I think it had more of a controlled descent. Dive implies screaming head-first into the water. But hey, that wouldn’t make a good headline. Great lucky escape though.
Yes it’s a spectacular photo, but it was hardly the biggest story of yesterday to involve aviation. Presumably the Mail wholly endorse the Heathrow expansion. Can anyone confirm this?
Awesome story. I’ve never heard of Birdstrikes and my bf is an air cadet and plane enthusiast. Jihady birds!
The Mail are all over the Christian guy who didn’ t want to drive the atheist bus. If he had been a Muslim the mail would have cried, special treatment.
If I was a regular reader I must say I’d be quite shocked at such an outbreak of news on the front page! Presumably it’s all normal service inside- seven pages about Princess Diana still being dead and communist teenage Muslim binge drinkers blamed for everything!
Neville – No it is actually proof miracles don’t happen.
The landing was purely down to the skill of the pilot and his years of heard work and training and dedication, not anything mystical or uncanny.
If anything, the only thing involved which could be classed as an ‘act of God’ (as it will surely be called in insurance terms) is the bird strike that brought it down in the first place.
So yes, in a way a miracle did happen, but thankfully the entirely human pilot managed to thwart God’s dastardly plan to kill everyone on board!
joking aside, some of you people are so purile. under read thid first you lot do hate people who read this paper why eles do you bother to leave comments if not to share in your bias. you lot are so fragile you seek comfort in like mindedness as do dm readers cant you get that into your thic skulls.please tell me where i am being lied to
As your terrible spelling, punctuation and grammar attest (even in your username), you’re not the sharpest tool in the box so are probably understandably easily lied to.
Fact is the DM and the majority of daily newspapers are businesses first and news outlets a distant second. They lie because they tell their demographic what they want to hear, not what reality is, to maintain a readership. In that sense, it’s just like a lifestyle magazine, but one geared towards bigots.
The irony here of course is that while you attack us, there’s plenty of journalists who actually write the thing who agree with this analysis – namely Rosie Boycott who used to edit the Express and is now a critic of it, and she’d know better than any of us. Ex-editors of the Sun have also gone on record stating how they were told to massage stories to fit Rupert Murdoch’s personal worldview and philosophy.
Of course they’re good at it, they’re paid to, and they take advantage of people who seek like mindedness as you say. Of course we share an opinion, but that’s hardly a notion of fragility. We discuss ideas in a forum as an ongoing dialogue where people actually do disagree quite a lot, whereas reading a newspaper is a one way monologue with no dissent or feedback. There’s a huge difference there.
scothmist,I disagree with the Mail because of its Journalism, its hysterical siege like mentality and its publication of continual mistruths that have no regulation by the PCC. I don’t give a damm that they’re Conservative and I don’t even like the Guardian. The Mail has a simple narrative behind all its stories and I have to say my biggest disagreement with them comes from their reporting of immigration and Aslyum seekers. They have a stance that immigration should be balanced and controlled (something I agree with) however they continue to play out this view with hateful stories about immigrants stealing benefits, causing crime and apparently not integrating with society. How is that a informed debate abot balanced migration and the proper effect migration has on a community? Look how they twisted the words of the Archbishop of York who made a very thoughtful speech on multiculturalism and Britishness. They turned round and said that he stated that migrants don’t belong which he didn’t! The Times has many articles about migration and the effect it has on the UK, and comes out against it many times. It does not however address this with hysterical articles about migrants eating swans and stealing benefits. At least not in the manner the Mail does. The Mail is not balanced and it does not inform its readers of all sides of an argument so that they can make their own informed decision.I’ll give it credit though. It’s not as bad as the Express which is 100 times worse than the Mail. I’d happily read the Mail over it
If Merk were to put a Guardian on this site I guarantee everybody here could bash it quite happily.
Sarah – I totally agree. While I hate the Mail and Express the most (The Express taking the absolute biscuit) if Merk posted any national daily here, including The Sun, The Guardian, The Independent, The Mirror, The Telegraph or The Times, I’d happily rag on all of them to different degrees.
The vast majority of national newspapers are nothing more than vanity tools for multi-millionaires and their worldviews. As Lord Beaverbrook, the famous press baron from the early 20th century freely admitted, he ran his newspapers “purely for the purpose of making propaganda”. Nothing has changed, be it Richard Desmond (Express), Rupert Murdoch (Sun/Times), Barclay Twins, previously Conrad Black (Telegraph) or Tony O’Reilly (Independent)
Only the Guardian, Mail and Mirror are run by trusts, but even then the Mirror was dominated by Robert Maxwell previously and run as his personal mouthpiece and the Mail is dominated by its long term editor Paul Dacre, and is essentially his skewed and uncompromising opinion on the world re-labelled as absolute reality and fact.
As much as it gets criticised by a lot of people for bias, the only news outlet I trust and read is the BBC, as if it does contain bias (as all second hand sources inescapably must, but that’s a different discussion) then it is the least visible of any, and probably the reason why the likes of The Mail, The Express and most of the UK press hate it. They hate it for the same reason as Iran and Zimbabwe hate it. Because it exposes them as utterly full of shit by reporting the truth,
well well well lets dael wtih setevn frist 9sic). as you understood my comment, your babyish comments are apt for you. i dont know how to describe you but scrotum comes close enough. i asked where not how, why or who lies, but just like your kind you answer another question. setive ahtch i may be all finger and thumbs when typing but if i choose not to correct my typing mistakes, thats a compliment to this forums readers. oh and your third sentence is not a question. and it shoul be written as ‘’spell checker”.
Sahra, thankyou for your comments. there is much wisdom lurking therein. Is there a right or a wrong answer to any question?
When addressing a problem, the law of unintended consequence’s must be kept in mind, but kindness will not wither if individuals, and it may be better if it is individuals and not goverments or its supportersare, are prepared to give their time, effort a lastly their own earned money.
Behaviour is what people intrinsically cling too.
I only read the internation herald tribune – it’s truely unbiased & good coverage of world affairs. Try it, the online version is the same as the printed version.
If English is his second language or he’s got some kind of disability, then I apologise, but otherwise he’s either drunk, very young or severely lacking in intelligence, in which case he can be safely ignored.
Ex Soldier, The International Herald Tribune is truly unbiased is it? I’ve been reading it the past couple of days in Japan, and I enjoy it greatly; but it’s a little naive to call any news outlet truly unbiased.
All 155 escape according to the BBC.
Do you think they needed to put the same number of people on each wing to stop the plane flipping over?
I think it had more of a controlled descent. Dive implies screaming head-first into the water. But hey, that wouldn’t make a good headline. Great lucky escape though.
Fanny Hill? I hope it does not include that scene where sex up the jacksy is involved.
Yes it’s a spectacular photo, but it was hardly the biggest story of yesterday to involve aviation. Presumably the Mail wholly endorse the Heathrow expansion. Can anyone confirm this?
No I think the mail are against a third runway – it’s a government sceme for a start and think of the poor house prices!!
Amazing story btw.
Awesome story. I’ve never heard of Birdstrikes and my bf is an air cadet and plane enthusiast. Jihady birds!
The Mail are all over the Christian guy who didn’ t want to drive the atheist bus. If he had been a Muslim the mail would have cried, special treatment.
Strange, that. Usually the survivor/death count in the Mail is reserved solely for the number of Britons aboard.
I pity the staff of Ask restaurants everywhere!
If I was a regular reader I must say I’d be quite shocked at such an outbreak of news on the front page! Presumably it’s all normal service inside- seven pages about Princess Diana still being dead and communist teenage Muslim binge drinkers blamed for everything!
Even in this so-called depressing world, this is proof that miracles do sometimes happen.
Neville – No it is actually proof miracles don’t happen.
The landing was purely down to the skill of the pilot and his years of heard work and training and dedication, not anything mystical or uncanny.
If anything, the only thing involved which could be classed as an ‘act of God’ (as it will surely be called in insurance terms) is the bird strike that brought it down in the first place.
So yes, in a way a miracle did happen, but thankfully the entirely human pilot managed to thwart God’s dastardly plan to kill everyone on board!
joking aside, some of you people are so purile. under read thid first you lot do hate people who read this paper why eles do you bother to leave comments if not to share in your bias. you lot are so fragile you seek comfort in like mindedness as do dm readers cant you get that into your thic skulls.please tell me where i am being lied to
As your terrible spelling, punctuation and grammar attest (even in your username), you’re not the sharpest tool in the box so are probably understandably easily lied to.
Fact is the DM and the majority of daily newspapers are businesses first and news outlets a distant second. They lie because they tell their demographic what they want to hear, not what reality is, to maintain a readership. In that sense, it’s just like a lifestyle magazine, but one geared towards bigots.
The irony here of course is that while you attack us, there’s plenty of journalists who actually write the thing who agree with this analysis – namely Rosie Boycott who used to edit the Express and is now a critic of it, and she’d know better than any of us. Ex-editors of the Sun have also gone on record stating how they were told to massage stories to fit Rupert Murdoch’s personal worldview and philosophy.
Of course they’re good at it, they’re paid to, and they take advantage of people who seek like mindedness as you say. Of course we share an opinion, but that’s hardly a notion of fragility. We discuss ideas in a forum as an ongoing dialogue where people actually do disagree quite a lot, whereas reading a newspaper is a one way monologue with no dissent or feedback. There’s a huge difference there.
scothmist,I disagree with the Mail because of its Journalism, its hysterical siege like mentality and its publication of continual mistruths that have no regulation by the PCC. I don’t give a damm that they’re Conservative and I don’t even like the Guardian. The Mail has a simple narrative behind all its stories and I have to say my biggest disagreement with them comes from their reporting of immigration and Aslyum seekers. They have a stance that immigration should be balanced and controlled (something I agree with) however they continue to play out this view with hateful stories about immigrants stealing benefits, causing crime and apparently not integrating with society. How is that a informed debate abot balanced migration and the proper effect migration has on a community? Look how they twisted the words of the Archbishop of York who made a very thoughtful speech on multiculturalism and Britishness. They turned round and said that he stated that migrants don’t belong which he didn’t! The Times has many articles about migration and the effect it has on the UK, and comes out against it many times. It does not however address this with hysterical articles about migrants eating swans and stealing benefits. At least not in the manner the Mail does. The Mail is not balanced and it does not inform its readers of all sides of an argument so that they can make their own informed decision.I’ll give it credit though. It’s not as bad as the Express which is 100 times worse than the Mail. I’d happily read the Mail over it
If Merk were to put a Guardian on this site I guarantee everybody here could bash it quite happily.
@ scothmist (sic, presumably):
I’m sorry, I’m really struggling to read your post. Could you run it through the spellchecker please?
Oh, and I think the punctuation keys on your keyboard may be broken.
Sarah – I totally agree. While I hate the Mail and Express the most (The Express taking the absolute biscuit) if Merk posted any national daily here, including The Sun, The Guardian, The Independent, The Mirror, The Telegraph or The Times, I’d happily rag on all of them to different degrees.
The vast majority of national newspapers are nothing more than vanity tools for multi-millionaires and their worldviews. As Lord Beaverbrook, the famous press baron from the early 20th century freely admitted, he ran his newspapers “purely for the purpose of making propaganda”. Nothing has changed, be it Richard Desmond (Express), Rupert Murdoch (Sun/Times), Barclay Twins, previously Conrad Black (Telegraph) or Tony O’Reilly (Independent)
Only the Guardian, Mail and Mirror are run by trusts, but even then the Mirror was dominated by Robert Maxwell previously and run as his personal mouthpiece and the Mail is dominated by its long term editor Paul Dacre, and is essentially his skewed and uncompromising opinion on the world re-labelled as absolute reality and fact.
As much as it gets criticised by a lot of people for bias, the only news outlet I trust and read is the BBC, as if it does contain bias (as all second hand sources inescapably must, but that’s a different discussion) then it is the least visible of any, and probably the reason why the likes of The Mail, The Express and most of the UK press hate it. They hate it for the same reason as Iran and Zimbabwe hate it. Because it exposes them as utterly full of shit by reporting the truth,
well well well lets dael wtih setevn frist 9sic). as you understood my comment, your babyish comments are apt for you. i dont know how to describe you but scrotum comes close enough. i asked where not how, why or who lies, but just like your kind you answer another question. setive ahtch i may be all finger and thumbs when typing but if i choose not to correct my typing mistakes, thats a compliment to this forums readers. oh and your third sentence is not a question. and it shoul be written as ‘’spell checker”.
Sahra, thankyou for your comments. there is much wisdom lurking therein. Is there a right or a wrong answer to any question?
When addressing a problem, the law of unintended consequence’s must be kept in mind, but kindness will not wither if individuals, and it may be better if it is individuals and not goverments or its supportersare, are prepared to give their time, effort a lastly their own earned money.
Behaviour is what people intrinsically cling too.
I’m sorry, and I’m genuinely not trolling or flaming here, but I can’t understand a damn thing you are trying to say.
STEVEN!!!!
I second that.
I only read the internation herald tribune – it’s truely unbiased & good coverage of world affairs. Try it, the online version is the same as the printed version.
I think Scothmist might be experiencing a manic phase :-/
FAO Minneythekid
Just Coming!
If English is his second language or he’s got some kind of disability, then I apologise, but otherwise he’s either drunk, very young or severely lacking in intelligence, in which case he can be safely ignored.
Ex Soldier, The International Herald Tribune is truly unbiased is it? I’ve been reading it the past couple of days in Japan, and I enjoy it greatly; but it’s a little naive to call any news outlet truly unbiased.
FAO Stephen.
I was hoping someone out there would know what I was talking about! I must e-mail them straight away!!!!
FAO Minneythekid
Good work!