Page 224 and 116 clod, off you go….

I don’t buy the Sun, or the Mail, but they’re still out there lying to people so apparently it’s a pretty crap response.

scary stat that its still the most widely read UK newspaper (I think) and that the wail is the most widely read on-line newssite

“I don’t know what an appropriate and proportionate response is- firebombing possibly.”

I think sanctions against lying newspapers/media outlets should be denial of distribution/broadcasting. IE, you can’t publish or broadcast for a period of time, if found guilty of publishing untruths. That might actually make proprietors and editors etc think, before lying. The loss in advertising revenue (and potential long term damage if companies pull out advertising altogether) would be significant.

I’d be interested in seeing a legal case against the Sun for lying again. And against Murdoch, as he’s ultimately responsible for the content of the media he owns and controls.

But ah, Murdoch. The Great Untouchable.

“Page 224 and 116 clod, off you go….”

I’ve got a life actually. Be a good chap and just find it for us, thanks.

It makes me want to say things like “freedom of the press is essential and absolute, except” and that’s not a good look.

I think sanctions against lying newspapers/media outlets should be denial of distribution/broadcasting. IE, you can’t publish or broadcast for a period of time, if found guilty of publishing untruths. That might actually make proprietors and editors etc think, before lying. The loss in advertising revenue (and potential long term damage if companies pull out advertising altogether) would be significant.

And therein lies the problem. Printed media are on a knife-edge. Anything you do that harms their sales will kill them off. People want to buy lies about Corbyn doing a jig. If you punish them effectively they fold. If you have punishments severe enough to make them print sane measured news they fold because nobody buys the paper.

I really don’t see any non fatal but effective way to make the printed media behave in a sane fashion because their whole business is selling lies to people who want to buy lies.

People who want truth get it from the TV media which although far from perfect is way, way better.

“And therein lies the problem. Printed media are on a knife-edge. Anything you do that harms their sales will kill them off. People want to buy lies about Corbyn doing a jig. If you punish them effectively they fold. If you have punishments severe enough to make them print sane measured news they fold because nobody buys the paper.”

I really don’t have a problem with that. I’d rather have no newspapers than ones printing lies. Because the lies are damaging our society and undermining our democracy.

So, if the proprietors want their newspapers to survive, they should stop publishing lies. I really can’t see how that would be a problem.

outofbreath – Member

If you punish them effectively they fold

Good. Let’s do that.

“Good. Let’s do that.”

I’d agree. But the Politician who implemented a set of rules that killed off the entire UK press would look to the electorate like a dictator.

We already punish them when they break the law.

Beyond that, whether they fold or not depends on whether people are prepared to buy them. Sadly, they do…but that is no business of governments. And they know a black pot when they see one.

People need to *want* to care that the papers are lying.

Bubble news doesn’t help anyone.

People increasing get their news feed via facebook with all the confirmation bias that this implies

That’s a very different argument to saying there are no non-racist concerns about immigration.

True – but elevating immigration to top slot and campaigning heavily on that issue is racist. If the cap fits …

“True”

Indeed it is.

but elevating immigration to top slot and campaigning heavily on that issue is racist

What race are most EU immigrants then?

“Anti-Zionism is anti-Semitic” and “Corbyn has a problem with Jews” – these are my views and are shared in the interview below from Newsnight broadcast yesterday.

BTW Corbyn turned down an opportunity to go to Israel and sent Tom Watson instead. Corbyn has such an issue he would not accept the invitation as he knows his supporters would not approve of the visit.

[video]http://youtu.be/S22KKrvSV8A[/video]

“Anti-Zionism is anti-Semitic” and “Corbyn has a problem with Jews” – these are my views

Your views are completely false and the argument that if you criticise Israel you are a de facto an anti semite and only a jew can decide is the sort of illogical tosh that would appeal to you. In that case all Jews hate the scottish, I am scottish ,I am the expert so its true.
Its such a weak weak argument that is so flawed its not even worth discussion

jambalaya – Member
“Anti-Zionism is anti-Semitic”

You know, I do have sympathy with you over the Labour thing to some extent and have said so over the years, but that statement is both ignorant and offensive.

If I said that the Palestinians weren’t entitled to a homeland, on the basis that Israel had won the land fair and square in a fight for survival, would that be racist?

I’d just assume you were trolling

No, I would only be trolling if I bothered pointing out how after being given safe harbour, the Palestinians tried to violently annex a large portion of Jordan for themselves, so no wonder none of the surrounding Arab nations wanted them either.

Rusty did you watch the video ? If not please do.

Junky there is a principal (I forget who it’s named after) that Labour where considering adopting (but did not) that any racist incident should be judged by the recipient. If a Scottish person thinks being called a Sweaty then it is a racist term.

Zionism simply means the right of Jews to self determination. By being anti-Zionist you are denying Jews to have a homeland, anywhere. To be anti-Zionist you wish to see the destruction of Israel, you are against a two-state solution. As Israel is the only Jewish state to be against the very existence of the country is anti-Semitic. Those that champion anti-Zionism are well aware of this, they use the term as a disguise.

My statement is one many many people make and it is absolutely legitimate to make it.

Critism of Israeli government action or policy is entirely legitimate. The Israeli opposition do it all the time as do many Jews around the world.

Zionism simply means the right of Jews to self determination.

#jambafact which as usual could have been avoided by the most cursory of checking.

Thanks for the response.

Would you consider the two terms synonymous Jambers?

Critism of Israeli government action or policy is entirely legitimate.

Criticism of anything is valid.
Not the view of Yair Lapid though, is it?

I have no dog in this fight, or any other.
I don’t care who is killing who.
I’d just like them to stop.

I disagree with Jambas and the bloke here but they have the simple point on their side – the -ism bit is in the eye of the beholder as the bloke in the video says. This may be crap but that is where the law lies and why is someone thinks that sweaty is racists – which it isnt – it is. Ditto if they think x is anti-semitic it is. That’s the way it (doesnt) works at the moment. It cant work n some cases but not in others to suit.

The law sides with the offended in any -ism case as weird as that seems at times.

Junky there is a principal (I forget who it’s named after) that Labour where considering adopting (but did not) that any racist incident should be judged by the recipient.

Steady on with the details there fella steady on 😯

Are all Jews racist because i just said so then ?
Really you want to agree with that rather than accept its a flawed premise that of they say its racist it is racist.

Zionism simply means the right of Jews to self determination. By being anti-Zionist you are denying Jews to have a homeland, anywhere.

no you are suggesting Israel is an apartheid expansionist state that brutalises and oppresses its neighbours , disobeys international law and its actions [ not existence] ought to be opposed on moral grounds

Saying israel does not deserve to exist is very different from massively criticising what they do.
Last i read up anti zionism had no agreed definition though Israel apologists do try to claim that anyone who criticises Israel is criticising jews. they do this as its hard to defend “putting people on a diet, illegal settlements, collective punishments and assassinations abroad to name a few of her sins.

The law sides with the offended in any -ism case as weird as that seems at times.

Citation of such law please.

I am happy to openly criticise Israel to some Jews to test your interpretation of the law.
EDIT: I think you are confusing it being recorded as a hate crime and it being prosecuted as such ???

http://www.politics.co.uk/news/2016/11/15/john-mcdonnell-backs-brexit-enormous-opportunity-britain

I’m not convinced that somehow wanting to trade with a little bit less red tape makes you a “corporate elite”.

Seems to me that “corporate elite” is mindless name calling which detracts from the debate in pretty much the same way as ‘racist’ name calling does.

While Labour supported remaining in the EU to protect workers’ rights, we cannot hide from the fact that too much of the EU also had aspects of the old model, putting the interests of big business over ordinary people,” he said.

Make your mind up John…

“Labour accepts the referendum result as the voice of the majority and we must embrace the enormous opportunities to reshape our country that Brexit has opened for us.”

Such as….

Perhaps it would be helpful if politicians chose to STFU on Brexshit, we simply trigger A50 and allow the negotiation process to run its course. We know the starting points all we need to work out is the compromise positions that lies somewhere in-between.

“Zionism simply means the right of Jews to self determination. By being anti-Zionist you are denying Jews to have a homeland, anywhere.”

Zionism is a political ideology. It is not one subscribed to by all Jews, even in it’s simplest original form.

The term “Zionism” was coined in 1890 by Nathan Birnbaum.

Its general definition means the national movement for the return of the Jewish people to their homeland and the resumption of Jewish sovereignty in the Land of Israel.

Since the establishment of the State of Israel in 1948, Zionism has come to include the movement for the development of the State of Israel and the protection of the Jewish nation in Israel through support for the Israel Defense Forces.

From inception, Zionism avocated tangible as well as spiritual aims. Jews of all persuasions – left, right, religious and secular – formed the Zionist movement and worked together toward its goals.

Disagreements in philosophy has led to rifts in the Zionist movement of the years and a number of separate forms have emerged, notably: Political Zionism; Religious Zionism; Socialist Zionism and Territorial Zionism.

Source: http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/Zionism/zionism.html

“To be anti-Zionist you wish to see the destruction of Israel”

Utter bollocks.

I actually agree with certain aspects of Zionism. I’m quite a fan of the idea of the kibbutzim and moshavim. I’m also a fan of many of the social aspects of Judaism, such as the importance of mutual support and the idea of strong community. Indeed, such philosophies form the basis of my own, and wider, political ideals to which I subscribe.

Anti-Israel, anti-Zionism and anti-Semitism too often become conflated, by those choosing to push their own particular agendae. One can be one or more, without the other. I’m personally vehemently opposed to the Israeli government regime, and the form of ‘Zionism’ practised by many who would happily see Arabs forced from their homes and even killed. I am also vehemently opposed to the murder of ordinary innocent Israeli citizens by members of Hamas or other organisations, and I am totally against the homophobia and oppressive fundamentalism espoused by many of Hamas’ members. However, I do feel there are people within Hamas, who may have something useful to say. But we aren’t hearing about them, only the shouty belligerent nut jobs. And it’s interesting that the mainstream UK/western media is quick to give platform to ‘liberals’ like Yair Lapid, yet chooses to ignore groups like Lehava and other far-right political organisations that have forged alliances with Likud.

Attempting to simplify the whole debate about Israel and Palestine, by just shouting ‘anti-Semitic!’ any time anyone dares criticise Israel, is crying wolf.

Applauds

Make your mind up John…

What is causing your confusion THM?

Its possible to both improve workers rights and still be predominately or overly pro the “corporate elite”/big business as the EU has been [ in the eyes of the person quoted]

Its not contradictory tbh its not even that difficult to grasp that it requires a clarification.

Wow:

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/tony-blair-returning-to-politics-comeback-jeremy-corbyn-nutter-theresa-may-lightweight-a7427676.html

[video]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Alegof-51pU[/video]

Obviously TB has realised that voters seem to be quite keen on narcissists these days.

Cyber physical, Jeremy? Ooooh, you tease…..

Suffice to say, his latest image issuance hasn’t gone down well.

Indy has more details, apparently Branson has donated £25k (not the largest amount ever seen), offices rented and Nick Clegg is on-board for a full on anti-Brexit campaign

Cyber physical, Jeremy? Ooooh, you tease…..

Just saw this 🙂 What the hell is going on in the labour media dept? Is it completely beyond them to think of a simple message that people will understand? How about ‘The tories are going to crash the economy with their reckless gamble on a brexit referendum’.

Daz the left have the bullsh.t bingo gold medal for talking in jargon. Just listen to 5 minutes of Russell Brand. If ever there was a less credible front man for a technology launch I’d like to see them.

Sadly for Labour Corbyn and Livingstones remarks about Castro a man who torutured Christians and Homosexuals overshadowed the above.

‘The tories are going to crash the economy with their reckless gamble on a brexit referendum’.*

*Which is also Labour policy.

*Which is also Labour policy.

It may (bizarrely) be labour policy to support brexit, but the referendum was a tory creation. In much the same way that the tories said ‘labour crashed the economy with their reckless borrowing’, it shouldn’t be too difficult for the geniuses in labour HQ to come up with a similar slogan along the lines of ‘the tories crashed the economy with their stupid referendum’.

Just listen to 5 minutes of Russell Brand.

He’s hardly a prominent voice of the left. In fact he’s been completely silent since his embarrassing dalliance with Ed Miliband.

“In much the same way that the tories said ‘labour crashed the economy with their reckless borrowing’, it shouldn’t be too difficult for the geniuses in labour HQ to come up with a similar slogan along the lines of ‘the tories crashed the economy with their stupid referendum’.”

Yup, in any sane world Labour would destroy the Govt over this Autumn statement. Unfortunately Labour can’t point out the Govts fiscal incompetence because Labour are openly saying they’re going to be billions worse.

2020 should be a sitter for Labour, it takes some kind of Leadership incompetence to miss this open goal.