Jump to content

The Politics Thread 2020

Guest

By Guest
in The Jim Smith Room

Recommended Posts

Stive Pesley

Stive Pesley

Posted
Posted
21 minutes ago, maxjam said:

I believe working people should not have to suffer brutal austerity for a crisis caused by the banks and the inhumane economic system we live under.

It must be significantly harder for the BBC to find extremists than it is to find moderate nurses for opinions.

Are you saying the bold bit is an extremist view?

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
  • Replies 9.5k
  • Created
  • Last Reply
GboroRam

GboroRam

Posted
Posted
24 minutes ago, maxjam said:

The Guido Fawkes link?  Doesn't that fall under the parameters you set out yourself about far right sources with good documentation still being believable?

They call out the BBC nurse being as being heavily biased and 5 mins detective work myself shows that to be the case.  His description from his own blog is as follows;

I’m a nurse in the Emergency Medical Unit at St Thomas Hospital. I’m an active socialist and trade unionist. I believe working people should not have to suffer brutal austerity for a crisis caused by the banks and the inhumane economic system we live under.

It must be significantly harder for the BBC to find extremists than it is to find moderate nurses for opinions.  Or maybe thats just not the angle they want to push.

The accusation is she complained about no PPE despite giving it away. No explanation of whether the PPE she allegedly gave was from the NHS.

What did she give? Where did she get it? Who owned it? Why was it given away? Did the NHS give her sufficient PPE for herself? 

The only source I can see for any of the accusation is the biased order-order website. Where's the backup to explain the detail above? Nowhere, that's where. I've asked a few times for some backup details but all I've been given so far is Guido Fawkes, a biased source. 

I don't think you're understanding what I'm saying. You are allowed to be a labour activist. You are allowed to be a Tory activist. You're even allowed to be a UKIP activist, although I'd prefer to stay away from the weird racist people. What I need is some detail about accusations when they're made, not just some spurious story on a biased website.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Uptherams

Uptherams

Posted
Posted
1 minute ago, GboroRam said:

The accusation is she complained about no PPE despite giving it away. No explanation of whether the PPE she allegedly gave was from the NHS.

What did she give? Where did she get it? Who owned it? Why was it given away? Did the NHS give her sufficient PPE for herself? 

The only source I can see for any of the accusation is the biased order-order website. Where's the backup to explain the detail above? Nowhere, that's where. I've asked a few times for some backup details but all I've been given so far is Guido Fawkes, a biased source. 

I don't think you're understanding what I'm saying. You are allowed to be a labour activist. You are allowed to be a Tory activist. You're even allowed to be a UKIP activist, although I'd prefer to stay away from the weird racist people. What I need is some detail about accusations when they're made, not just some spurious story on a biased website.

Mislead people into believing the hospital had a shortage. Yet the supplies are stored outside in shipping containers and had recently been topped up. ??

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
maxjam

maxjam

Posted
Posted
6 minutes ago, alexxxxx said:

Guido fawkes isn't always right. Case in point: https://www.manchestereveningnews.co.uk/news/greater-manchester-news/politics-blog-wrongly-claimed-labour-17535153

I'm not saying his is always right - but in this instance he is correct in pointing out that the person the BBC selected to put forwards their point of view is a left wing activist.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
GboroRam

GboroRam

Posted
Posted
10 minutes ago, maxjam said:

I'm not saying his is always right - but in this instance he is correct in pointing out that the person the BBC selected to put forwards their point of view is a left wing activist.

Not allowed an opinion unless it's a right wing one, I get it. Fair enough! 

Not allowed to complain about PPE if you voted Labour I guess.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
maxjam

maxjam

Posted
Posted
12 minutes ago, GboroRam said:

Not allowed an opinion unless it's a right wing one, I get it. Fair enough! 

Not allowed to complain about PPE if you voted Labour I guess.

Thats one way of interpreting what I'm saying I guess ?

The BBC still claim to be impartial (lol) at the very least they could either pick people that don't have a history of activism or introduce them as such.

If you read what he said in the Guardian you'd think fair enough its a left wing paper.  If you read something else from a right winger in the Daily Mail then you'd think fair enough its a right wing paper.  The BBC more than most have a responsibility to be impartial, if they are going to feature activists from either the right or the left then they should be called out for it.

Anyway, its turning into a circular argument now, I'll leave it here ?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
rynny

rynny

Posted
Posted
44 minutes ago, 86 Schmokes & a Pancake said:

Ah, just be grateful @GboroRam was on the naughty step when David was assigning mods to threads. You could have ended up modding this shitstorm ?‍♂️

I wish we had certain threads to moderate. Then I probably wouldn't come this thread at all. Unless I wanted to see how bad a job us mods are all doing. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
TramRam

TramRam

Posted
Posted
58 minutes ago, GboroRam said:

The accusation is she complained about no PPE despite giving it away. No explanation of whether the PPE she allegedly gave was from the NHS.

What did she give? Where did she get it? Who owned it? Why was it given away? Did the NHS give her sufficient PPE for herself? 

The only source I can see for any of the accusation is the biased order-order website. Where's the backup to explain the detail above? Nowhere, that's where. I've asked a few times for some backup details but all I've been given so far is Guido Fawkes, a biased source. 

I don't think you're understanding what I'm saying. You are allowed to be a labour activist. You are allowed to be a Tory activist. You're even allowed to be a UKIP activist, although I'd prefer to stay away from the weird racist people. What I need is some detail about accusations when they're made, not just some spurious story on a biased website.

1. You are allowed to be a labour activist. Full stop.

2. You are allowed to be a Tory activist. Full stop.

3. You're even allowed to be a UKIP activist, although I'd prefer to stay away from the weird racist people. A continuation of a sentence.

Islamaphobia and Anti Semitism is alledgedly rife in both the above in bold.

Now that could be construed as selective posting.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
GboroRam

GboroRam

Posted
Posted
1 minute ago, TramRam said:

1. You are allowed to be a labour activist. Full stop.

2. You are allowed to be a Tory activist. Full stop.

3. You're even allowed to be a UKIP activist, although I'd prefer to stay away from the weird racist people. A continuation of a sentence.

Islamaphobia and Anti Semitism is alledgedly rife in both the above in bold.

Now that's could be construed as selective posting.

Thanks for the grammar lesson, it really helps you get your point across and it doesn't sound condescending at all.

By the way, it's spelled allegedly. Happy to help.

Also, you missed an apostrophe.

anti-Semitism

/antɪˈsɛmətɪzəm/

noun

noun: anti-Semitism; noun: antisemitism

hostility to or prejudice against Jews.

 

By missing the UKIP from your bold type, are you suggesting there's no racism in that organisation?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
TramRam

TramRam

Posted
Posted
1 minute ago, GboroRam said:

Thanks for the grammar lesson, it really helps you get your point across and it doesn't sound condescending at all.

By the way, it's spelled allegedly. Happy to help.

Also, you missed an apostrophe.

anti-Semitism

/antɪˈsɛmətɪzəm/

noun

noun: anti-Semitism; noun: antisemitism

hostility to or prejudice against Jews.

 

By missing the UKIP from your bold type, are you suggesting there's no racism in that organisation?

Not at all, You did that for me, Thanks for the English lesson tho much app re she ated.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
GboroRam

GboroRam

Posted
Posted
3 minutes ago, TramRam said:

Not at all, You did that for me, Thanks for the English lesson tho much app re she ated.

You started by pointing out my run-on sentence.

I know there's issues with anti-Semitism in the Labour party membership, and if the senior party apparatchiks hadn't decided to undertake a suicide mission to bomb out Corbyn, maybe it could have been dealt with it. But the party "moderates" (ha-ha) thought it far better to let anti-Semitism (and other complaints) fester and go unaddressed, as long as it brought down the leadership. Now Starmer is in position, I suspect we'll hear a lot less about Labour's institutional anti-Semitism problem.

We know there's issues with Islamophobia, not just in the Tories but probably across the whole of society. Much of this is visible in the Tory membership, but I think we've seen enough incidents in comments from their MPs to ask questions.

As for UKIP, they were putting forward candidates who had outrageous views and indefensible racist opinions. That's next level stuff in my opinion.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Stive Pesley

Stive Pesley

Posted
Posted
1 hour ago, maxjam said:

Do I seriously need to answer this?

I quoted his introduction in full.  You just picked out one sentence.

The only other part of his introduction was "I’m a nurse in the Emergency Medical Unit at St Thomas Hospital. I’m an active socialist and trade unionist"

I didn't pick that bit out because I didn't think there was anything in that which seemed like anyone would even bother to argue were extremist views

So I guess what I'm picking up is that you definitely consider being a socialist and/or trade unionist an extremist view

It's one thing to say that he's clearly going to be left-biased (undoubtedly correct) but to claim that these are extremist views is out of order

I'm a socialist and a trade union member. Am I an extremist?

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Go to topic listing
×
×
  • Create New...