Fisk's Poppy Shame

[FrontEnder]

As long as he donates, he does not have to wear a poppy....

Well, no one has to wear one do they?

[sasguru]

To be fair "poppy escalation" (a.k.a. my poppy is bigger than yours, I have more poppies on my car than you, I wear my poppies all year round) is now rampant.
That's why I've given up wearing the rather expensive poppy brooch I bought years ago - to my mind the significance of wearing it at a particular time of year, for reflection, has become degraded.

[Mordac]

He sounds like an arrogant sanctimonious twerp, and writing for the Independent pretty much confirms it.

Rubbish. He's absolutely right about absolutely everything, and if you don't agree with him, you're a fascist.

[Jog On]

I'm ok with anti-war.

I just find this article insulting towards people who wear poppies simply because they wish to commemorate the sacrifice made by people, often close family members, in order that we have our freedom today.

This whole piece is laced with sneering sentiments.

The wearing of a poppy is not necessarily the jingoistic act that many would have you believe.

Reading this particular article I do wonder what he's getting at aside from "they dies for nothing as this war (as all wars) are pointless". It's a touchy subject and he clearly has a unique viewpoint but I don't think he'll win many friends over it.

The only reason I ever read Fisk or the Independent is because they do challenge the party line when it comes to Western foreign policy and intervention.

It does look like he's used memorial day to make a point which I'll agree is not appropriate and is insulting to those who've fought and died.

[Pip in a Poke]

He's a big anti-war guy. Pretty much all he writes about is coverage of Syria and what we're really doing there.

I'm ok with anti-war.

I just find this article insulting towards people who wear poppies simply because they wish to commemorate the sacrifice made by people, often close family members, in order that we have our freedom today.

This whole piece is laced with sneering sentiments.

The wearing of a poppy is not necessarily the jingoistic act that many would have you believe.

[BrilloPad]

It could have been worse. He could have been growing and processing them.

[Jog On]

He's a big anti-war guy. Pretty much all he writes about is coverage of Syria and what we're really doing there.

[Pip in a Poke]

As long as he donates, he does not have to wear a poppy....

I doubt very much that he donates to the British Legion.

In fact that article doesn't mention anything about donations - just sounds like an arrogant, stroppy teenager like a lot of these right on, lefty journos e.g. John Snow, Paul Mason et al.

[BrilloPad]

As long as he donates, he does not have to wear a poppy....

[OwlHoot]

I like Fisk, he's one of the only Western journalists I respect. I'm surprised he's allowed to write what he does in a Western MSM outlet.

He sounds like an arrogant sanctimonious twerp, and writing for the Independent pretty much confirms it.

[Jog On]

I like Fisk, he's one of the only Western journalists I respect. I'm surprised he's allowed to write what he does in a Western MSM outlet.

[Pip in a Poke]

Link


To make his argument sound rational and measured, he cites his own father's experiences in the trenches and concludes that the wearing of a poppy is something that he and, by extension, all of us plebs are not worthy.

Though it's not hard to deduce from the tone of the article that he is using this as a fig leaf for the contempt he has for the type of person who would wear a poppy

all the boys and girls of BBC World wearing their little poppies again. Bright red they were, with that particularly silly green leaf out of the top

But now I see these pathetic creatures with their little sand-pit poppies – I notice that our masters in the House of Commons do the same – and I despise them

Do these pathetic men and women know how they mock the dead