|
|
Post by sheepy on Mar 13, 2023 22:50:25 GMT
Have you got a political point to make, or just a cheap insult? I do, do you think he has broken the guidelines? that are about as clear as day, which now he has broken them thinks they should be changed. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 13, 2023 22:54:01 GMT
If we are a Liberal Free society, then the idea that a man who works as a sports (football) commentator on our state broadcaster cannot express an opinion on social media about a topical issue, is quite frankly ridiculous.
The comments he made were tame, and he merely suggested that the kind of language used surrounding asylum seekers was reminicent of 1930s Germany.
And he is 100% correct
For people like Jacob Reece Mogg to suggest that the licence fee is now up for debate / consideration again, is nothing short of vengeful blackmail, and political interference.
|
|
|
|
Post by andrewbrown on Mar 13, 2023 22:58:55 GMT
Have you got a political point to make, or just a cheap insult? I do, do you think he has broken the guidelines? that are about as clear as day, which now he has broken them thinks they should be changed. Like I've pointed out, what I think doesn't matter. (FWIW from what I read it certainly wasn't proven. He said he hadn't, and that appears to be the case.) The BBC have accepted that he hasn't. |
|
|
|
Post by wapentake on Mar 13, 2023 23:01:48 GMT
You think? Double standards here, some criticise the director generals links to the tories,sure and if it all pans out iffy sack him and if we’re to have any sort of even handed treatment of all and surely we should then Lineker needs taking to task too. Have you read any of the guidelines? I've read the same as everybody else has. But at the end of the day it isn't whether I think that he was broken the guidelines that matters. The BBC have accepted that he hasn't. So if somebody makes a decision that looks and feels has been made under duress or to cover other possible wrongdoing you’ll just shrug your shoulders and think I’m saying nothing? |
|
|
|
Post by sheepy on Mar 13, 2023 23:01:57 GMT
I do, do you think he has broken the guidelines? that are about as clear as day, which now he has broken them thinks they should be changed. Like I've pointed out, what I think doesn't matter. (FWIW from what I read it certainly wasn't proven. He said he hadn't, and that appears to be the case.) The BBC have accepted that he hasn't. It should at least matter to you but then maybe another time. |
|
|
|
Post by Baron von Lotsov on Mar 13, 2023 23:13:02 GMT
If we are a Liberal Free society, then the idea that a man who works as a sports (football) commentator on our state broadcaster cannot express an opinion on social media about a topical issue, is quite frankly ridiculous. The comments he made were tame, and he merely suggested that the kind of language used surrounding asylum seekers was reminicent of 1930s Germany. And he is 100% correct For people like Jacob Reece Mogg to suggest that the licence fee is now up for debate / consideration again, is nothing short of vengeful blackmail, and political interference. So if you sign the Official Secrets Act you are fine to share what you do on Twitter?
Have you never heard of a contract?
|
|
|
|
Post by andrewbrown on Mar 13, 2023 23:38:47 GMT
I've read the same as everybody else has. But at the end of the day it isn't whether I think that he was broken the guidelines that matters. The BBC have accepted that he hasn't. So if somebody makes a decision that looks and feels has been made under duress or to cover other possible wrongdoing you’ll just shrug your shoulders and think I’m saying nothing? Oh, there was exactly a bad decision made under duress. Those who created the issue in the first place, they had no right to question it. Unfortunately the BBC gave into that pressure and suspended Lineker without verifying whether he had actually broken any guidelines or not. However I do think it was far from accidental. The point is that we've been talking about Gary Lineker and not the Illegal Migration Bill itself, so 1 0 to Suella there I think. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 13, 2023 23:41:56 GMT
Baron von lotsov ... "So if you sign the Official Secrets Act you are fine to share what you do on Twitter?
Have you never heard of a contract?"
------------------------------------------------------------
The Official Secrets Act ? ... are you joking
I couldn't give a toss what the BBC contract states, if it states that a person outside of News & Current Affairs is not allowed to express a personal opinion on a topic in the news, then the contract should be ripped up and flushed down the bog.
This is not Russia or North Korea
|
|
|
|
Post by wapentake on Mar 13, 2023 23:53:33 GMT
So if somebody makes a decision that looks and feels has been made under duress or to cover other possible wrongdoing you’ll just shrug your shoulders and think I’m saying nothing? Oh, there was exactly a bad decision made under duress. Those who created the issue in the first place, they had no right to question it. Unfortunately the BBC gave into that pressure and suspended Lineker without verifying whether he had actually broken any guidelines or not. However I do think it was far from accidental. The point is that we've been talking about Gary Lineker and not the Illegal Migration Bill itself, so 1 0 to Suella there I think. You’ve no thought as to why the about turn and the DG and his problems are connected? |
|
|
|
Post by andrewbrown on Mar 14, 2023 0:06:00 GMT
The about turn was because Lineker hadn't actually done anything wrong, so the BBC really had no choice. I did hear someone say that Lineker had a lot of support from fellow colleagues because they were (are) concerned about the Richard Sharp appointment, but that is just hearsay and I have no knowledge.
|
|
|
|
Post by johnofgwent on Mar 14, 2023 0:28:30 GMT
You think? Double standards here, some criticise the director generals links to the tories,sure and if it all pans out iffy sack him and if we’re to have any sort of even handed treatment of all and surely we should then Lineker needs taking to task too. Have you read any of the guidelines? I've read the same as everybody else has. But at the end of the day it isn't whether I think that he was broken the guidelines that matters. The BBC have accepted that he hasn't. Well, i think the more factual statement would be that the BBC are reviewing their guidelines. I can’t fathom how likening the Home Secretary to the Nazis isn’t making a politically controversial statement. Perhaps you could explain that…. |
|
|
|
Post by Baron von Lotsov on Mar 14, 2023 2:21:25 GMT
Baron von lotsov ... "So if you sign the Official Secrets Act you are fine to share what you do on Twitter? Have you never heard of a contract?" ------------------------------------------------------------ The Official Secrets Act ... are you joking I couldn't give a toss what the BBC contract states, if it states that a person outside of News & Current Affairs is not allowed to express a personal opinion on a topic in the news, then the contract should be ripped up and flushed down the bog. This is not Russia or North Korea It does not say that. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 14, 2023 5:40:35 GMT
Yup you cannot have people speaking out against government illegal policies.😔 instead we must have the people speaking out against illegal migrants. No such thing. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 14, 2023 5:41:46 GMT
instead we must have the people speaking out against illegal migrants. I can only conclude that the illegal activities are supported and endorsed by the BBC, which is why this is being painted as a Linekerism victory. No such thing as illegal immigrants. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 14, 2023 5:47:51 GMT
Yup you cannot have people speaking out against government illegal policies.😔 A bit of a quandary then, the government who need to show at least willing to stop an illegal activity overseen by criminal organisations is doing so illegally. There must be some sort of logic involved even if it is a twisted one. I agree the people smugglers are criminals but the people in the boats must be presumed desperate to escape victimisation and death until they are processed and legally sent back whence they came, like the Albanians. The problem is the Tories refuse to process them and put them in hotels. We have people like Braverman who claims the refugee seekers are 'rich' because the pay the people smugglers thousands to get to the UK, not even acknowledging that the Jews paid thousands to escape the Nazis and were considered rich by doing so. Refugees arriving on our coast by any means are not illegal the illegal bit is the people traffickers. |
|
