Google apps
Main menu

"P.P.S"

17 Comments -

1 – 17 of 17
Blogger Adam Bernard said...

Not sure I'd want it to be illegal, but I'd quite like the publishers to think better of it.

Monday, 24 January, 2011

Blogger NickPheas said...

I am perhaps pleased to say that the link breaks my archaic work web browser.

Monday, 24 January, 2011

Blogger Sam Dodsworth said...

There's actually a service for linking to Daily Mail articles without increasing their pageview count (and advertising revenue):

http://sim-o.me.uk/2010/10/media-watching-by-proxy/

Meanwhile, the best response so far is:

http://themediablog.typepad.com/the-media-blog/2011/01/melanie-phillips-quiz-of-the-day.html

Monday, 24 January, 2011

Blogger Andrew Rilstone said...

I'm not for the moment asking if it ought to be illegal. I'm asking if, as a matter of fact, it is.

Monday, 24 January, 2011

Blogger Pete Darby said...

Well she has a point, I mean, look at the front page of BBC News, barely anything that isn't being dictated by the Gay Agenda: police seizing scam mails, Jeremy Hunt starting an enquiry into B Syb B, slowdown in the UK economy... frankly, it's all about sex sex sex with these people.

Tuesday, 25 January, 2011

Blogger Iain said...

I thing I'm just about to prove Melanie Phillips's point because I think she "must be considered a bigot".

Tuesday, 25 January, 2011

Blogger Gavin Burrows said...

Only the other week there was a whole Newsnight special on scattercushions.

We're through the looking glass here, people...

Tuesday, 25 January, 2011

Blogger Andrew Rilstone said...

The BBC is a propoganda machine for climate change zealots, apparently.

Tuesday, 25 January, 2011

Blogger NickPheas said...

Under what law do you think it might be illegal? It's not incitement to racial hatred, it's not really behaviour likely to cause a breach of the peace, though reading it aloud in a gay bar might be.

Tuesday, 25 January, 2011

Blogger Andrew Rilstone said...

From 2008, the law against incitment to hatred on racial or religious grounds was extended to include incitment to hated on the grounds of gender or orienatation.

http://www.stonewall.org.uk/what_we_do/parliamentary/2886.asp

Tuesday, 25 January, 2011

Blogger JWH said...

I think that as far as the legal side goes, her targets (in the article) are the government/BBC/judicial system etc. rather than homosexual people per se (like the use of "gay rights lobby" rather than "gays") - at least overtly. So there probably isn't a criminal case in there...?

Tuesday, 25 January, 2011

Blogger Andrew Rilstone said...

I'm not sure: do you think someone would get away with saying "I wasn't being anti-semitic, because I wasn't stirring up hatred against Jews, only against the Secret Elders of Zion?"

Wednesday, 26 January, 2011

Comment deleted

This comment has been removed by the author.

Wednesday, 26 January, 2011

Blogger JWH said...

If the 'Secret Elders of Zion' were distinct enough from the idea of 'Jews' then yes - but I don't think a court would accept that it was. By contrast, the idea of 'Gay Rights Lobby' could contain more people who were heterosexual than homosexual, by what I infer is her definition.

Wednesday, 26 January, 2011

Blogger Phil Masters said...

I'm not sure: do you think someone would get away with saying "I wasn't being anti-semitic, because I wasn't stirring up hatred against Jews, only against the Secret Elders of Zion?"

Verges on a tricky area, actually. Not that the whole Elders of Zion crap-heap is anything more than an extraordinarily feeble excuse for anti-semitism, mind. But there is a murky area of debate wherein some people try to use criticism of Zionism - or Israel in general - as a cover for anti-semitism, while other people accuse anybody who expresses doubts about Israeli government policies of being anti-semitic.

Wednesday, 26 January, 2011

Blogger Andrew Rilstone said...

Sorry.

"Zionism" I take to mean "The strong belief in the right of the Jews to have an independent homeland, in what they consider to be the historical Israell" or something like that. I would have thought you could have used "Zionist" as a description without appearing racist. A bit like the distinction people make between "Moslims" and "Islamists". (I have tried, without success, to get people to adopt the term "Christianist.")

"The Secret Elders of Zion" I took to be a reference to to a fictitious organization supposedly dedicated to the Jewish conquest of the world, by means of controlling the media, banks, schools, etc.

One of the eighteen things I am going to get around to doing one of these days is reading up on the origins and influence of the "Protocols" hoax. When I first discovered that the far right believe that a thing called "Political Correctness" is being orchastrated by a secret comittee of (Jewish) communists in order to bring down western civilisation, I thought "Hmmm...Where have I heard that before."

The idea that there is a thing called a Gay Lobby, demanding that children be taught about homosexuality because of some ulterior motive sounds, to me, a lot like the theory that there is a thing called the Jewish Conspiracy. But I'm getting a little ahead of myself...

Wednesday, 26 January, 2011

Blogger Sam Dodsworth said...

The idea that there is a thing called a Gay Lobby, demanding that children be taught about homosexuality because of some ulterior motive sounds, to me, a lot like the theory that there is a thing called the Jewish Conspiracy.

Outgroup homogeneity goes some way to explaining that, although it's by no means the last word.

Wednesday, 26 January, 2011