RugbyRebels

Russia ‘stoking refugee unrest in Germany to topple Angela Merkel’

Just when I thought they'd scraped the bottom of their Russophobic barrel. Astonishingly asinine.

twitchy wrote:http://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/artic ... hetic.html

I don't click on daily mail links. What's the gist?

UGagain wrote:Russia ‘stoking refugee unrest in Germany to topple Angela Merkel’

Just when I thought they'd scraped the bottom of their Russophobic barrel. Astonishingly asinine.

What's asinine? That there is an "expert" who says such a thing or that they should report it?

twitchy wrote:http://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/artic ... hetic.html

Dominic Sandbrook is clearly angling for a job at the Graun!

Eugene Wrayburn wrote:

UGagain wrote:Russia ‘stoking refugee unrest in Germany to topple Angela Merkel’

Just when I thought they'd scraped the bottom of their Russophobic barrel. Astonishingly asinine.

What's asinine? That there is an "expert" who says such a thing or that they should report it?

It's no surprise that there are fascist Russophobic loons working for NATO in Eastern Europe. But this guy is particularly fruity.

That the Grauniad should do 2 articles on this 'report' is asinine. It's not even vaguely good propaganda.

Eugene Wrayburn wrote:

twitchy wrote:http://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/artic ... hetic.html

I don't click on daily mail links. What's the gist?

Well bwger me after posting on various guises of RR for 11? years Eugene does a sensible post

and here is the alternative view....

http://www.spiked-online.com/newsite/ar ... t6OL2Dcuid

Haven't checked either link...but the Guardian has gone downhill somewhat rotten. It's all preaching the socialist candidates - either Corbyn or Sanders - cannot win, so vote for Hillary or go feck yourself. Insanity.

With the Indy going, will there be a balanced paper left?

Stom wrote:Haven't checked either link...but the Guardian has gone downhill somewhat rotten. It's all preaching the socialist candidates - either Corbyn or Sanders - cannot win, so vote for Hillary or go feck yourself. Insanity.

With the Indy going, will there be a balanced paper left?

When you say balanced, you mean conforming to your own particular prejudices, right?

fivepointer wrote:and here is the alternative view....

http://www.spiked-online.com/newsite/ar ... t6OL2Dcuid

I got as far as reading that they don't know the difference between sowing division and sewing division before I stopped.

Eugene Wrayburn wrote:

Stom wrote:Haven't checked either link...but the Guardian has gone downhill somewhat rotten. It's all preaching the socialist candidates - either Corbyn or Sanders - cannot win, so vote for Hillary or go feck yourself. Insanity.

With the Indy going, will there be a balanced paper left?

When you say balanced, you mean conforming to your own particular prejudices, right?

fivepointer wrote:and here is the alternative view....

http://www.spiked-online.com/newsite/ar ... t6OL2Dcuid

I got as far as reading that they don't know the difference between sowing division and sewing division before I stopped.

Probably juice the fold off they're spill chick software.

Eugene Wrayburn wrote:

Stom wrote:Haven't checked either link...but the Guardian has gone downhill somewhat rotten. It's all preaching the socialist candidates - either Corbyn or Sanders - cannot win, so vote for Hillary or go feck yourself. Insanity.

With the Indy going, will there be a balanced paper left?

When you say balanced, you mean conforming to your own particular prejudices, right?

Suggesting someone is not worth voting for simply because they are not electable is not presenting a balanced view...

If I, someone who is interested, has to dig for information on the differences between the candidates, then what will an average joe think? Will they bother to trawl through other sources? No. So by repeating the view that certain politicians are unelectable, the Guardian are misleading their readership. They are failing to provide the facts. This from a newspaper that won a Pulitzer for public service...

I just want a bit more reporting of facts and a bit less repeating of nonsense.