Abdullah's words, which she deeply regrets, might never have been seen by the families of the young men who died had it not been for the fact that some people who spotted them noticed that her Twitter profile said she had written for the Guardian. This led some Twitter users to leap to the conclusion that she was on the newspaper's staff, which amplified their shock and surprise. The complaints began on the Friday afternoon and intensified when other media organisations published stories online describing her as a Guardian journalist.This is the CiF editor Chris Elliott's way of deflecting any opprobrium aimed at the paper by immediately disavowing Ms Abdullah, and insinuating that it's the people who pointed out her heinous comments that are the ones really responsible for the hurt and upset caused to the families. Classy, eh?
And despite the article being one of CiF's 'Open Door' articles, it bears this message at the foot:
If you have any views on this article please email email@example.com as the comment thread will not be openedIntegrity, folks...
I missed all the 'squit' but then again having an above-average-IQ for Norfolk I don't twitter nor read the Guardian...nor wear ethnic skirts.
Oh "But what about Stephen Fry", I hear you cry,"He's from Norfuck and really really clever"?
Yes but the self proclaimed King Of Twitter is homosexual and that means he's allowed to have a twitterpinion.
And on the subject of sodomy and The Guardian...shouldn't that read 'Open BACK door'?
Guardian + integrity.
Two words not normally seen in the same sentence unless joined by a negative word or phrase.
Judging from what I can guess the comment to have been, I'm amazed she isn't a Guardian journalist :D
Or a Sun headliner...
"Guardian + integrity.
Two words not normally seen in the same sentence unless joined by a negative word or phrase."
"One wonders what her response might have been if those killed had been Female/Ethnic/Dykes or all three...?"
Then she'd never have uttered a peep...
Post a Comment