You are here: Home > Message Board > News & Politics > BBC (again)
June 3 2024 4.41pm

BBC (again)

Previous Topic | Next Topic


Page 205 of 414 < 201 202 203 204 205 206 207 208 209 >

 

View inflikted's Profile inflikted Flag 11 Mar 23 3.05pm Send a Private Message to inflikted Add inflikted as a friend

Originally posted by Hrolf The Ganger

Do you need a hug?

Nah just the tories to f*** off out of the government and out of the BBC. Snowflakes who can't handle the slightest bit of criticism.

 


Milkshakes Against Fascism

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
View inflikted's Profile inflikted Flag 11 Mar 23 3.09pm Send a Private Message to inflikted Add inflikted as a friend

Originally posted by Hrolf The Ganger
His kind cannot be allowed to influence the young and gullible.

If your children are that young and impressionable and you're letting them on twitter unsupervised, that's just bad parenting

Edited by inflikted (11 Mar 2023 3.09pm)

 


Milkshakes Against Fascism

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
View Dubai Eagle's Profile Dubai Eagle Flag 11 Mar 23 3.10pm Send a Private Message to Dubai Eagle Add Dubai Eagle as a friend

I would imagine the first round of people getting fired will be the middle aged guys on the most money, once that is done the bbc can focus on getting rid of those remaining that seem to be causing the most trouble - the time gap will give those that don't earn so much to consider what they really want, a job or short lived publicity for biting the hand that feeds them.

Originally posted by Spiderman

I think this is what they will do. Perhaps it was their intention all along and were just waiting for an excuse

 

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
View fishbone's Profile fishbone Flag London 11 Mar 23 3.13pm Send a Private Message to fishbone Add fishbone as a friend

Originally posted by Dubai Eagle

I would imagine the first round of people getting fired will be the middle aged guys on the most money, once that is done the bbc can focus on getting rid of those remaining that seem to be causing the most trouble - the time gap will give those that don't earn so much to consider what they really want, a job or short lived publicity for biting the hand that feeds them.


Funny, that’s exactly what they done in Germany in the 1930s.
How strange!

 

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
View fishbone's Profile fishbone Flag London 11 Mar 23 3.17pm Send a Private Message to fishbone Add fishbone as a friend

Originally posted by inflikted

Nah just the tories to f*** off out of the government and out of the BBC. Snowflakes who can't handle the slightest bit of criticism.[/quote

Well said!

 

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
View Wisbech Eagle's Profile Wisbech Eagle Online Flag Truro Cornwall 11 Mar 23 3.33pm Send a Private Message to Wisbech Eagle Add Wisbech Eagle as a friend

Originally posted by Badger11

I hadn't seen that article but I do remember this one.

[Link]

Surprised you use the Guardian as a source! I thought they were a bigger devil than even the BBC. So you choose what is most accurate. An article in the Guardian in November 21 or verbatim statements directly from the BBC in June 22. He wasn't sacked before the Ashes. He wasn't included in the team and that's what the BBC said at the time.

This though is all whataboutery. What's your reaction to my other comments?

 


For the avoidance of doubt any comments in response to a previous post are directed to its ideas and not at any, or all, posters personally.

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
View fishbone's Profile fishbone Flag London 11 Mar 23 3.36pm Send a Private Message to fishbone Add fishbone as a friend

Originally posted by Wisbech Eagle

Surprised you use the Guardian as a source! I thought they were a bigger devil than even the BBC. So you choose what is most accurate. An article in the Guardian in November 21 or verbatim statements directly from the BBC in June 22. He wasn't sacked before the Ashes. He wasn't included in the team and that's what the BBC said at the time.

This though is all whataboutery. What's your reaction to my other comments?

Yeah! He should have read the sun or the daily mail innit!!

 

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
View Wisbech Eagle's Profile Wisbech Eagle Online Flag Truro Cornwall 11 Mar 23 4.00pm Send a Private Message to Wisbech Eagle Add Wisbech Eagle as a friend

Originally posted by Hrolf The Ganger

Aside from anything else, it is absolute insanity when a group of celebrities is promoting the idea that we can just have unlimited immigration into this country, especially when an ever growing number are arriving here illegally.

This is a country with finite resources and space, which has an existing population that should be the primary concern of any government.
The insane, blind ideological lunacy the likes of Lineker spout is simply devoid of any foresight or intelligence.

His kind cannot be allowed to influence the young and gullible.

You have a history of posting inane comments, but this one takes you to a new low.

This has nothing at all to do with any "group of celebrities promoting the idea that we can just have unlimited immigration into this country".

Firstly because no-one actually believes that. More importantly, even they did, it's not about that.

This is about whether BBC employees, or contractors, have the right to express their opinions in their own time, on matters outside their area of responsibility. Whether you, I, Suella Braverman, Nigel Farage or Uncle Tom Cobley agree with their sentiments is irrelevant. One day someone will say things we do agree with and we cannot be selective. It's either OK, or it isn't.

Your last sentence is truly mind-blowing. Who do you think ought to be allowed to influence the young and gullible? Farage? Yaxley-Lennon? Enoch Powell? Alf Garnett?

 


For the avoidance of doubt any comments in response to a previous post are directed to its ideas and not at any, or all, posters personally.

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
View PalazioVecchio's Profile PalazioVecchio Flag south pole 11 Mar 23 4.20pm Send a Private Message to PalazioVecchio Add PalazioVecchio as a friend

Originally posted by Wisbech Eagle


Who do you think ought to be allowed to influence the young and gullible? Farage? Yaxley-Lennon? Enoch Powell? Alf Garnett?

Garnett was a caricature written by a leftie.

The other 3 are no more toxic than Linekar. But more respectful of democracy than Marxist Gary.

 


Kayla did Anfield & Old Trafford

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
View georgenorman's Profile georgenorman Flag 11 Mar 23 4.21pm Send a Private Message to georgenorman Add georgenorman as a friend

The solution to all this is for the BBC to become a self-funding organisation not subject to any sort of 'charter'. It would then be free to tell its presenters what they can and can't do and the presenters could choose whether to work for them or not. Such a BBC should also rebrand and change its name.

 

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
View inflikted's Profile inflikted Flag 11 Mar 23 4.24pm Send a Private Message to inflikted Add inflikted as a friend

Originally posted by PalazioVecchio

Garnett was a caricature written by a leftie.

The other 3 are no more toxic than Linekar. But more respectful of democracy than Marxist Gary.

Yaxley-Lennon is a bona fide fascist. Lineker is a moderate Liberal at best.

 


Milkshakes Against Fascism

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
View georgenorman's Profile georgenorman Flag 11 Mar 23 4.28pm Send a Private Message to georgenorman Add georgenorman as a friend

Originally posted by Wisbech Eagle

You have a history of posting inane comments, but this one takes you to a new low.

This has nothing at all to do with any "group of celebrities promoting the idea that we can just have unlimited immigration into this country".

Firstly because no-one actually believes that. More importantly, even they did, it's not about that.

This is about whether BBC employees, or contractors, have the right to express their opinions in their own time, on matters outside their area of responsibility. Whether you, I, Suella Braverman, Nigel Farage or Uncle Tom Cobley agree with their sentiments is irrelevant. One day someone will say things we do agree with and we cannot be selective. It's either OK, or it isn't.

Your last sentence is truly mind-blowing. Who do you think ought to be allowed to influence the young and gullible? Farage? Yaxley-Lennon? Enoch Powell? Alf Garnett?

What are your objections to unlimited immigration?

 

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply

 

Page 205 of 414 < 201 202 203 204 205 206 207 208 209 >

Previous Topic | Next Topic

You are here: Home > Message Board > News & Politics > BBC (again)