Activists Detained in UK for Incorrect Opinions

Synthic · **Posted:** Tue Mar 13, 2018 2:06 pm

Birthstone wrote:

Lunk wrote:

The fact that you actually think there is not a single shred of information in the article and its just "propaganda" is really sad and show how damn biased u are. Try deconstructing what u disagree with instead of just labeling it propaganda and maybe you might convince a few people your not blindly dismissing anything that disagrees with you.

I literally did deconstruct it in an earlier post. Try reading?

Usually when every single person disagrees with your premise, which is actually a non-argument in the first place, maybe you aren't actually correct. Not a single person has ever taken your "muh propaganda1!" crying seriously, yet you constantly raid political threads making sure every source perfectly aligns with your world view. Maybe you're just too enlightened for mere right wingers like me to understand :^)

Doldol · **Posted:** Tue Mar 13, 2018 4:41 pm

Neezon wrote:

Doldol wrote:

Lunk wrote:

It's impossible to get 100% unbiased news but that doesn't mean we should reject it just because we have a different bias.

I think that's sad, news should be 100% unbiased. It can be, all one would have to do is state all and only the facts. This used to be a thing btw.

To be fair it is honestly impossible (as far as we know anyways) to achieve un-biased news. While there certainly are different degrees to which someone's bias is prominent in news, how one writes and what one writes will always be influenced by one's bias, regardless of attempting to stay objective.

Having said that, the news sources and specific articles originally linked in this thread show a very clear, even blatant level of bias.

Quote:

This morning a man generally alleged to have ties to British Far-Right movements reportedly entered a school in London and shot 5 students, we are unaware what the condition of these students is at the present time. etc

This to me is 100% unbiassed as only facts are presented. I really am convinced unbiased news is possible, nothing in that sentence is not a fact. However if you are referring to for ex. saying " generally alleged to have ties to British Far-Right movements" is biased then I can see how one might think that, and I guess it is based towards what society thinks is the norm, but at the same time it states these things (= being on the far-right) not as fact, but as something being purportedly true. Then I guess not stating everything that could be said as true about someone/thing (which would be everything) could be construed as bias. But I think this is so far away from what society considers bias that it would not be accurate to call it being unbiased in anyway. You would have to get very philosophic with everything humans do is biased, we can't observe anything as it is, observing something changes that thing etc. This is so far away from the context, that I don't think it's relevant.

Uchies · **Posted:** Tue Mar 13, 2018 4:44 pm

Unbiased news programming is not possible, since humans are biased.

Sure, a story could be unbiased, but you won't find an outlet that is.

Doldol · **Posted:** Tue Mar 13, 2018 4:48 pm

Uchies wrote:

Unbiased news programming is not possible, since humans are biased.

Sure, a story could be unbiased, but you won't find an outlet that is.

I edited my prev post.

koolaid · **Posted:** Wed Mar 14, 2018 8:23 am

Uchies wrote:

Unbiased news programming is not possible, since humans are biased.

Sure, a story could be unbiased, but you won't find an outlet that is.

You can be biased by omission. Even if your stories are unbiased, if you only ever report one side, that's a bias. We saw that with Trump last year.

I don't know if this was already mentioned, but Lauren Southern was just barred entry to the UK for being a "christian extremist" and for "distributing racist material" while trying to attend a free speech event. So much for free speech eh?

Free-Shmoked · **Posted:** Wed Mar 14, 2018 8:37 am

Lunk wrote:

Neezon wrote:

Uchies wrote:

Kharn wrote:

Uchies wrote:

It’s a meme because Lauren Southern and Tommy Robinson are despised by left-wing media.

Ah, hard to believe that any "Right-wing" media/reporters even exist over there, as Lunk put it in regards to the far/-left wing in the EU and UK have had a firm grip on all things MSM for a long time now, longer than any of us have been alive.

I'll have to take a glance at that site again.

It's funny because anything slightly right-of-center is considered "extremist" by the UK media. Lauren and Tommy are both libertarian, but due to their stance on mass immigration, are portrayed by the media to be "hate-mongering", "extremist", and "alt-right".

What, in your opinion then, is extremism? From what I can find (through, admittedly, limited amounts of time spent researching), Tommy at least is and has been involved in several anti-immigration groups focusing particularly and specifically on keeping Islam and muslims out of England, as well as partaking in specific anti-islam groups such as the UK branch of Pegida. In my opinion, when you take a step further from anti-immigration, into specifically targeting a specific race or culture, as well as attempting to further the ideals of "keep England ethnically clean and intact", you have crossed over into extremist viewpoints.

Here for example is a quote I found, from an article regarding an extensive analysis of message boards used by EDL (English Defence League) members, a group formed by Tommy himself: "The ideology in forming the EDL was the belief that the religion of Islam "challenges an English, Christian way of life". To me, that is extremism. If you disagree, I would love to hear why so I can try to understand your point of view.

coming from a Muslim family i can honestly say its not wrong to single out specific ideologies. It IS wrong to do it by race/gender/sexual orientation or other things you cannot change about yourself, but when it comes to political views and culture i think it very necessary. Islam is not just a belief of where we all came from it describes a political system and view as well. its a lot more political than the Jewish or christian faiths and just like the old testament it has a LOT of things that go against western slandereds (i.e. equality, how justice should be dealt, punishments for smoking, drinking, ect ect). When immigration is slow and we take the most highly educated of different countries they adapt to western culture just fine. A good example is the Muslims in Canada who are not extremist or hostile to our values at all (99.9.% at least) but if you go to kenya (where half my family is from and you talk to the Muslims over there its crazy. so when you take a huge number of people with a very different culture and are not well educated into your country they will not adapt to western values because they can just live with other people who agree with them and have the numbers to vote to change laws to suit them better instead of western values.

And if you do not think western values are important then you throw away things that took hundreds of years to establish such as human right, equality, legal sex age, due process, fair trials, the idea of racism being bad, LGBT rights, equal pay and hiring practices, im sure you get the idea.

Lunk is 100% Right

This is the exact reason why the following is happening when it comes to immigration

Middle East (No sight of a bright future unless your rich - pritty much) ---> Europe

Europeans are getting angry - who ever can see whats hapenning / can afford to are

Europe ---> North America

Land in North America = Home of the Free

North America ---> Do Or Die

The EU will screw itself if they dont sort immigration policies out

i dont really think i would have said this about trump but he has a a valid point - Immigration on a merit based system

Skilled/Educated = Sure why not
Broke/Family hand outs = no no

PEACE

Neezon · **Posted:** Wed Mar 14, 2018 11:48 am

Synthic wrote:

Birthstone wrote:

Lunk wrote:

The fact that you actually think there is not a single shred of information in the article and its just "propaganda" is really sad and show how damn biased u are. Try deconstructing what u disagree with instead of just labeling it propaganda and maybe you might convince a few people your not blindly dismissing anything that disagrees with you.

I literally did deconstruct it in an earlier post. Try reading?

Usually when every single person disagrees with your premise, which is actually a non-argument in the first place, maybe you aren't actually correct. Not a single person has ever taken your "muh propaganda1!" crying seriously, yet you constantly raid political threads making sure every source perfectly aligns with your world view. Maybe you're just too enlightened for mere right wingers like me to understand :^)

Not really sure you're in much of a position to criticize people for opinions/sources that "align with their world view" if you read and link material such as "voiceofeurope" and openly biased news. While I won't agree with Birthstone's comments about all of this being propaganda, the sources you originally linked are very clearly biased and driven by a specific agenda. Pretending they aren't is frankly just silly

Birthstone · **Posted:** Wed Mar 14, 2018 3:59 pm

Neezon wrote:

While I won't agree with Birthstone's comments about all of this being propaganda, the sources you originally linked are very clearly biased and driven by a specific agenda. Pretending they aren't is frankly just silly

Propaganda (n.): Information, especially of a biased or misleading nature, used to promote or publicize a particular political agenda or point of view.

Uchies · **Posted:** Wed Mar 14, 2018 4:03 pm

Personally, I could give less of a shit about someone's ideology. I'm more concerned with culture. There are countries in the middle-east that have cultures that are just fine in my book... and I think that there's potential there, too. I mean, look at how Iran was in the 1960's... some cultures are not as easily compatible with others.

Mr. Simplistic · **Posted:** Wed Mar 14, 2018 6:03 pm

Birthstone wrote:

Neezon wrote:

While I won't agree with Birthstone's comments about all of this being propaganda, the sources you originally linked are very clearly biased and driven by a specific agenda. Pretending they aren't is frankly just silly

Propaganda (n.): Information, especially of a biased or misleading nature, used to promote or publicize a particular political agenda or point of view.

What do u mean you deconstructed it, all you did was say the source was biased and called it propaganda without addressing any of the issues it put forth. You putting a definition of a law and then saying there is no way it could possibly be misused without any evidence or citation is no where close to engaging and deconstructing anything. There are loads of examples of the uk courts prosecuting citizens over "hate speech" with evidence of intent to harm or harm done to anyone but they still get fined over edgy jokes, criticism of mass immigration, or criticism of islam. Now someone is under trial and could be facing prison time over a joke shared on Facebook (name is count dankula if u wanna google it)

So in short, no. Calling something propaganda and saying you disagree with the premise while ignoring the points brought up is not equivalent to an solid argument actually addressing the issues and points put forth in a constructive manner.

Register

Login

Activists Detained in UK for Incorrect Opinions

Print view

Previous topic | Next topic

Who is online