Cov related:Forgive me, which are BBC employees have been “cancelled” in the “last few years” that we’re supposed to be outraged about?
Oh, so we can change people's words to call them out now can we?This is all the justification you need:
Oh, so we can change people's words to call them out now can we?
How fucking ridiculous.
Why not change every use of the word migrant in this thread to the N word and see how it reads?
This has got to be the most crazy thing I've ever encountered.
But hey why not change this post to "let's invade Poland"
Ok, generally then. Who else was told that they couldn’t express personal opinions, that we should be equally outraged about? I have genuinely missed this.You're just qualifying my point on selective outrage and hypocrisy here. The world is bigger than just the BBC... No one can honestly say 'you know what, the reason I didn't speak up about free speech and cancellation before, was because that person didn't work for the BBC'.
Come on.
Let's just change your words to "I think that should be said in today's Germany."You don't think that sounds like something that could be said in 1930s Germany?
Ok.
That was live on BBC whilst working for BBC… not on her own private platform. Really quite different.Cov related:
Martine Croxall, BBC reporter and anchor (London) was at my school (think she left before I started).
Last year was taken off air by BBC for expressing glee at Boris demise.
Reinstated but then shuffled out.
Little things like this create precedence.
Just saying.
Let's just change your words to "I think that should be said in today's Germany."
You Nazi sympathising fucker!
This is all getting beyond ridiculous now.
But it didn't mention Jews in the original speech did it. ? It didn't refer to any specific race or religion. You could substitute umpteen speeches or text by inserting " Jew" and it would probably sound ominously 1930s Germany.You don't think that sounds like something that could be said in 1930s Germany?
Ok.
But it didn't mention Jews in the original speech did it. ? It didn't refer to any specific race or religion. You could substitute umpteen speeches or text by inserting " Jew" and it would probably sound ominously 1930s Germany.
Ok:That was live on BBC whilst working for BBC… not on her own private platform. Really quite different.
You asked for how what Lineker tweeted could be shown to be like 1930's Germany. That has been done. Now you're saying "no that doesn't count because that's not ehat he was talking about.But it didn't mention Jews in the original speech did it. ? It didn't refer to any specific race or religion. You could substitute umpteen speeches or text by inserting " Jew" and it would probably sound ominously 1930s Germany.
Didn’t call out Russia at that World Cup despite the Crimea invasion.Gary's position is interesting and seemingly very selective.
He for example seems to have no issue with Qatar, took their money.
Comparing people fleeing Nazi Germany with modern day France strikes me as a stretch.
Post me a similar speech made by a prominent Nazi party member in the 1930s. Perhaps lineker should have done that himself and then this whole argument wouldn't have ensued, but he chose not to. Piss poor.You asked for how what Lineker tweeted could be shown to be like 1930's Germany. That has been done. Now you're saying "no that doesn't count because that's not ehat he was talking about.
It was how the language was LIKE something that would've been said in the 1930's in Germany. So to make that companrison you change the target of Braverman's speech to one that would have been the equivalent of a target from 1930's Germany. And when you do that it sounds very like it.
And don't forget he took in a migrant for less than 3 weeks and made sure the world knew about it, so he does have the moral high ground.Didn’t call out Russia at that World Cup despite the Crimea invasion.
He’s a virtue signaller par-excellence. Fine. Up to him, but BBC impartiality rules must apply to everyone equally.
The whole point is that they are demonising a selection of people like the Jews were demonised in Germany in the 1930s. The point of substituting 'immigrant/asylum seekers/refugee' with the word Jew was to demonstrate that the language this Government is using against these people is like the Nazis used against Jews and other marginised minorities in the 1930s.But it didn't mention Jews in the original speech did it. ? It didn't refer to any specific race or religion. You could substitute umpteen speeches or text by inserting " Jew" and it would probably sound ominously 1930s Germany.
Didn’t call out Russia at that World Cup despite the Crimea invasion.Gary's position is interesting and seemingly very selective.
He for example seems to have no issue with Qatar, took their money.
Comparing people fleeing Nazi Germany with modern day France strikes me as a stretch.
Lineker is not an employed of the BBC.Didn’t call out Russia at that World Cup despite the Crimea invasion.
He’s a virtue signaller par-excellence. Fine. Up to him, but BBC impartiality rules must apply to everyone equally.
He not employed by a private employer. It’s the BBC, the state broadcaster. He is compensated well. Our police are not allowed to express personal views in social media. Teachers and others in the employ of the state must remain impartial.
Why should Lineker think that he is above other state employed people?
He’s probity correct, too many coffin dodgers making decisions they won’t have to endure MPs should retire at 60Ok:
Lineker on a BBC panel show. BBC TV not Twitter:
“(EU ambassador)…had said Brexit will take 10 years to complete.” Lineker continued “by then the people that voted for it will all be dead”
Look it up.
?Lineker is not an employed of the BBC.
Got lazy. Feet under the table. Far too comfortable and just getting a tad over confident.Didn’t call out Russia at that World Cup despite the Crimea invasion.
He’s a virtue signaller par-excellence. Fine. Up to him, but BBC impartiality rules must apply to everyone equally.
He not employed by a private employer. It’s the BBC, the state broadcaster. He is compensated well. Our police are not allowed to express personal views in social media. Teachers and others in the employ of the state must remain impartial.
Why should Lineker think that he is above other state employed people?
Lineker is 62.He’s probity correct, too many coffin dodgers making decisions they won’t have to endure MPs should retire at 60
And of course what he failed to do was to quote directly from the 1930s Nazi propaganda machine so we can compare and say " Oh Christ, he's right "The whole point is that they are demonising a selection of people like the Jews were demonised in Germany in the 1930s. The point of substituting 'immigrant/asylum seekers/refugee' with the word Jew was to demonstrate that the language this Government is using against these people is like the Nazi's used against Jews and other marginised minorities in the 1930s.
That is exactly the point Lineker was making too. He wasn't saying that we are living in a country like Nazi Germany but that the Government's rhetoric about immigrants is like the Nazis used against Jews. And of course he is right.
What constituency does he represent.Lineker is 62.
Off with him then?
He is a freelancer
With a BBC contract. Ok. Not going to argue. He’s a regular contractor to the BBC.He is a freelancer
Post me a similar speech made by a prominent Nazi party member in the 1930s. Perhaps lineker should have done that himself and then this whole argument wouldn't have ensued, but he chose not to. Piss poor.
Mate, they’re never gonna get it.Hitler: "The alien immigrant who comes among us must be prevented by every means from living apart and setting up his own kind of life. The people that have come to us should be shut out by all possible means."
Goring: "We will not allow the Jews to sneak in through the back door to our victory. We will keep them out of Germany."
Streicher: "The Jews are trying to flood Germany[...]We must put a stop to this before it's too late."
He could have done, I agree. That would have been more impactful, but he isn't a politician and it was a tweet. I guess he thought it was so obvious to anyone who had heard Braverman and Sunak speak last week. But yes a couple of examples would have been useful and there's no lack of them.And of course what he failed to do was to quote directly from the 1930s Nazi propaganda machine so we can compare and say " Oh Christ, he's right "
An opportunity lost. A huge one.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?