UK politics: Veni Vidi Vaccinati

[Zorral]

3 hours ago, Derfel Cadarn said:

Heh

 

 

 

[Maltaran]

1 hour ago, IheartIheartTesla said:

What I found hilarious is his nattering on about 'free speech', while simultaeously storming off a show when someone else offered their own 'free speech'. Honestly, these clowns are never consistent with their beliefs. and while they can dish it out, are certainly the biggest snowflakes around when hearing a dissenting opinion.

Anyway, regarding the royal saga, being rich doesnt inure you to racism or mental health issues.

Free speech means being able to say whatever you like with no consequences, didn't you get the memo?

[Clueless Northman]

1 hour ago, IheartIheartTesla said:

Anyway, regarding the royal saga, being rich doesnt inure you to racism or mental health issues.

That's obvious. Still, until they've checked their millionaire privilege and have actually dropped down their lifestyle level to something closer to British or American people, why should we bother about what they're going through. They're fucking royals, they're of no use to the society at all and are basically members of a parasitic class that lifes off of other people's work (actually, this goes for the bulk of "celebrities" as well).

I suppose there aren't many leftists left around, considering this is supposed to be news and people are supposed to care about them. Meanwhile, millions are going through mental health issues due to social and economic issues, and media, including bloody billionaire Oprah, don't give a flying fuck about them, because it would mean questioning the current economic system.

[Mr. Chatywin et al.]

13 minutes ago, Maltaran said:

Free speech means being able to say whatever you like with no consequences, didn't you get the memo?

So @Ran and the mods have no power over us anymore?

Muhahahahahahaha!!!!!!

[DMC]

4 minutes ago, Clueless Northman said:

I suppose there aren't many leftists left around, considering this is supposed to be news and people are supposed to care about them. Meanwhile, millions are going through mental health issues due to social and economic issues, and media, including bloody billionaire Oprah, don't give a flying fuck about them, because it would mean questioning the current economic system.

The politicization of this royal schism is pretty fascinating - and thoroughly on display in your post right here.  Moreover, it's quite obviously still leftist to defend people - no matter their own privilege - that are standing up to one of the most conservative status quo institutions in the world equipped with media attack dogs like Morgan who minimize mental health issues and excuse racism - if not trafficking in dogwhistles or outright racist criticism themselves.

[Derfel Cadarn]

1 hour ago, Tywin et al. said:

So @Ran and the mods have no power over us anymore?

Muhahahahahahaha!!!!!!

The mods’ interpretation may vary

[The Anti-Targ]

Who cares about this Meghan vs the Royal family nonsense? The real news is Oprah's ankle bracelet for secret child sex offences.

There is after all only one possible explanation for a bulge in knee length loose fitting leather boots,

https://www.newshub.co.nz/home/entertainment/2021/03/qanon-theorists-accuse-oprah-of-wearing-ankle-monitor-following-secret-arrest-during-megxit-interview.html

 

[A Horse Named Stranger]

So Whoopi ratted her out, eh?

[Maltaran]

1 hour ago, The Anti-Targ said:

Who cares about this Meghan vs the Royal family nonsense? The real news is Oprah's ankle bracelet for secret child sex offences.

There is after all only one possible explanation for a bulge in knee length loose fitting leather boots,

https://www.newshub.co.nz/home/entertainment/2021/03/qanon-theorists-accuse-oprah-of-wearing-ankle-monitor-following-secret-arrest-during-megxit-interview.html

 

Your link is geo-blocked

[The Anti-Targ]

35 minutes ago, Maltaran said:

Your link is geo-blocked

Wankers!

The original work was done by politifact so hopefully that doesn't have a geoblock on it https://www.politifact.com/factchecks/2021/mar/09/facebook-posts/no-oprah-wasnt-wearing-ankle-monitor-her-meghan-ma/

[DanteGabriel]

16 hours ago, BigFatCoward said:

She has been described by many people as pushy at a minimum. The thought that someone said 'you cant have help' and she (and harry) meekly accepted it has as much credibility as her claim she didnt know who harry was. 

Ah yes, "pushy" -- the description of choice when one knows that calling her "uppity" would get them dragged on social media. I will just remind you that the "pushy, aggressive black woman" or really, the pushy woman in general, is a tired and pernicious trope, but it doesn't surprise me that the cottage industry of royal defenders picked that one to attack her with.

 

16 hours ago, BigFatCoward said:

I'm about 90% on their side, but the claim that you cant question people and interrogate their accusations is utter horseshit. 

Surely there is a difference between "interrogating accusations" and saying you don't believe her and predicting in advance that she's going to play the race card and mental health card. That quote alone from Piers Morgan leads me to interpret his remarks less generously than you do.

 

14 hours ago, BigFatCoward said:

I dont doubt that this probably happened. I certainly dont doubt the situation caused her MH and made her consider suicide. I'd be surprised if anyone could go into that family and not be severely affected, and she had it far worse than Diana, Fergie and Kate. My issue is whether someone should be forced out of a job for asking whether it happened in the way described. 

Personally my interpretation was that Morgan was questioning this specific event rather than believing her about having MH issues. And I think the quote I shared above makes it more likely rather than less likely that is what he was saying. 

Hes still a massive bell end though, and should have been forced out many many times before, just not this time for me.

This is something that puts me in mind of the cancel culture debates, where the right wing arglebargle-sphere would have you believe someone got fired for one tweet or one bad decision, when in so many cases the purported "one thing" was merely the last incident in a long line of antagonism and fuckups. Piers Morgan is the shit of the earth, I don't care what he got fired for, because he never should have been out there with a platform sneering at marginalized people and sucking Donald Trump's ass in the first place.

[The Anti-Targ]

In any case, if the "one thing" is egregious enough then a firing is surely called for. Funny how a lot of the right wing who complain about cancelling for the "least bit of offence" are also very much in favour of no cause termination for employees.

[SeanF]

20 hours ago, Heartofice said:

I’m sure she did suffer mental health issues and maybe even felt suicidal. That bit I don’t really doubt.

Its just that basically everything else they said came across as a half truth, exaggeration or outright lie. 

I don’t think they’ve quite mastered, yet, Princess Diana’s sad puppy eyes, and lip-quivering emoting.

[BigFatCoward]

8 hours ago, DanteGabriel said:

Ah yes, "pushy" -- the description of choice when one knows that calling her "uppity" would get them dragged on social media. I will just remind you that the "pushy, aggressive black woman" or really, the pushy woman in general, is a tired and pernicious trope, but it doesn't surprise me that the cottage industry of royal defenders picked that one to attack her with.

 

Surely there is a difference between "interrogating accusations" and saying you don't believe her and predicting in advance that she's going to play the race card and mental health card. That quote alone from Piers Morgan leads me to interpret his remarks less generously than you do.

 

This is something that puts me in mind of the cancel culture debates, where the right wing arglebargle-sphere would have you believe someone got fired for one tweet or one bad decision, when in so many cases the purported "one thing" was merely the last incident in a long line of antagonism and fuckups. Piers Morgan is the shit of the earth, I don't care what he got fired for, because he never should have been out there with a platform sneering at marginalized people and sucking Donald Trump's ass in the first place.

Numerous staff have accused her as bullying going back at least 3 years, are you saying you dont believe them? (You really should be more supportive of victims of bullying and never accuse a victim of lying) so I dont think 'pushy' is unfair language to use.  Its possible to be the victim of racism, and be an arsehole.  And it's possible to think someone is absolute scum but not their actions in a particular case.

Everyone is entitled to interpret his actions. And overall Morgan clearly has had it in for her, however in my opinion it was pretty clear in this case when he said 'I dont beleive a word she said' he was talking about specifically the issue of her raising it as an issue, and was told to go away and be quiet. 

I said upthread that his conduct and numerous individual incidents should have led to him being forced out before, but I dont think that is the case here. I think he was gone with insufficient justification in this very particular case. 

The man is a disgrace and should never have been given the job in the first place and sacked many times. But this was overkill for this specific incident in my opinion. 

 

[Heartofice]

54 minutes ago, BigFatCoward said:

The man is a disgrace and should never have been given the job in the first place and sacked many times. But this was overkill for this specific incident in my opinion. 

It's curious because Morgan was hired specifically to spout off his opinions at people and to be unlikable. It's what he does and has been doing for years. The reason GMTV has been doing so well in comparison to before he arrived is precisely because he tends to go on rants, often saying things that people are secretly thinking. For ITV to turn around and sack him now is a bit odd, I can think of many occasions in the past where he has been far more outspoken on certain issues that I'd guess would have been the trigger point (Meghan phoning up his boss might have something to do with it!). They didn't fire him before because he was doing what he was paid to do, get viewers by being an arsehole.

Him ranting on about cancel culture is cheap though, he is the biggest exponent of cancel culture, he literally cancels people as soon as they disagree with him on anything. Whether that is blocking them on twitter, preventing them from speaking on his show or just walking off. He's a man-baby.

He's got a book out on cancel culture though so I'm sure this will sell a few more.

[Clueless Northman]

17 hours ago, DMC said:

The politicization of this royal schism is pretty fascinating - and thoroughly on display in your post right here.  Moreover, it's quite obviously still leftist to defend people - no matter their own privilege - that are standing up to one of the most conservative status quo institutions in the world

Except it's just the 1% fighting each other. That doesn't change anything for the common people, who are still abused, exploited and condemned to poverty by greedy rich entitled assholes. Why should they defend any of them, why should they even care? Black slaves didn't go out of their way to efend their whip-holding masters back in 1864, as far as I know? When Royals or billionaires bitch about each other, the leftist thing to do is to let them all rot, hoping for their swift demise, or ideally for a future glorious revolutionary day when they'll all be cast down and doomed to work in fast-food joints for the rest of their lives. Economic justice is the necessary basis for all justice, and there will be no economic justice as long as a small class of filthy rich people sit in huge mansions without having to work a day - be it in Buckingham or in some Beverly Hills luxury house, it's all just the same.

[SeanF]

3 hours ago, BigFatCoward said:

Numerous staff have accused her as bullying going back at least 3 years, are you saying you dont believe them? (You really should be more supportive of victims of bullying and never accuse a victim of lying) so I dont think 'pushy' is unfair language to use.  Its possible to be the victim of racism, and be an arsehole.  And it's possible to think someone is absolute scum but not their actions in a particular case.

Everyone is entitled to interpret his actions. And overall Morgan clearly has had it in for her, however in my opinion it was pretty clear in this case when he said 'I dont beleive a word she said' he was talking about specifically the issue of her raising it as an issue, and was told to go away and be quiet. 

I said upthread that his conduct and numerous individual incidents should have led to him being forced out before, but I dont think that is the case here. I think he was gone with insufficient justification in this very particular case. 

The man is a disgrace and should never have been given the job in the first place and sacked many times. But this was overkill for this specific incident in my opinion. 

 

Half in jest, I compared them to Leo and Savine on the Joe Abercrombie thread, but the other comparison is Tyrion.  Someone who suffers from real injustice, but also acts like an arsehole, and handwaves all criticism on the ground he's a dwarf.

[Heartofice]

The real edit of the interview has been released. Much improved

 

[DanteGabriel]

5 hours ago, BigFatCoward said:

Numerous staff have accused her as bullying going back at least 3 years, are you saying you dont believe them? (You really should be more supportive of victims of bullying and never accuse a victim of lying) so I dont think 'pushy' is unfair language to use.  Its possible to be the victim of racism, and be an arsehole.  And it's possible to think someone is absolute scum but not their actions in a particular case.

Well gosh, don't you know us race-baiting American liberals just take the word of any non-white person over the White Devil's word?

But seriously -- has anyone actually put their names to these accusations of her bullying? Or has it all been "palace sources" and anonymous gossip?

I am not assuming Markle to be some paragon of righteousness, but when the organization that protects a sweaty child rapist starts re-circulating rumors about her right before her interview goes out, and already has a documented history of trying to crush inconvenient royal wives... Well, pull the other one, it's got bells on.

5 hours ago, BigFatCoward said:

Everyone is entitled to interpret his actions. And overall Morgan clearly has had it in for her, however in my opinion it was pretty clear in this case when he said 'I dont beleive a word she said' he was talking about specifically the issue of her raising it as an issue, and was told to go away and be quiet. 

"I wouldn't trust her if she read me a weather report" and proclaiming before the interview that he assumed she would play the race and mental health cards tells me more than his (and your) effort to define it down to disbelief in one specific claim.

 

5 hours ago, BigFatCoward said:

I said upthread that his conduct and numerous individual incidents should have led to him being forced out before, but I dont think that is the case here. I think he was gone with insufficient justification in this very particular case. 

The man is a disgrace and should never have been given the job in the first place and sacked many times. But this was overkill for this specific incident in my opinion. 

Shit, he should have been canned just for walking off the set as soon as someone whose voice he couldn't shut off started to give him a taste of the shit he inflicts on everyone else all the time.

By the way, he's doubled down and tweeted that he still doesn't believe her. As a communications professional it might behoove him to be more specific about what he doesn't believe. But it's pretty funny that he quoted Churchill saying "Some people's idea of free speech is that they are free to say what they like, but if anyone says anything back, that is an outrage." That basically describes Piers Morgan's broadcast career, right up to him walking off the set of his show in outrage because someone pointed that there's a personal element to his relentless animosity toward her.

[Fragile Bird]

1 hour ago, DanteGabriel said:

 

I am not assuming Markle to be some paragon of righteousness, but when the organization that protects a sweaty child rapist starts re-circulating rumors about her right before her interview goes out, and already has a documented history of trying to crush inconvenient royal wives... Well, pull the other one, it's got bells on.

I think part of the anger over the interview relates to two issues. The first is that 99-year old Prince Phillip is in hospital and you know as well as I do this interview had been advertised and promoted as one that was going to be shocking and that shit bombs were going to be thrown. No way were they going to wait a few days or a week to get past that.

The second point was the interview was deliberately scheduled on Commonwealth Day (and obviously the reason it wasn’t going to be moved), a day the Queen addresses the Commonwealth and, by the way, the last official function Harry took part in. That point wasn’t missed in the press, it gave ample opportunity for the US media, and world media but with particular relish in the US, to shit all over not just the monarchy but the UK as a whole. “Look at the UK addressing their commonwealth full of “people of color” and the way they still deal with “people of color!” 
 

I like Oprah, I have sympathy for what Harry and Meghan are going through, but part of me says duck Oprah and duck Harry and Meghan.