[Tom4784]

Originally Posted by Brillopad

You seem to find a lot quite worrying as it seems to have become a mantra of yours. I could reccommend Kalms from your local health shop - they are helpful to those that suffer from anxiety.

Have you checked the date of the article - it is current news, you know something on our TVs and in our newspapers daily. Our country is experiencing uncertain times and many are interested in current events that affect all our lives even if you aren't. That isn't attacking people - it is presenting a different opinion. You are the one obsessed, obsessed with the word obsessed - as you have accused me of being obsessed about several different things. This is Serious Debates is it not, or are we only supposed to be interested in sex dolls and sausage rolls!

So you've chosen to ignore the grave revisionist inaccuracy in the article because an inaccuracy supports your agenda more than the actual reality of what happened. Says it all really.

[Brillopad]

Originally Posted by Kizzy

Then why are you focusing on the leader of the opposition? The person who is maintaining the status quo for some while subjecting others to a life of poverty and degradation is the current govt... Where are the voxpops in relation to that?

Discussing Corbyn at the moment is tantamount to discussion on sausage rolls as he is no the one in power making all the decisions is he?...

No, much to his distain, and he is trying very to be. His views are not 'maintaining the status quo' in the eyes of many, of which I am clearly one, and therefore his behaviour is of interest to me.

[Kizzy]

Originally Posted by Brillopad

You think the Guardian reporters don't present opinion pieces in their articles. Wake-up!

Please point what part of the article was a lie?

I can separate opinion from fact and present them accordingly. I didn't say any of it was a lie, just an opinion, one mans opinion.

[Tom4784]

I wouldn't slate the discussions about sausage rolls and sex robots, they're better than the spam topics like this one since they are promoting discussion. This topic is just you trying to bait people.

Like I've said before. You should just start three topics entitled 'I hate Jeremy Corbyn' ' I hate Muslims' and 'I hate the EU' and keep all these repetitive topics to one of those three threads because you are killing this section with spam.

[Kizzy]

Originally Posted by Brillopad

No, much to his distain, and he is trying very to be. His views are not 'maintaining the status quo' in the eyes of many, of which I am clearly one, and therefore his behaviour is of interest to me.

Good! What has the 'status quo' done?... The country is on it's arse! Austerity as an economic model has never worked it has been used many times before.

There has to be a point where you say, is there not a better way? Even if it was the conservatives saying it I would listen.

[Brillopad]

Originally Posted by Dezzy

I wouldn't slate the discussions about sausage rolls and sex robots, they're better than the spam topics like this one since they are promoting discussion. This topic is just you trying to bait people.

Like I've said before. You should just start three topics entitled 'I hate Jeremy Corbyn' ' I hate Muslims' and 'I hate the EU' and keep all these repetitive topics to one of those three threads because you are killing this section with spam.

You accuse me of trying to bait people - an opinion piece!

Current political issues posted in Serious Debates are spam because they don't encourage discussion - as in the opinion of Dezzy. Do you get how ridiculous that sounds?

What YOU really mean is you don't want ME posting anywhere on tibb because your personal opinions should dictate what and who can post. Whatever!

[Kizzy]

Originally Posted by Brillopad

You accuse me of trying to bait people - an opinion piece!

Current political issues posted in Serious Debates are spam because they don't encourage discussion - as in the opinion of Dezzy. Do you get how ridiculous that sounds?

What YOU really mean is you don't want ME posting anywhere on tibb because your personal opinions should dictate what and who can post. Whatever!

Why should anyone have your views thrust upon them when you have admitted in this thread you ave no intention of entertaining anything that goes against the 'status quo'?

You are exposing yourself as nothing but a hypocrite.

[Brillopad]

Originally Posted by Kizzy

Why should anyone have your views thrust upon them when you have admitted in this thread you ave no intention of entertaining anything that goes against the 'status quo'?

You are exposing yourself as nothing but a hypocrite.

What are you talking about? I said that many didn't believe that Corbyn was balancing the status quo which is what I thought you were saying. Where did I say 'I had no intention of entertaining anything that goes against the status quo'?

Getting pretty fed up with all this putting words in peoples' mouths.

[DemolitionRed]

Originally Posted by Kizzy

No, what's off putting is you attempting to pass an opinion piece off as fact.

That's exactly what she did

[Brillopad]

Originally Posted by DemolitionRed

That's exactly what she did

All newspaper articles have a slant and therefore are basically a news story come opinion piece. I have read the same newspaper articles in several papers telling the same story with different slants.

Point out any inaccuracies/untruths stated in that article! It is the information that counts, not the slant/opinion.

You often real off a lot of information in your posts without anything to back it up and expect people to take your word for it so please don't lecture me about opinion pieces.

[DemolitionRed]

Originally Posted by Brillopad

All newspaper articles have a slant and therefore are basically a news story come opinion piece. I have read the same newspaper articles in several papers telling the same story with different slants.

Point out any inaccuracies/untruths stated in that article! It is the information that counts, not the slant/opinion.

You often real off a lot of information in your posts without anything to back it up and expect people to take your word for it so please don't lecture me about opinion pieces.

News is factual and impartial. Bloggers are story tellers and I'm not saying there's anything wrong with that. I enjoy reading blogs if they are well written and I'll admit, the sort of blogs I want to read are ones that confirm my biases. When I want to read the news though, I want journalism that carries honesty, integrity, and fairness.

I often type out my opinions. If its factual, then its either something that's well known and a given or its something I post a link to. I probably post more links on here than most people, though I appreciate, most people won't open those links. If its an opinion, its something I've taken a personal interest in and likely something that was routed in solid journalism. If I suspect something is propaganda, I check its legitimacy.

The article you posted has no substance. Its just a long sarcastic rant about something we already know and already have an opinion on. All parties, at some point, will mimic other parties or look at ways to pull the 'no' voters on board. He mentions in the article... sarcastically, that Corbyn hasn't stopped campaigning since the last election... like that's a bad thing! All good politicians need to keep that campaign momentum up and active if they want to be seen as progressive. Both Labour and the Conservatives know they are going to alienate a percentage of supporters if they choose the rock or the hard place and so both those parties will likely take the option that will do them as a party, the least amount of damage.

[Tom4784]

Originally Posted by Brillopad

You accuse me of trying to bait people - an opinion piece!

Current political issues posted in Serious Debates are spam because they don't encourage discussion - as in the opinion of Dezzy. Do you get how ridiculous that sounds?

What YOU really mean is you don't want ME posting anywhere on tibb because your personal opinions should dictate what and who can post. Whatever!

I didn't say political issues in SD are spam, I said your topics were. You post a thread and you try to shut down anyone who thinks differently to you, you don't debate anything you just try to silence anyone that thinks differently to you. You are incapable of debate because all you want is a reaction. It's why you won't create one thread with all this **** in because you know the people you want to bait won't bother reading it but it's harder to ignore when you're spamming it all over the section and shoving down everyone's throats while doing your best to deny anyone that thinks differently to you their opinion.

Honestly Brillo when it comes to your last point, how many times have you tried to peddle that bull**** argument about me? It's especially laughable considering how I'm constantly stating that everyone is entitled to an opinion and everyone else is entitled to their views on that opinion. It's just more proof that you don't actually read posts, you just pretend that people responded in a way you wanted them to and run with that. the way you tried to make out that I said political issues in SD are spam is proof of this. You read what you want to read and what you want to read rarely reflects reality.

I notice you still are refusing to acknowledge TS' post about the major factual inaccuracies of your source.

[Vicky.]

As with EU/Brexit threads...Merged these threads. I did warn about the multiple threads on same subject. Obviously if there is actual new news then a new thread is needed. A new thread is not really needed for opinion pieces or old news.

Also to add, if anyone feels any member is taking the pee a little with spamming opinion pieces, please report it. Do NOT report if you just dislike the members opinions. Thanks.

[DemolitionRed]

I'm glad that all these things are being bunched into one. I can't see why it wouldn't work. I'm always pleased when I see a new topic I can participate in but joining a new topic just to be on the defensive gets tedious.

[Kizzy]

Originally Posted by Brillopad

All newspaper articles have a slant and therefore are basically a news story come opinion piece. I have read the same newspaper articles in several papers telling the same story with different slants.

Point out any inaccuracies/untruths stated in that article! It is the information that counts, not the slant/opinion.

You often real off a lot of information in your posts without anything to back it up and expect people to take your word for it so please don't lecture me about opinion pieces.

Newspapers report the facts and have quotes and statistics to back them up these can be presented with a slant but just because they are it doesn't mean that they then become purely opinion.

Where in the opinion piece is the evidence to back up his claims? A reader shouldn't have to go searching high and low to see is what is being suggested is credible.

Personally should I quote something I try to make a point of including a direct quote in respect of the topic or a credible statistic if it warrants it, that said it isn't always required here is it as this is a debate forum for opinion.

Therefore you can't object to people offering their opinion on certain topics, they are not attempting to pass them off as fact as you are doing here with this vlog.

[Brillopad]

Originally Posted by Dezzy

Tbh the topic should have ended here. The article is trash and revisionist.

Ah there you go again trying to ride the coat tails of a superior poster yet again. You are no TS. The only one you are kidding is yourself.

[Kizzy]

Originally Posted by Brillopad

Ah there you go again trying to ride the coat tails of a superior poster yet again. You are no TS. The only one you are kidding is yourself.

It could be worse, he could be a right wing vlogger kidding you... :/

[Kizzy]

Daily mail found to by print propaganda and lies pre election is forced to issue a retraction.

'The headline to an article on 12 May, based on a leaked draft of the Labour party’s election manifesto, said that Labour’s ‘class war manifesto would cost every family £4,000’. We are happy to clarify that, as the article stated, the £4,000 was an average figure and did not represent an estimate of the amount Labour was planning to raise in taxes from each family.'


At the time, The Daily Mail seemingly chose to ignore the fact that Labour’s manifesto would have meant tax rises for only the top 5% of earners in the UK. And it also ignored the fact that the Conservative manifesto was largely uncosted.

Corbyn-bashing ****rag

By the time of the ‘clarification’, however, the damage had already been done. With an overall reach of 31 million people a month, the tabloid impacts public opinion. This could be people actively reading it, or stumbling across its headlines on their social media feeds. So for it to casually publish such misleading propaganda just a month before an election is the height of bad journalism. But then, nothing less should be expected from The Daily Mail.


https://www.thecanary.co/uk/2017/09/...-corbyn-image/

[Kizzy]

Daily mail found to by print propaganda and lies pre election is forced to issue a retraction.

'The headline to an article on 12 May, based on a leaked draft of the Labour party’s election manifesto, said that Labour’s ‘class war manifesto would cost every family £4,000’. We are happy to clarify that, as the article stated, the £4,000 was an average figure and did not represent an estimate of the amount Labour was planning to raise in taxes from each family.'


At the time, The Daily Mail seemingly chose to ignore the fact that Labour’s manifesto would have meant tax rises for only the top 5% of earners in the UK. And it also ignored the fact that the Conservative manifesto was largely uncosted.

Corbyn-bashing ****rag

By the time of the ‘clarification’, however, the damage had already been done. With an overall reach of 31 million people a month, the tabloid impacts public opinion. This could be people actively reading it, or stumbling across its headlines on their social media feeds. So for it to casually publish such misleading propaganda just a month before an election is the height of bad journalism. But then, nothing less should be expected from The Daily Mail.


https://www.thecanary.co/uk/2017/09/...-corbyn-image/

[Kizzy]

Can't come soon enough!!

'For business, this will mean a focus on ending zero-hours contracts, repealing the Trade Union Act, sectoral collective bargaining, introducing a real National Living Wage, among a host of other policies to improve workers’ rights. The tone of how government approaches businesses will change.'


https://www.thecanary.co/uk/2017/09/...conservatives/

[Kizzy]

Can't come soon enough!!

'For business, this will mean a focus on ending zero-hours contracts, repealing the Trade Union Act, sectoral collective bargaining, introducing a real National Living Wage, among a host of other policies to improve workers’ rights. The tone of how government approaches businesses will change.'


https://www.thecanary.co/uk/2017/09/...conservatives/

[DemolitionRed]

Thanks Kizzy,

Right-wing Tory bias journalism was probably the worst its ever been before the last election. From the moment Corbyn started climbing the ranks in popularity, newspapers like The Sun, The Daily Mail and The Express went into a turbocharge of scare tactic revelations.

Propaganda works, the damage was done and very few people will be interested or even aware that the Daily Mail lied to them.

Its not just the newspapers though is it? May and her pundits openly encourage propaganda.

[DemolitionRed]

Double post because the site is sticking.

[Oliver_W]

The top 5% aren't exactly millionaires though, it starts at just £70k...

[DemolitionRed]

Originally Posted by Oliver_W

The top 5% aren't exactly millionaires though, it starts at just £70k...

Its not about them being millionaires, its about how much tax are they pay and are they paying enough? If you are in that 5% the chances are, you are not paying your fair dues.