|
|
Post by sandypine on Oct 21, 2023 18:57:58 GMT
Control is not the same as ownership. There is editorial direction in all news channels including GB news. The BBC slipped up the other day by allowing Matthew Goodwin to have a place in a discussion. We will probably not see him back again at Auntie as he was very critical of the Beeb and its news coverage. So who gives this “editorial direction” to “control” the media? The original observation about our media being controlled was no doubt a belly-guided reaction to not being able to find an echo for the poster’s own views. It’s a myth that an overall body is able to slap a D-notice on anything it doesn’t want published, or can dictate coverage for political motives. Proprietors and editors can and do cosy up to powerful bodies and individuals — some even angling for knighthoods and peerages — so it’s obvious some can be manipulated. But, on the whole, I’ve found the best of the British news media to be informative, truthful and reliable… If one cannot find in part an echo chamber for ones own views in the MSN, which one knows is shared by at least a fair proportion of the populace, then it seems obvious that all views are not been given an airing. The BBC is obligated to be impartial which does mean airing all views and questioning all. Editorial direction is obvious especially when the likes of Peter Sissons is given the Guardian as his topical information source. Climate change as an emergency is pushed in every report with very little in counter discussion and the behaviour during the Pandemic and subsequent Vax programmes does nothing to instill a feeling of impartiality in that 'editorial direction'. Who gives that direction is a much trickier topic. I do not know but it is obvious some force is at work, why, how and for what purpose in the long run is anyone's guess. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 22, 2023 5:43:32 GMT
Do you not read the news? Israel have threatened Egypt that it will attack aid convoys coming in to Gaza without their express permission, this has just been granted and the aid is starting to arrive. Israel ordered civilians to go to the Raffa crossing area and then proceeded to bomb them. Egypt has asked for safe zones to be put up in Gaza but Israel have refused. Egypt does not wand a war with Israel and are cautious of any action that could lead to that scenario. It is one thing to accept asylum seekers but another to end up in a war situation. So let us get this right, the people in Gaza are being bombed everywhere and Egypt will not let them out. So if there is a danger to Egypt they can ignore all asylum agreements, with no criticism from the left, in fact wide ranging support from the left. In is one thing to accept asylum seekers but another to have lodas of terrorists in your country. You have no idea of the political situation in the region. If Egypt accept asylum seekers from Gaza it could escalate to a war situation therefore not making it a safe country, they are therefore going for the next best option, safe zones within Gaza. If your home was invaded would you not fight back? I assume the answer would be yes. Therefore Egypt are not going to give a base to people that would carry on the war from inside their country. This has no equivalent to asylum seekers in the UK. |
|
|
|
Post by The Squeezed Middle on Oct 22, 2023 7:25:44 GMT
...If Egypt accept asylum seekers from Gaza it could escalate to a war situation therefore not making it a safe country, they are therefore going for the next best option, safe zones within Gaza. If your home was invaded would you not fight back? I assume the answer would be yes. Therefore Egypt are not going to give a base to people that would carry on the war from inside their country... Correct. ...This has no equivalent to asylum seekers in the UK. Bollocks. |
|
|
|
Post by sandypine on Oct 22, 2023 14:26:36 GMT
So let us get this right, the people in Gaza are being bombed everywhere and Egypt will not let them out. So if there is a danger to Egypt they can ignore all asylum agreements, with no criticism from the left, in fact wide ranging support from the left. In is one thing to accept asylum seekers but another to have lodas of terrorists in your country. You have no idea of the political situation in the region. If Egypt accept asylum seekers from Gaza it could escalate to a war situation therefore not making it a safe country, they are therefore going for the next best option, safe zones within Gaza. If your home was invaded would you not fight back? I assume the answer would be yes. Therefore Egypt are not going to give a base to people that would carry on the war from inside their country. This has no equivalent to asylum seekers in the UK. Well the Gazans are not dangerous they are in danger. Is that not the mantra and whatever the risks may be then humanitarian action comes first. Why would Israel go to war with Egypt for accepting refugees from Gaza. As regards one's home being invaded and fighting back is that not exactly what we do accept people whose homes have been invaded are are often fighting back which seems to be what is happening to Jews in Britain, they have become the victims of 'fighting back'. Egypt does not have to give a base to anyone what it has to do, like ourselves, is honour the convention they signed and allow refugees to escape a war torn enclave. This is the total hypocrisy of the left whereby their moral certitude depends very much on to whom it applies. EDIT as regards my home being invaded then currently it is, but fighting back does not seem to be an option and would raise the hackles of the left. |
|
|
|
Post by ratcliff on Oct 22, 2023 16:54:50 GMT
Keir Starmer is "Centre Left" or what some descrime as "Social Democrat" or "Moderate Left" He does not believe for example in wholesale nationalisation, or nationalisation of industry; He does not believe in a radical programme or agenda which involves spending billions of pounds of borrowed money; He has repeated over and over again that the Labour manifest ( when published ) going into the general election will all be fully costed. Those on the Left have been critical of Starmer, people like Len McCluskey and others, who say that Starmer is not radical enough, but Starmer does not belong to that wing of the Labour Party. Starmer knows that come the general election, the Conservatives (and others) will go through his manifesto with a fine tooth comb, looking to pull apart spending pledges. There are on-going struggles with some constituency parties, where local members want to put Corbynite candidates forward as prospective parliamentary candidates, but Starmer will have none of it, the party is now ONE political Party, not TWO, the civil war is over. Centre left? Don't make me laugh - he is simply the vanilla front man puppet with the left's fingers pulling all the strings in the background - when he tried to fire the appallingly gobby, out partying all night on the beer ginger growler , Rayner, he discovered he wasn't allowed to as she's a union plant and he's now had to appoint he shadow deputy PM. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 23, 2023 7:51:58 GMT
You have no idea of the political situation in the region. If Egypt accept asylum seekers from Gaza it could escalate to a war situation therefore not making it a safe country, they are therefore going for the next best option, safe zones within Gaza. If your home was invaded would you not fight back? I assume the answer would be yes. Therefore Egypt are not going to give a base to people that would carry on the war from inside their country. This has no equivalent to asylum seekers in the UK. Well the Gazans are not dangerous they are in danger. Is that not the mantra and whatever the risks may be then humanitarian action comes first. Why would Israel go to war with Egypt for accepting refugees from Gaza. As regards one's home being invaded and fighting back is that not exactly what we do accept people whose homes have been invaded are are often fighting back which seems to be what is happening to Jews in Britain, they have become the victims of 'fighting back'. Egypt does not have to give a base to anyone what it has to do, like ourselves, is honour the convention they signed and allow refugees to escape a war torn enclave. This is the total hypocrisy of the left whereby their moral certitude depends very much on to whom it applies. EDIT as regards my home being invaded then currently it is, but fighting back does not seem to be an option and would raise the hackles of the left. Update: Israel apologises for hitting an Egyptian tank in Egypt in it's rush to kill Palestinians at the border. If you have to ask the question "Why would Israel go to war with Egypt for accepting refugees from Gaza", you understand nothing of the politics of the area. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 23, 2023 7:54:17 GMT
Keir Starmer is "Centre Left" or what some descrime as "Social Democrat" or "Moderate Left" He does not believe for example in wholesale nationalisation, or nationalisation of industry; He does not believe in a radical programme or agenda which involves spending billions of pounds of borrowed money; He has repeated over and over again that the Labour manifest ( when published ) going into the general election will all be fully costed. Those on the Left have been critical of Starmer, people like Len McCluskey and others, who say that Starmer is not radical enough, but Starmer does not belong to that wing of the Labour Party. Starmer knows that come the general election, the Conservatives (and others) will go through his manifesto with a fine tooth comb, looking to pull apart spending pledges. There are on-going struggles with some constituency parties, where local members want to put Corbynite candidates forward as prospective parliamentary candidates, but Starmer will have none of it, the party is now ONE political Party, not TWO, the civil war is over. Centre left? Don't make me laugh - he is simply the vanilla front man puppet with the left's fingers pulling all the strings in the background - when he tried to fire the appallingly gobby, out partying all night on the beer ginger growler , Rayner, he discovered he wasn't allowed to as she's a union plant and he's now had to appoint he shadow deputy PM. Oh, you have real problems come the next GE. When Labour win, Starmer will immediately resign, Corbyn will be re-admitted and be made PM. 🤣 |
|
|
|
Post by Orac on Oct 23, 2023 7:57:25 GMT
If Israel was really 'rushing to kill' people at the border, there would be a lot more deaths.
We had the same silliness with the Ukraine conflict with the bizarre claim that Russia were targeting the disabled.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 23, 2023 8:18:17 GMT
If Israel was really 'rushing to kill' people at the border, there would be a lot more deaths. We had the same silliness with the Ukraine conflict with the bizarre claim that Russia were targeting the disabled. "Gaza’s sole border crossing with Egypt, the only entry point not controlled by Israel, has been hit again by an Israeli air raid, reports say. The third attack on the Rafah crossing in 24 hours consisted of “four missiles” that targeted the Palestinian side of the crossing, local Egyptian group Sinai for Human Rights said on Tuesday." You think this is silly? |
|
|
|
Post by Orac on Oct 23, 2023 8:22:39 GMT
Yes. Consider your claim vs the reality on the ground.
Reports say.
|
|
|
|
Post by sandypine on Oct 23, 2023 8:55:53 GMT
Well the Gazans are not dangerous they are in danger. Is that not the mantra and whatever the risks may be then humanitarian action comes first. Why would Israel go to war with Egypt for accepting refugees from Gaza. As regards one's home being invaded and fighting back is that not exactly what we do accept people whose homes have been invaded are are often fighting back which seems to be what is happening to Jews in Britain, they have become the victims of 'fighting back'. Egypt does not have to give a base to anyone what it has to do, like ourselves, is honour the convention they signed and allow refugees to escape a war torn enclave. This is the total hypocrisy of the left whereby their moral certitude depends very much on to whom it applies. EDIT as regards my home being invaded then currently it is, but fighting back does not seem to be an option and would raise the hackles of the left. Update: Israel apologises for hitting an Egyptian tank in Egypt in it's rush to kill Palestinians at the border. If you have to ask the question "Why would Israel go to war with Egypt for accepting refugees from Gaza", you understand nothing of the politics of the area. It seems 'politics of the area' takes precedence over accepting refugees. If the UK tries to place politics, and the safety of its own citizens, above the 'rights' of refugees then the left are up in arms at the inhuman approach of the political class. However come Israel and the Arab world and understanding of 'the politics of the area' oozes from every pore. As I said, as I keep saying, it is the hypocrisy of the left with their ability to turn their morality on its head dependant on who is 'victim' and who is 'persecutor'. The whole point that the left continually make is irrespective of any situation we are duty bound to accept refugees as they are in danger. However come Gaza and Israel and Egypt politics can be played to the full with people's lives. What an insidiously two faced game the left plays. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 23, 2023 10:14:43 GMT
Update: Israel apologises for hitting an Egyptian tank in Egypt in it's rush to kill Palestinians at the border. If you have to ask the question "Why would Israel go to war with Egypt for accepting refugees from Gaza", you understand nothing of the politics of the area. It seems 'politics of the area' takes precedence over accepting refugees. If the UK tries to place politics, and the safety of its own citizens, above the 'rights' of refugees then the left are up in arms at the inhuman approach of the political class. However come Israel and the Arab world and understanding of 'the politics of the area' oozes from every pore. As I said, as I keep saying, it is the hypocrisy of the left with their ability to turn their morality on its head dependant on who is 'victim' and who is 'persecutor'. The whole point that the left continually make is irrespective of any situation we are duty bound to accept refugees as they are in danger. However come Gaza and Israel and Egypt politics can be played to the full with people's lives. What an insidiously two faced game the left plays. What is insidious about it? Egypt are bound by treaties we know nothing about but we do know that Israel is a 'rogue' nation and liable to attack any country that they deem is helping terrorists be they that or not. You are arguing a point from our perspective in a land that does not share those values. Are you seriously making a case for the UK not accepting asylum seekers because Egypt will not, at this time? Kind of defeats the purpose of Brexit doesn't it? |
|
|
|
Post by Orac on Oct 23, 2023 10:23:58 GMT
It seems 'politics of the area' takes precedence over accepting refugees. If the UK tries to place politics, and the safety of its own citizens, above the 'rights' of refugees then the left are up in arms at the inhuman approach of the political class. However come Israel and the Arab world and understanding of 'the politics of the area' oozes from every pore. As I said, as I keep saying, it is the hypocrisy of the left with their ability to turn their morality on its head dependant on who is 'victim' and who is 'persecutor'. The whole point that the left continually make is irrespective of any situation we are duty bound to accept refugees as they are in danger. However come Gaza and Israel and Egypt politics can be played to the full with people's lives. What an insidiously two faced game the left plays. Are you seriously making a case for the UK not accepting asylum seekers because Egypt will not, at this time? Yes. Why apply a differing standard? |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 23, 2023 10:25:49 GMT
It seems 'politics of the area' takes precedence over accepting refugees. If the UK tries to place politics, and the safety of its own citizens, above the 'rights' of refugees then the left are up in arms at the inhuman approach of the political class. However come Israel and the Arab world and understanding of 'the politics of the area' oozes from every pore. As I said, as I keep saying, it is the hypocrisy of the left with their ability to turn their morality on its head dependant on who is 'victim' and who is 'persecutor'. The whole point that the left continually make is irrespective of any situation we are duty bound to accept refugees as they are in danger. However come Gaza and Israel and Egypt politics can be played to the full with people's lives. What an insidiously two faced game the left plays. What is insidious about it? Egypt are bound by treaties we know nothing about but we do know that Israel is a 'rogue' nation and liable to attack any country that they deem is helping terrorists be they that or not. You are arguing a point from our perspective in a land that does not share those values. Are you seriously making a case for the UK not accepting asylum seekers because Egypt will not, at this time? Kind of defeats the purpose of Brexit doesn't it? You are doing your "we" thing again to bolster your opinion, when "we" know no such thing. Israel is a legitimate nation. The rest of your post seems like nonsense, too. Which is expected from the left. |
|
|
|
Post by Bentley on Oct 23, 2023 10:26:26 GMT
Plenty of room for Gaza asylum seekers in other Muslim countries .
|
|
