James Blunt defends Morrissey's comments; other Morrissey Nobel concert press

Re: Favorable article about Morrisseys presence in Oslo (norwegian newspaper)

To use this thread to gather all news about the event, there was a press conference with the artists today. James Blunt was asked if it was right for Morrissey to appear at the concert. He responded with something like "Of course it's right for him to play here. It's the week of Mandelas death and he talked about compassion and understanding. I don't know what [Morrissey] said, but we must forgive and move on."
 
But what he DID say was that worse things than those events in Norway happen every day in KFC and McDonalds. By saying 'worse', being a comparitive adjective, he's comparing the events. How is he not? That's irrefutable.

P.
Well quite.
It is truely appalling to behold Moz fans trying condone what he said.
Accept it. He has made a dreadful statement. If your child was one of those murdered you would not accept what he said.
No normal person in possession of humanity or compassion would say anything like what he said.
 
But what he DID say was that worse things than those events in Norway happen every day in KFC and McDonalds. By saying 'worse', being a comparitive adjective, he's comparing the events. How is he not? That's irrefutable.

P.

Exactly! Worse than is pretty much the same thing as nothing compared to. Both phrases claim that killing animals for food by the meat industry is a greater tragedy than the killing of those children. Anyone who claims these semantic differences mean much, is an idiot. Or delusional. Probably both.
 
I suppose it was inevitable that those who share Morrissey's moral bankruptcy on this issue would eventually get to the point where they see the lack of a comma or even a lack of video evidence as a proof that it did not happen at all.

It is strange, though, that him actually saying it is not as annoying to some as me reminding people of its sheer, breathtaking awfulness. He should apologise on stage tonight. A full, sincere apology, so it can be put behind him once and for all. Everyone makes mistakes. Only fools or cowards compound those errors by putting their fingers in their ears and ignoring it.

Morrissey has even made me feel (very, very slightly) sorry for James Blunt, who would not have been put in that invidious position if Morrissey wasn't hiding in his suitcase. What else didn't Blunt hear but feels we should forgive anyway? The Wannsee Conference? The order to exterminate the Armenians? The poor sod got ambushed with the question which should have been fielded by the fool who caused the KFC controversy in the first place.

Bravo. :clap:
 
"I don’t know what he (Morrissey) said, but we have to forgive and move on."

:squiffy: Blunt is even more of a dick than I suspected.

Lest we forget: “We all live in a murderous world, as the events in Norway have shown. Though that is nothing compared to what happens in McDonald’s and Kentucky Fried Shit every day."

" I don't know what he said " !!!
Well that's enough for me Mr Blunt nothing changes. Forgive and move on ? A bloke with more grudges than lonely high court judges ?
You should do your homework Mr Blunt you've got very poor judgement on this horrible chap.

Game on Oslo you know the score the world is watching you, tonight is payback time for old bigmouth.
Give him hell


Benny-the-Butcher
 
Exactly! Worse than is pretty much the same thing as nothing compared to. Both phrases claim that killing animals for food by the meat industry is a greater tragedy than the killing of those children. Anyone who claims these semantic differences mean much, is an idiot. Or delusional. Probably both.

When I first read his comments I thought "come on Morrissey, for f***'s sake!". It sounded very insensitive, it still does in a way but I dont honestly think his intention was to diminish the importance of the killings. He simply made a comparison which might not make sense to you, it doesn't to me either because I am not a vegeterian, I eat meat and I think the killing of 70 humans is worse than that of those animals, BUT for someone like him who considers animals as equals and genuinely believes that killing an animal is as bad as killing a human being, it totally makes sense because it is a fact that millions of animals are killed everyday, so for him 1000000 is biggger and worse than 70 (which mathematically speaking is another undeniable fact). You might disagree with him, I do as well, but I can perfectly understand his point and that's got nothing to do with being an idiot or delusional.
 
Morrissey has paid a beautifull and lovery tribute 2 slaughted/murdered innocent childern in norway, hes expressed his deepest sympathy and despair and sorrow for these poor children there faimliy and friends, and at the same time spoke out and highlighted the horrific torture and unimaginable cruelty and treatment towards the milllions of other innocent beings (farm yard animals ect)
(Which order hes paid tribute and has spoken out against animal cruelty and the murder of innocent children in noway ect is irrelevant ! and has no bearing whatsoever ! )
Hes spoke about both and expressed his deepest sympathies for both ! :)
Both are just as important as each other!!!!!!!!!!!!!
The very caring, understanding and civil people ect including those in norway acknowledge his kindness, compassion and empathy for humans and other beings alike!
The other cruel, greedy and selfish ones amongst us may not ! :(
 
When I first read his comments I thought "come on Morrissey, for f***'s sake!". It sounded very insensitive, it still does in a way but I dont honestly think his intention was to diminish the importance of the killings. He simply made a comparison which might not make sense to you, it doesn't to me either because I am not a vegeterian, I eat meat and I think the killing of 70 humans is worse than that of those animals, BUT for someone like him who considers animals as equals and genuinely believes that killing an animal is as bad as killing a human being, it totally makes sense because it is a fact that millions of animals are killed everyday, so for him 1000000 is biggger and worse than 70 (which mathematically speaking is another undeniable fact). You might disagree with him, I do as well, but I can perfectly understand his point and that's got nothing to do with being an idiot or delusional.

What he said is there as record. We can only guess at his reasons for doing so - has anyone asked him? I think this was another in a long, long line of comments that seek to ally his strongly held beliefs with topical events, and hence keep his name in the news. It's his schtick, he's been doing it for years and years.

P.
 
Last edited:
Barleycorn keeps saying he said it's NOTHING COMPARED...

Morrissey said,

"Despite the love, we do live on a murderous planet,
as you will have seen over the last few days in Norway.
Murder murder murder.
But really, every single day, worse things happen in KFC and McDonalds.
Murder, murder, murder, murder, murder..."

He did not reduce the events of Norway to NOTHING. He commented on the magnitude of life extinguished as being a daily occurrence. His theme was murder of LIFE, a comment on the antithesis of peace and harmony. It wasn't humans vs animals, it was DEATH VS LIFE.

That is simply NOT what was reported and accepted (as he did not sue) as being said that night in Warsaw. In article after article after article it was reported as "We all live in a murderous world, as the events in Norway have shown, with 97 dead. Though that is nothing compared to what happens in McDonald's and Kentucky Fried Shit every day."

He even got the number of dead wrong because the authorities were still unsure themselves.

Even the TTY statement he felt compelled to issue afterwards compares the events in the last paragraph.

"29 July 2011

MORRISSEY STATEMENT

The recent killings in Norway were horrific. As usual in such cases, the media give the killer exactly what he wants: worldwide fame. We aren't told the names of the people who were killed - almost as if they are not considered to be important enough, yet the media frenzy to turn the killer into a Jack The Ripper star is .... repulsive. He should be un-named, not photographed, and quietly led away.

The comment I made onstage at Warsaw could be further explained this way: Millions of beings are routinely murdered every single day in order to fund profits for McDonalds and KFCruelty, but because these murders are protected by laws, we are asked to feel indifferent about the killings, and to not even dare question them.
If you quite rightly feel horrified at the Norway killings, then it surely naturally follows that you feel horror at the murder of ANY innocent being. You cannot ignore animal suffering simply because animals "are not us."

The first paragraph is fine, and I broadly agree with him, except, of course, how does he expect the roll call of the victims to be publicly released so soon after the attack? That isn't down to the media, which, by the way, he has spent the last three decades courting and castigating as it suits him.

But how is that second paragraph anything other than another comparison between the Utoya victims and poultry?

It's very strange to hear people who have argued long and loud that there is a comparison between human life and animal life suddenly decide that he didn't say what they've been defending.
 
When I first read his comments I thought "come on Morrissey, for f***'s sake!". It sounded very insensitive, it still does in a way but I dont honestly think his intention was to diminish the importance of the killings. He simply made a comparison which might not make sense to you, it doesn't to me either because I am not a vegeterian, I eat meat and I think the killing of 70 humans is worse than that of those animals, BUT for someone like him who considers animals as equals and genuinely believes that killing an animal is as bad as killing a human being, it totally makes sense because it is a fact that millions of animals are killed everyday, so for him 1000000 is biggger and worse than 70 (which mathematically speaking is another undeniable fact). You might disagree with him, I do as well, but I can perfectly understand his point and that's got nothing to do with being an idiot or delusional.

I'd like to ask Morrissey, "If you had a child and s/he was shot to death by a stranger, would this loss be nothing compared to the 100 chickens slaughtered earlier that same day?" Or rephrased, "Would the chickens' deaths be worse than the death of his child?" If he said yes, then YES, he is an idiot and delusional. And a monster as well. Anybody who claims that killing chickens is worse than, or nothing compared to, the death of even a single child has a broken moral compass.
 
I'd like to ask Morrissey, "If you had a child and s/he was shot to death by a stranger, would this loss be nothing compared to the 100 chickens slaughtered earlier that same day?" Or rephrased, "Would the chickens' deaths be worse than the death of his child?" If he said yes, then YES, he is an idiot and delusional. And a monster as well. Anybody who claims that killing chickens is worse than, or nothing compared to, the death of even a single child has a broken moral compass.

well, yes, in that case I would agree but if you read his statement from 29 July 2011, which someone posted below, I think you can hardly call him a monster or insensitive. The problem is every single word he says is overanalyzed and scrutinized. Add to that that he's usually a bigmouth and you get unfortunate comments like those he makes sometimes. The point I'm trying to make is that he's not insensitive or bad, he's what it is, he always says what he thinks and I don't think thats a bad thing. Yes, sometimes, it would be much better if he kept his mouth shut, I agree, but trying to make him look like a monster is very unfair in my opinion. I think he's quite the opposite of that, to be honest.
 
How do you think the family and friends of the victims feel if you keep bringing this up? I understand what Morrissey was trying to say, but the timing and wording could have been better. We are never going to agree on this, so please just leave it
 
No normal person in possession of humanity or compassion would say anything like what he said.

This is crazy. The actual statement wasn't even that radical. He's just stating a fact. Sorry, but factually speaking the meat industry is a much, much greater problem than one psychopath killing 77 kids. What's truly horrible is people knowing what this industry is like and still giving money to it.

What he said is there as record. We can only guess at his reasons for doing so - has anyone asked him?

I think it's completely understandable. I personally find it very strange when people react strongly to violence when it's done by an isolated psychopath, but seem to be completely okay with, say, hundreds of millions of animals being tortured on factory farms every day. He said what he said out of sincere sorrow and frustration.

I'd like to ask Morrissey, "If you had a child and s/he was shot to death by a stranger, would this loss be nothing compared to the 100 chickens slaughtered earlier that same day?" Or rephrased, "Would the chickens' deaths be worse than the death of his child?" If he said yes, then YES, he is an idiot and delusional. And a monster as well. Anybody who claims that killing chickens is worse than, or nothing compared to, the death of even a single child has a broken moral compass.

Oh come on. Of course everybody thinks that their child is the most important thing in the whole world. If Morrissey had a child, he would naturally think that anything bad happening to them would be the most horrible crime possible. This is very human, but it doesn't make it rationally or factually true.

The point is not the death. The moment when animals in the meat industry get to die must actually be the only moment of any kind of relief in their lives. The point is the suffering: in ability to sense pain, fear, anxiety and other basic emotions, birds and humans and all vertebrates are pretty much identical. Studies have shown that chickens are surprisingly intelligent animals; this isn't the most important thing though. (By the way: why the hell is everybody talking about chickens? As if they were the only species industries like McDonald's hurt.)

Saying that the importance of treating an individual without violence is determined by the individual's IQ would be stating that mentally handicapped people are morally less important than 'normal' people, and children morally less important than adults. In suffering, we are all biologically equal.
 
well, yes, in that case I would agree but if you read his statement from 29 July 2011, which someone posted below, I think you can hardly call him a monster or insensitive. The problem is every single word he says is overanalyzed and scrutinized. Add to that that he's usually a bigmouth and you get unfortunate comments like those he makes sometimes. The point I'm trying to make is that he's not insensitive or bad, he's what it is, he always says what he thinks and I don't think thats a bad thing. Yes, sometimes, it would be much better if he kept his mouth shut, I agree, but trying to make him look like a monster is very unfair in my opinion. I think he's quite the opposite of that, to be honest.

But each of those children were somebody's child. You say it would be horrible if he said killing chickens is worse than killing his child. Why is someone's child any different? A child is a child, no matter if the parent is a famous singer or a cashier at the local supermarket in Oslo.

If my son were killed, and Morrissey told me that the KFC chickens killings earlier that week are worse than my son's death, or that my son's death is nothing compared to the chickens' deaths, then you better believe I would think that he is a monster. I'd want to spit in his face, tbo. It is especially appalling coming from a man who has no children of his own and will never have to face the loss of a child.
 
The people nitpicking this statement ad nauseam sound like a bunch of f***ing evangelical Christians thumping their context bibles and rolling their eyes. Jesus. You know what he meant. Get over it.
 
But each of those children were somebody's child. You say it would be horrible if he said killing chickens is worse than killing his child. Why is someone's child any different? A child is a child, no matter if the parent is a famous singer or a cashier at the local supermarket in Oslo.

If my son were killed, and Morrissey told me that the KFC chickens killings earlier that week are worse than my son's death, or that my son's death is nothing compared to the chickens' deaths, then you better believe I would think that he is a monster. I'd want to spit in his face, tbo. It is especially appalling coming from a man who has no children of his own and will never have to face the loss of a child.

You don't have to bring up your son in this argument.
It seems you come here for the sake of self-publicity.

Morrissey has been faced the loss of his friends and family in his life.
In order to get a media coverage he won't stop being an outspoken individual.
 
I think it's completely understandable. I personally find it very strange when people react strongly to violence when it's done by an isolated psychopath, but seem to be completely okay with, say, hundreds of millions of animals being tortured on factory farms every day. He said what he said out of sincere sorrow and frustration.

You didn't add the rest of my point which was about the repetitive nature of his gnomic emissions -he has a long history of using topical news stories to conterpoint his views and keep his name in the news - as I said, it's been going on for years, it's nothing new. I'm not going to go over the disgrace of mass-market meat again, it's been done to death, so to speak. In summary - clumsy commentary.

P.
 
How do you think the family and friends of the victims feel if you keep bringing this up? I understand what Morrissey was trying to say, but the timing and wording could have been better. We are never going to agree on this, so please just leave it

I think they would be glad that people still care, instead of brushing it under the rug. I bet they would love to hear a formal apology. Then everyone could get closure once and for all. And Morrissey could be remembered as the singer who was able to be a man and admit when he was wrong. Problem is he still thinks what he said is OK and sound. That is why he won't retract it.
 
You don't have to bring up your son in this argument.
It seems you come here for the sake of self-publicity.

Morrissey has been faced the loss of his friends and family in his life.
In order to get a media coverage he won't stop being an outspoken individual.

Wrong. I bring my son up to show that I, as a parent, can empathize with these parents who lost their children... that I too would be quite upset with Morrissey's comment if it were my child who was one of the victims.

Now shut up. Publicity my ass. Publicity for what? You are a tool.
 

Trending Threads

Back
Top Bottom