Author Topic: Boris Johnson "After Rome"  (Read 12749 times)

Julian

  • samoture
Re: Boris Johnson "After Rome"
« Reply #25 on: December 08, 2008, 09:43:54 am »
If you can't put forward a reasonable argument then invent a straw man, resort to hyperbole and a scummy /dishonest misrepresentation of what was said, eh?

And does that advice come direct from BorisWatch?

Re: Boris Johnson "After Rome"
« Reply #26 on: December 08, 2008, 09:47:03 am »
No. What are you talking about? I quoted Boris's own words, cast your eye upthread. Again.

Re: Boris Johnson "After Rome"
« Reply #27 on: December 08, 2008, 10:12:21 am »
Yeah, but out of context so that they appeared to say something quite different to his original meaning.  Selective quoting proves nothing and makes you look foolish. 

By the way, I'm still interested to know what makes you think the ancient greeks were sexually incontinent. 

Re: Boris Johnson "After Rome"
« Reply #28 on: December 08, 2008, 11:00:35 am »
Selective quoting

I quoted the entire piece, here it is again:






   This is a turning point: we have to fly the flag for Britishness again - Telegraph






And the union jack is "endlessly" quoted in racial abuse cases, is it? Shrill, hysterical rabble rousing. Why did Boris lie about what he said if he's not desperate to cover up his unwise remarks?

and:

It is time to reassert British values…That means disposing of the first taboo, and accepting that the problem is Islam. Islam is the problem.
To any non-Muslim reader of the Koran, Islamophobia — fear of Islam — seems a natural reaction, and, indeed, exactly what that text is intended to provoke. Judged purely on its scripture — to say nothing of what is preached in the mosques — it is the most viciously sectarian of all religions.

The trouble with this disgusting arrogance and condescension is that it is widely supported in Koranic texts, and we look in vain for the enlightened Islamic teachers and preachers who will begin the process of reform. What is going on in these mosques and madrasas? "When is someone going to get 18th century on Islam’s mediaeval ***?"

A first step towards what could be called the re-Britannification of Britain.

By the way, I'm still interested to know what makes you think the ancient greeks were sexually incontinent. 

I don't.



I made the point that making sweeping remarks about races or social groups based on a book of myths is not a good idea.

It's a subtle point but I thought easy enough to understand.

Regulator

  • That's Councillor Regulator to you...
Re: Boris Johnson "After Rome"
« Reply #29 on: December 08, 2008, 11:18:14 am »
Selective quoting

I quoted the entire piece, here it is again:



   This is a turning point: we have to fly the flag for Britishness again - Telegraph





Err... no it's not.  It seems that your rabid dislike of Boris Johnson means you can't even get the article you're misquoting right...   ::-)

This is the article from which you draw your selective snippets in your first post.
Quote from: clarion
I completely agree with Reg.

Green Party Councillor

Re: Boris Johnson "After Rome"
« Reply #30 on: December 08, 2008, 11:28:11 am »
That's right , one article from The Spectator and one from The Telegraph.

As I said.

So Boris claims Islam is the enemy and makes no attempt to seperate ordinary muslims from mad bombers, then claims muslims don't condemn terrorism. In a city where 1 in 7 of us is a muslim his words were recklessly dishonest and designed to pander to the kind of muppet who thinks flying a flag has been banned. Boris pitched his journalism at the lowest common demoninator.


Regulator

  • That's Councillor Regulator to you...
Re: Boris Johnson "After Rome"
« Reply #31 on: December 08, 2008, 11:36:09 am »
That's right , one article from The Spectator and one from The Telegraph.

As I said.

So Boris claims Islam is the enemy and makes no attempt to seperate ordinary muslims from mad bombers, then claims muslims don't condemn terrorism. In a city where 1 in 7 of us is a muslim his words were recklessly dishonest and designed to pander to the kind of muppet who thinks flying a flag has been banned. Boris pitched his journalism at the lowest common demoninator.




You seem to be spinning so fast that you don't know whether you're coming or going.  Perhaps you should take a break and do some meditation or something...

All this frothing can't be good for you.
Quote from: clarion
I completely agree with Reg.

Green Party Councillor

Re: Boris Johnson "After Rome"
« Reply #32 on: December 08, 2008, 11:52:50 am »
Personal attacks are usually the sign of a lost argument.

I have an opinion and can back it up calmly.


You lose your temper and accuse people of being mentally ill.


Manotea

  • Where there is doubt...
Re: Boris Johnson "After Rome"
« Reply #33 on: December 08, 2008, 11:59:01 am »
Spindrift, did we once have a discussion about Napoleon on C+? You know, the one where you put forward Napoleon as a kindly humanitarian who wanted to unite Europe so all could enjoy the benefits of the enlighted French education and judicial system.

Re: Boris Johnson "After Rome"
« Reply #34 on: December 08, 2008, 12:04:25 pm »
Spindrift, did we once have a discussion about Napoleon on C+? You know, the one where you put forward Napoleon as a kindly humanitarian who wanted to unite Europe so all could enjoy the benefits of the enlighted French education and judicial system.

No idea. Link? Relevance?

clarion

  • Tyke
Re: Boris Johnson "After Rome"
« Reply #35 on: December 08, 2008, 12:05:28 pm »
To be fair, we do have enough evidene of Johnson being, at the very leat, inconsistent, and probably pandering to the specific prejudices of his audiences.

Can we have discussion on that, or will it continue to be ad hominem?
Getting there...

Re: Boris Johnson "After Rome"
« Reply #36 on: December 08, 2008, 12:06:50 pm »
Top stuff spindrift, but there's a contradiction here.  In your first post you quoted Boris thus:
“Islamaphobia is a natural reaction…it is the most viciously sectarian of religions…disgusting arrogance and condescension supported in Islamic texts…when is someobe gonna get medaeval on Islamic’s ass? ”

Now you're quoting him thus:
The trouble with this disgusting arrogance and condescension is that it is widely supported in Koranic texts, and we look in vain for the enlightened Islamic teachers and preachers who will begin the process of reform. What is going on in these mosques and madrasas? "When is someone going to get 18th century on Islam’s mediaeval ***?"

The first quote is not only selectively quoted, it has had the words shifted around to give it a different meaning. 

Just to pursue my interest (it's a subject close to my heart) if you don't believe the ancient greeks were sexually incontinent, why did you say that they were?

clarion

  • Tyke
Re: Boris Johnson "After Rome"
« Reply #37 on: December 08, 2008, 12:09:05 pm »
Phil, bear in mind that Johnson tends to use similar formulations in different articles, so it may not be as much a misquote as it seems, though I don't know that.  Just worth bearing in mind.
Getting there...

Re: Boris Johnson "After Rome"
« Reply #38 on: December 08, 2008, 12:14:35 pm »
It's definitely the same piece of writing - try checking spindrift's later post against the quote he posted originally. 

Edit: he also says it's the same piece...

Manotea

  • Where there is doubt...
Re: Boris Johnson "After Rome"
« Reply #39 on: December 08, 2008, 12:16:41 pm »
Spindrift, did we once have a discussion about Napoleon on C+? You know, the one where you put forward Napoleon as a kindly humanitarian who wanted to unite Europe so all could enjoy the benefits of the enlighted French education and judicial system.

No idea. Link? Relevance?

Oh, so you did participate in a discussion about Napoleon on C+, where you put forward Napoleon as a kindly humanitarian who wanted to unite Europe so all could enjoy the benefits of the enlighted French education and judicial system.

You're just not sure it was with me.

Links long gone. No relevence. Just asking. Have a nice day.

Julian

  • samoture
Re: Boris Johnson "After Rome"
« Reply #40 on: December 08, 2008, 01:00:14 pm »
To be fair, we do have enough evidene of Johnson being, at the very leat, inconsistent, and probably pandering to the specific prejudices of his audiences.

Can we have discussion on that, or will it continue to be ad hominem?

Mmm.

Here's my contribution to that discussion:  I wasn't hugely happy when Boris was elected; I didn't vote for him and I was very concerned that his efforts would be focused on the middle classes in suburban London and that Ken's good work on diversity, transport and entertainment would be dropped.  I knew that people who live in Surbiton and Highgate can afford to entertain themselves and were grumpy at the use of their taxes to pay for things like the Rise! festival - things which as a person on a low income living in Dalston, I had really, really valued.  London is expensive and free, high quality entertainment, accessed by reasonably priced, frequent buses, does encourage social inclusion - Ken's one LondON idea, I suppose.

I was also a bit concerned that Boris has outdated ideas on homosexuality, doesn't appear to have any idea at all about age prejudice, and has used racially inappropriate words in his writings.

Fortunately, I then read Boris Watch a few times and I'm beginning to quite like the man.  Boris is in fact a victim of near constant misrepresentation who is unable to wipe his arse without some fanatic dribbling into the blogosphere that he uses white toilet paper, the racist git. 

Boris Watch appears to be fuelled entirely by dislike for Boris, rather than by anything he's actually done - and certainly by nothing he's done since becoming Mayor. 

Re: Boris Johnson "After Rome"
« Reply #41 on: December 08, 2008, 01:06:46 pm »
So, you admit blah blah blah...

Nope.

 As I said, I've no idea what you're talking about , nor why you're making up stuff I never said on other threads on different forums. PM if you have other similar queries, same to you Phil, I'll be happy to explain the concept of analogies.

Boris Watch isn't a hate-filled site, don't be daft, it calmly disects Boris's evasions and inventions, like the danger posed by bendies, for instance.

Charlotte

  • Dissolute libertine
  • Here's to ol' D.H. Lawrence...
    • charlottebarnes.co.uk
Re: Boris Johnson "After Rome"
« Reply #42 on: December 08, 2008, 01:09:13 pm »
I think you're a bit annoyed because Bozzer hasn't really badly screwed up yet.
Commercial, Editorial and PR Photographer - www.charlottebarnes.co.uk

Regulator

  • That's Councillor Regulator to you...
Re: Boris Johnson "After Rome"
« Reply #43 on: December 08, 2008, 01:10:56 pm »

Fortunately, I then read Boris Watch a few times and I'm beginning to quite like the man.  Boris is in fact a victim of near constant misrepresentation who is unable to wipe his arse without some fanatic dribbling into the blogosphere that he uses white toilet paper, the racist git. 

Boris Watch appears to be fuelled entirely by dislike for Boris, rather than by anything he's actually done - and certainly by nothing he's done since becoming Mayor. 

You should try Boris Johnson Facts - they're 100% true you know...  Well, they must be - they're on the interweb.


 ;)
Quote from: clarion
I completely agree with Reg.

Green Party Councillor

cc93

Re: Boris Johnson "After Rome"
« Reply #44 on: December 08, 2008, 01:13:44 pm »
Did you see him on T*p G**r last night?

Even got in a suggestion that HVG drivers look in their mirrors occasionally for cyclists  :thumbsup:

EDIT - OOPS just noticed the other thread :hand:

Re: Boris Johnson "After Rome"
« Reply #45 on: December 08, 2008, 01:14:51 pm »
hasn't screwed up yet

You're kidding, right? A reversal of positive thinking about transport in a city that once led Europe, the scrapping of making Parliament Square a public space, losing two aides in 8 weeks (Ken lost 1 in 8 years) handing £17m to Venezuala and £400,000 to Porsche, meddling with the legal process and facing a possible suspension, scrapping the £25 charge for the most polluting vehicles, scrapping the press conferences, refusing to answer questions from journbalists, employing Simon "Asbestos" Milton from the Westminster homes-for-votes scandal, allowing PTWs in bus lanes despite them posing twice the risk to cyclists than cars.


I could go on. ;D

Re: Boris Johnson "After Rome"
« Reply #46 on: December 08, 2008, 01:17:56 pm »
If he's so bad, why did you have to misquote him, seriously altering his meaning in the process?

And why did you say that the ancient greeks were sexually incontinent, and then deny that that was your opinion?

Regulator

  • That's Councillor Regulator to you...
Re: Boris Johnson "After Rome"
« Reply #47 on: December 08, 2008, 01:18:23 pm »
Did you see him on T*p G**r last night?

Even got in a suggestion that HVG drivers look in their mirrors occasionally for cyclists  :thumbsup:

I'm sure you have that wrong.  Didn't BoJo say all cyclists are evil and it was Saint Jeremy who suggested that truck drivers use their mirrors?

How dare you suggest that I have said something else, when I clearly said the complete opposite - and you know I'm right as you can see here: Regulator is Right... You're just misquoting me...  Don't you understand journalistic license...
Quote from: clarion
I completely agree with Reg.

Green Party Councillor

cc93

Re: Boris Johnson "After Rome"
« Reply #48 on: December 08, 2008, 01:21:52 pm »
Did you see him on T*p G**r last night?

Even got in a suggestion that HVG drivers look in their mirrors occasionally for cyclists  :thumbsup:

I'm sure you have that wrong.  Didn't BoJo say all cyclists are evil and it was Saint Jeremy who suggested that truck drivers use their mirrors?


You're right - what he (BoJo) meant was they should use their mirrors in order to time the left-hooks accurately

sorry for the confusion  :)

Re: Boris Johnson "After Rome"
« Reply #49 on: December 08, 2008, 01:27:50 pm »
And why did you say that the ancient greeks were sexually incontinent

For the third time, I didn't.

It was an analogy, I compared one silly thing (using the koran to slag off all British muslims) with another (using Zeus myths to make assertions about the sexual behaviour of ancient Greeks. Please, please, take this off thread if you want me to go over this.

The far right, and those whose intention is to whip up hatred and suspicion, use these silly myths about the union jack being banned and all muslims support terrorism.

For Boris to do this, in exchange for cash, for a right wing audience was unwise as a journalist, disastrous for the mayor of a multi cultural city.

Why do you think Boris lied about what he said if it's so innocent?