Richard Littlejohn in late bid to steal Kelvin MacKenzie's crown...

[Strontium]

...for most tasteless comment of the year.

 

Fucking hell.

[Cardie]

Parts of it are right.

 

Could have done with toning it down hundred fold though.

[Strontium]

What parts of "Oh, they're only whores!" are "right"?

[Wig]

He went a bit mad there didn't he? Fuck me.

[BatChainPuller]

What an utter cunt - perfect columnist for that hate-filled piece of toilet paper that supported Hitler.

[rargh]

The prick does it for a rise. Give him the contempt he deserves and ignore him until he has nobody left to preach to.

[Sangria]

Fuck all right about that in my book. Similar to MacKenzie in he is an attention seeking fuckwit.

Put out something controversial and get attention, they really make me sick to be honest.

[Cardie]

What parts of "Oh, they're only whores!" are "right"?

 

Because that's all that was said wasn't it.....

[Wig]

Fuck all right about that in my book. Similar to MacKenzie in he is an attention seeking fuckwit.

Put out something controversial and get attention, they really make me sick to be honest.

 

You got that spot on there.

[Dirk]

We aren't all capable of free will. Here endeth the debate.

[Cardie]

why

[Thomo123]

The most disturbing part was the number of comments supporting the article. The man is a total utter cunt of the highest order.

[Bloodred]

Didn't think it was that bad, bit naughty like but everyones entitled to their opinion.

[Dirk]

why

 

We are products of our psychological make up. Free will would imply that our psychology make up is a product of our free will, it isn't. We all live within the constraints of our psychology, we can only see what our eyes allow us to see, hear what our ears allow us to hear (unless psychotic), taste what our tongues allow us to taste etcetera. We have choice but that's not the same as free will, the amount of choice that an individual has differs.

 

For instance, one third of individuals addicted to drugs and/or alcohol have an underlying psychiatric disorder. These will probably take drugs to self-medicate. However, it's a far more complex issue than this. There are individual differences in brain chemicals. We all have different levels. The science appears to show that a dopamine (DA) pathway from the vental tegmental area (VTA) to the nucleus accumbens is involved in the emotional response to drugs. It appears that there may be genetic elements involved. Therefore, some people may be more likely to become addicts than others.

 

This is an overly simplified account as the problem of addiction is incredibly complex, it covers areas such as behaviorism, neuroscience, psychology, economics, social psychology, developmental psychology. We have to look at each person as an individual and see how their development was shaped by their upbringing, their social group, their underlying neurochemistry, so on and so forth.

 

If you believe people have got free will then a schizophrenics should be able to stop their hallucinations using their own will. They can't. Addiction is a disease, yes there is an element of choice but that's usually severely limited and in any case, choice is not the same as free will. Cardie I'd be interested to hear your's or Littlejohn's theories on addiction given that you seem to be so opinionated on the issue.

[Cardie]

That old chestnut.

[Dirk]

That old chestnut.

 

You're a clueless idiot. Nice scientific reply there.

[Cardie]

Jesus psych students are a narky bunch.

[RedinSweden]

I thought he had dropped off the planet. He is such a twat.

[Dirk]

Jesus psych students are a narky bunch.

 

Fair dues. I apologise. :lol:

[mattyq]

He's a narrow minded bigot cunt of the first degree. Mail readers no doubt love him

[WaltonRed]

what a cunt.

 

Society has a lot to answer for not just in this case but in the vast majority of problems that Britain is ravaged by.

 

Its no suprise that he writes for that tory rag, look after oneself and fuck everyone else.If you fall on hard times tough shit its your fault.

 

I hope him and their readership fall on a spike from a great height.

[wiiksie]

Fellas come on, this is not just a 'bit naughty'. I would say its a fucking unbelievably biggoted load of shite, but its the Daily Mail. Expect nothing less.

 

Id like to end by adding this piece of ignorant shite from some cunt in the states:

 

"It is very likely that all five of these young women would still be alive if they had not chosen to prostitute themselves on the streets. We all make our own choices in life and we live or die with the consequences.

 

- Paula, Birmingham, Alabama USA"

 

Its so ignorant, wrong and stupid its actually funny.

[wiiksie]

...for most tasteless comment of the year.

 

Fucking hell.

And SD, why were you anywhere near this rag of a newspapers website mate? Didnt have you down as a closet mail reader ;)

[G Richards]

The best artcicle I read was a short piece by Matthew Paris in the Times last week. He was simply calling for the murder victims to be 'women' first and foremost. He was saddened that their humanity was lost behind the monicker 'prostitute'.

 

As for Littlejohn, I'm afraid he comes across as rather bitter in the Mail article. Whatever point he felt he wanted to make was lost in a sea of vitriol and terrible timing. His lack of compassion damages him as a man, and it undermines whatever viewpoint he feels he is bringing to the table.

 

He obviously carries a long term anti-Guardian agenda (and all of that is fine in the name of free speech, debate and opinion), but to continue this running feud in such poor taste is appalling.

 

 

PS - I do sometimes buy the Mail. To admit that on here might make me something of a pariah, judging by the hostile and intolerant opinions against it that I have read. Having said that I occasionally buy said paper, I am appalled by the Littlejohn piece under scrutiny in this thread.

[Dermot]

Does he still have a show on Radio 5 live as well?

 

What is with the beeb and these attention seeking stains on humanity?