| Is The Guardian 'paper' struggling? on 13:16 - Feb 4 with 1223 views | swanjackal |
| Is The Guardian 'paper' struggling? on 12:57 - Feb 4 by Humpty |
And Lisa is now showing what fake news is now. People on the right think anything they disagree with is fake news. Sane people can point out this.
Trump, an incredibly thin skinned man, told everyone that he was going to have the biggest ever inaugration event ever. Because that's what he does.
When it wasn't, he sent out his minions to lie their f*cking arses off and attack the press for telling the truth. And they did.
To me, it's not f*cking important how many people went to an event. I'll Judge Trump on his actions, not on how many went to his party.
But still they came out, Sean Spicer, Lance Priebus and Kellyanne Conway to tell complete lies about the inaugaration all spiced with a threat to the press. If you go after us for lying, we're going to deal with you. Even though it's such an inconsequential thing.
And days later they make up a terrorist attack that happened in America. Except it wasn't true and it didn't even happen. That's fake news Bluey. Fake news is coming straight from the White House. Please don't conflate this with anything that the BBC or Guardian says.
Your God Emperor and his minions are telling you fake news every day. [Post edited 4 Feb 2017 13:12]
|
He has extremely thin skin as does the whole RNC, and needs to step away from pointless issues, like the inauguration debacle. It is neither important or relevant to how a country is run.
There was no Bowling Green massacre, and Conway was silly to use the terms said, although she did come out and clarify that she made an error of wording the next day claiming she meant "terrorists" not "massacre"(whether you believe her or not), there was an incident there involving Iraqi nationals looking to supply financial aid and weaponry back to Al-Qaeda. This was the incident that led to Obama calling for an elongated period of restrictions, and extreme vetting of Iraqi nationals entering the country back in 2011. This also led to the creation of a list of potential countries (the 7 of the countries of the temporary ban implicated by Trump -which has been challenged and temporarily suspended due to a court in Seattle) that have a high risk of producing similar incidents by the security services. Obama didn't act on it, Trump did, albeit not addressing his security appointees first, and done it with extremely poor execution.
So, there was no "massacre" but there was an incident that sparked the creation of travel restrictions and the creation of potential threat lists under the Obama administration. [Post edited 4 Feb 2017 13:25]
|  |
|
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Hypocritically hypocritical ! |
|  |
| Is The Guardian 'paper' struggling? on 13:23 - Feb 4 with 1218 views | swanjackal |
| Is The Guardian 'paper' struggling? on 13:10 - Feb 4 by Humpty |
I know I said I wasn't going to respond anymore but I couldn't help it.
We're not talking about extremes here. We are talking about the POTUS. And his people are inventing terrorist attacks that happened on American soil that didn't actually f*cking happen. It was lies made up to influence a particularly stupid part of the populace that voted for him to justify an unjustifiable ban of muslims.
They made up a terrorist attack that didn't happen. Do you understand what I'm saying? This is not tw*ts like me and you arguing on the internet. This is real life. This is the POTUS. Are you that thick that you don't see the difference? |
As I have mentioned to you previously, I am very comfortable in my intelligence thank you.
Conway made the statement, she made up a false narrative of the actual event, not the POTUS, and she has made an apology and clarification, whether you believe her sincerity is up to you. I am intelligent enough to be able to apportion quotes to the correct people in this case though and not extend it by proxy.
I answered this in my previous post in more detail though. [Post edited 4 Feb 2017 13:25]
| |
|
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Hypocritically hypocritical ! |
| |
| Is The Guardian 'paper' struggling? on 13:36 - Feb 4 with 1202 views | Highjack |
I can't stand fake news, so I only read the Daily Sport these days.
 |  |
| |
| Is The Guardian 'paper' struggling? on 13:42 - Feb 4 with 1195 views | swanjackal |
| Is The Guardian 'paper' struggling? on 13:36 - Feb 4 by Highjack |
I can't stand fake news, so I only read the Daily Sport these days.
|
I loved the Sport, Friday was great late 90's with Shaun Ryder's column.
This is my favourite news article of all time though....
 | |
|
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Hypocritically hypocritical ! |
| |
| Is The Guardian 'paper' struggling? on 15:36 - Feb 4 with 1158 views | exiledclaseboy |
I think we're getting confused between fake news, which is a thing from all sides of the spectrum and basically consists of stupid people taking everything they read on Facebook and Twitter as gospel and alternative facts, a phrase which was coined only a few weeks ago by (I believe) Trump's press secretary. |  |
| |
| Is The Guardian 'paper' struggling? on 15:37 - Feb 4 with 1155 views | swanjackal |
| Is The Guardian 'paper' struggling? on 15:36 - Feb 4 by exiledclaseboy |
I think we're getting confused between fake news, which is a thing from all sides of the spectrum and basically consists of stupid people taking everything they read on Facebook and Twitter as gospel and alternative facts, a phrase which was coined only a few weeks ago by (I believe) Trump's press secretary. |
Possibly, although some instances transcend both genres. Bull is bull regardless. | |
|
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Hypocritically hypocritical ! |
| |
| Is The Guardian 'paper' struggling? on 15:42 - Feb 4 with 1153 views | exiledclaseboy |
| Is The Guardian 'paper' struggling? on 15:37 - Feb 4 by swanjackal |
Possibly, although some instances transcend both genres. Bull is bull regardless. |
Indeed. And Dr Winston's unintentionally hilarious analysis of the political leanings of the UK's written media was one if the finest examples of bull I've seen for a while. | |
| |
| Is The Guardian 'paper' struggling? on 15:45 - Feb 4 with 1149 views | swanjackal |
| Is The Guardian 'paper' struggling? on 15:42 - Feb 4 by exiledclaseboy |
Indeed. And Dr Winston's unintentionally hilarious analysis of the political leanings of the UK's written media was one if the finest examples of bull I've seen for a while. |
Depends on leanings too, people read a story differently, depending how far you lean in either direction.
I'm sure if you ask most people to list all the major papers in a spectrum, you would find a spectacular range of how they would line up. | |
|
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Hypocritically hypocritical ! |
| |
Login to get fewer ads
| Is The Guardian 'paper' struggling? on 15:51 - Feb 4 with 1147 views | exiledclaseboy |
| Is The Guardian 'paper' struggling? on 15:45 - Feb 4 by swanjackal |
Depends on leanings too, people read a story differently, depending how far you lean in either direction.
I'm sure if you ask most people to list all the major papers in a spectrum, you would find a spectacular range of how they would line up. |
I doubt it. You'd surely look at the leader columns and the editorial stance if you're struggling from the news content. It may be a bit more nuanced with the likes of the Times and the late, lamented Independent, which tended to vacillate depending on the issue. Even The Guardian came out in support of the LibDems at the 2010 election, a decision which didn't go down at all well with a big chunk of its already declining readership at the time. | |
| |
| Is The Guardian 'paper' struggling? on 15:54 - Feb 4 with 1142 views | londonlisa2001 |
| Is The Guardian 'paper' struggling? on 15:36 - Feb 4 by exiledclaseboy |
I think we're getting confused between fake news, which is a thing from all sides of the spectrum and basically consists of stupid people taking everything they read on Facebook and Twitter as gospel and alternative facts, a phrase which was coined only a few weeks ago by (I believe) Trump's press secretary. |
Trump uses both phrases. He is particularly fond of the expression 'fakenews' on his increasingly unhinged twitter account.
(His description of a Bush appointed judge who was confirmed 99 - 0 as a 'so called judge' was particularly amusing).
They use 'alternate facts' instead of 'lie' when the media point out that they are lying, in other words it is self directed. |  | | |
| Is The Guardian 'paper' struggling? on 15:56 - Feb 4 with 1136 views | exiledclaseboy |
| Is The Guardian 'paper' struggling? on 15:54 - Feb 4 by londonlisa2001 |
Trump uses both phrases. He is particularly fond of the expression 'fakenews' on his increasingly unhinged twitter account.
(His description of a Bush appointed judge who was confirmed 99 - 0 as a 'so called judge' was particularly amusing).
They use 'alternate facts' instead of 'lie' when the media point out that they are lying, in other words it is self directed. |
I'm so confused I don't know who to believe any more. I'll just continue to make my own mind up. | |
| |
| Is The Guardian 'paper' struggling? on 15:58 - Feb 4 with 1128 views | swanjackal |
| Is The Guardian 'paper' struggling? on 15:56 - Feb 4 by exiledclaseboy |
I'm so confused I don't know who to believe any more. I'll just continue to make my own mind up. |
Good idea. Tend to do that myself. Research all, trust no single source as gospel. | |
|
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Hypocritically hypocritical ! |
| |
| Is The Guardian 'paper' struggling? on 16:01 - Feb 4 with 1124 views | londonlisa2001 |
| Is The Guardian 'paper' struggling? on 15:56 - Feb 4 by exiledclaseboy |
I'm so confused I don't know who to believe any more. I'll just continue to make my own mind up. |
Good grief - you can't do that mun.
Easy guide - fake news - something Trump doesn't agree with or absolutely anything published by the New York Times.
Alternate fact - a lie told by Spicer or Conway which is easily disproved. | | | |
| Is The Guardian 'paper' struggling? on 16:02 - Feb 4 with 1120 views | swanjackal |
| Is The Guardian 'paper' struggling? on 15:51 - Feb 4 by exiledclaseboy |
I doubt it. You'd surely look at the leader columns and the editorial stance if you're struggling from the news content. It may be a bit more nuanced with the likes of the Times and the late, lamented Independent, which tended to vacillate depending on the issue. Even The Guardian came out in support of the LibDems at the 2010 election, a decision which didn't go down at all well with a big chunk of its already declining readership at the time. |
See you have almost confirmed what I have said, some views are shift-able in certain publications,hence why some people have varying views on their political leanings. The key issues to the individual then indicates how a person interprets the leaning of the publication. | |
|
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Hypocritically hypocritical ! |
| |
| Is The Guardian 'paper' struggling? on 16:03 - Feb 4 with 1113 views | swanjackal |
| Is The Guardian 'paper' struggling? on 16:01 - Feb 4 by londonlisa2001 |
Good grief - you can't do that mun.
Easy guide - fake news - something Trump doesn't agree with or absolutely anything published by the New York Times.
Alternate fact - a lie told by Spicer or Conway which is easily disproved. |
*snigger | |
|
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Hypocritically hypocritical ! |
| |
| Is The Guardian 'paper' struggling? on 16:05 - Feb 4 with 1113 views | exiledclaseboy |
| Is The Guardian 'paper' struggling? on 16:01 - Feb 4 by londonlisa2001 |
Good grief - you can't do that mun.
Easy guide - fake news - something Trump doesn't agree with or absolutely anything published by the New York Times.
Alternate fact - a lie told by Spicer or Conway which is easily disproved. |
I'm led to believe that everything is the fault of the liberal media. Trump is actually nicer than Jed Bartlett but the media tells us otherwise. The cads. | |
| |
| Is The Guardian 'paper' struggling? on 16:12 - Feb 4 with 1104 views | exiledclaseboy |
| Is The Guardian 'paper' struggling? on 16:02 - Feb 4 by swanjackal |
See you have almost confirmed what I have said, some views are shift-able in certain publications,hence why some people have varying views on their political leanings. The key issues to the individual then indicates how a person interprets the leaning of the publication. |
No I don't agree and I certainly haven't confirmed your view. It's blatantly obvious which way the vast majority of the papers lean politically. If someone can't see it they're probably not reading newspapers anyway. I gave two specific examples of where it's slightly more nuanced but they were isolated. The Times is a traditionalist Tory paper which flirted with Blair's Labour in the late 90s along with the rest of the Murdoch empire when it was obvious Blair was going to win and it was expedient for Murdoch to jump on board. The independent had liberal leanings toward the end of its life but never had a party political affiliation. The rest are obvious in most cases from reading headlines let alone detailed news coverage. But there are always the leading articles and editorials for the removal of any remaining doubt. [Post edited 4 Feb 2017 16:14]
| |
| |
| Is The Guardian 'paper' struggling? on 16:13 - Feb 4 with 1101 views | londonlisa2001 |
| Is The Guardian 'paper' struggling? on 16:05 - Feb 4 by exiledclaseboy |
I'm led to believe that everything is the fault of the liberal media. Trump is actually nicer than Jed Bartlett but the media tells us otherwise. The cads. |
And Sean Spicer a more competent press secretary than CJ Cregg. | | | |
| Is The Guardian 'paper' struggling? on 16:17 - Feb 4 with 1093 views | londonlisa2001 |
| Is The Guardian 'paper' struggling? on 16:03 - Feb 4 by swanjackal |
*snigger |
Yawn. | | | |
| Is The Guardian 'paper' struggling? on 16:22 - Feb 4 with 1088 views | swanjackal |
| Is The Guardian 'paper' struggling? on 16:17 - Feb 4 by londonlisa2001 |
Yawn. |
*snigger | |
|
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Hypocritically hypocritical ! |
| |
| Is The Guardian 'paper' struggling? on 16:28 - Feb 4 with 1281 views | swanjackal |
| Is The Guardian 'paper' struggling? on 16:12 - Feb 4 by exiledclaseboy |
No I don't agree and I certainly haven't confirmed your view. It's blatantly obvious which way the vast majority of the papers lean politically. If someone can't see it they're probably not reading newspapers anyway. I gave two specific examples of where it's slightly more nuanced but they were isolated. The Times is a traditionalist Tory paper which flirted with Blair's Labour in the late 90s along with the rest of the Murdoch empire when it was obvious Blair was going to win and it was expedient for Murdoch to jump on board. The independent had liberal leanings toward the end of its life but never had a party political affiliation. The rest are obvious in most cases from reading headlines let alone detailed news coverage. But there are always the leading articles and editorials for the removal of any remaining doubt. [Post edited 4 Feb 2017 16:14]
|
Thank you for your well considered thought out answer.
I stick by what I say, but thank you for responding with only the smallest of snark. | |
|
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Hypocritically hypocritical ! |
| |
| Is The Guardian 'paper' struggling? on 16:32 - Feb 4 with 1272 views | exiledclaseboy |
| Is The Guardian 'paper' struggling? on 16:28 - Feb 4 by swanjackal |
Thank you for your well considered thought out answer.
I stick by what I say, but thank you for responding with only the smallest of snark. |
I did reign in the snark in account of you being one of the few on here who I can disagree with without being called a nasty name. I thought I'd eliminated snark entirely but I'm only human. | |
| |
| Is The Guardian 'paper' struggling? on 16:33 - Feb 4 with 1268 views | swanjackal |
| Is The Guardian 'paper' struggling? on 16:32 - Feb 4 by exiledclaseboy |
I did reign in the snark in account of you being one of the few on here who I can disagree with without being called a nasty name. I thought I'd eliminated snark entirely but I'm only human. |
Okay you cocksplooge | |
|
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Hypocritically hypocritical ! |
| |
| Is The Guardian 'paper' struggling? on 18:02 - Feb 4 with 1243 views | Humpty |
| Is The Guardian 'paper' struggling? on 15:42 - Feb 4 by exiledclaseboy |
Indeed. And Dr Winston's unintentionally hilarious analysis of the political leanings of the UK's written media was one if the finest examples of bull I've seen for a while. |
I forgot he also mentioned the Morning Star. That well known daily.
I should have mentioned The Bulldog as well. A paper only Lohengrin has heard of. |  | | |
| Is The Guardian 'paper' struggling? on 18:03 - Feb 4 with 1238 views | Humpty |
| Is The Guardian 'paper' struggling? on 16:28 - Feb 4 by swanjackal |
Thank you for your well considered thought out answer.
I stick by what I say, but thank you for responding with only the smallest of snark. |
You liked Winston's pack of lies.
Says it all. | | | |
| |
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
