-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
- Velocio
- ladystardust
- DMCZone
- Jacqui
- Big Red
- mc_nebula
- Oliver Schick
- Zane Chaos
- Spudge
- Lileth
- LaLiLuLeLo
- braker
- villa-ru
- SnoHoHoHowy
- D. Generate
- jcgarcia
- joe smith
- Bernie
- Santa Cleft
- Plastic Pedals
- hillbilly
- miss_socks
- Kirth
Twenty Five. Sparky - snowbody
- Dan-cer, Prancer, Donner, Blitzen etc.
- Xmashineisbored
- Psy
- Slaytanic1 (will try not to smash my hand open at this one)
- party_paul
- BlueChristmas
- deckthetreeze
- mjs110
- mmccarthy
- Max
- S4NT4
- hael_mary
- d14vd_h
- Edmundro
- mincepie
- NurseHolliday
- V
- dogsballs (promise no mankini)
- the Skully and the ivy
- Speedball
- Velocio
-
-
before this thread descends into farce (which it should do soon)
'This brings me back to the bile, the fury, the inflammatory hate mail and the repeated posting of my home address on the internet...' Jan Muir
She should remember that in the same week her column was published, a man was murdered murdered in Trafalgar Sq.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2009/oct/22/baynham-homophobic-killing-trafalgar-squareHer words have an effect... somewhere along the line
-
Must be very confusing for the Mail. They routinely publish shit like this and get away with it
Precisely. Whether they like it or not - and the Mail doesn't - it's not necessarily newspapers that set the news agenda these. If they had stuck to it's anti immigrant rants no one would have said much. But it chose the wrong target: a young, tech-savvy, loyal fanbase. And it got well and truly fucked over
-
[QUOTE=Superprecise;1022835]Why do you not except that as an apology? She addresses every contentious issueQUOTE]
My main problem with it is that she defends herself by saying her column was 'misinterpreted', that the backlash was an orchestrated campaign - welcome, Daily Mail, to the interweb; and just because its an orchestrated campaign doesn't mean that those people who sign up to it are any less angry - and she rounds it off by saying are we becoming a society where no one can dare question the circumstances or behaviour of a person.
Well, yes, if it's based on fact. Her original premise was that there had been some sleazy aspect to Gately's death - but that was just innuendo. No evidence of a hedonistic lifestyle except a spliff or two and a random shag. And nothing in the coroner's report to suggest any suspicious circumstance. Which kind of invalidates the whole of the original piece...
-
I don't think she does herself any favours trying to justify her opinions in today's Daily Fail... perhaps it would be better is she just shut up completely
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-1222246/The-truth-views-tragic-death-Stephen-Gately.html
-
...has anyone seen it?
The synopsis...
***[FONT=Arial][SIZE=3]Internationally respected Siamese twin surgeon Dr. Josef Heiter has a demented vision for mankind’s future existence. He wants to remove human beings’ kneecaps so they have to exist on all fours and then surgically graft them mouth-to-anus to form a centipede chain. When two stranded female Americans arrive at his luxury home-cum-hospital looking for help, his long-gestating plan swiftly moves into chilling action with a shocking force. Kidnapping a third Japanese male tourist he begins the tissue matches, teeth removal and buttock moulding to create his triplet creature.
***[/SIZE][/FONT] -
-
-
The Daily Mail's Jan Moir.
now we all know the Mail can employ some pretty fucked up writers (UTFS James Martin), but Jan Moir is one bigotted old bag.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-1220756/A-strange-lonely-troubling-death--.html
http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/greenslade/2009/oct/16/dailymail-stephen-gately
oh FFS