Originally Posted by StickyEnd

Originally Posted by ashie

...Do you agree with me that political parties should avoid smear tactics? Yes or no?

This is how it is done Ashie.

Yes I agree, smearing is a bad thing to do. I do not like people just making stuff up about others and attacking the person rather than dealing with issues.

OR

Yes Ashie, I agree.

See? Easy peasy.

Good. We're agreed then.

[quote="Oyibo"]

Originally Posted by ashie

Originally Posted by the_boy_syrup

Does it not worry you and every other Labour supporter that most of the country believe the Mails version of events and scoff when Ministers are trotted out to deny it ?

That's just nonsense. How do you know it to be true? From reading ARRSE? It's an unprovable assertion.

Given Liebour's risible showing in the polls, I'm with TBS on that one.

So..Let's try again (Take 5) Were the story true about Liebour seeking to smear the General using his daughter, would you condemn it as despicable Ashie?

I'm not going to answer. We have agreed that political parties should not smear. You may draw your own conclusions from that.

Incidentally, your question is a good example of push-polling. I remember George Bush's campaign to be the Repug candidate in 2000 asking "Would you be more likely or less likely to vote for John McCain for president if you knew he had fathered an illegitimate black child?"

McCain had, of course, never fathered a black child.

[quote="ashie"]

Originally Posted by Oyibo

Originally Posted by ashie

Originally Posted by the_boy_syrup

Does it not worry you and every other Labour supporter that most of the country believe the Mails version of events and scoff when Ministers are trotted out to deny it ?

That's just nonsense. How do you know it to be true? From reading ARRSE? It's an unprovable assertion.

Given Liebour's risible showing in the polls, I'm with TBS on that one.

So..Let's try again (Take 5) Were the story true about Liebour seeking to smear the General using his daughter, would you condemn it as despicable Ashie?

I'm not going to answer. We have agreed that political parties should not smear. You may draw your own conclusions from that.

No we bloody haven't agreed:

(Take 6) Were the story true about Liebour seeking to smear the General using his daughter, would you condemn it as despicable Ashie?

(Edited to add)
If you can't or won't answer yes, the obvious inference - despite your earlier circumlocution - is that you do not find it despicable. It is not too great a logical leap to assume you consider it acceptable ("it's for the greater good").

So let's make it easier for you:

Do you consider it acceptable, if the story is true, for Liebour to smear the General by using his daughter as a vehicle?.

Originally Posted by Oyibo

Originally Posted by ashie

Originally Posted by Oyibo

Originally Posted by ashie

Originally Posted by the_boy_syrup

Does it not worry you and every other Labour supporter that most of the country believe the Mails version of events and scoff when Ministers are trotted out to deny it ?

That's just nonsense. How do you know it to be true? From reading ARRSE? It's an unprovable assertion.

Given Liebour's risible showing in the polls, I'm with TBS on that one.

So..Let's try again (Take 5) Were the story true about Liebour seeking to smear the General using his daughter, would you condemn it as despicable Ashie?

I'm not going to answer. We have agreed that political parties should not smear. You may draw your own conclusions from that.

No we bloody haven't:

(Take 6) Were the story true about Liebour seeking to smear the General using his daughter, would you condemn it as despicable Ashie?

You mean you believe that political parties should smear? Catch a grip, man.

Originally Posted by Stonker

Originally Posted by Bugsy

Ashie! In view of the manifest immorality of the present UK gobment, do you really have any doubts that the tossers weren't looking for an opportunity to launch a smear campaign? They do have previous, you know?

MsG

Delete " the present UK gobment," insert "TheMail On Every Day Of the Fecking Week"

I have literally moments ago posted these words on an other thread - but who cares: "I wouldn't wipe my arrse with that rag (unless, of course, it was subsequently used to wrap chips for the Mail's senior editor) :D "
========
Good thing I'm no moderator - I would be tempted to lock every thread that depended on stories from The Mail

From:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/news...ief-claim.html

We get this:

Mr Jones insisted that he had never been present at a meeting attended by Mr Joyce at which Sir David’s daughter was discussed and denied any smear campaign.

"Unfortunately Eric Joyce is getting into the realms of fantasy now, he has clearly had a lot of stress after his resignation," he said.

"The only meetings (in the MoD) that he attended that I am aware of were political meetings and at none of them was it ever discussed about smearing anybody."

Now that was a tad weaselly.

This is related:

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk...n-1782538.html

Anyway, I don't wish to risk the wrath of the mods by making this personal (ie all you fact-free rightists versus me). So let's leave it at that.

Originally Posted by ashie

Anyway, I don't wish to risk the wrath of the mods by making this personal (ie all you fact-free rightists versus me). So let's leave it at that.

Everyone else is wrong and you are right. It sounds awfully familiar....

Originally Posted by ashie

Originally Posted by StickyEnd

Originally Posted by ashie

In general, I condemn smear tactics by any political party. The truth still matters, however much The Mail and some posters here disagree.

You need to reconstruct The mail's story (as I did a bit) to see that it is based on nothing. It's just untrue.

That may be the case. I admit that I have seen no evidence for this particular story, but I still think it is probably accurate. Just a few years ago I would have agreed with your POV on this story. Since then I have watched and listened to Brown enough times to have formed a very negative opinion of the man. I consider him deceifull, dishonest and not willing to face the truth about damned near anything. I can't recall ever observing him answer a difficult/uncomfortable question in a clear precise manner. Not once.

I find it a bit shocking that I would trust an ubsubstantiated story like this more than the word of our government. That is the state of my opinion of them though. Spin and weasel enough and your audience will eventually not believe anything you say.

I admit that I have seen no evidence for this particular story, but I still think it is probably accurate.

Based on radio waves coming into your fillings, no doubt.

I find it a bit shocking that I would trust an unsubstantiated story like this

So do I. But then, this is ARRSE.

Try and read what I wrote Ashie. Cutting snippets like you just did is known a "quote mining" and is very dishonest.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fallacy...out_of_context

But you probably know that. I suspect that you just consider it another tool to use.

Originally Posted by StickyEnd

Originally Posted by Stonker

Originally Posted by Bugsy

Ashie! In view of the manifest immorality of the present UK gobment, do you really have any doubts that the tossers weren't looking for an opportunity to launch a smear campaign? They do have previous, you know?

MsG

Delete " the present UK gobment," insert "TheMail On Every Day Of the Fecking Week"

I have literally moments ago posted these words on an other thread - but who cares: "I wouldn't wipe my arrse with that rag (unless, of course, it was subsequently used to wrap chips for the Mail's senior editor) :D "
========
Good thing I'm no moderator - I would be tempted to lock every thread that depended on stories from The Mail

From:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/news...ief-claim.html

We get this:

Mr Jones insisted that he had never been present at a meeting attended by Mr Joyce at which Sir David’s daughter was discussed and denied any smear campaign.

"Unfortunately Eric Joyce is getting into the realms of fantasy now, he has clearly had a lot of stress after his resignation," he said.

"The only meetings (in the MoD) that he attended that I am aware of were political meetings and at none of them was it ever discussed about smearing anybody."

Now that was a tad weaselly.

This is related:

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk...n-1782538.html

OK. My last post on this. First The Telegraph:

Fears
are said to have
reports
were said to have been intending
a possible smear
the conversation is said to have
reportedly

From The Indy:
Alleged
it was claimed
alleged ministerial plot

Not a fact in sight. And both just based on The Mail's smear. Churnalism at its worst.

With that, I bid you good night.

Originally Posted by Majorpain

Originally Posted by ashie

Anyway, I don't wish to risk the wrath of the mods by making this personal (ie all you fact-free rightists versus me). So let's leave it at that.

Everyone else is wrong and you are right. It sounds awfully familiar....

And still no denial from Ashie that what is reported to have happened - if true - is wrong.

You Ashie, with the greatest respect, are a man of straw.