ChatterBank8 mins ago
Where Is Abdul ?
Man, I love Katie, I really do;
Answers
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by Khandro. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
retrocop - // I suggest you wind your neck in Mr Hughes and get off your pompous ,arrogant, high horse. My opinions on this site are as valid is yours so don't try to own the moral high ground because I recall exactly the type of morals you have. //
Suggestion noted - and since it is baed on your erronious opinion, it is ignored, as you would expect.
I have never suggested that your opinions are not as valid as anyone else's - please don't get nasty over something that is not there.
And as for my morals, I have no idea why you would think you know what they are - but let's not pursue that line of nonsense, in the interests of keeping the thread on track.
bednobs - //
id be v interested to know how khandro knows there isonly "representative" of the MET posting on this website.
Does 1 person who used to work for the MET "represent" that force as a whole? //
It does in Khandro's eyes, because that backs up his point of view.
For the rest of us, with a more balanced perception, it does nothing of the kind, any more than anyone's opinion is any more or less valid than anyone else's.
As retrocop pointed out to me with unecessary unpleasantness.
I have been here twenty-four years - I have understood the validity of opinions on this site a lot longer than he has.
Yes length of service ,it seems, Naomi butters no parsnips. I recall how pathetic it was to listen how the nasty BT management never made an effort to thank AH for his sevice with them on his day of retirement and his errr work coleagues never clubbed together for a farewll gift fo him. Tells you how highly he was regarded in the real world. Pathetic is the correct word indeed.
retrocop - // Yes length of service ,it seems, Naomi butters no parsnips. I recall how pathetic it was to listen how the nasty BT management never made an effort to thank AH for his sevice with them on his day of retirement and his errr work coleagues never clubbed together for a farewll gift fo him. Tells you how highly he was regarded in the real world. Pathetic is the correct word indeed. //
What on earth are you talking about?
On second thoughts, don't bother to answer.
I don't want to encourage you in your delusion that I actually care what you think.
andy hughes: Your implication that the approval of an ex- serving officer of the Metropolitan Police force to a statement about its performance is invalid and worthless, demonstrates (once again) what a spiteful, pathetic little man you are.
And regarding the OP, as you claim to have watched it through, (which I somehow doubt). What do you object to? - as I said earlier; 'What's the beef?'
Completely off topic given the above tiff, and I haven't watched this video, but sometimes KH comes out with rubbish, sometimes she doesn't.
For example (and I'm already putting my helmet on) I have a lot of sympathy with her view that fat people are lazy and she wouldn't employ them. I'm of the same mindset. Just to annoy people even further, she had said she wouldn't employ somebody who was clearly pregnant. I wouldn't either.
Khandro - //
andy hughes: Your implication that the approval of an ex- serving officer of the Metropolitan Police force to a statement about its performance is invalid and worthless, demonstrates (once again) what a spiteful, pathetic little man you are. //
Once again, in your decidedly un-Christian rush to be nasty, you have seen something that is not there in my post, and missed what actually is there.
I posted this - // Khandro - // Of the latter, the only representative of the Met on AB is retired police officer, Retro. Who has listened to what she says and seems to approves of it. //
Is that supposed to bolster your argument?
You are really reaching now ... //
From that, you imagine – and I do mean imagine – that I decided that retrocop’s opinion was “invalid and worthless”, neither of which I said, or inferred.
The point that you – and indeed retrocop, who also managed to miss the point in his haste to be offensive, was not that his opinion is “invalid and worthless”.
My point was, if you care to think first, and get het up second, that retrocop’s opinion is no less valid than anyone else’s opinion, but neither is it any MORE valid either.
Therefore your citing his view because he is an ex-Met officer as being more worthwhile, and that’s your conclusion, certainly not mine, and to be fair, not retrocop’s either, does not add weight to your argument in the slightest, and that was the point I made.
Retrocop then steamed in getting all high and mighty because he also misunderstood my post, and assumed I was saying his opinion is not valid.
I pointed out to him, and again to you, it is as valid as anyone’s opinion.
But not MORE valid because he used to be a police officer.
// And regarding the OP, as you claim to have watched it through, (which I somehow doubt). What do you object to? - as I said earlier; 'What's the beef?' //
I object to Katie Hopkins using her Pavlovian piffle to stir up nasty race hatred with her thinly veiled references to ‘them’ being Muslims, because she is a baiting nasty bigoted drip, and she uses her pointless jabbering to stir up unrest and antipathy which helps no-one anywhere, except whatever grubby money she can scratch for.
That’s the ‘beef’ as you quaintly put it.
Deskdiary - // For example (and I'm already putting my helmet on) I have a lot of sympathy with her view that fat people are lazy and she wouldn't employ them. I'm of the same mindset. Just to annoy people even further, she had said she wouldn't employ somebody who was clearly pregnant. I wouldn't either. //
My problem with Ms Hopkins, and similar talking head agitators, is that she will take a simple, and utterly wrong premise, based on ignorance and stupidity, and then stoke it up by agreeing, and adding an erudite argument, for the benefit of those unable to do so for themselves.
I honestly wonder if secretly she simply does it because she can, and it makes money.
Shooting fish in a cyber-barrel is absolutely no stretch for someone of Ms Hopkins' undoubted intelligence.
She spouts the opinons of the bigoted, which she may be, and the ignorant and stupid, and she is clearly neither of those.
So in terms of her view on fat people and employing expectant mothers, she can find an audience, and get paid for putting those views with far more erudition than most can manage.
That does not make her right, it simply makes her an exploiter of the meaner nastier bigoted hateful sides of human nature.
I wonder how she sleeps at night.
