From: hjkhjkhd@hhhh.com   
      
   "Martha Bridegam"  wrote in message   
   news:PdKbi.780$vi5.670@newssvr17.news.prodigy.net...   
   > Nigee wrote:   
   >> On 11 Jun, 21:32, "ROBBIE"  wrote:   
   >>> A co-worker rather contemptuously described me as 'an apologist for the   
   >>> Daily Mail' today. Because the office copy happened to have ended up on   
   >>> my   
   >>> desk - for the first time in many a month. I found his straight-faced   
   >>> description of it as 'utterly Nazi' both laughable and juvenile. The   
   >>> Daily   
   >>> Mail is a rather unpleasant and slightly boorish right-wing tabloid   
   >>> newspaper. If you identify that as being 'Nazi' then you have succumbed   
   >>> to   
   >>> the same kind of hyperbole and exaggeration that fuels boorish   
   >>> right-wing   
   >>> tabloids.   
   >>>   
   >>> As per: nothing to say about the apologists for *brown* fascism one sees   
   >>> from time to time in liberal newspapers and from the mayor of London   
   >>> (who he   
   >>> seems to admire). How are the Mail Nazis I asked. I seem to recall they   
   >>> they   
   >>> were the most vocal of all tabloids in the drive to catch Stephen   
   >>> Lawrence's   
   >>> murderers. They even printed the killers faces on the front page and ask   
   >>> them to sue if they wanted. He didn't like that.   
   >>> 'What about all their stuff about asylum seekers?' he asked, getting   
   >>> desperate. 'Well,' I said, 'even the government now admit the system's   
   >>> out   
   >>> of control'.   
   >>>   
   >>> He walked off and sat down and said half-serious: 'tut tut, apologist   
   >>> for   
   >>> the Daily Mail.'   
   >>>   
   >>> 'There are worse things to be,' I said.   
   >>>   
   >>> --   
   >>>   
   >>> 'When language gets corrupted, thought gets corrupted.'   
   >>>   
   >>> ROBBIE   
   >>   
   >> How old was said co-worker?   
   >>   
   >> Yes, the Mail is often nasty and mean-spirited.  I despised it when I   
   >> was younger and I don't buy it now.  I buy very few newspapers since   
   >> online does me well enough most of the time and who wants to *pay* to   
   >> be filled with dread and woe every morning.   
   >>   
   >> With a certain maturity, however, I can look past the Mail's   
   >> nastiness, as you can, and recognise that this does not mean that it   
   >> is automatically wrong about everything.  Another observation: most of   
   >> the people I see reading the Mail seem to me to be people who go out   
   >> to work everyday, obey the law, pay taxes, and generally live   
   >> restrained, decent, not particularly exciting, lives.  They are not   
   >> Nazis.   
   >>   
   >> See Blair having a pop at the Pissipendent?  He's right but he's got   
   >> the brassest of brass faces to start shouting his mouth off about spin   
   >> now.   
   >>   
   >   
   > Without venturing an opinion on any other part of the above, I just want   
   > to point out that most real historical N*zi Party supporters *did* "work   
   > every day, obey the law, pay taxes, and generally live restrained, decent,   
   > not particularly exciting, lives."   
      
   Supporters is the one word in your speciousade that betrays. I suppose it   
   leads on to that thing of 'well if you didn't go out and get yourself hanged   
   by piano wire opposing it, then you were goddam well for it!' A typical   
   teenage rebel view. That pretty much makes everyone in every country the   
   same as the arseholes in charge - all Americans as Rummy-ites, All Iraqis   
   Saddamites.   
      
   On the other hand, the krauts are f*cking nuts -- I mean look at your own   
   squarehead militancy and unsinkable sense of righteousness. Why, it's   
   practically Hitler Youth without the sectarianism. The British are not like   
   that. The cultures that are taking root here now unfortunately are.   
      
   ROBBIE   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)