Matt Posted November 5, 2014 Share Posted November 5, 2014 Not cherry picking anything, I've seen these stories shared on social media and put them on here, it's that what the off topics are for? Selecting one article from 2012 to support an certain point of view is indeed cherry picking. Which group on Facebook did you harvest this morsel from? Opposed to being directed to the BBC website?, How :censored:ing biased are they? Quite, I listened to a BBC reporter this morning whilst on the commute - an Afghan man was in Calais, stood up in what he owned, his family apparently slaughtered - lost pretty much everything. He explained that he wanted to come to UK to find an honest days work for an honest days pay, to start over and begin a new life, secure in the knowledge that there is infrastructure to support him, due process to protect him, and the basic human right to be in control of his destiny. This berk of a :censored:ing reporter reeled off a list of tweets that seemed to echo the sentiment of the hard-line right, 'Send them back', 'We don't want them' and so-on, delivered to the man as 'the voice of the nation'. The reporter failed to read any tweets or messages for balance; nor did the reporter speak for me as a citizen of this country. Not as bad as Kay 'Ebola' Burley, but appalling nonetheless. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matt Posted November 5, 2014 Share Posted November 5, 2014 If it was under the same circumstances as this families argeement then yes, why should anybody live in a £2million home whilst claiming benefits?? Going back to your original bellyache, I'm more shocked that this property commands such a price tag. :censored:ing capitalists. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OAFCM35 Posted November 5, 2014 Author Share Posted November 5, 2014 It's not just the missing word. It's the "incase" (one word where there should be two). It's the was/were grammar disaster. It's the fact of three :censored:-ups while attempting to do so little with the language. I want my money back for that :censored:. Like I've said further up, when you can't find a sensible argument or an angle to twist you knit pick, my own fault for not proof reading before I post I guess Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matt Posted November 5, 2014 Share Posted November 5, 2014 What makes there articles more credible than The Daily Mail's? Their. You'll learn something by the time we've finished even if it kills me. Any paper that has Dacre and Littlecock in it, is pretty sure that it can hit its desired 'outraged' little Englander target audience. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Scratch2000uk Posted November 5, 2014 Share Posted November 5, 2014 Quite, I listened to a BBC reporter this morning whilst on the commute - an Afghan man was in Calais, stood up in what he owned, his family apparently slaughtered - lost pretty much everything. He explained that he wanted to come to UK to find an honest days work for an honest days pay, to start over and begin a new life, secure in the knowledge that there is infrastructure to support him, due process to protect him, and the basic human right to be in control of his destiny. This berk of a :censored:ing reporter reeled off a list of tweets that seemed to echo the sentiment of the hard-line right, 'Send them back', 'We don't want them' and so-on, delivered to the man as 'the voice of the nation'. The reporter failed to read any tweets or messages for balance; nor did the reporter speak for me as a citizen of this country. Not as bad as Kay 'Ebola' Burley, but appalling nonetheless. Indeed. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
slystallone Posted November 5, 2014 Share Posted November 5, 2014 (edited) Well that's 10 minutes of my day I'm not going to get back isn't it? Oh well.... EDIT: Rosa's Panda pic at least made me chortle... Edited November 5, 2014 by slystallone Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
leeslover Posted November 5, 2014 Share Posted November 5, 2014 Going back to your original bellyache, I'm more shocked that this property commands such a price tag. :censored:ing capitalists. Far from scaring the middle classes, this article had Mr Tulsehill thinking how much the Government would give him if he let some (suitably vetted) claimants stay in one of the outbuildings on (the far side of) his grounds (in Summer whilst he is on the Grand Tour). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JoshOWTB Posted November 6, 2014 Share Posted November 6, 2014 Was this graph done before or after the E.U decided we owed them an additional £1.7bn? That is still only £26 per person. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OAFCM35 Posted November 6, 2014 Author Share Posted November 6, 2014 (edited) That is still only £26 per person. In the short term yes, let's wait and see how this graph changes now we have opened the door to every Tom, Dick and Jose Edited November 6, 2014 by OAFCM35 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zorrro Posted November 6, 2014 Share Posted November 6, 2014 Mass immigration has happened in Britain for centuries. It's no worse off now than it was then. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Diego_Sideburns Posted November 6, 2014 Share Posted November 6, 2014 That is still only £26 per person. Or the bill could be met in full by tightening up on tax avoidance. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stevie_J Posted November 6, 2014 Share Posted November 6, 2014 Or the bill could be met in full by tightening up on tax avoidance. Or telling doctors that they're not doing their jobs properly. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jimsleftfoot Posted November 6, 2014 Share Posted November 6, 2014 (edited) What makes there articles more credible than The Daily Mail's? My point was really that in reporting on immigration on a daily basis, it gives a voice to the likes of UKIP. My view is that there are other issues that are much bigger and should be debated which the BEEB is not reporting on. In the past UKIP and right leaning think tanks have commented that the BEEB isn't reflecting public thinking. I disagree, I think there is a vocal minority who is setting the agenda and the media has reacted to that. Edited November 6, 2014 by jimsleftfoot Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Scratch2000uk Posted November 6, 2014 Share Posted November 6, 2014 My point was really that in reporting on immigration on a daily basis, it gives a voice to the likes of UKIP. My view is that there are other issues that are much bigger and should be debated which the BEEB is not reporting on. In the past UKIP and right leaning think tanks have commented that the BEEB isn't reflecting public thinking. I disagree, I think there is a vocal minority who is setting the agenda and the media has reacted to that. Gives a voice to the "likes" of UKIP?. Why, shouldn't it? and what are the bigger issues they are not debating? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jimsleftfoot Posted November 6, 2014 Share Posted November 6, 2014 Gives a voice to the "likes" of UKIP?. Why, shouldn't it? and what are the bigger issues they are not debating? A lot of the issues surrounding 'immigration' are in my view, failures of planning e.g. lack of Primary Schools, housing etc. Spend less time worrying about immigration and spend more time trying to improve the lives of the people who live here. I would also add the failture to secure future power supplies to that. Though time and money could be freed up if they didn't try to constantly reform education/NHS and instead, looked to make small but acheivable improvements. Why not give more of a voice to the Green Party? They have been established longer, are not just a one issue protest vote party and many of there concerns are backed up by Science. I personally wouldn't vote for them but I think they deserve to get wider media coverage than the dissafected Tories that are UKIP. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
leeslover Posted November 6, 2014 Share Posted November 6, 2014 Why not give more of a voice to the Green Party? Stock up on candles if those crazy fools gain any influence. The lights are going out unless we built some big funk off fossil fuel and/or nuclear power stations fairly soon. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jimsleftfoot Posted November 6, 2014 Share Posted November 6, 2014 Stock up on candles if those crazy fools gain any influence. The lights are going out unless we built some big funk off fossil fuel and/or nuclear power stations fairly soon. I agree and I wouldn't vote for them on the basis of some of their policies but I still think that by giving them more of a voice would be a positive step. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matt Posted November 6, 2014 Share Posted November 6, 2014 I agree and I wouldn't vote for them on the basis of some of their policies but I still think that by giving them more of a voice would be a positive step. Labour has all but given up on the left, and the Greens are the radical left - it's a tough choice. The Greens don't seem to cut it on fundamentals like foreign policy, realistic energy strategy, and budget deficit, amongst a whole lot of others. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OAFCM35 Posted November 6, 2014 Author Share Posted November 6, 2014 Labour has all but given up on the left, and the Greens are the radical left - it's a tough choice. The Greens don't seem to cut it on fundamentals like foreign policy, realistic energy strategy, and budget deficit, amongst a whole lot of others. Do the tight thing and vote for ukip Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matt Posted November 6, 2014 Share Posted November 6, 2014 Do the tight thing and vote for ukip I didn't see that coming. I'd rather draw a big pair of hairy bollocks on my ballot paper than vote for those :censored:, and in doing so, I'd probably make more of a political statement. Is that where you EDL boys have gone to now? Be careful with those 'not trying to look like but nearly, so it'll look top on Britains First Facebook group' Nazi salutes in front of England flags, and I don't think drunken protests in pub car parks is quite the image Farage is looking for - although I do think you'd look very fetching in a purple and yellow outfit. Did I say fetching? I meant stupid. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Scratch2000uk Posted November 6, 2014 Share Posted November 6, 2014 Bunch of :censored: the lot of them. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OAFCM35 Posted November 6, 2014 Author Share Posted November 6, 2014 I didn't see that coming. I'd rather draw a big pair of hairy bollocks on my ballot paper than vote for those :censored:, and in doing so, I'd probably make more of a political statement. Is that where you EDL boys have gone to now? Be careful with those 'not trying to look like but nearly, so it'll look top on Britains First Facebook group' Nazi salutes in front of England flags, and I don't think drunken protests in pub car parks is quite the image Farage is looking for - although I do think you'd look very fetching in a purple and yellow outfit. Did I say fetching? I meant stupid. Your far too easy to get going, I even left a spelling mistake in there for you to latch on to. Nazi salutes in front of england flags?! Haha Just because somebody wishes for an alternative approach to immigration and expresses EU-scepticism doesn't make them a Nazi, Racist or a fascist. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rudemedic Posted November 6, 2014 Share Posted November 6, 2014 When Farage was campaigning in Heywood the other month, he was snapped in my local at around noon, possibly earlier as the landlord had opened up for them especially. He was still there 5 hours later. I don't know about you but I'd rather not vote for a who spends his working day, during one of his busiest periods in the year in a pub. That's before I get on to his policies. Considering that they only lost by 600 votes, if I was a UKIP supporter, and especially if I was a UKIP donor I'd be asking serious questions about it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matt Posted November 6, 2014 Share Posted November 6, 2014 Your far too easy to get going, I even left a spelling mistake in there for you to latch on to. I doubt it was intended, and to be fair it's happened so often that I'm completely numb to the whole bad spelling schtick. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OAFCM35 Posted November 6, 2014 Author Share Posted November 6, 2014 I doubt it was intended, and to be fair it's happened so often that I'm completely numb to the whole bad spelling schtick. I do it all the time is funny watching the grammar nazis fall over each other to correct me. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.