[Christmas Dynasnow]

Originally Posted by AnnieK

And when all those things happened, there were threads on here and on social media, newspaper comments sections, articles etc etc slating them for their actions.

Just because they have done questionable things does not mean that people can not be quite rightyly disgusted when this article was published but Meghans main detractors are.all saying "yeah but they have done this..." There shoukd be no "yeah buts" when it is a perceived threat of violence toward another human.

"when it is a perceived threat of violence toward another human"

did you post this when jo brand had her little moment

no

why

?

[joeysteele]

Originally Posted by AnnieK

And when all those things happened, there were threads on here and on social media, newspaper comments sections, articles etc etc slating them for their actions.

Just because they have done questionable things does not mean that people can not be quite rightyly disgusted when this article was published but Meghans main detractors are.all saying "yeah but they have done this..." There shoukd be no "yeah buts" when it is a perceived threat of violence toward another human.

Dead right Annie.

Even trying to minimise Clarkson's vile comments is unbelievable.

I have no idea at all what the Royal family think and really no one else outside the Royals do either.
However I'd think it a safe bet, IN MY VIEW anyhow, that even the Royal family would find Clarkson's vile comments and grossly sick joke,( if it really was one), indefensible.

[Candy Annie Cane]

Originally Posted by Kevin the Carrot

"when it is a perceived threat of violence toward another human"

did you post this when jo brand had her little moment

no

why

?

Did I take part in a thread? Was there a thread? Do you know what my thoughts were? Nope, I didn't think so.....but continue deflecting mr LT

Edit......I've just checked that thread from June 2019 and I did not post at all in it....could it be that I didn't see it and I was busy? Could it be I had nothing to add as it was fairly well condemned or maybe I wasn't here at all?? Am I not allowed an opinion on this thread because I didn't post in that thread 3 years ago?

[bots]

i find it difficult to get worked up by what people like Clarkson say. He is a persistent egocentric attention seeker. I've never given a second thought to people like him, and funnily enough, Meghan and Harry fall into the same category.

People say stupid things, some more than other, but no amount of hand wringing will change it

[jet]

Originally Posted by AnnieK

And when all those things happened, there were threads on here and on social media, newspaper comments sections, articles etc etc slating them for their actions.

Just because they have done questionable things does not mean that people can not be quite rightyly disgusted when this article was published but Meghans main detractors are.all saying "yeah but they have done this..." There shoukd be no "yeah buts" when it is a perceived threat of violence toward another human.

NOT from their supporters on here....and I didn't say 'but', I said I can think of worse things, which is perfectly true, wouldn't you agree?
The distress and sadness they brought to the Queen is not 'questionable things', it was downright cruelty of a dying woman. Horrendous. Unforgivable.
Her Lady in Waiting and others were devastated at the effect it had on her Majesty.
I have already condenmed Clarkson here for his stupid comment, unfortunately it doesn't work both ways.

[Christmas Dynasnow]

Originally Posted by AnnieK

Did I take part in a thread? Was there a thread? Do you know what my thoughts were? Nope, I didn't think so.....but continue deflecting mr LT

Edit......I've just checked that thread from June 2019 and I did not post at all in it....could it be that I didn't see it and I was busy? Could it be I had nothing to add as it was fairly well condemned or maybe I wasn't here at all?? Am I not allowed an opinion on this thread because I didn't post in that thread 3 years ago?

precisely..

[Candy Annie Cane]

Originally Posted by jet

NOT from their supporters on here....and I didn't say 'but', I said I can think of worse things, which is perfectly true, wouldn't you agree?
The distress and sadness they brought to the Queen is not 'questionable things', it was downright cruelty of a dying woman. Horrendous. Unforgivable.
Her Lady in Waiting and others were devastated at the effect it had on her Majesty.
I have already condenmed Clarkson here for his stupid comment, unfortunately it doesn't work both ways.

I didn't say "you" said anything.....I said their main detractors....that encompasses across all outlets and comments I have read.

There is plenty to condemn Harry and Meghan for....however I don't like the feeling that people think any person is fair game for comment such as clarkson said because of their previous actions

[Candy Annie Cane]

Originally Posted by Kevin the Carrot

precisely..

Precisely what???

Jesus, I can't remember what I did last week but now before I'm allowed an opinion I have to check thread history to see if I posted an opinion about someone you happen to admire

So sorry LT....I don't have that much spare time but I'll try and be mindful not to upset your delicate feelings

[jet]

Clarkson has apologised.
Lady Susan has apologised.
Have Meghan and Harry apologised yet?
NO.

[Christmas Dynasnow]

Jeremy Clarkson Calls For Strikers To Be Shot



Jeremy Clarkson said he would like to see striking public sector workers
"shot" in front of their families.

The Top Gear presenter made his comments on BBC's The One Show on the
evening
of Britain's biggest public sector strikes in 30 years.

He said of the strikers: "I'd have them all shot. I would take them outside
and execute them in front of their families.

"I mean, how dare they go on strike when they've got these gilt-edged
pensions that are going to be guaranteed while the rest of us have to work
for a living."

https://uk.news.yahoo.com/jeremy-cla...012156802.html

[ChristmasNeeve]

Originally Posted by jet

Clarkson has apologised.

Lady Susan has apologised.

Have Meghan and Harry apologised yet?

NO.

For what?

[Parmy]

Originally Posted by Glenn.

You really went there

Comparing your hatred of Meghan to Hitler

And you’re not irrational?

Do you know Albert Kidd?

[Liam-]

Originally Posted by Christmas Neeve

For what?

For still breathing obviously

[Good King Glennceslas]

Originally Posted by Christmas Neeve

For what?

Imagined atrocities that Harry and Meghan have committed. Atrocities that have no evidence of happening unless you believe the Daily Fail

[Parmy]

Originally Posted by Kevin the Carrot

Im afraid the issue is firmly with the Editor who would have seen this piece and passed it instead of politely saying that "sorry Jez but that is too much in light of recent very public attacks on young women - I get your column is all tongue in cheek and that its refers to a GOT famous moment and that Markle is a narcissistic passive-aggressive annoyance but that is too far and will create a sh1tstorm"

That is her job and she did not do it.

Useless woman...sack her now.

[Christmas Dynasnow]

Youtube video

[jet]

Originally Posted by Christmas Neeve

For what?

I’ll treat that disingenuous enquiry with the contempt it deserves.

[Christmas Dynasnow]

Originally Posted by jet

I’ll treat that disingenuous enquiry with the contempt it deserves.

well said Jet. Ridiculous pretence

[Good King Glennceslas]

Post some daily Mail articles to put her straight!!

[Alf]

Originally Posted by Soldier Boy

It's his "opinion" to state that he wants to see her stripped naked and paraded through town having **** thrown at her?

That's not really an opinion, is it? I know he was exaggerating and that he thought he was being funny (he wasn't "joking", but he did think he was being funny) but I don't think the suggestion of gangs of ruddy faced blokes stripping and humiliating women "for their wrongs" in expressions of their sad, impotent rage should really fall in the realms of "just an opinion".

Drunkenly burped out in a pub it should get an eye-roll and ignored. Published in a national newspaper that's read by the exact sort of people who ould - unironically, and genuinely - like to see the people mentioned tarred and feathered ... it's just horrific.

As a "joke" it works better as a satire of the people who do genuinely get themselves emotional and upset thinking about a random celebrity and a family of dough-faced aristocrats.

Of course it's an opinion. It's his opinion. What's not an opinion about that opinion?

[Christmas Dynasnow]

Originally Posted by Glenn.

Post some daily Mail articles to put her straight!!

post some comments from Harry and Meghan as they are legit??

[Rustic bauble]

Originally Posted by jet

I rest my case.

You do your Honor…

[user104658]

Originally Posted by Kevin the Carrot

Youtube video

The title of this reads like a parody of what an AI would generate if you asked it to create a YouTube video for gammon to wank over.

[Christmas Dynasnow]

Originally Posted by Soldier Boy

The title of this reads like a parody of what an AI would generate if you asked it to create a YouTube video for gammon to wank over.

I knew you'd be triggered

[Merry Mockmas]

Originally Posted by Kevin the Carrot

Im afraid the issue is firmly with the Editor who would have seen this piece and passed it instead of politely saying that "sorry Jez but that is too much in light of recent very public attacks on young women - I get your column is all tongue in cheek and that its refers to a GOT famous moment and that Markle is a narcissistic passive-aggressive annoyance but that is too far and will create a sh1tstorm"

That is her job and she did not do it.

That is a fair point.

How on earth did it pass by the Editor?