Quizzes & Puzzles2 mins ago
Why Is It That Only The Daily Mail Thought That This Obviously Racist Action Taken By The Police, Worthy Of Reporting On?
35 Answers
Answers
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by anotheoldgit. 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.
I'm thinking it is very possible that the copper was having an off day. Maybe he left home after arguing with her indoors and decided someone was going to get some .......'Do you know who I am?'
It happens, it has happened to me, a white male. Where do I go to tell my story?
Life is so unfair sometimes!
It happens, it has happened to me, a white male. Where do I go to tell my story?
Life is so unfair sometimes!
Middle class, white parents, talks posh, employed by the Daily Mail. The Daily Mail thinks "Why,he's one of us !"
It may do some good. The Bar will tell you that your best chance of getting a villain acquitted when he says the police threatened him unless he admitted something, or otherwise acted like suspicious bulllies, is to have Daily Telegraph readers, who,or whose family, have had dealings with the traffic division, on the jury. They think back to how they were dealt with and think "If that's how they treat us, I quite believe that's how they'd treat him, and worse"
It may do some good. The Bar will tell you that your best chance of getting a villain acquitted when he says the police threatened him unless he admitted something, or otherwise acted like suspicious bulllies, is to have Daily Telegraph readers, who,or whose family, have had dealings with the traffic division, on the jury. They think back to how they were dealt with and think "If that's how they treat us, I quite believe that's how they'd treat him, and worse"
-- answer removed --
andy-hughes
/// AOG - do you still have trouble disecting the genuine posts from the ironic ones? ///
andy-hughes
Yes I'm afraid I am from the old school who takes everyone by their word, and therefore not educated into this modern way of showing the hidden sarcasm or even the point for such sarcasm.
And to your question Andy, no I do not require lessons from a self described expert on the subject such as you, I much prefer to stay the way I am.
/// AOG - do you still have trouble disecting the genuine posts from the ironic ones? ///
andy-hughes
Yes I'm afraid I am from the old school who takes everyone by their word, and therefore not educated into this modern way of showing the hidden sarcasm or even the point for such sarcasm.
And to your question Andy, no I do not require lessons from a self described expert on the subject such as you, I much prefer to stay the way I am.
My test completed and the results are positive just as I thought they may be, being that some of you are all so predictable.
Here we has a thread that contained opportunities for your favourite rants, these being 'anti-police and 'racism', but because the article was in the Daily Mail you chose to criticise them, rather than congratulate them.
One even introduced the 'from middle class white parents' issue, and even a criticism of the Daily Telegraph readers, with even one on the papal election, and then Gromit's response on the fact that the victim himself writes for the Mail.
I wonder what the response would have been if the article had been in the Guardian and the victim had wrote for them?
Here we has a thread that contained opportunities for your favourite rants, these being 'anti-police and 'racism', but because the article was in the Daily Mail you chose to criticise them, rather than congratulate them.
One even introduced the 'from middle class white parents' issue, and even a criticism of the Daily Telegraph readers, with even one on the papal election, and then Gromit's response on the fact that the victim himself writes for the Mail.
I wonder what the response would have been if the article had been in the Guardian and the victim had wrote for them?
Look again at your OP, aog. You ask why only the Daily Mail thought that this racist action was worthy of reporting on. The answer is that the writer and subject of it is a regular, probably paid, contributor to the Daily Mail. Who else would know abut it? Who else would he send the story to?
If you are asking why the Daily Mail wasn't praised, well, was it condemned for doing it? No. If the writer had been a Guardian contributor and published in the Guardian I, for one, would be surprised. Guardian readers may be taken to know how some police behave, including in cases like this one. Daily Mail readers might be "outraged" and surprised.
If you are asking why the Daily Mail wasn't praised, well, was it condemned for doing it? No. If the writer had been a Guardian contributor and published in the Guardian I, for one, would be surprised. Guardian readers may be taken to know how some police behave, including in cases like this one. Daily Mail readers might be "outraged" and surprised.
annotheoldit writes,
"andy-hughes
Yes I'm afraid I am from the old school who takes everyone by their word, and therefore not educated into this modern way of showing the hidden sarcasm or even the point for such sarcasm.
And to your question Andy, no I do not require lessons from a self described expert on the subject such as you, I much prefer to stay the way I am.
In the last few months he wrote "[A suggestion for] Symbols, that show that a question or answer is either 'tongue in the cheek' or 'sarcastic', because some sometimes try and get out of an awkward situation by later saying "it was only tongue in the cheek" or " I was being sarcastic".”
“Zeuhl
/// The 'slavery' reference is silly aog.
The term you were searching for is 'mercenary' ///
It was merely a tongue in the cheek reference, highlighting the very fact that Cameron is trading in humans along with materials.”
Hmm...
"andy-hughes
Yes I'm afraid I am from the old school who takes everyone by their word, and therefore not educated into this modern way of showing the hidden sarcasm or even the point for such sarcasm.
And to your question Andy, no I do not require lessons from a self described expert on the subject such as you, I much prefer to stay the way I am.
In the last few months he wrote "[A suggestion for] Symbols, that show that a question or answer is either 'tongue in the cheek' or 'sarcastic', because some sometimes try and get out of an awkward situation by later saying "it was only tongue in the cheek" or " I was being sarcastic".”
“Zeuhl
/// The 'slavery' reference is silly aog.
The term you were searching for is 'mercenary' ///
It was merely a tongue in the cheek reference, highlighting the very fact that Cameron is trading in humans along with materials.”
Hmm...
Related Questions
Sorry, we can't find any related questions. Try using the search bar at the top of the page to search for some keywords, or choose a topic and submit your own question.