A Political Thread

[Not Mike Brown's Sock]

Turns out that (Sheree) the originator of the fake story that the 4 year old was a fake pic; who claimed that her account was hacked and that she'd never posted it - lied about that (she replied to comments on it); and has a son who is friends with Matt Hancock - who would, of course, have no possible reason to try to get this lie out there.
https://www.facebook.com/jon.maiden/posts/10156954643798269

And now for something completely different:

**** me man, I mean I love a good conspiracy theory but jeezus what you're accusing Hancock here is a stretch surely

 

[Which Tyler]

**** me man, I mean I love a good conspiracy theory but jeezus what you're accusing Hancock here is a stretch surely

All I'm "accusing" Hancock of being, is a friend to the son of the originator of the original lies. Given that the originator has a son who is facebook friends with Matt Hancock; I'd argue that the accusation is proven.
If you think that I'm accusing Matt Hancock of having written the whole thing himself, then you're wrong, I make no such accusation.

Any observations on the meat of the message? Any of the actual points made in the point-by-point breakdown? Anything to actually discuss? or is it just "That' a conspiracy theory, go away"?


ETA: I guess you could say that I'm accusing the originator of lying when she said that her account was hacked and that she had no awareness of the post - despite replying to it.

ETA2: Unless you think I'm Jon Maiden, of course - which I'm not.

 

[LeinsterMan (NotTigsMan)]

I miss the day and age where people didn't get their news from social media.

Honestly this election has been the worst and I only see the next elections being just as bad.

People posting **** tier election meme's supporting their arguments even if it makes no sense, has wrong stats and worst of all r/comedycemetery material.
People posting their fake stories about how something that clearly didn't happen to them, ended with the whole room standing and clapping them.
People posting how they are entitled to ****
People reposting made up stories that are the Onion but in real life.

I miss my small(ish) internet forums (Especially gaming and fitness ones) that had a close community and in jokes now the forums I used to post in are crap and full of people who post similar stuff that gets posted to social media accounts.

Discord is good but will most likely turn like every other platform once it gets popular.

I hate this age of wanting instant gratification even if it means talking BS to get those likes.

Like and share this post if you agree

 

[Not Mike Brown's Sock]

All I'm "accusing" Hancock of being, is a friend to the son of the originator of the original lies.
I guess you could say that I'm accusing the originator of lying when she said that her account was hacked and that she had no awareness of the post - despite replying to it.

Any observations on the meat of the message? Any of the actual points made in the point-by-point breakdown? Anything to actually discuss? or is it just "That' a conspiracy theory, go away"?

ETA: Unless you think I'm Jon Maiden, of course - which I'm not.

Hmm you might not have said it, but this insinuation in your post is that Hancock engineered it.

On the meat of it, all I can say is that I don't know.

The whole thing is really ******* weird and I'm not going to try and make a judgement on it when I don't have all the info.

I'd we're gonna make accusations though then traingate of 2016 sets a precedent. I wasn't at the hospital so I have no idea but it just proves that anyone can take a photo and say that it shows something.

 

[Not Mike Brown's Sock]

Like and share this post if you agree

Love it haha

 

[Leonormous Boozer]

I miss the day and age where people didn't get their news from social media.

Honestly this election has been the worst and I only see the next elections being just as bad.

People posting **** tier election meme's supporting their arguments even if it makes no sense, has wrong stats and worst of all r/comedycemetery material.
People posting their fake stories about how something that clearly didn't happen to them, ended with the whole room standing and clapping them.
People posting how they are entitled to ****
People reposting made up stories that are the Onion but in real life.

I miss my small(ish) internet forums (Especially gaming and fitness ones) that had a close community and in jokes now the forums I used to post in are crap and full of people who post similar stuff that gets posted to social media accounts.

Discord is good but will most likely turn like every other platform once it gets popular.

I hate this age of wanting instant gratification even if it means talking BS to get those likes.

Like and share this post if you agree

 

[ncurd]

snip

Is there a way to subscribe?

I swear if I see another 'The Canary' or 'Another Angry Voice' my 'friend' won't know what hit them.

I also had a friend share this utter shite
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...fl3TZja7txqpiaflgtnUowk_03u87TigHlc5jD4QE8ecI

Which when you read the article (which also meant clicking the damn thing and break my no Daily Mail rule) you discover her comment about 'legalised mass murder' had duck all to do with poppy campaigners and it was from something to do with a quote from Harry Patch....

 

[TRF_Olyy]

I hate this age of wanting instant gratification

You sound just like my ex-wife

 

[Amiga500]

I miss the day and age where people didn't get their news from social media.

As opposed to Laura fkking Kunseberg. (who doesn't deserve me to take the time to go look up how to spell her surname)

As Joe Brolly would say; "Journalist? She's not even a fkking distant cousin of a journalist."

 

[ncurd]

Considering the amount of complaints Kunnesberg obviously gets how many have actually been upheld?

Also political editor of BBC News has hardly been a heavyweight post. Newsnight is where the real '***ans' have traditionally lived.

 

[RedruthRFC]

Hmm you might not have said it, but this insinuation in your post is that Hancock engineered it.

In the context of this farce, I'd say that it's pretty important to use carefully selected, clear language, wouldn't you?

On the meat of it, all I can say is that I don't know.

The whole thing is really ******* weird and I'm not going to try and make a judgement on it when I don't have all the info.

I'd we're gonna make accusations though then traingate of 2016 sets a precedent. I wasn't at the hospital so I have no idea but it just proves that anyone can take a photo and say that it shows something.

Political journalist by any chance? To anyone else, 5 or 10 minutes of due diligence would throw up the statement from the hospital acknowledging the problem and apologising for it, making your comments about the photo sound pretty stupid.

 

[Not Mike Brown's Sock]

In the context of this farce, I'd say that it's pretty important to use carefully selected, clear language, wouldn't you?



Political journalist by any chance? To anyone else, 5 or 10 minutes of due diligence would throw up the statement from the hospital acknowledging the problem and apologising for it, making your comments about the photo sound pretty stupid.

Right that's not what I'm getting at. I'm not not saying the photo isn't real and there isn't a problem, just that during election times it's very easy to spin up conspiracy theories about who said what and why.
You literally tried to peddle a conspiracy theory based purely on someone's Facebook friend.
I'm pretty sure Facebook has said before that it averages 3.5 degrees or so seperation between any two people, making this whole thing actually not that unlikely.

My mum has her mp on Facebook ffs, doesn't mean if I post something political it's anything to do with him...

 

[ncurd]

I'm pretty sure Facebook has said before that it averages 3.5 degrees or so seperation between any two people, making this whole thing actually not that unlikely.

This true in terms of friendship I'm 3 degrees of separation from Neil Gaimann whom I've never been in the same room as (wish I knew the bloke)!

 

[RedruthRFC]

Right that's not what I'm getting at. I'm not not saying the photo isn't real and there isn't a problem, just that during election times it's very easy to spin up conspiracy theories about who said what and why.

Nobody is denying this. @Which Tyler and I are simply poiting out that the evidence that this is one such situation is easy to refute and are that the story is corroborated by a spokesperson for the hospital.

You literally tried to peddle a conspiracy theory based purely on someone's Facebook friend.
I'm pretty sure Facebook has said before that it averages 3.5 degrees or so seperation between any two people, making this whole thing actually not that unlikely.

Where? Quote please. I have done no such thing.

 

[Which Tyler]

Well,now I know - if I post something for discussion then I am personally 100% agreeing with every single thing that that post says.
Which is a quick way of saying that I shall never post anything ever again - which would be untrue.
As it happen, it seems to me that 17 of the 17 points are accurate and verified. Constructing a narrative from them would be dodgy, and linking it in any way to Matt Hancock as an originator would be a step too far - and certainly not an accusation I am making. However, I thought it a good summary of what we currently know - though I personally would have stopped at point #15.

The photo happened - that is a fact.
Journalists with integrity confirmed that the story was true before publishing.
Hospital staff who were present confirmed that the story was true.
Someone else posted lies about a "friend" to deflect and claim that the original story was untrue.
They then claimed that they didn't
Which was untrue.
Meanwhile thousands of other social media accounts repeated the precise same claim, verbatim, as originating from themselves.
Several members of the mainstream media leapt on the false refutation without properly fact-checking it.
Meanwhile, another story was put out by conservatives, possibly to distract from the above.
This was also leapt on by members of the mainstream media without properly fact-checking it.
This story was proven untrue in every single aspect, complete with video evidence (there was no assault, there were no hundreds of protestors, and they hadn't been shipped in by labour).

I think all of these things are provable fact; and are all worthy of discussion. I happened to post (and provide links to the original) a summary that went a couple of steps further; and whilst their following facts appear to be true, I personally see little relevance to them. Next time I'll know that that's not allowed because it's upset someone who made an assumption that was wrong.

 

[Amiga500]

Considering the amount of complaints Kunnesberg obviously gets how many have actually been upheld?

Likely not enough.

Also political editor of BBC News has hardly been a heavyweight post. Newsnight is where the real '***ans' have traditionally lived.

Agreed that it is not a traditional "heavyweight" post.

But, it is still a position of significant influence - and putting aside the gravity of the role, there is no excuse for her having no journalistic integrity whatsoever. You simply cannot be political editor and then release unsubstantiated claims about "assaults" or "fakes" - especially when just 1 or 2 questions to the right people would have clarified matters.


She's political editor of the BBC and gets away with journalistic murder. I remember Simon Israel mistakenly naming the wrong person on live TV when a report came through his ear - and there was an almighty fuss about it when it subsequently became clear he'd named the wrong person.

LK posts up sh|te all hours of the day without verifying it - and that is her operating without a live TV camera pointing at her. Gutter journalism and the BBC should be ashamed their standards have stooped so low.

 

[RedruthRFC]

Side note, I see that "M JD Hancock" has now locked his friends list!

Anyone know anything about the Electoral Commission's remit? It strikes me that these various deliberate attempts to fraudulently influence the result of election should be investigated as a criminal offence.

 

[Not Mike Brown's Sock]

Well,now I know - if I post something for discussion then I am personally 100% agreeing with every single thing that that post says.
Which is a quick way of saying that I shall never post anything ever again - which would be untrue.
As it happen, it seems to me that 17 of the 17 points are accurate and verified. Constructing a narrative from them would be dodgy, and linking it in any way to Matt Hancock as an originator would be a step too far - and certainly not an accusation I am making. However, I thought it a good summary of what we currently know - though I personally would have stopped at point #15.

The photo happened - that is a fact.
Journalists with integrity confirmed that the story was true before publishing.
Hospital staff who were present confirmed that the story was true.
Someone else posted lies about a "friend" to deflect and claim that the original story was untrue.
They then claimed that they didn't
Which was untrue.
Meanwhile thousands of other social media accounts repeated the precise same claim, verbatim, as originating from themselves.
Several members of the mainstream media leapt on the false refutation without properly fact-checking it.
Meanwhile, another story was put out by conservatives, possibly to distract from the above.
This was also leapt on by members of the mainstream media without properly fact-checking it.
This story was proven untrue in every single aspect, complete with video evidence (there was no assault, there were no hundreds of protestors, and they hadn't been shipped in by labour).

I think all of these things are provable fact; and are all worthy of discussion. I happened to post (and provide links to the original) a summary that went a couple of steps further; and whilst their following facts appear to be true, I personally see little relevance to them. Next time I'll know that that's not allowed because it's upset someone who made an assumption that was wrong.

Again you're misconstruing the point I'm trying to make.
There is clearly a beds problem in that hospital and I'm not disputing that that's an issue.

"and has a son who is friends with Matt Hancock - who would, of course, have no possible reason to try to get this lie out there."

The issue I have is that the above quote is clearly an insinuation that Hancock as something to do with it which, to my mind, is kinda rediculous. But sure keep going with the conspiracy theories.

Just to make it clear why I think you're insinuating that, I'll replace a couple words to mirror a fello conspiracy theory:

"and has a son who is works with NASA - who would, of course, have no possible reason to try to get this lie of the moon landing out there" - clear insinuation of guilt.


But sure, Tories are all evil ******** who hate the poor so keep going...

Also Tyler please don't stop posting, you'd be missed x

 

[ncurd]

Side note, I see that "M JD Hancock" has now locked his friends list!

I'll be honest there's an element of why hasn't he done this before now?

One it's bloody scary what information you can pull off Facebook, once had to grabs a whole bunch of information about family and even members I hadn't meant.

Two whilst he's a politician and rightly game for journalists or a generic loon family and friends aren't unless they chose to actively be involved. Im amazed it not shut down to protect them from harassment and abuse.

 

[Which Tyler]

I'm sorry I misconstrued your false accusation of me.

If you want to discuss the case up for discussion, I'll join in. If you want to discuss what you think of me, I'm out.