Would it be funny if Jeremy Clarkson got cancer?



P

Peter Clinch

Guest
Simon Brooke wrote:
> in message <[email protected]>, Rob Morley
> ('[email protected]') wrote:


>> I notice you snipped the bit about only stupid people taking him
>> seriously.

>
> It doesn't make any difference whether the person who kills you is clever
> or stupid, you're still dead. And given that that is so, you'd be pretty
> stupid not to take seriously someone who deliberately sets out to incite
> stupid people to try to kill you.


I think Rob's point more was you'll find eejits out to partake in that
sort of dopiness in any case. Getting riled by it is itself an
incitement for people to carry on joking about it, so if you really want
it to stop then stop taking it seriously!

And as Tony pointed out, "shoot them and burn the bodies" as often
espoused here is not what you'd call completely different.

Pete.
--
Peter Clinch Medical Physics IT Officer
Tel 44 1382 660111 ext. 33637 Univ. of Dundee, Ninewells Hospital
Fax 44 1382 640177 Dundee DD1 9SY Scotland UK
net [email protected] http://www.dundee.ac.uk/~pjclinch/
 
T

Tony Raven

Guest
Sirius631 wrote on 20/09/2006 08:25 +0100:
>
> Perhaps the BEEB could be persuaded to do a program based on Clarkson
> having to spend a week riding in London traffic.
>


The Sunday Times did an article on him and AA Gill cycling round
Amsterdam for the weekend. IIRC apart from the obligatory bluster he
seemed to quite like it.



--
Tony

"Anyone who conducts an argument by appealing to authority is not using
his intelligence; he is just using his memory."
- Leonardo da Vinci
 
M

Mark McNeill

Guest
Response to Tony Raven:
> The Sunday Times did an article on him and AA Gill cycling round
> Amsterdam for the weekend. IIRC apart from the obligatory bluster he
> seemed to quite like it.



I never knew about that. Interesting!

The AA Gill version:
http://tinyurl.com/kjcx4

The Clarkson version:
http://tinyurl.com/gyr83




--
Mark, UK
"You can safely assume that you've created God in your own image when it
turns out that God hates all the same people you do."
 
R

Rob Morley

Guest
In article <[email protected]>
Simon Brooke <[email protected]> wrote:
<snip>
> It doesn't make any difference whether the person who kills you is clever
> or stupid, you're still dead.


The closest I've come to being dead was as a result of the actions of a
lady schoolteacher, not a chav intent on having a bit of a laugh.

> And given that that is so, you'd be pretty
> stupid not to take seriously someone who deliberately sets out to incite
> stupid people to try to kill you.


You don't really believe that, do you? I'm more concerned about people
who don't see me at all than people who see me as a potential target.
>
> In short: I understood your inference, but did not wish to humiliate you by
> drawing attention to it.
>

No need to worry about my feelings sweetie.
 
S

soup

Guest
Tony Raven wrote:
> spindrift wrote on 19/09/2006 10:52 +0100:
> >
> > can I offer five handy hints to those setting out on a bike for the
> > first time.
> >
> > 1. Do not cruise through red lights. Because if I'm coming the other
> > way, I will run you down, for fun.
> >
> > 2. Do not pull up at junctions in front of a line of traffic.
> > Because if I'm behind you, I will set off at normal speed and you
> > will be crushed under my wheels ... "
> >

>
> How is that different from the URC mantra involving matches and sharp
> implements for transgressing motorists?


Because they are transgressing, JC is talking about the murder of people
just going about their day to day travels WITHOUT breaking any laws (in
point 2 above anyway).
In point 1 above he talks of running people down 'for fun' AFAIK the
'kill them and burn the bodies' (always thought this was a bit [1]over
the top) retort is saved as a means of justice not as a means of
enjoyment.


[1] for bit read huge great big amount.


--
This space intentionally left blank.
 
D

David Damerell

Guest
Quoting spindrift <[email protected]>:
>So how can he get away with bile like this:

[ie, Jeremy Clarkson]
>" I'VE argued for years that those stupid helmets worn by cyclists are
>no use whatsoever.
>But it turns out I'm wrong.
>In fact, they actually increase the chance of you being knocked off
>your bike and crushed to death under the wheels of an articulated
>lorry.


While Clarkson is a complete quimbecile, this seems quite benign. "I used
to think helmets were of no value, now I know their value is negative."
--
David Damerell <[email protected]> flcl?
Today is Monday, September.
 
A

Al C-F

Guest
Peter Clinch wrote:
> spindrift wrote:
>
>> Something rather less ambiguous:

>
>
> Spindrift goes on and on at such painful length that he does his cause
> more harm than good. That's not ambiguous at all!
>


He seems so determined to take offence that he must be a muslim.
 
A

Alan Braggins

Guest
In article <[email protected]>, Al C-F wrote:
>Peter Clinch wrote:
>> spindrift wrote:
>>
>>> Something rather less ambiguous:

>>
>> Spindrift goes on and on at such painful length that he does his cause
>> more harm than good. That's not ambiguous at all!

>
>He seems so determined to take offence that he must be a muslim.


How many feminists does it take to change a lightbulb?
One. And it's _not funny_.
 
M

Mark McNeill

Guest
Response to David Damerell:
> >" I'VE argued for years that those stupid helmets worn by cyclists are
> >no use whatsoever.
> >But it turns out I'm wrong.
> >In fact, they actually increase the chance of you being knocked off
> >your bike and crushed to death under the wheels of an articulated
> >lorry.

>
> While Clarkson is a complete quimbecile, this seems quite benign. "I used
> to think helmets were of no value, now I know their value is negative."


That's only one interpretation, and not the one which occurred to me
when I first read it; I took it to mean "I thought helmets had no use,
and now I find they have one - that of putting cyclists in greater
danger." That is a much less benign reading.


It reminds me rather of some of Jim Davidson's late-period live
material, which *can* sound racist if taken the way it appears to sound,
but is worded in such a way that the racism may be deniable.


As it happens, this thread has become timely in an unfortunate way:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/low/england/north_yorkshire/5365676.stm



--
Mark, UK
"History teaches us that whenever a weak and ignorant people possess a
thing which a strong and enlightened people want, it must be yielded up
peaceably."
 
D

David Hansen

Guest
On 21 Sep 2006 00:26:37 -0700 someone who may be "spindrift"
<[email protected]> wrote this:-

>Clarkson is joking about people receiving crushing head injuries.
>
>I wonder if he feels the same now:


His "jokes" are about cyclists. The impression he gives, from my
limited experience of his rantings, is that cyclists are sub-human
and thus don't need to be afforded proper consideration. A fellow
motorist and presenter of a rubbish television programme will
undoubtedly be a different matter.


--
David Hansen, Edinburgh
I will *always* explain revoked encryption keys, unless RIP prevents me
http://www.opsi.gov.uk/acts/acts2000/00023--e.htm#54
 
S

soup

Guest
Alan Braggins wrote:
> How many feminists does it take to change a lightbulb?
> One. And it's _not funny_.


Q,Why does it take two women with PMS to change a lightbulb.

A, "IT JUST DOES ALRIGHT!!"

--
This space intentionally left blank.
 
T

Tony Raven

Guest
soup wrote on 21/09/2006 16:04 +0100:
> Alan Braggins wrote:
>> How many feminists does it take to change a lightbulb?
>> One. And it's _not funny_.

>
> Q,Why does it take two women with PMS to change a lightbulb.
>
> A, "IT JUST DOES ALRIGHT!!"
>


Or the counter from my SO

Q How many men does it take to change a lightbulb?
A Just one but they hold the lightbulb and expect the world to revolve
around them

--
Tony

"Anyone who conducts an argument by appealing to authority is not using
his intelligence; he is just using his memory."
- Leonardo da Vinci
 
T

Tom Crispin

Guest
On Tue, 19 Sep 2006 20:30:34 +0100, Mark McNeill
<[email protected]> wrote:

>Response to david lloyd:
>> What would be funny and ironic would be if he was run over by a car. This is
>> unlikely to happen because I doubt if he walks anywhere.

>
>Oh, he could conceivably be run over - he does [or did] cycle regularly,
>allegedly. (Although I suppose he could be strictly an off-roader.)


Are you sure you're not confusing him with Jeremy Paxman?

TV presenter Jeremy Paxman says "cycling is easily the quickest way
around central London, faster than bus, Tube or taxi.“
http://www.sportengland.org/news/press_releases/on_the_road_to_cycling_success.htm
 
A

Alistair Gunn

Guest
Tony Raven twisted the electrons to say:
> Q How many men does it take to change a lightbulb?
> A Just one but they hold the lightbulb and expect the world to revolve
> around them


I thought that was only Oxbridge graduates?
--
These opinions might not even be mine ...
Let alone connected with my employer ...
 
S

Simon Brooke

Guest
in message <[email protected]>, Tony Raven
('[email protected]') wrote:

> soup wrote on 21/09/2006 16:04 +0100:
>> Alan Braggins wrote:
>>> How many feminists does it take to change a lightbulb?
>>> One. And it's _not funny_.

>>
>> Q,Why does it take two women with PMS to change a lightbulb.
>>
>> A, "IT JUST DOES ALRIGHT!!"

>
> Or the counter from my SO
>
> Q How many men does it take to change a lightbulb?
> A Just one but they hold the lightbulb and expect the world to revolve
> around them


How many Zen Masters does it take to change a lightbulb?

None. The universe revolves around the bulb, and the Master leaves it
alone.


--
[email protected] (Simon Brooke) http://www.jasmine.org.uk/~simon/

;; Men never do evil so completely and cheerfully as when they
;; do it from  religious conviction."          -- Pascal
 
D

davek

Guest
Tony Raven wrote:
> Q How many men does it take to change a lightbulb?
> A Just one but they hold the lightbulb and expect the world to revolve
> around them


If it was a bayonet-fitting lamp would they expect the world to push in
then twist a quarter turn?

d.
 
T

Tony Raven

Guest
Simon Brooke wrote on 21/09/2006 21:25 +0100:
>
> How many Zen Masters does it take to change a lightbulb?
>
> None. The universe revolves around the bulb, and the Master leaves it
> alone.
>


I would have thought the answer there would be that "if the bulb went
out and there was no-one around to see it is it really broken?"

How many economists does it take to change a lightbulb?

None, if it really needed changing market forces would have changed it
by now.


--
Tony

"Anyone who conducts an argument by appealing to authority is not using
his intelligence; he is just using his memory."
- Leonardo da Vinci
 
M

Mark McNeill

Guest
Response to Tom Crispin:
>
> Are you sure you're not confusing him with Jeremy Paxman?


Quite sure.



--
Mark, UK
"When you've told someone that you've left them a legacy the only decent
thing to do is to die at once."