Is the Guardian a biased rag?

Message

Capetonian · #61 Post by **Capetonian** » Sat Jan 19, 2019 3:17 pm

I would vote for a box of dead frogs (of either type!) in preference to Labour.

OFSO · #62 Post by **OFSO** » Sun Jan 20, 2019 1:03 pm

Don't smile at black people ! "Over-smiling allows us to mask an anti-blackness that is foundational to our very existence as white. A fleeting benevolence, of course, has no relation to how black people are actually undermined in white spaces. Black friends have often told me that they prefer open hostility to niceness."

Quoted from the Guardian last week. Written, needless to say, by a white person.

Capetonian · #63 Post by **Capetonian** » Sun Jan 20, 2019 1:20 pm

That is a typical example of the mindless meaningless lefty drivel that the ignorant do-gooders who write for the Guardian excrete, Polly Toynbee style. It is more divisive than overt racism.

I never thought I would thank someone for quoting from the Guardian, but in this case, I will do so as it just shows it up for what it is, a cesspit of flawed muddled left-wing thinking.

Slasher · #64 Post by **Slasher** » Sun Jan 20, 2019 1:54 pm

OFSO wrote: ↑
Sun Jan 20, 2019 1:03 pm
"Over-smiling allows us to mask an anti-blackness that is foundational to our very existence as white...."

Actually OFSO that dickhead writer may have a point. Unless one has been raised among blacks from very early childhood there's this deep down instinctive "aversion" to them. Even now I can't stand watching er...certain films where a black guy is porking a white woman. It's disgusting to be honest and I regard same as 'unnatural'. Again this is instinctive not cognative.

We look at blacks with this fleeting unconscious feeling of not really wanting to be in their immediate presence even though the darky concerned might be a bloody nice guy. It starts at school with this underlying feel despite kids at that age having not learnt racism and apparently getting along with each other. However I've found with constant exposure over many years this inate feeling becomes suppressed.

White buggers don't have this instinct towards other groups such as Asians, Latinos, and Middle Easterners (sans tea towel and fan belt).

Because it's a limbicular instinct it leads me to the possibility that it may be a question of territoriality in the ancient past. Food, hunting areas, women and other resources - all these were very competitively fought for. Anyway it's just an idle theory.

As for how blacks regard whites at the limbic level I don't know. I do recall in Oz that the boongs had the hots for white missys. If a gin scored with some drunk white bloke it was something to crow about with her mates before bedding down on the Todd that night.

Capetonian · #65 Post by **Capetonian** » Mon Jan 21, 2019 11:01 pm

I must agree with the above.

4mastacker · #66 Post by **4mastacker** » Wed Jan 30, 2019 10:58 pm

Saw this summary of the Guardian on another web-site:

The Guardian used to be a respectable newspaper with a left wing point of view that was worth reading even if you didn't necessarily agree with it. Nowadays it's just the opposite cheek on the same arse as the Daily Mail

Fair point!!

Capetonian · #67 Post by **Capetonian** » Wed Jan 30, 2019 11:15 pm

No doubt those who are incapable of sustaining a debate without posting multiple links to the Guardian and have no ideas of their own to contribute will disagree.

Not that we have anyone like that here, of course!

Cacophonix · #68 Post by **Cacophonix** » Wed Jan 30, 2019 11:28 pm

Capetonian wrote: ↑
Wed Jan 30, 2019 11:15 pm
No doubt those who are incapable of sustaining a debate without posting multiple links to the Guardian and have no ideas of their own to contribute will disagree.

Not that we have anyone like that here, of course!

I am not only a Guardian supporter, financially and spiritually, I have written articles for them (well the Observer anyway) and take pride in linking to their excellent site, particularly when it offends old right wing farts like you Capetonian

Caco

Krystal n Chips · #69 Post by **Krystal n Chips** » Thu Jan 31, 2019 7:22 am

Capetonian wrote: ↑
Wed Jan 30, 2019 11:15 pm
No doubt those who are incapable of sustaining a debate without posting multiple links to the Guardian and have no ideas of their own to contribute will disagree.

Not that we have anyone like that here, of course!

I'm not sure if your educational curriculum involved physics but, if it did, you may recall somebody called Newton, and his laws ? As he wasn't French, this possibility cannot be discounted.

If so, and this it where it can get problematic for some, these laws aren't exclusive to physics. With it so far ?

I have been reading the Guardian since 1976 as I said, and currently subscribe as you expect. I have never had the privilege of writing directly for the paper, but have had a post on TOP printed almost word for word.....which was nice. There again, I've also spoken to a BBC journalist, again with reference to posts on TOP as part of his research into a safety related topic.

Of course, the reason for above couldn't possibly be related to original thoughts.....in contrast say, to those egoistical, self-aggrandizing, racially prejudiced, surreal fantasy and repetitious posts by others

ian16th · #70 Post by **ian16th** » Thu Jan 31, 2019 9:25 am

Something interesting in the Guardian!

om15 · #71 Post by **om15** » Thu Feb 07, 2019 12:14 pm

The news that after 32 years of presenting the Today programme on Radio 4 in a completely professional and competent way John Humphries is planning retirement later this year.
The strident harpies on the Guardian have received this news with shrill delight, their outrage at the fact that the BBC continues to employ a news presenter that is white, male and exhibits common sense is expressed in articles presented in the paper this week.
For normal people these articles are an eye opener into the surreal world of make believe that the Guardian lives in, they also demonstrate how dangerous these demented women are to our values and way of life.

Boac · #72 Post by **Boac** » Thu Feb 07, 2019 2:10 pm

om - surely we can surely let those Guardian readers who 'travel' with these articles wallow in a feeing of self-justification and triumph without too much upset?

Regarding the paper itself, I actually think the value of a different viewpoint in the Guardian is significant but its effect on the country minimal.

Bring on Diane Abbott as the main presenter on 'Today' I say

BenThere · #73 Post by **BenThere** » Thu Feb 07, 2019 2:52 pm

I regularly read the Guardian and occasionally post on Comment is Free. The Guardian ably promotes its Left-Wing orientation, something I need to hear so as to better assess and critique my own views. Free expression is a treasure to hold, cherish and protect. While I seldom agree, The Guardian provides the counterpoint every thinking citizen should entertain, then determine where he/she stands.

om15 · #74 Post by **om15** » Thu Feb 07, 2019 3:04 pm

boac, I only do it to annoy because I know it teases, not meant to be taken seriously, nor I suspect do those who relentlessly draw our attention to the paper

om15 · #75 Post by **om15** » Sat Feb 09, 2019 11:28 am

Not recommended if you haven't had breakfast yet,

https://www.theguardian.com/lifeandstyl ... hotographs

Boac · #76 Post by **Boac** » Sat Feb 09, 2019 11:40 am

Not recommended if you haven't had breakfast yet

- well, I couldn't eat them all at once.

Fox3WheresMyBanana · #77 Post by **Fox3WheresMyBanana** » Fri Mar 01, 2019 3:09 pm

Comment is only Free on the Guardian if you agree with them or put up easily refuted criticism. If you put down factually accurate and well reasoned disagreement, they decide it has to be moderated. Then many hours later it's approved, by which time the debate is mainly over and the comment shows up on page 234. It's a neat trick where they can claim they don't ban things, but effectively do.
141,460 is the number of people who buy the Guardian (Jan 2019, via Press Gazette ABCs), about 1/3 of those who bought it 15 years ago, and 7% less than last year. The Guardian has not made a profit in my memory, and they lost £19m in their last accounts.
It's a socialist propaganda rag, end of.

Slasher · #78 Post by **Slasher** » Sat Mar 02, 2019 4:34 am

om15 wrote: ↑
Sat Feb 09, 2019 11:28 am
Not recommended if you haven't had breakfast yet,

https://www.theguardian.com/lifeandstyl ... hotographs

A real snatch-a-palooza that one, even if there are some godawful vomit-inducers in the photo grid.

No wonder it's K&C's favorite rag!

Krystal n Chips · #79 Post by **Krystal n Chips** » Sat Mar 02, 2019 6:42 am

Slasher wrote: ↑
Sat Mar 02, 2019 4:34 am

om15 wrote: ↑
Sat Feb 09, 2019 11:28 am
Not recommended if you haven't had breakfast yet,

https://www.theguardian.com/lifeandstyl ... hotographs
A real snatch-a-palooza that one, even if there are some godawful vomit-inducers in the photo grid.

No wonder it's K&C's favorite rag!

Oh quite ! that montage reminds me of those I've met in real life, and those on websites whom I haven't ( but would delight in doing so ) who epitomise the Anglo Saxon term used in lieu of the one used in the Guardian ....

Cacophonix · #80 Post by **Cacophonix** » Sat Mar 02, 2019 7:41 am

Of course it is biased, just like the other rags, whose bias is right wing. Its bias suits my bias, and I am not biased when I say that it serves me well enough. So well that I am a supporter and long may it cause the fulminati here to conflagrate on a regular basis!

Caco

Ops-Normal.org

Is the Guardian a biased rag?

Re: Is the Guardian a biased rag?

Re: Is the Guardian a biased rag?

Re: Is the Guardian a biased rag?

Re: Is the Guardian a biased rag?

Re: Is the Guardian a biased rag?

Re: Is the Guardian a biased rag?

Re: Is the Guardian a biased rag?

Re: Is the Guardian a biased rag?

Re: Is the Guardian a biased rag?

Re: Is the Guardian a biased rag?

Re: Is the Guardian a biased rag?

Re: Is the Guardian a biased rag?

Re: Is the Guardian a biased rag?

Re: Is the Guardian a biased rag?

Re: Is the Guardian a biased rag?

Re: Is the Guardian a biased rag?

Re: Is the Guardian a biased rag?

Re: Is the Guardian a biased rag?

Re: Is the Guardian a biased rag?

Re: Is the Guardian a biased rag?