Attention: Please take a moment to consider our terms and conditions before posting.
Lineker and Attenborough
Comments
-
Bit lost here. How would he know what SS? The screen grab I put up was from twitter, the clip Prague put up (mostly about Neill) was from twitter, why would he need to access iPlayer for that?stop_shouting said:
Thanks for the patronising post but how would you know? Unless you’re still illegally downloading BBC IPlayer?PragueAddick said:
If you’d bothered to read back on this thread before diving in you’d know the answer to this and other points you made in your post. My personal “favourite” is Andrew Neil.stop_shouting said:
Wtf you going on about. Why is a tweet by sugar relevant to what the issue at hand is here?Algarveaddick said:
Sorry to bring up a repeat... If he breached the rules, then so did this chap.stop_shouting said:The beeb gotta take a stand here. If lineker has breached impartiality rules then they have to take action. Likewise, with the presenters that have essentially gone on strike in support of him. Surely that’s breach of contract in anyone’s world. By downing tools, they’ve completely screwed up the beebs programming schedule for the indefinite future. As a licence payer, I’d be very annoyed if they let them get away with it.
As for going on strike? Have the tories actually made the right to protest by witholding your labour illegal yet?
I know they would like to.3 -
There are Holocaust survivors, people who lived through it, likening this government’s rhetoric to that of the Nazis.Southbank said:
As somebody with a Jewish family, anytime anybody compares anybody to the Nazis I would ask them to have a proper think about what they are saying. And please don't use the unique evil of the Holocaust to win your relatively petty political arguments.ShootersHillGuru said:
Leap to what you want to see which bears no resemblance to what I’ve said.Southbank said:
That a moderate right wing Tory Government is the same as the Nazi Party and that 1930s Germany is the same as 2020s Britain, and that trying to stop people drowning in the Channel is the same as the industrial slaughter of millions.ShootersHillGuru said:
Which analogy is wrong ?SporadicAddick said:
There's only so far you can stretch historical analogies, and I fear this is a step too far.ShootersHillGuru said:
How do you think Hitler persuaded the Germans to put him into power. He employed hate speech and the demonising of a minority. If you cannot see any similarities between the language Hitler employed and what people like our Home Secretary are using then you need to look a little closer. Language is how it started, followed by removal of human rights. Ring any bells ? Resettlement to the east ! What direction is Rwanda ?The_Organiser said:
Personally I think GL knew exactly what that implied. As we all know what followed the language in Germany.ShootersHillGuru said:
He didn’t make that comparison. He said some of the language used is not dissimilar.cfgs said:Not getting in to the whole debate about the BBC, etc but MOTD without the punditry means more football, which is good.
I will however say that if Mr Lineker knew anything about the rise of Hitler and his mob he wouldn't make the comparison. He owes an apology not to the government but to the memory of all those who suffered at the hands of the Third Reich.
Otherwise...13 -
Then you should know that throwing 'Nazi' around is not a great thing.ShootersHillGuru said:
I’m 25% Jewish. My grandfather. His parents born in Lithuania. Their families eradicated in the holocaust.Southbank said:
As somebody with a Jewish family, anytime anybody compares anybody to the Nazis I would ask them to have a proper think about what they are saying. And please don't use the unique evil of the Holocaust to win your relatively petty political arguments.ShootersHillGuru said:
Leap to what you want to see which bears no resemblance to what I’ve said.Southbank said:
That a moderate right wing Tory Government is the same as the Nazi Party and that 1930s Germany is the same as 2020s Britain, and that trying to stop people drowning in the Channel is the same as the industrial slaughter of millions.ShootersHillGuru said:
Which analogy is wrong ?SporadicAddick said:
There's only so far you can stretch historical analogies, and I fear this is a step too far.ShootersHillGuru said:
How do you think Hitler persuaded the Germans to put him into power. He employed hate speech and the demonising of a minority. If you cannot see any similarities between the language Hitler employed and what people like our Home Secretary are using then you need to look a little closer. Language is how it started, followed by removal of human rights. Ring any bells ? Resettlement to the east ! What direction is Rwanda ?The_Organiser said:
Personally I think GL knew exactly what that implied. As we all know what followed the language in Germany.ShootersHillGuru said:
He didn’t make that comparison. He said some of the language used is not dissimilar.cfgs said:Not getting in to the whole debate about the BBC, etc but MOTD without the punditry means more football, which is good.
I will however say that if Mr Lineker knew anything about the rise of Hitler and his mob he wouldn't make the comparison. He owes an apology not to the government but to the memory of all those who suffered at the hands of the Third Reich.
Otherwise...1 -
Gary Lineker didn't mention the word Nazi.Southbank said:
Then you should know that throwing 'Nazi' around is not a great thing.ShootersHillGuru said:
I’m 25% Jewish. My grandfather. His parents born in Lithuania. Their families eradicated in the holocaust.Southbank said:
As somebody with a Jewish family, anytime anybody compares anybody to the Nazis I would ask them to have a proper think about what they are saying. And please don't use the unique evil of the Holocaust to win your relatively petty political arguments.ShootersHillGuru said:
Leap to what you want to see which bears no resemblance to what I’ve said.Southbank said:
That a moderate right wing Tory Government is the same as the Nazi Party and that 1930s Germany is the same as 2020s Britain, and that trying to stop people drowning in the Channel is the same as the industrial slaughter of millions.ShootersHillGuru said:
Which analogy is wrong ?SporadicAddick said:
There's only so far you can stretch historical analogies, and I fear this is a step too far.ShootersHillGuru said:
How do you think Hitler persuaded the Germans to put him into power. He employed hate speech and the demonising of a minority. If you cannot see any similarities between the language Hitler employed and what people like our Home Secretary are using then you need to look a little closer. Language is how it started, followed by removal of human rights. Ring any bells ? Resettlement to the east ! What direction is Rwanda ?The_Organiser said:
Personally I think GL knew exactly what that implied. As we all know what followed the language in Germany.ShootersHillGuru said:
He didn’t make that comparison. He said some of the language used is not dissimilar.cfgs said:Not getting in to the whole debate about the BBC, etc but MOTD without the punditry means more football, which is good.
I will however say that if Mr Lineker knew anything about the rise of Hitler and his mob he wouldn't make the comparison. He owes an apology not to the government but to the memory of all those who suffered at the hands of the Third Reich.
Otherwise...
20 -
The Nazis didn't appear out of nowhere. Without hatred and words they wouldn't have appeared. Lineker could have said Nazis but he said 30s.7
-
This thread has descended into a debate about what Lineker said. In doing so, you're missing the point.
It doesn't matter what he said. He should be allowed to say what he wants. We can debate how far free speech goes i.e prejudiced speech, insults etc. But he didn't do anything untoward like that. He merely stated an opinion.
We should all be allowed to give an opinion without losing one's job. I still maintain that Glenn Hoddle should have kept his job.
The debate here should be about free speech not whether today's government really does mirror the German government in the 1930s.
Lineker has simply illustrated that the right to free speech in the UK has been eradicated. If you believe in free speech then you support Lineker regardless of what he said.16 -
This is true. Those that are agreeing with the sacking are not liking what he said. I agree with what he said but haven't agreed with all he and others have said and haven't called for him or others to be sacked. As long as he doesn't say it on MOTD, he should be able to say it. It is all about free speech at the end of the day.jimmymelrose said:This thread has descended into a debate about what Lineker said. In doing so, you're missing the point.
It doesn't matter what he said. He should be allowed to say what he wants. We can debate how far free speech goes i.e prejudiced speech, insults etc. But he didn't do anything untoward like that. He merely stated an opinion.
We should all be allowed to give an opinion without losing one's job. I still maintain that Glenn Hoddle should have kept his job.
The debate here should be about free speech not whether today's government really does mirror the German government in the 1930s.
Lineker has simply illustrated that the right to free speech in the UK has been eradicated. If you believe in free speech then you support Lineker regardless of what he said.1 -
He didn't say Nazi but it's clearly implied.
Personally thought it was stupid thing to say but he shouldn't have been stood down. It's his personal twitter after all so a private chat about the backlash from it should have happened. Now it's blown up and BBC look like clowns.
1 -
24 -
I don't think you can't say that with certainty. Why did he confine his words to the 30s? Why not link it to the Nazis directly?king addick said:He didn't say Nazi but it's clearly implied.
Personally thought it was stupid thing to say but he shouldn't have been stood down. It's his personal twitter after all so a private chat about the backlash from it should have happened. Now it's blown up and BBC look like clowns.0 - Sponsored links:
-
When I see something that I believe has similarities to what went on then I’ll call it out.Southbank said:
Then you should know that throwing 'Nazi' around is not a great thing.ShootersHillGuru said:
I’m 25% Jewish. My grandfather. His parents born in Lithuania. Their families eradicated in the holocaust.Southbank said:
As somebody with a Jewish family, anytime anybody compares anybody to the Nazis I would ask them to have a proper think about what they are saying. And please don't use the unique evil of the Holocaust to win your relatively petty political arguments.ShootersHillGuru said:
Leap to what you want to see which bears no resemblance to what I’ve said.Southbank said:
That a moderate right wing Tory Government is the same as the Nazi Party and that 1930s Germany is the same as 2020s Britain, and that trying to stop people drowning in the Channel is the same as the industrial slaughter of millions.ShootersHillGuru said:
Which analogy is wrong ?SporadicAddick said:
There's only so far you can stretch historical analogies, and I fear this is a step too far.ShootersHillGuru said:
How do you think Hitler persuaded the Germans to put him into power. He employed hate speech and the demonising of a minority. If you cannot see any similarities between the language Hitler employed and what people like our Home Secretary are using then you need to look a little closer. Language is how it started, followed by removal of human rights. Ring any bells ? Resettlement to the east ! What direction is Rwanda ?The_Organiser said:
Personally I think GL knew exactly what that implied. As we all know what followed the language in Germany.ShootersHillGuru said:
He didn’t make that comparison. He said some of the language used is not dissimilar.cfgs said:Not getting in to the whole debate about the BBC, etc but MOTD without the punditry means more football, which is good.
I will however say that if Mr Lineker knew anything about the rise of Hitler and his mob he wouldn't make the comparison. He owes an apology not to the government but to the memory of all those who suffered at the hands of the Third Reich.
Otherwise...1 -
Gary.palarsehater said:
No I mean my aunts neighbour in broadstairs, who awoke to find an illegal migrant in her kitchen demanding a lift to manchester.The Red Robin said:
By ‘areas’ do you mean Germany?palarsehater said:Labour Tory all cnuts.Illegal crossings across the channel need some sort of control, maybe will be different if you live in the areas affected you would think differently.16 -
Because I think if you say the word "Nazi" outright there is no defence.MuttleyCAFC said:
I don't think you can't say that with certainty. Why did he confine his words to the 30s? Why not link it to the Nazis directly?king addick said:He didn't say Nazi but it's clearly implied.
Personally thought it was stupid thing to say but he shouldn't have been stood down. It's his personal twitter after all so a private chat about the backlash from it should have happened. Now it's blown up and BBC look like clowns.
Saying it like he did leaves it open. Were there other radical political parties in the 30s he could have meant?0 -
.0
-
Fwiw I gotta have some agreement with south bank. I generally agree with linekers position but it’s always a bit cringe and could be said to downplay the Holocaust with too many comparisons to the Holocaust.0
-
I'm heartened by how much support Lineker is getting.
I would think that had Jeremy Clarkson been sacked by The Sun, not many others would have resigned in support.1 -
Not live / near live and able to ad lib though. The Apprentice is just one limited season programme and edited / scripted. Whereas MOTD is weekly and hitting more people more often.Algarveaddick said:
Because Alan Sugar is employed by the BBC to present a high profile prime time TV show, just like Gary Lineker.stop_shouting said:
Wtf you going on about. Why is a tweet by sugar relevant to what the issue at hand is here?Algarveaddick said:
Sorry to bring up a repeat... If he breached the rules, then so did this chap.stop_shouting said:The beeb gotta take a stand here. If lineker has breached impartiality rules then they have to take action. Likewise, with the presenters that have essentially gone on strike in support of him. Surely that’s breach of contract in anyone’s world. By downing tools, they’ve completely screwed up the beebs programming schedule for the indefinite future. As a licence payer, I’d be very annoyed if they let them get away with it.
As for going on strike? Have the tories actually made the right to protest by witholding your labour illegal yet?
I know they would like to.It is a comparison but arguably not the right comparison given their relative roles. He’s more aligned to the presenters on the news programmes I’d say and as I recall some have previously argued / indicated they are constrained by the relevant BBC policy.0 -
He could have meant that ultimately the Nazis gained power from these kind of words. Words of hate that dehumanise people. It is well known that every German wasn't a Nazi and there are points/events from one end to another. It is the same as the Holocaust survivor calling out Braverman. She wasn't calling Barverman a Nazi but pointing out the need to be careful about the words she uses.king addick said:
Because I think if you say the word "Nazi" outright there is no defence.MuttleyCAFC said:
I don't think you can't say that with certainty. Why did he confine his words to the 30s? Why not link it to the Nazis directly?king addick said:He didn't say Nazi but it's clearly implied.
Personally thought it was stupid thing to say but he shouldn't have been stood down. It's his personal twitter after all so a private chat about the backlash from it should have happened. Now it's blown up and BBC look like clowns.
Saying it like he did leaves it open. Were there other radical political parties in the 30s he could have meant?7 -
In the 1930’s, fuelled by the Daily Mail amongst others, Jewish migrants were forcibly put on aeroplanes by the British authorities at Croydon airport and sent to Germany.
Maybe Lineker should have pointed out on twitbook that the Tory hate speech was like Britain in the 1930’s.
I wonder if the BBC would’ve suspended him for alluding to that truth from British history.3 -
Lineker didn't tweet on MOTD, he didn't say it on MOTD, he didn't ad lib on MOTD. I think that's what is known as a straw man argument?valleynick66 said:
Not live / near live and able to ad lib though. The Apprentice is just one limited season programme and edited / scripted. Whereas MOTD is weekly and hitting more people more often.Algarveaddick said:
Because Alan Sugar is employed by the BBC to present a high profile prime time TV show, just like Gary Lineker.stop_shouting said:
Wtf you going on about. Why is a tweet by sugar relevant to what the issue at hand is here?Algarveaddick said:
Sorry to bring up a repeat... If he breached the rules, then so did this chap.stop_shouting said:The beeb gotta take a stand here. If lineker has breached impartiality rules then they have to take action. Likewise, with the presenters that have essentially gone on strike in support of him. Surely that’s breach of contract in anyone’s world. By downing tools, they’ve completely screwed up the beebs programming schedule for the indefinite future. As a licence payer, I’d be very annoyed if they let them get away with it.
As for going on strike? Have the tories actually made the right to protest by witholding your labour illegal yet?
I know they would like to.It is a comparison but arguably not the right comparison given their relative roles. He’s more aligned to the presenters on the news programmes I’d say and as I recall some have previously argued / indicated they are constrained by the relevant BBC policy.
He is not a news presenter, neither is Sugar.
It is a very comparable situation.19 - Sponsored links:
-
There's one bloke from Westerham who uses his Fisher Price binoculars to keep an eye out for boats crossing the Channel, but only when he knows there are photographers there. I'm sure he wants the boats to continue.bobmunro said:palarsehater said:Labour Tory all cnuts.Illegal crossings across the channel need some sort of control, maybe will be different if you live in the areas affected you would think differently.
I am not aware that anyone on this thread, any other thread, or any other source you care to mention, want the boats to continue.
But he's Palace, so he probably doesn't post on here.4 -
Linekar mentioned hostile rhetoric of Germany in the 30's. This lead to a situation where the Nazis took contol. He was not calling the Conservaties pushing this bill Nazis. Despicable, cynical, heartless and cruel maybe. The hostile environment of the Conservative party rhetoric has been going on for years. It only has got worse.Their policy will not solve boat crossings, there is no agreement on return, no place to accomodate large amount of refugees that are being branded and judged as economic migrants. Refugee organisations statistics show that up to 70% of those seeking refugee would be granted status but they are being branded as illegal. There was around 12k refugee claims awaiting a decision in 2010, now 160k+ due to the total cynical ineptness of this government.The illegal migrant policy & confected outrage around Linekar is a cynical political distraction both for the upcoming elections and for the Tory hard right extremisists to let some steam off as they are not getting their way with the Northern Ireland protocol. It is also a classic distraction to the Covid enquiry and general terrible state of the country under their watch.The Conservatives cannot run on their record - sewage in the rivers and sea, economic mismanagment and huge energy bills, housing, education and health dysfunctional and failing. Conservative chancellors who use their status to negotiate their own tax bill, people who arrange £800k loans and then get given high ranking jobs, Johnson with just about everything and handing out a knighthood to his own dad.This is all the Conservatives have got. Division and deflected away accountability for the state of the UK onto vulnerable people. What a despicable bunch the Tory hard right are - using vulnerable and desperate people to attempt to salvage their desperate political position.21
-
Setting aside the fact he didn't use that word, would you agree that words and language are important?Southbank said:
Then you should know that throwing 'Nazi' around is not a great thing.ShootersHillGuru said:
I’m 25% Jewish. My grandfather. His parents born in Lithuania. Their families eradicated in the holocaust.Southbank said:
As somebody with a Jewish family, anytime anybody compares anybody to the Nazis I would ask them to have a proper think about what they are saying. And please don't use the unique evil of the Holocaust to win your relatively petty political arguments.ShootersHillGuru said:
Leap to what you want to see which bears no resemblance to what I’ve said.Southbank said:
That a moderate right wing Tory Government is the same as the Nazi Party and that 1930s Germany is the same as 2020s Britain, and that trying to stop people drowning in the Channel is the same as the industrial slaughter of millions.ShootersHillGuru said:
Which analogy is wrong ?SporadicAddick said:
There's only so far you can stretch historical analogies, and I fear this is a step too far.ShootersHillGuru said:
How do you think Hitler persuaded the Germans to put him into power. He employed hate speech and the demonising of a minority. If you cannot see any similarities between the language Hitler employed and what people like our Home Secretary are using then you need to look a little closer. Language is how it started, followed by removal of human rights. Ring any bells ? Resettlement to the east ! What direction is Rwanda ?The_Organiser said:
Personally I think GL knew exactly what that implied. As we all know what followed the language in Germany.ShootersHillGuru said:
He didn’t make that comparison. He said some of the language used is not dissimilar.cfgs said:Not getting in to the whole debate about the BBC, etc but MOTD without the punditry means more football, which is good.
I will however say that if Mr Lineker knew anything about the rise of Hitler and his mob he wouldn't make the comparison. He owes an apology not to the government but to the memory of all those who suffered at the hands of the Third Reich.
Otherwise...1 -
Strong language alert.LenGlover said:Said it before but could Lineker be a victim of Godwin's Law?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jXqVGtxFppQ
7 -
So MOTD is only going to be 20 minutes then with no commentary or pundits.
really don't understand the reason for that call unless they are contractually obliged to only show a certain number of minutes of highlights per game, or they intentionally nuking the show for some reason. Seemed like a golden opportunity to try something a bit different just thrown away.
edit in fact the more I think about it, the more I think this is being intentionally done to piss people off as some kind of strange punishment for supporting GL.0 -
Algarveaddick said:
Strong language alert.LenGlover said:Said it before but could Lineker be a victim of Godwin's Law?https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jXqVGtxFppQ
Excellent stuff. Very well put.
2 -
How do we see this all going from now? Will Lineker go back, plus the others who have pulled out? The BBC have made a right mess of things here and seem to have completely misjudged the British mood from what I can see (although conscious that I am not there so maybe there are a lot of people happy with what the BBC have done).
Does seem like the latest chapter in years of strife and division in the UK though - a real shame to see and it deserves much better than the constant stoking of culture wars.5 -
Completely ignoring the point about his ability to ad lib and his frequency on TV.Algarveaddick said:
Lineker didn't tweet on MOTD, he didn't say it on MOTD, he didn't ad lib on MOTD. I think that's what is known as a straw man argument?valleynick66 said:
Not live / near live and able to ad lib though. The Apprentice is just one limited season programme and edited / scripted. Whereas MOTD is weekly and hitting more people more often.Algarveaddick said:
Because Alan Sugar is employed by the BBC to present a high profile prime time TV show, just like Gary Lineker.stop_shouting said:
Wtf you going on about. Why is a tweet by sugar relevant to what the issue at hand is here?Algarveaddick said:
Sorry to bring up a repeat... If he breached the rules, then so did this chap.stop_shouting said:The beeb gotta take a stand here. If lineker has breached impartiality rules then they have to take action. Likewise, with the presenters that have essentially gone on strike in support of him. Surely that’s breach of contract in anyone’s world. By downing tools, they’ve completely screwed up the beebs programming schedule for the indefinite future. As a licence payer, I’d be very annoyed if they let them get away with it.
As for going on strike? Have the tories actually made the right to protest by witholding your labour illegal yet?
I know they would like to.It is a comparison but arguably not the right comparison given their relative roles. He’s more aligned to the presenters on the news programmes I’d say and as I recall some have previously argued / indicated they are constrained by the relevant BBC policy.
He is not a news presenter, neither is Sugar.
It is a very comparable situation.I agreed Sugar is a comparison but not the only one and others are potentially more relevant especially where they have felt constrained to be able to give their opinions.This issue is not his opinion but whether he breached the BBC policy and in doing so is being treated differently to others.My view is I don’t care what he says one way or the other BUT if his bosses previously spoke to him on his social media activity it’s more about his relationship with his bosses.1 -
I recall from the days we were in the Premier League not being happy they showed so little of our action only to have it explained to me that their contract at the time only allowed them to show x amount of action. I presume they have something similar now so the pundits are extra important to fill the show. Is this correct now?1
-
I don't have sky but didn't they (at least what i remember from my pubbing days) used to have extended highlights much longer than MOTD - maybe it is a part of the Sky deal? I dunno tbh0
This discussion has been closed.
