liquidlen
Youth Player
Let's see how this goes then...
Posts: 487
|
Post by liquidlen on Apr 25, 2017 7:50:10 GMT
A big fat YES from me. Wikipedia founder Jimmy Wales is setting up a new online news service that aims to tell it like it is. I don't think the Tories or the Republicans will be at all thrilled with the outbreak of truth and unbiased reporting. I can't wait for it to launch and if it has half the integrity of Wikipedia it will be a major, major success. Unpaid, fact checked journalism has finally arrived to save the planet from the liars and the corrupt power-brokers of this world. I'm very happy that the online open source community will finally consign the likes of Murdoch, dildo millionaire and Express owner Richard Desmond and their guttural, hate filled rags such as the Daily Mail, Daily Express and Telegraph to the dustbins of history. It will also keep the likes of the Guardian and Mirror in check when they go off kilter too. www.theguardian.com/technology/2017/apr/25/wikipedia-founder-jimmy-wales-to-fight-fake-news-with-new-wikitribune-site |
|
|
|
Post by salopstick on Apr 25, 2017 8:24:11 GMT
I don't think labour and the democrats will be thrilled about the "truth" either
No political party has the monopoly on media truth. It's spun how ever which way they they want it spun
And what makes the journos writhing for the wikitribune any less leaning to a side
|
|
liquidlen
Youth Player
Let's see how this goes then...
Posts: 487
|
Post by liquidlen on Apr 25, 2017 8:56:05 GMT
I don't think labour and the democrats will be thrilled about the "truth" either No political party has the monopoly on media truth. It's spun how ever which way they they want it spun And what makes the journos writhing for the wikitribune any less leaning to a side Yes, I agree with that. Certainly Tony Blair and Alistair Campbell really introduced the UK to political spin, and you're right it's not just a Tory issue. However, British newspapers and their owners should not be setting the political agenda in this or any country, whether right or left leaning. It's very clear that the UK has a chronic problem with fake news, propaganda etc. because of the divisive, incestuous relationship the Tories share with the right wing press. What deeply concerns me is that Theresa May really does seem to be very much controlled by whatever right leaning agenda The Daily Mail sets right now, which is also reflected within the party's resident hard right buffoons like Reece-Mogg and Bill Cash. These newspapers and a weak, compliant PM (and May is weak) will slowly but surely push the UK to the hard right and that is no good for even moderate Conservatives. |
|
liquidlen
Youth Player
Let's see how this goes then...
Posts: 487
|
Post by liquidlen on Apr 25, 2017 9:04:47 GMT
www.wikitribune.comLooks very impressive, the video on the homepage explains the news model with great clarity. I've just signed up for it, if you care about the real news I suggest you do the same.
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 25, 2017 9:11:14 GMT
A big fat YES from me. Wikipedia founder Jimmy Wales is setting up a new online news service that aims to tell it like it is. I don't think the Tories or the Republicans will be at all thrilled with the outbreak of truth and unbiased reporting. I can't wait for it to launch and if it has half the integrity of Wikipedia it will be a major, major success. Unpaid, fact checked journalism has finally arrived to save the planet from the liars and the corrupt power-brokers of this world. I'm very happy that the online open source community will finally consign the likes of Murdoch, dildo millionaire and Express owner Richard Desmond and their guttural, hate filled rags such as the Daily Mail, Daily Express and Telegraph to the dustbins of history. It will also keep the likes of the Guardian and Mirror in check when they go off kilter too. www.theguardian.com/technology/2017/apr/25/wikipedia-founder-jimmy-wales-to-fight-fake-news-with-new-wikitribune-siteWhat this means is that you can't wait for what you see as the Tory press to be eradicated from the market ......purely poitical motive , well not everyone wants to read the Gurdian or the Daily Mirror I'm afraid . |
|
liquidlen
Youth Player
Let's see how this goes then...
Posts: 487
|
Post by liquidlen on Apr 25, 2017 9:24:11 GMT
A big fat YES from me. Wikipedia founder Jimmy Wales is setting up a new online news service that aims to tell it like it is. I don't think the Tories or the Republicans will be at all thrilled with the outbreak of truth and unbiased reporting. I can't wait for it to launch and if it has half the integrity of Wikipedia it will be a major, major success. Unpaid, fact checked journalism has finally arrived to save the planet from the liars and the corrupt power-brokers of this world. I'm very happy that the online open source community will finally consign the likes of Murdoch, dildo millionaire and Express owner Richard Desmond and their guttural, hate filled rags such as the Daily Mail, Daily Express and Telegraph to the dustbins of history. It will also keep the likes of the Guardian and Mirror in check when they go off kilter too. www.theguardian.com/technology/2017/apr/25/wikipedia-founder-jimmy-wales-to-fight-fake-news-with-new-wikitribune-siteWhat this means is that you can't wait for what you see as the Tory press to be eradicated from the market ......purely poitical motive , well not everyone wants to read the Gurdian or the Daily Mirror I'm afraid . Not at all. That's not what i'm saying in the slightest. Let these newspapers compete in a marketplace where the truth can now be fact-checked. It would be very undemocratic to simply eradicate the Tory press in the UK, it needs to die a natural death. If the Guardian goes to the wall as a result then so be it. We should welcome real news, not news that is merely salacious clickbait designed to maximise advertiser revenue via provocative editorial that seeks to victimise and bully those at the edges of society, demonise foreigners, the EU, asylum seekers, and anyone or anything else that does not fit into their narrow, skewed, biased world view. The news is clearly broken Mr Potter. I can only conclude that you disagree with news being factual, unbiased and truthful? |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 25, 2017 9:33:18 GMT
What this means is that you can't wait for what you see as the Tory press to be eradicated from the market ......purely poitical motive , well not everyone wants to read the Gurdian or the Daily Mirror I'm afraid . Not at all. That's not what i'm saying in the slightest. Let these newspapers compete in a marketplace where the truth can now be fact-checked. It would be very undemocratic to simply eradicate the Tory press in the UK, it needs to die a natural death. If the Guardian goes to the wall as a result then so be it. We should welcome real news, not news that is merely salacious clickbait designed to maximise advertiser revenue via provocative editorial that seeks to victimise and bully those at the edges of society. The news is clearly broken Mr Potter. I can only conclude that you disagree with news being factual, unbiased and truthful? Why would you conclude that ? I have said nothing that should provoke that kind of conclusion , I merely said that some people choose to read the type of newspapers that you castigated as being " right wing rags '" rather than the Guardian or the Mirror ....People will always buy what they want to read because of what they perceive the product to be , do you then say that anybody who does buy those news papers also disagrees with the new being factual....as a matter of interest I don't buy newspapers |
|
|
|
Post by followyoudown on Apr 25, 2017 9:42:33 GMT
I don't think labour and the democrats will be thrilled about the "truth" either No political party has the monopoly on media truth. It's spun how ever which way they they want it spun And what makes the journos writhing for the wikitribune any less leaning to a side I'm not sure how this would work much of the so called fake news is actually just opinion, really just a case of people being able to differentiate between actual news and opinion themselves. One example government says unemployment has gone down. Government will claim credit for that, Opposition will claim jobs are low paid / insecure. You can fact check the numbers, the rest good luck ! |
|
liquidlen
Youth Player
Let's see how this goes then...
Posts: 487
|
Post by liquidlen on Apr 25, 2017 9:45:16 GMT
Not at all. That's not what i'm saying in the slightest. Let these newspapers compete in a marketplace where the truth can now be fact-checked. It would be very undemocratic to simply eradicate the Tory press in the UK, it needs to die a natural death. If the Guardian goes to the wall as a result then so be it. We should welcome real news, not news that is merely salacious clickbait designed to maximise advertiser revenue via provocative editorial that seeks to victimise and bully those at the edges of society. The news is clearly broken Mr Potter. I can only conclude that you disagree with news being factual, unbiased and truthful? Why would you conclude that ? I have said nothing that should provoke that kind of conclusion , I merely said that some people choose to read the type of newspapers that you castigated as being " right wing rags '" rather than the Guardian or the Mirror ....People will always buy what they want to read because of what they perceive the product to be , do you then say that anybody who does buy those news papers also disagrees with the new being factual....as a matter of interest I don't buy newspapers Again, you seem to be missing the point. Let all these newspapers, no matter what our personal opinions are, compete in an open news environment where we all know that there is one news source that has full integrity, neutrality, honesty and clarity. Like Wikipedia, Wikitribune will be edited by hundreds of thousands of concerned individuals across the globe, working for free, united by a vision of truth, accuracy and integrity in their reporting. It's what we call the Open Source model and it's what runs the internet. The days of Paul Dacre's singular world view being expressed ad infinitum within The Daily Mail are seriously numbered, Mr. Potter. |
|
|
|
Post by The Drunken Communist on Apr 25, 2017 10:25:43 GMT
So, from what I can gather from this 'new' member of the forum, a new news outlet which supports the mass movement of people, believes the EU is the greatest thing ever, and all asylum seekers are genuine, peaceful & tolerant is an un-biased, agenda-free, bastion of the truth that we should all celebrate.
... And anything that doesn't believe mass immigration is a good idea, doesn't think that the EU dictatorship is the greatest creation in history, and doesn't believe all asylum seekers are genuine, peace loving people is biased, agenda driven fake news.
Hmm...
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 25, 2017 10:50:46 GMT
The thing that surprises me is that we(I) don't yet have a Slander Checker/Political Correct Programme that checks every word I write on my PC the same as my Spell Checker does.
The fact that ALL news papers slant the truth to suit their political and life style leanings is following the agenda of keep the opposition in turmoil, divide and conquer.
How many people like me straddle the views of the Tories and Labour and see merit on both sides as well as great failings. That's what I call being objective and not a sheep.
Most people just take "The Party View" whatever it is and defend it with an attitude of "We know it's shit" "But it's our shit" and we're not budging an inch.
I suppose "The Truth" is an ever changing thing, as they say One man's terrorist is another man's freedom fighter.
If it isn't the Farmer calling the shots it's the Pigs.
|
|
liquidlen
Youth Player
Let's see how this goes then...
Posts: 487
|
Post by liquidlen on Apr 25, 2017 11:02:59 GMT
The thing that surprises me is that we(I) don't yet have a Slander Checker/Political Correct Programme that checks every word I write on my PC the same as my Spell Checker does. The fact that ALL news papers slant the truth to suit their political and life style leanings is following the agenda of keep the opposition in turmoil, divide and conquer. How many people like me straddle the views of the Tories and Labour and see merit on both sides as well as great failings. That's what I call being objective and not a sheep. Most people just take "The Party View" whatever it is and defend it with an attitude of "We know it's shit" "But it's our shit" and we're not budging an inch. I suppose "The Truth" is an ever changing thing, as they say One mans terrorist is another mans freedom fighter. If it isn't the Farmer calling the shots it's the Pigs. Wikitribune is a reaction to two things. 1. Sensationalised storytelling in the news that is designed to drive ad revenue for "news sites" via clickbait. 2. Biased political reporting in the press that seeks to politicise or skew news items in order to influence public opinion and/or gain support for a specific political ideology. If you want to continue reading the Mail (EDIT - or the Guardian *Salopstick) with its highly politicised, often misleading and agenda driven reporting then please do so. If you want the facts of the matter reported in an unbiased way then i'd suggest you take a look at Wikitribune. Indeed, reference one against the other. The choice is yours to make, but clearly an informed individual will always prefer to read news of a factual, accurate, and honest nature. |
|
|
|
Post by salopstick on Apr 25, 2017 11:07:06 GMT
The thing that surprises me is that we(I) don't yet have a Slander Checker/Political Correct Programme that checks every word I write on my PC the same as my Spell Checker does. The fact that ALL news papers slant the truth to suit their political and life style leanings is following the agenda of keep the opposition in turmoil, divide and conquer. How many people like me straddle the views of the Tories and Labour and see merit on both sides as well as great failings. That's what I call being objective and not a sheep. Most people just take "The Party View" whatever it is and defend it with an attitude of "We know it's shit" "But it's our shit" and we're not budging an inch. I suppose "The Truth" is an ever changing thing, as they say One mans terrorist is another mans freedom fighter. If it isn't the Farmer calling the shots it's the Pigs. Wikitribune is a reaction to two things. 1. Sensationalised storytelling in the news that is designed to drive ad revenue for "news sites" via clickbait. 2. Biased political reporting in the press that seeks to politicise or skew news items in order to influence public opinion and/or gain support for a specific political ideology. If you want to continue reading the Mail with its highly politicised, often misleading and agenda driven reporting then please do so. If you want the facts of the matter reported in an unbiased way then i'd suggest you take a look at Wikitribune. Indeed, reference one against the other. The choice is yours to make, but clearly an informed individual will always prefer to read news of a factual, accurate, and honest nature. I don't buy or read the mail but it's always the mail people use as an example. The guardian is equally politicised, biased and agenda driven just the opposite side of the argument. People who only use right wing media outlets to highlight bias are equally biased |
|
liquidlen
Youth Player
Let's see how this goes then...
Posts: 487
|
Post by liquidlen on Apr 25, 2017 11:10:54 GMT
Wikitribune is a reaction to two things. 1. Sensationalised storytelling in the news that is designed to drive ad revenue for "news sites" via clickbait. 2. Biased political reporting in the press that seeks to politicise or skew news items in order to influence public opinion and/or gain support for a specific political ideology. If you want to continue reading the Mail with its highly politicised, often misleading and agenda driven reporting then please do so. If you want the facts of the matter reported in an unbiased way then i'd suggest you take a look at Wikitribune. Indeed, reference one against the other. The choice is yours to make, but clearly an informed individual will always prefer to read news of a factual, accurate, and honest nature. I don't buy or read the mail but it's always the mail people use as an example. The guardian is equally politicised, biased and agenda driven just the opposite side of the argument. People who only use right wing media outlets to highlight bias are equally biased Totally agree. The Guardian can be just as bad. The Mail does have a unique reputation in the regard of being a full on Tory rag though. |
|
liquidlen
Youth Player
Let's see how this goes then...
Posts: 487
|
Post by liquidlen on Apr 25, 2017 11:18:05 GMT
I don't think labour and the democrats will be thrilled about the "truth" either No political party has the monopoly on media truth. It's spun how ever which way they they want it spun And what makes the journos writhing for the wikitribune any less leaning to a side I'm not sure how this would work much of the so called fake news is actually just opinion, really just a case of people being able to differentiate between actual news and opinion themselves. One example government says unemployment has gone down. Government will claim credit for that, Opposition will claim jobs are low paid / insecure. You can fact check the numbers, the rest good luck ! It's about bringing the Open Source model into journalism; collaborative working in an unbiased way. Hugely successful in the world of software - it's the Open Source model that keeps the internet going. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Open-source_model |
|
|
|
Post by salopstick on Apr 25, 2017 11:19:53 GMT
I don't buy or read the mail but it's always the mail people use as an example. The guardian is equally politicised, biased and agenda driven just the opposite side of the argument. People who only use right wing media outlets to highlight bias are equally biased Totally agree. The Guardian can be just as bad. The Mail does have a unique reputation in the regard of being a full on Tory rag though. Only because people keep using the mail as their only/main argument for biased media. The guardian has a unique reputation in the regard of being a full on socialist rag |
|
|
|
Post by manmarking on Apr 25, 2017 11:30:27 GMT
Wikitribune is a reaction to two things. 1. Sensationalised storytelling in the news that is designed to drive ad revenue for "news sites" via clickbait. 2. Biased political reporting in the press that seeks to politicise or skew news items in order to influence public opinion and/or gain support for a specific political ideology. If you want to continue reading the Mail with its highly politicised, often misleading and agenda driven reporting then please do so. If you want the facts of the matter reported in an unbiased way then i'd suggest you take a look at Wikitribune. Indeed, reference one against the other. The choice is yours to make, but clearly an informed individual will always prefer to read news of a factual, accurate, and honest nature. I don't buy or read the mail but it's always the mail people use as an example. The guardian is equally politicised, biased and agenda driven just the opposite side of the argument. People who only use right wing media outlets to highlight bias are equally biased The Mail and the Guardian aren't really comparable, sloppy. Their target audiences are from totally different social demographics. The Guardian is more comparable with The Telegraph. Both are equally flawed as hard data sources in their own equal and opposite ways. But the "mid-market tabloid" sector has until recently been totally dominated by the Mail and the Express, both of which are right wing  We now have the i newspaper, which is aimed at a more similar demographic to the Mail. So if you must combat bias (even though you make no attempt to do so when discussing politics  ), use the i, not the Guardian, to compare to the Mail please, fella |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 25, 2017 11:59:03 GMT
I don't think labour and the democrats will be thrilled about the "truth" either No political party has the monopoly on media truth. It's spun how ever which way they they want it spun And what makes the journos writhing for the wikitribune any less leaning to a side Yes, I agree with that. Certainly Tony Blair and Alistair Campbell really introduced the UK to political spin, and you're right it's not just a Tory issue. However, British newspapers and their owners should not be setting the political agenda in this or any country, whether right or left leaning. It's very clear that the UK has a chronic problem with fake news, propaganda etc. because of the divisive, incestuous relationship the Tories share with the right wing press. What deeply concerns me is that Theresa May really does seem to be very much controlled by whatever right leaning agenda The Daily Mail sets right now, which is also reflected within the party's resident hard right buffoons like Reece-Mogg and Bill Cash. These newspapers and a weak, compliant PM (and May is weak) will slowly but surely push the UK to the hard right and that is no good for even moderate Conservatives. Mate, with all due respect you are just looking from your own political spectrum....just like everyone else What's right in your eyes maynot be in others... to quote a big labour donor......."that's your view...it doesn't mean it's right" |
|
liquidlen
Youth Player
Let's see how this goes then...
Posts: 487
|
Post by liquidlen on Apr 25, 2017 12:46:57 GMT
Totally agree. The Guardian can be just as bad. The Mail does have a unique reputation in the regard of being a full on Tory rag though. Only because people keep using the mail as their only/main argument for biased media. The guardian has a unique reputation in the regard of being a full on socialist rag That's not right. The Guardian is a mixed up centrist paper these days, certainly no fans of Corbyn in the main. The Independent online is probably your best shout for a pro-Labour read, but neither are as spliced on a politically genetic level as the Daily Mail and the Tory right. |
|
liquidlen
Youth Player
Let's see how this goes then...
Posts: 487
|
Post by liquidlen on Apr 25, 2017 12:51:12 GMT
Yes, I agree with that. Certainly Tony Blair and Alistair Campbell really introduced the UK to political spin, and you're right it's not just a Tory issue. However, British newspapers and their owners should not be setting the political agenda in this or any country, whether right or left leaning. It's very clear that the UK has a chronic problem with fake news, propaganda etc. because of the divisive, incestuous relationship the Tories share with the right wing press. What deeply concerns me is that Theresa May really does seem to be very much controlled by whatever right leaning agenda The Daily Mail sets right now, which is also reflected within the party's resident hard right buffoons like Reece-Mogg and Bill Cash. These newspapers and a weak, compliant PM (and May is weak) will slowly but surely push the UK to the hard right and that is no good for even moderate Conservatives. Mate, with all due respect you are just looking from your own political spectrum....just like everyone else What's right in your eyes maynot be in others... to quote a big labour donor......."that's your view...it doesn't mean it's right" We can only call it how we see it. Do you not think that The Daily Mail informs Theresa May's decision making via the hard right of the Conservative Party? |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 25, 2017 12:54:57 GMT
Why would you conclude that ? I have said nothing that should provoke that kind of conclusion , I merely said that some people choose to read the type of newspapers that you castigated as being " right wing rags '" rather than the Guardian or the Mirror ....People will always buy what they want to read because of what they perceive the product to be , do you then say that anybody who does buy those news papers also disagrees with the new being factual....as a matter of interest I don't buy newspapers Again, you seem to be missing the point. Let all these newspapers, no matter what our personal opinions are, compete in an open news environment where we all know that there is one news source that has full integrity, neutrality, honesty and clarity. Like Wikipedia, Wikitribune will be edited by hundreds of thousands of concerned individuals across the globe, working for free, united by a vision of truth, accuracy and integrity in their reporting. It's what we call the Open Source model and it's what runs the internet. The days of Paul Dacre's singular world view being expressed ad infinitum within The Daily Mail are seriously numbered, Mr. Potter. I am not missing the point that you are making at all , I understand that is of a purely political anti Tory one . |
|
liquidlen
Youth Player
Let's see how this goes then...
Posts: 487
|
Post by liquidlen on Apr 25, 2017 13:18:22 GMT
Again, you seem to be missing the point. Let all these newspapers, no matter what our personal opinions are, compete in an open news environment where we all know that there is one news source that has full integrity, neutrality, honesty and clarity. Like Wikipedia, Wikitribune will be edited by hundreds of thousands of concerned individuals across the globe, working for free, united by a vision of truth, accuracy and integrity in their reporting. It's what we call the Open Source model and it's what runs the internet. The days of Paul Dacre's singular world view being expressed ad infinitum within The Daily Mail are seriously numbered, Mr. Potter. I am not missing the point that you are making at all , I understand that is of a purely political anti Tory one . No, you're wrong again i'm afraid Mr. Potter. I'm not at all against the Tory party. What I object to are newspapers that manipulate the truth, distort facts and set out to achieve measured political goals through spin, false news, the demonisation of minorities and ad-hominen attacks, whether that occurs within The Daily Mail, The Guardian or The Sun. I choose to use The Daily Mail to best illustrate my point because of the way this particular "newspaper" informs the Conservative Party mindset to the point where it becomes a controlling political entity in its own right. The Guardian can be just as culpable but is nowhere near the same level as The Daily Mail. So no, i'm not anti-Tory but I strongly disagree with a number of their key policies. Same goes for Labour. |
|
|
|
Post by RipRoaringPotter on Apr 25, 2017 13:22:09 GMT
There's garbage on both sides of the political spectrum in the media - InfoWars/Guido Fawkes is the right's equivalent of The Canary, The Sun is the right's equivalent of the The Mirror etc. The Daily Mail is a bit of wildcard as it is a bag of garbage dressed up as a newspaper - probably the closest equivalent on the left is The Independent's mobile app (which for some reason is full of clickbait shit despite the actual newspaper being a lot better).
If this new initiative should achieve what it aims to, it should be embraced by both sides.
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 25, 2017 13:22:55 GMT
I am not missing the point that you are making at all , I understand that is of a purely political anti Tory one . No, you're wrong again i'm afraid Mr. Potter. I'm not at all against the Tory party. What I object to are newspapers that manipulate the truth, distort facts and set out to achieve measured political goals through spin, false news, the demonisation of minorities and ad-hominen attacks, whether that occurs within The Daily Mail, The Guardian or The Sun. I choose to use The Daily Mail to best illustrate my point because of the way this particular "newspaper" informs the Conservative Party mindset to the point where it becomes a controlling political entity in its own right. The Guardian can be just as culpable but is nowhere near the same level as The Daily Mail. So no, i'm not anti-Tory but I strongly disagree with a number of their key policies. Same goes for Labour. Ok |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 25, 2017 13:52:58 GMT
Mate, with all due respect you are just looking from your own political spectrum....just like everyone else What's right in your eyes maynot be in others... to quote a big labour donor......."that's your view...it doesn't mean it's right" We can only call it how we see it. Do you not think that The Daily Mail informs Theresa May's decision making via the hard right of the Conservative Party? There is no hard right in the Tory party |
|
liquidlen
Youth Player
Let's see how this goes then...
Posts: 487
|
Post by liquidlen on Apr 25, 2017 14:02:06 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 25, 2017 14:09:00 GMT
Ken Clarke is and always has been a cunt and a traitor to his party. by calling people in the Tory party hard right is like calling Charlie Williams an extreme racist there are real hard rights in this world |
|
|
|
Post by manmarking on Apr 25, 2017 14:22:55 GMT
Ken Clarke is and always has been a cunt and a traitor to his party. by calling people in the Tory party hard right is like calling Charlie Williams an extreme racist there are real hard rights in this world Why is he a traitor, fraise? |
|
liquidlen
Youth Player
Let's see how this goes then...
Posts: 487
|
Post by liquidlen on Apr 25, 2017 14:36:32 GMT
Ken Clarke is and always has been a cunt and a traitor to his party. by calling people in the Tory party hard right is like calling Charlie Williams an extreme racist there are real hard rights in this world You mean extremists? |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 25, 2017 14:46:01 GMT
Ken Clarke is and always has been a cunt and a traitor to his party. by calling people in the Tory party hard right is like calling Charlie Williams an extreme racist there are real hard rights in this world Why is he a traitor, fraise? Funny you should say that. I was reading a labour piece the other day and came upon something like this .... putting the eu before party / country telling Margaret Thatcher to go in 1990 Preventing John Major pledging referenda on all future Treaties, as well as on the euro, in 1997, so allowing Labour to avoid referenda on Nice, Amsterdam and Lisbon. Appearing with Tony Blair and Peter Mandelson on pro-European platforms, when William Hague was mounting a Eurosceptic campaign to save the pound. |
|
), use the i, not the Guardian, to compare to the Mail please, fella 
