|
|
Post by Pacifico on Jul 2, 2024 10:35:37 GMT
Got a link?, as the only thing I can find is this: "My right hon. Friend (Tony Blair) was then due to visit Gaza to meet Yasser Arafat, himself a former terrorist who, in a supremely and dramatically foolish act, rejected Barak's historic offer last autumn and who, to a considerable degree, is responsible for the fact that Sharon is Israel's prime minister today. Many of us - including me - who have wanted a Palestinian state, and still want one, view with horror the fact that Mr. Arafat presides over a regime that conducts public executions, among other things."Yes - Here is the link, a speech from Gerald Kaufman in the House of Commons, people should watch and listen, and learn. At 3 mins 20 seconds he refers to Yaser Arafat as "a friend of mine" www.youtube.com/watch?v=nWe8gRolEJkThanks. |
|
|
|
Post by ProVeritas on Jul 2, 2024 10:41:00 GMT
Funny how Arafat was denounced by actual Islamists because he advocated for a negotiated settlement between Palestine and Israel. But hey, why let the truth get in the way of your posts, you never have before. All The Best But did he still preside over a state that chopped people's heads off? So are you now recognising Palestinian Statehood? All The Best |
|
|
|
Post by The Squeezed Middle on Jul 2, 2024 10:55:09 GMT
But did he still preside over a state that chopped people's heads off? So are you now recognising Palestinian Statehood? All The Best No, my bad - I misquoted.
I should have said "Regime" as per Kaufmann.
|
|
|
|
Post by The Squeezed Middle on Jul 2, 2024 11:02:57 GMT
Funny how Arafat was denounced by actual Islamists because he advocated for a negotiated settlement between Palestine and Israel... Funny how Kaufmann apparently criticised Arafat's regime as head-choppers while simultaneously calling him "Friend". But hey, why let the truth get in the way of your posts, you never have before. But then you wouldn't know the truth if it bit you on the arse. After all, you never have before. |
|
|
|
Post by Baron von Lotsov on Jul 2, 2024 11:11:17 GMT
His self-employed status would be due to the tax/employment costs. Freelance is self-employed status and different rules apply, such as the BBC does not have vicarious liability. Or he is Freelance so he can work for many different organisations - you know - like a lot of Freelancers do. All The Best Yes he could, but the downside is they can sack him without any reason, whereas if he were an employee and got sacked for a bad reason he could take them to an employment tribunal. It's one of many reasons this arrangement is preferred in modern British corporations, given the amount of employee protection there is now. You should have noticed on his Linkedin page his work has been BBC all the way down the list. |
|
|
|
Post by ProVeritas on Jul 2, 2024 15:02:19 GMT
Or he is Freelance so he can work for many different organisations - you know - like a lot of Freelancers do. All The Best Yes he could, but the downside is they can sack him without any reason, whereas if he were an employee and got sacked for a bad reason he could take them to an employment tribunal. It's one of many reasons this arrangement is preferred in modern British corporations, given the amount of employee protection there is now. You should have noticed on his Linkedin page his work has been BBC all the way down the list. I think you are, probably deliberately, dishonestly equating "channel it was shown on" for "who he worked for" - he worked for Production Companies. He worked on: Show : Production Company(ies)The Winter King: Bad Wolf, One Big PictureMcDonald & Dobbs: Mammoth Screen, ITVThe Long Call: Silverprint Pictures, ITVMadness In The Method: Autumnwood Media, Happy Hour Films, Hawthorne Road ProductionsLondon Kills: Acorn Media Enterprises, PGM TV, Long Story TVSwimming With Men: MetFilm Production, Dignity Film Finance, Shoebox Films
Suspects: Newman StreetGreen Street 3: Tea Shop ProductionsLittle Crackers: Tiger Aspect ProductionsSo clearly NOT "BBC all the way down the list" as you falsely claim. It took me less than 30 seconds to find that list. It then took me 5 minutes to type it up and format it in as simple a form as possible in the (almost certainly vain) hope you'll actually understand it. All The Best |
|
|
|
Post by Baron von Lotsov on Jul 2, 2024 15:42:42 GMT
Yes he could, but the downside is they can sack him without any reason, whereas if he were an employee and got sacked for a bad reason he could take them to an employment tribunal. It's one of many reasons this arrangement is preferred in modern British corporations, given the amount of employee protection there is now. You should have noticed on his Linkedin page his work has been BBC all the way down the list. I think you are, probably deliberately, dishonestly equating "channel it was shown on" for "who he worked for" - he worked for Production Companies. He worked on: Show : Production Company(ies)The Winter King: Bad Wolf, One Big PictureMcDonald & Dobbs: Mammoth Screen, ITVThe Long Call: Silverprint Pictures, ITVMadness In The Method: Autumnwood Media, Happy Hour Films, Hawthorne Road ProductionsLondon Kills: Acorn Media Enterprises, PGM TV, Long Story TVSwimming With Men: MetFilm Production, Dignity Film Finance, Shoebox Films
Suspects: Newman StreetGreen Street 3: Tea Shop ProductionsLittle Crackers: Tiger Aspect ProductionsSo clearly NOT "BBC all the way down the list" as you falsely claim. It took me less than 30 seconds to find that list. It then took me 5 minutes to type it up and format it in as simple a form as possible in the (almost certainly vain) hope you'll actually understand it. All The Best I meant it was not a one-off. I did not read the entire list but saw BBC stuff all the way down it, i.e. not just a slither of time, but a regular who would know the BBC people well. That's what we are interested in here. This nominalism is a red herring. Whether 100% or even 70%, what we call him is irrelevant. It's the idea this has been set up through known contacts in the BBC. They are rather an incestuous crowd in this line of work. |
|
|
|
Post by ProVeritas on Jul 2, 2024 17:04:32 GMT
I think you are, probably deliberately, dishonestly equating "channel it was shown on" for "who he worked for" - he worked for Production Companies. He worked on: Show : Production Company(ies)The Winter King: Bad Wolf, One Big PictureMcDonald & Dobbs: Mammoth Screen, ITVThe Long Call: Silverprint Pictures, ITVMadness In The Method: Autumnwood Media, Happy Hour Films, Hawthorne Road ProductionsLondon Kills: Acorn Media Enterprises, PGM TV, Long Story TVSwimming With Men: MetFilm Production, Dignity Film Finance, Shoebox Films
Suspects: Newman StreetGreen Street 3: Tea Shop ProductionsLittle Crackers: Tiger Aspect ProductionsSo clearly NOT "BBC all the way down the list" as you falsely claim. It took me less than 30 seconds to find that list. It then took me 5 minutes to type it up and format it in as simple a form as possible in the (almost certainly vain) hope you'll actually understand it. All The Best I meant it was not a one-off. I did not read the entire list but saw BBC stuff all the way down it, i.e. not just a slither of time, but a regular who would know the BBC people well. That's what we are interested in here. This nominalism is a red herring. Whether 100% or even 70%, what we call him is irrelevant. It's the idea this has been set up through known contacts in the BBC. They are rather an incestuous crowd in this line of work. So you didn't even do a basic check of the FACTS before making a sweeping generalisation that all of his work was for the BBC. Then when caught in the lie you start back-tracking. I DID go down the list, about 55% of his work was done directly for the BBC. Almost as low as the Leave vote for the Brexit Referendum; would you say everyone voted for Brexit when discussing that? All The Best |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 2, 2024 17:24:41 GMT
Another smear by "Led by donkeys" arranging with the venue he was speaking at for a banner to be unfurled with a photo of Putin with the caption: I (heart) (love) Putin. Farage said "Who put that there?" Someone needs to get the sack! You were spotted as a Righty some time ago. Strong religious beliefs aligned with right-wing politics is IMO a dangerous place to be. Don't be so pathetic, see2. |
|
|
|
Post by Baron von Lotsov on Jul 2, 2024 17:26:48 GMT
I meant it was not a one-off. I did not read the entire list but saw BBC stuff all the way down it, i.e. not just a slither of time, but a regular who would know the BBC people well. That's what we are interested in here. This nominalism is a red herring. Whether 100% or even 70%, what we call him is irrelevant. It's the idea this has been set up through known contacts in the BBC. They are rather an incestuous crowd in this line of work. So you didn't even do a basic check of the FACTS before making a sweeping generalisation that all of his work was for the BBC. Then when caught in the lie you start back-tracking. I DID go down the list, about 55% of his work was done directly for the BBC. Almost as low as the Leave vote for the Brexit Referendum; would you say everyone voted for Brexit when discussing that? All The Best I'd already come to the conclusion the guy was a plant, so whether 55% or 70%, it doesn't matter.
This country is going to the dogs. it worries about the smallest of things, and ignores all the big problems. This election has been 90% what someone said which was racist. They are mad.
|
|
|
|
Post by Dogburger on Jul 2, 2024 18:00:14 GMT
You were spotted as a Righty some time ago. Strong religious beliefs aligned with right-wing politics is IMO a dangerous place to be. Don't be so pathetic, see2. Its the weirdest of things , religious people are normally right wing so why does that make them dangerous ? I just realised I've quoted the wrong person but I'll crack on ...... Maybe the arch bishop and others at the top go all wierdo lefty but the congregation are I would say of the right . Same goes for the mussas , very right wing in mussa countries but then tend to support labour when they come here . Is that because Christianity is of the right and they won't cosy up with Jesus ? Anyway just a few thoughts .........Vote Reform ! |
|
|
|
Post by ProVeritas on Jul 2, 2024 19:00:05 GMT
So you didn't even do a basic check of the FACTS before making a sweeping generalisation that all of his work was for the BBC. Then when caught in the lie you start back-tracking. I DID go down the list, about 55% of his work was done directly for the BBC. Almost as low as the Leave vote for the Brexit Referendum; would you say everyone voted for Brexit when discussing that? All The Best I'd already come to the conclusion the guy was a plant, so whether 55% or 70%, it doesn't matter.
This country is going to the dogs. it worries about the smallest of things, and ignores all the big problems. This election has been 90% what someone said which was racist. They are mad.
Well he must be then. After all, you've been right about so many other things in this thread. Oh, wait, no you haven't... All The Best |
|
|
|
Post by The Squeezed Middle on Jul 3, 2024 5:59:54 GMT
This country is going to the dogs. it worries about the smallest of things, and ignores all the big problems. This election has been 90% what someone said which was racist. They are mad... I don't often agree with you, but you're spot on there. Never mind the economy, law and order or immigration the politicos are more interested in men in frocks and whether someone told a "Racist" joke twenty years ago. None of which matters whatsoever to the average voter. |
|
|
|
Post by ProVeritas on Jul 3, 2024 9:11:34 GMT
This country is going to the dogs. it worries about the smallest of things, and ignores all the big problems. This election has been 90% what someone said which was racist. They are mad... I don't often agree with you, but you're spot on there. Never mind the economy, law and order or immigration the politicos are more interested in men in frocks and whether someone told a "Racist" joke twenty years ago. None of which matters whatsoever to the average voter. Christ, twice in as many days I am in complete agreement with you. All The Best |
|
|
|
Post by zanygame on Jul 3, 2024 9:15:13 GMT
So you didn't even do a basic check of the FACTS before making a sweeping generalisation that all of his work was for the BBC. Then when caught in the lie you start back-tracking. I DID go down the list, about 55% of his work was done directly for the BBC. Almost as low as the Leave vote for the Brexit Referendum; would you say everyone voted for Brexit when discussing that? All The Best I'd already come to the conclusion the guy was a plant, so whether 55% or 70%, it doesn't matter.
This country is going to the dogs. it worries about the smallest of things, and ignores all the big problems. This election has been 90% what someone said which was racist. They are mad.
Actually its not had much effect on the coming vote. Indeed there's so little gamble in this election that the news reporters are grabbing any story to fill the gap. Meanwhile the Tories are discussing what defines a man. Like that is a critical point in this election. Even stop the boats and the Rwanda bill have not driven the masses back to the Tories or Reform. The reason the real important things don't feature in the news is that the Tories know nothing they say is trusted anymore. And trust is everything. |
|
