Rincewind Posted 31 March 2015 Posted 31 March 2015 As with Brand and the recent video some will think others are influenced by what she says. While the video was an obvious piss take she is serious and really believes what she says and may well influence or confirm beliefs of others. She has no medical qualifications regarding mental health yet presents her views as fact. She attacks people who are unable to respond like the mentally ill and people who have suffered depression. It would be better if she was ignored but the media like to give audience to controversial figures in the run up to an election. As I said at some point she will not be flavour of the Month and will be forgotten. Maybe if not getting the attention or able to find work she may discover what depression is really like. She has problems of her own which she hides behind her attention seeking. A very insecure woman.
Steve_Guppy_Left_Foot Posted 31 March 2015 Posted 31 March 2015 To me it screams of just being like that tart someone made a thread of on here, the NHS boobs woman, someone told me they saw a documentary about her and all the negative press she gets she and her boyfriend instigate to keep her in the papers. It's fiction. Katy Hopkins probably isn't this vile creature, just someone who knows how to rile people up and make people talk about her, so she gets worse, the attention gets more and all just equals £££'s for her because people actually take her seriously. it's all bullsh*t to create headlines to, in turn, create money, that's what gives her the platform on This Morning and her column in the paper, as one poster earlier said, people get offended by it to make themselves feel better.
Guest MattP Posted 31 March 2015 Posted 31 March 2015 Not being funny, but haven't you pretty much just labelled youself an idiot, seeing you amongst other spend weeks on end getting in a tizz about stuff Russell Brand was spouting. You seemed pretty convinced Brand spoke for the left and lambasted him at every opportunity. Now the shoes on the other foot and the right have an idiotic self appointed bullshit spouter and you're calling everyone on the left stupid because they'll think she speaks for you all, when that's exactly the same as you were doing with Brand. No offence meant, just saying. None taken. I think you might have slightly exaggerated saying I spent weeks on end getting a tiff but I think there is a big difference with Hopkins and Brand, the former is a often foul-mouthed wind up merchant of the Twitterati but the latter has a far bigger following and is actively campaigning to change things in a way I consider quite dangerous, something Hopkins can't do and doesn't intend to do. I've just had a look on Hopkins Twitter and the replies are 99% people insulting her, she doesn't have any public support and in reality is an irrelevence unless given the airtime by her opponents, quite the opposite to Brand. Brand has also been invited numerous times onto Newsnight, the Daily Politics, Question Time and is given a ridiculous amount of airtime on other shows in comparison to other political fringe loonies despite never actually letting us really know what he stands for and what he is. As Webbo says above, the only people who actually seem to take notice of Katie Hopkins are people who seem to struggle to get through a day without being offended, the sort who want to be offended and tell their friends about it, I mean why are they even following her? it would never have crossed my mind to follow a Russell Brand or Owen Jones.
bovril Posted 31 March 2015 Posted 31 March 2015 To me it screams of just being like that tart someone made a thread of on here, the NHS boobs woman, someone told me they saw a documentary about her and all the negative press she gets she and her boyfriend instigate to keep her in the papers. It's fiction. Katy Hopkins probably isn't this vile creature, just someone who knows how to rile people up and make people talk about her, so she gets worse, the attention gets more and all just equals £££'s for her because people actually take her seriously. it's all bullsh*t to create headlines to, in turn, create money, that's what gives her the platform on This Morning and her column in the paper, as one poster earlier said, people get offended by it to make themselves feel better. It's an interesting comment on our times that there is a celebrity known as 'NHS boobs woman'.
MPH Posted 31 March 2015 Posted 31 March 2015 I've always said about Katy Hopkins that she only exists because people want to be offended. She posts something on twitter and then the thousands of people who follow her will retweet this to their friends so they can say how offended they are.The more offended they are, the more morally superior they feel. Sorry, I'm not interested. As with Brand and the recent video some will think others are influenced by what she says. While the video was an obvious piss take she is serious and really believes what she says and may well influence or confirm beliefs of others. She has no medical qualifications regarding mental health yet presents her views as fact. She attacks people who are unable to respond like the mentally ill and people who have suffered depression. It would be better if she was ignored but the media like to give audience to controversial figures in the run up to an election. As I said at some point she will not be flavour of the Month and will be forgotten. Maybe if not getting the attention or able to find work she may discover what depression is really like. She has problems of her own which she hides behind her attention seeking. A very insecure woman. do you realize you just agreed with a Tory voter? your homeless friends will be very offended...
whitlock Posted 31 March 2015 Posted 31 March 2015 I know several people with - or who previously suffered with - depression and the only people they wanted to hurt was themselves. There must be more severe psychological issues at play here. Except for Clarke Carlisle
MPH Posted 31 March 2015 Posted 31 March 2015 Common Characteristics Among Psychopaths The following characteristics of a psychopath, defined by Hervery M. Cleckley in 1941 in the book Mask of Sanity include: Superficial charm and average intelligence. Absence of delusions and other signs of irrational thinking. Absence of nervousness or neurotic manifestations. Unreliability. Untruthfulness and insincerity. Lack of remorse or shame. Antisocial behavior without apparent compunction. Poor judgement and failure to learn from experience. Pathological egocentricity and incapacity to love. http://crime.about.com/od/serial/a/psychopaths.htm
bovril Posted 31 March 2015 Posted 31 March 2015 Common Characteristics Among Psychopaths The following characteristics of a psychopath, defined by Hervery M. Cleckley in 1941 in the book Mask of Sanity include: Superficial charm and average intelligence. Absence of delusions and other signs of irrational thinking. Absence of nervousness or neurotic manifestations. Unreliability. Untruthfulness and insincerity. Lack of remorse or shame. Antisocial behavior without apparent compunction. Poor judgement and failure to learn from experience. Pathological egocentricity and incapacity to love. http://crime.about.com/od/serial/a/psychopaths.htm You missed out baffling team selections.
Vlad the Fox Posted 31 March 2015 Posted 31 March 2015 Common Characteristics Among Psychopaths The following characteristics of a psychopath, defined by Hervery M. Cleckley in 1941 in the book Mask of Sanity include: Superficial charm and average intelligence. Absence of delusions and other signs of irrational thinking. Absence of nervousness or neurotic manifestations. Unreliability. Untruthfulness and insincerity. Lack of remorse or shame. Antisocial behavior without apparent compunction. Poor judgement and failure to learn from experience. Pathological egocentricity and incapacity to love. http://crime.about.com/od/serial/a/psychopaths.htm They don't catch yawns either.
MC Prussian Posted 31 March 2015 Posted 31 March 2015 So Lufthansa/Germanwings were told as early as 2009 about a very serious depressive phase in Lubitz' life - he even declared that himself. At the time, he was in flight school. Very bad case of corporate negligence? Or did Lufthansa simply take any doctors' opinion for granted that Lubitz was past the bouts? Still, he lied about his condition on that fatal day, as he had a sick note.
Stadt Posted 31 March 2015 Posted 31 March 2015 Bit of an odd thing to say, you might as well say 'anyone who gets wound up about other peoples opinions is a moron'. If it angers you it angers you. Katie Hopkins is a twat, her sole purpose is to wind people up, once people realise she's deliberately coming out with controversial bollocks and paying attention she'll shut up.
DB11 Posted 31 March 2015 Posted 31 March 2015 So Lufthansa/Germanwings were told as early as 2009 about a very serious depressive phase in Lubitz' life - he even declared that himself. At the time, he was in flight school. Very bad case of corporate negligence? Or did Lufthansa simply take any doctors' opinion for granted that Lubitz was past the bouts? Still, he lied about his condition on that fatal day, as he had a sick note. So if someone suffers any sort of depression that should bar them from any future employment "just in case"? I think employing a just in case mentality would effectively be baby sitting everyone. Have you ever got drunk and done something stupid? Well then you're not allowed to drink alcohol again "just in case" you do something stupid in future. Ever made a mistake when driving a car? Well fvck it, you're not allowed to drive a car ever again "just in case" you cause a crash. If he'd been signed off to return to work then that should be the end of the issue.
Carl the Llama Posted 31 March 2015 Posted 31 March 2015 So if someone suffers any sort of depression that should bar them from any future employment "just in case"? I think employing a just in case mentality would effectively be baby sitting everyone. Have you ever got drunk and done something stupid? Well then you're not allowed to drink alcohol again "just in case" you do something stupid in future. Ever made a mistake when driving a car? Well fvck it, you're not allowed to drive a car ever again "just in case" you cause a crash. If he'd been signed off to return to work then that should be the end of the issue. As a general rule it should. But we're talking about an industry where, as this scenario has proved, a lot of people's live sit in the hands of one person. I've often shown up to work the day after a night spent suffering from severe depression and would be livid if my employer or any other ever told me I can't have a job because of it, but I absolutely agree that the piloting industry should be less tolerant than others in future on this issue.
DB11 Posted 31 March 2015 Posted 31 March 2015 Somewhat linked... someone with a stressful job who was on the sick with depression took a police car and rammed it into the gates of headquarters because he wanted to speak to the Chief Constable. He's been receiving nothing but sympathy from all corners of the internet that I have seen http://www.walesonline.co.uk/news/wales-news/off-duty-officer-suffering-post-traumatic-stress-8948898?ICID=FB-Wales-main An off-duty officer who crashed a police car into the gates of a police headquarters in a bid to have a showdown with his bosses was suffering from a mental illness, a court has heard.Kevin Szabo, 40, from Waterfall Road, Prestatyn, was accused of driving a Vauxhall Astra dangerously from Ellesmere Port police station to Cheshire Police headquarters in Winsford, on January 29 last year.Liverpool Crown Court heard Szabo, a former soldier who served in Iraq, had worked for Cheshire Police since 2008. He went on sick leave in September 2013 suffering from stress and depression.The court heard Szabo drove to Ellesmere Port police station on the day of the incident and sent a text message to his brother saying: “It’s time to put things right. I promise I’m not going to hurt myself. Just need a chat with the boss.”Wearing his police uniform, he took a set of keys to a marked police car and drove off despite attempts to stop him.Robert Dudley, prosecuting, said: “The control room were able to hear him. He said he was going to Winsford to call the chief constable to account for lack of welfare to police officers.“By now he was being kept under observation by multiple police cars and a police helicopter.”The court heard that after finding the gates were locked, Szabo drove through another set of gates at the rear of the building and up to the front door.He was arrested in the canteen, shouting: “Let me see the chief.”Szabo, who pleaded guilty to a charge of dangerous driving, wept in the dock as Nicholas Walker, defending, read glowing references from his former colleagues, calling him hard working and a man “with the highest integrity”.He said: “In Iraq he was exposed to horrific incidents that have caused him to suffer with post traumatic stress disorder. The loss of his good name is for him quite unbearable. It is also a loss to the public because of the officer he was.”He said Szabo’s illness had been misdiagnosed and it was only last summer that he was diagnosed as suffering from post traumatic stress disorder.The court was told Szabo had been sacked by Cheshire Police and his marriage has broken down.The Recorder of Liverpool, Judge Clement Goldstone QC, banned Szabo from driving for two years and gave him a 12 month community order with supervision.He said: “You had until that time led a wholly unblemished life and you have lost so much as a result - you have lost your marriage, you have lost your career and your life is going to be difficult unless and until you can recover your mental strength.”The court heard Szabo will begin six weeks of intensive treatment for his condition in April.
Rincewind Posted 31 March 2015 Posted 31 March 2015 The conditions have to be spotted though and that would take regular physiological and medical tests which can be hidden by the recipient.
MC Prussian Posted 31 March 2015 Posted 31 March 2015 So if someone suffers any sort of depression that should bar them from any future employment "just in case"? I think employing a just in case mentality would effectively be baby sitting everyone. Have you ever got drunk and done something stupid? Well then you're not allowed to drink alcohol again "just in case" you do something stupid in future. Ever made a mistake when driving a car? Well fvck it, you're not allowed to drive a car ever again "just in case" you cause a crash. If he'd been signed off to return to work then that should be the end of the issue. Even the most blind can acknowledge that in a position where you hold so much responsibility and have dozens, if not hundreds of passengers' lives in your hands as in flying commuter planes, such a diagnosis is a pretty valid reason not to employ people suffering from a deeply-rooted illness any further. We're not talking a simple office job here. And it's the case of a "serious depression", not just a simple or single bout that only lasted a short while. Which renders all your other points against it pretty useless. Drunk driving is a rather daft argument in this discussion, because most people are able to call it quits when required.
DB11 Posted 31 March 2015 Posted 31 March 2015 Even the most blind can acknowledge that in a position where you hold so much responsibility and have dozens, if not hundreds of passengers' lives in your hands as in flying commuter planes, such a diagnosis is a pretty valid reason not to employ people suffering from a deeply-rooted illness any further. We're not talking a simple office job here. And it's the case of a "serious depression", not just a simple or single bout that only lasted a short while. Which renders all your other points against it pretty useless. Drunk driving is a rather daft argument in this discussion, because most people are able to call it quits when required. I've not argued drunk driving
MC Prussian Posted 31 March 2015 Posted 31 March 2015 I've not argued drunk driving That's right. Your comparison is still far-fetched, though. On your own, be it sober or drunk, you're potentially endangering a lot less people than a pilot does by deliberately playing with the lives of 150+ people on a commercial plane or any other potential victims on the ground, depending on what area you're targeting.
DB11 Posted 1 April 2015 Posted 1 April 2015 Maybe they should introduce aptitude tests like they do in the army or to be an armed response cop to check mental stability. They might have been ruled unlawful under human rights though so not sure if they still do those.
leicsmac Posted 1 April 2015 Posted 1 April 2015 Maybe they should introduce aptitude tests like they do in the army or to be an armed response cop to check mental stability. They might have been ruled unlawful under human rights though so not sure if they still do those. You'd have thought they'd do that already as part of the standard civilian pilot medical. They certainly do it for ATC's who have as much responsibility.
Jon the Hat Posted 1 April 2015 Posted 1 April 2015 On the news this morning that Bild and Paris Match have been offered and seen mobile phone video footage of the last moments of the flight. What kind of utter utter **** gets hold of that and instead of taking it to the investigators tries to sell it? I hope they catch them and send them to jail for theft and impeding a criminal investigation and anything else they can think of. ***** of the highest order.
Fox92 Posted 1 April 2015 Posted 1 April 2015 (Adding onto Jon the Hat's post the news of the video is here). https://uk.news.yahoo.com/video-captures-final-moments-alps-crash-195859802.html#xyqlx7V Video Captures Final Moments Of Alps Crash
Tielemans63 Posted 2 April 2015 Posted 2 April 2015 Agree with JTHs post completely. That memory card containing the footage must have been taken from the crash site directly by an investigator or another authority figure. What the **** were they thinking compromising the investigation like that? What kind of sick ****s first thought is 'I can make a bit of money here'? Whoever it is should be named and shamed and left to face the music. The newspapers...don't even get me started, there's no journalistic merit in posting a video of hundreds of people realising they're going to die on their website which I'm sure is what they'd have done left unchecked. The mind boggles.
Jon the Hat Posted 2 April 2015 Posted 2 April 2015 The only other way that video might have got out is of course through a photo stream type setup where some unfortunate family member found it on their phone. Which is a horrific thought in itself. You would have said that though I guess.
Tielemans63 Posted 2 April 2015 Posted 2 April 2015 The only other way that video might have got out is of course through a photo stream type setup where some unfortunate family member found it on their phone. Which is a horrific thought in itself. You would have said that though I guess. True. Though that's even worse in many ways.
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.