obsidianwalker.bsky.social
899 posts
483 followers
545 following
Regular Contributor
Active Commenter
comment in response to
post
Blonde hair and blue eyes only will be next.
comment in response to
post
I strongly disagree with giving a platform to this person. Is it false equivalence to say pulling from history, you’d have thought it ok to platform Joseph Goebbels before the advent of the war?
When will you people understand you don’t give them air, you starve them of it.
comment in response to
post
🤣
comment in response to
post
wtf. Who the hell carries ID at the footy.
comment in response to
post
Legend !!!
comment in response to
post
Not any more.
comment in response to
post
It doesn’t matter. Everyone keeps saying this or that is illegal, but none of it matters as there is no one to apply the law.
comment in response to
post
New book?
comment in response to
post
ChatGPT.
comment in response to
post
There is no reasoning with lunatics.
comment in response to
post
🤣🤣👏
comment in response to
post
One of the many many reason you don’t reply the military on to your own population.
comment in response to
post
Good old WSJ. White washing for Trump.
comment in response to
post
The article published today covers all output.
comment in response to
post
I just believe the funding model needs changing. There is no penalty for driving down the road they are on, because the money flows in regardless.
comment in response to
post
That’s the thing for me, it ‘was’ central. But it’s now a place where they’d happy allow people to have a platform to argue water isn’t wet. To spout lie after lie. When do we get to see the Greens, or Lib Dem etc. I do very much agree re the world service etc.
comment in response to
post
Just my personal view. I don’t see why I should be forced to fund it.
comment in response to
post
In this day and age, I don’t believe the current funding model for the bbc should continue.
comment in response to
post
In high tourist areas, it seems to be a sensible move. Pretty much as per what we’ve seen abroad (as you say).
comment in response to
post
Doesn’t matter if it fails or not. The factors even being discussed should be causing serious concern.
comment in response to
post
Worth checking the Byline Times scoop.
comment in response to
post
Worth checking the Byline Time scoop.
comment in response to
post
When the national broadcaster of this country decides it needs to pander to followers of the Poundland Trump Party, we’re in trouble 😳
comment in response to
post
Who says the public are happy to fund it? The public aren’t asked and haven’t been.
comment in response to
post
That’s fine. You’d still be able to subscribe to the bbc. I don’t see why they shouldn’t have to raise funding themselves.
comment in response to
post
If the funds aren’t available, then they should be allowed to generate their own. Within reasonable rules obv.
comment in response to
post
The BBC story is a zinger and extremely concerning.
comment in response to
post
That doesn’t even make sense.
comment in response to
post
There has to be a point where the license fee is removed and the BBC fends for itself. That time is now.
comment in response to
post
WTAF 😳
comment in response to
post
Maybe call it what it is.
comment in response to
post
👏