donkey Posted October 8, 2010 Share Posted October 8, 2010 So, just to confirm, newspapers shouldn't report the dishonest use of benefits? To those people who are able to understand slightly more complex points, it will have been clear that what I was sayiing is that these stories about benefit scroungers are being published with unprecedented frequency at the moment, for politically motivated reasons. Particularly in Murdoch's papers. That is Rupert Murdoch, the international media magnate who owns Sky, The Sun and The News of the World plus numerous other publications and broadcasting oraganisations and who uses his outlets in an attempt to subvert the democratic process in various countries. Murdoch has close links with the Cameron government. In fact one of Cameron's main advisors is a Murdoch man who has been implicated in a criminal phone tapping scandal of immense proportions. http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/my-phone-was-hacked-28-times-says-jowell-2070190.html Despite this, cameron refuses to sack him, because Murdoch's rags are doing such sterling work in their crude attempts to whip the mob up into a frenzy about 'benefit scroungers' thus affording Cameron and his Bullingdon club chums the two fold opportunity to A: Distract attention away from the real culprits behind the huge drain on our economy and B: Target the cuts which should be being born by those responsible at people on benefits. Still, that's democracy, eh? In answer to your querstion, no I'm not saying papers should never run stores about benefit fraudsters, and the fact you thought that I was means this is probably going to go right over your head, so never mind, just keep reading the Sun and getting angry at whatever group of people it is Murdoch and his stooges feel it is expedient for you to be angry at. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alien Posted October 8, 2010 Share Posted October 8, 2010 To those people who are able to understand slightly more complex points, it will have been clear that what I was sayiing is that these stories about benefit scroungers are being published with unprecedented frequency at the moment, for politically motivated reasons. Particularly in Murdoch's papers. That is Rupert Murdoch, the international media magnate who owns Sky, The Sun and The News of the World plus numerous other publications and broadcasting oraganisations and who uses his outlets in an attempt to subvert the democratic process in various countries. Murdoch has close links with the Cameron government. In fact one of Cameron's main advisors is a Murdoch man who has been implicated in a criminal phone tapping scandal of immense proportions. http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/my-phone-was-hacked-28-times-says-jowell-2070190.html Despite this, cameron refuses to sack him, because Murdoch's rags are doing such sterling work in their crude attempts to whip the mob up into a frenzy about 'benefit scroungers' thus affording Cameron and his Bullingdon club chums the two fold opportunity to A: Distract attention away from the real culprits behind the huge drain on our economy and B: Target the cuts which should be being born by those responsible at people on benefits. Still, that's democracy, eh? In answer to your querstion, no I'm not saying papers should never run stores about benefit fraudsters, and the fact you thought that I was means this is probably going to go right over your head, so never mind, just keep reading the Sun and getting angry at whatever group of people it is Murdoch and his stooges feel it is expedient for you to be angry at. Quite...But it's not surprising what pops up when you type in 'Boob job' with google... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
purdyamos Posted October 8, 2010 Share Posted October 8, 2010 To those people who are able to understand slightly more complex points, it will have been clear that what I was sayiing is that these stories about benefit scroungers are being published with unprecedented frequency at the moment, for politically motivated reasons. Particularly in Murdoch's papers. That is Rupert Murdoch, the international media magnate who owns Sky, The Sun and The News of the World plus numerous other publications and broadcasting oraganisations and who uses his outlets in an attempt to subvert the democratic process in various countries. Murdoch has close links with the Cameron government. In fact one of Cameron's main advisors is a Murdoch man who has been implicated in a criminal phone tapping scandal of immense proportions. http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/my-phone-was-hacked-28-times-says-jowell-2070190.html Despite this, cameron refuses to sack him, because Murdoch's rags are doing such sterling work in their crude attempts to whip the mob up into a frenzy about 'benefit scroungers' thus affording Cameron and his Bullingdon club chums the two fold opportunity to A: Distract attention away from the real culprits behind the huge drain on our economy and B: Target the cuts which should be being born by those responsible at people on benefits. Still, that's democracy, eh? In answer to your querstion, no I'm not saying papers should never run stores about benefit fraudsters, and the fact you thought that I was means this is probably going to go right over your head, so never mind, just keep reading the Sun and getting angry at whatever group of people it is Murdoch and his stooges feel it is expedient for you to be angry at. I thought it my civic and moral duty to quote it again in case people missed it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mj.scuba Posted October 8, 2010 Share Posted October 8, 2010 To those people who are able to understand slightly more complex points, it will have been clear that what I was sayiing is that these stories about benefit scroungers are being published with unprecedented frequency at the moment, for politically motivated reasons. Particularly in Murdoch's papers. That is Rupert Murdoch, the international media magnate who owns Sky, The Sun and The News of the World plus numerous other publications and broadcasting oraganisations and who uses his outlets in an attempt to subvert the democratic process in various countries. Murdoch has close links with the Cameron government. In fact one of Cameron's main advisors is a Murdoch man who has been implicated in a criminal phone tapping scandal of immense proportions. http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/my-phone-was-hacked-28-times-says-jowell-2070190.html Despite this, cameron refuses to sack him, because Murdoch's rags are doing such sterling work in their crude attempts to whip the mob up into a frenzy about 'benefit scroungers' thus affording Cameron and his Bullingdon club chums the two fold opportunity to A: Distract attention away from the real culprits behind the huge drain on our economy and B: Target the cuts which should be being born by those responsible at people on benefits. Still, that's democracy, eh? In answer to your querstion, no I'm not saying papers should never run stores about benefit fraudsters, and the fact you thought that I was means this is probably going to go right over your head, so never mind, just keep reading the Sun and getting angry at whatever group of people it is Murdoch and his stooges feel it is expedient for you to be angry at. Coulson brought unwanted attention on NotW, I doubt very much he is Murdoch's inside man or even if Murdoch cares if Coulson gets the sack again. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
donkey Posted October 8, 2010 Share Posted October 8, 2010 Coulson brought unwanted attention on NotW, I doubt very much he is Murdoch's inside man or even if Murdoch cares if Coulson gets the sack again. It isn't a coincidence that Coulson is an ex Murdoch senior executive who is now responsible for disseminating Tory propaganda, and the chief outlet for this mis-information is through M<urdoch's media empire. These facts are definitely related Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
missflirtuk Posted October 8, 2010 Share Posted October 8, 2010 'I know most people will think it is wrong I am spending taxpayers' money on my looks. But I deserve it because I am a good mum. Having children has taken its toll on my body. All mums should be able to have cosmetic surgery'. . The cheeky cow. Good mum. She couldn't spell good mum never mind be one. How very dare she. The cheeky cow. Arrrggghh I wish I had half the amount of money these blood sucking benefit people do. If our handouts get cut back, we are going to suffer. It will mean I won't be able to buy my children new clothes when they get tatty. I won't be able to pay all my bills on time." Yet the couple can still afford luxuries like the giant telly and even a SWIMMING POOL. I think the government should stop paying out after the 1st child. See who is actually having kids for money. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mj.scuba Posted October 8, 2010 Share Posted October 8, 2010 It isn't a coincidence that Coulson is an ex Murdoch senior executive who is now responsible for disseminating Tory propaganda, and the chief outlet for this mis-information is through M<urdoch's media empire. These facts are definitely related It was also the main distributer of Labour lies until about a year ago, lets not forget that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
truman Posted October 8, 2010 Share Posted October 8, 2010 To those people who are able to understand slightly more complex points, it will have been clear that what I was sayiing is that these stories about benefit scroungers are being published with unprecedented frequency at the moment, I'm not sure about that...do you have figures to back it up? Genuine question... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
truman Posted October 8, 2010 Share Posted October 8, 2010 It isn't a coincidence that Coulson is an ex Murdoch senior executive who is now responsible for disseminating Tory propaganda, and the chief outlet for this mis-information is through M<urdoch's media empire. These facts are definitely related What was the reason the Sun was backing Labour a few years ago? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tatman Posted October 8, 2010 Share Posted October 8, 2010 Heres some more filthy scroungers!! I wish i could bring home the equivilant of 95 grand a year. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.