Thursday, 1 December 2011

What happened to 'free speech'?

Jeremy Clarkson is being pilloried because of his assertion that those public sector workers who took part in the latest 'protest strike' should be 'taken out and shot'. This is a man who makes his living by being outrageous and flouting political correctness. This is a someone who, because of his views, you either love or hate. That he is reported, subsequently, to have apologised does unfortunately lower his 'standing' in my eyes.

James Delingpole (who else?) brilliantly summarises this latest controversy when he writes that it is Clarkson's critics who should be taken out and shot (preceded of course by our politicians who have allowed/instigated/promoted, utilising, naturally, their paid 'social organisers' - Ed.):
".....It should be patently obvious to anyone who is familiar with his style or has seen one of his programmes – ie: everyone in the world – that Clarkson didn't mean it. For one thing, being an informed fellow he would be perfectly aware that the government simply hasn't the money to spend on bullets right now....."
Remember Sarah Kennedy? From the Mail (yes, I know, I know.....):
"She was twice rebuked for racist comments: once, she said black people could run fast because their ancestors were chased by lions. More recently, she said she nearly ran over a black pedestrian because he was invisible in black clothing, until he opened his mouth."
Once any race loses the ability to laugh at itself then it has lost the will to exist - likewise, by allowing itself to be cajoled by those whose entire raison d'etré is purely to stir up dissent whilst 'feathering their own nests'.

To end on a 'polite' non-PC joke:
"When does a cub become a boy scout? When he 'eats' his first Brownie'

11 comments:

Xopher said...

Is it object of the comment that screams and shouts or is far too often some member of the, oh so important, PC brigade?

Wolfers said...

Free speech is vital.

You are free to speak in an approved fashion.

The whole thing is utterly pathetic.

F***W*T TW****R said...

Ditto WfW.

TomTom said...

The BBC should be careful not Clarkson. It censors so many comments that it has a problem. As for Clarkson he was probably drunk, is boorish, and a minor public schoolboy....not much else to be said in exoneration really

PeterMG said...

The first question on question time was about this last night. A few people rebuked Dimbleby for choosing such an irrelevant question at a time when many more serious things needed to discussed. Dimbleby was not happy and I thought rather angrily wanted to drag it out.

You can have too much of Clarkson even if you are a fan. And yes he is a buffoon in real life and totally useless with anything of a mechanical/electronic nature

Anonymous said...

Your last remark about the Cub and the Brownie was unforgivable and outrageous. Brownies everywhere will be in fear of Cubs and the prospect of being devoured. People everywhere will be demanding your trial and summary execution on human rights grounds, and quite right too!Hune and Balls have tabled a motion each. Harperson has had a fit!

Anonymous said...

Anyone that protests about Clarksons idea to shoot strikers should be taken outside and shot.

Anonymous said...

Clarkson - Like Unison only funnier:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1Jh1M2Yvb4I

WitteringsfromWitney said...

X: It is of course the PC brigade, in their various guises, that are the ones who scream and shout about anything they have no permitted!

W: Agreed.

TT:Ah, but amusing all the same....

PMG: Agreed - you can have too much of him, but as I said to TT, in small doses he can be amusing.

Anon(1): Oops, me for the dungeons then?

Anon(2): Most definitely agree!

Anon (3): Thanks for the link.

TGR Worzel said...

I'm not entirely convinced by the argument that Clarkson didn't mean it.

I know somebody else who says things in a jokey way, so he can wriggle out of what he's said if he has to, but I now know that other person well enough to understand that he actually means what he is saying.

Clarkson clearly would not actually go as far as shooting the strikers, but I do have the impression that underneath his loudmouth act, he genuinely doesn't approve of the strikers...

WitteringsfromWitney said...

TGRW: I read a report that he had clearne his comments beforehand with the BBC - and in any event such programmes are 'scripted'. Presenters may not know the actual words guests will use, but they damn well know the general gist.

Which means whether he meant it or not is neither here nor there.