Lineker and Attenborough

EveshamAddick said:

Make no mistake, everywhere you look there is evidence of how the Tories have trashed the country. The broken asylum system is just one area. Hospital waiting lists, ambulance waiting times, increased homelessness and rough sleeping, depleted police force, falling rates of convictions, demoralised nurses, doctors, teachers, care workers. And that’s not all of it. Millions of pounds wasted by the Liz Truss experiment. Millions of pounds diverted to MP family, friends and Tory donors via the PPE scandal and illegal VIP channel awarding contracts during covid. Thousands of people killed by government failures when dealing with the pandemic. 

As others have said on here, they are basically trying to play the Brexit card again as they did in 2019 in order to get re-elected as they are not able to point to a single thing that has been improved on their watch. They know the new bill is illegal and when it fails they can then set this up as a culture war against the lefty lawyers and the evil EU.

Don’t be fooled again!

It’s likely to work too

And before Braverman and crew start bleating about the need to withdraw from the European Court of Human Rights, let’s just remind ourselves of the only other countries not in the ECHR - Belarus and Russia.

EveshamAddick said:

Make no mistake, everywhere you look there is evidence of how the Tories have trashed the country. The broken asylum system is just one area. Hospital waiting lists, ambulance waiting times, increased homelessness and rough sleeping, depleted police force, falling rates of convictions, demoralised nurses, doctors, teachers, care workers. And that’s not all of it. Millions of pounds wasted by the Liz Truss experiment. Millions of pounds diverted to MP family, friends and Tory donors via the PPE scandal and illegal VIP channel awarding contracts during covid. Thousands of people killed by government failures when dealing with the pandemic. 

As others have said on here, they are basically trying to play the Brexit card again as they did in 2019 in order to get re-elected as they are not able to point to a single thing that has been improved on their watch. They know the new bill is illegal and when it fails they can then set this up as a culture war against the lefty lawyers and the evil EU.

Don’t be fooled again!

And unfortunately we have enough ignorant divs ready to vote for them again despite the fact their own lives are demonstrably worse. 

EveshamAddick said:

And before Braverman and crew start bleating about the need to withdraw from the European Court of Human Rights, let’s just remind ourselves of the only other countries not in the ECHR - Belarus and Russia.

We are founder members of the European Convention on Human Rights and it is easy to confuse this with the Court of Justice of the European Union, which is what the Government wants people to think. They want people to think that anything to do with Europe affects our sovereignty which was a major part of the leave campaign.

The European Convention on Human Rights was set up after WW2 to make sure that the abuse of minorities and vulnerable people couldn't happen again.

There is something totally ironic that Sunak is now concerned that the resultant distraction of the Lineker situation has distracted everyone away from yet another attempt, albeit a totally flawed and illegal one, to solve the refugee crisis (which was meant to be a distraction from all the ills caused by this Government in the last 13 years).

JaShea99 said:

They said there wouldn’t be any BBC commentary on the WSL games today but I’ve just switched on and there is?

The BBC are using a world feed for the commentary.

No pundits or normal commentators.

SporadicAddick said:

Gary Poole said:

SporadicAddick said:

Gary Poole said:

SporadicAddick said:

ShootersHillGuru said:

SporadicAddick said:

ShootersHillGuru said:

The_Organiser said:

ShootersHillGuru said:

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.

He didn’t make that comparison. He said some of the language used is not dissimilar. 

Personally I think GL knew exactly what that implied. As we all know what followed the language in Germany.

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 ? 

There's only so far you can stretch historical analogies, and I fear this is a step too far. 

Which analogy is wrong ? 

The Germans didn't put Hitler into power though democratic means. .
If you think the language of our Government resembles Mein Kampf well....I cant really explain that to you.
Your analogy is as much nonsense as suggesting a Corbyn vctory in the 2019 election would have resulted in Gulags up north and the purging of the Milliband brothers..

 

By November 1932 the Nazi’s held the most seats in the Reichstag. In January 1933 Hitler was made Chancellor in a coalition, in much the same way that David Cameron first became  Prime Minister here.

So you agree the Germans didn’t put Hitler into power by democratic means?

I can’t recall Cameron arranging a fire at Parliament.

The fire wasn’t how he came to power, it was how he made his power absolute.

Exactly, Cameron eventually came to "absolute power" without a fire.

...and that's why this (and other) analogies are silly. 

SporadicAddick said:

Gary Poole said:

SporadicAddick said:

Gary Poole said:

SporadicAddick said:

ShootersHillGuru said:

SporadicAddick said:

ShootersHillGuru said:

The_Organiser said:

ShootersHillGuru said:

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.

He didn’t make that comparison. He said some of the language used is not dissimilar. 

Personally I think GL knew exactly what that implied. As we all know what followed the language in Germany.

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 ? 

There's only so far you can stretch historical analogies, and I fear this is a step too far. 

Which analogy is wrong ? 

The Germans didn't put Hitler into power though democratic means. .
If you think the language of our Government resembles Mein Kampf well....I cant really explain that to you.
Your analogy is as much nonsense as suggesting a Corbyn vctory in the 2019 election would have resulted in Gulags up north and the purging of the Milliband brothers..

 

By November 1932 the Nazi’s held the most seats in the Reichstag. In January 1933 Hitler was made Chancellor in a coalition, in much the same way that David Cameron first became  Prime Minister here.

So you agree the Germans didn’t put Hitler into power by democratic means?

So who should have been Chancellor when the Nazi’s held the most seats won democratically?

Whoever the President appointed.  

It was President Hindenburg that appointed Hitler as Chancellor.

You are misunderstanding what is meant by absolute power, it is the power held by a leader in an autocracy or dictatorship. Hitler achieved that by way of passing the enabling act after the Reichstag fire. He would not have been able to do that if he was not already Chancellor. But when you stated yesterday that he did not achieve power by democratic means you were incorrect.

msomerton said:

Sorry folks the BBC wright to 
Take action against Lineker.
It needs to be seen as impartial. It is there to present the news and evidence of what is happening not make judgements 
If Lineker had been sanctioned after tweeting in support of the government's refuge policy would there be the uproar we have now. Would his colleagues be taking action. I doubt it.

I wish you’d pay people the respect of reading at least of the preceding posts. If you had I don’t think you’d have written this.

seth plum said:

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.

No surprise on the stance the Daily Express and the Daily mail took, But over two days: 29/30 March 1939, 498 people attempted to be accepted as refugees when landing at Croydon airport and only 20 were refused. It appears that most of the 20 came from the region of moravská ostrava/mährisch ostrau in former czechoslovakia, a centre of the coal and steel industry and a vibrant jewish community before the war.

It's not clear why the 20 were denied entry.
This is appertaining to the picture of the man being carried to the plane by Policemen.

The devil is in the detail but most people had fuck all in 1930's Britain and worse was about to happen. 

msomerton said:

JamesSeed said:

msomerton said:

Sorry folks the BBC wright to 
Take action against Lineker.
It needs to be seen as impartial. It is there to present the news and evidence of what is happening not make judgements 
If Lineker had been sanctioned after tweeting in support of the government's refuge policy would there be the uproar we have now. Would his colleagues be taking action. I doubt it.

I wish you’d pay people the respect of reading at least of the preceding posts. If you had I don’t think you’d have written this.

Lineker might be a contractor, but the vast majority of his work is for the BBC and of course his current celebrity is due to his BBC profile. So i would reckon any court would rule he is to all intents and purposes an employer of the BBC.

He isn't an employer or an employee, he is freelance, there is a big difference.

msomerton said:

JamesSeed said:

msomerton said:

Sorry folks the BBC wright to 
Take action against Lineker.
It needs to be seen as impartial. It is there to present the news and evidence of what is happening not make judgements 
If Lineker had been sanctioned after tweeting in support of the government's refuge policy would there be the uproar we have now. Would his colleagues be taking action. I doubt it.

I wish you’d pay people the respect of reading at least of the preceding posts. If you had I don’t think you’d have written this.

Lineker might be a contractor, but the vast majority of his work is for the BBC and of course his current celebrity is due to his BBC profile. So i would reckon any court would rule he is to all intents and purposes an employer of the BBC.

so what courts would rule he is an employee then and does that mean he is owed holiday and sick time now. because the rules relating to an employment contract if challenged would not actually be ruled in the courts, not to begin with at least. I have not seen anywhere the BBC challenge his status as a freelance, quite why they would open themselves up to years of national insurance contributions and holiday and sick time they have avoided eludes me. Also I am pretty sure Gary Lineker is famous for reasons that extend beyond the BBC, something about being an ex footballer or something like that