


----------



## ruffneck23 (Jan 12, 2018)

Katie Hopkins refused appeal after losing libel case to Jack Monroe


----------



## Teaboy (Jan 12, 2018)

So Hopkin's lawyers were on a no win - no fee basis.  Seems like she may have been very badly advised.  It's a crying shame for her really


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 12, 2018)

Teaboy said:


> So Hopkin's lawyers were on a no win - no fee basis.  Seems like she may have been very badly advised.  It's a crying shame for her really


yeh, i'm crying.

crying with laughter


----------



## Chilli.s (Jan 12, 2018)

Exellent news.


----------



## existentialist (Jan 12, 2018)

Some measured words from Jack Monroe on being gracious in victory in that article...


----------



## existentialist (Jan 12, 2018)

Teaboy said:


> So Hopkin's lawyers were on a no win - no fee basis.  Seems like she may have been very badly advised.  It's a crying shame for her really


I suspect she was well advised, but chose to ignore the advice.


----------



## pesh (Jan 21, 2018)

People are crowdfunding to buy Katie Hopkins' house to turn it into a Refugee Shelter | Evolve Politics


> Arch hatemonger and anti-immigrant bile-spewer Katie Hopkins has been forced to put her £1m mansion on the market after losing a highly expensive libel case against food writer and political activist Jack Monroe – and now, in a brilliant twist of irony, people are raising money to buy Hopkins’ house in order to provide shelter for refugees and asylum seekers.


----------



## Plumdaff (Jan 21, 2018)

I don't understand why people think it's a great idea to help her out of her financial block hole. Raise the money, but don't give it to her!


----------



## pesh (Jan 21, 2018)

its not like the house isn't going to sell.


----------



## Plumdaff (Jan 21, 2018)

pesh said:


> its not like the house isn't going to sell.


Yeah, let's try and ensure she gets as much as possible for it


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Jan 21, 2018)

Hopkins has to flog her house to pay that legal bill? 

On top of losing her job at LBC and the Fail. I hope the inevitable bad atmosphere in Casa Hopkins has been really trying for the sick cunt.


----------



## Monkeygrinder's Organ (Jan 25, 2018)

Plumdaff said:


> I don't understand why people think it's a great idea to help her out of her financial block hole. Raise the money, but don't give it to her!



Find out where she moves to and use the cash for the houses either side.


----------



## RainbowTown (Jan 25, 2018)

Karma's a bitch, aint it.


----------



## gosub (Jan 25, 2018)

If Katie Hopkins fell over in the woods now, would anyone give a fuck?


----------



## bemused (Jan 25, 2018)

gosub said:


> If Katie Hopkins fell over in the woods now, would anyone give a fuck?



I would, I like walking in the woods. I've not seen her for ages what's she doing now?


----------



## agricola (Jan 25, 2018)

gosub said:


> If Katie Hopkins fell over in the woods now, would anyone give a fuck?



_"TV's Katie taken out by special branch"_

I'll get my own coat.


----------



## not a trot (Jan 26, 2018)

gosub said:


> If Katie Hopkins fell over in the woods now, would anyone give a fuck?



Hopefully a bear would shit on her.


----------



## JimW (Jan 29, 2018)




----------



## kabbes (Jan 29, 2018)

I’m glad she feels persecuted.  Now she knows what that’s like.


----------



## Sprocket. (Jan 29, 2018)

Self-imposed-imagined persecution.


----------



## Kaka Tim (Jan 29, 2018)

its appalling that if you constantly express controversial, shit stirring opinions in order to get attention that people give you grief for it. Its exactly like _1984._


----------



## krtek a houby (Jan 29, 2018)




----------



## gosub (Jan 29, 2018)

Kaka Tim said:


> its appalling that if you constantly express controversial, shit stirring opinions in order to get attention that people give you grief for it. Its exactly like _1984._


I STILL think Wham! were shit.


----------



## JimW (Jan 29, 2018)

krtek a houby said:


> View attachment 126297


Wasn't his monster mute? If only.


----------



## Sprocket. (Jan 29, 2018)

We should be thankful to be alive at the same as someone so modest and self sacrificing.


----------



## rekil (Jan 29, 2018)

JimW said:


> Wasn't his monster mute? If only.


No. 

Self-immolation at the north pole it is then.



			
				creature said:
			
		

> I shall quit your vessel on the ice raft which brought me thither and shall seek the most northern extremity of the globe; I shall collect my funeral pile and consume to ashes this miserable frame, that its remains may afford no light to any curious and unhallowed wretch who would create such another as I have been. I shall die. I shall no longer feel the agonies which now consume me or be the prey of feelings unsatisfied, yet unquenched.


----------



## Sprocket. (Jan 29, 2018)

JimW said:


> Wasn't his monster mute? If only.



The corpses of dangerous criminals sewn together, and according to one version I saw, the brain of A B Normal!


----------



## JimW (Jan 29, 2018)

copliker said:


> No.
> 
> Self-immolation at the north pole it is then.


 He'd never fit all that in a tweet though


----------



## Treacle Toes (Jan 29, 2018)

_This is how it feels being a fungal waste product. People either love or hate you.

 _


----------



## Yossarian (Jan 29, 2018)

copliker said:


> No.
> 
> Self-immolation at the north pole it is then.


----------



## JimW (Jan 29, 2018)




----------



## existentialist (Jan 29, 2018)

Rutita1 said:


> _This is how it feels being a fungal waste product. People either love or hate you.
> 
> View attachment 126299 _


When I get home from work, I shall 'shop Ceiling Cat in there.


----------



## steveo87 (Jan 29, 2018)

JimW said:


>


If you're to quote Inspiral Carpets lyrics, you could at least try to get it right...


----------



## Horus Snacks (Jan 30, 2018)

krtek a houby said:


> View attachment 126297



"something inside so strong..."

Has she sold her house yet? Poor lamb.


----------



## existentialist (Jan 31, 2018)

JimW said:


>


----------



## Gromit (Feb 1, 2018)

I love what Jack has to say on all this:



> “I’m seeing a lot of people levelling quite nasty abuse at Katie Hopkins re the appeal verdict. You lower yourselves to her standards, and by doing it in my name, drag me with you. It is the antithesis of everything I try to be. Be better. You can be better.”
> 
> Y’all are free to say what you like (within law and reason) but threats of violence, harm, sexual misdemeanor, etc, IN MY NAME, are my business. You can celebrate a legal victory without being quite so gratuitously *horrible* with it. Thanks.
> — jack monroe | (@BootstrapCook)



Class act


----------



## Horus Snacks (Feb 1, 2018)

Yeah, no.

That's an argument based on a false equivalency: the people Hopkins, a privileged media figure with a noticable following, denigrates and smears and those who insult her (where they differ) are not. She's a bully, if she's getting a lot of abuse - well those who live by the sword...

No sympathy for her at all. I'm glad she's lost out. She deserves to and the people who like and think like her need to see hear and feel that


----------



## Gromit (Feb 1, 2018)

Horus Snacks said:


> Yeah, no.
> 
> That's an argument based on a false equivalency: the people Hopkins, a privileged media figure with a noticable following, denigrates and smears and those who insult her (where they differ) are not. She's a bully, if she's getting a lot of abuse - well those who live by the sword...
> 
> No sympathy for her at all. I'm glad she's lost out. She deserves to and the people who like and think like her need to see hear and feel that


I’m sure Hopkins justifies her actions similarly. Well because they [insert arbitrary reason] it’s fine to do it to “those people”.

Celebs are fair game. They are asking for it. Look at what they wear.


----------



## Horus Snacks (Feb 1, 2018)

Of course she does, doesn't everyone believe their actions are justified?

I don't care about her value system, I care about mine and I feel that showin Hopkins some hate, not necessarily all day long forever and ever, is perfectly justifiable. She mongers hate, she gets shat on when she falls from grace (which she hasn't, she now works for Rebel Media spouting her bollocks for dollars on Youtube).


----------



## existentialist (Feb 1, 2018)

The best argument in support of Jack Monroe's point is, I think, the fact that whether or not Hopkins deserves to be treated the way she treats others, if we do that, we make ourselves more like her. I don't want to be more like Hopkins.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Feb 1, 2018)

existentialist said:


> The best argument in support of Jack Monroe's point is, I think, the fact that whether or not Hopkins deserves to be treated the way she treats others, if we do that, we make ourselves more like her. I don't want to be more like Hopkins.



Quite. I am happy to bask in her downfall but actively wishing physical harm on the vile piece of shit is a bit much.


----------



## Gromit (Feb 1, 2018)

It reminds me of those who froth at the mouth at the dirty barbaric Muslims who cut off people’s heads. We should cut off their heads they cry and completely meaning it. 
Failing to see how they are wishing to be as barbaric as those they accuse of barbarism.


----------



## Horus Snacks (Feb 1, 2018)

Not really, as i said there is a power differential at play with Hopkins.

I'm not arguing for what should happen, I simply don't care that it does happen - in the case of her receiving abuse. Shr brought it on herself.


----------



## bimble (Feb 1, 2018)

The worst torture for Hopkins has to be being ignored, threats of violence will delight her so counterproductive.


----------



## Horus Snacks (Feb 1, 2018)

bimble said:


> The worst torture for Hopkins has to be being ignored, threats of violence will delight her so counterproductive.


Sure, but that's a very simplistic approach. She won't ever be completely ignored anyway and I'm not sure she should.


----------



## Voley (Feb 4, 2018)

Well this is peculiar:

Katie Hopkins collapses roadside in South Africa after 'taking ketamine'


----------



## Thimble Queen (Feb 4, 2018)

Voley said:


> Well this is peculiar:
> 
> Katie Hopkins collapses roadside in South Africa after 'taking ketamine'



Pissing myself about that


----------



## Mr.Bishie (Feb 4, 2018)




----------



## Voley (Feb 4, 2018)

Twitter hasn't been slow to make a point about foreigners using the local health services. 

It's a weird story though - some people are claiming she takes it for epilepsy.


----------



## not a trot (Feb 4, 2018)

Couldn't she have got eaten by a lion, thereby doing humanity a favour and giving a lion a decent meal at the same time.


----------



## Voley (Feb 4, 2018)

In only slightly unrelated news, I sent a letter to a Miss K Hole last week.


----------



## Mr.Bishie (Feb 4, 2018)




----------



## Thimble Queen (Feb 4, 2018)

not a trot said:


> Couldn't she have got eaten by a lion, thereby doing humanity a favour and giving a lion a decent meal at the same time.



I'd be worried for the lion eating something that rancid tbf.


----------



## Thimble Queen (Feb 4, 2018)

Special Kate, indeed.


----------



## hash tag (Feb 4, 2018)

Why are people still giving this creature the oxygen of publicity. Is that not what she craves and keeps her earning money


----------



## existentialist (Feb 4, 2018)

hash tag said:


> Why are people still giving this creature the oxygen of publicity. Is that not what she craves and keeps her earning money


She's going to some impressively desperate lengths!


----------



## gosub (Feb 4, 2018)

existentialist said:


> She's going to some impressively desperate lengths!


And still had the Oxford Street run as a backup :-(


----------



## Ranbay (Feb 4, 2018)

Ketty Hopkins


----------



## Horus Snacks (Feb 4, 2018)

Voley said:


> Well this is peculiar:
> 
> Katie Hopkins collapses roadside in South Africa after 'taking ketamine'


No it's funny as fuck.

Bonus points if its fatal


----------



## Orang Utan (Feb 4, 2018)

hash tag said:


> Why are people still giving this creature the oxygen of publicity. Is that not what she craves and keeps her earning money


You start then


----------



## Badgers (Feb 4, 2018)




----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Feb 4, 2018)

Fucking lightweight as well as a racist cunt, she’s truly got it all.


----------



## existentialist (Feb 4, 2018)

gosub said:


> And still had the Oxford Street run as a backup :-(


I think she's probably hoping everyone's forgotten about that .


----------



## gosub (Feb 4, 2018)

existentialist said:


> I think she's probably hoping everyone's forgotten about that .


I was kinda hoping she has


----------



## existentialist (Feb 4, 2018)

gosub said:


> I was kinda hoping she has


Won't anyone think of the sausage???


----------



## Corax (Feb 4, 2018)

I don't doubt she's made suitably charitable statements about drug users in the past.


----------



## Badgers (Feb 4, 2018)

Fucking junky criminal tourist. I hope the lightweight cunt gets fucked for the healthcare costs


----------



## ffsear (Feb 4, 2018)

I assume she was given the drug rather then using it recreationaly.  I know paramedics over here use it all the time as an anti traumatic drug


----------



## Badgers (Feb 4, 2018)

ffsear said:


> I assume she was given the drug rather then using it recreationaly.  I know paramedics over here use it all the time as an anti traumatic drug


Would expect if she was given it by a paramedic they would have her lying down. It is usually a drug used for trauma or fragile (old/young/weak) patients. It is not usually given out for flu or a stubbed toe.


----------



## mwgdrwg (Feb 4, 2018)

There has to be an angle aiming for sympathy here.


----------



## Badgers (Feb 4, 2018)

mwgdrwg said:


> There has to be an angle aiming for sympathy here.


Bit of a sweeping statement assuming that a right wing, liar media cunt had an angle ?


----------



## mwgdrwg (Feb 4, 2018)

Badgers said:


> Bit of a sweeping statement assuming that a right wing, liar media cunt had an angle ?



Haha. True.


----------



## rekil (Feb 4, 2018)

JimW said:


> He'd never fit all that in a tweet though


Boat Happy emoji covers it.


----------



## Cloo (Feb 4, 2018)

existentialist said:


> View attachment 126474


Also, my mother is a white, conservative woman but she isn't a target because she's not an arsehole about it.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Feb 4, 2018)

Cloo said:


> Also, my mother is a white, conservative woman but she isn't a target because she's not an arsehole about it.



Can yer ma handle her K though?


----------



## Thimble Queen (Feb 4, 2018)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> Can yer ma handle her K though?



I heard Cloo's mum is an absolute demon for K. Slug lines all the way.


----------



## Cloo (Feb 4, 2018)

TBH, she was more of a LSD person in the 60s.


----------



## not a trot (Feb 4, 2018)

ffsear said:


> I assume she was given the drug rather then using it recreationaly.  *I know paramedics over here use it all the time as an anti traumatic drug[*/QUOTE]
> 
> But only after coming into contact with Hopkins.


----------



## fishfinger (Feb 4, 2018)

Cloo said:


> TBH, she was more of a LSD person in the 60s.


It must have been the brown acid, if she turned out tory


----------



## Magnus McGinty (Feb 4, 2018)

ffsear said:


> I assume she was given the drug rather then using it recreationaly.



It’s a horse tranquilliser. I won’t continue down this alley.


----------



## Badgers (Feb 5, 2018)

Magnus McGinty said:


> It’s a horse tranquilliser. I won’t continue down this alley.


No it isn't


----------



## Magnus McGinty (Feb 5, 2018)

Badgers said:


> No it isn't



You’re disagreeing with that deadly serious post?


----------



## kittyP (Feb 5, 2018)

Magnus McGinty said:


> You’re disagreeing with that deadly serious post?


It's used with the elderly and young as it's gentke on the cardio/pulmonary system.


----------



## ruffneck23 (Feb 5, 2018)

I wonder if she thought she was buying coke and someone saw her coming...


----------



## Yossarian (Feb 5, 2018)

She was apparently receiving "medical ketamine" for a "serious dislocation," though I still think she should now be known as Ketty Hopkins.


----------



## ruffneck23 (Feb 5, 2018)

Magnus McGinty said:


> It’s a horse tranquilliser. I won’t continue down this alley.[/QUO



Is that her version of events? if so forgive me for being sceptical


----------



## mwgdrwg (Feb 5, 2018)

Spiked


Yossarian said:


> She was apparently receiving "medical ketamine" for a "serious dislocation," though I still think she should now be known as Ketty Hopkins.



Expertly done you have to say...lay the "attention bait", then act all butt-hurt at the internet and media picking on her. She really needs to be starved of the oxygen of publicity.


----------



## Magnus McGinty (Feb 5, 2018)

kittyP said:


> It's used with the elderly and young as it's gentke on the cardio/pulmonary system.



Yes but I was making a joke. Never mind.


----------



## Horus Snacks (Feb 5, 2018)

Yossarian said:


> She was apparently receiving "medical ketamine" for a "serious dislocation," though I still think she should now be known as Ketty Hopkins.


A serious dislocation between reality and the hate she peddles


----------



## lefteri (Feb 5, 2018)

Yossarian said:


> She was apparently receiving "medical ketamine" for a "serious dislocation," though I still think she should now be known as Ketty Hopkins.


So why was she on the street instead of in a hospital bed? Or lying on a stretcher if it was administered by a paramedic at the scene of an accident? Sounds very iffy


----------



## lefteri (Feb 5, 2018)

Yossarian said:


> She was apparently receiving "medical ketamine" for a "serious dislocation," though I still think she should now be known as Ketty Hopkins.



Serious dislocation is usually the situation after receiving ketamine ime


----------



## Ax^ (Feb 5, 2018)

She has started some sort of go fund me page to pay for her ket...


Don't lend Katie a fiver...


----------



## Kaka Tim (Feb 5, 2018)

"Katie in the K-Hole" sounds like a great band name/song title/kids book.


----------



## Magnus McGinty (Feb 5, 2018)

Kate Hole.


----------



## Badgers (Feb 5, 2018)




----------



## teqniq (Feb 6, 2018)

Katie Hopkins banned from leaving South Africa after taking ketamine



> Katie Hopkins has had her passport confiscated and been prevented from leaving South Africa after being accused by the country's authorities of 'spreading racial hatred'....


----------



## ruffneck23 (Feb 6, 2018)

teqniq said:


> Katie Hopkins banned from leaving South Africa after taking ketamine


 

I cant 'like' this enough


----------



## elbows (Feb 6, 2018)

I dont trust any story where she is also the source of the story, especially when she has something specific to promote. Just looking at her twitter and it sounds like she was detained when arriving in the country, not when leaving.


----------



## krtek a houby (Feb 6, 2018)

elbows said:


> I dont trust any story where she is also the source of the story, especially when she has something specific to promote. Just looking at her twitter and it sounds like she was detained when arriving in the country, not when leaving.



Passport confiscated on entry but given back and now taken again


----------



## eatmorecheese (Feb 6, 2018)

Amusing, but just grist for the mill really. Now she has some more material for her so called 'journalism' and to feed her risible persecution complex.


----------



## A380 (Feb 6, 2018)

Plumdaff said:


> I don't understand why people think it's a great idea to help her out of her financial block hole. Raise the money, but don't give it to her!


Take the KLF approach?


----------



## Voley (Feb 6, 2018)

teqniq said:


> Katie Hopkins banned from leaving South Africa after taking ketamine


The Mirror not renowned for being masters of understatement but ''the unpopular media pundit'' made me smile.


----------



## Yossarian (Feb 6, 2018)

elbows said:


> I dont trust any story where she is also the source of the story, especially when she has something specific to promote. Just looking at her twitter and it sounds like she was detained when arriving in the country, not when leaving.



Yep, this whole South African trip seems like it could be the pilot for some really shitty reality show instead of actual reporting for Rebel Media - maybe they'll send her to Myanmar next to blame everything on the Rohingya.


----------



## planetgeli (Feb 6, 2018)

A380 said:


> Take the KLF approach?



Burn her?


----------



## Kaka Tim (Feb 6, 2018)

planetgeli said:


> Burn her?



Or dump her corpse on the stage at the brit awards?


----------



## planetgeli (Feb 8, 2018)

Right. Far be it for me to praise the Liberal shithole that is the Grauniad but this is one seriously good headline about this story.

*A-hole in a K-hole: Katie Hopkins’ ketamine adventures *


----------



## keybored (Feb 8, 2018)

Badgers said:


> No it isn't


Horse anaesthetic, then.


----------



## planetgeli (Feb 8, 2018)

keybored said:


> Horse anesthetic, then.



Nope. Tabloid shite. Worst horse anaesthetic ever.


----------



## keybored (Feb 8, 2018)

planetgeli said:


> Nope. Tabloid shite. Worst horse anaesthetic ever.


Ok.


> For large domestic
> animals, in developed and developing countries ketamine by the
> intravenous route is the drug of choice for induction (and sometimes maintenance) of
> anaesthesia; it is used widely in horses, cattle and other large animals (eg camels)




https://www.bap.org.uk/pdfs/Veterinary_use_of_ketamine_KC.pdf


----------



## teqniq (Feb 8, 2018)

Seen it used on a tiger once a long time ago, back before humans discovered it's recreational uses.


----------



## planetgeli (Feb 8, 2018)

keybored said:


> Ok.
> 
> 
> 
> https://www.bap.org.uk/pdfs/Veterinary_use_of_ketamine_KC.pdf



Widely used doesn't make it necessarily correct. The wide use is in conjunction with diazepam, because on its own ketamine makes a horse kick around wildly. Tiletamine is just as efficacious a drug.

How about labelling ketamine a children's anaesthetic? At 10x the dose recreational users dose at? Not quite so tabloid sexy though is it?


----------



## keybored (Feb 8, 2018)

planetgeli said:


> Widely used doesn't make it necessarily correct. The wide use is in conjunction with diazepam, because on its own ketamine makes a horse kick around wildly. Tiletamine is just as efficacious a drug.
> 
> How about labelling ketamine a children's anaesthetic? At 10x the dose recreational users dose at? Not quite so tabloid sexy though is it?


You said "Worst horse anaesthetic ever."



> *ketamine’s greatest role is as an anaesthetic*; it is used throughout the world to provide anaesthesia and pain relief in both animals and people. It is particularly vital in horses and is *now used globally for virtually every equine anaesthetic*.


Fears over Ketamine's future - Horse & Hound


----------



## billbond (Feb 8, 2018)

Ax^ said:


> She has started some sort of go fund me page to pay for her ket...
> 
> 
> Don't lend Katie a fiver...



Somebody  told me today their is one set up to help her pay off her court fees for that recent case she lost


----------



## William of Walworth (Feb 8, 2018)

planetgeli said:


> Right. Far be it for me to praise the Liberal shithole that is the Grauniad *but this is one seriously good headline about this stor*y.
> 
> *A-hole in a K-hole: Katie Hopkins’ ketamine adventures *



Story itself : worth checking as well .....


----------



## William of Walworth (Feb 8, 2018)

There's some pretty good taking apart of the A-hole in the *text*, as well, not just in the headline ....


----------



## ffsear (Feb 9, 2018)

Ketamine  Is awesome


----------



## William of Walworth (Feb 9, 2018)

ffsear said:


> Ketamine  Is awesome




Are you on it atm?


----------



## xenon (Feb 9, 2018)

Look, will someone just tell me how to anaesthetise this fucking horse. This surely is something Urban can help with.


----------



## Corax (Feb 9, 2018)

Yossarian said:


> Yep, this whole South African trip seems like it could be the pilot for some really shitty reality show instead of actual reporting for Rebel Media - maybe they'll send her to Myanmar next to blame everything on the Rohingya.


Doubt it. Both sides are a bit... brown.


----------



## Corax (Feb 9, 2018)

planetgeli said:


> Burn her?


Funnily enough, I've just watched the start of Charlie Brooker's Black Mirror Hated in the Nation episode


----------



## RainbowTown (Feb 9, 2018)

As obnoxious as she is (and she _is_) a tiny part of me actually feels pity for this woman (hard to fathom, I know). Because I think deep down she is a person beset by self-loathing and self-doubt  - rather like Milo Yiannopoulos. Their deliberate offensiveness and provocations and nastiness are born more out of insecurity and  low self-esteem, just as much as they are by bravado and bluster. Still a nasty woman, sure. But a pitiful one too. And a rather sad one.


----------



## Horus Snacks (Feb 9, 2018)

RainbowTown said:


> As obnoxious as she is (and she _is_) a tiny part of me actually feels pity for this woman (hard to fathom, I know). Because I think deep down she is a person beset by self-loathing and self-doubt  - rather like Milo Yiannopoulos. Their deliberate offensiveness and provocations and nastiness are born more out of insecurity and  low self-esteem, just as much as they are by bravado and bluster. Still a nasty woman, sure. But a pitiful one too. And a rather sad one.


You feel pity for the child abuse apologist, racist, and doxxer Milo Yanoupolis? Fuck me, how do you manage that? He's a vile opportunistic cunt who should serioiusly consider suicide.


----------



## butchersapron (Feb 9, 2018)

Horus Snacks said:


> You feel pity for the child abuse apologist, racist, and doxxer Milo Yanoupolis? Fuck me, how do you manage that? He's a vile opportunistic cunt who should serioiusly consider suicide.


Why have you come back here? No one wants you here.


----------



## Mr.Bishie (Feb 9, 2018)

ffsear said:


> Ketamine  Is awesome



Coming from a Tory, that’s that’s proper donkeh!


----------



## D'wards (Feb 25, 2018)

She's tweeted the application form for the nra, and states she'd carry a gun if she could.

I'm certain she's a character, a persona to earn money  (which she then gives to her solicitors) but she really is a cunt.


----------



## DaveCinzano (Feb 25, 2018)

Rutita1 said:


> _This is how it feels being a fungal waste product. People either love or hate you.
> 
> View attachment 126299 _


I love that she appears to be posing all serious, like, in a _military surplus_ store - see, she does have a modicum of self-awareness


----------



## Smoking kills (Feb 25, 2018)

D'wards said:


> She's tweeted the application form for the nra, and states she'd carry a gun if she could.
> 
> I'm certain she's a character, a persona to earn money  (which she then gives to her solicitors) but she really is a cunt.


Not even the NRA would let Katie anywhere near a gun.


----------



## DaveCinzano (Feb 25, 2018)

Thimble Queen said:


> Pissing myself about that


Bit like she will be if she overdoes the 'dust


----------



## D'wards (Feb 25, 2018)

Smoking kills said:


> Not even the NRA would let Katie anywhere near a gun.


She's a right wing extremist who suffers from epileptic fits, and takes strong psychoactive drugs to help with pain, and has called for the extermination of a religion of people.

I'm not sure of the NRA application process, but she could definitely buy an assault weapon capable of firing up to 180 rounds a minute if she wanted to.


----------



## Smoking kills (Feb 25, 2018)

D'wards said:


> She's a right wing extremist who suffers from epileptic fits, and takes strong psychoactive drugs to help with pain, and has called for the extermination of a religion of people.
> 
> I'm not sure of the NRA application process, but she could definitely buy an assault weapon capable of firing up to 180 rounds a minute if she wanted to.


Not in Devon she couldn't.


----------



## krtek a houby (Feb 25, 2018)

Oh,did she get out of SA,then? Shame.


----------



## cyril_smear (Feb 25, 2018)

planetgeli said:


> Widely used doesn't make it necessarily correct. The wide use is in conjunction with diazepam, because on its own ketamine makes a horse kick around wildly. Tiletamine is just as efficacious a drug.
> 
> How about labelling ketamine a children's anaesthetic? At 10x the dose recreational users dose at? Not quite so tabloid sexy though is it?



Very effective for people suffering medical trauma.

My friend broke his leg; had the bone poking out. Soon as the paramedics gave him the ketamine he was fine.


----------



## kabbes (Feb 25, 2018)

cyril_smear said:


> Very effective for people suffering medical trauma.
> 
> My friend broke his leg; had the bone poking out. Soon as the paramedics gave him the ketamine he was fine.


What, the ketamine caused the bone to immediately knit and return whence it belongs?


----------



## cyril_smear (Feb 25, 2018)

kabbes said:


> What, the ketamine caused the bone to immediately knit and return when it belongs?


I recall screws and bolts for a month or two; no knitting needles though.


----------



## cyril_smear (Feb 26, 2018)

kabbes said:


> What, the ketamine caused the bone to immediately knit and return whence it belongs?



Don't be flippant; it makes you a shit cunt.


----------



## kabbes (Feb 26, 2018)

cyril_smear said:


> Don't be flippant; it makes you a shit cunt.


I’ll add it to the list.


----------



## bellaozzydog (Feb 26, 2018)

keybored said:


> Horse anaesthetic, then.



It's a dissociative anaesthetic, used in trauma as it's good for patients with low unstable blood pressures. Not helpful for head injuries though 

Used regularly by the military in the field in the form of a ketamine lollipop, tip of the spear units get fentanyl lollies 

Back to Hopkins, I'm starting to feel a little bit sorry for her self generated, imploding universe and her deepening desperation, for at least two minutes anyways


----------



## pesh (Feb 26, 2018)

I'm quite enjoying it.


----------



## Pickman's model (Feb 26, 2018)

cyril_smear said:


> Very effective for people suffering medical trauma.
> 
> My friend broke his leg; had the bone poking out. Soon as the paramedics gave him the ketamine he was fine.


can he play the piano now?


----------



## Humirax (Feb 26, 2018)




----------



## agricola (Feb 27, 2018)




----------



## petee (Feb 28, 2018)

kabbes said:


> What, the ketamine caused the bone to immediately knit and return whence it belongs?



whither, not 'whence'


----------



## kabbes (Feb 28, 2018)

petee said:


> whither, not 'whence'


whence | Definition of whence in English by Oxford Dictionaries

“From what place or source.”

My usage was correct.


----------



## petee (Feb 28, 2018)

kabbes said:


> whence | Definition of whence in English by Oxford Dictionaries
> 
> “From what place or source.”
> 
> My usage was correct.



no, it wasn't.


----------



## Orang Utan (Feb 28, 2018)

petee said:


> no, it wasn't.


No, whither is to not from


----------



## kabbes (Feb 28, 2018)

petee said:


> no, it wasn't.


If it was good enough for Shakespeare, it’s good enough for me.


----------



## 19force8 (Mar 1, 2018)

kabbes said:


> If it was good enough for Shakespeare, it’s good enough for me.


Pah! The man didn't even own a dictionary.


----------



## billbond (Mar 3, 2018)

I see that Jack Monroe has come off twitter, she was the one who had the court case with kate hopkins
Bet she will soon back seems a bit of a attention seeker. Niece followed her

“I am and always will be a genderqueer androgynous little dyke, but I’m coming of Twitter for the good fo my mental health. I have been in enough abusive relationships are suffering as a result of what I experience on here every day.

“I’m getting back in the kitchen. I will continue to fight for womens rights, and for trans rights, and for human rights (again trans women are women), but this is not the best place for me to do it.

Ending with: “Thanks for the last few years, and goodbye.”


----------



## Libertad (Mar 3, 2018)

billbond said:


> seems a bit of a attention seeker



There's a lot of it about.


----------



## existentialist (Mar 3, 2018)

billbond said:


> I see that Jack Monroe has come off twitter, she was the one who had the court case with kate hopkins
> Bet she will soon back seems a bit of a attention seeker. Niece followed her


Oh, I wondered whose photo that was next to the definition of "snide" in my Picture Dictionary. Now I think I know


----------



## gentlegreen (Mar 8, 2018)




----------



## not-bono-ever (Mar 8, 2018)

;pbvj ad fkvmq[erkoqekobdofkbn['oefbdfvq]wernibh]r#nmt]
yomkt[,wt,ot
wro-mynw


----------



## teqniq (Mar 8, 2018)

Erm, what?


----------



## JimW (Mar 8, 2018)

gentlegreen said:


> View attachment 129569


For a [former?] professional writer that's a particularly ham-fisted pastiche.


----------



## pesh (Mar 8, 2018)




----------



## Kaka Tim (Mar 8, 2018)

first they came for geert wilders
then they came for marine le pen
then they came for paul and jayda

and i thought - 

Can you please hurry the fuck up and come for Katie Hopkins?


----------



## 19force8 (Mar 8, 2018)

JimW said:


> For a [former?] professional writer that's a particularly ham-fisted pastiche.


Oh come on, by those standards I was a professional writer*

* I sometimes had to reply to letters of complaint.


----------



## Beats & Pieces (Mar 8, 2018)

billbond said:


> I see that Jack Monroe has come off twitter, she was the one who had the court case with kate hopkins
> Bet she will soon back seems a bit of a attention seeker. Niece followed her
> 
> “I am and always will be a genderqueer androgynous little dyke, but I’m coming of Twitter for the good fo my mental health. I have been in enough abusive relationships are suffering as a result of what I experience on here every day.
> ...


----------



## not-bono-ever (Mar 8, 2018)

Hopkins is truly trawling the depths with her support for Jay and Paula. And I had so much respect for her before this.


----------



## not-bono-ever (Mar 8, 2018)

teqniq said:


> Erm, what?



thumping keyboard post


----------



## Orang Utan (Mar 8, 2018)

Beats & Pieces said:


>


What's the issue here?


----------



## agricola (Mar 8, 2018)

not-bono-ever said:


> Hopkins is truly trawling the depths with her support for Jay and Paula. And I had so much respect for her before this.



"_First, they came for the Nazis_"


----------



## Beats & Pieces (Mar 8, 2018)

Orang Utan said:


> What's the issue here?


----------



## Orang Utan (Mar 8, 2018)

Beats & Pieces said:


>


You're rolling your eyes at the wrong person. There's nothing they say in that quote to take issue with unless you are who I suspect you to be.


----------



## Beats & Pieces (Mar 8, 2018)

Orang Utan said:


> You're rolling your eyes at the wrong person. There's nothing they say in that quote to take issue with unless you are who I suspect you to be.



What you suspect I can't know, and until you do I can't comment.


----------



## Orang Utan (Mar 8, 2018)

Yes, you can. You can qualify your eye-rolling


----------



## 19force8 (Mar 8, 2018)

not-bono-ever said:


> thumping keyboard post


Can I have a go?

ihuWFKJ B/QSCA/, MACS/LNas


----------



## 8ball (Mar 8, 2018)

JimW said:


> For a [former?] professional writer that's a particularly ham-fisted pastiche.



I've had a few, but I'm having trouble even working out what it's meant to mean.


----------



## 19force8 (Mar 13, 2018)

Even this won't make me feel sorry for Mark Regev.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Mar 15, 2018)

19force8 said:


> Even this won't make me feel sorry for Mark Regev.
> 
> View attachment 129922



Makes me feel sorry for the current Mrs Regev, though.


----------



## 19force8 (Mar 18, 2018)

ViolentPanda said:


> Makes me feel sorry for the current Mrs Regev, though.


Dunno, might be a win/win for her.


----------



## not-bono-ever (Mar 24, 2018)

she is running out of material, increasingly attention seeeking shite


----------



## existentialist (Mar 24, 2018)

not-bono-ever said:


> View attachment 130791
> 
> she is running out of material, increasingly attention seeeking shite


Thing is, if you push down too hard on your end of the see saw, then instead of the see saw going down, you go up. Hopkins must be about to achieve orbital velocity any time soon...


----------



## marty21 (Apr 19, 2018)

Katie Hopkins musical confronts the age of outrage

Not sure if this has been posted  ( read the whole thread ? Lol) 

She has been out-trolled here


----------



## Dom Traynor (Apr 20, 2018)

not-bono-ever said:


> View attachment 130791
> 
> she is running out of material, increasingly attention seeeking shite


Frankie Boyle wants his jokes back


----------



## Santino (May 24, 2018)




----------



## Teaboy (May 24, 2018)

Says all you need to know about her really.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (May 24, 2018)

The Mirror can't go wrong on this, front page apology, "Sorry, it wasn't because of your use of ketamine, it was cos you're a racist piece of filth. Happy to set the record straight."


----------



## elbows (May 24, 2018)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> The Mirror can't go wrong on this, front page apology, "Sorry, it wasn't because of your use of ketamine, it was cos you're a racist piece of filth. Happy to set the record straight."



Not too far off, see following post in bandwidth thread... #114159


----------



## Treacle Toes (May 24, 2018)




----------



## Dogsauce (May 26, 2018)

It’s not like they could offer her compensation for reputational damage, is it?


----------



## Supine (Aug 15, 2018)

This made me laugh


----------



## cyril_smear (Aug 15, 2018)

19force8 said:


> Even this won't make me feel sorry for Mark Regev.
> 
> View attachment 129922


Is Katie Hopkins Jewish? Not that it matters (she's still a cunt though).


----------



## cyril_smear (Aug 15, 2018)

19force8 said:


> Even this won't make me feel sorry for Mark Regev.
> 
> View attachment 129922


I never yhthoug I'd say this but poor Mark Regev


----------



## Badgers (Aug 15, 2018)

cyril_smear said:


> Is Katie Hopkins Jewish? Not that it matters (she's still a cunt though).


Who cares  

Jewish cunt? Athiest cunt? Christian cunt? Cunt cunt?


----------



## cyril_smear (Aug 15, 2018)

Badgers said:


> Who cares
> 
> Jewish cunt? Athiest cunt? Christian cunt? Cunt cunt?



She's a cunt!!!

Edit; nay, she's a fucking cunt and a shit cunt at that.


----------



## Toast Rider (Aug 16, 2018)

Must be desperate if they need speakers of the calibre of a washed up failed business game show celebribigot


----------



## krtek a houby (Aug 16, 2018)

Toast Rider said:


> Must be desperate if they need speakers of the calibre of a washed up failed business game show celebribigot



'tis all the rage these days


----------



## isvicthere? (Aug 16, 2018)

Supine said:


> View attachment 144116 This made me laugh



It's interesting that Hopkins seems to disapprove of Idris Elba "fishing for attention"! Pot-kettle-black &c.


----------



## not-bono-ever (Aug 16, 2018)

It is pitiful really- this is how she earns a living - I can think of fewer things bags that score less on the contributions to society scale. She is so very very sad


----------



## mojo pixy (Aug 16, 2018)

Ditto the entire commentariat, frankly, _Parasites_ writ large.


----------



## Voley (Sep 16, 2018)

This is her back in 2014:

 



She's just had to enter into an IVA for bankruptcy after losing that libel case to Jack Monroe.


----------



## Badgers (Sep 16, 2018)

Voley said:


> This is her back in 2014:
> 
> View attachment 147144
> 
> ...


The Jack Monroe twitter thread is a great one


----------



## Badgers (Sep 16, 2018)




----------



## agricola (Sep 16, 2018)

Voley said:


> This is her back in 2014:
> 
> View attachment 147144
> 
> ...



She was touring South-West Wales last week trying to suggest that teaching children in Wales a dead language (Welsh) was wrong, so perhaps this isn't so much about Monroe as it is the swift vengeance of the meibion.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Sep 16, 2018)

Voley said:


> This is her back in 2014:
> 
> View attachment 147144
> 
> ...



Thanks for that Voley, proper brightened up my day


----------



## hash tag (Sep 16, 2018)

Someone told her to duck of out of Wales, she and her views were not welcome etc. 
She has filed for an iva then. That's Kharma for you.


----------



## Poot (Sep 16, 2018)

"arbitrary defender of free speech didn't want anyone to know'

I know I shouldn't, and actually it was said quite kindly, but the recommendation about where she could buy a cookbook all about cooking on a budget did make me chuckle.


----------



## A380 (Sep 16, 2018)

Badgers said:


>



There are some things that challenge my atheism...


----------



## Manter (Sep 16, 2018)

Voley said:


> This is her back in 2014:
> 
> View attachment 147144
> 
> ...


Ha!


----------



## Supine (Sep 16, 2018)

What a shame


----------



## Voley (Sep 16, 2018)

From what I can gather, Jack Monroe offered her a way out and the money back if she'd just apologise but she wouldn't do it. 

Hard not to gloat, really, isn't it?


----------



## Poot (Sep 16, 2018)

Couldn't happen to a nicer person.


----------



## beesonthewhatnow (Sep 16, 2018)

Voley said:


> From what I can gather, Jack Monroe offered her a way out and the money back if she'd just apologise but she wouldn't do it.
> 
> Hard not to gloat, really, isn't it?


It’s genuinely made my day.


----------



## marty21 (Sep 16, 2018)

Voley said:


> From what I can gather, Jack Monroe offered her a way out and the money back if she'd just apologise but she wouldn't do it.
> 
> Hard not to gloat, really, isn't it?


I think she asked her to pay £5k to a refugee charity  Probably knew Hopkins would never go for that  Although, short-term pain for long-term gain.


----------



## Voley (Sep 16, 2018)

marty21 said:


> I think she asked her to pay £5k to a refugee charity  Probably knew Hopkins would never go for that  Although, short-term pain for long-term gain.


Plus her costs. £24K instead of £120+. That's from memory though so don't quote me on that - the point is it really looks like she didn't have to be in this situation. Twitter has just dug this one up from back when she was wagging her finger at people in debt. Now to be fair to her - and God knows I don't want to -she's got an IVA so will be making efforts to pay back what she owes. But still.


----------



## kabbes (Sep 16, 2018)

I don’t really understand how 120k has left her bankrupt


----------



## Poi E (Sep 16, 2018)

A feckless person. I blame the parents.


----------



## existentialist (Sep 16, 2018)

kabbes said:


> I don’t really understand how 120k has left her bankrupt


Perhaps she already had debts? Or maybe it's a bit of "can't pay (easily), won't pay". I'm not convinced she's the full shilling.

Individual Insolvency Register - Home


----------



## Poi E (Sep 16, 2018)

existentialist said:


> I'm not convinced she's the full shilling.



You do those with mental health difficulties a disservice. She is just awful, darling, and that's it.


----------



## existentialist (Sep 16, 2018)

Poi E said:


> You do those with mental health difficulties a disservice. She is just awful, darling, and that's it.


Oh, I don't think it's necessarily mental health difficulties - I just think she doesn't have the ability to think about what she's doing/saying. Like a spoiled child, she expects to be able to say and do whatever she wants and not experience any consequences.


----------



## Voley (Sep 16, 2018)

kabbes said:


> I don’t really understand how 120k has left her bankrupt


I was also wondering what her creditors might think about her turning down the offer of having the money back (assuming it's true). Don't know a lot about these things but I can't imagine The Insolvency Service views things like that very favourably.


----------



## not-bono-ever (Sep 16, 2018)

I would have thought she *prepared* for this- how you want to interpret that is up to you. and the insolvensy lot


----------



## gosub (Sep 16, 2018)

Poi E said:


> You do those with mental health difficulties a disservice. She is just awful, darling, and that's it.


To be fair she has put herself in a position where she may well have mental health difficulties. A lot people with mental health problems and financial difficulties can coz mental health difficulties.. Vicious spiral


Though to get there as a result of 140 characters worth of brainfart is quite spectacular.  Up there with the ketamine reportage story. 


This thread draws me back with the same morbid fascination of rubbernecking a motorway carcrash


----------



## existentialist (Sep 16, 2018)

gosub said:


> Though to get there as a result of 140 characters worth of brainfart is quite spectacular.  Up there with the ketamine reportage story.


Plenty of people have got into far worse positions with 140 characters worth of brainfart - where Hopkins fucked up was in not doing the smart thing and backing down from her thoughtless hatefulness. Which is, in my view, what makes the resultant mess so delicious. And what makes it even more lipsmackingly delicious is how clear Jack Monroe is being to avoid just the kind of triumphalism we know Hopkins would have indulged in had the boot been on the other foot.


----------



## bellaozzydog (Sep 16, 2018)

I think she is of high enough profile to continue making money. Unfortunately the less palatable she becomes (Is that possible) the less palatable the organisations willing to use her type of profile.

How low can she go..watch this space


----------



## DotCommunist (Sep 16, 2018)

bellaozzydog said:


> I think she is of high enough profile to continue making money. Unfortunately the less palatable she becomes (Is that possible) the less palatable the organisations willing to use her type of profile.
> 
> How low can she go..watch this space


she was with canadian far right news outfit rebel media. possibly still is


----------



## gosub (Sep 16, 2018)

DotCommunist said:


> she was with canadian far right news outfit rebel media. possibly still is


Ah, the crew with the legal team that got 'Tommy Robinson'  free full board and lodging..


----------



## Plumdaff (Sep 16, 2018)

Well here in Wales she's been hanging about outside closed English medium schools at the weekend and taking pictures with kids cycling past without their parents permission. On that basis I don't think her massively hypocritical little campaign against the Welsh language has much backing or finance.

I might pity someone less contemptible.


----------



## existentialist (Sep 16, 2018)

This is mildly interesting...

MRS KATIE OLIVIA HOPKINS director information. Free director information. Director id 912244911



> Mrs Katie Olivia Hopkins holds 2 appointments at 2 active companies, has resigned from 1 companies and held 0 appointments at 0 dissolved companies. KATIE began their first appointment at the age of 32. Their longest current appointment spans 11 years, 2 months and 26 days at KATIE HOPKINS LIMITED
> 
> The combined cash at bank value for all businesses where KATIE holds a current appointment equals £225.2k, a combined total current assets value of £433.3k with a total current liabilities of £240.1k and a total current net worth of £197.1k. Roles associated with Mrs Katie Olivia Hopkins within the recorded businesses include: Director


----------



## gosub (Sep 16, 2018)

existentialist said:


> This is mildly interesting...
> 
> MRS KATIE OLIVIA HOPKINS director information. Free director information. Director id 912244911



I'd estimate her liability much higher than that ....somewhere closer to 'complete'


----------



## not-bono-ever (Sep 16, 2018)

Katie Olivia HOPKINS - Personal Appointments (free information from Companies House)

*satans mother*


----------



## Poi E (Sep 16, 2018)

Done some work for white racists in South Africa, too.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Sep 16, 2018)

kabbes said:


> I don’t really understand how 120k has left her bankrupt



She clearly never had you to mentor her in finance 


Losing all her paid work whilst being slapped with an un-swerveable bill of >£150k, house sold for just under a million but clearly mortgaged to the hilt or else there’d be equity, which it seems there isn’t. Plus costs of trying to get her show back on the road; plane tickets to Cape Town, hotels, ket, swastikas and whatever else the ‘orrible cunt needs to ply her trade.

2016 year of loss.

2018 year of tiny violin.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Sep 16, 2018)

The Mirror is rapidly becoming my fav rag...



			
				The Mirror said:
			
		

> things have gone from bad to worse for Katie Hopkins, who is now teetering on the verge of bankruptcy after being forced to apply for an IVA to manage her crippling debts.
> 
> *The racist commentator*, who made a living from writing reams of vile content about immigrants and Muslims, had to take out an Individual Voluntary Arrangement to manage her debts


----------



## Ax^ (Sep 16, 2018)

at least she did not get arrested for doing ketamine in south Africa


----------



## existentialist (Sep 16, 2018)

Ax^ said:


> at least she did not get arrest for doing ketamine in south Africa


No, just for inciting racial hatred


----------



## not-bono-ever (Sep 16, 2018)

she has been pumping the hidden genocide i.e. white south africans, line for some time now


----------



## Pickman's model (Sep 16, 2018)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> She clearly never had you to mentor her in finance
> 
> 
> Losing all her paid work whilst being slapped with an un-swerveable bill of >£150k, house sold for just over a million but clearly mortgaged to the hilt or else there’d be equity, which it seems there isn’t. Plus costs of trying to get her show back on the road; plane tickets to Cape Town, hotels, ket, swastikas and whatever else the ‘orrible cunt needs to ply her trade.
> ...


Yeh we've had to open up a second factory for my tiny violins as demand has soared, up 300% year on year


----------



## Calamity1971 (Sep 16, 2018)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> ket, swastikas


----------



## Jeff Robinson (Sep 17, 2018)

kabbes said:


> I don’t really understand how 120k has left her bankrupt



Seems to have coincided with her losing her weekly column and radio show. Maybe the combination of the settlement costs, her own legal fees (can’t believe she thought she could win this case), sudden loss of earnings and an expensive lifestyle was enough?


----------



## Poi E (Sep 17, 2018)

Land stolen, inhabitants displaced or killed. Hopkins has many a cause if that's her bent.


----------



## mwgdrwg (Sep 17, 2018)

It looks like us nasty Welsh Speakers is one of her latest causes. The vile freak.


----------



## alex_ (Sep 17, 2018)

Voley said:


> From what I can gather, Jack Monroe offered her a way out and the money back if she'd just apologise but she wouldn't do it.
> 
> Hard not to gloat, really, isn't it?



Jack Monroe offered to accept an apology, Hopkins refused, it went to court - all this money is now costs - there is no money back offer there was a way out before it got very expensive

Hopkins is either very stupid, very badly advised, mad or more than 1 of these.

Alex


----------



## Poot (Sep 17, 2018)

existentialist said:


> No, just for inciting racial hatred


Oh come on now, she was just saying what we were all thinking


----------



## likesfish (Sep 17, 2018)

Thing was the insults she aimed at Jack Monroe were aimed at the wrong person  so she could have apologised but chose not to so got stung


----------



## Sprocket. (Sep 17, 2018)

She is a truly vindictive person who appears to be bereft of and inkling of compassion for anyone but herself.
(Can I believe in kharma but not mediums)


----------



## A380 (Sep 17, 2018)

likesfish said:


> Thing was the insults she aimed at Jack Monroe were aimed at the wrong person  so she could have apologised but chose not to so got stung


I think what did for Katie ( along with the arrogance and stupidity obvs) was that plastic patriot world view that only people on the far right can can have any affection for the UK or any respect for people in the armed forces. So Katie saw one slur- about pissing on war memorials as one that could be levelled against any ‘lefty’. Jack was particularly quick to point out that she had relatives in the forces including one who’d been down south in the Falkland’s war with 2Para

This contrasts with Katie’s own experience of military life by wasting a place a Sandhurst by either fibbing to get in about not having asthma or, perhaps more likely, fibbing about having it whilst there as an excuse for failing to dig in and increase her fitness levels to the not easy, but not ridiculously difficult levels required at the start of the programme.

Anyway. Ha ha.

I though Jack Monroe’s response to the news was particularly thinking and gracious too.


----------



## likesfish (Sep 18, 2018)

it was epilepsy quite serious as well she in her own words was having blackouts but chose to continue she was lucky not to be dishonorably discharged things that go bang and not full attention do not mix.


----------



## The39thStep (Sep 20, 2018)

and she wont be going on her cruise next year either. 
Katie Hopkins and Tommy Robinson's cruise cancelled - as she swerves bankruptcy


----------



## gosub (Sep 20, 2018)

The39thStep said:


> and she wont be going on her cruise next year either.
> Katie Hopkins and Tommy Robinson's cruise cancelled - as she swerves bankruptcy


  A rerun type thing of Farage vs Geldof on Thames could have been quite entertaining


----------



## The39thStep (Sep 20, 2018)

gosub said:


> A rerun type thing of Farage vs Geldof on Thames could have been quite entertaining


£2700 a ticket apparantly


----------



## Teaboy (Sep 20, 2018)

The39thStep said:


> £2700 a ticket apparantly



Blimey.  Was it going to be some sort of fascist version of the love boat where they chugg around the med trying to run over drowning refugees?


----------



## pesh (Sep 20, 2018)

more like Titanic but with the captain in a k hole


----------



## Teaboy (Sep 20, 2018)

pesh said:


> more like Titanic but with the captain in a k hole



A racist k-hole?


----------



## pesh (Sep 20, 2018)

a kkk hole?


----------



## The39thStep (Sep 20, 2018)

Teaboy said:


> Blimey.  Was it going to be some sort of fascist version of the love boat where they chugg around the med trying to run over drowning refugees?


Educational lectures, meet and greet with AfD, Jobbik and others. Not sure what the entertainment on board was though.


----------



## DotCommunist (Sep 20, 2018)

The39thStep said:


> Educational lectures, meet and greet with AfD, Jobbik and others. Not sure what the entertainment on board was though.


black and white minstrel show


----------



## eatmorecheese (Sep 20, 2018)

DotCommunist said:


> black and white minstrel show


Ket-addled book burning


----------



## The39thStep (Sep 20, 2018)

DotCommunist said:


> black and white minstrel show


might be lost on the Yanks and Canadians
I'd have this bloke on


----------



## a_chap (Sep 20, 2018)

I get the impression people of a certain age will find that comedy routine funny. Sadly it will be wasted on the young.


----------



## A380 (Sep 20, 2018)

The39thStep said:


> and she wont be going on her cruise next year either.
> Katie Hopkins and Tommy Robinson's cruise cancelled - as she swerves bankruptcy




Now you tell me. I’ve just paid the deposit on the salvage tug hire to bring one of these down...


----------



## Streathamite (Sep 21, 2018)

christ, imagine being the contracted crew having to work that passage


----------



## ffsear (Sep 21, 2018)

Not even being a subtle racist anymore.   She's seriously losing the plot.


----------



## Yossarian (Sep 21, 2018)

ffsear said:


> Not even being a subtle racist anymore.   She's seriously losing the plot.




Was there ever a time when everything she said wasn't insane?


----------



## DotCommunist (Sep 21, 2018)

I too struggle to recall the era of Hopkins subtlety. I think the shittiest one yet was the post manchester attack one urging 'western men' to take up arms. Fuckin twat.


----------



## krtek a houby (Sep 21, 2018)

ffsear said:


> Not even being a subtle racist anymore.   She's seriously losing the plot.




Hopkins is targeting kids, now? Vile, vile person.


----------



## Rob Ray (Sep 21, 2018)

The39thStep said:


> might be lost on the Yanks and Canadians
> I'd have this bloke on




Hang on... is that Frances O Grady at 4 minutes 40?


----------



## Badgers (Sep 21, 2018)

krtek a houby said:


> Hopkins is targeting kids, now? Vile, vile person.


My first thought too  even in right wing circles she must be struggling for 'photoshoot pals' as she is such a walking embarrassment to the human race


----------



## The39thStep (Sep 21, 2018)

ffsear said:


> Not even being a subtle racist anymore.   She's seriously losing the plot.



Surprised to see how few babies had been named Nigel after Farages glittering career


----------



## krtek a houby (Sep 21, 2018)

Badgers said:


> My first thought too  even in right wing circles she must be struggling for 'photoshoot pals' as she is such a walking embarrassment to the human race



I wonder, in ten, 15 years time where she'll be. Will she have had an epiphany and renounced all this or will she end up on Fascist Big Brother (or whatever its incarnation down the road)...


----------



## The39thStep (Sep 21, 2018)

Yossarian said:


> Was there ever a time when everything she said wasn't insane?
> 
> View attachment 147579


Call Katy Hopkins in any British court and £140, 000 comes running out


----------



## The39thStep (Sep 21, 2018)

krtek a houby said:


> I wonder, in ten, 15 years time where she'll be. Will she have had an epiphany and renounced all this or will she end up on Fascist Big Brother (or whatever its incarnation down the road)...


she'll be forgotten in five years max


----------



## krtek a houby (Sep 21, 2018)

The39thStep said:


> she'll be forgotten in five years max



I admire your optimism (and will bookmark it, just in case  )


----------



## Badgers (Sep 21, 2018)

krtek a houby said:


> I wonder, in ten, 15 years time where she'll be. Will she have had an epiphany and renounced all this or will she end up on Fascist Big Brother (or whatever its incarnation down the road)...


Dead in ten I would guess


----------



## krtek a houby (Sep 21, 2018)

Badgers said:


> Dead in ten I would guess



I admire your optimism (although I don't wish her dead) I'd rather see her in prison or rejected by everybody...


----------



## existentialist (Sep 21, 2018)

krtek a houby said:


> I admire your optimism (although I don't wish her dead) I'd rather see her in prison or rejected by everybody...


The worst thing that could happen to her is that she becomes ignored and forgotten.


----------



## marty21 (Sep 21, 2018)

The39thStep said:


> and she wont be going on her cruise next year either.
> Katie Hopkins and Tommy Robinson's cruise cancelled - as she swerves bankruptcy


We were hoping for Jane McDonald so were disappointed when this act turned up on stage


----------



## Mrs Miggins (Sep 21, 2018)

I've always thought that she never really believed all the shit she was saying - it was all just a ruse to make as much money as possible. How amusing that she's now lost it all.


----------



## Lurdan (Oct 29, 2018)

Kind of inevitable I guess...


----------



## existentialist (Oct 29, 2018)

Lurdan said:


> Kind of inevitable I guess...


God, but she's a hateful piece of shit.


----------



## elbows (Oct 29, 2018)

Ham tension seeking behaviour, she needs some ointment for her supreme cists.


----------



## hot air baboon (Oct 29, 2018)

does she follow Jenny Tonge ?


----------



## Kaka Tim (Oct 30, 2018)

hot air baboon said:


> does she follow Jenny Tonge ?
> 
> View attachment 151044



'kin ell - yeah cos the far right are well known supporters of the palestinian struggle.


----------



## dylanredefined (Oct 30, 2018)

Kaka Tim said:


> 'kin ell - yeah cos the far right are well known supporters of the palestinian struggle.


 Yeah they hate Jews , but, love military hardware and hate Arabs.
Kind of short circuits their tiny brains.


----------



## hot air baboon (Oct 30, 2018)

Hopkin's comment trying to score Twitter likes out of a brutal senseless massacre emanates from an idiotic attention seeker - what's Tonge's excuse ?

afaics a significant element of the so-called alt-right are fully aligned with the Israeli far-right


----------



## hot air baboon (Oct 30, 2018)

...and just as a matter of historical interest...

_In the 1960s Genoud began supplying arms for Palestinian causes. The Lausanne-based New European Order organisation,[3] met in Barcelona in April 1969 where Palestinian groups received financial support and Genoud placed them in contact with former Nazis who would assist their military training, including pledged support designated for the Palestinian Liberation Organisation.

François Genoud - Wikipedia_


----------



## not-bono-ever (Oct 30, 2018)

Lurdan said:


> Kind of inevitable I guess...



200 hundred likes

how has it come to this?


----------



## existentialist (Oct 30, 2018)

not-bono-ever said:


> 200 hundred likes
> 
> how has it come to this?


One born every minute.


----------



## alex_ (Oct 30, 2018)

not-bono-ever said:


> 200 hundred likes
> 
> how has it come to this?



What’s so preposterous is that the bloke concerned, is almost certainly not a us passport holder, probably can’t even point to the med on a map, will literally know nothing about the refugee issues in the med and even stated that he was murdering Jews because they supported immigration into the US.

Hopkins is playing nazi bingo - it’s total fucking nonsense, and it’s still got likes !

Alex


----------



## Yossarian (Oct 30, 2018)

alex_ said:


> What’s so preposterous is that the bloke concerned, is almost certainly not a us passport holder, probably can’t even point to the med on a map, will literally know nothing about the refugee issues in the med and even stated that he was murdering Jews because they supported immigration into the US.
> 
> Hopkins is playing nazi bingo - it’s total fucking nonsense, and it’s still got likes !
> 
> Alex



I thought Hopkins' tweet was evil, but reasonably clear in stating that she believes liberal Jews brought this on themselves.


----------



## jimmer (Oct 31, 2018)

Hopkins was the headline speaker at the recent Traditional Britain Group (TBG) annual conference, for those unaware of who the TBG are, they're essentially what happened to the Monday Club after the Tories disavowed them for being openly racist and their events are usually well attended by Britain's leading fascists.


----------



## Ranbay (Oct 31, 2018)

3:33 is all i could take


----------



## Chilli.s (Oct 31, 2018)

She's a fuckin ballshitter who loves the sound of her own voice. Yawnsum.


----------



## skyscraper101 (Oct 31, 2018)

Can we just off her from Twitter already like Alex Jones already? Hasn't she said enough racist shit by now?


----------



## NoXion (Nov 1, 2018)

not-bono-ever said:


> 200 hundred likes
> 
> how has it come to this?



Twitter has a huge userbase, I wouldn't be so disheartened by such figures.


----------



## Chilli.s (Nov 1, 2018)

NoXion said:


> Twitter has a huge userbase, I wouldn't be so disheartened by such figures.


So 200 likes on twatter is actually a bit sad and pathetic.


----------



## Sprocket. (Nov 1, 2018)

Chilli.s said:


> So 200 likes on twatter is actually a bit sad and pathetic.



Like herself.


----------



## likesfish (Nov 1, 2018)

Chilli.s said:


> So 200 likes on twatter is actually a bit sad and pathetic.



IF your a "professional" shit stirrer and celebrity it's tumbleweed level


----------



## Lurdan (Nov 1, 2018)

She deleted that tweet a day after posting it. 

200 was only the number of likes when I took the screencap. There's a subsequent screencap where it had risen to 785. It has helpfully been posted to the twitter thread where she explains that she deleted the original tweet because it had 


> been misinterpreted to suggest the UK Chief Rabbi's support for mass migration was related to the horrific mass murder at the synagogue in Pittsburgh.



I imagine someone reminded her that she can no longer afford to defend her freedom of speech in court


----------



## keybored (Jan 8, 2019)

It looks a lot like Rebel Media have quietly mothballed Project Katie.

Zelo Street: Katie Hopkins DROPPED By Rebel Media


----------



## Yossarian (Jan 8, 2019)

keybored said:


> It looks a lot like Rebel Media have quietly mothballed Project Katie.
> 
> Zelo Street: Katie Hopkins DROPPED By Rebel Media



From the timing, it seems like her tweet in October blaming the chief rabbi for the synagogue massacre in Pittsburgh might have been a step too far even for Rebel Media.

Looks like she's found something else to keep her busy:


----------



## pinkmonkey (Jan 8, 2019)

She's made some anti asylum seeker rant today, whilst clutching a government document which contradicts what she has to say.


----------



## Chilli.s (Jan 8, 2019)

Talking out her arse as usual.


----------



## Kuke (Jan 8, 2019)

krtek a houby said:


> I wonder, in ten, 15 years time where she'll be. Will she have had an epiphany and renounced all this or will she end up on Fascist Big Brother (or whatever its incarnation down the road)...



Doing panto.

...In Thanet.


----------



## clicker (Jan 9, 2019)

Oh no she won't.


----------



## brogdale (Jan 9, 2019)

Kuke said:


> Doing panto.
> 
> ...In Thanet.


(((Thanet)))


----------



## Kaka Tim (Jan 9, 2019)

hopefully she'll end up chuntering her bile to nobody but herself as she mops up piss as a zero hours night cleaner. They way her careers is going shes going to hit that stage within 9 months.


----------



## Celyn (Jan 9, 2019)

Kaka Tim, I am impressed by your optimism.	

However, nights are valuable and I don't think I would trust that person to clean them properly. Might possibly consider employing her to clean bits of days. Only bits, of course, and would need good character references.

Really, while it might do her good to do work that she considers beneath her, with people tscbh, with wages tscbh _etc_, it would be unfair and cruel to the other cleaners who had to work with her.

She needs to have a very unpleasant job, much worse than cleaning, but a job that doesn't let her harm people, pays minimum wage (on the zero hours contract that you suggested), involves very antisocial sleep-wrecking shifts, and necessitates living in a fairly grotty (but overpriced) bedsit or flatshare and having a bit of worry about how to pay the rent, feed the meter/pay bills, buy food ...

_Edited to add_:  This job must also be in a different country because she would certainly enjoy being a scary foreign immigrant.


----------



## Raheem (Jan 9, 2019)

Is a zero hours contract really the best punishment we can think of for Katie Hopkins? Please, people, let's show some creativity.


----------



## keybored (Jan 9, 2019)

Raheem said:


> Is a zero hours contract really the best punishment we can think of for Katie Hopkins? Please, people, let's show some creativity.


Let her continue being Katie Hopkins?


----------



## wiskey (Jan 9, 2019)

Completely ignore her existence, as if she just isn't there.


----------



## Raheem (Jan 9, 2019)

wiskey said:


> Completely ignore her existence, as if she just isn't there.


Who?


----------



## Yossarian (Jan 9, 2019)

I guess she wasn't exactly setting the world on fire at Rebel Media if it took people months to notice that she got fired.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Jan 9, 2019)

Raheem said:


> Is a zero hours contract really the best punishment we can think of for Katie Hopkins? Please, people, let's show some creativity.



Bullet in the face, dump her corpse in the bins behind Sainsbury’s.


----------



## Yossarian (Jan 9, 2019)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> Bullet in the face, dump her corpse in the bins behind Sainsbury’s.



Making food inedible for skip-divers would be typical Hopkins.


----------



## krtek a houby (Jan 9, 2019)

Raheem said:


> Is a zero hours contract really the best punishment we can think of for Katie Hopkins? Please, people, let's show some creativity.



Sign her up to urban and let her "debate" with humanity's finest, most discerning, minds.


----------



## mystic pyjamas (Jan 9, 2019)

Raheem said:


> Who?


Katie Hopkins.
O I see what you did there.


----------



## chilango (Jan 9, 2019)

Can't we just delete this thread now and contribute just a little to erasing her online profile?


----------



## krtek a houby (Jan 9, 2019)

chilango said:


> Can't we just delete this thread now and contribute just a little to erasing her online profile?



Ach, nobody reads urban, it's fine


----------



## Kaka Tim (Jan 9, 2019)

krtek a houby said:


> Ach, nobody reads urban, it's fine


----------



## krtek a houby (Jan 9, 2019)

Kaka Tim said:


>



Meh, he's probably trying to pick up hot dates


----------



## chilango (Jan 9, 2019)

Free mix CDs more like....


----------



## ViolentPanda (Jan 9, 2019)

Chilli.s said:


> Talking out her arse as usual.



I suppose that's probably why she hasn't done her streak down Regents St with a sausage up her Gary - too busy using her arse for talking.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Jan 9, 2019)

Raheem said:


> Is a zero hours contract really the best punishment we can think of for Katie Hopkins? Please, people, let's show some creativity.



Give her a job cleaning the toilets in the Houses of Parliament with her tongue.


----------



## maomao (Jan 9, 2019)

I couldn't remember Katie Hopkins surname the other day when I was talking to someone so I googled 'Katie cunt' and it worked.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Jan 9, 2019)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> Bullet in the face, dump her corpse in the bins behind Sainsbury’s.



Too quick, not enough pain and suffering involved.

How about dipping her in a vat of her own bile, letting it slowly eat into her flesh, causing suppurating pustulent sores on the body. 

Or, if you want to make her suffering a social benefit, put her in the stocks, and provide the public with rotten vegetables - and the occasional stone - to chuck at her.


----------



## Poi E (Jan 9, 2019)

We'll not want to waste those rotten veges soon. Nice curdled gruel.


----------



## maomao (Jan 9, 2019)

ViolentPanda said:


> Too quick, not enough pain and suffering involved.
> 
> How about dipping her in a vat of her own bile, letting it slowly eat into her flesh, causing suppurating pustulent sores on the body.
> 
> Or, if you want to make her suffering a social benefit, put her in the stocks, and provide the public with rotten vegetables - and the occasional stone - to chuck at her.


You're right but such intricate executions would only feed her sense of self importance. I say stomach shot and let her bleed out in a bin behind Lidl.


----------



## not a trot (Jan 9, 2019)

ViolentPanda said:


> Give her a job cleaning the toilets in the Houses of Parliament with her tongue.



Name all publics bogs after her, then we can all piss on her.


----------



## Kuke (Jan 9, 2019)

K in every orifice then leave her in a room where every surface is covered in sandpaper.


----------



## Treacle Toes (Jan 9, 2019)

Kuke said:


> K in every orifice then leave her in a room where every surface is covered in sandpaper.



Stop sharing weird sexually violent fantasy shit please. A massive run up and punch in her shitty mouth will suffice.


----------



## SheilaNaGig (Jan 9, 2019)

maomao said:


> I couldn't remember Katie Hopkins surname the other day when I was talking to someone so I googled 'Katie cunt' and it worked.




Hopkins also comes up for

Katie horrible
Katie bitch (immediately after some apparently current slang term)
Katie nasty
Katie arsehole
Katie hurtful

And even
Katie thoroughly unpleasant


ETA

Also for:

Katie unpopular (although she shares this with Katie Price)


----------



## existentialist (Jan 9, 2019)

krtek a houby said:


> Sign her up to urban and let her "debate" with humanity's finest, most discerning, minds.


What have you got against Urban that you would do such a terrible thing to it?


----------



## cyril_smear (Jan 22, 2019)

What became of Katie Hopkins? She used to be all over the meedya...


----------



## Dogsauce (Jan 23, 2019)

Maybe someone could file one of those Google ‘right to be forgotten’ requests on her behalf? I’m sure it would be a relief to her to have no online footprint.


----------



## Poot (Jan 23, 2019)

In recent times she's been out-Hopkinsed so often that she's become lost in the noise I think. Either that or she's taken over Trump's Twitter feed.


----------



## ska invita (Jan 23, 2019)

cyril_smear said:


> What became of Katie Hopkins? She used to be all over the meedya...


Most recent tweet is gloating that a little video she made telling lies about what asylum seekers get if they come to the uk has over a million views 'on twitter alone'. So she's far from gone away.
The left is totally outflanked on social media


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 23, 2019)

cyril_smear said:


> What became of Katie Hopkins? She used to be all over the meedya...


----------



## cyril_smear (Jan 23, 2019)

ska invita said:


> So she's far from gone awaya


Shame


----------



## gentlegreen (Apr 16, 2019)

Those vile Notre Dame tweets.
Evil anti-"pc" bitch is hysterical.


----------



## petee (Apr 16, 2019)

gentlegreen said:


> Those vile Notre Dame tweets.
> Evil anti-"pc" bitch is hysterical.



jesus h. christ, so to speak.


----------



## Sprocket. (Apr 16, 2019)

No one has taken any notice of her for a bit. An empty vessel.


----------



## ska invita (Apr 16, 2019)

I look forward to hearing her take on the evidence that Stonehenge was built by 'immigrants' from southern europe


----------



## teqniq (Apr 16, 2019)

Conspiracy theories regarding Notre Dame seem to be crawling out of the woodwork predictably from the racist right and far-right. Qanon have been spouting guff but also noted Islamophobe Frank Gaffney:



also


----------



## JuanTwoThree (Apr 16, 2019)

Katie Hopkins using the fire as a metaphor for the Christian heart of Paris being extirpated, according to her, while careful not to accuse Islam directly but just leaving the suggestion of it, is more insidious than some nutter going straight for the conspiracy theory.


----------



## Sprocket. (Apr 16, 2019)

She is so obviously the epitome of Christian belief.


----------



## krtek a houby (Apr 16, 2019)

On darker moments, I get the feeling that people like Hopkins (or indeed, Trump with his attacks on Ilhan Omar) are trying to instigate something really, really horrible against Muslims. I fear for the future.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Apr 16, 2019)

What's with her mixing Jews and Christians together here? Is she not aware that there are three interlinked Abrahamic religions?


----------



## Treacle Toes (Apr 16, 2019)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> What's with her mixing Jews and Christians together here? Is she not aware that there are three interlinked Abrahamic religions?


She doesn't care for facts and Judeo-Christian/Western is obviously code for _White. _She thinks she is being clever.


----------



## pinkmonkey (Apr 16, 2019)

krtek a houby said:


> On darker moments, I get the feeling that people like Hopkins (or indeed, Trump with his attacks on Ilhan Omar) are trying to instigate something really, really horrible against Muslims. I fear for the future.


Well they've already achieved it - from the nasty attacks in the street on innocent British women trying to mind their own business that someone I work for keeps telling me about.


----------



## Favelado (Apr 16, 2019)

teqniq said:


> Conspiracy theories regarding Notre Dame seem to be crawling out of the woodwork predictably from the racist right and far-right. Qanon have been spouting guff but also noted Islamophobe Frank Gaffney:
> 
> View attachment 167880
> 
> ...



I saw the headline and thought it was Dean Gaffney. After the East 17 guy's meltdown, it didn't seem impossible.


----------



## mojo pixy (Apr 16, 2019)

I can't think of a church in Europe which has been burned down by a muslim for a very, very long time, certainly not in my lifetime. There's always just some grudge-laden anti-christian and the most famous I can think is a genuine neo-nazi. There was a man in Penzance last year, but ''Paul Ratcliffe'' doesn't seem to be a muslim name whatever his personal politics may be.

Not that facts matter to these people, but still. Burned churches is a minor interest of mine so I keep an eye on them. This one is special because of its stature and significance, if it turns out to have been arson I wouldn't be surprised to see a noisy minority demand the return of the guillotine for the culprits.

EtA, wrong thread but whatever. There's no context there for the above post so it can stay here.


----------



## Yossarian (Apr 16, 2019)

She's sticking to the Notre Dame Truther angle and will probably be going on about it for the next year.


----------



## krtek a houby (Apr 16, 2019)

Wish she'd gone up in flames instead of ND.


----------



## Sprocket. (Apr 16, 2019)

To paraphrase the great Marcus Garvey.

A man without knowledge of his past history, origin and culture is like a tree without Hopkins swinging from it!


----------



## JuanTwoThree (Apr 16, 2019)

Yossarian said:


> She's sticking to the Notre Dame Truther angle and will probably be going on about it for the next year.
> 
> View attachment 167899



FOAF 
Friend of a Fascist


----------



## gentlegreen (Apr 16, 2019)

By coincidence, an important mosque has gone up in flames in Jerusalem.

jerusalem mosque fire - Google Search


----------



## mojo pixy (Apr 16, 2019)

god upping the ante, again


----------



## Sprocket. (Apr 16, 2019)

ska invita said:


> I look forward to hearing her take on the evidence that Stonehenge was built by 'immigrants' from southern europe



OT. But I knew this from reading the Times Atlas of World History about 40 years ago. Bit late with the news or because it’s a now confirmed theory?
Might need a move to separate thread.


----------



## likesfish (Apr 16, 2019)

When Hopkins dies in a tragic honey badger related accident (just have to wait for Maggie to grow a bit more). .

Karma would have her reincarnated as an asylum seeker.


----------



## Dogsauce (Apr 16, 2019)

likesfish said:


> When Hopkins dies in a tragic honey badger related accident (just have to wait for Maggie to grow a bit more). .
> 
> Karma would have her reincarnated as an asylum seeker.



That sounds too painless, I think some sort of termite catastrophe would be more satisfying. Or better still she lives but nobody pays the slightest attention to her crap.


----------



## Balbi (Apr 16, 2019)

Bang on, Dogsauce. A bitter retirement (beginning any time now, thanks) of isolation and loneliness.


----------



## existentialist (Apr 16, 2019)

Balbi said:


> Bang on, Dogsauce. A bitter retirement (beginning any time now, thanks) of isolation and loneliness.


This is much more the sort of karmic misery I'd like to inflict. If there were a way of forcing someone to uncover their blind spots and see their appallingness in all its glory, I'd guarantee that it'd cause far more pain and terror than all the termites, alligators, or arse-boring boneworms (I just invented those) on the face of the planet...

Scopolamine, perhaps?


----------



## Yossarian (Apr 16, 2019)

likesfish said:


> Karma would have her reincarnated as an asylum seeker.



I give it less than 5 years until she's in Arizona or Idaho or Tennessee, etc. moaning about how socialist Islamist Europe has turned her into a refugee.


----------



## newbie (Apr 17, 2019)

Dogsauce said:


> Or better still she lives but nobody pays the slightest attention to her crap.


EOT


----------



## Argonia (Apr 17, 2019)

Dogsauce said:


> That sounds too painless, I think some sort of termite catastrophe would be more satisfying. Or better still she lives but nobody pays the slightest attention to her crap.



She's got almost one million followers at Twitter. What are they all following for?


----------



## hash tag (Apr 17, 2019)

Argonia said:


> She's got almost one million followers at Twitter. What are they all following for?



The same reason people are still talking about her on here, which I fail to understand


----------



## Treacle Toes (Jan 30, 2020)

Suspended from Twitter today.


Then this popped up ...



Video in the tweet thread.


----------



## editor (Jan 30, 2020)

Here's the vid


----------



## two sheds (Jan 30, 2020)

From 7:45 certainly worth watching  again


----------



## Supine (Jan 30, 2020)

two sheds said:


> From 7:45 certainly worth watching  again



Wow!!!!!!!!! Bloody hell


----------



## isvicthere? (Jan 30, 2020)

editor said:


> Here's the vid




That is class!


----------



## two sheds (Jan 30, 2020)

Supine said:


> Wow!!!!!!!!! Bloody hell



It's like Tourettes brought on when thinking of any minority.


----------



## ATOMIC SUPLEX (Jan 31, 2020)

Well she certainly let it all out. . . 
Just wish they had actually confronted her and took her to task. I would have liked to have seen that.


----------



## billy_bob (Jan 31, 2020)

I'm in two minds about this. Funny, but then she's the living embodiment of 'any publicity is good publicity' so it's not going to do her any harm, is it?


----------



## marty21 (Jan 31, 2020)

Hopkins supporters are raging about the ban - and piling on Rachel Riley (on twitter, probably elsewhere as well) a few months ago, they were very supportive on Riley when she was attacking Corbyn and the anti-semitism thing


----------



## Yossarian (Jan 31, 2020)

ATOMIC SUPLEX said:


> Well she certainly let it all out. . .
> Just wish they had actually confronted her and took her to task. I would have liked to have seen that.



So they paid for her trip to Prague, gave her a nice dinner and booze in a fancy hotel, pretended to enjoy her company, and listened to her rant without saying a word? Weird prank - I wonder if Hopkins is going to claim that she knew it was fake all along but tricked a bunch of lefties into putting her up at the Four Seasons and smiling as she spoke her mind.


----------



## Chilli.s (Jan 31, 2020)

Quite pleased with this. The vid doesn't seem to give her a platform for her bile but does show her in her wide eyed crazy manner.


----------



## teqniq (Jan 31, 2020)

Apparently her supprters on Twitter are in full-on racist vitriol mode.

E2a concerning her banning, I mean. Which may actually only be temporary.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 31, 2020)




----------



## teqniq (Jan 31, 2020)

Yeah, haven't watched the vid but looks to be a bit of a damp squib to me. Of more import to me is her Twitter ban even if it is temporary.


----------



## Chilli.s (Jan 31, 2020)

Shows her gullibility and inability to discern a real award from a prank, shows her glorying in her offensive speech.


----------



## bellaozzydog (Jan 31, 2020)

teqniq said:


> Yeah, haven't watched the vid but looks to be a bit of a damp squib to me. Of more import to me is her Twitter ban even if it is temporary.



I suggest you watch it to the end to get the real flavour of Hopkins unleashed

jaw dropping shit


----------



## Athos (Jan 31, 2020)

It shows what nasty views she has. But, given they're well known, and given she's proud of them, and glad of any publicity, I'm not sure how well this prank landed; they've sent her on an 'all expenses paid' trip to a good hotel in a great city, for a free dinner with booze, just to call her a cunt behind her back.  Would've been much better if they confronted her then and there.


----------



## Chilli.s (Jan 31, 2020)

I like the more subtle approach they've used. Called her a cunt, she didn't notice, gave her no platform, didn't engage with her cuntyness. It's more dismissive of her and her ignorant behaviour to ignore it and demonstrate that some people are above it.


----------



## Athos (Jan 31, 2020)

Chilli.s said:


> I like the more subtle approach they've used. Called her a cunt, she didn't notice, gave her no platform, didn't engage with her cuntyness. It's more dismissive of her and her ignorant behaviour to ignore it and demonstrate that some people are above it.



There's little achievement in calling her it behind her back.

And they gave her more of a platform than if they'd done nothing.

They didn't ignore her; would've been better if they had, or tackled her,  in my opinion.


----------



## Proper Tidy (Jan 31, 2020)

Just got round to watching it. Still, the lad got loads of engagement from it which I'd imagine was his motivation


----------



## Chilli.s (Jan 31, 2020)

Athos said:


> There's little achievement in calling her it behind her back.



They told her what the award was called, she didn't notice the obvious.



Athos said:


> And they gave her more of a platform than if they'd done nothing.



They edited her rant so her context was removed but theirs was left in, all her swearyness.



Athos said:


> They didn't ignore her; would've been better if they had, or tackled her, in my opinion.



Paid actors, the implication being only stayed and and listened coz... money.


----------



## 8ball (Jan 31, 2020)

Chilli.s said:


> They edited her rant so her context was removed but theirs was left in, all her swearyness.



I think it was the effortless and abundant gleeful hatred more than the swearyness that had the impact.


----------



## Chilli.s (Jan 31, 2020)

8ball said:


> I think it was the effortless and abundant gleeful hatred more than the swearyness that had the impact.


You could almost see the spittle flecks on the lens.


----------



## Athos (Jan 31, 2020)

Chilli.s said:


> They told her what the award was called, she didn't notice the obvious.



And? Just a bit childish.



Chilli.s said:


> They edited her rant so her context was removed but theirs was left in, all her swearyness.



Nobody cares about her swearing; it's the hateful stuff that's significant.  But we all know that's what she thinks; she's proud of it; she wants it publicised - that notoriety is how she makes her living!



Chilli.s said:


> Paid actors, the implication being only stayed and and listened coz... money.



Yeah, but she has loads of people who gladly lap up what she says; it's a non-point, really.

They've just treated her to a jolly-up and kept her in the public consciousness, to get a bit of footage for a cheap laugh.  Don't get me wrong; I'm happy to see her called a cunt, but it seems a weak response to have rewarded her for spouting that shit and not tackling it.  And you do have to wonder if self-promotion wasn't the main driver.

But happy to agree to disagree.


----------



## BristolEcho (Jan 31, 2020)

Actually thought this was shit she has been given a platform right there to say everything she feels and no one challenges her. Yes she looks a bit stupid, but we all knew that anyway and we all knew what her views are already as she's never bored of putting it out there.

Had they have confronted her with it at the end or the next day then it would have been funny.


----------



## chilango (Jan 31, 2020)

I'm sure there's better things to spend your money on if you're a bored rich kid. But there's worse too...


----------



## ska invita (Jan 31, 2020)

What actually happened to get her banned?. The one thing I read was Rachel Riley sorted out a meeting with staff at Twitter and it was a result of that? There's something weird about that to me. Surely they should be able to see it for themselves without someone off Countdown getting involved?


----------



## maomao (Jan 31, 2020)

I think she probably revels in being called a cunt. Her Twitter bio is 'biggest bitch in Britain' after all. That's why you can never win with the right. They're proud of being bad people.


----------



## teqniq (Jan 31, 2020)

Not just Rachel Riley, this guy and the organisation he represents as well.


----------



## Treacle Toes (Jan 31, 2020)

The bit in the vid where she says 'this is the most fun i've had in ages'...That seemed sincere to me. She really is a miserable, hateful, RentAGob and not much else. She took herself there.


----------



## Treacle Toes (Jan 31, 2020)

Chilli.s said:


> Shows her gullibility and inability to discern a real award from a prank, shows her glorying in her offensive speech.



This is a good point. She must be so desperate.


----------



## Numbers (Jan 31, 2020)

I know it's not acceptable these days, but IME over the years a carefully timed smack in the gob has put to rest IME many a mouther-offer.


----------



## Mrs Miggins (Feb 1, 2020)

She is utterly vile but it seems like they just spent an awful lot of money. I kind of dislike them for that.


----------



## Treacle Toes (Feb 1, 2020)

Mrs Miggins said:


> She is utterly vile but it seems like they just spent an awful lot of money. I kind of dislike them for that.



I agree it's a contrived, long and expensive game they have played. I am also with Numbers that sometimes giving someone a slap in the chops seems like the most immediate, rewarding way of shutting someone up. The vid is interesting though IMO, whilst annoying. She is utterly desperate for work, a platform, to stay relevant. From what I've seen over recent months she has repeatedly gone to the States to entertain Trumpers and sell her wretched soul. Brand Hatie needs an international platform like twitter to race bait, post up her pathetic monologue vids and survive. Pretty much only Breitbart left for her isn't there?


----------



## elbows (Feb 1, 2020)

edit - oops wrong thread!


----------



## teqniq (Feb 1, 2020)

Wrong thread, unless of course Katie Hopkins is, in fact a disease.


----------



## keybored (Feb 1, 2020)

Rutita1 said:


> Pretty much only Breitbart left for her isn't there?



She could blow the cobwebs off her gab account Katie Hopkins (@[email]KTHopkins@gab.com[/email]) | gab.com


----------



## Magnus McGinty (Feb 1, 2020)

Wouldn’t it be nice to have the money to spare to afford to hire actors, flights, hotel rooms and the such for some apolitical posh boy japes?


----------



## a_chap (Feb 1, 2020)

Yes


----------



## Mr Moose (Feb 1, 2020)

Mrs Miggins said:


> She is utterly vile but it seems like they just spent an awful lot of money. I kind of dislike them for that.



Is it worse than spending a load of money on a film production? Surely it’s a creative work in the same way as lots of film and TV.


----------



## Mrs Miggins (Feb 1, 2020)

Mr Moose said:


> Is it worse than spending a load of money on a film production? Surely it’s a creative work in the same way as lots of film and TV.


I dunno I just think they come across like 2 kids with a lot spare cash playing a prank. I don't think what they did is wrong - she is a massive cunt - I just wish I had all that money sloshing around.


----------



## Reno (Feb 1, 2020)

Mr Moose said:


> Is it worse than spending a load of money on a film production? Surely it’s a creative work in the same way as lots of film and TV.


Yup, that’s pretty much what it is. It’s how Josh Peters makes his money, with a YouTube channel where he pranks people. Not really my thing, but he makes a lot of money doing it, so he does what any film or tv production does, he puts that money into creating more content.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Feb 1, 2020)

Point of interest; they didn’t put her up in the Four Seasons, just had the award ceremony there, they put her up in a cheapo gaff, and flew her on WizzAir.

And it’s nice that they got her to spew her bile in a format that people who are ambivalent to her may well see. But I imagine that they could have spent that clearly large sum of money more wisely when it comes to countering racism and bigotry. But fair play for having a go.


----------



## Dogsauce (Feb 1, 2020)

Rutita1 said:


> From what I've seen over recent months she has repeatedly gone to the States to entertain Trumpers and sell her wretched soul. Brand Hatie needs an international platform like twitter to race bait, post up her pathetic monologue vids and survive. Pretty much only Breitbart left for her isn't there?



Can’t they keep her out of the States because of the ketamine incident?


----------



## cyril_smear (Feb 1, 2020)

Pointless. She's not exactly the kind of person that would fall in to a deep depression over being slightly embarrassed.


----------



## keybored (Feb 1, 2020)

Dogsauce said:


> Can’t they keep her out of the States because of the ketamine incident?


Sadly it was all made up.


----------



## Ranbay (Jun 19, 2020)

Banned off the twits init... 



			https://twitter.com/kthopkins?lang=en


----------



## fucthest8 (Jun 19, 2020)

I can't believe I've only just come across this one, but I heard her called Hatie Cockpins elsewhere yesterday and I love it.


----------



## fucthest8 (Jun 19, 2020)

What exactly does she tell her children? That it's all just an act and they must never tell? Or is she raising them to actually be like her? The mind boggles.


----------



## Badgers (Jun 19, 2020)

Ranbay said:


> Banned off the twits init...
> 
> 
> 
> https://twitter.com/kthopkins?lang=en


Permanent too I understand


----------



## brogdale (Jun 19, 2020)

Badgers said:


> Permanent too I understand


Not long enough, IMHO


----------



## existentialist (Jun 19, 2020)

Ranbay said:


> Banned off the twits init...
> 
> 
> 
> https://twitter.com/kthopkins?lang=en


Was it in response to something specific she posted? Or just generally/cumulatively?


----------



## Ranbay (Jun 19, 2020)

existentialist said:


> Was it in response to something specific she posted? Or just generally/cumulatively?


----------



## teqniq (Jun 19, 2020)

Due to a petition according to this:









						Katie Hopkins permanently banned from Twitter for hateful conduct
					

Katie Hopkins' Twitter account has been taken down by the micro-blogging website for good after a petition was started to get her account removed




					www.mirror.co.uk


----------



## lefteri (Jun 19, 2020)

fucthest8 said:


> Cockpins



she’s supported by bellends


----------



## fucthest8 (Jun 19, 2020)

I also like "professional moron agitator Katie Hopkins ..."  thanks to Newsthump


----------



## Badgers (Jun 19, 2020)

existentialist said:


> Was it in response to something specific she posted? Or just generally/cumulatively?


I suspect her pop at Daniel Rashford maybe have caused a bit of a response.


----------



## teqniq (Jun 19, 2020)

Slightly off topic, but not that much:



Oh dear. How sad. Never mind.


----------



## kenny g (Jun 19, 2020)

Worth reading the whole tragic tale 








						Milo Yiannopoulos Says He's Broke
					

“I can’t put food on the table this way.”




					www.vice.com


----------



## two sheds (Jun 19, 2020)

kenny g said:


> Worth reading the whole tragic tale
> 
> 
> 
> ...





> “I’m clinging on for dear life. And I’ll never give up,” said Yiannopoulos, who did not immediately respond to VICE News’ direct message seeking comment. “But holy fucking hell the base in America SUCKS. Frankly they deserve to lose their country and if by some miracle we manage to save it, it’ll be no thanks whatsoever to voters, readers, subscribers and ENTIRELY thanks to the few brave souls battling on the front lines, beyond all reason and hope.
> 
> “It’s years too late,” he added. “The time to act was when I got booted off Twitter. Nobody did.”



That's ... just ... sad


----------



## Badgers (Jun 19, 2020)

Assume that HateBook is still giving her a platform?


----------



## AmateurAgitator (Jun 19, 2020)

It's all rather late in the day tho.


----------



## flypanam (Jun 19, 2020)

two sheds said:


> That's ... just ... sad


Didn’t he used to sport a “stop being poor” t shirt?


----------



## steveo87 (Jun 19, 2020)

teqniq said:


> Slightly off topic, but not that much:
> 
> View attachment 218423
> 
> Oh dear. How sad. Never mind.


Who'd of thought being a right wing cunt would be so bad for the bank balance.



Anyway, does she have a 'base' of any sort - of supporters?
I mean Milo's got Men's Rights wankers.
Even BF have an army of Gammon Twats.

Hopkins always struck me as someone who just said stuff deliberately provocative/insulting on Twitter, like a normal Troll. 

Maybe she's actually fucked off this time....


----------



## AmateurAgitator (Jun 19, 2020)

flypanam said:


> Didn’t he used to sport a “stop being poor” t shirt?


Yeah, I remember the pics.


----------



## teqniq (Jun 19, 2020)

steveo87 said:


> Who'd of thought being a right wing cunt would be so bad for the bank balance.
> Anyway, does she have a 'base' of any sort - of supporters?
> I mean Milo's got Men's Rights wankers.
> Even BF have an army of Gammon Twats.
> ...


----------



## steveo87 (Jun 19, 2020)

Ah shite, didn't think of that.


----------



## Badgers (Jun 19, 2020)

steveo87 said:


> Ah shite, didn't think of that.


New accounts with less followers are suspended/banned quickly if reported. 

I suspect there is a lot of people watching out for this and will be quick to share/report.


----------



## two sheds (Jun 19, 2020)

flypanam said:


> Didn’t he used to sport a “stop being poor” t shirt?



Ooo I hope so


----------



## Ax^ (Jun 19, 2020)

how many times has she been banned from twitter now


----------



## bimble (Jun 19, 2020)

My whole twitter timeline has temporarily become full of joy and happiness. This has never happened before.


----------



## Badgers (Jun 19, 2020)

Ax^ said:


> how many times has she been banned from twitter now


Suspended a few times 
This is a permenant ban apparently


----------



## Ax^ (Jun 19, 2020)

Hopefully


----------



## Ax^ (Jun 19, 2020)

bimble said:


> My whole twitter timeline has temporarily become full of joy and happiness. This has never happened before.



Just had a look at my rarely used twitter feed

people are very very happy on it


----------



## bimble (Jun 19, 2020)

Just trying to remember, her whole public life started when she got onto the apprentice tv show and everyone loved hating her so the press loved printing things on her - before that she was just whatever worked in a bank or something?


----------



## Ax^ (Jun 19, 2020)

bimble said:


> Just trying to remember, her whole public life started when she got onto the apprentice tv show and everyone loved hating her so the press loved printing things on her - before that she was just whatever worked in a bank or something?



Pretty much she lied to get into Sandhurst and got found out on the passing out parade, then became an banker and a media spokeperson for the Met office

the the apprentice


----------



## bimble (Jun 19, 2020)

The met office? Like a weather girl?


----------



## Ax^ (Jun 19, 2020)

bimble said:


> The met office? Like a weather girl?



Nah a Global Brand spoke person a media role that she got sacked out of quite quickly after the apprentice


----------



## bimble (Jun 19, 2020)

The Wikipedia entry on her has a catalogue of her ‘views’, her life’s work.


----------



## not a trot (Jun 19, 2020)

bimble said:


> The Wikipedia entry on her has a catalogue of her ‘views’, her life’s work.




Can't wait to read her obituary on there.

Hopkins was born.
Hopkins became a cunt.
Hopkins died.


----------



## Ax^ (Jun 19, 2020)

this is funny but not as funny as her losing her house for being to proud to aplogise to someone she mistook on twitter


the bleeting of the lost of free speech is going to go on for a bit

from the same sort of cunts that have been calling for a ban  on the  BLM protests


----------



## DaveCinzano (Jun 19, 2020)

Source: Andy Fanton


----------



## Badgers (Jun 19, 2020)

https://twitter.com/itsKTHopkins?s=09
		


Parody or a new account


----------



## Doodler (Jun 19, 2020)

If prominent alt righters and populist windup merchants get purged from social media they don't have much to fall back on.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Jun 19, 2020)

fucthest8 said:


> I also like "professional moron agitator Katie Hopkins ..."  thanks to Newsthump



Thump’s got some good’uns, “Tommy Robinson, professional gammon herder”


----------



## BristolEcho (Jun 19, 2020)

Doodler said:


> If prominent alt righters and populist windup merchants get purged from social media they don't have much to fall back on.



Aren't most of them on Gab? They sent me an email the other day claiming to be the hotbed of conservative free speech.


----------



## Doodler (Jun 19, 2020)

BristolEcho said:


> Aren't most of them on Gab? They sent me an email the other day claiming to be the hotbed of conservative free speech.



I guess so. Milo Yiannopoulos seems disillusioned with it all, according to this 2019 Vice article.


----------



## BristolEcho (Jun 19, 2020)

Poor Milo he's having an awful time.  Do we need to set up a crowdfunder?


----------



## kenny g (Jun 19, 2020)

TBH it is a bit depressing that there isn't any alternative to corporate social media shite. But on the other hand there are a few silver linings..


----------



## eatmorecheese (Jun 19, 2020)

BristolEcho said:


> Poor Milo he's having an awful time.  Do we need to set up a crowdfunder?



Fuck 'im. He could always bring out a book...


----------



## FridgeMagnet (Jun 19, 2020)

kenny g said:


> TBH it is a bit depressing that there isn't any alternative to corporate social media shite. But on the other hand there are a few silver linings..


There are plenty of alternatives. You're posting on one right now.


----------



## kenny g (Jun 19, 2020)

FridgeMagnet said:


> There are plenty of alternatives. You're posting on one right now.



True. I hope Katie has a suitable reception when she wonders over here.


----------



## Raheem (Jun 19, 2020)

.


----------



## two sheds (Jun 19, 2020)

I now can't see her name without translating it to Hatie Kopkins. Could perhaps change the thread title?


----------



## teqniq (Jun 19, 2020)

Oh dear. They didn't last long did they?



Linky


----------



## petee (Jun 19, 2020)

teqniq said:


> Slightly off topic, but not that much:
> 
> View attachment 218423
> 
> Oh dear. How sad. Never mind.



excellent point.
also, chris "the crying nazi" cantwell. sidelined, impoverished, the works.


----------



## two sheds (Jun 19, 2020)

teqniq said:


> Oh dear. They didn't last long did they?
> 
> View attachment 218483
> 
> Linky



I will not be gurgle-wurgle-gurgled


----------



## krtek a houby (Jun 19, 2020)

teqniq said:


> Oh dear. They didn't last long did they?
> 
> View attachment 218483
> 
> Linky


Returning banned posters. So predictable.


----------



## two sheds (Jun 19, 2020)

She's not very good at 'subtle' is she?


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Jun 20, 2020)

> But when she said she did not like children with geographical location names, it was pointed out that one of her children was called India.


Why are racists so monumentally stupid? Is it cos of the racism or is it the idiocy that makes them racist?


----------



## alfajobrob (Jun 20, 2020)

She is vile.

To be charitable I'd say the brain injury fucked her.

Only excuse I can think of..


----------



## bimble (Jun 20, 2020)

My local village racist (not the only one I’m sure just the one I am aware of) also named her daughter India. Coincidence or is it that anyone who thinks “India” is a great name for a girl cos it’s all mystical and exotic and pretty is basically telling you they’re a racist twit without having to say anything?


----------



## maomao (Jun 20, 2020)

bimble said:


> My local village racist (not the only one I’m sure just the one I am aware of) also named her daughter India. Coincidence or is it that anyone who thinks “India” is a great name for a girl cos it’s all mystical and exotic and pretty is basically telling you they’re a racist twit without having to say anything?



Empire innit. The jewel in the crown. It's almost a racist name in itself (apologies to anyone called that).

One of the best bits of being furloughed has been not sharing breathing space with people who tell me Hopkins is only saying what everyone's thinking. She's a hateful and worthless scumbag and I hope this pushes her even further into irrelevancy.


----------



## alfajobrob (Jun 20, 2020)

bimble said:


> My local village racist (not the only one I’m sure just the one I am aware of) also named her daughter India. Coincidence or is it that anyone who thinks “India” is a great name for a girl cos it’s all mystical and exotic and pretty is basically telling you they’re a racist twit without having to say anything?



You have your own village racist 😂😂😂


You just need to quote Father Ted.

"Can we all be rascist now Father?


----------



## petee (Jun 20, 2020)

maomao said:


> Empire innit.



Aryans, too.


----------



## Kaka Tim (Jun 20, 2020)

a martyr to the cause of hate mongering.


----------



## A380 (Jun 20, 2020)

First they came for Katie Hopkins and I did not speak out because I’d been waiting fucking ages for them to come for Katie Hopkins.


----------



## trabuquera (Jun 20, 2020)

bimble said:


> My local village racist (not the only one I’m sure just the one I am aware of) also named her daughter India. Coincidence or is it that anyone who thinks “India” is a great name for a girl cos it’s all mystical and exotic and pretty is basically telling you they’re a racist twit without having to say anything?



Nah sorry going to disagree on this one. Racists calling their kids 'India' is obviously fucking stupid but there are plenty of non-racist Indias (and  Indias/ Indras of colour... musicians India.Arie, actress Indra Ove to name but two.) I agree it's become something of an upper middle class fake-multicultural cliche (India Jane Birley, India Hicks etc etc etc) but an indicator of racism in itself? A generalisation too far imho. (Geographical names always a bit weird anyway, imho, why would you want to call a child Brooklyn or Sydney or what have you. And they never choose good ones either. I've never met a Mauritania or a Nicaragua or even a Panama...)


----------



## bimble (Jun 20, 2020)

Yeah maybe not one of my most solid early morning theories. I used to know a very posh lady who named her daughter Iscthia, which managed to be pretentious in several ways all at once.


----------



## Smangus (Jun 20, 2020)

Incontinentia Buttocks ?


----------



## A380 (Jun 20, 2020)

trabuquera said:


> Nah sorry going to disagree on this one. Racists calling their kids 'India' is obviously fucking stupid but there are plenty of non-racist Indias (and  Indias/ Indras of colour... musicians India.Arie, actress Indra Ove to name but two.) I agree it's become something of an upper middle class fake-multicultural cliche (India Jane Birley, India Hicks etc etc etc) but an indicator of racism in itself? A generalisation too far imho. (Geographical names always a bit weird anyway, imho, why would you want to call a child Brooklyn or Sydney or what have you. And they never choose good ones either. I've never met a Mauritania or a Nicaragua or even a Panama...)



I thought a lot of the Brooklyns and Sydneys were to mark the conception? Not sure though; my kids are closer to this celeb stuff. I’ll ask Back Seat of A Ford Escort and Manchester Premier Inn if they know for sure.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Jun 20, 2020)

Nothing wrong with Sidney though...


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Jun 20, 2020)

A380 said:


> I thought a lot of the Brooklyns and Sydneys were to mark the conception? Not sure though; my kids are closer to this celeb stuff. I’ll ask Back Seat of A Ford Escort and Manchester Premier Inn if they know for sure.



Ali G and Me Julie were going to name their kid The Bogs at KFC Egham.


----------



## ruffneck23 (Jun 20, 2020)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> Ali G and Me Julie we’re going to name their kid The Bogs at KFC Egham.


except there isnt a KFC at Egham, nearest is Staines or Thorpe Park ( I only know cos I worked in Egham for a few years   )


----------



## two sheds (Jun 20, 2020)

Have we had this yet?









						Furious Katie Hopkins supporters are tweeting ‘I am Katie Hopkins’ after far-right activist banned from Twitter
					

‘All her disciples on twitter should now shout out I am Katie Hopkins. I’ll start it off. I am Katie Hopkins,’ says account which does not appear to be a parody




					www.independent.co.uk
				




"I am Hatie Kopkins" "No _I _am Hatie Kopkins" ...


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Jun 20, 2020)

ruffneck23 said:


> except there isnt a KFC at Egham, nearest is Staines or Thorpe Park ( I only know cos I worked in Egham for a few years   )



I know, that’s why it made me chuckle so much. There is a Burger King there now though, on the Runnymede roundabout.


----------



## AmateurAgitator (Jun 21, 2020)

Katie Hopkins supporters mistaking 'freedom of speech infringement' with 'everyone thinking she's a dick'
					

Supporters of Katie Hopkins have today insisted her banning by Twitter is an infringement on her freedom of speech, rather than a simple demonstration of the fact that lots of people think she's a dick.




					newsthump.com


----------



## Buddy Bradley (Jun 21, 2020)

trabuquera said:


> I've never met a Mauritania or a Nicaragua or even a Panama...


They should combine them with regular names, IMO.

Mauricetania.

Nicolaragua.

Panamatthew.


----------



## kenny g (Jun 21, 2020)

ruffneck23 said:


> except there isnt a KFC at Egham, nearest is Staines or Thorpe Park ( I only know cos I worked in Egham for a few years   )


Maybe he made it inaccurate as was worried about wannabe Ali G's heading over to the Egham Burger King's bogs with their Julie's? Having said that if I ever meet a Woking Pizza Express with a roving eye and a propensity for tall tales I won't have any doubts about the father.


----------



## A380 (Jun 21, 2020)

kenny g said:


> Maybe he made it inaccurate as was worried about wannabe Ali G's heading over to the Egham Burger King's bogs with their Julie's? Having said that if I ever meet a Woking Pizza Express with a roving eye and a propensity for tall tales I won't have any doubts about the father.


No sweat.


----------



## DaveCinzano (Jun 21, 2020)

two sheds said:


> Have we had this yet?
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Bonkers that the _Indy_ doesn't even seem to have done any basic checks - Barnbrook is not exactly someone who keeps a low profile. He's that ex-Met copper and former BNP member who's never shy about putting forward his _Well it stands to reason_ brand of ‘I'm not a racialist’ _common sense_.

See previous posts passim.


----------



## DaveCinzano (Jun 21, 2020)

DaveCinzano said:


> Bonkers that the _Indy_ doesn't even have done any basic checks - Barnbrook is not exactly someone who keeps a low profile. He's that ex-Met copper and former BNP member who's never shy about putting forward his _Well it stands to reason_ brand of ‘I'm not a racialist’ _common sense_.
> 
> See previous posts passim.


And this is the sort of thing Barnbrook retweets:


----------



## agricola (Jun 21, 2020)

DaveCinzano said:


> Bonkers that the _Indy_ doesn't even have done any basic checks - Barnbrook is not exactly someone who keeps a low profile. He's that ex-Met copper and former BNP member who's never shy about putting forward his _Well it stands to reason_ brand of ‘I'm not a racialist’ _common sense_.



He has repeatedly stood for office as well, for a variety of far-right groups and as "an independent".   IIRC he has lost every single time.


----------



## DaveCinzano (Jun 21, 2020)

agricola said:


> IIRC he has lost every single time.



CUI BONO


----------



## agricola (Jun 21, 2020)

DaveCinzano said:


> CUI BONO



certainly not those of us who fund his pension


----------



## Orang Utan (Jun 21, 2020)

Anyone here visited these rival Twitter sites like Parler and Gab? They sound like horrific swamps of hatred and vitriol, even compared with Twitter?


----------



## Mr.Bishie (Jun 21, 2020)

Orang Utan said:


> Anyone here visited these rival Twitter sites like Parler and Gab? They sound like horrific swamps of hatred and vitriol, even compared with Twitter?



No, & the latter is specific for the far right to hang out.


----------



## DaveCinzano (Jun 21, 2020)

Mr.Bishie said:


> the latter is specific for the far right to hang out.



CULTURAL MARXIST FAKE NEWS!!!!!!!

It's simply a place for free speech enthusiasts to indulge in their God-given right to free speechify about the scientific superiority of Homo Caucasianis.

Also; QAnon bantz.


----------



## not-bono-ever (Jun 21, 2020)

being a victim is an established route for these attention seeking tools.


----------



## Puddy_Tat (Jun 22, 2020)

it appears that someone got to parler first, got an account in KH's name and started a crowd funding thing for legal action against twitter


----------



## Ground Elder (Oct 5, 2020)

Hopkins has posted an apology to Finsbury Park Mosque, after falsely claiming that attendees had attacked police officers. That last line must have hurt.


----------



## existentialist (Oct 5, 2020)

Ground Elder said:


> Hopkins has posted an apology to Finsbury Park Mosque, after falsely claiming that attendees had attacked police officers. That last line must have hurt.
> 
> View attachment 233047


What's the betting that this was the cheaper alternative to a very costly libel suit?


----------



## elbows (Oct 5, 2020)

existentialist said:


> What's the betting that this was the cheaper alternative to a very costly libel suit?



Rather high given the undisguised way the statement included various positive things the solicitors obviously said should form part of her public apology.


----------



## editor (Oct 5, 2020)

Ground Elder said:


> Hopkins has posted an apology to Finsbury Park Mosque, after falsely claiming that attendees had attacked police officers. That last line must have hurt.
> 
> View attachment 233047


They should have sued her so hard that she ended up living in a tent and relying on their charity.


----------



## rubbershoes (Oct 5, 2020)

editor said:


> They should have sued her so hard that she ended up living in a tent and relying on their charity.



She's in some form of insolvency at the moment isnt she?


----------



## existentialist (Oct 5, 2020)

rubbershoes said:


> She's in some form of insolvency at the moment isnt she?


Well, she had that enormous judgement made against her last year, or whenever it was...thoroughly deserved.


----------



## billy_bob (Oct 5, 2020)

editor said:


> They should have sued her so hard that she ended up living in a tent and relying on their charity.



Having a bunch of Muslims publicly and ever so magnanimously accept her apology might be even more painful to her than that.


----------



## existentialist (Oct 5, 2020)

Yep.









						Katie Hopkins forced to apologise for wrongly linking mosque to attack on police
					

Finsbury Park mosque took legal action against commentator after tweet in May




					www.theguardian.com
				




That's got to have *really *stuck in her throat. Good


----------



## ElizabethofYork (Oct 6, 2020)

At the same time she made that apology, she was spouting more racist bilge on Instagram.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Oct 6, 2020)

ElizabethofYork said:


> At the same time she made that apology, she was spouting more racist bilge on Instagram.




Seems she's been let in to the US, even though the country is supposed to be closed to non-Americans...


----------



## Lurdan (Jan 14, 2021)




----------



## Steel Icarus (Jan 14, 2021)

Only joined when it went full on openly Nazi

Skillz

All those people claiming she was merely an agent provocateur playing a role...well this is deep cover now, like Reece Dinsdale at the end of ID


----------



## Johnny Vodka (Jan 14, 2021)

She needs to get back on the ket..

Ketty Bopkins


----------



## Ax^ (Jan 14, 2021)

she could be leader of that failing party within the week

anything to attempt to stay relevent


----------



## ATOMIC SUPLEX (Jan 14, 2021)

What exactly do ukip stand for now post brexit? 

Sidenote
I can't believe Hopkins is two years younger than me!! Obviously being a fascist cunt ages you somewhat.


----------



## ElizabethofYork (Jan 14, 2021)

She's been all over instagram recently with covid denials and lurid conspiracy theories.


----------



## existentialist (Jan 14, 2021)

Lurdan said:


>


It's starting to become pretty obvious which demographic UKIP is triangulating towards...


----------



## gosub (Jan 14, 2021)

If a tree falls in a forest and no one is around it hear it, is it just seeking publicity?


----------



## Steel Icarus (Jan 14, 2021)

ATOMIC SUPLEX said:


> What exactly do ukip stand for now post brexit?
> 
> Sidenote
> I can't believe Hopkins is two years younger than me!! Obviously being a fascist cunt ages you somewhat.


Three and a half years younger than me!


----------



## DaveCinzano (Jan 14, 2021)

editor said:


> Vile, publicity-desperate waste of space that really isn't even worthy of discussion.


[Six years and 81 pages later...]


----------



## existentialist (Jan 14, 2021)

DaveCinzano said:


> [Six years and 81 pages later...]


81 pages in six years is pretty low-key by Urban standards!


----------



## DJWrongspeed (Jan 14, 2021)

what is UKIP for now? making sure England leaves planet earth?


----------



## steeplejack (Jan 14, 2021)

Like George Best "signing" for Dunstable Town when he was a washed up jakey in his forties. 

Funny and tragic in equal measure. All we need now is for Norris McWhirter to be appointed UKIP regional chairman for the afterlife via a seance, and maybe the return of Buster "Billy Britain" Mottram as a by-election candidate, to establish the party's healthy, forward looking agenda for fifty years ago.


----------



## existentialist (Jan 14, 2021)

steeplejack said:


> Like George Best "signing" for Dunstable Town when he was a washed up jakey in his forties.
> 
> Funny and tragic in equal measure. All we need now is for Norris McWhirter to be appointed UKIP regional chairman for the afterlife via a seance, and maybe the return of Buster "Billy Britain" Mottram as a by-election candidate, to establish the party's healthy, forward looking agenda for fifty years ago.


Or this plank (racist Pembrokeshire councillor):














						Pembrokeshire County Councillor Paul Dowson has joined UKIP
					

IN THE WAKE of UKIP Wales’s recent commitment to end the project to make Wales a ‘Nation of Sanctuary’, Pembroke Dock Central Councillor Paul Dowson has announced today that he will sit as a UKIP councillor on Pembrokeshire County Council. Cllr Dowson said: “I’m delighted to announce that I am...




					pembrokeshire-herald.com
				




Known locally as "uncle Fester", and with a long history of unconvincingly-denied racist and homophobic Facebook posts. I met him once (in a musical context), and would say that he'd give Priti Patel a pretty good run for her money in the Thick As Mince Olympics.


----------



## panpete (Jan 14, 2021)

ElizabethofYork said:


> She's been all over instagram recently with covid denials and lurid conspiracy theories.


I know she courts controversy and I know there are some conspiracy theorists who are really in bed with "The Man" but I never expected KH to be in this camp, am surprised.


----------



## ddraig (Jan 14, 2021)

panpete said:


> I know she courts controversy and I know there are some conspiracy theorists who are really in bed with "The Man" but I never expected KH to be in this camp, am surprised.


Why?!?!
They do things for attention (just like many/most right wingers) and to try and get money in
She is disgusting and racist, how have you not noticed??? 

e2a - covid denial is common with the far right (because they don't like doing things for the common good or like to be told, they just want to carry on doing what THEY want, that's it)


----------



## panpete (Jan 14, 2021)

ddraig said:


> Why?!?!
> They do things for attention (just like many/most right wingers) and to try and get money in
> She is disgusting and racist, how have you not noticed???


Of course I have, I've heard a lot of absurdity come out of her mouth, insane comments about people who call thier kids Tyler and another about people who name their kids after countries/places, doesn't she have a kid called India?
I just didn't expect her to get into non mainstream stuff, but you learn something new every day.


----------



## Treacle Toes (Jan 14, 2021)

panpete said:


> Of course I have, I've heard a lot of absurdity come out of her mouth, insane comments about people who call thier kids Tyler and another about people who name their kids after countries/places, doesn't she have a kid called India?
> I just didn't expect her to get into non mainstream stuff, but you learn something new every day.


She's an out-and-out bigot in every sense of the word. A shameless, MAGA loving grifter and a conspiraloon....There isn't any inconsistency here at all.


----------



## marty21 (Jan 14, 2021)

Ax^ said:


> she could be leader of that failing party within the week
> 
> anything to attempt to stay relevent


Who is the leader this week ?


----------



## Ax^ (Jan 14, 2021)

Well its not Lewis


----------



## marty21 (Jan 14, 2021)

steeplejack said:


> Like George Best "signing" for Dunstable Town when he was a washed up jakey in his forties.
> 
> Funny and tragic in equal measure. All we need now is for Norris McWhirter to be appointed UKIP regional chairman for the afterlife via a seance, and maybe the return of Buster "Billy Britain" Mottram as a by-election candidate, to establish the party's healthy, forward looking agenda for fifty years ago.


Tbf to Best, he was a washed up jakey in his 20s when he signed for Dunstable.


----------



## panpete (Jan 14, 2021)

Rutita1 said:


> She's an out-and-out bigot in every sense of the word. A shameless, MAGA loving grifter and a conspiraloon....There isn't any inconsistency here at all.


Thanks for explaining that, I had her down as a controversy courting sort, snobbish, but nothing to do with counter culture, or infiltration of it, but, as I said, we learn something new every day.


----------



## Deej1992 (Jan 15, 2021)

My thought on Katie Hopkins joining UKIP.

Eww.


----------



## tufty79 (Jan 15, 2021)

panpete said:


> Thanks for explaining that, I had her down as a controversy courting sort, snobbish, but nothing to do with counter culture, or infiltration of it, but, as I said, we learn something new every day.


Don't we all! I fucking love learning. And I love learning everything I got wrong on accidentally


----------



## existentialist (Jan 15, 2021)

Deej1992 said:


> My thought on Katie Hopkins joining UKIP.
> 
> Eww.


My thoughts on Katie Hopkins: Eww
My thoughts on UKIP: Eww

I hope they're very happy together (they might be, but not for long)


----------



## Chilli.s (Jan 15, 2021)

At last, her bid to be prime minister is getting nearer.


----------



## not a trot (Jan 15, 2021)

marty21 said:


> Who is the leader this week ?



A giant dog turd. So Hopkins would make an equal replacement.


----------



## stdP (Jan 15, 2021)

not a trot said:


> A giant dog turd. So Hopkins would make an equal replacement.



Dog turds are usually associated with animals that people actually love and care for.


----------



## Virtual Blue (Jan 15, 2021)

S☼I said:


> Three and a half years younger than me!



I didn't realise she was so fucking young!! Jesus Christ, she looks like shit....wtf


----------



## existentialist (Jan 15, 2021)

Virtual Blue said:


> I didn't realise she was so fucking young!! Jesus Christ, she looks like shit....wtf


Funny how hate shows, isn't it?


----------



## Lurdan (Jan 15, 2021)

Virtual Blue said:


> I didn't realise she was so fucking young!! Jesus Christ, she looks like shit....wtf


Have to confess I think of her as being quite hot in a sort of Joan of Arc way.


----------



## DaveCinzano (Jan 15, 2021)

Lurdan said:


> Have to confess I think of her as being quite hot in a sort of Joan of Arc way.


No one's making cute little tabletop gaming miniatures of Hopkins, though. Effigies and voodoo dolls maybe, but not cute little tabletop gaming miniatures.



			https://cdn-animation.artstation.com/p/video_sources/000/143/358/turntable-joan-of-arch-color.mp4


----------



## pinkmonkey (Jan 15, 2021)

not a trot said:


> A giant dog turd. So Hopkins would make an equal replacement.


I was gonna say KH and UKIP go together like beans on toast, but no, they go together like a fly on a dog turd.


----------



## Lurdan (Jan 15, 2021)

I


DaveCinzano said:


> No one's making cute little tabletop gaming miniatures of Hopkins, though.


I was thinking more of something like this.


Spoiler


----------



## tufty79 (Jan 15, 2021)

I'm not going to join in the comments about her appearance.


I'm 41, and look like I started my paper round in 1844


----------



## panpete (Jan 15, 2021)

I guess Katie Hopkins would love it if she knew there was an 82 page thread devoted to her.
I wonder, does she have some kind of personality disorder?
I know I wouldn't be able to sit in the same room as her, I bet her negative energy is really palpable.


----------



## tufty79 (Jan 15, 2021)

I would refuse to sit in a room with her because I'd probably bite her 


Some people are just shitweasels without any underlying pathology behind it, it's just human nature


----------



## panpete (Jan 15, 2021)

tufty79 said:


> I would refuse to sit in a room with her because I'd probably bite her
> 
> 
> Some people are just shitweasels without any underlying pathology behind it, it's just human nature


I sense pathology in her, school bully type, well more than school bully, maybe she was jealous malicious etc as a girl.


----------



## salem (Jan 15, 2021)

Lurdan said:


>


I know people called Nigel Farrage a Poundshop trump but holy fuck this is like the branding of the shitty poundshop in the back of a condemned shopping centre in some shitty town in the arse end of nowhere.



With a shit logo made by someone who has no idea of how contrast should work. Fucking hell that red on purple is hard to read.


----------



## panpete (Jan 15, 2021)

salem said:


> I know people called Nigel Farrage a Poundshop trump but holy fuck they really are running with that branding aren't they.
> 
> View attachment 249134


Scuse my ignorance but what exactly do UKIP stand for?
I read racism and wanting a US insurance style healthcare system, but there is also "don't believe all you read"
I can't handle loads of text but a quick comprehensive few lines on here as to what they stand for will do me.


----------



## salem (Jan 15, 2021)

Initially it was just get the  UK out of Europe, now it's whatever populist crap they think idiots will go for. There is no coherent plan so don't feel ignorant for not knowing - I certainly don't.


----------



## panpete (Jan 15, 2021)

salem said:


> Initially it was just get the  UK out of Europe, now it's whatever populist crap they think idiots will go for.


Thanks, I'm autistic and no offence but that's a bit vague, are they extreme right or am I just buying into what I read about them.


----------



## SheilaNaGig (Jan 15, 2021)

They're far right panpete


----------



## Chilli.s (Jan 15, 2021)

salem said:


> Fucking hell that red on purple is hard to read.


Isn't that red just supposed to be a splatter of blood for some kind of in joke amongst their followers?


----------



## SheilaNaGig (Jan 15, 2021)

panpete









						Revealed: Ukip membership surge shifts party to far right
					

Investigation reveals exodus of party’s moderates and influx of more extreme newcomers




					www.theguardian.com
				





UKIP stands for U.K. Independence Party.

They wanted independence from Europe. Nigel Farage started the party because he wanted Brexit.

That got wrapped up with anti-immigration.

Which soon attracted racists to the party.

As a general rule, people who are anti-immigration are racists,

So racists like UKIP.

When the referendum returned a “leave” result and Brexit was certain, the party had no further reason to exist.

However, Farage and the people who liked him wanted the party to continued so that they could pursue racist ideas under cover of a legitimate party. So UKIP continued.

They have tried to reposition the themselves as “not racist” and they have tried to present other policies, but it hasn't worked. Because they thing that they all have in common is racism, and not much else matters to them. Everything else they want or believe stems from their racism.


----------



## Buddy Bradley (Jan 15, 2021)

DaveCinzano said:


> No one's making cute little tabletop gaming miniatures of Hopkins, though. Effigies and voodoo dolls maybe, but not cute little tabletop gaming miniatures.
> 
> 
> 
> https://cdn-animation.artstation.com/p/video_sources/000/143/358/turntable-joan-of-arch-color.mp4


Surely that's not a tabletop gaming miniature, it's a model of the actress from the first Bill & Ted film.


----------



## salem (Jan 15, 2021)

panpete said:


> Thanks, I'm autistic and no offence but that's a bit vague, are they extreme right or am I just buying into what I read about them.


No offence taken! My response was very vague. Personally I think they will say whatever they think will get them attention but generally yes they are right wing.


----------



## Favelado (Jan 15, 2021)

tufty79 said:


> I would refuse to sit in a room with her because I'd probably bite her
> 
> 
> Some people are just shitweasels without any underlying pathology behind it, it's just human nature



She got messed up by nuns I reckon. I think she went to an evil school. Just to be clear, I do hate her though.


----------



## Orang Utan (Jan 15, 2021)

Didn’t she become famous from The Apprentice? Being odious is part of the job specification for that


----------



## SheilaNaGig (Jan 15, 2021)

Here’s a quick gallop through her back story.









						Katie Hopkins interview: 'Can you imagine the pent-up rage?'
					

She used The Apprentice as a launchpad, and last week two million people watched her on The Big Benefits Row. With giggles and amazing frankness, Katie Hopkins explains why it's her right to say: 'This is how it should be'




					www.theguardian.com


----------



## eatmorecheese (Jan 15, 2021)

Orang Utan said:


> Didn’t she become famous from The Apprentice? Being odious is part of the job specification for that


..memorably described by Charlie Brooker as an 'evil, peeled dormouse'.

She's got multiple issues imo, with my armchair psych hat on. Her odiousness is her business strategy, her resentment at the world and all the planets adjacent is palpable.

Unless she wants to address her issues, challenge, point and laugh is the best approach imo...


----------



## brogdale (Jan 15, 2021)

SheilaNaGig said:


> Here’s a quick gallop through her back story.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


be more interested in seeing her under a galloping herd of large, wild horses, tbh.


----------



## tufty79 (Jan 15, 2021)

brogdale said:


> be more interested in seeing her under a galloping herd of large, wild horses, tbh.



Could I provide the soundtrack?


----------



## brogdale (Jan 15, 2021)

Please, not the Osmonds, though


----------



## DaveCinzano (Jan 15, 2021)

Buddy Bradley said:


> Surely that's not a tabletop gaming miniature



Yes way, dude









						Brandon Beren | 3D Sculptor - Joan of Arc
					

Hi Everyone, I had the pleasure of being the Digital Sculptor for Bill & Ted's Riff in Time. I'm responsible for designing all of the miniatures produced for the game based off the Bill & Ted films and all the historical figures. Be excellent to each other!  Get your copy of the game here...




					www.berenart.net


----------



## tufty79 (Jan 15, 2021)

DaveCinzano said:


> Yes way, dude
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Is it my birthday today or something? It started out good and just keeps getting better 

That is totally non bogus DaveCinzano and I need it in my life


----------



## panpete (Jan 15, 2021)

SheilaNaGig said:


> panpete
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Thanks for such a concise and specific reply.


----------



## panpete (Jan 15, 2021)

SheilaNaGig said:


> Here’s a quick gallop through her back story.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


I'll read that because I wondered about her early life as a chlid, I imagine her to be a mean spirited jealous girl but with an abusive home background.


----------



## DaveCinzano (Jan 15, 2021)

tufty79 said:


> Is it my birthday today or something? It started out good and just keeps getting better
> 
> That is totally non bogus DaveCinzano and I need it in my life


It's demonstrably the least heinous thing on any KH thread


----------



## panpete (Jan 15, 2021)

SheilaNaGig said:


> Here’s a quick gallop through her back story.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Thanks for this, it gives a great insight into why KH is the way she is. I haven't finished reading it either, but read enough to want to read on as it jives with how I imagined her childhood to be, (lower down)
I hope my comments make for good reading.
Can't comment on Big Benefits Row - never saw it. Great company? all narcissists are - until their dark side is out.

"scandalising audiences with a set of opinions typically held by *mean girls bitching in the playground" *Very apt for KH. 





> When not on telly, she can be found calling Nelson Mandela a "cantankerous old git" in her weekly Sun column, or tweeting prolifically about her disgust for people who are fat, or unemployed, or badly dressed.


Poor Nelson, I like him. I have some relatives and some ex work colleagues who used to people watch but not in a good way, "She needs to lose weight" "look at her fat ar5e" 





> Most famously, she has declared ginger-haired babies "harder to love"


 Ridiculous cobblers talk.

As for her opinions on class, well.....need I say more 



> she tries to pick a couple of fights when I haven't even disagreed with her.


 I know people like this who would argue with the saints in heaven for the sake of it, they like to make the atmosphere of a room negative, typical narcissist.


> In between the jokes and giggles she is coiled to spring from what she calls "girly chitchat" into TV studio rottweiler mode, but whenever she does, she stops listening, so it seems pointless. We already know what she thinks. I'm more interested to know why.


Rude to boot.



> Some critics claim she doesn't believe a word she says, and peddles controversy for money.


I thought this, but I am always open to others opinions if they make more sense to me than my own.


> Others think she must be secretly horrified that so many people hate her. I don't detect an ounce of truth in either theory. It turns out Hopkins has never watched herself on television, never cries, is essentially immune to most human emotion, confuses public insults with compliments, and has kept secret the fact that she is hospitalised on average once every 10 days. The curious puzzle of Hopkins only begins to make sense when she describes the first 23 years of her life.


The above, to me, points to a narcissist. She has built a fortress around her fragile ego, so strong that she appears tough, but I have met some people like this and when they get a tiny whiff their ego is threatened they go into a rage or cry hysterically. I read (rightly or wrongly) she has some kind of epilepsy, why hide it? it is not a stigma? Because......you guessed it.....



> Now 39, Hopkins grew up in "a regular middle-class family" ....snip.... Both girls attended a private convent school from the age of three to 16. "I don't mean some notion of a grammar school convent school, I mean proper nuns, nunned up to the max. The headmistress was called Sister Philomena, and she," Hopkins adds admiringly,* SYCOPHANT*"was mean." The nuns tied Hopkins' left hand behind her back to try and force her to be right-handed, and school life was highly regimented. "Oh, beyond! Whistle blows once: don't move. Whistle blows twice: into lines. Whistle blows three times: into class. Can you imagine," she laughs, "the pent-up rage?"


I thought she must have had some highly traumatic background, I would have come out of such a school traumatised.


> I can imagine, *but it appears Hopkins can't. *"Yuh, very exciting. I had a hoot at school, it was a blast, it really was St Trinian's – we were all girls together and it was really good fun."


Maybe KH has repressed the trauma, makes sense.


> She can't recall any bullying or teasing,


Was she a bully? No comment from Kate.



> no teenage insecurities at all, on account of always getting As, mastering grade eight piano and violin by 14, and being picked for all the sports teams. "I suppose I was one of those girls that was just fine."


Some sporty girls are bullies, not all, no insecurities, eh! Kate, then why are you like this now? Think again pet.



> Her parents were strict about exams and homework, but didn't need to be, because "I wasn't going to come second. One of the frustrating things with my children now is that I understood very quickly what you had to give the teacher to get a top mark. It's not rocket science, is it? It frustrates me that mine can't see that yet." Her three children are nine, eight and five.


God help her poor kids.



> She knew exactly what she wanted to do. "I was going to be the colonel of the forces. I loved the military. I loved the discipline, the rigour, the big shouty men. I love monosyllabic orders. 'George: Bed! George: Shoes!' That's how I talk to my children, yeah, and I love it. Love it!" She still likes to address her girlfriends by their surnames, "So you'd be 'Heads'", and the very thought of a man in uniform barking acronyms sends her into a schoolgirl froth. "Yes! Someone hot. With muscles. That you can clearly see, despite thick cotton. Definitely!"


This ties in and makes sense as well, traumatised by the perpetrators of abuse, so KH joins them, identifies with them.



> But Hopkins' military career came to an abrupt end days before the passing out ceremony. If I didn't slow her down she would have glossed briskly over the details, but it transpires that *she had an epileptic seizure on the parade square. "It's not something I talk about," she says quickly, "because I see it as a failing.*


So I wasn't wrong re the epileptic shame/stigma. 





> So it does annoy me a little bit when people say 'she failed at the forces', but of course I never respond. I never say why, because it sounds like an excuse, and I won't have that. I won't have an excuse."





> She didn't cry when the army discharged her. In fact, in her whole life she "genuinely can't remember ever crying", and says she doesn't even know what fear feels like. The only failure she can identify was her first marriage, which ended within a year. "That was bad. But am I over it? Yes. Did it really matter? No."


She either sobbed into her pillow in secret and lied about it or has repressed it to the point of near madness. Many of these people marry bullies who overpower them, I know a female like this, never married though. Either that or she married a passive man who saw the light and ran for the hills (just my speculation)



> Hopkins joined a business consultancy after Sandhurst, moved to Manhattan and began going out with the boss. When their first daughter, India, was born in 2004, she took two weeks' maternity leave, and was away on business most of the time, seeing her daughter only at weekends.


How is a healthy maternal bond supposed to develop in those circumstances? Poor India, I fear for her dysfunctional life.


> The couple moved back to the UK and got married before the arrival of their second daughter, Poppy, the following year. Her husband was present for the birth, but Hopkins had to get herself and Poppy home from the maternity ward 48 hours later, because by then he had left her for his secretary. Neither Hopkins nor her daughters have ever spoken to or seen him again.


 Sad but she probably drove the poor man nuts.


> She relays all this with the pragmatism of someone describing a little HR restructuring – and looks pleased when I say so. "Well, it sort of was like that, only in a life way." She says she doesn't experience "emotional stuff", has never known a moment's maternal guilt,* -SNIP-* being in the public eye is exactly like being on the army parade square. Anything is fair game, -SNIP-women in her old platoon who couldn't hack Sandhurst and quit.


 The woman is definitely disturbed, pathological, I knew it.
............continued in next post due to too many characters...........


----------



## panpete (Jan 15, 2021)

.......continued from above.......

*



			Deaf to distress, her indifference towards anyone else's feelings makes sense.
		
Click to expand...

*


> But I'm confused about how she reconciles her contempt for emotional messiness with a private life so colourful that she once listed *"stealing husbands" as her hobby on her CV.* Her first husband was just one of a string of married fathers whom Hopkins seduced away from their families, including her second husband, the father of her five-year-old son.


Another narcissistic trait.



> How can someone so impatient with indisciplined self-indulgence justify wreaking havoc in so many lives, in of all things the name of love? "Oh, spare me the oestrogen tears," she groans. "We've all got skeletons in our closets. I couldn't be disingenuous enough to say I'm sorry for those women or children, because lots of us have done things wrong. When you look at the statistics for men and women having affairs, it's huge."


pur-l-e-a-s-e-e-e-e


> Lots of women are a size 18, but in Hopkins' book that's inexcusable. *So why is poor impulse control acceptable in sexual behaviour, but not anything else?* "For me there are certain standards of life. Intrinsic to my life are work, fitness, discipline." So if I was fat she'd call me disgusting, but if I tried to steal her husband she'd say: 'Fair enough'? "Yeah."


Narcissists are hypocrites


> How can she be so sure her standards are objectively right? "Because when I look at the things I think are important, they're all things that don't ask anything of anybody else. If you are healthy and not obese you're not asking the NHS for anything. I'm not asking the taxpayer to fund my benefits. Because I'm not asking anything from anyone, I think that that gives me the right to say: 'This is how it should be.'"


But dear Kate, you are taking, you stole men from women and children, you didn't bother asking - hypocrite bullshitter.



> I had put Hopkins' horror of being weak and needing help down to nothing too terrible ever having happened to her. *But the horror is too visceral for that, and the real explanation is a revelation. *She can see how some people have suffered awful things, "but I just don't connect with that, because I still have my thing going on." It takes a moment to realise she is talking about epilepsy. All of a sudden she speaks very quickly, as if the words were burning coals.



Narcissists have shame, (toxic shame was mentioned on here the other day) dear Kate has such a lot of shame she has projected it onto an illness she genuinely cannot help and is stigmatising it.



> Has anyone ever suggested, I ask, that *she is profoundly disconnected from her emotions? *"No, I think I'm just very male." *I think her emotional disconnect is quite extreme. *"Do you?" She looks surprised. "I don't think it is." But being "very male" wouldn't explain her violent disgust for others' failure to live up to her standards, nor why women's failings upset her so much more than men's. It doesn't explain why she never watches herself on TV, not even her debut on The Apprentice. "Yes, that is odd," she concedes, when this curious fact emerges. "I hadn't actually thought that before, but I suppose it is." And it doesn't explain why the only response she seems unable to deal with is sympathy. If I glowered at her she would be quite impervious – but a sympathetic look is a kind of agony for Hopkins, making her literally squirm, and I think this has distorted her entire perspective on other people's problems.


I think the interviewer hit some real salient points here. Insistencies are rife with narcissists. Sympathy would be an insult to her fragile ego, these people don't have big egos, they compensate by inflating their tiny egos, so they look big and pompous. She is a fragile little angry school girl who has not got over the abuse perpetrated by the nuns. 



> They lose. The truth is, life is just not fair."


 Life is what we make it, myself included. Those with a win-lose attitude are often narcissists. Pecking orders are important with bullies, my Dad even mentioned a pecking order. 



> The child I've just described (born to addicts) didn't do anything to cause its circumstances – so why is it right for that human being to lose?
> 
> "I really don't have an answer for it," she admits. "But if you're the sort of parent who can't give a toss, then I can't give a toss about your child either."


Pure arrogance.

Katie Hopkins is an angry little girl with a fragile ego.


----------



## panpete (Jan 15, 2021)

eatmorecheese said:


> ..memorably described by Charlie Brooker as an 'evil, peeled dormouse'.
> 
> She's got multiple issues imo, with my armchair psych hat on. Her odiousness is her business strategy, her resentment at the world and all the planets adjacent is palpable.
> 
> Unless she wants to address her issues, challenge, point and laugh is the best approach imo...


Not laugh at her, but challenge yes, which I think the interviewer in the guardian did really well imo.


----------



## panpete (Jan 15, 2021)

Oooh I took Kate to page 83 of our thread.


----------



## eatmorecheese (Jan 15, 2021)

panpete said:


> Not laugh at her, but challenge yes, which I think the interviewer in the guardian did really well imo.



I get that. But the point from her perspective may be to simply generate rancour and attention. Once you've clocked the hurtful nature of picking on the weak to enhance a media career, laughing and ridicule can help drain the genuine horror of her worldview of power and influence. That's how people have coped with Trump to some extent


----------



## panpete (Jan 15, 2021)

eatmorecheese said:


> I get that. But the point from her perspective may be to simply generate rancour and attention. Once you've clocked the hurtful nature of picking on the weak to enhance a media career, laughing and ridicule can help drain the genuine horror of her worldview of power and influence. That's how people have coped with Trump to some extent


Another narcissist with a disturbed childhood.


----------



## Ax^ (Jan 15, 2021)

hey panpete

have you seen when she was tricked into taking a fake award


----------



## Orang Utan (Jan 15, 2021)

I don’t think she really thinks some of the stuff she writes/says. She’s sold her soul. Will say horrible things for cash. She may have regrets on her death bed. Trying to be charitable here, but I’m not even convincing myself.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 15, 2021)

Orang Utan said:


> I don’t think she really thinks some of the stuff she writes/says. She’s sold her soul. Will say horrible things for cash. She may have regrets on her death bed. Trying to be charitable here, but I’m not even convincing myself.


To be fair she'll say horrible things for free too


----------



## panpete (Jan 15, 2021)

Ax^ said:


> hey panpete
> 
> have you seen when she was tricked into taking a fake award


I haven't.


----------



## panpete (Jan 15, 2021)

Orang Utan said:


> I don’t think she really thinks some of the stuff she writes/says. She’s sold her soul. Will say horrible things for cash. She may have regrets on her death bed. Trying to be charitable here, but I’m not even convincing myself.


Nah, look at the way her mind was corrupted by those nun's horrible treatment and her Stockholm syndrome way of processing it, admiring them and saying school was enjoyable, she hasn't processed the trauma and unprocessed trauma leads to destructiveness in word and deed.


----------



## ffsear (Jan 15, 2021)

I wouldn't even know that Katie Hopkins is still alive if went for this thread popping up in the new post feeds. What not just ignore and block the cunt?


----------



## Ax^ (Jan 15, 2021)

panpete said:


> I haven't.



this is fun



Spoiler: fake award








withstanding the 2 guys doing it


----------



## panpete (Jan 15, 2021)

Ax^ said:


> this is fun
> 
> 
> 
> ...



What she said at the end of the vid is unspeakable.
Cruelty to cruel people is just lowering themselves to their level though.


----------



## Ax^ (Jan 15, 2021)

they don't sound like working class fella, had the backing of someone, access to a film crew and were able to publish


are they not her equals 

aside from they both are not race baiting wankers

and have never been ejected from south Africa for doing ketamine


----------



## fucthest8 (Jan 15, 2021)

Can I just remind everyone that, like that other waste of human flesh Yaxley-Lennon, it's important that we use her actual name

Hatie Kokpins


----------



## hitmouse (Jan 15, 2021)

marty21 said:


> Who is the leader this week ?


Is it still Jo Swinson, or am I getting mixed up?


panpete said:


> Scuse my ignorance but what exactly do UKIP stand for?
> I read racism and wanting a US insurance style healthcare system, but there is also "don't believe all you read"
> I can't handle loads of text but a quick comprehensive few lines on here as to what they stand for will do me.


Worth mentioning that after Farage left, they took a hard shift to the far-right under Batten:




__





						DFLA – Gerard Batten’s Bootboys – Football Lads & Lasses Against Fascism
					






					flaf.org.uk
				











						Tommy Robinson and UKIP recruit Polish Nazis as personal security
					

“I despise Nazis as much as I despise Islamists.” – Tommy Robinson, October 2013 “The DFLA shuns the failed extremist politics, particularly far-left and far-right groups” – The DFLA, M…




					antifascistnetwork.org
				



Although they might have had another change since then, I've not been following them too closely.


----------



## panpete (Jan 15, 2021)

Ax^ said:


> hey panpete
> 
> have you seen when she was tricked into taking a fake award


I just watched the video and made a post on here. 
Her speech was obnoxious to say the least.
Still, while she behaves cruelly I feel that cruelty to people who behave cruel is coming down to their level.


----------



## MrSpikey (Jan 17, 2021)

Ax^ said:


> and have never been ejected from south Africa for doing ketamine



This calumny cannot be allowed to stand. Katie Hopkins was not ejected from South Africa for doing ketamine, as the Mirror's correction shows:

"A previous version of this article suggested that Katie Hopkins was stopped from leaving South Africa because of the consumption of Ketamine. We are happy to clarify that Ms Hopkins was detained for spreading racial hatred, which took place after the Ketamine incident. "


----------



## panpete (Jan 17, 2021)

I'm just reading the comments on Katie Hopkins interview: 'Can you imagine the pent-up rage?'.
I like to think I can spot a good piece of writing, at the time of reading I aimed to express the articulate way Ms Aitkenhead the interviewer handled the interview, I found a comment so eloquently put about what the interviewer thought of KH that I have put it below.
"
_My sentiments exactly.
In a finely written article, Ms. Aitkenhead's insight reveals to us as deeply insecure woman, one who, as a child, apparently could only save herself physically by sacrificing herself psychically. Hopkins is hardly the first child who, when faced with complete dependence on cruelly authoritarian parents, resorted to sacrificing her emotional self, still to this day under 24-hour lock-down, in order to internalize her parents' authoritarian obsessions as her own.
_


> _"Her parents were strict about exams and homework, but didn't need to be, because 'I wasn't going to come second. One of the frustrating things with my children now is that I understood very quickly what you had to give the teacher to get a top mark. ' "_
> 
> 
> 
> ...


----------



## tufty79 (Jan 17, 2021)

Pete, don't bother. She's just one of them cunts that doesn't even deserve understanding or empathy. There's a shitload about at the moment, don't waste your oxygen that feeds your brain on them


----------



## tufty79 (Jan 17, 2021)

Basically acknowledge what they are, block, and keep growing xxxx


----------



## panpete (Jan 17, 2021)

tufty79 said:


> Pete, don't bother. She's just one of them cunts that doesn't even deserve understanding or empathy. There's a shitload about at the moment, don't waste your oxygen that feeds your brain on them


I see what you mean, I have an interest in abnormal psychology, and wanted to illustrate that Kate is not simply a controversy seeker, she has deep psychpathology.


----------



## tufty79 (Jan 17, 2021)

Spend the brain power on how to join in with positive change. It's impossible to survive otherwise. Compassion for those that need or "deserve"it is one thing, Katie Hopkins and her swarm are a different kettle of life wasting fish x


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 17, 2021)

panpete said:


> I'm just reading the comments on Katie Hopkins interview: 'Can you imagine the pent-up rage?'.
> I like to think I can spot a good piece of writing, at the time of reading I aimed to express the articulate way Ms Aitkenhead the interviewer handled the interview, I found a comment so eloquently put about what the interviewer thought of KH that I have put it below.
> "
> _My sentiments exactly.
> In a finely written article, Ms. Aitkenhead's insight reveals to us as deeply insecure woman, one who, as a child, apparently could only save herself physically by sacrificing herself psychically. Hopkins is hardly the first child who, when faced with complete dependence on cruelly authoritarian parents, resorted to sacrificing her emotional self, still to this day under 24-hour lock-down, in order to internalize her parents' authoritarian obsessions as her own._


Never read comments on newspaper articles


----------



## Chilli.s (Jan 17, 2021)

Pickman's model said:


> Never read comments on newspaper articles


Never read comments on Youtube


----------



## tufty79 (Jan 17, 2021)

Never read replies to your own quoted posts on here by people you love


----------



## T & P (Jan 17, 2021)

Never tell me the odds.


----------



## tufty79 (Jan 17, 2021)

T & P said:


> Never tell me the odds.


10-1 <taps nose>


----------



## panpete (Jan 18, 2021)

Pickman's model said:


> Never read comments on newspaper articles


I just thought that comment was much more eloquently put than my two-post commentary.


----------



## not-bono-ever (Feb 10, 2021)

Her house that she had to flog was nice


----------



## Nanker Phelge (Feb 10, 2021)

. nonsense


----------



## panpete (Feb 10, 2021)

I feel, rather than just a love of courting controversy, she has a profound pathology.


----------



## DaveCinzano (Feb 10, 2021)

panpete said:


> I feel, rather than just a love of courting controversy, she has a profound pathology.


----------



## kabbes (Feb 10, 2021)

panpete said:


> I feel, rather than just a love of courting controversy, she has a profound pathology.


These aren’t the only two options, you know


----------



## panpete (Feb 10, 2021)

Imagine her as future prime minister YIKES!!!!!!


----------



## Argonia (Feb 10, 2021)

panpete said:


> Imagine her as future prime minister YIKES!!!!!!



Like when Diana Tinkman of the BNP became Prime Minister


----------



## hash tag (Jul 17, 2021)

If we were to cancel her passport....








						Petition to boot Katie Hopkins out of Australia is signed by thousands
					

Katie Hopkins admitted breaking Australian lockdown rules by opening her door to workers delivering her food naked and a petition which calls for her to be deported for the breach has been signed by more than 3000 people




					www.mirror.co.uk


----------



## eatmorecheese (Jul 17, 2021)

hash tag said:


> If we were to cancel her passport....
> 
> 
> 
> ...


I find the fact that she's the other side of the world from me rather soothing.


----------



## hash tag (Jul 17, 2021)

Exactly that. Can we sign a petition to leave her there?


----------



## eatmorecheese (Jul 17, 2021)

hash tag said:


> Exactly that. Can we sign a petition to leave her there?


I couldn't wish that on my extended family, they've got their own cunts to deal with


----------



## glitch hiker (Jul 17, 2021)

eatmorecheese said:


> I find the fact that she's the other side of the world from me rather soothing.


not far enough


----------



## quiet guy (Jul 17, 2021)

I'm sure the Aussies have an atoll or two that they could ship her off to as an undesirable


----------



## not-bono-ever (Jul 17, 2021)

THe best brains in the government worked night and day to come up with shamima begums passport removal - can’t they come up with a cunning plan to get rid of the wretch ?


----------



## quiet guy (Jul 18, 2021)

not-bono-ever said:


> THe best brains in the government worked night and day to come up with shamima begums passport removal - can’t they come up with a cunning plan to get rid of the wretch ?


For Johnson's mob she's the wrong colour to go down that route and would set a precident for the rest of the right wing shit heads.


----------



## Chairman Meow (Jul 18, 2021)

We don't bloody want her! Lots of stranded Aussies are very aggrieved that she has managed to get in to Oz while they struggle get back home due to the border caps. Is she really here though, or is she just pretending to wind everyone up?


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Jul 18, 2021)

Chairman Meow said:


> We don't bloody want her! Lots of stranded Aussies are very aggrieved that she has managed to get in to Oz while they struggle get back home due to the border caps. Is she really here though, or is she just pretending to wind everyone up?



She is a well known liar. And having been exposed as a ket-head you’d think she’d be barred from getting a visa on that alone…


----------



## Yossarian (Jul 18, 2021)

She's reportedly set to be on Celebrity Big Brother in Australia, but looks like they'll try to get rid of her first:



> Deputy Prime Minister Barnaby Joyce said he had no issue deporting Ms Hopkins if she was found to have broken infection control rules.
> 
> “I'm the one who wanted to send home Johnny Depp's dog so I have no problem sending home someone who wants to flout our laws,” he told the ABC











						Minister calls for deportation of British commentator Katie Hopkins after boasts of quarantine breach
					

Health Minister Greg Hunt says if it is found that Katie Hopkins breached Sydney COVID-19 quarantine rules then deportation should follow.




					www.sbs.com.au
				




Joyce also threatened to euthanise Depp's dog, IIRC, I don't think many people would object to that happening in this case.


----------



## isvicthere? (Jul 18, 2021)

First Liz Jones, now Katie Hopkins! It seems like this week urban is reheating old threads about hateful and irrelevant right-wing media women!


----------



## Storm Fox (Jul 18, 2021)

Oh dear, she's coming home .

All she had to do was STFU and make some money. But no she had to talk shit. 









						Far-right commentator Katie Hopkins dumped by Big Brother after Australia hotel quarantine claims
					

Seven terminates contract and British far-right figure expected to leave country after joking about plans to breach quarantine rules




					www.theguardian.com
				




Well she wanted a tough immigration system, but I think it will be somehow Australia's fault.


----------



## AmateurAgitator (Jul 18, 2021)

isvicthere? said:


> First Liz Jones, now Katie Hopkins! It seems like this week urban is reheating old threads about hateful and irrelevant right-wing media women!


Thankfully I have no idea who Liz Jones is. And I'd say that's a good thing.


----------



## isvicthere? (Jul 18, 2021)

Count Cuckula said:


> Thankfully I have no idea who Liz Jones is. And I'd say that's a good thing.


 
Similar to Katie Hopkins, but not quite as hateful. Writes for the Daily Mail. A thread about her was bumped this week after about three years.


----------



## maomao (Jul 18, 2021)

Jones can be nasty but in a way that ultimately makes you feel a bit sorry for her; she is genuinely very fucked up. Hopkins is a hateful shite who knows exactly what she's doing and needs her skull staved in with a brick.


----------



## cupid_stunt (Jul 18, 2021)

What are the odds that she end-ups on GB News?


----------



## ska invita (Jul 18, 2021)

cupid_stunt said:


> What are the odds that she end-ups on GB News?


Putting the LBC band back together


----------



## beesonthewhatnow (Jul 18, 2021)

cupid_stunt said:


> What are the odds that she end-ups on GB News?


Well, Nigel the unflushable turd has just joined their ranks, so it can’t be long till she’s there as well.


----------



## glitch hiker (Jul 18, 2021)

Is she coming back here? I fucking hope not. No doubt she'll be waved through our viral-friendly border.

The Oz trade deal once again exporting shit we don't want in return for fuck all


----------



## cupid_stunt (Jul 18, 2021)

beesonthewhatnow said:


> Well, Nigel the unflushable turd has just joined their ranks.



He's been there from the start, with his own Sunday morning show & regularly as a guest on other shows, but he's been upgraded to an hour daily Mon-Thur.


----------



## quiet guy (Jul 18, 2021)

That's fine, I don't watch GBNews so he can spout his bile all he likes on this minor station hidden down the arse end of the Freeview channel list broadcasting to the other small minded, bigoted dick heads, just so long as he kept off the mainstream media.


----------



## quiet guy (Jul 18, 2021)

beesonthewhatnow said:


> Well, Nigel the unflushable turd...


That's the best soubriquet yet for Farrage


----------



## cyril_smear (Jul 18, 2021)

glitch hiker said:


> Is she coming back here? I fucking hope not. No doubt she'll be waved through our viral-friendly border.
> 
> The Oz trade deal once again exporting shit we don't want in return for fuck all


I can’t get an eighth of premium grade spliff through the border, but they’ll let this cunt in!


----------



## Cerv (Jul 18, 2021)

bizarre that while thousands of Australians are stranded abroad because of border restrictions, they'd grant Hopkins a visa to be on a TV game show in the first place. that looks bad even if they're not a fascist demagogue wannabe. 
you think someone at the production company would've made the point that they could've just hired enough domestic celebrities?


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Jul 18, 2021)

Cerv said:


> bizarre that while thousands of Australians are stranded abroad because of border restrictions, they'd grant Hopkins a visa to be on a TV game show in the first place. that looks bad even if they're not a fascist demagogue wannabe.
> you think someone at the production company would've made the point that they could've just hired enough domestic celebrities?



It’s not like they’re short of home grown racists down there is it.


----------



## krtek a houby (Jul 18, 2021)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> It’s not like they’re short of home grown racists down there is it.



This observation being a bit, er, racist in itself. Or so been told by Australians.

And Americans.

And any expats who feel their country is being unfairly accused of racism...


----------



## Sasaferrato (Jul 18, 2021)

glitch hiker said:


> not far enough



Not sure you can get much further.


----------



## glitch hiker (Jul 18, 2021)

Sasaferrato said:


> Not sure you can get much further.


In a box of lead, bound with chains forged from the souls of the damned, and cast into the pit of the Leviathan at the bottom of the first ocean. 

Or the burning heart of the sun


----------



## Chilli.s (Jul 18, 2021)

quiet guy said:


> That's fine, I don't watch GBNews so he can spout his bile all he likes on this minor station hidden down the arse end of the Freeview channel list broadcasting to the other small minded, bigoted dick heads, just so long as he kept off the mainstream media.


see it does have another use after all, not just about point and laugh


----------



## panpete (Jul 18, 2021)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> She is a well known liar. And having been exposed as a ket-head you’d think she’d be barred from getting a visa on that alone…


Katie Hopkins on ketamine? I find psychedelics and Katie Hopkins a difficult thing to associate with each other, I'd see her drug of choice more as booze.


----------



## ruffneck23 (Jul 18, 2021)

panpete said:


> Katie Hopkins on ketamine? I find psychedelics and Katie Hopkins a difficult thing to associate with each other, I'd see her drug of choice more as booze.


My theory was she was trying to buy coke and someone saw her coming, sold her ket and she was too stupid to taste it before doing it.


----------



## panpete (Jul 18, 2021)

ruffneck23 said:


> My theory was she was trying to buy coke and someone saw her coming, sold her ket and she was too stupid to taste it before doing it.


LOL if she ever decided to do illegal drugs I think coke would be her drug of choice.


----------



## Orang Utan (Jul 18, 2021)

panpete said:


> LOL if she ever decided to do illegal drugs I think coke would be her drug of choice.


she's deffo already well familiar with doing drugs.

btw she once said that fat kids should take coke


----------



## two sheds (Jul 18, 2021)

I thought it was "Let them eat coke"


----------



## krtek a houby (Jul 19, 2021)

panpete said:


> Katie Hopkins on ketamine? I find psychedelics and Katie Hopkins a difficult thing to associate with each other, I'd see her drug of choice more as booze.



Reckon she's addicted to attention, more than anything else.


----------



## Yossarian (Jul 19, 2021)

They're deporting her. 



> "We are getting her out of the country as soon as we can arrange that," she said. "I am hoping that will happen imminently."











						Home Affairs Minister says authorities are getting Katie Hopkins 'out of the country as soon as we can'
					

The far-right British commentator, who was dropped by Channel 7 after bragging about flouting hotel quarantine rules, will be deported from Australia.




					www.abc.net.au


----------



## krtek a houby (Jul 19, 2021)

Yossarian said:


> They're deporting her.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



'tis well satisfying when bigots get their comeuppance


----------



## ElizabethofYork (Jul 19, 2021)

More attention for the attention seeker.


----------



## Chairman Meow (Jul 19, 2021)

She got a $1000 fine and is on her way to Sydney Airport for deportation.


----------



## ruffneck23 (Jul 19, 2021)

I'm guessing she wont be getting her fee, which I think she desperately needs after having to sell her house after losing the court case and being sacked from LBC.

A $1000 fine too, she must be devastated.

Oh well, such a shame.


----------



## souljacker (Jul 19, 2021)

Presumably she'll need to quarantine when she gets back to the UK? This must be costing her a fortune lol.


----------



## Epona (Jul 19, 2021)

Why are we cheering her getting deported?  We don't want her back!!!


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Jul 19, 2021)

Epona said:


> Why are we cheering her getting deported?  We don't want her back!!!



I was hoping they would send her to that Indonesian island that they stick refugees on.


----------



## ruffneck23 (Jul 19, 2021)

Epona said:


> Why are we cheering her getting deported?  We don't want her back!!!


I'm not really cheering her deportation, I'm cheering that she will go bankrupt  and her humiliation.


----------



## steveo87 (Jul 19, 2021)

Epona said:


> Why are we cheering her getting deported?  We don't want her back!!!


We created her, it's our responsibility to contain her. 

Hopefully in a lead lined box....


----------



## brogdale (Jul 19, 2021)

Time to reveal her Bangladeshi parentage methinks!


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Jul 19, 2021)

South Africa and now Australia. Which will be the next country to expel her?


----------



## two sheds (Jul 19, 2021)

With extreme luck we'll refuse entry and send her back.


----------



## ruffneck23 (Jul 19, 2021)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> South Africa and now Australia. Which will be the next country to expel her?


All of them, I hope.


----------



## steveo87 (Jul 19, 2021)

two sheds said:


> With extreme luck we'll refuse entry and send her back.


It would be peak Johnson Government to get into a diplomatic incident with Australia over Katie bloody Hopkins....


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Jul 19, 2021)

There's no quarantine in the UK for arrivals from Australia, but as she's being deported Australia will book the flight, they should stick her on Qatar Airways, via Red List (hotel quarantine, £1750) Doha.


----------



## MickiQ (Jul 19, 2021)

The woman clearly has an overinflated view of her own importance, did she truly believe that she could publicly cock a snoot at the Australian Govt and they just accept it?


----------



## existentialist (Jul 19, 2021)

MickiQ said:


> The woman clearly has an overinflated view of her own importance, did she truly believe that she could publicly cock a snoot at the Australian Govt and they just accept it?


Yep.

Though I suspect she _doesn't_ have an overinflated, etc - it's more likely that, deep down, she knows she's nothing (or worse), and compensates by projecting this huge egotistical persona. And, because she's doing that, she's never stopping to check whether she's crossing any lines...in fact, she's made a virtue out of crossing lines, and is thus presumably floored/outraged when she finds herself being held to account for it.


----------



## ruffneck23 (Jul 19, 2021)




----------



## Pickman's model (Jul 19, 2021)

ruffneck23 said:


>



couldn't we persuade the australians to send her to some desolate uninhabited island?


----------



## existentialist (Jul 19, 2021)

Pickman's model said:


> couldn't we persuade the australians to send her to some desolate uninhabited island?


Give it a few weeks, and the UK may qualify for that description...it's certainly desolate already!


----------



## Steel Icarus (Jul 19, 2021)

Surprised they didn't keep her, that Deputy PM isn't the nicest man on earth for sure


----------



## existentialist (Jul 19, 2021)

S☼I said:


> Surprised they didn't keep her, that Deputy PM isn't the nicest man on earth for sure


Perhaps he doesn't like the idea of competition?


----------



## ruffneck23 (Jul 19, 2021)

S☼I said:


> Surprised they didn't keep her, that Deputy PM isn't the nicest man on earth for sure


you mean this fella ?









						Australian deputy PM threatens to boot Katie Hopkins out the country
					

Australian deputy PM threatens to boot Katie Hopkins out the country




					uk.sports.yahoo.com


----------



## cyril_smear (Jul 19, 2021)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> She is a well known liar. And having been exposed as a ket-head you’d think she’d be barred from getting a visa on that alone…


“Exposed as a key head” ?


----------



## Pickman's model (Jul 19, 2021)

cyril_smear said:


> “Exposed as a key head” ?


time to take a trip to specsavers


----------



## Pickman's model (Jul 19, 2021)

Storm Fox said:


> Oh dear, she's coming home .


we wanted football
karma sent hopkins


----------



## cyril_smear (Jul 19, 2021)

Pickman's model said:


> time to take a trip to specsavers


just fuck off


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Jul 19, 2021)

ruffneck23 said:


> you mean this fella ?
> 
> 
> 
> ...




"Pack your bongo and get out of the country"


----------



## cyril_smear (Jul 19, 2021)

Pickman's model said:


> time to take a trip to specsavers


Just fuck off


----------



## existentialist (Jul 19, 2021)

cyril_smear said:


> Just fuck off


TBH, I think you're pissing in the wind. And your one-poster "just fuck off" campaign doesn't look as if it's gaining any traction - perhaps just cut your losses now, eh?


----------



## Pickman's model (Jul 19, 2021)

cyril_smear said:


> Just fuck off


you could find the most insulting phrase in the english language and repetition would still reduce its impact. and 'just fuck off' conveys more of desperation than of insult, it's frankly pitiful.


----------



## two sheds (Jul 19, 2021)

ruffneck23 said:


>



the humiliation  her peoiple won't be able to talk to her any more in case she's picked up a vaccine infection


----------



## cupid_stunt (Jul 19, 2021)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> She is a well known liar. And having been exposed as a ket-head you’d think she’d be barred from getting a visa on that alone…



That reminds me of the Mirror complaint case, and one of the best newspaper corrections ever published.



> The Mirror argued its reporting was accurate but later added a correction to the story which the newspaper felt made the chain of events clearer: *“A previous version of this article suggested that Katie Hopkins was stopped from leaving South Africa because of the consumption of ketamine. We are happy to clarify that Ms Hopkins was detained for spreading racial hatred, which took place after the ketamine incident.”*













						Katie Hopkins wins complaint against Mirror for ketamine headline
					

Website suggested she was detained abroad for taking drugs, rather than allegedly spreading racial hatred




					www.theguardian.com


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Jul 19, 2021)

cupid_stunt said:


> That reminds me of the Mirror court case, and one of the best newspaper corrections ever published.
> 
> 
> 
> ...




I wrote that for them, never got my royalties for it either...



Bahnhof Strasse said:


> The Mirror can't go wrong on this, front page apology, "Sorry, it wasn't because of your use of ketamine, it was cos you're a racist piece of filth. Happy to set the record straight."


----------



## isvicthere? (Jul 19, 2021)

How debased does the Big Brother franchise have to have become for Hatie Kopkins to be classed as a "VIP"?


----------



## isvicthere? (Jul 19, 2021)

Pickman's model said:


> you could find the most insulting phrase in the english language and repetition would still reduce its impact. and 'just fuck off' conveys more of desperation than of insult, it's frankly pitiful.



"Just fuck off" sounds like the honest, but rejected, ad slogan of a budget airline.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Jul 19, 2021)

isvicthere? said:


> "Just fuck off" sounds like the honest, but rejected, ad slogan of a budget airline.




Too mild for Ryanair.


----------



## A380 (Jul 19, 2021)

What’s that Skip? There’s a deranged naked nazi breaking Covid regulations in room 107. OK I’ll get the cops.


----------



## cyril_smear (Jul 19, 2021)

existentialist said:


> TBH, I think you're pissing in the wind. And your one-poster "just fuck off" campaign doesn't look as if it's gaining any traction - perhaps just cut your losses now, eh?


It’s not a campaign. Even if I could do that, I wouldn’t. Not my style to be vindictive. I just don’t want them to respond to me, and you can’t beat a good “fuck off”, it’s concise!


----------



## existentialist (Jul 19, 2021)

cyril_smear said:


> It’s not a campaign. Even if I could do that, I wouldn’t. Not my style to be vindictive. I just don’t want them to respond to me, and you can’t beat a good “fuck off”, it’s concise!


I can recommend a far better way of preventing him from (appearing to) follow you...


----------



## bellaozzydog (Jul 19, 2021)

She’ll shake it off and end up tonguing farages arsehole on GBNews


----------



## Pickman's model (Jul 19, 2021)

cyril_smear said:


> It’s not a campaign. Even if I could do that, I wouldn’t. Not my style to be vindictive. I just don’t want them to respond to me, and you can’t beat a good “fuck off”, it’s concise!


it's feeble


----------



## Epona (Jul 19, 2021)

A380 said:


> View attachment 279394
> 
> What’s that Skip? There’s a deranged naked nazi breaking Covid regulations in room 107. OK I’ll get the cops.



Didn't they use a pair of dead kangaroo arms on sticks to film certain parts of Skippy?  Or is that an urban myth?


----------



## Pickman's model (Jul 19, 2021)

Epona said:


> Didn't they use a pair of dead kangaroo arms on sticks to film certain parts of Skippy?  Or is that an urban myth?











						Remote Control - Saturday 12 October 2013
					

Kangs of guilt over Skippy’s lasting fraud




					www.garstangcourier.co.uk


----------



## cyril_smear (Jul 19, 2021)

existentialist said:


> I can recommend a far better way of preventing him from (appearing to) follow you...


Pray tell...


----------



## existentialist (Jul 19, 2021)

cyril_smear said:


> Pray tell...


The "Ignore" button. With the added benefit that we don't have to participate in your tiny feud, too.


----------



## krtek a houby (Jul 19, 2021)

A380 said:


> View attachment 279394
> 
> What’s that Skip? There’s a deranged naked nazi breaking Covid regulations in room 107. OK I’ll get the cops.



She'll roo the day she set foot in the place


----------



## ruffneck23 (Jul 19, 2021)




----------



## krtek a houby (Jul 19, 2021)

isvicthere? said:


> "Just fuck off" sounds like the honest, but rejected, ad slogan of a budget airline.


 Am sure KH hears the phrase a lot


----------



## cyril_smear (Jul 19, 2021)

krtek a houby said:


> She'll roo the day she set foot in the place


Very punny.


----------



## Stash (Jul 19, 2021)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> I was hoping they would send her to that Indonesian island that they stick refugees on.


The people on that island have suffered enough


----------



## wemakeyousoundb (Jul 19, 2021)

bellaozzydog said:


> She’ll shake it off and end up tonguing farages arsehole on GBNews


_ordering mind bleach_


----------



## Raheem (Jul 19, 2021)

bellaozzydog said:


> She’ll shake it off and end up tonguing farages arsehole on GBNews


"Katie, how can we tell if anyone's watching?"

"I've got an idea..."


----------



## tony.c (Jul 19, 2021)

Australian Home Affairs Minister says 'good riddance'.









						Aussie Home Minister says 'good riddance' to deported Katie Hopkins
					

THE AUSTRALIAN Home Minister said "good riddance" to political commentator Katie Hopkins during an interview as she said her department was working as quick as they could to remove her from the country following her quarantine breaches.




					www.express.co.uk


----------



## bellaozzydog (Jul 19, 2021)

Raheem said:


> "Katie, how can we tell if anyone's watching?"
> 
> "I've got an idea..."



quadruples watching figures


----------



## Pickman's model (Jul 19, 2021)

Raheem said:


> "Katie, how can we tell if anyone's watching?"
> 
> "I've got an idea..."


----------



## krtek a houby (Jul 19, 2021)

tony.c said:


> Australian Home Affairs Minister says 'good riddance'.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Home and Away


----------



## Ax^ (Jul 19, 2021)

how did she even get an Australian visa when she was deported from ZA on drug charges


----------



## elbows (Jul 19, 2021)

krtek a houby said:


> Home and Away



Would have preferred Prisoner Cell Block H(opkins).


----------



## Orang Utan (Jul 19, 2021)

Ax^ said:


> how did she even get an Australian visa when she was deported from ZA on drug charges


she wasn’t


----------



## Raheem (Jul 19, 2021)

Ax^ said:


> how did she even get an Australian visa when she was deported from ZA on drug charges


It was race hate charges, not drugs. No comment on the fact that's fine for an Australian visa.


----------



## krtek a houby (Jul 19, 2021)

elbows said:


> Would have preferred Prisoner Cell Block H(opkins).





elbows said:


> Would have preferred Prisoner Cell Block H(opkins).


 Hopkins at Hanging Rock


----------



## Dogsauce (Jul 19, 2021)

krtek a houby said:


> Reckon she's addicted to attention, more than anything else.


Well, given her antipodean expulsion was the most read Guardian article earlier this morning I guess this must count as a victory.


----------



## RainbowTown (Jul 19, 2021)

Beneath that vile, negative narcissism of hers, lies a woman who appears full of self-loathing and bitterness. Her constant need to be noticed smacks as some sort of pitiful low self- esteem, and it's this which drives that attention seeking trait of hers. She is not a pleasant person, no. Far from it. But my overriding impression towards her is of pity. A dismissive pity, yes. But pity nevertheless. Take away the bullying, bravado and bullshit that she spews out _ad nauseum_, and you're left with someone who, in the end, cuts a rather sad and pathetic figure.


----------



## steveo87 (Jul 19, 2021)

Not to body shame, or make comments about woman's dress (but to definitely make a dad joke):
Do you reckon she got money off that jumper?


----------



## ruffneck23 (Jul 19, 2021)

RainbowTown said:


> Beneath that vile, negative narcissism of hers, lies a woman who appears full of self-loathing and bitterness. Her constant need to be noticed smacks as some sort of pitiful low self- esteem, and it's this which drives that attention seeking trait of hers. She is not a pleasant person, no. Far from it. But my overriding impression towards her is of pity. A dismissive pity, yes. But pity nevertheless. Take away the bullying, bravado and bullshit that she spews out _ad nauseum_, and you're left with someone who, in the end, cuts a rather sad and pathetic figure.


Nah the hate she spills , she deserves nothing but contempt, if that makes me a cunt , well I’m a cunt then , but not a horrible racist one , I’m too old to forgive hate filled fucks , sorry , not sorry


----------



## DaveCinzano (Jul 19, 2021)

RainbowTown said:


> Beneath that vile, negative narcissism of hers, lies a woman who appears full of self-loathing and bitterness. Her constant need to be noticed smacks as some sort of pitiful low self- esteem, and it's this which drives that attention seeking trait of hers. She is not a pleasant person, no. Far from it. But my overriding impression towards her is of pity. A dismissive pity, yes. But pity nevertheless. Take away the bullying, bravado and bullshit that she spews out _ad nauseum_, and you're left with someone who, in the end, cuts a rather sad and pathetic figure.





ruffneck23 said:


> Nah the hate she spills , she deserves nothing but contempt, if that makes me a cunt , well I’m a cunt then , but not a horrible racist one , I’m too old to forgive hate filled fucks , sorry , not sorry



I refer the Rt Hon Members to my response of 10th February









						Katie Hopkins
					

. nonsense




					www.urban75.net


----------



## 8ball (Jul 19, 2021)

Well, we know who's going to be on GB News soon, I s'pose.


----------



## Riklet (Jul 19, 2021)

_insert Nelson "Ha Ha" picture i cba to find cos this shitskid isnt even worth it_


----------



## comrade spurski (Jul 19, 2021)

RainbowTown said:


> Beneath that vile, negative narcissism of hers, lies a woman who appears full of self-loathing and bitterness. Her constant need to be noticed smacks as some sort of pitiful low self- esteem, and it's this which drives that attention seeking trait of hers. She is not a pleasant person, no. Far from it. But my overriding impression towards her is of pity. A dismissive pity, yes. But pity nevertheless. Take away the bullying, bravado and bullshit that she spews out _ad nauseum_, and you're left with someone who, in the end, cuts a rather sad and pathetic figure.


I don't mean this to be critical of you but I couldn't disagree more.
No one who refers to refugees as "cockroaches" or calls for a "final solution" to deal with Muslims deserves anyone's pity imho. 
The term "nazi" or "fascist" is over used imo but her views are very close to that ideology from what I see.
Like I said, I don't mean this as a judgement on you.


----------



## RainbowTown (Jul 19, 2021)

ruffneck23 said:


> Nah the hate she spills , she deserves nothing but contempt, if that makes me a cunt , well I’m a cunt then , but not a horrible racist one , I’m too old to forgive hate filled fucks , sorry , not sorry






comrade spurski said:


> I don't mean this to be critical of you but I couldn't disagree more.
> No one who refers to refugees as "cockroaches" or calls for a "final solution" to deal with Muslims deserves anyone's pity imho.
> The term "nazi" or "fascist" is over used imo but her views are very close to that ideology from what I see.
> Like I said, I don't mean this as a judgement on you.



I am not saying she doesn't deserve contempt. She does.
Likewise, neither am I implying she deserves to be forgiven either, for spouting her miserable and wretched opinions. She doesn't.
I'm just giving a personal view as to why I think she conducts herself in such a callous and pig-ignorant manner.
And I pity her, yes; though not out of any kind of sympathy. Absolutely not. Rather, I pity her because behind her racist venom and (self) hatred, there lies a person of no real worth. Or value. And I think she knows that. Deep down.. Only, like all bullies and narcissists, she cannot nor will not acknowledge that. Acknowledge her own insignificance.


----------



## Yossarian (Jul 19, 2021)

I just hope this deportation doesn't lead to a wider trend of Australia sentencing COVID deniers etc. to be transported to Britain.

"So you think the rules are a joke, huh? Pack your bongo mate, you're going somewhere where they don't have any."


----------



## brogdale (Jul 19, 2021)

Yossarian said:


> I just hope this deportation doesn't lead to a wider trend of Australia sentencing COVID deniers etc. to be transported to Britain.
> 
> "So you think the rules are a joke, huh? Pack your bongo mate, you're going somewhere where they don't have any."


_The Fatal Shore _inverted.


----------



## Ax^ (Jul 19, 2021)

was this the same company that used or still produces neighbours

does anyone still watch it

has it gotten realy rough after it was taken off terrestrial tv?


----------



## Orang Utan (Jul 19, 2021)

Ax^ said:


> was this the same company that used or still produces neighbours
> 
> does anyone still watch it
> 
> has it gotten realy rough after it was taken off terrestrial tv?


yeah, it's more like Mad Max these days - BDSM gear, gladitorial fights to the death, brutal gang warfare over scarce resources. Bouncer has gone rogue and started his own scavenger gang.


----------



## elbows (Jul 19, 2021)

The last time I saw Neighbours mentioned in the news it was because people were recounting unpleasant racist experiences on set.


----------



## eatmorecheese (Jul 19, 2021)

Ax^ said:


> was this the same company that used or still produces neighbours
> 
> does anyone still watch it
> 
> has it gotten realy rough after it was taken off terrestrial tv?


No one watches it in Australia


----------



## eatmorecheese (Jul 19, 2021)

I must admit, it's nice to see Australia's draconian hostile environment immigration policy rapidly deal with a genuine undesirable.


----------



## bellaozzydog (Jul 19, 2021)

RainbowTown said:


> Beneath that vile, negative narcissism of hers, lies a woman who appears full of self-loathing and bitterness. Her constant need to be noticed smacks as some sort of pitiful low self- esteem, and it's this which drives that attention seeking trait of hers. She is not a pleasant person, no. Far from it. But my overriding impression towards her is of pity. A dismissive pity, yes. But pity nevertheless. Take away the bullying, bravado and bullshit that she spews out _ad nauseum_, and you're left with someone who, in the end, cuts a rather sad and pathetic figure.


That is very generous thinking of you and to some extent these right wing mouth pieces are all a bit damaged, Grimes, Rachael Riley, Milo Yiannopoulos et al 

…..but at some point their message needs to be shut the fuck up


----------



## Dom Traynor (Jul 20, 2021)

Orang Utan said:


> yeah, it's more like Mad Max these days - BDSM gear, gladitorial fights to the death, brutal gang warfare over scarce resources. Bouncer has gone rogue and started his own scavenger gang.



Carl Kennedy in a leather jockstrap and hockey mask


----------



## eatmorecheese (Jul 20, 2021)

Dom Traynor said:


> Carl Kennedy in a leather jockstrap and hockey mask


"It's a perfectly straightforward procedure..."


----------



## Raheem (Jul 20, 2021)

Dom Traynor said:


> Carl Kennedy in a leather jockstrap and hockey mask


<Notes down idea for Neighbours-themed Cluedo.>


----------



## AmateurAgitator (Jul 21, 2021)




----------



## BigMoaner (Aug 12, 2021)

Come on covid. Try your best. Have her in your sites.


----------



## panpete (Aug 15, 2021)

Orang Utan said:


> she's deffo already well familiar with doing drugs.
> 
> btw she once said that fat kids should take coke


Outrageous


----------



## AmateurAgitator (Aug 30, 2021)




----------



## two sheds (Dec 27, 2021)

Do I recognize this woman?


----------



## colacubes (Dec 27, 2021)

two sheds said:


> Do I recognize this woman?
> 
> View attachment 303421


That is a 3 year old post from her Twitter account, so yes.


----------



## gentlegreen (Dec 28, 2021)

But does she have MT-G's weird feet too ?


----------



## 8ball (Dec 29, 2021)

two sheds said:


> Do I recognize this woman?
> 
> View attachment 303421



Dunno why precisely, but she strikes me as someone with a brain illness more than someone who is evil in the usual sense.


----------



## DaveCinzano (Dec 30, 2021)

8ball said:


> Dunno why precisely, but she strikes me as someone with a brain illness more than someone who is evil in the usual sense.


Pretty sure that when ICD-11 drops it's not going pathologise grifty arseholery.


----------



## 8ball (Dec 30, 2021)

DaveCinzano said:


> Pretty sure that when ICD-11 drops it's not going pathologise grifty arseholery.



Yeah, that's fair comment.  Maybe I'm just gullible in thinking no one would could come out with that kind of crap without a broken brain.


----------



## DaveCinzano (Sep 19, 2022)

Side-mention yesterday in a write-up on the serial stalker Alex Belfield, with whom she appeared in a stage show described by the promoter as "the perfect night out if you want to laugh at the insanity of our lefty world" last weekend - after his conviction but before he was sentenced to 5.5 years in prison:









						Jeremy Vine attacks social media firms after jailing of stalker
					

BBC and Channel 5 broadcaster says firms such as YouTube and Twitter have no moral values




					www.theguardian.com


----------



## Storm Fox (Sep 19, 2022)

I happened to turn on the radio while Vine was Interviewing Hopkins. I switched on in the middle of the interview, so didn't know who was being interviewed, and thought she was such an unpleasant person I had to listen to the end to find out who was being interviewed. 
Luckily it was Hopkins and not someone I had previously thought was a decent person.


----------



## Karl Masks (Sep 19, 2022)

gentlegreen said:


> But does she have MT-G's weird feet too ?
> 
> View attachment 303426


Have yoyu seen how she does crossfit? It's like watching a spasming fish fall out of a tree


----------



## ska invita (Sep 19, 2022)

(((Blackpool)))


----------



## Raheem (Sep 19, 2022)

DaveCinzano said:


> Side-mention yesterday in a write-up on the serial stalker Alex Belfield, with whom she appeared in a stage show described by the promoter as "the perfect night out if you want to laugh at the insanity of our lefty world" last weekend - after his conviction but before he was sentenced to 5.5 years in prison:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Thanks. I hadn't looked into this Jeremy Video be story and didn't know what to make if it, but now I get the picture.

Have they based his image on some other news reporter, though?


----------

