Daily Mail Censorship

[Aardvark]

It's not just the Mail. My handful of comments there have been published. The Times, which I no longer read online as I won't pay Murdoch, stopped publishing any of my comments after I criticised a journalist's lack of objectivity and research of her subject and then stated some truisms about Murdoch and his press. The comment was removed and future comments were deleted the moment the mods found my name there.

Yesterday the Indie blocked a couple of my posts that had links in them. The issue was Clarkson's comments and I stated that UNISON leaders had called for Maggie to be torched on her birthday. I was asked to provide a link, but couldn't find the tweet in question. I tried to post the following links, but was modded out:

Kill A Tory (reprise) - YouTube

Kill Tories! | Flickr - Photo Sharing!

Labour leadership hopeful: I wish I had killed Margaret Thatcher | Politics

The links are valid as part of the debate as I was trying to highlight that Clarkson's words (taken out of context in any event) might have been offensive, but that actually worse things are said about the Tories and there is less fuss, if any. People talk about Clarkson's being paid by the BBC, but at the time of McDonnell's comments he represented 8,162 Tory electors; he now represents 12,553. McDonnell is a key trade union activist. You would have thought the links would have been valid in the context of the debate, but perish the thought that the Indie would allow the hypocrisy of the left to be highlighted.

[Baron von Lotsov]

Here is another post I got censored on. All I did was say that in a free society one can spend their money how they like, because the article makes out the government are paying for empty rooms for housing benefit claimants. The truth is the government pays for the cost of one bedroom, and if you have more then you pay the rest yourself. This is a classic example of lies and fascism combined. The Mail loves to stamp on the poorest with a jackboot.

1m empty rooms paid for by housing benefits... and it's costing the taxpayer £500m a year | Mail Online

You will see the rest of the comments are not too favourable towards this fascist stance. They have removed it from their front page now.

[IceDragon]

Don't be fooled, for all their froth and bubble the Daily Mail are, under the surface quite conventional and toe the line when it comes to how they report the news. They revel in the almost pantomimist criticism of the killers of satire themselves, the left of British politics, as the "baddie" of the newsstands.

[Baron von Lotsov]

Don't be fooled, for all their froth and bubble the Daily Mail are, under the surface quite conventional and toe the line when it comes to how they report the news. They revel in the almost pantomimist criticism of the killers of satire themselves, the left of British politics, as the "baddie" of the newsstands.

I think they are in actual fact a very leftwing newspaper. They have no idea about capitalism and seem to like rousing up the proles for their two minutes of hate. I'm convinced the closest to a capitalist paper and the conventional rightwing is the Telegraph. They have not always been like that, as in they went through a bad patch at one time and were all pro-EU etc, but these days I find I agree with it most of the time. The Times is no longer a proper rightwing paper either. I do find the Telegraph tends to attract the most intelligent readership out of the lot. I can’t say that for the Mail though. I tend to get censored if I post anything that needs any degree of intelligence to understand. So it is a bit like the BBC where intelligent comment is deemed offensive. Indeed the Telegraph can have some rather riveting discussions in it. For example there was one article that there were a number of people who worked at CERN who were posting and we had a rather well informed debate about particle physics. You would never get that in the Mail in a million years.

[TannyD]

They never put any of my comments up.

I guess thay don't want to hear how full of **** and hate they are about disabled people...

[Baron von Lotsov]

They never put any of my comments up.

I guess thay don't want to hear how full of **** and hate they are about disabled people...

Actually Hitler started on the disabled before he moved on to Jews. It was a kind of ‘right to die’ issue that was the very first Nazi execution.

[TannyD]

Actually Hitler started on the disabled before he moved on to Jews. It was a kind of ‘right to die’ issue that was the very first Nazi execution.

Thanks for the correction as it is clear to most people that I didn't have a clue about that. I didn't know who Adolf Hitler was, but I do know thanks to Baron von Lotsov.

If it wasn't for you I would still be thinking that it was the Daily Mail that were the first to start on the disabled and not only produced newspapers but had a hand in the construction industry over in Germany.

[Baron von Lotsov]

Thanks for the correction as it is clear to most people that I didn't have a clue about that. I didn't know who Adolf Hitler was, but I do know thanks to Baron von Lotsov.

If it wasn't for you I would still be thinking that it was the Daily Mail that were the first to start on the disabled and not only produced newspapers but had a hand in the construction industry...Daily Mail branded gas chambers...

It's just like the communists. Many here in the West were told what they did, thought it was absolutely disgusting, and kind of reacted in a sort of 'how could they possible manage to do that' kind of way. Well the answer to that apparently is they didn't just start off executing Jews and neither did the Soviets just plunge straight into it. What they did was pretty much what we see today. They do it via a kind of creeping agenda coupled with heavy-duty propaganda from state broadcasters. Someone who I spotted on a forum once was from East Germany at the time they had the Berlin Wall. In the schools they were told it was a 'capitalist protection barrier'. ‘Capitalist’ was just the boogieman of the time. You could exchange that word for a more modern word, such as 'racist', 'workshy' etc and find it all fits into place.

[TannyD]

It's just like the communists. Many here in the West were told what they did, thought it was absolutely disgusting, and kind of reacted in a sort of 'how could they possible manage to do that' kind of way. Well the answer to that apparently is they didn't just start off executing Jews and neither did the Soviets just plunge straight into it. What they did was pretty much what we see today. They do it via a kind of creeping agenda coupled with heavy-duty propaganda from state broadcasters. Someone who I spotted on a forum once was from East Germany at the time they had the Berlin Wall. In the schools they were told it was a 'capitalist protection barrier'. ‘Capitalist’ was just the boogieman of the time. You could exchange that word for a more modern word, such as 'racist', 'workshy' etc and find it all fits into place.

Okay, it seems that you didn't understand what I posted. Nevermind, I will let that slide...as pursuing it might be pointless.

Thank-you once again Baron.

[Baron von Lotsov]

Another of my posts has been censored. This time it was because I said a recent poll in the Telegraph had over 90% of the respondents wishing to leave the EU, and that if Clegg's PR man's letter got published it would be hilarious because the Telegraph readers are capitalists that would wish to hang the heads of Lib Dems on poles outside the Tower of London. It was all true, but the Mail does not like the truth and would rather censor it as any self-respecting fascist would wish to do.

Nick Clegg and Lib Dem plot with lobbyist to rally business chiefs against Cameron | Mail Online