Morrissey = Racist ??:

http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2011/oct/17/morrissey-takes-racism-battle-court

Late to the party here:

You would not label someone as a paedophile unless you were 100 percent certain that its fact.

You would not label someone as a fraudster unless you were 100 percent certain that its fact

You would not label someone as a rightwing/leftwing/religious extremist unless you were 100 percent certain that its fact

You would not label someone as a plaigarist unless you were 100 percent certain that it is a fact

And so on.....as i have made my point

Free speech isnt free as it costs and here is where you start paying for it.

Free speech that is free is speech that says nothing controversial and which doesnt stray out of accepted norms as there is no payback for that kind of speech.

How many who are aware of this actually study it in detail objectively and draw a conclusion based on that rather than just mindlessly jump to a conclusion which appeals to their own prejudices ??

"Morrissey = Twat"

"Morrissey = Racist"

"Morrissey = Bigot"

and so on.....

It really is just mindless.


Going by what i have read on this topic it does not appear that Morrissey is a racist at all as nothing that i have heard or read from Morrissey explicitely states that he is racist but what you have is a series of comments that are open to interpretation and therefore open to accusations of racism which is typical since so many misunderstand what racism actually means and further to that racism/pc people are just a little bit over-enthusiastic and zelous in their pursuit of equality and fairness and that they choose to look for reasons to slander someone as a racist based on their own prejudices and statements and comments that are ambigious or badly articulated or not thought out properly.

Why Morrissey didnt act rather than just issue threats at the time of the NME article in 2007 i simply dont understand as his decision was always going to store up problems later on.The NME should not have based a front cover article on slander and defamation of character as it was highly irresponsible and that kind of editorial decision should have been based on FACT rather than for the sake of a sensationalist front cover article in the editorial style of a tabloid.It would have been more productive to arrange an interview where it could have been settled that way instead soon after the publication of the article.The NME should not have inferred anything when publishing the interview.

They also knew all about morrisseys reputation for being outspoken and controversial and they took advantage of it when pulishing the interview in the style of a tabloid and that is what is the cause of the problem as the interview had already been edited/amended 3 times before publication which presumes that both parties were happy with the content of the interview but Morrissey had no control over how the interview was presented and what was inferred by the editor of the NME and its design and layout .

I am not aware that there is a time limit on when you can file a lawsuit if its a libel case but i could very easily be wrong but its implied by the NME that the time that has passed since the article was published means that there is no longer a case for libel and the NME imply that there are other motives involved and that there is no longer a case against themselves.This is standard procedure and its no different to how a tabloid would act after consultation with lawyers as the whole point is to avoid action being taken against them and its somewhat cowardly behaviour which attempts to distract from the case in point.Ultimately they do not want to have to payout £££££££££££££££££££££££££ when you cannot automatically assume that £££££££££££££££££££ is the motivating factor in clearing ones own name unless the case against them involves loss of earnings and business etc plus various other factors which does not appear to be the case with Morrissey as it does not appear to have harmed his career in any significant way.I have no idea wether or not Morrissey is seeking a financial settlement or wether its simply about clearing his name but in any case the judge may rule that the NME have to pay compensation in which case Morrissey has no control over that decision and if he isnt seeking cash and gets awarded cash then he may give it to animal rights causes or whatever so who knows........

"...his fans still love him.." - Evans.

Of course his fans still love him so WTF would you expect otherwise ???

Its not just about fans of Morrissey as they are not going to change their minds as they are well known for being loyal as fans of whatever usually are but its about the publics wider perception of you and wether or not their opinion of you has changed as a result of and wether or not that perception has been altered due to an editorial policy and baseless allegations and insinuations etc etc.

Evans[NME] is a dipshit as the comments from Morrissey concerning the Chinese and their treatment of animals which is what Morrissey was talking about when he described them as a "Sub-species" and Morrissey is also irresponsible for saying it when he should have articulated himself a bit better by stating that the Chinese treatment of animals is subhuman or inhumane* for example.Describing them as "sub-species" was shooting himself in the foot.Knowing that Morrissey is passionate about the treatment of animals and vegetarianism and against meat eaters then its seems to be the case that Evans is deliberately misinterpreting what Morrissey meant by a "subspecies" given that Morrisseys opinions and causes are very well publicised its a shame that Evans didnt take this into consideration rather than reacting in a knee-jerk fashion to make her own case stronger.

Evans is the weak link in this case judging by her comments and strawman arguments in this article and if i was a judge i would dismiss them out of hand and i would make a very strong point while doing so.



Morrissey is and always has been a commenter on English culture and an enthusiast of it which is clear from lyrics and videos.It is in no way racist to comment on the decline of English culture if it is a natural evolution of UK culture or if its because of open borders and mass immigration as either way it is a valid criticism and in no way does it imply that one race is superior to another which is the core meaning of racism anyway.The issue concerns racism but it not an exclusively racist issue by any means as its a cultural issue.

How dare you complain about or critique loss of culture and immigration !!!!

How dare you then presume that someone is a racist and do so without an adequate basis !!.

Morrissey complained about multiculturalism in London and while that may or may not be a valid criticism London is and always has been a multicultural city so either accept it or move on although its fair to say that there are plenty of areas of London that are pretty much exclusively/predominantly white.Knightsbridge/Kensington is multicultural as its full of the rich of all nationalities and from my own experience it was and i doubt that it has changed since then.Morrissey commented that while walking along the main street in Knightsbridge he complained that he didnt hear an English accent all the while but there is nothing like a little exaggeration to make your point better.


As for the 1992 example concerning the flag then that again is open to interpretation but wrapping a flag around yourself does not mean that you are a member of the BNP for example.besides that Morrissey has always flirted with imagery and Skinhead culture simply because it is/was part of English culture and The Smiths have always had a skinhead/lad culture following unless i am mistaken*.Morrissey has always been a fan of and celebrated White English Working Class culture and that obviously involves the Union Jack.His own background is White Working Class so why shouldnt he celebrate it ??

Evans also seems critical of Morrisseys right to express himself freely using that as a means to undermine the case against the NME which is sort of a strawman argument to vindicate the NME who instead of simply questioning the comments by Morrissey they chose instead to publish a series of allegations against Morrissey which was irresponsible on their part with no thought given to the consequences of their actions as they were convinced of their own self-righteousness.PC types generally do get carried away with themselves just a little bit and having been the victim of it myself i talk from personal experience although like Morrissey i was somewhat irresponsible and stupid and after the event it was perfectly clear that my comments were misconstrued partly deliberatly and partly because it was not an unfair conclusion to reach having not explained myself properly at the time.

The FACT is if you are accused of racism for whatever reason without an adequate basis for the accusations then those accusations will follow you around unless you do what you have to do to clear your name and make it abundantly clear that you are not a racist then those that may or may not have a grudge against you no longer have a case and have to cease and desist.

*That is an opinion that i agree with 100 percent as in inhumane treatment.

To sum up what i think about this i will say that McNicholas was sloppy and unprofessional for various reasons and there are question marks as to why Morrissey didnt act at the time instead of threatening action and no more.

At some point you have to take responsibility for what you type and say or face the consequences of it and think before typing or speaking.

*I saw The Smiths in 1984 [Meat Is Murder tour] and it was by far the roughest live concerts i have ever been to before and since due to the geezer element present.