Katie Hopkins sacked from LBC radio after Manchester comments

[Withano]

http://www.independent.co.uk/arts-entertainment/tv/news/kate-hopkins-lbc-radio-sacked-fired-manchester-attack-final-solution-daily-mail-muslims-racism-a7756776.html

The announcement comes shortly after Hopkins said that a "final solution" is needed following the Manchester terror attack. A controversial tweet even by her standards, it appeared to imply that, in her eyes, there ought to be a genocide of Muslims

[Niamh.]

Good. Horrible Cretin

[DemolitionRed]

Good... disgusting woman.

[UserSince2005]

awww shes nice really, we saw the real her in the cbb house. lovely women.

[arista]

she is Stupid

[Greg!]

Bye bitch!

[Alf]

Just start your own podcast Katie.

[smudgie]

Shame All who employ her don't do the same.
The woman is an idiotic moron.:fist:

[Ronald.]

Good to hear, horrible woman she is. R.

[Alf]

Speak your mind, lose your job. What a wonderful liberal society we live in.

[Shaun]

Incite genocide, lose your job. What a peculiar set of circumstances.

[Niamh.]

Speak your mind, lose your job. What a wonderful liberal society we live in.

She is free to speak her mind and her employers are free to decide that they don't want someone with her opinions representing them :shrug:

[Lostie!]

*employs someone known for spouting hateful crap*
*sacks her for spouting hateful crap*

I mean, I'm glad she was sacked because she's an absolute turd of a human but surely they knew what they were getting when they gave her the job in the first place.

[Rob!]

Speak your mind, lose your job. What a wonderful liberal society we live in.

Yes because implying that killing off an entire religion should have indicated her promotion :umm2:

[Alf]

She is free to speak her mind and her employers are free to decide that they don't want someone with her opinions representing them :shrug:I'm not sure you'd say the same thing, if your husband was fired from his job, for his opinion in a tweet. You might do, but I don't reckon you would.

[Niamh.]

I'm not sure you'd say the same thing if your husband was fired from his job for his opinion in a tweet. You might do, but I don't reckon you would.

My husband doesn't use Twitter so he's safe enough :p

[Alf]

Yes because implying that killing off an entire religion should have indicated her promotion :umm2:I don't agree with what she said, but I'll defend her right to say it.

I'd rather know what extreme people are saying.

[Shaun]

I'm not sure you'd say the same thing, if your husband was fired from his job, for his opinion in a tweet. You might do, but I don't reckon you would.

Considering her entire job was publicly issuing her opinion I wouldn't say it's quite the irrelevant quibble you're making it out to be.

[Alf]

Considering her entire job was publicly issuing her opinion I wouldn't say it's quite the irrelevant quibble you're making it out to be.You mean one rule for some, a different rule for others?

[Lostie!]

I'm not sure you'd say the same thing, if your husband was fired from his job, for his opinion in a tweet. You might do, but I don't reckon you would.

I think she had the good sense to marry a man who isn't a massive dickhead with a habit of saying outrageously offensive things in the first place.

This whole "FREEDOM OF SPEECH!!!" defence that gets trotted out every time the bigots say something completely indefensible is beyond tired.

[King Gizzard]

What happened to free speech? You can't allude to genocide in public anymore?!

[Withano]

I don't agree with what she said, but I'll defend her right to say it.

I'd rather know what extreme people are saying.

How can you possibly defend her right to incite the murder of millions lol. Something something freedom of speech probably?

[Shaun]

You mean one rule for some, a different rule for others?

I mean "hired as a talk show host / columnist / whatever her title was" on a talk radio station and getting fired for inciting genocide =/ "hired as a fireman" and tweeting that too. Although of course instances of people being fired for their conduct on social media are common nowadays.

As anyone with sense would agree: freedom of speech is not the freedom from repercussions.

[thesheriff443]

Only idiots take idiots seriously.

[Withano]

Only idiots take idiots seriously.

Why wouldnt a smart person take an idiot seriously. They're an idiot? Idiots do and say lots of idiotical things and mean it. Thinking about it, the opposite of what you said is true.

[thesheriff443]

Why wouldnt a smart person take an idiot seriously. They're an idiot? Idiots do and say lots of idiotical things and mean it. Thinking about it, the opposite of what you said is true.

A smart person has intelligence to realise someone is being an idiot, were as an idiot will not have the intelligence to realise someone is being an idiot.

[MB.]

She'll probably go and work for Breitbart or something now, but at least her fade into irrelevance is speeding up

[Kazanne]

A smart person has intelligence to realise someone is being an idiot, were as an idiot will not have the intelligence to realise someone is being an idiot.

But we all think we are that smart person sheriff ,none of us think of ourselves as an idiot ,do we?

[the truth]

meanwhile jihadi terrorists are free to wander the country

[thesheriff443]

But we all think we are that smart person sheriff ,none of us think of ourselves as an idiot ,do we?

An idiot is not clever enough to realise they are an idiot

[thesheriff443]

meanwhile jihadi terrorists are free to wander the country

Same as someone with a mental illness or a drink driver.

[Alf]

You agree that all those that incited the murder of Trump, in tweets, are just as guilty as Hopkins, and you would support them all being fired from their job (If they had one)?


But the better question is, were you one of those people?

[thesheriff443]

You are far more likely to get killed in a road accident then by terrorist in this country.

[Lostie!]

A smart person has intelligence to realise someone is being an idiot, were as an idiot will not have the intelligence to realise someone is being an idiot.

But everyone who criticises her obviously thinks she's an idiot so I can only assume you actually mean her defenders are the idiots.

But I don't think you do so I'm not sure what logic you're attempting to work with here.

[the truth]

You agree that all those that incited the murder of Trump, in tweets, are just as guilty as Hopkins, and you would support them all being fired from their job (If they had one)?


But the better question is, were you one of those people?

the liberals will avoid that question as they are hypocrites
also the nude statues of trump the liberals built they found hilarious showing his penis
imagine the hysteria from liberals if such statues were built showing hilarys saggy vagina

[Northern Monkey]

I mean there are some gems of sensible points in with all the rubbish she spouts but she's stepped over the line with this one.You can't just go around inciting genocide.LBC had no choice as a public broadcaster.

[Kazanne]

You agree that all those that incited the murder of Trump, in tweets, are just as guilty as Hopkins, and you would support them all being fired from their job (If they had one)?


But the better question is, were you one of those people?

I didn't know about that Alf,that is equally as bad ,also the many hate preachers who want to wipe out all white westeners , trouble is they MEAN it.

[Alf]

I mean there are some gems of sensible points in with all the rubbish she spouts but she's stepped over the line with this one.You can't just go around inciting genocide.LBC had no choice as a public broadcaster.Of course they had a choice. Who was stopping them from not having a free choice?

[Northern Monkey]

Of course they had a choice. Who was stopping them from not having a free choice?

Their reputation and veiwership.It's all about the money

[Jake.]

Proof that freedom of speech doesn't = freedom of consequence

[Niamh.]

Proof that freedom of speech doesn't = freedom of consequence

Exactly, I don't get how this is so hard to understand tbh

[Alf]

Their reputation and veiwership.It's all about the moneyI personally couldn't care less about their company, it wouldn't change a thing in my life if they went bust. But when people are being fired from their jobs because of something they said (in an emotion of anger after a tragic event) in their own free time, then that could potentially happen to me or anybody else.

[Tom4784]

Deserved.

Exactly, I don't get how this is so hard to understand tbh

All opinions come with consequences but some people don't want to face those consequences.

[Black Dagger]

Same as someone with a mental illness or a drink driver.

Excuse me.

[Niamh.]

Deserved.



All opinions come with consequences but some people don't want to face those consequences.

There has to be consequences, if there wasn't the world would be even more hostile than it is now. I mean if we're saying she should be allowed say what she likes and not face any consequences then why aren't kids in school allowed to call the kid they don't like ugly or why aren't work mates allowed to insult eachother or costumers? It's the same thing, by all means call the girl in accounts a fat bitch, that's your right to free speech but you're going to face consequences for it

[Northern Monkey]

I personally couldn't care less about their company, it wouldn't change a thing in my life if they went bust. But when people are being fired from their jobs because of something they said (in an emotion of anger after a tragic event) in their own free time, then that could potentially happen to me or anybody else.

I couldn't care about their ratings etc either but they do.They run on being popular.
Hopkins public image is her job when she's employed by a public broadcaster.If they hadn't got rid of her they'd be losing listeners left right and centre.It offends patriots,WW2 vets,Jewish people,Muslims anybody who is against the Nazis,anybody who is against genocide,pretty much the majority of all listeners.There are people who don't care what she says too but that's no good for the radio station.They need the listeners.
If she was just Joe public then she may get away with it but you can't really blame LBC for sacking her.They're trying to dig themselves out of a hole.

[Jack_]

I don't agree with what she said, but I'll defend her right to say it.

I'd rather know what extreme people are saying.

She has every right to say it, but LBC has every right to decide that she's crossed a line and let her go. There was a boycott by journalists and political commentators alike being organised, and that's not a good look for a broadcaster that relies on advertiser funding.

Freedom of speech is not the freedom to say what you like and have no one respond, criticise or make you face consequences for it. I went to a local election hustings last night and a woman asked about Christians' right to freedom of expression with regards to LGBT issues. After all of them agreed that one's right to personal faith cannot override the rights of the LGBT community, rather they exist concurrently, she responded that she wasn't happy with the answers because she felt that 'relationships should only be between a man and a woman'. She was quickly booed by most of the audience, and then protested 'see! I'm not allowed to say this anymore', to which one of the candidates said '...you just said it!'. We all laughed. People like this woman need to understand that you're entitled to say what you like, but others are entitled to criticise you for it.

[Kizzy]

She was employed to incite hatred... but the public don't want it any more, we are all hated out.

Thank god, there has to be a better solution.

[TomC]

Speak your mind, lose your job. What a wonderful liberal society we live in.

There's freedom of speech. But why shouldn't companies have the freedom to sack people who post hateful posts about genocide of an entire religion?

[Alf]

She has every right to say it, but LBC has every right to decide that she's crossed a line and let her go. There was a boycott by journalists and political commentators alike being organised, and that's not a good look for a broadcaster that relies on advertiser funding.

Freedom of speech is not the freedom to say what you like and have no one respond, criticise or make you face consequences for it. I went to a local election hustings last night and a woman asked about Christians' right to freedom of expression with regards to LGBT issues. After all of them agreed that one's right to personal faith cannot override the rights of the LGBT community, rather they exist concurrently, she responded that she wasn't happy with the answers because she felt that 'relationships should only be between a man and a woman'. She was quickly booed by most of the audience, and then protested 'see! I'm not allowed to say this anymore', to which one of the candidates said '...you just said it!'. We all laughed. People like this woman need to understand that you're entitled to say what you like, but others are entitled to criticise you for it.Yep, you can criticise, but taking away the livelihood off someone?

This isn't about Katie Hopkins, she'll get by and find a job in no time, and her children will be fed. But this could happen to anyone, people with children who couldn't survive, so their children go hungry, because Mum or Dad had an opinion on monstrous event.

[Mystic Mock]

Speak your mind, lose your job. What a wonderful liberal society we live in.

No channel/radio station is gonna be seen to defend someone that wants to genocide a group of people.

Speaking your mind is one thing, but being completely stupid is another, and she fell into the latter here.

[Kizzy]

Yep, you can criticise, but taking away the livelihood off someone?

This isn't about Katie Hopkins, she'll get by and find a job in no time, and her children will be fed. But this could happen to anyone, people with children who couldn't survive, so their children go hungry, because Mum or Dad had an opinion on monstrous event.

I doubt mum or dad would be in a position of such influence, and so on one hand who cares?... On another, imagine you were an employer and your employees were damaging your business with their comments that are counter to yours?

[Gusto Brunt]

Well to be frank, aside from deliberate controversial comments, I actually don't think she was very competent behind the mic.

Sounded very amateurish and she found it hard to have an in depth conversation with anyone. Also lacked the general knowledge and political know-how of most talk show hosts.

That said, Hopkins made Bev Turner seem like Jonathan Dimbleby!

How Be has hung onto her job at LBC is a complete mystery. Sounds like a Blue Peter presenter, and is thick as two short planks.

[Mystic Mock]

You agree that all those that incited the murder of Trump, in tweets, are just as guilty as Hopkins, and you would support them all being fired from their job (If they had one)?


But the better question is, were you one of those people?

Well you can't go around inciting murder and then expect to keep your job like nothing has happened, so it's better they lose their job than face a much servere punishment of going to Prison.

Although Hopkins wishing genocide on a whole group of people is alot worse than wishing murder on one individual, both are bad, but the Hopkins one is worse.

[Alf]

I doubt mum or dad would be in a position of such influence, and so on one hand who cares?... On another, imagine you were an employer and your employees were damaging your business with their comments that are counter to yours?I don't think it has anything to do with business, Katie is quite popular. No! this is political.

[Mystic Mock]

I don't think it has anything to do with business, Katie is quite popular. No! this is political.

Katie is very controversial so she does have to be careful not to cross the line.