Cameron … supporter of bullies!

I thought I was seeing things when Cameron appeared on BBC News supporting Jeremy Clarkson, saying how much his children would miss him if he had to leave Top Gear as a result of “the incident”.

Personally, I think Top Gear is a waste of licence payer fees … middle aged men in badly fitting jeans, who despite their high salaries, don’t seem to spend much of it on haircuts or grooming, endorsing petrol guzzling vehicles (Kyoto agreement anyone?)

Anyway,  I just turn over to one of the other channels if there is a cack BBC programme on the TV.

Obviously I was not present when “the incident” took place, but it is reported that Clarkson assaulted a producer because no food was available…

Imagine for a moment, if you will, being in your place of work and a colleague assaults you. The police would be called… your colleauge would be subject to the conduct and discipline procedures of the organisation. They would be suspended and may possibly lose their job.

Yet CaMORON seems to think there is nothing wrong with going on TV and supporting someone who thinks it is perfectly OK to punch another person.

And that tells us everything we need to know about the tories, who lets face it have “punched” the NHS, Royal Mail, the disabled, students, transport, education, the environment, the ill, the vulnerable and are just about to launch an attack on pensioners.

Nuff said!

This entry was posted in Jeremy Clarkson and tagged , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

22 Responses to Cameron … supporter of bullies!

  1. patricknelson750 says:


    Liked by 3 people

  2. sdbast says:

    Reblogged this on sdbast.


  3. Pingback: Cameron … supporter of bullies! – glynismillward189 | Vox Political

  4. Gael says:

    Yes, indeed. I heard it on the radio. I shouted at the radio.

    Liked by 1 person

  5. Andy Robertson-Fox says:

    Cameron said “I don’t know what happened, I hope this can be sorted out.”
    He did not say his chıldren would miss Clarkson ıi he had to leave Top Gear, he said his children would be heartbroken if Top Gear was taken of air.
    Note he said Top Gear not Clarkson.
    He also said, “The Prime Minister has many responsibilities…sadly, securing the future of Top Gear isn’t one of them.”
    Note he said Top Gear not Clarkson.
    There is nothing in what Cameron said that suggests he condones or supports bullying.

    Clearly from the support of the petitioncalling for Clarkson to be reinstated your views on the spending of licence payer’s fees are not universal but then, havıng read many of your blogs, I suspect the opinion of glynismillward189 is frequently in the minorıty.


  6. Reblogged this on aspiblog and commented:
    This is excellent stuff from Glynis Millward…

    Liked by 2 people

  7. I have reblogged this on aspiblog, shared with my twitter followers on @aspitweets, and think it is an excellent post.

    Liked by 1 person

  8. jaypot2012 says:

    ARF has got his knickers in a twist so just ignore him.
    A PM should have more to worry about than this bullying goon. But then, Cameron and his lot are all bullying goons.

    Liked by 1 person

  9. jaypot2012 says:

    Reblogged this on Jay's Journal and commented:
    Bloody Clarkson, all over a steak! He ought to be thankful he could get food in the first place, even if it was cold meats etc. To drag the chef back to make this arrogant piece of manure a steak is downright disgusting. I hope he never gets his job back and I hope that they drop Top Gear to!

    Liked by 2 people

  10. Pingback: Barometer | Gabriel Vents

  11. Andy Robertson Fox …. “nothing to support the claim…”

    Definition of bully.
    noun (plural bullies)

    A person who uses strength or influence to harm or intimidate those who are weaker:
    ‘he is a ranting, domineering bully’

    So in my opinion Clarkson is a bully; Cameron knows this because the incident has been all over the media. As a spokesperson for the hotel at which Clarkson and his entourage were staying said … “There’s been some pretty accurate reporting of what happened.” (source – Sky News)
    and from the same source…
    Support has also come from Prime Minister David Cameron, who said he was a “huge talent”.

    The 54-year-old lives in his Witney constituency in Oxfordshire and is a friend.

    Mr Cameron told BBC Midlands Today: “I don’t know exactly what happened. He is a constituent of mine, he is a friend of mine, he is a huge talent.

    “I hope this can be sorted out because (Top Gear) is a great programme and he is a great talent.”

    On the balance of probabilities… (that is, it is more likely than not ) Clarkson is a bully and David Cameron knowing this supports him.

    Liked by 1 person

    • Andy Robertson-Fox says:

      Thank you for the definition of the word “bully”. I suspect that my scholastic education and my understanding of the word predates yours by many years. Nevertheless it is gratifying to know of someone else who can use a dictionary.
      The Sky News clip confirms that Clarkson used bad language – something with which your blog is not unfamiliar – but makes no reference to any physical contact.
      But you just don’t get it do you? You miss the whole point of my earlier comments in that whether Clarkson did or did not in any way “bully” is ırrelevant to your headline “Cameron…..supporter of bullıes” simply because, to put it bluntly, you are accusing the Prime Minister of lying when he said he did not know the details. You have no evidence to justıfy your claim as where a person lives, being a constituent, being a friend being a huge talent, and beıng popular do not constitute grounds for assumıng them to be a bully.
      No, as they say you have fallen for the old one of not letting fact get in the way of a story….a story I suggest you would not have entertained had ıt involved an individual of, shall we say, a diıfferent political colour. .

      Liked by 1 person

      • Oh Andy you are a card!
        I would like to make the following observations and comments if I may.
        You said, and I quote “having read many of your blogs, I suspect the opinion of glynismillward189 is frequently in the minority.”

        I suspect my blog is your guilty pleasure Andy. 😉
        It’s my blog and I will write on it what I like (within reason). If you don’t agree with what I say, I have no problem with that and I would actively encourage those who don’t agree with me to proffer their opinion and have in fact done so.

        You then go on to state “I suspect that my scholastic education and my understanding of the word pre dates yours by many years”

        Well I wouldn’t know about that Andy, but if it assists you, I am 55 years old. I was grammar school educated, culminating in the successful completion of O and A levels (as they were then called). Following this, I undertook a degree in nursing followed by post graduate diplomas in various disciplines, too many to mention here. I currently work in the civil service and having undertaken advocacy training/qualifications, am involved in litigation strategy. Anyway… enough about me…

        You then state “The Sky News clip confirms that Clarkson used bad language – something with which your blog is not unfamiliar”

        You are correct. My blog does indeed let out the odd expletive deleted. I see nothing wrong in either myself (or indeed anyone else) expressing themselves in good old Anglo Saxon. What I don’t endorse is a person in a superior position (Clarkson) using that position to bully, threaten and intimidate a colleague. THAT is unacceptable.
        To do that to someone is in fact common assault… sorry to subject you to another definition, but here it is…

        Where the victim apprehends immediate unlawful personal violence an assault will be committed even if there was no actual threat of violence:

        Logdon v DPP [1976] Crim LR 121

        The actions of the defendant must cause the victim to apprehend immediate unlawful personal violence. Originally it was thought that only conduct could amount to an assault:

        R v Meade and Belt (1823) 1 Lew. C.C. 184

        You then say that there was … “no reference to any physical contact.”
        There may not have been in that particular article from Sky News, which I was using to illustrate the conduct of Clarkson in relation to his conduct towards his colleague.

        However, other media organisations have stated that there was some form of physical contact.

        This from the Mirror … The outspoken presenter, who was due to film scenes nearby, is said to have called Oisin a “lazy Irish c***” before punching him and ­splitting his lip.

        Oisin, 36, was treated at A&E, but is understood to have “no interest” in filing assault claims against his boss or speaking to the press.”

        I still stand by what I stated originally, Cameron does support Clarkson, it follows therefore that he is a supporter of bullies. What he should have done is not said anything about it at all, but maybe Mr Cameron missed the benefits of your scholastic education.

        As for comment … “I suggest you would not have entertained had ıt involved an individual of, shall we say, a different political colour.”

        Not sure what you mean by that Andy. I believe that it is no secret that I do not support the tories. However, if another politician (of whatever political party) had supported a bully, then be under no illusion, I would have said the same thing.

        Liked by 1 person

      • Thank you for your reply, albeit rather long because you include more definitions of what constitutes bullying but I have never disagreed on that aspect.
        I fully accept that it is your blog and that you are entitled to say, within reason, what you wish. It would be rather boring if everyone simply agreed with you and in many ways a different opinion adds rather than detracts from the matter under discussion.
        As you have given a brief resume of your career may I reciprocate and confirm that I am, ındeed, a bit older than you having completed my A levels at grammar school and started work, if not before you were born at least before you got to kindergarten. Aithough accepted for unıversıty a place was, unfortunately, not taken up due to family concerns. After a career in the Cıvıl Service encompassing office management, personnel management, O & M and culminating in analytical studies in employment and training I joined private industry in the opthalmics trade. I am now well retired.
        As I said I have no argument with the definitıon of a bully and on this occasıon it may well be, given the very mixed media reports of what did or did not happen, that Clarkson overstepped the mark. I hold no candle for him on this.
        Where we are at variance is in your describing the Prime Minister as “a supporter of bullies”. In his intervıew Cameron said that he did not know what had happened but hoped it could be sorted out. If he did not know the details there is nothing on which to base your judgement of him. ..Friendship, near neighbour, talented do not confirm support for a bully but merely acknowledges what one knows to be true, When asked in an interview he could not say nothing so he stated he did not know the details; a perfectly non-commıtal response. How many of their friends knew about Rolf Harris, Gary Glitter, before the stories broke and were confirmed…and they were popular, talented individuals in their own field…yet.
        As regards the final paragraph of my previous comment, you clearly understand my point but I would add this….supposıng I had been stopped in the street and given the same response as Cameron – I don’t know what happened I hope this can be sorted out – would you have labelled Andy Robertson-Fox as a supporter of bullies? .

        Liked by 1 person

      • Sorry for the delay in getting back to you Andy … had rather a busy Mothers Day.
        It’s interesting that our backgrounds (as far as work goes) are not dissimilar.
        I stand by what I say… that Cameron is a supporter of bullies, in so far as that he knew or ought to have known that Clarkson abused his colleague. He should quite simply not have got involved in the debate about it.

        So suffice to say, we’ll have to agree to differ.

        Kind regards as always.


  12. richmalpass says:

    They are all one, privately-educated, white-privileged, middle-class group who all look out for one another. Cameron should have known better than to make any comment. Clarkson deserved to go years ago, as explained here:

    Liked by 1 person

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s