Home   |   Browse       NEW: (hypothetically starring) VIC REEVES as LUKE SKYWALKER .. in "Waiting for Godot, the hollywood version".

Some Guardian propaganda at work.   Share:  
Thrust of argument: Go to the link below. Direction of resistance / implied resistance: Admit that the top of the page seems to tell you that Russian planes did something against international law and may have been preparing to nuke England. It gives you that kind of story, leaving it to your imagination - so the extremity of your assumption is down to you.


bp AT APPROX 466.45 bt AT APPROX 226.05 capita (at half strength)
AT APPROX 159.95 g4s AT APPROX 255.00 hammerson (at half strength)
AT APPROX 432.50 icag (at half strength)
AT APPROX 628.00 m&s AT APPROX 280.00 rbs AT APPROX 258.50 sage (at half strength)
AT APPROX 687.20 sainsbury AT APPROX 238.90 standardlife AT APPROX 366.10 vodafone AT APPROX 202.95 aaltd AT APPROX 79.74 acaciamining AT APPROX 148.80 aldermore AT APPROX     - arrowglobal AT APPROX 344.50 ashmore AT APPROX 390.20 bba AT APPROX 335.20 bca AT APPROX 156.20 boohoo AT APPROX 175.90 booker AT APPROX     - brewindolphin AT APPROX 344.40 browngroup AT APPROX 190.40 capitalandcounties AT APPROX 269.20 cybg AT APPROX 305.20 dominos AT APPROX 326.30 eigroup AT APPROX 120.00 esure AT APPROX 227.00 firstgroup AT APPROX 84.45 greencore AT APPROX 129.20 hastings AT APPROX 264.20 hochschild AT APPROX 206.70 inmarsat AT APPROX 394.00 intuproperties AT APPROX 214.50 ipgroup AT APPROX 110.40 iwg AT APPROX 232.40 johnlainggroup AT APPROX 244.20 mangroup AT APPROX 171.10 meggit AT APPROX 451.50 moneysupermarket AT APPROX 283.00 nostrum AT APPROX 290.50 patisserieholdings AT APPROX 368.00 photome AT APPROX     - purplebricks AT APPROX 364.20 pzcussons AT APPROX 220.40 rankgroup AT APPROX 217.00 rentokil AT APPROX 272.60 rotork AT APPROX 275.80 rpsgroup AT APPROX 257.00 sig AT APPROX 137.40 south32 AT APPROX 181.00 spirehealth AT APPROX 218.40 stagecoachgroup AT APPROX 140.90 sthree AT APPROX 350.00 stmodwen AT APPROX 383.60 stobart AT APPROX 235.00 stockspirits AT APPROX 265.44 talktalk AT APPROX 109.10 trproperty AT APPROX 377.90 tullow AT APPROX 180.20 tyman AT APPROX 296.50 vectura AT APPROX 78.60 virginmoney AT APPROX 262.56



Enter your DOMAIN NAME to
collect this point:


Removal of resistance: Then, near the end, where less than 10% of the readers reach, it tells you "The spokesman said there was no particular reason for concern over Russian warplanes flying in international air space, but that such exercises were shadowed by Nato aircraft as a precaution and to protect civil air traffic" - so basically there was no reason to do it other than to make a show of pretending Russia is dangerous and wasting money on prancing around with military toys like a bunch of dickheads (and Russia is no less guilty of THAT).

Who is "the spokesman"? They don't make it completely clear, but it is relatively clear - "Nato said". That's who. A NATO spokesman said pretty much that it wasn't actually illegal but we were a bit upset and so you should all consider it pretty much illegal. These are sick military fucks. Sickos. Such lies are a sick sick sick thing. And in broad daylight. Easy for even a 12 year old school child to spot, and many would, if shown the information, and many are.
Unification: The url is named "raf-russian-bomber-uk-airspace", the article is named "RAF intercepts Russian bomber approaching UK airspace" - it basically misinforms you by dancing close to a sensationalist lie without being detailed enough to tell you either the truth OR a lie. It is therefore deceptive and a lie in spirit - it embraces the spirit of lying. It is propaganda. Another example of the Guardian being a TOOL. That's right. A TOOL.
Rebut this point   Support this point   Edit this point

(TVhobo's estimated size of readership since 2013, mainly in the UK and USA, with Germany in third place:
over 200,000 readers across approximately 200 cities/towns


Copy/paste point into your work:

Type: Open statement

1 versions:

1. Server time: 12:3:20 on 15/2/2018

Related points:





previous point on the grid   |   next point on the grid


Click here to read about Shams Pirani, the editor and chief author on this grid - note, if you can actually prove anything written above wrong, I would gladly, if the proof is sufficient, correct what I've written and what I think - if I could, however, prove your attempted proof wrong, then I would accordingly say so and maintain whatever point of view is completely based on fact and proof.

Browse the index: 1 | 2 |3 |4 |5 |6 |7 |8 |9 |10 |11 |12 |13 |14 |15 |16 |17 |18 |19 |20 |21 |22