Is Jeremy Clarkson finished?

[Rasiak-9-]

Top Gear must be a anathema to the BBC top brass. Unlike virtually every other programme the corporation produces it positivity revels in it's rejection of political correctness. Any concern for environmental issues is well concealed as Clarkson power slides the latest ridiculous 500 bhp sports car around the track. For that matter it's presenters are all white middle aged men, which is definitely a 'no-no' in a world that demands that at least half of them (yes 1.5 people) should be a disabled black lesbian.

 

I suspect there are many at the Beeb who would love to see the programme canned because it goes against everything they stand for. I further suspect that these faceless execs are behind much of the negative publicity Top Gear is attracting in the press - it may well be that this covert campaign to 'get Clarkson' will prove to be successful before very long.

 

And they'll be wrong because Top Gear, for all its failings, is loved by millions around the world preciously because it is so gloriously immature, outdated and irrelevant. It will be a sad day when the BBC decides that it can find no room any longer for Top Gear - afterall the founding purpose of this organisation was supposed to be to inform, educate and entertain was it not?

 

Pretty much this.

 

Pap, do you honestly think that rebellion against political correctness is somehow the establishment or the norm? or that being offensive against our culture of permanent hysteria and sensitivity is the 'safe' position to take when it comes to being successful in the public eye?

 

And I'm neither a conservative, nor do I find Clarkson funny, hell I'm 24 and I don't even drive or have any interest in cars for that matter.

 

However, I do really enjoy Clarkson's stubborn popularity as well as the fact that he's a real fly-in-the-ointment for the PC Guardianista-BBC axis.

 

I wrote a little blog about his '****** moment' not too long ago actually.

 

http://ifwhattheysayistrue.blogspot.co.uk/2014/05/bemused-blacks-and-guilty-whites-jeremy.html

[TopGun]

I imagine the BBC would love to get rid of Clarkson but in doing so they would lose the revenue that Top Gear brings in. Equally I imagine that Clarkson is very aware that the BBC is the best TV company to support a programme like Top Gear at low TV production risk compared to the commercial sector.

[pap]

Pretty much this.

 

Pap, do you honestly think that rebellion against political correctness is somehow the establishment or the norm? or that being offensive against our culture of permanent hysteria and sensitivity is the 'safe' position to take when it comes to being successful in the public eye?

 

And I'm neither a conservative, nor do I find Clarkson funny, hell I'm 24 and I don't even drive or have any interest in cars for that matter.

 

However, I do really enjoy Clarkson's stubborn popularity as well as the fact that he's a real fly-in-the-ointment for the PC Guardianista-BBC axis.

 

I wrote a little blog about his '****** moment' not too long ago actually.

 

http://ifwhattheysayistrue.blogspot.co.uk/2014/05/bemused-blacks-and-guilty-whites-jeremy.html

 

I've been clear on my feelings on Clarkson throughout. He's a bloke who deliberately courts controversy for publicity, going as close as he can before getting sacked. It's got bugger all to do with a culture of permanent hysteria, and a lot more to do with Clarkson and co deliberately setting out to offend.

 

It's clear from your blog that you don't really have a defence of Clarkson. I don't quite know how you feel qualified to decide that there is outrage, let alone that it's fake, or that no black person (you know, I know) finds it offensive. I mean, if you'd polled at all, or had numbers somewhere, they'd surely be cited.

 

You complain about the fakery of the outraged masses, but I don't think your piece contains a single verifiable fact. It looks like a diatribe against what you imagine left-wing university graduates to be. Says a lot more about you than Clarkson, I reckon.

 

Soz.

[aintforever]

Pretty much this.

 

Pap, do you honestly think that rebellion against political correctness is somehow the establishment or the norm? or that being offensive against our culture of permanent hysteria and sensitivity is the 'safe' position to take when it comes to being successful in the public eye?

 

And I'm neither a conservative, nor do I find Clarkson funny, hell I'm 24 and I don't even drive or have any interest in cars for that matter.

 

However, I do really enjoy Clarkson's stubborn popularity as well as the fact that he's a real fly-in-the-ointment for the PC Guardianista-BBC axis.

 

I wrote a little blog about his '****** moment' not too long ago actually.

 

http://ifwhattheysayistrue.blogspot.co.uk/2014/05/bemused-blacks-and-guilty-whites-jeremy.html

 

Spot on, it's purely my hatred of political correctness which makes me like Clarkson. He never actually does anything that offensive, he only does stuff that PC morons think might be offensive to someone.

[Frank's cousin]

I've been clear on my feelings on Clarkson throughout. He's a bloke who deliberately courts controversy for publicity, going as close as he can before getting sacked. It's got bugger all to do with a culture of permanent hysteria, and a lot more to do with Clarkson and co deliberately setting out to offend.

 

It's clear from your blog that you don't really have a defence of Clarkson. I don't quite know how you feel qualified to decide that there is outrage, let alone that it's fake, or that no black person (you know, I know) finds it offensive. I mean, if you'd polled at all, or had numbers somewhere, they'd surely be cited.

 

You complain about the fakery of the outraged masses, but I don't think your piece contains a single verifiable fact. It looks like a diatribe against what you imagine left-wing university graduates to be. Says a lot more about you than Clarkson, I reckon.

 

Soz.

 

Have to say totally with Pap on this. What some seem to forget is that ' PC gone mad' is the last sorry and desperate excuse of those who cling onto outdated socially historically acceptable bigotry. Many of its defenders try and cite that for every in PC comment, there are never really that many that are 'offended' or those that are are just over sensitive..... Conveniently forgetting simple principles. Something does not need to offend anybody for it to be wrong. It does not need to have been deliberate for it still to be wrong - whether it's something as serious as criminal activity where 'ignorance of the law is no defence' or something 'trivial' in this a case where at best it's a 'coincidence' (really BBC 82 and FKL?) - being stupid is no defence at all.

 

Clarkson May or may not hold these 'controversial', 'edgy' views - accepting the part played in generating audience. Umber sand discussion that his 'unPC' opinion and insensitive comments generate - whether on TG or in his various newspaper columns or books... But in some respects that would make him worse, exploiting the ignorance of some towards their own innate bigotry for his personal financial gain... He's just a sad old and outdated ****, lucky enough to have found an audience for his limited repertoire. An audience without the intelligence to see his 'act' as the old school bigot for what it is, or one that is in agreement with his opinion.

[pap]

Spot on, it's purely my hatred of political correctness which makes me like Clarkson. He never actually does anything that offensive, he only does stuff that PC morons think might be offensive to someone.

 

It's 8am on a Sunday morning. Turn on the telly and watch some real cartoons. Might be good for you and Rasiak-9 to learn from the professionals before creating more of your own.

[Sour Mash]

Have to say totally with Pap on this. What some seem to forget is that ' PC gone mad' is the last sorry and desperate excuse of those who cling onto outdated socially historically acceptable bigotry. Many of its defenders try and cite that for every in PC comment, there are never really that many that are 'offended' or those that are are just over sensitive..... Conveniently forgetting simple principles. Something does not need to offend anybody for it to be wrong. It does not need to have been deliberate for it still to be wrong - whether it's something as serious as criminal activity where 'ignorance of the law is no defence' or something 'trivial' in this a case where at best it's a 'coincidence' (really BBC 82 and FKL?) - being stupid is no defence at all.

 

Clarkson May or may not hold these 'controversial', 'edgy' views - accepting the part played in generating audience. Umber sand discussion that his 'unPC' opinion and insensitive comments generate - whether on TG or in his various newspaper columns or books... But in some respects that would make him worse, exploiting the ignorance of some towards their own innate bigotry for his personal financial gain... He's just a sad old and outdated ****, lucky enough to have found an audience for his limited repertoire. An audience without the intelligence to see his 'act' as the old school bigot for what it is, or one that is in agreement with his opinion.

 

Do you really just think he's been 'lucky' to find an audience? I don't care much for the show and therefore rarely watch, but it's obviously an extremely popular and successful show the world over, and it's easy to see why.

 

You put it down to bigotry, can you list out all these occurrences? His use of the N word was obviously wrong, but I can't think of too many other examples of outright bigotry?

[Turkish]

Have to say totally with Pap on this. What some seem to forget is that ' PC gone mad' is the last sorry and desperate excuse of those who cling onto outdated socially historically acceptable bigotry. Many of its defenders try and cite that for every in PC comment, there are never really that many that are 'offended' or those that are are just over sensitive..... Conveniently forgetting simple principles. Something does not need to offend anybody for it to be wrong. It does not need to have been deliberate for it still to be wrong - whether it's something as serious as criminal activity where 'ignorance of the law is no defence' or something 'trivial' in this a case where at best it's a 'coincidence' (really BBC 82 and FKL?) - being stupid is no defence at all.

 

Clarkson May or may not hold these 'controversial', 'edgy' views - accepting the part played in generating audience. Umber sand discussion that his 'unPC' opinion and insensitive comments generate - whether on TG or in his various newspaper columns or books... But in some respects that would make him worse, exploiting the ignorance of some towards their own innate bigotry for his personal financial gain... He's just a sad old and outdated ****, lucky enough to have found an audience for his limited repertoire. An audience without the intelligence to see his 'act' as the old school bigot for what it is, or one that is in agreement with his opinion.

 

And in an outstanding example of inane bigotry Franks Cousin labels all top gear viewers as thick, racist bigots. Well done sunshine.

[Viking Warrior]

Oh and you don't court controversy pap ??? Your the true messiah . I will remember to believe every word and post you make

 

"I've been clear on my feelings on Clarkson throughout. He's a bloke who deliberately courts controversy for publicity,"

[pap]

I'd like to address a recurring theme of this thread, and indeed Rasiak-9's polemic against an imagined population. This notion of a PC mob, ready to jump on anything that might offend somebody, somewhere. We live in a society comprised of people from around the world, and do it reasonably well - something we should all be proud of. One of the reasons we do it reasonably well is because in general society, we've taken a hard line against some of the worst excesses of prejudice.

 

Going back to the offence that started the thread, Jeremy's toying with a racial slur in an archaic nursery rhyme. That's a term that carries deep connotations of de-humanising the target, and still has the capability to carry deep offense when employed in its old context, and it still is. One of my kids came back from school at five years old asking me what a "n****r" was, against a backdrop in which five year old kids had racially abused the new black kid in class. Racism is like a hereditary disease.

 

If a primary school teacher had been caught using the term in any context, let alone an offensive one, he or she would at least be up for a meeting with the governors, possibly heading out of the profession depending on the severity or the publicity of the offence. Ron Atkinson's TV career went down the pan when he was caught off-camera. Malky Mackay and Iain Moody have a long way back into polite footballing society, if it exists at all.

 

It makes me laugh that the people who cry "PC gone mad" are the same sort of people that don't think "n****r" is offensive, and would possibly like to say it again. I know, I know. You've all got black mates; none of them are offended when you launch into your repertoire of escaped racial slurs from the 1970s, and do you know what? I'd actually believe you in a lot of cases. A big part of having mates from other races is celebrating and laughing about your different perspectives, but not all of those views will be suitable for public consumption outside of context.

 

Thing is, it's really not that hard to treat others with respect or have an inkling of what might upset them. Clarkson knows, certainly. He's made a career out of working out what it is that annoys people, annoying them and then pretending that he didn't know he was being annoying.

 

We call them trolls round these parts.

[pap]

Oh and you don't court controversy pap ??? Your the true messiah . I will remember to believe every word and post you make

 

"I've been clear on my feelings on Clarkson throughout. He's a bloke who deliberately courts controversy for publicity,"

 

I don't deny it, VW. The cheques are rolling in

[Viking Warrior]

The difference between you and him PAP

 

Is that your not a huge TV. Star

I note you don't say much about may and Hammond and the rest of the TG production team

 

Or even the BBC bosses who are now more than aware 0f clarksons comment .

 

Why not blame everyone involved with top gear instead of focusing it on one individual .

[aintforever]

Thing is, it's really not that hard to treat others with respect or have an inkling of what might upset them. Clarkson knows, certainly. He's made a career out of working out what it is that annoys people, annoying them and then pretending that he didn't know he was being annoying.

 

We call them trolls round these parts.

 

From the poster who tried to make out the Lee rigby murder was a false flag operation carried out by the government. Priceless.

[aintforever]

He's just a sad old and outdated ****' date=' lucky enough to have found an audience for his limited repertoire. An audience without the intelligence to see his 'act' as the old school bigot for what it is, or one that is in agreement with his opinion.[/quote']

 

That would be a global audience of 350 million, all stupid compared to old Frank. :lol:

[Batman]

From the poster who tried to make out the Lee rigby murder was a false flag operation carried out by the government. Priceless.

 

Remember the victims in the Boston Bomb, were all 'crisis actors'

[pap]

From the poster who tried to make out the Lee rigby murder was a false flag operation carried out by the government. Priceless.

 

Remember the victims in the Boston Bomb, were all 'crisis actors'

 

Arf. How did we get from Clarkson to here?

 

Oh yeah. That's right. Thick posters running out of arguments on the discussed topics. I'd expect it from a web designer, but I thought ship's cooks were jollier.

[trousers]

People do realise that they are responding in exactly the way Pap wants them to respond, don't they?

[Frank's cousin]

And in an outstanding example of inane bigotry Franks Cousin labels all top gear viewers as thick, racist bigots. Well done sunshine.

 

To use a James Mayosm ..... Cock!

 

You do seem to struggle with very simple concepts at Times Turkish dear boy. Don't you understand that you could enjoy TG without always enjoying or agreeing with Clarkson's prattish bigotry? I labelled all those who enjoy Clarkson's brand of 'controversial' PC bating as stupid... Slight difference. But as you as 'aintforver' enjoy demonstrating frequently, you struggle with nuance.... If nothing else you are at least consistently entertaining.

[hypochondriac]

To use a James Mayosm ..... Cock!

 

You do seem to struggle with very simple concepts at Times Turkish dear boy. Don't you understand that you could enjoy TG without always enjoying or agreeing with Clarkson's prattish bigotry? I labelled all those who enjoy Clarkson's brand of 'controversial' PC bating as stupid... Slight difference. But as you as 'aintforver' enjoy demonstrating frequently, you struggle with nuance.... If nothing else you are at least consistently entertaining.

 

Would be a bit weird if you found Clarkson offensive or unappealing yet loved top gear wouldn't it?

[Rasiak-9-]

Have to say totally with Pap on this. What some seem to forget is that ' PC gone mad' is the last sorry and desperate excuse of those who cling onto outdated socially historically acceptable bigotry.

 

This myth has to stop.

 

Complaining about a hysterical and disproportionate reaction to racism is NOT an endorsement or excuse for racism.

 

By that rationale, you can't oppose the death penalty without being said to be excusing or endorsing murder.

 

I abhor racism.

 

I also however, think that as a seperate issue, the desperation to slander people you dislike politically with accusations of 'racism' for social clumsiness is not only disgusting slander, and incredibly disrespectful and exploitative of black people.

[Rasiak-9-]

We live in a society comprised of people from around the world, and do it reasonably well - something we should all be proud of. One of the reasons we do it reasonably well is because in general society, we've taken a hard line against some of the worst excesses of prejudice.

 

This sentences is a very good summary of where well-meaning liberals go spectacularly wrong when it comes to race.

 

The reason we live in a largely pleasant and multicultural society is because we don't desperately seek to identify, pigeon-hole and categorise people from other cultures and backgrounds. The reason we're very quickly losing that pleasant and multicultural society is because we've begun to do exactly that.

 

Multiculturalism used to equate to pluralism; the aim to live in a society where everyone was treated equally in the eyes of the law and could more-or-less be confident that if they conformed to the niceties of the (very pleasant and welcome, relative to others) country in which they lived, they'd benefit from that.

 

Multiculturalism now no longer means treating everyone from the same background equally; but treating them completely differently according to their race and background, as well as the addition of a self-appointed bourgeoisie in some cases outright telling people of various cultures how they ought to feel and how they ought to want to be treated.

 

Liberal racism, i.e. the idea that people of other races need to be helped because (lets keep this hush hush eh Tarquin?) they're just not as intelligent as the big, bad, genetically lucky white man is far more worrying than the overt, easily identified and dispelled ignorance of the Daily Mail brigade.

 

Now granted, I can only base this on my own experiences to the extent that they are subjective, but in my experience the most PC of the people I've met at university and suchlike are those who come from very well-to-do, rural areas and are very self-conscious about the fact that their background is so white and middle-class.

 

A good example of this would be the propagation of the recurring joke "I'm not racist, I have loads of black friends!". Despite the fact that it should be patently obvious to almost anyone that if you are accused, wrongly, of racism, and you do indeed have plenty of black friends ready to defend you to the hilt, that it is obviously a very reasonable defense!

 

Anyway, whilst they're good and well-meaning people insofar as they want everyone to be as happy, successful and equal as possible, their racism very often manifests itself in the fact that they sincerely don't believe that other races, and in particular black people, are as intelligent as whites.

 

We want equality between blacks and whites? Well we need welfare programmes to redress the balance and to get the unflattering black crime rate down.

 

- Why wouldn't added emphasis on family and education work?

 

- Well...y'know...

 

You get similar things with the foreign aid budget. I remember talking to my boss (a very pleasant, liberal lady who, like a good little serf, thinks precisely what the Beeb and Guardian tell her to) and discussing the Western response to social issues in Africa and why it would be far better for us to leave the continent alone, rather than putting small businesses out of the market by essentially giving them food/money and creating a culture of dependency.

 

The reality of it was that whilst her liberalism appeared to be a bashful self-hating-whitey complex, it was actually a rather sinister, nasty belief that blacks were incapable of advancing technologically in the same way whites had, and that being the 'lucky' race we are its our duty to help them.

 

Funnily enough I was the only white lad at my house at Uni (and no of course I wouldn't dream of doing anything so downright nasty as to call them any sort of racial slur) but I do remember telling my friends that "guys...do you not realise that when these people are so incredibly PC...they're not treating you like you're equals" they were straight away like..."yeah....we get it....we know."

[Ludwig]

This myth has to stop.

 

Complaining about a hysterical and disproportionate reaction to racism is NOT an endorsement or excuse for racism.

 

You saying its a myth doesn't make it a myth. Its not a myth.

 

This sentences is a very good summary of where well-meaning liberals go spectacularly wrong when it comes to race.

 

The reason we live in a largely pleasant and multicultural society is because we don't desperately seek to identify, pigeon-hole and categorise people from other cultures and backgrounds. The reason we're very quickly losing that pleasant and multicultural society is because we've begun to do exactly that.

 

Multiculturalism used to equate to pluralism; the aim to live in a society where everyone was treated equally in the eyes of the law and could more-or-less be confident that if they conformed to the niceties of the (very pleasant and welcome, relative to others) country in which they lived, they'd benefit from that.

 

Multiculturalism now no longer means treating everyone from the same background equally; but treating them completely differently according to their race and background, as well as the addition of a self-appointed bourgeoisie in some cases outright telling people of various cultures how they ought to feel and how they ought to want to be treated.

 

Ha! What a complete load of nonsense. Who are you? How dare you pretend to know what multiculturalism in the past was like? Multiculturalism used to equate to an aim where everyone was treated equally? That is THE most ridiculous thing that has been written on here in quite a long time. Go and read up about how immigrants, particularly black and Asian people, were treated in the 1950s, 60s, 70s and 80s. Then once you've done that, try speaking to some people who were around then. And once you've done that come back on here and state again what multiculturalism used to mean. You have not got a clue and it is you that is insulting ethnic minorities by pretending that you have any idea about anything. You don't know what you're talking about but seem to be acting like some kind of expert.

[Turkish]

To use a James Mayosm ..... Cock!

 

You do seem to struggle with very simple concepts at Times Turkish dear boy. Don't you understand that you could enjoy TG without always enjoying or agreeing with Clarkson's prattish bigotry? I labelled all those who enjoy Clarkson's brand of 'controversial' PC bating as stupid... Slight difference. But as you as 'aintforver' enjoy demonstrating frequently, you struggle with nuance.... If nothing else you are at least consistently entertaining.

 

Yep, the standard FC response when made to look silly. Say they don't understand nuance.

[Frank's cousin]

Yep, the standard FC response when made to look silly. Say they don't understand nuance.

 

Hahaha - this one was not even subtle. Just went straight over your head. You really do need to read things a little more carefully before jumping to your usual conclusions. It is funny as feck though watching you make a right arse of it. ;-)

[Frank's cousin]

This myth has to stop.

 

Complaining about a hysterical and disproportionate reaction to racism is NOT an endorsement or excuse for racism.

 

By that rationale, you can't oppose the death penalty without being said to be excusing or endorsing murder.

 

I abhor racism.

 

I also however, think that as a seperate issue, the desperation to slander people you dislike politically with accusations of 'racism' for social clumsiness is not only disgusting slander, and incredibly disrespectful and exploitative of black people.

 

the irony is that you seem to be accusing the 'PC Brigade' of over intellectualising a problem that does not require it.... Which is wrong in itself. This is not a difficult concept, in fact it's very simple. Racism, like all prejudices is a result of ignorance. People who are either poorly educated or schooled in the ignorance themselves. Folks don't like PC because they consider it 'telling them how to behave'- well if it's challenging casual racism, how is that wrong? .... "Such shame we are not allowed laugh at the 'darkies' any more, how dare they tell us that, it's just a bit a of fun and I know loads of black people who find it funny and are not offended by it... "

 

Its simple - if you think and these casual remarks are harmless, that in itself is bad. What is worse is that you seem to be suggesting that it's disrespectful and exploitative of black people to stand against it... What utter ******. As you seemed to miss, it's not about black people, it's about what is right and wrong.... It's not about standing up for others, it's about illustrating to the ignorant what is... Right and wrong, because although they may claim to know this, they obviously do not, if they relieve it's fine to call folks slants.... As it's just a joke...

[Turkish]

Hahaha - this one was not even subtle. Just went straight over your head. You really do need to read things a little more carefully before jumping to your usual conclusions. It is funny as feck though watching you make a right arse of it. ;-)

 

Of course Franco it's me isn't it. Not the person who describes clarkson as an outdated ****, a bigot whose audience is too thick to see through his act or are also bigots and lining his pockets whilst doing so. Yet absolutely loves the programme he presents and watches them avidly. You do know by watching top gear you too are lining the man you despises pockets, don't you Franco??

Edited 6 October, 2014 by Turkish

[pap]

This sentences is a very good summary of where well-meaning liberals go spectacularly wrong when it comes to race.

 

The reason we live in a largely pleasant and multicultural society is because we don't desperately seek to identify, pigeon-hole and categorise people from other cultures and backgrounds. The reason we're very quickly losing that pleasant and multicultural society is because we've begun to do exactly that.

 

Multiculturalism used to equate to pluralism; the aim to live in a society where everyone was treated equally in the eyes of the law and could more-or-less be confident that if they conformed to the niceties of the (very pleasant and welcome, relative to others) country in which they lived, they'd benefit from that.

 

I've snipped the rest, but wanted to comment on this post, and may go beyond what's quoted here.

 

I find it interesting that you feel that now is the appropriate time to enumerate just how far left-wingers have gone off the reservation. I mean, your thoughts on multiculturalism are articulate and all, but they're very much unbidden. I deliberately avoided the term "multiculturalism" in my post for two reasons. First, it does carry a lot of negative connotations. Secondly, I've seen my immigrant family go the other way (integration) and do okay out of it.

 

Onto your objections, which are becoming clearer by the minute. The irony is that prejudice lies at the heart of them. You're right; the posts are entirely subjective, but tell their own story. Taking the blog piece and this post into evidence, it's clear that if you determine that someone is a left-winger with a bit of privilege in their background, you don't want to know. Fair play; you admit and qualify your personal perspective, but if your universal set of people who care about the myriad number of issues that may be termed "politically correct" is the left-wingers you met at Uni, then you're only considering a tiny fraction of the whole.

 

It may take you longer to identify the people you don't like. You might have to recon their newspaper of choice at lunchtime or something. Isn't your willingness to characterise and dismiss an entire group of people on your limited subjective experience borderline discriminatory itself?

 

Furthermore, your assertion that positive discrimination is a bad thing because you met a left-winger with weird views is another example of extrapolating the behaviour of an individual to an entire sub-group, especially when there's every chance it could be largely fictional in the first place.

 

I'm just guessing, but back in the day, did you ever front your obviously strong opinions in the Student Union and get shot down by a gang of left-wingers? If so, it has left a hell of a mark.

Edited 6 October, 2014 by pap

[CHAPEL END CHARLIE]

This myth has to stop.

 

Complaining about a hysterical and disproportionate reaction to racism is NOT an endorsement or excuse for racism.

 

By that rationale, you can't oppose the death penalty without being said to be excusing or endorsing murder.

 

I abhor racism.

 

I also however, think that as a seperate issue, the desperation to slander people you dislike politically with accusations of 'racism' for social clumsiness is not only disgusting slander, and incredibly disrespectful and exploitative of black people.

 

NO NO NO!

 

Pap has made it quite clear to me that Clarkson's conservative politics has nowt to do with his opinion of him and the vile programme in question. Indeed I happen to know that our Pap can sometimes be found out drinking socially with Jezza and Jim Davison every time they are in town because he's a extremely broad-minded kind of chap.

 

As for Pap's principled and consistent stance against of racism, this too is beyond question. Anyone reading the 'Gaza' thread who might have formed the conclusion that he can be perhaps just a tad anti-Semitic at times (all Jewish children are evil) can rest assured that this misapprehension is the result of his SWF account being temporarily high-jacked by those sinister 'dark forces' on here that are seeking to portray him as some kind of hypocrite who's concern for his fellow men is always subservient to his concern for politics.

 

Thinking back on it now I realise that many (if not all) of Pap's more memorable contributions on here are veritable 'pearls of wisdom' that the rest of we mere mortals should never have dared to doubt. George Galloway is without question the finest statesman this country has seen in a generation. It is a matter of fact that the 'Boston Bombings' were staged by wicked US Neocons in order to further their own ends. Only a complete fool could believe that the Apollo moon landings represented a genuine triumph for the Human spirit and not the fabricated NASA fraud there so obviously were. And as for Lee Rigby and the 'crisis actors' ... well need I go on?

 

If I have one (tiny) criticism it is that Pap can sometimes be prone to misinterpreting my attempts to be supportive as a form of supercilious attack that they most certainly were never intended to be - but I'll forgive him because nobody's perfect afterall.

 

[pap]

NO NO NO!

 

Pap has made it quite clear to me that Clarkson's conservative politics has nowt to do with his opinion of him and the vile programme in question. Indeed I happen to know that our Pap can sometimes be found out drinking socially with Jezza and Jim Davison every time they are in town because he's a extremely broad-minded kind of chap.

 

As for Pap's principled and consistent stance against of racism, this too is beyond question. Anyone reading the 'Gaza' thread who might have formed the conclusion that he can be perhaps just a tad anti-Semitic at times (all Jewish children are evil) can rest assured that this misapprehension is the result of his SWF account being temporarily high-jacked by those sinister 'dark forces' on here that are seeking to portray him as some kind of hypocrite who's concern for his fellow men is always subservient to his concern for politics.

 

Thinking back on it now I realise that many (if not all) of Pap's more memorable contributions on here are veritable 'pearls of wisdom' that the rest of we mere mortals should never have dared to doubt. George Galloway is without question the finest statesman this country has seen in a generation. It is a matter of fact that the 'Boston Bombings' were staged by wicked US Neocons in order to further their own ends. Only a complete fool could believe that the Apollo moon landings represented a genuine triumph for the Human spirit and not the fabricated NASA fraud there so obviously were. And as for Lee Rigby and the 'crisis actors' ... well need I go on?

 

If I have one (tiny) criticism it is that Pap can sometimes be prone to misinterpreting my attempts to be supportive as a form of supercilious attack that they most certainly were never intended to be - but I'll forgive him because nobody's perfect afterall.

 

Poor old Charlie. Attempts character assassination. Unwittingly commits suicide.

[Rasiak-9-]

I've snipped the rest, but wanted to comment on this post, and may go beyond what's quoted here.

 

I find it interesting that you feel that now is the appropriate time to enumerate just how far left-wingers have gone off the reservation. I mean, your thoughts on multiculturalism are articulate and all, but they're very much unbidden. I deliberately avoided the term "multiculturalism" in my post for two reasons. First, it does carry a lot of negative connotations. Secondly, I've seen my immigrant family go the other way (integration) and do okay out of it.

 

Onto your objections, which are becoming clearer by the minute. The irony is that prejudice lies at the heart of them. You're right; the posts are entirely subjective, but tell their own story. Taking the blog piece and this post into evidence, it's clear that if you determine that someone is a left-winger with a bit of privilege in their background, you don't want to know. Fair play; you admit and qualify your personal perspective, but if your universal set of people who care about the myriad number of issues that may be termed "politically correct" is the left-wingers you met at Uni, then you're only considering a tiny fraction of the whole.

 

It may take you longer to identify the people you don't like. You might have to recon their newspaper of choice at lunchtime or something. Isn't your willingness to characterise and dismiss an entire group of people on your limited subjective experience borderline discriminatory itself?

 

Furthermore, your assertion that positive discrimination is a bad thing because you met a left-winger with weird views is another example of extrapolating the behaviour of an individual to an entire sub-group, especially when there's every chance it could be largely fictional in the first place.

 

I'm just guessing, but back in the day, did you ever front your obviously strong opinions in the Student Union and get shot down by a gang of left-wingers? If so, it has left a hell of a mark.

 

No, not at all. I just have an analytic mind which gives me the opportunity to think critically about people's real motivations, that's all. I'm not involved in politics but I do find it easy to spot inconsistencies that permeate political belief systems.

 

I know that you've already made your mind up about me. In your opinion, anyone who opposes the left-wing doctrines that you espouse must by definition be either a right-wing bigot or just so hopelessly unintelligent. In either case, they aren't worth listening to. A moderate who objects simply to the methodology by which an equal, fair and just society can be brought about, can easily be lumped in with both of the above categories in much the same way.

 

Positive discrimination is a hopelessly ineffective system. Youtube Thomas Sowell on the subject.

[Rasiak-9-]

You saying its a myth doesn't make it a myth. Its not a myth.

 

I'm sorry, so complaining about a disproportionate reaction to racism defining the complainant as racist *is* something you agree with?

 

Does that not depend on how disproportionate the reaction is? If we had the death penalty for racial transgressions would you say that anyone who complained about it was merely a closet racist? How disproportionate would our hypothetical punishment have to be before you thought 'hmm...maybe they have a point'.

 

 

 

QUOTE=Ludwig;2063400]Ha! What a complete load of nonsense. Who are you? How dare you pretend to know what multiculturalism in the past was like? Multiculturalism used to equate to an aim where everyone was treated equally? That is THE most ridiculous thing that has been written on here in quite a long time. Go and read up about how immigrants, particularly black and Asian people, were treated in the 1950s, 60s, 70s and 80s. Then once you've done that, try speaking to some people who were around then. And once you've done that come back on here and state again what multiculturalism used to mean. You have not got a clue and it is you that is insulting ethnic minorities by pretending that you have any idea about anything. You don't know what you're talking about but seem to be acting like some kind of expert.

 

Ah yes. The old canard of "I'm older than you and therefore you're not old enough to have an opinion!".

 

I've grown up in London. My mother worked as a social worker with troubled youths in the Brixton riots and I have friends from a very wide variety of backgrounds. I've talked to my elders with a keen interest and researched social policy with regard to race in the UK as well as other countries and in particular, the US.

 

All you've done there is scoff at my points and stamp your foot at my temerity to form conclusions you don't agree with. Behave yourself.

[hypochondriac]

Pretty sure buzzing orn isn't much older than you. Must be about 22 or something like that. I expect his aggressive reaction has more to do with his own ethnicity than anything else.

[Frank's cousin]

Of course Franco it's me isn't it. Not the person who describes clarkson as an outdated ****, a bigot whose audience is too thick to see through his act or are also bigots and lining his pockets whilst doing so. Yet absolutely loves the programme he presents and watches them avidly. You do know by watching top gear you too are lining the man you despises pockets, don't you Franco??

 

Oh dear... You think I watch that crap?... Again,jumping to conclusions. I used to think you did this idiot act as a wind up, attention seeking etc.... But have come to the conclusion you are actually a bit dim ... For the record 'sunshine' - I am sure that of TG's'350mill' viewers there are plenty who cringe when Clarkson opens his gob and drops another casually racist remark.... But it's ok because it's just 'social clumsiness' as some his defenders seem to say... That's the 'best' excuse yet .... It's the fact that there are still so many who defend such 'social clumsiness' that means PC exists - to educate the stupid.

[Ludwig]

 

Ah yes. The old canard of "I'm older than you and therefore you're not old enough to have an opinion!".

 

I've grown up in London. My mother worked as a social worker with troubled youths in the Brixton riots and I have friends from a very wide variety of backgrounds. I've talked to my elders with a keen interest and researched social policy with regard to race in the UK as well as other countries and in particular, the US.

 

All you've done there is scoff at my points and stamp your foot at my temerity to form conclusions you don't agree with. Behave yourself.

 

Sorry, i didnt realise your mum worked in Brixton. Apologies for me suggesting you don't know what you are talking about, clearly i am wrong.

 

Brixton and the youths of Brixton that your mum worked with are a clear sign of the equal way that all races were treated back before the PC nonsense came in. You stated that the aim of multiculturalism in the past was equality and that people would be treated equally in the eyes of the law and would all get along and make good. That clearly ties in with life in Brixton in the 1980s, i can see that now.

 

There obviously wasn't any discrimination going on in the past. Everyone was equal. No one was abused or attacked in the street. No one had their houses or business attacked. No one was denied a job or a place to rent because of their colour. No one was subjected to greater police activity than others. All of these didn't happen and it is only today that the PC brigade (usually guardian reading vegans) create the problem by highlighting "issues" and saying what is acceptable and not acceptable. I agree with you now, having thought long and hard about it and spoken to my elders, that everything was fine back then because people kept their mouths shut and anyone insisting that we show a bit more respect for people of different backgrounds is a PC w*nker and it is THEY who have created the issues, not anyone else.

 

By the way, i was not stamping my feet and scoffing because you formed conclusions i dont agree with. I was stamping my feet and scoffing because you were talking out of your arse as if you are an expert, on a subject matter that you just don't understand.

[pap]

No, not at all. I just have an analytic mind which gives me the opportunity to think critically about people's real motivations, that's all. I'm not involved in politics but I do find it easy to spot inconsistencies that permeate political belief systems.

 

I know that you've already made your mind up about me. In your opinion, anyone who opposes the left-wing doctrines that you espouse must by definition be either a right-wing bigot or just so hopelessly unintelligent. In either case, they aren't worth listening to. A moderate who objects simply to the methodology by which an equal, fair and just society can be brought about, can easily be lumped in with both of the above categories in much the same way.

 

Positive discrimination is a hopelessly ineffective system. Youtube Thomas Sowell on the subject.

 

Your post has little to do with left-wingers, and more to do with your ideas of what left-wingers are. Champagne socialists, rich kids that don't have a clue, Tarquin - it's all there. It's more like an Young Conservative A-level student having pop at writing his first Spectator article than evidence of an analytical mind in full flow.

 

My objection to your posts, blog or otherwise, is that you seem to have taken very limited experience and projected it onto a whole group of people. It's got bugger all to do with left wing vs right wing, and more to do with the inherent prejudice of generalising an entire group of people. For the record, I've got plenty of Tory mates too. Not especially proud of them, but there you go

[Turkish]

Oh dear... You think I watch that crap?... Again' date='jumping to conclusions. I used to think you did this idiot act as a wind up, attention seeking etc.... But have come to the conclusion you are actually a bit dim ... For the record 'sunshine' - I am sure that of TG's'350mill' viewers there are plenty who cringe when Clarkson opens his gob and drops another casually racist remark.... But it's ok because it's just 'social clumsiness' as some his defenders seem to say... That's the 'best' excuse yet .... It's the fact that there are still so many who defend such 'social clumsiness' that means PC exists - to educate the stupid.[/quote']

 

Oh dear Franco, so you've gone from the sweeping Clarksons entire audience are thick,bigots or both, to there will be plenty that cringe at him yet love His programme in the space of 24 hours. Then to cap it all accuse others of being thick when you've been pulled up for it. This superiority complex isn't doing you any good Franco, but I'm sure you can put it all down to nuance.

[Frank's cousin]

Oh dear Franco, so you've gone from the sweeping Clarksons entire audience are thick,bigots or both, to there will be plenty that cringe at him yet love His programme in the space of 24 hours. Then to cap it all accuse others of being thick when you've been pulled up for it. This superiority complex isn't doing you any good Franco, but I'm sure you can put it all down to nuance.

 

Keep laughing Turks, best way to deal with your issues.... Pretty sad that our education system failed you so badly that you struggle so much with Basic comprehension.. Thankfully you seem to be the only one struggling with this quite simple concept... but at least you seem to have a rather fertile imagination. But you are right, I do seem to be struggling with how you can so blatently misinterpret or even read things into posts that simply are not there... Although I suspect an element of that is through choice.... Problem with such wind up though, is it still makes you look thick as ****... Need to be careful, some folks might start to believe that is the real you, and your pseudo pretence at being ignorant is not so much put on, as a natural state.

 

 

You can't seem to differentiate between the entire audience of TG and those that are simply admirers of Clarkson's 'humour' or enjoy his rather obviously contrived 'social clumsiness'.... Fair enough, it is wrong of me to to call you up on this if you are incapable of such a distinction

[CHAPEL END CHARLIE]

Russia and the Ukraine are on the verge of war, the deadly Ebola virus sweeps much of western Africa and the black flag of ISIS flies within a few miles of Baghdad. And yet here we all are wasting our time arguing about light entertainment on the BBC.

 

As it happens I don't personally believe that Clarkson is the vile racist that some on here are seeking to portray him as. But my opinion on Clarkson, and for that matter whether you agree with it, are both matters of bugger-all importance really. You remember the now notorious 'N' word that started this ridiculous 5 page thread running - the 'Guy Gibson's dog' word? Well those with any concern at all for the truth will concede that he didn't actually say that word. But this is no court of law, so let's not let the mere facts of the matter interfere with our fun.

 

But if I'm wrong and Clarkson is indeed a racist and not the overgrown naughty schoolboy with a mischievous sense of humour he appears to be, then at least he's a 'equal-opportunities' bigot because I can recall that he (and his fellow Top Gear presenters) being equally nasty to the following groups:

 

Fat Americans

His Excellency the Mexican Ambassador to the Court of St James

Socialists

Caravan enthusiasts ('the love that dare not speak its name')

All of Eastern Europe

Germans (many, many times)

The French Police Force

Murderers

Members of the Morris Marina Owners club

Members of the Austin Allegro Owners club

Rich people from Cheshire

Trade Unionists

The Chinese

Australians

Old People

Women

The Advertising industry

Sunderland FC fans

Teenagers

Anyone who is a member of a Golf club ...

 

... and John Prescott.

 

Now if only Pap could organise these serious maligned groups into some sort of effective protest group then he could get George Galloway to lead them and march on the BBC 'en masse' ... and I think we can all agree that what a magnificent sight that would be.

[pap]

Russia and the Ukraine are on the verge of war, the deadly Ebola virus sweeps much of western Africa and the black flag of ISIS flies within a few miles of Baghdad. And yet here we all are wasting our time arguing about light entertainment on the BBC.

 

As it happens I don't personally believe that Clarkson is the vile racist that some on here are seeking to portray him as. But my opinion on Clarkson, and for that matter whether you agree with it, are both matters of bugger-all importance really. You remember the now notorious 'N' word that started this ridiculous 5 page thread running - the 'Guy Gibson's dog' word? Well those with any concern at all for the truth will concede that he didn't actually say that word. But this is no court of law, so let's not let the mere facts of the matter interfere with our fun.

 

But if I'm wrong and Clarkson is indeed a racist and not the overgrown naughty schoolboy with a mischievous sense of humour he appears to be, then at least he's a 'equal-opportunities' bigot because I can recall that he (and his fellow Top Gear presenters) being equally nasty to the following groups:

 

Fat Americans

His Excellency the Mexican Ambassador to the Court of St James

Socialists

Caravan enthusiasts ('the love that dare not speak its name')

All of Eastern Europe

Germans (many, many times)

The French Police Force

Murderers

Members of the Morris Marina Owners club

Members of the Austin Allegro Owners club

Rich people from Cheshire

Trade Unionists

The Chinese

Australians

Old People

Women

The Advertising industry

Sunderland FC fans

Teenagers

Anyone who is a member of a Golf club ...

 

... and John Prescott.

 

Now if only Pap could organise these serious maligned groups into some sort of effective protest group then he could get George Galloway to lead them and march on the BBC 'en masse' ... and I think we can all agree that what a magnificent sight that would be.

 

I quite enjoyed this post, especially the caravan enthusiasts part.

 

In fact, I enjoyed it so much I'm going to (mostly) overlook the bit where the funny second part defeated the leading paragraph.

 

Good work, Charlie

[Turkish]

Keep laughing Turks, best way to deal with your issues.... Pretty sad that our education system failed you so badly that you struggle so much with Basic comprehension.. Thankfully you seem to be the only one struggling with this quite simple concept... but at least you seem to have a rather fertile imagination. But you are right, I do seem to be struggling with how you can so blatently misinterpret or even read things into posts that simply are not there... Although I suspect an element of that is through choice.... Problem with such wind up though, is it still makes you look thick as ****... Need to be careful, some folks might start to believe that is the real you, and your pseudo pretence at being ignorant is not so much put on, as a natural state.

 

 

You can't seem to differentiate between the entire audience of TG and those that are simply admirers of Clarkson's 'humour' or enjoy his rather obviously contrived 'social clumsiness'.... Fair enough, it is wrong of me to to call you up on this if you are incapable of such a distinction

 

Yes Franco, pretend I don't understand, pretend you're oh so clever, convince yourself that you've tied me up in knots. Yet there is only one of us getting oh so wound up yet again on an internet message board. Only one of us ranting, swearing, name calling and resorts to insults. The one that is The superior one, the educated super being, the master of naunce, the self styled forum voice of reason, resorting to foul fingered insults yet again. Yet I'm the thick one who just doesn't get it

Edited 7 October, 2014 by Turkish

[Whitey Grandad]

For the record, I've got plenty of Tory mates too. Not especially proud of them, but there you go

 

Are you saying...

 

'Some of my best friends are Tories'?

[pap]

Are you saying...

 

'Some of my best friends are Tories'?

 

Lord no.

 

My best mates are all left-wingers from Cantell

[Unbelievable Jeff]

I'm conflicted about this. I like Top Gear, it can be proper laugh out loud funny. However, that does not include the casual racism. I think they try to do racism the same way that Family Guy does, but they're just not as intelligent as Seth and his writers.

 

The thing is, there is NO need for these small comments/'mistakes' as the show is funny enough without them.

 

It seems they're trying to be controversial for the sake of it, when they don't need to be to get viewers.

 

TG, grow up and get back to what made you funny in the early seasons.

[pap]

I'm conflicted about this. I like Top Gear, it can be proper laugh out loud funny. However, that does not include the casual racism. I think they try to do racism the same way that Family Guy does, but they're just not as intelligent as Seth and his writers.

 

The thing is, there is NO need for these small comments/'mistakes' as the show is funny enough without them.

 

It seems they're trying to be controversial for the sake of it, when they don't need to be to get viewers.

 

TG, grow up and get back to what made you funny in the early seasons.

 

It's already been established that the only people that could possibly get why Clarkson is offensive are left-wingers, just because of his politics.

 

So either shut your trap or join a weaving commune

[Unbelievable Jeff]

It's already been established that the only people that could possibly get why Clarkson is offensive are left-wingers, just because of his politics.

 

So either shut your trap or join a weaving commune

 

 

I love political discrimination, it explains our society down to ground

 

Me, I hate 60% of the people I talk to, work with or see on the street because they believe in a fairer society, more state funding and taxing of the rich. I presume you're the same Pap, but the other way round.

 

The problem with Clarkson (and this isn't just Clarkson - please note they have writers and producers who are culpable for this kind of thing) is that what is said is in bad taste, and isn't actually funny.

 

And this is from someone who quite likes him.

[rallyboy]

It's the PR campaign for the new series.

The End.

[CHAPEL END CHARLIE]

I quite enjoyed this post, especially the caravan enthusiasts part.

 

In fact, I enjoyed it so much I'm going to (mostly) overlook the bit where the funny second part defeated the leading paragraph.

 

Good work, Charlie

 

Damn it you lefty git!

 

Now I'm going to have to add 'generous to a fault' to the long list of all your other fine qualities.

[Frank's cousin]

Yes Franco, pretend I don't understand, pretend you're oh so clever, convince yourself that you've tied me up in knots. Yet there is only one of us getting oh so wound up yet again on an internet message board. Only one of us ranting, swearing, name calling and resorts to insults. The one that is The superior one, the educated super being, the master of naunce, the self styled forum voice of reason, resorting to foul fingered insults yet again. Yet I'm the thick one who just doesn't get it

 

Oh dear seems I have hit a nerve, edited to get a bit more vitriol in haha.. You are so transparent. I think the Board needs to leap to your defence. Turks playing the victim card is sadly not new, but it IS funny. You are a fantasist, if you really read all that victimisation and 'rant and throwing insults (thick as s hit - so very very bad..' Yet so very very true) - wound up' into a simple post.

 

You do not get it, or you chose not to, as you have failed to respond to any of the points, just retreated as usual into your 'look at me' pretend victim. To my shame I find myself laughing at you... When if I was as superior as you say I am , I should feel nothing but pity.....

[revolution saint]

Jeremy Clarkson may or may not be an intentional / unintentional racist but he's still a tw*t though, right?

[Turkish]

Oh dear seems I have hit a nerve, edited to get a bit more vitriol in haha.. You are so transparent. I think the Board needs to leap to your defence. Turks playing the victim card is sadly not new, but it IS funny. You are a fantasist, if you really read all that victimisation and 'rant and throwing insults (thick as s hit - so very very bad..' Yet so very very true) - wound up' into a simple post.

 

You do not get it, or you chose not to, as you have failed to respond to any of the points, just retreated as usual into your 'look at me' pretend victim. To my shame I find myself laughing at you... When if I was as superior as you say I am , I should feel nothing but pity.....

 

Okay Franco, as I've been labelled a fantastic by you let's pretend all 3 of your posts today, which is all the post you're allowed, WERE NOT full of name calling, swearing, your view of how pathetic you think I am. Let's pretend you didn't use all your post allowance saying that and you cooling batted me away with a cutting riposte which left me floundering and lost for for words, meanwhile you merrily carried on revealing your distaste for Clarkson to the wider forum audience. In that parallel fantasy world you hit a nerve. However as we can see from the above posts, I'll have to wait until tomorrow for the next instalment of how much you laugh at me, how thick I am, how much of a **** I am, because you've used up every single on of your posts today doing just that haven't you pal. I know you have, shall we say, issues, so I hope today little rant doesn't push you over the edge so for that reason I'm happy to pretend that Yes Franco, it's you that's hit the nerve.