How Can The Truth Be Offensive?

[ToraToraTora]

https://news.sky.com/story/nigel-farage-called-out-for-blanket-accusation-as-he-says-growing-number-of-muslims-loathe-british-values-13143302

"Nigel Farage has argued on Sky News that a "growing number" of young Muslims in the UK do not subscribe to British values." - bang on, it seems the truth offends the trobiscite supporters if Islam.

[THECORBYLOON]

TORATORATORA, "Religion is not a race in cannot be racism."

Appeal judgments have confirmed that the Sikh and Jewish religions were protected by the 1976 Race Relations Act.

[Deskdiary]

^^^that doesn't make them races.

[andy-hughes]

No, but makes them protected under Racism legislation. 

[New Judge]

“Worryingly, many ABers seem to approve of what this racist bigot has to say.”

I think you have it wrong – at least as far as I am concerned. I obviously can’t speak for all AB-ers and I’m not really that concerned about what they approve of or not. That’s none of my business. My main concern is not whether they approve of what Mr Farage has to say or not. It’s whether they approve of his right to say it.

Femi seems to believe not (and I assume you agree with him). Mr Philips suggested that Mr Farage’s remarks were “incendiary” but for Femi that did not go far enough. According to him he should have been denounced as a racist and a bigot, the interview terminated there and then and Mr Farage never invited to appear on the station again.

The duty of broadcasters when handling issues on which there are varied opinion is to present a balanced output. How can that be done if one side of the argument is simply closed down as being “wrong”? Are you really saying that some opinions with which you do not agree are so odious (in your opinion) that they must not be presented at all? I assume you will answer “yes” to that question and if so, who decides what is presented and what is not? And how do people with an opinion contrary to yours publicise their views? Forget any individual topic such as the views of Mr Farage (which whom you obviously disagree and so would like to see “cancelled”). Just consider the question in general terms.

This is a genuine question to which I believe an answer would help us understand your psyche. I believe there is a serious problem in the UK where here is an element of society intent on closing down all opinion which is deemed “incendiary” (i.e. not acceptable to some people). And I find that extremely disturbing – far more so than Mr Farage’s opinion of whether Muslims integrate into UK society or not.

If you really want to seen how a contentious subject should be handled, have a look at this:

 It is an interview from 1958 between Daniel Farsons, a TV presenter from that time, and one James Wentworth Day, an author and broadcaster and a promoter of Agrarian Right politics. If you can bear it that far, notice the very last sentence by Mr Farsons. I’m afraid he puts the excitable and hysterical Femi firmly in his place.

[ToraToraTora]

steady on judge you'll have the screens of the nation pebble dashed with trobiscite peace porridge!

[douglas9401]

James Wentworth Day, not clever and, I imagine, now dead.

[Deskdiary]

"Are you really saying that some opinions with which you do not agree are so odious (in your opinion) that they must not be presented at all? I assume you will answer “yes” to that question..."

 

Unfortunately there are many many people now who simply cannot accept an opposing opinion because it challenges their unshakable self-belief that they simply MUST be correct. Only "correct" opinions are acceptable, and people who have "incorrect" opinions must be closed down. You only need to look at Graham Linehan as proof of this; despite him having an opinion that chimes with the vast vast majority of the UK, because the loud minority decided he had "incorrect" opinions he HAD to be silenced.

 

It really is quite pathetic that they don't possess the mental robustness to accept people may have the bare-faced temerity in not agreeing with them.

[ToraToraTora]

Yes DD it's nouveau fascism, only the "correct" previously ordained and duly proscribed view on any given subject will be tolerated. Those daring to differ must be closed down "cancelled" etc.  At least they are not gassing us.... yet!

[New Judge]

"James Wentworth Day, not clever and, I imagine, now dead."

Certtainly dead, duggie (1899-1983). Whether or not he was "clever" I suppose depends on your definition. He was a successful author and journalist as well as breaking into television when it was in its infancy in the 1950s.

His views were often condemned as racist and xenophobic. But back then opposing views were tolerated and challenged rather than being "cancelled" as they are today.

[andy-hughes]

This so reminded me of Harry Enfield's 'Mr Cholmendly- Warner and Grayson' sketches, they absolutely nailed the stiff presentation and received pronunciation we can see and hear on this clip.

[douglas9401]

Back then the jury was still out on which of the big cats had spots that didn't change.

The lion was top of the complete roaster list.