Keep your foot down, Clarkson, there’s a lot riding on this

Jeremy-Clarkson

Contrary to popular belief, I can’t stand Jeremy Clarkson. He epitomises most things I detest: he’s boorish, puerile and frankly, the sort of person who should still be strutting around a 6th form grammar school common room proudly wearing a prefect badge and pretending he was the one who discovered Pink Floyd.

He is, however, a fantastic performer in his chosen field. He brings simple humour, outrage, offence and plain speaking to a public ever more constricted by an elite few who wish to control not just what we can say but what we can think – for their own ends, naturally.

And the public have just given him half a million signatures in less than 24 hours, a new record, to carry on doing all of the above via the Guido Fawkes petition at Change.org. Now either you want to call half a million (now 700,000) of your fellow citizens utter morons who refuse to toe the party line or you can examine a little closer what is actually happening here.

Whether or not Clarkson is your cup of tea, his message is certainly mine. This is a battle between a state broadcaster and a representative of free speech – a long game between the two bitter rivals and you’d better hope that Clarkson wins. If he doesn’t, and ends up fired, the worst that will happen is Netflix or Sky will sign him up and make him even richer and more popular than the BBC ever could or (God willing) he will break the strangle hold of our unelected cabal of humourless, dour and politically correct jizzcandles currently ruling the airwaves via Salford Media City.

Naturally, I’m backing Clarkson. Just as I’ll back anyone who decides not to wear the saddle of conformity, obedience and inoffensiveness. The dream of the BBC is to inflict their Orwellian version of a bland, desperately equal but false society on all of us whilst sitting smugly in their media towers deciding how we should all act, talk and think. Mavericks are ridiculed and silenced, even the ones paying the bills and most definitely the ones making people laugh or think. There is little point in having a State broadcaster if it cannot control the State message and Clarkson’s message of humour and fun does not bode well with social engineers desperate for control over the very proles who are forced to fund it even if they never watch it.

If we lose this battle, it won’t just be tobacco that comes in boring plain wrappers with only the state message stamped on it, it’ll be everything – booze, then fast food, then food, then fashion and every other aspect of our mundane lives that our masters are so desperate to control. We need more Clarksons breaking down the BBC into manageable chunks to be sold off, not less. We need more mavericks happy to answer back, happy to turn their insolent mouths into popular thought and more free thinkers and speakers to fight back against a generation of nay sayers and yoghurt knitting collectivists determined to see us all in androgenous Mao suits slaving over our tax bills.

Keep your foot down Clarkson, it’s a long road we all need to travel.

49 COMMENTS

  1. He got pissed and punched some guy who was just trying to do his job. And you tossers choose to glorify the wanker. More fool you.

  2. Lets hope the arrogant Beeb f*****s sack him and he stands in Eid’s or Harriet Har’manhater’s constituency

  3. Erm… didn’t he punch someone in the face? I understand the need to respect and maintain freedom of speech, but surely violence should be punished…?

  4. From what I understand, he went off on one having returned to a good hotel at 2130, after a full day’s filming to find the person responsible for the programme – the producer – had failed to ensure that the kitchen was still open, or alternative arrangements had been made. At the very least, the enquiry should be into this man’s incompetence, bordering on negligence, and duty of care to his staff, or don’t the BBC consider catering to be part of staff welfare anymore? Huh!

  5. So what other jobs do you get to punch a collegue and not get suspended? Is it just a BBC thing or do other companies have no punching rules. Will you defend me if I do it?

  6. Allegedly he thumped someone while at work, if true this is gross misconduct and the sack whoever you work for. Should he get off because of his celebrity then who can’t he punch, because normal rules clearly wouldn’t apply – why shouldn’t he be allowed to punch you, after all he’s clearly more popular than you are? He reads stuff other people write off an autocue and makes mildly controversialist comments; he’s not Einstein, get another one.

    • Yup – he seems to have made a big mistake. I guess he should have stuck to kiddy fiddling like Savile. That never seemed to bother the bbc’s disciplinary process at all.

    • But he DIDN’T punch anyone, the guy that he had an altercation with has now said a dozen times there was nothing in it , they both got frazzled at the end of a long day, no punches were thrown, he didn’t feel the need to complain and he and Jezza were and are still mates. Its a witch hunt , pure and simple.

      Oh and are you sure you should never punch anyone at work? If I had been working with Saville and he’d tried anything I would have beaten the crap out of him.

  7. Excellent article about the BBC one of the most vile and pernicious organisations around. The insulting part is that we are expected to pay for them.
    Looks like they will have difficulty credibly ignoring a petition heading towards the million mark.
    Oh wait we are talking about the BBC I forgot. This is their next film as it’s ok to be a rapist and necrophiliac but someone who is entertaining and says what he thinks. Hang the bastard.

  8. Maybe Clarkson has smoked out the BBC / Labour / Guardian spy who has been doing the Guardianistas bidding and trying to get Clarkson. Rummaging through the cutting room bin and leaking out-takes and “insider” statements. Someone in the Top Gear organisation has been actively trying to get Clarkson sacked for an age. The left have got to have their crucifixion. ISIS who they worship in their hoped for Jewish extermination are having just waaay too much fun with those uppity Christians. Jezza even has the same initials. Sorted. Lets the champagne bottles be strewn.

    • The leftie capacity for jew-hatred-but-tying-self-into-knots-to-deny-it double think is truly amazing.

  9. Well said, OH! But let me gently remind you that we are being asked to “toe” the line … Clarkson is the one who, when he occasionally gets stuck, has to tow.

  10. Oh come on… “a battle between a state broadcaster and a representative of free speech”? Really? “a representative of free speech”?

  11. 700,000 people condone violence in the workplace. I find this astonishing. Presumably if one of their co-workers punches them over a disagreement about their work, they’ll just laugh it off and insist that the person who punched them goes unpunished.

    • I accuse YOU of punching that producer.

      Now do you understand the difference between a fact and am allegation?

      (HT to a Guido contributor)

      • That’s why he’s been suspended pending an investigation. Because an allegation has been made by someone that was actually there.

        Or should allegations of violence in the workplace by those witnessing it just be dismissed?

        • And you not being there would know exactly what happened. No one has dismissed it and until the facts are made public as Dodgy says it’s just an allegation

        • How do you know that the person who reported it was there? The supposed “victim” denies anything serious or untoward happened.

          This sounds like the bloke who reported John Terry for racism you know the off duty cop who claimed that despite not actually being in the ground and despite actually not being able to lip read reported the footballer for something he said that the victim standing 2 yards away admits he never heard.

        • The trouble is that in too many ‘public sector’ organisations allegations of serious wrong-doing are indeed just dismissed, but minor allegations are taken up with vigour.
          To my mind, all the Clarkson allegations (slope, eenie meanie and now this) have been cooked up by someone with an agenda – someone who was not present, and was not affected by the incidents.
          That is why I signed the petition, and because Guido specifically carried a rider saying ‘subject to detailed allegations or evidence’

    • You know for a fact it was a punch? The reports I’m hearing now is that it wasn’t anywhere near a punch, it was just a bunch of shouting. If you can’t handle someone like Jeremy clarkson getting shouty then you probably shouldn’t work in the entertainment business.

    • Maybe it would help if you bothered to find out what the supposed “victim” had to say about it.

      Oh and all you tossers going on about the evil of punching co-workers presumably if anyone had smacked Saville in the mouth for trying to fiddle with them you’d have started a petition to support Saville?

  12. I too despise Clarkson, mainly for the reasons you outline. But I would absolutely defend his right to say what he wants, even if I find it abhorrent. However that isn’t the issue here – this isn’t about free speech, it’s about an alleged act of violence at work apparently because his dinner wasn’t ready on time. And that’s where – if the allegation is true – Clarkson has given the BBC a gift because they can silence him on their network over an issue that doesn’t land them in the mire of free speech.

    Don’t get me wrong I know that they have been gunning for him for ages because of what he says, but the reality is that pretty much anyone who allegedly assaulted a co-worker would be suspended and, if found to have done it, dismissed from their job.

    • How do we know whether or not the allegation is valid, was the person making the allegation actually there?

      • I would imagine that the internal investigation will answer that question (and the police investigation if it goes in that direction).

  13. Clarkson is a buffoon, but I agree he should carry on. NOT however if he punched somebody without good reason. Free speech doesn’t include the right to un-provoked violence.

      • That’s not completely true. Muggers aren’t generally provoked. But this was an argument between too people that got a little bit too overheated and strayed into pushy-shovey territory – and the push-shover realised this and owned up instantly. And for that he gets fired while the other guy – who could have walked away at any time – doesn’t get a word of criticism. The fact is, people sometimes allow their tempers to get the better of them, but as things go, this was at the very mildest end of the scale. Naturally though, the BBC has jumped on the opportunity to defenestrate Clarkson. It was only a matter of time… if not this, then some other excuse would have been found.

  14. What an utter cockstaple you are, and so is everyone else that signed the petition.

    He’s been suspended amid accusations of punching a producer for not putting food on during filming.

    If ANYONE employed ANYWHERE had engaged in that behaviour they would have been sacked, not suspended pending an investigation.

    So what you’re arguing for is for celebrities that the public like should be free to engage in behaviour that would get anyone else at least sacked, and at worst arrested.

    I’m off to lamp a co-worker who did something that pissed me off, will you be signing my petition to be re-instated too?

    Pathetic.

    • You are so utterly predictable, you faux outraged idiots!
      You know perfectly well the 700,000 people and rising, are fed up with the Al Beeb.The fascist left are already prejudging the internal investigation and cannot wait to hang Clarkson up to dry, Andrew Neil will be next!

    • Oh FFS he’s been suspended on a pretext. It’s a common ploy in large organisations, especially those local authorities or central government, and presumably the BBC as well. If the organisation would be acting illegally by dismissing somebody for the real reason, or would be exposing itself to ridicule or criticism were the real reason published, it can wait until the person is accused of something more tangible (like a punch or theft) rather than more nebulous accusations (like “not recognizing the paramount position of the values, objectives and political stance of the organisation and of Professors of Decision Science and the need for wise stewardship of the safety of children and of the Planet”). If the waiting takes too long, the organisation will eventually resort to re-investigating other “on-file” allegations that had supposedly been “dealt with”, or fabricating historical allegations from suitably primed claimants.

      No private organisation would go to this length to get rid of somebody it didn’t want, especially if the individual makes such a positive input to the balance sheet.

      It’s not about food; it’s not about punching; it’s not about audience figures. It’s about politics.

  15. BBC: “Oh, why can’t you all just surrender to the inevitable and adopt the Sharia Law that we’re so tirelessly promoting? It will make things SO much easier. You’re all horrible ‘phobes.”

      • No, silly! The people doing the throwing of our second-favourite Discriminated Against people aren’t real Muslims! Didn’t you get the memo? They have Nothing To Do With Islam. There is no conflict between the BBC’s love of gay folk and their love of the Religion of Peace. None at all. Nope. No, there isn’t. There isn’t. Shut up.

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here