FabSwingers.com mobile

Join us FREE, we're FREE to use

Web's largest swingers site since 2006.

Already registered?
Login here

Back to forum list
Back to The Lounge

Govt minister looking at porn

Jump to newest
 

By (user no longer on site) OP   
over a year ago

Isnt it good to know they are human? Or should they be above such things? Should they resign?

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *anrteeCouple
over a year ago

London

Well they shouldn't be doing at tax payers expense, if they want to do it they should do in their own time; its not as if they don't get enough time off.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *mallcock43Man
over a year ago

blackpool

I would be sacked for looking at porn in works time. Oh shit better get off lol

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *anrteeCouple
over a year ago

London


"I would be sacked for looking at porn in works time. Oh shit better get off lol "

I'm not looking at porn; I'm networking

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *mallcock43Man
over a year ago

blackpool


"I would be sacked for looking at porn in works time. Oh shit better get off lol

I'm not looking at porn; I'm networking"

Yeah that’s what am doing lmao

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

People often use their work computers for personal things, often while supposedly working. They might even post to Facebook about how the unemployed just don't want to work.

If the porn he viewed was illegal, then he should have been charged. If not and the police who gave the story to the media made money from it, then they should be charged.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"People often use their work computers for personal things, often while supposedly working. They might even post to Facebook about how the unemployed just don't want to work.

If the porn he viewed was illegal, then he should have been charged. If not and the police who gave the story to the media made money from it, then they should be charged."

Kind of agree on both as none come out of this very good.

But end of day he should not have been doing it in the workplace and given his job...I would say he should have resigned.

But he won't be allowed to as TMs government is too fragile as it is.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *ineMan
over a year ago

In cave behind a waterfall on a hill

As the guy involved has repeatedly denied this for about 9 years now...

Perhaps your thread should say ...

Allegedly.

Even the ex police who have potentially acted in an illegal manner have said what was found was legal.

So should this even be in the public domain if no offence has been committed?

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"

So should this even be in the public domain if no offence has been committed?

"

If I looked at pornography at work and was caught doing so, I would expect to be sacked...

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"As the guy involved has repeatedly denied this for about 9 years now...

Perhaps your thread should say ...

Allegedly.

Even the ex police who have potentially acted in an illegal manner have said what was found was legal.

So should this even be in the public domain if no offence has been committed?

"

I think legal in these days means that it was not child porn.

Now I own up to watching non illegal porn but I would not do it in the workplace.

And I get you when he says he hasn't watched it himself...but that in itself raises questions on security issues if someone else had access to a government computer.

It's not all cut and dried imo

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *m3232Man
over a year ago

maidenhead


"Well they shouldn't be doing at tax payers expense, if they want to do it they should do in their own time; its not as if they don't get enough time off. "

Makes them no diff than most employees being lazy on there job

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *arciocialWoman
over a year ago

Leicester


"

So should this even be in the public domain if no offence has been committed?

If I looked at pornography at work and was caught doing so, I would expect to be sacked..."

I've not followed this headline because I couldn't see how it was news. How do they know he was looking at it during his work hours?

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"

So should this even be in the public domain if no offence has been committed?

If I looked at pornography at work and was caught doing so, I would expect to be sacked...

I've not followed this headline because I couldn't see how it was news. How do they know he was looking at it during his work hours? "

I think IP addresses and the times of the downloads would make that very easy for IT detective's to achieve this

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *ineMan
over a year ago

In cave behind a waterfall on a hill


"

So should this even be in the public domain if no offence has been committed?

If I looked at pornography at work and was caught doing so, I would expect to be sacked...

I've not followed this headline because I couldn't see how it was news. How do they know he was looking at it during his work hours? "

It may have been on his computer...

But there is apparently no evidence to say he was downloading or looking at it...

But why let the facts get in the way of another salicaiuos story that has no apparent substance.

Just another example of the negatives and shame witch hunt mentality of don't let the facts get in the way of an opportunity for some to give others a good kicking?

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

I would have thought we might be a little bit more sexually liberated on here. What's the difference between him looking at legal porn or being on Facebook?

I get the whole 'during work time' thing but these MP's are not 9-5. They work well into their own time.

No offence committed, I hope the individuals that leaked this are sanctioned.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *eedsandyMan
over a year ago

Leeds

Trial by Police and media, just like Cliff Richard and look what happened there. He sued South Yorkshire Police and the case was settled with them paying "substantial compensation" in May of this year to him. Money that should have been used for policing in South Yorkshire.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

I don't understand why people still download porn when you can stream it so easily.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"I don't understand why people still download porn when you can stream it so easily."

In fairness it was around 9 years ago

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

If Damian Green has been spending all that time at work watching porn and, it was part of his pledge to the people of Ashford who elected him, to wank harder for them, then he was fulfilling his obligations.

However, I strongly doubt that the people of Ashford elected him due to his masturbating skills. Even if no law has been broken his employer should seriously consider his suitability for the job. I wouldn't want anyone I'd elected sitting in his office with his cock on his desk. Most people in most places of work would face a disciplinary of some form if not the sack.

No wonder nothing gets done. Wank in your own time or fuck off!

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *lanemikeMan
over a year ago

Bolton

Mr Green does not have an employer: he is self-employed, all MPs are. Certainly feel he is being "stitched up" for some reason.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"If Damian Green has been spending all that time at work watching porn and, it was part of his pledge to the people of Ashford who elected him, to wank harder for them, then he was fulfilling his obligations.

However, I strongly doubt that the people of Ashford elected him due to his masturbating skills. Even if no law has been broken his employer should seriously consider his suitability for the job. I wouldn't want anyone I'd elected sitting in his office with his cock on his desk. Most people in most places of work would face a disciplinary of some form if not the sack.

No wonder nothing gets done. Wank in your own time or fuck off!"

He's clearly good at what he does or its unlikely he'd be in the position he's in. That should be what matters most. He hasn't broken any laws. Would we be calling for his sacking if he'd been on Amazon or Ebay?

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *otlovefun42Couple
over a year ago

Costa Blanca Spain...


"As the guy involved has repeatedly denied this for about 9 years now...

Perhaps your thread should say ...

Allegedly.

Even the ex police who have potentially acted in an illegal manner have said what was found was legal.

So should this even be in the public domain if no offence has been committed?

"

Absolutely right.

Before this guy is hung out to dry by the court of public outrage a few things need to be considered.

1. Damian Green strongly denies that there was any porn on his computer.

2. The alleged "discovery" was made by police back in 2008 when his home and office were raided by police on the instructions of the then Home Secretary Jacqui Smith. Done on the pretext that Green had leaked documents showing how shambolic the then Labour governments immigration policy was at the time. I don't know if Green did or didn't leak the documents, but even if he did the abuse of power by the Labour government at the time was nothing short of disgraceful and some would say illegal.

Which brings us to today.

The copper in charge of the 2008 raid was none other than, his current accuser, Bob Quick who was not only an assistant commissioner at the time but also had his eyes on the top job.

The furore that followed the Green raid pretty much put paid to any chance of his career going any further so some could quite easily assume that this is the actions of a very bitter ex cop.

In another twist deputy speaker Eleanor Laing has stated that prior to 2010 pornographic images regularly found their way onto her official computer almost on a daily basis.

Ministry of dirty tricks anyone?

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site) OP   
over a year ago


"As the guy involved has repeatedly denied this for about 9 years now...

Perhaps your thread should say ...

Allegedly.

Even the ex police who have potentially acted in an illegal manner have said what was found was legal.

So should this even be in the public domain if no offence has been committed?

"

I didnt say who it was...

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"If Damian Green has been spending all that time at work watching porn and, it was part of his pledge to the people of Ashford who elected him, to wank harder for them, then he was fulfilling his obligations.

However, I strongly doubt that the people of Ashford elected him due to his masturbating skills. Even if no law has been broken his employer should seriously consider his suitability for the job. I wouldn't want anyone I'd elected sitting in his office with his cock on his desk. Most people in most places of work would face a disciplinary of some form if not the sack.

No wonder nothing gets done. Wank in your own time or fuck off!

He's clearly good at what he does or its unlikely he'd be in the position he's in. That should be what matters most. He hasn't broken any laws. Would we be calling for his sacking if he'd been on Amazon or Ebay?"

It's not the porn that bothers me it's the wasting of time and tax payers money so yes...if proven!

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *lanemikeMan
over a year ago

Bolton


"

It's not the porn that bothers me it's the wasting of time and tax payers money so yes...if proven!"

So you have never idled away a few minutes at work? We all have !!

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"

It's not the porn that bothers me it's the wasting of time and tax payers money so yes...if proven!

So you have never idled away a few minutes at work? We all have !!"

We also don't know whether it was in his own time.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"

It's not the porn that bothers me it's the wasting of time and tax payers money so yes...if proven!

"

If it wasn't for the porn then there wouldn't be a story.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *anrteeCouple
over a year ago

London


"

It's not the porn that bothers me it's the wasting of time and tax payers money so yes...if proven!

So you have never idled away a few minutes at work? We all have !!

We also don't know whether it was in his own time."

The allegation is that emails were sent from that computer at the same time.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *lanemikeMan
over a year ago

Bolton


"

It's not the porn that bothers me it's the wasting of time and tax payers money so yes...if proven!

If it wasn't for the porn then there wouldn't be a story. "

Yes, it would not quite read the same if he had been looking at the football scores....!!

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"People often use their work computers for personal things, often while supposedly working. They might even post to Facebook about how the unemployed just don't want to work.

If the porn he viewed was illegal, then he should have been charged. If not and the police who gave the story to the media made money from it, then they should be charged."

My understanding is that it was found during an unrelated investigation.

The computer was government property.

The officer who released the information is retired so not subject to any police regs?

The minister shouldn't really be looking at it in a jib with position of trust representing the public? I bet if it was on the officers computer there would also be an outcry?

It is trial by media, but maybe he shouldn't have had it on a works computer??? I stand to be corrected on the facts though.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *lmostthereMan
over a year ago

Southampton

Almostthere and the Don't Care Bear don't care. Unless it was anything really good in which case it should be divulged in the public interest.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"

It's not the porn that bothers me it's the wasting of time and tax payers money so yes...if proven!

So you have never idled away a few minutes at work? We all have !!

We also don't know whether it was in his own time.

The allegation is that emails were sent from that computer at the same time. "

I've sent work emails at 2am.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

I would have to agree, much of the conversation is based on "alegadly". There's a lot of conflicting information and speculation based on that information. I don't feel we have the full picture and may never have the full facts. Something quite possibly stinks in all of this too.

I have in the past, worked till two and later to get a job finished, so as not to let a client down and preserve my reputation. That is my career choice!

Some one mentioned earlier that he doesn't have an employer as he is self employed. Yet his salary comes from somewhere! The tax payers pay his wages, some that elected him and, a lot that didn't. He also has a boss and a code of conduct.

He should be accountable to the public for the work he does and the time he spends wanking or on eBay, or whatever, that he claims as work, unless you think he is diligent with his time keeping?

The term self employed means that he takes responsibility for his own tax affairs but who ever puts money in his account for work, or time he claims he was working is his employer. In this case the tax payers via the treasury.

When I undertake a job, the person paying for that job is employing me!

The alleged amount of time spent is more than a few minutes here and there!

I charged £40 an hour when I ran a client driven business. If a job I do for you takes 20 days and I spent 1 hour of each of those days watching porn or doing my own thing and I charge it to you, that's £800 you're paying for my services that you shouldn't be paying for! Is that acceptable?

What if the ten people I employed were all doing the same thing on the jobs they were working on? That's £8,000 plus the £800 so £8,800 I've over charged my clients over a 20 day period. Is that acceptable?

That's just one small business taking the piss over a twenty day period.

What if the tax payer was having to foot that £8,800? Is that acceptable?

If you think it is, can I offer you my services?

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *itmanAndHerrCouple
over a year ago

st helens

He needs sacking for being so stupid. Why would you use a government/employers computer to look at porn when you undoubtedly have affordable if not unlimited data on your personal device?

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *entenTeaCouple
over a year ago

Buckley North Wales


"He needs sacking for being so stupid. Why would you use a government/employers computer to look at porn when you undoubtedly have affordable if not unlimited data on your personal device? "

Absoloutely right

In any other organisation you'd get the sack for accessing porn on a company computer. Even if its in your own time. Companies now have VERY clear policies.

If parliament is not clear about acceptable standards even in private time, thats something they need to rectify. But the other perspective is that he may be a porn addict. If you are working hours comming home tierd your judgment is impaired especially if you have addictive tendencies.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

Looking at porn: fine and dandy.

Looking at porn on a work PC: sackable offence.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *ineMan
over a year ago

In cave behind a waterfall on a hill

This thread has got more ranty and further from the known facts by the hour.

He denies downloading or accessing porn

There is no evidence to suggest he has lied about that...

But why let the known facts get in the way of a good lynching?

If this was you ...

If your reputation was apparently being wrongly traduced

If the mob rules...

If despite their being apparently no offence committed...

Then just how happy would you be to be pursed by a howling mob...

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

This accusation is unfounded undefined and unfair.

It was not uncommon 9 years ago for unsolicited emails to have pictures of semi or naked women in them, in fact its less common but still happens now. For all we know it could have been a single picture of a woman in a short skirt that some policeman decided to call porn.

This is the same MP who was in the press for briefly touching the knee of a woman who worked for him, and sending her a text making plans to go for a drink which they do regularly anyway.

Amazing to follow this thread and see he is also accused of wanking at work when there is absolutely no evidence that he ever actually did anything in any way wrong.

A clear case of a manufactured story.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *y Favorite PornstarCouple
over a year ago

Basingstoke


"I would have to agree, much of the conversation is based on "alegadly". There's a lot of conflicting information and speculation based on that information. I don't feel we have the full picture and may never have the full facts. Something quite possibly stinks in all of this too.

I have in the past, worked till two and later to get a job finished, so as not to let a client down and preserve my reputation. That is my career choice!

Some one mentioned earlier that he doesn't have an employer as he is self employed. Yet his salary comes from somewhere! The tax payers pay his wages, some that elected him and, a lot that didn't. He also has a boss and a code of conduct.

He should be accountable to the public for the work he does and the time he spends wanking or on eBay, or whatever, that he claims as work, unless you think he is diligent with his time keeping?

The term self employed means that he takes responsibility for his own tax affairs but who ever puts money in his account for work, or time he claims he was working is his employer. In this case the tax payers via the treasury.

When I undertake a job, the person paying for that job is employing me!

The alleged amount of time spent is more than a few minutes here and there!

I charged £40 an hour when I ran a client driven business. If a job I do for you takes 20 days and I spent 1 hour of each of those days watching porn or doing my own thing and I charge it to you, that's £800 you're paying for my services that you shouldn't be paying for! Is that acceptable?

What if the ten people I employed were all doing the same thing on the jobs they were working on? That's £8,000 plus the £800 so £8,800 I've over charged my clients over a 20 day period. Is that acceptable?

That's just one small business taking the piss over a twenty day period.

What if the tax payer was having to foot that £8,800? Is that acceptable?

If you think it is, can I offer you my services? "

MPs don't get paid by the hour and I'm happy to bet that DG averages well above 40 hours a week even if he can fit a wank in at the end of his day.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

Aye hang him out to dry regardless of the fact that he has repeatedly deny it and that it allegedly happened nine years ago

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

On reflection I feel that the ex police officers who didn't find anything illegal, but now are profiting at least in notoriety from empty accusations should be sued for every penny they own, and left destitute and homeless for Christmas.

And we should all get a share of the proceeds, because they wasted our time.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

I heard he fecking nicked a hat aswell

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
Post new Message to Thread
back to top