Wasn’t that before the rule changes at the BBC. Who knows what would happen now to Clarkson but he get flack regularly around comments he makes (rightly, or wrongly I don’t care)
1 Like
Im so sorry that someone standing up for migrants and being punished for it is too dramatc for you.
Maybe we should all just ignore human rights issues in the future as its clearly all to dramatic to deal with.
You might not agree with the severity of what is going on, but please stop trying to shut people down by making them seem wrong for taking it seriously.
1 Like
And id watch this if you still think this is as simple as someone having an opinion and then not going to work.
I suspect it’s not the dramatic nature of what is going on as much as the quite dramatic posts you seem to keep making. Most of the rest of this thread is a fairly decent and civil discussion about the matter.
2 Likes
Like I said, I’m so sorry if a person defending human rights of some of the most vulnerable people is too dramatic for you.
This group of people are being demonised, despite many of them being victims. Lineker stood up for them and is being pubished, despite plenty of other people being able to get away with other political opinions. Including Lineker himself about Qatar.
You might not care about this situation, but I do. Frankly, I really dont care if you think this is too dramatic when this it literally the reality of the situation. Sometimes reality is dramatic. Im not going to shut up just because reality is too dramatic for you.
1 Like
Well you truly proved me wrong there.
Continuing on…
This incident has at the very least highlighted the increased difficulty in maintaining any kind of neutrality with the BBC, and possibly has to be looked at in regards to context. A sports presenter expressing opinion out of work is probably not the hill you’d want to die on.
It’s also providing some good coverage of opposition to the current government policy and/or direction of travel. Any debate is good 
4 Likes
Especially when the primary objection to it came from the government itself. If the government complains about something and the BBC acts on it, extremely difficult to pass that off as ‘impartiality’.
2 Likes
This whole thing should have followed the most simple and basic ethics of free speech.
“I may not like or agree with what you say, but you have the right to say it”
1 Like
So they’ll end up taking the feed provided from the Premier League, I suspect they’ll try and get round the players boycott by using the PL mixed zone feed.
Suspect the Premier League will be furious, people going on about well, it’s just the games, the BBC win the contract from the PL because of the wider MOTD package, and not to have a YouTube show in the evening
Picking a fight with people (Lineker and the pundits) who don’t need the money from MoTD is just one you lose, and the way Sky Sports have been hugely sympathetic, probably means Lineker ends up fronting Super Sunday from next season, or goes back to BT/Discovery
1 Like
You’ve literally just made comparisons that go beyond language. You’re talking about the UK being on a path to… what exactly? The holocaust? Invasion of Europe? It’s this inference that has got GL into such trouble.
I don’t think it’s helpful to characterise the debate like this. No one should be travelling here by small boats in this way. Economic migrants making false asylum claims should be stopped from attempting the journey, and asylum seekers with legitimate claims should have other routes to get here.
My own position is that I support the creation of safe legal route, and we clearly need to improve the current processing and return of asylum seekers, but that criminalist small boats crossings probably isn’t all bad (as long as it’s not used as an excuse to forgo our international commitments to refugees).
Nobody is trying to shut anybody down, least of all the person you’re directing this to.
All I see is a very civil conversation on this thread.
4 Likes
I agree apart from, not honouring our commitments is exactly what it’s being used for.
The government already knows this will ‘push the boundaries’ of human rights laws. It sets a terrible international precedent too, to simply stop offering asylum by cutting off the last possible way for many people to claim it. The language of Bravermen’s video is clear - these asylum seekers (whether they are genuine or not) are bad people.
I also worry it will push the most desperate into other even worse options, like the backs of lorrys eg Essex lorry deaths - Wikipedia
There wouldn’t be the same issue with small boats if there were legal routes, people wouldn’t be putting their family on those death traps and paying smugglers their life savings to ride on them if they had another way.
3 Likes
Absolutely. Given the majority of those who get here have asylum approved, it would at the very least reduce the numbers coming across this way (or any other dangerous route) if those approved have a legal and safe way to apply.
As for what, I don’t know. Do we have data on what other countries do, in terms of legal application routes?
1 Like
I always think of the “general outraged” as being more right wing than left wing. They get outraged at their own stuff AND then paint pretend pictures about how the left is always outraged.
But that is a little facetious of me.
It actually goes to show that we should be careful to avoid this American view of left/right being a binary thing. Plenty of people have nuanced views on individual issues and don’t adhere to party lines on all things.
2 Likes
It wasn’t saying all outraged are left wing. It’s in brackets to contextualise who I think are in this case more broadly the outraged. I would easily put outraged (right) for other situations.
Gotcha thank you for the clarification.
From the discourse I’ve seen on Twitter and Reddit (such happy places) I’ve seen a fair amount of outrage from across the spectrum. There are plenty of outraged right wing people who think Gary is some kind of “liberal wokerati” who should stay out of it. Coz immigrants are ruining all the things.
BBC pulls Football Focus after hosts drop out, Sky News understands
As we reported a few moments ago, both Alex Scott and Kelly Somers are understood to have dropped out of hosting Football Focus.
The programme typically airs at noon - but Sky News understands it has been pulled from air in the wake of the scandal.
It reportedly comes after the presenter and pundits withdrew from the show.
Good. The BBC has handled this terribly so I’m glad some more people are stepping down from presenting.
Yet that is the reality of the situation, so it is helpful to present the situation in this way.
For another topic. This will be the first actual test of the BoE’s resolution procedure. It could be a tough test, too, given the amount of illiquid assets (e.g startup shares) the bank holds.
Given my company banks with them, I’ll be watching like a hawk but I’m not expecting great things next week. I feel like the government should step in if another bank doesn’t, but whether it will is another matter.
1 Like
I mean that’s extremely subjective (and vague).
They are clearly ‘left’ in the context of British politics though. They support a bigger state than we currently have, the conservatives generally support a smaller one.
1 Like