Mass Graves Found In Khan Younis
News1 min ago
Does Anyone Feel Uneasy When We Find Out That Political Parties And Newspapers Collude To Lie To The Voting Public?
Are we happy that this is just part of the election process...
...or should we be concerned that what is dressed up as a news story is in fact (for want of a better phrase) - party political cobblers?
http://
...or should we be concerned that what is dressed up as a news story is in fact (for want of a better phrase) - party political cobblers?
http://
Answers
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by sp1814. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
I don't think newspapers should be impartial...but at the very least they need to verify the content they print.
Okay...even if the letter was orchestrated by Conservative Central Office (which it was), for God's sake...check that the list doesn't include duplicates:
https:/
I mean seriously:
https:/
Okay...even if the letter was orchestrated by Conservative Central Office (which it was), for God's sake...check that the list doesn't include duplicates:
https:/
I mean seriously:
https:/
here's today's BBC story on Ukip
http://
Two hours ago, admittedly; maybe it's time they published another one?
http://
Two hours ago, admittedly; maybe it's time they published another one?
jno
Not sure how this connects to this thread, but to would appear that whilst Nigel Farage is tired of racists slurs being directed to UKIP, he's not too afraid to direct exactly the same slur to the SNP:
http://
Sauce for the goose perhaps?
Not sure how this connects to this thread, but to would appear that whilst Nigel Farage is tired of racists slurs being directed to UKIP, he's not too afraid to direct exactly the same slur to the SNP:
http://
Sauce for the goose perhaps?
naomi24
Because the list is flawed.
It's claimed that the list was signed by business owners.
Not true.
Also, there are loads of duplicates in it.
The link to the signatories has been removed.
“The Marsha Phoenix Memorial Trust is listed as one of the 5,000 businesses who are “signatories” to a letter supporting the conservative government published in today’s Telegraph Newspaper. They have stated, "that the Trust is a very small charity and not a small business. It should not and should never appear on any list of political endorsements such as the one published in the Telegraph of apparent owners of small businesses. We do not and have not made any such political endorsement today or at any other time".
Also, dozens of businesses included as signatories which are dissolved or in liquidation.
And some of these 'business owners' describe themselves as the following:
“consultant” (of a funeral parlour??), “admin”, “payroll”, “office manager”, “office assistant”, “executive assistant”, “medical director”, “academy director”, “Chief Inspiration Officer” (a what, now?), “site manager” of a regional dept, “sub postmaster” of a branch.
It's just dishonest.
Because the list is flawed.
It's claimed that the list was signed by business owners.
Not true.
Also, there are loads of duplicates in it.
The link to the signatories has been removed.
“The Marsha Phoenix Memorial Trust is listed as one of the 5,000 businesses who are “signatories” to a letter supporting the conservative government published in today’s Telegraph Newspaper. They have stated, "that the Trust is a very small charity and not a small business. It should not and should never appear on any list of political endorsements such as the one published in the Telegraph of apparent owners of small businesses. We do not and have not made any such political endorsement today or at any other time".
Also, dozens of businesses included as signatories which are dissolved or in liquidation.
And some of these 'business owners' describe themselves as the following:
“consultant” (of a funeral parlour??), “admin”, “payroll”, “office manager”, “office assistant”, “executive assistant”, “medical director”, “academy director”, “Chief Inspiration Officer” (a what, now?), “site manager” of a regional dept, “sub postmaster” of a branch.
It's just dishonest.
icecreamicecream
I'm going to ignore your comment, because I have information about my voting intentions that you're not privvy to.
To everyone else, your comment might seem accurate, but because I myself have info that you couldn't possibly know, I am thinking that you're coming across as a bit...well, you know...
I'm going to ignore your comment, because I have information about my voting intentions that you're not privvy to.
To everyone else, your comment might seem accurate, but because I myself have info that you couldn't possibly know, I am thinking that you're coming across as a bit...well, you know...
SP, Your man, who according to his website, started his blog in 2011 “because he was really quite annoyed at the government”, says //The letter is still on their [The Telegraph’s] website, but the link to the signatories leads nowhere//, but he’s wrong. The list of the 5000-plus signatories, noting that one, number 413, on the letter has subsequently asked for his name to be removed, is freely available on the Telegraph website.
http://
http://
Related Questions
Sorry, we can't find any related questions. Try using the search bar at the top of the page to search for some keywords, or choose a topic and submit your own question.