|
I reckon there's a 'real or fake Guardian article' online quiz in the making here
|
#
¿
Oct 1, 2015 11:46
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ Apr 29, 2024 01:39 |
|
|
XMNN posted:That question is absolutely ridiculous. Not if they're talking about Trident and someone starts going 'b-b-but terrorists!' Then it's a pretty good followup question
|
|
#
¿
Oct 1, 2015 11:51
|
|
|
XMNN posted:Why would you use nuclear weapons on a non-nuclear pseudo-state at any point ever? It's a ludicrous proposition. Well yeah, that's why going on about IS in the context of Britain's nuclear deterrent is silly. It's pretty much a thought-terminating cliche at this point, so the natural response is to actually follow it to its absurd conclusion And the Corbyn thing is silly because we're imagining some bizarro world where the UK is about to be invaded by who knows, and the entire world-changing and possibly world-ending decision rests on the fact Corbyn said 'don't wanna'. Sounds like a right wing comic where America gets invaded because the lefty peacenik government lets the reds know they're weak and then you get tanks driving through McDonalds
|
|
#
¿
Oct 1, 2015 12:37
|
|
|
Oberleutnant posted:can we please just have a loving moratorium on nukechat Future transmission from Labour government 2020 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FHy8kW632dE
|
|
#
¿
Oct 1, 2015 14:11
|
|
|
Zephro posted:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8ABghHHFv5k I like how the thumbnail makes it look like Eamonn Holmes is a smiling and fun interviewer instead of a belligerent third-rate Kay Burley
|
|
#
¿
Oct 1, 2015 14:43
|
|
|
LemonDrizzle posted:Apparently, there will actually be two things that survive nuclear armageddon: cockroaches and the Swiss. Wow we all know kapparomeo's a bit of an rear end but this might be going too far mfcrocker posted:Yeah I mean between those two it's the machete every time You gotta saute them til they whistle
|
|
#
¿
Oct 1, 2015 15:47
|
|
|
Check out his Lordship there with electricity connected to his childhood home! Luxury Now in 1905...
|
|
#
¿
Oct 3, 2015 20:37
|
|
|
EmptyVessel posted:Hm, bit hyperbolic this. By "fourth paragraph" you're referring to the fourth sentence (even with line breaks between a sentence is hardly a paragraph) which reads in it's entirety "US forces were carrying out air strikes at the time." It's almost like you are complaining that the BBC are not serving you nice, short, punchy soundbites, as if that was a barrier to actual reporting as opposed to being the opposite. If Russia had done it the headline would have been Russia Bombs Hospital. And saying 'the US was carrying out airstrikes at the time' makes it sound like they don't have any actual information about what happened, even though the rest of the piece makes it pretty clear. It's like refusing to explicitly deny you hosed a dead pig and skirting around the issue OwlFancier posted:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xe1a1wHxTyo That's the inferior version, too much smirking https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VKHFZBUTA4k
|
|
#
¿
Oct 3, 2015 21:41
|
|
|
Well I think the idea is to spend the next five years trying to shift the public narrative away from this gotcha bullshit, so the Tories will actually have to do more than point at Labour and go 'ooooaahhh' this time. Get people used to hearing some actual straight answers and expecting them from the other side as well, instead of giving them a pass with whatever fairy stories they come out with If Labour's going to play the long game they have to stick to it, not fall back into the RoboEd style of mechanically parroting a diet version of whatever the tories say
|
|
#
¿
Oct 4, 2015 01:13
|
|
|
EmptyVessel posted:To take this back to the original 'BBC News is poo poo' loop - I heard all of this on the BBC radio 4 news yesterday afternoon, including recording of an MSF representative from the hospital tallking about sending GPS coordinates etc. Maybe don't rely on online media - they just want your click. That's fine, but an increasingly large number of people get their news from online sources now, including shared articles on social media (which tend to be a quick headline summary). You shouldn't give them a pass just because it's the online version - I'm not expecting massive depth, just not weasel wording about the most basic facts of the incident. The BBC especially has a responsibility to be objective and accurate in its reporting, and not just on Radio 4 feedmegin posted:To be honest, I really, really doubt the US pilots doing the strike were thinking 'ooh yes, let's go bomb an MSF hospital'. It's more likely that the US army had been told but it didn't get communicated to the guys who needed to know. This fuckup is more about massive incompetence than the US intentionally bombing a hospital. Why give them the benefit of the doubt? This is world's largest, most well-funded, most advanced military force with a history of experience and involvement in global conflict. "Oops" doesn't cut it - it sure wouldn't if some ragtag local militia hit a hospital with a stray rocket, so why give a pass to a global superpower carrying out precision airstrikes using the most advanced comms technology known to mankind, in an area with a known and long-established hospital, with specific rules of engagement about about the use of force near those facilities? I mean they claimed to be attacking insurgents in the area, the Afghan government said the Taliban were firing from the hospital, and after the bombing they claimed to have found 10-15 militants hiding in the hospital... and the most advanced military force on the planet repeatedly bombed the hospital for an hour, even after the hospital itself immediately contacted them and said YOU ARE BOMBING US AND KILLING PEOPLE. I mean call me crazy, but it almost sounds like they were knowingly and intentionally targetting that hospital to git um terrists. It's not like this is unprecedented or anything
|
|
#
¿
Oct 4, 2015 18:17
|
|
|
oxford_town posted:Fun though it looks, I'm not sure shouting "Tory scum" and egging delegates does much to engender sympathy amongst the electorate. It might rouse a bit of curiosity in people who somehow think everything's just fine though
|
|
#
¿
Oct 4, 2015 18:27
|
|
|
OwlFancier posted:With video! Whoa, a magic anarchist flag 
|
|
#
¿
Oct 4, 2015 19:36
|
|
|
Everyone who's ever gone to Syria is an ISIS member, apparently. I'm glad our highly objective government has moved on from threating to revoke their citizenship, to executing them for political reasons. Truly a recipe for success in the middle east and winning hearts and minds back home
|
|
#
¿
Oct 4, 2015 19:52
|
|
|
If a lot of people send him the same info it's probably true
|
|
#
¿
Oct 5, 2015 05:08
|
|
|
Prince John posted:This is a bit obtuse. Two of the British citizens killed featured in ISIS recruitment videos according to the Guardian. One of them was killed by the Americans and I can't quickly find any info on the third individual. It was more a comment on how every time people go to Syria, or are thought to have gone to Syria, it's immediately claimed that they're joining IS. Even when they're medical students, who are thought to be going to IS-controlled areas in a country experiencing a medical and humanitarian crisis - nobody knows where they are but boy howdy, we sure know what nefarious plans they have! The government is demonising everyone with any connection to the country (unless they're white) and talking about revoking citizenship and 'deradicalising' people who've even dared to visit the country against the orders of the government. I mean this is still a country with people and families and homes, with a humanitarian crisis and a civil war against terrible oppressive forces - there are all kinds of reasons people might go there (when they actually do), which is why it's important to identify the actual threats instead of claiming everyone (except the white people) is connected to the world's most reviled organisation It's that demonisation and othering that shifts the balance and lets the government assassinate its own citizens outside of the legal system, and lets David Cameron actually stand up in parliament and say it was done to prevent hypothetical future crimes, saying it proudly because he knows people will just accept it. Meanwhile IS gains support because not only is the UK treating Muslims as the enemy within, now we're proudly killing Muslims to prevent their inevitable future acts of terrorism. That drone strike and the justification that followed it were unprecedented, it's a serious shift in an already ugly and problematic approach to the issue of radicalisation - a thing that's fueled by our actions and treatment of those at-risk groups. But hey we killed two bad guys. I'm sure it was worth it, David Cameron says so
|
|
#
¿
Oct 5, 2015 15:29
|
|
|
I think we're in for some revelations about what a scone is here
|
|
#
¿
Oct 5, 2015 16:55
|
|
|
Renaissance Robot posted:How could you not post the subtitle? He said 'you will work to get out of poverty' and that tax credits are 'a bribe'. I bet he dreams of running a Victorian workhouse every night
|
|
#
¿
Oct 6, 2015 22:25
|
|
|
OwlFancier posted:I would say "Arbeit macht frei" but it's not really witty satire because it's literally what he's saying. Yeah it really is. It's not even 'we'll make sure there are jobs so everyone has the opportunity to work', he's outright declaring war on the welfare system and the people who rely on it to live. The other thing I heard him saying (before I couldn't take any more) was that child tax credits are a 'bribe' because so many families with children qualify for them. You might think this has something to do with families' income levels and the amount of inequality in the country - luckily the Tories are planning to eliminate the relative poverty measure, based on the median income, because they don't like how relative poverty goes up when there's growth that leaves poorer people behind This whole thing is like a meeting of the top supervillains to join forces on a nefarious plan to destroy the world (except boring as hell, because at least supervillains have the decency to acknowledge how evil and extreme they're being -IDS sounded like he was talking about cutting back on office supplies)
|
|
#
¿
Oct 6, 2015 23:00
|
|
|
serious gaylord posted:Didn't one of them try it for a TV show? There's been a bunch of TV shows where someone does what should be the real definition of 'benefits tourism', spending a day or a week slumming it and then going back to their nice life instead of having to face that reality stretching out ahead of them The trouble is it's not even about whether they understand or care about what it's like, if they were lording it up at their golden goblet and pig's head banquets but genuinely had a plan to help people and increase opportunities and get people into real work, that would be great. But it's purely punitive, 'if you cut them work will come' wishful thinking with zero substance and real consequences for the people it will hit. And they basically get a pass because people buy the "make people do an honest day's work" narrative
|
|
#
¿
Oct 6, 2015 23:23
|
|
|
Loving that strong, effective government
|
|
#
¿
Oct 7, 2015 00:39
|
|
|
JFairfax posted:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y_JDQinNE8w Radio 4 is some powerful poo poo
|
|
#
¿
Oct 9, 2015 19:21
|
|
|
XMNN posted:So what does everyone think about the billion pound NHS overspend, probably definitely all down to bastard mismanaging bureaucrats and not chronic underfunding and related issues, right? Proceeding as planned
|
|
#
¿
Oct 9, 2015 19:28
|
|
|
Silly Hyena posted:The issue is also that straight-up advocating it as a joke is exactly the same as straight-up advocating it, so it's impossible to tell whether it was a deadpan joke with no punchline or an unironic statement with a flimsy "just a joke" justification because he chickened out. Same with Bowie and his Nazi apologism, who's gonna defend it if there's no way to know if he's serious or not (unless they share his beliefs obviously). If you're roleplaying a rapist it depends on what you're doing - if the intent is to shock the audience and make them uncomfortable with the words and attitudes you're confronting them with, that's one thing. If it's 'just a laugh' and 'that one harmless mate who takes it a bit too far' then you're not challenging anything, you're just normalising it. It's not about whether you believe it or not, it's about the harm you do and if you're actively contributing to a very real problem I dunno what 'just bants' stuff you're talking about, but there's punching upwards and there's punching downwards, and making sexual assault against women more acceptable when it's already a massive problem is very different from, say, joking about killing the rich (who are in no danger whatsoever as a group)
|
|
#
¿
Oct 9, 2015 20:38
|
|
|
lmaoboy1998 posted:When a comic uses racial slurs to create an unsympathetic racist character who he very obviously dislikes and is making fun of, and everyone in the audience understands what is happening, I don't see how you can describe what he's doing as negative. Deconstructing regressive attitudes with comedy is a Good Thing and its quite hard to make fun of anything effectively if you can't use its language. I don't know what bit you're talking about, but that sounds like using a slur that already carries a lot of negative power in society to paint someone with that association. Attacking certain attitudes by basically going 'this is what they're really saying', and relying on the slur to do the heavy hitting. So it's not attacking the slur itself, it's using the slur to attack another worthy target - but using that slur does normalise it. If everyone did it, the joke would lose its impact because it wouldn't be taboo anymore That works for people reclaiming a word, but it's also a way for slurs to be 'ok to say' - which they were before society changed enough for them to become taboo. So you have to be careful you're not rolling back that progress and making it ok for shitheads to openly be shitheads
|
|
#
¿
Oct 9, 2015 21:55
|
|
|
OwlFancier posted:On the other hand the only reason that would work is if people are trying to get around the taboo on use of words by making up new euphemisms for the same ideas. Well yeah, that's what I was saying. You attack their attitudes by drawing a direct comparison with using the slur, and let the negative association with that do the work. But it only works while that taboo is still strong, and if popular comedians start throwing it around a lot (even if it's for good reason) it starts to lose its impact. The badness of the attitudes hasn't changed, but the social cost of using the slurs has Don't forget this discussion started because of a guy making jokes about drugging women so he can rape them, and it's not even shock value humour anymore. Just banter, 'haha surprise sex' and all that. The more casually people refer to these things, the less people take them seriously, and that has consequences in society as a whole
|
|
#
¿
Oct 9, 2015 22:31
|
|
|
thespaceinvader posted:Are the Tories just relying on shrinking turnout and gerrymandering to win the next election? Because they seem now to be loving over EVERYONE, not just the people who don't vote for them. There's nothing new about loving over public sector workers, especially on pensions
|
|
#
¿
Oct 10, 2015 14:09
|
|
|
Neurolimal posted:I still cant believe that the tories literally offeres up, silver platter, protecting tuition, and Nick Clegg/Libdem said "nah, we good". Not to defend  or anything but I have strong doubts about Gideon offering anything* up on a silver platter, no strings attached*I can think of a couple of things if they're on a literal silver platter
|
|
#
¿
Oct 10, 2015 18:13
|
|
|
XMNN posted:Is that a coke joke or a pig joke? Coke, pig and joke, pick two! MrL_JaKiri posted:There were strings attached, the strings were "We're going to blame you for everything unpopular with our base (to our base) or with the population at large (to the population at large) for the next 5 years". Which they did anyway. Well yeah, so they're not really strings attached to the offer - if Clegg turned down a tuition fee freeze it'll have been to gain something else, even if he secretly wanted them to go up anyway. It's just basic horse trading I wouldn't be surprised if it was something to do with electoral reform, the referendum was a pretty big campaign pledge the lib dems actually managed to achieve baka kaba fucked around with this message at 19:27 on Oct 10, 2015 |
|
#
¿
Oct 10, 2015 19:22
|
|
|
MrL_JaKiri posted:It's very difficult to change peoples minds through debating with them, because they have a psychological need to win irrespective of being right. eg. More republicans thought there were WMDs in Iraq after there were categorically found not to be than before when there was some room for doubt. Yeah, this is also why bullshit stories are such an easy sell - people want to have a position on things, but detail is hard and experts will always know more than you. So when someone comes out with an alternative line that's based on 'common sense' people can latch onto it easily, and never be beaten by experts because they have their own simple narrative they can argue. And then they'll argue it any time the subject comes up, because now they're invested in the lie See: the national credit card, climate change denial etc
|
|
#
¿
Oct 10, 2015 19:51
|
|
|
Gonzo McFee posted:The Babby men are mad at Jezza Corbae for not bending the knee to her Lizardfullenss. This whole thing is stupid as gently caress and I'm sure kapparomeo will be happy to tell us why the Queen's special treehouse club is actually Very Serious And Important
|
|
#
¿
Oct 12, 2015 00:06
|
|
|
Angepain posted:It is very important that you stand in front of a chair and perform a ceremony before being briefed on Syria, also this ceremony can only happen at a specific time each month, I mean anything else would just be silly. To be fair the reptilians do have a problem with Xenu's galactic spies infiltrating and replacing politicians with pod people, gotta scan them every month to make sure
|
|
#
¿
Oct 12, 2015 00:26
|
|
|
Renfield posted:Tom Watson isn't backing down: Fixed for the evening news coverage, which introduced it as "Tom Watson could have apologised, but as you're about to hear, he didn't"
|
|
#
¿
Oct 12, 2015 19:06
|
|
|
whooooaaaaaaaa
|
|
#
¿
Oct 12, 2015 20:36
|
|
|
So now Labour isn't voting for the Kill Deficit And Run Surplus bill after all. Gideon has this to sayquote:“Labour’s economic policy has lurched from chaos to incredibility. Two weeks ago, they said they were going to vote for a surplus – now we know they want to keep on borrowing forever. That would be a grave threat to the economic security of working people.” I don't think we even need comedians chanting the 'threat to security' mantra, by the election they'll have run it into the ground themselves
|
|
#
¿
Oct 12, 2015 20:52
|
|
|
Loving Africa Chaps posted:Is this the best piece of spin ever? Pretty sure he said the exact same thing when it happened a couple of months ago. Economic thing happened? It's good! Plan working!
|
|
#
¿
Oct 13, 2015 14:29
|
|
|
Debt represented by a fat line of coke
|
|
#
¿
Oct 13, 2015 15:24
|
|
|
PlantHead posted:This is true and is the same poo poo sandwich that the country had to eat under Labour, don't blame Osbourne for this, when there is plenty of other stuff you can blame him for. I'm gonna blame Osborne for it, tyvm! Blair was poo poo and condemned the NHS etc to lots of nice hefty loan repayments with PFI, but the real deficit increase happened after he'd done one, in 2008 for obvious reasons. That meant a bunch of debt began to pile on as Labour tried to get things under control and automatic stabilisers kicked in. Before then things were pretty much stable  So fast forward to 2010 and you have the Tories sharpening the axe and saying we'll be having no more of this. Well, if he wanted to, he could have slashed the deficit back to pre-2008 by cutting back on public spending, cutting stabilisers like welfare, reversing all the things which made it rise in the first place - after all, crisis over, right? Except no, he couldn't, that deficit exists for an actual reason, removing all that stuff would tank the country (which is what the rise in deficit spending tries to avoid). His government needs it, which is exactly why the deficit has barely moved and the debt continues to rise under his watch. But they don't want the plebs to know that, so they take the opportunity to wring their hands about the deficit and how it's so terrible and bad bad Labour, and use it as an excuse to make (often financially counterproductive) changes to the public sector, the welfare state, selling off valuable assets for gently caress all, the usual Tory stuff And as well as exploiting the deficit for political gain and justifying their glorious austerity crusade, that austerity programme is actively harming the economy - meaning the deficit will need to remain higher even longer, and the national debt will continue to grow faster than necessary. Which is why Osborne's been repeatedly failing to meet his own targets, turns out when you gently caress up managing the economy it doesn't magically improve, no matter how often you say it on TV I mean you can say it's not his fault he's an idiot who has no idea what the gently caress he's doing, I'm open to that
|
|
#
¿
Oct 13, 2015 17:48
|
|
|
Loving Africa Chaps posted:So the tories have decided the free market can do one when it inconveniences them like when they demoralise NHS staff so they leave substantive posts and have decided to introduce a cap on agency pay Isn't the whole reason locum work is so highly paid down to basic desperation in finding qualified people to fill in? And the whole reason it's needed in the first place because of staffing problems? So instead of fixing the underlying problem, they're preventing the NHS from finding any solution at all? It's almost like they're trying to force a crisis or something 
|
|
#
¿
Oct 13, 2015 18:07
|
|
|
Kids today are too busy with their beep boop machines, they don't have time to "roll up a reefer" man
|
|
#
¿
Oct 14, 2015 10:58
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ Apr 29, 2024 01:39 |
|
|
Oberleutnant posted:http://www.theguardian.com/global-development/2015/oct/14/refugee-rhetoric-echoes-1938-summit-before-holocaust-un-official-warns That's all very well but 
|
|
#
¿
Oct 14, 2015 12:08
|
|