Bob The Badger

1 hour ago, G STAR RAM said:

You were putting words in my mouth that I never said. Its ok to just hold your hands up and admit you lied.

The holocaust survivor part is irrelevant. 

The fact is that she was not alive during the 1930s, so unless you have evidence to back up that she is a specialist in the area, than her word carries no more weight than anyone else that has read, watched and heard stories about it.

Her family being murdered in the holocaust is irrelevant?

And you think it's just as likely that there are people on this board who know as much about the holocaust as a woman whose family was killed in it?

It's like saying some random dude in America probably knows as much about the Hillsborough disaster as the parents of a kid who died in it.

I guess it's *possible* but it's a preposterous thing to say.

You do have a way of backing yourself into corners.

32 minutes ago, G STAR RAM said:

So I didnt say holocaust survivor, thank you for confirming. 

You were referring to a holocaust survivor. Grow up. 

2 hours ago, G STAR RAM said:

Was just making the point that the evidence of something born 10 years after the evidence being discussed would carry no more weight than someone on the DCFC forum.

here you go @G STAR RAM

I presume you meant someone not something. 

33 minutes ago, G STAR RAM said:

No I didnt put that and go back and edit at all, so really not sure why you put that.

Ive not seen any reasonable comparisons.

Ive not seen the Government blaming economic and social issues on immigrants either, perhaps you could link some articles.

Back to everyone with a different point of view falling for lies about Brexit ? Its boring and been done to death so won't bother responding to that. 

I got it from reading it mate but you're right, you said it in a different comment.

And you find it boring because you fell for the lies about the NHS, the oven ready deals, the better trade deals, the no increases in red tape, and Ireland not being an issue.  

It's best to feign boredom when you've been duped because the alternative is to question you're own way of thinking and belief system and that's really hard.  
 

15 minutes ago, therealhantsram said:

This is nonsense. Anyone can see that the viewing figures were up for the same reason that everyone slows down to rubberneck an accident on the motorway.

I watched for the first time this season to see what it was like.

I lasted until about 2 minutes into the Leicester game before I got utterly bored and went back to watch Wossy.

It was surreal that's for sure and I'm not sure it will catch on.

30 minutes ago, G STAR RAM said:

Not dismissed her, just said her comments carry no more weight than anyone else's opinion who wasn't there to witness it.

Out of interest, how do you know what she has read, watched and heard what the people said? 

For all of the people saying Bravermans language is comparabld with that used in 1930s Germany, nobody has been able to provide any good examples yet...

You actually said that the opinion of a woman who was a holocaust survivor carried no more weight than that of somebody in s DCFC forum, only you went back in and edited it because even you realised how ridiculous you sounded.

How do I know she knows more about it because her family were murdered?

You're right I don't.

I just kind of jumped to the conclusion that somebody who had their family murdered by a genocidal regime would know more about it than the likes of you and me.

And you have had examples of what Braverman said and how the Tories have systematically blamed immigrants for problems that have little or nothing to do with them.

The Tories keep battering the Stop the Boats message because it instils fear and positions those people as the enemy in exactly the same way as Hitler positioned the Jews as the enemy

The Nazis blamed the Jews for the economic and social issues that had nothing to do with them and the Tories are doing the same to illegal immigrants and people are falling for it. I guess they are, largely speaking, the same people that fell for the lies about Brexit.

22 minutes ago, i-Ram said:

Reading this, it seems someone simply has a problem with the word invasion - an incursion by a large number of people or things into a place. I had better be a bit more careful using that word in the future then ? Oh and trafficked and transported. Better avoid those too.  It’s a minefield. Minefield, hang on a minute is that ok? Yeah, I think so. It’s a minefield.
The problem is fast becoming that anyone and everyone now seems to be finding indignation, and wants to point fingers, and label people, on the basis of a single word. Context no longer seems to apply. I am going to withdraw from this thread before I use inappropriate single words. Enjoy it guys, until it is closed.

This entire debate is because of language and Lineker comparing the Government's language to that of Germany in the 30s.

And he was right to do that because there are some very strong similarities.

You're looking at this through the lens of what happened after in Germany. Nobody is saying the Tories are about to march into Poland or commit genocide, but they are using similar language to shift focus.

You should check out Don't think of an Elephant by George Lakoff. You may learn a bit about how language just like that used by Braverman is deliberately used to deflect attention and create fear. 

2 hours ago, G STAR RAM said:

Fair play to an 83 year old who can remember the language used by the Nazis before she was even born.

Think that has firmly put @i-Ramin his place.

Yeah, if only there was some way of knowing what was being said by the Germans, but it's a total mystery.

Love the way you dismiss a holocaust survivor mate because she has only read, watched, and heard what the people who slaughtered her people said and wasn't old enough to have been there in person.

3 minutes ago, ariotofmyown said:

Thread closed.

I saw that on FB earlier and meant to go and look for the video to post here and forgot!

He absolutely ducking nails it.

1 hour ago, i-Ram said:

I respect your opinion. But (I think) you are relatively young.

Irrespective of how disgusting the policy might be (and again that is a personal opinion), Lineker has made a crass comment regarding it, comparing it similar ‘in language’ to 1930’s Germany. Not only is that insensitive to the Jewish community in particular, I think many who lost friends and family in the subsequent war have found it a pretty offensive comparison too. The proposed policy, and even the language used, is nothing like what was fermenting in 1930’s Germany. My opinion, again for what it is worth, is that Lineker should be free to say what he thinks, but not without consequences to his contractual relationship with the BBC, and that on this matter in particular he has been offensive to a great many.

I am still waiting for even one poster on here to give me examples of language being used by politicians over here that are not too dissimilar to that being used by Adolf and his cohorts in the lead up to WW2.

Pay attention mate.

Straight from the mouth of a Holocaust survivor.

I suspect she has more of an inside track on this than you do.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-64282961

11 hours ago, 1of4 said:

Great MOTD tonight, no commentary just crowd noise. Maybe we should also scrap the multi camera coverage and go with a single camera that tracks the flow of play. That will give us that actually being there match experience.  Why not go all in by sticking a microphone randomly somewhere in the ground so we can listen to someone moan about the ref or the failings of their star player not scoring an easy chance.

Pah, why would we want exprofessionals giving their opinions about a game of football. Especially when we all know more about the game than anyone who as played the game at a high level.

I only got half way through the Leicester game and turned it off. 

10 minutes ago, Grumpy Git said:

Starmer is smart enough to know you can’t get elected by being an out and out ‘socialist’. The tabloid press in this country will not let it happen.

Corbyn is a socialist, look where that got us, an 80 seat majority for the most horrible PM to ever draw breath.

Yep. Blair recognised that after Kinnock blew his opportunity. We'll not see a socialist Prime Minister in our lifetime, but we will hear a lot of people bleating about socialism.  

19 minutes ago, cstand said:

When socialism was not obsessed with identity politics.

 

 

I'm not sure you know what identity politics are if you think it's a left wing obsession. 

Socialism is fundamentally the same now as then and Cloughie was left of people like Starmer. 

7 minutes ago, cstand said:

Classic Clough nailed it years ago. This should be played to all the so called pundits over and over again.

 

Good solid socialist, Cloughie was. 

3 minutes ago, Kathcairns said:

Very clever, youve got your opinion and ive got mine . I personally wouldnt class anyone a nazi unless i had proof.

You have proof Lineker didn't call the Government Nazis, but you seem to still believe he did.

15 minutes ago, Kathcairns said:

Same thing to me, it was the nazls that brought in that policy, well before the war started.

But it's not the same thing.

He said 'it is an immeasurably cruel policy directed at the most vulnerable people in' language that is not dissimilar to that used by Germany in the 30s'.

If he had said the Tory Government is the same as the Nazi Government, then that would be the same thing and we could (mostly) all agree that is going too far.

Just saying it's the same thing to you and ignoring the actual facts, doesn't make it the same thing. It's demonstrably not the same thing no matter how hard you wish it were and want it to be because you don't like the guys' political beliefs. 

15 minutes ago, Carl Sagan said:

Lineker wrote "in language not dissimilar to used by Germany in the 1930s". Hitler became Chancellor in 1933, heading up the National Socialists aka Nazis, so the reference by Lineker was a clear allusion to Nazi Germany.

Hitler was a vegetarian, so he was clearly attacking vegetarians too.

36 minutes ago, Kathcairns said:

Why does slotting the equaliser in against germany give him the right to call people that want the boats stopped nazis. He has got the money that it does not make any difference to him, waiting lists, housing ,energy bills.

He didn't call them Nazis. Let's at least try and stick to facts when they are so easy to access.

It's interesting that almost all of his colleagues have come out in support.

<gasp> I wonder if he's well-liked by people who actually know him?

I've been on Twitter for 15 years and only once felt the need to block somebody.

There's no need because I never see people in my feed who I don't like more than very occasionally. And when they do pop up if I don't interact with them, or with commenters in their thread, Twitter doesn't keep showing me their stuff.

Spooky how that works.

People blocking celebs are usually trying to make a grand (empty) gesture. Nobody cares.

5 minutes ago, Bald Eagle&#x27;s Barmy Army said:

Yea but who cares what Gary has said? Really? 
 

He comes across as a decent guy, great presenter and a very likeable individual. 
 

It’s just another case of harassment. 

I don't know Lineker, but that's my impression too.

I don't remember reading anything bad about Lineker from people who have met the guy in a social setting. But hey, I don't know him.

I 100% get people not liking his presenting style and I also get people not liking him for his political views, but this is now a full-on character attack by many people.

There are far too many people pretending it's not their prior antipathy toward the guy that is driving their responses now.

The BBC should act accordingly and appropriately within the terms of his contract and everybody else should just get on with their lives.

Except for me that is. I'm sticking around because somebody has to stick around to tell people they shouldn't be sticking around.

44 minutes ago, 86 Hair Islands said:

, nor do I really believe that you are sat in your armchair seething!

Neither do I.

I think he's seething and posting far too much to actually sit down in an armchair.

If there was an Olympic medal for seething and seething-related activities we'd all be cheering G Star on in Paris next year on his way to a certain gold. 

10 hours ago, G STAR RAM said:

All 2 of them for about 6 months, please don't tell me you fell for that publicity stunt

If it was 3, you'd have said, only 3, with his money?

If he'd done it anonymously and it got out you'd said he leaked it.

I have no idea if it was a publicity stunt and neither do you, so to suggest people are gullible to think that is baffling. 

But having said that, for a man who is the highest-paid presenter on BBC TV, widely liked and admired and a multi-millionaire, I have no clue why he would need that kind of publicity. It seems a very weird thing to do. He could have just written a cheque and got the same amount of publicity and not had his life disturbed.

You have to have a pretty entrenched cynical agenda to call accepting immigrants into your home for 6 months a publicity stunt.

If he'd put a tent up and had a party for an afternoon and invited the press and TV around, then yeah, maybe. Taking people into your home for 6 months seems to me like he actually wants to help people less fortunate than himself.

What a radical idea eh?

11 minutes ago, Tyler Durden said:

He's employed by the BBC as he is desperately trying to currently prove with his case with HMRC. Your handyman or whatever isn't .

Quite ironic really that Lineker is trying to fall over himself to prove to HMRC that he is employed by the BBC to save himself millions  of pounds of tax liabilities on one hand but then doesn't think he then likewise has to fit in with his employers standards.

Ergo. 

Yeh but Your Honour  you said if money has been exchanged then ergo there's an employment contract in place.

Are you now saying that me giving Malcolm 50 quid to wire a plug may not be an entirely watertight legal definition of a contract of employment?

If so, could he be dissing Ant and Dec in the pub as I type and I've no legal recourse to get my 50 quid back for bringing me into disrepute?

I'm bummed and Mrs Badger will be furious. 

49 minutes ago, RoyMac5 said:

 

Nailed it. 

47 minutes ago, cstand said:

 

No unless he signed a legally binding contract with you.

But @Tyler Durden QC said if he's taken money then ergo there's an employment contract in place. 

I'm starting to think you guys may not be the experts I was lead to believe. Ergo I feel silly now.