British Politics


  • Banned

    @MajorRage said in British Politics:

    @Rembrandt said in British Politics:

    @MajorRage said in British Politics:

    There is a double standard yes. But is it by the BBC? Where did BBC release an official statement on Dankula? Did Dankula do his "comedy" act on the BBC?

    They fired him for it

    Right, didn't know that. I can now see why can call it a double standard. Although those comments seem a bit more that they didn't like him, as opposed to what was happening to do with his 'comedy' act.

    @Rancid-Schnitzel said in British Politics:

    @MajorRage said in British Politics:

    @Rembrandt said in British Politics:

    @Rembrandt said in British Politics:

    @jegga said in British Politics:

    Nothing to see here , move along according to the bbc

    https://www.google.co.nz/amp/s/www.bbc.com/news/amp/entertainment-arts-48611424

    The double standards are so blatant.

    Scottish comedian's Pug doing a sieg heil = serious Nazi recruitment
    Lefty comedian suggesting protesters use battery acid rather than milkshakes = obviously a joke

    I can't believe people in the UK still pay their TV license for this trash.

    @MajorRage key part in bold.

    Also on the topic of Jock. He's due to get married this week, 3 days out from the wedding a few people invited pulled out....coincidentally the couple then received contact from a 'JOurNaliST' who wants to write a (hit)piece on it. After everything this couple has been through the last 2 years I'm starting to think people in media are no longer human.

    Dank's response for comment was pretty good though.

    By the BBC?

    I get the double standard. I'm struggling to see why this is the BBC fault. You should be supporting the BBC for supporting Brand's comments as a joke. Over they years, they have paid Carr, Boyle to name just 2 so this isn't new for them.

    You get the double standard, but don't understand the point? It's pretty simple. If the BBC had any integrity they would be applying these arguments across the board not just to defend their own or those that share their ideological bent.

    What? You now WANT the BBC to fire everybody who says something controversial?

    I struggle to understand why you aren't supportive of BBC here re their comments about Brand.

    For Christ sake Rage I didn't say that at all. Is it so hard to understand? It's really really simple. The BBC should apply that standard (obvious joke and freedom speech) across the board and not just to those who think like them. It's blatant hypocrisy and it's ridiculous to claim they should be supported for it.



  • Right, to get this thread back on relevant British Politics.

    Big day today for the Tory leadership. Johnson appears to be in the box seat, but we had a long discussion at work yesterday about who else is there. Lots of wider thoughts that a large amount of the ex-Johnson supporters are very much so anybody-but-johnson supporters. So even though the candidacy shows him a fairway ahead intraparty, once the first votes go the swings should be interesting.

    FWIW, I think Johnson will be next PM and it will make things very interesting. I'd prefer to see Gove, or Raab, as I think Johnson's past will come back to haunt him. Regardless, we are almost guaranteed a Brexiteer at the helm for the next shift, so we should get some action.



  • @Rancid-Schnitzel said in British Politics:

    For Christ sake Rage I didn't say that at all. Is it so hard to understand? It's really really simple. The BBC should apply that standard (obvious joke and freedom speech) across the board and not just to those who think like them. It's blatant hypocrisy and it's ridiculous to claim they should be supported for it.

    I'm not supporting hypocrisy. I'm supporting their comments on Brand.


  • Banned

    @MajorRage said in British Politics:

    @Rancid-Schnitzel said in British Politics:

    For Christ sake Rage I didn't say that at all. Is it so hard to understand? It's really really simple. The BBC should apply that standard (obvious joke and freedom speech) across the board and not just to those who think like them. It's blatant hypocrisy and it's ridiculous to claim they should be supported for it.

    I'm not supporting hypocrisy. I'm supporting their comments on Brand.

    And the criticism is because of their hypocrisy. Do you understand now?



  • @MajorRage I quite like what I've seen of Raab, really good back story too.

    Buzzfeed journalist proudly posted on twitter on what they thought was a hitpiece on him..responses are gold.



  • @Rancid-Schnitzel said in British Politics:

    @MajorRage said in British Politics:

    @Rancid-Schnitzel said in British Politics:

    For Christ sake Rage I didn't say that at all. Is it so hard to understand? It's really really simple. The BBC should apply that standard (obvious joke and freedom speech) across the board and not just to those who think like them. It's blatant hypocrisy and it's ridiculous to claim they should be supported for it.

    I'm not supporting hypocrisy. I'm supporting their comments on Brand.

    And the criticism is because of their hypocrisy. Do you understand now?

    I understand that if you take isolated incidents which support your views and put them together, you could come up with hypocrisy, yes. Reality is that hypocrisy was there at the time, not now. They hypocrisy with Dankula was there when they employed Gervais, Boyle, Carr, Clarkson just to name a few. All 4 of them have been found guilty on mulitple occasions of saying offensive things. It took one to physically punch somebody to get fired.

    Now why were they treated differently to Dankula? I would guess popularity. Something else that Jo Brand has. Dankula is a nobody. A nobody who has been (wrongly, in my view) charged with anti-semitism stuff. That is a pretty hot topic at the moment given what has been happening under Corbyn's watch. So a nobody, whose getting the most publicity he's ever had due to anti-semitism stuff, is dropped by the BBC. That ain't a big deal for me.

    I acknowledge your hypocrisy and see how you get to your conclusion. I just don't buy the relevancy, and fully support the BBC on their comments re Brand.


  • Banned

    @MajorRage said in British Politics:

    @Rancid-Schnitzel said in British Politics:

    @MajorRage said in British Politics:

    @Rancid-Schnitzel said in British Politics:

    For Christ sake Rage I didn't say that at all. Is it so hard to understand? It's really really simple. The BBC should apply that standard (obvious joke and freedom speech) across the board and not just to those who think like them. It's blatant hypocrisy and it's ridiculous to claim they should be supported for it.

    I'm not supporting hypocrisy. I'm supporting their comments on Brand.

    And the criticism is because of their hypocrisy. Do you understand now?

    I understand that if you take isolated incidents which support your views and put them together, you could come up with hypocrisy, yes. Reality is that hypocrisy was there at the time, not now. They hypocrisy with Dankula was there when they employed Gervais, Boyle, Carr, Clarkson just to name a few. All 4 of them have been found guilty on mulitple occasions of saying offensive things. It took one to physically punch somebody to get fired.

    Now why were they treated differently to Dankula? I would guess popularity. Something else that Jo Brand has. Dankula is a nobody. A nobody who has been (wrongly, in my view) charged with anti-semitism stuff. That is a pretty hot topic at the moment given what has been happening under Corbyn's watch. So a nobody, whose getting the most publicity he's ever had due to anti-semitism stuff, is dropped by the BBC. That ain't a big deal for me.

    I acknowledge your hypocrisy and see how you get to your conclusion. I just don't buy the relevancy, and fully support the BBC on their comments re Brand.

    What? It's based on popularity now? Give me a break. It's ideological. But even if it is just based on popularity doesn't that mean the BBC should be held in even more contempt?

    And those comparisons are weak in 2019. No way they get their break out roles with the BBC in this day and age.



  • @Rancid-Schnitzel

    We're going round in circles. I support BBC comments here. It doesn't mean I support every single thing they have ever done - their treatment of Deayton will always piss me off.

    I have extremely strong doubts that whoever made the Dankula decision was involved with the Brand statement. It's like comparing a junior accountant to a global salesperson in a 50,000+ employee firm.

    So lets just agree to disagree.



  • @Rembrandt said in British Politics:

    @MajorRage I quite like what I've seen of Raab, really good back story too.

    Buzzfeed journalist proudly posted on twitter on what they thought was a hitpiece on him..responses are gold.

    Yes, my biggest concern of Raab is how somebody could be part of a negotiating team, get to the end of it then walk away as the result is shit.

    Um .. weren't you part of it? It may just be that May over ruled him (as is her right) on too many thing, but then he could have managed the PR better by strolling earlier.

    Outside that though, I do like him.



  • BoJo in the box seat

    Fool me once, shame on you.
    Fool me twice, shame on me.





  • Harper, Leadsome, McVey out.

    So thats the end of female leadership.

    Johnson got a whopping 114 votes. This is a one horse race.



  • https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-48613921?fbclid=IwAR3_LeMueBhzOmWKovCShbqq_M1uK5ZfeYHfTyJTvWCD4r1qmxC3_BXJjss

    Thank folau for that! Let's not throw away a bargaining chip before a new leader can even get on the table.



  • @MiketheSnow said in British Politics:

    Yes please Boris

    bojo.jpg

    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/comment/personal-view/3640768/Browns-looking-for-a-Scottish-ally.html

    Seems like the very definition of a false equivalence.



  • So the BBC after defending Jo Brand and championing free speech now edits the "offending" article out.

    Weak.

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-48628007


  • Banned

    @Catogrande said in British Politics:

    So the BBC after defending Jo Brand and championing free speech now edits the "offending" article out.

    Weak.

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-48628007

    They helped make the bed, now they have to lie in it.



  • @Rancid-Schnitzel said in British Politics:

    @Catogrande said in British Politics:

    So the BBC after defending Jo Brand and championing free speech now edits the "offending" article out.

    Weak.

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-48628007

    They helped make the bed, now they have to lie in it.

    I’m sort of with MR in that I think it was good that they came to Jo Brand’s defence but I also see the hypocrisy in that position. But to now cave in like that is weaker than a can of piss.



  • Gervais gets it



  • Comedy Gold



  • Comedy Gold
    And unfortunately the most toxic
    Hasbyn's biggest gaffe

    IMG-20190614-WA0003.jpg


Log in to reply