aintforever

That’s your opinion, other people have different opinions which is why the BBC try to report facts.

Of course you can, you can see what someone has done and why they did it and form your own opinion on wether they are a terrorist or not - you don't have to be told by people in government what to think. By your rationale, if Jeremy Corbyn happened to be our PM and he didn't classify Hamas as a terrorist organisation then that would be a Fact.

Am pleased for Newcastle despite them being owned by murderers. Only downside is now they have won something it does make our ‘fuck all since 1976’ seem just that little bit more shit.

Not all governments consider them to be a terrorist organisation because they believe they are fighting a just cause so I would say it was a matter of opinion. Calling someone 'bomber', 'attacker', 'gunman', 'kidnapper' is just stating facts. Personally I think it’s good to have a news reporters trying to be as impartial as possible, saying someone is a gunman is not saying they are not a terrorist and doesn’t diminish what they have done.

In my opinion they are, I would also class some of the things Israel has done as terrorism as well.

I don’t know enough about their members to say. I listen to Radio 5 a lot and they are always calling Hamas a terrorist organisation on there so I’m not sure what the fuss is about.

They did actually, would have preferred it if more had joined up in though.

It’s a policy they have had for ages, it’s not worth getting upset about and makes perfect sense because in some situations wether someone is a terrorist is a matter of opinion not fact. And it makes sense that it applies to news reports, not programmes, because they are reporting events as they happen. ”The corporation's editorial guidelines say the word "terrorist" can be "a barrier rather than an aid to understanding". They say: "We should convey to our audience the full consequences of the act by describing what happened. "We should use words which specifically describe the perpetrator such as 'bomber', 'attacker', 'gunman', 'kidnapper', 'insurgent' and 'militant'. "We should not adopt other people's language as our own; our responsibility is to remain objective and report in ways that enable our audiences to make their own assessments about who is doing what to whom." If you are in favour of unbiased reporting, as you say, then surely you agree with the above?

Are fans are a bunch of pussies, they should have been giving those wanker players dogs abuse for playing like that yet most just sat there in silence.

So you are having a go at the BBC for not calling Islamic terrorists terrorists, yet provide a link showing them calling Islamic terrorists terrorists. Not that it really matters but those are links to programmes, I expect their rules on labelling terrorists applies specifically to news reports.

He’s been shit for weeks now. Strolls around the pitch like he thinks he’s Matt Le Tiss or something - just another rat that will jump ship when we go down.

He’s just fucking clueless, way worse than under Martin.

Of course it makes sense to get your news from a variety of sources, that’s just obvious. I don’t think anyone on here has suggested otherwise. Whatever you read will undoubtedly have some bias but you will be hard pressed to find anything with the same standards as what the BBC have imo. You are all over the place on this, BBC’s wording with regard to terrorists is what it is because of their aim to not show any bias (one person’s terrorist is another’s freedom fighter etc), yet you claim the opposite.

Which news outlets would you say are more balanced?

Would it even have been investigated and highlighted if any other company had produced it? I dunno. It’s because it is funded by the tax payer it has to uphold higher standards, and rightly so.

Politics over there is completely fucked. I don’t usually take much notice of it but had a look on X the other day and it’s polarised to the point where rational debate is just impossible. Trump could literally say anything and some people will support it because it’s their side, and vice-versa. It’s like the Brexit situation we had here but on steroids. I wouldn’t be surprised if Trumps whole stance on Ukraine is shaped by the fact that Biden supported Kiev. Whatever the Democrats thought and did has to be wrong, actual facts are irrelevant. I guess they have always had the two party thing over there but I expect the whole thing has been turned toxic by social media.

It wasn't just the managers though was it, wasn't he time he took over when Kat was looking to flog the club so we were already in decline, he certainly didn't have Cortese spaffing Marcus's money up the wall like it was going out of fashion, like Posh had. Football fans always get spoilt easily, when you are used to Van Dyke and Mane you are bound not to get excited by likes of Che Adams and Jack Stephens. Puel's football was boring as hell though which didn't help which is why when he got sacked I wasn't bothered even though I thought it was harsh.

Excellent job compared to two complete tossers you mean.

His problem was that he followed Poch and Koeman, the fans were spoilt.

I wonder if the sports finance rules are making a difference? The middle clubs seem to be catching up with the traditional Champions League sides which makes the gap between sides like us even bigger. Or could just be us that are shit and making it look worse.

How can VAR not see him holding him. Cheating cunts

So shit from Sugawara.

This, wasn’t a lot of contact but stupid thing to do.

I expect Russia launched the attack because they knew that without US intelligence it is harder for Ukraine to intercept them so would be more effective. Previously as soon as missiles or drones were launched the US would tell them where and when they would hit - so basically the US is actively aiding the killing of civilians in Ukraine. Trump clearly wants Russia to get the upper hand and take more land, that will force Ukraine to sign the deal for the minerals and make it easier for Trump to do a deal with Putin (if he has all of the Donbas regions he can claim a victory).

So the day after he criticised old rubber face they dig up some dirt and get him suspended.