mjw Posted June 26, 2016 Share Posted June 26, 2016 Soubrey and Salmond to tag team the rest of them. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mark Connolly Posted June 26, 2016 Share Posted June 26, 2016 Be interesting to see what Soubry's attitude towards Eck is this time. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
capybara Posted June 28, 2016 Share Posted June 28, 2016 Queen to get a 3million pound pay rise , up 38 % since 2012 , in it together eh. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Antlion Posted June 28, 2016 Share Posted June 28, 2016 Queen to get a 3million pound pay rise , up 38 % since 2012 , in it together eh. Well-deserved for the inspiring national leadership and unification she's come out and shown during the turmoil of the last few days. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wee Willie Posted June 28, 2016 Share Posted June 28, 2016 Queen to get a 3million pound pay rise , up 38 % since 2012 , in it together eh. Ye forgot tae add that other leech. http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-36643314 Charles' income rises Meanwhile, Prince Charles's private income from his Duchy of Cornwall estate, a portfolio of land, property and financial investments, rose by 3% to £20.5m during the last financial year, and his tax bill increased by £531,000 to just over £5m. … The prince also received £1.4m in funding from the Sovereign Grant and government departments during the period. It's time benefits were means tested. That c**t still has his hand oot for taxpayers money. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Granny Danger Posted July 1, 2016 Author Share Posted July 1, 2016 Austrian Presedential election must be rerun due to irregularities. Hopefully sensible folk will get the message and turn out to vote to keep the far-right candidate out. https://www.theguardian.com/world/2016/jul/01/austrian-presidential-election-result-overturned-and-must-be-held-again-hofer-van-der-bellen As the Guradian says there is absolutely no doubt that this sort of situation is fuelled in part by an anti-establishment sentiment. In some places, such as Spain, there are left-of-centre parties winning support. Sadly in other parts of Europe and the U.S. it's right-wing nutters who are offering an outlet for this sentiment. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jmothecat Posted July 1, 2016 Share Posted July 1, 2016 Austrian Presedential election must be rerun due to irregularities. Hopefully sensible folk will get the message and turn out to vote to keep the far-right candidate out. https://www.theguardian.com/world/2016/jul/01/austrian-presidential-election-result-overturned-and-must-be-held-again-hofer-van-der-bellen As the Guradian says there is absolutely no doubt that this sort of situation is fuelled in part by an anti-establishment sentiment. In some places, such as Spain, there are left-of-centre parties winning support. Sadly in other parts of Europe and the U.S. it's right-wing nutters who are offering an outlet for this sentiment. Utterly depressing news. An Austrian friend of mine has just gone a bit mental about it on Facebook, but I can't blame her at all. Completely appropriate reaction. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Granny Danger Posted July 7, 2016 Author Share Posted July 7, 2016 I get a Scotsman e-mail every morning, I've been getting it for years. It has five news headlines and five sports headlines. This morning there was no reference to Chilcot. As a matter of interest I've just logged on to the Daily Record online, their home page has no reference to Chilcot. What a fucking disgrace. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dogmc Posted July 7, 2016 Share Posted July 7, 2016 I get a Scotsman e-mail every morning, I've been getting it for years. It has five news headlines and five sports headlines. This morning there was no reference to Chilcot. As a matter of interest I've just logged on to the Daily Record online, their home page has no reference to Chilcot. What a fucking disgrace. Free press indeed. The media in this country are indeed a national disgrace. I've no idea how journalists and editors of some of the papers (and bbc sky etc) can look themselves in the mirror. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jmothecat Posted July 7, 2016 Share Posted July 7, 2016 I get a Scotsman e-mail every morning, I've been getting it for years. It has five news headlines and five sports headlines. This morning there was no reference to Chilcot. As a matter of interest I've just logged on to the Daily Record online, their home page has no reference to Chilcot. What a fucking disgrace. Well the Star went the other way with 'Blair is the worlds worst terrorist' as their front page headline. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cream Cheese Posted July 7, 2016 Share Posted July 7, 2016 10 minutes ago, jmothecat said: Well the Star went the other way with 'Blair is the worlds worst terrorist' as their front page headline. When even the Star is holding back, you know there's a problem. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
capybara Posted July 7, 2016 Share Posted July 7, 2016 http://derekbateman.scot/ Another excellent article from Bateman 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bob the tank Posted July 12, 2016 Share Posted July 12, 2016 Marie Rimmer Labour MP is back in court today on an assualt charge. Let's hope justice is served today. BBC trying to make Rimmer out to be the victim of abuse which made her retaliate. Ffs you couldn't believe the bbc if they were telling you the date. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lichtgilphead Posted July 12, 2016 Share Posted July 12, 2016 27 minutes ago, bob the tank said: BBC trying to make Rimmer out to be the victim of abuse which made her retaliate. Ffs you couldn't believe the bbc if they were telling you the date. Not just the BBC. The Daily Record headline is "Independence campaigner denies provoking Labour MP accused of assaulting her outside polling station" 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jamie_B Posted July 12, 2016 Share Posted July 12, 2016 Presumably it was day two of a continuing trial and that was the main thrust of today's evidence.In fact, having just read it, that's exactly the case. Day one's copy was about the victim telling what happened. Today's is the MP giving her side.You can hardly call it a conspiracy. Court reporters are duty bound to give an accurate and balanced account of a trial. If the day's evidence is the cross examination of that victim then that's how the story will read. Which is exactly how this one reads. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mjw Posted July 12, 2016 Share Posted July 12, 2016 James Cook defending the BBC on twitter and Daisley rides to his defence .Again.People who are not journalists shouldn't be allowed opinions in his world. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lichtgilphead Posted July 12, 2016 Share Posted July 12, 2016 19 minutes ago, Jamie_Beatson said: Presumably it was day two of a continuing trial and that was the main thrust of today's evidence. In fact, having just read it, that's exactly the case. Day one's copy was about the victim telling what happened. Today's is the MP giving her side. You can hardly call it a conspiracy. Court reporters are duty bound to give an accurate and balanced account of a trial. If the day's evidence is the cross examination of that victim then that's how the story will read. Which is exactly how this one reads. Firstly, my point regards the headline, not the body of the story. As has been pointed out on many previous occasions, many people only scan the headlines and don't bother with the actual facts of the story. Lets look at some other headlines from today (these are all the headlines I can currently find, so I'm not being selective) STV: Yes campaigner 'saw MP assault colleague on referendum day' Metro: Labour MP on trial for kicking woman outside polling station Liverpool Echo: St Helens MP Marie Rimmer on trial over 'referendum assault' St Helens Star: Campaigner tells court she did not provoke alleged kick Only the BBC and Record have headlines beginning "Yes campaigner denies lying..." and "Independence campaigner denies..." You are the person claiming that I see a conspiracy. All I see is the the 2 main pro-union news outlets in Scotland putting their usual biased spin on things. Secondly, you claim that the MP was "giving her side". I wasn't aware that she had given evidence - it certainly isn't in the report in the Record. I wonder whether Rimmer will actually have the guts to face her accusers or whether she will rely on her right to silence? Thirdly, if you believe that court reporters are duty bound to give an accurate and balanced account, I would suggest that you are very, very naive. Finally, the story hasn't exactly gone national, has it. Imagine if an SNP MP was actually facing criminal charges... 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jamie_B Posted July 12, 2016 Share Posted July 12, 2016 Secondly, you claim that the MP was "giving her side". I wasn't aware that she had given evidence - it certainly isn't in the report in the Record. I wonder whether Rimmer will actually have the guts to face her accusers or whether she will rely on her right to silence? Thirdly, if you believe that court reporters are duty bound to give an accurate and balanced account, I would suggest that you are very, very naive. I'll take these in reverse order.I'm a full time national newspaper/broadcaster court reporter. So I'll claim some expertise on that thanks.On your other point I wrote that before I read the copy. To be factually accurate, her lawyer was today putting her position to the complainer.The headlines saying she's "on trial for alleged assault" are fair enough but don't convey the information they should. They're trial day one headlines, not for continuing evidence. BBC's day one headline was essentially that. I'm sure the record's would have been too. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Granny Danger Posted July 12, 2016 Author Share Posted July 12, 2016 57 minutes ago, Jamie_Beatson said: Presumably it was day two of a continuing trial and that was the main thrust of today's evidence. In fact, having just read it, that's exactly the case. Day one's copy was about the victim telling what happened. Today's is the MP giving her side. You can hardly call it a conspiracy. Court reporters are duty bound to give an accurate and balanced account of a trial. If the day's evidence is the cross examination of that victim then that's how the story will read. Which is exactly how this one reads. Who decides if they have? Whose going to challenge them if they don't? What procedures are in place to hold them to account? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lichtgilphead Posted July 12, 2016 Share Posted July 12, 2016 5 minutes ago, Jamie_Beatson said: I'm a full time national newspaper/broadcaster court reporter. So I'll claim some expertise on that thanks. On your other point I wrote that before I read the copy. To be factually accurate, her lawyer was today putting her position to the complainer. The headlines saying she's "on trial for alleged assault" are fair enough but don't convey the information they should. They're trial day one headlines, not for continuing evidence. BBC's day one headline was essentially that. I'm sure the record's would have been too. 1) I'm a professional who appears in court as part of the job. I have personal experience of court reporters slanting their copy to their editorial line. Please don't insult our intelligence by claiming that court reporters are unbiased. 2) Is it common for professional reporters to comment on articles then claim they haven't actually read them? 3) She is on trial for alleged assault. That's the story. As usual, the defence is trying to discredit the evidence of the prosecution witnesses. Why is this aspect of the trial the story on this particular occasion? I would suggest that the BBC & Record are biased. You are free to disagree with that conclusion. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.