That's the beauty of free speech. It inspires debate. It allows people to look at alternative points of view.
I disagree with pretty much every word Brendan O'Neill has written. But, then again, I disagree with pretty much every word Brendan O'Neill has ever written.
I suppose my starting point is that I am not, as he identifies as, a "Marxist Libertarian".
I don't support free speech when it is only 1 way. So (for example) he is perfectly entitled to support Conspiracy theories. Support Tommy Robinson. Nigel Farage. That people should have been taking to the streets to enforce Brexit.
As per usual, that article is terribly written. Worse, even, than the Gary Lineker Tweet (which should never have alluded to 1930s Germany).
A man trying to play the Race Card. As to why people from the poorest 150 countries in the World should automatically barred from applying for Asylum to this country. To not be allowed to be heard. Regardless of merit or lack of it. Just because of where they have come from.
Gary Lineker 'wept' when he learned Ian Wright and Alan Shearer had backed him in Match Of The Day row - as Greg Dy ke says 'this is the end' of him as a BBC presenter'
NEW Regular pundits Ian Wright and Alan Shearer both announced they would not appear on tonight's show to round up the day's Premier League action as an act of 'solidarity' with their colleague. Other presenters, commentators, and pundits all followed suit. Lineker was taken off air by BBC bosses on Friday after Tweeting earlier in the week that the government's new 'Stop The Boats' immigration policy was 'not dissimilar to that used by Germany in the 30s'. Addressing the saga, former BBC director-general Greg **** (left) has said he now believes there is no way back for Lineker to return as a BBC presenter.
I love watching Question Time. However, and I am sure that she does not do it deliberately, Fiona Bruce shows a very apparent bias towards the Conservative Party. Is far more brutal in questioning of people from other parties. Allows the Tory to routinely interrupt other guests, while insisting other people do not. Most weeks, the Tory speaks as much as the other 4 combined.
When the Express feels compelled to report on anything anti-Tory, you know there is a story there. Not like it's the Mirror/Grauniad.
Last night's QT included an incredibly one-sided attack on Gary Lineker's use of language. And when the only person on the panel who is talking sense is Richard Madeley, you know you have a dodgy list of guests. Jenryk was as odious as ever, Ken Clarke was rather past it and sad, the Labour woman was hapless, and the other woman a bit weird.
I find it a bit strange that a BBC sports freelancer is not allowed to give his opinion in his non-BBC tweets, but an employed BBC host of a political programme is apparently free to give her opinion on that self-same tweet.
BBC should ‘absolutely' sack Fiona Bruce for ‘bias' - YOU VOTED
That's the beauty of free speech. It inspires debate. It allows people to look at alternative points of view.
I disagree with pretty much every word Brendan O'Neill has written. But, then again, I disagree with pretty much every word Brendan O'Neill has ever written.
I suppose my starting point is that I am not, as he identifies as, a "Marxist Libertarian".
I don't support free speech when it is only 1 way. So (for example) he is perfectly entitled to support Conspiracy theories. Support Tommy Robinson. Nigel Farage. That people should have been taking to the streets to enforce Brexit.
As per usual, that article is terribly written. Worse, even, than the Gary Lineker Tweet (which should never have alluded to 1930s Germany).
A man trying to play the Race Card. As to why people from the poorest 150 countries in the World should automatically barred from applying for Asylum to this country. To not be allowed to be heard. Regardless of merit or lack of it. Just because of where they have come from.
We will just have to differ on that one.
No idea what he's said on anything else, I was sent that article and agreed with every word of it. Still do. Happy to agree to differ, would be a boring world if people agreed on everything!
That's the beauty of free speech. It inspires debate. It allows people to look at alternative points of view.
I disagree with pretty much every word Brendan O'Neill has written. But, then again, I disagree with pretty much every word Brendan O'Neill has ever written.
I suppose my starting point is that I am not, as he identifies as, a "Marxist Libertarian".
I don't support free speech when it is only 1 way. So (for example) he is perfectly entitled to support Conspiracy theories. Support Tommy Robinson. Nigel Farage. That people should have been taking to the streets to enforce Brexit.
As per usual, that article is terribly written. Worse, even, than the Gary Lineker Tweet (which should never have alluded to 1930s Germany).
A man trying to play the Race Card. As to why people from the poorest 150 countries in the World should automatically barred from applying for Asylum to this country. To not be allowed to be heard. Regardless of merit or lack of it. Just because of where they have come from.
We will just have to differ on that one.
No idea what he's said on anything else, I was sent that article and agreed with every word of it. Still do. Happy to agree to differ, would be a boring world if people agreed on everything!
He did the paper review on Sky News for a very short space of time. I wasnt particularly impressed. A man with some peculiar views. That is as far as I am concerned.
The BBC have far more need to resolve the Lineker situation than Gary Lineker. And it really should be fairly easy to resolve. The BBC has loads of employment lawyers. And 1 or 2 of them know their stuff. For example:-
1. GL accepts that, while he is carrying out work as a presenter for the BBC, he is not to express political views in his capacity as Presenter 2. The BBC accept that GL can make the occasional joke as presenter, provided it is clear that that is what it is. In addition, the BBC will let GL appear in his personal capacity on political programmes, provided it is clear that he appears purely in a personal capacity 3. It is accepted that GL is allowed to tweet etc in his personal capacity when not carrying out work for the BBC. There are 2 provisos as part of that agreement:- (a) That all such accounts are clearly marked to show that this is GL giving purely personal opinions, and is in no way providing opinion in any way sanctioned by the BBC, and (b) That GL is under no circumstances to compare anything to Nazi Germany. GL accepts that it is not only unhelpful, it makes him look like a t1t
The term "channel migrants" on this thread has got me thinking. Because there are a lot of migrants coming over the channel. And a sizeable majority are most certainly not "asylum seekers". But this Government seeks, rather ironically, only to persecute those fleeing persecution. And largely ignore everyone else.
People tend to have quite polarised opinions on refugees in general, and asylum-seekers in particular. So I started looking at 1 of the few places where opinions should be balanced-the House of Commons Library and Briefing papers. Because these come from an academic standpoint, and are not seeking to make party political points. So-here are 2 recent ones:-
Some of these facts show the distortion that is taking place. So-for example-over 1.1 million people migrated to this country in the year to June 2022. And 560,000 emigrated from it.
It is only a small minority of our immigrants who are currently asylum seekers. The largest influx comes from people coming here for education (277,000). Then "other"-which includes people from Ukraine/Hong Kong, and family migrants. Then it is work migration. Then there are the large amount of EU Nationals that came here before Brexit-many of those 3.6 million are still here. And let's not forget the large numbers who overstay their Visa, most often education Visas.
It is all very well saying that Asylum seekers are increasing. But they still make up only 18% of migrants to this country. There were 90,000 asylum applications last year. But our net migration was over 500,000 last year.
This Government isn't just persecuting a Minority. It is not just persecuting those fleeing persecution. It is lying about the major causes of net migration, which have little to do with asylum seekers.
There is a small percentage of the population that follow the Nigel Farage view on immigration. Namely that there shouldnt be any.
There is a much larger group, in which I would include myself, that empathise with the plight of asylum seekers, but realise we cant take all of them. Does anyone really think we can take them all?
Does anyone really think that we continue as we are? Should we fund the ever increasing hotel bills, currently at £3billion per year? Continue to employ an increasing number of staff to process the applications, which is currently at 4,000. Arent there more important things to spend this money on? Should we be reliant upon the people smugglers in deciding how many asylum seekers arrive?
The French coast is almost impossible to police. There is 90 miles of it to monitor. Once the boat reaches the water, they wont intervene. The French claim to have stopped 30,000 last year. These 30,000 were just stopped on a particular day, but free to make another attempt the following day, or even later the same day. We now plan to give them 500 million quid to delay more crossings.
There is a fairly simple solution to immediately stop the small boats, and put the people traffickers out of business. We also have to open up legal routes, and take in our fair share. Last year we apparently had 22 arrivals from Afghanistan. Yet the 15,000 that we promised asylum to, are still there, and seem to have been forgotten about. Its just another mess.
Comments
That was a rubbish story in the Sun in July 2017. Why was it rubbish?
The Calais Jungle was closed in 2016.
Just the Sun providing its usual mix of racism, titillation and lies.
I disagree with pretty much every word Brendan O'Neill has written. But, then again, I disagree with pretty much every word Brendan O'Neill has ever written.
I suppose my starting point is that I am not, as he identifies as, a "Marxist Libertarian".
I don't support free speech when it is only 1 way. So (for example) he is perfectly entitled to support Conspiracy theories. Support Tommy Robinson. Nigel Farage. That people should have been taking to the streets to enforce Brexit.
As per usual, that article is terribly written. Worse, even, than the Gary Lineker Tweet (which should never have alluded to 1930s Germany).
A man trying to play the Race Card. As to why people from the poorest 150 countries in the World should automatically barred from applying for Asylum to this country. To not be allowed to be heard. Regardless of merit or lack of it. Just because of where they have come from.
We will just have to differ on that one.
https://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/uknews/hugh-bonneville-and-jason-watkins-act-out-satire-of-bbc-s-gary-lineker-response/ar-AA18tKlq?ocid=msedgntp&cvid=21ea7db0904a4b0997b078f1e435d872&ei=66
NEW Regular pundits Ian Wright and Alan Shearer both announced they would not appear on tonight's show to round up the day's Premier League action as an act of 'solidarity' with their colleague. Other presenters, commentators, and pundits all followed suit. Lineker was taken off air by BBC bosses on Friday after Tweeting earlier in the week that the government's new 'Stop The Boats' immigration policy was 'not dissimilar to that used by Germany in the 30s'. Addressing the saga, former BBC director-general Greg **** (left) has said he now believes there is no way back for Lineker to return as a BBC presenter.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-11847577/Gary-Lineker-broke-tears-learned-pundits-backed-solidarity.html
https://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/uknews/bbc-should-absolutely-sack-fiona-bruce-for-bias-you-voted/ar-AA18uosQ?ocid=msedgntp&cvid=2296b64d570843eba99816ea1f14292d&ei=8
I wasnt particularly impressed.
A man with some peculiar views.
That is as far as I am concerned.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brendan_O'Neill_(columnist)
This is about it's level.
1. GL accepts that, while he is carrying out work as a presenter for the BBC, he is not to express political views in his capacity as Presenter
2. The BBC accept that GL can make the occasional joke as presenter, provided it is clear that that is what it is. In addition, the BBC will let GL appear in his personal capacity on political programmes, provided it is clear that he appears purely in a personal capacity
3. It is accepted that GL is allowed to tweet etc in his personal capacity when not carrying out work for the BBC. There are 2 provisos as part of that agreement:-
(a) That all such accounts are clearly marked to show that this is GL giving purely personal opinions, and is in no way providing opinion in any way sanctioned by the BBC, and
(b) That GL is under no circumstances to compare anything to Nazi Germany. GL accepts that it is not only unhelpful, it makes him look like a t1t
Scott Benton MP 🇬🇧🏴 🍊
@ScottBentonMP
·
Follow
👍 Best #MatchOfTheDay episode in years.
⚽️ Had all the goals in
🤫No ‘expert’ analysis
🍺 And finished quicker than usual so I could make the pub for last orders.
What’s not to like 🤷♂️
People tend to have quite polarised opinions on refugees in general, and asylum-seekers in particular. So I started looking at 1 of the few places where opinions should be balanced-the House of Commons Library and Briefing papers. Because these come from an academic standpoint, and are not seeking to make party political points. So-here are 2 recent ones:-
https://commonslibrary.parliament.uk/research-briefings/sn06077/#:~:text=In the year ending June 2022: 1.1 million,migrants moving in and out of the country.
https://commonslibrary.parliament.uk/research-briefings/sn01403/
Some of these facts show the distortion that is taking place. So-for example-over 1.1 million people migrated to this country in the year to June 2022. And 560,000 emigrated from it.
It is only a small minority of our immigrants who are currently asylum seekers. The largest influx comes from people coming here for education (277,000). Then "other"-which includes people from Ukraine/Hong Kong, and family migrants. Then it is work migration. Then there are the large amount of EU Nationals that came here before Brexit-many of those 3.6 million are still here. And let's not forget the large numbers who overstay their Visa, most often education Visas.
It is all very well saying that Asylum seekers are increasing. But they still make up only 18% of migrants to this country. There were 90,000 asylum applications last year. But our net migration was over 500,000 last year.
This Government isn't just persecuting a Minority. It is not just persecuting those fleeing persecution. It is lying about the major causes of net migration, which have little to do with asylum seekers.
Namely that there shouldnt be any.
There is a much larger group, in which I would include myself, that empathise with the plight of asylum seekers, but realise we cant take all of them.
Does anyone really think we can take them all?
Does anyone really think that we continue as we are?
Should we fund the ever increasing hotel bills, currently at £3billion per year?
Continue to employ an increasing number of staff to process the applications, which is currently at 4,000.
Arent there more important things to spend this money on?
Should we be reliant upon the people smugglers in deciding how many asylum seekers arrive?
The French coast is almost impossible to police.
There is 90 miles of it to monitor.
Once the boat reaches the water, they wont intervene.
The French claim to have stopped 30,000 last year.
These 30,000 were just stopped on a particular day, but free to make another attempt the following day, or even later the same day.
We now plan to give them 500 million quid to delay more crossings.
There is a fairly simple solution to immediately stop the small boats, and put the people traffickers out of business.
We also have to open up legal routes, and take in our fair share.
Last year we apparently had 22 arrivals from Afghanistan.
Yet the 15,000 that we promised asylum to, are still there, and seem to have been forgotten about.
Its just another mess.