Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Rape crisis centre calls for media code after George Hook show

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #16
    It took me a while to read and understand that article, and I consider myself a fairly literate, intelligent person. There are many people who might read that article and still have no idea what this guy is on about. He's not just sitting down the pub sharing a pint with a gang of intellectuals, he is writing for a national newspaper and as such has to be careful what he says. You might "get" his argument straight away. It may have taken me longer. Some people might not get it at all and start thinking he believes that there was no extermination programme in Nazi Germany - or worse, that it didn't happen. This guy is just talking semantics - " when is a holocaust not a holocaust? When no ovens are involved " - which is fine when you're having an in-depth discussion with your cronies. Not so good when you're writing in a national newspaper. And he must have known his article would cause controversy; that's why he wrote it. In short, he was just trying to look clever, which isn't really his job.
    Last edited by KatieMorag; 14-09-2017, 11:29 AM.

    Comment


    • #17
      I hope they find a cure for his problem soon....
      Here Rex!!!...Here Rex!!!.....Wuff!!!....... Wuff!!!

      Comment


      • #18
        ''The Holocaust'' started when the first Jewish person became a victim when Hitler's Regime came to power and will finish when the last jewish victim of that Regime dies......
        There were certainly more than six million victims......
        Here Rex!!!...Here Rex!!!.....Wuff!!!....... Wuff!!!

        Comment


        • #19
          I think the point he makes ,without saying it is, the English language can be used in what ever way one would want it to be used, he states he is a holocaust denier, because it doesn`t fit the greek meaning of the word, but acknowledges that there were millions murdered by the third reich .. who is he anyway ,never heard of him.
          in god i trust...everyone else cash only.

          Comment


          • #20
            Originally posted by cosmo View Post
            I think the point he makes ,without saying it is, the English language can be used in what ever way one would want it to be used, he states he is a holocaust denier, because it doesn`t fit the greek meaning of the word, but acknowledges that there were millions murdered by the third reich .. who is he anyway ,never heard of him.
            He will be world famous when he moves into a some South-American Embassy........
            Here Rex!!!...Here Rex!!!.....Wuff!!!....... Wuff!!!

            Comment


            • #21
              Originally posted by cosmo View Post
              I think the point he makes ,without saying it is, the English language can be used in what ever way one would want it to be used, he states he is a holocaust denier, because it doesn`t fit the greek meaning of the word, but acknowledges that there were millions murdered by the third reich .. who is he anyway ,never heard of him.
              My point is how is the average Joe (no offence to Quinner) supposed to work that out? I know I probably sound condescending but most people's grasp of the English language simply isn't that good. Which is why they run a mile from the likes of The Times and read the Red Tops instead (and are ridiculed for doing so.) Writers such as Myers need to make their articles more readily accessible to the majority, instead of producing these intellectual musings which
              are only understood by a few and to the rest of us look like gobbledygook and can be, as in this case, so easily misconstrued.

              Comment


              • #22
                Originally posted by KatieMorag View Post
                My point is how is the average Joe (no offence to Quinner) supposed to work that out? I know I probably sound condescending but most people's grasp of the English language simply isn't that good. Which is why they run a mile from the likes of The Times and read the Red Tops instead (and are ridiculed for doing so.) Writers such as Myers need to make their articles more readily accessible to the majority, instead of producing these intellectual musings which
                are only understood by a few and to the rest of us look like gobbledygook and can be, as in this case, so easily misconstrued.
                Thank you Katie...But I have never felt that I was the ''average Joe''.......
                Here Rex!!!...Here Rex!!!.....Wuff!!!....... Wuff!!!

                Comment


                • #23
                  Originally posted by Twobob View Post
                  She's a bleedin cracker .
                  Her Da had an interesting business career before he got jailed.

                  She isn't a bad interviewer, I notice they have started to use her as a fill in presenter on Newnight,

                  Comment


                  • #24
                    Originally posted by Napper Tandy View Post
                    Her Da had an interesting business career before he got jailed.

                    She isn't a bad interviewer, I notice they have started to use her as a fill in presenter on Newnight,
                    I have never fancied anybody's Father.....
                    Here Rex!!!...Here Rex!!!.....Wuff!!!....... Wuff!!!

                    Comment


                    • #25
                      Originally posted by KatieMorag View Post
                      It took me a while to read and understand that article, and I consider myself a fairly literate, intelligent person. There are many people who might read that article and still have no idea what this guy is on about. He's not just sitting down the pub sharing a pint with a gang of intellectuals, he is writing for a national newspaper and as such has to be careful what he says. You might "get" his argument straight away. It may have taken me longer. Some people might not get it at all and start thinking he believes that there was no extermination programme in Nazi Germany - or worse, that it didn't happen. This guy is just talking semantics - " when is a holocaust not a holocaust? When no ovens are involved " - which is fine when you're having an in-depth discussion with your cronies. Not so good when you're writing in a national newspaper. And he must have known his article would cause controversy; that's why he wrote it. In short, he was just trying to look clever, which isn't really his job.
                      Elements of the article are pedantic, I agree... arguing about the literal interpretation of six million being an exact figure, or the Greek origin and meaning of the word 'holocaust' can come across as being laboured and cantankerous.

                      But his central theme on the stultifying effects of dogma - man-made or religious - is a valid observation in my opinion, and remains so now just as it was when the article was written ten or twelve years ago. Dogma should never replace reason and logic in any advanced society and what he terms 'secular religion' should be always open to challenge in the same way any other faith based beliefs are. Truth belongs to everyone - it doesn't require dogma to defend it.
                      Everything is self-evident.

                      Comment


                      • #26
                        I'm just saying that he should articulate his arguments so that they're easier to understand and less open to misinterpretation.

                        Comment


                        • #27
                          He could just tell the truth and stop waffling.....
                          Here Rex!!!...Here Rex!!!.....Wuff!!!....... Wuff!!!

                          Comment


                          • #28
                            Originally posted by KatieMorag View Post
                            I'm just saying that he should articulate his arguments so that they're easier to understand and less open to misinterpretation.
                            That's certainly true in the case of the recent Sunday Times article which cost him his livelihood... and he's admitted as much himself.
                            Everything is self-evident.

                            Comment


                            • #29
                              Originally posted by cogito View Post
                              That's certainly true in the case of the recent Sunday Times article which cost him his livelihood... and he's admitted as much himself.
                              that's alright then......i'm sure he'll bounce back anyway.......

                              Comment


                              • #30
                                Originally posted by KatieMorag View Post
                                that's alright then......i'm sure he'll bounce back anyway.......
                                There's zero chance of that... he's completely f*cked.

                                A group called 'The Campaign Against Anti-Semitism' announced he would never appear in the UK media again in any form. The offending article about women in the BBC was published in the Irish edition of the Sunday Times. If he'd kept his snout out of the internal politics of the neighbour's broadcasting service (while writing in a UK owned newspaper) then you or the rest of the world would probably never have heard of him.

                                His poorly judged stereotyping of the two women would have probably raised a bit of indignation here but little else - but when the British media and the Twitter denunciations of 'vile racism' and 'crude anti-semitism' started to let fly that S\unday morning - coupled with the 'news' (taken from Wikpedia) that he was a 'holocaust denier' - he was sacked and his career came to an abrupt end. The mainstream media here just ran for cover - the 'holocaust denial' article which I posted above was abruptly removed from the websites of the Irish Independent (who'd commissioned it nine years earlier) and the Belfast Telegraph within hours of his sacking by the Times.

                                There's a lot of irony in all this...

                                Firstly, Myers is one of the very few journalists in this country who has consistently supported the state of Israel over the past couple of decades - and has attracted a lot of abuse from those, particularly on the Left, who are sympathetic and active in the Palestinian cause. Jewish and Israeli interests here in Ireland must be pulling their hair out at the turn of events.

                                Secondly, he's despised and ridiculed here by many nationalists because of his constant undermining and questioning of republican sacred cows - the legitimacy of political violence, sectarianism in the IRA during the War Of Independence, the 1916 Rising, criticism of Pearse, Dev (and Michael Collins) and many other nationalist untouchables. Someone was enquiring here recently about the term 'shoneen' - it was invented for Myers.

                                His many enemies here are rolling around laughing at the beautiful irony of Myers being taken out of the picture by British jewish outrage....

                                But even among some of his critics there is a sense of discomfort that an independent minded individual can be so effectively silenced for breaching that 'dogma' referred to in a previous post.

                                Some of the regular history contributors here should be aware also that it was largely through his championing of Irish servicemen and women in the British forces in both world wars that Myers revived the memory and public discourse on those sometimes forgotten figures from the past.
                                Everything is self-evident.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X