Printable Version of Topic

Posted by: x2lls Aug 1 2018, 12:13 AM

FAKE NEWS?
How contemptible for politicians, the BBC and all the other main stream media outlets to complain about fake news.
No one can deny that the internet is saturated with fake news, but most of it is so obviously fake that with a moments reasoned examination it becomes clear that most of it is just ‘Click Bait’ designed to provoke a reaction or manipulate opinion.

However when it comes to fake news, nobody does it better than the aforementioned culprits. One only has to look at how the subject of immigration and multiculturalism is handled. They are falling over each other to present it in a favourable light, whilst demonising anyone who attempts to unwrap the facts as a racist or a xenophobic Nazi.

The subject of the Monarchy also gets the same relentless positive treatment with presenters falling over themselves in competition to display the most embarrassing levels of obsequious grovelling deference. It’s enough to make you sick.

Then we have the frenzied coverage that focuses on celebrity worship. Creating millionaires out of talentless narcissistic exhibitionists then fawning over them and their obscene wealth as if they were emperors, and inciting the audience to do the same.

Just how they have the gall to complain about fake news is an outrage, but it does serve to illustrate their vanity for their own illusions and authority. A false authority that in my view is far more dangerous than the click bait we see elsewhere. A charade that falls apart and is exposed the moment the audience decides to regain their faculties of reason and think for themselves.

When your society is being manipulated and governed by such an organised regime of denial, manipulation and fake news, it runs the risk of destabilising the very society it claims to protect. When such organisations are made up of hundreds of thousands of people, and every one of them, without exception, proclaim without the slightest sign of embarrassment that ‘Islam is a religion of peace’, I think you may find that complaints of fake news almost too outrageous for words.

Posted by: newres Aug 1 2018, 06:20 AM

There's more than a grain of truth in much of that. It's a shame you ruined it with your usual Islamophobia nonsense in the last paragraph. Aside from anything else, when was the last positive story on the news about Islam? It's always the opposite.

Posted by: SirWilliam Aug 1 2018, 07:42 AM

Forgive my ignorance but I have yet to see anything "positive" in a religion that is fear based. I agree that most followers are perfectly model citizens but if their god, or it's earthly representatives, say jump, they ask as one: How high?
This has nothing to do with bigotry, xenophobia, racial intolerance, white supremacy, fake news or any other noun/adjective etc that is banded around, just total mistrust of their agenda.

Posted by: Strafin Aug 1 2018, 08:03 AM

Religion is b0llocks and we need to stop pandering to it. Whether it's Islam, Christianity, or Scientology.

Posted by: On the edge Aug 1 2018, 08:22 AM

We've never had what many fondly imagine is supposed to be 'freedom of speech'. Regrettably, the liberal elements in our society who believe in another imagined freedom called 'equality' have almost mortally damaged our society for their constant failure to permit appropriate responses. The usual default is therefore to denigrate and call for a ban on all religion. Time and again history shows that doing that simply results in some form of totalitarianism; which is just as unattractive. However, if we continue with the liberal approach, anarchy results. The only answer seems to be to give a robust response to those clearly seeking to disrupt. Just as most parents realise that naughty kids need proper discipline rather than a bogus diagnosis and a bottle of Ritalin.

Posted by: Strafin Aug 1 2018, 01:11 PM

We have freedom of speech. You're rights enable you to say whatever you like. However we also have the law that punishes you if you abuse that right.

Posted by: newres Aug 1 2018, 01:16 PM

Aren't all religions fear based? Behave or you go to H E L L?

Posted by: TallDarkAndHandsome Aug 1 2018, 01:35 PM

Quite. I believe in science. Not a sky fairy, of any kind.
To be honest, anyone (all faiths) that believe in a supreme being are about as sane as the patients in one flew over the cuckoos nest.
Ban it all.

Posted by: SirWilliam Aug 1 2018, 03:52 PM

Exactly. Interesting to note that christianity support is on the wane in the UK basically because the C of E doctrine has liberalised over the last century. Catholicism is run by an iron fist from Rome and it's followers are as intransigent as any when it comes to questioning their beliefs, not from conviction but fear.

Posted by: On the edge Aug 1 2018, 07:53 PM

Err yes, but the qualification then eliminates the totality! Yes, if you break the law by what you say you can be prosecuted. I think our biggest issue today is that the law is not imposed properly or fairly. For instance, the 'hate' preachers should have been dealt with quickly and severely. Similarly, the attacks on our legally established religion should have been prosecuted with the same vigour applied to recently imported ones.

Posted by: On the edge Aug 1 2018, 07:57 PM

No issue, but look at what you'll have instead. North Korea is a secular society, as was Soviet Russia. Not sure a country of self made men worshipping their maker would be any more palatable.

Posted by: TallDarkAndHandsome Aug 4 2018, 08:14 PM

Both dictatorships. Any country tried a none dictatorship secular society? Can you think of any? Where more than 50% of the population are none believers? Closest I can find is Iceland.

Posted by: x2lls Aug 4 2018, 11:31 PM

It beats me why supposed intelligent subscribers still go on about religion as a component of reality and discussion. Eradicate/Redact it from us normal members of the human race. **** OFF. Religion has NO PLACE in ANY conversation. ISLAM more so. Forgive me my leaning. Or was that learning?

Posted by: On the edge Aug 5 2018, 05:59 AM

Always amazes me when supposedly intelligent people try to stifle debate, odd really for people preaching freedom of speech and expression.

Posted by: On the edge Aug 5 2018, 06:22 AM

The big question is really the influence or control of religion on the state. Population numbers may give some idea, but the 'Do you believe in God?' is a question rarely if ever, asked by census takers anywhere.

So, have we any avowed 'secular' states. The Republic in France is so claimed, and I'd argue New Zealand is another. They certainly work. However, they are necessarily influenced by the electors; so if they, individually, have exercised their choice, it could be said, if they were sufficient in number, that a 'believers lobby group' was influencing the state. That's just the same as any other lobby group though and that's democracy!

One of the key factors in the making of a state is its legal code; that enshrines the state's ethos. Our UK law is based on Mosaic law which has a religious background of course. Many of the EU nation states have legal systems based on Roman law, apparently secular, but when studied, again there was a religious base; that is the pantheon of Roman gods.

The best example of a successful new start is the US Constitution where the founding fathers had discovered that if you threw out one legal system, it had to be replaced with something that really just enhanced the best elements of the old.

Just as other nations find what we do is repugnant, we feel the same about them. Hence the criticality of properly enunciating national values and protecting them. Its in this we find our problems today and something we've not been good at doing. Given politicians will always walk the easy path, its down to 'we the people' to properly maintain that protection - by constantly reminding politicians of where we stand.

Posted by: newres Aug 5 2018, 07:25 AM

I wouldn't use intelligent in relation to him though. In my opinion you are immediately thick if you use the actions of a tiny minority of a population and ascribe it to the the rest. It's like me saying all celebrities are paedophiles because Jimmy Saville and Gary Glitter are/were. It lacks reasoning ability.

Posted by: SirWilliam Aug 5 2018, 07:57 AM

Religion is a little like funeral insurance in that neither benefits the subscriber after death, but is embraced just in case there is an afterlife. No scientific evidence substantiates a divine being yet still we choose to believe because it is easier to do so than to question the established status quo.

Posted by: newres Aug 5 2018, 10:09 AM

I would bet more than 50% or near of the UK population is agnostic. Like you though, I’m an atheist. The difference is I’m happy for my neighbours to believe. I couldn’t care less. I think there are lots of good things in what we call “Christian values”, but I would think those values are universal rather than specifically Christian.

Posted by: TallDarkAndHandsome Aug 5 2018, 01:29 PM

Religion is as ridiculous as the flat earthers. And that movement has grown massively!😂

Posted by: SirWilliam Aug 5 2018, 03:49 PM

The split on believers/non-believers seems to be a reflection of the brexit division and one would be interested to know if one side favoured remain over leave? Then we could break it down into whether catholics favour european ties over c of e?
Fun this statistics lark.

Posted by: TallDarkAndHandsome Aug 5 2018, 05:23 PM

Run a poll!

Posted by: On the edge Aug 5 2018, 06:23 PM

Don't need to. Mainstream Catholic and CofE leadership are predominantly remain. Congregations represent their constituency views broadly. However, what would be regarded as the firing churches, very devout Christians who are strong leavers or in the don't care camp.

I suspect the 'follow national trend' result would be the same for most other categories. Working with small commercial and not for profit groups nationwide, result is same.

The interesting issue would be the result of another referendum. World Trade rules which are being plugged at the moment are seen as the 'exit' gate, now even by remainers. Quite a good number of remainers have 'seen the EU for what it is' thanks to Messrs Barnier(sic) and his boorish attitudes. So, I'm far from convinced another referendum would give 'remain' a majority. One common thread though, the biggest barrier to leave, ironically by both sides, is the demonstrable paucity of British management and commercial ability. In other words, not sure we are up to stand in on our own. This from a diverse cross functional groups but a small number nevertheless.

Posted by: newres Aug 5 2018, 07:14 PM

So if the great nationalist project fails it’ll be because our managers weren’t up to it? Utter nonsense. We are jumping blindfolded off a cliff.

On your other point, I think a lot of the population have become more entrenched but there’s millions in the middle that have seen the mess we’re making of it all.

Posted by: On the edge Aug 5 2018, 08:34 PM

I don't mean supervisors, more managements / directors. The issue isn't specifically EU either. It's more our rather the damage to trade and commerce our financial system creates. That is, a focus on short term returns and personal reward. For instance, most of our 'manufactured' foodstuffs are imported from the Continent these days, as is much confectionery etc. Our own plants simply become distribution points or just closed down. Ironically, the Governments hand would be strengthened if we started suggesting to the French and Dutch in particular that these plants will return. OK, this is arguably globalisation, but British managements never put up much of a fight and seem incapable of lobbying HMG for the protections from hostile take over that exist everywhere else. Cadbury, GKN, De La Rue being good examples. So, as we can't unload coal anymore, having no productive base means the only thing we have to offer is UK financial services - which as we all know aren't really widely respected.

Our negotiating stance with EU has been lacklustre and pedestrian, no great surprises. However, the stance of the EU has been that of the playground bully. As above, with the amount they presently import to us, they have rather more to lose. The fact we haven't been giving the French press scare stories about ramping down our need for Dannone etc, it quite a worry. The fact that the rest of the World manages with World Trade rules, which were only railed against by Vince Cable and the EU itself demonstrates the EU is actually not the free trade idealist it thinks it is.

The issue we have today, is that a good many of our peers simply don't accept anything either the EU or our own government is saying. Mainstream media, all of it, is increasingly seen as aligned and biased - so, for the first time for ages, people are assessing what they see against their own knowledge and experience.

Sure, there are still lots of pseudo intellectual types; still coming out with the same old bilge, even when it's demonstrably inaccurate and wrong. It's the likes of these, often in what were middle management roles generally in non productive organisations or finance only directorships that will bring us down.

Posted by: TallDarkAndHandsome Aug 5 2018, 09:14 PM

Congratulations. Thats newres that is. 😂

Posted by: DereckT Aug 5 2018, 10:03 PM

Opinion
Science frequently disproves religion
Religion has never disproved science.
?

Posted by: On the edge Aug 6 2018, 05:40 AM

Four legs good two legs bad.

Posted by: Berkshirelad Aug 8 2018, 12:05 PM

Four wheels better...