political commentator * author * publisher * bookseller * radio presenter * blogger * Conservative candidate * former lobbyist * Jack Russell owner * West Ham United fanatic * Email iain AT iaindale DOT com
interesting.......if a member of the public were to do that to some of the violence inciting banners at a loony islamist demo what's the betting plod would do them for criminal damage and conduct likely.....? I applaud him personally, but he has plainly broken the law.
Having once seen Nick Robinson carry on with a (non live) piece to camera when someone nearby fainted probably due to the heat from the lights - and then show no concern for the person thereafter, I perhaps view this incident in a slightly different light, idiotic as the demonstrator may be.
So Iain you endorse a member of the public to criminaly damage another individuals rights. Sums up Tory policy rule by force didn't Hitler do something similar, oh well.
The full YouTube version posted by “peacestrike.org” (hmmn, bird in the hand?) was captioned: “Nick Robinson looses it”. Yep, sort of says it all - Loosers..
No Iain calling someone an idiot shows you as a dictartorial Tory when you have no facts to back up your childish statement.
I live in a democracy were people have freedom of speech and for you to condone N Robinsons actions as it satisfies your idealogistic status as you are right links yousrelf to all dictators in past and present history.
What if that sign had said something that you agreed with like gays should be given marital rights as the majority of people, or whatever, and the actions taken by NR were the same.
A public space Iain 'College Green'(whatever its called) or have the BBC got the title deeds for that piece of land. End of story? You want freedom of speech as I believe you do and as such such NR was in the wrong and if you can't see the error in condoning NR's action it says more about your political sides theories over human rights than my assumed mental status.
As you wish to end this then maybe you might reflect before posting on your future stance on other issues. G'night.
The protestor was being obnoxious and forcing a political message onto the BBC, which has enough problems with accusations of bias (one way or the other). It seems to me that any BBC employee has a responsibility to prevent blatant political slogans being broadcast, whatever they say, unless they're in a context that allows Auntie to achieve balance, such as PPBs. Maybe had there been a pro-war poster in shot at the same time, Nick wouldn't have got so irate?! In any case, quite how anyone can possibly claim that one can conduct criminal damage upon a piece of scraggy scrawled-upon cardboard is clearly losing possession of their senses.
Even without his nom de plume, from his grasp of English one can tell that Cynical Highlander is a Scotchman. I wonder if his 'logic' is any clearer when expressed in his native tongue.
Good for Nick robinson. If stupid politically immature hippies want to protest on video they may make their own videos. The BBC have the right to make videos without morons jumping into the background.
If I was taking pictures of my family on holiday and some idiot was deliberately wavings signs in the background I would have done the same thing, and rightly so.
Watching Leftists defend freedom of speech is like asking a vegetarian butcher for advice about the flavour of different cuts of meat.
You have to understand that for a narcissistic Leftist, waving his anti-war placard behind the head of a BBC reporter trying to do a live report is a contribution to world peace.
"destruction of property", "Criminal damage", "Freedom of speech", "human rights" ... for goodness sake!
A presenter broke a hand made banner after he'd had it waved around his head whist he was trying to work. Get a sense of perspective everyone & get over it. People who refer pathetic little incidents like this to the police are part of the problem.
The protester got what he wanted - lots of free publicity. Nick got what he wanted - his frustration vented at getting his broadcast hijacked. End of story. Move along.
If the protestor had been in the background when Robinson had smashed his sign, I would have had no sympathy for Robinson. The fact that he tried to disrupt a news report that has to be impartial, and clearly would not move, means Robinson was right at least morally to react the way he did. It is irrelevant what the cause was, I would say the same for any protest march by any group of people.
31 comments:
*Chortle*
I enjoyed that!
Rambo Robbo - Macrame black belt fourth dan and UK Basketry Champion. You really wouldn't want to cross him.
Lucky the banner holder wasn't hospitalised. Robinson would have tied him in knots.
He's sort of apologised now. He 'regrets' it at least.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/nickrobinson/2010/10/last_nights_six_oclock_news.html
Hmm. All it takes is a complaint from the poster's owner, and a media-savvy constable to see Nick arrested for criminal damage live on air!
interesting.......if a member of the public were to do that to some of the violence inciting banners at a loony islamist demo what's the betting plod would do them for criminal damage and conduct likely.....?
I applaud him personally, but he has plainly broken the law.
There's one problem, now all the dumb F$%ks that say Nick is a Tory will have ammo (they'll still be dumb f$%ks with faulty ammo, only louder).
Any guesses as to the outcome if the crusty had decided to smash one of the BBCs signs?
What a lad! Whudda thought it?
humourous, but isn't it also criminal damage?
Having once seen Nick Robinson carry on with a (non live) piece to camera when someone nearby fainted probably due to the heat from the lights - and then show no concern for the person thereafter, I perhaps view this incident in a slightly different light, idiotic as the demonstrator may be.
Well after the cuts the police will be too busy to protect correspondents who are too fatuous to publish their reports from indoors.
So Iain you endorse a member of the public to criminaly damage another individuals rights. Sums up Tory policy rule by force didn't Hitler do something similar, oh well.
What an utter idiot you are.
The full YouTube version posted by “peacestrike.org” (hmmn, bird in the hand?) was captioned: “Nick Robinson looses it”. Yep, sort of says it all - Loosers..
Nick Robinson 1, Unwashed Commies 0.
No Iain calling someone an idiot shows you as a dictartorial Tory when you have no facts to back up your childish statement.
I live in a democracy were people have freedom of speech and for you to condone N Robinsons actions as it satisfies your idealogistic status as you are right links yousrelf to all dictators in past and present history.
What if that sign had said something that you agreed with like gays should be given marital rights as the majority of people, or whatever, and the actions taken by NR were the same.
What then?
He was well within his rights whatever the banner said. They had invaded his space so he took appropriate action. End of story.
A public space Iain 'College Green'(whatever its called) or have the BBC got the title deeds for that piece of land. End of story? You want freedom of speech as I believe you do and as such such NR was in the wrong and if you can't see the error in condoning NR's action it says more about your political sides theories over human rights than my assumed mental status.
As you wish to end this then maybe you might reflect before posting on your future stance on other issues. G'night.
"They had invaded his space"
College Green?
How very grand.
Childish protestor; childish response.
The protestor was being obnoxious and forcing a political message onto the BBC, which has enough problems with accusations of bias (one way or the other). It seems to me that any BBC employee has a responsibility to prevent blatant political slogans being broadcast, whatever they say, unless they're in a context that allows Auntie to achieve balance, such as PPBs. Maybe had there been a pro-war poster in shot at the same time, Nick wouldn't have got so irate?! In any case, quite how anyone can possibly claim that one can conduct criminal damage upon a piece of scraggy scrawled-upon cardboard is clearly losing possession of their senses.
Iain, applauding the destruction of private property?
Blimey.
Even without his nom de plume, from his grasp of English one can tell that Cynical Highlander is a Scotchman. I wonder if his 'logic' is any clearer when expressed in his native tongue.
Good for Nick robinson. If stupid politically immature hippies want to protest on video they may make their own videos. The BBC have the right to make videos without morons jumping into the background.
If I was taking pictures of my family on holiday and some idiot was deliberately wavings signs in the background I would have done the same thing, and rightly so.
Maybe there is hope for the BBC after all.
Watching Leftists defend freedom of speech is like asking a vegetarian butcher for advice about the flavour of different cuts of meat.
You have to understand that for a narcissistic Leftist, waving his anti-war placard behind the head of a BBC reporter trying to do a live report is a contribution to world peace.
"destruction of property", "Criminal damage", "Freedom of speech", "human rights" ... for goodness sake!
A presenter broke a hand made banner after he'd had it waved around his head whist he was trying to work. Get a sense of perspective everyone & get over it. People who refer pathetic little incidents like this to the police are part of the problem.
The protester got what he wanted - lots of free publicity. Nick got what he wanted - his frustration vented at getting his broadcast hijacked. End of story. Move along.
Shame on him.
If the protestor had been in the background when Robinson had smashed his sign, I would have had no sympathy for Robinson. The fact that he tried to disrupt a news report that has to be impartial, and clearly would not move, means Robinson was right at least morally to react the way he did. It is irrelevant what the cause was, I would say the same for any protest march by any group of people.
Well said Rebel Saint
"The BBC have the right to make videos without morons jumping into the background."
They do? Is that in Magna Carta or the ECHR?
"The BBC have the right to make videos without morons jumping into the background. "
Indeed, and they own perfectly good studios with security guards policing who can and can't enter the building.
However, no-one has any right to stop someone doing something in public that harms no-one.
No-one has the right to forcibly take someone else's property regardless of how cheaply it was made. And even less right to break it.
Post a Comment