GBN / Adam Chapman: "'Say what you want about Morrissey...he was right about Islamic terrorism in the UK' - Brendan O'Neill" (September 25, 2024)

'Say what you want about Morrissey...he was right about Islamic terrorism in the UK' - Brendan O'Neill

Excerpt:

The Spiked Political Editor tells GB News that Morrissey summed this up perfectly during a gig at the Palladium in London a few years back.
The former lead singer of The Smiths was introducing his new song at the time, ‘Bonfire of Teenagers’, which is about the Manchester Arena bombing in 2017.
Mr O'Neill, who was in the crowd that night, alleged Morrisey looked out at the audience and asked: "How come you know the name Myra Hindley but many of you won’t know the name of the man who bombed the Manchester Arena?"

It's such a good question. We all know Myra Hindley and Ian Brady. But if you went out on the streets and asked a hundred people to name Salman Abedi [the Manchester arena bomber] I bet they wouldn't be able to," the Spiked Political Editor said.
It's a striking observation given the asymmetry of the crimes and when they occurred: Abedi killed 22 people at the Ariana Grande concert in 2017 - and Brady and Hindley murdered five children more than 50 years ago.



Use this link to avoid nag screen:

Or give them traffic here:

Exit stage...
Regards,
FWD.


Related item:
 
Last edited:
I’ve never met anyone who remembers the islamic homophobic murder of the three picnic homosexuals in Reading. That one was memory holed in a flash. Ditto the murder of the lesbians in Bournemouth recently. If they can’t pin the hate crimes on the “far right” then it’s a hush crime.

The Spiked Political Editor cites the recent terror attack in 2020 which saw Libyan refugee Khairi Saadallah shout "Allahu akbar" as he stabbed three friends to death and injured three others in a Reading park.
"How many people remember his name?" Mr O'Neill asks rhetorically.
 
. All the while, I'm now apparently to understand, that self same establishment - which never truly changes, even over centuries - must have been secretly protecting...Asian groomers in the towns beyond Holy London; the very same towns, with the very same 'uncivilised' denizens, which the establishment and its helpful media traditionally ignores or despises except for outbreaks of patronisation or contempt (which is effectively the same thing).

You’ve really gone out on a Naz Shah-like limb there in denying the well established fact that muslim males are targeting vulnerable working class infidel girls on an industrial scale across Britain and that the authorities conspired to cover up the crimes. Naz Shah who now sits in government, shared tweets calling for the victims to shut up in the name of community cohesion.
 
I've denied nothing of the sort. Instead, I highlighted how institutional cover-ups are hardly exclusive to non-white criminality.
 
However one good reason not to give out names or at least to not highlight them is because of the possible copycat effect.
Also, many prosecutions are unsafe and result in innocent people being imprisoned or worse.
I though Morrissey was out of his depth in trying to defend Weinstein and Spacey without really knowing anything about those cases.
Was he defending them though, or was he rather trying to bring some balance to accusations repeated for comment by the interviewer who wouldn't have known any more about the cases? Morrissey's mind is dramatic; he may have been considering contexts and possibilities. And he's long been viewed as the outsider's outsider; someone who talks about human beings others give up on and automatically vilify. He seems to have an inbuilt reflex to try to get into the minds of life's oddities, whether ordinary or monstrous. The saints and the sinners, and the lumpen proletariat in between.
 
Last edited:
Once a Trotskyist, O'Neill was formerly a member of the Revolutionary Communist Party and wrote for the party's journal Living Marxism. In 2019, O'Neill said he was a Marxist libertarian.[2][3]

Our categories are very confused. After the Manchester bombing, Jeremy Corbyn made a much criticised speech, reasonably warning that the war on terror, or British, Western foreign policy, was fueling terrorism - https://news.sky.com/story/anger-as-jeremy-corbyn-links-foreign-policy-to-uk-terror-attacks-10894047

Shortly after, his ruthlessly engineered downfall was pursued not just by conservatives but equally by his own party, and of course, BICOM.
 
Absolutely awful song both musically and lyrically and now even visually.
Typical Quilloughby gimmick song formula to shock and gain media publicity and headlines.
He used to throw mud on the Royal Family for the same reason.
It’s all very boring now.

Benny 🇬🇧 :knife:
You really really need to get a life.
 
It feels tantamount to emotional blackmail that Morrissey is advancing the idea that the song’s subject matter (and his view of it) is essentially problematic for people.

I don’t think it is. But I’d suggest it does deserve something a lot better. It’s a poor song.
I think it's become very clear that this song was never about any concern for the children who were murdered
 
Is this really what we are condemned to now? Week after month of opinion pieces that are debated ad nauseam, until Morrissey is in a wheelchair?

Nothing more can be said at this point. Nothing more needs to be said. Release fu cking music.
 
Is this really what we are condemned to now? Week after month of opinion pieces that are debated ad nauseam, until Morrissey is in a wheelchair?

Nothing more can be said at this point. Nothing more needs to be said. Release fu cking music.
MOZI in a wheelchair, I know, I know, it’s serious.
 
Amazing. I had the opposite reaction to the testimonies in that documentary. I thought the accusers opened themselves to all sorts of questions, and I could easily see why Spacey had been acquitted by the courts at every turn.
and why does it always take so long for prople to come forward,we are seeing that this week with al fayed,we are up to 200 women who were sexually assaulted by the old f...,surely one of the 200 could have come forward,and before someone says he was too powerful no one is above the law no matter how much money they have.
 
But that is exactly the kind of stuff the far-right says. They keep using the words lies and truth until they have lost all their meaning, which has been their goal all along.
No 'side' has a monopoly on lies. No 'side' has a monopoly on truth. Those who wield power, those who seek power, from either 'side' of the political spectrum, have a tendency to twist lies and truth for their own ends. If you haven't learned that from history, you need to go back to school.
 
No 'side' has a monopoly on lies. No 'side' has a monopoly on truth. Those who wield power, those who seek power, from either 'side' of the political spectrum, have a tendency to twist lies and truth for their own ends. If you haven't learned that from history, you need to go back to school.
All true, but if your solution to that is believing blatant lies from the far-right, then you never were in school in the first place.
 
But that is exactly the kind of stuff the far-right says. They keep using the words lies and truth until they have lost all their meaning, which has been their goal all along.
It’s just so ridiculous. Why can’t they see that? How do you become so delusional that you think YouTubers and alternative publications with very clear agendas are keepers of the truth? It must be hell to live your life thinking that society is constantly out to get you.
 
It's so PECULIAR what you can and cannot remember. For example, we vividly recall the young ruffian who wrecked a changing room in Debenhams and then got arrested the very same day in the toilets of the Shakespeare just opposite (1982). Haven't got a bloody clue who's bombing Lebanon right now, however.
 

Trending Threads

Back
Top Bottom