The Labour Party are cockwombles .....

Snicky

Thorium Indium Potassium
Patron
You'll find that baiting me won't work, so you can save your energy, or perhaps channel it into fucking off ;)
I'm not baiting you, I'm being deliberately facetious to make my point. If you think the fake wreath pic was defamatory, why not Sepp's catalogue of pig pictures?
 

Sepp Blatter

Liz Truss Groupie
Patron
Given that I despise Jezza almost as much as I hate Johnson........
That is the point, though - there are people criticising Corbyn because they are trying to make a political point against him. Would they say the same if it was a Labour councillor sued by a Tory MP under similar circumstances, or would they gloat?

Myself (and Reg, I believe) are critical of this action not because we are trying to get into a party political debate or take sides. We are doing it in the name of free speech for all and the right to lampoon public figures of all stripes, as a neutral concept.

There is a big difference between those two reasons for questioning this.

This all works both ways, of course.
 

raefil

Dolly Patron
Patron
Ooohhh back on the Jews again.

What did they sue for? A satirical joke picture or a nasty written accusation that Riley is dangerous? An accusation that led to abuse, death threats and calls for her to be sacked.
Yes back on people being falsely accused of hating jews again.

You have a problem with that?

The courts dont appear to.

 

Snicky

Thorium Indium Potassium
Patron
That is the point, though - there are people criticising Corbyn because they are trying to make a political point against him. Would they say the same if it was a Labour councillor sued by a Tory MP under similar circumstances, or would they gloat?

Myself (and Reg, I believe) are critical of this action not because we are trying to get into a party political debate or take sides. We are doing it in the name of free speech for all and the right to lampoon public figures of all stripes, as a neutral concept.

There is a big difference between those two reasons for questioning this.

This all works both ways, of course.
I certainly would.
 

Snicky

Thorium Indium Potassium
Patron
Yes back on people being falsely accused of hating jews again.

You have a problem with that?

The courts dont appear to.

What does that case have to do about Jews or being falsely accused of hating Jews? Have you read your own link?

And falsely accused of hating Jews? Last week you got all upset and offended because some of us actually wanted due process to be followed after Azeem Rafiq's allegations were broadcast. And this week you have the audacity to claim that hatred towards a Jew or a couple of Jews was false?

What is your problem with Jewish people that you wish that the abuse of them be held to lesser standard than other ethnic minorities with brown skin? You take Rafiq's word for it but demand a much higher burden of proof for Jews.
 

Sepp Blatter

Liz Truss Groupie
Patron
I'm not baiting you, I'm being deliberately facetious to make my point. If you think the fake wreath pic was defamatory, why not Sepp's catalogue of pig pictures?
Easy there - even I am not depraved enough to sink to the level of pig porn.

You will be hearing from my lawyers concerning this defamation of my impeccable character.
 

raefil

Dolly Patron
Patron
What does that case have to do about Jews or being falsely accused of hating Jews? Have you read your own link?

And falsely accused of hating Jews? Last week you got all upset and offended because some of us actually wanted due process to be followed after Azeem Rafiq's allegations were broadcast. And this week you have the audacity to claim that hatred towards a Jew or a couple of Jews was false?

What is your problem with Jewish people that you wish that the abuse of them be held to lesser standard than other ethnic minorities with brown skin? You take Rafiq's word for it but demand a much higher burden of proof for Jews.
Just for reference

I think youll find the antiracists are disgusted at what he posted about the jews, I certainly am, im equally disgusted at what has come to light over the past few days.

I could twist this the other way, of course ;)
 

Regardless

Forum Patron
Patron
So... that Tony Blair photoshopped image... it is in principle EXACTLY the same level of satire as the Jezza wreath one imo. I strongly believe neither of them to be libellous. And IMO, a judge and jury would find the same.

IMO - Jezza has just got peed off with OTT criticism and lashed out. But this could have severe consequences for satire in general - and as stated, satire is one of the few weapons we have against the powerful.

Those defending the damages claim made against the Tory councillor still haven't commented on the Blair photo, despite a few prompts. Is that an oversight... or avoidance?!
 

raefil

Dolly Patron
Patron
So... that Tony Blair photoshopped image... it is in principle EXACTLY the same level of satire as the Jezza wreath one imo. I strongly believe neither of them to be libellous. And IMO, a judge and jury would find the same.

IMO - Jezza has just got peed off with OTT criticism and lashed out. But this could have severe consequences for satire in general - and as stated, satire is one of the few weapons we have against the powerful.

Those defending the damages claim made against the Tory councillor still haven't commented on the Blair photo, despite a few prompts. Is that an oversight... or avoidance?!
I have never used that Blair meme here or elsewhere.
 

Snicky

Thorium Indium Potassium
Patron
So... that Tony Blair photoshopped image... it is in principle EXACTLY the same level of satire as the Jezza wreath one imo. I strongly believe neither of them to be libellous. And IMO, a judge and jury would find the same.

IMO - Jezza has just got peed off with OTT criticism and lashed out. But this could have severe consequences for satire in general - and as stated, satire is one of the few weapons we have against the powerful.

Those defending the damages claim made against the Tory councillor still haven't commented on the Blair photo, despite a few prompts. Is that an oversight... or avoidance?!
That's the point I was trying to make to Essex with my facetious post but he has disappeared after accusing me of baiting him.
 

raefil

Dolly Patron
Patron
As usual, unable to defend the indefensible so he posts funny emojis.
Defend the indefensible?

Fuck off, theres nothing i need to defend, as I just proved to you I condemned rafiqs antisemitism just as i condemn all forms of racism.

Anyway you just carry on accusing posters of being nazis eh ;)
 

Sepp Blatter

Liz Truss Groupie
Patron
So... that Tony Blair photoshopped image... it is in principle EXACTLY the same level of satire as the Jezza wreath one imo. I strongly believe neither of them to be libellous. And IMO, a judge and jury would find the same.

IMO - Jezza has just got peed off with OTT criticism and lashed out. But this could have severe consequences for satire in general - and as stated, satire is one of the few weapons we have against the powerful.

Those defending the damages claim made against the Tory councillor still haven't commented on the Blair photo, despite a few prompts. Is that an oversight... or avoidance?!
You could argue that the Blair photo is even more libellous, in some ways, because it looks much more realistic - part of arguing whether something should be construed as satire is whether someone could potentially believe it.

The Corbyn photoshop is so crap that nobody would believe it was a real photo - the Blair one, on the other hand, is an excellent job.

Found a good article about the Blair image, which shows the importance of satire in criticising politicians:

 

Snicky

Thorium Indium Potassium
Patron
Defend the indefensible?

Fuck off, theres nothing i need to defend, as I just proved to you I condemned rafiqs antisemitism just as i condemn all forms of racism.

Anyway you just carry on accusing posters of being nazis eh ;)
Never done that, and I never will. Because I'm not some leftie fucktard that uses shit like that or makes stuff up because they can't argue their point. And well done for avoiding the fact that I have just shone a light on your double standard, one rule for them and another rule for others, virtuous anti-racist stance.
 
Top