Trigger warning:

This site may, in fact always will contain images and information likely to cause consternation, conniptions, distress, along with moderate to severe bedwetting among statists, wimps, wusses, politicians, lefties, green fascists, and creatures of the state who can't bear the thought of anything that disagrees with their jaded view of the world.

Dec 2, 2011

Jeremy Clarkson comments, so what’s all the fuss about?

Google searches for the terms, Jeremy Clarkson, shoot them, and execute unionists seem to be very popular today according to sitemeter, which indicates that Jeremy has made some sort of politically incorrect statement. In this day and age it doesn’t take much to offend the panty pissing paragons of political correctness, they tend to be a soft target.

A quick check reveals numerous reports of Clarkson stating a desire to shoot strikers and execute them in front of their families. Anyone who watches Top Gear or any show he appears on is well aware that he tends towards the controversial, and that it is pretty much tongue in cheek. Many possibly tune in for the sake of getting a dose of irreverence.

While there are myriad calls for him to be sacked, and a union is seeking legal advice to see whether they can pave him prosecuted, the reality is that he has been deliberately taken out of context. He was in fact taking the piss on the issue of ‘balance’ requiring another opinion, other than that presented as that alternative opinion.

‘Balance’ is an issue over here as well and deserves the sort of ridicule Clarkson dished out. People like Andrew Bolt and Allan Jones have been accused of failing to provide it. It’s a bit silly to suggest that Bolt should provide space to climate frantic, Tim Flannery or that Barnaby Joyce must allow space in his Canberra Times column for Gillard to answer.

This is what is being presented as Clarkson’s comments:

The reality is that this is only a brief excerpt of a longer segment. Here though is the full transcript of the interview, which makes clear the dishonesty of this attack:

Matt Baker [presenter]: Well Jeremy, schools, hospitals, airports, even driving tests, have all been affected. Do you think the strikes have been a good idea?

Jeremy Clarkson [guest]: I think they have been fantastic. Absolutely. London today has just been empty. Everybody stayed at home, you can whizz about, restaurants are empty.

Alex Jones [presenter]: The traffic, actually, has been very good today.

Jeremy Clarkson: Airports, people streaming through with no problems at all. And it's also like being back in the 70s. It makes me feel at home somehow.

Matt Baker: Do you know anyone who has been on strike today?

Jeremy Clarkson: Of course I don't, no. What, somebody public service? No, I don't. No, absolutely. But we have to balance this though, because this is the BBC.

Matt Baker: Yes, exactly.

Jeremy Clarkson: Frankly, I'd have them all shot. I would take them outside and execute them in front of their families. I mean, how dare they go on strike when they have these gilt-edged pensions that are going to be guaranteed while the rest of us have to work for a living?

Matt Baker: Well, on that note of balancing an opinion, of course those are Jeremy's views.

Alex Jones: Only Jeremy's views.

Jeremy Clarkson: They're not. I've just given two views for you.
The whole thing is a storm in a tea cup over a misrepresentation. Perhaps the people doing this should be the ones that get sacked.


  1. Agreed, but how often do union leaders anywhere get sacked?

  2. Agreed Angry, but it is not just the union leaders pushing this bullshit. It seems that everyone with an axe to grind as well as his dog are pushing the idea that the comment as posted on Youtube is all that occurred in the entire interview.

    There must be some bastard who can be held to account although it would then be difficult to explain why union leaders were not.

  3. Seems he'll be the target of the two minute hate a little longer. Apparently in this week's Sun column he talks about suicides and how sad it is that some people feel driven to it, but how selfish are those few who choose to end their lives by jumping in front of trains because of the effect it has on the poor driver and the delays it causes to thousands of others. I can't argue with any of it, and would expand it to include any suicides who choose to top themselves in a way that can harm someone else. Doesn't reduce my sympathy for the suicide - it's just saying that some means harm other people. Once again, the focus is all on a sentence or two in order to sustain maximum offence and claim hurt feelings, and the stuff about the effect on other people is glossed over or entirely ignored.

  4. He has a good point on the issue but like most of the stuff he says it will generate controversy. Having never been in the position of contemplating suicide I have little understanding of the feelings involved.

    The son of a friend was diagnosed with cancer and pulled into a police station parking lot and shot himself some years back. It was probably a thoughtful way to go about it, although I guess, the cops could have done without it.

    The real tragedy was that in the autopsy, it was proved that he didn't have cancer. Just a bloody shame he didn't get a second opinion.