Piers Morgan Counter-Petition: UK Doesn't Want Him Back

TruthOut10

Active Member
Dec 3, 2012
627
100
28
Gun advocates are not the only ones speaking out about Piers Morgan. There's now a counter-petition to keep the CNN host in the United States that reads, "No one in the UK wants him back."

The counter-petition was started on the White House website on Tuesday, and had 126 signatures as of Wednesday morning. It cites three reasons that Morgan should stay in the country.

"Firstly, the first amendment," it begins. "Second and the more important point. No one in the UK wants him back. Actually there is a third. It will be hilarious to see how loads of angry Americans react."

Piers Morgan Counter-Petition: 'No One In The UK Wants Him Back'
 
We could send the limey prick to France, but that would likely cause them to surrender to us. And that would be even worse than putting up with the jerk. So, I say we keep him but confine him to Malibu.
 
I never really watched Piers Morgan before now (but thanks to the silly anti-freedom of the press petition I feel compelled to).

But can somebody explain this:
How come Piers Morgan wasn't a problem until a week ago?
 
I never really watched Piers Morgan before now (but thanks to the silly anti-freedom of the press petition I feel compelled to).

But can somebody explain this:
How come Piers Morgan wasn't a problem until a week ago?




Piers Morgan is a very sharp guy and I like watching his interviews because he is very intelligent, very fair, and he's not afraid to ask a tough question. That said, I've only seen a few of his interviews so far. I caught a bit of a recent discussion after the Sandy Hook shooting and I've never seen him so upset..he kept telling the NRA supporter to stop laughing over and over, stop laughing, stop laughing, as the guy was scoffing another trite retort in the immediate wake of dead children, Piers was visibly upset by this man's flippant demeanor. Just because I was applauding my television at the time, doesn't mean I can't see he was clearly a little less than neutral at that point. Not that I think he did or said anything wrong, I'm just not sure what his job description is supposed to be. So far, every time I've seen him, I've really liked him...A bright, articulate gentleman with a sense of humor and cojones! :thup:
 
If you are enamored with liberal interviewers' who ask guests, whom have an opposing viewpoint, setup questions; then interrupt their answers before hearing them out, and then resort to name-calling.....then Piers Morgan is your man!
Perplexing to me how some consider this 'bright and articulate'.
 
If you are enamored with liberal interviewers' who ask guests, whom have an opposing viewpoint, setup questions; then interrupt their answers before hearing them out, and then resort to name-calling.....then Piers Morgan is your man!
Perplexing to me how some consider this 'bright and articulate'.

I thought that was Chris Matthews ?

Ah, what do I know from TV. Judging by the vitriol here I'm missing a lot. I gotta catch up.
 
Just look at all these namby pamby libs he's confronted on this issue! :lol:




[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g0O3B7N848o]Jesse Ventura Debates Piers Morgan on Gun Control - YouTube[/ame]

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w8Yx-tp_V8I]Jesse Ventura on CNN Piers Morgan Sept. 17th, 2012 Full Interview (HD) - YouTube[/ame]


[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=50vUx0DfGtE]Piers Morgan Tonight, Interview with Ted Nugent - May 19, 2011 - YouTube[/ame]

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tMso12zeYDQ]Ted Nugent Schools Piers Morgan about Sucking On His Machine Gun - YouTube[/ame]

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SZCxArSFRcw]CNN: Ted Nugent on guns and Obama - YouTube[/ame]


[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RC4JJWUtzkc]Heated Debate - "You're An Unbelievably STUPID Man Aren't You!" Piers Morgan To Pro-Gun Guest - YouTube[/ame]
 
[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hgYMOZD6xtc]Piers Morgan Explodes At Gun Advocate - YouTube[/ame]
 
What parent would name their son "Piers?"
Jesus Christ - talk about setting someone up for a lifetime of asskicking and assfucking.
 
What parent would name their son "Piers?"
Jesus Christ - talk about setting someone up for a lifetime of asskicking and assfucking.



Thank you for that incredibly insightful and MANLY comment. :razz:

I was going to say, what kind of man takes a picture of himself with his middle finger up his nose, but that's just as good. He speaks for himself btw.

I suspect he can't handle seeing any of his like-minded fellow travelers judged by a jury of his Piers :rofl:
 
Ao 126 people who aren't from England start a petition in the US for the people they don't represent.

And I thought the first petition was fucking retarded.
 
Piers Morgan is an opinionated blowhard who is nothing more than a liberal shock jock like Ed Schultz with a British accent masquerading as a journalist.

Here's why the Brits don't want him back.

Editor sacked over 'hoax' photos

Daily Mirror editor Piers Morgan has been sacked after the newspaper conceded photos of British soldiers abusing an Iraqi were fake.

In a statement the Mirror said it had fallen victim to a "calculated and malicious hoax" and that it would be "inappropriate" for Morgan to continue.


In his recklessness to pursue his anti war agenda, Piers stopped at nothing. He is widely detested for endangering British troops by printing fake photos.

Here's one. This fake photo shows a "British soldier" urinating on an Iraqi prisoner.

_40104961_front_mirror_203.jpg


The BBC's Nicholas Witchell said it appeared Piers Morgan remained unrepentant right to the end

"According to one report Mr Morgan refused the demand to apologise, was sacked and immediately escorted from the building," he said.


And some comments as to the appropriateness of his sacking. Some defended him; most did not.

Absolutely. He clearly made a fatal error of judgement, and on top of that went on to sensationalise something that would not only damage the reputation of the armed forces but put innocent lives at risk.

Being fired was the least the Mirror could do, and clearly it was taking interest, as always, in itself. Not the truth, not good journalism, not the lives of soldiers, civilians, nor even the real instances of human rights abuse, just its own sales, its own survival.
Dave, Huddersfield, UK

The sacking of Piers Morgan was absolutely justified. As he was the editor of the Mirror it should have been his responsibility to ensure that the photographs were verified as being genuine before publishing.
Adam Walker, Sheffield

I would have thought as an experienced journalist Mr Morgan should have fully researched his sources etc prior to publishing to prevent exactly what has happened.
John Baxter, Ruislip, Middx

He had to go. Not only was he badly duped by the worst hoax since the Hitler diaries, but the repercussions his mistake has caused for British troops couldn't be more serious.
Paul Askew, Leeds, England

At last we have justice! Yes, the Mirror was right to take this action. The irresponsible actions of this man have put our lads in Iraq at serious risk. It's about time the gutter press became more responsible and less self-seeking.

Let this be a lesson to all of them.
Liz, Brighton


BBC NEWS | UK | Politics | Editor sacked over 'hoax' photos
 
Last edited:
I watched those video clips again when I got home last night, and I've been thinking one thing we need to make clear in this discussion about banning certain assault weapons, is that is a totally separate issue to having gun-free zones.

I agree with those who say gun-free zones are a bad idea and I totally understand the mentality of having the independence to defend yourself and your family. So, IMO, the idea of having guns in school is not a bad one, just the notion that it should be the teachers or administrative staff is not an acceptable approach. I see no problem letting schools have a couple of armed guards or cops on duty every day... They can prohibit firearms in the school from average citizens who have gun permits while still keeping kids from being sitting ducks. Only highly trained, specially certified and qualified security personnel should be permitted to bear an assault weapon in public.
 
I watched those video clips again when I got home last night, and I've been thinking one thing we need to make clear in this discussion about banning certain assault weapons, is that is a totally separate issue to having gun-free zones.

I agree with those who say gun-free zones are a bad idea and I totally understand the mentality of having the independence to defend yourself and your family. So, IMO, the idea of having guns in school is not a bad one, just the notion that it should be the teachers or administrative staff is not an acceptable approach. I see no problem letting schools have a couple of armed guards or cops on duty every day... They can prohibit firearms in the school from average citizens who have gun permits while still keeping kids from being sitting ducks. Only highly trained, specially certified and qualified security personnel should be permitted to bear an assault weapon in public.

I watched those clips too and they were insightful to get a look at who we're talking about (thanks again). It's hard to see from that where all the ad hominem posted about him comes from. He's opinionated and passionate, sure, but what commentator isn't? I actually couldn't finish watching Ted Nugent -- talk about hyperopinionated...

A friend was telling me PM had interviewed another guy where the question was something like "why do you want to shoot these guns" and the subject kept saying "because it's fun!!" and laughing. I don't know who the subject was but I'd like to find that one.

As for armed guards in schools, all I can say is echo another poster somewhere who said "my son doesn't live in a war zone. Why would I want him to be in one?"
 
Last edited:
If you go back and think about the arguments on either side, on those discussion shows and on this forum, it's as if everyone is arguing separate issues but in the emotions of the moment, they are unable to recognize that fact... Wanting to ban assault weapons is not the same as wanting to take away your right to defend yourself, nor is it the same as wanting gun-free zones. I realize some people want all of the above or none of the above, but most rational people realize the best answer is more complex than that.
 

Forum List

Back
Top