NFR Piers Morgan V Alex Jones - Deport Piers

[OdecaMynoT]

Mr Jones is the result of closely related parents methinks. 098.gif 098.gif

[McBridefan1]

I suppose fox will be having an equally ill prepared left wing nutjob on to "debate" o'reilly

[McBridefan1]

I won't watch the video because you can incite any ineffective tactician into saying what you want them to, its lazy journalism. How about debating a well thought out adversary? No that's too hard and doesn't get the same ratings...

Really? Piers gave him every opportunity to enter a debate but the maniac decided against it. Considering his wide spread opinion being drifted over a hundred stations (his quote) I believe this would make him opinionated enlough to enter a debate and not belittle himself into firstly intimidation by raising his voice, then referring to violence like with the boxing and referencing attacking, then belittling Britain mentioned above then mocking an accent in another attempt to imtimidate. This man is a prime example and if anything exemplify's Pier's point regarding guns etc.
Maybe lazy but the guy in question fell for the 'trap' of entering into a debate that he had no intention of entering.

It is his choice of adversary that is lazy... they found a crazy person and shockingly he goes crazy, sounds like a set up to me. There are many well informed and articulate defenders of the right to bear arms, I may disagree with them but they definitely put forth a valid arguement...

I see your point. Seems a shame that a man who already had a widespread opinion regarding the issue will now be used to show the anti guns argument considering he was there to promote the opposite. Those people you speak of must be gutted not to have had a shot rather than this mentalist. No one forced him to act the way he did.

No no one forced him to act that way, but what sort of reaction do you supoose I would get if I interviewed some ignorant brit, then asked him why England has never elected a black man as their primeminister. And said it with an air of self righteous american arrogance? You think I might be able to elicit an angry rotort or two? Easy to fight a battle of wits against an unarmed opponent.

[aFFCn_Fan]

I won't watch the video because you can incite any ineffective tactician into saying what you want them to, its lazy journalism. How about debating a well thought out adversary? No that's too hard and doesn't get the same ratings...

Really? Piers gave him every opportunity to enter a debate but the maniac decided against it. Considering his wide spread opinion being drifted over a hundred stations (his quote) I believe this would make him opinionated enlough to enter a debate and not belittle himself into firstly intimidation by raising his voice, then referring to violence like with the boxing and referencing attacking, then belittling Britain mentioned above then mocking an accent in another attempt to imtimidate. This man is a prime example and if anything exemplify's Pier's point regarding guns etc.
Maybe lazy but the guy in question fell for the 'trap' of entering into a debate that he had no intention of entering.

It is his choice of adversary that is lazy... they found a crazy person and shockingly he goes crazy, sounds like a set up to me. There are many well informed and articulate defenders of the right to bear arms, I may disagree with them but they definitely put forth a valid arguement...

I see your point. Seems a shame that a man who already had a widespread opinion regarding the issue will now be used to show the anti guns argument considering he was there to promote the opposite. Those people you speak of must be gutted not to have had a shot rather than this mentalist. No one forced him to act the way he did.

No no one forced him to act that way, but what sort of reaction do you supoose I would get if I interviewed some ignorant brit, then asked him why England has never elected a black man as their primeminister. And said it with an air of self righteous american arrogance? You think I might be able to elicit an angry rotort or two? Easy to fight a battle of wits against an unarmed opponent.

We did elect a woman as prime minister...i won't mention how well that turned out. Hang on, does that mean I've fallen into your trap and become the ignorant Brit?

[zzamora]

I won't watch the video because you can incite any ineffective tactician into saying what you want them to, its lazy journalism. How about debating a well thought out adversary? No that's too hard and doesn't get the same ratings...

Really? Piers gave him every opportunity to enter a debate but the maniac decided against it. Considering his wide spread opinion being drifted over a hundred stations (his quote) I believe this would make him opinionated enlough to enter a debate and not belittle himself into firstly intimidation by raising his voice, then referring to violence like with the boxing and referencing attacking, then belittling Britain mentioned above then mocking an accent in another attempt to imtimidate. This man is a prime example and if anything exemplify's Pier's point regarding guns etc.
Maybe lazy but the guy in question fell for the 'trap' of entering into a debate that he had no intention of entering.

It is his choice of adversary that is lazy... they found a crazy person and shockingly he goes crazy, sounds like a set up to me. There are many well informed and articulate defenders of the right to bear arms, I may disagree with them but they definitely put forth a valid arguement...

I see your point. Seems a shame that a man who already had a widespread opinion regarding the issue will now be used to show the anti guns argument considering he was there to promote the opposite. Those people you speak of must be gutted not to have had a shot rather than this mentalist. No one forced him to act the way he did.

No no one forced him to act that way, but what sort of reaction do you supoose I would get if I interviewed some ignorant brit, then asked him why England has never elected a black man as their primeminister. And said it with an air of self righteous american arrogance? You think I might be able to elicit an angry rotort or two? Easy to fight a battle of wits against an unarmed opponent.

We did elect a woman as prime minister...i won't mention how well that turned out. Hang on, does that mean I've fallen into your trap and become the ignorant Brit?

Ahh ahh ahh no politics.

THAT is a controversial view.

[MJG]

Does this Alex Jones really believe the crap he talks?

[sipwell]

I won't watch the video because you can incite any ineffective tactician into saying what you want them to, its lazy journalism. How about debating a well thought out adversary? No that's too hard and doesn't get the same ratings...

Really? Piers gave him every opportunity to enter a debate but the maniac decided against it. Considering his wide spread opinion being drifted over a hundred stations (his quote) I believe this would make him opinionated enlough to enter a debate and not belittle himself into firstly intimidation by raising his voice, then referring to violence like with the boxing and referencing attacking, then belittling Britain mentioned above then mocking an accent in another attempt to imtimidate. This man is a prime example and if anything exemplify's Pier's point regarding guns etc.
Maybe lazy but the guy in question fell for the 'trap' of entering into a debate that he had no intention of entering.

It is his choice of adversary that is lazy... they found a crazy person and shockingly he goes crazy, sounds like a set up to me. There are many well informed and articulate defenders of the right to bear arms, I may disagree with them but they definitely put forth a valid arguement...

I see your point. Seems a shame that a man who already had a widespread opinion regarding the issue will now be used to show the anti guns argument considering he was there to promote the opposite. Those people you speak of must be gutted not to have had a shot rather than this mentalist. No one forced him to act the way he did.

No no one forced him to act that way, but what sort of reaction do you supoose I would get if I interviewed some ignorant brit, then asked him why England has never elected a black man as their primeminister. And said it with an air of self righteous american arrogance? You think I might be able to elicit an angry rotort or two? Easy to fight a battle of wits against an unarmed opponent.

He does have a radio and TV show with a considerable audience. He is not an 'ignorant American'. Crazy, yes, not the best spokesperson for the right to bear arms, possibly, but not ignorant.

[ToodlesMcToot]

I say this without having seen the video or having any intent toward propping up anything he's involved with. There is absolutely nothing about Piers Morgan that's worthy of my attention. He's awful.

[McBridefan1]

I won't watch the video because you can incite any ineffective tactician into saying what you want them to, its lazy journalism. How about debating a well thought out adversary? No that's too hard and doesn't get the same ratings...

Really? Piers gave him every opportunity to enter a debate but the maniac decided against it. Considering his wide spread opinion being drifted over a hundred stations (his quote) I believe this would make him opinionated enlough to enter a debate and not belittle himself into firstly intimidation by raising his voice, then referring to violence like with the boxing and referencing attacking, then belittling Britain mentioned above then mocking an accent in another attempt to imtimidate. This man is a prime example and if anything exemplify's Pier's point regarding guns etc.
Maybe lazy but the guy in question fell for the 'trap' of entering into a debate that he had no intention of entering.

It is his choice of adversary that is lazy... they found a crazy person and shockingly he goes crazy, sounds like a set up to me. There are many well informed and articulate defenders of the right to bear arms, I may disagree with them but they definitely put forth a valid arguement...

I see your point. Seems a shame that a man who already had a widespread opinion regarding the issue will now be used to show the anti guns argument considering he was there to promote the opposite. Those people you speak of must be gutted not to have had a shot rather than this mentalist. No one forced him to act the way he did.

No no one forced him to act that way, but what sort of reaction do you supoose I would get if I interviewed some ignorant brit, then asked him why England has never elected a black man as their primeminister. And said it with an air of self righteous american arrogance? You think I might be able to elicit an angry rotort or two? Easy to fight a battle of wits against an unarmed opponent.

We did elect a woman as prime minister...i won't mention how well that turned out. Hang on, does that mean I've fallen into your trap and become the ignorant Brit?

No that's a reasonable response from someone who has had a think, my guess is i could get a much more angry response from a less informed and more vocal member of the brit tribe...

[GoldCoastWhite]

I won't watch the video because you can incite any ineffective tactician into saying what you want them to, its lazy journalism. How about debating a well thought out adversary? No that's too hard and doesn't get the same ratings...

Amen to that amigo ! Damn I'd love to have way too many beers with you whilst hurling abuse at each other !  oztralian

[McBridefan1]

I won't watch the video because you can incite any ineffective tactician into saying what you want them to, its lazy journalism. How about debating a well thought out adversary? No that's too hard and doesn't get the same ratings...

Amen to that amigo ! Damn I'd love to have way too many beers with you whilst hurling abuse at each other !  oztralian

Would be one of the better ways to spend a day or two brothah... lol

[FFC1987]

I won't watch the video because you can incite any ineffective tactician into saying what you want them to, its lazy journalism. How about debating a well thought out adversary? No that's too hard and doesn't get the same ratings...

Really? Piers gave him every opportunity to enter a debate but the maniac decided against it. Considering his wide spread opinion being drifted over a hundred stations (his quote) I believe this would make him opinionated enlough to enter a debate and not belittle himself into firstly intimidation by raising his voice, then referring to violence like with the boxing and referencing attacking, then belittling Britain mentioned above then mocking an accent in another attempt to imtimidate. This man is a prime example and if anything exemplify's Pier's point regarding guns etc.
Maybe lazy but the guy in question fell for the 'trap' of entering into a debate that he had no intention of entering.

It is his choice of adversary that is lazy... they found a crazy person and shockingly he goes crazy, sounds like a set up to me. There are many well informed and articulate defenders of the right to bear arms, I may disagree with them but they definitely put forth a valid arguement...

I see your point. Seems a shame that a man who already had a widespread opinion regarding the issue will now be used to show the anti guns argument considering he was there to promote the opposite. Those people you speak of must be gutted not to have had a shot rather than this mentalist. No one forced him to act the way he did.

No no one forced him to act that way, but what sort of reaction do you supoose I would get if I interviewed some ignorant brit, then asked him why England has never elected a black man as their primeminister. And said it with an air of self righteous american arrogance? You think I might be able to elicit an angry rotort or two? Easy to fight a battle of wits against an unarmed opponent.

We did elect a woman as prime minister...i won't mention how well that turned out. Hang on, does that mean I've fallen into your trap and become the ignorant Brit?

No that's a reasonable response from someone who has had a think, my guess is i could get a much more angry response from a less informed and more vocal member of the brit tribe...

Like someone already mentioned and was my point, they found a man who said he was broadcasted over 120 channels and to some is a spokesmen for them in their fight to own guns. I think we can all agree is was a bad interview as a whole and not a dominant view for people wanting Guns.  

[McBridefan1]

I won't watch the video because you can incite any ineffective tactician into saying what you want them to, its lazy journalism. How about debating a well thought out adversary? No that's too hard and doesn't get the same ratings...

Really? Piers gave him every opportunity to enter a debate but the maniac decided against it. Considering his wide spread opinion being drifted over a hundred stations (his quote) I believe this would make him opinionated enlough to enter a debate and not belittle himself into firstly intimidation by raising his voice, then referring to violence like with the boxing and referencing attacking, then belittling Britain mentioned above then mocking an accent in another attempt to imtimidate. This man is a prime example and if anything exemplify's Pier's point regarding guns etc.
Maybe lazy but the guy in question fell for the 'trap' of entering into a debate that he had no intention of entering.

It is his choice of adversary that is lazy... they found a crazy person and shockingly he goes crazy, sounds like a set up to me. There are many well informed and articulate defenders of the right to bear arms, I may disagree with them but they definitely put forth a valid arguement...

I see your point. Seems a shame that a man who already had a widespread opinion regarding the issue will now be used to show the anti guns argument considering he was there to promote the opposite. Those people you speak of must be gutted not to have had a shot rather than this mentalist. No one forced him to act the way he did.

No no one forced him to act that way, but what sort of reaction do you supoose I would get if I interviewed some ignorant brit, then asked him why England has never elected a black man as their primeminister. And said it with an air of self righteous american arrogance? You think I might be able to elicit an angry rotort or two? Easy to fight a battle of wits against an unarmed opponent.

He does have a radio and TV show with a considerable audience. He is not an 'ignorant American'. Crazy, yes, not the best spokesperson for the right to bear arms, possibly, but not ignorant.

Oh sippy, If having a radio or tv show proves you are not ignorant, then please explain the
Kardashians, jersey shore and just about any other reality show...

[Logicalman]

No no one forced him to act that way, but what sort of reaction do you supoose I would get if I interviewed some ignorant brit, then asked him why England has never elected a black man as their primeminister. And said it with an air of self righteous american arrogance? You think I might be able to elicit an angry rotort or two? Easy to fight a battle of wits against an unarmed opponent.

Jones is no more ignorant than you or I am, he is simply passionate about his beliefs. In this case, he is paranoid concerning the Government, and, in line with the majority of the talk-show radio hosts (read Fox broadcasters), he attempts to use the power of shouting one's opponents down rather than reasoned argument. He then went into a period of trying to mimic an English accent, when all he managed to do was show himself to be the archetypal redneck and simply reinforced persons not living in the US views that all Americans are ignorant, uneducated and belligerent bigots, which is not the case.

For those of the anti-gun lobby, considering the amount of TV publicity this interview garnered this morning, they must be smiling with glee and celebrating (mind the pun) a pro-gun enthusiast shooting his own leg off on TV , whilst those of the NRA must have been cringing (OK, well those that have more than a couple of brain cells to rub together and are a little higher in the evolutionary scale than the scum knuckle-draggers, that is), and wondering why this guy gets to be on TV.

The petition this guy started has 31,000 signatures, above the 25K required for the Government to consider it, though I doubt anything will happen to Piers, as he is still (technically) covered under the 1st amendment, which the petition appears to deprive him of by deportation.

I have to admit, I watched this interview 'live' and went to bed still chuckling at Jones' reference to it being 1776 all over again - perhaps he could have meant the civil war, as it's not quite the British Monarch involved in this spat.

[SH47]

You might all be amused to know that some wag has started a Government e petition to keep Piers Morgan in the USA. You can vote here folks

http://epetitions.direct.gov.uk/petitions/43602

[Logicalman]

I won't watch the video because you can incite any ineffective tactician into saying what you want them to, its lazy journalism. How about debating a well thought out adversary? No that's too hard and doesn't get the same ratings...

Really? Piers gave him every opportunity to enter a debate but the maniac decided against it. Considering his wide spread opinion being drifted over a hundred stations (his quote) I believe this would make him opinionated enough to enter a debate and not belittle himself into firstly intimidation by raising his voice, then referring to violence like with the boxing and referencing attacking, then belittling Britain mentioned above then mocking an accent in another attempt to imtimidate. This man is a prime example and if anything exemplify's Pier's point regarding guns etc.
Maybe lazy but the guy in question fell for the 'trap' of entering into a debate that he had no intention of entering.

It is his choice of adversary that is lazy... they found a crazy person and shockingly he goes crazy, sounds like a set up to me. There are many well informed and articulate defenders of the right to bear arms, I may disagree with them but they definitely put forth a valid arguement...

The reason for the interview was not, primarily, about the gun debate, it was purely in response to this guy raising a petition to have Piers deported. The gun debate was the background to the comments made by Piers that led to the petition being raised.

[McBridefan1]

I won't watch the video because you can incite any ineffective tactician into saying what you want them to, its lazy journalism. How about debating a well thought out adversary? No that's too hard and doesn't get the same ratings...

Really? Piers gave him every opportunity to enter a debate but the maniac decided against it. Considering his wide spread opinion being drifted over a hundred stations (his quote) I believe this would make him opinionated enough to enter a debate and not belittle himself into firstly intimidation by raising his voice, then referring to violence like with the boxing and referencing attacking, then belittling Britain mentioned above then mocking an accent in another attempt to imtimidate. This man is a prime example and if anything exemplify's Pier's point regarding guns etc.
Maybe lazy but the guy in question fell for the 'trap' of entering into a debate that he had no intention of entering.

It is his choice of adversary that is lazy... they found a crazy person and shockingly he goes crazy, sounds like a set up to me. There are many well informed and articulate defenders of the right to bear arms, I may disagree with them but they definitely put forth a valid arguement...

The reason for the interview was not, primarily, about the gun debate, it was purely in response to this guy raising a petition to have Piers deported. The gun debate was the background to the comments made by Piers that led to the petition being raised.

Oh well there's me with avian ovum on my face... I am stepping off my soapbox now.

[McBridefan1]

Yes right then... those yanks are bloody nutters... god save the queen.

[McBridefan1]

You might all be amused to know that some wag has started a Government e petition to keep Piers Morgan in the USA. You can vote here folks

http://epetitions.direct.gov.uk/petitions/43602

Say what you will, but them queenies have a great sense of humour.!

[CurryForMario]

Piers isn't a very likeble guy - and if you end up feeling bad for him in this interview imagine how bad the other guy is!