Viking Supporters Co-operative
Viking Chat => Off Topic => Topic started by: BillyStubbsTears on June 12, 2020, 08:17:03 pm
-
I was saying last week, I actually think she genuinely is a psychopath.
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/deport-autistic-jamaica-osime-brown-uk-home-office-a9400101.html?amp
This story has choked me right up.
My brother-in-law has serious autism. He is utterly incapable of looking after himself and would fall through the cracks if he didn't have family looking after him.
The lad in this story came to Britain when he was 4. He's in prison for nicking a mobile phone.
What the f**k have we allowed ourselves to become as a country?
-
We have other threads on here about patriotism and supporting your country.
Priti Patel was sacked from her previous ministerial role because she colluded, without the knowledge of her bosses, with a foreign government to subsidies that government with British taxpapyers money.
In previous years this could have been seen as treasonable. For Cummings & Johnson it made her deserving of being Home Secretary.
That's all you ever need to know about Priti Patel.
-
She is an absolutely vile hateful woman.
-
Priti Pathetic imo
-
She seem to have a natural ability to get right people's noses
-
As do Edd Milliband, John McConnell, Eimily Thornberry, Diane Abbott, Rebecca Long Bailey, and not forgetting Jeremy Corbyn Syd, just a few of the reasons you and them lost again by a landslide.
-
As do Edd Milliband, John McConnell, Eimily Thornberry, Diane Abbott, Rebecca Long Bailey, and not forgetting Jeremy Corbyn Syd, just a few of the reasons you and them lost again by a landslide.
So the Conservatives have not learned from Labour’s mistakes Selby?
-
As do Edd Milliband, John McConnell, Eimily Thornberry, Diane Abbott, Rebecca Long Bailey, and not forgetting Jeremy Corbyn Syd, just a few of the reasons you and them lost again by a landslide.
You won. Get over it. Celebrate how fantastically you have done...
-
She seem to have a natural ability to get right people's noses
I can think of someone not a million miles away that does too.
-
As do Edd Milliband, John McConnell, Eimily Thornberry, Diane Abbott, Rebecca Long Bailey, and not forgetting Jeremy Corbyn Syd, just a few of the reasons you and them lost again by a landslide.
You won? You should have said. I never knew.
-
There's no joy in victory if your party wins but your country loses.
-
No need to be so critical of yourself Glyn, I am sure deep down you are a decent lad.
-
Johson, grayling, cummings, shapps, gove, raab, hancock, mogg, I think they are all really nice people :)
-
No need to be so critical of yourself Glyn, I am sure deep down you are a decent lad.
I know, that's why I wasn't doing do.
Please, if you're going to try and be witty don't rely on the same tired old material. You'll lose what little audience you have left.
-
As do Edd Milliband, John McConnell, Eimily Thornberry, Diane Abbott, Rebecca Long Bailey, and not forgetting Jeremy Corbyn Syd, just a few of the reasons you and them lost again by a landslide.
Wrong selby, you lost. Sadly, you took the rest of the country down with you too - but hey ho, I'm sure you'll enjoy your chlorinated chicken and hormone fed beef!
-
As do Edd Milliband, John McConnell, Eimily Thornberry, Diane Abbott, Rebecca Long Bailey, and not forgetting Jeremy Corbyn Syd, just a few of the reasons you and them lost again by a landslide.
Wrong selby, you lost. Sadly, you took the rest of the country down with you too - but hey ho, I'm sure you'll enjoy your chlorinated chicken and hormone fed beef!
.... and the horrific stuff (banned in 100 + Countries) that they drug Pigs with
I cant bear to think of that
...and I remind Johnson of his promise to stop live exports to here there and Italy etc. 1000 miles on a hot lorry to die the same death that you could have "enjoyed" in Carlisle
Oops another promise already seems to have gone awry - never mind that plank Helen Whately will get the Fox hunting going again I am sure
-
Did you notice Patel yesterday condemning the violence "by a small minority" of the people protesting on Saturday.
A fiver for anyone who finds evidence of her saying the violence at the BLM protest the week before was by a small minority.
She must have been told off since.
https://twitter.com/BenKentish/status/1272555528317739008?s=19
-
Kato. I will say it again just for you, I voted to remain, I am just a better loser than a lot on here and am happy to accept a democratic vote, you obviously don't.
like small kids when not able to get an ice cream.
-
For you bst https://amp.theguardian.com/politics/live/2020/jun/08/uk-coronavirus-johnson-says-anti-racist-protests-were-subverted-by-thuggery-live-news-covid19-updates
Thank you. I retract my comment.
-
Kato,I am not bothered how much chlorinated chicken is imported, I will not nor do I have to buy any of it, or any other cheap food buddy. In fact if I wanted the meat I eat I could walk down the lane and and be introduced to the animal it came from.
-
Kato,I am not bothered how much chlorinated chicken is imported, I will not nor do I have to buy any of it, or any other cheap food buddy. In fact if I wanted the meat I eat I could walk down the lane and and be introduced to the animal it came from.
Much of the population doesn’t have that option though, so if our food isn’t labelled properly how would we have the choice to avoid products like that.?
Or are you so self centred you really don’t care about what happens to others.?
-
Kato, you can take the horse to the water buddy, but you can't make it drink mate.
To me it is up to the customer themselves, but before that the government agencies to impose the law on food hygiene and standerd laws that already exist.
I am old enough and know that there has been in the past
-
Kato. I will say it again just for you, I voted to remain, I am just a better loser than a lot on here and am happy to accept a democratic vote, you obviously don't.
like small kids when not able to get an ice cream.
I was referring to your post which was clearly referring to the GE. Not sure what type of ice cream the Yanks will let us have though.
-
Kato, you can take the horse to the water buddy, but you can't make it drink mate.
Oh but you can selby, it's very easy if you know what you're doing; oh, and so long as there are two of you....
First person takes the horse by its whiskers and pulls it's mouth well into the water container, (or lake etc). The second person stands immediately behind the horse and, when the horses mouth is deep in the water, kicks it hard in the bollox.....
Whsssssssssssssssssss :thumbsup:
-
Yes Kato, I can just imagine you with tour bike helmet on behind the horse.
-
Kato. I will say it again just for you, I voted to remain, I am just a better loser than a lot on here and am happy to accept a democratic vote, you obviously don't.
like small kids when not able to get an ice cream.
I was referring to your post which was clearly referring to the GE. Not sure what type of ice cream the Yanks will let us have though.
That is a load of Walls.
-
Nice friends she keeps too. You'd think there was some political gamesmanship and sleight of hand going on in the background if you didn't know better. Oh, hang on.....
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2020/jun/16/priti-patel-linked-with-monument-protection-campaign-organiser
-
Nice friends she keeps too. You'd think there was some political gamesmanship and sleight of hand going on in the background if you didn't know better. Oh, hang on.....
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2020/jun/16/priti-patel-linked-with-monument-protection-campaign-organiser
It seems there's nothing beneath Priti Patel.
-
This story is before Patel's time. But this is what our Home Office has been doing for a decade now. Read it. If this doesn't fill you with rage at what we have become, I fear for your soul.
https://mobile.twitter.com/john_vassiliou1/status/1275176474241388544
I am walking round my office kicking walls after reading this. Because it chimes exactly with what I've written before about what happened to my brother-in-law who lost his dad to cancer in chaotic circumstances when he was 8, and despite being born in Britain, raised speaking English, with English friends in an English town, was unable to get the paperwork to prove his British citizenship when he wanted to join the RAF.
May, Rudd and now Patel. Three women who have made me feel disgusted to be British, because they f**k people's lives for political benefit.
-
Thank you for worrying for my soul
-
Just bumped her back up after that display on Telly yesterday. Toeing the Party line of course but HELL have they no sense of irony slating Liverpool fans slating those on the beaches "who should have taken better responsibility" "and also thought of others - rather than themselves" yet defending Cummings again.
Of COURSE "he was a different case - and has issue has been and gone - BUT we have ths terrible disease now and should all be aware of it and use common sense to help get rid of it"
Yet they as Politicians ignore the fact that the terrible disease WAS there when he did what he did - and the advice could not have been clearer. It was STAY HOME - SAVE LIVES - PROTECT THE NHS
-
How can this be right?
Priti Patel’s hubby is siphoning of £25K in public money “to run her office”
- even though he already has a full time job AND is a Cllr.
A reminder that a senior French politician has just been imprisoned for inventing a job
to siphon of money for his wife.
-
He's off the gravy train now Foxbat
Priti Patel’s husband comes off the payroll (paywall)
Tuesday August 08 2017, 12.01am BST, The Times
-
Just bumped her back up after that display on Telly yesterday. Toeing the Party line of course but HELL have they no sense of irony slating Liverpool fans slating those on the beaches "who should have taken better responsibility" "and also thought of others - rather than themselves" yet defending Cummings again.
Of COURSE "he was a different case - and has issue has been and gone - BUT we have ths terrible disease now and should all be aware of it and use common sense to help get rid of it"
Yet they as Politicians ignore the fact that the terrible disease WAS there when he did what he did - and the advice could not have been clearer. It was STAY HOME - SAVE LIVES - PROTECT THE NHS
wolf out of interest as your obviously cross Mps have not followed instructions, did you see the Labour mp who was stood in the middle of hundreds if not thousands of protesters? If you did would you not think that is far more dangerous than being in a car? Yes Cummings might well have lied but as your post is pretty much saying how dangerous the virus is maybe you should be writing how furious with the labour mp you are to
-
Im p****d off with all breakers of ANY rule
Yellow Lines - not on
Using a Mobile to call in car not hands free not on
Using Mobile to text in Car - blood beginning to boil
Parking in 2 spots crap
Parking in disabled spots blood boiling
Breaking lockdown by any person - simply not on
Breaking lockdown when you PERSONALLY laid down the rules - intolerable
Yes he was in a car on way to Durham but did he have to fuel up ? Did his kid need a pee on way. Did ne drive round and round Barnard Castle on his wifes birthday or sit by the River
Did he go home after mixing with Liar Johnson when the latter had symptoms ?
Did he go back to Number 10 (and Johnson) after visiting his Wife because she supposedly had symptoms ?
All the transgressions I mentioned above are to me "red lines" but Cummings is by far the worst and it has nothing whatsoever to do with Party politics.
-
And here's the latest from one of BP's heroines....
https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/priti-patel-called-for-new-lottery-rules-after-meeting-with-richard-desmond-gfv9shcsh
-
Just. Speechless.
https://mobile.twitter.com/BBCPolitics/status/1283347431606964226
This is what happens when people who have made their career by bullshitting to people who don't question them get questioned.
Excruciatingly embarrassing.
-
Just. Speechless.
https://mobile.twitter.com/BBCPolitics/status/1283347431606964226
This is what happens when people who have made their career by bullshitting to people who don't question them get questioned.
Excruciatingly embarrassing.
"This Government is led by the science....of guessing."
-
Another report that Johnson has sat on for months.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-55007122
-
They are saying Johnson will invest more Political capital "defending her to the hilt" whilst NOT releasing the Report that he will say clears her or negates the charges against her
They are therefore asking, if she is "not guilty" in his eyes why not SHOW the relevant sections of the Report
Thats them (BBC SKY ITV etc) "saying" and "asking" not me
-
They also say in theor opinion - she wont resign - Liar Johnson wont sack her - and he will say she didnt realise she was bullying people and will apologise if she is asked by those she bullied without realising she was doing it
They are also saying that would be a start, but she has broken the Ministerial Code and almost always that means the person in question just "goes" - AND furthermore she has accidenatally bullied people in 2 other Ministries when she has been in charge there but Johnson will keep all that quiet by not publishing the Report of course
See - public service from Donnywolf (courtesy of Media outlets) so you can go about your business without waiting for Johnsons response - a much better use of your time
-
Boris Johnson has said he will not sack her as she bullied a civil servant unknowingly.
Unbelievable!
-
Yep you have got to give it to Bercow, he bullied people publically for all to see for four years on prime time TV, and his staff in the office apparently and never was highlighted by any of you.
-
... and he too is a Tory originally till he had to become "Independent" as part of the job
-
Yep you have got to give it to Bercow, he bullied people publically for all to see for four years on prime time TV, and his staff in the office apparently and never was highlighted by any of you.
If keeping MP’s of all colours in order, which was his job to do was bullying, then he’s guilty as charged, and in that context you need to redefine what bullying is
-
Boris Johnson has said he will not sack her as she bullied a civil servant unknowingly.
Unbelievable!
Incredible isn't it?
The report, apparently according to leaks, finds her guilty of breaking the Ministerial Code on bullying, but she didn't realise she was a bully so that's ok.
Great defence for the future. If you are too sociopathic to realise what a Kitson you are being, you can get away with anything. "I'm sorry officer, when I swung a punch in that bloke's face, I didn't realise he might get hurt."
-
From the Daily Mash...
I didn't realise slamming a civil servant's nuts in a drawer was considered 'bullying', says Priti Patel
20th November 2020
PRITI Patel has confessed she had no idea that Chinese burns, nutsack drawer-slammings and regular wedgies were what the weak considered ‘bullying’.
The home secretary faces allegations of what civil servants call bullying and she calls ‘robust motivational techniques’, including getting your briefcase thrown onto the roof and swirlies.
She said: “So calling a senior civil servant a four-eyed pisswipe who shags his mum is ‘bullying’ now, is it? Well I didn’t know.
“May I remind you that some of these people insist they are ‘politically neutral’ instead of backing Brexit to the absolute hilt? If that’s not provocation I don’t know what is.
“Yes, perhaps I did flush the occasional lunch down the toilets. Perhaps a few pairs of glasses got stamped on. Perhaps copies of the ministerial code left on my desk, with key passages highlighted, were returned smeared with excrement.
“But I am a strong, decisive woman who demands a lot of my employees, and I don’t apologise for that. Now come here. Me and my gang are going to throw you in the bins.”
Conservative MP Eleanor Shaw said: “Priti is not a bully and is a kind, wonderful person. When I hear her coming I definitely do not hide in the toilets.”
-
Nice friends she keeps too. You'd think there was some political gamesmanship and sleight of hand going on in the background if you didn't know better. Oh, hang on.....
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2020/jun/16/priti-patel-linked-with-monument-protection-campaign-organiser
It seems there's nothing beneath Priti Patel.
I wish I was.
-
the problem is if good people keep resigning the only thing left is the stuff that floats on a stagnant pond.
Live Guardian
''PM's ministerial standards adviser quits over Priti Patel decision
Sir Alex Allan, the prime minister’s adviser on ministerial standards, has quit following Johnson’s refusal to sack Priti Patel.
A Cabinet Office inquiry into allegations of bullying and harassment by the home secretary found that she had broken the ministerial code.
But Boris Johnson has judged that Patel did not breach the code.
In the report, Allan advised that Patel had not consistently met “the high standards required by the ministerial code of treating her civil servants with consideration and respect”.
It added that her approach on occasions had amounted to behaviour “that can be described as bullying in terms of the impact felt by individuals”.
“To that extent her behaviour has been in breach of the ministerial code, even if unintentionally.”''
-
So an independent senior guy writes a report, and the PM ignores the findings.
On what grounds.?
Do they think the public seeing this, cannot see through what they are doing.?
What a crock of shite we have running our country.
-
“We’re so Priti, oh so Priti va-Kitson, and we don’t care”...
-
What a great end to National Anti Bullying week is it? All we need now is Frank Spencer (aka Gavin Williamson) where is he by the way? To come out and back her and say "It was nuffin to do wiv me"
-
I love the term 'Ministerial Code' - sounds like something all Witches and Wizards must adhere to, else they'll get in trouble with the Ministry of Magic!
Harry Potter reference for those unaware of wtf I'm on about.
-
So an independent senior guy writes a report, and the PM ignores the findings.
On what grounds.?
Do they think the public seeing this, cannot see through what they are doing.?
What a crock of shite we have running our country.
Unfortunately with an 80 Seat majority they can almost do what they want to do as long as they dont rile more than 40 of their own MPs
Unfortunately if they do they will just "buy them off"
Get used to it everyone (that cares) as its a long way to 2024
-
Carry on like they are doing and 40 or more of them will crack..
-
This is disgraceful from the BBC Chief Tory apologist!
https://twitter.com/bbclaurak/status/1329752731612045313?s=21
-
I don’t get your point.? LK has just reported what has happened with the report and what has been said by key players.
I don’t see any “editorial” comment from her on this case - can you be more specific as to what she has done wrong.?
The BBC headline for this story is the resignation of the ministerial standards advisor, after Johnson rejected the report’s conclusions. That implies criticism of the PM IMHO.
-
I don’t get your point.? LK has just reported what has happened with the report and what has been said by key players.
I don’t see any “editorial” comment from her on this case - can you be more specific as to what she has done wrong.?
The BBC headline for this story is the resignation of the ministerial standards advisor, after Johnson rejected the report’s conclusions. That implies criticism of the PM IMHO.
Sorry I was trying to reference one post in that thread, you may have missed it, but to me she try’s in that one tweet to justify bullying, here is the text of that one tweet
“ Worth saying the report also makes unusual criticism of Home Office, says Patel didn't always receive support she should have from her officials”
-
Sorry but how does that justify bullying.? It just shows certain parts of the report identifying some failings elsewhere..
-
Its a shame Priti Patels immigration laws weren't in force in the 1960's then we wouldn't have had to put up with this evil bitch.
-
Its a disgusting situation, she should have been sacked immediately
-
What I don't get is what Johnson sees as a benefit in acting like this.
Patel should never have been allowed anywhere close to a senior Cabinet position after she broke every rule in the book by effectively conducting her own foreign policy discussions with the Israeli Govt. Then, within months of getting the Home Secretary post, she clearly acts in a way which, in normal times, would require her sacking.
She's a loose cannon. It is farcical to think that she's not going to carry on acting like this. She WILL have to be sacked sooner or later. So, as with Cummings, Johnson puts a lot of skin in the game to support a colleague, then loses eventually anyway. Just like he's done 8 or 10 times already with U-turns.
I wonder why he doesn't see it.
-
Because that act of being a jolly bumbling idiot isn't really an act at all. The job he always wanted is too big for him. He will be gone in the New Year. Not sure who we will get next will be any better though.
-
Stuck on it'll be Gove.
-
Rather it was Raab.
-
Aarrghhhhh :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm:
-
The biggest worry in this issue is the fact that, once again, Johnson has tried to sit on an embarrassing report, then been forced to deal with it. Makes you wonder what else he's trying to cover.
-
Then you've got this aspect:
1) Patel is accused of bullying.
2) Govt announces it can do nothing till an independent inquiry looks into the allegation.
3) Independent inquiry says Patel was a bully.
4) Johnson sits on the report for months, then when it is leaked, says Patel isn't a bully, case closed.
-
What has she actually been accused of doing?
If it's just a case of someone getting a bawling out for being useless at their job or not doing what they're told then I don't see that as bullying. If every time someone got a bollocking at work they called it bullying then we'd all have had some.
It's not like the Home Office actually cover themselves in glory is it?
-
Well one of her staff tried to commit suicide after working with Patel. That might give you an insight into what she's like AL.
The boss of the first company I worked for was the biggest Kitson and the biggest bully I have ever known. There were three nervous breakdowns and one suicide attempt among staff, and one case of someone just vanishing.
It is f**king horrific working for someone like that.
-
If the senior civil servant in the home office sought for to resign and then sue for constructive dismissal under her watch, what does that say.?
-
Still, at least she baits the libs!
-
Yesterday the government announced they would be scrapping the funding for tackling LGBT bulling in schools.
Today Johnson announced he would be taking no action against a senior minister who was found to have bullied junior staff on several occassions and thus broken the ministeral code.
Is it really a coincidence they have done these in Anti-Bullying Week! (Yes it really is that).
-
If the senior civil servant in the home office sought for to resign and then sue for constructive dismissal under her watch, what does that say.?
It would say she was a slow learner as a previous Ministry she headed had one woman leave and claim (and win) unfair dismissal and a huge pay off * I will look for the details somewhere so it can be fact checked
She was also accused of bullying in the second Department she headed
Here is an extract showing she has "form" and has cost (presumably) the Taxpayer 25k already
The senior Civil Service man at the centre of the latest proven breaking of the Ministerial Code is heading for a Tribnal and they are queueing up to give evidence in HIS favour
-
So despite being warned by a senior civil servant to moderate her abusive behaviour, then being found guilty by the independent investigation into her bullying, we are supposed to feel sorry for the bully.
Johnson decides to circle the wagons;
https://twitter.com/PippaCrerar/status/1329772020658294786
So the just outcome is the resignation of the civil servant who did his job, and reported back on the abuser.
Its a great defence......I might have been a dreadful bully, but I didn't really mean it, so thats OK if I say sorry!
-
Regardless of the bullying or not, the PM asked for this investigation and the report. The senior advisor is independent and made his conclusions. But then the PM ignored the findings.
Why bother.? The ignorance and ineptitude and invertebrateness of our PM is just as much of a scandal as Patel being found out to be a bully..
Oh and saying sorry I didn’t mean it and I didn’t know, is a child’s defence..
-
He is a mirror image of the other clown across the pond.
-
What has she actually been accused of doing?
If it's just a case of someone getting a bawling out for being useless at their job or not doing what they're told then I don't see that as bullying. If every time someone got a bollocking at work they called it bullying then we'd all have had some.
It's not like the Home Office actually cover themselves in glory is it?
My missis years back got a well paid job that just involved a bit of a commute
Turns out it was a commute because noone local would work for him. Full on hairdryer type bollocking for slightest thing and general bully tactics, she told me after she left that she'd considered crashing car at times on way to work just so she had excuse not to go in. That's what bullying at work is , nothing to do with a firm or challenging environment
-
It's a very archaic way of managing.
-
Turnbull.
She's got my sympathy. I know exactly what it feels like to want to crash your car rather than have to go into work.
AL. What we are talking about is far worse than "giving someone a bollocking". It's about power games by sociopaths.
I'll give you a personal example. In 1991, during the recession, there were rumours that there's be job losses at the company I worked at. I was desperate to get away anyway and I applied for and got another job.
At the time, I was a young engineer doing what's called "training under agreement". It meant as part of my employment, I was expected to train to become a chartered engineer. There was a gentleman's agreement that graduates under training didn't leave, and companies didn't lay them off.
I put in my notice and immediately got called into the boss's office. Think on, I was 24; he was 65 and one of the biggest names in the country in our field. He went ballistic the moment I closed the door, telling me, with a finger in my face, that training under agreement was a sacred arrangement. He said (quote) "If you break your agreement, I'll make damn sure you never get a job in this industry again."
So I turned down the other job.
6 weeks later, he laid off three other graduate engineers who were training under agreement.
What he did was disgusting. It was a power trip, intimidating someone to do his bidding. I was strong enough to deal with it and I gave him a mouthful and resigned a year later when he tried stuffing me for a f**k up he had made. But a lad a year or two older than me got stress-induced epilepsy and never worked again.
I f**king hate bullies and anyone, like Johnson, who covers for them is a pathetic coward.
-
Turnbull.
She's got my sympathy. I know exactly what it feels like to want to crash your car rather than have to go into work.
AL. What we are talking about is far worse than "giving someone a bollocking". It's about power games by sociopaths.
I'll give you a personal example. In 1991, during the recession, there were rumours that there's be job losses at the company I worked at. I was desperate to get away anyway and I applied for and got another job.
At the time, I was a young engineer doing what's called "training under agreement". It meant as part of my employment, I was expected to train to become a chartered engineer. There was a gentleman's agreement that graduates under training didn't leave, and companies didn't lay them off.
I put in my notice and immediately got called into the boss's office. Think on, I was 24; he was 65 and one of the biggest names in the country in our field. He went ballistic the moment I closed the door, telling me, with a finger in my face, that training under agreement was a sacred arrangement. He said (quote) "If you break your agreement, I'll make damn sure you never get a job in this industry again."
So I turned down the other job.
6 weeks later, he laid off three other graduate engineers who were training under agreement.
What he did was disgusting. It was a power trip, intimidating someone to do his bidding. I was strong enough to deal with it and I gave him a mouthful and resigned a year later when he tried stuffing me for a f**k up he had made. But a lad a year or two older than me got stress-induced epilepsy and never worked again.
I f**king hate bullies and anyone, like Johnson, who covers for them is a pathetic coward.
Billy we don't always share the same views but on this we do .
I absolutely loath bullies , there's nothing ever going to boil my pyss more .
For balance I understand Gordon Brown had his moments too , it's not a Tory thing by any means .
As a person with power you take people with you not drive them away .
Sadly it's a management strategy that is in decline and says more about the quality of management today than it does about anything else .
Then again its about who you know rather than the skills you have today .
I've been got rid of twice for calling it out in the past and fronting it out with the perpetrator in past employments .
OK I lost a couple of jobs but I survived , the real satisfaction was exposing these people for how weak they really are when you front them up .
Not with brawn but with eye to eye contact , facts and an opinion .
Tough they mostly certainly aren't .
-
She claimed she didn’t know she was doing it, but apparently the senior guy who resigned in spring did tell her about her behaviour - according to the man himself..
-
She claimed she didn’t know she was doing it, but apparently the senior guy who resigned in spring did tell her about her behaviour - according to the man himself..
Which is not in the report.
Exact copy of the Russia Report which didn't find any evidence of interefence in the referendum - because they didn't investigate it.
-
Reported this morning that Johnson asked the inquiry head to water down his findings back in the Summer. And the buzzard language used by No10 in responding to this makes it clear this report is true.
-
Reported this morning that Johnson asked the inquiry head to water down his findings back in the Summer. And the buzzard language used by No10 in responding to this makes it clear this report is true.
Here’s a link
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-55026137
-
Note that No10 doesn't deny Johnson asking Allan to change his report. They just say he didn't succeed.
-
As I read this morning , the Tories are all for you taking responsibility for your lives which is fine but they aren't so enthusiastic about taking responsibility themselves .
Patel is a vile women who has no place in public office , not because I say so but because the facts regarding her whole career say she is .
-
As I read this morning , the Tories are all for you taking responsibility for your lives which is fine but they aren't so enthusiastic about taking responsibility themselves .
Patel is a vile women who has no place in public office , not because I say so but because the facts regarding her whole career say she is .
People should take responsibility though.
I had a mate telling me this morning that he was trying to get three other lads to travel together to Wales to have a round of golf.
Unbelievably stupid.
-
Just a reminder from back in March, in case folks have forgotten;
https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-51705069
So that will be a pay out for summat that didn't happen, or if it did, she did not realise it was like that!
If you believe Patel, you probably believe in the Tooth Fairy as well.
-
But that story cannot be right Albie. Because Patel insists that no-one ever pointed out to her that she was engaging in bullying behaviour.
-
Although. This from the head of the FCO civil service who resigned his highly paid job in protest at her behaviour.
https://mobile.twitter.com/ChrisGiles_/status/1329857122545315841
-
It looks like when johnson's overtures to Alex Allan to 'tone it down' were rebuffed access to Putnam was denied. The latter could have happened anyway as belt and braces to ensure the inquiry was scuttled.
Win win all round for the narcissists.
-
No-one is talking about the elephant in the room.
Bullying is a form of mental illness. It is based upon lack of empathy for others, and it needs to be addressed with professional help.
Patel seems to think "try harder" will do the job.
You need to be wilfully ignorant to think that. A sociopath will continue to default to incorrect attitudes because of an inability to calibrate appropriate responses.
So, two big issues;
1) Is Patel seeing Doctors, to diagnose and resolve her condition,
2) Is it appropriate for Patel to continue as Home Secretary when suffering from an illness that will impact her decision making in that role?
-
No-one is talking about the elephant in the room.
Bullying is a form of mental illness. It is based upon lack of empathy for others, and it needs to be addressed with professional help.
Patel seems to think "try harder" will do the job.
You need to be wilfully ignorant to think that. A sociopath will continue to default to incorrect attitudes because of an inability to calibrate appropriate responses.
So, two big issues;
1) Is Patel seeing Doctors, to diagnose and resolve her condition,
2) Is it appropriate for Patel to continue as Home Secretary when suffering from an illness that will impact her decision making in that role?
Rather than sack her Johnson will reshuffle her out of the job, taking the problem to another department, he’s incapable of making the difficult decisions
-
They are already tipping that - and he will hand her Education probably calling it the massive job that remains to be fettled (as Williamson must be a casualty in any reshuffle surely ?) to make it look better for her in case she starts bullying HIM
He is totally incompetent (looking) but then again name 30 members of this Government and you would get 30 incompetent Yes Men and Women capable only of repeating Get B****t done Rule of 6 Hands Face Space into every supposed answer
-
No-one is talking about the elephant in the room.
Bullying is a form of mental illness. It is based upon lack of empathy for others, and it needs to be addressed with professional help.
Patel seems to think "try harder" will do the job.
You need to be wilfully ignorant to think that. A sociopath will continue to default to incorrect attitudes because of an inability to calibrate appropriate responses.
So, two big issues;
1) Is Patel seeing Doctors, to diagnose and resolve her condition,
2) Is it appropriate for Patel to continue as Home Secretary when suffering from an illness that will impact her decision making in that role?
I didn't know that Albie. I presumed it was someone unusuited power being unable to use that power in an acceptable manner.
And Johnson excused it because coming from a public school background (and his own family background according to the latest book) bullying is a 'normal' and acceptable activity.
-
Whose latest book?
-
Tom Bower - it was serialised in the papers a month or so ago:
https://www.theguardian.com/books/2020/oct/13/boris-johnson-the-gambler-by-tom-bower-review-the-defining-secret
-
No-one is talking about the elephant in the room.
Bullying is a form of mental illness. It is based upon lack of empathy for others, and it needs to be addressed with professional help.
Patel seems to think "try harder" will do the job.
You need to be wilfully ignorant to think that. A sociopath will continue to default to incorrect attitudes because of an inability to calibrate appropriate responses.
So, two big issues;
1) Is Patel seeing Doctors, to diagnose and resolve her condition,
2) Is it appropriate for Patel to continue as Home Secretary when suffering from an illness that will impact her decision making in that role?
Actually Albie, I have fantasies about her thrashing the f*ck out of me.
Maybe I need professional help as well.
-
I bet she wouldn't come cheap, SS. Probably more than you can afford! We can have a whip-round if you like!
-
She probably costs a Priti penny.
-
I bet she wouldn't come cheap, SS. Probably more than you can afford! We can have a whip-round if you like!
Would that be the Labour whip?
-
I heard Diane Abbott was a bit disappointed when Jezza turned up without his, especially when he told her Kier had taken it off him. "That's Blatant Bullying", she protested.
-
SS,
Yes, I reckon that you might need a fix.
Older gents of a certain vintage fantasising about being lashed in a dungeon by Patel...not healthy, that!
Don't forget she won't know when to stop, and she won't be slow about using the red hot poker on a bad lad.
Could turn out nasty!
-
I bet she wouldn't come cheap, SS. Probably more than you can afford! We can have a whip-round if you like!
Would that be the Labour whip?
Now that Caroline Flint has gone, it'll have to be Jess Phillips doing the whipping.
She looks mean enough for it to be enjoyable.
-
I've heard you can buy a blow-up Emily Thornberry dominatrix doll, but it takes 3 days to blow the chuffing thing up.
-
I've heard you can buy a blow-up Emily Thornberry dominatrix doll, but it takes 3 days to blow the chuffing thing up.
Never mind the doll; someone should have stuck a pin in the real thing some time ago and let out some of that f*cking hot air she spouts.
-
I've heard you can buy a blow-up Emily Thornberry dominatrix doll, but it takes 3 days to blow the chuffing thing up.
Never mind the doll; someone should have stuck a pin in the real thing some time ago and let out some of that f*cking hot air she spouts.
There certainly was a heavy build-up of Corbyn Monoxide.
-
words from the sage to ministers and senior cilvil servants ''there is no place for bullying''
-
The dizzy bitch strikes again....
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-essex-55403058
How do these people stay in a job?
-
Try this humdinger from her. 2:15:45 here.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/sounds/play/m000qjdl
"The Govt has been proactive and consistently ahead of the curve" on COVID.
Not sure which possibility is the more scary there. The thought that someone running the country actually believes that. Or the thought that she holds us in such utter contempt that she reckons she can say that and we'll nod sagely and say, "Yep. Can't fault them."
-
The dizzy bitch strikes again....
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-essex-55403058
How do these people stay in a job?
It turns out though that the dizzy bitch was speaking the truth.
Don’t you agree NNK.
I wonder how many other people wrote on social media condemning the perpetrators of the crime.
-
Hound.
You DO realise it is potentially a criminal offence to comment on judicial matters like this? And you DO realise the Home Secretary has a particular profile here?
Surely you are not condoning what she did? Are you?
-
Hound.
You DO realise it is potentially a criminal offence to comment on judicial matters like this? And you DO realise the Home Secretary has a particular profile here?
Surely you are not condoning what she did? Are you?
Of course not, you have read what I posted.
Was she telling the truth?
-
No-one is talking about the elephant in the room.
Bullying is a form of mental illness. It is based upon lack of empathy for others, and it needs to be addressed with professional help.
Patel seems to think "try harder" will do the job.
You need to be wilfully ignorant to think that. A sociopath will continue to default to incorrect attitudes because of an inability to calibrate appropriate responses.
So, two big issues;
1) Is Patel seeing Doctors, to diagnose and resolve her condition,
2) Is it appropriate for Patel to continue as Home Secretary when suffering from an illness that will impact her decision making in that role?
Actually Albie, I have fantasies about her thrashing the f*ck out of me.
Maybe I need professional help as well.
Oi, get to the back of the queue!
-
TBF, she is Priti scary - an example of someone completely out of her depth and pitifully inept.......... and yet she seems to be convinced she's doing a great job. I wouldn't employ her to clean my gutters let alone run a government department...
-
She just isn't very good is she? But I guess she can't say "well we failed a bit on that".
-
Hound. If you want to be pedantic, no she wasn't. They hadn't been convicted at the time so they weren't officially criminals.
But that is utterly and totally beside the point.
We have a fine tradition in this country of the judiciary and judicial proceeds being kept separate from politicians. She was utterly irresponsible wading into this and should be condemned for doing so without reservation.
-
Nutty as a fruitcake, is PP.
As Home Secretary, she should be aware not to comment on legal proceedings ongoing;
https://www.thelondoneconomic.com/news/priti-patel-caused-legal-storm-by-posting-tweet-about-migrant-deaths/21/12/
Then she comments on the Dover chaos and reckons the UK is "ahead of the curve on Covid";
https://www.politicshome.com/news/article/priti-patel-forced-to-admit-there-are-10-times-the-number-of-lorries-stuck-waiting-in-kent-amid-border-row-with-france-than-the-government-claimed
Completely mad, IMO!
-
The dizzy bitch strikes again....
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-essex-55403058
How do these people stay in a job?
It turns out though that the dizzy bitch was speaking the truth.
Don’t you agree NNK.
I wonder how many other people wrote on social media condemning the perpetrators of the crime.
(https://i.imgur.com/8Ww8nfm.jpg)
-
The dizzy bitch strikes again....
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-essex-55403058
How do these people stay in a job?
It turns out though that the dizzy bitch was speaking the truth.
Don’t you agree NNK.
I wonder how many other people wrote on social media condemning the perpetrators of the crime.
(https://i.imgur.com/8Ww8nfm.jpg)
Life must be hard for you NNK.
I hope you get well soon.
-
Hound. If you want to be pedantic, no she wasn't. They hadn't been convicted at the time so they weren't officially criminals.
But that is utterly and totally beside the point.
We have a fine tradition in this country of the judiciary and judicial proceeds being kept separate from politicians. She was utterly irresponsible wading into this and should be condemned for doing so without reservation.
I have to laugh at you sometimes BST
Your responses are so much in the vein of a politician.
-
You would though wouldn’t you . ?
-
The dizzy bitch strikes again....
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-essex-55403058
How do these people stay in a job?
It turns out though that the dizzy bitch was speaking the truth.
Don’t you agree NNK.
I wonder how many other people wrote on social media condemning the perpetrators of the crime.
(https://i.imgur.com/8Ww8nfm.jpg)
Life must be hard for you NNK.
I hope you get well soon.
Life is fine here hound, just an annoying cough. Of course, it would be a little better if people actually got the obvious point of a post without it having to be explained to them! I mean, it was all there in the link I posted; perhaps you didn't bother to read beyond the headline?
-
The dizzy bitch strikes again....
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-essex-55403058
How do these people stay in a job?
It turns out though that the dizzy bitch was speaking the truth.
Don’t you agree NNK.
I wonder how many other people wrote on social media condemning the perpetrators of the crime.
(https://i.imgur.com/8Ww8nfm.jpg)
Life must be hard for you NNK.
I hope you get well soon.
Life is fine here hound, just an annoying cough. Of course, it would be a little better if people actually got the obvious point of a post without it having to be explained to them! I mean, it was all there in the link I posted; perhaps you didn't bother to read beyond the headline?
Well of course i did NNK which is why i asked you the question and said that PP was telling the truth.
Dont start assuming stuff like some of our other posters.
Merry Christmas.
-
Hound.
I have to say I don't find it particularly funny when politicians start playing about like this.
On its own, you could brush this off as a mistake. But this comes from the same person who has berated "activist lawyers" for doing their job and taking legal action against the Home Office when the HO broke the law and tried to ram through illegal deportations. That rabble rousing came despite her being briefed by the Met that far-right thugs were planning attacks on these lawyers.
I'll be honest, politicians like that scare me. But you feel free just to laugh.
-
Hound.
I have to say I don't find it particularly funny when politicians start playing about like this.
On its own, you could brush this off as a mistake. But this comes from the same person who has berated "activist lawyers" for doing their job and taking legal action against the Home Office when the HO broke the law and tried to ram through illegal deportations. That rabble rousing came despite her being briefed by the Met that far-right thugs were planning attacks on these lawyers.
I'll be honest, politicians like that scare me. But you feel free just to laugh.
LoL.
You just dont like stuff said or done by politicians who arent on your side.
-
Hound.
And THAT is the perfect example of judging someone by your own standards.
You don't EVER address issues. You just play this stupid game of assuming no one else judges things on merit.
-
Hound.
And THAT is the perfect example of judging someone by your own standards.
You don't EVER address issues. You just play this stupid game of assuming no one else judges things on merit.
Its just that you make me laugh BST.
You always come back to me with a lecture of some kind or another.
What would Churchill have said etc.
It must be nice to be perfect.
-
Hound.
And THAT is the perfect example of judging someone by your own standards.
You don't EVER address issues. You just play this stupid game of assuming no one else judges things on merit.
How can one address the issues if you don't read a lot about the subject.
-
Hound.
I am a long way short of perfect. But what I do, every time I give my piece, is that I try to explain the thinking behind it.
What I've never understood is why people would spend time on here basically saying "Ner, ner I don't believe you" over and over and over again while not addressing the actual substantive isdue being discussed.
-
Hound.
I am a long way short of perfect. But what I do, every time I give my piece, is that I try to explain the thinking behind it.
What I've never understood is why people would spend time on here basically saying "Ner, ner I don't believe you" over and over and over again while not addressing the actual substantive isdue being discussed.
But i dont always say i dont beleive you.
You are moving the goalposts again here though as you often do.
All i said was that PP had told the truth,which she did, and then you have spun this out on a tangeant.
Come on. admit it, you often come back and lecture me on something, often about what napoleon or Churchill used to do.
Odd though that you pick no one else from more recent times (since the late 40s that is).
-
Hound.
I am a long way short of perfect. But what I do, every time I give my piece, is that I try to explain the thinking behind it.
What I've never understood is why people would spend time on here basically saying "Ner, ner I don't believe you" over and over and over again while not addressing the actual substantive isdue being discussed.
But i dont always say i dont beleive you.
You are moving the goalposts again here though as you often do.
All i said was that PP had told the truth,which she did, and then you have spun this out on a tangeant.
Come on. admit it, you often come back and lecture me on something, often about what napoleon or Churchill used to do.
Odd though that you pick no one else from more recent times (since the late 40s that is).
Surely you can appreciate that at best it was naive and at worst, downright irresponsible to be tweeting - as Home Secretary - about an ongoing trial, labelling people criminals?
-
Hound.
I am a long way short of perfect. But what I do, every time I give my piece, is that I try to explain the thinking behind it.
What I've never understood is why people would spend time on here basically saying "Ner, ner I don't believe you" over and over and over again while not addressing the actual substantive isdue being discussed.
But i dont always say i dont beleive you.
You are moving the goalposts again here though as you often do.
All i said was that PP had told the truth,which she did, and then you have spun this out on a tangeant.
Come on. admit it, you often come back and lecture me on something, often about what napoleon or Churchill used to do.
Odd though that you pick no one else from more recent times (since the late 40s that is).
Surely you can appreciate that at best it was naive and at worst, downright irresponsible to be tweeting - as Home Secretary - about an ongoing trial, labelling people criminals?
I have already said that i dont condone it.
I simply passed a comment that she was telling the truth.
-
PP ahead of the curve
https://cdn1.matadornetwork.com/blogs/1/2018/08/tianmen-mountain-winding-road.jpg
-
Hound.
I am a long way short of perfect. But what I do, every time I give my piece, is that I try to explain the thinking behind it.
What I've never understood is why people would spend time on here basically saying "Ner, ner I don't believe you" over and over and over again while not addressing the actual substantive isdue being discussed.
But i dont always say i dont beleive you.
You are moving the goalposts again here though as you often do.
All i said was that PP had told the truth,which she did, and then you have spun this out on a tangeant.
Come on. admit it, you often come back and lecture me on something, often about what napoleon or Churchill used to do.
Odd though that you pick no one else from more recent times (since the late 40s that is).
Surely you can appreciate that at best it was naive and at worst, downright irresponsible to be tweeting - as Home Secretary - about an ongoing trial, labelling people criminals?
I have already said that i dont condone it.
I simply passed a comment that she was telling the truth.
It probably is the truth but it's not right of any politician, especially the home secretary to make comments that could influence court proceedings.
-
Hound.
I am a long way short of perfect. But what I do, every time I give my piece, is that I try to explain the thinking behind it.
What I've never understood is why people would spend time on here basically saying "Ner, ner I don't believe you" over and over and over again while not addressing the actual substantive isdue being discussed.
But i dont always say i dont beleive you.
You are moving the goalposts again here though as you often do.
All i said was that PP had told the truth,which she did, and then you have spun this out on a tangeant.
Come on. admit it, you often come back and lecture me on something, often about what napoleon or Churchill used to do.
Odd though that you pick no one else from more recent times (since the late 40s that is).
Surely you can appreciate that at best it was naive and at worst, downright irresponsible to be tweeting - as Home Secretary - about an ongoing trial, labelling people criminals?
I have already said that i dont condone it.
I simply passed a comment that she was telling the truth.
It probably is the truth but it's not right of any politician, especially the home secretary to make comments that could influence court proceedings.
Agreed.
-
''It probably is the truth but it's not right of any politician, especially the home secretary to make comments that could influence court proceedings''
If you'd expressed this in your original comment hound it would have shown a better understanding of the topic and saved another circular dabate.
-
For someone who claims not to be a Tory voter, Hound bizarrely refuses to criticise anything they say or do no matter how grossly serious it may be. Instead he tries to bait those who do care enough to comment and who go to the trouble of explaining why it matters whilst he repeatedly paints himself into a corner, as in this example. Not very smart is it.
-
''It probably is the truth but it's not right of any politician, especially the home secretary to make comments that could influence court proceedings''
If you'd expressed this in your original comment hound it would have shown a better understanding of the topic and saved another circular dabate.
If people hadn’t read into my original post what they wanted it to have said then perhaps they wouldn’t have jumped down my throat about what I did say.
The round in a circle happened because some posters can’t wait to have a pop at me on the political threads.
-
For someone who claims not to be a Tory voter, Hound bizarrely refuses to criticise anything they say or do no matter how grossly serious it may be. Instead he tries to bait those who do care enough to comment and who go to the trouble of explaining why it matters whilst he repeatedly paints himself into a corner, as in this example. Not very smart is it.
This all began because I said that PP was telling the truth.
Even your god, BST, agrees that it was the truth.
(With the classic BST caveat of course).
Also, I have criticised some of the stuff that the government has done but not to the point that some Labour voters have done, much of it with hindsight.
As for painting myself into the corner, I don’t accept that.
I asked a question of NNK and most of the usual suspects piled in to help him out with the usual barrage of posts against anyone who doesn’t fit in with the anti government rhetoric.
Finally, I don’t claim not to have voted Tory, I DIDNT vote Tory so resent the implication that I was not being honest.
-
The dizzy bitch strikes again....
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-essex-55403058
How do these people stay in a job?
It turns out though that the dizzy bitch was speaking the truth.
Don’t you agree NNK.
I wonder how many other people wrote on social media condemning the perpetrators of the crime.
(https://i.imgur.com/8Ww8nfm.jpg)
Life must be hard for you NNK.
I hope you get well soon.
Life is fine here hound, just an annoying cough. Of course, it would be a little better if people actually got the obvious point of a post without it having to be explained to them! I mean, it was all there in the link I posted; perhaps you didn't bother to read beyond the headline?
Well of course i did NNK which is why i asked you the question and said that PP was telling the truth.
Dont start assuming stuff like some of our other posters.
Merry Christmas.
Nope, what she said only became the truth once the court session ended; prior to that it was just speculation which could have, (negatively), impacted the outcome of the trial.
Merry Christmas to you too Hound, hope you have a good one.
-
.... AND precisiely why they usually say - well there is a criminal investigation underway / ongoing litigation / ongoing Court Case .....(and other such phrases) .... so you will appreciate I cannot comment specifically on this Case.
... AND Interviewers will say I appreciate there is a criminal investigation underway / ongoing litigation / ongoing Court Case .....(and other such phrases) .... so whilst I appreciate you cannot comment specifically on this Case could you perhaps talk in a general way about ........
-
The dizzy bitch strikes again....
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-essex-55403058
How do these people stay in a job?
It turns out though that the dizzy bitch was speaking the truth.
Don’t you agree NNK.
I wonder how many other people wrote on social media condemning the perpetrators of the crime.
(https://i.imgur.com/8Ww8nfm.jpg)
Life must be hard for you NNK.
I hope you get well soon.
Life is fine here hound, just an annoying cough. Of course, it would be a little better if people actually got the obvious point of a post without it having to be explained to them! I mean, it was all there in the link I posted; perhaps you didn't bother to read beyond the headline?
Well of course i did NNK which is why i asked you the question and said that PP was telling the truth.
Dont start assuming stuff like some of our other posters.
Merry Christmas.
Nope, what she said only became the truth once the court session ended; prior to that it was just speculation which could have, (negatively), impacted the outcome of the trial.
Merry Christmas to you too Hound, hope you have a good one.
NNK, point of order here.
I actually said that “it turns out she was telling the truth”.
That clearly says “it turns out” so means that after the conviction she was right.
My comment never indicated that PP was right prior to the conviction.
-
You lot should link arms and march with banners,
all this 1980s bottled up anger
Priti is bang tidy so who cares what she does politically
-
chesus shaggy on the eggnog already
-
Sha66y may have been on the eggnog last night, but this morning he will be sober, and Priti will still be bang tidy.
-
Bang tidy? She’s not bad looking but way too hefty for my liking. Still, to each their own!
-
Some of you lot must be pretty desperate if you think Patel is anywhere remotely close to decent. She looks like the biggest easter egg you have ever seen on legs.
-
Some of you lot must be pretty desperate if you think Patel is anywhere remotely close to decent. She looks like the biggest easter egg you have ever seen on legs.
Bet you daren't say that about Diane Abbott, the handful of snowflakes would be determined that the site had a White Christmas!
-
Some of you lot must be pretty desperate if you think Patel is anywhere remotely close to decent. She looks like the biggest easter egg you have ever seen on legs.
Bet you daren't say that about Diane Abbott, the handful of snowflakes would be determined that the site had a White Christmas!
But Diane Abbott doesn't look like an Easter egg on legs.
-
But that's not the point! The point is you wouldn't dare say she looked like an Easter egg on legs even if you thought she did, because the handful of snowflakes would be determined that the site had a White Christmas.
-
Diane Abbot looks like an Easter Egg on legs next to PP
-
Both of you are reading something into my post that isnt there. I was comparing Patels shape to that of a large easter egg. Nothing else.
-
What am I reading that isn't there?
-
What am I reading that isn't there?
Snowflakes and White Christmas? I wonder why you brought Diane Abbott into the discussion?
Lets face it though Priti Patel is hardly Snow White is she?
-
This one slipped under the radar last week.
After a year of running up legal costs, the Home Office decided not to contest Sir Philip Rutnam's constructive dismissal case after he resigned as top civil servant in the Dept due to abusive behaviour from Patel.
£340,000, he's been awarded, plus legal costs.
But Patel hasn't admitted doing it wrong.
-
Doubt that award will be paid by Patel personally.
Probably paid out of public funds, so you and me to stump up on her behalf....bargain eh!
Happy to be corrected if anyone knows different.
EDIT
Answering my own question here;
https://www.joe.co.uk/news/paying-for-patels-bullying-265612
Better than paying undeserving nurses by the look of it.
-
Maybe there needs to be some sort of change to the system where if an appeal is sponsored with public money the case has to go the full distance.
-
Maybe there needs to be some sort of change to the system where if an appeal is sponsored with public money the case has to go the full distance.
Yes that seems a cracking use of public money. We all know in these cases the complainant has the advantage, so rightly or wrongly there's often a settlement.
-
Really BFYP?
A private individual has the advantage over the Govt? When the Govt is racking up legal costs over a year in a case that it has no intention of actually defending? But the claimant doesn't know that at the time and faces financial ruin if they lose and have costs awarded against them?
Let me give you the cynic's take. The HO has tried to financially bully Rutnam out of this action, then pulled out because they knew they didn't have a leg to stand on, and preferred not to have the details of Patel's actions pored over in court and a legal judgement made against her.
-
You won't see this in the Mail or the Sun etc, but....
“...Of further note is that the judges found that that the SSHD seriously breached her duty of candour in judicial review proceedings by failing to disclose correspondence sent by the Coroner following the inquest into the unnatural death of Carlington Spencer in IRC Morton Hall in which the Coroner had expressed severe criticism of the SSHD for attempting to remove relevant witnesses. This has sounded in an award of indemnity costs for the Applicant for the relevant period.
This is a ground-breaking judgment that marks the first time that the Secretary of State has been held accountable for her role, and failure, in ensuring the effective investigation of deaths in the immigration detention estate. It is also represents a first in confirming that the duty to ensure an effective investigation under Article 2 ECHR affects the exercise of the Secretary of State’s immigration powers. The SSHD cannot frustrate or undermine an inquiry into how and in what circumstances a vulnerable person died where Article 2 ECHR is engaged.
This case also demonstrates serious failings on behalf of the SSHD in developing any or adequate policies to ensure against compromising an investigation into a death in custody. Serious failings within the detention estate that led to a death in detention were compounded by the failures of the SSHD to comply with her Article 2 ECHR procedural requirements and ensure that best evidence was available for the subsequent coronial inquest.
This case also shows that it is not, nor should it be, incumbent on the witness to a death in custody to identify themselves as witnesses, keep in contact with the investigating authorities, and prevent their own removal, in order to ensure the effectiveness and integrity of the coronial process.
At a time when judicial review and the conduct of publically funded lawyers acting in the field of immigration and public law is under scrutiny, it is salient to observe that but for the intervention of publically-funded lawyers and last minute judicial review action, necessitated by what is now known to have been unlawful decisions to remove and failures to have in place adequate policy frameworks to ensure that evidence is secured, this important witness to a death in custody would have been removed from the jurisdiction and the coronial investigation weakened. Amongst other things, the case is a vindication of the rule of law and access to justice, guaranteed by judicial review...”
https://www.gardencourtchambers.co.uk/news/home-office-held-in-breach-of-article-2-duty-concerning-death-in-immigration-detention
But she still won’t resign, and Bozo won’t sack her!
P.
-
Johnson scares me in his absolute contempt for truth.
Patel in many ways is far scarier. She has a contempt for democratic process. A perfect example of a right wing authoritarian. It is astonishing that she has ever been given any high office after what she did in Israel. To have her as Home Secretary sends out a very worrying message about where we are going.
-
And she's back in the news again.
Nearly 35 years ago, a private investigator called Daniel Morgan was killed with an axe through the back of his head. He had been investigating police corruption.
No-one has ever been convicted of the murder, but there were lots of threads came out of it, including the fact that his business partner worked with the Murdoch-owned News of the World on hacking private data on a monumental scale.
In 2013, the Govt set up an inquiry into the case. Eight years later, the report was due to be released next week.
Patel has just blocked it.
-
“ A Home Office spokesperson denied Patel wanted to block or censor parts of the report. They said: “Under the terms it was commissioned in 2013, it is for the home secretary to publish the report which she hopes to do as soon as possible.
“The home secretary also has an obligation to make sure the report complies with human rights and national security considerations.
“This has nothing to do with the independence of the report and the Home Office is not seeking to make edits to it.”
-
Yes Belton, they would say that wouldn't they?
This from a Govt that commissioned an inquiry into Patel's bullying of staff, which found that Patel bullied staff, but no action was taken because Johnson decided Patel didn't bully staff.
Anyway, this particular inquiry panel has made it bluntly clear what they think of Patel blocking the report.
https://mobile.twitter.com/peterjukes/status/1394704390628560896
But you just go on insisting there's nothing to see here, eh?
-
This, also from a Govt that sat for a year on a report into Russian interference in our elections that said it was astonishing that the Govt hadn't instructed the security services to do a detailed search for evidence into Russian interference. And when pressed why he hadn't and wouldn't do that, Johnson said it was because he hadn't seen any evidence of Russian interference.
(I have to keep going back and checking that one because it is truly f**king surreal that a UK PM can say that and still be in the job, but that is precisely what happened.)
But still. Mustn't point these things out because...politically motivated attacks and all that.
-
The last two paragraphs of that HO statement by the way.
They have suddenly decided they have a responsibility to ensure that an independent inquiry complies with human rights and security obligations.
But they are not seeking edits.
So, if Patel decrees that the report DOES infringe those obligations...then what? Presumably it never sees the light of day?
-
Quite sad really that people sit and search for online news reports and Tweets and then rush to post them on a football forum.
I suppose it must be gratifying for the poster when four or five people sometimes back them up by adding their two pennorth and then discrediting anyone who dares to add a differing point of view.
-
Billy. I’m not insisting anything. It was just a quote from the Guardian about the topic you put on here.
If both sides aren’t allowed a say then where does that leave us, eh?
-
Takes all sorts Hound.
In the pyramid of sadness, where do people who just tell everyone what they think about people who do that sit?
-
It's "bothsides" Belton.
-
Quite sad really that people sit and search for online news reports and Tweets and then rush to post them on a football forum.
I suppose it must be gratifying for the poster when four or five people sometimes back them up by adding their two pennorth and then discrediting anyone who dares to add a differing point of view.
It's quite sad that you don't feel included hound, nothing stopping you joining in look how many have over the years hundreds of pages thousands of posts.
-
It's "bothsides" Belton.
I’m not sure what that’s supposed to mean, Billy.
Have you had money on Oxford to win the play offs, or something?
-
If you don't get it Belton then you're way beyond my ability to help.
And nope. The last betbim ever going to have on football was last Xmas. £50 on the Rovers to win the playoffs.
-
Ah well, never mind Billy. I’ll just have to try to get through the day without the help of your infinite wisdom and your superior, yet modestly articulated intelligence.
However, if anyone else can shed any light on what ‘it’s “bothsides” Belton’ means, then please let me know.
-
Takes all sorts Hound.
In the pyramid of sadness, where do people who just tell everyone what they think about people who do that sit?
Some of your posts are becoming very strange BST.
-
Quite sad really that people sit and search for online news reports and Tweets and then rush to post them on a football forum.
I suppose it must be gratifying for the poster when four or five people sometimes back them up by adding their two pennorth and then discrediting anyone who dares to add a differing point of view.
It's quite sad that you don't feel included hound, nothing stopping you joining in look how many have over the years hundreds of pages thousands of posts.
I would have to be in BSTs gang to be included though.
Come to think of it though, I am included whenever I post something that you don’t like.
-
Quite sad really that people sit and search for online news reports and Tweets and then rush to post them on a football forum.
I suppose it must be gratifying for the poster when four or five people sometimes back them up by adding their two pennorth and then discrediting anyone who dares to add a differing point of view.
I think if you look at your post at the base of the latest off-off topic comment and reread your churlish post, you may be able to see why it elicited the responses it did, remind me were you not saying only the other day the politics should be discussed elsewhere?
Still playing the person/s rather than the topic.
-
Quite sad really that people sit and search for online news reports and Tweets and then rush to post them on a football forum.
I suppose it must be gratifying for the poster when four or five people sometimes back them up by adding their two pennorth and then discrediting anyone who dares to add a differing point of view.
I think if you look at your post at the base of the latest off-off topic comment and reread your churlish post, you may be able to see why it elicited the responses it did, remind me were you not saying only the other day the politics should be discussed elsewhere?
Still playing the person/s rather than the topic.
Oh come on SR.
Are you saying that you don’t ever attack the poster.
Of course you do, there won’t be many on here who haven’t done that.
I think you are as guilty of it as anyone else.
-
Quite sad really that people sit and search for online news reports and Tweets and then rush to post them on a football forum.
I suppose it must be gratifying for the poster when four or five people sometimes back them up by adding their two pennorth and then discrediting anyone who dares to add a differing point of view.
I think if you look at your post at the base of the latest off-off topic comment and reread your churlish post, you may be able to see why it elicited the responses it did, remind me were you not saying only the other day the politics should be discussed elsewhere?
Still playing the person/s rather than the topic.
Oh come on SR.
Are you saying that you don’t ever attack the poster.
Of course you do, there won’t be many on here who haven’t done that.
I think you are as guilty of it as anyone else.
Is this some sort of excuse for your childish behaviour?
-
Quite sad really that people sit and search for online news reports and Tweets and then rush to post them on a football forum.
I suppose it must be gratifying for the poster when four or five people sometimes back them up by adding their two pennorth and then discrediting anyone who dares to add a differing point of view.
I think if you look at your post at the base of the latest off-off topic comment and reread your churlish post, you may be able to see why it elicited the responses it did, remind me were you not saying only the other day the politics should be discussed elsewhere?
Still playing the person/s rather than the topic.
Oh come on SR.
Are you saying that you don’t ever attack the poster.
Of course you do, there won’t be many on here who haven’t done that.
I think you are as guilty of it as anyone else.
Is this some sort of excuse for your childish behaviour?
Look in the mirror Sydney.
You are not in a position to accuse anyone of that.
Unless posters are in your favoured group your responses to them are extremely childish and condescending.
-
Quite sad really that people sit and search for online news reports and Tweets and then rush to post them on a football forum.
I suppose it must be gratifying for the poster when four or five people sometimes back them up by adding their two pennorth and then discrediting anyone who dares to add a differing point of view.
I think if you look at your post at the base of the latest off-off topic comment and reread your churlish post, you may be able to see why it elicited the responses it did, remind me were you not saying only the other day the politics should be discussed elsewhere?
Still playing the person/s rather than the topic.
Oh come on SR.
Are you saying that you don’t ever attack the poster.
Of course you do, there won’t be many on here who haven’t done that.
I think you are as guilty of it as anyone else.
Is this some sort of excuse for your childish behaviour?
Look in the mirror Sydney.
You are not in a position to accuse anyone of that.
Unless posters are in your favoured group your responses to them are extremely childish and condescending.
Post em up hound do your worst, maybe you should put your hand up when SM finished up then you can have a forum just for yourself.
-
Quite sad really that people sit and search for online news reports and Tweets and then rush to post them on a football forum.
I suppose it must be gratifying for the poster when four or five people sometimes back them up by adding their two pennorth and then discrediting anyone who dares to add a differing point of view.
I think if you look at your post at the base of the latest off-off topic comment and reread your churlish post, you may be able to see why it elicited the responses it did, remind me were you not saying only the other day the politics should be discussed elsewhere?
Still playing the person/s rather than the topic.
Oh come on SR.
Are you saying that you don’t ever attack the poster.
Of course you do, there won’t be many on here who haven’t done that.
I think you are as guilty of it as anyone else.
Is this some sort of excuse for your childish behaviour?
Look in the mirror Sydney.
You are not in a position to accuse anyone of that.
Unless posters are in your favoured group your responses to them are extremely childish and condescending.
Post em up hound do your worst, maybe you should put your hand up when SM finished up then you can have a forum just for yourself.
If anyone is interested, and they probably won’t be, they could trawl back through your posts and see for themselves.
You know, like you invited people to do with my posts not so long ago.
I honestly don’t understand what you mean with the middle bit of your last message.
-
Quite sad really that people sit and search for online news reports and Tweets and then rush to post them on a football forum.
I suppose it must be gratifying for the poster when four or five people sometimes back them up by adding their two pennorth and then discrediting anyone who dares to add a differing point of view.
I think if you look at your post at the base of the latest off-off topic comment and reread your churlish post, you may be able to see why it elicited the responses it did, remind me were you not saying only the other day the politics should be discussed elsewhere?
Still playing the person/s rather than the topic.
Oh come on SR.
Are you saying that you don’t ever attack the poster.
Of course you do, there won’t be many on here who haven’t done that.
I think you are as guilty of it as anyone else.
Is this some sort of excuse for your childish behaviour?
Look in the mirror Sydney.
You are not in a position to accuse anyone of that.
Unless posters are in your favoured group your responses to them are extremely childish and condescending.
Post em up hound do your worst, maybe you should put your hand up when SM finished up then you can have a forum just for yourself.
this is getting boring hound put up or shut up, just a suggestion like. Have you reread your initial post that kicked this off rooming with selby is not working out is it?
-
this is getting boring hound put up or shut up, just a suggestion like. Have you reread your initial post that kicked this off rooming with selby is not working out is it?
I think I can speak for everyone when I say it's not 'getting' boring..... the constant hijacking of threads to play out your obvious attraction to each other is at times tedious to say the least... :whistle:
-
Quite sad really that people sit and search for online news reports and Tweets and then rush to post them on a football forum.
I suppose it must be gratifying for the poster when four or five people sometimes back them up by adding their two pennorth and then discrediting anyone who dares to add a differing point of view.
I think if you look at your post at the base of the latest off-off topic comment and reread your churlish post, you may be able to see why it elicited the responses it did, remind me were you not saying only the other day the politics should be discussed elsewhere?
Still playing the person/s rather than the topic.
Oh come on SR.
Are you saying that you don’t ever attack the poster.
Of course you do, there won’t be many on here who haven’t done that.
I think you are as guilty of it as anyone else.
Is this some sort of excuse for your childish behaviour?
Look in the mirror Sydney.
You are not in a position to accuse anyone of that.
Unless posters are in your favoured group your responses to them are extremely childish and condescending.
Post em up hound do your worst, maybe you should put your hand up when SM finished up then you can have a forum just for yourself.
this is getting boring hound put up or shut up, just a suggestion like. Have you reread your initial post that kicked this off rooming with selby is not working out is it?
You are right, it is very boring, as are most of your responses to me.
So, as I know how you like the final word on things you can have it.
[quote author=SydneyRover
the case has to go the full distance.
-
Quite sad really that people sit and search for online news reports and Tweets and then rush to post them on a football forum.
I suppose it must be gratifying for the poster when four or five people sometimes back them up by adding their two pennorth and then discrediting anyone who dares to add a differing point of view.
I think if you look at your post at the base of the latest off-off topic comment and reread your churlish post, you may be able to see why it elicited the responses it did, remind me were you not saying only the other day the politics should be discussed elsewhere?
Still playing the person/s rather than the topic.
Oh come on SR.
Are you saying that you don’t ever attack the poster.
Of course you do, there won’t be many on here who haven’t done that.
I think you are as guilty of it as anyone else.
Is this some sort of excuse for your childish behaviour?
Look in the mirror Sydney.
You are not in a position to accuse anyone of that.
Unless posters are in your favoured group your responses to them are extremely childish and condescending.
Post em up hound do your worst, maybe you should put your hand up when SM finished up then you can have a forum just for yourself.
this is getting boring hound put up or shut up, just a suggestion like. Have you reread your initial post that kicked this off rooming with selby is not working out is it?
You are right, it is very boring, as are most of your responses to me.
So, as I know how you like the final word on things you can have it.
Tell you what hound you are right about everything you comment on, you win, you can have the glory and the admiration of all the forum members you want, go for it.
[
-
this is getting boring hound put up or shut up, just a suggestion like. Have you reread your initial post that kicked this off rooming with selby is not working out is it?
I think I can speak for everyone when I say it's not 'getting' boring..... the constant hijacking of threads to play out your obvious attraction to each other is at times tedious to say the least... :whistle:
I clicked on the topic because I thought people might be discussing how Patel has blocked the report into Daniel Morgan's murder - whilst investigating police corruption - on 'national security grounds'.
Seems I was wrong - damned if I know what they are 'discussing' - give them their own PM button or sub-forum.
-
I did Wilts. Before it descended into personal slurs as it tends to do these days.
-
I did Wilts. Before it descended into personal slurs as it tends to do these days.
I think it was you who started the personal stuff again, Billy.
-
On the contrary Belton. I was taking issue with your handling of facts, not with you personally.
-
Billy. First of all you told me to ‘continue insisting there is nothing to see’ after I simply quoted from a Guardian article about the subject you brought up.
Secondly, you told me I was beyond your help when I asked you to clarify a comment you made directly to me (I still don’t know what you meant, by the way).
Personal, unnecessary digs. And then you deny any wrongdoing and slate others for doing the same.
Quite pathetic.
-
I did Wilts. Before it descended into personal slurs as it tends to do these days.
Hugely important topic that has not had a fraction of the coverage it deserves. What 'national security' grounds could relate to the murder of someone investigating police corruption?
He said....trying to take the topic back to something interesting...
-
I suppose, Wilts, that the very fact that there may be be a national security issue will probably mean you and I will never know.
-
The plot thickens Belton - the investigating panel have refused to hand over their report to Patel
The independent panel investigating the Daniel Morgan scandal is refusing the home secretary’s demands to hand over its report before it can be published, as senior police sources say nothing in the case affects national security.
But one source with close knowledge of the five Metropolitan police inquiries into the case and the documents involved, said: “There are no national security issues involved. There are national embarrassment issues.”
https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2021/may/19/daniel-morgan-panel-refuses-to-hand-over-report
I hope Belton that the panel get their way - and the public do know why this man was murdered - and what corruption was he was investigating and who covered it up? But I find your faith in someone who was sacked from a previous government for lying quite touching - and worrying - becuase that is how they have got away with it for so long.
-
Wilts. How you can equate my comments into you being touched and worried, I have no idea. IF this is a matter of national security then it should not be made public. IF it is not a matter of national security then it should be made public. IF there is proved to be a cover up then those responsible should be held to account.
I have never suggested any different. You just assume.
#bothsides
-
The plot thickens Belton - the investigating panel have refused to hand over their report to Patel
The independent panel investigating the Daniel Morgan scandal is refusing the home secretary’s demands to hand over its report before it can be published, as senior police sources say nothing in the case affects national security.
But one source with close knowledge of the five Metropolitan police inquiries into the case and the documents involved, said: “There are no national security issues involved. There are national embarrassment issues.”
https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2021/may/19/daniel-morgan-panel-refuses-to-hand-over-report
I hope Belton that the panel get their way - and the public do know why this man was murdered - and what corruption was he was investigating and who covered it up? But I find your faith in someone who was sacked from a previous government for lying quite touching - and worrying - becuase that is how they have got away with it for so long.
That's quite cynical Wilts they the government just want to put the report in a safe place ........ with all the others
-
Belton
Once again, I was NOT having a go at you as a person. I was commenting on your approach of consistently criticising any criticism of the Govt. In this particular case, you presented an unfiltered and unprocessed statement from the HO which was highly questionable in its factual accuracy and flatly refuted by the very Panel that had run the inquiry.
It's been a consistent approach of yours to claim that there is a balance between "both sides" in recent political disagreements. The term for that is Bothsidesism. Your contribution last night was very much in that vein and I responded as such. If I got that wrong, I apologise, but perhaps you could have made that clear by saying whether you thought there was merit in the HO statement rather than simply presenting it.
I don't agree that there is an inevitable and intrinsic value in both sides' arguments. Where I think that one side's argument is lacking in merit, I try to provide evidence as to why I come to that conclusion. As I did last night. I happen to think that Bothsidesism is an intellectual cop out that allows, in fact, requires any unsubstantiated bullshit argument to be given equal due.
The confusion here is that you seem to be conflating an attack on your opinions on this issue as a personal attack on you. It wasn't.
Contrast that against Hound's contribution to this discussion. Which you don't appear to be sufficient exercised by to offer an opinion on.
Your choice of course but forgive me if I interpret that as a rather biassed approach to the discussion.
-
Everything is questionable, Billy. That’s kind of the whole point of all this.
You consistently criticise the government over any subject. Never offering an alternative view. I often feel it necessary to address your bias.
#bothsidesmatter
Oh, you forgot to explain how me being beyond your help wasn’t a personal dig.
-
Belton
Your third paragraph: My comment was was a quip. It was intended to be a humorous way of saying that if you truly don't understand why a Bothsidesist approach in the current era is a dangerous abdication of responsibility, then we are living in different worlds and there's not a lot I can say to convince you. We used to do robust humour in here before folk started taking every post as a personal assault.
Your first paragraph in this latest post sort of makes my point for me. Yes everthing is questionable. Which is precisely why my take is that intelligent people have a responsibility to identify the truly mendacious, rather than take a Zen-like neutral approach to everything.
Your second paragrpah is factually wrong by the way. But I'll accept it as an honest mistake rather than a personal assault.
-
Billy. Call it what you like. Call me what you like.
I absolutely do not give two hoots what you think about my approach to debate. I certainly don’t care for yours either, but accept it for what it is rather than lecturing you on how it should be done. I will say this, though: the day I stop listening to ‘the other man’s views’ or acknowledging that there are always two sides to a story, before forming my own opinion, is the day I give up.
I also don’t care about your personal insults. I’ve learned that these are just part of your debating style. What does irk me is this ‘mightier than thou’ attitude of suggesting that when you throw personal insults about, then it’s ‘just ‘avin a laugh mate, bit o’ banter, and lamenting the days of robust humour - where’s everyone’s sense of humour gone? Whereas when others do the same, you’re aghast at just what this forum has come to. It’s quite ironic that you, of all people, are ruing the lost good old days before the forum mutated into what it is now.
You can’t keep jumping off your horse to say something and jump back on it to say something else - well you can, but eventually your horse will collapse and you’ll be left with nowhere to run.
#bothsidesmatter
-
Belton.
I'm really trying to rise above your insistence on making this personal.
Simple question if "both sides matter".
Do you give equal weight to the HO press release and the comment from the inquiry panel in response to that?
-
Everything is questionable, Billy. That’s kind of the whole point of all this.
You consistently criticise the government over any subject. Never offering an alternative view. I often feel it necessary to address your bias.
#bothsidesmatter
Oh, you forgot to explain how me being beyond your help wasn’t a personal dig.
Belton, seeing as BST brought my name into the conversation with you this morning, I think it is right that I say that your second paragraph above is the primary reason that I wrote what I did about some posters (and it is only a few) continually posting anti government propaganda and links to Twitter etc about it.
The night I wrote it I had had a quick look on the forum and on any thread away from the football ones I had seen nothing but post after post of stuff having a pop at anything, however obscure, that discredited the government.
I saw nothing that included bothsidism.
I have tried recently not to get involved but in a moment of weakness I was again sucked in.
As ever, I found myself bombarded and allowed myself to become embroiled in an argument which, as usual, was going nowhere.
Thankfully I decided to terminate it.
Apologies to anyone who was annoyed by that by the way.
However, you are right that there is a feeling that sometimes people (me and you perhaps?) feel the need to offer a different opinion but invariably on our forum are then harangued for doing so.
Anyway, I felt the need to get that off my chest.
Stay well everyone.
-
Belton.
I'm really trying to rise above your insistence on making this personal.
Simple question if "both sides matter".
Do you give equal weight to the HO press release and the comment from the inquiry panel in response to that?
And there you go again: insult, then tell me how desperate you are not to fall to my level.
In answer to your question.
Yes I do. You should try it.
Read my response to Wilts.
#bothsidesmatter
-
Everything is questionable, Billy. That’s kind of the whole point of all this.
You consistently criticise the government over any subject. Never offering an alternative view. I often feel it necessary to address your bias.
#bothsidesmatter
Oh, you forgot to explain how me being beyond your help wasn’t a personal dig.
Belton, seeing as BST brought my name into the conversation with you this morning, I think it is right that I say that your second paragraph above is the primary reason that I wrote what I did about some posters (and it is only a few) continually posting anti government propaganda and links to Twitter etc about it.
The night I wrote it I had had a quick look on the forum and on any thread away from the football ones I had seen nothing but post after post of stuff having a pop at anything, however obscure, that discredited the government.
I saw nothing that included bothsidism.
I have tried recently not to get involved but in a moment of weakness I was again sucked in.
As ever, I found myself bombarded and allowed myself to become embroiled in an argument which, as usual, was going nowhere.
Thankfully I decided to terminate it.
Apologies to anyone who was annoyed by that by the way.
However, you are right that there is a feeling that sometimes people (me and you perhaps?) feel the need to offer a different opinion but invariably on our forum are then harangued for doing so.
Anyway, I felt the need to get that off my chest.
Stay well everyone.
Thanks for injecting some maturity and humility into the conversation,Hound. Let’s hope it’s not relentlessly beaten out of you again.
-
yes hound your old job is still vacant, forum pedant
-
yes hound your old job is still vacant, forum pedant
Well done Sydney. Right on cue.
-
take a bow yourself belton
-
OK Belton. So you say you choose to give equal regard to "both sides".
Is there a red line at which that no longer applies?
In this case, are you really saying we should give equal consideration to the independent inquiry panel's judgement that the HO is exceeding its authority and undermining the indepence of the process, and a decision by the Govt to block publication, when that Govt has a track record of delaying politically inconvenient reports then totally ignoring their conclusions?
Do you wipe the slate clean after each transgression and assume that both sides are playing by the rules?
Hound. I didn't bring you into this discussion. You waded in with a personal insult.
-
Wilts. How you can equate my comments into you being touched and worried, I have no idea. IF this is a matter of national security then it should not be made public. IF it is not a matter of national security then it should be made public. IF there is proved to be a cover up then those responsible should be held to account.
I have never suggested any different. You just assume.
#bothsides
Yes thanks Belton - perfectly fair and resonable. If you trust the government to have that judgement of course as some of us are more trusting than others.
Nothing personal of course, this is just a generalisation, as speaking entirely for myself I always welcome your opinion even if I dont agree with it.
-
Quite sad really that people sit and search for online news reports and Tweets and then rush to post them on a football forum.
I suppose it must be gratifying for the poster when four or five people sometimes back them up by adding their two pennorth and then discrediting anyone who dares to add a differing point of view.
BST, the above was my post that you are referring to as a personal insult I assume.
Can you see any reference to you personally?
Belton
Once again, I was NOT having a go at you as a person. I was commenting on your approach of consistently criticising any criticism of the Govt. In this particular case, you presented an unfiltered and unprocessed statement from the HO which was highly questionable in its factual accuracy and flatly refuted by the very Panel that had run the inquiry.
It's been a consistent approach of yours to claim that there is a balance between "both sides" in recent political disagreements. The term for that is Bothsidesism. Your contribution last night was very much in that vein and I responded as such. If I got that wrong, I apologise, but perhaps you could have made that clear by saying whether you thought there was merit in the HO statement rather than simply presenting it.
I don't agree that there is an inevitable and intrinsic value in both sides' arguments. Where I think that one side's argument is lacking in merit, I try to provide evidence as to why I come to that conclusion. As I did last night. I happen to think that Bothsidesism is an intellectual cop out that allows, in fact, requires any unsubstantiated bullshit argument to be given equal due.
The confusion here is that you seem to be conflating an attack on your opinions on this issue as a personal attack on you. It wasn't.
Contrast that against Hound's contribution to this discussion. Which you don't appear to be sufficient exercised by to offer an opinion on.
Your choice of course but forgive me if I interpret that as a rather biassed approach to the discussion.
......and yes you did bring me into the discussion when you mentioned me in the above post to Belton.
-
Let me help you here hound, it's an insult to all those that read newspapers and take news from many sources, that you are suggesting that some do nothing else but look for items that apparently get up your nose, just a suggestion like, when you voice your opposition to something voice it to the crux of the comment and not the authors. When you have mastered that you may find that myself and maybe others will listen to your argument whereby creating a stimulating debate.
But as I don't speak for anyone but myself bst may be referring to something entirely different.
-
:zzz:
-
Apologies Hound. It was clearly just a coincidence, you posting straight after my post. How COULD I have thought otherwise...?
Belton.
The point is that, at some stage, when people on one side of an argument have a track record of demonstrably and deliberately misleading, it is natural, in fact I'd say necessary to start to assume that is what they are doing. Otherwise, you give equal credence to oil industry-funded climate change deniers as you do to peer-reviewed academic researchers on climate.
In the case of this Government, yo seem determined to insist that criticism has to be balanced with the Govt's own line. Even when the Govt has been shown time and time again to deliberately mislead. I am genuinely interested in how far a Govt would have to go in misleading before you would start to question whether giving equal weight to their line might be unhealthy? Would you have argued against criticism of Trump when he said we should look into injecting bleach to cure COVID for example?
-
Billy. The Trump comparison is ridiculous.
The point is much, much, much simpler than you insist on trying to make it.
I’m not arguing against the criticism of the government. That is the very problem with your style of debate: if I am not totally with you, then I MUST be totally agin you.
I happen to think that the government could well be trying to cover something up here. As I have said before, if that is shown to be true then I shall be as appalled as you. What I won’t do is treat their guilt as fact. Not until it is fact.
Your process is disturbing, not mine.
-
Belton
I'm establishing a principle.
Clearly you don't believe that we always have to give equal credence to "both sides". Because some times, one side or the other is simply not deserving of credence.
Now. That point established, back to this Govt and reports. Does it worry you that they have a track record of delaying publication of embarrassing reports, then ignoring their recommendations? Does that give you pause for thought about whether you should give credence to what this Govt says about the reasons for blocking the publication of this report?
I'm not asking you to "accept guilt as fact". I'm asking you to approach a debate with a robust attitude as to what evidence you can trust. In this particular debate, your only substantive contribution was to post verbatim a Govt statement. If you'd said back then that you think the Govt could well be trying to cover something up, but here's what they say anyway, we could have avoided a lot of pointless interaction.
-
And the condescension begins. Sometimes I imagine you have a checklist at the side of you of how to drain the life out of someone.
You could have avoided pointless interaction much easier than the methods you always choose.
Just try to remember, Billy, as much as you like to think you are the oracle of discussion on this football forum spin off, you’re actually not. We disagree on many topics, including the topic of how to disagree. I accept that - so should you.
This is not a personal attack, by the way - it’s my personal opinion of your attitude on here.
#bothsidesmatterunlessit’strumptellingustodrinkbleach
-
A crash course in the process of debate is needed I think.
BobG
-
I know, Bob. I keep trying to tell him.
-
Debate is fact based. Opinion is not.
BobG
-
Opinion is not fact based?
-
Belton
If you start from the principle that I'm not making this personal, there'd be no need for you to feel personally affronted.
Your initial contribution to this debate was a value-neutral submission of a statement from a Govt that you finally say you think has something to hide. I truly don't understand why you didn't simply say "Here's what the Govt says but I'm not sure I believe it because...". There truly would have been no need for us to go round the houses to get to where we are now. I really don't get why you think me saying that is condescension. It just seems to me like a statement of the bleeding obvious.
-
I offered it up for a bit of context Billy. Perhaps I should have wrote ‘for a bit of context.
The reason I did that was because you were, with absolute certainty, going to dismiss any suggestion that the government could be anything other than guilty, guilty, guilty. I don’t have to give you my opinion, or defend my reasons for posting something, just because it might save you a bit of time. Respond or don’t respond, but stop moaning about wasting your time.
Bit of advice to do with what you want: if you think you may be wasting your time, then don’t respond.
See if you can start by not responding to this post, because I guarantee you will see it as a further waste of your time.
-
Opinion is not fact based?
Correct Mate
Cheers
BobG
-
Back on topic of embarrassing shit being kept from seeing the light of day.
Cameron is known to have sent at least a dozen messages to the Permanent Secretary at the Treasury, lobbying for Greensill to be given special treatment.
A Freedom of Info request went to the Treasury to have the Secretary's replies published.
This response looks like a middle finger to the concept of FoI. Or, if we are going to look at it from both sides, maybe it's an admission that the Permanent Secretary can't be trusted to wipe his own arse.
“The Treasury does not hold this information. On 1 June 2020, Mr Scholar’s mobile phone had to be reset, after being automatically locked when an incorrect password was entered several times."
-
In that case the government should ask Cameron or anyone else to produce replies they have received so evidence can be examined, I'm sure they'll do that.
-
Belton
I'm establishing a principle.
Clearly you don't believe that we always have to give equal credence to "both sides". Because some times, one side or the other is simply not deserving of credence.
Now. That point established, back to this Govt and reports. Does it worry you that they have a track record of delaying publication of embarrassing reports, then ignoring their recommendations? Does that give you pause for thought about whether you should give credence to what this Govt says about the reasons for blocking the publication of this report?
I'm not asking you to "accept guilt as fact". I'm asking you to approach a debate with a robust attitude as to what evidence you can trust. In this particular debate, your only substantive contribution was to post verbatim a Govt statement. If you'd said back then that you think the Govt could well be trying to cover something up, but here's what they say anyway, we could have avoided a lot of pointless interaction.
This one is one of the finest examples a government not wanting to know and protecting donors.
''Leveson inquiry: government confirms second stage axed'' (Mar 2018)
And it just happens that ...............
''The Conservative manifesto for last year’s general election included plans to abandon Leveson 2, which was intended to examine relationships between journalists and the police''
ITMA
https://www.theguardian.com/media/2018/mar/01/leveson-inquiry-part-2-cancellation-condemned-by-labour-as-breach-of-trust
-
Opinion is not fact based?
Correct Mate
Cheers
BobG
Belton: There’s a half full glass of milk in the fridge, Bob.
Bob: No there isn’t, it’s half empty.
Belton: There’s plenty for both of us.
Bob: No there isn’t how can there be? You have it - I’ll do without.
Belton: What about your cornflakes?
Bob: I’ll have toast instead.
Belton: Suit yer sen Bob, I’ll save your half of the milk for if you change your mind.
Bob: I won’t. Where’s the butter?
Belton: There’s half a tub on the side.
Bob: b*llocks!
-
encore belton?
-
Always leave them wanting more, Sydney.
-
The Patel report suppression mystery rolls on.
https://mobile.twitter.com/adavies4/status/1395673982255386625
She's now saying nothing about "reviewing" the report for national security issues. Now the issue is that she needs to read it before putting it before Parliament, and "she" (note: she says "I", not "the HO") hasn't received it.
But the panel who produced the report said they would be submitting it to the HO today, for Patel to be able to be up to speed with its contents (note: NOT "review" it - contrary to the HO prrss statement on Weds, there is no mechanism by which a Govt Dept can "review" an independent inquiry report) before presenting it to Parliament on Monday.
I'd be amazed if the Panel hasn't submitted the report today. So there is no reason whatsoever that the report should not be made public on Monday.
We will see...
-
I suppose it depends on how big Patel’s/ the HO’s in tray is really.
If I received an email on Friday afternoon that demanded action by Monday morning, I’d say ‘f**k that, you should have sent it sooner, I clock off in 10 minutes’.
Perhaps that’s why I’m not Home Secretary.
-
That'll be why the Panel proposed this approach to the HO several weeks ago. In order for the HO to get space in the diary. At which time the HO raised no objections and didn't mention the issue of needing to do a security review. (The report has already been thoroughly checked by security specialists at The Met by the way.)
All out there in the public domain if you want to look for it Belton.
-
Yeah but she’s still got to read it and they might not even have sent it yet. They could have sent it earlier regardless.
It seems to me bothsides are being a bit petty.
-
Then the HO should have:
a) Negotiated a different timetable weeks ago and
b) Not used the entirely spurious claim this week that they had to run national security checks (apparently telling the Panel that they had the right to redact sections of the report).
-
I don’t disagree with with what the HO could have done. I’m just suggesting that the HO could have been sent the documents earlier than what is effectively the afternoon before it’s due to to be put to parliament. If they had, it would reduce the excuses the HO could give for not presenting it on Monday.
-
Belton.
I'm sure you know this sort of timescale is standard practice for major reports. The point is that the reports are made public, and relevant Govt departments get short pre-sight of the report so that they can frame a response to the key issues. That's why Executive Summaries are written.
There is nothing unusual in what was proposed here. Your insistence that the Panel should have chucked convention on its head in this case is odd.
-
Billy. You said you would be ‘amazed if the panel hadn’t sent the document today, so there would be no reason why it couldn’t go to parliament on Monday.
YOU brought this one working day timescale into the equation, not me.
Now you’ve gone off rabbiting on about my ‘insistance blah blah blah...’ YET again. I haven’t insisted anything. Not directly, indirectly, or anything in between.
I commented on what YOU wrote. YOU.
The only ‘odd’ things going on here are your increasingly nonsensical rants.
Do what Patel’s probably going to do: shut your lap top and have chill over the weekend or you’ll make yourself ill.
-
Bizarre end to a straightforward discussion.
-
But you’ll thank me for it. Have a great weekend.
-
I heard the Morgan family lawyer interviewed on the radio today. It's not been clipped up but what he said was very similar to his Sky interview.
It's an independent report and no-one other than the panel has a responsibility to change or ammend it - as set by its terms of reference. Should Patel seek to do so then there is a case for taking this to the High Court to stop her and have it released un-redacted.
The surmission is that the Home Office were involved in the police corruption and the cover-up of the murder - as were newspaper journalists and editors of the time. One of whom may have gone on to be employed as an advisor by a Tory PM - and she wishes to remove any reference to this.
https://news.sky.com/story/daniel-morgan-priti-patel-accused-of-ignorance-after-report-into-private-detectives-murder-delayed-12310637
-
That'll be Coulson presumably?
-
It sounds like this could be even bigger than first imagined, Wilts.
Let’s hope that whatever the HO’s reasons are to get involved, underhand or not, the truth comes out in the end
-
Peter Jukes has been following this case for a long time, even written a book about it. This is his take on why Patel has acted as she did:
https://bylinetimes.com/2021/05/19/did-murdoch-or-the-met-delay-the-daniel-morgan-independent-panel-report/
-
Leveson 2, now.
-
Interesting reading Wilts. I hadn't realised the report was delivered to the HO last Friday. Makes you wonder why Patel says she hasn't seen it yet. It's not like she's been overwhelmed with work. She had a carefully staged photo op at a police raid on a gang of immigrant-smugglers yesterday. Important police work of course, although what benefit there was in the Home Secretary being there looking like the Grim Reaper is anyone's guess.
https://mobile.twitter.com/pritipatel/status/1395329315198455812?ref_src=twsrc%5Egoogle%7Ctwcamp%5Eserp%7Ctwgr%5Etweet
-
Why on Earth are some people unable to grasp the concept of 'discussion'? When folk are devoted to 'opinion' masquerading as fact, and even worse, lose their cool when their opinion is challenged by a contrary fact, you know that the ability of this country to make reasoned and rational decisions is on the way to being well and truly buggered.
You can have huge (HUGE!) disagreements and remain friends. My best mate is a right wing conservative Cabinet Member in Milton Keynes yet he and I have not 'argued' in 30 odd years. We debate, all the time. We discuss. We advance verifiable reasons for our respective positions and we challenge each other, hard, when fact is supplanted by opinion. The end result does not change the fundamental value systems and beliefs of either of us, but it certainly does modify the analysis of issues, of causes and of effects. And it is all done without rancour. We both learn from it and we both become better informed. That is the whole bloody purpose of any discussion!
As for your idiocy above Belton, I feel sorry that you have had to resort to such childish behaviour.
BobG
-
And what do you form your opinion of my idiocy on, Bob, if it’s not the facts put in front of you?
It is of my opinion that you are THE most obnoxious, belittling, arrogant poster on this forum. I form that opinion by looking at the facts presented in your words. I might be wrong, of course, but these are the only facts I have to work with.
As for opinion masquerading as fact, you are the master of this technique. You’re brilliant at it. Second to none.
You are of course the man who calls people ‘illiterate’ for writing ‘of’ instead of ‘have’.
And please, don’t feel sorry for me.
-
Good Law Project now revealing Patel is in up to the neck in the PPE corruption deals;
https://goodlawproject.org/patel-mirza-and-the-middlemen/
Fasten your seatbelts!
-
So the Morgan report is apparently coming out today.
-
So the Morgan report is apparently coming out today.
''The official inquiry investigating his death sent warning letters to people facing criticism in its long-awaited report, which is due to be published on Tuesday''
like they'll be surprised
-
So the Morgan report is apparently coming out today.
It's out and looking like Cressida Dicks position is untenable
https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2021/jun/15/daniel-morgan-met-chief-censured-for-hampering-corruption-inquiry
https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-57484219
-
This is a government where no one is expected to resign, whatever the offence that is exposed.
So I would be surprised if Patel or Dick walked the plank over anything, to be honest.
In the background, Patel is working to criminalise journalism;
https://www.dailymaverick.co.za/article/2021-06-15-priti-patels-new-threat-to-british-journalists/
This is outrageous, and would extend government control over what is reported, how and by whom.
Fundamental attack on the idea of a democratic society.
Do feel free to disagree, with reasons!
-
Patel is a personal friend of Rupert Murdoch and was a guest at his wedding to Jerry Hall a couple of years back.
I doubt very much she will be criminalising all journalists - just Rupert's competition...
-
This is a government where no one is expected to resign, whatever the offence that is exposed.
So I would be surprised if Patel or Dick walked the plank over anything, to be honest.
In the background, Patel is working to criminalise journalism;
https://www.dailymaverick.co.za/article/2021-06-15-priti-patels-new-threat-to-british-journalists/
This is outrageous, and would extend government control over what is reported, how and by whom.
Fundamental attack on the idea of a democratic society.
Do feel free to disagree, with reasons!
Bang on Albie.
This summarises just how unaccountable this Govt is.
https://mainlymacro.blogspot.com/2021/06/a-government-out-of-control.html?m=1
Johnson has only been in power 2 years but there have already been 5-6 instances where in normal times a minister would be sacked. Every one of those has been glossed over.
You can't overstate how far from normal this is. We are going down a very bleak road.
-
As you were!
''Don’t bet on Cressida Dick resigning over Daniel Morgan findings
Analysis: a police commissioner with nine lives, Dick is no stranger to surviving a public-relations disaster''
https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2021/jun/15/dont-bet-on-cressida-dick-resigning-over-daniel-morgan-findings
-
When you look at the failures of the met recently and further back there is a genuine argument to be had that it needs to be disbanded, broken up and rebuilt so that it protects and serves the people rather than itself. This could be a catalyst for change to the force across the UK, when failures in areas such as undercover officers, Hillsborough and many many other failures including the latest report. They certainly cannot be trusted in any way to investigate themselves.
''Revealed: the grim list of sex abuse claims against Metropolitan police
The force upheld 119 cases among 600 complaints; they included an officer who was sacked after having sex with a rape victim''
https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2021/mar/20/revealed-the-grim-list-of-sex-abuse-claims-against-metropolitan-police
-
I hadn't thought of this but suddenly a picture emerges.
https://mobile.twitter.com/RichardJMurphy/status/1404865007096111105
Dick is accused by the authors of the Morgan Report of systematically undermining them by blocking their access to key evidence.
In the Vote Leave case, the Electoral Commission gathered a file of evidence on how VL broke electoral law, including setting up front organisations to illegally channel hundreds of thousands of pounds of advertising funding through. They passed it on to the Met for investigation. The Met sat on it for two years then announced it had ended its investigation and wouldn't pursue it further. The Met has never given any explanation for this decision which, prima facie looks bizarre.[1]
The whole edifice looks rotten to the core. Police defending politicians who in return defend the police.
[1] The core allegation was that VL had reached its legal spending limit. Coincidentally, a new organisation BeLeave sprang out of nowhere with £600k in the bank. It funnelled that into aggressive Leave advertising aimed at young voters. It was run by two young activists whose balls had barely dropped and who had previously worked for VL. But Dick decided there was no case to answer.
-
Cressida Dick is “H” then.
-
She's certainly a protected species, there are shed loads of disasters with her directly in charge and loads more on her watch.
-
I can imagine the conversation between Patel and Dick now.
Patel. It may be in the public interest and the integrity of us all if you stepped down Cressida.
Dick. If I go I’m taking the lot of you with me.
Patel. Hmm. Ok, if you put it that way, let’s ride out the storm.
-
Peter Jukes has been following this case for a long time, even written a book about it. This is his take on why Patel has acted as she did:
https://bylinetimes.com/2021/05/19/did-murdoch-or-the-met-delay-the-daniel-morgan-independent-panel-report/
Seen what's happened to Jukes this weekend?
A bunch of far right social media vigilantes have been spreading claims that he's a child abuser. Attempted character assassination.
https://www.crowdjustice.com/case/peter-jukes/
We aren't (yet) at the position they have in Russia, where campaigning journalists are killed or imprisoned. But there is a chilling process at work in this country, with the far right trying to scare off anyone who digs into their cess pit.
-
Yes I saw that. I also saw what happened to Nicholas Watt during the week.
I keep saying that this government has now enabled and for some part embraced fascism. And still some people mock.
-
And as the Culture War goes on, our Culture Secretary is berating companies for choosing not to advertise on the new far right TV news channel.
-
So much for the Free Market, eh?
-
Those abusing Jukes on social media are going to get their arse fried in court.
They should have deep pockets if they are going to make false claims.
Be interesting to see if they reach an out of court settlement first, like Elon Musk.
I bet the social media companies are regretting giving them a platform.
They could have been put up to it, of course, by someone who can afford to pay if they take the hit on his behalf. Wouldn't be the first time!
-
So much for the Free Market, eh?
GB News.
"We stand for the sanctity of freedom. That is, until you use your freedom to choose to ignore us. Then you are a fascist."
-
This is corruption on an industrial scale
https://twitter.com/richardnewby3/status/1414570687616978946?s=21
-
This is corruption on an industrial scale
https://twitter.com/richardnewby3/status/1414570687616978946?s=21
I thought witness tampering was a criminal offence?
-
''Tory MP says party must change attitude towards taking the knee''
Shouldn't it be:
tory party stops being the party of division and negates the need to take the knee in UK?
-
''Tory MP says party must change attitude towards taking the knee''
Shouldn't it be:
tory party stops being the party of division and negates the need to take the knee in UK?
it should be up to the individual person no? There are many people I know who vote labour that do not like it does that make them and the Labour Party racist?
-
''Tory MP says party must change attitude towards taking the knee''
Shouldn't it be:
tory party stops being the party of division and negates the need to take the knee in UK?
it should be up to the individual person no? There are many people I know who vote labour that do not like it does that make them and the Labour Party racist?
Read the post again, you've missed the point.
-
Unfortunately for the BLM movement it has been jumped on by people who call for things that will never happen like defunding the police ect. In the real world how can anyone support that? The protests in london half the people had anti Tory and excitation. Rebellion banners, and were simply there to protest which is a shame, racism like any form or abuse and bullying needs to be addressed and certain people need educating or punishing for there vile views, but just because you don't agree with BLM does not mean you are racist
-
''Tory MP says party must change attitude towards taking the knee''
Shouldn't it be:
tory party stops being the party of division and negates the need to take the knee in UK?
it should be up to the individual person no? There are many people I know who vote labour that do not like it does that make them and the Labour Party racist?
Read the post again, you've missed the point.
I have read it but maybe I don't get the point? Hope your feeling better now?
-
https://macdonaldlaurier.ca/files/pdf/20210224_Black_Lives_Matter_Orlu_COMMENTARY_FWEb.pdf
-
Unfortunately for the BLM movement it has been jumped on by people who call for things that will never happen like defunding the police ect. In the real world how can anyone support that? The protests in london half the people had anti Tory and excitation. Rebellion banners, and were simply there to protest which is a shame, racism like any form or abuse and bullying needs to be addressed and certain people need educating or punishing for there vile views, but just because you don't agree with BLM does not mean you are racist
As you keep on missing the point deliberately or otherwise and trying to derail the conversation I will post this comment by Normal Rules as it explains what many refuse to accept
Normal Rules
''"Defund the police," a phrase popularized by Black Lives Matter during the George Floyd protests
"Defund the police" is a slogan that supports divesting funds from police departments and reallocating them to non-policing forms of public safety and community support, such as social services, youth services, housing, education, healthcare and other community resources. Activists who use the phrase may do so with varying intentions; some seek modest reductions, while others argue for full divestment as a step toward the abolition of contemporary police services. Activists who support the defunding of police departments often argue that investing in community programs could provide a better crime deterrent for communities; funds would go toward addressing social issues, like poverty, homelessness, and mental disorders.[1][2] Police abolitionists call for replacing existing police forces with other systems of public safety, like housing, employment, community health, education, and other programs''
Does that make sense to you bp?
-
https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-56281781
Link was in the same Twitter thread, a settlement. I can’t help wondering why you chose not to link that? You remind me of another poster with the misrepresentation, can’t for the life of me remember his name……………
-
Just because bpool has a different point of view doesn’t mean he is trying to derail the conversation.
-
Just because bpool has a different point of view doesn’t mean he is trying to derail the conversation.
You are allowed to offer your opinion on my opinion and add to the conversation hound, thinking outside the circle ......... of those you prefer to support
-
''Tory MP says party must change attitude towards taking the knee''
Shouldn't it be:
tory party stops being the party of division and negates the need to take the knee in UK?
it should be up to the individual person no? There are many people I know who vote labour that do not like it does that make them and the Labour Party racist?
Read the post again, you've missed the point.
I have read it but maybe I don't get the point? Hope your feeling better now?
Then you're wilfully missing it. Sydney said they should be the party who ends the need to take a knee, i.e. try and tackle systemic racism.
But you rush in to revert to type with your "but but but Labour".
-
Just because bpool has a different point of view doesn’t mean he is trying to derail the conversation.
You are allowed to offer your opinion on my opinion and add to the conversation hound, thinking outside the circle ......... of those you prefer to support
However, people are allowed to offer a different opinion and not take the conversation any further.
Lots of times people do that on the forum.
-
it's like racism hound just because your neighbour is doesn't mean you have to be aye?
-
''Priti Patel ‘misled’ MPs over plans for protest crackdown
FoI responses suggest home secretary did not consult Police Federation and did not have data on modern slavery''
It's about time this woman fell on her sword
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2021/jul/18/priti-patel-misled-mps-over-plans-for-protest-crackdown
-
Horrible woman but well suited to the party she represents.
-
Pretty Patel is a babe !
-
Pretty Patel is a babe !
Yeah; I've still not been able to play out my fantasy of her thrashing the f*ck out of me.
The problem is she's too expensive, which is why BB is still trying to organise a whip-round for me.
-
SS. My dyslexia's let me down a bit in the search for a way of getting her to carry out your fantasy. I've just spent 4 hours this afternoon on the M&S website.
-
My doctor gave me a prescription for daily sex.
Mrs Belton reckons it’s for dyslexia.
-
''The police bill is not about law and order – it’s about state control''
''The bill seeks to quietly criminalise “serious annoyance”, increase police powers to restrict protests, and give the home secretary discretion over what types of protests are allowed.
This bill would make it a crime to cause “serious annoyance” to the public, with a maximum penalty of 10 years in prison. However, one of the most worrying powers created by the bill gives the home secretary control over the definition of “serious disruption to the life of the community” and “serious disruption to the activities of an organisation”, both of which can determine when police powers to limit protest are engaged. This power effectively grants a minister the ability to suppress the kinds of protests that he or she does not like or agree with''
The government refers to the 2019 Extinction Rebellion protests and the recent “Kill the Bill” protests in Bristol as justifying these new powers. After all, given the images of a seemingly beleaguered police force struggling to defend itself against a mob who have set fire to vans, with officers suffering broken bones and a collapsed lung, ought we not to give the police the tools to fight back?
Except that it turns out that the media coverage of the Bristol protests has been misleading, the Avon and Somerset police admitted there had not been any broken bones or punctured lungs and the locals in Bristol tell a very different story of heavy-handed police tactics. In addition, it has been reported that far more protesters than police were injured''
Must be the influence of the rouble on the party.
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2021/aug/09/police-bill-not-law-order-state-control-erosion-freedom
-
She's been at it again.
Authorised 90 people who are established UK based and who have served a 1 year or more prison sentence to be deported to Jamaica on Tuesday. All of them had completed their sentence. Some for crimes as minor as drug dealing (remember Michael Gove has admitted being a coke user but apparently that doesn't result in a prison sentence for him - just the people he buys it off). Some have lived in Britain since they were kids and have no base in Jamaica. One in his late 60s is thought to have dementia.
What Patel sneeringly calls "activist lawyers" worked pro bono on this last week. They found that in 83 of the 90 cases, the deportations were legally flawed. The plane finally took off with 7 on board. Without this action, Patel was prepared to illegally deport 83 people.
That from an immigrant herself who by any rational assessment, broke the law with big flashing lights on, when she secretly visited Israel, having undocumented foreign policy discussions.
She's a psychopath. This is the country you are living in.
-
As minor as drug dealing! f**king hell!
-
She's been at it again.
Authorised 90 people who are established UK based and who have served a 1 year or more prison sentence to be deported to Jamaica on Tuesday. All of them had completed their sentence. Some for crimes as minor as drug dealing (remember Michael Gove has admitted being a coke user but apparently that doesn't result in a prison sentence for him - just the people he buys it off). Some have lived in Britain since they were kids and have no base in Jamaica. One in his late 60s is thought to have dementia.
What Patel sneeringly calls "activist lawyers" worked pro bono on this last week. They found that in 83 of the 90 cases, the deportations were legally flawed. The plane finally took off with 7 on board. Without this action, Patel was prepared to illegally deport 83 people.
That from an immigrant herself who by any rational assessment, broke the law with big flashing lights on, when she secretly visited Israel, having undocumented foreign policy discussions.
She's a psychopath. This is the country you are living in.
On a practical level it doesn't make any sense there would be hundreds of thousands of people living in the UK without visas, on a humanitarian level it's an abomination.
-
As I say BB, and as you ignore, Class A drug possession doesn't result in any legal sanction at all if you are the Cabinet Secretary. On the other hand, if you are caught providing the drugs to him, and you were born in Jamaica and moved here when you were two years old, Patel's Britain says you first do your stretch inside, then several years later, regardless of whether or not you have kept your nose clean (ahem) since, you can be picked up and deported.
I wouldn't have expected you to engage sensibly on the morality of this. You didn't disappoint me.
-
Possession and dealing are completely different.
-
In patel's and tory britain you can be deported when you are a citizen and have full residential rights, especially if you are black.
-
Aaaannnddd there you go again BB.
The point is (and I understand that you will refuse to engage with this because you've dug yourself in) that Gove has never once faced criminal prosecution for ADMITTING Class A drug possession and use. He's on video accepting that his crime could have left him facing a 7 year stretch. But he's never been prosecuted. Instead he was promoted to Justice Secretary.
-
PS. Several of the people who have previously been deported under that scheme were deported after serving a few months in prison for possession with intent to supply dope. Which our current Foreign Secretary has admitted to dabbling in.
-
What never ceases to amaze me are the things that become acceptable if they happen to justify yet another political point. Yes this is a direct point I am making about our Billy - call it a personal attack all you like.
On top of telling all the forum he has ‘blocked’ me for pointing out the sheer hypocrisy of his posts, depending on whoever he is vilifying at any particular time, now he is dumbing down drug dealing because someone he despises has admitted drug taking and hasn’t served time for it.
Pathetic.
-
How do you ‘dabble’ in intent to supply? What does that mean?
-
Anyone who is selling drugs illegally is scum, and it’s a shame more of them can’t be locked away or deported.
To suggest that the people bst was defending were in prison or subject to deportation “for as little as drug dealing” is ridiculous.
The harm that they do to people is shocking.
I wonder what the others on the deportation list “only” did.
Robbery, rape, attempted murder?
Ah well, nothing too serious I suppose.
-
Aaaannnddd there you go again BB.
The point is (and I understand that you will refuse to engage with this because you've dug yourself in) that Gove has never once faced criminal prosecution for ADMITTING Class A drug possession and use. He's on video accepting that his crime could have left him facing a 7 year stretch. But he's never been prosecuted. Instead he was promoted to Justice Secretary.
I dare say many people have dabbled in drugs when they were youngsters but quickly realised their stupidity and grew up to be decent human beings doing responsible jobs in senior positions in many industries as well as politics. Should all of those who were willing to admit it lose their jobs or is it only Tory politicians who should?
-
Anyone who is selling drugs illegally is scum, and it’s a shame more of them can’t be locked away or deported.
To suggest that the people bst was defending were in prison or subject to deportation “for as little as drug dealing” is ridiculous.
The harm that they do to people is shocking.
I wonder what the others on the deportation list “only” did.
Robbery, rape, attempted murder?
Ah well, nothing too serious I suppose.
One of the ones previously deported lived in England since he was 2 and served 7 months for selling cannabis when he was 19. Dominic Raab has admitted using dope. I wonder if it dawns on him where that came from. Maybe he ordered it off Amazon.
See me. I reckon if an adult comes to the UK and commits a serious crime, we are well within our rights to deport them after they have served their sentence. If someone has been brought up here and they commit a crime, bang them up by all means. But you don't then have the right to subject them to a double penalty by retrospective action years later where you drag them away from their families and shuffle them off to a foreign country. They are our responsibility. They became criminals in Britain.
And you certainly don't do that if your standard is that the very politicians who implement these laws admit imprisonable crimes and don't even get their wrists slapped.
-
Isn't it law that they have to deported after a 1 year plus sentence?
-
Possession and dealing are completely different.
-
But anyway, back to the original point before the Moral Majority waded in. The ones who are so keen to see the law upheld.
The point was that 83 of the 90 who Patel wanted to deport this week would have been deported in contravention of the very law she is supposed to be implenting. That shows a degree of incompetence or maybe spiteful disregard that is just beyond belief.
Or maybe I'm wrong. Maybe it doesn't matter if you are arrested without warning years after your original crime and illegally booted out of the country. Judging by the responses in here, most folk don't seem to give a f**k about the actual due process of law.
-
Possession and dealing are completely different.
Yes. The possession crime that Gove admitted to could have landed him with a 7 year sentence. The lad I referred to got a 15 month sentence for dealing dope and served 7 months.
One gets deported to a country he hasn't seen since he was just out of nappies. The other gets a Cabinet post.
-
He was lucky he wasn't in a country that stipulates the death sentence for drug trafficking, or life in prison.
-
Odd really though that someone who buys drugs for his own use and therefore is putting only his own life at risk is somehow deemed to be more of the devil than the bas**rds who sell drugs to kids and potentially kill them or ruin their lives forever.
Not many people backing bst up on this point.
-
Pretty Patel is a babe !
Yeah; I've still not been able to play out my fantasy of her thrashing the f*ck out of me.
The problem is she's too expensive, which is why BB is still trying to organise a whip-round for me.
I’m liking the pun, intentional or not
-
BB
That's the law. Do you want to uphold the law or not?
On a practical level, how many drug dealers do you think there would be if there were no drug users?
-
What? You are well and truly scraping the bottom of the barrel in this humiliating defeat, aren't you!
-
Apologies BB. I meant Hound.
You all look the same when you get in these lop-sided arguments of yours. Easy mistake to make.
-
Defeat is it? Odd that, cos I haven't seen any of your hive mind even address the core point I was making in the OP.
-
BST, you accuse others of lop-sided arguments but the truth is the only people who agree with you are those who are equally as hate-filled as you.
-
But anyway, back to the original point before the Moral Majority waded in. The ones who are so keen to see the law upheld.
The point was that 83 of the 90 who Patel wanted to deport this week would have been deported in contravention of the very law she is supposed to be implenting. That shows a degree of incompetence or maybe spiteful disregard that is just beyond belief.
Or maybe I'm wrong. Maybe it doesn't matter if you are arrested without warning years after your original crime and illegally booted out of the country. Judging by the responses in here, most folk don't seem to give a f**k about the actual due process of law.
I can't understand though if they have a legal.right to remain why did it take so long literally until they were about to be flown out for the legal aspects to move?
I do agree if the government don't understand these laws then something is very wrong. It will be interesting to see the final outcome.
-
Apologies BB. I meant Hound.
You all look the same when you get in these lop-sided arguments of yours. Easy mistake to make.
Apologies…you all look the same. An outrageous metaphor.
-
But anyway, back to the original point before the Moral Majority waded in. The ones who are so keen to see the law upheld.
The point was that 83 of the 90 who Patel wanted to deport this week would have been deported in contravention of the very law she is supposed to be implenting. That shows a degree of incompetence or maybe spiteful disregard that is just beyond belief.
Or maybe I'm wrong. Maybe it doesn't matter if you are arrested without warning years after your original crime and illegally booted out of the country. Judging by the responses in here, most folk don't seem to give a f**k about the actual due process of law.
I can't understand though if they have a legal.right to remain why did it take so long literally until they were about to be flown out for the legal aspects to move?
I do agree if the government don't understand these laws then something is very wrong. It will be interesting to see the final outcome.
Because the decisions are being rammed through, and the cases are being defended pro bono in the solicitors' spare time.
-
BB
That's the law. Do you want to uphold the law or not?
On a practical level, how many drug dealers do you think there would be if there were no drug users?
And why do you think there are so many drug users then.
-
This really is the most astonishing defence of the absolutely indefensible.
-
She's been at it again.
Authorised 90 people who are established UK based and who have served a 1 year or more prison sentence to be deported to Jamaica on Tuesday. All of them had completed their sentence. Some for crimes as minor as drug dealing (remember Michael Gove has admitted being a coke user but apparently that doesn't result in a prison sentence for him - just the people he buys it off). Some have lived in Britain since they were kids and have no base in Jamaica. One in his late 60s is thought to have dementia.
What Patel sneeringly calls "activist lawyers" worked pro bono on this last week. They found that in 83 of the 90 cases, the deportations were legally flawed. The plane finally took off with 7 on board. Without this action, Patel was prepared to illegally deport 83 people.
That from an immigrant herself who by any rational assessment, broke the law with big flashing lights on, when she secretly visited Israel, having undocumented foreign policy discussions.
She's a psychopath. This is the country you are living in.
“Some for crimes as minor as drug dealing”.
There it is bst, as clear as day.
I can’t understand why you have lied about this on the climate crisis thread.
-
Surely the state has to take some responsibility for allowing kids to grow up where illegal drugs are freely accessible, the police have failed miserably in their joint (ahem) effort in the war against drugs along with customs. As we know there are racist elements within all sectors of the community especially the police therefore if you are black there is more chance 9x of getting stopped and searched in the first place.
-
If Labour were in power and there were hundreds of daily illegal arrivals and the police (recently critisised for corruption in a report on a murdered pi) had just given a shotgun licence to an unhinged murderer, would people be defending the Home Secretary!
I notice that it was briefed yesterday Johnson was going to make her Security Miniter, then told overnight by MI5 he couldn't because she was a secuity risk (which is why May sacked her).
Clown car government
-
If Labour were in power and there were hundreds of daily illegal arrivals and the police (recently critisised for corruption in a report on a murdered pi) had just given a shotgun licence to an unhinged murderer, would people be defending the Home Secretary!
I notice that it was briefed yesterday Johnson was going to make her Security Miniter, then told overnight by MI5 he couldn't because she was a secuity risk (which is why May sacked her).
Clown car government
Couldn’t agree more Wilts, this lot need shooting. Am really wishing these days there was a credible alternative at the time of the last election. It’s looking more and more like a long term disaster for all
-
Priti Patel.
We can't accommodate 20,000 Afghan refugees in one go.
https://mobile.twitter.com/SkyNews/status/1427876388476964867
I bet Priti Patel is REALLY pleased that Priti Patel wasn't the Home Secretary in 1972, when Priti Patel's family were among 28,000 Ugandan Indians who were welcomed to Britain over a few months, despite far-right politicians saying we couldn't accommodate them.
-
Priti Patel.
We can't accommodate 20,000 Afghan refugees in one go.
https://mobile.twitter.com/SkyNews/status/1427876388476964867
I bet Priti Patel is REALLY pleased that Priti Patel wasn't the Home Secretary in 1972, when Priti Patel's family were among 28,000 Ugandan Indians who were welcomed to Britain over a few months, despite far-right politicians saying we couldn't accommodate them.
Billy. There is nothing wrong with anything Patel says in that interview. Of course structures have to be in place for such a mammoth task.
Your comments, however, are pathetic.
A pathetic attempt to provide further ‘proof’ in your pathetic mission to feed and dictate to others your personal hatred of those in government.
-
Damn!
I thought I’d wandered onto the Pretty Patel sheer babydoll website……
-
I've said all I'm going to say about Priti Patel; and I've got the lash marks to prove it.
In my dreams anyway.
-
Damn!
I thought I’d wandered onto the Pretty Patel sheer babydoll website……
Not proud to say I googled this.