View Poll Results: 10 days left, what'll it be?

Voters
92. You may not vote on this poll
  • Hard Brexit (crash out)

    45 48.91%
  • No Brexit (Remain by revoking A50)

    24 26.09%
  • Withdrawal Agreement (after a new session is called)

    0 0%
  • Extension + Withdrawal Agreement

    3 3.26%
  • Extension + Crashout

    9 9.78%
  • Extension + Remain

    11 11.96%
  1. #24541
    Quote Originally Posted by LeGin Tufnel View Post
    Lies, Mr D.

    https://www.buzzfeed.com/tabathalegg...mail-headlines

    With the exception of the The Times, which on occasion I do find space in my schedule to accommodate, literally, every single other right-leaning British newspaper isn't fit to wipe my arse.
    All of those sensationalist headlines are from the Dacre days. The Daily Mail has improved significantly since then. Granted it will never be a Guardian but it's far more balanced and sensible with respect to leave/remain than is given credit for.

  2. #24542
    Moderator Northern Goblin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    Cumbria, England
    Posts
    12,676
    Quote Originally Posted by Slant View Post
    I know it's a joke, but I'm not getting it. The EU expects someone to either ask for a extension formally, in the European Council, where usually only the PM has the power to speak... so who determines which representative of the UK is sent to the EC? And the same is valid for a revocation (academical question at this point).
    Ok couple of things to clear up here.

    The PM actually goes on behalf of the Queen, who, if she so desired, has the right to go herself and represent the UK.

    Legislation passed commanding the PM to go means to ignore it would be illegal, that'll cost him his job, potentially land him in a cell temporarily and we send someone else in a caretaker role.

    Revocation can be notified by one of several people if I'm not mistaken, including the Speaker of the House.

    His bluster is purely that, his hands are tied but he's making as much noise as possible to garner sympathy from the leave side of the public.


    Sports and Fitness mod, Brit with weird sleeping hours.
    Has good taste in ale, bad taste in D&D choices.

  3. #24543
    Herald of the Titans Monster Hunter's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2019
    Location
    Astera
    Posts
    2,900
    Quote Originally Posted by draykorinee View Post
    No, the BBC did not get reprimanded and both ofcomm and the government who hold sway over the Royal charter have not commented on bias or even came close to removimg its charter because of bias. .

    The BBC is bias in some of its comedy but ofcomm were very clear that they are offering trusted news.

    You're welcome to share the details of this reprimand though, I've never heard of it, the studies done in the BBC generally don't support a strong bias to the left, and there are lots of people claiming its been too far to the right with people like Andrew Neil and in particular giving Farage so much air time for a part time mep.
    https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.tel...bc-warned/amp/

    - - - Updated - - -

    Quote Originally Posted by Thardrisal View Post
    Yeah I think Monster Hunter is in that specific group of cowardly and pathetic individuals that want to essentially to talk to themselves in a vacuum without fear of contradiction, like an aggressive mental patient.

    It would save me a lot of time if I could just post corrections to every factual error MT comes up with, rather than having to deal with his endless attempts to muddy the waters further when he's caught with this pants down in public.

    - - - Updated - - -



    You may think this is more of Dribble's partisanship, but it is actually true. It has changed significantly. Admittedly it was extremely bad to begin with.

    - - - Updated - - -



    Yeah fuck off then, with your tail between your legs you annoying little twat, about time really.

    Oh and please learn to use a spell/grammar checker, your English is embarrassing.
    So dar you haven't posted anything except stamens to the effect of "nuh huh" where as u have delved into my concerns. Its clear by how much it bothers you that you make soc accounts that I have a point you don't like and can't tackle directly.

    Also im heavily dyslexic, so don't be an ablalsit twat on top of a general knob.
    stuck in the D2:shadow keep Que....please send help!

  4. #24544
    Quote Originally Posted by Monster Hunter View Post
    That story is essentially a bunch of MPs moaning that the BBC are telling the, uncomfortable, truth.

  5. #24545
    The Insane Jessicka's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    Manchester
    Posts
    19,011
    Quote Originally Posted by draykorinee View Post
    No, the BBC did not get reprimanded and both ofcomm and the government who hold sway over the Royal charter have not commented on bias or even came close to removimg its charter because of bias. .

    The BBC is bias in some of its comedy but ofcomm were very clear that they are offering trusted news.

    You're welcome to share the details of this reprimand though, I've never heard of it, the studies done in the BBC generally don't support a strong bias to the left, and there are lots of people claiming its been too far to the right with people like Andrew Neil and in particular giving Farage so much air time for a part time mep.
    To say this on a day where they just reprimanded a journalist for calling out Trump for being racist, because they're not allowed to call people making (repeated) racist statements racists, or people who lie, liars. This is why we are where the fuck we are. Because we can't call Trump a racist or Boris a liar, even though they both have phenomenal form for being those things.

    And indeed, Ofcom are now investigating the BBC for this.

  6. #24546
    The Insane Jessicka's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    Manchester
    Posts
    19,011
    Quote Originally Posted by LeGin Tufnel View Post
    Yep. In all honesty, John Whittingdale deserves a good pick axe between the eyes.

    BBC are in impossible position.

    1/4 of me thinks let's just get on and move to a subscription based model and I can happily condemn Nihal on R5 to the rubbish dump of failed talking heads who think they're journalists. 3/4 of me thinks I still very much enjoy seeing hysterical right wing tears re. their funding.

    - - - Updated - - -



    Read the following from first paragraph to last:

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-49837511

    Specifically, this debate is more nuanced than you frame it. If you're going to criticise the BBC, do so for the right reasons.
    I’m not going to trust the BBC to report on themselves. It’s not nuanced. The literal head of policy said straight up that they can’t call someone who tells a lie a liar, or someone who makes a racist comment - however frequently - racist, because they regard calling people liars and racists as insults.

    That is their actual policy. That is why they frame these things, if they contest them at all, as “which this other guy says isn’t true”. Then it’s no longer presented as whether the statements are true or not, but come down to just opinions. And the worst of this is their disgraceful reporting on global warming.

    That matters a lot because it impacts how they report things. When you see them report “X said this” and doesn’t directly spell out that what was said is not true, or that it was racist or whatever, then that gives that untrue statement legitimacy. They instead relegate whether it’s true or not to another column on their website called ‘reality check’, which isn’t repeated in their main reports through other media.

    It’s an awful way to do business.

    Furthermore, the LSE paper I linked for Monster Hunter on the previous page found them not to be any better than other media when it came to smearing and attacking Corbyn, principally because of how it frames it’s reports in this way.
    Last edited by Jessicka; 2019-09-27 at 11:20 PM.

  7. #24547
    Quote Originally Posted by Jessicka View Post
    I’m not going to trust the BBC to report on themselves. It’s not nuanced. The literal head of policy said straight up that they can’t call someone who tells a lie a liar, or someone who makes a racist comment - however frequently - racist, because they regard calling people liars and racists as insults.

    That is their actual policy. That is why they frame these things, if they contest them at all, as “which this other guy says isn’t true”. Then it’s no longer presented as whether the statements are true or not, but come down to just opinions. And the worst of this is their disgraceful reporting on global warming.

    That matters a lot because it impacts how they report things. When you see them report “X said this” and doesn’t directly spell out that what was said is not true, or that it was racist or whatever, then that gives that untrue statement legitimacy. They instead relegate whether it’s true or not to another column on their website called ‘reality check’, which isn’t repeated in their main reports through other media.

    It’s an awful way to do business.
    This is simply not true:

    Explaining their thinking, the BBC's letter said: "Due impartiality does not require absolute neutrality on every issue or detachment from fundamental democratic principles. And the president's remarks were widely regarded as racist and condemned in the UK across the political spectrum.

    "Ms Munchetty had been pressed to comment by her co-presenter and had a legitimate, personal reason for feeling strongly on this issue. She was therefore in our view entitled to give a personal response to the phrase 'go to back to your own country', as it was rooted in her own experience of racism and in a generally accepted interpretation of that phrase."

    Adding: "But it is also evident that Ms Munchetty, despite at the end of the exchange acknowledging 'I am not here to give my opinion', did comment directly and critically on the possible motive for, and potential consequences of, the president's conduct, which by their nature were a matter for legitimate discussion and debate. This, in our view, went beyond what the Guidelines allow for under these circumstances, and on those grounds I am therefore upholding your complaint."


    The problem here is that the BBC holds itself to impossibly high standards of integrity and is, therefore, currently tying itself in knots.

    I promise you, it is not the BBC who is the enemy here.

  8. #24548
    The Insane Jessicka's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    Manchester
    Posts
    19,011
    Quote Originally Posted by LeGin Tufnel View Post
    This is simply not true:

    Explaining their thinking, the BBC's letter said: "Due impartiality does not require absolute neutrality on every issue or detachment from fundamental democratic principles. And the president's remarks were widely regarded as racist and condemned in the UK across the political spectrum.

    "Ms Munchetty had been pressed to comment by her co-presenter and had a legitimate, personal reason for feeling strongly on this issue. She was therefore in our view entitled to give a personal response to the phrase 'go to back to your own country', as it was rooted in her own experience of racism and in a generally accepted interpretation of that phrase."

    Adding: "But it is also evident that Ms Munchetty, despite at the end of the exchange acknowledging 'I am not here to give my opinion', did comment directly and critically on the possible motive for, and potential consequences of, the president's conduct, which by their nature were a matter for legitimate discussion and debate. This, in our view, went beyond what the Guidelines allow for under these circumstances, and on those grounds I am therefore upholding your complaint."


    The problem here is that the BBC holds itself to impossibly high standards of integrity and is, therefore, currently tying itself in knots.

    I promise you, it is not the BBC who is the enemy here.
    There is nothing in there that contradicts what I said. She suggested he was racist for making racist comments. But she’s not allowed to do that, only debate whether the comments were racist. That inherently suggests that it’s not racist and that therefore it must be okay to say these things. And certainly not suggest Trump is racist, in spite of repeatedly saying and doing very racist things.

    Just rattling out “a bunch of people think this is racist” isn’t exactly affirming.

    It’s actually a classic right wing tactic to gain legitimacy, as mastered by the tobacco industry and oil industries for decades, to try to keep a debate open to give a perception of doubt over the harm they do, so they can keep doing it.

    It’s like when they put Nigel fucking Lawson up in climate change debate against actual experts, just because he disagreed with them and they wanted to ‘present balance’.

    The BBC are fucking terrible.
    Last edited by Jessicka; 2019-09-27 at 11:41 PM.

  9. #24549
    Quote Originally Posted by Northern Goblin View Post
    Ok couple of things to clear up here.

    The PM actually goes on behalf of the Queen, who, if she so desired, has the right to go herself and represent the UK.

    Legislation passed commanding the PM to go means to ignore it would be illegal, that'll cost him his job, potentially land him in a cell temporarily and we send someone else in a caretaker role.

    Revocation can be notified by one of several people if I'm not mistaken, including the Speaker of the House.

    His bluster is purely that, his hands are tied but he's making as much noise as possible to garner sympathy from the leave side of the public.
    Ok, my concern is... let's assume he ignores it, gets fired, goes to jail for a couple days or weeks... as far as the EU is concerned, if nobody is present to make these requests, the UK will be out. Regardless of him being in jail, contempt or everyone really, really wanting for these things to be requested.

    Your suggestion of a caretaker role, or even the Queen herself doing it (by instructions of Parliament, I suppose) would be a good trump card to have. Because I think he may just be planning something like that. But it needs to be legal and constitutional, otherwise BoJo might actually try to use the ECJ to nullify any such request. That's why I'm asking. This is bordering on conspiracy theory, but I want to understand the potential schemes working here, because I think the Brexiteers are scheming right now. I don't think we'll have heard the last of this, yet. There's still a month to go. And a month that still has nothing speaking against a no-deal. Remember, simply not wanting it is not good enough. It has to be replaced with a deal. And despite BoJo's propaganda about progressing, I think everyone knows by now that the EU is not impressed by anything he came up with so far. Certainly anything without a solution to the Irish situation will be dismissed.
    Users with <20 posts and ignored shitposters are automatically invisible. Find out how to do that here and help clean up MMO-OT!
    “It’s majoritarian, the majority wins, it’s ruled by the majority for the majority – sod the minority. Whereas true democracy includes everybody’s opinion in society,” - Margaret Georgiadou, 2019 about Brexit referendum.
    PSA: Being a volunteer is no excuse to make a shite job of it.

  10. #24550
    Moderator Northern Goblin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    Cumbria, England
    Posts
    12,676
    It's not by instruction from Parliament, it's her right to demand she attend.

    But yes, there are always ways and means, sometimes it tends to be a bit roundabout but ultimately it gets the necessary results.

    Annoyingly to say this, a month is a heck of a long time in politics, come the 11th hour we can push through crazy amounts of legislation. Makes you wonder why we aren't doing it now though.


    Also Johnson's career is dead if he relies on the ECJ for anything. Farage and co will tear him to shreds.


    Sports and Fitness mod, Brit with weird sleeping hours.
    Has good taste in ale, bad taste in D&D choices.

  11. #24551
    Titan draykorinee's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Location
    Ciderland, arrgh.
    Posts
    13,167
    Quote Originally Posted by Monster Hunter View Post
    Brexiteers angry that he can't get positive coverage of Brexit in the Torygraph is absolutely not supporting anything you said.

    John Whittingdale, a Conservative MP, said that he is concerned that the corporation is "constantly looking for negatives and highlighting the challenges" of Brexit.
    Arrgh, bloody BBC looking for the challenges of Brexit.

  12. #24552
    Quote Originally Posted by Northern Goblin View Post
    It's not by instruction from Parliament, it's her right to demand she attend.

    But yes, there are always ways and means, sometimes it tends to be a bit roundabout but ultimately it gets the necessary results.

    Annoyingly to say this, a month is a heck of a long time in politics, come the 11th hour we can push through crazy amounts of legislation. Makes you wonder why we aren't doing it now though.


    Also Johnson's career is dead if he relies on the ECJ for anything. Farage and co will tear him to shreds.
    You think? They have no morals, no ethics... they don't care how, they just want to get out of the EU, to avoid those tax evasion regulations. I think they'd cheer him on if only he saves them their necks.
    Users with <20 posts and ignored shitposters are automatically invisible. Find out how to do that here and help clean up MMO-OT!
    “It’s majoritarian, the majority wins, it’s ruled by the majority for the majority – sod the minority. Whereas true democracy includes everybody’s opinion in society,” - Margaret Georgiadou, 2019 about Brexit referendum.
    PSA: Being a volunteer is no excuse to make a shite job of it.

  13. #24553
    Scarab Lord
    Join Date
    Oct 2015
    Location
    Baden-Wuerttemberg
    Posts
    4,796
    it seems opposition cannot agree upon Corbyn as caretaker PM, but will not wait much longer with VONC. it has to and therefore will happen before the EU Summit to safeguard against weird and shady attempts by Boris to sit it out. those 14 days grace period between vote itself and scheduling a GE would bite them otherwise

  14. #24554
    Quote Originally Posted by Pann View Post
    That story is essentially a bunch of MPs moaning that the BBC are telling the, uncomfortable, truth.
    John Whittingdale, a Conservative MP, said that he is concerned that the corporation is "constantly looking for negatives and highlighting the challenges" of Brexit.
    LOL this is fucking Orwellian.

    - - - Updated - - -

    Quote Originally Posted by tynitha View Post
    It seems very weird to me that the BBC can release an hour long documentary about how anti-semitic Jeremy Corbyn is, when he has literally never said anything anti-semitic, but no one is allowed to say Donald Trump is a racist, when he says openly racist shit more or less daily. Or, to a lesser extent, Boris Johnson, whose dog whistle messages are pretty blatant if not quite on the Trump level. That doesn't seem very nuanced to me, just seems like a double-standard.

    Not that I really care either way. Maybe Labour will pick up some votes from confused nazis.
    That anti-Semitism thing is fucking ridiculous, the media was blatantly spreading a partisan slur based on nothing. I couldn't believe it when I saw some British TV shows accepting that narrative without question.

  15. #24555
    Quote Originally Posted by Mormolyce View Post
    That anti-Semitism thing is fucking ridiculous, the media was blatantly spreading a partisan slur based on nothing. I couldn't believe it when I saw some British TV shows accepting that narrative without question.
    Well, they spread every Brexit lie, why stop there...
    Users with <20 posts and ignored shitposters are automatically invisible. Find out how to do that here and help clean up MMO-OT!
    “It’s majoritarian, the majority wins, it’s ruled by the majority for the majority – sod the minority. Whereas true democracy includes everybody’s opinion in society,” - Margaret Georgiadou, 2019 about Brexit referendum.
    PSA: Being a volunteer is no excuse to make a shite job of it.

  16. #24556
    Herald of the Titans Monster Hunter's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2019
    Location
    Astera
    Posts
    2,900
    Quote Originally Posted by Pann View Post
    That story is essentially a bunch of MPs moaning that the BBC are telling the, uncomfortable, truth.
    Basically how I see any one who complains about the media.

    It's like yea.... There bias, but there also bias towards you from other papers, and it's always been like that so get over it.

    That my general response.
    stuck in the D2:shadow keep Que....please send help!

  17. #24557
    People still don't get that "Imperialism is wrong and it's all the Jews fault." the book with Corbyn writing the forward saying how great it is somehow isn't antisemitic? Strange.

  18. #24558
    Quote Originally Posted by tynitha View Post
    I suppose you think it is anti-semitic to say that The Jewish media and their gentile pawns justify most of the wars of the world, and that Zionists control half the world, not just a statement of fact?
    Damn, Protocals of the Elders of Zion much?

    I mean what you sprouted is one of the bigger anti semetic conspiracies out there.

  19. #24559
    Quote Originally Posted by Kallisto View Post
    People still don't get that "Imperialism is wrong and it's all the Jews fault." the book with Corbyn writing the forward saying how great it is somehow isn't antisemitic? Strange.
    No doubt it's politically embarrassing, but it's a book from 1901 so yeah some of it is backwards and racist. He obviously wasn't endorsing the problematic parts of it. By that logic anyone who likes Lovecraft or Robert E. Howard is a racist.

    Quote Originally Posted by tynitha View Post
    I suppose you think it is anti-semitic to say that The Jewish media and their gentile pawns justify most of the wars of the world, and that Zionists control half the world, not just a statement of fact?

    I suppose you think it is anti-semitic to fire a rocket at Israel in self-defense?

    I suppose you think it is anti-semitic to point to the Israeli government's role in provoking attacks on synagogues worldwide?
    1. Yes
    2. No
    3. Maybe? I have no idea what this one is.

  20. #24560
    The Insane Jessicka's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    Manchester
    Posts
    19,011
    Quote Originally Posted by Kallisto View Post
    Damn, Protocals of the Elders of Zion much?

    I mean what you sprouted is one of the bigger anti semetic conspiracies out there.
    On balance, Corbyn’s shit is less bad than the overt racism, sexism, homophobia, transphobia, xenophobia, islamophobia, and indeed anti-semitism present in the current government.

    But you wouldn’t think that from the coverage.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •