Urban75 Home About Offline BrixtonBuzz Contact

the long-awaited 'why the telegraph is going downhill' thread

Protesters plan 'disorder' at Mark Duggan vigil, police warn
The Metropolitan Police says it has officers on standby ahead of a vigil for Mark Duggan in Tottenham on Saturday as a number of protesters plan to "provoke disorder"

Part of this operation includes assessing all available information and intelligence, and we are aware of a limited amount of information that indicates a small number of people are expressing their desire to use this vigil as an opportunity.
"This information includes the intention of protest groups to attend and of people looking to provoke disorder. We will be ready to intervene immediately if required."

The police statement follows concerns that the crowds would clash with football fans going to see Tottenham Hotspur play Crystal Palace nearby. The match is due to start at 3pm.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/law-and-order/10565392/Protesters-plan-disorder-at-Mark-Duggan-vigil-police-warn.html
Click to expand...

:facepalm:
 
nino_savatte said:
With the first episode of Benefit Street creating a real shitstorm it was inevitable that Eddie Munster (Brendan O'Neill) would use his blog to whine that it's a "crime" to "criticise the welfare state".


I would say O'Neill had better hope that he doesn't fall seriously ill or become severely disabled but a cunt like him is bound to have private health insurance as well as oodles of dosh (earned from speaking on behalf of Pfizer and other corporations) to cushion any blow.

You will notice how O'Neill skilfully avoids any mention of the number of hate tweets the programme generated.
Click to expand...

I agree with everything you say here, except the use of the adjective 'skillfully' in relation to Eddie Cuntster's writing.
 
The thoroughly deranged James Delingpole is at it again. He complains that "the Blair government paid for the subversion of our state broadcaster". What it boils down to is this: the BBC haven't fallen over themselves to take up the Climate Change Deniers point of view. Naturally, given the enfeebled state of his mind, this is all down to Blair.
So now we know yet another reason why the BBC is so biased in its reporting on climate change: because in 2006 the Labour government effectively paid it to be so. It was a £67,000 grant from the Department for International Development (DFID) which paid for the notorious, secret high-level seminar at which the BBC was persuaded to abandon all pretence at neutrality on the global warming issue. I expect the BBC's environmental analyst Roger Harrabin just can't wait to get his teeth into this major scandal.http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/j...rsion-of-our-state-broadcaster/#disqus_thread
Click to expand...

Delingpole also cites Nigel Lawson's Global Warming Policy Foundation as a fount of truth. Well, he would, wouldn't he?

What I found more interesting are the scientifically ignorant comments like the one from this chappie.
spencerisright
• 13 minutes ago
If there is more CO2 doesn't that mean that plants will thrive, so there'll be more food?

Fenbeagle spencerisright
• 15 minutes ago
Yes.
Click to expand...
Humans can't breathe CO2 :facepalm: These fuckers were obviously absent when basic science was being taught in their school.
 
nino_savatte said:
The thoroughly deranged James Delingpole is at it again. He complains that "the Blair government paid for the subversion of our state broadcaster". What it boils down to is this: the BBC haven't fallen over themselves to take up the Climate Change Deniers point of view. Naturally, given the enfeebled state of his mind, this is all down to Blair.


Delingpole also cites Nigel Lawson's Global Warming Policy Foundation as a fount of truth. Well, he would, wouldn't he?

What I found more interesting are the scientifically ignorant comments like the one from this chappie.

Humans can't breathe CO2 :facepalm: These fuckers were obviously absent when basic science was being taught in their school.
Click to expand...

Thats not facepalmingly scientifically ignorant, increased plant growth due to higher CO2 levels would be down to higher levels of photosythesis, which does release oxygen that humans, along with everything else living need for respiration. Shame though it would also fuck up the transpiration rates thereby making the deserts grow faster
 
gosub said:
Thats not facepalmingly scientifically ignorant, increased plant growth due to higher CO2 levels would be down to higher levels of photosythesis, which does release oxygen that humans, along with everything else living need for respiration. Shame though it would also fuck up the transpiration rates thereby making the deserts grow faster
Click to expand...
Intuitively, I knew it was a bad thing.
 
gosub said:
Thats not facepalmingly scientifically ignorant, increased plant growth due to higher CO2 levels would be down to higher levels of photosythesis,
Click to expand...

And where would these new plants grow? We're busy tearing down green spaces for buildings and farms. And the sea level is rising, reducing the land area.
 
gosub said:
What new plants, you'd have increased growth out of the existing ones.
Click to expand...

Enough to compensate? Remember that you need more water as well as more CO2.

Perhaps we could formalise this: has human activity changed the annual amount of oxygen generated? And if so, to what degree?
 
RedDragon said:
A bloody coup?

Daily Telegraph sacks editor Tony Gallagher in shock move designed to 'move beyond putting news online' Independent
Click to expand...
Wonder if its because he's turned his paper's website into a favoured hangout for all manner of fascist bigotted looney cranks? Advertisors tend not to be enamoured with the sort of comments appearing under many articles in the Torygraph.....
 
Gingerman said:
Wonder if its because he's turned his paper's website into a favoured hangout for all manner of fascist bigotted looney cranks? Advertisors tend not to be enamoured with the sort of comments appearing under many articles in the Torygraph.....
Click to expand...

Honestly, the main difference between the Torygraph comments section and Scumfront is that Scumfront is slightly more articulate. I'm still confused as to why it is quite as bad as it is, Torygraph commenters constantly go on about the bell curve and stuff it's really weird.
 
RedDragon said:
A bloody coup?

Daily Telegraph sacks editor Tony Gallagher in shock move designed to 'move beyond putting news online' Independent
Click to expand...
Bizarre that the Media Guardian has eulogised Gallagher on his departure as a 'great news journalist'. The Telegraph's news pages are full of shit, from the courts to climate change.
 
Graeme Archer, who is apparently a statistician, tells us that the "IDS and the Tories aren't hard hearted, they want to rescue people from joblessness". Oh, how I laughed.
I put "hardening" in quotes, because I'm not so sure that support for the policy should be translated into interpersonal hatred. I do get annoyed that I have to go to work at six in the morning, while the unemployed do not – of course I do – and equally, every time I see a single mother with five kids on the news, I wonder how many months of work I've endured, in order to contribute enough income tax that these modern families be housed; but I don't wish harm on the unemployed, or the overly fecund. If anything, the emotion induced by their plight (a revealing word choice) is that least fashionable one: pity. I feel lucky that I had the wherewithal to succeed (so far) in the random lottery of life, and I wish more people shared that luck. I worry about those the caravan is leaving behind.

The personal is political. Labour seek to paint Conservative policies – such as the cap – as the governmental manifestation of this "hardening" of attitudes, as evidence of an unkind – a nasty – party. I don't think they've got that right, any more than the pollsters have. IDS will today give a speech in which he makes the counterpoint: as the interest in Channel 4's Benefits Street has shown, it's the opposite of nasty to care about the abandonment of generation after generation of some families to what the minister calls the "twilight world" of welfare dependency.
http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/g...-they-want-to-rescue-people-from-joblessness/
Click to expand...

Smug as well as thick... not to forget delusional.
 
Last edited:
nino_savatte said:
Graeme Archer, who is apparently a statistician, tells us that the "IDS and the Tories aren't hard hearted, they want to rescue people from joblessness". Oh, how I laughed.
Click to expand...

He's almost there: the Tories want people to rescue themselves. Tebbit's "Get on your bike!" So they try to create an environment in which people can do that. Except they have failed in that and continue to fail to realise that many people need help.

Speaking of statistics, I saw in the DT that more people are in employment than ever, so I half expect the Tories to try to switch to that instead of counting the unemployed.
 
Quartz said:
He's almost there: the Tories want people to rescue themselves. Tebbit's "Get on your bike!" So they try to create an environment in which people can do that. Except they have failed in that and continue to fail to realise that many people need help.

Speaking of statistics, I saw in the DT that more people are in employment than ever, so I half expect the Tories to try to switch to that instead of counting the unemployed.
Click to expand...
The latest 'decrease' in the number of unemployed can be explained by the numbers of people forced into workfare, zero hours 'self-employed work and those claimants who have been sanctioned. Statistics are the sophist's best friend.
 
Quartz said:
Speaking of statistics, I saw in the DT that more people are in employment than ever, so I half expect the Tories to try to switch to that instead of counting the unemployed.
Click to expand...

It's used all the time by Tory politicians who think people are too stupid to realise what those figures mean. Of course, the fact that there are more people alive than previously has nothing to do with more people being in work.
 
You can always rely on Hannan for a hackneyed phrase... or a lie or several. Today, he uses the 'politics of envy' narrative in response to Labour's plan to reinstate the 50p tax rate for the wealthiest if they win in 2015.
Envy is an ugly and debilitating condition, but it seems to have an evolutionary-biological basis. The dosage varies enormously from individual to individual, but even toddlers often display a sense that, if they can’t have something, no one else should either. If they had the vocabulary, they would doubtless, like the 69 per cent of Labour supporters, explain that emotion “on moral grounds”. Few toddlers, and few Labour voters, openly admit to being actuated by vindictiveness.
http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/d...-are-to-punish-the-rich-not-to-raise-revenue/
Click to expand...

Most of the greedy rich cunts (his mates) have already stashed their money in tax havens anyway.
 
I picked up a copy of the DT in the hospital today - possibly not today's - and spotted an article which said that 20% of the unemployed - though they didn't use that word - were ex criminals, and gave a figure of 1M, which means that the true unemployed total is 5 million. That will be no surprise to many, after all, governments have fiddled the figures for many years, but to see it even obliquely acknowledged in the DT is interesting.
 
Quartz said:
I picked up a copy of the DT in the hospital today - possibly not today's - and spotted an article which said that 20% of the unemployed - though they didn't use that word - were ex criminals, and gave a figure of 1M, which means that the true unemployed total is 5 million. That will be no surprise to many, after all, governments have fiddled the figures for many years, but to see it even obliquely acknowledged in the DT is interesting.
Click to expand...

It's an "experimental" study by the Ministry of Justice (totally trustworthy, then! :facepalm: ) of 4.3 million offenders in England and Wales.
It's being misrepresented as being about "the unemployed" - it's a study that shows that 20%(-ish) of that 4.3 million were claiming one or more benefits.
What the Telegraph probably reserved for the last paragraph of the article is that these 4.3 million "offenders" include people CAUTIONED, as well as people found guilty in court.

In other words, it's basically (pardon the pun) a study in how studies are spun to suit ideology.
 
Harry Mount (no doubt pronounced "mynt"), cousin of Dippy Dave writes:
A strike-busting Routemaster – a sight to gladden the heart
The streets of London are full this morning with hard-working people desperate to get to the office, despite the best intentions of 1970s dinosaur, Bob Crow. While he and his Tube strikers stick the kettle on and enjoy a few more hours in bed, thousands of commuters have to put up with the misery of streets clogged with stationary traffic.

But, still, those commuters battle to work – walking, climbing on Boris bikes and taking advantage of extra strike-busting buses. Among them are lots of Routemasters brought back into service – not just the red ones, but the glorious green ones, too. In all the frustration brought on by the strike, it's a double pleasure – to see those beautiful vehicles and to think they might drive Crow nuts every time he catches sight of one.
http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/cultur...ing-routemaster-a-sight-to-gladden-the-heart/
Click to expand...

Idiot. The Telegraph's solitary Routemaster isn't "breaking the strike" at all. In fact, if anything, it's contributing to the traffic jams above ground.

Mount (pronounced 'cunt') has had most expensive education that money can buy and he still doesn't understand that in order to break a tube strike, you'd have to have an army of scabs running the trains.:facepalm:
 
I was chatting to my Mum on the phone today, mentioning how much I'd been enjoying the snow boarding coverage at the Olympics and particularly the commentators. She told me how some people had been complaining about their delivery and I hypothesised that those people were in the Telegraph, which she reads. She didn't make an attempt to deny it.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

cupid_stunt
The sale of the Daily Telegraph, Sunday Telegraph and the Spectator
2
Replies
39
Views
2K
PR1Berske
PR1Berske
R
Oceangate's Titan. The Bayesian yacht. Why do the deaths of rich people matter more than poor people?
5 6 7 8 9
Replies
248
Views
8K
ghost boy
ghost boy
hash tag
Sainsbury's are going down the pan
2 3
Replies
60
Views
3K
cesare
cesare
Dystopiary
Why Sky News is going down the pan
Replies
7
Views
707
Boris Sprinkler
Boris Sprinkler
Kaka Tim
The 2024 General Election prediction thread - Who is the Urban 75 Ballot Box Nostradamus?
2 3 4 5
Replies
125
Views
5K
MrsArcanum
MrsArcanum
Back
Top Bottom