Clarkson

12467…17

Comments

  • CHRISNOIR
    CHRISNOIR Posts: 1,400
    Slowmart wrote:
    Will be BBC fall on the sword of principle or find a work around to ensure the concerned parties are happy?

    "Storm in a tea-cup, high-pressure environment, all good friends really, banter got a bit out of hand, look - here's Jeremy and the producer shaking hands and having a laugh (circling lawyers just out of shot), it's tough making these programmes etc. On that bombshell - same time next week " - BBC Press Release (that I've just made up).
  • Manc33
    Manc33 Posts: 2,157
    edited March 2015
    If they weren't feeding him enough food on set and he got angry, I think he might have a case.

    We're talking going without food here!

    If it was ultimately the producers responsibility to get the food in and he hadn't, Jezza might have a case. I mean its like a law of nature or something. All he has to say in his defence is "I always get like that when I am really hungry" and all the blame goes on the producer because he shouldn't have been going hungry.

    Sounds to me like the producer is neglecting his staff.

    "If Clarkson is sacked by the BBC or leaves, Chris Evans is the early favourite to replace him."

    For crying out loud... not that tosser. :(
  • markhewitt1978
    markhewitt1978 Posts: 7,614
    It's not like food is hard to come by in Newcastle ;)
  • chris_bass
    chris_bass Posts: 4,913
    Slowmart wrote:
    Mr Bass, in the BBC's inclusive and celebratory aspect to diversity, equality and religion in all it's forms the meaning of my last sentence is whatever you would like it to be.

    I would like it to be a weasel riding a woodpecker, wearing a blue, black, white and gold dress, swearing in Cheltenham and punching producers whilst in flight.
    www.conjunctivitis.com - a site for sore eyes
  • chris_bass
    chris_bass Posts: 4,913
    Manc33 wrote:
    If they weren't feeding him enough food on set and he got angry, I think he might have a case.

    We're talking going without food here!

    If it was ultimately the producers responsibility to get the food in and he hadn't, Jezza might have a case. I mean its like a law of nature or something. All he has to say in his defence is "I always get like that when I am really hungry" and all the blame goes on the producer because he shouldn't have been going hungry.

    Sounds to me like the producer is neglecting his staff.

    Yeah, last time we ran out of pens in the office i stabbed the person responsible in the face.
    www.conjunctivitis.com - a site for sore eyes
  • Manc33
    Manc33 Posts: 2,157
    Chris Bass wrote:
    Yeah, last time we ran out of pens in the office i stabbed the person responsible in the face.

    It got you more pens I bet. :P

    "After it cancelled the final three shows the BBC could face financial penalties from other broadcasters they have sold the show to for failing to deliver a full series."

    Too right.

    Fine them hundreds of millions.
  • florerider
    florerider Posts: 1,112
    making the next Snickers commercial?
  • pblakeney
    pblakeney Posts: 27,286
    Chris Bass wrote:
    Yeah, last time we ran out of pens in the office i stabbed the person responsible in the face.
    I presume that you used a pencil in lieu of a pen?

    Does everything have to be carbon these days? :wink:

    I know they are graphite.
    The above may be fact, or fiction, I may be serious, I may be jesting.
    I am not sure. You have no chance.
    Veronese68 wrote:
    PB is the most sensible person on here.
  • sungod
    sungod Posts: 17,334
    no idea of the facts of what the buffoon did, personally i quite enjoy him

    what irks is the massive double standards of the current bbc leadership where people involved in uncovering the despicable long term abuse by savile et al. have been punished, banished or purged, and the managers who led this protected, promoted and found nice little earners

    btw also a bbc fan, long may it live, but the current self-aggrandising clique are running it into the ground
    my bike - faster than god's and twice as shiny
  • Manc33
    Manc33 Posts: 2,157
    sungod wrote:
    what irks is the massive double standards of the current bbc leadership where people involved in uncovering the despicable long term abuse by savile et al. have been punished, banished or purged, and the managers who led this protected, promoted and found nice little earners

    Someone once said about the BBC "There's always at least one pedo on each programme".

    I can believe it.

    After all wouldn't that be the best way of controlling what people say and do? This is a known thing by now, if you whittle away all the stupid distractions and get down to brass tacks.

    No one gets in trouble because it is so rife at the BBC (and in government) and the whole thing would be blown wide open. If you don't believe that just read up on "Operation Ore" where they did start prosecuting pedo's but had to stop the whole operation because it was getting embarrassing - the pedo's being prosecuted were not dirty old men in their basement... it was doctors, policemen, lawyers, teachers... even the head of Hull council was part of the list... in other words all the people in society that influence anything. So they just dropped the whole thing because it was more to do with high class people than the usual conception of a pedo.

    Are you catching on yet?

    Ever wonder why we go to war with places like Iraq?

    We wouldn't be doing if the government wasn't bursting at the seams with blackmailed pedophiles voting the wrong way, even against their own wishes - despite being a sicko. That's the part that gets me, even sodding pedophiles wouldn't vote to go kill millions of innocent people, but they have to.

    Jimmy Savile was rubbing shoulders with the Royal Family and they never get one single mention whenever Savile is being discussed, how would that be? Let's have some more info on just why this guy was allowed to come and go at Buckingham Palace as he pleased, while everyone else except Prince Phillip and Prince Charles were security checked. That puts Savile at a far "higher" level than anyone in the know ever dares to let on.

    Clarkson on the other hand is a straight up guy and you can tell he is, which is why the BBC don't like him.

    They don't take well to individuality and people that have an opinion. Especially when they are influencing millions of people. Ya can't do that! You either get your character assassinated or you get physically assassinated, or like with David Shayler - told to become a messiah. I doubt that guy would still be alive had he not done that. This only makes his info all the more interesting, we all know the guy has enough integrity to not become the messiah and yet... he did? Yeah right, tell another one.

    Please don't send me a warning by PM for going "off topic", I have only discussed stuff here in response to someone already discussing it (despicable long term abuse by savile et al, managers protected, promoted and found nice little earners).

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-20237564
    "some were found to be innocent"

    Impossible since all of it was tracked via the pedophile's credit cards and the website they were purchasing images from was owned by the authorities. So they absolutely do have a record of every single name with 100% proof tying them to their address and them to their credit card. "Some were found innocent" just tells you everything you need to know. Generally the more money they earned the more likely they were to be let off.
  • slowmart
    slowmart Posts: 4,516
    What are the Thirty-Nine Steps? Come on! Answer up! What are the Thirty-Nine Steps?



    And what happened to MH370?
    “Give a man a fish and feed him for a day. Teach a man to fish and feed him for a lifetime. Teach a man to cycle and he will realize fishing is stupid and boring”

    Desmond Tutu
  • veronese68
    veronese68 Posts: 27,804
    Slowmart wrote:
    What are the Thirty-Nine Steps? Come on! Answer up! What are the Thirty-Nine Steps?
    A song by Shawaddywaddy? Something about 39 steps to heaven.
    Kinesis Pro6
    Marin Nail Trail
    Cotic Solaris
  • tlw1
    tlw1 Posts: 22,142
    Veronese68 wrote:
    Slowmart wrote:
    What are the Thirty-Nine Steps? Come on! Answer up! What are the Thirty-Nine Steps?
    A song by Shawaddywaddy? Something about 39 steps to heaven.

    the long way to get sober?
  • rolf_f
    rolf_f Posts: 16,015
    How on earth can any sane person sign a reinstatement petition without actually knowing what he has done?! I wonder how many of the people who have signed already would have done so if he'd been accused of murdering someone. Quadruple figures at least I suspect.

    Not quite sure I understand the rationale of canning the last three shows. If Clarkson did something wrong, then cancel him but, the show can go on without him. It wouldn't exactly be the end of the world. I guess there'd be an issue over his contribution to the pre-recorded stuff but as that was already done I'd have thought it could still be used.

    I mean, the show is a load of crap (and that piece on Peugeot the other week was really scraping the bottom of the desperate barrel) but lots of people like it so why spoil it because of the actions of one presenter?
    Faster than a tent.......
  • MisterMuncher
    MisterMuncher Posts: 1,302
    If the BBC don't like Clarkson, then why has it commissioned and broadcast 99% of his TV output for the guts of 30 years, frequentlying using his blunt speaking persona as a marketing point? Is it some kind of elaborate double-bluff?
  • Pross
    Pross Posts: 43,461
    Manc33 wrote:
    If they weren't feeding him enough food on set and he got angry, I think he might have a case.

    We're talking going without food here!

    If it was ultimately the producers responsibility to get the food in and he hadn't, Jezza might have a case. I mean its like a law of nature or something. All he has to say in his defence is "I always get like that when I am really hungry" and all the blame goes on the producer because he shouldn't have been going hungry.

    Sounds to me like the producer is neglecting his staff.

    "If Clarkson is sacked by the BBC or leaves, Chris Evans is the early favourite to replace him."

    For crying out loud... not that tosser. :(

    But the producer was doing him a favour by not feeding him. Don't forget that 'they' put mind altering pathogens in food in order to control people.
  • MisterMuncher
    MisterMuncher Posts: 1,302
    Rolf F wrote:
    How on earth can any sane person sign a reinstatement petition without actually knowing what he has done?! I wonder how many of the people who have signed already would have done so if he'd been accused of murdering someone.

    Is cos he's a legend and all anti-PC, innit? With his wildly controversial opinions he has, for money.

    Meanwhile, website comments overflow with speculation as to how Mr Tymon definitely had it coming, and can expect worse.
  • ddraver
    ddraver Posts: 26,691
    Flip that comment around and ask why so many people are happy to dance on his Grave
    We're in danger of confusing passion with incompetence
    - @ddraver
  • the playing mantis
    the playing mantis Posts: 2,129
    wonder how many of you right on cyclists are creaming your pants at clarkson potentially getting the boot? havent read the thread, tldr, but imagine its many!

    anyone who doesnt find top gear or clarkson at least mildly funny (even though the show itself has generally declined in hilarity in recent series, apart from the odd episode), is the reason this stupid country will get whats coming to it when it elects a labour led coalition government propped up by the snp, and bleating about cuts that dont affect the vast majority but find it oh so fashionable and right on to crap on about them.
  • the playing mantis
    the playing mantis Posts: 2,129
    Manc33 wrote:
    sungod wrote:
    what irks is the massive double standards of the current bbc leadership where people involved in uncovering the despicable long term abuse by savile et al. have been punished, banished or purged, and the managers who led this protected, promoted and found nice little earners

    Someone once said about the BBC "There's always at least one pedo on each programme".

    I can believe it.

    After all wouldn't that be the best way of controlling what people say and do? This is a known thing by now, if you whittle away all the stupid distractions and get down to brass tacks.

    No one gets in trouble because it is so rife at the BBC (and in government) and the whole thing would be blown wide open. If you don't believe that just read up on "Operation Ore" where they did start prosecuting pedo's but had to stop the whole operation because it was getting embarrassing - the pedo's being prosecuted were not dirty old men in their basement... it was doctors, policemen, lawyers, teachers... even the head of Hull council was part of the list... in other words all the people in society that influence anything. So they just dropped the whole thing because it was more to do with high class people than the usual conception of a pedo.

    Are you catching on yet?

    Ever wonder why we go to war with places like Iraq?

    We wouldn't be doing if the government wasn't bursting at the seams with blackmailed pedophiles voting the wrong way, even against their own wishes - despite being a sicko. That's the part that gets me, even sodding pedophiles wouldn't vote to go kill millions of innocent people, but they have to.

    Jimmy Savile was rubbing shoulders with the Royal Family and they never get one single mention whenever Savile is being discussed, how would that be? Let's have some more info on just why this guy was allowed to come and go at Buckingham Palace as he pleased, while everyone else except Prince Phillip and Prince Charles were security checked. That puts Savile at a far "higher" level than anyone in the know ever dares to let on.

    Clarkson on the other hand is a straight up guy and you can tell he is, which is why the BBC don't like him.

    They don't take well to individuality and people that have an opinion. Especially when they are influencing millions of people. Ya can't do that! You either get your character assassinated or you get physically assassinated, or like with David Shayler - told to become a messiah. I doubt that guy would still be alive had he not done that. This only makes his info all the more interesting, we all know the guy has enough integrity to not become the messiah and yet... he did? Yeah right, tell another one.

    Please don't send me a warning by PM for going "off topic", I have only discussed stuff here in response to someone already discussing it (despicable long term abuse by savile et al, managers protected, promoted and found nice little earners).

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-20237564
    "some were found to be innocent"

    Impossible since all of it was tracked via the pedophile's credit cards and the website they were purchasing images from was owned by the authorities. So they absolutely do have a record of every single name with 100% proof tying them to their address and them to their credit card. "Some were found innocent" just tells you everything you need to know. Generally the more money they earned the more likely they were to be let off.

    even though tldr, read this top comment...suppose jet fuel doesnt melt steel beams either?
  • pblakeney
    pblakeney Posts: 27,286
    the playing mantis wrote:
    even though tldr, read this top comment...suppose jet fuel doesnt melt steel beams either?
    Don't try this at home.
    The above may be fact, or fiction, I may be serious, I may be jesting.
    I am not sure. You have no chance.
    Veronese68 wrote:
    PB is the most sensible person on here.
  • Manc33
    Manc33 Posts: 2,157
    How come the BBC kept him on for 30 years if they don't like him... because they can't exactly come out and say "We don't like the stuff you say and you're making people look at stuff from other angles" they just have to put up with it, unless they can oust him out somehow.

    As has already been said above, how come Clarkson gets flak anytime he so much as mutters anything wrong, yet other people at the BBC are getting big bonuses. Well if Clarkson went along with the speed camera BS, all this "save the planet" BS and whatever other lies the government and BBC are conjuring up for us... he would be getting a blind eye turned to his antics I am sure.

    Clarkson might sound controversial but he isn't, that's just normal folks, guys like him used to be the norm. Now he is one of the only "outspoken" people left on the TV full stop. Its hardly a surprise they want such a guy out. I say "outspoken" in quotes because it is only the fact that there's no one left on TV that is outspoken that makes Clarkson seem that way.

    You only have to watch one clip of the BBC reporting on the Israel-Palestine conflict to see they are not interested in the truth at all. We get to hear absolutely nothing about innocent Palestinians being killed or any of it. They only ever have to give the impression they are unbiased... well, every babysitter that ever murdered anyone they were babysitting will have been "a nice guy" beforehand, so it doesn't work like that. We're being conned by the best liars.

    Did you know Eric Blair that wrote 1984 used to work at the BBC? Where do you think he got his ideas from.

    One of the biggest lies I ever saw on a BBC website was a page about "Drink and drugs" when drink is not only very much a drug but one of the drugs that kills the most people of all drugs.

    We're paying to be manipulated, Ben Linus style.
  • the playing mantis
    the playing mantis Posts: 2,129
    the playing mantis wrote:
    Manc33 wrote:
    sungod wrote:
    what irks is the massive double standards of the current bbc leadership where people involved in uncovering the despicable long term abuse by savile et al. have been punished, banished or purged, and the managers who led this protected, promoted and found nice little earners

    Someone once said about the BBC "There's always at least one pedo on each programme".

    I can believe it.

    After all wouldn't that be the best way of controlling what people say and do? This is a known thing by now, if you whittle away all the stupid distractions and get down to brass tacks.

    No one gets in trouble because it is so rife at the BBC (and in government) and the whole thing would be blown wide open. If you don't believe that just read up on "Operation Ore" where they did start prosecuting pedo's but had to stop the whole operation because it was getting embarrassing - the pedo's being prosecuted were not dirty old men in their basement... it was doctors, policemen, lawyers, teachers... even the head of Hull council was part of the list... in other words all the people in society that influence anything. So they just dropped the whole thing because it was more to do with high class people than the usual conception of a pedo.

    Are you catching on yet?

    Ever wonder why we go to war with places like Iraq?

    We wouldn't be doing if the government wasn't bursting at the seams with blackmailed pedophiles voting the wrong way, even against their own wishes - despite being a sicko. That's the part that gets me, even sodding pedophiles wouldn't vote to go kill millions of innocent people, but they have to.

    Jimmy Savile was rubbing shoulders with the Royal Family and they never get one single mention whenever Savile is being discussed, how would that be? Let's have some more info on just why this guy was allowed to come and go at Buckingham Palace as he pleased, while everyone else except Prince Phillip and Prince Charles were security checked. That puts Savile at a far "higher" level than anyone in the know ever dares to let on.

    Clarkson on the other hand is a straight up guy and you can tell he is, which is why the BBC don't like him.

    They don't take well to individuality and people that have an opinion. Especially when they are influencing millions of people. Ya can't do that! You either get your character assassinated or you get physically assassinated, or like with David Shayler - told to become a messiah. I doubt that guy would still be alive had he not done that. This only makes his info all the more interesting, we all know the guy has enough integrity to not become the messiah and yet... he did? Yeah right, tell another one.

    Please don't send me a warning by PM for going "off topic", I have only discussed stuff here in response to someone already discussing it (despicable long term abuse by savile et al, managers protected, promoted and found nice little earners).

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-20237564
    "some were found to be innocent"

    Impossible since all of it was tracked via the pedophile's credit cards and the website they were purchasing images from was owned by the authorities. So they absolutely do have a record of every single name with 100% proof tying them to their address and them to their credit card. "Some were found innocent" just tells you everything you need to know. Generally the more money they earned the more likely they were to be let off.

    even though tldr, read this top comment...suppose jet fuel doesnt melt steel beams either?

    this is too funny, started reading the jihadi john thread and u do actually believe this bollox! i swear id dint type this before i had read that thread! still at least you stick to your guns mr icke
  • Manc33
    Manc33 Posts: 2,157
    You sound like someone that's not even looked into any of it. You didn't counter anything I said, you just said its "bollox" lol. Great argument you've got there.

    "Previously dismissed as a conspiracy theory by the establishment, MP's in Parliament are now raising the issue and demanding answers about allegations of pedophiles operating in Westminster during the 1980s"
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dxnBGTXr6i8

    The key phrase there is "Previously dismissed as a conspiracy theory".

    Yep, let's just call it a conspiracy theory that means it isn't real weeeeeeeeeeeee... where's my red glasses...
  • chris_bass
    chris_bass Posts: 4,913
    It is hard to argue with pointless, paranoid, irrelevant nonsense.

    Why not just say George Orwell, that's the name he wrote under, its just all part of your "I KNOW stuff" routine.
    www.conjunctivitis.com - a site for sore eyes
  • RDW
    RDW Posts: 1,900
    Anyone who doubts the veracity of the latest monstrous conspiracy Manc33 has uncovered needs to watch this hard-hitting documentary right now!: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RcU7FaEEzNU
  • Manc33
    Manc33 Posts: 2,157
    edited March 2015
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VnSS4-sTL64

    Is it still bollox?

    What is bollox is being ignorant to the point you're denying reports that have been put on mainstream news programmes. Go take a hard look in the mirror and ask yourself why you'd do that because I don't have any answer to it. You might start being slightly more aware of what's going on in the world, but probably not.

    Another thing about this is they only ever say "historical cases" to try to make you never think it might still be going on. Of course its going on, its how policies that would never see the light of day normally, get pushed through Parliament.

    How many dossiers go missing, hardly any, but when one does it is always with regards to pedophiles, thats all just a big coincidence too, of course.

    How people are able to add several "coincidences" together and still say yeah, all just a theory, is beyond me. We know this stuff by now, Operation Ore is all you need to look at really to see that pedophiles do not get prosecuted. As if I would rant the way I do if it was this isolated thing or that isolated thing, it is a dozen things.
  • the playing mantis
    the playing mantis Posts: 2,129
    manc, do you have a job, gf/wife or family? im intrigued how you have so much time to read up and make such long winded posts on here.

    still carry on. such convition is to be admired...now how about nessie, sasquatch and ABC's?
  • RDW
    RDW Posts: 1,900
    Manc33 wrote:
    Go take a hard look in the mirror and ask yourself why you'd do that because I don't have any answer to it.
    tumblr_n1gzrbtuUu1snwi4wo1_500.jpg
  • Manc33
    Manc33 Posts: 2,157
    the playing mantis wrote:
    now how about nessie, sasquatch and ABC's?

    How about you mentioned that not me, you mentioned that not me and you mentioned that not me.

    I am talking about pedophiles in Westminster and you're talking about the Loch Ness monster.

    What would you do if you suddenly saw a car run someone over... turn your back and pretend you didn't see it, start dancing? Changing the subject hardly changes anything.

    Imagine a court case where someone accuses someone of something and he just starts talking about the history of Australia from 1834 to 1878. What in the F does any of it have to do with what is being discussed?

    As per usual, like most people, you can't even discuss this stuff. At least this time around some of it got on the news and people know about it now although what they know is still a long way off the reality of it because the news only ever gives you a watered down or bias version.

Categories