On 27 Nov 2017 at 7:01pm Boney Finger wrote:
Who organised this protest against Katie Hopkins?
Was it a local councillor, Union Music or other?
On 27 Nov 2017 at 7:11pm Baz wrote:
Not sure who organised it, but I have noticed that one of the 17 year girls who took part, also posts pics of herself wearing next to nothing on Instagram.
On 27 Nov 2017 at 7:12pm Who wrote:
Who's to credit and thank you mean, obviously.
On 27 Nov 2017 at 7:26pm Ella wrote:
Hi Baz,
Who is this 17 year old you are referring to?
On 27 Nov 2017 at 7:29pm Hyena wrote:
I wonder at the level of protest if Anjem Choudary and Abu Hamza were giving a little talk on Lewes High St.
On 27 Nov 2017 at 7:36pm Pointy Finger wrote:
There seem to be two married couples in the running for this accolade, both beginning with F
On 27 Nov 2017 at 8:17pm Self Righteous wrote:
We love self publicity and enhancing our status among our friends. When it came to the blacking up protest we were right in there ... but not there on the night (too busy busy busy!). When it came to KH we were in there again .... but not there on the night (date night!). When it comes to food banks and Christmas we are right in there to take some "glory" but not engaging with those that are there each and every week helping people in need. It's all about us us US! We DID IT! ... KH has been taken DOWN by OUR efforts .... oh and yours too! We going to smugly snuggly up now on the sofa :-)
On 27 Nov 2017 at 8:43pm The Tooth Fairy wrote:
Indeed I look forward to their starring role on Boxing Day at he hunt along side ‘Get your Peppers Out For The Lads’
Though they may find The Hunt followers a little less of a push over than than the elderly they frightened at the weekend
On 27 Nov 2017 at 8:45pm Sunny wrote:
Union F's are particularly vocal in their views vis KH on Facebore. So much so they will not listen to anyone else's.
On 27 Nov 2017 at 8:46pm endoftheouse wrote:
NF seems to be boasting all over the Lewes fb pages how the soap dodgers and himself were able to cause mischief at The All Saints.And now he is putting persons names on the Lewes fb site who he believes may be related to causing the yellow graffiti around Lewes. I would be going down to the Malling Foodbank on a Monday lunchtime if I felt NF was blaming one of my family without any evidence.NF likes to boast he goes there on a Monday if that helps anyone who needs to talk to NF.
On 27 Nov 2017 at 9:25pm Al Jolson wrote:
Saturday night proved one thing and that is that fascism is alive and well in our town. It doesn't matter which direction it comes from, right or left, fascism is fascism. We saw it a couple of weeks ago with bonfire and now we witness violence at a speakers event.
I have a genuine concern for how the decent people of this town can make a stand against these liberal bigoted fascists. I'm not talking violence because judging on last Saturday night that would make us as bad as them.
On 27 Nov 2017 at 9:37pm Huh? wrote:
What violence was that, Al?
All I saw was a noisy, generally good natured protest with people of all ages and all walks of life coming out to tell a hateful troll that her intolerance is not welcome in Lewes
I saw a statement from KH making out that the protestors were masked anarchist maniacs, but as with most of her output, it was completely made up, self serving BS.
On 27 Nov 2017 at 9:43pm Hyena wrote:
@Huh, unfortunately you gave her exactly what she wanted which was very good of you.
On 27 Nov 2017 at 11:37pm Jacky wrote:
Huh some of the protestors were masked so that part of her allegation is true. And whilst parts of the group may have been well natured there were a significant few who were anything but.
On 28 Nov 2017 at 12:22am Really? wrote:
I’d like to return to the point made earlier - the way a girl decided to dress in no way devalues her political voice. A woman’s or girl’s worth is not founded in the way she dresses. What’s also interesting is that you further investigated this young girl and chose to comment on something completely irrelevant to the protest - I’d like to reiterate - what she wears doesn’t devalue her politics.
As far as the violence is concerned, there was very little violence from the “liberal fascists”. The only significant violence came from the far right crew inside who attacked a person with a plank. The egg throwing is nothing compared to this assault.
The younger children there were not harmed or scared as there was nothing to fear from the liberal side, but you are correct in that they are children nonetheless; children who decided they don’t want to grow up in a world where hate speech can be spoken freely, children who were 100% free to chose to not come, but instead rallied their friends and children who thoroughly enjoyed the satisfaction of overcoming a speaker who frequently hate mongers, because they know their actions are worthwhile.
If you’ll look closely at the photo, you see smiling children, not swearing or being rude but proud of their accomplishments.
Rather than judging the parenting of people who you have no connection to, why not encourage political proactiveness, thinking and debate within families so that children grow up with knowledge to make their own choices.
On 28 Nov 2017 at 6:23am Al Jolson wrote:
Political proactiveness is not shutting things down.
Poisoning young minds with this mentality can only be a bad thing.
With regards to the violence, even Susan Murrey has condemned it on Facebook.
On 28 Nov 2017 at 8:08am Nowall Fister wrote:
Drown out anyone who disagrees with you.
On 28 Nov 2017 at 8:59am Billy wrote:
@Really, in my opinion, a girl parading herself in her underwear on a public website devalues any views she might have on other moral issues.
Also, some of the children shown in other photos are clearly very young (I guess somewhere between 4 and 8) - are you really sure that those children understood why they were there? Their views or those of their parents?
On 28 Nov 2017 at 10:05am Pedro wrote:
@ Billy, you seem ultra-conservative and prudish about how women should conduct themselves on instagram. Perhaps Saudi Arabia is better suited to you.
I see Katie Hopkins has now been dropped from the Daily Mail online website. I guess her tired old hatred has reached saturation point and even the Mail find it tedious.
On 28 Nov 2017 at 10:42am ClarifiedButler wrote:
@Pedro Yes definitely, anyone who is critical of young women taking part in a shallow and degrading culture of sexualised exhibitionism propagated by big corporations definitely belongs in Saudi Arabia...
On 28 Nov 2017 at 11:06am Insta Babe wrote:
Stupid comment pedro. Par for the course
On 28 Nov 2017 at 11:23am Pedro wrote:
But its HER choice if a woman wishes to do that. It certainly should not devalue their opinions just because a woman who also happens to be demonstrating body confidence and being proud of their figure, which was the more troubling aspect of Billys comment.
On 28 Nov 2017 at 11:50am ClarifiedButler wrote:
Nobody has denied her right to do anything Pedro, but part of living in a liberal society is that the way you behave is open to criticism. The way children and young people are using social media is not healthy, and there is ample evidence to support this. You can band around terms like 'body confidence' and 'proud of her figure' all you like, but this needs to be tempered by some sober and empirically grounded reasoning of how the current social media culture affects young people in our society and whose interest this serves. This is the responsibility of the adults in our communities, because the corporations have no reason to scrutinise themselves.
On 28 Nov 2017 at 12:02pm done to death wrote:
The KH incident has been done to death. KH should not be tolerated and neither should protests of the nature of that event. Switch it round and both Abu Hamza and right wing protest organised by Pie and Mash group etc should also not be tolerated.
Let's not argue with each other about which sort of hate and protest is worse than the other. Both are bad and should be dealt with.
p.s. leave the young women alone, it's really creepy
On 28 Nov 2017 at 12:21pm Pedro wrote:
@ clarifiedbutler, I'm not disagreeing about the perils and impacts of social media, particularly on young people, but we are talking about discrediting a young persons opinion based solely on something as trivial as posting pictures of THEMSELVES entirely legally in what they feel comfortable with. I suggest if it makes one feel uncomfortable viewing the female form in any state of dress (or lack of), should be the ones judged more harshly, and if it offends them, they should avert their gaze.
This is basically a summary of Billys thought process (and possibly others) : "some young whipper snapper who dislikes Katie Hopkins (my dear idol, Katie) and protests against her, deserves to be entirely discredited of her views because she posts some pics of herself in a bikini on instagram" - can you not see how ridiculous this comes across? Its utterly irrelevant, although I agree with some of your points about social media having detrimental consequences, that belongs in a thread of its own.
I suppose those tacky images of KH having sex in a field, and having an affair with a married man is far more morally acceptable than some instagram pics. 
On 28 Nov 2017 at 12:29pm Roving reporter wrote:
Tacky? It was only tacky because some moronic paper published the photos. What a prude you are pedro. Are you suggesting some kind of ban on extra marital sex?
On 28 Nov 2017 at 12:34pm Hamid Barr wrote:
Pedro - the Ena Sharples of Lewes
On 28 Nov 2017 at 1:34pm ClarifiedButler wrote:
@Pedro It's interesting that you have ascribed a set of motivations for this young girl's behaviour in exactly the same way that Billy did. You claim that posting photos of herself wearing very little is because this makes her feel "comfortable" and she is "body confident", but these are values that you yourself have introduced. She may be riddled with self-doubt and insecurities, and looking for an easy way of gaining validation based on her appearance. If you regard this as trivial, then you clearly have not even begun to educate yourself on the psychological impact social media is having on both young and old.
On 28 Nov 2017 at 2:33pm Pedro wrote:
@ roving reporter - Yea, it was tacky (and yea, newspapers often pull stunts like this, but if you're in the public eye, you unfortunately have to be prepared for this kind of intrusion in your life), but I never said the word "ban", you did. Morally speaking though, I'd say extra-marital affairs are more worthy of judgement than someone posting a few non-nude photos (or even nude) of themselves. Personally, if there is honesty and and relationship is open, then extra-marital sex is not an issue - unfortunately this wasn't the case with KH with her affair. Her relationships are the least bothersome thing about her though.
@ ClarifiedButler - She may indeed be deeply insecure, but I fail to see the significance of it on her opinion of someone like Katie Hopkins (as yea, none of us know her motivations for using instagram, we can only speculate, and how would we know as she is a regular member of the public). Again, you are participating in an entirely different debate to this thread, and something that I'm sure we would find some common ground on. I'm simply stating it is highly unfair to discredit someones opinion based on probably innocuous and unremarkable social media activity picked. Had they found endless ranting and hate speech, there may be some grounds for it as it offers a larger window to their opinions and thought-process, but to dismiss someone for their appearance and how they wish to share their appearance is far more unreasonable and unreliable. This is not a surprising tactic though from people wishing to divert negative attention away from Katie Hopkins and on to someone else instead. Right-wing media pulls these stunts all the time, its pretty transparent but often effective.
On 28 Nov 2017 at 2:51pm P(iss) O(ff) P(edro) wrote:
Why does every thread have to end up being about YOU? Can you not seek some counselling rather than bore everyone to tears with your endless attention seeking posts?
On 28 Nov 2017 at 3:33pm Double fist wrote:
Fister was pro-blacking up wasn't he? Hard to imagine he'd also be anti-Hopkins on that basis. He does really love being important though, that matters to him a lot. Having got the boot from every Bonfire Society he joined he's moved on to social activism by the looks of things. He's probably dumb enough to make it quite far up the council greasy pole if he ever got a job as a busy-body clerk or something.
On 28 Nov 2017 at 3:35pm Hyena wrote:
Would you take Jezza less seriously if he posted pictures of himself in his free Venezuela boxers?
On 28 Nov 2017 at 5:30pm We'vehadourfun wrote:
This girl will never become an MP now, because of these images. So how empowering is that? I think a certain person would do well in showing a bit less interest in the young lady.
On 28 Nov 2017 at 5:52pm The Tooth Fairy wrote:
Oh Pedro you are a tiresome bore
One of the reasons, and there are many, that I treat Ms Pepper with utter contempt is her previous role in the Murdoch machine
On 28 Nov 2017 at 5:54pm Woman wrote:
These images are just a sad reflection on the fact most girls deride their self esteem from how they look.
On 28 Nov 2017 at 7:38pm Man wrote:
Deride = ridicule, express contempt for.
On 28 Nov 2017 at 9:15pm maisy wrote:
which girl are you talking about?