Visit of U.S. President
 

Thankfully, the commemorations of the D-Day landings will overshadow this thugs visit to the United Kingdom and he'll be out of the way for the Trooping of the Colour - now someone may deem this political and close the thread.

As with most of us his origins both betray and dictate his manner, or lack thereof, and to an extent his methods.

He is entirely a product of the business world where he gained influence on the back of great wealth and was not subject to the need to bring subordinates along with him through careful management.

Although that may be his biggest failing it isn't really his fault. In his world patient diplomacy is seen as weakness and take-it-or-leave-it attitudes as a reasonable negotiating tool.

He chimes with a lot of his countrymen who are steeped in a philosophy similar to his own - what counts is winning and at any cost - provided you have the financial back-up.

His domestic record is enviable. No matter what you think of the man he is achieving what so many before have not. His many critics have valid reasons but in the real word of the snake pit you need focus.

To us, the result is more how you get there than the getting there. Maybe, to some extent, exposure to a gentler approach like ours will rub a few corners off. Hopefully.

A state visit by any POTUS is an occasion which I think should be welcomed and treated with due respect. It is an opportunity for the UK to rise above the politics as has been done with state visits afforded to previous and some might say far more controversial figures. The images will be projected around the world and people will expect to see what we can do best on these occasions. :}

Whether we love him or loathe him, he is where he is because of a democratic process.

He is the President of the US and therefore arguably the most powerful person on earth.

Andy.

:smilie_re:

Look at our own Representatives, can't get a job done between them.

Before we cast aspersions at others. :D

Kev.

I sincerely hope your right Steve, but what little chance is there of that happening when JC, leader of the opposition is planning to speak and join in on the march tomorrow against Trump, as is his right to free speech. Yes the images are being seen around the world, even here in Kenya, it’s a media bonanza and how they love it if there is anything acrimonious to report. The upside is that the news is not about the B word ;)

Yep, the Russians democratically voted him in :D

The sooner the sexist, racist bigot is back on airforce 1 heading home the better.

At least ours don't want to build a wall to stop the Scots or the Welsh getting in!

Not my favorite person but I agree with Darcydogs last sentence.

this respect has to go both ways though, I am not sure he even could spell it, never mind understand what it means. (I can't help but think if he read that, he would challenge me to an IQ test :p:). It is all me me me, the US the US, but it is me first. If you go to another country, you should respect their cultures and traditions, and if you cant or dont want to, then accept that they exist. He needs someone to walk behind him saying 'you are only a man, only a man'


I do not understand how the American democratic process works. I may have misunderstood it (and probably have) but the majority vote doesnt always win or even count, but 'college votes' are what counts? :shrug:

I have always said that a businessman (or woman), preferably self made, should run a country, with an accountant running the exchequer. And I believe my theory is proving correct, however, Trump sadly doesnt have the diplomacy to do it as effectively as he could. Nor I believe has he the empathy to delegate effectively (he has been too coddled with yes men and has only seen the poor from driving past or collecting rents with his father). Perhaps he has delegated too much in the past that he is so far removed from the nitty gritty he doesnt understand why things dont happen or go his way (back to the yes men and coddling).

He is right I believe in shutting down everything (the federal govt, the borders trade, etc) and regrouping, then saying 'right, this is how it will be done......' (I know he shut down the govt more of a punishment and a show of strength, which is where the lack of diplomacy comes in).

But it is the cost of the visit that bothers me, as well as how the local infrastructure gets affected by it all. I was stuck on the motorway one evening with G Dubya's entourage having the opposite direction lanes to themselves, blasting down at 100+mph, the wrong way. The other direction had been stopped and diverted for over an hour! All at rush hour! He landed using marine one, and was driven back!

Previously a secret service agent trying to stop me from stopping my van when Clinton (at the time of the peace accord!) was due in four hours. 'You cannot park there, sir!' 'Hey look at that, I managed it!' went in and dropped off the repair and back out with him grumbling on his mic. Reading in the reg of the van lol. I wasnt planning on stopping, as even on a normal day you werent supposed to park there lol.

the problem with Trump though, he wont let you have the ball, and when he cant get it back, he will storm off the pitch.

And the best protest sign today (I have edited it for the forum)

:bowdown:

Us Brits sure do put on a good show, that state banquet looked super impressive. :chat:

There's nowt like a bit of subtlety :D:D

Written in words that Trump can understand.

I think this one is :p:

(Edited on my phone, I hope it has worked, if not, I hear Guantanamo is nice this time of year)

Sent from my SM-A600FN using Tapatalk
https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/201...b268b26b81.jpg

But at what cost, not to those outside the US (as that is the part I agree with - sort out yourself first). He is only in place for a short period of time, and he will do what he feels is good for his business interests first and what he thinks will make him shine in history, but it is history that will judge him.

It wouldn't be the first time if they did. :p: :getmecoat:

I’m no fan of the man, but what really is the point of this type of protest? What is it going to change, in reality?

It’s not like it’s the King saying "who will rid me of this accursed priest", is it?

The devil in me would like to see JC or VC, as PM, having to meet DT as President, after their very publicly snubbing him.....

I'm afraid that just serves to illustrate the banal irrelevance of the anti-Trump bandwagon. It is also typical of the internet shouters and ranters without a brain between them. Dissent is not only fine, it's also admirable and to be welcomed. But some people, most of them with sadly disappointing lives consisting of precisely no achievement worth mentioning, are the ones who have to shout the loudest to get attention. Sad.

Some people use all manner of media to make noise. Even twitter.

But the whole poli… spectrum has it own idiots! We seem to give loudmouths an open mic to lambast anything they either think will make them heroes or promote their twisted little lives.

Personally, I wouldn't give any consideration to premature blandishments from senior people in his position unless there was a pen in his hand hovering over the contract. But I would treat him with normal courtesy and respect befitting his position. We seem to be losing the ability to be nice to people but, thankfully, his meeting with the Queen will demonstrate there is still some civility in this land. Anything else is commercial suicide - that's how he operates so successfully.

We don't have to like him to do business with him. Those that think otherwise don't run businesses.

From what I understand it's not up to him, he can express an opinion on such matters but it's up to the two house to agree on trade deals. With a 2/3 majority I think.

Maybe the name of it gives the game away. I wouldn't know, never having visited it.

If Nicola Sturgeon gets her way it'll be her building it!

Our lot, could not build a back step !! Or a back stop. :D:D

Kev.

Oh it's a mixed bag of people on there. Some tremendous and some not so.

Point taken. Although a lot of the reportage from it that reaches other outlets is invariably offensive, rude in the extreme, or dripping with sarcasm. Sometimes freedom of speech needs careful forethought.

From what I've seen, admittedly minimal, is an initial attack from a self- important demagogue posing as a man-of-the-people which draws a reply in a similar vein from its intended target, and leading to uncontrollable conflict. Thankfully, not on here. Maybe they need controls similar to ours.

I see that the review of the troops at the palace was conducted at a pace which seemed to leave Charles chasing the field somewhat lol. His face displayed a bit of humour though which I suppose you could expect of someone who was raised on the likes of Sellers, Milligan and Seacombe et al.

:smilie_re: Derek (Windrush) I think would have been fairly pleased at the choice of music which the band played as it included Soldiers Of The Queen - a constituent part of his old regimental march following its amalgamation with another. As for The Halls Of Montezuma, well I had a vision of Charles waving from them to the presenting officer and Donald Trump as they stood in Tripoli. :eek: :getmecoat:

Both pass comment on things not in their power to give, some can't help themselves in doing so.

I hope DT and his supporters don't see the writing on the poster on the left Andy - otherwise they will be well pleased that people think so highly of him! :D

Yep - trade agreements are designed/refined by large populations of technocrats over years before they are ready for "signing" by the heads of state. A trade agreement between the US and the UK will be no different.

Where a head of state does have executive powers is to prevent progress being made in trade negotiations "in the national interest".

DT's approach to negotiations thus far seems to to me to have been a case seeking highly advantageous position for US interests and therefore not very successful in concluding such negotations.

Here is an interesting and in my view balanced perspective form the US side.

https://edition.cnn.com/2019/06/04/b...ump/index.html

American Ambassador, on BBC Marr (Sunday) claiming again that US/UK Trade Deal would need to include food, including US Chlorinated Chicken and Hormone injected beef.

Donald Trump at official Press Conference today says that as far as US is concerned the NHS *is* on the table in any trade deal: “The NHS and everything else”.

So much for ‘taking back control’ !
Now we know what ‘America First’ will mean.

Did he say whether we will have anything left under our ownership once the "trade deal" is signed? :shrug:

Should by any chance trade negotiations start, the very first item on the agenda should be the USA repaying the unpaid debt of £12.6 million congestion charges outstanding - that's just in London.

It's a two way street with the only obstruction being a matter of Law. Once that's out of the way all the lights change to Green. In his currently good mood he'll be pleased to hear that. It's odd that no legal charges have ever been made for recovery, I wonder who keeps allowing it. Are there similar policies in NY? Negotiator, Schmegotiator.

Bad show Stevie. Determined to do it weren't you? Did that as children playing table tennis - upset the table to stop.

I just wonder what sanctions he will impose on the U.K. if we don't agree with his trade deals. As he does with other countries who stand up to him.:shrug:
See post 40.
Just to add, i think Trump is looking to start World War 3,not with bombs and bullets,but a financial war.

This actually highlights the problem facing us - that the country is divided, the population polarised, and will remain so because at least 50% of the population believe that the country has been misled during recent times to secure certain outcomes. There is a strong argument for going back to the country so that the populaion has the opportunity to reinforce their positions now that that there is more clarity, the consequences of which will impact them for tens of years.

I refer of course to the justification for inviting DT for a state visit. ;)

If I was in JC's position, I would have gone to the state banquet and raised a glass to offer a toast to a great statesman and American - the late John McCain. :}

Good and relevant point if I may say. But....consider the extensive presence of existing commercial and military US interests already here. This is a whip with two handles and nobody wants to let go.

Given the backbone, it should be resolved a lot easier than the last time anybody got into negotiations with a trading partner. I'd volunteer a year just for the fun of it. A suitable mindset is all that is required and Mr. Trump is definitely not a salesman, he can only try to dictate and that means he's not as cute as he thinks he is.

Or as long standing. At the back of my mind I had the following reminder waiting to see light of day:

Life is but a walking shadow, a poor player
That struts and frets his hour upon the stage
And then is heard no more: it is a tale
Told by an idiot, full of sound and fury,
Signifying nothing.

Macbeth, but so Trump.

Thou art forgiven thy trespass on sacred ground.

I once too, I said once and once only, fell foul of the same Damoclean fate. I mentioned, entirely within proper context, the horticultural term for a square of turf beginning with an ‘s’, followed by an ‘o’ and finishing with a ‘d’. The ‘post’ button resulted in two lines of upper case reprimand which provoked streams of invective. Sotto voce, of course.

Many a great day spent at Salisbury Racecourse DD, most certainly a sport to enjoy with a flutter. :D

The British monarch has quite the royal stable of winning thoroughbreds don't you know. :D ;)

My father is friends with Dessie's trainer David Elsworth, I've met him a few times now, nice bloke.

We've spent many an hour watching the lads and lasses with the horses up on the gallops at Whitsbury, I even have a photo of me as a young lad stood with Dessie. ;)

Im amazed this lot of "opinions" some offensive others insulting has escaped the moderators crayon. Brexit Brexit Brexit Brexit Brexit and long live the Blessed Nigel. Chris.S.

Please, desist from your repeated disparaging and thinly disguised insults to members on here. If you take exception to the views of others it would be the gentlemanly thing either to address them personally by PM or refrain from calling their contributions to an informative and progressive thread a load of BS.

We all know what that stands for and that in itself is purely avoidance of the censor filter so is a rule breaker. You would also know as you type it it is likely to be offensive and more likely to arouse a similar response. Again, a rule breaker.

Instead you have met with polite ignorance or well mannered return. Your rule-breaking is intentional. Do yourself a favour - adopt a more conciliatory mood or do the other thing!

We are constantly monitoring this thread. Should the insults and name calling start to get really personal, then it will get closed. Just keep to the topic and play nicely.

It is interesting that you take offence from a general statement that is far milder than those we often see on the forum. This is your right of course.

But, telling another poster what he should do is beyond the reasonable. Particularly, as you often appear to be supporting those who go on personal attacks when others have a different viewpoint to theirs. That again is your right, but does not win you my respect.

I have a great deal of respect for the majority of members and this shows in in my exchanges with the majority. But, respect can be lost, and a few have achieved this. This is a natural dynamic on a forum such as this, do you not think?

Perhaps you could resolve a point of intrigue for me please Wraymond. Did you assume that my post the subject of your comment was aimed at yourself?

If so, why did you assume that?

Excellent! :bowdown:

The state visit all seemed to go quite well, well planned and all went like clockwork. Donald conducted himself impeccably, seemed to be much laughter with the Queen, Charles and May. I see many of the Body language experts are jumping on the bandwagon giving their views on what they thought was going on, quite funny really, but that's media for you. :duh:

Not sure it was a good idea JC boycotted the state banquet, Trump has him all summed up it seems, and I see Farage and Boris gets the thumbs up. ;)

TBH, who doesn't want a trade deal with the US after the UK leaves the European Union? and its pretty much safe to say the NHS isn't on the table.

All you Trump haters :shrug: you're a thing of the past... :D ;)

If you ever visit Normandy the American Cemetery at Coleville is a must do visit. Immaculately maintained and a very moving place to pay your respects. The British ones at Bayeux and Ranville also worth a visit. The German one at La Cambe is much more sombre but it is nonetheless is a place of rest for many who died whatever side they were on.

This just popped up on my Facebook. Trump is clueless. I am wondering if his advisers are too or has he simply forgotten what he was told.

https://m.facebook.com/story.php?sto...&id=6622931938

Sent from my SM-A600FN using Tapatalk

I bet he thinks of it as something like the IRS .....

Sent from my SM-A600FN using Tapatalk

Irrelevant.

What people are failing to realise is in the next GE there will be at LEAST 4 parties splitting the remain vote, with leavers only really having to vote for just one (UKIP aren't much of a force anymore)

Which means they'll continue to do badly.

Didn't see that interview but did see Morgan on Question Time. Don't tell anyone, I'd hate to get called out as a fan of Morgan, but have to say he was an absolute star. Easily the best on the panel. By best I mean frank, forthright, measured and non-deflecting.

In the interests of balance, the rest of the programme was as predictable as ever with Madame the Chair intervening on her own behalf and panellists too erring on the self obsessed.

On the other hand the This Week that followed was full of school boy fun. Thank Andrew for the levity as usual. We even gratefully received two words which were at best unexpected.

The first, in a reference to the split of Change UK which described their recent, some might say happy upheaval, was a ClusterChuka. I kid you not.

The second, forgive me for skipping the context - there are lawyers everywhere - was Rohypnol. First time ever I've heard that word on a show of this type. I hope it doesn't fall foul of our profanity censor. I'm still laughing.

And, I must say, commendations to our mods for their forbearance and unending, I hope, patience in allowing adult (in the general sense) progress on this excellent thread.

I rarely watch QT. Didn't last night but I am always impressed by those who do not hail from Westminster. No sound bit nonesense just genuine opinions etc. Refreshing change

Nice bit of detail, mobile in hand. I'm surprised there isn't a cake of that balloon, I wonder what flavour it would be?

Trump Gateau.

A large squirt of bluster, a sprinkle of acidic spice, a spoonful of false pepper, and a burst of aromatic lacquer. Plenty of lard.

Stirred with a greedy spoon and left on a low burner for quite a long time until the edges turn orange.

Do not pierce with a sharp object, embarrassing noises are likely to disappoint. Indigestion may follow if swallowed.

If so, seek immediate medical advice. Preferably NHS. Free. Currently – that’s not an ingredient of the cake.

A general comment and I must be careful not to incite so that the thread is immediately closed. I watched it this evening on “catchup” on the internet using a VPN. It was most telling when Fiona Bruce asked the audience to raise their hands if any of them were conservatives. Only 3 hands went up. Of the 3, one spoke up to tell how ashamed the conservatives should be for the mess they had created around Brexit. He had some looks of disapproval, but no one shouted him down. Surely there must have been more than 3 conservatives in the audience.....;)

Watched an old episode of Foyle's War last night. It was based on time at the end of the war.
Couple of things i picked up on.
American business man saying to Foyle. " Germany going to war was inevitable if you bankrupt a country,it will in time fight back."
American business man to British business man," I will be having a meeting with the Shah of Iran next week,to get him to allow you to get control of his oil fields,we must do all we can together to keep Stalin away from Iran's oil."
I know it's only a television (play),but 75 yrs later nothing has changed.:mad:

Not forgetting that prior to Word War 2, in the 1920s and 30s, the USA was plotting war against Great Britain under "War Plan Red".
Although jealous of the British Empire, they decided to join us when Hitler became a bigger threat to world power.

Personally I couldn't care less about Donald Trump. Not a man I would want to meet, but there again there are a lot of people I'm not bothered about meeting.

On the bright side he never invited me to meet him whilst he was here so I didn't have to make a decision about it:D.

Do I like the use of the balloons and blimps ridiculing people - no. I think it's demeaning. Not only for the target but also for the user. In fact any argument or debate that has to resort to making fun of individuals looks, appearance or indeed beliefs would suggest that they have ran out of coherent argument and have now resorted to school playground tactics.

IMHO those who flew the balloon are as bad as those who made up and use the meme comparing the blimp to the blonde woman.

Just my opinion :shrug:

A large part of the problems with bandwagon behaviour is the growth of inflated language and most terms of vocal abuse. It spreads like wildfire when the culprits lack any personal ideas and rely on the impetus from social media sources for their education. Words that once were factual definitions of particular movements, worthy and less so, that degenerated into disrepute become devalued and adopted by petty revolutionaries.

Take the word that gobby woman in the news seems so fond of, the 'F' word, Fascist. She uses it as a foul swearword designed to enrage and to provoke a violent reaction.

The word means the crushing of opposition by secret police through civil militia. She apparently fails to recognise her freedom to demonstrate her views in violent manner by using the term in the attempted crushing of dissent in the presence of substantial numbers of Police! The very thing to which she ignorantly and violently objects!

Some of these ignoramuses actually seek public office. Heaven help us. I sometimes wish they would remember you don't quench a fire with more heat. You need calm water.

There are always idiots and they are in every walk of life. 'Nazi' is becoming more and more the term of abuse by those who are unbelievably fortunate not to be able to remember how and why the word was relevant. Maybe it's a good thing they do not remember so can look forward to the better future so many of their countrymen died for.

I have to say they have grown up in many countries as the blessed generation, blessed in many ways but now unaware of their own history and as a result will be unable to recognise the incremental steps towards repetition by other means. Incredibly current.

"The worst facists are the anti-facists"

Somebody said that once.

In the interests of balance, I wonder if there is a term for anti-fascist that has a positive connotation rather than the pejorative 'anti'.

I'm sure they see themselves as kind and gentle people of sweet nature and impeccable manners, as having a liking for the Lords Byron and Tennyson and William Wordsworth and the like. 'Anti' is nowadays always used to put a bad colour on something and way beyond the opposite equivalent of 'pro'.

Well it wasn't my son, who lives in Berlin and has gone on many (peaceful) anti-Fascist marches. He's also taken out German citizenship because he saw clearer than I that the referendum would mean leaving and turning our backs on Europe.

Pacifist, liberal,

Then maybe anti-pacifists lol

Sent from my SM-A600FN using Tapatalk

Totally agree, incitement to violence, joking or not, she shouldn't have said what she did. :shrug:

I really don't understand how the BBC can keep up their appearances with acts such as this, it would seem someone has hit the self-destruct button me thinks. :duh:

Her foul output is seen as comedy. Until of course the subject becomes fatist or sizeist or laddish or any other trumped up target. Then she complains the loudest.

What we get is so called comedy where laughs are obtained by the desperate from the also-ran wannabes who dare not have a voice of their own.

When someone objects to her language or target, and in her own manner and idiom or fails to laugh like a drain, they are called anti-feminist or misogynist. Then jumped on by the hordes of illiterates that abound on social media. Not that there is much that is socialist there. That's with a small 's' by the way.

Just seen an interview with a USA news journalist and N. Farage and he is calling for police action alleging Incitement. There seems little chance of success even though the subject Brand was discussing was milk shakes being thrown at politicians. Imagine the fuss if N.F. suggested similar action against, say, L. Kuenssberg. Maybe they are trying too hard to formulate a TV licence policy.

Just wondering. What source would you suggest for a completely unbiased reporting of news items?
Since the independence referendum I have perceived the BBC to be very biased against Scotland in their national news service so have discounted them as credible a number of years ago

That's good to hear, I don't understand why such comments would get broadcast... :duh:

Jo brand's comments had passed me by.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-48611424

it's something she probably regrets but it's not something I'd get foaming at the mouth about. Comedians have been pushing boundaries for years and in doing so inevitably offend people.

From a Morning Star point of view they always seem a bit right of centre. Interesting to hear you feel the BBC is London centric. From what I can see it seems to cover England very well but seems to ignore the Welsh, Northern Irish and Scottish nations.
All a matter of perspective I suppose.

We in East Anglia have always felt the BBC to be biased towards the North, South and West of England as well as Scotland, Wales (or Whales if you believe the PROTUS :}) and NI. ;):}

Ofcom are investigating the bias of the BBC. My own view is that the TV license should be scrapped and the BBC should cope in finding the funds by other means. The very least, pensioners should get the license free and those at the BBC who betrayed the pensioners, should own up to their mistakes and take the fall. Sack the liberal biased ones, they can go first :D

Sorry Maninder to stray from the main topic ....the visit of the U.S President.

I get my views modulated by subscribing to the Spectator. There are two or three Scottish contributors along with several controversial writers of varied loyalties and (in my opinion at least) one or two excellent well balanced articles on several subjects.

There are also niche humorous articles and eminently respectable writers of note. No chance of Ms J. Brand being welcomed. It is eminent in its wide spectrum staffing and very long existence.

Cost works out less than a daily newspaper for a weekly issue which arrives in the post every Friday without fail (in my experience of about 8 years). It's not my only source but it's a good start.

If you don't want to chance your arm with a subscription, I'll be happy to send you a couple of copies! I have no personal investment or interest involved!

The Spectator - well known Conservative publication, past editors include Boris Johnson, Nigel Lawson to name a couple :p:;)

Take it in context, a comedian saying a 'joke'* is NOT inciting someone to go out and hurl acid. Just think about it the furore. What people are suggesting, is that Jo Brand is inciting some hippy to throw acid onto a politician!!!! Yet Trump, surely has been successful in inciting a lot worse (or at least not been too enthusiastic in subduing it).

With the milk shake attacks on Stephen Christopher Yaxley-Lennon and Nigel Farage, surely a less painful equivalent of an egg (or rotten tomatoes perhaps), it has to be the new egg on the face, on somewhat odious characters who incite their own brand of incitement. Saying it though, in light of recent acid attacks of course is unwise and inconsiderate (and I disagree with any of it, acid or milk shake by the way). Just as Danny Baker was unwise to post the picture he did (which in context actually worked! - ie another animal for the performing zoo that he believes is the Royal Family - he should have known better for sure!)

Our moral compasses have become so skewed because our feelings are being hurt, it is becoming disturbing. We have the power to turn the channel, switch onto a CD etc. We are not snowflakes! It all reminds me of Frankie Boyle and his crack at Katie Price's son. I never liked her, and could never warm to Frankie Boyle nor his humour, but that crack about the child, actually made me angry. Angry that he made fun of a disabled child, and even more angry, he actually made me feel some sympathy for Katie Price!

Jo Brand as a radicalising imman of comedy, give me a break!:duh::duh:

* I havent heard the so called joke, but have watched and heard Jo Brand, and can envisage that it was exasperated throwaway comment said in a sarcastic tone. Maybe I am wrong about how she said it, and was actually preaching for someone to do it? :shrug: I doubt it somehow.

It appears that Jo Brand is to be investigated by police for allegedly 'inciting violence' against politicians... about time.

Inciting violence, expressing a 'fantasy' (her word), sounds like a 'hate' crime to me. Jo Brand hasn't apologised as yet, and it appears she is not employed by the BBC. :shrug:

I think situations such as this doesn't sit well for the security and safety of the politicians, just look what happened to Jo Cox.

another nail in the coffin of satire RIP Spitting Image

It's very apparent that there are no extenuating circumstances and no misunderstanding. She was a psychiatric nurse and fully aware of the power of suggestion. I believe, like others have done before her, she used her supposed skills to deliberately attempt to provoke a reaction that she would otherwise been unable to draw out. Unfortunately, as others with malice in mind have found, she failed.

Thinking she could say what she liked and rely on a defence of hiding behind a petty excuse she thought she could plead innocence by being funny. There seems no doubt she, as usual, was putting her training to use. I just hope those idiots who can't tell when they are being stupid don't fall for it.

:eek: was this not on a comedy show with an audience of middle classed so called intellectuals? Supposedly people who have the intelligence and aptitude to understand satire, cynicism and peaceful demonstration?

I am only asking as I said before, I havent been able to hear the comment nor the show.

You must look at the bigger picture Alan, sadly we don't live in a world of everything being sunshine and flowers.

Respectfully I have to disagree with the referendum opinion.

Leaving the EU does not mean turning our backs on Europe, since we don't need to have a union in order to have solidarity, friendship and good solid trade deals with the member states - it just means we won't have to ask permission from Brussels first.

Hi Wes, I worked at the same hospital Jo Brand trained in. I had the same training she had, except I had more training in general nursing and obstetrics. With my insights, I think she was foolish in saying what she said about the battery acid. But she must be pooping herself, worrying if anything comes from what the police can find. She might get away with it. But she would be well versed in the games people play and how to take her comments to the edge. Her humour in that moment, some will admire, but others will make political capital from. Despite what she said to the Sky news reporter about free speech today, it's something she will not say again 'live'. Just my opinion.

It is not about the bigger picture! It is about a small specific audience of a radio show. It is about a comedian known for sarcasm, likely saying something to express HER own exasperation at how ridiculous todays politicians and maybe even society have become. Now blown out of proportion, into a worldwide audience, where someone will now throw acid into the face of a politician, and blame a comedienne 'wot told him/her to do it' then expect a skiing holiday because he/she had a bad childhood as well.

The only way there will be a bigger picture is if someone does it because they were told to by her! At that point it has nothing to do with her! It has everything to do with the tosspot nutter who threw it!

How many times has she spoken of 'attacking' a husband or lover if he did something to irritate her, during a humourous monologue on a show (eg QI or Have I Got News for You etc)? Is that condoning domestic violence???

I despair if people genuinely believe her to be inciting violence of this kind!

Perhaps I imagine her saying it the way I have always watched her on TV, naive, perhaps, or just despairing of the society we are now living in, where I cannot even comment on how pretty a lady's dress is without being accused of something untoward!

When I first saw the Danny Baker picture mentioned earlier, I immediately thought exactly as he did when he explained why he did it - another animal to add to the performing zoo of the Royal Family. But then I am not racist (but I can see how unwise it was to post it!), nor and more importantly, I have not experienced any serious or concerning form or racism (does that make me naive?). Equally I havent experienced any form of an acid attack either, but have had a drink or two thrown over me (and an egg once) .

The context is so different it's hard to identify it in such terms as 'inciting violence'. We need to be careful when using some terms that we don't water them down or its something that may be regretted. Not in this particular issue but in a wider sense. It should be reserved for those, I believe, related to terrorism.

I haven't heard the clip but I've read the text as printed from the link I put on. She seems to say immediately after, that she's only joking and no one should carry out what she said.

I'm not sure what fallout you're thinking of. The only thing I've seen is a call for her to be sacked, but she's not employed by the BBC. You mean the police? If I had to bet they'll probably 'speak' to her.

On all counts, well said.

What! just because she doesn't hold the same views, so she thinks its ok to use violence to express her dissatisfaction by commenting on public radio (that is not sarcasm). :shrug:

Brand continued her comment by saying ''I’m not going to do it, it’s purely a fantasy''.

Obviously Brand wouldn't do such a thing, but its the words and the thought behind what she said. Her remarks are far more serious than a simply joke Alan, fantasizing about throwing acid over a person, especially with the spate of recent attacks has left many sickened and horrified.

No one should use violence against another person just because they hold different views than them, throwing any type of object or substance at someone is a violent act.

Theresa May has said ''politicians should be able to go about their work and campaign without harassment, intimidation or abuse''.

Jo Brands remarks, and with the BBC allowing such content to be broadcast is in fact normalising violence, its certainly nothing to joke about. :shrug: These walkabouts politicians do have a serious safety aspect to them, even Trumps state visit brought out the hate mob, so you can see how dangerous such remarks can impact the safety of a person.

I am not condoning nor agreeing with actions. One drink and the egg were not meant for me, but one drink, from an ex. For me turning up to a bar with a lady friend , misunderstanding that she was with me. But my point was that these were violent acts , Using non lethal materials to make a point, as in the milkshake attacks. They are wrong, but the methods employed are obviously intentional and it was to those that incited the hatred (and even violence) in the first place were attacked.

To be even suggesting that a comedian on a comedy show, that has a tiny middle classed audience (and even with a disclaimer!!??) was inciting violence is a sad reflection on how sad and dependant our society has become.

What happened to making ones own mind up, self control? What you are doing is comparing her to radicalised preachers of hate. Context!!

Yes John, it does look like you are slipping into the snowflake beliefs.



Sent from my SM-A600FN using Tapatalk

Has anybody here actually heard the radio program concerned? Or, more importantly, the actual remark? There are other examples of things that should not have been said, anywhere - let alone on national radio, that have achieved notoriety that have resulted in serious consequences. Each escape of foul wind subsequently gets the norm that much higher.

Another question: anyone know the title of the so-called show? Heresy. from my Webster's Dictionary: 'Any course of conduct or instruction designed to produce dissention and schism...'. They actually plan to cause friction by such a title. So far as anyone can tell there is no suggestion that Brand would do such a thing. On the other hand her fans contain an element of limited sensibilities and it is reasonable to think that the BBC would know that. They are as culpable as she is.


The 'employment' false herring. She is not directly employed on the BBC staff account. She receives fees for her appearance on a session basis - handsome fees at that. The BBC does not have any reason to fear industrial action for wrongful dismissal - just decline to re-engage her and, unfortunately, let the market find its level.

Yes, I have heard it, it was aired on the news yesterday. Its now been edited out from the BBC iPlayer.

Thanks.

She will probably use that as a badge of courage and encouragement. I believe she will never back down of her own accord - and I don't blame her for taking advantage of the support she gets. She's had precious little in her early domestic life which goes some way towards understanding her.

On the other hand it's to be hoped she takes note of the fuss and moderates her behaviour. There's no reason for everyone to join the gallop to the bottom in some sort of bravado contest. Most of us have a filter between brain and mouth, JB's has been mislaid along the way.

I haven't heard it, so I cannot comment on it, but would ask you, did you feel in any way enthused or even encouraged to grab something to throw at Farage? Did you feel in any way that jo brand was permitting the breaking of assault laws, whilst talking on a comedy show? Was their anything in the demeanour of her voice to encourage or enthuse like a preacher from the pulpit to the masses or even perhaps a motivational speaker at a self help seminar?



Sent from my SM-A600FN using Tapatalk

Context

And for what it's worth, I grew up with and see violence borne from an ingrained hatred, spurred on by preachers of hate. That hate has long since been taken out of proportion and context too, to the situation I live in today.

Those that participate in that hatred and violence (of all means) get their bitterness from alleged people of trust, ministers etc in a church, NOT a comedienne on a comedy show!

Sent from my SM-A600FN using Tapatalk

'Just wondering. What source would you suggest for a completely unbiased reporting of news items?
Since the independence referendum I have perceived the BBC to be very biased against Scotland in their national news service so have discounted them as credible a number of years ago'


My references to the Spectator were in answer to an enquiry from someone seeking the truth and unbiased opinion from a selection of contributors.

This to enable a balanced view to be obtained which might lead to a happier and wider reliance on general learned opinion and to avoid the need for unnecessary attempts at unhelpful comments. To reduce it to mentioning two controversial editors is entirely to miss the point.

By its nature my offer was well meaning and genuinely offered. The uninvited reply resulted, however, in a possibly accidentally negative impression and may have cast doubt on the veracity of my commendation.

It seems to me reasonable to avoid giving biased views by presenting misleading statements. Anyone with any knowledge of the Spectator (est. 1828) would know about its often stated policy of taking contributions from the spectrum of socio/politico commentary, thereby offering views not necessarily in accordance with its own editorial content, whatever that might be. The link below is to their current contributors and establishes just who is relevant.

/www.spectator.co.uk/writers/

Alan, I have given my concerns on the matter, and no amount of posts persuasive or otherwise, from you or anyone else is going to change my views on the incident. :}

It used to be equated to that, the subsequent fall from grace due to 'right-on' Governors and 'woke' staffers has resulted in the insulating balloon suffering multiple punctures. Those punctures so far have not reached to the egos of student minions and their contributions to the faddish struggle to remain relevant. We are poorly served by the flood to streaming (screaming?) US cop shows.

Ditto I am afraid.

Sent from my SM-A600FN using Tapatalk

I agree with you. Comments from JB on a comedy show are not taken by right mided (or even wrong minded) people in the same way as those made by say Farage to a private gathering of supporters and filmed secretly.

Thanks for your reply. Sorry for not responding sooner, even whilst on annual leave life seems hectic.

I've always been a little put off by the Spectator, albeit it's a long time since I read an issue.
I'm on holiday next week, Tenerife here I come:D, so will pick up am issue to read.

Thanks again

The sad and for me frustrating part of this, for us to suggest that it could be used to incite hatred, means we have strayed so far from being right minded, to being 'wrong minded'.

I agree that certain voices have to be 'reigned in' or monitored, however, this particular incident (which was listened to by a limited audience!) is just too far in this nanny state.

Sent from my SM-A600FN using Tapatalk

Would it cut down the number of M.P.s in Parliament if there was a box "none of the above"

Why have there not been howls of protest of misogyny from the wokers about V. Derbyshire. If anything in the world is sexist that must be. Are we sure it wasn't an (in)voluntary Asperger lapse. I saw her interview with Andrea Leadsom recently and Derbyshire was mocking and insolent in the extreme. She failed on that occasion and AL retained her polite courtesy and calm composure faultlessly throughout, even smiling.

Turns out Trump has a history against Comcast, therefore the Sky news will be skewed against Trump. This will explain the excessive(?) coverage of the protesters.

Fox news used to be a very Republican leaning news program (back when I was there at least when GDubya was president) , and I would imagine he and Murdoch would be great friends:shrug:, so likely to be more positive to Trump.

I think Comcast own it now, after Murdoch lost out buying it back, after which he went to Fox. I think this was last year or year before. Comcast are definitely not friends of Trump. (I always thought it was just CNN lol)

(just scanning through the history of it, it is quite a bit more complicated than above, but Comcast are the sole owners, which goes a long way to explain why you have seen so much anti Trump sentiment on it - if you think the BBC are biased, you should try flicking between Fox News and Sky news lol)

Melania seems extremely subdued and forgiving whilst maintaining decorum. Indeed, almost saintly. Obviously somewhat more than a trophy.

Fox News = Murdoch = Trump's ally

Sky News = Comcast = Trump's enemy

I came across an article recently of Trump calling out Comcast as a fake news outlet, hence why I mentioned it. I recall a post you made somewhere complaining about all the protester coverage against Trump.

If you want a broader view on political bias,you should watch,as i often do,CNN and R.T.;)

So it's the least worst of a bad lot. Some choice. Unfortunately the current choices neither inspire nor encourage.


Was watching a channel today 'Keep it Country' (FV 87) recommended to me by my daughter's Irish husband. In spite of its title it's mainly Irish Folk (think Dubliners or Fureys) and partly C/W and sometimes has slots about history. Today it was about USA observations of UK history of 20th century government. Very surprisingly they were full of compliments and admiration about our way of doing things. It's nothing but embarrassing now. We are a laughing stock because of the useless idiots looking after their own futures.

CNN on 506 Sky.

Apparently Nigel Farage, Donald Trump and Boris Johnson are great friends. I wonder what it is they see in each other? ;)