Katie Hopkins permanently suspended from Twitter

[xoggoth]

Small balls and hung like a hamster might be.

[rogerfederer]

Nice if real far right and real far left could cancel out. Trouble is, "far" often gets applied to anyone who doesn't go along with the other side's rhetoric.

PS Although Hopkins was definitely over the top. People need to use careful language to make a valid point.

Interesting.

Your sig linked blog seems to suggest that you actually think otherwise:
--------------------------------
"What is the biggest driver of far right terrorism? The liberal dream world.

All the usual stuff is being trotted out about the recent massacre in El Paso, saying Trump invited it.

The Liberals love to bang on about right wing terrorism and never consider the causes. Most of the wars and conflicts throughout history have not been about colour or race, but have been between groups who live close together but have different, and often conflicting, cultures and do not socially interact. It is inevitable and, frankly, understandable, that people feel resentment against migrant groups who want to lead their society in a different direction, who have cultural practices they regard as wrong, who put the interests of their own people first, who fail to integrate and change the nature of a community or cause unnacceptable pressures on resources such as employment opportunities or low cost housing. Would some of these posh liberals feel the same way if they had the same experiences as ordinary people who live in high migrant areas?

It is human nature that people will feel resentment against others who they feel are having an adverse impact on their lives and with whom they have little or no connection. Unfortunately, it is also human nature that hatred and resentment can grow irrationally in some to embrace those who are not the problem. We see it in the Labour party where opposition to Israel drives anti-semitism, in the UK where law abiding Muslims suffer a spike of abuse after Islamic terrorist incidents, and we have seen it in this incident in El Paso where the largely Hispanic population dates back to the time when it was a part of Mexico and has little to do with recent migration.

Terrible yes, but you won't change human nature by trotting out liberal mantras, far better to work with it. Effective migration controls, allowing in moderate numbers of people who make a major contribution to society, abide by our laws, embrace our main cultural values and are willing and able to integrate would be the best possible solution to racism. It wouldn't matter a damn what race they were. Irrational attacks like the one in El Paso would be much less likely to happen.

The reality is that if we had had Trump and Enoch types in power over the last several decades, right wing terrorism would scarcely exist."
--------------------------------

So, according to you, the centre and left wing - both asking for equality, equity and raising other issues - are fuelling the rise of far right wing terrorism?

What if we swap the word "left" with "right" and "right" with "left"? If far left terrorist acts were said to be caused by the far right wing requesting too much pro-white supremacy would that mean the right should tone down a bit? There is NO excuse for terrorist acts and suggesting people tone down language or requests, rather than using intelligent discussion to talk about them, is a ridiculous comment and response to a highly complex issue.

Ironically, very few modern intelligent people think the centre-left and centrist political ground - promoting equality and equity - is a bad place to be. Promoting a white supremacist mantra is considered bad form and is racist.

Also: what is the word 'Liberal'? It was originally linked to a liberal mindset, Libertarianism, the Republican USA free market dream. Amazingly now English speaking people, such as yourself, have tried to re-use this word to mean COMPLETELY the opposite. Don't you find it strange that you have tried to rebrand this word to mean 'left wing' or 'far left'? In terms of definition it's actually a description of right wing liberalisation of markets; modern freedom of choices for individuals - in fact it's the very basis of the Republican Grand Old Party.

Your blog is quite concerning, because it is as if you don't even see that your own complaints about these "liberals" (whatever that even means) and "the other side" discussion points apply to your own side.

Suggesting people shouldn't campaign for the main headline centre-left and centre policies because it makes far right people resort to violence, bombing, far right terrorism, has to be the most moronic thing I have yet read.

Please reconsider. The less division we have in society, the better, and that includes better equity and equal treatment for all people regardless of the colour of their skin.

[BR14]

good grief. JtB was less verbose.

[rogerfederer]

good grief. JtB was less verbose.

At least that poster contributed something to this forum. Removal of your posts would lead to no noticeable difference whatsoever. I understand he also had some involvement with HMRC and clarifying legislation or some such, in the not so distant past.

Simple minds like yours - if your posting efforts here are representative of almost anything in that skull - don't seem to like exactitude and complex discussions having complex writings.

I could've just stated "I notice your blog seems to be overly obsessed with old man 1950's sex jokes, including about a 16 year old girl; also, you seem to be blind to your own hypocricy, given that the statements you apply to the other extreme political side apply to your own extreme political side."

However, there is no explanation within such a comment and it doesn't help Xoggoth understand that perhaps his views are extremely biased and are just as biased as those on the far left.

[BR14]

this is general, you sanctimonious blowhard.

[rogerfederer]

this is general, you sanctimonious blowhard.

---

Yet most posters manage to string more than a few words together. Should all discussion points raised be posted in the professional Business forum? Of course not.

Away back to your bed, probably the safest place for you.

[Old Greg]

this is general, you sanctimonious blowhard.

How is that anger management course going? Still early days?

[TheGreenBastard]

I'm sorry that Twitter exercising its commercial freedom has triggered your delicate snowflake sensibilities.

Google, Twitter and Facebook are effectively gatekeepers of the internet at current state of play - Google in particular is effectively a monopoly for search in the West.

But so long as everyone is cool with them keeping quiet on Hong Kong (and working with the Chinese authorities) and Myanmar, I won't point out the hypocrisy.

[Old Greg]

Google, Twitter and Facebook are effectively gatekeepers of the internet at current state of play - Google in particular is effectively a monopoly for search in the West.

But so long as everyone is cool with them keeping quiet on Hong Kong (and working with the Chinese authorities) and Myanmar, I won't point out the hypocrisy.

Then do something about it, rather than whining.

[AtW]

Google, Twitter and Facebook are effectively gatekeepers of the internet at current state of play - Google in particular is effectively a monopoly for search in the West.

But so long as everyone is cool with them keeping quiet on Hong Kong (and working with the Chinese authorities) and Myanmar, I won't point out the hypocrisy.

Google is blocked in China