The Daily Mail

[????]

...doncha just love it

Only paper brave enough to call Steven Lawrence's accused "Murderers" (opening up a potential million pound plus lawsuit) all those years back and now hopefully going to be vindicated......

...Good old libs at the Guardian really stuck it to those racist scumbags....er, not

[Huguenot]

Eh?

A thread about a newspaper headline from February 1997?

[????]

Topical. They've (or two of them) just been charged again since Double Jeopardy gone.

[StraferJack]

It's back in the news Huguenot - 2 of them look set to face trial

Why ???? says only the mail had the bottle and then has a pop at just the Guardian, only he can answer

At the time, I remember reading this and thought it was about right..

I fear ???? may actually drive himself nuts (or become Melanie Philips) if he doesn't calm down

[*Bob*]

That's one in the bag for The Mail and one in the eye for the Guardian!

Sorry.. Stephen who?

[Huguenot]

As any fule no, Quids is already certifiable ;-)

"More serious, the paper carried out little investigation of its own nor unearthed any significant new facts. Its indictment was based largely on police belief. But the police are not always right. That is the purpose of a trial: to ensure the prosecution's evidence is fully tested."

And just to pop one on the Mail...

"Cynics can point to a very belated conversion by the Mail. Until yesterday, the Mail's coverage of the shameful killing had been somewhat peripheral. The murder was only mentioned in three stories in the last year before the inquest, only six the previous year, and just 20 since the murder was committed."

That having been said, I do sincerely hope they nail the bastards.

[*Bob*]

From what I remember The Mail were lacklustre about the case, criticised the Lawrence campaign - and only decided to get their cocks out for a swingathon when they realised it might help them sell a few more rags.

[huncamunca]

The Mail is up there with McDonalds - yes its shit and their product is vile, but its an easy target for the lazy MoR liberal chattering classes who have a copy of No Logo on their bookshelves.shit products IMO but they have a popular following that irks the bodenfaced Bourgeoisie. lazy and uninspired sneering from the selfish cod left pretenders. innit.

[????]

Well, they were the only ones who did get their cocks out.....and waved them in the face of the scaredy pinkos too

[StraferJack]

For someone who eschews lazy targets, one can't help but see a pattern in your posts huncs

[????]

I've got No Logo and it is without doubt one of the most smug piles of bourgeois hypocracy I've ever read....and there's been a few as my missus takes The Guardian

[Huguenot]

I'm never quite sure that huncamunca knows who his target is.

For instance the discussion of the Hastings and Whitstable blow-ins talks about them as Guardianistas - but aspirational middle classes read the Mail in Hastings, not the Guardian.

Likewise the social climbing self-righteous gossips he describes are best characterised by Hyacinth Bucket, a notorious Mail reader.

Similarly huncamunca talks about a social set that are 'bodenfaced' - perfectly clear that this is a set for whom brands are a badge of honour - but then claims that they have 'No Logo' on their shelf as if were elevated to biblical status. This is a contradiction.

It's inconsistent.

I didn't really see any problem with No Logo. It was just kind of stating the obious and was a bit preachy. Nothing to get excited about.

[????]

Hastings and Whitstable are being invaded by right on, 'artistic' Guardianistas from London Huge not apirational lower middle class Mail readers.

[Annette Curtain]

Huguenot Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Eh?

>

> A thread about a newspaper headline from February

> 1997?

????'s likes to stew on these things, before making his decisive moves.

[Huguenot]

I'll take your word for it Quids.

But I'll be honest and say that I don't know what a right-on guardianista is? I've heard your and hunca's characterisation of it, but I've never met someone who matches the description.

It certainly doesn't seem to match anyone I know who reads the Guardian.

The closest I can get was the more militant female side of the labour group at university - but they all grew out of it when they wanted to buy a house.

[taper]

The Daily Heil is a risible rag (as occasionally is the Farringdon Bogroll). I heard Dacre drove this campaign because Neville Lawrence (the father) was his decorator. That might be apocryphal, but I have a vague recollection.

[mockney piers]

You don't need real examples when conjuring up the 'other' a bogeyman to attract the focus of the baseless fears and prejudices of those you want to appeal to with one's demagoguery, whether it be the corrupt west, the sharia hungry muslims, pinko guardianistas, racist mail readers, or dare I say, scheming jews.

Oops I've just snorkied this debate by invoking snorky's law.

Ironic how much certain posters go on about tiresome drones isn't it.

[Moos]

Now, Quids, your Guardian thread was in the Drawing Room but your Mail one in the Lounge.

Are you making a point about class? Or comparative seriousness?

(hee hee)

[????]

you guess ;-)

[Annette Curtain]

???? Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

and there's been a few as my missus

> takes The Guardian

Like medicine ?

[????]

Yup. It's a laxative.

[Annette Curtain]

Eww...

:-$

* waves hand in front of nose *

[MrBen]

Moos, Quidsy, Huge, *Bob*, Mockers, Snorky and er Taper all giving it good.

I've not felt quite like this since Pink Floyd reformed for Live 8. Grown men wept.

[david_carnell]

There was a documentary the other night depicting a libel fight between the Daily Mail and the Sun vs Carter Ruck law firm (of Trafigura infamy). Never have I wanted both sides to lose so badly.

[Moos]

....and Carnelli for the bass note.

I think snuncamunca deserves great credit for breathing new life into the Lounge. But I do think he should let his missus have her logon back.