79 thoughts on “Greta’s Time

  1. Nigel

    Oh, and obviously this is far too boring and uninteresting for most people since it relates to the impeachment which isn’t anywhere near entertaning or dramatic enough, but their Guardians Of The Year are The Public Servants:
    ‘At the White House, Trump’s top Russia expert, Fiona Hill, uncovered and then reported what she later realized was a “domestic political errand.” Hill’s Ukraine expert on the National Security Council (NSC), Lieut. Colonel Alexander Vindman, witnessed the July 25 call and raised alarms. In the Office of Management and Budget (OMB), the fiscal boiler room of the federal government, 15-year senior civil servant Mark Sandy struggled to reconcile Congress’ lawful provision of military aid to Ukraine with Trump’s orders to withhold it, and raised legal concerns with his superior.’

    1. Ringsend Incinerator

      Oh Fupp Off and post your boomer guff in the proper channel you gobshine.

      Kudos to Greta.

      1. Captain Pants

        its not amazing at all that’s been the game since about 2015 – make something that’s a bit crap, or an argument that doesn’t really work, ensure its got a young person, a minority or an lgbtquia person involved, and then you can accuse people of racism, sexism, misogyny or being boring and old for criticizing it. its just worn out at this point…

  2. Bort

    Greta Thunberg 16 – Billie Eilis 17. The 2 most famous teens, very different, blows my mind. Thunberg – child. Eilis – Adult

    1. Nullzero

      Isn’t Gammon just a racist slur?

      Oh but it’s OK because it’s prejudice against white men who are universally privileged.

        1. Nullzero

          It’s a slur directed at White men because they are white men. That is a racial slur.

          Sorry to burst your SJW bubble Nigel, but discrimination of any hue should be repugnant to any intelligent human being.

          1. Nullzero

            It does represent discrimination Nigel. That doesn’t change just because you don’t want it to be the case.

            You do understand the difference between reality and your opinions?

            It is a term that is used to discriminate against white middle aged men by making them a something to be ridiculed. If a similar term was being used to ridicule black women for simply being black women people would be outraged and rightly so.

            All discrimination is abhorrent, even if you think its OK because white people are on the receiving end of it which only makes you look daft.

            I’m happy to keep going on this Nigel, so dig away.

          2. Nullzero

            Good old Nigel, trying to have the last word whilst completely ignoring the facts.

            Who needs facts when you have a misplaced sense of moral superiority?

            Defending racism as well. As previously defending the use of illegal drugs.

            You get up on your soapbox here but you are shown to have no credibility whenever somebody scratches the surface of your neo liberal world view, you don’t even know what you believe in. Pathetic.

          3. Nullzero

            Yes it is Nigel. It was created by black youths in London to ridicule middle aged white men.

            Now I accept that one group is seen as being disadvantaged while the other isn’t but discrimination on grounds of skin colour are classified as racist.

            I’ll keep checking back here and correcting your willful ignorance Nigel, so please continue to post your statements that you cannot substantiate and I’ll keep making an eejit out of you.

          4. Nullzero

            Isn’t “white fragility” a concept about how white people are unable to confront racism?

            I don’t know how that term (which itself is simply an opinion put forward by an author) applies to a term that is used to discriminate against people based on their skin colour.

            Nigel, yet again you’ve outdone yourself in mixing things up and getting it all wrong, bravo.

          5. Nullzero

            It is racial discrimination. Its discrimination based on a persons skin colour.

            I know you don’t like that you could possibly be wrong about something but you’re wrong here.

            It’s such a puerile term to begin with, the way people revel in using it says an awful lot about their level of intelligence.

            All discrimination is wrong Nigel not just the discrimination you take issue with. It isn’t something you get to pick and choose. Grow up and give due consideration to what you write or say I future.

          6. Nullzero

            Yes it is Nigel. I’ve explained why.

            All you keep doing is saying it isn’t without explaining anything.

          7. Nullzero

            How is it an embarrassment?

            It’s a slur that is used to discriminate against somebody based upon their skin colour Nigel.

            Just because there are throngs of idiots online willing to do the mental gymnastics required to frame it as some sort of “right on” means of sticking it to “the man”, it just isn’t the case.

            If a term was being used to describe any other ethnic group it would be seen as indefensible, but because its about white people and some other white people are saying it as well it suddenly isn’t a racial slur.

            Seriously Nigel take a step back and think about it logically, it is a racial slur, it just happens to be an acceptable form of racial slur. It’s in the same vein as “honkey” or “cracker”.

            Here’s the thing Nigel, the way to get away from discriminatory language isn’t to invent new discriminatory language to aim at the perceived perpetrators of racism and intolerance.

            Terms like Gammon just serve to divide people further, and the defense of these types of terms as being acceptable is an indicator of the nonsensical thought processes of the new so called “progressives”.

          8. Nullzero

            At least we know what you really want for Christmas, the last bloody word.

            You’ll always be wrong to me Nigel.

      1. V

        I don’t like the expression myself
        But I haven’t come across anything yet that captures Noel Grealish so well

        We swap out Gammon for Grealish

        Well it works for me
        So will that be alright with everyone

        including the lads already with the great big Grealish head on them

      2. GiggidyGoo

        I thought that the term Gammon was used to describe men whose complexions (face) were pink and who were pro Brexit.
        I learn something new every day.

  3. Clampers Outside

    There’s more here complaining about complainers than there are any complainers.

    So, to balance things….

    “The Power of Youth” should read “The Power of the Mum and Dad behind the Youth”, in fairness.

    1. Nigel

      If only she’d been an orphan she might deserve some shred of credit, but having supportive parents is just cheating.

  4. V

    I think Broadsheet should have a Person of the Year

    and various other insert whatever you’re having yourself of the year

    anyone else?

    1. millie vanilly strikes again

      Not a bad idea. I’m rubbish at stuff like this but I always enjoy reading what people put out there.

  5. f_lawless

    Has anyone told her who some of the past winners have been? I doubt she’d particularly want to be associated with the likes of Hitler, Stalin, Nixon, Kissinger, George W Bush. It’s weird to think that the tarnished TIME brand still holds so much sway with people – but I guess that’s why it was bought up a few years ago by tech billionaire Marc Benioff even though the company is in serious decline.

    1. GiggidyGoo

      When you get the likes of Enda Kenny and Leo Varadkar on the front of the EMEA edition, that tells its own story.

    2. f_lawless

      Also,in reference to a comment above, Benioff has publicly supported Hillary Clinton and was a major donor to her failed campaign of 2016. It’s not hard to see how he may be inclined to use his brand to attempt to bolster the credibility of the ‘Ukrainegate’ fiasco.

      1. Nigel

        In fairness you hardly have to be a tech billionaire to see what a crook and a far-right demagogue Trump is.

    3. Nigel

      I’m sure once she’s made aware of this travesty she’ll abandon climate activism and begin a new crusade against Time Person Of The Year covers.

      1. GiggidyGoo

        Wait until she finds out how many trees were felled to supply the paper for the magazines, and the amount of fuel used to transport them to eventually reach your local newsagent, or delivery to your door.

    4. Increasing Displacement

      Don’t forgot “the American soldier” was it one year
      Cancelled my subscription and never bought a copy again after that

  6. some old queen

    Where Greta and the chem trail conspiracy theorists meet is that flying machines pump chemicals into the air which are much more toxic than any mobility at ground level because they are in the air within seconds?

    The Greens here tramp down on country people- what is with the rousing of that particular demographic? Rural need new ways of earning a living- of rearing a family- of not having to spend five hours a day commuting to and from Dublin or Belfast- give us answers and- it is NOT broadband.

    1. Nigel

      I guarantee you that environmentalists are as concerned about airline pollution and carbon as they are about plastic pollution and waming in the sea, the disappearance of the arctic and antarctic ice sheets, shrinking glaciers, water shortages, wildfires, severe storms and hurricanes, automobile and transport pollution, energy supply from oil and fracked gas, and sustainable and biodiversity-friendly agricultural practices. There are, as you can see, rather a lot of things to be concerned about if you’re concerned about the environment, but whatever the problem is, there are pretty sure to be environmentalists concerned about it and trying to do something about it, and somebody else standing beside them telling them that there are also other problems and why are you tramping down on this one. For feck’s sake.

  7. Bud Flanagan

    Great choice by Time.
    It’s extraordinary that a child has consistently been able garner worldwide headlines over what is probably the most important subject to face our planet.
    And she triggered that oaf Jeremy Clarkson.
    I can’t think of anyone who deserves it more.
    By a country mile.

      1. Bud Flanagan

        Having had time to think about this I would probably put the Hong Kong protestor in the mix as well.
        But Time has always picked its person of the year for the influence they have asserted and in this instance I’d still put Greta ahead.

  8. DOC

    R.I.P. David Bellamy (1933-2019)
    What has this got to do with Greta?
    In 2004 he dismissed Global Warming as “Poppycock”
    It cost him his T.V. career

Comments are closed.