General Election 12 December.

[apelike]

2 hours ago, L00b said:

I don’t consider the BBC a reliable source of information these days. Quite the contrary.  

 

Not quite on the basement level of The Express, sure. But comparable to the Telegraph, so that’s saying some I guess.

 

Thanks for the effort all the same.

As I cannot get any information to confirm what you have claimed in your previous post can you now say where you got your information from otherwise it will just be the usual fake news? You diss the BBC so can you now provide a link confirming it was Russia? Or did you get your information from Twitter like many on here seem to?

[Car Boot]

5 hours ago, CaptainSwing said:

I see that one LibDem constituency party, Canterbury, has decided to do just that - much to the fury of LibDem HQ.

 

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/nov/12/lib-dem-candidate-stands-aside-to-avoid-nightmare-of-tory-win

The aggressive totalitarian leadership of Jo Swinsons Lib Dems is now taking disciplinary action against Tim Walker for refusing to split the Remain vote at the coming general election.

[Car Boot]

Vote Jo Swinsons Lib Dems to keep out Remain supporting Labour MPs in marginal seats and ensure the Tories win the election!

[nightrider]

7 hours ago, Anna B said:

Jeremy Corbyn says the Labour party has suffered a serious Cyber Attack.

What a dirty fight this is turning out to be.

Thats debatable:

 

https://www.wired.co.uk/article/labour-party-cyber-attack-ddos

2 hours ago, steved32 said:

I completely agree.  The beeb have still not apologised for Fiona Bruce's misrepresentation of the truth about the legality of Vote Leave's campaign on Question Time.

And they were caught this week using years old footage of Boris laying a wreath to hide the mess he made of it this year. Their "news" is nothing more than government propaganda. The sad thing is a lot of older people still trust it as a main news source and hence can be easily manipulated.

[L00b]

55 minutes ago, apelike said:

As I cannot get any information to confirm what you have claimed in your previous post can you now say where you got your information from otherwise it will just be the usual fake news? You diss the BBC so can you now provide a link confirming it was Russia? Or did you get your information from Twitter like many on here seem to?

I did indeed.

 

Twitter is a newsfeed as valid as any other (traditional media, aggregators like Google news, etc) and, like all others, the information found on it is only as believable as its source’s record of reliability.

 

The BBC has shown itself to be as unreliable as the tabloids, Facebook and Twitter of late, so I give it equal -not superior- weight, unless a journalist’s source for a particular piece of information is named and quoted.

 

If you care to go back to your link, you can observe for yourself whether Gordon the journalist said who told him exactly what.

Edited November 13, 2019 by L00b

[apelike]

1 hour ago, L00b said:

I did indeed.

 

Twitter is a newsfeed as valid as any other (traditional media, aggregators like Google news, etc) and, like all others, the information found on it is only as believable as its source’s record of reliability.

Thought so...  Unfortunately twitter is getting to be as bad as the other social media sites for putting out fake news and has been flagged up as being wrong about stuff on more than one occasion.

 

Quote

The BBC has shown itself to be as unreliable as the tabloids, Facebook and Twitter of late, so I give it equal -not superior- weight, unless the journalist’s source for a particular piece of information is named and quoted.

It has? As for the rest I agree..

 

Quote

If you care to go back to your link, you can observe for yourself whether that government source mentioned by the journalist is named or quoted.

By the same token the Labour source was also not given or cited. When IT security experts seem to think the whole thing about it being from Russia was suspect I tend to believe them and not some post on twitter.

Edited November 13, 2019 by apelike

[L00b]

1 hour ago, apelike said:

Thought so...  Unfortunately twitter is getting to be as bad as the other social media sites for putting out fake news and has been flagged up as being wrong about stuff on more than one occasion.

 

It has? As for the rest I agree..

 

By the same token the Labour source was also not given or cited. When IT security experts seem to think the whole thing about it being from Russia and was suspect I tend to believe them and not some post on twitter.

In the current (British) political climate, what some unnamed security experts "seem to think" matters little more to me, in the absence of objective supporting evidence, than what a Labour HQ spokesperson says.

 

The issue, at least as I see it, is that Russia has plenty of form about the matter and modus operandi, and plenty of motive on top of that, where Labour does not.  Which will explain why either the DDOS attack originated from there, or why the attacker -if not Russian indeed- used Russian IPs to launch the DDOS attack from.

 

But then, one would need to have followed investigative journalists like e.g. Carole Cadwallahr (and others) over the past 3+ years, with some assiduity (they hardly get much exposure, amidst all the factless dog whistling vying for headlines and columns), to be familiar with that Russian precedent for online jiggery-pokery (not only in the UK either, by very far). Tons of evidence, long made public, besides smoking guns and records of 'strangely coincidental' meetings between relevant persons (with photo evidence) spanning years and years...if one can be bothered to keep an open, critical mind and look at the full picture from the multitude of such evidence come to light over time, rather than let confirmation bias insta-reject it all as 'fake news' in case it should threaten to throw a pall upon the legitimacy of the referendum campaign and result.

 

Now, if only there was an authoritative government report about such Russian interferences in British democracy to refer you to...

Edited November 13, 2019 by L00b

[Longcol]

2 hours ago, CaptainSwing said:

Yes.  Be afraid.  Be very afraid.

 

Labour web site still down a few minutes ago, when I went there to try and download their manifesto (specifically to see exactly what is their stated position on Brexit).

I got on to their site alright but it shows the manifesto as "coming soon".

 

They're probably still arguing about it.

 

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/nov/13/mccluskey-tells-corbyn-defy-calls-extend-freedom-of-movement

 

Update: according to the news, not due to be released until next week - and AFAIK the Tories not publishing theirs until the end of the month!

Edited November 13, 2019 by Longcol

[Anna B]

Jeremy Corbyn's aims are well known and haven't changed that much from their last manifesto. Unlkike Boris Johnson who makes new promises every week with no intention of keeping any of them. . .  

[Pettytom]

1 hour ago, Longcol said:Update: according to the news, not due to be released until next week - and AFAIK the Tories not publishing theirs until the end of the month!

The Tory one is finished. It says: “get Brexit done”

 

No further details available