DACREGATE

Originally posted by TheDailyPlanet
If a metaphor is not understood figuratively, it can be taken literally.

[edit on 13-3-2010 by TheDailyPlanet]

Yes, I'm aware of that - it's the basis of my rebuttal. However, it pertains to metaphors generally, not just violent crime related ones; a point you seem adamant in skirting around.

You might be interested in this band and plotting violent crimes against maps of tours, personal appearances and so on in the future as they're perhaps one of the next big things!


I wonder what impact this had at the time?


Or maybe something a little more recent from the 1970s?

This thread is against knife crime. I'm very unhappy that you have posted "Mack the knife" etc, a song I detest, I will not be clicking the links, and will not support the encouragement of knife crime or violent crime.

Originally posted by Merriman Weir

Originally posted by MMPI2

Originally posted by Merriman Weir
Seriously, this whole theory is flawed beyond belief.

I have to disagree. The theory has a great deal of merit and should be taken seriously by anyone who lives over there.

"Over there"? But not anyone who lives anywhere else? Does the American media never use metaphor? Does knife crime (or gun crime or violent crime generally) never happen in America? If the theory has a great deal of merit as you say, why is it not similarly applicable to America? Or is there also an extra fabricated element going to have to come into play to demonstrate it only happens in the UK? Sounds like the conspiracy inflation model to me.

Also, if the theory has as much merit as you and Daily Planet believe, why not address some of the other points?

Why such a selective understanding of Angular Gyrus Syndrome? Where are all the other symptoms associated with this kind of condition besides 'literalism'.

Why only the 'literalism' and why only literalism relating to knife crime. I've already shown an earlier point on this to be a nonsense. Daily Planet believes that 'over the moon' would be an OK metaphor (an example I used earlier), when it wouldn't: the problem with this syndrome is that metaphors generally aren't seen for what they are and are interpreted literally. It's not specific to knife-relate metaphors as he's claiming.

How about addressing the fact the demographics of people committing knife crime aren't those exposed to print media, particularly the Daily Mail as well as the fact that this seems to have peaked at a time when the power of the print media is actually in decline and circulation figures are struggling? I've gone into more detail about this earlier on in the thread.

[edit on 13-3-2010 by Merriman Weir]

I would direct, Merriman, your attention to my first post in this thread. To wit - "4) Or, does the news organizations' use of the knife / blade metaphor just reflect the British culture's at-large internalization of the knife as a symbol of power because the citizenry really does not have access to a more salient power metaphor? Their guns, traditional symbols of masculine power and virility, have been taken from them by a stern nanny state. All you guys have left is knives. For all practical purposes, you have been emasculated!"

Yes, I live in the United States. Comparing our two cultures is inappropriate, for reasons to numerous to outline here. Additionally, for all practical purposes, using this particular argument ("Why does the phenomenon occur in just this situation (UK) and not in other situations (the US)?") is a non sequitur simply because it does not address the material of the original topic: Why do marked increases in knife crimes appear to occur after specific behaviors of certain Brit media outlets?

I would also offer that this data could be made into such a form that it could undergo statistical scrutiny. Specifically, you could compare 'anticipated' or 'expected' numbers of assaults by knife to 'actual' or 'observed' numbers of assaults by knife via a non-parametric tool called the "Chi-Square' calculation. My statistics skills are rusty, but it would not be hard for a person in this field to determine if the obvious (albeit anecdotal) rise in assault by blade is due to purely chance factors or if there is a correllational or perhaps even a CAUSAL linkage to the use of the knife metaphor in specific media outlets.

My hunch is that there is at least a correlational link, and most likely a causal link two the two factors.

Originally posted by MMPI2


I would direct, Merriman, your attention to my first post in this thread. To wit - "4) Or, does the news organizations' use of the knife / blade metaphor just reflect the British culture's at-large internalization of the knife as a symbol of power because the citizenry really does not have access to a more salient power metaphor? Their guns, traditional symbols of masculine power and virility, have been taken from them by a stern nanny state. All you guys have left is knives. For all practical purposes, you have been emasculated!"

I question your idea that "traditional symbols of masculine power and virility, have been taken from them by a stern nanny state. All you guys have left is knives". Have you got images disabled or can you see the little fellow underneath my account name? He suggests differently. Guns are relatively recent and you're trying to project something onto a culture where it was never the case in the first place. The fact of the matter is that Britain has never had the same kind of gun culture as America, even before changes in any kind of gun law Your arguments a little bit disingenuous: it's not as if America represents a 'before' in a 'before and after' demonstration.

Yes, I live in the United States. Comparing our two cultures is inappropriate, for reasons to numerous to outline here. Additionally, for all practical purposes, using this particular argument ("Why does the phenomenon occur in just this situation (UK) and not in other situations (the US)?") is a non sequitur simply because it does not address the material of the original topic: Why do marked increases in knife crimes appear to occur after specific behaviors of certain Brit media outlets?

It is actually worth comparing the UK and the US because there's a suggestion that the whole of this country is somehow a population of potential Manchurian Candidates, sleeping and docile until their triggers are activated. You claim that it's to do with "emasculation", which I, with respect, think is a nonsense for the reasons I mentioned above. Gun ownership and gun culture was always different in this country. I find it ironic that you're saying that comparing the two cultures is inappropriate when your actual argument is based on the comparison of gun cultures (or lack of) between here and there.

I would also offer that this data could be made into such a form that it could undergo statistical scrutiny. Specifically, you could compare 'anticipated' or 'expected' numbers of assaults by knife to 'actual' or 'observed' numbers of assaults by knife via a non-parametric tool called the "Chi-Square' calculation. My statistics skills are rusty, but it would not be hard for a person in this field to determine if the obvious (albeit anecdotal) rise in assault by blade is due to purely chance factors or if there is a correllational or perhaps even a CAUSAL linkage to the use of the knife metaphor in specific media outlets.

My hunch is that there is at least a correlational link, and most likely a causal link two the two factors.

One link that you and the OP don't seem to be willing to make - and these are things that can be corroborated - are circulation figures (which have been dwindling at a time when knife crime rose) and the overlap of the demographics who actually read print based news or read it online and the demographics that actually commit knife-based crime.

You might have noticed that the bulk of the OPs posts seem directed against Paul 'sweary' Dacre and the Daily Mail. Do you know the audience and/or target demographic of the Daily Mail, don't you? Here's a clue: it's not young men committing knife crime.

reply to post by Merriman Weir


Isolated references may be inconsequential, true. But there could be a certain value attached to a constant pounding of references, creating an image which could be subliminally implanted into one's psyche, causing the unstable and unbalanced to act upon.

MW, surely you don't argue that this is out of the question?

Originally posted by ladyinwaiting
reply to post by Merriman Weir

 

Isolated references may be inconsequential, true. But there could be a certain value attached to a constant pounding of references, creating an image which could be subliminally implanted into one's psyche, causing the unstable and unbalanced to act upon.

MW, surely you don't argue that this is out of the question?

If that's the case then how come the demographic that is by and large response for knife crimes aren't big Daily Mail readers or even target audiences of Dacre and his ilk? If it's down to repeated exposure of these headlines, then why isn't knife crime a predominantly middle-class and right wing middle-England problem? Or are you really suggesting that it is?

[edit on 13-3-2010 by Merriman Weir]

reply to post by Merriman Weir


No. My intention is not to prove or disprove whether this happening.
I'm just making the point that it is possible.

Unlikely? Perhaps.

Impossible? No.

Edit to add on second thought: We cannot honestly say, that not one, not a single solitary knife weilding son of a gun was not influenced. We just can't make that statement and know it to be true.

All the incidents involved the newspaper reports? No.

But at least one of them was influenced by the repetition of the knife cliches? Could be.

[edit on 3/13/2010 by ladyinwaiting]

Originally posted by ladyinwaiting
But at least one of them was influenced by the repetition of the knife cliches? Could be.

[edit on 3/13/2010 by ladyinwaiting]

Might have been - might not have been. The point is neither you nor I nor the OP actually knows. The OP merely thinks he knows and has convinced himself that he knows. However the burden of proof lies with the OP and there's not much in the way of proof.

Also, even if I did acknowledge that one of them was influenced by this theory, to extrapolate on that, and reach the position where the OP has found itself is madness. A single statistical point doesn't make a pattern, and that's all the OP sees: patterns everywhere.

Ah, come on now, Mr. M.W., Sir.

I was really thinking you were a first-class guy, debating fairly, with level-headed arguments and points to make, which you were doing eloquently.

Until I noticed your siggie this morning. Now, really. Don't you think that's antagonistic? Or in ATS language, a bit of the trolling persuasion?

Patterns patterns everywhere and not a drop to drink.




Edit to remove this emoticon:

[edit on 3/14/2010 by ladyinwaiting]

Originally posted by ladyinwaiting
Ah, come on now, Mr. M.W., Sir.

I was really thinking you were a first-class guy, debating fairly, with level-headed arguments and points to make, which you were doing eloquently.

Until I noticed your siggie this morning. Now, really. Don't you think that's antagonistic? Or in ATS language, a bit of the trolling persuasion?

Patterns patterns everywhere and not a drop to drink.




Edit to remove this emoticon:

[edit on 3/14/2010 by ladyinwaiting]

I honestly don't think it's trolling and I deny the accusation for two very good reasons. Firstly, the only way it could be taken offensively is if the view is taken that it's a potential trigger - any other context simply renders the string of words as being meaningless and/or a bit 'weird'. However the problem lies with the fact that it's actually a quote by the OP. Surely this means the usage by the OP is as much a potential trigger as my own usage.

This ties into the second point: the OP seems to have a problem with newspapers printing headlines with these key phrases in them but, somehow, it's not a potential problem for him to be repeating these same phrases on here. Seems a bit hypocritical and even contradictory, no? It's wrong of the Daily Mail to be using these phrases because of it's influence, but it's not wrong to be creating thread after thread about these phrases on the busiest conspiracy board on the internet with a daily viewing rate of 100,000s? I ask you: how is that meant to work then?

I actually think that - if the OP is right in their assertions (and I don't think that is the case) - that it's actually more dangerous to bring this here than it is to the mainstream public. I mean this with all due respect, but if there's a demographic that is already 'pushed to the edge', 'backed into a corner', 'angry', 'impressionable', 'feels the need to do something' as well as having a statistically higher amount of people with personal problems or mental health 'issues' then it's a good percentage of this site.

So who is really creating a problem (within the context of their own argument): me or the OP?

The Daily Mail toe the line now, I have recently observed.

They haven't returned to giving free houses away from time to time, and long gone are the days of the shadow font on the front cover, but they have ceased and desisted from provocative language, since their Directors were sent notification of the bill being sent later today.

Those following threads, the 'longevity thread' called "Wow - Get Younger Juice - IS THIS FOR REAL?" was moved to the Health & Wellness section, to be found on www.belowtopsecret.com.

The newspaper company has been given the offer to pay in instalments. None of the amount goes to me of the larger of the invoices, for the value of GBP 72.5 million.

[edit on 15-3-2010 by TheDailyPlanet]

I'm leaving this site now. Thanks very much. Will return to comment when can.

Hope you've enjoyed my posts.

Originally posted by TheDailyPlanet
I'm leaving this site now. Thanks very much. Will return to comment when can.

Hope you've enjoyed my posts.

Cogitative dissonance at it's best!

Seriously, if you're not trolling with all this. Take some time out to stand back and be a little more objective about much of this.

Merriman, I am ignoring your posts, I have hundreds of pieces of information, including from knife murderers, connecting would you believe the idea of "knives being got out", and would you believe "knives being got out".

The more you post in the manner that you have been, the more likely it is that knife crime returns. If you find you are wrong, which you are, then STOP posting your dysgenic diatribe.

Yes, believe it or not, many "knife murderers" have read the Daily Mail. The Daily Mail is left on trains, passed onto kids by parents, the website is read by over 30 million people, the printed paper by over 5.5 million.

Here is the link to the YouTube videos where I'm sat at my computer and I expose the truth:- (I do hope some of you will click this link, please)

www.youtube.com...

[edit on 22-3-2010 by TheDailyPlanet]

Things are progressing. Unless someone tells me otherwise, knife crime has come to a complete standstill - no knife crime.

The Daily Mail have been sent the 'debit note', and will need to pay £7million a month (circa) to our solicitor's client account.

They can afford this, they make over £0.33million per day, at the moment.

Well, it's all over now for the Daily Mail, I pray to God.

Bankruptcy etc. beckons.

I have advised the local community by raising my voice in the streets, that the newspaper should not be bought, that this was the newspaper that said get the knives out for Gordon Brown, the prime minister.

I said that the knives are no longer out, for the prime minister, and that those that continue to buy the paper do so knowing that the paper has "blood on its' hands" and that they support the funding of this organisation by purchasing this evil newspaper.

Dacre recently capitalized a knives word, resulting in further murders which have already been committed.

He must stop this - stop what you are doing Mr. Dacre.

The newspaper group has no future, because during interviews with youngsters on the phone all youngsters spoken to (and more will be interviewed soon), felt that:-

the "Rape girl, 13, stoned to death" headline was a rape incitement.

the "Knives were out" headlines were referring to real life weapon knives.

They also understood the phrase "Knives were being sharpened" relating the sharpening of weapon knives.

One of the Executive Managing Editors responded when I said a man had been killed very shortly after the Evening Standard printed a "knives come out" headline in London, by saying "that's right".

It's WRONG AND TERRIBLE TO INCITE. These were incitements, effectively, I believe. The Daily Telegraph, The Times, The Daily Mail, The Daily Express, The Sun, The Star, The News of the World, the Guardian, the Independent, the Independent on Sunday, and the Mirror - these are newspapers that you cannot trust. They can't use the phrases again.

According to information which I have received in confidence, the understanding is that bad news sells more papers, and that the incitements may have been put in in an effort to sell more papers, for persons such as Mr. Rupert Murdoch etc.


[edit on 30-4-2010 by TheDailyPlanet]

TheDailyPlanet is very concerned that posters seem to be going out of their way to give devil's advocate debates rather than support the truth.

The Site Administrator himself has argued that my threads are fanatical balony, and this really upsets me and my sentiment for abovetopsecret.com has dropped greatly.

When posting on forums, try to post constructive helpful posts, even to agree at times etc. rather than using this devil's advocate arguing technique that many of the posters seem to prefer to want to use, for reasons I cannot begin to fathom.

I think if any control freakery is further employed on the threads that I have created in the pursuit of a bettter world, eg post removals etc, then I will have to go to my local pub and recommend that people do not visit abovetopsecret.com at all.