If this was simply a case about an assault there would be no debate. The bigger issue is the pretentious people who are so offended by Clarkson bucking the trend of hyper-polite mollycoddling.

if there weren't so many preening chavs wailing and gnashing their teeth, he would have probably been sacked the next day, and you're right - there would have been no debate.

There never should have been.

If it had been up to the self righteous prigs with sticks up their ar$es, then he would have been sacked immediately and any debate stifled.

The rest of us believe in the justice of following set disciplinary procedure and investigating an incident fully before taking final action.

We also believe in the freedom of speech which allows debate.

Oh yes, of course "you" do.

If this was simply a case about an assault there would be no debate. The bigger issue is the pretentious people who are so offended by Clarkson bucking the trend of hyper-polite mollycoddling.

if there weren't so many preening chavs wailing and gnashing their teeth, he would have probably been sacked the next day, and you're right - there would have been no debate.

There never should have been.

If it had been up to the self righteous prigs with sticks up their ar$es, then he would have been sacked immediately and any debate stifled.

The rest of us believe in the justice of following set disciplinary procedure and investigating an incident fully before taking final action.

We also believe in the freedom of speech which allows debate.

Unless of course, it refers to the obvious. Which results in automatic accusations of racism, bigotry and Islamophobia.

All accusations that I am sure have at one time or another, been levelled at Clarkson.

As I have said in other topics; freedom of speech means that even people one disagrees with are entitled to their opinion and to express that opinion; within the law, of course.

That you two don't like that is your problem.

As I have said in other topics; freedom of speech means that even people one disagrees with are entitled to their opinion and to express that opinion; within the law, of course.

That you two don't like that is your problem.

They're just disagreeing with you.

As I have said in other topics; freedom of speech means that even people one disagrees with are entitled to their opinion and to express that opinion; within the law, of course.

That you two don't like that is your problem.

I'm not really bothered what you've posted in other topics and no-one has stopped you posting them; I pointed out the absurdity of what you posted here, when "your" sides idea of freedom of speech includes threats of violence against the victim of Clarkson's assault and, as I read today, death threats against the man who sacked him for it.

That really encourages "freedom of speech which allows debate", doesn't it?

As I have said in other topics; freedom of speech means that even people one disagrees with are entitled to their opinion and to express that opinion; within the law, of course.

That you two don't like that is your problem.

I was neither, agreeing or disagreeing with you.

Merely pointing out your hypocrisy.

Whatever the outcome, I don't give that producer much chance of another producer job. The man that got Jeremy sacked and resulted in the Beeb losing millions of pounds, plus gaining much hatred from the viewing public is going to be notorious.

Whatever the outcome, I don't give that producer much chance of another producer job. The man that got Jeremy sacked and resulted in the Beeb losing millions of pounds, plus gaining much hatred from the viewing public is going to be notorious.

Considering he was the one who got punched in the face, I'd imagine most in the industry would feel sympathetic towards him.

In what way is he 'the man that got Jeremy sacked'? He didn't even report the incident. Are you blaming him for putting his face in the way of Clarkson's fist?

I am really pity of Jeremy even I have never watched Top Gear with him and will never watch Top Gear without him.

Whatever the outcome, I don't give that producer much chance of another producer job. The man that got Jeremy sacked and resulted in the Beeb losing millions of pounds, plus gaining much hatred from the viewing public is going to be notorious.

You really are in denial. Your hero got himself sacked by launching an unprovoked assault on a junior colleague. The producer is being backed by his employers and will do just fine. Sky have already said they will not be touching Clarkson with a barge pole, after the Andy Gray/ Richard Keys episode, they cannot afford to employ a known workplace bully, they would be crucified as soon as Clarkson went off on his next one. Also the advertisers would pull the rug as soon as Clarkson started one of his trademark attempts at humour by slagging off perfectly good products, coupled with his casual racism. Maybe we will see him on Channel 5 in a couple of years hosting a crappy chat show! But it really is quite sad to see grown men hero worshipping this bully, even to the extent of issuing death threats to a senior BBC person. Behaving like babies throwing a tantrum after having their favourite toy confiscated.

I Love the broom broom show and the bad Irishman make it go bye bye!

http://static1.holidayextras.com/images/family-travel/crying-baby.jpg

As I have said in other topics; freedom of speech means that even people one disagrees with are entitled to their opinion and to express that opinion; within the law, of course.

That you two don't like that is your problem.

I'm not really bothered what you've posted in other topics and no-one has stopped you posting them; I pointed out the absurdity of what you posted here, when "your" sides idea of freedom of speech includes threats of violence against the victim of Clarkson's assault and, as I read today, death threats against the man who sacked him for it.

That really encourages "freedom of speech which allows debate", doesn't it?

1) What is absurd about my commenting that, like 350 million people, I am a fan of Top Gear?

What is absurd about my not prejudgeing Clarkson and awaiting the result of the BBC enquiry before passing judgement on the incident?

What is absurd about my saying after the result of that enquiry was published

you (Clarkson) did unforgivably overstep the line this time.

?

2) What do you fail to understand about "within the law?"

There are a lot of childish, mindless idiots on the internet who make similar childish and idiotic tweets etc. to those you have posted about a wide range of people and groups.

It is up to the sites concerned whether or not to remove such posts and whether or not to report them to the proper authorities.

That I was a fan of Top Gear does not mean I agree with those tweets you posted; and you are clutching at straws in trying to infer that I do.

Do you agree with similar tweets from people who agree with you on subjects you have an opinion about? I hope not.

I was neither, agreeing or disagreeing with you.

Merely pointing out your hypocrisy.

Hypocrisy?

Please point out any post I have made in this, or any other, topic which any reasonable person could consider hypocritical.

Please point out any post I have made in this, or any other, topic which any reasonable person could consider hypocritical.

This topic is about TOP GEAR, bringing up posts from other threads is off-topic.

It's over. Dab away the tears and move on.

I'm sure he'll make enough out of his newspaper column to live on, and there's always Talksport.

The program format that we know as Top Gear is not over nor is the career of Oisin Tymon working on it!!!! I wonder just how many more viewers worldwide will watch the next recorded program showing the public "kiss and make up" of Oisin and Jeremy. I wonder just how much that would be worth on the advertising channels? How many more viewers were gained from the Argentinian fiasco?

Who is Jeremy Clarkson?

Oh well, never mind.....

I am not surprised Sky will no touch him...

The BBC should sell the program, if is worth £50m per annum then they should get many times that for the rights, then invest it in new program ideas.

Whoever buys the rights can choose whether to engage Clarkson and/or the other two.

As for Clarkson if nobody wants him I am sure a person of his talent and wealth could start their own production company.

I am not surprised Sky will no touch him...

The BBC should sell the program, if is worth £50m per annum then they should get many times that for the rights, then invest it in new program ideas.

Whoever buys the rights can choose whether to engage Clarkson and/or the other two.

As for Clarkson if nobody wants him I am sure a person of his talent and wealth could start their own production company.

It is not about production, that is easy, it is about distribution on who can deliver the program worldwide!!

I know it is 1st April but I am sure this is no joke...

Jeremy Clarkson is to appear again on stage with Richard Hammond and James May, with whom he presented the BBC's Top Gear.

A deal has been done to fulfil a series of live shows that were planned before the presenter was dropped from the show for hitting a producer.

The gigs will be stripped of all BBC branding and content and will be called Clarkson, Hammond and May Live.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-32137424

I think this might be one, though...

http://www.theguardian.com/media/2015/apr/01/jeremy-clarkson-joins-guardian-drive-for-fossil-fuel-divestment

I think this might be one, though...

http://www.theguardian.com/media/2015/apr/01/jeremy-clarkson-joins-guardian-drive-for-fossil-fuel-divestment

Clarkson has joined the climate Nazis. And on that bombshell my admiration for the man has turned to dust. I guess he only had one good original idea.

I think this might be one, though...

http://www.theguardian.com/media/2015/apr/01/jeremy-clarkson-joins-guardian-drive-for-fossil-fuel-divestment

Clarkson has joined the climate Nazis. And on that bombshell my admiration for the man has turned to dust. I guess he only had one good original idea.

You might want to look a little more closely at that report.

Top Gear is made in other countries around the world. The only version that did really well was the British one. Has anyone tried to watch the American version? It's dreadful. May all you naysayers get what you wish for in the boring sanitised replacement. (If there is one.)

Oh man! I just got it. 555

Oh man! I just got it. 555

As did I.

I think this might be one, though...

http://www.theguardian.com/media/2015/apr/01/jeremy-clarkson-joins-guardian-drive-for-fossil-fuel-divestment

Clarkson has joined the climate Nazis. And on that bombshell my admiration for the man has turned to dust. I guess he only had one good original idea.

Nah. I reckon he's taking the piss. They're so lacking in humour that they actually believe him though.

I think this might be one, though...

http://www.theguardian.com/media/2015/apr/01/jeremy-clarkson-joins-guardian-drive-for-fossil-fuel-divestment

Clarkson has joined the climate Nazis. And on that bombshell my admiration for the man has turned to dust. I guess he only had one good original idea.

Nah. I reckon he's taking the piss. They're so lacking in humour that they actually believe him though.

I guess that pretty much flew over your head, then.

Oh man! I just got it. 555

As did I.

Yeah. Got me, for a while. 5555.

Have I got news for you. Clarkson to host Have I got news for you.

Have I got news for you. Clarkson to host Have I got news for you.

And, have I got news for you...

Oh no he's not...

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-32244405

[the pantomime season starts early]