Thread: Daily Mail: Enemies of the people Board: Hell / Ship of Fools.


To visit this thread, use this URL:
http://forum.ship-of-fools.com/cgi-bin/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=3;t=005632

Posted by Sipech (# 16870) on :
 
You utter fuckwits!

Independent judges that uphold the rule of law and who made a lawful judgement asserting the sovereignty of parliament are not fucking enemies of the people!

Xenophobic, nationalistic, homophobic tabloid newspapers and those that endorse them are far more likely to be "enemies of the people".

A major part of the Brexit argument was the assertion that the UK parliament should be sovereign. That much was sound and most agreed on. Where they went wrong was the assumption that it wasn't.

It is sovereign.

That's what the judges ruled. They didn't block Brexit

"But, but, but...." the Brexiters moaned, "The qualified and experienced lawyers didn't agree with my tabloid-fuelled view that populism = democracy."

As others have pointed out, the most dangerous of dictatorships in the past have often started out by attacking the judiciary in the name of the people. It's not big, it's not clever and neither are those who agree with the paper that declared "Hurrah for the blackshirts". Go stick your head in a bucket of ammonia if you can't be bothered to learn what parliamentary democracy means!
 
Posted by quetzalcoatl (# 16740) on :
 
Quite scary stuff, when they start attacking judges, and implicitly, Parliament itself. This is the road to fascism, based on plebiscites.

[ 04. November 2016, 10:49: Message edited by: quetzalcoatl ]
 
Posted by BroJames (# 9636) on :
 
But surely respect for the rule of law is one of our fundamental British values. No-one is above the law, not even a plebiscite.

Of course the law can be changed or amended - that is the job of Parliament.
 
Posted by Karl: Liberal Backslider (# 76) on :
 
Note the Weasel Words:

quote:
Originally Posted by Fascist Bog-Roll Substitute:

The Lord Chief Justice and two colleagues were branded 'out of touch'
They were accused of putting Britain on course for a 'constitutional crisis'

Note the use of the passive here. The great thing about the passive is you don't have to say who actually did something. So a single lone swivel-eyed cockwomble can denounce the fact that it's illegal to feed children through bacon slicers and the statement "Bacon slicing of children ban blasted as Liberal Do-Gooding nonsense" becomes true.

So the question to any headlines or bullet points in the passive becomes "by whom?"

The answer's usually in paragraph 19.

In this case it's "usual suspects".

[ 04. November 2016, 11:06: Message edited by: Karl: Liberal Backslider ]
 
Posted by Callan (# 525) on :
 
I suspect that the Judges aren't the real target as I imagine that if the Mail darkens their door at all, it gets no further than the servants quarters. It's more likely to put the wind up Members of Parliament who may be contemplating "doing a Ken Clarke" and voting with their consciences.
 
Posted by quetzalcoatl (# 16740) on :
 
After all, the people have spoken, and Parliament should now be silent, while the Blessed Theresa reads the runes.
 
Posted by Alan Cresswell (# 31) on :
 
The people have spoken. They don't want the rule of law, or Parliament. They want to be ruled by tabloid newspaper editors.
 
Posted by Penny S (# 14768) on :
 
I did the French Revolution in 'O' Level. Than whose excesses it was once amusing to compare to leaving a baby on a Southern Region station.
This is utterly scarey.
Thank goodness we don't have the NRA.
The woman who brought the case has had death threats straight after the result was published.
 
Posted by Eutychus (# 3081) on :
 
A picture is worth a thousand words (you need to check the headlines in the boxes at the top, too).
 
Posted by Penny S (# 14768) on :
 
Thanks for the cheering!
 
Posted by Tubbs (# 440) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Alan Cresswell:
The people have spoken. They don't want the rule of law, or Parliament. They want to be ruled by tabloid newspaper editors.

They want the rule of law and Parliament when it agrees with them. When it doesn't it's obviously wrong and needs overthrowing. Dacre is as much a hate preacher as Abu Hamza.

Tubbs
 
Posted by Alan Cresswell (# 31) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Penny S:
The woman who brought the case has had death threats straight after the result was published.

Since Farage promised thugs on the streets and violence in the event of a Remain vote, that is entirely consistent with the way the Leave campaign has been conducted.
 
Posted by Doc Tor (# 9748) on :
 
I did notice that the deputy leader of Britain First was convicted (amongst other things) of wearing a 'political uniform'. A law which was introduced specifically against the Blackshirts.

I thought/hoped my streetfighting days were over...
 
Posted by Bishops Finger (# 5430) on :
 
I wouldn't even consider wiping my arse with the Daily Wail. My shit is of far too high a quality...

IJ
 
Posted by mr cheesy (# 3330) on :
 
I'm beyond being surprised by the antics of the Daily Moan, Express etc. It is so wholly without logic (we want to give powers back to our parliament from Brussels, except when we have to actually, y'know, discuss anything) that it is increasingly becoming a wolfwhistle to the worst side of British nationalism.

Of course, the establishment is so fundamentally torn on the whole messy issue of the CSA enquiry that on another level it isn't even wrong to question the reasons for decisions by the law courts.

The problem is not with criticising the court or even putting judges under the spotlight for their decisions - it is the rank hypocracy implicit in the Moan's position, aping Farage's opportunism. Can we imagine that they'd all be villifying the courts if the decision had gone the other way? Wouldn't they be asking for another ref if Remain had won by 52%-48% instead of vice versa?

[ 04. November 2016, 14:09: Message edited by: mr cheesy ]
 
Posted by Alan Cresswell (# 31) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by mr cheesy:
Wouldn't they be asking for another ref if Remain had won by 52%-48% instead of vice versa?

In the words of Nigel Farage (I'll scrub down my keyboard shortly), "In a 52-48 referendum this would be unfinished business by a long way." (In a pre-referendum interview in the Mirror - so, that will be a second washing of my keyboard then).
 
Posted by Tubbs (# 440) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Alan Cresswell:
quote:
Originally posted by mr cheesy:
Wouldn't they be asking for another ref if Remain had won by 52%-48% instead of vice versa?

In the words of Nigel Farage (I'll scrub down my keyboard shortly), "In a 52-48 referendum this would be unfinished business by a long way." (In a pre-referendum interview in the Mirror - so, that will be a second washing of my keyboard then).
The Mirror was pro-remain. A difficult line to walk given many of it's readers weren't. You just need to wash that keyboard the once.

Tubbs
 
Posted by Alan Cresswell (# 31) on :
 
It wasn't their stance on the referendum, just the general ickiness shared by all the red tops - the scandals of celebrities and other trivia dressed up as news and the like.

Of course, if that interview had been in the Sun or Mail I'd have probably given up cleaning the keyboard as a lost cause and simply binned it.
 


© Ship of Fools 2016

Powered by Infopop Corporation
UBB.classicTM 6.5.0