Can't Work, Won't Work

justjohn

Pixie5740 wrote: »

Gruinard Island?

http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gruinard_Island



.

back to the drawing board that island is far too small. lol

Pixie5740

justjohn wrote: »

back to the drawing board that island is far too small. lol

Stack 'em high

theartfullodger

Pixie5740 wrote: »

Gruinard Island?

http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gruinard_Island

Well yes, but sadly the scr*ats would still be entitled to UK benefits as Gruinard is still in UK. And sadly the anthrax has mainly gone....

Lioness_Twinkletoes

justjohn wrote: »

have you seen "24 hr in police custody"


last episode I watched was of a couple accused of human trafficking. Seems to be the new scam as soon as an illegal immigrant makes a proven or on unproven allegation the government and council give them a hand out lol

Although in this instance the allegations were unfounded and the accusers were rejected for housing or benefits. All those involved returned to their home countries.

stu12345_2

i was told those that have the means to own newspaper companies,tv companies, eg the sun, sky, mr murdoch, will have more power than any pm. as what they write and how they edit it to spread their views and influence the viewer , reader.

hence the smart ones between us can read between the lines and make up what is edited or written for pure entertainment/shock purposes.
i guess its like what we type in a forum,but where we can have an educated debate, but forums dont sell 4million copies a day to influence the unguided.

sensationalism sells.

you cant shout back at a newspaper,if they write unsavoury things about you, or against your views unless you have millions to take then to court for libel.

or unless you own your own rival newspaper tv company.

p00hsticks

stu12345 wrote: »

i was told those that have the means to own newspaper companies,tv companies, eg the sun, sky, mr murdoch, will have more power than any pm. as what they write and how they edit it to spread their views and influence the viewer , reader.

That used to be the case, but no longer. There are so many diverse sources of media input now that the newspapers and TV companies have nothing like the clout they used to 30-40 years ago, when newspaper support for particular parties could swing elections.

Newspaper circulation and viewing figures for individual newspapers / TV channels has plummeted since then.

stu12345_2

if i called you a fat lazy scrounger, you would take offence and complain, (no offence lol), then how the heck can a newspaper legally print such material, without it getting retracted or banned.

like the tum and dumber article in which the mother and daughter in scotland, in the sun, mother is chubby, but ill, daughter bit plump, but broken leg,
but the sun calls the tum and dumber without highlighting their ailments or injuries in clear large capital letters, or without justifying that tum and dumber is highly incorrect and legally offensive.

45002

TV at it's worst.

http://www.channel5.com/shows/benefits/episodes/episode-3-641

ratrace

stu12345 wrote: »

i was told those that have the means to own newspaper companies,tv companies, eg the sun, sky, mr murdoch, will have more power than any pm. as what they write and how they edit it to spread their views and influence the viewer , reader.

hence the smart ones between us can read between the lines and make up what is edited or written for pure entertainment/shock purposes.
i guess its like what we type in a forum,but where we can have an educated debate, but forums dont sell 4million copies a day to influence the unguided.

sensationalism sells.

you cant shout back at a newspaper,if they write unsavoury things about you, or against your views unless you have millions to take then to court for libel.

or unless you own your own rival newspaper tv company.

At last someone who does not take things at face value :money:

jules888

Surely this is in the wrong part of the forums!
What is it to do with house buying/selling?