Urban75 Home About Offline BrixtonBuzz Contact

Douglas Murray is a skid mark

I'm just one of them 'conspiraloons' who think Diana's death might not have been an accident, the Deepcut soldiers deaths might not have been suicide and there might just have been SOMETHINg suspicious about the death of Dabid Kelly

I'm mental me!

Plenty of people make stuff up.
 
That's my point: he's a twat who knows he's a twat and has deceided to turn his twattery to his advantage by revelling in his twatdom. Whereas Blair is a twat who appears to consider himself a normal human being.

So you dig sociopaths, right?
:cool:
 
I was sat next to him for a whole evening once. I got drunk.
We had a very very very very very long argument which went on for about 5 hours, about everything. Literally, everything.
 
I was sat next to him for a whole evening once. I got drunk.
We had a very very very very very long argument which went on for about 5 hours, about everything. Literally, everything.
you were near him with cutlery and didn't make the most of it?

shit, with enough force, i reckon even a butterknife could break through the sternum. plus, no jury in the land would convict.

you let us all down. :(
 
I like Douglas Murray, I just saw him on Question Time, and I like anyone who does not hold back on their views, even if I disagree with them. It's why I also like George Galloway, Murray and him could have a great argument and it would make good tv.
 
I like Douglas Murray, I just saw him on Question Time, and I like anyone who does not hold back on their views, even if I disagree with them. It's why I also like George Galloway, Murray and him could have a great argument and it would make good tv.

Funnily enough I don't tend to like middle-class cunts who declare how we need savage cuts and to go through a hangover. Neither of which he will have to endure. He's a fucking slimy cunt who's happy to destroy other peoples lives to ensure his reactionary politics can get a foothold.
 
Funnily enough I don't tend to like middle-class cunts who declare how we need savage cuts and to go through a hangover. Neither of which he will have to endure. He's a fucking slimy cunt who's happy to destroy other peoples lives to ensure his reactionary politics can get a foothold.

It is the pure 'nakedness' (for want of a better term) of his politics. He doesn't even try and hide it behind any fluffy liberal platitudes. It is fucking disgusting. He is the enemy.
 
Funnily enough I don't tend to like middle-class cunts who declare how we need savage cuts and to go through a hangover. Neither of which he will have to endure. He's a fucking slimy cunt who's happy to destroy other peoples lives to ensure his reactionary politics can get a foothold.

Both Labour and conservative are going to bring savage cuts, they just disagree on how soon.
 
Both Labour and conservative are going to bring savage cuts, they just disagree on how soon.

Funnily enough I don't like them either... But I despise slimy little fucks like Murray who were born with a silver tea set in their mouths let alone spoon pontificating about how savage the cuts need to be carried out that he will never see the reality of.
 
I don't think it is just trolling or attention seeking.
Being charitable I think he is wrong about pretty much everything but he means well.
He is good to argue with, I like a good argument and that was a belter.
By the end I was laughing fit to bust because I had never met anyone with whom I disagreed about absolutely everything before, even about how to make gravy.

His trouble is that he is absolutely sure that he is completely right all the time. But some of the things he believes are just batshit bonkers.

He is completely obsessed with the overwhelming threat to western civilisation from jihadis, for a start. He just can't see that there just isn't a massive existential threat to the West from jihadis.
 
I don't think it is just trolling or attention seeking.
Being charitable I think he is wrong about pretty much everything but he means well.
He is good to argue with, I like a good argument and that was a belter.
By the end I was laughing fit to bust because I had never met anyone with whom I disagreed about absolutely everything before, even about how to make gravy.

His trouble is that he is absolutely sure that he is completely right all the time. But some of the things he believes are just batshit bonkers.

He is completely obsessed with the overwhelming threat to western civilisation from jihadis, for a start. He just can't see that there just isn't a massive existential threat to the West from jihadis.

He's pally with Robert Spencer, self-styled Catholic an-ti-gee-hadist, isn't he.
The Christian Action Network was apparently in the UK as part of a tour with none other than Robert Spencer. In an August posting on Jihad Watch, Spencer tells us that:
I had a most illuminating dinner with a group including Douglas Murray that offered a bracing introduction to British dhimmitude: we had to move our dinner at the last minute since the proprietors of the George Restaurant didn’t like us discussing jihad and Islamization on the premises…When not getting bounced out of pubs, the intrepid Jason Campbell of the Christian Action Network and I took strolls into a few mosques…
http://barthsnotes.wordpress.com/20...gue-interviewed-by-veteran-us-anti-gay-bigot/
 
He has to believe that there is a terrible threat to civilisation to justify to himself why he comes out with all this extreme stuff: he makes the threat extreme because it counterbalances the extreme nonsense that he wants to come out with.


Take away the threat and he just looks like a hysterical scaredy cat. I think he is a hysterical scaredy cat myself but he makes a living out of it and he gets to feel that he is Doing Something Important, which he needs to feel.
 
To be honest the issue of whether he's honestly a cunt or just plays one on TV doesn't concern me all that much. There's usually an element of both, anyway.

It's not just the "clash of civilisations" stuff by the way, he comes out with a lot more than that.
 
He has to believe that there is a terrible threat to civilisation to justify to himself why he comes out with all this extreme stuff: he makes the threat extreme because it counterbalances the extreme nonsense that he wants to come out with.


Take away the threat and he just looks like a hysterical scaredy cat. I think he is a hysterical scaredy cat myself but he makes a living out of it and he gets to feel that he is Doing Something Important, which he needs to feel.
Who pays Douglas Murray to be a scaremonger, or is this a free public service conducted in his own time?
 
Who pays Douglas Murray to be a scaremonger, or is this a free public service conducted in his own time?

douglas's CV said:
Douglas Murray is the Director of the Centre for Social Cohesion (CSC), a non-partisan think-tank in Westminster, London. Founded in 2007 to promote human rights, tolerance and greater cohesion among the UK's ethnic and religious communities and within wider British society, the CSC is the first think-tank in the UK to specialise in studying radicalisation and extremism within Britain.

http://www.douglasmurray.co.uk/cv.htm
 
Originally Posted by douglas's CV
Douglas Murray is the Director of the Centre for Social Cohesion (CSC), a non-partisan think-tank in Westminster, London. Founded in 2007 to promote human rights, tolerance and greater cohesion among the UK's ethnic and religious communities and within wider British society, the CSC is the first think-tank in the UK to specialise in studying radicalisation and extremism within Britain.

http://www.douglasmurray.co.uk/cv.htm

Ironic then that he said this.......

This is, of course, the same Douglas Murray whose February 2006 speech to the Pim Fortuyn Memorial Conference was so extreme "All immigration into Europe from Muslim countries must stop ... Conditions for Muslims in Europe must be made harder across the board" that the Social Affairs Unit have removed it from their website.
 
Heck I am not going to defend him :)

He had a go about immigration on QT tonight, got a good response from the audience though, it was in the context of "broken britain".

Not saying you are, but we can add hypocrite to the other list of entirely correct epithets we already have for him.
 
The reason (imho) people like him are good value on programmes like QT is that they do not follow the politically correct sterilised politics of the main parties and instead say what a proportion of the audience are actually thinking. Galloway is the same, perhaps Boris Johnston also.
 
Douglas Murray is the Director of the Centre for Social Cohesion (CSC), a non-partisan think-tank in Westminster, London. Founded in 2007 to promote human rights, tolerance and greater cohesion among the UK's ethnic and religious communities and within wider British society, the CSC is the first think-tank in the UK to specialise in studying radicalisation and extremism within Britain.
http://www.douglasmurray.co.uk/cv.htm

We don't need Douglas Murray to study radicalism and extremism in Britain. There are countless academics (PhDs and post-docs) already prepared or being prepared on that very subject. The police have their own investigative units, as do, I presume, the security services MI5/6.

Murray's political bias makes him wholly unsuitable for such a role.

Murray's CSC (Centre for Social Cohesion), a right-wing (Christian) think tank, was set up by the right-wing (Christian) think tank Civitas in 2007. Their aims overlap to a small extent, although only Civitas seeks to end the NHS system of healthcare in UK. One of the directors of CSC is Baroness Cox who herself supports right-wing armed Christian separatists around the world, notably the Armenian separatists in Nagorno-Karabakh and the Sudan People's Liberation Army in southern Sudan, so the CSC has a clear political and religious bias that renders it incapable of informing anyone reliably regarding radicals or extremists, given its director's support for militant Christian separatists and Douglas Murray's penchant for associating himself and his group with the American Christian Right (see Bartholomew's Notes on Religion link above).

Murray should not be interviewed on news and current affairs programmes without making clear his radical right-wing Christian links. If people are unlucky enough to be subject to Murray's viewpoints and those of his associates, then the interviewer needs to explain these links, so that viewers/listeners are reasonably aware that they're listening to a minority viewpoint from radical right-wing Christians.
 
Back
Top Bottom