Jump to content

Recommended Posts

To give Shaun Wright his due, he really believes he is in the clear on this, or he's in denial, or he needs the money, or he's being economical with the truth etc.


But a man who resists Theresa May and Nick Clegg, the red tops and Uncle Tom Cobleigh has won a bit of respect from me.


Of course he won't last

aquarius moon Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> What is all this Guardian nonsense?

>

> If you hate it, don't read it and there would be

> no need for a six page thread.

>

> Simple.

>

> (read the Mirror or Star instead)


Or the Mail ;)

El Pibe Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> I used to do crosswords.

> Telegraph is nice and vanilla, indy is usually

> doable.

> Could never get into the guardian one.

>

> Private eye most satisfying.


Love a good crossword, it's a peculiarly English thing, and I love them.

aquarius moon Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> What is all this Guardian nonsense?

>

> If you hate it, don't read it and there would be

> no need for a six page thread.

>

> Simple.


Not really simple at all. The Guardian does the best journalism in the UK. No contest.


But, its opinion pieces are barking mad, wildly inaccurate, rather sexist and, in the case of Rotherham, it turns out heavily blinkered. The latter has possibly/maybe spread to its otherwise excellent investigative journalism.


It's a all a bit of a curate's egg - parts of it are excellent. The rest smells more than a little rotten.

Loz Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> aquarius moon Wrote:

> --------------------------------------------------

> -----

> > What is all this Guardian nonsense?

> >

> > If you hate it, don't read it and there would

> be

> > no need for a six page thread.

> >

> > Simple.

>

> Not really simple at all. The Guardian does the

> best journalism in the UK. No contest.

>

> But, its opinion pieces are barking mad, wildly

> inaccurate, rather sexist and, in the case of

> Rotherham, it turns out heavily blinkered. The

> latter has possibly/maybe spread to its otherwise

> excellent investigative journalism.

>

> It's a all a bit of a curate's egg - parts of it

> are excellent. The rest smells more than a little

> rotten.


Have you not expressed reasons why you should like it as a newspaper? Otherwise might it not be propaganda?

  • 4 weeks later...

If you wanted a defining article on how stupid the Guardian opinion pieces can be, you could do worse than this little gem.


http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2014/sep/28/kebabs-train-tickets-teach-you-about-britain


Apart from the rest of the awful attempt at satire, has anyone ever seen PMQs on a TV in a barbers shop? And who knew that "boisterous behaviour, coarse language and even violence" only started in the working class thirty years ago?

Whilst I'm not a lover of this particular publication, I'm somewhat surprised at the level of venom directed towards it. One post I saw states "The Guardian. Wrong about everything. Always." Hmmmm

The Mail is far more despicable, as is the Sun, the others aren't much better, and just as deserving of your scorn and derision.

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Latest Discussions

    • I'm not sure it's sensible  to presume any agreement from interlocutors, but if you do, then I do agree that it's the right thing to say so. My own guess -- it's nothing more -- is that the officers were acting just to effect an arrest on arrival, as requested, quite possibly without any knowledge of the content of wretched tweet at all*, and that their being armed was absolutely incidental.  But I don't know any reliable facts. I do think the turning up (5?) en masse to do so was possibly complacent and unthinking, if there was no reason to believe the arrestee was a threat.  If they had  been doing so for good reason, I guess they could have had at least one weapon trained at him, and had  him hands above head or on the ground in no time.  But I know no reliable facts of the incident whatsoever.  Perhaps they were Father Ted fans -- seriously -- and trogged along, on a quiet afternoon, to see the man himself.  Perhaps they and/or their CO will get a severe bollocking from above.  I don't know. * But even that with some reservations.  The last time I looked up cases on wrongful arrest, years ago, I think I remember there being held then to be at least some onus on the acting arresting officer to be satisfied that  the required grounds for a lawful arrest  did exist.  And I don't know any of the facts of the present case. 
    • They carry guns at the airport.  It may not make it ok but that is a fact.  In France and America they all carry guns.
    • TfL and the Met had a small team a few years ago dedicated to addressing bike theft.  https://tfl.gov.uk/info-for/media/press-releases/2011/february/officers-target-bike-thieves-and-successfully-reunite-stolen-bikes-with-their-owners I assume that went with austerity. There is now a Task Force https://www.london.gov.uk/who-we-are/what-london-assembly-does/questions-mayor/find-an-answer/metropolitan-police-service-cycle-taskforce And some advice from the MPS: https://www.met.police.uk/cp/crime-prevention/keeping-vehicles-safe/how-safe-is-your-bike/ The marking service is good and helps.  As a cyclist you do your best to minimise the likelihood and I would never leave a high end bike locked on the street out of sight.  I've had three bikes stolen in London over the last two decades. Gum Tree sadly makes it too easy and for every bike theft there is someone knowingly or unknowingly prepared to buy a bargain that is stolen.  
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

Search
×
    Search In
×
×
  • Create New...