The guidelines regarding sports presenters expressing opinions on public social media are vague.It has probably already been said but surely the fact that Lineker tweeted about Corbyn in 2017 and now Braverman, is the very definition of impartiality; ie treating everyone equally.
It's almost as if Auntie is breaking her own treaty by it's actions.
Because he condemns racism while indulging in casual anti-semitism by minimising the evil of the Nazi regime and holocaust. Andrew Bridgen was suspended from the Conservative Party for the same thing recently.
Because it is my human right to be angry if I want to be.... surely your're not going to deprive me of that are you?
He minimised it by comparing the description of some limited measures to stop illegal migration into a country with one of the worst crimes in human history. The two aren’t comparable and to imply they are equivalent is to minimise one and exaggerate the other.
Yes, he said the language in the 1930s, not the actual holocaust, but the implication was clear. After all, the nazis aren’t regarded as one of the most evil regimes in history because of their language in the early part of their reign. It was clear the line of argument he was making was to equate the current actions of the government with those of Nazi germany. That is an absolutely risible comparison that is offensive and beyond contempt.
LolSeen quite a few of the older, miserable sort across the internet pretending the show was better last night.
Why the fuck would anyone wait around until 22:30 to watch some brief highlights? They're on YouTube about 15 mins after full time.
In fact, why are you staying up until then to watch MOTD any other week if you find the presenters so insufferable?
It’s not an unremarkable immigration policy in 2023 that is being compared. It’s a disgraceful policy that criminalises asylum seekers for being asylum seekers. You’re the one trying to minimise the contemptibility of this government proposal.Well, I believe he did. I would add i don’t think his comments were worthy of any particular censure. People are allowed, still, to be offensive now and then. But his comments did serve to minimise the evils of Nazi germany by comparing it to an unremarkable immigration policy in 2023.
No, I don’t think so. Minimisation of the evils of the holocaust is a standard antisemitic trope. As with Andrew Bridgen this kind of false equivalence is often widely condemned.Guy suggests language used by a political party is similar to early 1930's propaganda, criticizes them for it, and he's an anti-semite?
Think you've got your wires crossed mate.
You missed the "City barely stay in title race" then? And yes, that is real."City escape with victory" and "reactions as City barely beat Crystal Palace" were the first two things I saw. Is it the same old anti City rhetoric every week on there too ?
The analogy Lineker drew is sound, for the reasons you to which you point. Anyone who makes a leap from that to concentration camps is simply looking for reasons to dislike what he has said. It’s irrational and therefore best ignored.
Gary Lineker did not minimise the evils of the holocaust. He didn’t even mention the holocaust.No, I don’t think so. Minimisation of the evils of the holocaust is a standard antisemitic trope. As with Andrew Bridgen this kind of false equivalence is often widely condemned.