Hey there! Sign in to join this conversationNew here? Join for free

Owen Jones embarrasses himself on Sky News debate about Orlando Watch

    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    Where can you complain about the hosts?

    I mean the first thing that happened was that he was exaplaining it was a hate crime against gays, and the male moderator was like "it's something that's carried out against human beings, no matter...(fairly safe to assume he was going to say something along the lines of no matter their sexuality)" then he went on to say "you can't say it's worse than what happened in France" - again, complete lie. Owen never said that. What the moderator assumed was that because Owen was explaining it is a hate crime, that Owen thinks that makes it worse. Which shows the prejudice on the part of the moderator.

    And from there the two moderators just got worse and worse. Sky should fire them.
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    The woman wasn't a moderator. She was a pundit like Owen.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    a hard lefty throwing a hissy fit? lol stop the presses
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    Don't understand what this argument is about. Both Jones and the presenters seemed to be agreeing with one another, despite any shouting.
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by JohnGreek)
    No, sweethearts, I think that the selection of the venue, and the attacker's previous comments to his father and his coworkers, make it clear that this was specifically an attack on a particular subset of society that disgusted him. It may also happen to be an attack on the freedom to enjoy yourself/humanity/the West, but, at its core, this was a homophobic attack.
    The Paris attack was also an attack on a particular subset of society: people who like to drink and listen to music, which is forbidden by Islam just like homosexuality. More broadly, both attacks were against elements of Western culture as it diverges from Islamic culture; both attackers chose the most Western-y venues they could to attack.

    Now one can make the argument that an attack on homosexuals is more bad than an attack on concert goers because homosexuals are more important or something like that, which the presenters weren't willing to agree with, but Jones explicitly denied that he was making that argument. So where was the disagreement?


    edit: My sense is that Jones wanted the presenters to spontaneously state that an attack on homosexuals is worse than an attack on concert goers, but wasn't willing to explicitly say so himself, and he got frustrated and stormed out because they weren't saying what he wanted and he wasn't willing to openly demand that they should. Just a guess though and I might be wrong.
    Offline

    10
    ReputationRep:
    All I gathered from this is that he's an unprofessional crying p*ss baby. But I can't help feel sorry for him, I would also feel guilty if I'd spent my life covering for the ideology that just killed 50 LGBT people.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    >Says an attack on gays is an attack on people
    >gays are people too
    >owen gets pissed

    does he not think gays are people too?

    >She says the attacker is a lunatic
    >Owen gets pissy
    >She shuts him down

    So the attacker was a rational thoughtful human bean. what are you trying to say Owen?
    Offline

    18
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by JohnGreek)
    You gottta love the other two presenters about how adamant they were that this wasn't an attack on LGBT people (rather, it was an attack against the "freedom to enjoy yourself?" Hmm. )

    No, sweethearts, I think that the selection of the venue, and the attacker's previous comments to his father and his coworkers, make it clear that this was specifically an attack on a particular subset of society that disgusted him. It may also happen to be an attack on the freedom to enjoy yourself/humanity/the West, but, at its core, this was a homophobic attack.

    I genuinely don't know why anyone would try to deny this any more. Accept it and move onto tackling the underlying problems.
    I completely agree, they were a bit deluded, at one point it's like she was almost suggesting that the fact it was a gay nightclub was a coincidence and not specifically targeted, which is laughable really. I don't think he was trying to suggest it was worse than the Bataclan or compare tragedies, but he did want them to recognise the homophobic and hate element to the attack as well as the terror element, which they appeared to downplay.

    I don't blame him for getting upset in the circumstances and I watched some his videos last week and I respect and like the guy a lot, but I do think he could have handled it a bit better if I'm honest.
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    i think he raised good points, better than the hosts. he did a good job
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    If an attack was carried out in a black church, no one would it wasn't racist. If an attack was carried out on a synangogue no one would say it wasn't anti-Semitic. Yet when an attack is carried out on a gay bar by a homophobe, apparently that's not homophobic....
    Offline

    12
    ReputationRep:
    Just a thought from me but are we certain that the attack had a homophobic incentive? Yes, I know it seems blatantly obvious as he attacked a LGBT nightclub but technically we're still making assumptions. Personally, I don't see how it is offensive how it's labelled as an 'attack on the west' as well as an attack on the LGBT community, it affects both groups of people so I'm perplexed on why he was so furious. I may be mislead and if so, please explain why.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    Everything Owen Jones does is an embarrassment.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    plz read http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016...e-what-his-ha/
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    Owen 'the cuck' Jones
    • TSR Support Team
    Offline

    21
    ReputationRep:
    TSR Support Team
    (Original post by epage)
    He didn't 'embarrass himself' he stood up for what he believed in and said what every member of the LGBT community was thinking.
    Eh, he did embarrass himself with things like the snide remark at the end (something about them finally listening to an LGBT voice) which generally made it sound like he thought you couldn't have an opinion on the attack unless you were LGBT - which is obviously nonsense, I'm not French, American or Jewish, but I can certainly think Paris, 9/11 and the holocaust were horrific.

    The other pundits were poor, but Jones really didn't help himself at all.


    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Noodle0)
    All I gathered from this is that he's an unprofessional crying p*ss baby. But I can't help feel sorry for him, I would also feel guilty if I'd spent my life covering for the ideology that just killed 50 LGBT people.
    Last time I checked, it was a grown lunatic that killed 50 LGBT people.
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Bornblue)
    If an attack was carried out in a black church, no one would it wasn't racist. If an attack was carried out on a synangogue no one would say it wasn't anti-Semitic. Yet when an attack is carried out on a gay bar by a homophobe, apparently that's not homophobic....
    Nobody said it wasn't homophobic it was but it is a lot broader than just a homophobic attack and that can not be ignored
    • TSR Support Team
    Offline

    21
    ReputationRep:
    TSR Support Team
    (Original post by Lujubi)
    Last time I checked, it was a grown lunatic that killed 50 LGBT people.
    A grown lunatic who'd pledged his allegiance to a group exposing the extremist ideology they're talking about. If it were just one unhinged person with no real affiliations fair enough, but once they've pledged their support to a terrorist group, claiming it had nothing to do with their ideology makes no sense.

    Did he attack LGBT people specifically because he was just coincidentally a homophobe as well or because he subscribed to an ideology and a group that is homophobic? Who can tell. Did he commit an attack in general because he subscribed to an ideology and a group that is promoting such behaviour? Almost certainly.


    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by difeo)
    Acting like a petulant child



    Thoughts?
    Anyone who watches press preview knows he's a bell of the highest order anyway. Maybe he should concentrate on why the shooter, who was also a member of the LGBTQTUDKSBFLWI community felt ostracised himself.


    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Stiff Little Fingers)
    A grown lunatic who'd pledged his allegiance to a group exposing the extremist ideology they're talking about. If it were just one unhinged person with no real affiliations fair enough, but once they've pledged their support to a terrorist group, claiming it had nothing to do with their ideology makes no sense.

    Did he attack LGBT people specifically because he was just coincidentally a homophobe as well or because he subscribed to an ideology and a group that is homophobic? Who can tell. Did he commit an attack in general because he subscribed to an ideology and a group that is promoting such behaviour? Almost certainly.


    Posted from TSR Mobile
    He was gay himself, so I'm 100% sure he was no ISIS supporter, nor were they a supporter of him.


    Posted from TSR Mobile
 
 
 
Reply
Submit reply
TSR Support Team

We have a brilliant team of more than 60 Support Team members looking after discussions on The Student Room, helping to make it a fun, safe and useful place to hang out.

Updated: June 16, 2016
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • Poll
    Brexit voters: Do you stand by your vote?
    Useful resources
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

    Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

    Write a reply...
    Reply
    Hide
    Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.