Morrissey was right by Lushington D. Brady - The BFD

China is an oppressive regime ruled by fear. Their record on human rights and animal rights is not going to improve anytime soon unfortunately. They had their chance to come clean when the virus broke out and they vigilantly kept it hidden. The Tiananmen Square massacre, one child policy and now this outbreak due to their obsession with eating anything that moves are all evidence of repulsive behaviour modern civilisation does not need. They're in the f***ing dark ages. One might call them a sub-species. I think someone did a while back. That gentleman may have been onto something. Of course there are some decent people there too but obviously their voices are shut down by the big thumb.

It's got a repressive government - but their main problem is they developed into a vastly rich, high-tech state in a very short space of time & they've let some of their traditions continue without taking into account its possible impact.

They might change. They're embarrassed by this pandemic. I doubt they'd want another.
 
They have live markets. Where they eat the animals alive. I think it was born in a lab though.
 
They have live markets. Where they eat the animals alive. I think it was born in a lab though.

It wasn't. It was born out of terrible meat industry practices. Battery farms have the same outbreaks but they can usually contain it.
 
Well colour me shocked. Another far-right website supports Morrissey.
The genuine far right don't like vegans (they confuse it with being far left) and, given Morrissey's "f*** Trump" stance, probably wouldn't have much time for Morrissey. You're confusing people who are against barbaric treatment of animals with the far right. And if you're not horrified and outraged by what happens to animals in these "Wet markets" then - plot twist - it's your morals that are disgusting, not Morrissey's. As a former Morrissey fan you should know better. Did you learn nothing from his early work?
 
The genuine far right don't like vegans (they confuse it with being far left) and, given Morrissey's "f*** Trump" stance, probably wouldn't have much time for Morrissey. You're confusing people who are against barbaric treatment of animals with the far right. And if you're not horrified and outraged by what happens to animals in these "Wet markets" then - plot twist - it's your morals that are disgusting, not Morrissey's. As a former Morrissey fan you should know better. Did you learn nothing from his early work?
There's an awful lot of projection there. I am against cruelty and suffering no matter where it takes place. But you go right ahead and try make a point that makes a singer you like look prescient, when he was nothing of the sort.
 
Hello to everyone.

We had to join up to this site as we're huge Smiths and Morrissey fans. Not ones for posting on social media, but seeing as our mate Trevor aka Uncleskinny continues to post his left wing anti Morrissey bollocks on this site we thought we'd sign up and inform a few people of the real Trev!

Trev's nickname is cabbage head, the guy is a complete moron. Think of the fattest melonheaded smelly scruffy annoying kid at school and this is Trev. Trev has had one girlfriend (or so he says, no one ever saw her). He spends most hours every days on his xbox. Everyone ignores him, he turns up to bars and tries to talk to everyone about how much he hates Tories and Morrissey. People remind him that he used to have an almost gay fascination with Morrissey and constantly tell him to F*** off. Oh and he really does stink, especially his breath.

Anyway loving the new Moz album.

Good bye from Bd6
 
Troll != person with whom I disagree.
If someone's opinions offend you, use the Ignore feature.
Not person I disagree with in itself no.

A person who is proactively incendiary and antagonistic. A person who deliberately posts provocatively and offensively about the subject of the site.

My agreement or disagreement with them doesn't come into it.

But I understand, the site doesn't ban trolls. Got it.

I'm just wondering why.
 
Not person I disagree with in itself no.

A person who is proactively incendiary and antagonistic. A person who deliberately posts provocatively and offensively about the subject of the site.

My agreement or disagreement with them doesn't come into it.

But I understand, the site doesn't ban trolls. Got it.

I'm just wondering why.

Radis a free speecher? I thought that was one of Moz's crimes.
 
There's an awful lot of projection there. I am against cruelty and suffering no matter where it takes place. But you go right ahead and try make a point that makes a singer you like look prescient, when he was nothing of the sort.
Well you don't get dogs being boiled alive in woks in outside WHSmiths in Dagenham High Street do you? But when Morrissey asserts that scenes like this take place exclusively in China, Indonesia and certain other countries in the far East, he's painted by people like you as a racist.

When the opening post is concerned with the fact that someone is saying Morrissey wasn't immoral to condemn this cruelty, and your first and only reaction (as per usual) is to comment that supporting Morrissey on this issue is to be politically far right, then you don't really portray yourself as someone who prioritises concern for cruelty and suffering above moaning about a singer's politics. Which is to say it rings hollow.

It's the same reason he supports For Britain - they're the only UK political party who wants to ban the unnecessarily cruel practice of halal slaughter. Whatever else For Britain may stand for, Morrissey's primary motivation is animal rights. Aside from being a singer, he's an animal rights activist. He always has been and he has never compromised on this even when it alienates people. Whatever it takes to protect animals as much as he can and discourage abuse of vulnerable creatures, he will support that.
He may not have weighed up all the implications of supporting For Britain, he may not care about any collateral damage. But his primary focus is to protect animals. Rightly or wrongly, or naively, this is his where he is coming from. This is his motivation and very obviously, since the Smiths, it always has been. Love for vulnerable animals. To distort this as racist is to miss the point. And if you haven't missed the point then you are purposely misconstruing his motives as being guided by racism, and shame on you. So to accuse anyone of "an awful lot of projection" you're either an absolute halfwit and/or hypocrite.

By the way, at no point was I suggesting he was prescient. He was right in the 1980s and he's right now. It's your morals that have devolved.
 
Last edited:
Well you don't get dogs being boiled alive in woks in outside WHSmiths in Dagenham High Street do you? But when Morrissey asserts that scenes like this take place exclusively in China, Indonesia and certain other countries in the far East, he's painted by people like you as a racist.

When the opening post is concerned with the fact that someone is saying Morrissey wasn't immoral to condemn this cruelty, and your first and only reaction (as per usual) is to comment that supporting Morrissey on this issue is to be politically far right, then you don't really portray yourself as someone who prioritises concern for cruelty and suffering above moaning about a singer's politics. Which is to say it rings hollow.

It's the same reason he supports For Britain - they're the only UK political party who wants to ban the unnecessarily cruel practice of halal slaughter. Whatever else For Britain may stand for, Morrissey's primary motivation is animal rights. Aside from being a singer, he's an animal rights activist. He always has been and he has never compromised on this even when it alienates people. Whatever it takes to protect animals as much as he can and discourage abuse of vulnerable creatures, he will support that.
He may not have weighed up all the implications of supporting For Britain, he may not care about any collateral damage. But his primary, unblinkered focus is to protect animals. Rightly or wrongly, or naively, this is his where he is coming from. This is his motivation and very obviously, since the Smiths, it always has been. Love for vulnerable animals. To distort this as racist is to miss the point. And if you haven't missed the point then you are purposely misconstruing his motives as being guided by racism, and shame on you. So to accuse anyone of "an awful lot of projection" you're either an absolute halfwit and/or hypocrite.

By the way, at no point was I suggesting he was prescient. He was right in the 1980s and he's right now. It's your morals that have devolved.

I suspect he doesn't support For Britain now & is in a political limbo.

But it does seem to have been driven by animal liberation & feminism.
 
I suspect he doesn't support For Britain now & is in a political limbo.

But it does seem to have been driven by animal liberation & feminism.
I wouldn't be surprised if he felt his support for them was no longer worth the hassle. His support for them was never as feverishy ardent as his detractors portrayed it. A small lapel badge, and a comment about UKIP being too sexist to elect a woman as leader, and all of a sudden the man who sang "It takes guts to be gentle and kind" has transformed into Hitler. Did it ever ring true?

But absolutely; Animal liberation, gay rights and feminism are just three very humane reasons he would have supported them over any racist motives. Incidentally three values he has very famously espoused in lyrics and interviews since the Smiths. So why anyone would have gone straight to him suddenly turning far-right for his motives after all these decades defies any sense.
 
Last edited:
Morrissey was 100% right.

Up until recently my position was that I didn't endorse Morrissey's statement but I understood that he made the comments in the context of his view on animal welfare. There have been plenty of other examples of Morrissey voicing contempt for humanity when it came to our treatment of animals, so it felt to me like the "sub-species" comments were taken out of context and used as a stick to beat him by rags like the NME and Guardian.

Having found myself stuck indoors, with lots of free time on my hands (thanks to Covid-19) , earlier today I finally stumbled across some examples of videos showing cruelty to animals that staggers belief. Not just people enjoying eating some animal based food, but people positively revelling in the cruelty and barbarism they are inflicting, often on still living creatures.

  • biting heads, or limbs, off living animals
  • barbecuing, or frying, living animals
  • skinning living animals

After what I've seen today, I think "sub-species" is a f***ing understatement.
 
Morrissey was 100% right.

Up until recently my position was that I didn't endorse Morrissey's statement but I understood that he made the comments in the context of his view on animal welfare. There have been plenty of other examples of Morrissey voicing contempt for humanity when it came to our treatment of animals, so it felt to me like the "sub-species" comments were taken out of context and used as a stick to beat him by rags like the NME and Guardian.

Having found myself stuck indoors, with lots of free time on my hands (thanks to Covid-19) , earlier today I finally stumbled across some examples of videos showing cruelty to animals that staggers belief. Not just people enjoying eating some animal based food, but people positively revelling in the cruelty and barbarism they are inflicting, often on still living creatures.

  • biting heads, or limbs, off living animals
  • barbecuing, or frying, living animals
  • skinning living animals

After what I've seen today, I think "sub-species" is a f***ing understatement.

It's pretty hard to cope with if you're not used to it.

I think Moz's scathing opinions would be easier to understand if people remembered he actually watches this stuff.
 
Discovered her as he browsed online and liked what he saw?

Maybe. I haven't checked what she had online before FB.

The FB stuff is so depressing, it's mainly all the things we've been muttering about on the left apart from the batshit Globalists are trying to rule Europe stuff (it is batshit!!).

So now we have some lefties who go nuts & think Mossad is breaking into their house to steal a shoe & some who think The House of Saud is going to wipe out the white race in between shopping trips, or both. :head-smack:
 
Maybe. I haven't checked what she had online before FB.

The FB stuff is so depressing, it's mainly all the things we've been muttering about on the left apart from the batshit Globalists are trying to rule Europe stuff (it is batshit!!).

So now we have some lefties who go nuts & think Mossad is breaking into their house to steal a shoe & some who think The House of Saud is going to wipe out the white race in between shopping trips, or both. :head-smack:
Sounds like the supposed far-right and supposed left are very similar these days.
 

Trending Threads

Back
Top Bottom