FabSwingers.com > Forums > Politics > Sir Keir Starmer blunder
Sir Keir Starmer blunder
Jump to: Newest in thread
Extraordinary blunder yesterday, from a lawyer for heavens sake, who can't remember what he said in 2017. He repeatedly denied in PMQs that he wanted to stay in the European medicines agency, before a humiliating climb down last night. I want a decent opposition.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-9219429/Furious-Keir-Starmer-confronts-Boris-Johnson-PMQs.html?ito=native_share_article-masthead |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
 |
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Extraordinary blunder yesterday, from a lawyer for heavens sake, who can't remember what he said in 2017. He repeatedly denied in PMQs that he wanted to stay in the European medicines agency, before a humiliating climb down last night. I want a decent opposition.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-9219429/Furious-Keir-Starmer-confronts-Boris-Johnson-PMQs.html?ito=native_share_article-masthead"
At least he had the dignity to accept he was wrong and apologies, has Boris ever told a lie in parliament ? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Extraordinary blunder yesterday, from a lawyer for heavens sake, who can't remember what he said in 2017. He repeatedly denied in PMQs that he wanted to stay in the European medicines agency, before a humiliating climb down last night. I want a decent opposition.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-9219429/Furious-Keir-Starmer-confronts-Boris-Johnson-PMQs.html?ito=native_share_article-masthead
At least he had the dignity to accept he was wrong and apologies, has Boris ever told a lie in parliament ? "
Probably, I've never voted for Boris, thread is about Sir Keir.  |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Extraordinary blunder yesterday, from a lawyer for heavens sake, who can't remember what he said in 2017. He repeatedly denied in PMQs that he wanted to stay in the European medicines agency, before a humiliating climb down last night. I want a decent opposition.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-9219429/Furious-Keir-Starmer-confronts-Boris-Johnson-PMQs.html?ito=native_share_article-masthead"
The daily mail
The go to source for political impartiality
Funny how the last several weeks boris has been totally humiliated but the media has chosen not to mention it.
Free press my arse. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *ostafunMan
over a year ago
near ipswich |
"Apparently this Guardian link works in fact:
https://www.google.co.uk/amp/s/amp.theguardian.com/world/2021/feb/03/boris-johnson-visit-vaccine-plant-despite-covid-outbreak
"
i saw that dickhead blackford yesterday calling boris a criminal for going to scotland. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Just reading those 2 articles its crystal clear why the daily mail is respected throughput journalism as a bastion of integrity and impartiality."
I solemnly promise not to quote the Mail again unless absolutely necessary and I need to invoke article 16. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Just reading those 2 articles its crystal clear why the daily mail is respected throughput journalism as a bastion of integrity and impartiality.
I solemnly promise not to quote the Mail again unless absolutely necessary and I need to invoke article 16."
No it's quite amusing reading people trying to defend it as a credible source of news. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Just reading those 2 articles its crystal clear why the daily mail is respected throughput journalism as a bastion of integrity and impartiality.
I solemnly promise not to quote the Mail again unless absolutely necessary and I need to invoke article 16.
No it's quite amusing reading people trying to defend it as a credible source of news."
But does the article say anything that didn't happen?? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
Could have sworn they had to pay damages the other day to prince harry.
A bit strange as they are normally so far up the royal families arse,they could pass for pinocchio.
But apparently everything they print is right?
Rightio |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"The Daily Mail 
You'll never have a lefty admit that anything in that paper is right. Even if it is "
A stopped clock is right twice a day.
The point is, something being published in the daily mail, has zero bearing on it being true or not. It's the equivalent of "some bloke down the pub told me...". Only more like "some racist bloke down the pub told me..."
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *ostafunMan
over a year ago
near ipswich |
you will all be dragged into a debate about the credibility of a newspaper to divert you from the original post a tactic that has been used for ages now and something i refuse to engage in anymore. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"you will all be dragged into a debate about the credibility of a newspaper to divert you from the original post a tactic that has been used for ages now and something i refuse to engage in anymore."
Then stop quoting the bloke down the pub/daily mail as if it was a credible news source.
Should be easy enough. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *ostafunMan
over a year ago
near ipswich |
"you will all be dragged into a debate about the credibility of a newspaper to divert you from the original post a tactic that has been used for ages now and something i refuse to engage in anymore.
Then stop quoting the bloke down the pub/daily mail as if it was a credible news source.
Should be easy enough."
As i said i dont i only quote the guardian you are directing that at the wrong person keep up please. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"you will all be dragged into a debate about the credibility of a newspaper to divert you from the original post a tactic that has been used for ages now and something i refuse to engage in anymore."
This isn’t a politics forum anymore. The art of discussion has been lost by those who just want to argue and wagon circle. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *ostafunMan
over a year ago
near ipswich |
"you will all be dragged into a debate about the credibility of a newspaper to divert you from the original post a tactic that has been used for ages now and something i refuse to engage in anymore.
This isn’t a politics forum anymore. The art of discussion has been lost by those who just want to argue and wagon circle. "
you have got that right mate. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"you will all be dragged into a debate about the credibility of a newspaper to divert you from the original post a tactic that has been used for ages now and something i refuse to engage in anymore.
This isn’t a politics forum anymore. The art of discussion has been lost by those who just want to argue and wagon circle. "
Analysis of data source is a key element of reasoned discussion. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Maybe righties can stop quoting the Mail and lefties can stop quoting the Guardian.
Seems fair "
It is a mistake to equate the accuracy of the guardian with that of the daily mail.
In truth, it would be more beneficial if people quoted the actual information being reported on directly, rather than linking to a newspaper that is reporting on the information. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *andy 1Couple
over a year ago
northeast |
"you will all be dragged into a debate about the credibility of a newspaper to divert you from the original post a tactic that has been used for ages now and something i refuse to engage in anymore."
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"you will all be dragged into a debate about the credibility of a newspaper to divert you from the original post a tactic that has been used for ages now and something i refuse to engage in anymore.
This isn’t a politics forum anymore. The art of discussion has been lost by those who just want to argue and wagon circle.
Analysis of data source is a key element of reasoned discussion."
And is the analysis of data sources on here done in a reasoned fashion? Nope it’s dismissed as either lefty bollocks or righty bollocks.
There is no longer objectivity. It’s straight down to arguing.
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"you will all be dragged into a debate about the credibility of a newspaper to divert you from the original post a tactic that has been used for ages now and something i refuse to engage in anymore.
This isn’t a politics forum anymore. The art of discussion has been lost by those who just want to argue and wagon circle. "
The three or four same ones on every thread too. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Maybe righties can stop quoting the Mail and lefties can stop quoting the Guardian.
Seems fair
It is a mistake to equate the accuracy of the guardian with that of the daily mail.
In truth, it would be more beneficial if people quoted the actual information being reported on directly, rather than linking to a newspaper that is reporting on the information."
I think you've just proved what twisted is trying to say.
Apparently the Mail is so much worse than the Guardian. Who decides that? Because as far as I can see a right will see they mail is better and a lefty will say the Guardian is.
How about we all accept that one is left, one is right and they both print whichever way suits their narrative |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *andy 1Couple
over a year ago
northeast |
"you will all be dragged into a debate about the credibility of a newspaper to divert you from the original post a tactic that has been used for ages now and something i refuse to engage in anymore.
This isn’t a politics forum anymore. The art of discussion has been lost by those who just want to argue and wagon circle.
The three or four same ones on every thread too."
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Extraordinary blunder yesterday, from a lawyer for heavens sake, who can't remember what he said in 2017. He repeatedly denied in PMQs that he wanted to stay in the European medicines agency, before a humiliating climb down last night. I want a decent opposition.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-9219429/Furious-Keir-Starmer-confronts-Boris-Johnson-PMQs.html?ito=native_share_article-masthead"
I can't remember what is said at 20:17 never mind in 2017  |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Maybe righties can stop quoting the Mail and lefties can stop quoting the Guardian.
Seems fair
It is a mistake to equate the accuracy of the guardian with that of the daily mail.
In truth, it would be more beneficial if people quoted the actual information being reported on directly, rather than linking to a newspaper that is reporting on the information."
Please fill your boots and comment on the Guardian article I linked cheers |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Maybe righties can stop quoting the Mail and lefties can stop quoting the Guardian.
Seems fair
It is a mistake to equate the accuracy of the guardian with that of the daily mail.
In truth, it would be more beneficial if people quoted the actual information being reported on directly, rather than linking to a newspaper that is reporting on the information."
Like I said earlier,the 2 papers report the same story.
The 'lefty 'one reports it in a measured tone concluding that starmer was in the wrong.
The other using hyperbolic language with no pretence at any impartiality at all.
Like I said though it's highly amusing watch people quote it as an informative and unbiased source of information. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Just reading those 2 articles its crystal clear why the daily mail is respected throughput journalism as a bastion of integrity and impartiality.
Once again Lionel we agree, brilliant paper."
Yep cant go wrong with a paper that openly supported Mussolini. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Maybe righties can stop quoting the Mail and lefties can stop quoting the Guardian.
Seems fair
It is a mistake to equate the accuracy of the guardian with that of the daily mail.
In truth, it would be more beneficial if people quoted the actual information being reported on directly, rather than linking to a newspaper that is reporting on the information.
Like I said earlier,the 2 papers report the same story.
The 'lefty 'one reports it in a measured tone concluding that starmer was in the wrong.
The other using hyperbolic language with no pretence at any impartiality at all.
Like I said though it's highly amusing watch people quote it as an informative and unbiased source of information. "
The guardian article says he forgot what he said four times in 2017 re the European medicine agency.
This is unimpressive. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Maybe righties can stop quoting the Mail and lefties can stop quoting the Guardian.
Seems fair
It is a mistake to equate the accuracy of the guardian with that of the daily mail.
In truth, it would be more beneficial if people quoted the actual information being reported on directly, rather than linking to a newspaper that is reporting on the information.
Like I said earlier,the 2 papers report the same story.
The 'lefty 'one reports it in a measured tone concluding that starmer was in the wrong.
The other using hyperbolic language with no pretence at any impartiality at all.
Like I said though it's highly amusing watch people quote it as an informative and unbiased source of information.
The guardian article says he forgot what he said four times in 2017 re the European medicine agency.
This is unimpressive. "
Im not arguing.
I'm saying the 2 papers have printed the same story.
One has printed the facts in a measured manner.
The other is painfully sensationalist and biased. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Maybe righties can stop quoting the Mail and lefties can stop quoting the Guardian.
Seems fair
It is a mistake to equate the accuracy of the guardian with that of the daily mail.
In truth, it would be more beneficial if people quoted the actual information being reported on directly, rather than linking to a newspaper that is reporting on the information.
I think you've just proved what twisted is trying to say.
Apparently the Mail is so much worse than the Guardian. Who decides that? Because as far as I can see a right will see they mail is better and a lefty will say the Guardian is.
How about we all accept that one is left, one is right and they both print whichever way suits their narrative"
I'm not left or right with my politics.
Neither side appeals to me.
The Guardian is a terrible news paper with poor quality journalism. But the Daily Mail is specifically known for promoting misinformation, and articles promoting xenophobia and transphobia. These are not two equally bias news sources. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Maybe righties can stop quoting the Mail and lefties can stop quoting the Guardian.
Seems fair
It is a mistake to equate the accuracy of the guardian with that of the daily mail.
In truth, it would be more beneficial if people quoted the actual information being reported on directly, rather than linking to a newspaper that is reporting on the information.
Please fill your boots and comment on the Guardian article I linked cheers "
No thanks. This story is thoroughly uninteresting for me. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Maybe righties can stop quoting the Mail and lefties can stop quoting the Guardian.
Seems fair
It is a mistake to equate the accuracy of the guardian with that of the daily mail.
In truth, it would be more beneficial if people quoted the actual information being reported on directly, rather than linking to a newspaper that is reporting on the information.
Like I said earlier,the 2 papers report the same story.
The 'lefty 'one reports it in a measured tone concluding that starmer was in the wrong.
The other using hyperbolic language with no pretence at any impartiality at all.
Like I said though it's highly amusing watch people quote it as an informative and unbiased source of information.
The guardian article says he forgot what he said four times in 2017 re the European medicine agency.
This is unimpressive.
Im not arguing.
I'm saying the 2 papers have printed the same story.
One has printed the facts in a measured manner.
The other is painfully sensationalist and biased."
Just dip sampling the Conservative articles in the Gdian and I could say the same thang about them.
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Maybe righties can stop quoting the Mail and lefties can stop quoting the Guardian.
Seems fair
It is a mistake to equate the accuracy of the guardian with that of the daily mail.
In truth, it would be more beneficial if people quoted the actual information being reported on directly, rather than linking to a newspaper that is reporting on the information.
Like I said earlier,the 2 papers report the same story.
The 'lefty 'one reports it in a measured tone concluding that starmer was in the wrong.
The other using hyperbolic language with no pretence at any impartiality at all.
Like I said though it's highly amusing watch people quote it as an informative and unbiased source of information. "
I haven't seen the Guardian report this at all??
Why wouldn't they? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"you will all be dragged into a debate about the credibility of a newspaper to divert you from the original post a tactic that has been used for ages now and something i refuse to engage in anymore.
This isn’t a politics forum anymore. The art of discussion has been lost by those who just want to argue and wagon circle.
Analysis of data source is a key element of reasoned discussion.
And is the analysis of data sources on here done in a reasoned fashion? Nope it’s dismissed as either lefty bollocks or righty bollocks.
There is no longer objectivity. It’s straight down to arguing.
"
Because 9 times out of 10 when it's in the mail it is bollocks.
The guardian is a centre leaning paper but it at least strives at impartiality.
The mail is a hate rag with zero credibility in regards to journalistic credibility.A middle class sun.
The fact that the 2 papers are serously compared on here is highly amusing.
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Maybe righties can stop quoting the Mail and lefties can stop quoting the Guardian.
Seems fair
It is a mistake to equate the accuracy of the guardian with that of the daily mail.
In truth, it would be more beneficial if people quoted the actual information being reported on directly, rather than linking to a newspaper that is reporting on the information.
Like I said earlier,the 2 papers report the same story.
The 'lefty 'one reports it in a measured tone concluding that starmer was in the wrong.
The other using hyperbolic language with no pretence at any impartiality at all.
Like I said though it's highly amusing watch people quote it as an informative and unbiased source of information.
The guardian article says he forgot what he said four times in 2017 re the European medicine agency.
This is unimpressive.
Im not arguing.
I'm saying the 2 papers have printed the same story.
One has printed the facts in a measured manner.
The other is painfully sensationalist and biased.
Just dip sampling the Conservative articles in the Gdian and I could say the same thang about them.
"
The guardian sensationalist?
Serously? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Maybe righties can stop quoting the Mail and lefties can stop quoting the Guardian.
Seems fair
It is a mistake to equate the accuracy of the guardian with that of the daily mail.
In truth, it would be more beneficial if people quoted the actual information being reported on directly, rather than linking to a newspaper that is reporting on the information.
Like I said earlier,the 2 papers report the same story.
The 'lefty 'one reports it in a measured tone concluding that starmer was in the wrong.
The other using hyperbolic language with no pretence at any impartiality at all.
Like I said though it's highly amusing watch people quote it as an informative and unbiased source of information.
The guardian article says he forgot what he said four times in 2017 re the European medicine agency.
This is unimpressive.
Im not arguing.
I'm saying the 2 papers have printed the same story.
One has printed the facts in a measured manner.
The other is painfully sensationalist and biased.
Just dip sampling the Conservative articles in the Gdian and I could say the same thang about them.
The guardian sensationalist?
Serously?"
Some of it could be construed as sensationalist. Depends who is doing the looking. People are so entrenched in their bias.
Would it be safe to say you would never vote Tory? Even if they had sound policy? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"As the drama continued to unfold, Sir Keir sat guppy-eyed, twirling his right foot round and round like a helicopter rotor, as poisoned as a thousand wasp stings.
"
Quentin is quite amusing and at least he actually turns up to Parliament to watch. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"As the drama continued to unfold, Sir Keir sat guppy-eyed, twirling his right foot round and round like a helicopter rotor, as poisoned as a thousand wasp stings.
Quentin is quite amusing and at least he actually turns up to Parliament to watch. "
It’s all bollocks tbh. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Maybe righties can stop quoting the Mail and lefties can stop quoting the Guardian.
Seems fair
It is a mistake to equate the accuracy of the guardian with that of the daily mail.
In truth, it would be more beneficial if people quoted the actual information being reported on directly, rather than linking to a newspaper that is reporting on the information.
Like I said earlier,the 2 papers report the same story.
The 'lefty 'one reports it in a measured tone concluding that starmer was in the wrong.
The other using hyperbolic language with no pretence at any impartiality at all.
Like I said though it's highly amusing watch people quote it as an informative and unbiased source of information.
The guardian article says he forgot what he said four times in 2017 re the European medicine agency.
This is unimpressive.
Im not arguing.
I'm saying the 2 papers have printed the same story.
One has printed the facts in a measured manner.
The other is painfully sensationalist and biased.
Just dip sampling the Conservative articles in the Gdian and I could say the same thang about them.
The guardian sensationalist?
Serously?
Some of it could be construed as sensationalist. Depends who is doing the looking. People are so entrenched in their bias.
Would it be safe to say you would never vote Tory? Even if they had sound policy? "
A lot of it is poorly written and uninteresting. But not so much sensationalist.
The Independent occupies the non-right wing sensationalist section of the market. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Maybe righties can stop quoting the Mail and lefties can stop quoting the Guardian.
Seems fair
It is a mistake to equate the accuracy of the guardian with that of the daily mail.
In truth, it would be more beneficial if people quoted the actual information being reported on directly, rather than linking to a newspaper that is reporting on the information.
Like I said earlier,the 2 papers report the same story.
The 'lefty 'one reports it in a measured tone concluding that starmer was in the wrong.
The other using hyperbolic language with no pretence at any impartiality at all.
Like I said though it's highly amusing watch people quote it as an informative and unbiased source of information.
The guardian article says he forgot what he said four times in 2017 re the European medicine agency.
This is unimpressive.
Im not arguing.
I'm saying the 2 papers have printed the same story.
One has printed the facts in a measured manner.
The other is painfully sensationalist and biased.
Just dip sampling the Conservative articles in the Gdian and I could say the same thang about them.
The guardian sensationalist?
Serously?
Some of it could be construed as sensationalist. Depends who is doing the looking. People are so entrenched in their bias.
Would it be safe to say you would never vote Tory? Even if they had sound policy? "
For balance I would say the likes of the times is a Tory paper, but it at least panders to people who can read. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Maybe righties can stop quoting the Mail and lefties can stop quoting the Guardian.
Seems fair
It is a mistake to equate the accuracy of the guardian with that of the daily mail.
In truth, it would be more beneficial if people quoted the actual information being reported on directly, rather than linking to a newspaper that is reporting on the information.
Like I said earlier,the 2 papers report the same story.
The 'lefty 'one reports it in a measured tone concluding that starmer was in the wrong.
The other using hyperbolic language with no pretence at any impartiality at all.
Like I said though it's highly amusing watch people quote it as an informative and unbiased source of information.
The guardian article says he forgot what he said four times in 2017 re the European medicine agency.
This is unimpressive.
Im not arguing.
I'm saying the 2 papers have printed the same story.
One has printed the facts in a measured manner.
The other is painfully sensationalist and biased.
Just dip sampling the Conservative articles in the Gdian and I could say the same thang about them.
The guardian sensationalist?
Serously?
Some of it could be construed as sensationalist. Depends who is doing the looking. People are so entrenched in their bias.
Would it be safe to say you would never vote Tory? Even if they had sound policy?
For balance I would say the likes of the times is a Tory paper, but it at least panders to people who can read."
I made another comment in a thread about the Times, their content has become noticeable thinner in the past couple of years unfortunately. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"https://fullfact.org/health/keir-starmer-european-medicines-agency/
Good link.
I do try to quote fullfact frequently but didn't realise they'd have this story up and checked so quickly "
It was very easy for them to check and report this event quickly |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"As the drama continued to unfold, Sir Keir sat guppy-eyed, twirling his right foot round and round like a helicopter rotor, as poisoned as a thousand wasp stings.
"
And you can see why its quoted as gospel on here. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"I rest my case everyone is talking about newspapers not the thread you have been suckered in yet again folks. "
Probably because this is not an interesting story:
Politiciann says something which contradicts what he said before. Apologised. End.
What's more interesting is the media slant, and how people perceive the media they consume and what effect it has on their outlook. Also interesting to see people point to the guardian as if it's somehow the non-right wing Daily Mail.
Much more interesting conversation. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Extraordinary blunder yesterday, from a lawyer for heavens sake, who can't remember what he said in 2017. He repeatedly denied in PMQs that he wanted to stay in the European medicines agency, before a humiliating climb down last night. I want a decent opposition.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-9219429/Furious-Keir-Starmer-confronts-Boris-Johnson-PMQs.html?ito=native_share_article-masthead
At least he had the dignity to accept he was wrong and apologies, has Boris ever told a lie in parliament ?
Probably, I've never voted for Boris, thread is about Sir Keir. "
Then I refer you to my previous reply, he had the dignity to accept he was wrong and apologies, is that an acceptable response ? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"I rest my case everyone is talking about newspapers not the thread you have been suckered in yet again folks.
Probably because this is not an interesting story:
Politiciann says something which contradicts what he said before. Apologised. End.
What's more interesting is the media slant, and how people perceive the media they consume and what effect it has on their outlook. Also interesting to see people point to the guardian as if it's somehow the non-right wing Daily Mail.
Much more interesting conversation."
Well people who were there say that Sir Keir squared up to Boris after PMQs and had to be pulled away ranting and raving that he lied about the European medicines support.
Which turned out to be accurate and Sir Keir had forgotten.
Makes me question his mental stability and fitness to be opposition leader tbh. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"I rest my case everyone is talking about newspapers not the thread you have been suckered in yet again folks. "
I wonder why that is? Well I don't really, it's because they don't find it interesting and no one would spend much time commenting if they opened their own post on the subject, so they use it simply as a platform to spout what they want to talk about.
Personally I think Mods should step in when deliberate detailing happens. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"I rest my case everyone is talking about newspapers not the thread you have been suckered in yet again folks.
Probably because this is not an interesting story:
Politiciann says something which contradicts what he said before. Apologised. End.
What's more interesting is the media slant, and how people perceive the media they consume and what effect it has on their outlook. Also interesting to see people point to the guardian as if it's somehow the non-right wing Daily Mail.
Much more interesting conversation.
Well people who were there say that Sir Keir squared up to Boris after PMQs and had to be pulled away ranting and raving that he lied about the European medicines support.
Which turned out to be accurate and Sir Keir had forgotten.
Makes me question his mental stability and fitness to be opposition leader tbh. "
People who were there are also saying that never happened, so what does this mean? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"I rest my case everyone is talking about newspapers not the thread you have been suckered in yet again folks.
Probably because this is not an interesting story:
Politiciann says something which contradicts what he said before. Apologised. End.
What's more interesting is the media slant, and how people perceive the media they consume and what effect it has on their outlook. Also interesting to see people point to the guardian as if it's somehow the non-right wing Daily Mail.
Much more interesting conversation.
Well people who were there say that Sir Keir squared up to Boris after PMQs and had to be pulled away ranting and raving that he lied about the European medicines support.
Which turned out to be accurate and Sir Keir had forgotten.
Makes me question his mental stability and fitness to be opposition leader tbh. "
Everybody would be surprised if you were not feeling like this so who cares? Surprisingly I wonder how a pm who has been an office for a year and still hasn’t answered a single question in a straight manner is fit for purpose or if his mental aptitudes are adequate. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"I rest my case everyone is talking about newspapers not the thread you have been suckered in yet again folks.
I wonder why that is? Well I don't really, it's because they don't find it interesting and no one would spend much time commenting if they opened their own post on the subject, so they use it simply as a platform to spout what they want to talk about.
Personally I think Mods should step in when deliberate detailing happens."
Last time I checked it wasnt upto you. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"I rest my case everyone is talking about newspapers not the thread you have been suckered in yet again folks.
Probably because this is not an interesting story:
Politiciann says something which contradicts what he said before. Apologised. End.
What's more interesting is the media slant, and how people perceive the media they consume and what effect it has on their outlook. Also interesting to see people point to the guardian as if it's somehow the non-right wing Daily Mail.
Much more interesting conversation.
Well people who were there say that Sir Keir squared up to Boris after PMQs and had to be pulled away ranting and raving that he lied about the European medicines support.
Which turned out to be accurate and Sir Keir had forgotten.
Makes me question his mental stability and fitness to be opposition leader tbh. "
Who said he squared upto him? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"I rest my case everyone is talking about newspapers not the thread you have been suckered in yet again folks.
I wonder why that is? Well I don't really, it's because they don't find it interesting and no one would spend much time commenting if they opened their own post on the subject, so they use it simply as a platform to spout what they want to talk about.
Personally I think Mods should step in when deliberate detailing happens."
You're suggesting that the mods should remove posts that discuss the source of information quoted. But leave posts, like yours, that are discussing the discussions of the source of information quoted? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"I rest my case everyone is talking about newspapers not the thread you have been suckered in yet again folks.
Probably because this is not an interesting story:
Politiciann says something which contradicts what he said before. Apologised. End.
What's more interesting is the media slant, and how people perceive the media they consume and what effect it has on their outlook. Also interesting to see people point to the guardian as if it's somehow the non-right wing Daily Mail.
Much more interesting conversation.
Well people who were there say that Sir Keir squared up to Boris after PMQs and had to be pulled away ranting and raving that he lied about the European medicines support.
Which turned out to be accurate and Sir Keir had forgotten.
Makes me question his mental stability and fitness to be opposition leader tbh.
Who said he squared upto him?"
Mark Francois said so according to the guardian:
"The Conservative MP Mark Francois, who made a point of order after PMQs reading out some pre-prepared comments quoting Starmer on the EMA, later claimed he had seen Starmer angrily confront Johnson in the lobbies after their exchange"
I don't make this stuff up you know  |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"I rest my case everyone is talking about newspapers not the thread you have been suckered in yet again folks.
Probably because this is not an interesting story:
Politiciann says something which contradicts what he said before. Apologised. End.
What's more interesting is the media slant, and how people perceive the media they consume and what effect it has on their outlook. Also interesting to see people point to the guardian as if it's somehow the non-right wing Daily Mail.
Much more interesting conversation.
Well people who were there say that Sir Keir squared up to Boris after PMQs and had to be pulled away ranting and raving that he lied about the European medicines support.
Which turned out to be accurate and Sir Keir had forgotten.
Makes me question his mental stability and fitness to be opposition leader tbh.
Who said he squared upto him?
Mark Francois said so according to the guardian:
"The Conservative MP Mark Francois, who made a point of order after PMQs reading out some pre-prepared comments quoting Starmer on the EMA, later claimed he had seen Starmer angrily confront Johnson in the lobbies after their exchange"
I don't make this stuff up you know "
Ha ha ha
I see what the guardian are doing there
Very clever
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *renzMan
over a year ago
Between Chichester and Havant |
I've become bored with these threads as they just keep going round and round with the same protagonists trying to shout louder than the other.. but the interesting thing about this thread, when I pointed out a few weeks ago that all media is bias to some extent, whether paper, TV station, website etc, with very few genuinely unbiased I was shot down in flames. Now I see those same protagonists saying there are bias in the newspapers! Who'd have thought? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"I rest my case everyone is talking about newspapers not the thread you have been suckered in yet again folks.
Probably because this is not an interesting story:
Politiciann says something which contradicts what he said before. Apologised. End.
What's more interesting is the media slant, and how people perceive the media they consume and what effect it has on their outlook. Also interesting to see people point to the guardian as if it's somehow the non-right wing Daily Mail.
Much more interesting conversation.
Well people who were there say that Sir Keir squared up to Boris after PMQs and had to be pulled away ranting and raving that he lied about the European medicines support.
Which turned out to be accurate and Sir Keir had forgotten.
Makes me question his mental stability and fitness to be opposition leader tbh.
Who said he squared upto him?
Mark Francois said so according to the guardian:
"The Conservative MP Mark Francois, who made a point of order after PMQs reading out some pre-prepared comments quoting Starmer on the EMA, later claimed he had seen Starmer angrily confront Johnson in the lobbies after their exchange"
I don't make this stuff up you know
Ha ha ha
I see what the guardian are doing there
Very clever
"
Since when has the Guardian been a credible source? Since when has the Guardian been a credible source?
Mark Francois... |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"I rest my case everyone is talking about newspapers not the thread you have been suckered in yet again folks.
Probably because this is not an interesting story:
Politiciann says something which contradicts what he said before. Apologised. End.
What's more interesting is the media slant, and how people perceive the media they consume and what effect it has on their outlook. Also interesting to see people point to the guardian as if it's somehow the non-right wing Daily Mail.
Much more interesting conversation.
Well people who were there say that Sir Keir squared up to Boris after PMQs and had to be pulled away ranting and raving that he lied about the European medicines support.
Which turned out to be accurate and Sir Keir had forgotten.
Makes me question his mental stability and fitness to be opposition leader tbh.
Who said he squared upto him?
Mark Francois said so according to the guardian:
"The Conservative MP Mark Francois, who made a point of order after PMQs reading out some pre-prepared comments quoting Starmer on the EMA, later claimed he had seen Starmer angrily confront Johnson in the lobbies after their exchange"
I don't make this stuff up you know
Ha ha ha
I see what the guardian are doing there
Very clever
Since when has the Guardian been a credible source? Since when has the Guardian been a credible source?
Mark Francois... "
It's gonna be quite hard to discuss politics if people are not going to accept any source at all lol. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"I rest my case everyone is talking about newspapers not the thread you have been suckered in yet again folks.
Probably because this is not an interesting story:
Politiciann says something which contradicts what he said before. Apologised. End.
What's more interesting is the media slant, and how people perceive the media they consume and what effect it has on their outlook. Also interesting to see people point to the guardian as if it's somehow the non-right wing Daily Mail.
Much more interesting conversation.
Well people who were there say that Sir Keir squared up to Boris after PMQs and had to be pulled away ranting and raving that he lied about the European medicines support.
Which turned out to be accurate and Sir Keir had forgotten.
Makes me question his mental stability and fitness to be opposition leader tbh.
Who said he squared upto him?
Mark Francois said so according to the guardian:
"The Conservative MP Mark Francois, who made a point of order after PMQs reading out some pre-prepared comments quoting Starmer on the EMA, later claimed he had seen Starmer angrily confront Johnson in the lobbies after their exchange"
I don't make this stuff up you know
Ha ha ha
I see what the guardian are doing there
Very clever
Since when has the Guardian been a credible source? Since when has the Guardian been a credible source?
Mark Francois...
It's gonna be quite hard to discuss politics if people are not going to accept any source at all lol. "
Mark Francois |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"I rest my case everyone is talking about newspapers not the thread you have been suckered in yet again folks.
Probably because this is not an interesting story:
Politiciann says something which contradicts what he said before. Apologised. End.
What's more interesting is the media slant, and how people perceive the media they consume and what effect it has on their outlook. Also interesting to see people point to the guardian as if it's somehow the non-right wing Daily Mail.
Much more interesting conversation.
Well people who were there say that Sir Keir squared up to Boris after PMQs and had to be pulled away ranting and raving that he lied about the European medicines support.
Which turned out to be accurate and Sir Keir had forgotten.
Makes me question his mental stability and fitness to be opposition leader tbh.
Who said he squared upto him?
Mark Francois said so according to the guardian:
"The Conservative MP Mark Francois, who made a point of order after PMQs reading out some pre-prepared comments quoting Starmer on the EMA, later claimed he had seen Starmer angrily confront Johnson in the lobbies after their exchange"
I don't make this stuff up you know
Ha ha ha
I see what the guardian are doing there
Very clever
Since when has the Guardian been a credible source? Since when has the Guardian been a credible source?
Mark Francois...
It's gonna be quite hard to discuss politics if people are not going to accept any source at all lol. "
Well, the Guardian has often been discredited here by a lot of people. As for Mark Francois, if you’ve read the article in the Guardian as I have, you should probably mention what the Labour Chris Matheson said. It’s in the line just below. Dare to quote it? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"I've become bored with these threads as they just keep going round and round with the same protagonists trying to shout louder than the other.. but the interesting thing about this thread, when I pointed out a few weeks ago that all media is bias to some extent, whether paper, TV station, website etc, with very few genuinely unbiased I was shot down in flames. Now I see those same protagonists saying there are bias in the newspapers! Who'd have thought? "
No one denies every single news outlet is biased to a certain degree.
However there are degrees of bias.
No argument the guardian is a centre leaning newspaper ,however it doesnt resort to hysterical headlines and at least aims for impartiality.
For example look at the recent eu ireland issue which the pro eu guardian, criticised heavily.
Now compare that to the mail.
Just go and Google daily mail eu or jeremy corbyn and see how many hits you get.
How someone can sit there and say with a straight face that the mail is a credible source of news Is beyond me. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"I rest my case everyone is talking about newspapers not the thread you have been suckered in yet again folks.
Probably because this is not an interesting story:
Politiciann says something which contradicts what he said before. Apologised. End.
What's more interesting is the media slant, and how people perceive the media they consume and what effect it has on their outlook. Also interesting to see people point to the guardian as if it's somehow the non-right wing Daily Mail.
Much more interesting conversation.
Well people who were there say that Sir Keir squared up to Boris after PMQs and had to be pulled away ranting and raving that he lied about the European medicines support.
Which turned out to be accurate and Sir Keir had forgotten.
Makes me question his mental stability and fitness to be opposition leader tbh.
Who said he squared upto him?
Mark Francois said so according to the guardian:
"The Conservative MP Mark Francois, who made a point of order after PMQs reading out some pre-prepared comments quoting Starmer on the EMA, later claimed he had seen Starmer angrily confront Johnson in the lobbies after their exchange"
I don't make this stuff up you know
Ha ha ha
I see what the guardian are doing there
Very clever
Since when has the Guardian been a credible source? Since when has the Guardian been a credible source?
Mark Francois...
It's gonna be quite hard to discuss politics if people are not going to accept any source at all lol.
Mark Francois "
Yes yes francois haha yes lol very good yawn
My impartial opinion is that Starmer is not upto the job which is a serious matter. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"I rest my case everyone is talking about newspapers not the thread you have been suckered in yet again folks.
Probably because this is not an interesting story:
Politiciann says something which contradicts what he said before. Apologised. End.
What's more interesting is the media slant, and how people perceive the media they consume and what effect it has on their outlook. Also interesting to see people point to the guardian as if it's somehow the non-right wing Daily Mail.
Much more interesting conversation.
Well people who were there say that Sir Keir squared up to Boris after PMQs and had to be pulled away ranting and raving that he lied about the European medicines support.
Which turned out to be accurate and Sir Keir had forgotten.
Makes me question his mental stability and fitness to be opposition leader tbh.
Who said he squared upto him?
Mark Francois said so according to the guardian:
"The Conservative MP Mark Francois, who made a point of order after PMQs reading out some pre-prepared comments quoting Starmer on the EMA, later claimed he had seen Starmer angrily confront Johnson in the lobbies after their exchange"
I don't make this stuff up you know
Ha ha ha
I see what the guardian are doing there
Very clever
Since when has the Guardian been a credible source? Since when has the Guardian been a credible source?
Mark Francois... "
 |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"I rest my case everyone is talking about newspapers not the thread you have been suckered in yet again folks.
Probably because this is not an interesting story:
Politiciann says something which contradicts what he said before. Apologised. End.
What's more interesting is the media slant, and how people perceive the media they consume and what effect it has on their outlook. Also interesting to see people point to the guardian as if it's somehow the non-right wing Daily Mail.
Much more interesting conversation.
Well people who were there say that Sir Keir squared up to Boris after PMQs and had to be pulled away ranting and raving that he lied about the European medicines support.
Which turned out to be accurate and Sir Keir had forgotten.
Makes me question his mental stability and fitness to be opposition leader tbh.
Who said he squared upto him?
Mark Francois said so according to the guardian:
"The Conservative MP Mark Francois, who made a point of order after PMQs reading out some pre-prepared comments quoting Starmer on the EMA, later claimed he had seen Starmer angrily confront Johnson in the lobbies after their exchange"
I don't make this stuff up you know
Ha ha ha
I see what the guardian are doing there
Very clever
Since when has the Guardian been a credible source? Since when has the Guardian been a credible source?
Mark Francois...
It's gonna be quite hard to discuss politics if people are not going to accept any source at all lol.
Mark Francois
Yes yes francois haha yes lol very good yawn
My impartial opinion is that Starmer is not upto the job which is a serious matter. "
Because he was wrong on 1 occasion and apologised? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"I rest my case everyone is talking about newspapers not the thread you have been suckered in yet again folks.
Probably because this is not an interesting story:
Politiciann says something which contradicts what he said before. Apologised. End.
What's more interesting is the media slant, and how people perceive the media they consume and what effect it has on their outlook. Also interesting to see people point to the guardian as if it's somehow the non-right wing Daily Mail.
Much more interesting conversation.
Well people who were there say that Sir Keir squared up to Boris after PMQs and had to be pulled away ranting and raving that he lied about the European medicines support.
Which turned out to be accurate and Sir Keir had forgotten.
Makes me question his mental stability and fitness to be opposition leader tbh.
Who said he squared upto him?
Mark Francois said so according to the guardian:
"The Conservative MP Mark Francois, who made a point of order after PMQs reading out some pre-prepared comments quoting Starmer on the EMA, later claimed he had seen Starmer angrily confront Johnson in the lobbies after their exchange"
I don't make this stuff up you know
Ha ha ha
I see what the guardian are doing there
Very clever
Since when has the Guardian been a credible source? Since when has the Guardian been a credible source?
Mark Francois...
It's gonna be quite hard to discuss politics if people are not going to accept any source at all lol.
Mark Francois
Yes yes francois haha yes lol very good yawn
My impartial opinion is that Starmer is not upto the job which is a serious matter. "
So... can you post the paragraph just after the Mark Francois bit? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"I rest my case everyone is talking about newspapers not the thread you have been suckered in yet again folks.
Probably because this is not an interesting story:
Politiciann says something which contradicts what he said before. Apologised. End.
What's more interesting is the media slant, and how people perceive the media they consume and what effect it has on their outlook. Also interesting to see people point to the guardian as if it's somehow the non-right wing Daily Mail.
Much more interesting conversation.
Well people who were there say that Sir Keir squared up to Boris after PMQs and had to be pulled away ranting and raving that he lied about the European medicines support.
Which turned out to be accurate and Sir Keir had forgotten.
Makes me question his mental stability and fitness to be opposition leader tbh.
Who said he squared upto him?
Mark Francois said so according to the guardian:
"The Conservative MP Mark Francois, who made a point of order after PMQs reading out some pre-prepared comments quoting Starmer on the EMA, later claimed he had seen Starmer angrily confront Johnson in the lobbies after their exchange"
I don't make this stuff up you know
Ha ha ha
I see what the guardian are doing there
Very clever
Since when has the Guardian been a credible source? Since when has the Guardian been a credible source?
Mark Francois...
It's gonna be quite hard to discuss politics if people are not going to accept any source at all lol.
Well, the Guardian has often been discredited here by a lot of people. As for Mark Francois, if you’ve read the article in the Guardian as I have, you should probably mention what the Labour Chris Matheson said. It’s in the line just below. Dare to quote it? "
Free country mate you can quote it yourself although you have just said others have rubbished it as a source... Can't win lol |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"I've become bored with these threads as they just keep going round and round with the same protagonists trying to shout louder than the other.. but the interesting thing about this thread, when I pointed out a few weeks ago that all media is bias to some extent, whether paper, TV station, website etc, with very few genuinely unbiased I was shot down in flames. Now I see those same protagonists saying there are bias in the newspapers! Who'd have thought? "
Who are the unbiased sources in your opinion? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"I rest my case everyone is talking about newspapers not the thread you have been suckered in yet again folks.
Probably because this is not an interesting story:
Politiciann says something which contradicts what he said before. Apologised. End.
What's more interesting is the media slant, and how people perceive the media they consume and what effect it has on their outlook. Also interesting to see people point to the guardian as if it's somehow the non-right wing Daily Mail.
Much more interesting conversation.
Well people who were there say that Sir Keir squared up to Boris after PMQs and had to be pulled away ranting and raving that he lied about the European medicines support.
Which turned out to be accurate and Sir Keir had forgotten.
Makes me question his mental stability and fitness to be opposition leader tbh.
Who said he squared upto him?
Mark Francois said so according to the guardian:
"The Conservative MP Mark Francois, who made a point of order after PMQs reading out some pre-prepared comments quoting Starmer on the EMA, later claimed he had seen Starmer angrily confront Johnson in the lobbies after their exchange"
I don't make this stuff up you know
Ha ha ha
I see what the guardian are doing there
Very clever
Since when has the Guardian been a credible source? Since when has the Guardian been a credible source?
Mark Francois...
It's gonna be quite hard to discuss politics if people are not going to accept any source at all lol.
Mark Francois
Yes yes francois haha yes lol very good yawn
My impartial opinion is that Starmer is not upto the job which is a serious matter.
Because he was wrong on 1 occasion and apologised?"
Because the reports I give weight to yesterday make him sound unhinged and forgetful, which no amount of apologies are going to fix next time he blunders. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"I rest my case everyone is talking about newspapers not the thread you have been suckered in yet again folks.
Probably because this is not an interesting story:
Politiciann says something which contradicts what he said before. Apologised. End.
What's more interesting is the media slant, and how people perceive the media they consume and what effect it has on their outlook. Also interesting to see people point to the guardian as if it's somehow the non-right wing Daily Mail.
Much more interesting conversation.
Well people who were there say that Sir Keir squared up to Boris after PMQs and had to be pulled away ranting and raving that he lied about the European medicines support.
Which turned out to be accurate and Sir Keir had forgotten.
Makes me question his mental stability and fitness to be opposition leader tbh.
Who said he squared upto him?
Mark Francois said so according to the guardian:
"The Conservative MP Mark Francois, who made a point of order after PMQs reading out some pre-prepared comments quoting Starmer on the EMA, later claimed he had seen Starmer angrily confront Johnson in the lobbies after their exchange"
I don't make this stuff up you know
Ha ha ha
I see what the guardian are doing there
Very clever
Since when has the Guardian been a credible source? Since when has the Guardian been a credible source?
Mark Francois...
It's gonna be quite hard to discuss politics if people are not going to accept any source at all lol.
Mark Francois
Yes yes francois haha yes lol very good yawn
My impartial opinion is that Starmer is not upto the
job which is a serious matter. "
Mark Francois ??
My impartial opinion is that he is up to the job and don’t believe anything that Mark Francois says |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"I rest my case everyone is talking about newspapers not the thread you have been suckered in yet again folks.
Probably because this is not an interesting story:
Politiciann says something which contradicts what he said before. Apologised. End.
What's more interesting is the media slant, and how people perceive the media they consume and what effect it has on their outlook. Also interesting to see people point to the guardian as if it's somehow the non-right wing Daily Mail.
Much more interesting conversation.
Well people who were there say that Sir Keir squared up to Boris after PMQs and had to be pulled away ranting and raving that he lied about the European medicines support.
Which turned out to be accurate and Sir Keir had forgotten.
Makes me question his mental stability and fitness to be opposition leader tbh.
Who said he squared upto him?
Mark Francois said so according to the guardian:
"The Conservative MP Mark Francois, who made a point of order after PMQs reading out some pre-prepared comments quoting Starmer on the EMA, later claimed he had seen Starmer angrily confront Johnson in the lobbies after their exchange"
I don't make this stuff up you know
Ha ha ha
I see what the guardian are doing there
Very clever
Since when has the Guardian been a credible source? Since when has the Guardian been a credible source?
Mark Francois...
It's gonna be quite hard to discuss politics if people are not going to accept any source at all lol.
Mark Francois
Yes yes francois haha yes lol very good yawn
My impartial opinion is that Starmer is not upto the job which is a serious matter.
Because he was wrong on 1 occasion and apologised?
Because the reports I give weight to yesterday make him sound unhinged and forgetful, which no amount of apologies are going to fix next time he blunders. "
Look I'm far from his biggest fan..but when has starmer ever come across as "unhinged?
Would you consider mark Francois an impartial source? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"I rest my case everyone is talking about newspapers not the thread you have been suckered in yet again folks.
Probably because this is not an interesting story:
Politiciann says something which contradicts what he said before. Apologised. End.
What's more interesting is the media slant, and how people perceive the media they consume and what effect it has on their outlook. Also interesting to see people point to the guardian as if it's somehow the non-right wing Daily Mail.
Much more interesting conversation.
Well people who were there say that Sir Keir squared up to Boris after PMQs and had to be pulled away ranting and raving that he lied about the European medicines support.
Which turned out to be accurate and Sir Keir had forgotten.
Makes me question his mental stability and fitness to be opposition leader tbh.
Who said he squared upto him?
Mark Francois said so according to the guardian:
"The Conservative MP Mark Francois, who made a point of order after PMQs reading out some pre-prepared comments quoting Starmer on the EMA, later claimed he had seen Starmer angrily confront Johnson in the lobbies after their exchange"
I don't make this stuff up you know
Ha ha ha
I see what the guardian are doing there
Very clever
Since when has the Guardian been a credible source? Since when has the Guardian been a credible source?
Mark Francois...
It's gonna be quite hard to discuss politics if people are not going to accept any source at all lol.
Mark Francois
Yes yes francois haha yes lol very good yawn
My impartial opinion is that Starmer is not upto the job which is a serious matter.
Because he was wrong on 1 occasion and apologised?
Because the reports I give weight to yesterday make him sound unhinged and forgetful, which no amount of apologies are going to fix next time he blunders. "
Wasnt he a qc previously?
Do you get many successful forgetful lawyers? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"I rest my case everyone is talking about newspapers not the thread you have been suckered in yet again folks.
Probably because this is not an interesting story:
Politiciann says something which contradicts what he said before. Apologised. End.
What's more interesting is the media slant, and how people perceive the media they consume and what effect it has on their outlook. Also interesting to see people point to the guardian as if it's somehow the non-right wing Daily Mail.
Much more interesting conversation.
Well people who were there say that Sir Keir squared up to Boris after PMQs and had to be pulled away ranting and raving that he lied about the European medicines support.
Which turned out to be accurate and Sir Keir had forgotten.
Makes me question his mental stability and fitness to be opposition leader tbh.
Who said he squared upto him?
Mark Francois said so according to the guardian:
"The Conservative MP Mark Francois, who made a point of order after PMQs reading out some pre-prepared comments quoting Starmer on the EMA, later claimed he had seen Starmer angrily confront Johnson in the lobbies after their exchange"
I don't make this stuff up you know
Ha ha ha
I see what the guardian are doing there
Very clever
Since when has the Guardian been a credible source? Since when has the Guardian been a credible source?
Mark Francois...
It's gonna be quite hard to discuss politics if people are not going to accept any source at all lol.
Well, the Guardian has often been discredited here by a lot of people. As for Mark Francois, if you’ve read the article in the Guardian as I have, you should probably mention what the Labour Chris Matheson said. It’s in the line just below. Dare to quote it?
Free country mate you can quote it yourself although you have just said others have rubbished it as a source... Can't win lol"
Free country... lol
Your sense of honesty is probably not getting too much in the way is it?
Chris Matheson said the description was untrue ‘it’s absolute bollocks’. ‘There was a brief chat and Keir and I left together’.
How can you have a reasonable discussion if people don’t even have the courage to have a minimum of integrity when posting.
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"I rest my case everyone is talking about newspapers not the thread you have been suckered in yet again folks.
Probably because this is not an interesting story:
Politiciann says something which contradicts what he said before. Apologised. End.
What's more interesting is the media slant, and how people perceive the media they consume and what effect it has on their outlook. Also interesting to see people point to the guardian as if it's somehow the non-right wing Daily Mail.
Much more interesting conversation.
Well people who were there say that Sir Keir squared up to Boris after PMQs and had to be pulled away ranting and raving that he lied about the European medicines support.
Which turned out to be accurate and Sir Keir had forgotten.
Makes me question his mental stability and fitness to be opposition leader tbh.
Who said he squared upto him?
Mark Francois said so according to the guardian:
"The Conservative MP Mark Francois, who made a point of order after PMQs reading out some pre-prepared comments quoting Starmer on the EMA, later claimed he had seen Starmer angrily confront Johnson in the lobbies after their exchange"
I don't make this stuff up you know
Ha ha ha
I see what the guardian are doing there
Very clever
Since when has the Guardian been a credible source? Since when has the Guardian been a credible source?
Mark Francois...
It's gonna be quite hard to discuss politics if people are not going to accept any source at all lol.
Mark Francois
Yes yes francois haha yes lol very good yawn
My impartial opinion is that Starmer is not upto the job which is a serious matter.
Because he was wrong on 1 occasion and apologised?
Because the reports I give weight to yesterday make him sound unhinged and forgetful, which no amount of apologies are going to fix next time he blunders. "
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"I rest my case everyone is talking about newspapers not the thread you have been suckered in yet again folks.
Probably because this is not an interesting story:
Politiciann says something which contradicts what he said before. Apologised. End.
What's more interesting is the media slant, and how people perceive the media they consume and what effect it has on their outlook. Also interesting to see people point to the guardian as if it's somehow the non-right wing Daily Mail.
Much more interesting conversation.
Well people who were there say that Sir Keir squared up to Boris after PMQs and had to be pulled away ranting and raving that he lied about the European medicines support.
Which turned out to be accurate and Sir Keir had forgotten.
Makes me question his mental stability and fitness to be opposition leader tbh.
Who said he squared upto him?
Mark Francois said so according to the guardian:
"The Conservative MP Mark Francois, who made a point of order after PMQs reading out some pre-prepared comments quoting Starmer on the EMA, later claimed he had seen Starmer angrily confront Johnson in the lobbies after their exchange"
I don't make this stuff up you know
Ha ha ha
I see what the guardian are doing there
Very clever
Since when has the Guardian been a credible source? Since when has the Guardian been a credible source?
Mark Francois...
It's gonna be quite hard to discuss politics if people are not going to accept any source at all lol.
Mark Francois
Yes yes francois haha yes lol very good yawn
My impartial opinion is that Starmer is not upto the job which is a serious matter.
Because he was wrong on 1 occasion and apologised?
Because the reports I give weight to yesterday make him sound unhinged and forgetful, which no amount of apologies are going to fix next time he blunders.
Look I'm far from his biggest fan..but when has starmer ever come across as "unhinged?
Would you consider mark Francois an impartial source?"
Mark ‘where has he been for the last 12 months ‘ Francois? He was probably seething because the speaker shut down the pathetic question he asked in parliament , the man is an imbecile |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"I rest my case everyone is talking about newspapers not the thread you have been suckered in yet again folks.
Probably because this is not an interesting story:
Politiciann says something which contradicts what he said before. Apologised. End.
What's more interesting is the media slant, and how people perceive the media they consume and what effect it has on their outlook. Also interesting to see people point to the guardian as if it's somehow the non-right wing Daily Mail.
Much more interesting conversation.
Well people who were there say that Sir Keir squared up to Boris after PMQs and had to be pulled away ranting and raving that he lied about the European medicines support.
Which turned out to be accurate and Sir Keir had forgotten.
Makes me question his mental stability and fitness to be opposition leader tbh.
Who said he squared upto him?
Mark Francois said so according to the guardian:
"The Conservative MP Mark Francois, who made a point of order after PMQs reading out some pre-prepared comments quoting Starmer on the EMA, later claimed he had seen Starmer angrily confront Johnson in the lobbies after their exchange"
I don't make this stuff up you know
Ha ha ha
I see what the guardian are doing there
Very clever
Since when has the Guardian been a credible source? Since when has the Guardian been a credible source?
Mark Francois...
It's gonna be quite hard to discuss politics if people are not going to accept any source at all lol.
Well, the Guardian has often been discredited here by a lot of people. As for Mark Francois, if you’ve read the article in the Guardian as I have, you should probably mention what the Labour Chris Matheson said. It’s in the line just below. Dare to quote it?
Free country mate you can quote it yourself although you have just said others have rubbished it as a source... Can't win lol
Free country... lol
Your sense of honesty is probably not getting too much in the way is it?
Chris Matheson said the description was untrue ‘it’s absolute bollocks’. ‘There was a brief chat and Keir and I left together’.
How can you have a reasonable discussion if people don’t even have the courage to have a minimum of integrity when posting.
"
But you said other people said that source was rubbish. Can't have it both ways. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"I rest my case everyone is talking about newspapers not the thread you have been suckered in yet again folks.
Probably because this is not an interesting story:
Politiciann says something which contradicts what he said before. Apologised. End.
What's more interesting is the media slant, and how people perceive the media they consume and what effect it has on their outlook. Also interesting to see people point to the guardian as if it's somehow the non-right wing Daily Mail.
Much more interesting conversation.
Well people who were there say that Sir Keir squared up to Boris after PMQs and had to be pulled away ranting and raving that he lied about the European medicines support.
Which turned out to be accurate and Sir Keir had forgotten.
Makes me question his mental stability and fitness to be opposition leader tbh.
Who said he squared upto him?
Mark Francois said so according to the guardian:
"The Conservative MP Mark Francois, who made a point of order after PMQs reading out some pre-prepared comments quoting Starmer on the EMA, later claimed he had seen Starmer angrily confront Johnson in the lobbies after their exchange"
I don't make this stuff up you know
Ha ha ha
I see what the guardian are doing there
Very clever
Since when has the Guardian been a credible source? Since when has the Guardian been a credible source?
Mark Francois...
It's gonna be quite hard to discuss politics if people are not going to accept any source at all lol.
Mark Francois
Yes yes francois haha yes lol very good yawn
My impartial opinion is that Starmer is not upto the job which is a serious matter.
Because he was wrong on 1 occasion and apologised?
Because the reports I give weight to yesterday make him sound unhinged and forgetful, which no amount of apologies are going to fix next time he blunders.
Look I'm far from his biggest fan..but when has starmer ever come across as "unhinged?
Would you consider mark Francois an impartial source?
Mark ‘where has he been for the last 12 months ‘ Francois? He was probably seething because the speaker shut down the pathetic question he asked in parliament , the man is an imbecile "
Is he still in the ta? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"I rest my case everyone is talking about newspapers not the thread you have been suckered in yet again folks.
Probably because this is not an interesting story:
Politiciann says something which contradicts what he said before. Apologised. End.
What's more interesting is the media slant, and how people perceive the media they consume and what effect it has on their outlook. Also interesting to see people point to the guardian as if it's somehow the non-right wing Daily Mail.
Much more interesting conversation.
Well people who were there say that Sir Keir squared up to Boris after PMQs and had to be pulled away ranting and raving that he lied about the European medicines support.
Which turned out to be accurate and Sir Keir had forgotten.
Makes me question his mental stability and fitness to be opposition leader tbh.
Who said he squared upto him?
Mark Francois said so according to the guardian:
"The Conservative MP Mark Francois, who made a point of order after PMQs reading out some pre-prepared comments quoting Starmer on the EMA, later claimed he had seen Starmer angrily confront Johnson in the lobbies after their exchange"
I don't make this stuff up you know
Ha ha ha
I see what the guardian are doing there
Very clever
Since when has the Guardian been a credible source? Since when has the Guardian been a credible source?
Mark Francois...
It's gonna be quite hard to discuss politics if people are not going to accept any source at all lol.
Mark Francois
Yes yes francois haha yes lol very good yawn
My impartial opinion is that Starmer is not upto the job which is a serious matter.
Because he was wrong on 1 occasion and apologised?
Because the reports I give weight to yesterday make him sound unhinged and forgetful, which no amount of apologies are going to fix next time he blunders.
Look I'm far from his biggest fan..but when has starmer ever come across as "unhinged?
Would you consider mark Francois an impartial source?
Mark ‘where has he been for the last 12 months ‘ Francois? He was probably seething because the speaker shut down the pathetic question he asked in parliament , the man is an imbecile
Is he still in the ta?"
Probably, they use him as a sand bag |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *renzMan
over a year ago
Between Chichester and Havant |
"I've become bored with these threads as they just keep going round and round with the same protagonists trying to shout louder than the other.. but the interesting thing about this thread, when I pointed out a few weeks ago that all media is bias to some extent, whether paper, TV station, website etc, with very few genuinely unbiased I was shot down in flames. Now I see those same protagonists saying there are bias in the newspapers! Who'd have thought?
Who are the unbiased sources in your opinion?"
There aren't any. That was my point as I'm sure you remember Lionel. How many people actually write or say something that is unbiased? Certainly not on these threads, so why different anywhere else? Everyone has an opinion, a leaning one way or another, there is always a side to everyone. I seem to remember saying that I might read something and then make up my own mind on how biased that story, statement might be. I take information from wherever and decide for myself whether I believe it or not. Yes on many subjects I lean one way or the other, which will colour my opinion. Anything truly independent and unbiased? As I said very rare, if at all. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"I rest my case everyone is talking about newspapers not the thread you have been suckered in yet again folks.
Probably because this is not an interesting story:
Politiciann says something which contradicts what he said before. Apologised. End.
What's more interesting is the media slant, and how people perceive the media they consume and what effect it has on their outlook. Also interesting to see people point to the guardian as if it's somehow the non-right wing Daily Mail.
Much more interesting conversation.
Well people who were there say that Sir Keir squared up to Boris after PMQs and had to be pulled away ranting and raving that he lied about the European medicines support.
Which turned out to be accurate and Sir Keir had forgotten.
Makes me question his mental stability and fitness to be opposition leader tbh.
Who said he squared upto him?
Mark Francois said so according to the guardian:
"The Conservative MP Mark Francois, who made a point of order after PMQs reading out some pre-prepared comments quoting Starmer on the EMA, later claimed he had seen Starmer angrily confront Johnson in the lobbies after their exchange"
I don't make this stuff up you know
Ha ha ha
I see what the guardian are doing there
Very clever
Since when has the Guardian been a credible source? Since when has the Guardian been a credible source?
Mark Francois...
It's gonna be quite hard to discuss politics if people are not going to accept any source at all lol.
Well, the Guardian has often been discredited here by a lot of people. As for Mark Francois, if you’ve read the article in the Guardian as I have, you should probably mention what the Labour Chris Matheson said. It’s in the line just below. Dare to quote it?
Free country mate you can quote it yourself although you have just said others have rubbished it as a source... Can't win lol
Free country... lol
Your sense of honesty is probably not getting too much in the way is it?
Chris Matheson said the description was untrue ‘it’s absolute bollocks’. ‘There was a brief chat and Keir and I left together’.
How can you have a reasonable discussion if people don’t even have the courage to have a minimum of integrity when posting.
But you said other people said that source was rubbish. Can't have it both ways. "
You don’t do sarcasm do you. Fans of the empire often take things on face value. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"I rest my case everyone is talking about newspapers not the thread you have been suckered in yet again folks.
Probably because this is not an interesting story:
Politiciann says something which contradicts what he said before. Apologised. End.
What's more interesting is the media slant, and how people perceive the media they consume and what effect it has on their outlook. Also interesting to see people point to the guardian as if it's somehow the non-right wing Daily Mail.
Much more interesting conversation.
Well people who were there say that Sir Keir squared up to Boris after PMQs and had to be pulled away ranting and raving that he lied about the European medicines support.
Which turned out to be accurate and Sir Keir had forgotten.
Makes me question his mental stability and fitness to be opposition leader tbh.
Who said he squared upto him?
Mark Francois said so according to the guardian:
"The Conservative MP Mark Francois, who made a point of order after PMQs reading out some pre-prepared comments quoting Starmer on the EMA, later claimed he had seen Starmer angrily confront Johnson in the lobbies after their exchange"
I don't make this stuff up you know
Ha ha ha
I see what the guardian are doing there
Very clever
Since when has the Guardian been a credible source? Since when has the Guardian been a credible source?
Mark Francois...
It's gonna be quite hard to discuss politics if people are not going to accept any source at all lol.
Mark Francois
Yes yes francois haha yes lol very good yawn
My impartial opinion is that Starmer is not upto the job which is a serious matter.
Because he was wrong on 1 occasion and apologised?
Because the reports I give weight to yesterday make him sound unhinged and forgetful, which no amount of apologies are going to fix next time he blunders.
Look I'm far from his biggest fan..but when has starmer ever come across as "unhinged?
Would you consider mark Francois an impartial source?
Mark ‘where has he been for the last 12 months ‘ Francois? He was probably seething because the speaker shut down the pathetic question he asked in parliament , the man is an imbecile
Is he still in the ta?
Probably, they use him as a sand bag "
He has multi purposes. He can also act as a scumbag too. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"I rest my case everyone is talking about newspapers not the thread you have been suckered in yet again folks.
Probably because this is not an interesting story:
Politiciann says something which contradicts what he said before. Apologised. End.
What's more interesting is the media slant, and how people perceive the media they consume and what effect it has on their outlook. Also interesting to see people point to the guardian as if it's somehow the non-right wing Daily Mail.
Much more interesting conversation.
Well people who were there say that Sir Keir squared up to Boris after PMQs and had to be pulled away ranting and raving that he lied about the European medicines support.
Which turned out to be accurate and Sir Keir had forgotten.
Makes me question his mental stability and fitness to be opposition leader tbh.
Who said he squared upto him?
Mark Francois said so according to the guardian:
"The Conservative MP Mark Francois, who made a point of order after PMQs reading out some pre-prepared comments quoting Starmer on the EMA, later claimed he had seen Starmer angrily confront Johnson in the lobbies after their exchange"
I don't make this stuff up you know
Ha ha ha
I see what the guardian are doing there
Very clever
Since when has the Guardian been a credible source? Since when has the Guardian been a credible source?
Mark Francois...
It's gonna be quite hard to discuss politics if people are not going to accept any source at all lol.
Mark Francois
Yes yes francois haha yes lol very good yawn
My impartial opinion is that Starmer is not upto the job which is a serious matter.
Because he was wrong on 1 occasion and apologised?
Because the reports I give weight to yesterday make him sound unhinged and forgetful, which no amount of apologies are going to fix next time he blunders.
Look I'm far from his biggest fan..but when has starmer ever come across as "unhinged?
Would you consider mark Francois an impartial source?
Mark ‘where has he been for the last 12 months ‘ Francois? He was probably seething because the speaker shut down the pathetic question he asked in parliament , the man is an imbecile
Is he still in the ta?
Probably, they use him as a sand bag
He has multi purposes. He can also act as a scumbag too. "
, like a lot of Tory MPs , he does provide us with some comedy gold |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"According to the extensive report in the Times, there very much was a confrontation between Keir and Boris and Keir was out of control. So that's three sources from across the spectrum. "
Haha, keep digging Chris |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"According to the extensive report in the Times, there very much was a confrontation between Keir and Boris and Keir was out of control. So that's three sources from across the spectrum. "
Who have the times named As a source? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"According to the extensive report in the Times, there very much was a confrontation between Keir and Boris and Keir was out of control. So that's three sources from across the spectrum.
Haha, keep digging Chris "
Don't blame me if you vote him in and he starts wars, that's all I'm saying. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"According to the extensive report in the Times, there very much was a confrontation between Keir and Boris and Keir was out of control. So that's three sources from across the spectrum. "
According to a Tory mp who refuses to be named, he threatened to stick a fishing Rod into Bojo’s backside and make him swirl on Westminster Bridge charging walkers by to view the show and encourage them to make donations for the Scottish fishermen affected by the Brexit deal. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"According to the extensive report in the Times, there very much was a confrontation between Keir and Boris and Keir was out of control. So that's three sources from across the spectrum.
Haha, keep digging Chris
Don't blame me if you vote him in and he starts wars, that's all I'm saying. "
Bloody hell,,an empire lover scared of wars! I’m worried about this new race of snowflakes! |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"According to the extensive report in the Times, there very much was a confrontation between Keir and Boris and Keir was out of control. So that's three sources from across the spectrum.
Who have the times named As a source?"
"several mps"
Matheson is the only one denying it happened. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"According to the extensive report in the Times, there very much was a confrontation between Keir and Boris and Keir was out of control. So that's three sources from across the spectrum.
Haha, keep digging Chris
Don't blame me if you vote him in and he starts wars, that's all I'm saying. "
Hahaha, you must have a large shovel ? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"According to the extensive report in the Times, there very much was a confrontation between Keir and Boris and Keir was out of control. So that's three sources from across the spectrum.
Who have the times named As a source?"
They won’t name him directly but they have described him as a fat dwarf who wears glasses |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"According to the extensive report in the Times, there very much was a confrontation between Keir and Boris and Keir was out of control. So that's three sources from across the spectrum.
Haha, keep digging Chris
Don't blame me if you vote him in and he starts wars, that's all I'm saying.
Bloody hell,,an empire lover scared of wars! I’m worried about this new race of snowflakes! "
Exactly, back in the ‘glory days’ of the empire MPs settled disputes by having a dual, and Chris is getting upset about a few cross words |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"According to the extensive report in the Times, there very much was a confrontation between Keir and Boris and Keir was out of control. So that's three sources from across the spectrum.
Haha, keep digging Chris
Don't blame me if you vote him in and he starts wars, that's all I'm saying.
Bloody hell,,an empire lover scared of wars! I’m worried about this new race of snowflakes!
Exactly, back in the ‘glory days’ of the empire MPs settled disputes by having a dual, and Chris is getting upset about a few cross words "
Crossed |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"According to the extensive report in the Times, there very much was a confrontation between Keir and Boris and Keir was out of control. So that's three sources from across the spectrum.
Who have the times named As a source?
"several mps"
Matheson is the only one denying it happened. "
So they cant even name them?
Apart from Francois? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"According to the extensive report in the Times, there very much was a confrontation between Keir and Boris and Keir was out of control. So that's three sources from across the spectrum.
Who have the times named As a source?
They won’t name him directly but they have described him as a fat dwarf who wears glasses "
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"According to the extensive report in the Times, there very much was a confrontation between Keir and Boris and Keir was out of control. So that's three sources from across the spectrum.
Who have the times named As a source?"
"Several MPs". They saw him challange Boris at close quarters.
Which means he spoke to him while standing close to him.
The article fades out before the subscription thing kicks in.
https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/keir-starmer-and-boris-johnson-in-commons-row-over-covid-vaccine-comments-7j6hvsks7 |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"According to the extensive report in the Times, there very much was a confrontation between Keir and Boris and Keir was out of control. So that's three sources from across the spectrum.
Haha, keep digging Chris
Don't blame me if you vote him in and he starts wars, that's all I'm saying.
Bloody hell,,an empire lover scared of wars! I’m worried about this new race of snowflakes!
Exactly, back in the ‘glory days’ of the empire MPs settled disputes by having a dual, and Chris is getting upset about a few cross words "
Speak softly and carry a big stick. That was Empire.
Not turn purple and rant.
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"According to the extensive report in the Times, there very much was a confrontation between Keir and Boris and Keir was out of control. So that's three sources from across the spectrum.
Haha, keep digging Chris
Don't blame me if you vote him in and he starts wars, that's all I'm saying.
Bloody hell,,an empire lover scared of wars! I’m worried about this new race of snowflakes!
Exactly, back in the ‘glory days’ of the empire MPs settled disputes by having a dual, and Chris is getting upset about a few cross words
Speak softly and carry a big stick. That was Empire.
Not turn purple and rant.
"
No it wasn’t, your just making stuff up again |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *ostafunMan
over a year ago
near ipswich |
"According to the extensive report in the Times, there very much was a confrontation between Keir and Boris and Keir was out of control. So that's three sources from across the spectrum. "
Was he spinning like a weather vain depending on which way the wind was blowing. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"According to the extensive report in the Times, there very much was a confrontation between Keir and Boris and Keir was out of control. So that's three sources from across the spectrum. Was he spinning like a weather vain depending on which way the wind was blowing. "
What’s a weather vain??? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"According to the extensive report in the Times, there very much was a confrontation between Keir and Boris and Keir was out of control. So that's three sources from across the spectrum. Was he spinning like a weather vain depending on which way the wind was blowing.
What’s a weather vain??? Sorry there bob i know grammar and spelling are your big concern and you cannot understand anything that is written unless every letter ,comma and semi colon are correct.Maybe that school of life didnt work out for you to well after all.Vane understand now? 
Not really but I’m not sure what vains have to do with the weather. Maybe that’s a school of life thing. I didnt think you would somehow you never could in the past. "
Bloody tories. Stuck in the past. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *obka3Couple
over a year ago
bournemouth |
"Just reading those 2 articles its crystal clear why the daily mail is respected throughput journalism as a bastion of integrity and impartiality.
Once again Lionel we agree, brilliant paper.
Yep cant go wrong with a paper that openly supported Mussolini."
Whereas you love a paper that was a supporter of the slave trade, |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *andy 1Couple
over a year ago
northeast |
"I rest my case everyone is talking about newspapers not the thread you have been suckered in yet again folks.
Probably because this is not an interesting story:
Politiciann says something which contradicts what he said before. Apologised. End.
What's more interesting is the media slant, and how people perceive the media they consume and what effect it has on their outlook. Also interesting to see people point to the guardian as if it's somehow the non-right wing Daily Mail.
Much more interesting conversation.
Well people who were there say that Sir Keir squared up to Boris after PMQs and had to be pulled away ranting and raving that he lied about the European medicines support.
Which turned out to be accurate and Sir Keir had forgotten.
Makes me question his mental stability and fitness to be opposition leader tbh. "
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *obka3Couple
over a year ago
bournemouth |
"It is possible to ignore the odd typo, autocorrect, poor grammar or just a mistake, we all make them after all."
But it's so much easier to ignore a post that you cant produce an answer to by claiming you dont understand it. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *ostafunMan
over a year ago
near ipswich |
"It is possible to ignore the odd typo, autocorrect, poor grammar or just a mistake, we all make them after all."
Not for some it seems they do not understand when you write weather vain instead of weather vane, its lucky i didnt write weather vein that would have caused even more outrage.If i had said i was dyslexic he would have looked a real fool but im not that cruel. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Just reading those 2 articles its crystal clear why the daily mail is respected throughput journalism as a bastion of integrity and impartiality.
Once again Lionel we agree, brilliant paper.
Yep cant go wrong with a paper that openly supported Mussolini.
Whereas you love a paper that was a supporter of the slave trade, "
Good point
Lets completely ignore the fact the mail openly supported facism because the propertieer of another paper had links to the slave trade 3 centuries ago.
And I get accused of whatabouttery. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
» Add a new message to this topic
