New Morrissey website 'Morrissey Central', including lengthy statement re The Independent

Obviously the successor to True To You has now arrived:
http://www.morrisseycentral.com/

Why The Independent hates independence - Morrissey Central
March 28, 2018

The importance of an artist (or political figure) is sometimes evident in the efforts taken to silence them. Two weeks ago, with stiff-backed priggishness, The Independent printed an extreme Hate Piece so loaded with vile bile that it almost choked on its own endless capacity to be appalled. As its target, it seemed evident that The Independent found me so morally shredded and physically repulsive that I appeared to fascinate them, whilst it also seemed obvious that any announcement of my painful death would make them laugh loudly. Yes, this is what we’re dealing with. Their moral outrage is certain that it has hit upon something as they take a stab at just about everything whilst hitting nothing.
Telford grooming gangs? Hardly worth a whisper in The Independent. Instead let’s demonize Morrissey - who deserves our indefatigable abuse since he appears to be saying some things that many people are actually thinking. To truthophobics, I am apparently worse than useless.

You see, The Independent ‘newspaper’ isn’t actually a paper with news, and it will express only the views of their editor/dictator, whose name is Christian Broughton. What he will tell us is happening and what we see is happening are two entirely different things. In order to find out the truth of anything, you must take note of what Christian Broughton does not allow into print.
My manager (Peter Katsis) spoke to Christian Broughton after the Hate Piece had appeared, and he asked why Broughton had sanctioned such a diabolically contrived and bitterly inaccurate mess. Broughton pointed out that “it would be difficult to find anyone at The Independent
who agreed with Morrissey’s views.” This almost- illiterate reply fully reveals The Independent’s dog-yapping will to destroy anyone with a view that doesn’t match their own. The Independent, you see, must supervise and censor art - that is their function.
But what are my views? And why do they ‘get at’ the stiff boundaries of The Independent? And what is The Independent independent of? Truth? Shame? They state confidently that, when I recently asked a packed audience at Glasgow Arena if they actually liked Nicola Sturgeon, that half the audience walked out in disgust towards me. As you can guess, without any principals of justice. The Glasgow audience, in fact, roared a deafening “NOOOOO!” in reply to the question, and not one person was known to have left the venue in protest. The Independent is willing to lie to its readers in order to create a skewed truth, and to hell with any principals of justice. If the newspaper is willing to take such silly risks with very basic facts then what on earth could they report that you would actually believe? They tell their readers that I “loathe Nicola Sturgeon” (which is untrue), and they explain by way of sneering slur how I am “loving Brexit”.

I believe I have mentioned Brexit twice in my entire life, and neither comment expressed love. I had explained how Brexit had been a strike for democracy because of the disgust that the political elite had shown towards the people who did not vote the way that they were warned to by media bullies. But why attack anyone who loves Brexit? Almost two years on from the result, the EU still has not allowed the UK to leave its clutches - which simply explains exactly why the Leave campaigners voted as they did in the first place. Doesn’t it twig?
However, any Brexit loathing by The Independent does not reflect majority opinion, and this lends them no independent thought whatsoever, but blind bureaucratic arrogance instead. This is symptomatic of a modern, shredded British society, where free speech no longer exists. When the print media are lost for a reply, they simply change the subject by naming their
opponent as ‘racist’, which is the perfect ploy because most people are naturally appalled to be called racist, and they step back in silence, and the debate collapses unresolved. Use of the word often only ever comes from people who themselves are intolerant. It works. Even though England introduced the world to democracy, great art and great literature, it is now leading the way with a dark and largely hidden agenda where no one is entitled to disagree; only one interest and opinion must prevail within the print media. Art is now fully outside tabloid journalism, and the gaping hole shrieks at us via the commercial arena with its automatic laughter and the impotent emotion of reality TV. The American genius William Burroughs was once interviewed on Radio 1 in the 1970s. Today’s Radio 1 is such an intellectually paralyzed blast of surface that it would not remotely consider interviewing anyone of the nature or intellect of Burroughs. Is civilization over? The cannibalistic mobile grave known as The Guardian suggests so. Thrilled at the knowledge of their own power, both The Guardian and The Independent daily confirm the views of everyone who morally objects to them (and The News of The World turns in its urn.) Their intolerant and totalitarian criticism of others reveals so much about themselves. Perhaps newspapers just cannot keep up with the open-ness and tolerance of internet news sites? The future of The Independent seems only a question of your commitment to it. It claims that I support Harvey Weinstein - someone about whom I know almost nothing. I do not believe I could recognize him in photographs. The Independent also claims that my audience have deserted me - yet this month I have completed my most successful UK tour, selling 22,000 tickets in London alone, selling out concerts at Alexandra Palace, The London Palladium, Brixton Academy and The Royal Albert Hall, all played within the space of 8 days. The Independent has an almost breathless capacity for misinformation and deception. Its uncontested rules of hate are like a fully drawn bow aiming its arrow at 42 targets, yet hitting none; bitter at the core, yet taking a stab, as its writer moves with one-way-or-another-you-will-remember-my-name outrage.

I am neither Loony Left nor Far Right. I am a humanitarian. I have not ever once voted in a British election because I have not ever discovered a party that represents my views. My main social concern is the abolition of the abattoir, the continued existence of which in modern times is beyond sane belief.
I confess that my life in music has been stunted by shyness, and this remains. I am too interior, and this can often seem like bone splitting arrogance. But it is not. I do not want to be like anyone else in music because there is no point. I want to bring something different into view. When I attempt to clarify, I will admit that it often sounds like an attack. I believe England can look after itself. It does not need the EU to police its laws, its thought, its borders or its liberty. It does not take a genius to arrive at this viewpoint.

Because The Independent cannot keep their own views under control, it seems obvious to me that we must source our information from alternative news outlets - they, at any rate, are telling us that we should. British mainstream media is now so politically correct that basic truth is actually impossible, and although it is obsessed with promoting social diversity they will not accept diverse opinion. Most British newspapers can only offer secrecy. When news is offered as opinion, it can only therefore be biased. Last year I completed a questionnaire for The Daily Mail in which one of their questions was ‘Whom do you most dislike?’. I replied ‘Theresa May, because of her support for killing foxes and badgers.’ The questionnaire appeared in print, but the Theresa May reply was missing because it obviously didn’t fit with the Mail’s political position as Theresa May’s personal notice-board. Journalists only ever talk to other journalists, it seems.

‘The London intellect, so pert and shallow,
like a stream that never reaches the ocean.’
E. M. Forster.


I have been criticized in the UK for so long (nowhere else!) that anything said about me no longer strikes me as a threat because I am still, after all, here. We should, I think, be striving for something more morally useful than whatever The Independent vomits out by way of spite.

Katie Boyle, who very sadly died this week, said “you have to accept [the press] telling complete lies about you. You can’t take legal action because that fans the flame.” I see what she means!


In 1887 the masthead of The New York Times began its famous slogan: All The News That’s Fit To Print.
In 2018, The masthead of The Independent should read All The Shit That’s Fit To Print. The Independent has tried to put me out of circulation: and viva hate, to that!


Morrissey

23 March 2018.

42708_morrisseycentral.jpg



Media coverage:


Related item:
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Nothing really changes, just the names...

https://www.haaretz.com/1.4810319
https://www.myjewishlearning.com/article/1933-1939-early-stages-of-persecution/
http://assets.cambridge.org/97805217/73089/excerpt/9780521773089_excerpt.pdf
http://www1.assumption.edu/ahc/raceriots/
https://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/assault/roots/overview.html

You use the the crimes committed by a group or assumptions made about them, real or not, and use those to stereotype the whole and add the propaganda from the general media from the time. Then you talk about the group as though those people are below you, often barely human - all of those people.

Then at some point either something catastrophic happens because of your beliefs or you move on, either way society looks back and says what was that all about?

It's just surprising that it keeps happening no matter how many times the cycle is repeated.
 
What a cop-out. He is arrogant, and has never attempted to hide it.

He's old enough to understand how he projects himself, and to do so with much more grace, and humility than he does. It's called being mature, and rational. He simply chooses not to, and he's perfectly capable of doing so.

The intentionally controversial things he has said about numerous subjects don't have to do with shyness, they have to do with an arrogance about his own intelligence.

A man who boldly states, "I don't have to justify myself" is not being shy.

In Morrissey's world, he's the only person who is allowed to have an opinion on others. If you have an opinion on him, then suddenly his rights are being abused.

Let's not forget that he lied about the Der Speigel interview, and now he's acting put upon by the Independent. The hypocrisy can only be derived from arrogance, and self-absorption at this point. Any other explanation is pure sympathy seeking.

Only the mentally ill cultists think otherwise.

How can a well-written, insightful post like this receive seven troll ratings? Because you don't agree?

Perhaps the mozbots should get their definition of a "troll" straight.
 
Nothing really changes, just the names...

https://www.haaretz.com/1.4810319
https://www.myjewishlearning.com/article/1933-1939-early-stages-of-persecution/
http://assets.cambridge.org/97805217/73089/excerpt/9780521773089_excerpt.pdf
http://www1.assumption.edu/ahc/raceriots/
https://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/assault/roots/overview.html

You use the the crimes committed by a group or assumptions made about them, real or not, and use those to stereotype the whole and add the propaganda from the general media from the time. Then you talk about the group as though those people are below you, often barely human - all of those people.

Then at some point either something catastrophic happens because of your beliefs or you move on, either way society looks back and says what was that all about?

It's just surprising that it keeps happening no matter how many times the cycle is repeated.
Charlie, I have a lot of respect for you but I do feel you're wide of the mark on this. The sexual grooming gangs, targeting almost exclusively poor white girls, were almost exclusively Muslim, and predominantly Pakistani in origin. This isn't propaganda, it's an inescapable, if unpalatable, fact. It has been established, and accepted by commentators on all sides of the political spectrum, that these men had a deeply ingrained disrespect for specifically white girls and that the authorities ignored the warnings about this for years because of a fear of appearing racist. Trying to paint the natural response to these abhorrent crimes as racist is what caused the problem in the first place. The fact that these men - who abused hundreds of vulnerable girls - were all Muslims is not an irrelevant detail. You cannot hope to resolve a problem if you cannot even address it by its name.
 
Nothing really changes, just the names...

https://www.haaretz.com/1.4810319
https://www.myjewishlearning.com/article/1933-1939-early-stages-of-persecution/
http://assets.cambridge.org/97805217/73089/excerpt/9780521773089_excerpt.pdf
http://www1.assumption.edu/ahc/raceriots/
https://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/assault/roots/overview.html

You use the the crimes committed by a group or assumptions made about them, real or not, and use those to stereotype the whole and add the propaganda from the general media from the time. Then you talk about the group as though those people are below you, often barely human - all of those people.

Then at some point either something catastrophic happens because of your beliefs or you move on, either way society looks back and says what was that all about?

It's just surprising that it keeps happening no matter how many times the cycle is repeated.


:crazy:

REAL or not? LOL as if there were any difference.
Ayatollah, you need to take this post back and fix it, its incoherent.:confused:

Something catastrophic may happen to the beliefs when
you get shot in the brain. LOL
 
Charlie, I have a lot of respect for you but I do feel you're wide of the mark on this. The sexual grooming gangs, targeting almost exclusively poor white girls, were almost exclusively Muslim, and predominantly Pakistani in origin. This isn't propaganda, it's an inescapable, if unpalatable, fact. It has been established, and accepted by commentators on all sides of the political spectrum, that these men had a deeply ingrained disrespect for specifically white girls and that the authorities ignored the warnings about this for years because of a fear of appearing racist. Trying to paint the natural response to these abhorrent crimes as racist is what caused the problem in the first place. The fact that these men - who abused hundreds of vulnerable girls - were all Muslims is not an irrelevant detail. You cannot hope to resolve a problem if you cannot even address it by its name.


He couldnt get a regular wife and had to go Muslim
only explanation for his defense of this type of behavior. He may have had
to convert.:oldwoman:
O...the meek and mild Muslim bla.... lol
who wast no time in establishing grooming gangs.
How can anyone defend he BS?
Then they go on and carry on about some Moz comment LOL
 
Nothing really changes, just the names...

https://www.haaretz.com/1.4810319
https://www.myjewishlearning.com/article/1933-1939-early-stages-of-persecution/
http://assets.cambridge.org/97805217/73089/excerpt/9780521773089_excerpt.pdf
http://www1.assumption.edu/ahc/raceriots/
https://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/assault/roots/overview.html

You use the the crimes committed by a group or assumptions made about them, real or not, and use those to stereotype the whole and add the propaganda from the general media from the time. Then you talk about the group as though those people are below you, often barely human - all of those people.

Then at some point either something catastrophic happens because of your beliefs or you move on, either way society looks back and says what was that all about?

It's just surprising that it keeps happening no matter how many times the cycle is repeated.

Thank you for providing those links. I learned a number of things from reading through them.
 
Charlie, I have a lot of respect for you but I do feel you're wide of the mark on this. The sexual grooming gangs, targeting almost exclusively poor white girls, were almost exclusively Muslim, and predominantly Pakistani in origin. This isn't propaganda, it's an inescapable, if unpalatable, fact. It has been established, and accepted by commentators on all sides of the political spectrum, that these men had a deeply ingrained disrespect for specifically white girls and that the authorities ignored the warnings about this for years because of a fear of appearing racist. Trying to paint the natural response to these abhorrent crimes as racist is what caused the problem in the first place. The fact that these men - who abused hundreds of vulnerable girls - were all Muslims is not an irrelevant detail. You cannot hope to resolve a problem if you cannot even address it by its name.

I agree with you Peppermint this one was mainly a muslim crime and it extends up and down the country but what you have to take note of is mozza choosing to highlight this one, on the back of the Germany sex capital because of open boarders remark. Also note when he choses to highlight incident in his autobiography he refers to "Palestinian bombers".
Its now a general theme . As already said in recent weeks we have Had the Catholic church in the news for child abuse, why not mention them?
"Morrissey isn't a racist , I don't think though He's just a bit of a dick who likes to tread on sensitive toes . On top of that he now seems like a shill for the Zionist crowd, like many a gay ". This guy has a point

The "dick move"comment by Famous When Dead is LOL , I think FWD is very good for moz solo . He has tried to be very positive about Slim Etsy R (maybe trying to build bridges with the moz and family?) in past posts but even he can see Moz Central is a vanity piece for Sammy . Another attempted to try and ride his uncles fame . Sammy has tried many times to try to be ahead of the curve in a look at me "when it comes to Morrissey news, come to me first" type way . His comment when he put up the tour film speaks loud enough "I put this up because I can" . What a f***wit comment
He has released a mock up of World Peace Is None Of My Business before the actual one, this mad his uncle very angry . He has thrown his uncle under the bus in the Italy carry on, he has made his uncle look very stupid with dumbass photoshops , then he does this websites and tries to pretend he created the covers, done the pictures. This kind of lying goes against what moz has been about , he always takes pains to credit material for cover art etc.
It really was a "dick move' FWD is right. Then you should hear him moan to Grandma Morrissey about how his uncle isn't doing enough for him. The guy is a fool. Frank got Nancy, Loudon got Rufus , David got Duncan , all very talented relatives , even Sean Lennon has some talent and intelligence . Who does Moz get a Gary Barlow lookalike with no talent in any way , an expensive paid for education all the chances wealth can bring and all he can do is act like a hardcore Moz fan rather than an actual supportive relative . I don't think gets his uncle at all.
It's very cringe inducing when Sammy does his Morrissey pose photos.I have never seen another relative of a famous person do this. Its do desperate. They don't even look alike. Now Moz has got closer to his 60s and sammy has gotten past 30 as they have both got rounder , they do look more alike, sometimes around the eyes but they don't look like each other in any real sense. If you saw Sammy walking around you wouldn't say "He looks like Morrissey " , if you were speaking to him and morrissey came on the TV/ radio you wouldn't say "he looks like Morrissey " . The only reason people would ever say he looks like his uncle is if they know he's related , as thats whats people do as soon as they find out someone is related. I knew some people who knew KY and they said she would be very off about him saying he was just typical of rich peoples relatives uninteresting and dickish. At the time I felt sorry for him as he would often try to be KY's friend , wear her tshirts etc, now I think he deserves every cruel word going. Why did KY get suck aggression aimed at her and Sammy gets a pass, is it because she's a woman? At least she has some talent and a bit of a brain.
Moz solo should refrain from giving him air.
 
To give some context on why gay people may support Israel is it doesn't want to throw them off roofs like large parts of the Middle East.
 
I appreciate that you took the time to reply to me and have spent some time reflecting on your points. One I have struggled with is how you talk about options refugees have. In the truest sense of the word, sure, they might choose to stay or go. Then I started to think about the memoirs of refugees I’ve read and people I’ve spoken with. Then my mind couldn’t leave the experiences I had while visiting the Killing Fields in Cambodia.

That day was one of the saddest and most sobering days of my life as I witnessed the aftermath of a genocide. I first visited the memorial that soars stories into the sky crammed with stacks of human bones recovered from the site. I walked around excavated burial pits where remains were recovered of teachers, doctors, opposition leaders, mothers, fathers, children - some people Pol Pot considered a threat and many who just got caught up in it. As I walked, everywhere I could see human teeth, hair, bits of clothing protruding from the dirt after a recent rain. I saw the trees where speakers were placed used to play music to drown out the screams so neighboring farmers did not become too suspicious. And I saw the tree that was used to murder the smallest of children who were not considered worth wasting a bullet on, they were picked up by their ankles and swung into the tree until their heads were bashed open.

This was only one of 100s of Killing Fields around Cambodia. While the Khmer Rouge was in power, it is estimated that more than 25% of the population was killed for either suspicion of supporting the previous government, being an intellectual, or being of the “wrong” ethnicity or religion. Everyone I met had lost family members. Just wearing glasses would make you suspicious of being an intellectual. Everyone was at risk of being tortured, imprisoned or murdered.

So I think about the people who fled Cambodia as refugees into Thailand and eventually resettled in the US. Sure, I suppose they had an option not to go. They could have stayed to listen to their family members being murdered, knowing they were next. They could have clung to their native land and taken their chances in the prison work camps where starvation and disease were prevalent. They might have made that choice. But if those conditions are the reality you face, is that really a choice?

I believe you live in a society where there are possibilities of making good choices. I grew up knowing that for most people and most of the time life is about making a choice between the least bad of two bad alternatives. That's the way most people live around the world. That's the way I live.
 
Snip...
The "dick move"comment by Famous When Dead is LOL , I think FWD is very good for moz solo . He has tried to be very positive about Slim Etsy R (maybe trying to build bridges with the moz and family?) snip...
Just for clarity: re: building bridges.
Been there, done that years ago - never my intention many years later to do so again nor will it ever be.
I won't go on too much about SER other than to say that he provides information and it gets presented here for comment/articles et al. The quality, worth and motivations behind his contributions are totally subjective and up for debate, but I certainly won't stop posting them because of strongly emoted opinions.
My point about 'dick move' was simple: don't put copyright signs with your name over other people's work (eg: Stanley Kubrick) as a photographer of all people should understand how that looks to other photographers. He was extremely quick to advertise/take credit/inform people that a picture he shot was used everywhere in the media recently and I think he'd have a strong opinion if someone else attached their name to it.
Nothing deeper than that.
Regards,
FWD.
 
I believe you live in a society where there are possibilities of making good choices. I grew up knowing that for most people and most of the time life is about making a choice between the least bad of two bad alternatives. That's the way most people live around the world. That's the way I live.
That's true and that is why most people admire criminals on tv and in films who just do what they want and care fook al about the consequences. Had I known today what I know now I would have been a hardened criminal with loads of lives on my conscience.

Mind you, the way I behave here I probably achieved that.
 
Charlie, I have a lot of respect for you but I do feel you're wide of the mark on this. The sexual grooming gangs, targeting almost exclusively poor white girls, were almost exclusively Muslim, and predominantly Pakistani in origin. This isn't propaganda, it's an inescapable, if unpalatable, fact. It has been established, and accepted by commentators on all sides of the political spectrum, that these men had a deeply ingrained disrespect for specifically white girls and that the authorities ignored the warnings about this for years because of a fear of appearing racist. Trying to paint the natural response to these abhorrent crimes as racist is what caused the problem in the first place. The fact that these men - who abused hundreds of vulnerable girls - were all Muslims is not an irrelevant detail. You cannot hope to resolve a problem if you cannot even address it by its name.
Some people will never accept that any ethnicity other than white can commit despicably racist crimes. This Charlie man is one of them. It's like a mental disease. You could shove the evidence directly under their nose but they'd still blame it all on prejudice, ignorance, the tabloids etc... Maybe facing the truth is what scares these people. They know they wouldn't be able to handle it so they put up barriers for the safety of their mental health.
 
To give some context on why gay people may support Israel is it doesn't want to throw them off roofs like large parts of the Middle East.
Ah, so Israel loves gays then. How about blacks? They've been threatening to throw out thousands of Africans and hurl them back to Africa because they don't want any black people soiling their monoculture. "We can't handle the crime etc" (their words). No worries though, a settlement has been reached with the UN and now Canada and Europe will be taking them. So while Israel may love gays it certainly doesn't want to enjoy any black vibrancy - not for us thank you very much. Forget silly comments online, that's real racism.
 
Some people will never accept that any ethnicity other than white can commit despicably racist crimes. This Charlie man is one of them. It's like a mental disease. You could shove the evidence directly under their nose but they'd still blame it all on prejudice, ignorance, the tabloids etc... Maybe facing the truth is what scares these people. They know they wouldn't be able to handle it so they put up barriers for the safety of their mental health.
I like CC. I agree with him on some things, not on others. I wouldn't care to speculate on his motivations, because they'd probably be wrong and I don't consider it my business. I just wanted to say what I thought, that's all.
 
I like CC. I agree with him on some things, not on others. I wouldn't care to speculate on his motivations, because they'd probably be wrong and I don't consider it my business. I just wanted to say what I thought, that's all.
Yeah, no probs. Just letting you know my opinion on the matter.
 
No. But like I say, his reputation precedes him, and these are sensitive issues.

I don't think his 'reputation' should preclude him from making an accurate observation on the state of the MSM. If grooming gangs are areal thing then his observation is a valid one. The sanest days are mad when you have someone getting jailed for making a joke with his dog making a Nazi salute yet the likes of the the Independent won't look into serious issues like grooming gangs. On another note, I see gun-control London has now edged past New York City for homicide rates. Oh well, knife deaths are just part and parcel of living in a big city I suppose.
 

Trending Threads

Back
Top Bottom