Off Topic Politics Thread

  • Please bear with us on the new site integration and fixing any known bugs over the coming days. If you can not log in please try resetting your password and check your spam box. If you have tried these steps and are still struggling email [email protected] with your username/registered email address
  • Log in now to remove adverts - no adverts at all to registered members!
Had an interesting convo with Mrs No7 the morning about the refugee/asylum seekers situation. We have very differing political views, mainly because I like to see all sides of an argument then make an informed decision and she just reads, wait for it, the Mail online as "its quick and easy and I don't have time to research, and it has a good entertainments section"

I asked what was her view on the refugee situation. Her answer was predictable after knowing her reading material.

"I think it is good, as we can't afford to give homes to all those people whilst we are in crisis...most of them are criminals anyway".

I did try to educate her (not by telling her my personal view btw as that is wrong, but by pointing her in the direction of more balanced media), to no avail. I left it there as I don't want WWIII to erupt before the weekend. Just goes to show though how the media can influence even intelligent people.

Maybe I am extra sensitive as the son of two legal immigrants from the 60s, but I do wonder how we have been together for over 27 years sometimes.
 
"I think it is good, as we can't afford to give homes to all those people whilst we are in crisis...most of them are criminals anyway".

Sorry to hear the whole piece but this part stood out immediately. Twenty seconds of thought and you can assess pretty accurately how likely it is to be true but it's a talking point I see everywhere. People are beginning to believe it.

Vin
 
Boris Johnson’s autobiographer (I thought Johnson was a journalist and would have written his own book) stating quite clearly that Stanley Johnson regularly beat his wife, at times in front of Bozo.
Perhaps his defenders, including Fiona Bruce on QT who slapped down a comment on this by saying that his abuse was “a one off” should be sanctioned and suspended until she stops putting forward comments based on her own opinion.

You must log in or register to see media
 
  • Like
Reactions: ChilcoSaint
I reckon the BBC might be lining up to sack him actually, noticing that they are ramping up their own articles about why he is a problem for them. Hardly unbiased reporting in of itself, feels like they are building their case.

Not sacking per se, but called it.

Created a rod for their own backs though as now they have created a precedent there will be seismic campaigns to oust anyone who is perceived to have offended anyone at anytime over any issue and they will get it from all sides.

What is actually more shocking and has gone under the radar because of this noise, is that they have also decided not to broadcast one of the episodes of the new Attenborough series because it spotlights destruction of nature and they didn’t want to offend right wing groups any further.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Archers Road
They have opened the door to all sorts of **** here.

Alan Sugar photoshopped Corbyn into a picture with Hitler when he was leader of the opposition and went unpunished.

Andrew Neil tweeted his personal political opinions when he was working for the BBC.

Just some examples.

In an attempt to appear unbiased they have created an example of bias.