Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-15977813

Do you think he needs to be sacked? Does this need to go to the police as some want? The comments made were completely out of line and this could be one step too far for him in my opinion. The BBC have said sorry for him too many times. But don't think it warrants police intervention.

If this goes to the police it will be a fething joke.

Clarkson is known for this kind of humour, I think some people need to get a grip.

People need to get a grip and Clarkson needs to stop trying to be so contentious, it gets wearing. Both sides can do something about this bull...

The OC-D

Look at this video on here..

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-15977813

See the craggy faced old boiler whinging about it. What a fething joke, clearly the bloke was joking, what on earth is her problem?

Im sick and tired of all this "fake outrage" people are outraged about everything these days, how is this even a story? It is not even newsworthy.

I met JC in Ganners and he was a proper nice bloke, I for one am delighted that he is annoying the humourless gangsters that run the unions.

It's just Clarkson being a loud-mouthed dill weed as he so often does.

He should be reprimanded, certainly. Nurses and teachers pay the TV licence fee too.

Eh, he's not unknown to say such things(iirc)...If anything he'll get a slap on the wrist and be forced to make a public apology

No, he's within his rights. Would we be up in arms if a random person said it? Anyway It was quite clearly a joke, it's more a case of "I don't like him so he can go fest himself"

He's just being Clarkson.

As he said on Top Gear to Alastair Campbell - "I don't believe what I write, any more than you believe what you say". Whether that makes it right to say the things he does is a different matter, but you can't take anything he says at face value because it's a persona.

Anyway, someone who has punched Piers Morgan in the face gets cut slack by me.

Anyway, someone who has punched Piers Morgan in the face gets cut slack by me

only one of the dozens of punchesז he deserves.

It was a serious point made in his usual crashing joke style. Cant see the issue with it myself. For Unison to be taking legal advice shows how much effing money they must have stored in their coffers to start a fight with.

That's the point of unions.

Clarkson isn't high on my list of favourite people, but his comments always seem to get blown hilariously out of proportion.

He's been on our screens for God-knows-how-many-years with his same style of humour and still people haven't learned to recognise it, or simply refuse to recognise it.

That and if Clarkson gets the sack, you can pretty much kiss Top Gear and the viewers it brings goodbye, which would be a large step backwards for the BBC.

Not that big. The producers have been trying for a couple of years to figure out how to retire the show gracefully.

davidjones wrote:It was a serious point made in his usual crashing joke style. Cant see the issue with it myself. For Unison to be taking legal advice shows how much effing money they must have stored in their coffers to start a fight with.

Sorry, what was his 'serious point'?

Whether or not you agree with their reasons for striking on this occasion, the rights to form trades unions and to take industrial action are legally unequivocal. To see an overpaid buffoon like Clarkson condemning nurses, teachers and public servants for exercising a legal right in defence of a contractual entitlement (and indeed to hear him utter the words 'public service' with such distaste) on the BBC, is more than a little distasteful.

English Assassin wrote:To see an overpaid buffoon like Clarkson condemning nurses, teachers and public servants for exercising a legal right in defence of a contractual entitlement (and indeed to hear him utter the words 'public service' with such distaste) on the BBC, is more than a little distasteful.

Distasteful is entirely the wrong word.

To you it is. I think it's brilliant and I think he is funny, so do millions of others. YMMV.

It's also testament to the BBC's famously impartial broadcasting. Considering every time I have checked their website this week I've seen some craggy faced militant union gangster waffling on endlessly about how everyone supports them even though they don't, I was extremely pleased when I logged on today and saw JC having a big of a laugh. I also sat through the other half of the video with the sour faced union bint overreacting hugely. Legal action!? Do me a favour.

Go with a bunch of your trendy friends and see a "right-on" comedian like Ben Elton and see some of the disgustingly offensive things they say about the Royal Family or David Cameron or anyone unlucky enough to go to a private school (but not anyone from the labour party even though they all go to private school as well). Its far far worse than this bloke comically saying "line em up and shoot em!"

Of course, the BBC wouldn't then give air time to someone needlessly over reacting and demanding they take legal action against said comedian. It's a joke, people tell jokes that certain people find offensive/hilarious depending on their political/religious beliefs every single day of the week. You don't see the Pope demanding action against the any number of comedians who say truly offensive things about the Catholic church. When they call the Royal family deeply offensive names you dont see staunch Royalists like me going on telly and demanding "action".

This is just more of the truly staggering hypocrisy I expect from lefties, union mobsters and anyone who writes for the Guardian.

"Unlucky enough to go to a private school"? Seriously?

ArbeitsSchu wrote:"Unlucky enough to go to a private school"? Seriously?

Yes, unlucky enough to (through no fault of their own) be born into a family that can afford to send you to a good school.

Something that any good parent would do if they had the cash to do so.

Oh my, those poor over-privileged rich children with their vast fortunes, instant directorships and holidays to Aspen. Truly how terrible it is that they might be mocked....

ArbeitsSchu wrote:Oh my, those poor over-privileged rich children with their vast fortunes, instant directorships and holidays to Aspen. Truly how terrible it is that they might be mocked....

You have quite clearly missed the point entirely. Eveyone wants to be rich. Im not saying they are unlucky because their lives are gak, Im saying unlucky because that makes you the target for abuse by crass people who display little common sense.

Your a class warrior then? You have a needless and prejudiced hate for any people who happen to have wealthy parents?

How is that their fault?

And how is your labelling them all any different from racism if someone happens to be black?

Clarkson needs to be sentanced to drive a Four-two for a year. If he gets caught driving anything else he gets a broke down Yugo.

helgrenze wrote:Clarkson needs to be sentanced to drive a Four-two for a year. If he gets caught driving anything else he gets a broke down Yugo.

Ill lend him my car.

While I can understand why some people might be offended by that (Jezza's long been known to have a very poor brain to mouth filter) it annoys me that some of those nutcases are intending to initiate legal action.

Big babies.

mattyrm wrote:

ArbeitsSchu wrote:Oh my, those poor over-privileged rich children with their vast fortunes, instant directorships and holidays to Aspen. Truly how terrible it is that they might be mocked....

You have quite clearly missed the point entirely. Eveyone wants to be rich. Im not saying they are unlucky because their lives are gak, Im saying unlucky because that makes you the target for abuse by crass people who display little common sense.

Your a class warrior then? You have a needless and prejudiced hate for any people who happen to have wealthy parents?

How is that their fault?

And how is your labelling them all any different from racism if someone happens to be black?

Far from it. I got into a 500 post argument on a Disability Rights site the other night over the idiot notion that Rich = Evil, Poor = Good. I don't happen to think in sweeping stereotypes, because its ridiculous and far from reflective of the reality of humanity. What I DO understand is that having a guaranteed income for life based on vast personal wealth is a hell of a lot of compensation for being called names by poor people. For example, A4E's director Emma Harrison. Being handed a company by daddy, then given an award for being an "entrepreneur" whilst you "advise" the government on how to give your free company more money whilst living in a stately home, and lauded as some sort of expert on family life at the same time is a very comfortable situation to be in when someone who gets paid less than 60 quid a week calls your company £4Emma. Water slides off a ducks back very well when that Duck is MADE OF GOLD. David Cameron was "unlucky" enough to have a family wealthy enough to buy him into power? Poor Dave. My heart bleeds for him, it truly does.

What I realise is that when someone spits upwards, its fair game. When someone spits downwards its just bullying, which is usually only funny to other bullies.

ArbeitsSchu wrote:

Far from it. I got into a 500 post argument on a Disability Rights site the other night over the idiot notion that Rich = Evil, Poor = Good. I don't happen to think in sweeping stereotypes, because its ridiculous and far from reflective of the reality of humanity. What I DO understand is that having a guaranteed income for life based on vast personal wealth is a hell of a lot of compensation for being called names by poor people. For example, A4E's director Emma Harrison. Being handed a company by daddy, then given an award for being an "entrepreneur" whilst you "advise" the government on how to give your free company more money whilst living in a stately home, and lauded as some sort of expert on family life at the same time is a very comfortable situation to be in when someone who gets paid less than 60 quid a week calls your company £4Emma. Water slides off a ducks back very well when that Duck is MADE OF GOLD. David Cameron was "unlucky" enough to have a family wealthy enough to buy him into power? Poor Dave. My heart bleeds for him, it truly does.

What I realise is that when someone spits upwards, its fair game. When someone spits downwards its just bullying, which is usually only funny to other bullies.

Yes mate and as I said you missed the point, "unlucky" was a sarcastic jibe because the abuse comes for no other reason than being rich. Of course its great if you go to private school and your Dads got a yacht! But the point is, Its not like you earn the abuse like someone who actually does something wrong, but you will still get some.

gak, for myself Id let someone call me names 12 hours a day if I got 5 million pounds off them. Its why I think footballers need to man up. The crowd get to throw mars bars at you if your fat, and you get to be rich as feth. Seems a fair one to me. For that money you should have the professionalism not to kung-fu kick the crowd like Eric Cantona!

And regards your heart bleeding for Dave, he hasn't been complaining about class warfare has he? Im sure he is like you or I, and is happy to be called names as long as he has beluga caviar and a 12 bedroomed house.

The rest of your post I can agree on. I'm the son of a welder from Middlesbrough, Im not even remotely rich, I just argue alot on behalf of rich people because I am of the opinion (possibly from having several great "posh" officers in the Marines) that disliking someone because of their family background is just as ridiculous as disliking someone who happens to be born black, gay or ginger.

Well.. maybe not that last one.

I absolutely think he should be sacked, but mainly because he isn't funny and certainly isn't worth his £1million contract (which I pay for).

The BBC is too in thrall to its big stars, such as Clarkson, Paxman, Marr, Forsythe & Norton and are under a misguided impression that their audiences would dry up if they stop making programmes with these aforementioned personalities.

The only two people who come close to providing value for money are David Attenborough and James May.

I think that was Clarkson being Clarkson. It's been a few months since he mortally offended a gigantic group of people. He's been about as uncivil to the entire country of Mexico and truck drivers.

mattyrm wrote:

ArbeitsSchu wrote:

Far from it. I got into a 500 post argument on a Disability Rights site the other night over the idiot notion that Rich = Evil, Poor = Good. I don't happen to think in sweeping stereotypes, because its ridiculous and far from reflective of the reality of humanity. What I DO understand is that having a guaranteed income for life based on vast personal wealth is a hell of a lot of compensation for being called names by poor people. For example, A4E's director Emma Harrison. Being handed a company by daddy, then given an award for being an "entrepreneur" whilst you "advise" the government on how to give your free company more money whilst living in a stately home, and lauded as some sort of expert on family life at the same time is a very comfortable situation to be in when someone who gets paid less than 60 quid a week calls your company £4Emma. Water slides off a ducks back very well when that Duck is MADE OF GOLD. David Cameron was "unlucky" enough to have a family wealthy enough to buy him into power? Poor Dave. My heart bleeds for him, it truly does.

What I realise is that when someone spits upwards, its fair game. When someone spits downwards its just bullying, which is usually only funny to other bullies.

Yes mate and as I said you missed the point, "unlucky" was a sarcastic jibe because the abuse comes for no other reason than being rich. Of course its great if you go to private school and your Dads got a yacht! But the point is, Its not like you earn the abuse like someone who actually does something wrong, but you will still get some.


gak, for myself Id let someone call me names 12 hours a day if I got 5 million pounds off them. Its why I think footballers need to man up. The crowd get to throw mars bars at you if your fat, and you get to be rich as feth. Seems a fair one to me. For that money you should have the professionalism not to kung-fu kick the crowd like Eric Cantona!

And regards your heart bleeding for Dave, he hasn't been complaining about class warfare has he? Im sure he is like you or I, and is happy to be called names as long as he has beluga caviar and a 12 bedroomed house.

The rest of your post I can agree on. I'm the son of a welder from Middlesbrough, Im not even remotely rich, I just argue alot on behalf of rich people because I am of the opinion (possibly from having several great "posh" officers in the Marines) that disliking someone because of their family background is just as ridiculous as disliking someone who happens to be born black, gay or ginger.

Well.. maybe not that last one.

I very much doubt that most of the abuse going "up" gets anywhere near the ears of our "betters". I have a worrying feeling that Dave really does actually believe that he understands the common man, and that we really are "all in it together".

For the record, I don't particularly think that Clarkson should be fired, or sued, or whatever. But I will say that I think fat-arse TV talking heads who get paid to go on international holidays in supercars should be herded into camps and gassed....

Fair is fair.

If we had to put up with Ben Elton, lefties should put up with Clarkson.

The difference being Elton had a persistent political agenda wrapped in comedy which the BBC propogated.

Comedy isnt neutral any more, this is a bad thing, but at least Clarkson was giving his comments on an armchair in a chat show rather than part of a routine.

Also having people shot is a turn of phrase, to him, only a dimwitted union twit would see otherwise. Problem is, there are plenty of those people around.

Incidentally, Clarkson is occasionally to be seen having a quiet pint around our area. Given that its a northern "Red Or Dead" ex-mining town, this sort of comment is rarely heard from his lips, for fear that some ex-miner will stave his head in.

ArbeitsSchu wrote:Incidentally, Clarkson is occasionally to be seen having a quiet pint around our area. Given that its a northern "Red Or Dead" ex-mining town, this sort of comment is rarely heard from his lips, for fear that some ex-miner will stave his head in.

Well, he has been vocal on Top Gear that he only actually agree's with half of what he says to be fair.

And there is the other obvious one, is your comment to be considered insulting? Its hardly cowardly to not gob off when your having a quiet pint and you know that 90% of the pub would happily stamp on your face. Plus he would look ridiculously boorish, saying this gak on TV is one thing, I doubt he is trying for laughs when he wants a quiet pint.

For example, If I walked into a pub and Islam4UK were having their yearly get together I think it would be eminently sensible to keep my mouth shut.