Year 12s: what will be the first way you research your future options? >>

Jeremy Clarkson Controversy, again...

Scroll to see replies

Reply 20

Cannotbelieveit

Jeremy Clarkson = Living Legend

Reply 21

detinus

Original post by meow444

He is kind of missing the point that there are plenty of terrorists who aren't muslim...

He didn't mention Muslims...

Reply 22

Ewan

They should just introduce those machines that can see beneath your clothing? No searching required then...

Reply 23

EcclesRose

Yawn. Jeremy you bore me with your opinions - and you confuse racism with discrimination

(edited 11 years ago)

Reply 24

internet tough guy

Does anyone know what was the context behind these remarks?

Was he doing a Top Gear show (or some other comedy-related stuff) while those comments were made?

If so, then we could all assume its was just done out of a laugh, so he's probably not being serious.

Reply 25

Kylewalker346234

Spot On.
Or at the very least, have a fast-track for people returning to their own country! last time we came back from America, spent an hour in those hellish zig-zag queues!

Reply 26

ddrrzzeerr

He is right. The truth is a young Asian male is much more likely to commit a terroist attack so surely it makes sense be more careful with them. A white british family coming back from holiday are never going to be commiting terroist attacks so why waste time with them? It is common sense. I have to pay more for my car insurance because I am a young male, I could be the safest driver in the country and be a much lower risk to the insurance company than older people who pay much less. Not every young person in the country is a dangerous driver yet we all have to pay more. I am not angry about that because from the insurance companies point of view I can see it is a sensible policy. Its exactly the same with what clarkson is saying, we may as well use the extra information we have.

Reply 27

L i b

Original post by Mendeleev's Table

I have no problem with how he actually said it. I don't live with a stick up my backside. However, I don't agree with what he said; if terrorist organisations start to see that certain groups are waved through immigration, what is to stop them attempting to convert them?

Good luck.

The reason that most IRA terrorists spoke with Irish accents was not simply the lack of a decent recruitment campaign. Equally, the fact that Islamic terrorists are mostly brown-skinned is hardly a point worth ignoring.

Reply 28

Psyk

Original post by L i b

It's not quite the same though. Irish nationalism is by definition linked to being Irish. Islamic extremism is not necessarily strongly linked to being a brown-skinned asian person. Being a muslim (and becoming a muslim extremist) is open to anyone, of any race, of any background, from any part of the world. Being an Irish nationalist is only really open to people from Ireland or with links to Ireland.

There's a fairly large number of white muslims. If the extremists knew they could easily get waived through at airports, I'm sure they would target them and try to radicalise them.

Reply 29

alexmagpie

It's basic signal detection theory. Immigration officials know full well that aside from the controversy this would spark, there could be loss of life - not to mention a massive public and media outcry if they started waving people through and missed a terrorist who went on to cause an incident. Better to check everyone than miss someone for the sake of a bit of convenience.

Besides, I think they already use their discretion. As an 18 year old white woman I can say I've never had a pat down search - but I'm pretty sure an 18 year old Asian man might well have had.

Reply 30

AYE

Original post by detinus

He didn't mention Muslims...

When he mentioned "blowing up", what did you think he was on about?

Reply 31

Snagprophet

Well it makes sense to not suspect native families of being terrorists. I don't see why there would be a public outcry, there certainly wasn't when men were discriminated against by being made to pay higher car insurance than women on the basis of who we happened to be born as, so why would another case of discrimination on the basis of birth be controversial?

Oh yeah, because that discrimination wouldn't affect white men, so it's suddenly wrong to discriminate.

Also, I don't understand why the Mail doesn't say when or where Clarkson even said this. He couldn't muttered it in his sleep or something. I don't see why he's being made out to be a public spokesman.

(edited 11 years ago)

Reply 32

A Mysterious Lord

Original post by meow444

He is kind of missing the point that there are plenty of terrorists who aren't muslim...

Name one that has targeted an airport/aircraft.

I don't recall airport security being this high in the days of the IRA.

Reply 33

lightburns

It's not PC, but it's not too out of line. If most terrorists fit the description of X, then you focus on people who look like X coming through. If terrorists don't tend to take kids along, you don't focus much attention on them - if terrorists change who they put through, then you change your selection.

Airports tend to do random baggage checks etc.; you can't search everyone, so surely a bit of prejudice so you can search the people who 'look a bit dodgy' isn't too bad a thing? It's like, if you were living in some areas of SE London where black gangs are common, police should be more cautious around that group of people. Similarly, in an area known for having white skinhead racist neo-nazis, police should focus on whites more. It's common sense.

Reply 34

S-man10

People won't realise this is typical Clarkson :sigh:

How about we just laugh and move along?

(edited 11 years ago)

Reply 35

Life_peer

I like Jeremy Clarkson for many reasons, one of them being his sense of humour, sincereness and outspokenness. These days, celebrities are usually spending great amounts of time to fake their real selves, but he and James May appear to be really honest and make very similar jokes about themselves (for example when Jeremy was in a wetsuit which had FAT written on it on Top Gear). To date, I condemn only one of his claims – the one about Gordon Brown being one-eyed – for which he however apologised and I believe it was really the heat of the moment.

So, whatever he says, my real concern is about the society being too politically correct and forgetting about the fact they are just words – he did not invade Poland… People who get hurt by words of a stranger are the ones who need to think about themselves. Jeremy Clarkson is a nice person, I think.

Reply 36

concubine

Goddamnit I hate people that get offended by stupid ****.

The abuse of children, the violent oppression of people, genocide, greed driven barriers to providing medical treatments for those most in need of them... THIS IS THE KINDA STUFF THAT SHOULD OFFEND PEOPLE, not the lighthearted comments of an ENTERTAINER.

And I hate the morons than insult those that complain about comments like Clarkson's by calling them 'liberals'.

What, so you're against liberalism? Alright then. **** off and go be oppressed somewhere.

(edited 11 years ago)

Reply 37

Tahooper

Original post by Ewan

They should just introduce those machines that can see beneath your clothing? No searching required then...

No.

The increased risk of cancer and the blatant violation of privacy is certainly not worth "automated searching".

Reply 38

Tahooper

Original post by concubine

What, so you're against liberalism? Alright then. **** off and go be oppressed somewhere.

Modern liberalism is a form of oppression though e.g. smoking ban, arresting people for saying things they disagree with, ethnic/gender quotas, higher taxes...

Reply 39

Ewan

Original post by Tahooper

No.

The increased risk of cancer and the blatant violation of privacy is certainly not worth "automated searching".

Risk calculated to be minimal it seems. The privacy violation doesn't wash with me, planes need to be safe. People are already searched, and their luggage inspected in detail. I don't really see how this is any worse than current procedure. You could give people a choice I suppose, although I would suspect when faced with 2 hour queues people would be willing to sacrifice a bit of privacy :biggrin: